ML20197C636
| ML20197C636 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 12/11/1997 |
| From: | Bangart R NRC OFFICE OF STATE PROGRAMS (OSP) |
| To: | GENERAL, OHIO, STATE OF, OKLAHOMA, STATE OF, PENNSYLVANIA, COMMONWEALTH OF |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20197C641 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9712240237 | |
| Download: ML20197C636 (5) | |
Text
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
o 9
DEC 1127.
ALL AGREEMENT STATES OHIO, OKLAHOMA, PENNSYLVANIA STATE LIAISON OFFICERS CERCLA REAUTHORIZATION NRC Chairman Shirley Ann Jackson discussed the issue of reauthorization of the Comprehensive Environmental, Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA) on October 16,1997 at the All Agreement States Meeting in Los Angeles, Califomia. In her remarks, Chairman Jackson indicated that the Commission had submitted draft legislative language to address the finality of NRC and Agreement State decisbn-making in decommissioning and decontamination cases. Enclosed for your information is a copy of the legislative language propo'.,ed by the Commission as well as other related correspondence. On November 9,1997, Representative Mike Oxley (R-OH) introduced H.R. 3000 which contains language supported by NRC which addresses the issue of finality of NRC and Agreement State decision-making in decommissioning and decontamination cases.
OriginalSened By RICHARD L BANGART Richard L. Bangart, Director Office of State Programs
Enclosures:
As stated e
9712240237 971211 PDR STPRG ESGGEN R
- }
l
.,p - ' ', a #
o f" u,-
s-1 Distribution:
'Q' Nf[LIlW.H,4f;tfff uf H
DIR RF lW n
DCD (SP03) fDR (YES.:/_) (NO_)
A/S File SLO File 9
l N)
DOCUMENT NAMED : CE RCLA.WPD
- See previous concurrence, t,
. em.e ** *,n, nt. becate h the box. 'C' = Cm without anschmenUesoswo
- P = Cm Mth anachmenvenelosure "N" = No coc e l OFFICE OSP OSP:DD OSP:D[, o lNAME SDroggitis:nb PLohaus RBangart i Mb lDATE 12/8/97*
12/8/97*
12/fl/97 YOSP FILE CODE: SP-A-4, SP-S-9"
e 4
ALL AGREEMENT STATES OHIO, OKLAHOMA, PENNSYLVANIA STATE LIAISON OFFICERS CERCLA REAUTHORIZATION NRC Chairman Shirley Ann Jackson discussed the issue of rea'uthorization of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, arp Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA) with you on October 16,1997 at the All Agreement States M,eeting in Los Angeles, California.
In her remarks, Chairman Jackson indicated that the Comrpission had submitted draft legislative language to address the finality of NRC and Agrfement State decision-making in dewrtmassioning and decontamination cases. Enclosedfor your information is a copy of the legislative language proposed by the Commission as we,il as other related correspondence. On November 9,1997, Representative Mike Oxley (R-OH))ntroduced H.R. 3000 which contains language supported by NRC which addresses the issue of finality of NRC and Agreement State decision-making in decommissioning and decontamin'ation cases.
Richard L. Bangart, Director Office of State Programs
Enclosures:
/
As stated
/
/
/l
/
/
l l
l ll l
t Distribution:
DIR RF DCD (SP03)
A/S File PDR (YES_f.) (NO_)
SLO File f
/
DOCUMENT NAME: G:\\ CERCLA.WPD n e.e*.. em et w. mieuni.nt. wae.i. > m. tion J c em w eiout n.etm nv.new.w.
r - em wem eu. aim.ac.new.w.
