Text

Decommissioning Funding Status Report for Financial Assurance as of 12/31/2016
	ML17094A247
Person / Time
Site:	Comanche Peak
Issue date:	03/30/2017
From:	Hope T; Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Co, Luminant Generation Co
To:	; Document Control Desk, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
	CP-201700223, TXX-17035
	Download: ML17094A247 (398)
	v • d • e

{{#Wiki_filter:Timothy A. Hope Luminant Manager, Regulatory Affairs P 0 Box 1002 Timothy.Hope@luminant.com 6322 North FM 56 Glen Rose, TX 76043 Luminant T 254 897 6370 c 817 360 6882 F 254 897 6573 Ref: 10CFR50.75(f) CP- 201700223 10CFR72.30(c) Log# TXX-17035 March 30, 2017 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission ATTN: Document Control Desk Washington, DC 20555

SUBJECT:

COMANCHE PEAK NUCLEAR POWER PLANT DOCKET NOS. 50-445 AND 50-446 AND 72-74 DECOMMISSIONING REPORT

Dear Sir or Madam:

Attached is the biennial decommissioning report for Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant (CPNPP) Units 1 and 2, prepared and submitted pursuant to 10CFR50.75(f) and 10CFR72.30(c). Comanche Peak Power Company LLC (CP PowerCo) is an unregulated utility and therefore does not meet the definition of an electric utility as defined by 10CFR50.2. The recovery of decommissioning funds for the eventual decommissioning of CPNPP Units 1 and 2 is assured through the collection of a non-bypassable charge which is subsequently contributed to an external trust. The applicable sections of the citation (e.g., an Order by the rate-regulatory authority) by the regulatory authority that allows for the collection of non-bypassable charges established for the collection of decommissioning funds estimated to be required under 10 CFR 50.75(b) and (c) is provided below. The distribution utility will collect from customers and the generation company will contribute all funds collected to the decommissioning trust fund:

Enclosure to TXX-17035, Public Utility Commission of Texas (PUCT) Order dated November 6, 2015, page 3 of 7, paragraph #9.

The annual collection rate for each unit:

Enclosure to TXX-17035, Annual Projected Funding Requirement, 2015 Funding Analysis, Exhibit SRF-4, Page 5 of 5.
Enclosure to TXX-17035, PUCT Order dated November 6, 2015, Page 6 of 7, paragraph

                    #2 of Section IV.

14 po/

                                                                                                      ;J[LA,S 5 Z &
                                                                                                             ;J f_f<-,

tJMSS

U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission TXX-17035 Page 2 March 30, 2017 Also, pursuant to the requirements of 10 CFR 72.30(c), Vistra Operations Company LLC (Vistra OpCo) is submitting the 2017 Decommissioning Funding Status Report for Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant (CPNPP) Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation, Docket No. 72-74 (CPNPP ISFSI). to this letter contains the information required by 10 CFR 72.30(b). The amounts to be collected for CPNPP decommissioning are based on a site specific decommissioning study that includes direct waste disposal. In addition, the radiological cost component breakdown of the 2014 Site Specific cost is included in the 2015 Financial Assurance filing (Enclosure to TXX-17035, Luminant Filing dated June 15, 2015, document Lll-1703-001, Rev. 0, Page xx of xxi). When projected to the license expiration date for each unit using the 2 percent annual real rate of return as allowed per 10CFR50.75(e)(ii), the projected Nuclear Decommissioning Trust balance is greater than the escalated NRC minimum cost of decommissioning for Units 1 and 2. Should you have any questions, please contact Carl B. Corbin at (254) 897-0121. Sincerely, Vistra Operations Company L C

                                                           ~                   /-- ~

Timothy A Hope Manager, Regulatory Affairs Attachments 1. 2017 Decommissioning Funding Status Report for Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant Units 1 and 2

2. 2017 Decommissioning Funding Status Report for Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant Units 1 and 2 Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation Enclosure Public Utility Commission of Texas (PUCT), Docket No. 44845, Application of Luminant Generation Company LLC for Review of Nuclear Decommissioning Cost Study and Funding Analysis.

c- Kriss Kennedy, Region IV Margaret M. Watford, NRR Resident Inspectors, Comanche Peak

Attachment 1 to TXX-17035 Page 1of2 NRC Decommissioning Funding Status Report for Financial Assurance at December 31, 2016 Luminant Generation Company LLC Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant (CPNPP) Information is submitted to nrovide Financial Assuranc* Unit# 1 Unit# 2

1. The minimum amount of decommissioning funds estimated to be required pursuant to 10 CPR 50.75 (b) and (c).

At December 31, 2016 Using NRC 10 CPR 50.75(c) formulas (Note 1) $ 392.6 million $ 392.6 million Site-specific study (Note 2) $ 785.8 million $ 853.9 million

2. The amount accumulated at the end of the calendar year preceding the date of the report for items included in 10 CPR 50.75 (b) and (c).

Investment categories per Regulatory Guide 1.159 2.6.2. (Note 3) Cash 1% 1% U.S. Equities 66% 66% U.S. Fixed Income 33% 33% 100% 100% Market Value at December 3 1, 2016 $ 474.2 million $ 537.8 million

3. A schedule of the annual amounts remaining to be collected for items in 10 CPR 50.75 (b) and (c). Unit# 1 Unit# 2 Years 201 7 through 2029 ( 13 years) 11.9 million 8.2 million Year 2030 3.0 million 8.2 million Year 2031 8.2 million Year 2032 8.2 million Year 2033 2.0 million Totals $ 157.6 million $ 133.0 million

4. The assumptions used regarding escalation in decommissioning costs, rates of earnings on decommissioning funds, and rates of other factors used in funding projections. Unit# 1 Unit# 2 Estimated Escalation rate for decommissioning costs (Note 4; 2.4810% 2.4730%

Estimated Earnings rates on decommissioning funds (Note 5) 2017 through 2029 4.46% 4.46% 2030 through 2075 3.58% 3.58% 2076 and thereafter 2.61% 2.61% Rates of other factors used in funding projections None None

5. Any power sale contracts upon which licensee is relying to certifying financial assurance. None None

6. Modifications to licensee's method of providing financial assurance since previous report. None None

7. Material changes to trust agreement. None None NOTE: All forecast data are based on the Decommissioning Cost Study and Funding Analysis filed with the Public Utility Commission of Texas on June 16, 2015 and is subject to approval by the Commission.

L__ __ _ to TXX-17035 Page 2 of2 Note 1 Labor (South) and Energy are based on BLS (Lx=2.499, Ex=l.870) as of December 2016. Burial inflation factors are based on NUREG 1307, "Report on Waste Burial Charges," Revision 16 (Bx=8.508). Note2 The Site Specific Decommissioning Cost estimates for unit 1 and 2, with a 10% contingency adjustment, are provided in the Enclosure to letter TXX-17035, pages 228-231. See the Financial Escalation Analysis Document Ll 1-1703-002, Rev. 0, Page 12 through 15 of29. Note 3 The after-tax amount of funds accumulated through December 31, 2016 is provided below. Tax Basis Market Value After Tax Unit 1 294,604,614 474,183,434 438,267,670 Unit2 347 679 362 537 778 178 499.758.414 Total 642,283,976 1,011,961,611 938,026,084 Note: Calculation of after tax balance assumes 20% tax rate. Note4 The rate of escalation in decommissioning costs for Unit 1 and 2 are provided in the Enclosure to letter TXX-17035, page 223. See the Financial Escalation Analysis Document Ll 1-1703-002, Rev. 0, Page 7 of 29. Note 5 The rate of earnings on decommissioning funds is provided in the Enclosure to letter TXX-17035, page 275. See the Direct Testimony of Robert Frenzel, Witness for Luminant Generation Company, 2015 Nuclear Decommissioning Study, Exhibit RF-4, pages 1-4 of5. The Net Expected Investment Returns Allocation Factor in this schedule represents the weighted average allocations during the referenced Period as established in the June 16, 2015 filing. to TXX-17035 Page 1of2 2017 Decommissioning Funding Status Report for Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant Units 1 and 2 Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation Pursuant to 10 CFR 72.30(c), each licensee for an Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation (ISFSI), including an ISFSI licensed under the General License provided for in 10 CFR Part 72, Subpart K, is required, at intervals not to exceed 3 years, to resubmit a decommissioning funding plan with adjustments as necessary to account for changes in costs and the extent of contamination, as well as information regarding the financial assurance provided for funding such costs. Vistra Operations Company LLC (Vistra OpCo) provides the following information regarding the Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant (CPNPP) Units 1 and 2 Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation, Docket No. 72-74 (CPNPP ISFSI):

1. Information on how reasonable assurance will be provided that funds will be available to decommission the ISFSI:

See response to number 4 below, which discusses the appropriate method of financial assurance contemplated under 10 CFR 72.30(e).

2. A detailed cost estimate (DCE) for decommissioning:

In a reported dated June 2015, TLG Services, Inc. (TLG) (Enclosure to TXX-17035) prepared a site specific Decommissioning Cost Study (with an adequate contingency factor) for the Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant (CPNPP) that included the costs of decommissioning the ISFSI. The TLG Report determined the total cost of decommissioning the CPNPP ISFSI (without contingency, Enclosure to letter TXX-17035, document Lll-1703-002, Rev.O, Appendix E, page 2 of 2, Table E, "Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant ISFSI Decommissioning Cost Estimate") to be: 2014 Dollars Escalation Factor (%) 2016 Dollars (million) (from TLG Report) (million) Unitl 3.6 2.481 3.8 Unit2 3.6 2.473 3.8 Total 7.6 This cost estimate includes the cost of an independent contractor to perform all decommissioning activities and the cost of meeting the 10 CFR 20.1402 criteria for unrestricted release. Below is the effect of the following on the detailed cost estimate since the previous report. Spills of radioactive material producing additional None residual radioactivity in onsite subsurface material Facility modifications None* Changes in authorized possession limits None Actual remediation costs that exceed the previous None cost estimate

1-Attaclunent 2 to TXX-17035 Page2of 2 2017 Decommissioning Funding Status Report for Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant Units 1 and 2 Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation

The only substantive changes made to the plant inventory from the 2010 analysis (that would impact decommissioning) were the addition of the Flex storage building and RP building (Enclosure to TXX-17035, Document Lll-1703-002, Rev. 0, page viii of xii). These changes are within the scope of the analysis under 10 CFR 50.75 (Attachment 1 to TXX-17035).

3. Identification of and justification for using the key assumptions contained in the decommissioning cost estimate:

The assumptions used in the development of the decommissioning cost estimate and their justification can be found in the TLG Report.

4. A description of the method of assuring funds for decommissioning from 10 CFR 72.30(e),

including means of adjusting cost estimates and associated funding levels periodically over the life of the facility: Vistra OpCo is using the external sinking fund method as authorized in 10 CFR 72.30(e)(5) and 50.75(e)(l)(ii). Vistra OpCo recovers its costs for decommissioning through cost of service ratemaking, including the estimated costs to decommission the CPNPP ISFSI, which are included in the TLG Report. Pursuant to Substantive Rule 25.303(f)(2) of the Public Utility Commission of Texas (PUCT), the TLG Report is updated, and the required annual funding amount necessary to decommission CPNPP is adjusted under the jurisdiction of the PUCT. In the event that funds remaining to be placed into the Vistra OpCo' s external sinking funds are no longer approved for recovery in rates by competent rate making authorities, Vistra OpCo will make changes to provide financial assurance using one or more of the methods stated in 10 CFR 72.30(e)(1)-(4).

5. The volume of onsite subsurface material containing residual radioactivity that will require remediation to meet the criteria for license termination:

There has been no event at the ISFSI facility to lead us to believe there is subsurface contamination. Therefore, Vistra OpCo assumes that there is no volume of onsite subsurface material containing residual radioactivity that will require remediation to meet the criteria for license termination.

