2002 MASSACHUSETTS LOW - LEVEL RADIOACTIVE WASTE SURVEY REPORT

APRIL  2004

MASSACHUSETTS DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC HEALTH
RADIATION CONTROL PROGRAM
90 WASHINGTON STREET
DORCHESTER, MA 02121
617-427-2944

2002 MASSACHUSETTS LOW - LEVEL RADIOACTIVE WASTE SURVEY REPORT 

APRIL  2004

THE COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS 
MITT ROMNEY GOVERNOR
KERRY HEALEY LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR

EXECUTIVE OFFICE HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
RONALD PRESTON SECRETARY

DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC HEALTH
CHRISTINE C. FERGUSON COMMISSIONER

BUREAU OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH ASSESSMENT
SUZANNE CONDON ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER

RADIATION CONTROL PROGRAM
ROBERT WALKER DIRECTOR

DATA ANALYSIS AND SURVEY REPORT LAYOUT:
FREDERICK P. BARKER JR., P.E., ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEER V1
RADIATION CONTROL PROGRAM

TABLE OF CONTENTS

                                                                                                                                               Page

Preface........................................................................................................................................1
Chapter 1: Executive Summary...................................................................................................3
Chapter 2:  2002 LLRW Management Data Summary...............................................................13
Chapter 3: National Data............................................................................................................21
Chapter 4: Financial Data...........................................................................................................29
Appendix A.................................................................................................................................31

LIST OF TABLES

                                                                                                                                               Page
 1. List Of 23 Large Generators That Transferred More Than 
     100.0 Cubic Feet Of LLRW In 2002............................................................................................4
 2. List of 8 Large Generators That Transferred More Than 1.000 Curie 
     of LLRW In 2002........................................................................................................................6
 3. List Of 11 Large Generators That Stored More Than 100.0 
     Cubic Feet Of  LLRW In 2002.....................................................................................................7
 4. List Of 7 Large Generators That Stored 1.000 Curie Or More
     Of  LLRW In 2002.......................................................................................................................8
 5. List Of 10 Most Common Isotopes Reported Transferred Or Stored...........................................9
 6. List Of 10 Most Common Isotopes Reported Transferred..........................................................10
 7. List Of 10 Most Common Isotopes Reported Stored.................................................................11
 8. Activity And Volume By Class For The Year 2002..................................................................19 
 9. 2002 LLRW Volume and Activity Summary from All States From MIMS ............................21
 10. Comparisons Of LLRW Transferred From Massachusetts For 2002......................................24
 11. Massachusetts 2002 Waste Generator Category Results From MIMS....................................24
 12. MA Waste Classification And Generator Class For 2002 From MIMS...................................25
 13. Classification Of Radioactivity Factor (CRF) 345 CMR Table 4.03 B...................................30
 14. Activity And Volume By Waste Generator Category For 2002...............................................47
 15. List of Facilities Activities And Volumes Produced In 2002..................................................59

TABLE OF CONTENTS  continued

LIST OF FIGURES
                                                                                                                                                Page
 
 1.  Low-Level Radioactive Waste Disposal Compact Membership.............................................28
 2.  Percent of Total Activity By Waste Class For 2002................................................................31
 3.  Percent Activity Placed In Storage By Waste Class For 2002.................................................32
 4.  Percent Activity Transferred By Waste Class For 2002..........................................................33
 5.  Percent Total Volume By Waste Class For 2002.....................................................................34
 6.  Percent Volume In Storage By Waste Class For 2002.............................................................35
 7.  Percent Volume Shipped By Waste Class For 2002................................................................36
 8.  Comparison of Waste Activities By Waste Class For 2002....................................................37
 9.  Comparison Of Waste Volumes By Waste Class For 2002.....................................................38
10. Percent Of Total Activity By Waste Generator Category For 2002........................................39
11. Percent Of In-Storage Activity By Waste Generator Category For 2002................................40
12. Percent Of Transferred Activity By Waste Generator Category For 2002..............................41
13. Comparison Of Waste Activities By Waste Generator Category For 2002.............................42
14. Percent Of Total Volume By Waste Generator Category For 2002.........................................43
15. Percent Of In-Storage Volume By Waste Generator Category For 2002.................................44
16. Percent Of Transferred Volume By Waste Generator Category For 2002..............................45
17. Comparison Of Waste Volumes By Waste Generator Category For 2002..............................46
18. Volume LLRW Transferred By Year.......................................................................................48
19. Activity In Curies Transferred By Year ....................................................................................49
20. Total RAM Reporting Frequency For All Classes of Waste In 2002......................................50
21. Total RAM Reporting Frequency For Class A Waste In 2002................................................51
22. Total RAM Reporting Frequency For Class B Waste In 2002................................................52
23. Total RAM Reporting Frequency For Class C Waste In 2002................................................53
24. Total RAM Reporting Frequency For HVLA Waste In 2002.................................................54
25. In-Storage RAM Reporting Frequency For All Classes Of Waste In 2002.............................55
26. Transferred RAM Reporting Frequency For All Classes Of Waste In 2002...........................56
27. Distribution Of Organizations That Generated Waste In 2002 - By Activity..........................57
28. Distribution Of Organizations That Generated Waste In 2002 - By Volume..........................58
29. 2002 DPH Radioactive Waste Survey Form............................................................................79

PREFACE

The Low-Level Radioactive Waste Management Board (Board) was established pursuant to the provisions of section 2 of Chapter 111H of the Massachusetts General Laws, and was the lead state agency responsible for planning and effecting the management of  low-level radioactive waste (LLRW) in the Commonwealth. In 2002 the Board was abolished and its powers and duties were transferred to the Department of Public Health (DPH).

DPH conducted an annual survey to determine the characteristics of LLRW generated, stored, and transferred for out of state disposal. The less complex 2002 survey  differed from past Board surveys as management method and characteristics, container and packing methods, storage off or on site, routine or non-routine waste, specific out of state disposal sites, and future projection questions were eliminated. The definition of long-lived radioactive waste generated needed to be reported was increased from a  half-life of 90 days to 120 days. A copy of the 3 page 2002 survey used is shown as figure 29. 

The Massachusetts Low-Level Radioactive Waste Management Act (Chapter 111H) mandates under section 7 that each person who generates, treats, stores, transports, or disposes of LLRW within the Commonwealth shall annually provide detailed and accurate information concerning the types, volumes, radioactivity, sources, and characteristics of the LLRW produced as well as current and projected LLRW management activities, including source minimization, volume minimization, and on-site storage, treatment, packaging, and transportation practices as the DPH deems necessary.

This report summarizes data compiled from responses to the “Calendar Year (CY) 2002 Radioactive Waste Survey” of radioactive materials users licensed in Massachusetts by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) and the Massachusetts Department of Public Health. The data provided by the generators in the annual survey is used in connection with DPH’s activities to arrange storage, treatment, and disposal solutions for LLRW generated in Massachusetts and to formulate LLRW policy in the Commonwealth.

Comments on this document and suggestions for future survey reports are welcome and should be addressed to:
MA Department of Public Health
Radiation Control Program  
90 Washington Street
Dorchester, MA 02121
617 - 427 - 2944				
                                                Fax 617 - 427 - 2925            

The focus of this report is on the characteristics and management of LLRW in the Commonwealth. The data collected enables DPH to formulate policy on the LLRW storage, treatment, disposal, and other management activities. This survey system is used by DPH to determine which classes of LLRW with relatively short half-lives may be stored for natural radioactive decay, which classes will require disposal, and which classes will require special management procedures during the life of a disposal facility accepting LLRW in the Commonwealth, should such a facility be necessary.

The annual survey also is used with DPH’s activities to arrange storage, treatment, and disposal solutions for the LLRW generated in Massachusetts. Both in-state and out-of-state disposal options require the detailed characterization of: (1) the total waste inventory placed in a facility throughout its operating life; and (2) the amounts of activity remaining in the facility during the closure. The annual survey is the primary data source for the facility inventory projections.

2002 Survey Report Contents

Chapter 1 is an Executive Summary, highlighting volume and activity data on LLRW shipped for disposal in 2002, and showing the distribution of large and small generators. Chapter 2 presents generator categories, classes, management discussion, and transfer disposal rates past, present, and future. Chapter 3 contains national data with a state-by-state comparison of volume and activity shipped for disposal to the facilities in Barnwell, South Carolina; Clive, Utah; and Richland, Washington. Chapter 4 discusses financial aspects and LLRW billing formula used.

Appendix A contains numerous tables and figures.

Tables and figures in this report present survey responses rounded by standard methods, and therefore totals may not equal 100%

                                                                           
 Chapter 1
                                                        Executive Summary

1.1   2002 Survey Results Summary

Waste generators consist of those licensees either transferring or storing LLRW, or both.
During 2002  Massachusetts waste generators reported that they generated 63,667 cubic feet of low-level radioactive waste (LLRW) containing 5,600 curies. Of this volume and activity, 30,921 cubic feet containing 877 curies were transferred  and 32,746 cubic feet containing 4,723 curies were stored in-state for further treatment and disposal. A total of 55 different isotopes were reported generated with Tritium (H-3) being the most common and  with a total of 110 reports for all classes of waste.

The last survey report completed  by the Board was in 1999 for calendar year 1997. No formal survey reports were compiled for years 1998-2001 by the Board or DPH. The 2002 volume and activity totals have decreased substantially from 1997 results while the number of licensees and number of generators has increased. 

Massachusetts generators had access to three disposal facilities in the country that accept LLRW: Barnwell, South Carolina; Clive, Utah; and Richland, Washington. Barnwell accepted Class A, B, C and HVLA  LLRW, but no waste mixed with, or exhibiting characteristics of, toxic chemical hazardous material (called mixed waste). The Clive site accepted Class A and HVLA  LLRW while Richland facility accepted only Massachusetts waste from naturally-occurring or accelerator-produced radioactive material (NARM).1   These three disposal sites, however, are a temporary solution to LLRW management in Massachusetts.

Since Massachusetts is classified as an unaffiliated state and not a member of any of the ten national interstate compacts for low-level waste disposal, our generators are free to dispose of their LLRW to any licensed facility willing to accept it. A national map showing the various compact memberships is shown as figure 1.

During 2002, 77 Massachusetts generators reported that they shipped or transferred 30,920.68 cubic feet of LLRW containing 876.61 curies of radioactivity to out-of-state disposal facilities. 

3,510.7 cf or 80.63% of the volume of LLRW containing 1.275 curies  or 0.15% of the activity was shipped to the Clive, Utah facility.  The Barnwell, South Carolina facility received only 843.536 cf or 19.37 % of the volume of LLRW, but 841.643 curies or 99.85% of the activity. No 

1 NARM is naturally-occurring and accelerator produced radioactive material and is not regulated by the NRC. This responsibility lies with the individual states.
LLRW was shipped to the Richland, Washington facility during 2002.
Thus the highest activity LLRW goes to Barnwell site and highest volume LLRW goes to Clive site, according to the disposal site’s manifest documents. The reported  totals in and out do not match up, and are discussed later in the report in Chapter 3. 

Since the survey eliminated the questions regarding licensees’ future projections, DPH estimates 
with some confidence (plus or minus 10%) that total statewide future annual LLRW projections until 2012 will remain constant at 80,000 cubic feet and 20,000 curies. These numbers include both LLRW transferred and stored.

1.2    Distribution of Large and Small Generators by Transfers

Seventy seven organizations reported transferring LLRW for disposal in 2002, representing an increase of 22% over 63 reported in 1997. Of the 77 organizations 54 or 70.1%  shipped 100 cubic feet or less (100 cubic feet is equivalent to just over thirteen 55-gallon drums) and can be classified as “small quantity” generators, slightly greater than the number in 1997 which was 53. 

Of the 77 organizations 69 generators or 89.6% shipped 1.000 curie or less and can be classified as  “small activity” generators, greater than the number in 1997 which was 53.

