[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 106 (Friday, June 3, 2005)]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E5-2850]
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket No. 50-029]
Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact
Related to License Termination Plan for the Yankee Atomic Electric
Company; License DPR-003, Rowe, MA
AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
ACTION: Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John Hickman, Division of Waste
Management and Environmental Protection, Office of Nuclear Material
Safety and Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Mail Stop
T7E18, Washington, DC 20555-00001. Telephone: (301) 415-3017; e-mail
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) (or the staff) is
considering Yankee Atomic Electric Company's request for approval of
the License Termination Plan (LTP) submitted for the Yankee Nuclear
Power Station (YNPS) in Rowe, Massachusetts. The NRC has prepared this
environmental assessment (EA) to determine the environmental impacts
(radiological and non-radiological) of approving the LTP and of
subsequently releasing the site for unrestricted use (as defined in 10
CFR 20.1402). This is consistent with the final rule, 10 CFR 50.82 that
appeared in the Federal Register on July 29, 1996 (61 FR 39278,
Decommissioning of Nuclear Power Reactors), which established the
criteria for license termination and the requirement for a license
As discussed in Section 1.3 below, the primary scope of this EA is
the evaluation of the impacts of the radiation release criteria and the
adequacy of the final status survey, as presented in the LTP.
YNPS is a deactivated pressurized-water nuclear reactor situated on
a small portion of a 2,200-acre site. The site is located in
northwestern Massachusetts in Franklin County, near the southern
Vermont border. The plant and most of the 2,200-acre site are owned by
the Yankee Atomic Electric Company (YAEC). A small portion on the west
side of the site (along the east bank of the Sherman Reservoir) is
owned by USGen New England, Inc. The YNPS plant was constructed between
1958 and 1960 and operated commercially at 185 megawatts electrical
production (after a 1963 upgrade) until 1992. In 1992, YAEC determined
that closing the plant would be in the best economic interest of its
customers. In December 1993, NRC amended the YNPS operating license to
retain a ``possession-only'' status. YAEC began dismantling and
decommissioning activities at that time. These activities continue and
their relevance with respect to this EA is discussed in Section 1.3.
The spent nuclear fuel remaining onsite was transferred in 2003 from
the spent fuel pool to the independent spent fuel storage installation
(ISFSI) located adjacent to the plant. The spent fuel pool was
subsequently drained in compliance with regulatory requirements.
In November 2003, YAEC submitted its LTP with a goal to complete
decommissioning by mid-2005 (YAEC, 2003). Draft Revision 1 to the plan
was submitted September 2, 2004 (YAEC, 2004a), in response to a NRC
request for additional information (NRC, 2004). Subsequently, on
November 19, 2004, YAEC submitted Revision 1 to the LTP (YAEC, 2004f).
YAEC is proposing to decontaminate the YNPS site to meet the
unrestricted release criteria of 10 CFR 20.1402. Additionally, YAEC has
stated that it intends to comply with the Commonwealth of Massachusetts
cleanup criteria of 105 CMR 120.291 established by the Massachusetts
Department of Public Health (MDPH) and the Massachusetts Department of
Environmental Protection (MDEP). Most site structures will be
demolished to grade or entirely removed, and most buried piping or
utilities removed. Basements will be perforated to allow groundwater to
flow through during remediation. The following structures will remain
after phased release of the site: the administration building, guard
building, a small switchyard outside the guard building, the ISFSI, the
ISFSI security building, and access roads. After the irradiated fuel
has been removed from the site and prior to license termination the
ISFSI and ISFSI security building will be removed.
1.2 Need for the Proposed Action
Licensees of nuclear facilities must apply to the NRC before
terminating a license voluntarily and decommissioning a facility. YAEC
submitted the LTP, as required by 10 CFR 50.82, before requesting
license termination. The NRC must determine whether the proposed
procedures, adequacy of radiation criteria for license termination, and
the final status survey planned for completing decommissioning appear
sufficient and, if implemented according to the plan, would demonstrate
that the site is suitable for release.
To fulfill its obligations under the National Environmental Policy
Act (NEPA), the NRC must evaluate the radiological and nonradiological
environmental impacts associated with approval of the LTP and
subsequent termination of the license. These evaluations involve an
assessment of the impacts of the remaining buildings or structures and
residual material present at the site at the time of license
As described in the Statements of Consideration accompanying the
Final Rule on Decommissioning of Nuclear Power Reactors (61 FR 39278),
the NRC must consider the following in order to approve the LTP:
(1) The licensee's plan for assuring that adequate funds will be
available for final site release,
(2) radiation release criteria for license termination, and
(3) the adequacy of the final survey required to verify that these
release criteria have been met.
1.3.1 Issues Studied in Detail
Consistent with NEPA regulations and guidance to focus on
environmental issues of concern, impacts to land use, water resources,
and human health were selected for detailed study because of their
potential to be affected by an approval of the LTP. These issues are
discussed in this EA due to the potential for impacts from remaining
structures and/or residual material left at the site.
1.3.2 Issues Eliminated From Detailed Study
Issues eliminated from detailed study in this EA include air
quality, historic and cultural resources, ecological resources
(including endangered and threatened species), socioeconomic
conditions, transportation, noise, visual and scenic quality, off-site
waste management, and accident scenarios. These issues were eliminated
because they would not be affected by implementation of the LTP at the
site (i.e., ensuring the site meets radiation release criteria in the
final status survey). The financial assurance review, which is a
required part of the LTP approval, is not related to human health or
the environment and will not be discussed in this EA.
Impacts from decommissioning activities at the YNPS site are not
evaluated in this EA. NRC has already assessed power plant
decommissioning impacts in programmatic NEPA documents. Specifically,
the environmental impact statement for decommissioning activities (NRC,
1988, 2002) discusses the range of impacts expected from power plant
decommissioning activities. Further, in reviewing the LTP, the staff
also determined that the environmental impacts were enveloped by the
generic analysis performed in support of ``Radiological Criteria for
License Termination.'' (62 FR 39058) Decommissioning impacts at the
YNPS site were also addressed in the YAEC's Post-Shutdown
Decommissioning Activities Report (PSDAR) (YAEC, 2000).
Additionally, the Commission has made a generic determination that,
if necessary, spent fuel generated in any reactor can be stored safely
and without significant environmental impacts for at least 30 years
beyond the plant's licensed operating life (64 FR 68005 and 10 CFR
51.23). Therefore, this EA does not evaluate environmental impacts of
spent fuel storage in the onsite independent spent fuel storage
installation (ISFSI). However, the ISFSI is discussed briefly in
Sections 3.2 and 4.1.
2.0 Proposed Action and Alternatives
2.1 The Proposed Action
The proposed action is the NRC's review and approval of YAEC's LTP.