6. A certification that financial assurance for decommission has been provided in the amount of the cost estimate for decommissioning:

The submission of this report serves as certification that financial assurance has been provided in the amount of the cost estimate for decommissioning.

                      - I Enclosure to TXX-17035

11111111111111 lrn 11 Control Number: 44845 11111111 111111 Item Number: 1 Addendum StartPage: 0

II 44845 Luminant Staphanie Zapata Moore Vice President & General Counsel Lumlnant 1601 Bryan Street Lumlnant 22nd Floor stephanle.moore@lumlnant.com Dallas, Texas 75201 T 214.875.8183 c 214.542.6460 F 214.875.9478 June 16, 2015 Filing Clerk Public Utility Commission of Texas 1701 Congress Avenue P.O. Box 13326 Austin, Texas 78711-3326 ' 1':- ~ Re: Nuclear Decommissioning Cost Study and Funding Analysis Filing Made Pu1sJan~ P.U.C. Substantive Rule 25.303 £- . (.1 ~

n . O"I In accordance with Public Utility Commission of Texas Substantive Rule 25.303(f)).'.enclosed please find the requisite number of copies of the Decommissioning Cost Analyit.s for ~e Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant and Funding Analysis for Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Pl'Ntt, filed by Luminant Generation Company LLC (Luminant). The cost study and funding anaj.ysis are attached to the supporting testimony of Mr. William A. Cloutier, Jr. and Mr. Robei¥C. Frenzel, respectively. The attached documents constitute the updated cost study and funding analysis required by Substantive Rule 25.303(f). Luminant respectfully requests that you accept the filing and that it be filed in your usual and customary manner. Very truly yours, Stephanie Zapata Moore Encl. cc: Office of Public Utility Counsel 000001 I

DOCKET NO~ ':I: 8 4 5 LUMINANT GENERATION § COMPANY LLC'S NUCLEAR § BEFORE THE DECOMMISSIONING COST § STUDY AND FUNDING ANALYSIS § PUBLIC UTILITY COMMISSION FILING PURSUANT TO SUBST. R. § 25.303(f)(2) § OF TEXAS (' DIRECT TESTIMONY OF WILLIAM A. CLOUTIER, JR. ON BEHALF OF LUMINANT GENERATION COMPANY LLC June 2015 000002

DOCKET NO. 4 4 84 5 *~ LUMINANT GENERATION COMPANY LLC'S NUCLEAR DECOMMISSIONING COST STUDY AND FUNDING ANALYSIS FILING PURSUANT TO SUBST. R. 25.303(f)(2) DIRECT TESTIMONY OF WILLIAM A. CLOUTIER, JR. TABLE OF CONTENTS I. Introduction 3

11. Experience 4

111. Summary of Estimated Costs 11 A. Spent Fuel Management B. Site Security 13 C. Low-Level Radioactive Waste 14 D. Industry Experience 15 16 IV. Basis for Decommissioning Costs 17 V. Cost Estimating Methodology 19 VI. Decommissioning Alternatives 28 VII. Decommissioning Processes 31 A. Period 1 - Planning and Engineering 33 B. Period 2 - Decommissioning Operations C. Period 3 - Site Restoration 34 36 D. Post Period 3 - Spent Fuel Storage 36 VIII. Decommissioning Escalation 37 IX. Conclusion 41 AFFIDAVIT EXHIBITS WAC-1 Decommissioning Cost Analysis for the Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant, dated May 2015 WAC-2 Financial Escalation Analysis for the Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant, dated June 2015 000003

Luminant Generation Company LLC Page 3 of 41 * . Direct Testimony otWillia!'Jl A. Cloutier, Jr. 2015 Nuclear Decommissioning Report I. INTRODUCTION 1 Q. PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND BUSINESS ADDRESS. 2 William A. Cloutier, Jr., 148 New Milford Road East, Bridgewater, CT 3 A. 4 06752. 5 Q. WHAT IS YOUR OCCUPATION? I am the Manager of Decommissioning Services at TLG Services, Inc. 6 A. (TLG"). On September 19, 2000, Entergy Nuclear, Inc. acquired the stock 7 of TLG Services with TLG thereby becon:iing a wholly owned, indirect 8 subsidiary of Entergy Corporation. As such, I am also the Manager of 9 Decommissioning with Entergy Nuclear, Inc. 10 ' WHAT ARE YOUR RESPONSIBILITIES WITH THAT ORGANIZATION? 11 Q. I am responsible for the technical and business management of the 12 A. engineering consulting services in the area of decommissioning planning 13 14 for nuclear generating stations. WHAT IS YOUR EDUCATIONAL AND PROFESSIONAL 15 Q. 16 BACKGROUND? I completed my Bachelor of Science in Mechanical Engineering at 17 A. Worcester Polytechnic Institute of Worcester, Massachusetts, in 1977. I 18 joined TLG Engineering in July 1983 shortly after its founding. I was 19 employed by Nuclear Energy Services ("NES") in Danbury, Connecticut 20 from 1977 until I joined TLG. My prior employment was with EBASCO 21 000004

Luminant Generation Company LLC Page 4 of 41 Direct Testimony of William A. Cloutier, Jr. 2015 Nuclear Decommissioning Report 1 L Serv1ces. 2 Q. WHAT IS THE PURPOSE OF YOUR TESTIMONY IN THIS 3 PROCEEDING? 4 A. I am presenting the results of the 2015 decommissioning cost update and 5 financial escalation analysis prepared for the Comanche Peak Nuclear 6 Power Plant ("Comanche Peak") for Luminant Generation Company LLC 7 ("Luminant") by TLG. My testimony summarizes the results of the update 8 of the 2010 decommissioning cost study, identifies major changes from 9 the previous estimate, and provides an overview of the decommissioning 10 process. 11 The 2015 decommissioning cost update is attached to my 12 testimony as Exhibit WAC-1. The financial escalation analysis for 13 Comanche Peak is attached to my testimony as Exhibit WAC-2. This 14 testimony, the cost update attached as Exhibit WAC-1, and the escalation 15 analysis attached as Exhibit WAC-2 were all prepared under my direction 16 and control and are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and 17 belief. 18 11. EXPERIENCE 19 Q. WHAT DECOMMISSIONING EXPERIENCE DO YOU HAVE? 20 A. My decommissioning experience began as site representative for NES 21 during the planning for the decontamination and dismantling of the 000005

Luminant Generation Company LLC Page 5 of 41 Direct Testimony of William A. Cloutier, Jr. 2015 Nuclear Decommissioning Report 1 Western New York Nuclear Service Center ("West Valley"). I managed an 2 on-site facility assessment in support of the initial planning for 3 decommissioning of this fuel reprocessing facility. I also established 4 design criteria for the high-level waste vitrification process hardware 5 needed to handle the residual inventories in storage. 6 Following the West Valley program, I was involved in the 7 engineering and planning for the decommissioning of the Shippingport 8 Atomic Power Station. I prepared activity specifications, cost/benefit 9 evaluations and provided technical expertise in the support of the 10 decommissioning planning and engineering for the dismantling of the 11 United States' (U.S.) first commercial atomic power station. 12 While at NES, I developed a conceptual Decommissioning Plan for 13 the dormant Humboldt Bay reactor facility. This included the preparation 14 of activation profiles and associated packaging analyses for reactor 15 components. I was also involved in the estimation of cost and schedule for 16 dismantling the unit and remediating the site. 17 At TLG, I have been responsible for developing engineering and 18 planning studies for nuclear plant decommissioning. These studies 19 evaluate the options available, and provide the licensees/owners of the 20 facilities with both the technical and financial resource requirements 21 associated with site remediation and facility disposition. I have supervised 22 the preparation of more than 100 studies since 1983. have been 000006

Luminant Generation Company LLC Page 6 of 41 Direct Testimony of William A Cloutier, Jr. 2015 Nuclear Decommissioning Report 1 involved as the Project Manager in the detailed decommissioning planning 2 for the Pathfinder, Rancho Seco, Trojan, Maine Yankee, Big Rock Point, 3 Bruce ("Canadian") heavy-water nuclear units, and the Tokai gas-cooled 4 nuclear unit in Japan. 5 TLG assisted Northern States Power Company in the initial 6 planning for decommissioning the Pathfinder Atomic Power Station. I 7 performed an on-site inspection of the facility, and evaluated removal 8 techniques for the asbestos insulation and one-piece extraction of the 9 reactor vessel. I supervised the preparation of a detailed feasibility 1O assessment of the activities required to decontaminate the Reactor and 11 Fuel Handling Buildings, as well as the detailed cost analysis, which was 12 subsequently submitted to, and approved by, the Nuclear Regulatory 13 Commission ("NRC") with the Decommissioning Plan for the unit. 14 TLG has assisted the Sacramento Municipal Utility District since 15 1987 with the decommissioning planning for the Rancho Seco Nuclear 16 Generating Station. Since the 900 MWe unit ceased operation in 1989, 17 this work included a detailed reactor vessel activation analysis, 18 preparation of decommissioning alternative cost and schedule estimates, 19 and assistance with the preparation of the decommissioning plan 20 originally using the SAFSTOR method, and then the DEGON method. 21 In 1990, TLG was selected by Cintichem, Inc. (a subsidiary of 22 Hoffman-LaRoche) as Decommissioning Co-Manager of a 10 megawatt 000007

Luminant Generation Company LLC Page 7 of 41 Direct Testimony of William A Cloutier, Jr. 2015 Nuclear Decommissioning Report 1 thermal ("MWt") production reactor and associated hot cells and facilities. 2 I was on-site in 1992, assisting the engineering staff with the preparation 3 of activities specifications and detailed work procedures, especially for the 4 removal of the underground hold-up tank. I also participated in the overall 5 project planning, as well as in meetings of the Nuclear Safeguards 6 Committee. 7 TLG provided consulting services to Portland General Electric in 8 the engineering and planning for decommissioning the 1,100 MWe Trojan 9 Nuclear Plant and to the Maine Yankee Atomic Power Company in the 10 engineering and planning for decommissioning the 900 MWe Maine 11 Yankee unit. Both efforts involved participation in a program, initiated 12 shortly after the cessation of plant operations that identified and evaluated 13 the utility's decommissioning options, resulting in a recommended action 14 plan. I managed the teams responsible for identifying funding 15 requirements based upon actual plant conditions, technical and financial 16 constraints, state and federal requirements, and options available. 17 I also managed a team assisting Consumers Power Company in 18 the development of the Decommissioning Plan for the Big Rock Point 19 Plant. TLG provided assessments of the decommissioning options 20 available, addressing high-level waste management and low-level 21 radioactive waste disposal constraints. The highly detailed estimates 22 generated by TLG were used by the owner to develop bid specifications 000008

Luminant Generation Company LLC Page 8 of 41 Direct Testimony of William A. Cloutier, Jr. 2015 Nuclear Decommissioning Report 1 for use in the management of the field activities. 2 I have managed several international programs involving 3 decommissioning planning for reactors in Italy, South Africa and Japan. I 4 have worked with the International Atomic Energy Agency ("IAEA"), most 5 recently on the disposition planning for a reactor in Kazakhstan. 6 I have also been responsible for preparation of decommissioning 7 cost analyses and spent fuel management plans filed with the NRC for 8 financial assurance. This included cost analyses included with the Post-9 Shutdown Decommissioning Activities Report for the Crystal River and 1O Vermont Yankee nuclear units. 11 I have also been responsible for preparation of previous 12 decommissioning cost studies for Comanche Peak dating back to 1989. 13 Q. HAVE YOU PREPARED OR CO-AUTHORED ANY STUDIES OR 14 REPORTS ON DECOMMISSIONING COST ESTIMATING AND 15 TECHNOLOGY? 16 A. Yes. I was a contributing author on the "Guidelines for Producing 17 Commercial Nuclear Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Estimates" 18 (AIF/NESP-036) for the Atomic Industrial Forum, National Environmental 19 Studies Project ("Guidelines"). The Guidelines identify the elements of 20 costs to be included in the estimation of decommissioning activities for 21 each of the principal decommissioning alternatives. Specific guidance in 22 cost estimating methodology and reference cost data are provided in this 000009