Tables 1 and 2  show the distribution by volume and activity of organizations that shipped large amounts of  LLRW in 2002.  Because the volume of waste transferred does not necessarily correlate with the amount of activity within the transferred waste, the 54 “small quantity” shippers by volume are not all the same “small activity” shippers. In addition, these data show a consistent trend in Massachusetts: that most Massachusetts LLRW generators produce small volumes of waste requiring disposal in licensed LLRW disposal facilities, and only a small amount 23 of 139 or 16.5% of Massachusetts generators produce large volumes (greater than 100 cubic feet) of waste requiring disposal.

Typical transfers by shipping are usually done by rail car,  truck, or ship to one of three licensed disposal sites. The US Department of Transportation (DOT) has strict packaging requirements for shipping LLRW using three types of containers which are classified as either LSA, Type A, or Type B.

TABLE 1			
LIST OF 23 LARGE GENERATORS THAT TRANSFERRED MORE THAN 100.0			
 CUBIC FEET OF LLRW IN 2002			
			
FACILITY NAME	VOLUME IN CUBIC FEET		
1. Entergy Nuclear Generating Co. 		8,814.6		
2. Yankee Atomic Electric Co.		6,828.5		
3. Perkinelmer Life Sciences, Inc.		4,308.2		
4. Bristol - Myers Squibb Med. Img.	2,160.4		
5. Harvard University		2,132.7		
6. Charles River Laboratories, Inc.		866.0		
7. Dana - Farber Cancer Institute		696.0		
8. Millennium Pharmaceuticals		517.5		
9. Genzyme Corporation		510.0		
10. Genetics Institute, LLC	397.5		
11. Mass. General Hospital		315.0		
12. Phylos, Inc.	277.5		
13. Woods Hole Oceanographic Inst.	210.2		
14. Boston University Med. Ctr. Hospital		166.0		
15. Springborn Smithers Lab., Inc.		151.4		
16. Beth Israel Deacon. Med. Center		136.0		
17. Epix Medical, Inc.	131.6		
18. Framatome ANP DE&S	121.1		
19. Geltex Pharmaceutical, Inc.	111.7		
20. U Mass / Memorial Clinic Systems		109.1		
21. Praecis Pharmaceuticals, Inc.		105.0		
22. Biogen, Inc.	105.0		
23. Northeastern University	100.3		

One hundred cubic feet of waste per annum is a threshold in Chapter 111H section 13, since those operations whose waste production exceed that threshold must develop and institute a waste minimization program predicated on detailed plans. More information is available in DPH Regulatory Guide No. 1.1 Revision 2.0 dated August 1995 and titled: Regulatory Guidance for Low - Level Radioactive Waste Minimization.

                                                   
                                                                TABLE 2		
LIST OF 8 LARGE GENERATORS THAT TRANSFERRED MORE THAN 1.000 CURIE OF LLRW IN 2002   		
		
FACILITY NAME                                    	ACTIVITY IN CURIES	
		
1. Perkinelmer Life Sciences, Inc.                     	733.300	
2. Entergy Nuclear Generating Company              	104.000	
3. Yankee Atomic Electric Company                    	  19.240	
4. Transkaryotic Therapies Inc.                            	    5.000 	
5. Harvard University                                            	    3.521	
6. Dana-Farber Cancer Institute                             	    2.600	
7. EGS Gauging Incorporated                               	    1.982	
8. Bristol-Myers Squibb Med. Img.     	    1.610	

1.3 Distribution of Large and Small Waste Generators by Storage In-State

One hundred and eleven organizations reported in-state storage of LLRW in 2002. Of the 111 organizations 100 or 90.1% stored 100 cubic feet or less and can be classified as “small quantity” in state storage generators by volume. The list of the largest generators storing more than 100.0 cubic feet of waste in 2002 is shown in Table 3. Because the activity of waste in storage does not necessarily correlate with the amount of volume in storage, the 100  “small activity” in-state storage generators are not all the same “small volume storage generators” shippers. In addition, these data show again a consistent trend in Massachusetts: that most Massachusetts LLRW generators produce small amounts of activity requiring disposal in licensed LLRW disposal facilities.
 
Tables 3 and 4  shows the storage by volume and activity of organizations that stored large amounts of  LLRW in 2002.  Because the volume of waste stored does not necessarily correlate with the amount of activity within the stored waste, the 100 “small quantity” storers by volume are not all the same “small activity” storers.
The same trend exists for the activity of the transferred waste with 8 of 139 or 5.8% of the Massachusetts generators producing greater than 1.000 curie.
Of the 111 generators 104 or 93.6% stored less than 1.000 curie and can be classified as “small quantity” in-state storage generators by activity. The list of  generators storing more than 1.000 curie of waste in 2002 is shown in Table 4. 

Typical storage containers include 55 and 30 gallon steel drums and boxes. Other containers used less frequently are small steel pails or cans in the ½ to5 gallon size and 9-10 cubic feet fiber drums used as temporary containment vessels prior to processing, such as incineration.     

                                                             Table 3	
LIST OF 11 LARGE GENERATORS THAT STORED MORE THAN 100.0 CUBIC                                                            FEET OF LLRW IN 2002	
                   Facility Name                                               	  Waste Volume in Cubic Feet In Storage   		
1. Entergy                                                            		27,358.2	
2. Boston University Med. Ctr. Hospital                		669.0	
3. Dana Farber Cancer Institute                              		637.0	
4. Genetics Institute, LLC                                       		593.0	
5. Millennium Pharmaceuticals                              		487.5	
6. Perkinelmer Life Sciences, Inc.                          		 385.5	
7. Bristol-Myers Squibb Med. Img.                        		161.0	
8. AEA Technology QSA, Inc.                               		150.0	
9. Genzyme Corporation                                         		150.0	
10. Starmet NMI                                                     		150.0	
11. Mass. Amherst, Univ. of                                   		135.0	

                                                                  TABLE 4	
  LIST OF 7 LARGE GENERATORS THAT STORED 1.000 CURIE OR MORE                                                                           OF LLRW IN 2002	
Facility Name                                                                          	Activity in Curies	
		
1.Entergy Nuclear Generating Co.                                       	4,490.081    	
2.Perkinelmer Life Sciences, Inc.                                                   	153.120	
3.AEA Technology QSA, Inc.                                                              	50.000	
4.U Mass Memorial Clinical Systems                                                  	20.000	
5. Dana-Farber Cancer Institute                                                              	1.800	
6. Radiation Monitoring Devices                                                            	1.000	
7. RMD, Inc. RMD Inst., LLC                                                                	1.000	

1.4 Distribution of Isotopes Generated for All Classes of Waste

A total of 55 different radionuclides were reported generated by all licensees. The survey requested that responders only report those isotopes with a half life greater than 120 days, and this excludes most medical radionuclides such as I-125 and P-32. However all principal isotopes listed were grouped together with other radionuclides on the survey report in terms of volume and activity.
 Figure 20 shows the total RAM reporting frequency for the top 25 reported isotopes for all classes of waste. Table 5 shows the ten most common isotopes by frequency of reports either transferred or in storage.
The 30 least  reported isotopes, with only 1-2 reports by licensees, are in decreasing order: Tc-99m, In-111, Tc-99, U-235, Cl-36, C-11, Y-90, Tm-170, Ir-192, Pb-210, Se-75, Sb-124, Y-91, Pu-241, Po-210, PM-147, Tl-202, Zr-95, Mn-56, Au-198, I-129, Gd-153, Fe-59, Eu-154, Cu-64, Cs-134, Co-56, Cm-244, Ba-133 and Na-24. They are not listed in Figure 20.

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             

                                          
Table 5	
LIST OF 10 MOST COMMON ISOTOPES REPORTED TRANSFERRED OR STORED	

Isotope	Half Life	       Number of Facilities	
			
1. H-3	12.3 years	110	
2. C-14                                                                     	5,730 years	72	
3.1-125	60.14 days	37	
4.S-35	87.2 days	 35	
5.P-32                             	14.29 days	31	
6.P-33                                	25.4 days	22	
7.Cs-137	30.17 years	15	
8.Co-60	5.27 years	13	
9.Cr-51	27.7 days	12	
10.Fe-55                             	2.73 years	10	

1.5 Distribution of Isotopes Transferred for All Classes of Waste

A total of 42 different isotopes were reported transferred by all licensees. The totals transferred and stored do not necessarily add up to the totals generated since some licensees transfer and store the same isotope, while others either store or transfer same isotope, but not both.
Figure 26 shows the total RAM transferred for the top 24  reported isotopes for all classes of waste in 2002. Table 6 shows the top 10 most common isotopes by frequency transferred for all classes of waste.
The 18 least  reported isotopes transferred with only 1 report each  by licensees are, in decreasing order: U-235, Tl-202, Se-75, Pu-241, PM-147, Pb-210, Zr-95, In-111, Ba-133, I-129, Gd-153, Fe-59, Eu-154, Cs-134, Cl-36, Cd-109, C-11, and Ir-192. They are not listed in Figure 26.

TABLE 6	
LIST OF 10 MOST COMMON  ISOTOPES REPORTED TRANSFERRED IN 2002	

Isotope	Half Life	Number of Facilities	
H-3	12.3 years	65	
C-14	5,730 years	42	
I-125	60.14 days	18	
S-35	87.2 days	16	
P-32	14.29 days	14	
P-33	25.4 days	10	
Co-60	5.27 years	 8	
Cs-137	30.17 years	 8	
Fe-55	2.73 years	 7	
Cr-51	27.7 days	 5	

1.6 Distribution of Isotopes In Storage for All Classes of Waste

A total of 45 different isotopes were reported in storage or stored by all licensees. The totals transferred and stored do not necessarily add up to the totals generated since some licensees transfer and store same the isotope, while others either store or transfer same isotope, but not both. Figure 25 shows the total RAM in storage for top 24 reported isotopes for all classes of waste in 2002. Table 7 shows the top 10 most common isotopes by frequency in storage for all classes of waste.
The 21 least  reported isotopes with only one report each by licensees are: Ir-192, Y-91, Y-90, U-235, Tm-170, Tl-202, Th-232, Sb-124, Po-210, Zr-95, Mn-56, Au-198, In-111, Eu-154, Cu-64, Cs-134, Co-56, Cm-244, Cl-36, C-11, and Na-24. They are not listed in Figure 25.

TABLE 7	
LIST OF 10 MOST COMMON ISOTOPES REPORTED STORED IN 2002	

Isotope	Half Life	Number of Facilities	
H-3	12.3 years	81	
C-14	5,730 years	54	
I-125	60.14 days	26	
S-35	87.2 days	25	
P-32	14.29 days	22	
P-33	25.4 days	16	
Cs-137	30.17 years	10	
Co-60	5.27 years	 8	
Cr-151	27.7 days	 8	
Fe-55	2.73 years	 7	

1.7 Distribution of Isotopes Generated for Class A Wastes.

A total of 53 different  isotopes or radionuclides were reported generated by all licensees.
Figure 21 shows the total RAM reporting frequency for the top 30 reported isotopes for Class A waste. The 23 least  reported isotopes with only one report each are: Ir-192, Y-91, Y-90, Tm-170, Tl-202, Se-75, Sb-124, Pu-241, Po-210, PM-147, Zr-95, Mn-56, Au-198, I-129, Gd-153, Fe-59, Eu-154, Cu-64, Cs-134, Co-56, Cm-244, Ba-133, and Na 24. They are not listed in Figure 21.

1.8 Distribution of Isotopes Generated for Class B Wastes.

A total of 7 different isotopes were reported generated by all licensees. Figure 22 shows the total RAM reporting frequency for all reported isotopes for Class B waste. The three most common with two reports each, were Co-60, Cs-137, and Fe-55.

1.9 Distribution of Isotopes Generated for Class C Wastes.

A total of 3 different isotopes were reported generated by all licensees. Figure 23 shows the total RAM reporting frequency for all reported isotopes for Class C waste. The three reported isotopes with one report each were Pb-210, Ra-226, and U-238.

1.10 Distribution of Isotopes generated for Class HVLA Wastes.

A total of 15 different isotopes were reported generated by all licensees. Figure 24 shows the total RAM reporting frequency for all reported isotopes for Class HVLA waste. The three most common with 2-10 reports were I-125, C-14, and H-3. 

