Response to Comments from Yankee Companies

R esponses to Industry Questions received from the posting of the FRN

INDUSTRY RESPONSES RECEIVED AFTER POSTING INITIAL RESPONSES

SPECIFIC TO THE YANKEE COMPANIES

The Yankee companies (Yankee Atomic Electric Company; Connecticut Yankee Atomic Power Company; Maine Yankee Atomic Power Company) are three stand alone shutdown reactor sites with Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation (ISFSI) facilities located in New England.

We appreciate the opportunity to provide comments on the proposed reinstatement of Form GC­-859, "Nuclear Fuel Data Survey"- previously designated as Form RW-859, “Nuclear Fuel Data Survey" (Federal Register Notice Vol. 77, No. 141, July 23, 2012, page 43067) and respond to the four specific items that comments have been invited on.

(a) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information shall have practical utility

The Yankee companies recognize the need of the federal government to collect the information necessary to meet its obligations mandated under the Nuclear Waste Policy Act and Standard Contracts to remove the spent nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive waste from our sites. Accordingly, we are supportive of the reintroduction of the Form 859 for that purpose.

The Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982 (NWP A) required that the US Department of Energy (DOE) enter into Standard Contracts with all generators or owners of spent nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive waste of domestic origin. Form RW-859 "Nuclear Fuel Data Survey" evolved from Appendix B to the Standard Contract and was collected annually by the Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management for survey years from 1983 through 1995 and for survey years 1998 and 2000. The Form RW-859 was last collected in 2003 and was discontinued in 2009. The survey containing data as of December 31, 2002 was the last one collected. Since then, activities have been transferred to the Office of Standard Contract management that was created within the Office of the General Counsel (GC) resulting in the Form number being changed from Form RW-859 to Form GC-859.

The new Form GC-859 represents a change from previous version of the Nuclear Fuel Data Survey. The Yankee companies fully complied with the reporting of information requested from 1983 until the last Form RW-859 was collected in 2003 and would caution that the terminology and definitions used in the new Form GC-859 must remain fully consistent with those established in the Standard Contract and used as the basis for collecting and reporting information compiled in the historical RW-859 Forms. To not do so would result in the collection and reporting of data in the new Form GC-859 that would not be consistent with the data historically collected and reported in the Form RW-859.

RESPONSE (a)

When drafting the new Form GC-859, the terminology and definitions established and used in the Standard Contract were called upon so that a consistency was in place for all parties having involvement and/or interaction with the new Form GC-859. This allows a baseline understanding of verbiage no-matter what the role of any individual or organization during the data collection and sharing process. This will apply whether that role might be in conducting the survey, responding to the survey or utilizing the compiled results of the survey.

In most cases, all of the terms and definitions are worded exactly as stated in the Standard Contract except where data collection requirements have changed. Examples of this would be in the collection of certain special fuel forms data, in distinguishing between single-element canisters and multi-element casks, and in terms related to initial loading weights and enrichments.

(b) The accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used

The Federal Register Notice cites an estimated "Number of Annual Burden Hours" per response for the permanently shut down nuclear reactors respondent category to be 40 hours.

We would note that stand-alone shutdown reactor ISFSI sites such as the Yankee sites no longer have reactor fuels groups or the resources available to compile and report all of the information requested in the Form GC-859. Accordingly it is difficult for us to evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of annual burden hours. It is our understanding however, that stand-alone shutdown reactor ISFSI sites will only have to provide the information that they have available and that it can be submitted in "any readily-available database or spreadsheet" format and that DOE will fill in the Form. If this is the case, then we believe that the estimate could be accurate.

RESPONSE (b)

Respondents to the Form GC-859 Nuclear Fuel Data survey will be provided with the data submitted on the last survey collecting data through 2002. Much of the data required on Schedules A, B, C and E have, therefore, already been provided. Respondents are asked to check this previously submitted data and verify that the historical data is correct then update that information with new or additional data. For example, in the permanently discharged fuel schedule (C.1.1), only the storage location and possibly some status codes should change. There may also be changes and updates to the canister and non-fuel component sections of the survey.