Luminant Generation Company LLC Page 9 of 41 Direct Testimony of William A Cloutier, Jr. 2015 Nuclear Decommissioning Report 1 study. The major objective of this study was to provide a basis for a 2 consistent cost estimating methodology. I was also a contributing author 3 to the "Decommissioning Handbook," a 2004 U.S. Department of Energy 4 ("DOE")/ASME publication and authoritative reference for practitioners of 5 nuclear decommissioning. 6 I directed an NRC-funded program to compare an agency-sponsored 7 generic decommissioning evaluation for boiling water reactors with a 8 comparable site-specific analysis. Working with the NRC's contractor, 9 Battelle Pacific Northwest Laboratories, I was able to reconcile many of the 1O differences in methodology, scope and pricing structure. The program 11 ultimately resulted in the evolution of a more industry-responsive 12 decommissioning cost estimating tool (generic software program) for use by 13 the NRC. 14 I was the U.S. consultant and member of a task force charged with 15 developing technical recommendations for the decommissioning planning 16 and management of research reactors and other small nuclear facilities for 17 the IAEA in 1993. 18 I have also been a key participant and contributor in the software 19 development for TLG's proprietary decommissioning computer code(s) 20 used to derive costs, manpower requirements, and radioactive and non-21 radioactive waste volume inventories resulting from decommissioning 22 activities. 000010

Luminant Generation Company LLC Page 10 of 41 Direct Testimony of William A. Cloutier, Jr. 2015 Nuclear Decommissioning Report 1 Q. HAS THE NRC APPROVED SITE-SPECIFIC COST ESTIMATES 2 UTILIZING THE TLG COST ESTIMATING METHODOLOGY? 3 A. Yes. The NRC has reviewed TLG's cost estimating methodology. The NRC 4 approved the decommissioning plan proposed by TLG for the Pathfinder 5 Atomic Power Station. Funding provisions were based upon a site-specific 6 estimate developed by TLG. TLG was also selected by the following utilities 7 to prepare site-specific cost estimates for inclusion within the 8 decommissioning plans submitted to the NRC for the identified nuclear 9 units: 10 Long Island Lighting Company/Long Island Power Authority Shoreham 11 Sacramento Municipal Utility District Rancho Seco 12 Portland General Electric Trojan 13 Yankee Atomic Electric Company Rowe 14 Maine Yankee Atomic Power Company Maine Yankee 15 Pacific Gas & Electric Humboldt Bay-3 16 Southern California Edison San Onofre-1 17 Consumer Power Company Big Rock Point 18 Duke Energy Crystal River 19 Exelon Generation Oyster Creek 20 Entergy Vermont Yankee Vermont Yankee 21 22 The NRC has also approved TLG site-specific cost studies for several 23 nuclear units including Vermont, Crystal River, Pilgrim, and Cooper 24 submitted by their owners as part of the financial planning required five 25 years prior to a scheduled cessation of operations. 26 Q. DOES THE 2015 DECOMMISSIONING COST UPDATE FOR 27 COMANCHE PEAK DICTATE HOW THE COMANCHE PEAK SITE WILL 000011

Luminant Generation Company LLC Page 11 of 41 Direct Testimony of William A. Cloutier, Jr. 2015 Nuclear Decommissioning Report 1 ULTIMATELY BE DECOMMISSIONED? 2 A. No. The primary objective of the 2015 study was to update the previous 3 (2010) estimate to decommission the nuclear station. The study is not a 4 detailed decommissioning engineering plan and, therefore, does not 5 commit the participants to a specific course of action for the station 6 following ultimate plant shutdown. 7 Ill.

SUMMARY

OF ESTIMATED COSTS 8 Q. WOULD YOU PLEASE SUMMARIZE THE DECOMMISSIONING COSTS 9 IDENTIFIED BY YOUR STUDY? 10 A. As provided on page xx of Exhibit WAC-1, the total cost to promptly 11 decommission and completely dismantle Comanche Peak ("DECON") is 12 estimated to be approximately $1.668 billion. The total cost to place the 13 station into safe-storage with decommissioning deferred so that its 14 operating licenses are terminated within a 60-year regulatory time limit is 15 estimated to be approximately $1.911 billion (page xxi). These costs were 16 developed in 2014 dollars and do not include future inflation, or consider 17 the cost of money over the time period involved. 18 The prompt or DECON cost includes a contingency component of 19 17 .61 %, based upon a line-item analysis of uncertainty and risk. The 20 estimate adjusted for the 10% ceiling value for contingency, identified in the 21 Public Utility Commission of Texas ("PUCT') Substantive Rule 22 25.231(b)(1)(F)(i), would be approximately $1.561 billion (in 2014 dollars). 000012

Luminant Generation Company LLC Page 12 of 41 Direct Testimony of William A. Cloutier, Jr. 2015 Nuclear Decommissioning Report 1 However, it should be noted that this administrative reduction in the 2 contingency is expected to produce a shortfall in the collection of monies 3 required to complete the decommissioning process, based upon the total 4 cost calculated by a site-specific estimate, as I explain later in my 5 testimony. 6 Q. WHAT WAS THE PREVIOUS COST ESTIMATED FOR 7 DECOMMISSIONING AND DISMANTLING COMANCHE PEAK? 8 A. The total cost to promptly decommission and dismantle Comanche Peak 9 in 2010 was estimated at $1.224 billion (in 2009 dollars and not adjusted 10 for the 10% contingency ceiling). 11 Q. WHAT ARE THE MAJOR REASONS FOR THE INCREASE SINCE THE 12 PREVIOUS STUDY? 13 A. TLG used the same site-specific, technical database for the physical 14 plant, relied upon in 2010, to update the decommissioning cost presented 15 in Exhibit WAC-1. Luminant provided the financial information used to 16 convert the estimate from 2009 dollars to 2014 dollars. The 36.3% 17 increase over the five-year period is a result of several changes in the basic 18 cost estimating assumptions as well as economics, i.e., price increases in 19 labor, equipment and materials, and the cost of services. The areas most 20 affected by changes in the estimating assumptions or methodology include 21 spent fuel management, site security, and low-level radioactive waste 000013 L_

Luminant Generation Company LLC Page 13 of 41 Direct Testimony of William A. Cloutier, Jr. 2015 Nuclear Decommissioning Report 1 disposition. Additional cost elements were added based upon industry 2 experience. Specific cost elements are discussed in more detail in the 3 following sections. 4 A. Spent Fuel Management 5 The changes in the spent fuel management assumptions account for 6 approximately 57.1% of the total increase in the cost from 2010 to 2015 7 ($254.0 of the $445.0 million increase for the DECON alternative). 8 The 2010 analysis assumed that the DOE would begin accepting 9 spent fuel from the Comanche Peak site in 2025 with all fuel off site by 10 2064. Based upon the 2025 start date, 1,785 spent fuel assemblies were 11 shipped from the plant's spent fuel pools directly to the DOE between 12 2025 and 2038 (five years following the cessation of Unit 2 operations). 13 The remaining assemblies generated over the lifetime of the units were 14 placed into dry storage. This required a total of 104 storage casks, of 15 which, 42 were loaded during decommissioning. 16 The 2015 analysis assumed that the DOE would begin accepting 17 spent fuel from the Comanche Peak site in 2041 with all fuel off site by 18 2080 (16 years later than assumed in 2010). Based upon the 2041 start 19 date (which is after the decommissioning has been completed in the 20 DECON scenario), there were no assemblies shipped from the plant's 21 spent fuel pools directly to the DOE (all the assemblies generated over 22 the lifetime of the station were placed into dry storage). This required a 000014

Luminant Generation Company LLC Page 14 of 41 Direct Testimony of William A. Cloutier, Jr. 2015 Nuclear Decommissioning Report 1 total of 160 storage casks, of which, 82 were loaded during 2 decommissioning. 3 Luminant's 2015 spent fuel management assumptions pertaining to 4 when the DOE would initiate the acceptance of Comanche Peak's spent 5 fuel and how long the process would take, resulted in 40 additional dry 6 fuel storage casks loaded in the 2015 analysis, 56 additional dry fuel 7 storage casks being off-loaded from the Independent Spent Fuel Storage 8 installation ("ISFSI"), and 16 additional years of caretaking expenses 9 (including round-the-clock security) until the transfer of spent fuel to the 10 DOE is complete, as compared to the expectations in 2010. 11 The cost increase for the dry fuel storage casks, including the 12 loading and transfer costs, in the 2015 estimate, was approximately 13 $121.7 million. The cost increase for the longer caretaking period was 14 approximately $132.3 million, for a combined total of $254.0 million. 15 B. Site Security 16 A significant increase in the decommissioning organization has been in 17 the area of security. Over the past several years following the 2001 18 terrorist attacks, the NRC has required many security enhancements at its 19 licensed power reactors, reactors undergoing decommissioning, and at 20 ISFSI. The NRC directed the owners of these facilities to upgrade their 21 physical security plans, guard training and qualification plans, and 22 contingency plans. 000015

Luminant Generation Company LLC Page 15 of 41 Direct Testimony of William A. Cloutier, Jr. 2015 Nuclear Decommissioning Report 1 In March 2009, the NRC approved a new final rule that further 2 enhanced its security regulations governing the design basis threat. The 3 new rule increased the strength of the design basis threat force against 4 which plant security must defend, and this resulted in changes to the 5 Comanche Peak security plans. Accordingly, TLG modified its security 6 cost model to increase the size of the security force during 7 decommissioning and, in particular, for long-term caretaking of the spent 8 fuel following decommissioning, for those reactor sites like Comanche 9 Peak that have an ISFSI. 1O The changes in the security organization for decommissioning 11 added approximately $67 million to the 2015 Comanche Peak estimate or 12 15.1 % of the total cost increase (excluding the spent fuel ca retaking 13 period). 14 C. Low-Level Radioactive Waste Management 15 In 2010, the cost for disposal of the majority of the low-level radioactive 16 waste generated in the decontamination and dismantling of Comanche 17 Peak was based upon the prevailing rates at EnergySolutions' Clive, Utah 1 18 disposal site. For the higher activity waste (Class B and C), that Clive was 19 unable to accept, waste disposal rates for the Barnwell facility in South NRC regulations define three distinct classes of low-level radioactive waste, Class A, Class B and Class C, determined by the concentration of long-lived radioisotopes and the associated requirements for isolation from the environment. Waste with concentrations in excess of Class C limits (Greater-than-Class C or GTCC} is generally not suitable for shallow land disposal. See 10 CFR §61.55. 000016

Luminant Generation Company LLC Page 16 of 41 Direct Testimony of William A. Cloutier, Jr. 2015 Nuclear Decommissioning Report 1 Carolina were used as a proxy (Luminant did not have access to Barnwell 2 in 2010). 3 Since 2010, the Texas Compact opened a disposal facility in 4 Andrews County, Texas (owned and operated by Waste Control 5 Specialists). As such, the 2015 cost for low-level radioactive waste disposal 6 was based upon representative rates for the Texas facility; consistent with 7 the waste classification (the Texas facility is able to accommodate Class A, 8 B and C waste). 9 In 2010, off-site waste processing (decontamination, volume 1O reduction, etc.) was cost effective, based upon the cost of direct disposal. At 11 Luminant's current cost for waste disposal at the Texas Compact site, off-12 site waste processing is not cost effective. As such, the 2015 study 13 assumes that all low-level radioactive waste generated from 14 decommissioning is disposed of at Andrews County. 15 D. Industry Experience 16 TLG's cost model has evolved over the years as experience from 17 decommissioned plants is made available. Several cost elements were 18 added to the 2015 cost model for Comanche Peak as a result of this 19 learning process. They included: 1) additional remedial action personnel 20 to support interim radiological surveys, in-situ waste characterization, and 21 remediation and decontamination effectiveness assessments; 2) 22 excavation of underground commodities around the perimeter of the 000017