Chapter 2
2002 LLRW Management Data Summary

2.1  Sources and Types of LLRW

Low-level radioactive waste (LLRW) is radioactive material that (1) is neither high-level radioactive waste, nor spent fuel, nor uranium mill tailings; and (2) is classified by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) as LLRW. It does not include waste which remains a federal responsibility, such as that owned or generated by the U.S. Department of Energy, the U.S. Navy as a result of decommissioning Navy vessels, or by the federal government as a result of any research, development, testing, or production of any atomic weapon.

LLRW is generated as a by-product of various uses of radionuclides. Typical applications include:

 (1) the production of electricity by a nuclear power plant;

 (2) the production and end-use of radio pharmaceuticals for medical procedures such as                   cancer and thyroid dysfunction diagnosis and treatment, radio immunoassay, and                              diagnostic imaging examinations;

 (3) research and development in the life science and biotechnology industry for the treatment and prevention of various diseases and medical dysfunctions, and in the environmental field to study the effects of chemicals on plant and aquatic life, and for ocean studies:

 (4) commercial uses such as within instruments that measure level, thickness, and density or that are used in moisture analysis and quality control; sealed sources that are used for industrial radiography of pressure vessels and other structural welds; smoke detectors and exit signs in buildings and commercial aircraft; and

 (5) university education and research in medicine, material science, and biotechnology.

 2.2 Regulations Pertaining to Radioactive Materials Licensees

On March 21, 1997 Massachusetts became an agreement state with the NRC. Under the agreement, NRC transferred to the Commonwealth the responsibility for regulating the use of (1) radioactive materials produced as byproducts of the operation of nuclear reactors; (2) uranium and thorium source materials; and (3) small quantities of fissionable materials. NRC retains jurisdiction over regulation of nuclear reactors, federal agencies that use nuclear materials, and companies that distribute certain materials (e.g. smoke detectors) to the public. 

Massachusetts radioactive material licensees are regulated by the DPH Radiation Control Program under 105 Code of Massachusetts Regulations (CMR) 120.000 Massachusetts Regulations for the Control Of Radiation and 345 CMR Low Level Radioactive Waste Management Board as amended. Licensees remaining under the jurisdiction of the NRC are regulated under Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR). 

 2.3   LLRW Generator Categories

In Massachusetts 521 colleges and universities, hospitals, government agencies, biotechnology firms, and other businesses, including two nuclear power plants (one operational and another undergoing decommissioning), held licenses2  from the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission  (NRC) and the Massachusetts Department of Public health in 2002 to use or process source, special nuclear or byproduct material.

Much of the information in this report is grouped by waste category of generator, of which there are five:

(1) Academic (Acad) - universities, colleges, and other research institutions

(2) Commercial (Comm) - organizations such as biotechnology, engineering, and construction companies, testing laboratories, radiopharmaceutical manufacturers and suppliers, and companies using radioactive materials for process, quality control, and analysis (also referred to as industry by Department of Energy (DOE). 

(3) Government (Govt) - local, state, and federal entities. (Federal does not include DOE, US Navy, or atomic weapon productions, and state does not include universities and colleges.)

(4) Health - hospitals, clinics, and physicians (also referred to as medical by DOE)

(5) Utility - companies that operate or are decommissioning nuclear power plants

The categories listed above are convenient for data analysis, but there is an inherent interrelationship among them.

Figures 10-17 and Table 9  show the volumes and activity results for the 5 various
waste generator categories according to survey results. The utility category leads the group as top volume and activity generator except for transferred activity in which the commercial category is the leader. The government category generates the least amounts in all activity and volume productions. 

2  The total number of radioactive materials licensees and registrants in Massachusetts varies from time to time due to expiration or terminations of some licenses and registrations, and the issuance of new ones. 

2.4    Waste Classification System 

Four classes of waste are defined by federal 10 CFR 61 and state DPH 105 CMR 120.299 Appendix E  regulations.

Class A wastes are characterized by their low concentrations of long lived radionuclides and concentrations of short-lived radionuclides that will decay to acceptable levels within a 100-year institutional control period when a disposal facility is actively maintained after closure. These concentration limits have been calculated on the basis of dose limits to an individual who might inadvertently intrude, occupy the disposal site, and encounter waste after this time.

Class B wastes are the next level of wastes that could represent a potential hazard to an inadvertent intruder, without additional protective measures, since they contain higher concentrations of short-lived and long lived radionuclides. They must meet NRC’s minimum stability requirements so that the waste forms or containers can “maintain gross physical properties and identity, over 300 years” thus limiting the exposure to a potential intruder.

Class C wastes are wastes that, due to their greater concentrations of long-lived or short-lived radionuclides, must meet more stringent waste form requirements to ensure stability, and must be disposed of in such a way as to protect the inadvertent intruder for a longer period of time. These wastes must meet the stability requirements for form or container (300 years) and must be disposed of in a manner which protects against inadvertent intrusion for at least 500 years.

Greater than Class C (GTCC) wastes are wastes whose larger concentrations of radionuclides make them unacceptable for near-surface land disposal, unlike classes A, B and C. GTCC disposal remain the responsibility of the federal government and their present strategy is deep geological disposal. GTCC is not LLRW. A burial site under consideration is located in Nevada.

The fifth class of waste is not defined in NRC or DPH regulations, but only in old Board 345 CMR regulations is HVLA (High Volume Low Activity) wastes.

HVLA Waste are soils or demolition rubble that have average concentrations less than or equal to the concentrations set forth in 345 CMR 1.13, Table 1.13B and that have been accepted for disposal at a licensed LLRW disposal facility. HVLA is considered as Class A waste, but treated separately in Massachusetts so as to allow some licensees a reduced annual LLRW fee of 90% of the proportional assessment.

Figure 2-9 and Table 8 show the volume and activity results for the four various waste classes. The most waste generated in terms of  volume and activity were Class A wastes, and the least amounts were Class C wastes.

Some of the licensees generated more than one class of waste so the totals may not equal 100%.

2.5   LLRW Management Method Terms

LLRW management refers to the storage, packing, treatment, transportation, or disposal of LLRW. Some of the terms used in past surveys were:
•	abIncineration for disposal - refers to procedure where LLRW, such as animal carcasses and liquid scintillation fluids, are incinerated per 10 CFR 20 which limits specific activity of waste to 0.05 microcuries of Hydrogen-3 (Tritium) or Carbon-14, per gram of material.

•	abmixed waste storage - radioactive material contaminated by chemical or toxic material. Past surveys classified such waste with the addition of the letter “H” after classification letter A, B, C, or HVLA. (i.e., Class AH, Class BH, etc.).

•	abshipped for disposal - refers to LLRW delivered directly, or via a processor, to one of three NRC-licensed disposal facilities located in SC, UT, and WA.

•	abstorage - refers to LLRW  that was generated during the survey year or prior years and that was held in storage. The waste may undergo additional radioactive decay prior to final packaging for disposal, and reported volume and activity may not reflect actual disposal properties.

•	abstorage for decay - refers to procedure in which LLRW with a relatively short half-life is held for natural radioactive decay (at least 10 half-lives). Storage for decay is a common practice.

•	abtransfer to an authorized recipient - refers to transfer of radioactive material for disposal or recycling to another licensee, such as sealed sources returned to the supplier since the  energy being emitted is no longer useful.

•	abvolume reduction - refers to negative change in LLRW volume from sorting and segregating (the separation of the non-radioactive from the radioactive portion), compaction, incineration, and decontamination.

This survey did not ask the licensees which management method(s) was used as past surveys did.

 2.6     Licensee LLRW Survey Results

The 2002 Radioactive Waste Survey requested data on LLRW produced during calendar year 2002 or retained in storage from previous years. The survey was mailed in May of 2003 to 521 companies and institutions licensed by the NRC and DPH in any time during  2002 to possess sources of ionizing radiation involving the use of radioactive materials in the Commonwealth; 505 or 96.9% of licensees returned the 2002 survey form which increased from a 85.2% return rate in 1997 and a 72% in 1996.

Licensees that did not return the form were evaluated by DPH to determine if they typically generate LLRW which requires disposal. Most non-respondents were identified as licensees that manage by storage for decay, or transfer sealed sources3 to an authorized recipient, or do not generate any LLRW. Some of the 2002 licensees had gone out of business and were unable to receive the survey 
form as they had no forwarding address. To correct that deficiency in the future DPH is now surveying the licensees as their license is terminated and not waiting to the following year to mail out the survey form. Two licensees were in bankruptcy.

DPH is exploring the possibility of having licensees with an e mail address on file (currently 72%) complete 2004  annual radiation waste surveys on line using a DPH assigned password. This would be optional.  Comments regarding this new procedure are encouraged.

Table 8 shows that 139 licensees (27.5%) of the 505 who responded  reported producing LLRW for transfer or in storage during 2002 . The remainder used sealed sources or did not generate any long lived (half- life greater than 120 days) LLRW during 2002.
.
Table 8 - 2002 activity and volume summary:

•	ab63,667.21 cubic feet of LLRW containing 5,599.96 curies were generated during 2002

•	ab5,236.63 curies (93.51 %)  were from Class A LLRW

•	ab361.2 curies (6.45 %)  were from Class B LLRW

•	ab0.00 curies (0.00%) were from Class C LLRW

•	ab2.12 curies (0.04%)  were from Class HVLA  LLRW

•	ab58,462.38 cubic feet (91.82 %) were Class A LLRW

•	ab1,785.70 cubic feet (2.80%) were Class B LLRW

•	ab1.00 cubic foot (0.002 %) was Class C LLRW

•	ab3,418.14 cubic feet (5.37 %) were Class HVLA  LLRW

3 sealed sources are usually returned to the manufacturer for recycling or disposal. The most common sealed source is lead paint detector containing the accelerator-produced radionuclide Cobalt 57 (Co-57).

•	ab30,920.68 cubic feet (48.57 %) containing 876.61 curies (15.65 %) of LLRW were transferred to licensed brokers or disposal sites for disposal out of Massachusetts

•	ab32,746.44 cubic feet (51.43 %) containing 4,723.34 curies (84.35 %) of LLRW were placed in storage in Massachusetts

TABLE 8

Activity and Volume by Class for the Year: 2002
  Class		       No. Submitted 	                                             Activity( curies )	                                      Volume ( cu. ft. )
	       in the Class
	In Storage	Transferred	TOTAL	In Storage	Transferred	TOTAL
	A	131	4,452.27	784.36	5,236.63	30,994.24	27,468.04	58,462.38
	B	4	270.00	91.20	361.20	1,518.50	267.20	1,785.70
	C	1	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	1.00	1.00
	HVLA	14	1.07	1.05	2.12	233.70	3,184.44	3,418.14
	Grand Totals:	150	4,723.34	876.61	5,599.96	32,746.44	30,920.68	63,667.21
	Total number of surveys submitted for 2002 : 	505
	Number Without Any Waste Generation for 2002	366
	Number With Waste Generation for 2002 : 	139

Note: Some licensees generated more than one class, and totals may not equal 100%.

2.7      MA Historic, Current and Projected Annual Transfer Disposal Rate Results

Figure 18  shows total cubic feet of LLRW that were transferred from 1994-2002 with the exception of  years 1998-2001 for which no published data is available. Although the old LLRW Board was funded until 2002, the last report was for 1997 and printed in 1999. With the exception of 1996, amounts transferred decreased  annually from 1,082,172 cf in 1994 to 30,920.68 cf in 2002.

The 1996 cf transfer spike was influenced by the closure of Barnwell disposal site during 6 months in 1995. During that time many generators placed LLRW in storage until it reopened in 1996, and then shipped it. 

The present survey does not distinguish between routine and non-routine LLRW shipped for disposal. Routine refers to LLRW from process operations that is expected to be generated annually for the foreseeable future. Non-routine refers to LLRW from one time decommissioning or site remediation projects. A non-routine example is  a decommissioning project at the former nuclear power plant operated by Yankee Atomic Electric Company in Rowe, and one for site remediation is Starmet NMI (formerly Nuclear Metals, Inc.)in Concord. 