The NRC staff will review the plan to ensure that the license
termination activities (i.e., designation of radiation release criteria
and design of the final status survey) will comply with NRC
regulations. If NRC approves the plan, the approval will be issued in
the form of an amendment to the YNPS license (Possession Only License
YAEC plans to complete decommissioning of the YNPS site for
unrestricted use, as described in the LTP and consistent with NRC
regulations at 10 CFR 20.1402. In addition, YAEC intends to comply with
the Commonwealth of Massachusetts cleanup criteria in 105 CMR 120.291
specified by the MDPH and by the MDEP in the Massachusetts Contingency
Plan (MCP) and Solid Waste Regulations, as applicable. To meet NRC's
unrestricted release criteria, areas of the site will be divided into
survey units. These units will be sampled or surveyed in accordance
with the LTP to verify that site-specific criteria have been met. These
criteria, known as ``derived concentration guideline levels'' (DCGLs),
are discussed further in Sections 3.4 and 4.3.
Initially, YAEC plans to release all but 87 acres of the site for
unrestricted use after having passed the final survey. The remaining 87
acres would remain on the license until the spent fuel is shipped
offsite for permanent disposal (see Section 4.1) and the ISFSI is
decommissioned. At that time, the remaining acreage would again be
surveyed and, contingent on survey results, the license terminated.
As an alternative to the proposed action, the staff considered the
``no-action alternative.'' The no-action alternative would maintain the
status quo. This would result in no change to current environmental
impacts, which are larger than those resulting from the proposed
3.0 Affected Environment
3.1 Site Description
The YNPS site is located at 49 Yankee Road, approximately three
miles north-northwest of the northwestern Massachusetts town of Rowe,
in Franklin County.
The site is adjacent to the Vermont border on land characterized by
heavily wooded, steep hills. It is situated within the Deerfield River
Valley and abuts the eastern shores of the Deerfield River and Sherman
Reservoir. Hills bounding the Deerfield River valley rise 500 to 1000
feet above the site, reaching elevations of 2100 feet above mean sea
level (ERM, 2004a). The combined population of the two nearest towns,
Rowe and Monroe, is less than 500.
The YNPS property consists of about 2,200 acres in the towns of
Rowe and Monroe. Most of this property (approximately 1,825-acres) is
owned by YAEC; the remaining portion is owned by USGen New England,
Inc., (USGen). The USGen property is a narrow strip of upland to the
west of the plant, extending along the entire eastern bank of Sherman
Reservoir. USGen also owns the reservoir itself, the Sherman Dam,
property west of the Sherman Reservoir, and property downstream of
Sherman Dam encompassing both banks of the Deerfield River. YNPS
operations have been conducted on about 15 developed acres, primarily
on land owned by YAEC, but extending onto property owned by USGen (ERM,
The YNPS site is divided into three areas based on past site
activities and land use:
1. Industrial Area: approximately 12-acre fenced portion of the
site that contains industrial plant structures and operations.
2. Radiologically Controlled Area (RCA): 4-acre parcel within the
industrial area that contains radiological materials associated with
3. Non-Industrial Area: remaining land outside the fenced
industrial area that contains the USGen Sherman Station hydroelectric
plant, the Sherman Reservoir and Dam, transmission lines traversing the
site, administration building and visitor center, roadways, fill areas
and undeveloped woodland (YAEC, 2004b; ERM, 2004a).
During construction of the YNPS facility, some construction and
demolition debris was placed into what is now the Southeast
Construction Fill Area (SCFA). This area of approximately 1.5 acres
contains soil and rock, in addition to wood, concrete, asphalt, and
metal debris. In accordance with MDEP Solid Waste permits, YAEC plans
to remove the materials from this area, returning native soils to other
areas of the site for regrading.
Ecology and Cultural Resources
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service confirmed in correspondence with
YAEC that no federally listed endangered or threatened species occur on
the site. (ERM, 2004b) Massachusetts species of concern have been
identified on the YNPS site. A northern spring salamander was
identified in a headwater channel of Wheeler Brook. The bristly black
currant was discovered in a drainage area along the Wheeler Brook
Divertment, outside the site's eastern fenceline. Longnose suckers are
documented to exist in the Sherman Reservoir. YAEC is working with the
Massachusetts Division of Fisheries & Wildlife under the National
Heritage and Endangered Species Program (NHESP) to develop a plan for
the protection of these species during the remainder of decommissioning
Several resources of cultural and historic significance exist at
the site; however, none of these have been affected by decommissioning
activities. A 2003 report documents these resources, most of which are
located in the undeveloped uplands (PAL, 2003). The report also
includes a management plan that meets Massachusetts Historical
3.1.1 Existing Radiological Contamination
The majority of the site located outside the industrial area was
determined to be non-impacted (about
2170 acres), as documented in Section 2.5 of the LTP. The non-impacted
area consists mostly of forested, rugged terrain that has not been
disturbed. This determination is based on both the Historical Site
Assessment (YAEC, 2004c) and additional characterization surveys.
Radiologically-impacted areas of the site include the industrial
area and surrounding open land areas extending out approximately 1000
feet from the vapor container (now dismantled). The radiologically
impacted areas comprise approximately 30 acres, the majority of which
are minimally impacted (contain residual radioactivity at levels no
greater than a fraction of the proposed DCGLs). For a more detailed
description of initial radiological characterization of the impacted
area, refer to the YNPS Historical Site Assessment and Section 2.4 of
The Historical Site Assessment also identified low levels of
contamination, primarily Co-60, in the sediments of Sherman Reservoir.
This radioactive material was deposited as a result of permitted and
monitored radioactive liquid releases. Characterization surveys showed
the radioactive material concentration is a small fraction of the
proposed DCGLs. Areas with potentially contaminated sediments are
included in the final status surveys for further evaluation.
Site characterization activities were performed in two phases,
initial and continuing. The results of the initial phase were submitted
to the NRC in January 2004. After a review of the results of the
initial characterization, YAEC initiated the continuing phase, which
will be ongoing throughout the remainder of the decommissioning
activities. The results would be used to guide the remediation
activities, and to confirm the appropriateness of the radiological
source terms used for the dose model and basis for the corresponding
DCGLs by media.
Site characterization surveys are conducted to determine the nature
and extent of radiological contamination at the YNPS site. The purpose
of the site characterization survey is to: (1) Permit planning for
remediation activities; (2) demonstrate that it is unlikely that
significant quantities of residual radioactivity have gone undetected
at the site after remediation; (3) provide information to design the
final site survey (i.e., identify survey unit classifications for
impacted areas); and (4) provide input to dose modeling (NRC, 2003).