Luminant Generation Company LLC Page 17 of 41 Direct Testimony of William A Cloutier, Jr. 2015 Nuclear Decommissioning Report 1 power block; 3) additional heavy equipment to support plant demolition 2 activities; and 4) an allowance for the disposal of operations support 3 equipment in storage at the time of decommissioning. The 2015 cost 4 model also used a lower packaging density than was used in 2010. The 5 change in density increased the number of waste containers required, 6 transport costs, and the volume (and cost) of waste disposal. 7 Q. FOR PURPOSES OF THE ESTIMATE, WHEN DID YOU ASSUME THE 8 UNITS WOULD BE DECOMMISSIONED? 9 A. The nuclear units were assumed to shutdown upon the expiration of their 10 current 40-year operating licenses. It was also assumed that 11 decommissioning activities would be coordinated between the two units at 12 Comanche Peak to the maximum extent possible. 13 IV. BASIS FOR DECOMMISSIONING COSTS 14 Q. WHAT JS THE BASIS FOR THE DECOMMISSIONING STUDY? 15 A. The 2015 update was developed primarily using the technical database 16 (inventory of the physical plant) from 2010 decommissioning study. This 1"1 database was updated, as required, to reflect any changes in the plant site 18 and for compatibility with the latest cost modeling software. 19 Decommissioning is a labor-intensive program. Accordingly, 20 Luminant provided updated craft labor costs, utility salaries, associated 000018

Luminant Generation Company LLC Page 18 of 41 Direct Testimony of William A Cloutier, Jr. 2015 Nuclear Decommissioning Report 1 overhead and benefits, severance for the decommissioning organization, 2 and security contractor costs for inclusion within the cost model. 3 Low-level radioactive waste, for purposes of this cost analysis, was 4 assumed to be shipped to Waste Control Specialist's facility in Andrews 5 County Texas .. 6 The spent fuel management requirements identified by Luminant 7 were also incorporated into the decommissioning program and reflected 8 Luminant's experience in the handling and storage of spent fuel. g Q. ARE THERE ANY FEDERAL REGULATIONS APPLICABLE TO 10 DECOMMISSIONING? 11 A. Yes. The NRC published the Final Rule entitled "General Requirements 12 for Decommissioning Nuclear Facilities" in the Federal Register of June 13 27, 1988 (53 Fed. Reg. 24018) to establish technical and financial criteria 14 for decommissioning licensed facilities. The regulations addressed 15 decommissioning planning needs, timing, funding methods, and 16 environmental review requirements with the intent to assure that 17 decommissioning of all licensed facilities would be accomplished in a safe 18 and timely manner, and that adequate licensee funds would be available 19 for this purpose. In 1996, the NRC published revisions to the Final Rule. 20 The amended regulations clarified ambiguities and codified procedures and 21 terminology as a means of enhancing efficiency and uniformity in the 22 decommissioning process. The amendments allow for greater public 000019

Luminant Generation Company LLC Page 19 of 41 Direct Testimony of William A. Cloutier, Jr. 2015 Nuclear Decommissioning Report 1 participation during decommissioning and better define the transition 2 process from operations to decommissioning. The decommissioning cost 3 analysis prepared for Comanche Peak fully satisfies the requirements set 4 forth in this regulation. 5 V. COST ESTIMATING METHODOLOGY 6 Q. WHAT METHODOLOGY WAS USED TO PREPARE THE COST 7 ESTIMATE? 8 A. The methodology used to develop the cost estimate followed the basic 9 approach presented in the AIF/NESP-036 study report, "Guidelines for 10 Producing Commercial Nuclear Power Plant Decommissioning Cost 11 Estimates," and the DOE's "Decommissioning Handbook." The estimating 12 techniques have been augmented, when appropriate, to reflect 13 experience gained in decommissioning of several of the large commercial 14 plants over the past 20 years and the recent closure of the Crystal River, 15 Kewaunee and Vermont Yankee nuclear plants. 16 The two references describe a unit cost factor method for 17 estimating decommissioning activity costs to standardize the estimating 18 calculations. Unit cost factors for activities such as concrete removal 19 ($/cubic yard), steel removal ($/ton), and cutting costs ($/inch) were 20 developed from the labor information provided by Luminant. Consumable 21 material information was taken in large part from R.S. Means, "Building 22 Construction Cost Data 2014." The activity-dependent costs for 000020

Luminant Generation Company LLC Page 20 of 41 Direct Testimony of William A. Cloutier, Jr. 2015 Nuclear Decommissioning Report 1 decontamination, removal, packaging, shipping and burial were estimated 2 using the item quantity (cubic yards, tons, inches, etc.) originally 3 developed from Comanche Peak plant drawings and inventory 4 documents. The activity duration critical path qerived from such key 5 activities, e.g., the disposition of the nuclear steam supply system 6 ("NSSS"), 2 was used to determine the total decommissioning program 7 schedule. 8 The program schedule is used to determine the period-dependent 9 costs such as program management, administration, field engineering, 1O equipment rental, quality assurance and security. The salary and hourly 11 rates are typical for personnel associated with period-dependent costs. 12 The costs for conventional demolition of non-radioactive structures, 13 materials, backfill, landscaping and equipment rental were obtained from 14 conventional demolition references. 15 In addition, collateral costs were included for heavy equipment 16 rental or purchase, safety equipment and supplies, energy costs, permits, 17 taxes, and insurance. 18 The activity-dependent, period-dependent, and collateral costs 19 were added to develop the total decommissioning costs. An overall 20 contingency was added to allow for the effects of unpredictable program 21 problems on costs. 2 The NSSS is the collection of equipment, including the reactor vessel that produces the high pressure steam used to drive the turbines. The NSSS, and supporting cleanup systems, is where most of the highly radioactive components reside. 000021

Luminant Generation Company LLC Page 21 of 41 Direct Testimony of William A Cloutier, Jr. 2015 Nuclear Decommissioning Report 1 One of the primary objectives of every decommissioning program is 2 to protect public health and safety. The cost estimates for the Comanche 3 Peak decommissioning activities include the necessary planning, 4 engineering and implementation to provide this protection to the public.

*- 5 Q. WHAT IS THE BASIS FOR THE CONTINGENCY?

6 A. The purpose of the contingency is to allow for the costs of high probability 7 program problems occurring in the field where the frequency, duration, 8 and severity of such problems cannot be predicted accurately and have 9 not been included in the basic estimate. The Association for the 10 Advancement of Cost Engineering, International ("AACE") (in their Cost 11 Engineers' Notebook) defines contingency as follows: 12 Contingency - specific p*rovision for unforeseeable elements of cost 13 within the defined project scope; particularly important where 14 previous experience relating estimates and actual costs has shown 15 that unforeseeable events, which will increase costs, are likely to 16 occur. 17 Past decommissioning experience has shown that unforeseeable 18 elements of cost are likely to occur in the field and may have a cumulative 19 effect. In the AIF/NESP-036 Guidelines Study, TLG examined the major 20 activity-related problems (decontamination, segmentation, equipment 21 handling, packaging, shipping and burial) with respect to reasons for 22 contingency. Individual activity contingencies ranged from 10% to 75% of 23 the related base cost, depending on the degree of difficulty judged to be 000022

Luminant Generation Company LLC Page 22 of 41 Direct Testimony of William A. Cloutier, Jr. 2015 Nuclear Decommissioning Report 1 appropriate from our actual decommissioning experience. The overall 2 contingency, when applied to the appropriate components of the 3 Comanche Peak DEGON estimate, on a line item basis, results in an 4 average of approximately 17.61%. 5 Q. IS IT FAIR TO VIEW THE CONTINGENCY AS A "SAFETY FACTOR" OR 6 CUSHION AGAINST FUTURE PRICE INCREASES? 7 A. No. There is a general misconception on the use and role of the 8 contingency within decommissioning estimates, sometimes incorrectly g viewed as a "safety factor." Safety factors provide additional security and 10 address situations that may never occur. Contingency dollars are 11 expected to be fully expended throughout the program. They also provide 12 assurance that sufficient funding is available to accomplish the intended 13 tasks. An estimate without contingency, or from which contingency has 14 been removed, can disrupt the orderly progression of events and 15 jeopardize a successful conclusion to the decommissioning process. 16 Contingency, as used in these estimates, does not account for price 17 escalation and inflation in the cost of decommissioning over the remaining 18 operating life of the unit. Thus, the contingency will be spent, however, 19 since contingency dollars are intended to address complexities in the 20 performance of the field decontamination and dismantling activities, it is 000023

Luminant Generation Company LLC Page 23 of 41 Direct Testimony of William A. Cloutier, Jr. 2015 Nuclear Decommissioning Report 1 difficult to identify today those activities most likely to be affected in the 2 future. 3 Q. DOES THE ESTIMATED COST OF DECOMMISSIONING INCLUDE AN 4 ALLOWANCE FOR DISPOSAL OF SPENT NUCLEAR FUEL? 5 A. No. It is important to note that, although decommissioning of a site cannot 6 be complete without the removal of all spent fuel and source material, the 7 disposition of spent nuclear fuel is outside the scope of decommissioning. 8 In accordance with the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982 (Public Law 94-9 425), the DOE is required by law to enter into contracts with owners 10 and/or generators of spent fuel, pursuant to which . the DOE is 11 contractually responsible for final disposition of spent fuel as high-level 12 nuclear waste. To cover the cost of spent fuel disposition, the DOE 13 assesses the facility operator 1 mill/kWh based on net electrical 14 generation (although this fee has been recently suspended). Therefore, 15 the cost of disposal of spent fuel is accounted for separately and is 16

specifically excluded from the decommissioning cost estimates.

17 Q. DOES THE PRESENCE OF SPENT FUEL ON-SITE, FOLLOWING 18 PLANT SHUTDOWN, AFFECT THE DECOMMISSIONING 19 PROCESSES? 20 A. Yes. Although the study does not address the removal or disposal of 21 spent fuel from the Comanche Peak site, it does consider the constraint 000024

Luminant Generation Company LLC Page 24 of 41 Direct Testimony of William A. Cloutier, Jr. 2015 Nuclear Decommissioning Report 1 that the presence of spent fuel on the site can impose on other 2 decommissioning activities. In particular, the decommissioning scheduling 3 developed in support of both the 2010 and 2015 Comanche Peak 4 estimates recognizes a DOE minimum cooling prerequisite for off-loading 5 the fuel from the storage pool and the uncertainty in the timing for the 6 removal of the spent fuel from the site. As such, these requirements will 7 necessarily delay the final release of the site for alternative/unrestricted 8 use. This delay is reflected in the increased cost of the period-dependent 9 activities. To the extent possible, the decommissioning estimates were 1O structured around the spent fuel area of the plant and its availability for 11 decontamination, such that delays in decommissioning other portions of 12 the facility could be minimized. Decommissioning would proceed on the 13 surrounding facilities and non-essential systems during the time the pools 14 are operational. The operating license can then be amended for a partial 15 release of the property with the remaining fuel placed in dry storage. 16 Q. WHY DOES THE 2015 UPDATE ASSUME THAT ISFSI WILL BE 17 OPERATING AT THE COMANCHE PEAK SITE PRIOR TO THE 18 CESSATION OF PLANT OPERATIONS? 19 A. The storage pools at Comanche Peak are near capacity and supplemental 20 storage is required for continued operation. Even if the DOE commenced 21 the transfer of spent fuel today, the first assemblies would not be expected 22 to be removed from the Comanche Peak site for several years (since it was 000025