The DOE had planned to supply respondents only the data submitted on the last Nuclear Fuel Data survey. The cycle by cycle historical data requested on Schedule C.1.2 has not previously been collected. The DOE can, however, construct this data from previous survey submittals through the 1995 survey year. Up until that version of the survey, data were collected not only on discharged fuel, but on newly inserted fuel and fuel in the reactor core. Since the three Yankee reactors were either shutdown or in its last cycle as of 1995, the DOE can construct complete cycle data for these reactors. We will provide this historical data to Yankee and personnel at Yankee would then only need to review for accuracy. The DOE will furnish historical cycle data to any respondent who requests it.

Again let us stress that the DOE’s desire is to collect as much of the data as possible without totally monopolizing the time of the respondent. There is an inherent burden associated with this survey that will need to be factored into making sure the information collected is accurate and usable. The DOE understands that in certain situations, especially in your case, the information that will need to be provided may not be available in a format that easily conveys to the Form GC-859 collection system or, as your example indicates, may be from a no-longer active environment. In those scenarios, the DOE will welcome any and all information available, provided in any format.

Note that for shutdown reactors, there may be schedules where detailed data is required, an example being the data on assemblies in dry storage in Schedule D. The DOE will accept this information in any available form. After the DOE has entered the data that may have been supplied in an alternate format and that data has been reviewed by the appropriate DOE representative, the survey data information will be returned to the respondent so that they may verify that the information was captured correctly.

(c) Ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected

The Yankees have no comments regarding this item.

RESPONSE (c)

None required

(d) Ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology.

As noted in our comments to (b) above, utilities such as the Yankee companies that no longer have reactor fuels groups or resources available to compile and report all of the information requested in the Form GC-859. Accordingly, it will be important that sites such as the Yankee sites will only have to provide the information that they have available and that it can be submitted in "any readily-available database or spreadsheet" format.

RESPONSE (d)

The question / comment (d) is similar to (b). The response to question (b) also pertains to (d).

Additionally, the system has been designed in Microsoft Access so that when DOE or other users perform analytics they have the information in a database format. However, in certain sections (for example, permanently discharged fuel and fuel cycle history), Microsoft Excel has been utilized to simplify data entry and manipulation.

With the additional burden that exists for the sites that do not have the working infrastructure and resources in place to more readily respond to the Form GC-859 survey, we will gladly take the information that you do have available in any format that you have available.

(Additional Comments :)

The GC-859 contains a new schedule for reporting information on Greater Than Class C (GTCC) Low Level Radioactive Waste (LLRW). This schedule is not mandatory and only respondents who have readily available access to this data are requested to report. We would note that the Yankee company sites all have GTCC waste in storage that we will report. We would also underscore that it is the obligation of the Department of Energy under the NWPA and Standard Contract to take title to and remove this material along with the removal of the stored Spent Nuclear Fuel. We would further note that all of the GTCC material at each of the Yankee sites is stored in dual-purpose canister systems licensed by the US NRC for transportation.

The Yankee companies appreciate the opportunity to provide comments on the proposed reinstatement of Form GC-859, "Nuclear Fuel Data Survey".

RESPONSE (Additional Comments)

The DOE is thankful that The Yankee Companies plan to report their Greater-Than-Class C (GTCC) Low-Level Radioactive Waste (LLRW) and will gladly accept the information that the Yankee companies provide. Any GTCC LLRW data provided will assist the DOE Office of Environmental Management in evaluating options for disposal of this waste. Knowing that there is an additional burden for the sites that do not have the working infrastructure and resources in place to more readily respond to this new schedule of the Form GC-859 survey, the DOE will accept this data in any format and work with those groups providing the data to ensure the burden doesn’t become overwhelming.

Page 2 of 2