Figure 19 shows total activity in curies of LLRW that was transferred from 1994-2002 with the exception of years 1998-2001 for which no published data is available. As discussed above, the figure shows decreasing amounts annually from 140,934 curies in 1994 to 876.61 curies in 2002.

Since the survey eliminated the questions from licensees of future projections, DPH Radiation Control Program’s staff estimates with some confidence (plus or minus 10%) that total statewide future annual LLRW projections until 2012 will remain constant at 80,000 cubic feet and 20,000 curies. These figures include both storage and transfers.

Chapter 3   

NATIONAL  DATA                                                 
                                                                                                                                                                                       
3.1   State-by-State Comparison

Table 9 shows how Massachusetts LLRW volume and activity shipped for disposal compared to other states in 2002. These totals  include high volume low activity (HVLA) wastes shipped out of state.

In terms of ranking Massachusetts with the 49 other states, Massachusetts ranked 27th in terms of volume  generated, and 20th in terms of activity generated as reported by the Manifest Information Management System (MIMS) in 2002. MIMS is operated by the US Department of Energy, and does not assure quality of information. The totals reported do not agree exactly with DPH LLRW survey results.

TABLE 9 	
	
2002 LLRW VOLUME AND ACTIVITY SUMMARY FROM ALL STATES FROM MIMS	
                                                                    
Year
Received	
State	Volume
(ft3)	Activity
(curies)	
2002	Alabama	18,474.77	1,299.27	
2002	Alaska	47,570.30	0.15	
2002	Arizona	2,077.91	175.83	
2002	Arkansas	1,790.39	13.27	
2002	Army Out U.S.	125.80	50.94	
2002	California	462,441.86	4,002.14	
2002	Colorado	288.86	0.32	
2002	Connecticut	27,783.29	3,177.24	
2002	Delaware	366.39	0.50	
2002	Dist of Columbia	259.93	0.76	
2002	Florida	22,497.62	1,258.04	
2002	Georgia	7,688.66	1,777.15	
2002	Hawaii	251.19	39.62	
2002	Idaho	314.62	0.69	
2002	Illinois	852,258.46	19,746.90	
2002	Indiana	191.78	7.00	
2002	Iowa	3,530.80	108.39	

2002	Kansas	808.04	2,126.93	
2002	Kentucky	40,286.27	1.84	
2002	Louisiana	18,191.28	1,598.45	
2002	Maine	313,362.17	1,047.61	
2002	Maryland	6,692.72	241.32	
2002	Massachusetts	4,357.77	854.48	
2002	Michigan	8,599.86	243.85	
2002	Minnesota	3,696.18	30.49	
2002	Mississippi	671.85	279.69	
2002	Missouri	26,970.32	358.46	
2002	Montana	0.20	0.00	
2002	Nebraska	2,083.73	984.95	
2002	Nevada	8.74	0.06	
2002	New Hampshire	2,674.51	207.94	
2002	New Jersey	546,549.69	1,440.52	
2002	New Mexico	215.49	0.01	
2002	New York	148,934.56	1,365.03	
2002	North Carolina	207,555.16	71,948.00	
2002	North Dakota	82.84	0.01	
2002	Ohio	16,755.40	1,218.53	
2002	Oklahoma	671,827.97	1.58	
2002	Oregon	13,286.79	0.41	
2002	Pennsylvania	55,024.70	6,586.38	
2002	Puerto Rico	11.71	0.32	
2002	Rhode Island	0.70	2.02	
2002	South Carolina	14,912.86	10,339.69	
2002	South Dakota	41.43	0.02	
2002	Tennessee	272,845.60	388.47	
2002	Texas	70,386.15	1,077.38	
2002	Utah	417.64	0.58	
2002	Vermont	1,093.40	91.78	
2002	Virginia	32,652.07	1,135.39	
2002	Washington	51,053.20	127.23	
2002	West Virginia	181.09	0.09	
2002	Wisconsin	12,584.83	205.46	
2002	Wyoming	0.10	1.25	
Total:		3,992,729.65	135,564.44	

Table 10 shows that Barnwell in SC reported that Massachusetts generators shipped some 843.536 cubic feet of LLRW totaling 841.643 curies in 2002 making the average concentration over 1 curie per cubic foot of waste. Envirocare in UT reported receiving some 3,510 cf with 1.27 curies or 1 curie per 2,750 cf.

3.2 Manifest Information Management System (MIMS)

The Manifest Information Management System (MIMS)4 provides information on waste shipments to 3 commercial disposal facilities located in Barnwell, SC; Clive, UT; and Richland, WA. The Barnwell, SC site is operated by Chem-Nuclear Systems, the Clive, UT site is operated by Envirocare of Utah, and the Richland, WA site is operated by US Ecology Inc. 

According to MIMS approximately 600,000 cubic meters (21.186 million cf) of waste containing almost 9 million curies of radioactivity were disposed from 1989 to 2001 at commercial disposal sites. The vast majority of the waste, some 85% of the volume and activity came from nuclear facilities (utility).  The Massachusetts figures are substantially less with utility shipping some 13-15% of the volume and the activity.

MIMS provides a comparison of the waste generated from Massachusetts waste generators as reported by the 3  commercial waste disposal sites and the DPH LLRW survey summary results. All data is from three different data bases collected by three different agencies.

The DPH survey results showed a total of 876.61 curies transferred while MIMS showed 854.48 curies transferred. DPH generator results for activity were 102.59% of total as reported by disposal sites through MIMS. Results were within 3% of each other showing consistency and accuracy. 

DPH survey results showed a total of 30,920.68 cubic feet of waste transferred while MIMS showed 4,357.77 cubic feet transferred. DPH generator results for volume were 709.55% of total as reported by disposal sites through MIMS. Differences can not be readily explained. Possible explanations are:

1. LLRW is shipped to the generator’s home office out of state and is combined with LLRW from other sites. This total is then reported to MIMS, and DPH has no way of determining the MA total from this. 

2. LLRW undergoes a  degree of compaction or volume reduction5. One utility reports that its waste is shipped to a broker out of state where waste is segregated (free release) in order to reduce burial volume. The compaction method is by a glass melting process. 

3. Generators estimating the volume of transferred LLRW. The actual volume inflated by shipping container and packing which is later removed by broker.

4. Some waste held for convenience and deferred expenditures by broker or others, and sometimes for years.

5. Other unknown reasons. Comments are welcome!

DPH should stress in future surveys to report the volume in cf actually transferred to final disposal site.

4 website is  
5 volume reduction refers to negative change in LLRW volume that occurs due to processing, either on or off site where waste was generated

                                                                           
TABLE 10	
             	
COMPARISONS OF LLRW TRANSFERRED FROM MASSACHUSETTS FOR 2002	

	Richland, WA Database*	Barnwell, SC Database	Clive, UT Database	Totals From The Three Disposal Sites	MIMS Database	 DPH Database	
Volume, CF	   0.000            	843.536	 3,510.7	4,354.236	4,357.77	30,920.68	
Activity,
Curies	  0.000	841.643	1.275	842.918	854.48	876.61	

* Richland, WA site last received  LLRW from MA generators in 1992.

                                                                             

TABLE 11			
			
MASSACHUSETTS 2002 WASTE GENERATOR CATEGORY RESULTS FROM  MIMS   			
			
Generator Class                                   	Volume Transferred (CF)                	Activity Transferred (curies) 	
			
Academic                                                               	17.36  (0.40%)                    	0.42 (0.05%)	
			
Government                                                                 	9.90 (0.23%)                                            	0.03 (0.01%)	
			
Industry                         	3,760.68 (86.29%)                                       	719.22 (84.17%)	
			
Medical                                             	1.23 (0.03%)                                            	 0.04 (0.01%)	
			
Utility                                                                                                    	568.60 (13.05%)                                         	134.77 (15.77%)                              	
			
Totals                                                                               	4,357.77CF                                                    	  854.48 Ci	

                                                                                     TABLE 12	
	
                    MA WASTE CLASSIFICATION AND GENERATOR CLASS FOR 2002 FROM MIMS

Disposal
Site	
Year
Received	
Generator
Class	Total
Volume
(ft3)	Total
Activity
(curies)	Class A
Volume
(ft3)	Class B
Volume
(ft3)	Class C
Volume
(ft3)	
 Barnwell	 2002	 Academic	17.36	0.42	17.07	0.00	0.29	
 Barnwell	 2002	 Government	9.90	0.03	9.70	0.00	0.20	
 Barnwell	 2002	 Industry	390.38	709.38	106.40	240.00	43.98	
 Barnwell	 2002	 Medical	1.23	0.04	1.05	0.00	0.18	
 Barnwell	 2002	 Utility	429.60	134.77	80.90	206.81	141.89	
 Envirocare	 2002	 Industry	3,370.30	9.84	3,370.30			
 Envirocare	 2002	 Utility	139.00	0.00	139.00			
Total:			4,357.77	854.48	3,724.42	446.81	186.54       	

3.2  National Regulatory History For LLRW

  1980's

In 1980, the U.S. Congress passed the Low-Level Radioactive Waste Policy Act (P.L. 96-573).

The Act established three major policies:
1.Each state is responsible for the LLRW generated within its boundaries.

2.States may form compacts (or groups of states) to facilitate managing LLRW generated within the boundaries of the compact states.

3.Compacts could not refuse waste from other states until U.S. Congress had ratified the compact.

On 1/1/1986 the Low Level Radioactive Waste Policy Amendments Act (P.L.99-240) was signed into law, making a generator’s continued access to the three operating disposal sites contingent on its compact meeting specified milestones for new site development. The amended Act clarified Congress’ intent to require compacts (or individual states not within a compact) to provide disposal capacity for LLRW generated within its boundaries by 1/1/1993.

The chief mandate of these federal statues requires each state to provide for its LLRW disposal by 1/1/1996. If a state fails to do this by this date, it must assume ownership and liability for all LLRW produced within its borders after 1996.

In response to these federal laws, Massachusetts enacted MGL Chapter 111 H in 1987. This 48 section general law  as amended in 2002 authorizes the DPH to regulate the management of  low level radioactive waste in the Commonwealth. Complete copies of the general law are available on state website at  

   1990's

In early 1990's the Massachusetts Low Level Radioactive Waste Management Board (consisting of 9 members) was established to manage LLRW in Massachusetts and to investigate whether a LLRW disposal site would be located in Massachusetts. In March of 1996 after a thorough investigation, the Board voted not to locate a LLRW disposal site in Massachusetts as three out-of-state disposal sites (SC, WA, and UT) were available to Massachusetts generators. The other reasons an in state disposal site was not selected were the politics of siting and the critical need to address potential health, safety, and environmental issues.

    2000's

In fall of 2002 Board was abolished by the Legislature and its powers and duties were transferred to DPH. . Massachusetts remains an unaffiliated state and is not a member of any of the ten state LLRW compacts.  The other unaffiliated states are :District of Columbia, New York, New Hampshire, Michigan, North Carolina, Rhode Island, and Puerto Rico.

Figure 1 is map of USA showing Low Level Radioactive Disposal Compact Membership by states and including District of Columbia and Puerto Rico. Membership changes do occur, and currently Maine has notified the Texas Compact of its intentions to withdraw.

   Future

Barnwell, SC  accepts LLRW through brokers or processors or directly from LLRW generators, only until June 30, 2008. After 2008 they will only accept LLRW from Atlantic Compact members (formerly the Northeast Compact) consisting of states of SC, CT, and NJ. If Massachusetts were to consider joining, then we would have to become a host state. The Board had rejected that idea back in 1996. 
Clive, Utah is accepting LLRW Class A including HVLA waste. They do not accept Class B or C wastes.

Richland ,WA is not accepting any Class A, B, C, or HVLA LLRW wastes, but will accept NARM and NORM wastes which are not considered LLRW wastes.

Texas has recently passed legislation to allow creation of two privately run LLRW disposal facilities to be licensed as one site by the state. On December 29, 2003 Texas opened up the process to accept applications from July 8-August 6, 2004 from any interested parties to license a LLRW disposal site.  One site may dispose of federal facility waste and the other may dispose of commercial low-level radioactive waste.  Texas is host state to the Texas Compact, which includes ME and VT as members. Maine has given notice of its intent to terminate effective in April 2004. New membership cost is upwards of $25 million dollars if Massachusetts should consider joining and Massachusetts is considering its options.
 