Luminant Generation Company LLC Page 25 of 41 . Direct Testimony of William A. Cloutier, Jr. 2015 Nuclear Decommissioning Report 1 one of the last reactors to commence operations). As such, an ISFSI has 2 already been constructed at the Comanche Peak site (the first storage 3 casks were loaded and placed on the pad in early 2012). 4 The 2015 estimates assume that the ISFSI can be expanded to 5 accommodate the spent fuel residing in the plant's storage pools at the 6 cessation of operations. With the pools emptied, decommissioning 7 operations can be concluded and the operating licenses 8 terminated/amended. Costs are included within the estimates to augment 9 the ISFSI and for the continued operation of this facility at the site until 10 2080, at which time the DOE was expected to complete the transfer of 11 spent fuel. 12 Q. WHAT CONSIDERATIONS ARE MAD_E REGARDING THE CAPACITY OF 13 THE ISFSI? 14 A. The capacity of the ISFSI is based upon a vertical spent fuel storage cask 15 system, utilizing a Multi-Purpose Canister ("MPG") design. The ISFSI can 16 be expanded to accommodate the residual inventory present in the spent 17 fuel pools at the cessation of operations. Eighty two casks were projected to 18 be required for the storage of the spent fuel resident in the storage pools 19 after the required* cooling period, based upon a loading of 32 fuel 20 assemblies per cask. An additional ten casks were required for the storage 000026

Luminant Generation Company LLC Page 26 of 41 Direct Testimony of William A Cloutier, Jr. 2015 Nuclear Decommissioning Report 3 1 of Greater-than-Class C ("GTCC") material generated in the segmentation 2 (i.e., the cutting into pieces) of the reactor vessel internals. It was assumed, 3 because of DOE's breach of its obligation under the Nuclear Waste Policy 4 Act and its contracts with nuclear plant owners timely to provide fuel 5 transportation casks, that Luminant would provide the spent fuel storage 6 canisters and concrete overpacks (for radiation protection) for both the 7 spent fuel and GTCC casks stored at the ISFSI. For estimating purposes, 8 the ISFSI storage pad(s) were sized for a total of 170 casks (160 for spent 9 fuel from operations/decommissioning and 10 for GTCC material). 10 Q. WHAT ISFSI CAPITAL COSTS ARE REFLECTED IN THE 2015 UPDATE? 11 A Since the ISFSI is required for continued plant operation, only the capital 12 costs required for the expansion are reflected within the 2015 13 decommissioning estimates. Such expenditures include pad expansion and 14 the purchase of storage canisters and concrete overpacks. The costs 15 associated with the post-operation maintenance of spent fuel in the ISFSI 16 are also reflected within the estimates. Caretaking costs include staffing, 17 security, insurance, and fees, as well as costs associated with the final 18 disposition of the facility. The decommissioning cost for the ISFSI is 19 provided in Appendix E of Exhibit WAC-1.

3. GTCC waste contains radionuclide concentrations in excess of those permitted for Class C and for shallow-land disposal. See 10 CFR §61.55. Although classified as low-level radioactive waste, this material will most likely be disposed of at the geologic repository along with the spent fuel.

000027

Luminant Generation Company LLC Page 27 of 41 Direct Testimony of William A. Cloutier, Jr. 2015 Nuclear Decommissioning Report 1 Q. DOES THE PROCESS OF DECOMMISSIONING EXTEND BEYOND 2 THE REMOVAL OF CONTAMINATED AND ACTIVATED MATERIAL 3 FROM THE SITE? 4 A. Yes. There are additional activities, beyond the removal of contaminated 5 material that will be undertaken in the process of releasing the site for 6 alternative use. This work includes costs for the remaining dismantling 7 and grading operations. 8 Q. PLEASE DESCRIBE THE SITE RESTORATION ACTIVITIES. 9 A. The largest component of the site restoration costs is for dismantling the 10 decontaminated structures. Next are costs incurred to remove certain 11 non-contaminated systems and components. This work must be 12 accomplished to provide access to all areas of the plant for the radiation 13 surveys required by the NRC prior to license termination and release of 14 the site for another use. 15 Q. WHY IS IT NECESSARY TO DISMANTLE THE REMAINING 16 STRUCTURES AT THE SITE? 17 A. Efficient removal of the contaminated materials and verification that the 18 radionuclide concentrations are below the stringent NRG limits will require '19 substantial damage to many of the structures. Blasting, coring, drilling, 20 scarification (surface removal), and the other decontamination work will 21 damage power block structures including the Reactor Buildings, Auxiliary, 000028

Luminant Generation Company LLC Page 28 of 41 Direct Testimony of William A. Cloutier, Jr. 2015 Nuclear Decommissioning Report 1 and the Fuel Building. Verifying that subsurface radionuclide 2 concentrations meet NRC site release requirements may require removal 3 of grade slabs and lower floors, potentially weakening footings and 4 structural supports. 5 It is also important to remember that the Comanche Peak 6 structures were custom designed and built to support a specific nuclear 7 unit that went into service in the early 1990's. They would most likely be 8 an impediment rather than a benefit to any potential future plant, if one 9 were ever to be constructed at the site. Moreover, the facility's 1O infrastructure degrades without continual maintenance. Unless the site is 11 redeveloped shortly after release of its NRC license, the value in reusing 12 plant facilities quickly diminishes. 13 Dismantling is clearly the most appropriate and cost-effective 14 option and should serve as the foundation for the decommissioning cost 15 estimates. It is unreasonable to anticipate that these structures would be 16 repaired and preserved after the radiological contamination is removed. 17 VI. DECOMMISSIONING ALTERNATIVES 18 Q. DESCRIBE THE DECOMMISSIONING ALTERNATIVES DELINEATED 19 IN THE NRC RULE. 20 A The supplemental information to the NRC Rule (53 Fed. Reg. 24022-23) 21 describes three decommissioning alternatives as acceptable: DECON 22 (prompt removal/ dismantling), SAFSTOR (mothballing) and, under 000029 L ___

Luminant Generation Company LLC Page 29 of 41 Direct Testimony of William A. Cloutier, Jr. 2015 Nuclear Decommissioning Report 1 special circumstances, ENTOMB (entombment). They are defined as 2 follows: 3 DECON is the alternative in which the equipment, structures, 4 and portions of a facility and site containing radioactive 5 contaminants are removed or decontaminated to a level that 6 permits termination of the license and allows the property to 7 be released for unrestricted use shortly after cessation of 8 operations; 9 SAFSTOR is the alternative in which the nuclear facility is 1O placed and maintained in a condition that allows the nuclear 11 facility to be safely stored and subsequently decontaminated 12 (deferred decontamination) to levels that permit termination 13 of the license and release for unrestricted use; and 14 ENTOMB is the alternative in which radioactive 15 contaminants are encased in a structurally long-lived 16 material, such as concrete; the entombed structure is 17 appropriately maintained and continued surveillance is 18 carried out until the radioactivity decays to a level permitting 19 termination of the license and unrestricted release of the 20 property. 21 It should be noted that the NRG provides that delayed decommissioning 22 following initial mothballing or entombment activities should not exceed 60 000030

Luminant Generation Company LLC Page 30 of 41 Direct Testimony of William A. Cloutier, Jr. 2015 Nuclear Decommissioning Report 1 years, unless it can be shown necessary to protect public health and 2 safety. 4 This rule has limited the use of the ENTOMB alternative. 5 3 However, both the DEGON and SAFSTOR alternatives are considered 4 reasonable options for decommissioning Comanche Peak. The rule also 5 requires utilities to perform a periodic review of the funding plan over the 6 life of the facility. TLG's site-specific cost estimates and decommissioning 7 alternatives are formulated within the framework of the NRC's rule. 8 Q. IS IT NECESSARY TO SELECT A SPECIFIC DECOMMISSIONING 9 METHOD AT THIS TIME? 10 A. No. The actual method or combination of methods selected to 11 decommission Comanche Peak should be based on a detailed economic, 12 engineering and environmental evaluation of the alternatives considering 13 the site and surroundings at the time of decommissioning and reflecting 14 the latest experience in the decommissioning of similar nuclear power 15 facilities. However, for financial planning purposes, the decommissioning 16 cost funding should be based upon the DEGON methodology. The 17 DEGON methodology provides the most reasonable means for 18 terminating the license for the site in the shortest possible time. 19 Furthermore, this alternative avoids the long-term costs and commitments

4. See 10 CFR 50.82(a)(3).

5. The NRC has identified certain regulatory actions that could improve the viability of the ENTOMB alternative, however, the NRC's Staff has recommended deferral of any near term rulemaking (SECY-02-0191 dated October 25, 2002). The NRC Commissioners concurred with that recommendation in a memorandum dated November 26, 2002.

000031

Luminant Generation Company LLC Page 31of41 Direct Testimony of William A. Cloutier, Jr. 2015 Nuclear Decommissioning Report 1 associated with the maintenance, surveillance and security requirements 2 of the conventional delayed dismantling alternatives. The PUCT has 3 adopted the DEGON alternative as a basis for funding nuclear plant 4 decommissioning in every case in which a TLG witness has testified. 5 The recommended alternative also allows use of the plant's 6 knowledgeable operating staff, a valuable asset to a well-managed, 7 efficient decommissioning program. Equipment needed to support 8 decommissioning operations such as cranes, ventilation systems and 9 radwaste processing equipment would be fully operational. In addition, the 10 site would be available for other use in the near term, with the exception 11 of the area immediately surrounding the station's fuel storage facility. 12 VII. DECOMMISSIONING PROCESSES 13 Q. WOULD YOU DESCRIBE THE PROCESS OF DECOMMISSIONING A 14 NUCLEAR POWER REACTOR UTILIZING THE DE CON 15 ALTERNATIVE? 16 A. Yes. The conceptual approach that the NRC has identified in their 17 amended regulations is to divide decommissioning into three phases. The 18 initial phase commences with the effective date of permanent cessation of 19 operations and involves the transition of both plant and licensee from 20 reactor operations, i.e. power production, to facility de-activation and 21 closure. During Phase I, notification is to be provided to the NRC certifying 22 the permanent cessation of operations and the removal of fuel from the 000032

Luminant Generation Company LLC Page 32 of 41 Direct Testimony of William A. Cloutier, Jr. 2015 Nuclear Decommissioning Report 1 reactor vessel. The licensee would then be prohibited from reactor 2 operation. Before or within two years following cessation of operations, the 3 licensee is required to provide a Post-Shutdown Decommissioning Activities 4 Report ("PSDAR"). This report would provide a description of the licensee's 5 planned decommissioning activities, a corresponding schedule and an 6 estimate of expected costs. The PSDAR would also address whether 7 environmental impacts associated with the proposed decommissioning 8 scenario have already been considered in a previously prepared 9 environmental statement(s). Ninety days following the NRC's receipt of the 1O PSDAR, the licensee can initiate certain decommissioning activities without 11 specific NRG approval, under a modified 10 CFR 50.59 review process. 12 The proposed rule would permit the licensee to expend up to 3% of the 13 generic decommissioning cost for planning, with an additional 20% 14 available following the 90-day waiting period and certification of permanent 15 defueling. Remaining funds would be available to the licensee with 16 submittal of a detailed, site-specific cost estimate. 17 Phases II and Ill pertain to the activities involved in reactor 18 decommissioning and license termination. A termination plan is required 19 two years prior to license termination and contains a detailed site 20 characterization, i.e., location, type and amount of radioactivity, a 21 description of any remaining dismantling activities to be accomplished, 22 detailed plans for a final survey and the planned end use of the site. An 000033