n - no em OFFICE QOSP
/ OSP$@ /
OSP:D NAME SDroggitis:nb PLohadsLd RBangart DATE 12/$/97 12///97 12/ /97 OSP FILE CODE: SP-A-4, SP-S-9
/
/
.9* ** 49
. a *-
j j
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON C.C. 206S0001 f
December 11, 1997
. ALL AGREEMENT STATES ~
OHIO, OKLAHOMA, PENNSYLVANIA STATE 8 IAISON OFFICERS CERCLA REAUTHORIZATION NRC Chairman Shirley Ann Jackson discussed the issue of reauthorization of the Comprehent've Environmental, Response, Compensation, 6 ad Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA) on October 16,1997 at the All Agreement States Meeting in Los Angeles, California. In her remarks, Chairman Jackson indicated that the Commission had submitted draft legislative
' language to address the finality of NRC and Agreement State decista-making in decommissioning and decontamination cases. Enclosed for your information is a copy of the legislative language proposed by the Commission as well as other related correspondence. On November 9,1997, Representative Mike Oxley (R-OH) introduced H.R. 3000 which contains language supported by NRC which addresses the issue of finality of NRC and Agreement State decision-making in decommissioning and decontamination cases.
hkat (
OVWt1 Richard L. Bangart, LJector //
-Office of State Programs V
Enclosures:
As stated 1
....s....w
lh /
UNITED STATES
$t NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION e
WASHINGTON. D.C. 20655-0001 f
g j-
%,,..... j' October 20, 1997 CHARMAN The Honc..able Dan Schaefer, Chairman Subcommittee on Energy and Power Committee on Commerce United States House of Representatives Washington, DC 20515
Dear Mr. Chairman:
As you know, the Commission has been concemed in several areas in the event that Congress should enact Superfund reauthorization legislation. In particular, the Commission would like to see legislation which would achieve finality in Commission decisions in site decontamination and decommissioning, avoid negative impact on NRC's Agreement State program and avoid inappropriate use of Safe Drinking Water Act established Maximum Contaminant Levels for cleanup of radionuclides.
The Commission has written previously to the Congress stating policy views on these issues.
In addition, that was the subject of my telephone conversation with you several weeks ago.
Commission staff has also met with your staff to discuss our concems, in this connection, we have reviewed the draft legislative product of our staff to staff discussions and find that it would achieve the policy objectives set forth in our letters to Congress. Consequently, we support the enclosed attemative draft legislative version, if you wish to discuss any of these matters further, pluase feel free to contact me or my sta Sincerely, LW /t )/QL,
7 Shirley A. Jackson
Enclosures:
- 1. Legislative Memo 2.- NRC Proposed Draft Legislation
$WN 9vu h 6y,
l
,s* #%,
UNITED STATES t
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION j
wAsmwoTow, o.c. samem October 20, 1997 Chaitten The Honorable Ralph M. Hall Subcommittee on Energy and Power Committee on Commerce United States House of Representatives Washington, DC 20515
Dear Congressman Hall:
As you know, the Commission has been concemed in several areas in the c.vor.t that Congress should enact Superfund reauthorization legislation. In particular, the Commission would like to see legislation which would achieve finality in Commission decisions in site decontamination and decommissioning, avoid negative impact on NRC's Agreement State program and avoid inappropriate use of Safe Drinking Water Act established Maximum Contaminant Levels for cleanup of radienuclides, The Commission has written previously to the Congress stating policy views on these issues.
s i
Commission staff has also met with your staff to discuss our concems. In this connection,
,;roduct of our staff to staff discussions and find that it we have reviewed the draft legisla':
would achieve the policy objective. et forth in our letters to Congress. Consequently, we support the enclosed attemative draft legislative version.
If you wish to discuss any of these matters further, please feel free to contact me or my staff.
Sincerely, lL &
4 Shirley A. Jackson
Enclosures:
- 1. Legislative Memo
- 2. NRC Proposed Draft Legislation i
't
}
O
___w
> y
. i.(
1stATIVE MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF PROPOSED CERCLA AMENDMENT in July 19g7, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission issued a final rule that establishes the
- radiological criteria for the termination of licenses that fall under the regulatory authority of the Commission. These regulations provide a clear and consistent regulatory basis for determining t
l.
the adequacy of remediation of residual radioactivity resulting from the possession of Atomic Energy Act material. Creating an additional cleanup standard, whether by Federal statute or oy regulation, may make it extremely difficult for the cleanup of a site containing residual twdioactivity to reach finality. As a result, potential cleanup liability of parties who have been associated with an affected site may be viewed as being limitless in duration and amount. The f
proposed amendment is intended to establish that NRC's cleanup standards are protective for
- CERCLA purposes, and that NRC standards govem the cleanup of sites and materiallicensed by the Commission.