The Controller’s office still has authority under MGL Ch 428 of Acts of 1993 to issue up to $45 million dollars in bonds for the purpose of siting LLRW storage, treatment, or disposal facilities. The authorization expires in 2018.
This bond authorization could be used to join a compact with the understanding the monies would be repaid back to the Commonwealth by new LLRW generator’s fees. 

As a result of the above, on July 1, 2008  Massachusetts generators will have no treatment option other than decay on site unless Texas opens a new LLRW site for Class B and C wastes.

3.3  INTERREGIONAL COOPERATION

DPH continues to participate in the Low-Level Radioactive Waste Forum, Inc. (LLW Forum). Their informative web site which includes useful links is     
The LLW Forum is a national association of representatives of compacts6, host states, unaffiliated states, and states with currently operating disposal facilities and established to facilitate the implementation of the 1985 Low-Level Radioactive Waste Policy Amendments Act. The LLW Forum provides an opportunity for states and compacts to share information and exchange views with officials of federal agencies and other interested parties. LLW Forum participants also serve as liaisons to other entities, including the Conference of  Radiation Control Program Directors, the Conference of State Legislatures, and the federal Facility Compliance Act Task Force. MA is represented on the LLW Forum by Mr. Robert Walker and Mr. Frederick Barker.
                                                                              
6 Compact is a formal agreement between two or more states under Article 1, Section 10 of the US Constitution, states may form compacts with the consent of Congress to resolve conflicts or address common problems. More than 120 such compacts have focused on various subjects, including water, education, transportation, fisheries, health, and waste. 

                                                                        

                                                                              FIGURE 1                                                                             

Chapter 4    
                                                                Financial Data

4.1   Financing LLRW Management

In October of 2002 the Board was dissolved, and its funds were transferred to DPH. The balance forward for FY 2003 to DPH was approximately $135,000. 

Limited assessment funds were received in FY 2002 as invoices were sent out in fall of 2001 to cover calendar year 2000 assessments. No invoices were sent out to any licensees to cover calendar year 2001 LLRW assessments, and none are planned as DPH was not responsible in 2001.

Funds to manage the requirements of MGL Ch 111H as amended including the annual survey come from an assessment on radioactive material users and LLRW generators pursuant to MGL Chapter 111H sections 4A and 4B. A total of 507 users were assessed $190,971.47 starting in April of 2004 using the same rates7 as the Board last used in 2001 for period of calendar year 2002. 16 users were unresponsive and did not submit the survey form. Some could not be found, and some are in process of having their licenses terminated.

The billed amounts range from the regulatory minimum of $75.00 to a maximum of $99,980 per licensee.

Cities and towns are exempt from the annual LLRW fees per MGL Chapter 29, section 27 C, but must still submit the annual LLRW survey when requested.  Eleven municipal licensees are in this category.

One waste generator is in bankruptcy and owes the Commonwealth over $82,000 in past fees.

The “flat assessment” charged to all licensees and registrants is $75.00 per year and remains unchanged. In addition, a proportional assessment of $1.96 per cubic foot of the weighted volume is calculated for some licensees or registrants pursuant to 345 CMR 4.03 (2) (c) 3 and an additional assessment of $0.20 per cubic foot of the weighted volume of high volume, low activity waste is calculated for some licensees or registrants pursuant to 345 CMR 4.03 (2) (c)4.
 
The total LLRW annual fee charged is based on billing formula below:

$ LLRW ANNUAL FEE = $75.00 + (CRF (PF) (CA + 3CB +5CC)) + ((HVLA (0.1) (PF))    	

PF is proportional fee or proportional assessment currently set at $1.96 per cubic foot of waste. The PF figure formerly was much higher and has been decreasing over time.

CRF is classification radioactivity factor varying between 1.0 - 1.3 as shown in Table 13.

CA = Class A LLRW waste volume in cubic feet

7 According to FY 1997  Board’s annual report, a total of 534 radioactive materials users and LLRW generators were assessed $275,872.63 during fiscal year 1997.

CB = Class B LLRW waste volume in cubic feet

CC = Class C LLRW waste volume in cubic feet

PF = Proportional assessment set at $1.96 per cubic feet of weighted volume of waste per DPH

HVLA = HVLA waste volume in cubic feet

                                                                                 Table 13	
                                        Classification of Radioactivity Factor (CRF)  345 CMR Table 4.03 B	
Radioactivity of Waste Shipped for Disposal Off Site or Stored for Later Disposal 	          Classification of Radioactivity Factor (CRF) 	
		
less than 1.0 curie per year                                                                                                   	         1.0	
1.0 curie per year or more, but less than 10.0 curies per year                                                	         1.1	
10.0 curies per year or more, but less than 100.0 curies per year                                              	          1.2	
100.0 curies per year or more                                                                                                    	          1.3	

In summary the billing invoice amount is a function of volume, class, and activity of waste generated per year with all licensees (except cities and towns) paying a $75.00 minimum LLRW fee. The higher the volume and activity and class of LLRW generated, the higher the annual fee payable.

4.2  DOE FUNDING

No funds from US Department of Energy (DOE) were received in 2002 pursuant to the federal Low-Level Radioactive Waste Policy Act, as amended (P.L. 99-240). These funds were collected by certain  LLRW disposal sites as a surcharge to use these disposal sites. The funds are held by DOE, and rebated to various states based upon their success in meeting milestones outlined in federal law. Since Massachusetts ceased its disposal siting activities in 1996 and remains an unaffiliated disposal state, no funds were received in 2002.

APPENDIX  A

FIGURE 2

PERCENT OF TOTAL ACTIVITY BY WASTE CLASS FOR 2002

FIGURE 3

PERCENT ACTIVITY PLACED IN STORAGE BY WASTE CLASS FOR 2002

FIGURE 4

PERCENT ACTIVITY TRANSFERRED BY WASTE CLASS FOR 2002

FIGURE 5

PERCENT TOTAL VOLUME BY WASTE CLASS FOR 2002

FIGURE 6

PERCENT VOLUME IN STORAGE BY WASTE CLASS FOR 2002

FIGURE 7

PERCENT VOLUME SHIPPED BY WASTE CLASS FOR 2002

FIGURE 8

COMPARISON OF WASTE ACTIVITIES BY WASTE CLASS FOR 2002

FIGURE 9

COMPARISON OF WASTE VOLUMES BY WASTE CLASS FOR 2002

FIGURE 10

PERCENT OF TOTAL ACTIVITY BY WASTE GENERATOR CATEGORY FOR 2002

FIGURE 11

PERCENT  OF  IN - STORAGE  ACTIVITY  BY WASTE  GENERATOR  CATEGORY  FOR  2002

FIGURE 12

PERCENT OF TRANSFERRED ACTIVITY BY WASTE GENERATOR CATEGORY FOR 2002

FIGURE 13

COMPARISON OF WASTE ACTIVITIES BY WASTE GENERATOR CATEGORY FOR 2002

FIGURE 14

PERCENT OF TOTAL VOLUME BY WASTE GENERATOR CATEGORY FOR 2002

FIGURE 15

PERCENT OF IN-STORAGE VOLUME BY WASTE GENERATOR CATEGORY FOR 2002

FIGURE 16

PERCENT OF TRANSFERRED VOLUME BY WASTE GENERATOR CATEGORY FOR 2002

FIGURE 17

COMPARISON OF WASTE VOLUMES BY WASTE GENERATOR CATEGORY FOR 2002

TABLE 14
 Activity and Volume by Waste Generator Category
For 2002
	Waste Generator 	Activity (curies)	Volume (Cu. ft.)
	Category	Transferred	In Storage	Total	Transferred	In Storage	Total
	Academic	3.69	0.82	4.50	2,531.25	540.57	3,071.82
	(Percent)	0.4%	0.0%	0.1%	8.2%	1.7%	4.8%
	Commercial	745.64	210.02	955.66	11,191.19	3,241.11	14,432.39
	(Percent)	85.1%	4.4%	17.1%	36.2%	9.9%	22.7%
	Government	0.20	0.01	0.21	4.10	3.00	7.10
	(Percent)	0.0%	0.0%	0.0%	0.0%	0.0%	0.0%
	Health	3.85	22.42	26.27	1,551.04	1,603.56	3,154.60
	(Percent)	0.4%	0.5%	0.5%	5.0%	4.9%	5.0%
	Utility	123.24	4,490.08	4,613.32	15,643.10	27,358.20	43,001.30
	(Percent)	14.1%	95.1%	82.4%	50.6%	83.5%	67.5%
	Grand Total	876.61	4,723.34	5,599.96	30,920.68	32,746.44	63,667.21

                                                                          FIGURE 18 
   
                                                 Note: No data available for 1998-2001 from DPH as no survey reports were printed.

                                                                                                   FIGURE 19

FIGURE 20
TOTAL RAM REPORTING FREQUENCY FOR ALL CLASSES OF WASTE IN 2002

 

FIGURE 21

TOTAL RAM REPORTING FREQUENCY FOR CLASS A WASTE IN 2002

FIGURE 22
TOTAL RAM REPORTING FREQUENCY FOR CLASS B WASTE IN 2002

FIGURE 23

TOTAL RAM REPORTING FREQUENCY FOR CLASS C WASTE IN 2002

FIGURE 24
TOTAL RAM REPORTING FREQUENCY FOR HVLA WASTE IN 2002

FIGURE 25
IN-STORAGE RAM REPORTING FREQUENCY FOR ALL CLASSES OF WASTE IN 2002

FIGURE 26
TRANSFERRED RAM REPORTING FREQUENCY FOR ALL CLASSES OF WASTE IN 2002

FIGURE 27
DISTRIBUTION OF ORGANIZATIONS THAT GENERATED WASTE IN 2002 - BY ACTIVITY

FIGURE 28
DISTRIBUTION OF ORGANIZATIONS THAT GENERATED WASTE IN 2002 - BY VOLUME

                                                               
TABLE 15	

List of Facilities Activities and Volumes Produced in 2002
	VOLUME ( cu. ft. )	ACTIVITY ( curies )
	Facility Name	Transferred	In Storage	Total	Transferred	In Storage	Total
	A-PAINTING & LEAD DETECT. SERV	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	AA & K DELEADING, INC.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	ABBOTT BIORESEARCH CENTER, INC	0.0	22.5	22.5	0.000	0.033	0.033
	ABC TESTING, INC.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	ACAMBIS, INC.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	ACLIN, INC.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	ACTION ENVIRONMENTAL, INC.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	ADAPTIVE OPTICS ASSOCIATES, INC.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	ADDISON GILBERT HOSPITAL	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	ADVANCE TESTING CO. INC.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	ADVANCED CARE PHARMACY	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	ADVANCED CELL TECHNOLOGY	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	ADVANCED MAGNETICS, INC.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	AEA TECHNOLOGY QSA, INC.	90.0	150.0	240.0	0.520	50.000	50.520
	AGGREGATE INDUSTRIES-NORTHEAST	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	ALC ENVIRONMENTAL, INC.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	ALKERMES, INC.	0.0	7.5	7.5	0.000	0.021	0.021
	ALL STATE SERVICES ENVIRON.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	ALLEGHENY RODNEY	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	ALLIANCE IMAGING	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	ALLIANCE IMAGING, INC.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	ALLIED TESTING LABS., INC.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	