Luminant Generation Company LLC Page 33 of 41 Direct Testimony of William A Cloutier, Jr. 2015 Nuclear Decommissioning Report 1 updated cost to complete would be required along with the reporting of any 2 new or altered environmental consequences. 3 TLG's estimate for DEGON addresses Phase I activities in Period 4 1. Phase II and Ill activities are included in Period 2. Period 3 and Post-5 Period 3 are added for site restoration and long-term spent fuel 6 management and have no NRG correlation. 7 A. Period 1 - Planning and Engineering 8 This period begins upon shutdown of the facility, and involves site 9 preparations to initiate decommissioning. The reactors would be defueled 10 with the fuel placed in the spent fuel pools until it is cooled sufficiently to 11 be transferred to DOE or an alternative storage facility. As noted earlier, 12 transportation and disposal of spent fuel at a DOE facility is not 13 considered part of decommissioning and no costs associated with these 14 activities are included in the decommissioning estimates. (These 15 expenses have been funded by the owner throughout the plant's 16 operating life, payable to DOE for future rendering of these services.) 17 However, the impact on the decommissioning schedule due to the 18 presence of such material on-site has been addressed in the study 19 through the schedule. Wastes remaining from plant operations would be 20 removed from the site and all systems nonessential to decommissioning 21 would be isolated and drained. 000034

Luminant Generation Company LLC Page 34 of 41 Direct Testimony of William A. Cloutier, Jr. 2015 Nuclear Decommissioning Report 1 B. Period 2 - Decommissioning Operations 2 This period commences once the PSDAR has been submitted to 3 the NRC for review and with the mobilization of the decontamination and 4 dismantling workforce. This phase addresses the removal of radioactivity 5 from the site and concludes with termination of the NRC license (except 6 as required for any remaining spent fuel on the site). Activities include 7 selective decontamination of contaminated systems, e.g., using 8 aggressive chemical solvents to dissolve corrosion films holding 9 radionuclides, thereby reducing radiation levels. 10 While effective, the on-site decontamination processes are not 11 expected to reduce residual radioactivity to the levels necessary to 12 release the material as clean scrap. Therefore, all contaminated 13 components will have to be removed for controlled burial. However, 14 decontamination will reduce personnel exposure and permit workers to 15 operate in the immediate vicinity of rriost components, cutting and 16 removing them for controlled disposition at a low-level radioactive waste 17 burial facility. 18 Contaminated piping to and from major components will be cut and 19 removed. Selected major cqmponents such as the reactor recirculation 20 pumps, moisture separators and other large components will then be 21 removed intact and sealed so that they may be transported off-site. 22 Smaller components, such as sampling system pumps, filters, filter 000035

Luminant Generation Company LLC Page 35 of 41 Direct Testimony of William A Cloutier, Jr. 2015 Nuclear Decommissioning Report 1 housings, strainers, etc., will be loaded into containers and shipped for 2 additional processing or controlled disposal. 3 The reactor vessel and its internals will be segmented and remotely 4 loaded into steel liners for transport to the burial facility in heavily shielded 5 shipping casks. The reactor vessel and internals will have sufficiently high 6 radiation levels to require all cutting to be done underwater or behind 7 heavy shields, using cutting torches operated by remote control to reduce 8 radiation exposure to the workers. 9 Concrete immediately surrounding the reactor vessel is expected to 10 be radioactive and will be removed by controlled blasting. This blasting 11 process is well-developed, safe and is the most cost effective way to 12 remove the heavily-reinforced concrete from the structure. 13 The surfaces of sections of interior floors within areas of the 14 Reactor Building and other buildings in the power block are expected to 15 be contaminated from exposure to contaminated air/water as a result of 16 plant operations. This contamination will be removed by scarification 17 (surface removal) so that the remaining surface will be clean and will not 18 require costly controlled burial. 19 Contaminated process equipment, pipe hangers, supports and 20 electrical components will be removed and routed for off-site processing 21 or controlled disposal. 000036

Luminant Generation Company LLC Page 36 of 41 Direct Testimony of William A Cloutier, Jr. 2015 Nuclear Decommissioning Report 1 Finally, an extensive radiation survey will be performed to ensure 2 all radioactivity above the levels specified by the NRC has been removed 3 from the site. With NRC confirmation, the facilities may be released for 4 unrestricted access. 5 c. Period 3 - Site Restoration 6 This period begins once license termination activities have 7 concluded and involves the demolition of all remaining structures, typically 8 to a depth of three feet below grade. Clean concrete rubble would be 9 used on-site for fill and additional soil would be used to cover each 1O sub grade structure. 11 D. Post Period 3 - Spent Fuel Storage 12 The ISFSI will continue to operate under the General Part 50 license 13 (in accordance with 10 CFR 72, Subpa*rt K) following the transfer of the 14 spent fuel inventory from the Fuel Building. The transfer of spent fuel from 15 Comanche Peak was assumed to begin in the year 2041 and continue with 16 the final spent fuel shipment presumed to occur in the year 2080. 17 At the conclusion of the spent fuel transfer process, the ISFSI will be 18 decommissioned. The NRC will terminate the Part 50 license if it 19 determines that site remediation has been performed in accordance with a 20 license termination plan and the terminal radiation survey and associated 21 documentation demonstrate that the facility is suitable for release. Once the 22 requirements are satisfied, the NRC can terminate the license for the ISFSI. 000037

Luminant Generation Company LLC Page 37 of 41 Direct Testimony of William A. Cloutier, Jr. 2015 Nuclear Decommissioning Report 1 The reinforced concrete dry storage modules are then demolished, 2 the concrete storage pad is removed, and the area graded and landscaped 3 to conform to the surrounding environment. 4 Q. WHAT ASSURANCE IS THERE THAT THE ESTIMATED COST FOR 5 DECOMMISSIONING WILL REFLECT FUTURE DEVELOPMENTS AND 6 INCREASES OR DECREASES IN COSTS? 7 A. The cost estimate prepared for Comanche Peak is based on present 8 technology, the current information available on decommissioning costs 9 and on existing federal regulations. No provision is made to include future 10 costs or savings due to the uncertainties in improvements in technology, 11 major regulatory changes, inflation factors, etc. It should be noted that 12 contingency, as used in the estimates, only covers uncertainties within the 13 decommissioning process and is not intended as price protection or 14 protection against inflation. The estimate should be updated in the future 15 to account for any future developments. 16 VIII. DECOMMISSIONING ESCALATION 17 Q. DID TLG ALSO PERFORM AN ESCALATION ANALYSIS OF THE 2014 18 DOLLAR ESTIMATES TO ARRIVE AT FUTURE COSTS? 19 A. Yes. The TLG financial escalation analysis for Comanche Peak is 20 attached as Exhibit WAC-2. 21 Q. HOW WAS THE ESCALATION RATE FOR DECOMMISSIONING COST 000038

Luminant Generation Company LLC Page 38 of 41 Direct Testimony of William A. Cloutier, Jr. 2015 Nuclear Decommissioning Report 1 DETERMINED? 2 A. The TLG decommissioning cost model separates each line item in the 3 cost estimate into five separate cost components: labor, equipment & 4 materials, energy, low-level radioactive waste disposal, and other costs. 5 These line item costs were summed by period and distributed into cash 6 flows over the expected decommissioning schedule. TLG used projected 7 rates for labor, equipment & materials, energy, and other costs, together 8 with a contractual index for waste disposal in order to calculate the overall 9 escalation rate used in this analysis. The cash flows shown in Exhibit 10 WAC-2 serve as the input to the inflation model. 11 Q. HOW WAS THE LABOR PORTION OF THE ESCALATION RATE 12 DETERMINED? 13 A. The estimate for labor escalation was obtained from IHS via their 14 Datalnsight-Web online service using first quarter 2015 projections. TLG 15 used the ECI Total Compensation, Private Industry Workers (ECIPCTNS) 16 for the decommissioning period. A twenty-five year moving average was 17 used for future years beyond the current forecast horizon of the IHS 18 database. 19 Q. HOW WAS THE EQUIPMENT & MATERIAL PORTION OF THE 20 ESCALATION RATE DETERMINED? 21 A. The estimate for equipment and material escalation was obtained from 000039

Luminant Generation Company LLC Page 39 of 41 Direct Testimony of William A. Cloutier, Jr. 2015 Nuclear Decommissioning Report 1 IHS via their Datalnsight-Web online service using first quarter 2015 2 projections. TLG used the Producer Price Index, Machinery & Equipment 3 (WPIP11) for escalating the decommissioning expenditures. A twenty-five 4 year moving average was used for future years beyond the current 5 forecast horizon of the !HS database. 6 Q. HOW WAS THE ENERGY PORTION OF THE ESCALATION RATE 7 DETERMINED? 8 A. The estimate for energy escalation was obtained from IHS via their 9 Datalnsight-Web online service using first quarter 2015 projections. TLG 10 used the Producer Price Index, Fuels and Related Products and Power 11 (WPIP05) for escalating the decommissioning expenditures. A twenty-five 12 year moving average was used for future years beyond the current 13 forecast horizon of the IHS database. 14 Q. HOW WAS THE OTHER COSTS PORTION OF THE ESCALATION 15 RATE DETERMINED? 16 A. The estimate for other costs escalation was obtained from IHS via their 17 Datalnsight-Web online service using first quarter 2015 projections. TLG 18 used the Consumer Price Index, Services (CUSASNS) for escalating the 19 decommissioning expenditures. A twenty-five year moving average was 20 used for future years beyond the current forecast horizon of the IHS 21 database. 000040

Luminant Generation Company LLC Page 40 of 41 Direct Testimony of William A. Cloutier, Jr. 2015 Nuclear Decommissioning Report 1 Q. HOW WAS THE LOW-LEVEL RADIOACTIVE WASTE BURIAL 2 PORTION OF THE ESCALATION RATE DETERMINED? 3 A. The escalation rate for low-level radioactive waste disposal charges was 4 based upon the terms delineated in current agreement Luminant 5 Generation Company LLC has with Waste Control Specialists LLC, the 6 licensee and operator of the low-level radioactive waste disposal facility in 7 Andrews County, Texas. 8 Q. WHAT IS THE RESULT OF THE COMBINATION OF THESE 9 INDIVIDUAL ESCALATION RATES? 10 A. The overall escalation rate when including the individual factors for labor, 11 equipment & material, energy, low-level radioactive waste burial, and 12 other costs is approximately 2.48% for Unit 1, and approximately 2.4 7% 13 for Unit 2. These are the effective rates; the actual model used the 14 individual rates for each of the five categories. The resulting cash flow 15 after applying the individual escalation rates is shown in Tables 7 - 9C in 16 Exhibit WAC-2 . 17 0. WHY IS THE ESCALATION RATE DIFFERENT FOR EACH UNIT? 18 A. Each unit's escalation rate is a composite of the five individual cost 19 categories tracked by TLG. Since each unit has a differing fraction for 20 these categories, the resulting overall escalation rate is unique to that unit 21 and its associated input values. 000041

*~*

Luminant Generation Company LLC Page 41of41 Direct Testimony of William A Cloutier, Jr. 2015 Nuclear Decommissioning Report 1 Q. WHY IS THIS METHODOLOGY USED INSTEAD OF AN OVERALL 2 INFLATION ESTIMATE FOR FUTURE DOLLAR COSTS? 3 A. While it is not specifically required that this escalation methodology be 4 used to determine future costs, this approach focuses on specific areas of 5 price escalation that impact the cost of decommissioning, unlike other 6 price escalators used in the development of an overall Gross Domestic 7 Product inflator. The weighting of the methodology takes into 8 consideration the impacts of specific costs associated with 9 decommissioning the Comanche Peak facility. This can be clearly seen by 10 referring to Exhibit WAC-2, and comparing the fractions of cost by 11 category between the two units. 12 IX. CONCLUSION 13 Q. DOES THIS CONCLUDE YOUR DIRECT TESTIMONY? 14 A. Yes, it does. 000042

AFFIDAVIT STATE OF CONNECTICUT §

                                      § COUNTY OF LITCHFIELD                § BEFORE ME, the uodersigned authority, on this day personally appeared William A. Cloutier, Jr., to me known, who being duly swam according to law, deposes and says:
         "My name is William A. Cloutier, Jr. I am over the age of 21 and a resident of the State of Connecticut. The fOregoing testimony and the opinions stated therein are, in my judgment and based upon my professional experience, true and oorrect."
                                                  ~~~CJ William A. Cloutier, Jr.               /