Site characterization activities include the collection of various
types of samples, including soil, sediment, water, concrete, metal, and
surface residues. Surveys and sampling conducted during site
characterization are based on knowledge of the plant history and likely
areas of contamination. In accordance with 10 CFR 50.82(a)(9)(ii)(A),
radiological conditions of the site were provided in Section 2.0 of the
LTP. The results of sample analyses and the use of the results in
identifying the significant radionuclides expected to be present after
remediation are described in Attachments 2B and 2C of Chapter 2 of the
YAEC conducted a series of sample analyses using site media
believed to represent the distribution of radionuclide contaminants,
and their decay-corrected isotopic distribution, over the operational
history of the plant. In its technical basis document, YAEC describes
the method that was used to determine radionuclides that could be
present at the site (YAEC 2003). The radionuclides include, but are not
limited to: 3H, 14C, 54Mn,
55Fe, 57Co, 58Co, 59Ni,
60Co, 63Ni, 65Zn, 90Sr,
94Nb, 99Tc, 106Ru, 108mAg,
125Sb, 129I, 134Cs, 137Cs,
144Ce, 145Pm, 152Eu, 154Eu,
155Eu, 238Pu, 239Pu, 240Pu,
241Pu, 241Am, 243Cm, and
244Cm. These radionuclides include fission and activation
products, which are typical of those found in pressurized-water reactor
plants. These radionuclides are also described in two NRC documents:
NUREG/CR-0130, ``Technology, Safety and Costs of Decommissioning a
Reference Pressurized Water Reactor Power Station,'' (Smith et al.,
1978) and NUREG/CR-3474, ``Long-Lived Activation Products in Reactor
Materials,'' (Evans et al., 1984).
Based on dose model assumptions (including the expected time at
which the site will be remediated) YAEC has identified the following 22
radionuclides as potentially contributing to the dose after license
termination: 3H, 14C, 55Fe,
60Co, 63Ni, 90Sr, 94Nb,
99Tc, 108mAg, 125Sb, 134Cs,
137Cs, 152Eu, 154Eu, 155Eu,
238Pu, 239Pu, 240Pu, 241Pu,
241Am, 243Cm, and 244Cm. Accordingly,
these radionuclides would form the basis in planning and conducting all
final status surveys, and demonstrating compliance with the site
3.1.2 Existing Hazardous and Chemical Contamination
Over the YNPS plant's operating life, a number of hazardous
materials or chemicals were used throughout the industrial area. Some
of these materials are: water treatment and other maintenance
chemicals, fuel, lubricating and transformer oils (including oils
containing polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs)), and chemicals used for
the various reactor systems (including boron, hydrazine, 1,1,1-
trichloroethane, and trisodium phosphate). Additionally, some of the
building structures and surfaces contain asbestos, PCB-containing
paint, and/or lead-based paint (ERM, 2004a).
While the plant was operating, it was classified as a small
quantity generator of hazardous wastes under the Resource Conservation
and Recovery Act (RCRA). However, YAEC is currently a large quantity
generator (generating over 1,000 kilograms of hazardous wastes per
month) due to the increased volume of hazardous and mixed wastes
associated with decommissioning activities. The MDEP regulates YAEC's
hazardous waste generation and storage activities.
Contamination and Remediation
Nonradiological chemical cleanup at the site must comply with MDEP
regulations under the Massachusetts Contingency Plan (MCP) (310 CMR
40.00), which regulates the investigation and cleanup of oil and
hazardous materials releases to soil or water (ERM, 2004a), and the
MDEP Solid Waste Regulations at 310 CMR 19.000, which regulate the
investigation and remediation of the SCFA and the review of beneficial
reuse determination (BUD) permits. YAEC had intended to remediate
onsite contamination to enable future use of the site without
restrictions, however deed restrictions will be utilized in the
remediation of the industrial use of the site.
The primary non-radiological contaminant of concern at the site is
PCBs. A release of PCB-containing paint chips from the vapor container
(reactor containment) into the Sherman Reservoir was discovered in the
spring of 2000. The paint chips migrated to the reservoir through the
stormwater drainage system. Immediate action was taken to remediate
some of the storm drain sediments. Additional cleanup has been ongoing
since 2001, including remediation of soils in landscaped areas onsite
and of the sediments in the Sherman Reservoir and western storm
drainage ditch. PCBs in soils and sediments are being remediated to
meet the requirements of both the MDEP and the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) generally
to a level of 1 milligrams/kilogram (mg/kg, or parts-per-million). YAEC
has documented its PCB remediation program in three reports prepared
according to MCP
requirements: Phase II Comprehensive Site Assessment, Phase III
Remedial Action Plan, and Phase IV Remedy Implementation Plan.
Massachusetts and Vermont public health agencies have issued
advisories due to the presence of mercury in fish from the Sherman
Reservoir. Atmospheric deposition from industrial activities is a
likely source of the mercury found in these fish. Additionally, PCBs
were detected at trace levels in the tissues of fish in the vicinity of
the East Storm Drain Outfall. The source of the PCBs is likely the PCB-
containing paint chips that migrated into the reservoir. The licensee
is controlling any remaining PCB-containing paint so no further
environmental impact is expected. As discussed in Section 3.1.2, YAEC
is in the process of remediating the PCB-contaminated areas of the
reservoir near the East Storm Drain Outfall (ERM, 2004a).
YAEC began an additional site-wide characterization of soils,
groundwater, and sediments in 2003 and identified several areas for
further study. According to the June 2004 Site Characterization Status
Report (ERM, 2004c) and the January 2005 Phase II Comprehensive Site
Assessment Report, minor contamination in groundwater and sediment, as
well as localized areas of contaminated soil, were identified as
requiring further evaluation. Groundwater contaminants are discussed in
Section 3.3.2. Sediment impacts include PCBs, which is consistent with
previous investigations. Soil impacts include low levels of the
following compounds: petroleum hydrocarbon impacts near parking areas;
PCBs near the transformer yard; dioxin near the former incinerator;
lead around the former shooting range; and beryllium near the ISFSI and
former cooling water discharge structure. YAEC will continue to work
with the MDEP to fulfill MCP requirements and demonstrate that the
entire site has been adequately characterized and remediated where
necessary, according to MDEP regulations. When the site is released
from NRC jurisdiction, it will remain under state jurisdiction until
all nonradiological contamination issues are resolved with the MDEP.
As discussed earlier, most site buildings are being demolished to
ground level, and some foundations (notably, the Spent Fuel Pool/Ion
Exchange Pit, or SFP/IXP) will be removed entirely. Basements will be
remediated to meet the DCGLs before they are perforated to facilitate
groundwater flow. Soils will be used to backfill the basements and
other holes. Additionally, concrete demolition debris generated from
dismantlement activities may be used as backfill material if it passes
the final status survey or contains no detectable contamination.