	VOLUME ( cu. ft. )	ACTIVITY ( curies )
	Facility Name	Transferred	In Storage	Total	Transferred	In Storage	Total
	ALPHA ANALYTICAL LAB., INC	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	ALTRAN CORPORATION	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	AMERICAN ENG. & TESTING, INC.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	AMERICAN LEAD PAINT INSPECTORS	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	AMERICAN RED CROSS BLOOD SERV.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	AMGEN, INC.	9.2	13.8	23.0	0.001	0.005	0.006
	AMHERST COLLEGE	0.0	3.0	3.0	0.000	0.004	0.004
	AMPTEK, INC.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	ANALYTICAL ANSWERS , INC	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	ANGELL MEMORIAL ANIMAL HOSP.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	ANNA JAQUES HOSPITAL	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	ANTIGENICS INC.	3.0	2.0	5.0	0.006	0.010	0.016
	ANTIGENICS INCORPORATED	0.0	1.5	1.5	0.000	0.019	0.019
	APPLIED BIOSYSTEMS	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	ARCHEMIX	0.0	50.0	50.0	0.000	0.004	0.004
	ARIAD PHARMACEUTICALS, INC.	0.0	0.7	0.7	0.000	0.764	0.764
	ARQULE, INC.	14.0	21.0	35.0	0.057	0.001	0.058
	ASAP LEAD PAINT INSPECTIONS	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	ASPEN SQUARE MANAGEMENT	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	ASTRAZENECA PHARMACEUTICALS LP	58.8	0.0	58.8	0.001	0.000	0.001
	ASTRAZENECA PHARMACEUTICALS LP	0.0	34.1	34.1	0.000	0.004	0.004
	ATC ASSOCIATES, INC.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	ATC ASSOCIATES, INC.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	ATC GROUP SERVICES, INC.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	ATHENA DIAGNOSTICS, INC.	0.0	16.3	16.3	0.000	0.000	0.000
	AVANT IMMUNOTHERAPUTICS, INC.	0.0	10.0	10.0	0.000	0.001	0.001

	VOLUME ( cu. ft. )	ACTIVITY ( curies )
	Facility Name	Transferred	In Storage	Total	Transferred	In Storage	Total
	AVENTIS PHARMACEUTICALS, INC.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	AXIOM PARTNERS, INC.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	B.J. EDGE & ASSOCIATES	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	BAKER TESTING SERVICES INC.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	BARTLETT NUCLEAR, INC.	0.0	50.0	50.0	0.000	0.001	0.001
	BAYER HEALTHCARE LLC	0.0	0.7	0.7	0.000	0.000	0.000
	BAYSTATE HEALTH SYSTEMS, INC.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	BECHTEL/PARSONS BRINCKERHOFF	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	BECTON DICKINSON AND COMPANY	0.0	7.5	7.5	0.000	0.006	0.006
	BERKSHIRE MEDICAL CENTER	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	BETH ISRAEL DEACON.MED CENTER	136.0	24.8	160.8	0.047	0.042	0.089
	BETH ISRAEL DEACONESS HOSPITAL	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	BEVERLY HOSPITAL	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	BIOGEN, INC.	105.0	0.0	105.0	0.011	0.000	0.011
	BIOMEASURE, INC.	4.0	0.0	4.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	BIOMEDICAL TECHNOLOGIES, INC.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	BLACKMAN, MEL	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	BOSTON BIOMEDICAL RES. INST.	18.7	0.0	18.7	0.005	0.000	0.005
	BOSTON CHILD. LEAD POISON PRE.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	BOSTON COLLEGE	22.5	87.5	110.0	0.016	0.091	0.107
	BOSTON HEART FOUNDATION AND	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	BOSTON UNIV. CHARLES RIVER CAM	10.8	90.7	101.5	0.000	0.019	0.019
	BOSTON UNIVERSITY MED CTR HOSP	166.0	669.0	835.0	0.120	0.145	0.265
	BRANDEIS UNIVERSITY	75.0	97.5	172.5	0.018	0.500	0.518
	BRIDGEWATER GODDARD PARK MED	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	BRIDGEWATER STATE COLLEGE	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000

	VOLUME ( cu. ft. )	ACTIVITY ( curies )
	Facility Name	Transferred	In Storage	Total	Transferred	In Storage	Total
	BRIGHAM & WOMEN'S HOSPITAL	0.0	48.0	48.0	0.000	0.069	0.069
	BRISTOL-MYERS SQUIBB MED. IMG.	2,160.4	161.0	2,321.4	1.610	0.477	2.090
	BROCKTON BOARD OF HEALTH	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	BROCKTON CARDIOLOGY ASSOCIATE	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	BROCKTON HOSPITAL	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	BROWN AND CALDWELL	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	BRUKER DALTONICS, INC.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	CAMBREX BIO SCIENCE MA, INC.	45.0	7.5	52.5	0.016	0.002	0.019
	CAMBRIDGE PUB. HEALTH ALLIANCE	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	CAMP DRESSER & MCKEE, INC.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	CAPE COD HOSPITAL	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	CAPITAL CARDIOLOGY ASSOC.,P.C	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	CARDINAL HEALTH 414, INC.	0.0	1.0	1.0	0.000	0.010	0.010
	CARDINAL HEALTH 420, LLC	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	CARDIOLOGY CONSULT.OF CENTRAL 	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	MASS., LLP
	CARDIOVASCULAR SPECIALISTS	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	CARITAS CARNEY HOSPITAL	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	CARITAS GOOD SAMARITAN MED CT.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	CARITAS NORWOOD HOSPITAL	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	CARITAS SOUTHWOOD HOSPITAL	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	CAT HOSPITAL, THE	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	CATALDO, JOSEPH P.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	CAULFIELD ENVIRONMENTAL	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	CBR INSTITUTE FOR BIOMED. RESEARCH, 	0.0	64.7	64.7	0.000	0.220	0.220
	INC.
	CELL SIGNALING TECHNOLOGY	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	CHADWICK MEDICAL ASSOCIATES	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000

	VOLUME ( cu. ft. )	ACTIVITY ( curies )
	Facility Name	Transferred	In Storage	Total	Transferred	In Storage	Total
	CHARLES RIVER LABORATORIES,INC	866.0	34.0	900.0	0.042	0.001	0.043
	CHARLES RIVER PHARMSERVICES	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	CHARLES STARK DRAPER LAB., INC	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	CHARLTON MEMORIAL HOSPITAL	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	CHARM SCIENCES INC.	64.6	0.5	65.1	0.014	0.002	0.016
	CHEM SHARED SERVICES, INC.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	CHEMGENOMICS, INC.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	CHEMIC LABORATORIES, INC.	0.0	8.0	8.0	0.000	0.005	0.005
	CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL, THE	45.0	41.3	86.2	0.038	0.247	0.285
	CIANO, DIANE C.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	CIS-US, INC.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	CLARK UNIVERSITY	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	CLINICAL SCIENCE LAB., INC.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	CLINOMICS LABORATORIES, INC.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	COASTAL ENGINEERING CO., INC.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	COLLEGE OF OUR LADY OF ELMS	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	COLLEGE OF THE HOLY CROSS	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	COMBINATORX, INC.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	COMMUNICATIONS & POWER INDUST.	7.5	0.0	7.5	0.008	0.000	0.008
	CONAM INSPECTION	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	COOLEY DICKINSON HOSPITAL, INC	0.0	6.0	6.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	COVINO ENVIRON. ASSOC. INC.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	CRANE & CO., INC.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	CRITICAL THERAPEUTICS, INC,	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	CUBIST PHARMACEUTICALS, INC.	86.0	8.0	94.0	0.016	0.001	0.018
	CURIS, INCORPORATED	38.5	15.0	53.5	0.014	0.005	0.019

	VOLUME ( cu. ft. )	ACTIVITY ( curies )
	Facility Name	Transferred	In Storage	Total	Transferred	In Storage	Total
	CYCLIS PHARMACEUTICALS, INC.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	DANA-FARBER CANCER INSTITUTE	696.0	637.0	1,333.0	2.600	1.800	4.400
	DAVID & SON LEAD INSPECTIONS	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	DELTA AIR LINES, INC.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	DENTCH, EDWARD R.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	DIGIRAD IMAGING SOLUTIONS, IN	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	DIGITAL SCINTIGRAPHICS, INC.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	DISCOVERY LABWARE, INC.	52.5	5.0	57.5	0.001	0.000	0.002
	DIVERSIFIED ENVIRONMENTAL CORP	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	DOSITEC, INC.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	DYAX CORP./PROTEIN ENGINEERING	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	E.T. & L. CONSTRUCTION CORP.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	EASTERN NAZARENE COLLEGE	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	EGS GAUGING  INCORPORATED	4.1	0.0	4.1	1.982	0.000	1.982
	EISAI RESEARCH INSTITUTE	27.0	7.5	34.5	0.013	0.001	0.014
	ELECTRONIC CONCEPTS, INC.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	ELIXIR PHARMACEUTICALS, INC.	0.0	4.0	4.0	0.000	0.005	0.005
	EMCON	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	EMD LEXIGEN RESEARCH CENTER 	0.0	20.9	20.9	0.000	0.003	0.003
	CORPORATION
	EMERALD LEAD TESTING CO.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	EMERSON HOSPITAL	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	ENANTA PHARMACEUTICALS	0.2	0.4	0.6	0.001	0.000	0.001
	ENSR INTERNATIONAL	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	ENTERGY NUCLEAR GENERATING 	8,814.6	27,358.2	36,172.8	104.000	4,490.081	4,594.081
	COMPANY
	ENVIRONMENTAL AND LEAD PT INSP	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	ENVIRONMENTAL COMPLIANCE SERV	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000

	VOLUME ( cu. ft. )	ACTIVITY ( curies )
	Facility Name	Transferred	In Storage	Total	Transferred	In Storage	Total
	ENVIRONMENTAL LEAD DETECTION, INC.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	ENVIRONMENTAL STRATEG.&MANAGE	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	ENVIRONMENTAL TESTING SVCS.INC	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	ENVIROSCIENCE CONSULTANTS, INC	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	ENVIROSENSE, INC.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	ENVIROTEST LABORATORY	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	ENZYME CENTER (THE)	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	EPIC THERAPEUTICS, INC.	0.0	56.3	56.3	0.000	0.000	0.000
	EPIX MEDICAL, INC.	131.6	0.0	131.6	0.009	0.000	0.009
	ERM	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	ESSENTIAL THERAPEUTICS	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	EUKARION, INC.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	EXACT SCIENCES CORPORATION	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	EXALPHA BIOLOGICALS, INC.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	EYETECH PHARMACEUTICALS, INC.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	F. H. PETERSON MACHINE CORP.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	F.J. STORCH BUILDING INSP. SER	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	F.X. MASSE ASSOCIATES, INC.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	FAIRVIEW HOSPITAL	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	FALMOUTH HOSPITAL	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	FAULKNER HOSPITAL	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	FITCHBURG BOARD OF HEALTH	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	FITCHBURG STATE COLLEGE	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	FORSYTH INSTITUTE THE	0.0	35.0	35.0	0.000	0.008	0.008
	FRAMATOME ANP DE&S	121.1	67.0	188.1	0.010	0.010	0.020
	FRANKLIN ANALYTICAL SERVICES	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000

	VOLUME ( cu. ft. )	ACTIVITY ( curies )
	Facility Name	Transferred	In Storage	Total	Transferred	In Storage	Total
	FSL ASSOCIATES, INC.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	GAETA, NEIL A.,	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	GAF  MATERIALS CORPORATION	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	GALANEK, MITCHELL S.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	GALEOTA ASSOCIATES, INC.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	GANNETT FLEMING, INC.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	GE ION TRACK	0.0	3.0	3.0	0.000	0.150	0.150
	GEI CONSULTANTS, INC.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	GELTEX PHARMACEUTICALS, INC.	111.7	19.2	131.0	0.012	0.009	0.022
	GEM ENVIRONMENTAL	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	GENERAL DYNAMICS DEFENSE SYS.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	GENETICA, INC.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	GENETICS INSTITUTE, LLC	397.5	593.0	990.5	0.125	0.409	0.534
	GENETIX PHARMACEUTICALS, INC.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	GENOME THERAPEUTICS CORP.	7.5	7.5	15.0	0.092	0.029	0.121
	GENPATH PHARMACEUTICALS, INC.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	GENVEC, INC.	0.0	28.1	28.1	0.000	0.012	0.012
	GENZYME BIOSURGERY	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	GENZYME CORPORATION	510.0	150.0	660.0	0.000	0.300	0.300
	GEODESIGN, INC.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	GEORGE, DAVID R.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANTS, INC	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	GEOTECHNICAL GROUP INC.(TGG)	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	GEOTECHNICAL SERVICES, INC.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	GEOTESTING EXPRESS, INC.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	GILLETTE COMPANY, THE	0.0	30.5	30.5	0.000	0.010	0.010