4 l
The amendment is needed not only because of potential conflicts on the Federal level, but because of implications for the States. Section 274 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 provides a program under which an interested State may enter into an agreement with the Commission i-
_ (thereby becoming an Agreement State) for the Commission to discontinue its authority over radioactive material within the State. (The Commission retains continuing responsibility to review the State's regulatory program to ensure, among other things, that the program is adequate to protect the public health and safety and is compatible with the Commission's program.) Currently, there are 30 Agreement States. As part of its agreement, an Agreement State may undertake to regulate the termination of Atomic Energy Act materiallicenses.
Accordingly, some States also issue radiological criteria for the termination of licenses. The State's criteria riust be at least as stringent as the Commission's in order for the State program to be found compatible, and may be more stringent than the Commission's. Based on past experience, most Agreement States will likely adopt ths Commission's cleanup criteria, which are supported by the data presented in the Commission's Generic Environmental impact Statement for its final cleanup rule. The proposed amendment would avoid the development of conflicts between the standards prescribed by CERCLA or EPA, on the one hand, and the criteria developed by the Commission and the Agreements States, on the other hand, i
The proposed amendment would make it clear that the standards issued by the Commission t
and Agreer~ ant States would Ovem cleanup of Atomic Energy Act material at licensed i
facilities. Tne Commission or an Agreement State would invoke the application of CERCLA only in circumstances where it is necessary to effect adequate cleanup. That could conceivably be the case in rare cases where the regulatory efforts of the NRC or an Agreement State have not accomplished results that are satisfactory to the NRC or the Agreement State.
The amendment of section 101(10)(K) would make it clear that the exceptions to the notification and liability provisions uf CERCLA sections 102 and 107 that apply to Federally permitted releases of Atomic Energy Act material by a licensee also apply to a release of Atomic Energy Act material after a license has been terminated. This would ensure that releases presenting the same risk receive the same treatment under the notification and liability requirements of the Act.
L w
m w
,s wwr y.
s
.n v
y'ny-rw e'
e
.c ; _
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION PROPOSED i
DRAFT LEGISI.ATION TO AMEND CERCLA
- 1. Section 121 of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Usbility Act of 1980 (42 U.S.C. 9621) is further amended by adding the following new paragraph at the end of subsection (b):*
'(4) SOURCE, BYPRODUCT, AND SPECIAL NUCLEAR MATERIAL-No cuthority of this Act may be used to commence an administrative orjudicial action with respect to source, special nuclear, or byproduct material that is subject to decontamination regulations issued by the Nucisar Regulatory Commission for license tenninetion under the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, or by a State which has entered into an agreement pursuard to section 274b. of that Act, unless such action is requested by the Nuclear Regulatory Comm(asion or, in the esse of such material under the jurisdiction of a State which has entered into an agreement pursuant to section 274b. of that Act, the Governor of the State.
- 2. Section 101(10) of the Comprehensive Environmantal Response, Compensation and Uability Act (42 U.S.C. $9601(10)) is amended by inserting the following before the period at the end of paragraph (K):
l
- or any release of such ms.
r M accordance with reguladora el the Nuclear Regulatory Commission following termination of a licenso issued by the Nuclear
' Regulatory Commission pursuant to the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (42 U.S.C. $2011 et seq.) or by a State acting under an Agreement entered into pursuant to section 274 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954."
Note that the section of the bill that contains this amendment should also contain a separate provision that provides the following:
l "the amendment of section 101(10)(K) contained in this section shall be effective only j
with respect to licenses terminated on or after the effectiva date of this Act.'
r l
- Note that this placement of the proposed amendment of section 121 is based on draft bill provisions developed by members of the House Commerce Committee. The exact placement of the amendment in the legislation will depend on the version of the bill under consideration.
Conforming changes may also be needed in other provisions of the bill.