Backfill using concrete demolition debris will be conducted under a BUD
permit from MDEP, which will include a deed restriction and compliance
with MDEP and MDPH requirements for such reuse.
3.2 Land Use
YNPS industrial and administrative operations are conducted on
approximately 15 acres of land, primarily owned by YAEC but also
including property owned by USGen, as discussed in Section 3.1. The
USGen property, consisting of a segment that extends along the entire
eastern bank of the Sherman Reservoir, is subject to a 2001 Grant of
Conservation Restriction issued by the Massachusetts Department of
Environmental Management. USGen has agreed to restrict future uses of
its property for preservation purposes, except as necessary for
operation of its hydroelectric power plant (ERM, 2004a).
Approximately 87 acres of the site is dedicated to the long term
storage (about 20 years) of spent fuel and other high-level radioactive
waste in the ISFSI. The ISFSI consists of a concrete pad within a fence
and a buffer area with a 300-meter radius.
Transmission lines and two public roads traverse the site.
Readsboro Road runs in a north-south direction approximately 1500 feet
west of the plant, across the river. Monroe Hill Road is approximately
2500 feet from the plant to the southwest, running in a north-south
direction between the towns of Rowe and Monroe.
Some farms and a few commercial sites are located in the
surrounding area. There are no exclusively commercial areas within five
miles of the site. The only industrial property in the area is the
adjacent USGen hydroelectric station and five associated powerhouses
that are situated near the Sherman and other reservoirs along the
Deerfield River. The nearest highway and railroad right-of-way are each
located about five miles south of the site. Several public lands and
conservation areas are located within five miles of the site (YAEC,
1999, 2004a). The river is used for recreation and sport fishing, as
well as for producing hydroelectric power.
3.3 Water Resources
The discussion of water resources is divided into surface water and
groundwater. The following sections provide a summary of the
characteristics of each within and around the YNPS site.
3.3.1 Surface Water
Surface Water Features
Surface water bodies on the site or in its immediate vicinity
include the Deerfield River, Sherman Reservoir, Wheeler Brook and an
associated tributary, a divertment from Wheeler Brook, a discharge
canal, and the stormwater drainage systems for the eastern and western
halves of the Industrial Area. Wheeler Brook and its tributaries flow
about 400 to 500 feet outside the Industrial Area around the south and
east sides of the site before Wheeler Brook discharges into Sherman
Reservoir (Framatome, 2003).
Sherman Reservoir was formed by the installation of Sherman Dam on
the Deerfield River. The reservoir is approximately two miles long, a
quarter mile wide, and up to 75 feet deep along its central channel
(Framatome, 2003). The discharge canal, which discharges into the
Sherman Reservoir, was constructed to receive return water from the
plant's cooling water processes.
Stormwater at the site flows into two systems, the East Storm Drain
System and the West Storm Drain System, draining the eastern and
western halves of the Industrial Area, respectively. The East Storm
Drain System discharges to the Sherman Reservoir, while the West Storm
Drain System discharges to the Deerfield River. Stormwater from the
undeveloped uplands is captured by the Wheeler Brook Divertment. The
divertment flows into Wheeler Brook, which flows into the Sherman
Wetlands on the site are located in several areas and primarily
border water bodies such as the Sherman Reservoir, Deerfield River,
Wheeler Brook, and associated tributaries. Additional wetland areas
were identified in the two stormwater detention basins at the site.
Some isolated wetlands exist in the southern part of the site. Wetlands
were formally delineated in an Abbreviated Notice of Resource Area
Delineation (Woodlot, 2004), which was approved by the Town of Rowe
Conservation Commission in March 2004.
During the plant operation, stormwater, service water, and
noncontact cooling water were discharged as wastewaters through seven
outfalls to the Sherman Reservoir and the West Storm Drain System (to
the river). Currently, stormwater and treated wastewaters from the
laboratory or from decommissioning activities are
discharged through three remaining outfalls. Discharges are approved
under a National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit
issued jointly by the MDEP and EPA, which sets specific limits for pH,
oil and grease, suspended solids, and flow, and also requires the
maintenance of a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (ERM, 2004b).
These discharges are also monitored and treated for radiological
materials according to NRC requirements.
A temporary wastewater processing system treats and stores
wastewaters received from the radioactive laboratory sump discharge
line. This water is treated and then batch-discharged. Discharges of
these wastewaters through the treatment plant or through the stormwater
drainage system are covered under the NPDES permit. The temporary
treatment system will be dismantled and disposed of off-site as
radioactive waste (YAEC, 2004a).
The auxiliary service water system is being used to supply water
from the Sherman Reservoir to support decontamination and dismantling
activities. The system will be dismantled once it is no longer needed
for these activities (YAEC, 2004a).
Three septic systems with several associated leach fields have been
used at the YNPS site. The leach fields are located generally on the
western portion of the site. Three of these leach fields have been in
use since 1978, when two formerly-used leach fields were abandoned in
Aquifers and Geology
The groundwater system at the YNPS site is a product of the
geology, particularly the petrology and hydraulic conductivity of the
rocks, the glacial history, the geomorphology, and the hydrology of
this area. The YNPS site is located on the east side of the Berkshire
Mountains predominantly on a terrace of the Deerfield River. The
terrace is recessed into the east side of a two mile wide glacially-
derived river valley where the valley walls rise to over 1,000 feet
above the river elevation. The YNPS plant is adjacent to a dammed
portion of the Deerfield River, Sherman Dam and Sherman Reservoir. The
local gradient for this portion of the Deerfield River is 28.4 feet/
mile over a river distance of about 33 miles from the Vermont border at
the Sherman Pond to the West Deerfield, Massachusetts gauging station
The local groundwater system is extremely complex, with three
groundwater-bearing units, from top to bottom: stratified drift,
glaciolacustrine, and bedrock. The stratified drift unit contains
permeable surficial sands and gravels,10 to 20 feet thick, that are
water-laid, ice-contact deposits derived from a melting glacier. The
glaciolacustrine unit comprises sediments up to 260 feet thick of
glaciolacustrine origin, containing multiple, relatively thin water-
bearing units of fine to medium-grained sand, interspersed within
relatively impermeable, fine-grained sand and silts. The bedrock unit
is a gray, medium-grained, moderately foliated metamorphic rock that
contains significant amounts of megacrystals of plagioclase feldspar
albite. This bedrock is the upper member of the Lower Cambrian Hoosac
Formation, which is relatively competent with few fractures (YAEC,
Contamination and Monitoring
As discussed in Section 3.1.2, YAEC began additional site-wide
characterization of groundwater in 2003 and identified several areas
for further study. According to the June 2004 Site Characterization
Status Report (ERM, 2004c), nonradiological contamination in
groundwater and sediment, as well as localized areas of contaminated
soil, were identified that required further evaluation. Non-
radiological groundwater contaminants identified were found to be in
isolated areas and do not suggest the presence of a plume. These
contaminants include low levels of 1,1-dichloroethane, PCBs, and
petroleum hydrocarbons. YAEC will continue to work with the MDEP to
fulfill MCP requirements and demonstrate that groundwater has been
adequately characterized and remediated where necessary.