	VOLUME ( cu. ft. )	ACTIVITY ( curies )
	Facility Name	Transferred	In Storage	Total	Transferred	In Storage	Total
	GMP GENETICS, INC.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	GOLDMAN ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULT.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	GPC BIOTEC, INCORPORATED	66.6	23.9	90.5	0.060	0.085	0.145
	GRANGER-LYNCH CORPORATION	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	GUNTLOW & ASSOCIATES	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	GWATHMEY, INC.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	GZA GEOENVIRONMENTAL, INC.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	HALEY & ALDRICH, INC.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	HALLMARK HEALTH SYSTEM, INC.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	HAMILTON THORNE BIOSCIENCES	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	HARBOR MEDICAL ASSOCIATES, PC	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	HARRINGTON MEMORIAL HOSPITAL	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	HARTIN, ROBERT	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	HARVARD ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICE	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	HARVARD UNIVERSITY	2,132.7	0.0	2,132.7	3.521	0.000	3.521
	HAWTHORN MEDICAL ASSOCIATES	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	HEALTHALLIANCE HOSPITALS, INC.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	HEART CENTER, THE	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	HEARTSAFE	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	HEMMILA, FREDERIC J.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	HERLEY NEW ENGLAND	0.0	7.5	7.5	0.000	0.500	0.500
	HEYWOOD HOSPITAL	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	HOLY FAMILY HOSP.  & MED. CTR	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	HOLYOKE HOSPITAL, INC.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	HOMEINEX CORP.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	HORNE, DAVID C.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000

	VOLUME ( cu. ft. )	ACTIVITY ( curies )
	Facility Name	Transferred	In Storage	Total	Transferred	In Storage	Total
	HOUSING ENVIRONMENTAL SERV.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	HUSTON, GERALD F., SR.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	HYBRIDON, INC.	4.1	2.0	6.1	0.001	0.000	0.001
	HYGIENETICS ENVIRON. SERVICES	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	IDENIX (MASSACHUSETTS) INC.	34.8	7.5	42.3	0.014	0.001	0.015
	IEL SERVICE, INC.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	ILEX ONCOLOGY INC.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	IMAGING ASSOCIATES, INC.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	IMMUNOGEN, INC.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	IMPERIAL INSPECTION SERVICES	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	IMPLANT SCIENCES CORP.	0.0	4.0	4.0	0.000	0.024	0.024
	INDUSTRIAL NUCLEAR COMPANY,INC	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	INFINITY PHARMACEUTICALS, INC	0.0	4.0	4.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	INNOV-X SYSTEMS	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	INOTEK CORP.	26.4	0.0	26.4	0.001	0.000	0.001
	INTERLEUKIN GENETICS, INC.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	INTERNAL MEDICINE & CARDIOLOG	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	ITI QUALITEK, INC.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	J & M INSPECTIONAL SVCS. INC.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	JACOBS CIVIL INC.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	JAWORSKI GEOTECH, INC.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	JAY CASHMAN, INC.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	JHR CONTRACTING	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	JOHNSON FOILS	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	JORDAN HOSPITAL	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	JOSLIN DIABETES CENTER, INC.	60.0	0.0	60.0	0.029	0.000	0.029

	VOLUME ( cu. ft. )	ACTIVITY ( curies )
	Facility Name	Transferred	In Storage	Total	Transferred	In Storage	Total
	KANE, JACK	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	KEVILLE ENTERPRISES, INC.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	KIDDE-FENWAL, INC.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.020	0.020
	LAHEY CLINIC FOUNDATION	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	LANE CONSTRUCTION CORP. THE	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	LAWRENCE GENERAL HOSPITAL	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	LAWRENCE PUMPS, INC.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	LEAD PAINT TESTING CO., THE	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	LEADSAFE ENVIRONMENTAL SVCS.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	LENOX INSTITUTE OF WATER TECH.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	LESSARD ENVIRONMENTAL, INC.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	LFR INC.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	LITTLETON LIGHT & WATER DEPT.	4.1	0.0	4.1	0.200	0.000	0.200
	LOCKHEED MART. SYSTEMS SUPPORT	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	LOVELY, PAUL	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	LOWELL GENERAL HOSPITAL	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	LYNCH, BERNARD	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	M&M LEAD INSPECTIONAL SVCS.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	M/A-COM INCORPORATED	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	MACLARY, RICHARD	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	MALDEN REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	MALLINCKRODT, INC.	0.0	12.6	12.6	0.000	0.010	0.010
	MARCHI, KIRBY D.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	MARINE BIOLOGICAL LABORATORY	0.0	8.5	8.5	0.000	0.010	0.010
	MASS. -AMHERST, UNIV. OF	0.0	135.0	135.0	0.000	0.159	0.159
	MASS. -BOSTON, UNIVERSITY OF	0.0	0.7	0.7	0.000	0.010	0.010

	VOLUME ( cu. ft. )	ACTIVITY ( curies )
	Facility Name	Transferred	In Storage	Total	Transferred	In Storage	Total
	MASS. -DARTMOUTH, UNIV. OF	0.0	3.0	3.0	0.000	0.001	0.001
	MASS. -LOWELL, UNIVERSITY OF	0.0	7.0	7.0	0.000	0.002	0.002
	MASS. BIOMEDICAL INITIATIVES	1.4	0.0	1.4	0.000	0.000	0.000
	MASS. COLLEGE OF PHARMACY-	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	MASS. DEPT OF PUBLIC HEALTH	0.0	3.0	3.0	0.000	0.010	0.010
	MASS. DEPT. ENVIRONMENTAL PROT	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	MASS. DEPT. OF LABOR & WORKFORCE 	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	DEV.
	MASS. DPH CHILD LEAD POIS PREV	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	MASS. EMERGENCY MGT. AGENC	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	MASS. EYE & EAR INFIRMARY	75.2	0.0	75.2	0.018	0.000	0.018
	MASS. GENERAL HOSPITAL	315.0	64.0	379.0	0.031	0.009	0.040
	MASS. HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	MASS. INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY	40.0	0.0	40.0	0.079	0.000	0.079
	MASSACHUSETTS MOBILE PET, P.C.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	MATRITECH, INCORPORATED	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	MEDI-PHYSICS, INC., DBA AMERSHAM 	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	HEALTH
	MERCURY THERAPEUTICS, INC.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	MERCY HOSPITAL, INC., THE	0.0	3.0	3.0	0.000	0.001	0.001
	MERRIMACK COLLEGE	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	MERRIMACK VALLEY CARD. ASSOC.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	MERRIMACK VALLEY HOSPITAL	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	METABOLIX, INC.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	METROWEST MEDICAL CENTER	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	MICROBIA, INC.	8.8	0.0	8.8	0.006	0.000	0.006
	MICROCHIPS, INC.	71.2	2.5	73.6	0.001	0.000	0.001
	MILFORD WHITINSVILLE HOSPITAL	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000

	VOLUME ( cu. ft. )	ACTIVITY ( curies )
	Facility Name	Transferred	In Storage	Total	Transferred	In Storage	Total
	MILLENNIUM PHARMACEUTICALS	517.5	487.5	1,005.0	0.495	0.072	0.566
	MILLER ENGINEERING & TEST INC.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	MILLER, P. TERRY	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	MILLIPORE CORPORATION	0.0	1.0	1.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	MILLIPORE CORPORATION	0.0	51.4	51.4	0.000	0.008	0.008
	MILTON HOSPITAL	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	MINUTEMAN ENVIRONMENTAL SEVICES 	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	INC.
	MOLECULAR INSIGHT PHARMACEUTICALS, 	30.0	0.0	30.0	0.002	0.000	0.002
	INC.
	MORTON HOSPITAL & MED. CENTER	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	MOUNT AUBURN HOSPITAL	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	MOUNT HOLYOKE COLLEGE	7.5	3.0	10.5	0.003	0.001	0.004
	MUSEUM OF FINE ARTS (BOSTON)	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	NASHOBA VALLEY MEDICAL CENTER	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	NAVIX DIAGNOSTIX, INC (FIXED)	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	NAVIX DIAGNOSTIX, INC (MOBILE)	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	NEOGENESIS PHARMACEUTICALS,INC	30.1	0.0	30.1	0.007	0.000	0.007
	NEW BEDFORD HEALTH DEPARTMENT	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	NEW BEDFORD MEDICAL ASSOCIATE	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	NEW ENG. COLLEGE OF OPTOMETRY	0.0	1.0	1.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	NEW ENG. P.E.T.NET DIST.CENTER, LLC	0.0	0.1	0.1	0.000	0.400	0.400
	NEW ENG.PET OF GREATER LOWELL	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	NEW ENGLAND BAPTIST HOSPITAL	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	NEW ENGLAND BIOLABS, INC.	21.5	7.5	29.0	0.090	0.033	0.123
	NEW ENGLAND CARDIOLOGY, LLC	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	NEW ENGLAND MEDICAL CENTER	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	NEW ENGLAND MEDICAL SPECIALIS	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000

	VOLUME ( cu. ft. )	ACTIVITY ( curies )
	Facility Name	Transferred	In Storage	Total	Transferred	In Storage	Total
	NEW ENGLAND PET IMAGING SYSTM	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	NEWTON HEALTH DEPT., CITY OF	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	NEWTON HOUSING REHAB./CITY OF	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	NITON CORPORATION	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	NITROMED, INC.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	NOBLE HOSPITAL	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	NORFOLK COUNTY CARDIO.  ASSOC	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	NORFOLK LEAD INSPECTION	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	NORFOLK RAM GROUP, LLC	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	NORTH ADAMS REGIONAL HOSPITAL	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	NORTH SHORE CARDIOVASCULAR A.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	NORTH SHORE LEAD PAINT TEST CO	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	NORTH SHORE MEDICAL CENTER	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	NORTH SHORE MEDICAL CENTER-UNI	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	NORTHEAST GENERATION SERVICES	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	NORTHEASTERN UNIVERSITY	100.3	8.0	108.3	0.009	0.000	0.009
	NORWICH LABORATORIES, INC.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	NOVA CHEMICALS INCORPORATED	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	NUCLEAR INSTRUMENT CO.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	NUVELO	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	OMNIGENE BIOPRODUCTS, INC.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	ORGANOGENESIS, INC.	75.0	15.0	90.0	0.027	0.000	0.028
	OST SERVICES LLC	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	OXFORD INSTRUM. AMERICA, INC.	0.0	1.0	1.0	0.000	0.054	0.054
	PALMER PAVING CORPORATION	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	PANAMETRICS, INC.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000

	VOLUME ( cu. ft. )	ACTIVITY ( curies )
	Facility Name	Transferred	In Storage	Total	Transferred	In Storage	Total
	PANTHER ENVIRONMENTAL	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	PARATEK PHARMACEUTICALS, INC.	0.0	9.9	9.9	0.000	0.001	0.001
	PARE ENGINEERING CORPORATION	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	PELLETIER, LEO H.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	PENNONI ASSOCIATES, INC.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	PERKINELMER LIFE SCIENCES, INC	4,308.2	385.5	4,693.7	733.300	153.120	886.420
	PERKINELMER OPTOELECTRONICS	0.0	1.5	1.5	0.000	0.026	0.026
	PFIZER, INC.	0.0	75.0	75.0	0.000	0.102	0.102
	PHARMA MAR USA, INCORPORATED	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	PHOTODETECTION SYSTEMS, INC.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	PHOTOVAC, INC.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	PHYLOS, INC.	277.5	30.0	307.5	0.285	0.115	0.400
	PINE & SWALLOW ASSOCIATES, INC	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	PIONEER VALLEY CARDIOLOGY, PC	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	PK ASSOCIATES, INC.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	PLYMOUTH RUBBER CO., INC.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	POLAROID CORPORATION	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	POLYGENYX, INC.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	PRAECIS PHARMACEUTICALS, INC.	105.0	15.0	120.0	0.032	0.005	0.037
	PRIME ENGINEERING, INC.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	PROFESSIONAL SERV. INDUSTRIES	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	PROSCAN, INC.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	PROTZE CONSULTING ENGINEERS	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	Q-ONE BIOTECH, INC.	2.1	1.0	3.2	0.896	0.680	1.576
	QUALITY ASSURANCE LAB, INC.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	QUEST DIAGNOSTICS LLC	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000