SU~CRIBED AND SWORN TO BEFORE ME by the said William A. CloL.'tier, Jr. this~ day of June, 2015. CAREN C. VICKERY NOTARY PUBLIC MY COMMlS8IoN EXPIRES 7131/2019 000043 L_

Document Lll-1703-001, Rev. 0 DECOMMISSIONING COST ANALYSIS for the COMANCHE PEAK NUCLEAR POWER PLANT prepared for Luminant Generation Company LLC prepared by TLG Services, Inc. Bridgewater, Connecticut May 2015 EXHIBIT WAC-1 000044

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant Document Lll-1703-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Page ii of xxi APPROVALS Project Manager u/~tZ~;J_ z IJ J.4"1 Z1us William A. Cloutier, Jr. Date Project Engineer Technical Manager EXHIBITWAC-1 TLG Services, Inc. 000045

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant Document Ll 1-1703-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Page iii of xxi TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION PAGE EXECUTIVE SU1VIJ.VIARY .................................................................................. viii-xxi

1. INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................... 1-1 1.1 Objectives of Study ........................................................................................... 1-1 1.2 Site Description ................................................................................................. 1-2 1.3 Regulatory Guidance ........................................................................................ 1-3 1.3.1 High-Level Radioactive Waste Management.. .................................... 1-4 1.3.2 Low-Level Radioactive Waste Management ....................................... 1-8 1.3.3 Radiological Criteria for License Termination .................................... 1-9

2. DECOMMISSIONING ALTERNATIVES .............................................................. 2-1 2.1 DECON .............................................................................................................. 2-2 2.1.1 Period 1- Preparations ......................................................................... 2-2 2.1.2 Period 2 - Decommissioning Operations .............................................. 2-4 2.1.3 Period 3 - Site Restoration .................................................................... 2-7 2.1.4 ISFSI Operations and Decommissioning ............................................ 2-8 2.2 SAFSTOR .......................................................................................................... 2-9 2.2.1 Period 1 - Preparations ......................................................................... 2-9 2.2.2 Period 2- Dormancy ............................................................................ 2-10 2.2.3 Periods 3 and 4 - Delayed Decommissioning ..................................... 2-11 2.2.4 Period 5 - Site Restoration .................................................................. 2-12 2.2.5 ISFSI Operations and Decommissioning .......................................... 2-13

3. COSTESTIMA.TE ..................................................................................................... 3-1 3.1 Basis of Estimate .............................................................................................. 3-1 3.2 Methodology ...................................................................................................... 3-1 3.3 Impact of Decommissioning Multiple Reactor Units ..................................... 3.3 3.4 Financial Components of the Cost Model.. ..................................................... 3-4 3.4.1 Contingency ........................................................................................... 3-4 3.4.2 Financial Risk ........................................................................................ 3-6 3.5 Site-Specific Considerations ............................................................................. 3-7 3.5.1 Spent Fuel Management ....................................................................... 3-7 3.5.2 Reactor Vessel and Internal Components ......................................... 3-10 3.5.3 Primary System Components ............................................................. 3-11 3.5.4 Main Turbine and Condenser ............................................................. 3-12 3.5.5 Retired Components ............................................................................ 3-12 EXHIBIT WAC-1 TLG Services, Inc . . 000046

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant Document Lll-1703-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Page iv of xxi TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued) SECTION PAGE 3.5.6 Transportation Methods ..................................................................... 3-13 3.5.7 Low-Level Radioactive Waste Disposal ............................................. 3-14 3.5.8 Site Conditions Following Decommissioning .................................... 3-15 3.6 Assumptions .................................................................................................... 3-15 3.6.1 Estimating Basis ................................................................................. 3-15 3.6.2 Labor Costs .......................................................................................... 3-16 3.6.3 Design Conditions ................................................................................ 3-16 3.6.4 General ................................................................................................. 3-17 3.7 Cost Estimate Summary ............................................................................... 3-20

4. SCHEDULE ESTIMATE ........................................................................................ 4-1 4.1 Schedule Estimate Assumptions ..................................................................... 4-1 4.2 Project Schedule ................................................................................................ 4-2

5. RADIOACTIVE WASTES ........................................................................................ 5-1

6. RE SULTS ................................................................................................................. 6-1

7. REFERENCES .......................................................................................................... 7-1 TABLES DECON Cost Summary, Decommissioning Cost Elements ............................ xx SAFSTOR Cost Summary, Decommissioning Cost Elements ....................... xxi 3.1 Spent Fuel Management ............................................................................... 3-22 3.2 Unit 1, DE CON Alternative, Schedule of Total Annual Expenditures ....... 3-25 3.2a Unit 1, DE CON Alternative, License Termination Expenditures ............... 3-27 3.2b Unit 1, DEGON Alternative, Spent Fuel Management Expenditures ........ 3-28 3.2c Unit 1, DECON Alternative, Site Restoration Expenditures ...................... 3-30 3.3 Unit 2, DEGON Alternative, Schedule of Total Annual Expenditures ....... 3-31 3.3a Unit 2, DEGON Alternative, License Termination Expenditures ............... 3-33 3.3b Unit 2, DEGON Alternative, Spent Fuel Management Expenditures ........ 3-34 3.3c Unit 2, DEGON Alternative, Site Restoration Expenditures ...................... 3-36 3.4 Unit 1, SAFSTOR Alternative, Schedule of Total Annual Expenditures .... 3-37 3.4a Unit 1, SAFSTOR Alternative, License Termination Expenditures ........... 3-40 EXHIBIT WAC-1 TLG Services, Inc. 000047

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant Document Lll-1703-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Page v of xxi TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued) SECTION PAGE TABLES (continued) 3.4b Unit 1, SAFSTOR Alternative, Spent Fuel Management Expenditures ..... 3-43 3.4c Unit 1, SAFSTOR Alternative, Site Restoration Expenditures ................... 3-45 3.5 Unit 2, SAFSTOR Alternative, Schedule of Total Annual Expenditures .... 3-46 3.5a Unit 2, SAFSTOR Alternative, License Termination Expenditures ........... 3-48 3.5b Unit 2, SAFSTOR Alternative, Spent Fuel Management Expenditures ..... 3-50 3.5c Unit 2, SAFSTOR Alternative, Site Restoration Expenditures ................... 3-52 5.1 DECON Alternative, Decommissioning Waste Summary ............................. 5-5 5.2 SAFSTOR Alternative, Decommissioning Waste Summary .......................... 5-6 6.1 DECON Alternative, Decommissioning Cost Elements ................................. 6-4 6.2 SAFSTOR Alternative, Decommissioning Cost Elements ............................. 6-5 FIGURES 4.1 Activity Schedule .............................................................................................. 4-3 4.2 Decommissioning Time line, DE CON .............................................................. 4-7 4.3 Decommissioning Time line, SAFSTOR .......................................................... 4-8 5.1 Radioactive Waste Disposition ........................................................................ 5-3 5.2 Decommissioning Waste Destinations, Radiological.. .................................... 5-4 APPENDICES A. Unit Cost Factor Development ............................................................................. A-1 B. Unit Cost Factor Listing .................................................................... ,................. B-1 C. Detailed Cost Analysis, DECON .......................................................................... C-1 D. Detailed Cost Analysis, SAFSTOR ...................................................................... D-1 E. Detailed Cost Analysis, ISFSI.. ............................................................................ E-1 EXHIBIT WAC-1 TLG Services, Inc. 000048

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant Document Lll-1703-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Page vi of xxi TABLE OF ACRONYMS I ABBREVIATIONS Atomic Industrial Forum document delineating a AIF/NESP-036 standardized cost estimating model for decommissioning ALARA As-Low-As-Reasonably-Achievable Comanche Peak Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and CERCLA Liability Act (also referred to as Superfund) CFR Code of Federal Regulations DECCER TLG's Proprietary Decommissioning Cost Model DE CON Prompt Decommissioning (NRC Acronym) DOC Decommissioning Operations Contractor DOE Department of Energy ENTOMB Entombment or Hardened Storage (NRC Acronym) EPA Environmental Protection Agency FSAR Final Safety Analysis Report GTCC Greater-than-Class C (as defined by 10 CFR §61) IP Industrial Package ISFSI Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation LSA Low Specific Activity LTP License Termination Plan Multi-Agency Radiation Survey and Site Investigation MARS SIM Manual Luminant Luminant Generation Company LLC MOU Memorandum of Understanding (between NRC and EPA) MPC Multi-Purpose Canister MTU Metric Tons of Uranium NRC Nuclear Regulatory Commission (or Commission) NSSS Nuclear Steam Supply System NWPA Nuclear Waste Policy Act OFF Oldest Fuel First PERT Program Evaluation and Review Technique PS DAR Post-Shutdown Decommissioning Activities Report SAFSTOR Passive Storage (NRC Acronym) sco Surface Contaminated Object TEDE Total Effective Does Equivalent WDF Work Difficulty Adjustment Factors EXHIBIT WAC-1 TLG Services, Inc. 000049

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant Document Lll-1703-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Page vii of xxi REVISION LOG Date Item Revised Reason for Revision 0 05-28-2015 Original Issue EXHIBIT WAC-1 TLG Services, Inc. 000050 -~---

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant Document Lll-1703-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Page viii of xxi EXECUTIVE

SUMMARY

This report presents estimates of the cost to decommission the Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant (Comanche Peak) for the selected decommissioning scenarios following the scheduled cessation of plant operations. The estimates are designed to provide Luminant Generation Company LLC (Luminant) with sufficient information to assess its financial obligations, as they pertain to the decommissioning of the nuclear station. The analysis relies upon site-specific, technical information from an evaluation prepared in 2010,[ 1] updated to reflect current assumptions pertaining to the disposition of the two nuclear units and relevant industry experience in undertaking such projects. The costs are based on several key assumptions in areas of regulation, component characterization, high-level radioactive waste management, low-level radioactive waste disposal, performance uncertainties (contingency) and site restoration requirements. The analysis is not a detailed engineering evaluation, but estimates prepared in advance of the detailed engineering required to carry out the decommissioning of the nuclear station. It may also not reflect the actual plan to decommission Comanche Peak; the plan may differ from the assumptions made in this analysis based on facts that exist at the time of decommissioning. The station inventory, the basis for the decontamination and dismantling requirements and cost, and the decommissioning waste streams, were reviewed for this analysis. The only substantive changes made to the plant inventory from the 2010 analysis (that would impact decommissioning) were the addition of the Flex storage building and RP building. The costs to decommission Comanche Peak for the scenarios evaluated are tabulated at the end of this section. Costs are reported in 2014 dollars and include monies anticipated to be spent for radiological remediation and operating license termination, spent fuel management, and site restoration activities. A complete discussion of the assumptions relied upon in this analysis is provided in Section 3, along with schedules of annual expenditures for each scenario. A sequence of significant project activities is provided in Section 4 with timelines for each scenario. Detailed cost reports used to generate the summary tables contained within this document are provided in Appendices C and D.