Radiological groundwater monitoring at the YNPS site (excluding
monitoring for the Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program) has
occurred since the plant shut down in 1992. Currently, 39 monitoring
wells are in operation throughout the site. Monitoring wells were
installed in stages, as follows: two in the late 1970s, 15 in 1993-94,
21 from 1997 through 2001, and 17 during the summer of 2003, with 14 of
the older wells properly abandoned due to decommissioning (demolition)
activities. Most of the wells that were installed prior to 2003 are
located in the RCA, although a few are either downgradient or
upgradient of the RCA. All of the wells installed before 2003 except
one are shallow, ranging in depth from 7 to 31 feet below the land
surface. The exception is a 49-foot bedrock monitoring well in the RCA.
The monitoring wells installed during the summer of 2003 contain wells
screened as follows: three in the stratified drift unit, seven in the
glaciolacustrine unit, and seven in the bedrock unit.
Groundwater samples have been collected for radiological analysis
since 1993. Until 2003, YAEC analyzed the groundwater samples for
tritium, gross alpha, gross beta, and gamma spectroscopy. The
analytical results for these samples (i.e., groundwater samples from
monitoring wells screened primarily in the stratified drift unit)
indicated that only tritium was present above the minimum detection
concentration. The largest tritium concentrations were observed in
wells located immediately downgradient of the spent fuel pit and ion
exchange pit (SFP/IXP).
In 2003, YAEC made several changes to improve site characterization
and sampling and analytical procedures:
1. During the summer of 2003, YAEC installed 17 monitoring wells,
as mentioned above, to characterize the glaciolacustrine and bedrock
units more adequately. YAEC installed additional monitoring wells in
2004 and will install more as required by MDEP to improve its
characterization of groundwater at the site.
2. YAEC began quarterly sampling events in 2003, and in 2004
improved sampling procedures by measuring the groundwater levels in all
monitoring wells within a few hours before any water samples were
collected. YAEC has also committed to collecting the water samples from
the monitoring wells over a shorter time period.
3. YAEC improved and explained its analytical analysis of the
groundwater samples by analyzing for the radionuclides of concern at
the YNPS site. Table 2-6 of the LTP lists the radionuclides of concern
(or see Section 3.1.1). In July and November 2003, YAEC conducted
analyses for these radionuclides of concern and for Mn-54. Tritium was
the only plant-generated radionuclide that was detected in samples from
the July and November 2003 events.
The largest tritium concentration historically observed at the YNPS
site was groundwater flowing from Sherman Spring early in plant
operation, which is downgradient from the Sherman Dam and Sherman Pond
near the Deerfield River. Groundwater from Sherman Spring had a tritium
concentration of 7,195,000 picoCuries/liter (pCi/L) in December 1965.
The tritium contamination is reported to have been caused by a leakage
from the SFP/IXP, which was repaired in May 1965 and in 1979, when a
stainless-steel liner was installed. Tritium levels in groundwater
samples from Sherman Spring have decreased steadily over time, and have
varied from non-detectable (ND) to 890 picoCuries/liter in recent
Tritium concentrations from the July and November 2003, sampling
events are variable by space and time throughout the hydrogeologic
units at the site. The tritium plume extends from the source area at
the SFP/IXP towards Sherman Spring and the Deerfield River, with the
highest tritium concentrations present immediately downgradient of the
SFP/IXP. The maximum tritium concentrations were approximately 2,000
pCi/L in the stratified drift unit, 45,000 pCi/L in the
glaciolacustrine unit, and 6,000 pCi/L in the bedrock unit.
3.4 Human Health
Potential human health hazards associated with the YNPS site range
from potential exposure to very low levels of radioactivity in soils
and groundwater, to limited areas of relatively high levels of
radioactivity within the remaining portions of the reactor support
structures and systems.
The intent of the final decommissioning activity at the site is to
reduce radiological contamination at the site to meet NRC's
unrestricted release criteria, and to also meet the criteria of the
MDPH and MDEP. After decommissioning activities are complete, license
termination activities will verify adequacy of the radiological release
criteria (i.e., DCGLs) and the final status survey. Unrestricted use of
the site is defined in 10 CFR 20.1402, as follows:
A site will be considered acceptable for unrestricted use if the
residual radioactivity that is distinguishable from background
radiation results in a TEDE [total effective dose equivalent] to an
average member of the critical group that does not exceed 25 mrem
[millirem] (0.25 mSv) [milliSievert] per year, including that from
groundwater sources of drinking water, and that the residual
radioactivity has been reduced to levels that are as low as reasonably
achievable (ALARA) * * *.
As planned, the 0.25 mSv/yr (25 mrem/yr) TEDE all-pathway limit
would be achieved at the site through the application of DCGLs used to
measure the adequacy of remediation activities. The DCGLs in use at the
YNPS site were calculated using dose models based on guidance provided
in NUREG/CR-5512, Volumes 1, 2, and 3, NUREG/CR-6697, and the computer
codes RESRAD Version 6.21 and RESRAD-BUILD Version 3.21 code for
generating the DCGLs. These dose models translate residual
radioactivity into potential radiation doses to the public, based on
select land-use scenarios, exposure pathways, and identified critical
groups. A critical group is defined as the group of individuals
reasonably expected to receive the greatest exposure to residual
radioactivity given the assumptions of a given scenario. Such scenarios
and their associated modeling are designed to overestimate, rather than
underestimate, potential dose.
YAEC has also agreed to meet the following radiological site
criteria of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts: 1 mrem/yr for concrete
rubble used on-site as fill; 10 mrem/yr for the entire site; and the
risk criteria for cumulative radiological and non-radiological risk as
determined by a Risk Assessment according to the MCP.
4.0 Environmental Impacts
4.1 Land Use
YAEC plans to release eventually all of the property associated
with the YNPS site to local, state, or federal government or non-profit
entities for conservation purposes. YAEC has developed an American Land
Title Association survey to document the site's legal boundaries. In
addition, natural and cultural resources inventories and management
plans have been developed. The management plans specify the obligations
necessary to preserve the site for conservation (YAEC, 2004b).
Termination of the YAEC license is not reasonably expected to
result in any adverse impacts to onsite and adjacent land use. Soils
not meeting the radiological criteria for license termination will be
removed and disposed of at a licensed facility as low-level radioactive
waste. Initially, most of the YAEC-owned property would be released,
except for approximately 87 acres containing the spent fuel storage
facility and associated buffer zone. That acreage would be released
when the fuel is removed to a permanent repository and the storage
facility is decommissioned.