!i l'
I l
\\
7 %s o,mo mm P.
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
~
I WAsHIN@ ton, D.C. SteeMcM November 7, 1997 The Honorable Michael G. Oxley House Commerce Committee Subcommittee on Finance and Hazardous Materials U.S. House of Representatives West.ington, DC 20515-3504
Dear Congressman Oxley:
The Commission has concems in several areas that the NRC hopes could be addressed in Superfund reauthorization legislation, in particular, the Commission would like to see
- legislation which would achieve finality in Commission decisions in site decontamination and decommissioning, avoid negative impact on NRC's Agreement State programs and avoid inappropriate use of Safe Drinking Water Act established Maximum Contaminant Levels for cleanup of radionuclides. The Commission has written previously to the Cong>ess stating policy views on these issues and suggesting legislation that would address these issues.
On October 10, igg 7, Chairman Shirley Ann Jackson wrote you in support of a draft legislative product based upon staff tn staff discussions. Based on additional staff ciscussions, the NRC could suppor <' e enclosed draft legislation, which would address the basic issues.
If you wish to discuss any of these matters further, please feel free to contact me or my staff.
Sincerely, Dennis K. Rathbun, Director Office of Congressional Affairs
Enclosure:
As Stated 9
e 9
e
e e,.-,L-NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSlo 4 PROPOSED DRAFT LEGISLATION TO AMEND CERCLA
- 1. Section 121 of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act of 1980 (42 U.S.C. $9621) is further amended by adding the following new paragraph at the end of subsection (b);*
- (4) SOURCE, BYPRODUCT, AND SPECIAL NUCLEAR MATERIAL.-No authority of this Act may be used to commence an administrative or judicial action with respect to source, special nuclear or byproduct material that is subject to decontamination regulations issued by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission for license termination under the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, or by a State which has entered into an agreement pursuant to section 247b. of that Act, unless such action is requested by t** Nuclear Regulatory Commission or, in the osse of such material under the jurisdiction of a State which has enter 0d into an agreement pursuant to sec' ion 2476.
of that Act, the Govemor of the Stat:,.
- 2. Section 101(10) of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (42 U.S.C. $9601(10)) is amended by inserting the following before the period at the end cf pers ;raph (K):
' or any release of such material in accordance with regulations of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission following termination of a license issued by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission pursuant to the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (42 USC $2011 et seq.) or by a State acting under an agreement entered into pursuant to section 274 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954.
l l
i
- Note that this placement of the proposed amendment of section 121 is based on draft bill provisions developed by members of the House Commerce Committee. The exact I
placement of the amendment in the legislation will depend on the version of the bill undsr consideration. Conforming changes may also be needed in other provisions of the bill.
^
--~ ~
t TOHgitif Of (fjt EnittD CIAtti IElasismaton, DC 20515 J-NovemSer 7,1997 Mike Oxley Chairman Finance and Hazardous Materials Subcon.mittee House Committee on Commerce U.S. House ofRepresentatives Washington, D.C. 20515
Dear Mike:
As you consider comprehensive Superfund reform legislation this year, we urge you to consider a provision to crimre that the Environmental Protection Agency accords due deference to the decisions on the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) with respect to the cleanup ofradionuclides at licensed nuclear facilities.
p i
'[,#
The Subcommittee on Energy and Power hasjurisdiction over the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (AEA), which gives the NRC broad authority over the regulation of radioactive materials. NRC is the pre-eminent authority within the federal govemment g9 5
on the commercial use of rah +ive material in a msaner that is protectiv s ofhuman health and the environment. Accordingly, Congress has entrusted them thraugh the AEA with the authority and responsibility to regulate the use of such materials in a safe
.h g# j(
manner. While the AEA has long authorized the Environmental Protection Agency (b
(EPA) to set radiological dose standards, EPA has so far chosen not to exercise that authority.