	VOLUME ( cu. ft. )	ACTIVITY ( curies )
	Facility Name	Transferred	In Storage	Total	Transferred	In Storage	Total
	QUINCY MEDICAL CENTER, INC.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	QUINLAN, MICHAEL A.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	R. P. HOLMES ENVIRONMENTAL	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	R.J. INSPECTIONS	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	RADIATION MONITORING DEVICES	0.0	0.1	0.1	0.000	1.000	1.000
	RADIOCAT	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	RADIOMED CORP.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	RAYTHEON COMPANY	0.0	5.5	5.5	0.000	0.001	0.001
	READING CARDIOLOGY ASSOCIATES	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	REMSERV, INC.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	REPLIGEN CORPORATION	0.0	7.5	7.5	0.000	0.001	0.001
	RIVER BEND MEDICAL GROUP	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	RMD, INC., RMD INST., LLC	0.0	0.1	0.1	0.000	1.000	1.000
	ROADS CORPORATION	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	ROCKBESTOS-SUPRENANT	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	ROXBURY COMMUNITY COLLEGE	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	RSP ASSOCIATES, INC.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	S.V. HOSPITAL, L.L.C.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	SAINTS MEMORIAL MED. CENTER	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	SANBORN, HEAD & ASSOCIATES,	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	SCHEPENS EYE RESEARCH INST.	28.8	0.0	28.8	0.020	0.000	0.020
	SEA CONSULTANTS	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	SEQUEGEN, COMPANY	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	SERONO REPRODUCT.BIOLOGY INST.	0.0	75.0	75.0	0.000	0.040	0.040
	SEVERN TRENT LABORATORIES, INC	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	SHARED DIAGNOSTIC SERVICES,INC	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000

	VOLUME ( cu. ft. )	ACTIVITY ( curies )
	Facility Name	Transferred	In Storage	Total	Transferred	In Storage	Total
	SHIELDS IMAGING OF MASS., LLC	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	SIEMENS MEDICAL SYSTEMS, INC.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	SIMMONS COLLEGE	11.6	6.5	18.1	0.003	0.002	0.005
	SIONEX CORPORATION	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	SMITH AND WESSEL ASSOC. INC.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	SMITH COLLEGE	0.0	2.7	2.7	0.000	0.004	0.004
	SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTE	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	SOLID STATE TESTING, INC.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	SOLUTIA, INC.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	SOUTH SHORE HOSPITAL	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	SOUTH SHORE LEAD PAINT TESTING	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	SOUTHPORT INC.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	SPAULDING REHAB HOSPITAL	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	SPIRE CORPORATION	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	SPRINGBORN SMITHERS LAB., INC.	151.4	7.5	158.9	0.001	0.000	0.001
	SPRINGFIELD HOUSING AUTHORITY	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	SPRINGFIELD WATER & SEWER COMM	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	SPRUCE ENVIRONMENTAL TECH.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	ST. ANNE'S HOSPITAL	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	ST. ELIZABETH'S MEDICAL CENTER	0.0	70.0	70.0	0.000	0.101	0.101
	ST. LUKE'S HOSPITAL	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	STARMET NMI	0.0	150.0	150.0	0.000	0.100	0.100
	STERIS-ISOMEDIX SERVICES	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	STONE & WEBSTER, Inc.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	STOWE WOODWARD, LLC	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	STURDY MEMORIAL HOSPITAL	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000

	VOLUME ( cu. ft. )	ACTIVITY ( curies )
	Facility Name	Transferred	In Storage	Total	Transferred	In Storage	Total
	SUFFOLK UNIVERSITY	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	SUMMIT LTD.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	SUNTORY PHARMA. RESEARCH LAB.	0.0	1.0	1.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	SURFACE LOGIX, INC.	0.0	4.0	4.0	0.000	0.002	0.002
	SYNTA PHARMACEUTICAS CORPORATION	0.0	10.0	10.0	0.000	0.006	0.006
	SYNTONIX PHARMACEUTICALS, INC.	36.5	9.4	45.9	0.043	0.015	0.059
	T.R. WILBURY LABORATORIES, INC	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	TECTONIC ENGINEERING CONSULTANS	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	TEI BIOSCIENCES, INC.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	TGA SCIENCES INC.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	THERION BIOLOGICS CORPORATION	0.0	7.5	7.5	0.000	0.006	0.006
	THERMO ENVIRONMENTAL INSTRUM.	1.0	0.0	1.0	0.200	0.000	0.200
	THESEUS IMAGING CORPORATION	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	THOMPSON & LICHTNER CO., INC.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	TIAX LLC	0.2	0.0	0.2	0.001	0.000	0.001
	TOBEY HOSPITAL, INC.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	TOLAN, RICHARD E.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	TOLERRX, INC.	7.3	0.0	7.3	0.006	0.000	0.006
	TOXICON CORPORATION	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	TRANSKARYOTIC THERAPIES, INC.	15.0	0.0	15.0	5.000	0.000	5.000
	TRANXENOGEN, INC.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	TRC ENVIRONMENTAL CORPORATION	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	TRC ENVIRONMENTAL CORPORATION	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	TUFTS UNIVERSITY	0.0	3.0	3.0	0.000	0.010	0.010
	TUFTS UNIVERSITY, SCH. OF MED.	96.0	42.0	138.0	0.022	0.004	0.026
	TUFTS-NEW ENGLAND MEDICAL CENTER	84.0	40.0	124.0	0.013	0.006	0.019

	VOLUME ( cu. ft. )	ACTIVITY ( curies )
	Facility Name	Transferred	In Storage	Total	Transferred	In Storage	Total
	TW ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES, INC.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	TYCO ELECTRONIC PRODUCT GROUP	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	U.S. GENOMICS	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	UCB RESEARCH, INC.	0.1	0.0	0.1	0.004	0.001	0.005
	UMASS MEMORIAL/MARLBOROUGH 	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	HOSPITAL
	UMASS/MEMORIAL CLINICAL SYSTEMS	109.1	0.5	109.6	0.999	20.000	20.999
	UNITECH SERVICES GROUP, INC.	18.7	7.6	26.3	0.049	0.019	0.068
	UNIVERSAL METAL CORPORATION	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	USGEN NEW ENGLAND, INC.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	USGEN NEW ENGLAND, INC.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	UTS OF MASSACHUSETTS, INC.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	V.I. TECHNOLOGIES, INC.	7.5	0.0	7.5	0.273	0.000	0.273
	VALLEY SAFETY SERVICES ASSOCIATES	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	VANASSE, HANGEN, BRUSTLIN, INC	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	VENEGAS INDUSTRIAL TESTING LAB	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	VERTEX PHARMACEUTICALS, INC.	56.5	9.5	66.0	0.010	0.001	0.010
	VIACELL, INC.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	VICAM	0.0	15.0	15.0	0.000	0.006	0.006
	VISEN MEDICAL, INC.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	WALSH, JOHN	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	WALTHAM HOSPITAL	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	WAMPANOAG TRIBE OF AQUINNAH	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	WARATAH PHARMACEUTICALS, INC.	8.9	0.0	8.9	0.000	0.000	0.000
	WARNER BROS., INC.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	WELLESLEY COLLEGE	0.0	3.0	3.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	WESTON & SAMPSON ENGINEERS, I	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000

	VOLUME ( cu. ft. )	ACTIVITY ( curies )
	Facility Name	Transferred	In Storage	Total	Transferred	In Storage	Total
	WHEATON COLLEGE	31.9	0.0	31.9	0.005	0.000	0.005
	WHITEHEAD INST. FOR BIOMED RES	0.0	52.5	52.5	0.000	0.005	0.005
	WILLIAMS COLLEGE	0.0	2.0	2.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	WINCHESTER HOSPITAL	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	WING MEMORIAL HOSPITAL CORPORATION	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	WOODARD & CURRAN, INC.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	WOODS HOLE OCEANOGRAPHIC INST.	210.2	45.0	255.2	0.200	0.010	0.210
	WORCESTER DEPT. OF HEALTH	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	WORCESTER POLYTECHNIC INST.	3.0	10.0	13.0	0.012	0.000	0.012
	WORCESTER, PUBLIC WORKS	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	WTE RECYCLING, INC.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	XRF CORPORATION	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	YANKEE ATOMIC ELECTRIC COMPANY	6,828.5	0.0	6,828.5	19.240	0.000	19.240
	YANKEE ENG. & TESTING, INC.	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.000	0.000	0.000
	ZYCOS, INC.	0.0	0.5	0.5	0.000	0.005	0.005
	GRAND TOTALS:	30,920.7	32,746.4	63,667.2	876.614	4,723.342	5,599.958

Figure 29
                                          Commonwealth of Massachusetts
DPH Radiation Control Program
Calendar Year (CY) 2002 Radioactive Waste Survey

Licensee Name		
Radiation Safety Officer		
Street Address		
City / State / Zip Code						/	/	
E-Mail Address		
Radioactive Materials License Number 	__ __ - __ __ __ __	

Person Completing Survey / Title						/	
Telephone / Telefax					/		
Certifying Official / Title						/	
Signature / Telephone					/	
Date of Survey Completion		

		NO	
In 2002, did you generate any long-lived (half-life greater than 120 days) radioactive waste?			
In 2002, did you transfer any licensed material for disposal at a licensed low-level radioactive waste disposal facility?			
Did your organization have any long-lived radioactive waste requiring disposal in storage either on or off site on 12/31/02?			

If you answered YES to any of the above questions complete all applicable sections of Part Two.  If you answered NO to all questions, STOP HERE and return this form.

Return Address:

Massachusetts DPH Radiation Control Program
174 Portland Street, 5th Floor
Boston, MA  02114-1714

CY 2002 Radioactive Waste Survey

Section A : Radioactive Waste Generated in Calendar Year 2002

Class A
(other than HVLA*)	Transferred for Disposal in CY 2002	In Storage as of 12/31/02	Total	
Volume, ft3				
Activity, curies				
Principal Isotopes				

Class B
(other than HVLA*)	Transferred for Disposal in CY 2002	In Storage as of 12/31/02	Total	
Volume, ft3				
Activity, curies				
Principal Isotopes				

Class C
(other than HVLA*)	Transferred for Disposal in CY 2002	In Storage as of 12/31/02	Total	
Volume, ft3				
Activity, curies				
Principal Isotopes				

High Volume, Low Activity Waste	Transferred for Disposal in CY 2002	In Storage as of 12/31/02	Total	
Volume, ft3				
Activity, curies				
Principal Isotopes				

 

CY 2002 Radioactive Waste Survey

Section B : Radioactive Waste Generated Prior to Calendar Year 2002
That Requires Disposal AND Was Not Reported on Previous Surveys

	Transferred for Disposal in CY 2002	In Storage as of 12/31/02	Total	
Years of Generation				
Class
(A, B, C or HVLA)				
Volume, ft3				
Activity, curies				
Principal Isotopes				

Has your waste minimization statement or plan, which is on file with the Massachusetts DPH Radiation Control Program, changed since last year?  If you answered YES, please include your updated statement and/or plan with this survey.	

YES	

NO	

Many pertinent 105 CMR 120 regulations may be found on the Massachusetts DPH Radiation Control Program’s web page at www.state.ma.us/dph/rcp.

High Volume, Low Activity Waste.  Definition - Soils, demolition rubble or other LLRW that has average concentrations of radioactive material less than or equal to the concentrations set forth in 345 CMR 1.13, Table 1.13B, and has been or would be accepted by a licensed low-level radioactive waste disposal facility.

If you need assistance completing this survey, please contact the Radiation Control Program staff at (617) 727-6214.