Land on and directly adjacent to the site is expected to remain
heavily wooded, with lightly populated communities in the surrounding
area. Recreational opportunities afforded by the Deerfield River will
likely continue and could increase.
The deed restriction required by the MDEP Solid Waste BUD permit
will require prior written approval by the MDEP for any use of the
former industrial area of the site other than as passive recreation,
and will prohibit excavations in that area.
4.2 Water Resources
Approval of the LTP and eventual termination of the license are not
anticipated to result in any significant impacts to either surface
water or groundwater. The approved radiation release criteria must be
met as a condition of license termination and release of the site.
4.2.1 Surface Water
Land areas from which precipitation runs off to surface waters,
will be subject to further investigation, remediation where necessary,
and the final status survey. YAEC will need to verify that DCGLs have
been met in accordance with Section 5 of the LTP, thus demonstrating
compliance with the release criteria. Further, YAEC will need to
demonstrate compliance with the MCP surface water requirements for both
nonradiological and radiological contaminants. YAEC's future license
termination also would not be expected to result in any adverse impact
to surface water flow or quality, as batch discharges will cease along
with other license termination activities.
Prior to license termination, the amount of impervious area will be
reduced by about 8 acres (from about 9.5 acres) due to revegetation of
areas currently occupied by buildings, roads, and parking lots (ERM,
2004d). YAEC intends to leave the current stormwater drainages
unaltered to prevent the destruction of wetland areas that have formed
in the drainages. Drainage pipes will be closed, so that discharges
will likely continue as sheet flow from the drainages into water
Both the existing water supply system (upgradient supply well) and
sewage system will remain in place. YAEC will inspect the remaining
septic systems (discussed in Section 3.3.1) for compliance with state
septic system regulations before the property title is transferred.
Groundwater monitoring wells have been installed and monitored in the
vicinity of the site septic systems.
Several closure activities are being conducted on or near wetlands
resources. YAEC has prepared an Integrated Permit Package to address
the regulatory requirements applicable to such activities (ERM, 2004d).
The activities requiring wetlands-related permits include PCB
remediation, decommissioning of circulating water intake and discharge
structures, removal of the Southeast Construction Fill Area,
implementation of Sherman Dam flood control measures, and regrading of
the site. Additionally, a wetlands restoration plan has been developed
(Woodlot, 2004) to implement the
permit requirements. Further information concerning wetlands activities
can be found in the Integrated Permit Package and the Wetland
Restoration and Replication Plan (Woodlot, 2004).
YAEC samples three surface water sites for its Radiological
Environmental Monitoring Program (REMP) at the YNPS site. The Deerfield
River is sampled downstream from the YNPS site at Bear Swamp Lower
Reservoir with an automatic sampler every two hours. These samples are
composited each month. YAEC also collects monthly grab samples from
Sherman Pond and from an upstream Deerfield River site at the Harriman
Reservoir. Samples from all three sites are analyzed for gamma emitting
radionuclides, tritium, and gross beta. The tritium and gamma
spectroscopy results for 2003 indicated that no surface water samples
contained detectable levels of plant-generated radionuclides. Also, the
gross beta averages for 2003 were slightly greater at the upstream
Deerfield River site than at the downstream site (YAEC, 2004d). Based
upon these recent data, YAEC states that the surface waters do not
require remediation pertaining to plant-generated radionuclides.
YAEC states that remediation will not likely be required for
groundwater at the YNPS site to meet NRC's license termination criteria
because H-3 levels are expected to meet NRC's unrestricted release
criteria when the site is released (when the ISFSI is decommissioned
and the license terminated). If decommissioning activities at the YNPS
site increase the concentrations of plant-generated radionuclides
dissolved in the groundwater, the monitoring program at this site
should detect this change. Groundwater samples from the existing 39
monitoring wells should indicate changes in the groundwater
downgradient from the radiologically-controlled area. Because some
monitoring wells have been abandoned during decommissioning, new
monitoring wells will need to be installed to meet MDEP requirements to
characterize potential changes in the level of plant-generated
radionuclides dissolved in the groundwater.
Groundwater at the site also will be required to meet the dose-
based radiological criteris of the MDPH and the risk-based criteria of
the MDEP Risk Assessment process (for both radiological and non-
4.3 Human Health Impacts
Compliance with 10 CFR 20.1402 for unrestricted release (and,
therefore, human health protection requirements) is contingent upon
successful remediation and/or removal of contaminated soil,
groundwater, ancillary contaminated materials, and structures to
acceptable levels (corresponding to a total dose of 0.25 mSv/yr (25
mrem/yr) or less per year) to an average member of the critical group.
In addition, residual radioactivity must meet the ALARA requirements of
As noted in Sec. 3.4, YAEC also has agreed to meet the more
restrictive radiological release criteria of the MDPH and the MDEP.
Derived Concentration Guideline Levels
YAEC has defined levels of residual radioactivity for various
sources at the site that correspond to meeting the dose limit. These
acceptable levels are defined as the DCGLs. Potential radiation doses
for the bounding exposure scenarios are calculated by assuming an
average fixed concentration level for each of the potential sources of
residual radioactivity. The sources are soil, building surfaces,
subsurface partial structures, and concrete debris. Two critical groups
were identified to whom the DCGLs would be applicable: A full-time
resident farmer group (associated with soil, building surfaces,
subsurface partial structures, and concrete debris sources) and a
building occupancy group (associated with the building surfaces
The DCGLs for each source were derived using the radiation doses
per unit activity and a separate dose constraint for each source. Table
4-1 lists the DCGLs for each radionuclide from each source. Within each
critical group, each DCGL was selected to correspond to a fraction of
the 0.25 mSv/yr (25 mrem/yr) dose limit so that the total dose to the
average member of that group from all sources would equal the limit.
For the resident farmer critical group, the doses corresponding to
DCGLs (and totaling 25 mrem/yr) are:
Subsurface partial structures: 0.005 mSv/yr (0.5 mrem/yr)
Groundwater: 0.0077 mSv/yr (0.77 mrem/yr).
Concrete debris and soil: 0.2373 mSv/yr (23.73 mrem/yr)
In areas that have co-mingled soil and concrete debris, YAEC would
use the smaller of the two DCGLs for each radionuclide (see Table 4-1),
and for areas with only soil, YAEC would use the soil DCGLs.