Earlier this year, NRC issued a rule on the decontamination and decommissioning
$h
- g ofli-wl nuclear facilities. This rule set standards for radladon fmm any l
decommissioned site that are conUtem with, and, in fact, well below accepted
/
l international standards for radiation to provide an added margin ofsafety. NRC initially J
proposed this rule in 1994, and spent three years soliciting, responding to and
- d l
incorporatir.g commma from a broad variety of stakeholders, including EPA.
l EPA, as you know, hasjurisdiction under the Superfund law for the cleanup of pollutants, contaminants and hazardous substances ~ including radionuclides - at contaminated facilities across the country. Under Superfund, EPA is required to clean up these sites to a level that is protective of human health and the environment. These cleanups must comply with " applicable, relevant and appropriate" remedial requirements of federal and State law.
Ma*49 Se elC480 teF#
t i
i Congrt55 of (fjt Cnittb Ctatt5 Elasinngton, DC 20515
'I
~
November 7,1997 Mike Oxley Chairman Finance and Hazardous Materials Subcomminee House Committee on Commerce U.S. House of Representatives Washington,D.C. 20515
Dear Mike:
As you consider comprehensive Superfund reform legislation this year, we u.ge you to consider a provision to ensure that the Environmental Protection Agency accords duc deference to the decisions of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) with respect to the cleanup ofradionuclides at licensed nuclast facilities.
The Subcomminee on Energy and Power hasju.isdicdon over the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (AEA), which gives the NRC broad authority over the regulation of radioactive materials. NRC is the pre-eminent authority within the federal govemment on the commercial use of r=4-ive material in a manner that is protective ofhuman health and the environment. Accordingly, Congress has entrusted them through the AEA with the authority and responsibility to regulate the use of such materials in a safe manner. While the AEA has long authorized the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to set radiological dose standards, EPA has so far chosen not to exercise that authority.
Earlier this year, NRC issued a rule on the decontamination and decommissioning oflicensed nuclear facilities. This rule set standards for radiation from any demmissioned site that are consistent with, and, in fact, well below accepted international standards for radiation to prmide an added margin ofsafety. NRC initially proposed this rule in 1994, and spent three years soliciting, responding to and incorporating comments from a broad variety of stakeholders, including EPA.
EPA, as you know, hasjurisdiction under the Superfund law for the cleanup of pollutants, contaminants and hazardous substances - including radionuclides - at contamied facilities across the country. Under Sup:rfund, EPA is required to clean up these sites to a level that is protective of human health and the environment. These cleanups must comply with " applicable, relevant and appropriate" remedial requirements of federal and State law.
l m..
..... +
p.,
Page2 s
DA has long considered NRC standards for the cleanup af radioactive
-. so be a protective requirement of federal law applicable to the cleanup materials. Therefore, any site cleaned up under an NRC license termiassion a would not be required to undergo an additional cleanup for adioactive ma Superfund, since EPA would wind up using the applicable NRC s the she.
Administrator Carol Browner wrote NRC Chainnsa Shirley Jackson e year that EPA would find NRC's rule "not protec I
views in the new cleanup rule. Potentially, this could masa that, afte under NRC's rule, EPA could require that the site be cleaned up a second tim unknown EPA standard, which has never been publicly reviewed.
l We find this reversal of EPA policy, and the lack of deference to the fed agency with primary expertise on radiological efrecta, dianaacerting.
unnecessarily raise fears about the government's efforts to protect its cithsm j
addition, h presents an unacceptable situation for the regulated comm ry. of wasting resources doing the same job twice.
the j
We ask that you include in your Superfund rwanhorintion bill the attache amendr.sent proposed by the NP.C. We believe this narrowly, but WJy l
the problem raised by NRC. This Ww will promote a grenser level l
the decontamination and deconunissioning process and, most important maintain full pr*+a for hum an health and the environment.
Thank you in advaocra for your consideration. If you have any que do not hesitate to contact us er Patrick O'Keefe with Cons Grace Warren with Congressa an Hall (5 6673).
Best regards.
Sincerely,
[
)&
/
M6
/
3 llalphHaf Dan Schaefer Ranking Member Chairman Energy andPower Subcomminee Energy and Power Subcommittee House Commlace on Comrnerce House Committee onCommerce
- ~ L
- -#"-'"-tr-
,,y
,_