For the building occupancy critical group, YAEC would take a sum-
of-fractions approach to ensure that if a member of the public were
both a member of the building occupancy critical group and the resident
farmer critical group, their total dose would be less than 0.25 mSv/yr
Any actual doses would likely be much less than the 0.25 mSv/yr (25
mrem/yr) limit. This is due to the conservatism in both the modeling
and the assumption that the entire source would have residual
radioactivity at the DCGL. (It is more likely that the sources will
have residual radioactivity at considerably less than the DCGLs.)
Provided compliance with the 10 CFR 20.1402 limit is demonstrated
through the results of the final status survey, there would be no
anticipated adverse impacts to human health from approval of license
termination, as described in the environmental impact statement for
license termination (NUREG-1496) (NRC, 1997a).
The manner in which the DCGLs are derived for the YNPS site is
documented in Chapter 6 of the LTP, Revision 1. In deriving the DCGLs,
an adult resident farmer is considered to represent the average member
of the critical group. The hypothetical resident farmer is assumed to
build a house on the contaminated soil (or soil/concrete debris mix),
draw water from a well placed into the tritium plume, grow plant food
and fodder on the contaminated area, raise livestock on the
contaminated area, and catch fish from a pond on the contaminated area.
The resident farmer scenario is considered the bounding scenario
because it embodies the greatest number of exposure pathways,
represents the longest exposure durations, and includes the greatest
number of sources, of all scenarios envisioned. The DCGLs are shown in
The NRC will evaluate the appropriateness of the postulated
exposure scenarios and the methodology used for deriving the DCGLs as
part of its review of the LTP. The NRC staff's Safety Evaluation Report
will provide the details of this review.
YAEC would use a series of surveys, including the final status
survey, to demonstrate compliance with the radiological release
criteria consistent with the Multi-Agency Radiation Survey and Site
Investigation Manual (NRC, 1997a). Planning for the final status survey
involves an iterative process that
requires appropriate site classification (on the basis of the potential
residual radioactivity levels relative to the DCGLs) and formal
planning using the Data Quality Objective process. YAEC has committed
to an integrated design that would address the selection of appropriate
survey and laboratory instrumentation and procedures, including a
statistically-based measurement and sampling plan for collecting and
evaluating the data needed for the final status survey. YAEC has
requested that it be permitted to modify the classification levels
based on new information during the decommissioning process.
Table 4-1.--Derived Concentration Guideline Levels*
Soil (pCi/ Building surface partial Concrete debris[dagger]
Radionuclide g)[dagger] (dpm/100 cm2) structures (pCi/g)
[Dagger] (pCI/g) Sec.
H-3.......................... 3.5E+02......... 3.4E+08......... 1.35E+02....... 9.5E+01 (cellar holes).
C-14......................... 5.2E+00......... 1.0E+07......... 2.34E+03....... 7.2E+00.
Fe-55........................ 2.8E+04......... 4.0E+07......... ............... 1.4E+02.
Co-60........................ 3.8E+00......... 1.8E+04......... 3.45E+03....... 4.3E+00.
Ni-63........................ 7.7E+02......... 3.7E+07......... 6.16E+04....... 1.0E+02.
Sr-90........................ 1.6E+00......... 1.5E+05......... 1.39E+01....... 7.5E01.
Nb-94........................ 6.8E+00......... 2.6E+04......... ............... 7.0E+00.
Tc-99........................ 1.3E+01......... 1.4E+07......... ............... 6.1E+01.
Ag-108m...................... 6.9E+00......... 2.5E+04......... ............... 7.0E+00.
Sb-125....................... 3.0E+01......... 1.0E+05......... ............... 3.1E+01.
Cs-134....................... 4.7E+00......... 2.9E+04......... ............... 4.7E+00.
Cs-137....................... 8.2E+00......... 6.3E+04......... 1.45E+03....... 6.7E+00.
Eu-152....................... 9.5E+00......... 3.7E+04......... ............... 9.5E+00.
Eu-154....................... 9.0E+00......... 3.4E+04......... ............... 9.1E+00.
Eu-155....................... 3.8E+02......... 6.5E+05......... ............... 3.8E+02.
Pu-238....................... 3.1E+01......... 5.7E+03......... ............... 9.5E+00.
Pu-239....................... 2.8E+01......... 5.1E+03......... ............... 8.8E+00.
Pu-241....................... 9.3E+02......... 2.5E+05......... ............... 1.4E+02.
Am-241....................... 2.8E+01......... 5.0E=03......... ............... 4.1E+00.
Cm-243....................... 3.0E+01......... 7.2E+03......... ............... 4.7E+00.
* To convert to Bq from pCi, multiply by 0.037.
[dagger] Represents a dose of 23.73 mrem/yr.
[Dagger] Represents a dose of 25 mrem/yr.
Sec. Represents a dose of 0.5 mrem/yr, radionuclides based upon those found in concrete samples.
5.0 Agencies and Persons Consulted and Sources Used
A copy of the Environmental Assessment was provided to the
Commonwealth of Massachusetts on March 3, 2005. The Massachusetts
Department of Environmental Protection provided comments by letter
dated March 31, 2005, which were incorporated into this EA.
The NRC staff has determined that the proposed action would not
affect listed threatened or endangered species or critical habitat
designated under the Endangered Species Act. Therefore, no consultation
is required under Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act. Likewise,
the NRC staff has determined that the proposed action would not affect
historic or archaeological resources. Therefore, no consultation is
required under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act.
The NRC has prepared this EA related to the issuance of a license
amendment that would approve the LTP. On the basis of this EA, the NRC
has concluded that there are no significant environmental impacts and
the proposed license amendment does not warrant the preparation of an
Environmental Impact Statement. Accordingly, it has been determined
that a Finding of No Significant Impact is appropriate.
The documents related to this proposed action are available for
public inspection and copying at NRC's Public Document Room at NRC
Headquarters, One White Flint North, 1555 Rockville Pike, Rockville,
Maryland 20852. Most of these documents also are available for public
review through our electronic reading room (ADAMS): http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html.
7.0 List of Preparers
C. McKenney, Health Physicist, Division of Waste Management, dose
J. Peckenpaugh, Hydrologist, Division of Waste Management,
C. Schulte, Project Manager, Division of Waste Management and
Environmental Protection, non-radiological environmental issues.
J. Thompson, Health Physicist, Division of Waste Management and
Environmental Protection, Final Status Survey, radiation release
8.0 List of Acronyms
ALARA as low as reasonably achievable
BUD beneficial reuse determination
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
DCGL derived concentration guideline limit
dpm/100cm2 disintegrations per minute per 100 square
EA environmental assessment
EPA Environmental Protection Agency
FR Federal Register
FSS final status survey
ISFSI independent spent fuel storage installation
LTP license termination plan
MCP Massachusetts Contingency Plan
MDEP Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection
MDPH Massachusetts Department of Public Health, Radiation Control
mrem/y millirem per year
mSv/yr milliSievert per year
NEPA National Environmental Policy Act
NHESP National Heritage and Endangered Species Program
NPDES National Pollution Discharge Elimination System
NRC Nuclear Regulatory Commission
ORISE Oak Ridge Institute for Science and Education
PCBs Polychlorinated biphenyls
pCi/L picocurie per liter
PSDAR post shutdown decommissioning activities report
RCA Radiologically-controlled area
REMP Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program
RCRA Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
SCFA Southeast Construction Fill Area
TEDE total effective dose equivalent
TSCA Toxic Substances Control Act
YAEC Yankee Atomic Electric Company
YNPS Yankee Nuclear Power Station
10 CFR Part 20. Code of Federal Regulations, Title 10, Energy,
Part 20, ``Standards for protection against radiation.''
10 CFR Part 50. Code of Federal Regulations, Title 10, Energy,
Part 50, ``Domestic licensing of production and utilization
10 CFR Part 51. Code of Federal Regulations, Title 10, Energy,
Part 51, ``Environmental protection regulations for domestic
licensing and related regulatory functions.''
61 FR 39278. ``Decommissioning of Nuclear Power Reactors.''
Federal Register. July 29, 1996.
62 FR 39058. ``Radiological Criteria for License Termination.
Final Rule.'' Federal Register. July 21, 1997.
64 FR 68005. ``Waste Confidence Decision Review.'' Federal
Register. December 6, 1999.
Evans et al., 1984. ``Long-Lived Activation Products in Reactor
Materials,'' NUREG/CR-3474. August 1984. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, Washington, DC.
ERM, 2004a. ``Baseline Environmental Report,'' April 30, 2004.
Environmental Resources Management, Boston, Massachusetts.
ERM, 2004b, ``Expanded Environmental Notification Form,'' March
31, 2004. Environmental Resources Management, Boston, Massachusetts.
ERM, 2004c, ``Site Characterization Status Report,'' June 4,
2004. Environmental Resources Management, Boston, Massachusetts.
ERM, 2004d, ``Integrated Permit Package, Yankee Nuclear Power
Station,'' May 7, 2004. Environmental Resources Management, Boston,
Kennedy and Strenge, 1992. ``Residual Radioactive Contamination
From Decommissioning.'' NUREG/CR-5512, Volume 1. October 1992. U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC.
Kleinschmidt, 2004. ``Post-Decommissioning Grading Plan and
Stormwater Management Analysis,'' August 2004. Kleinschmidt Energy
and Water Resource Consultants.
MASS, 2004. ``Certificate of the Secretary of Environmental
Affairs on the Expanded Environmental Notification Form,'' May 7,
2004, Massachusetts Executive Office of Environmental Affairs,
MHC, 2003. Letter, Massachusetts Historical Commission to YAEC,
``Yankee Nuclear Power Station Decommissioning, Rowe;
MHC33426,'' dated August 18, 2003.
NRC, 1988. ``Final Generic Environmental Impact Statement on the
Decommissioning of Nuclear Facilities.'' August 1988. U.S. Nuclear
Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC.
NRC, 1997a. ``Generic Environmental Impact Statement in Support
of Rulemaking on Radiological Criteria for License Termination of
NRC-Licensed Nuclear Facilities.'' NUREG-1496. July 1997. U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC.
NRC, 1997b. ``Multi-Agency Radiation Survey and Site
Investigation Manual (MARSSIM).'' NUREG-1575. December 1997. U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC.
NRC, 2002. ``Generic Environmental Impact Statement on the
Decommissioning of Nuclear Facilities. Supplement Dealing with
Decommissioning of Nuclear Power Reactors.'' November 2002. NUREG-
0586, Supplement 1, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington,
NRC, 2003. ``Consolidated NMSS Decommissioning Guidance,''
NUREG-1757. September 2003
NRC, 2004. Letter, NRC to YAEC, ``Yankee (Rowe) Nuclear Power
Station--Request for Additional Information Re: License Termination
Plan,'' dated June 16, 2004.
PAL, 2003. ``Archeological Reconnaissance Survey, Archeological
Resources Management Plan, Yankee Nuclear Power Station,'' November,
2003. Public Archeology Laboratory, Inc., Pawtucket, Rhode Island.
Smith et al., 1978. ``Technology, Safety and Costs of
Decommissioning a Reference Pressurized Water Reactor Power
Station.'' NUREG/CR-0130. June 1978. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, Washington, DC.
Woodlot, 2004. ``Yankee Nuclear Power Station Site Closure
Project Wetland Restoration and Replication Plan,'' August 2004.
Woodlot Alternatives, Inc., Topsham, Maine, and Environmental
Resources Management, Boston, Massachusetts.
YAEC, 1993. ``YNPS Decommissioning Environmental Report,''
December, 1993, Yankee Atomic Electric Company, Rowe, Massachusetts.
YAEC, 2000. ``Post Shutdown Decommissioning Activities Report,''
June, 2001. Excerpted from the YNPS Final Safety Analysis Report,
Yankee Atomic Electric Company, Rowe, Massachusetts.
YAEC, 2003. ``YNPS License Termination Plan,'' Revision 0.
November 24, 2003, Yankee Atomic Electric Company, Rowe,
YAEC, 2004a. ``YNPS License Termination Plan,'' Draft Revision
1, September 2, 2004, Yankee Atomic Electric Company, Rowe,
YAEC, 2004b. ``Site Closure Project Plan,'' Revision 2. March
31, 2004, Yankee Atomic Electric Company, Rowe, Massachusetts.
YAEC, 2004c. ``YNPS Historical Site Assessment,'' January 2004,
Yankee Atomic Electric Company, Rowe, Massachusetts.
YAEC, 2004d. ``Annual Radiological Environmental Operating
Report,'' Yankee Rowe Station Radiological Environmental Monitoring
Program--January 1, 2003--December 31, 2003. Yankee Atomic Electric
Company, Rowe, Massachusetts.
YAEC, 2004e. ``Hydrogeologic Report of 2003 Supplemental
Investigation'' March 15, 2004. Yankee Atomic Electric Company,
YAEC, 2004f. ``YNPS License Termination Plan,'' Revision 1,
November 19, 2004, Yankee Atomic Electric Company, Rowe,
YAEC, 2005. ``Supplement to Proposed Amendment to YNPS
Possession Only License,'' April 7, 2005, Yankee Atomic Electric
Company, Rowe, Massachusetts.
Framatome, 2003. ``Site Ground Water Data Collection for YNPS
Decommissioning, quo; Rev 1. February, 2003, Framatome ANP DE&S,
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 23rd day of May, 2005.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Acting Deputy Director, Division of Waste Management and Environmental
Protection, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards.
[FR Doc. E5-2850 Filed 6-2-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P