   "Decommissioning Cost Study for the Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant," Document Lll-1621-001, Rev. 0, TLG Services, Inc., June 2010 EXHIBIT WAC-1 TLG Services, Inc.                                                                        000051

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant Document Lll-1703-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Page ix of xxi Consistent with the 2010 analysis, the current cost estimates assume that the shutdown of the nuclear units is a scheduled and pre-planned event (e.g., there is no delay in transitioning the plant and workforce from operations or in obtaining regulatory relief from operating requirements, etc.). The estimates include the continued operation of the fuel building as an interim wet fuel storage facility for approximately five and one-half years after Unit 2 operations cease. During this time period, it is assumed that the spent fuel residing in the pools will be transferred to an independent spent fuel storage installation (ISFSI) located on the site. The ISFSI will remain operational until the Department of Energy (DOE) is able to complete the transfer of the fuel to a federal facility (e.g., a monitored retrievable storage facility).£21 Alternatives and Regulations The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) provided initial decommissioning requirements in its rule adopted on June 27, 1988J3l In this rule, the NRC set forth financial criteria for decommissioning licensed nuclear power facilities. The regulations addressed planning needs, timing, funding methods, and environmental review requirements for decommissioning. The rule also defined three decommissioning alternatives as being acceptable to the NRC: DECON, SAFSTOR, and ENTOMB. DECON is defined as "the alternative in which the equipment, structures, and portions of a facility and site containing radioactive contaminants are removed or decontaminated to a level that permits the property to be released for unrestricted use shortly after cessation of operations."[4) SAFSTOR is defined as "the alternative in which the nuclear facility is placed and maintained in a condition that allows the nuclear facility to be safely stored and subsequently decontaminated (deferred decontamination) to levels that permit release for unrestricted use."[5] Decommissioning is to be completed within 60 years, although longer 2 Projected expenditures for spent fuel management identified in the cost analyses do not consider any compensation from the DOE with regard to the delays incurred by Luminant in the timely removal of spent fuel from the site. a U.S. Code of Federal Regulations, Title 10, Parts 30, 40, 50, 51, 70 and 72 "General Requirements fo.r Decommissioning Nuclear Facilities," Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Federal Register Volume 53, Number 123 (p 24018 et seq.), June 27, 1988 4 Ibid. Page 24022, Column 3 Ibid. EXHIBIT WAC-1 TLG Services, Inc. 000052

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant Document Ll 1-1703-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Pagex of xxi time periods will be considered when necessary to protect public health and safety. ENTOMB is defined as "the alternative in which radioactive contaminants are encased in a structurally long-lived material, such as concrete; the entombed structure is appropriately maintained and continued surveillance is carried out until the radioactive material decays to a level permitting unrestricted release of the property."[6] As with the SAFSTOR alternative, decommissioning is currently required to be completed within 60 years, although longer time periods will also be considered when necessary to protect public health and safety. The 60-year restriction has limited the practicality for the ENTOMB alternative at commercial reactors that generate significant amounts of long-lived radioactive material. In 1997, the NRC directed its staff to re-evaluate this alternative and identify the technical requirements and regulatory actions that would be necessary for entombment to become a viable option. The resulting evaluation provided several recommendations; however, rulemaking has been deferred pending the completion of additional research studies (e.g., on engineered barriers). In 1996, the NRC published revisions to the general requirements for decommissioning nuclear power plants to clarify ambiguities and codify procedures and terminology as a means of enhancing efficiency and uniformity in the decommissioning process.f7l The amendments allow for greater public participation and better define the transition process from operations to decommissioning. Regulatory Guide 1.184, issued in July 2000, further described the methods and procedures acceptable to the NRC staff for implementing the requirements of the 1996 revised rule relating to the initial activities and major phases of the decommissioning process. The costs and schedules presented in this analysis follow the general guidance and processes described in the amended regulations. The format and content of the estimates is also consistent with the recommendations of Regulatory Guide 1.202, issued in February 2005.[81 6 Ibid. Page 24023, Column 2 U.S. Code of Federal Regulations, Title 10, Parts 2, 50, and 51, "Decommissioning of Nuclear Power Reactors," Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Federal Register Volume 61, (p 39278 et seq.), July 29, 1996 s "Standard Format and Content of Decommissioning Cost Estimates for Nuclear Power Reactors," Regulatory Guide 1.202, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, February 2005 EXHIBIT WAC-1 TLG Services, Inc. 000053

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant Document Lll-1703-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Page xi of xxi Comanche Peak Decommissioning Scenarios Two decommissioning scenarios were evaluated for Comanche Peak. The scenarios selected are Tepresentative of alternatives available to the owner and are defined as follows:

1. The first scenario assumes that the units would be promptly decommissioned (DECON alternative) upon the expiration of the current operating licenses, i.e.,

2030 and 2033 for Units 1 and 2, respectively. Spent fuel in the wet storage pools would be relocated to the ISFSI for interim storage until such time that the DOE can complete the transfer, presumed to be in the year 2080.

2. In the second scenario, the nuclear units are placed into safe-storage (SAFSTOR alternative) at the end of their current operating licenses. Spent fuel in wet storage pools at that time would be relocated to the ISFSI for interim storage so as to minimize caretaking costs. The fuel would be transferred to the DOE (consistent with the assumptions in the DECON scenario) until the process is presumed to be complete in the year 2080. Decommissioning is deferred to the maximum extent (approximately 50 years) such that the property is released for unrestricted use within the generally required 60-year period (i.e., 2090 based upon the current Unit 1 shutdown date).

Methodology The methodology used to develop the estimates described within this document follows the basic approach originally presented in the cost estimating guidelines[9l developed by the Atomic Industrial Forum (now Nuclear Energy Institute). This reference describes a unit factor method for determining decommissioning activity costs. The unit factors used in this analysis incorporate site-specific costs and the latest available information on worker productivity in decommissioning. An activity duration critical path is used to determine the total decommissioning program schedule. This is required for calculating the carrying costs, which include program management, administration, field engineering, equipment rental, quality assurance,* and security. This systematic approach for assembling decommissioning estimates ensures a high degree of confidence in the reliability of the resulting costs. The estimates also reflect lessons learned from previously completed decommissioning projects, including TLG's involvement in the Shippingport Station decommissioning, completed in 1989, and the decommissioning of the Cintichem reactor, hot cells and T.S. LaGuardia et al., "Guidelines for Producing Commercial Nuclear Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Estimates," AIF/NESP-036, May 1986 EXHIBIT WAC-1 TLG Services, Inc. 000054

Comanche Peah Nuclear Power Plant Document Lll-1703-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Page xii of xxi associated facilities, completed in 1997. In addition, the planning and engineering for the Rancho Seco, Trojan, Yankee Rowe, Big Rock Point, Maine Yanlrne, Humboldt Bay-3, Oyster Creek, Connecticut Yankee, Crystal River, San Onofre and Vermont Yankee nuclear units have provided additional insight into the process, the regulatory aspects, and the technical challenges of decommissioning commercial nuclear units. Contingency Consistent with cost estimating practice, contingencies are applied to the decontamination and dismantling costs developed as "specific provision for unforeseeable elements of cost within the defined project scope, particularly important where previous experience relating estimates and actual costs has shown that unforeseeable events which will increase costs are likely to occur."[lOJ The cost elements in the estimates are based on ideal conditions; therefore, the types of unforeseeable events that are almost certain to occur in decommissioning, based on industry experience, are addressed through a percentage contingency applied on a line-item basis. This contingency factor is a nearly universal element in all large-scale construction and demolition projects. It should be noted that contingency, as used in this analysis, does not account for price escalation and inflation in the cost of decommissioning over the remaining operating life of the nuclear units. Contingency funds are expected to be fully expended throughout the program. As such, inclusion of contingency is necessary to provide assurance that sufficient funding will be available to accomplish the intended tasks. Low-Level Radioactive Waste Disposal The contaminated and activated material generated in the decontamination and dismantling of a commercial nuclear reactor is classified as low-level (radioactive) waste, although not all of the material is suitable for "shallow-land" disposal. With the passage of the "Low-Level Radioactive Waste Policy Act" in 1980,[llJ and its Amendments of 1985,(121 the states became ultimately responsible for the disposition of low-level radioactive waste generated within their own borders. Vermont, along with Maine, joined with Texas to form a compact for the disposal of low-level radioactive waste generated by the three states, with Texas as the host state. The Maine Legislature subsequently voted to exit the Texas compact (effective April 5, 10 Project and Cost Engineers' Handbook, Second Edition, American Association of Cost Engineers, Marcel Dekker, Inc., New York, New York, p. 239. 11 "Low-Level Radioactive Waste Policy Act of 1980," Public Law 96-573, 1980. 12 "Low-Level Radioactive Waste Policy Amendments Act of 1985," Public Law 99-240, 1986. EXHIBIT WAC-1 TLG Services, Inc. 000055

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant Document Lll-1703-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Page xiii of xxi 2002) following the shutdown and decommissioning of its only commercial nuclear unit (J\1aine Yankee). Vermont remains a member of the compact. The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ), the environmental agency for the state, is responsible for the licensing of any low-level radioactive waste disposal facility in Texas. In 2004, the agency received an application from Waste Control Specialists (WCS) for authorization to construct and operate a low-level radioactive disposal site in Andrews County. The agency granted WCS a disposal license in 2009 and approval to commence construction in early 2011. Constn1ction of the disposal facility is now complete and is now receiving waste from compact members (and limited quantities from non-compact members). For the purposes of this analysis, low-level radioactive waste generated in the decontamination and dismantling of the plant and remediation of the Comanche Peak site, and designated for direct disposal, is assumed to be shipped to the Texas Compact site. Waste disposal costs are based upon representative rates for the facility consistent with the waste classification. The dismantling of the components residing closest to the reactor core generates radioactive waste that may be considered unsuitable for shallow-land disposal (i.e., low-level radioactive waste with concentrations of radionuclides that exceed the limits established by the NRC for Class C radioactive waste (GTCC)). The Low-Level Radioactive Waste Policy Amendments Act of 1985 assigns the federal government the responsibility for the disposal of this material. The Act also states that the beneficiaries of the activities resulting in the generation of such radioactive waste bear all reasonable costs of disposing of such waste. However, to date, the federal government has not identified a cost for disposing of GTCC or a schedule for acceptance. For purposes of this analysis only, the GTCC radioactive waste is assumed to be packaged and disposed of in a similar manner as high-level waste and at a cost equivalent to that envisioned for the spent fuel. The GTCC is packaged in the same canisters used for spent fuel and stored on site (for example, at the ISFSI). The GTCC is assumed to be transferred to a designated DOE disposal facility once the spent fuel has been removed from the site. High-Level Radioactive Waste Management Congress passed the "Nuclear Waste Policy Act"l1 3l (NWPA) in 1982, assigning the federal government's long-standing responsibility for disposal of the spent nuclear fuel 13 Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982 and Amendments," DO E's Office of Civilian Radioactive JV[anageinent, 1982 EXHIBIT WAC-1 TLG Services, Inc. 000056

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant Document Lll-1'103-001, Rev. O Decommissioning Cost Analysis Page xiv of xxi and high level radioactive waste created by the commercial nuclear generating plants to the DOE. The NWPA provides that DOE will enter into contracts with utilities in which DOE promises to take the utilities' spent fuel and high-level radioactive waste and utilities will pay the cost of the disposition services for that material. The NWPA, along with the individual contracts with the utilities, specifies that the DOE was to begin accepting spent fuel by January 31, 1998. Today, the country is at an impasse on high-level waste disposal, even with the License Application for a geologic repository submitted by the DOE to the NRC in 2008. The current administration cut the budget for the repository program and promised to "conduct a comprehensive review of policies for managing the back end of the nuclear fuel cycle ... and make recommendations for a new plan.>'[141 Towards this goal, the administration appointed a Blue Ribbon Commission on America's Nuclear Future (Blue Ribbon Commission) to make recommendations for a new plan for nuclear waste disposal. The Blue Ribbon Commission's charter includes a requirement that it consider "[o]ptions for safe storage of used nuclear fuel while final disposition pathways are selected and deployed."[15J On January 26, 2012, the Blue Ribbon Commission issued its "Report to the Secretary of Energy containing a number of recommendations on nuclear waste disposal. Two of the recommendations that may impact decommissioning planning are: ci "[T]he United States [should] establish a program that leads to the timely development of one or more consolidated storage facilities."[16J

   "    "[T]he United States should undertake an integrated nuclear waste management program that leads to the timely development of one or more permanent deep geological facilities for the safe disposal of spent fuel and high-level nuclear waste."[17J In January 2013, the DOE issued the "Strategy for the Management and Disposal of Used Nuclear Fuel and High-Level Radioactive Waste," in response to the recommendations made by the Blue Ribbon Commission and as "a framework for 14  Charter of the Blue Ribbon Commission on America's Nuclear Future, "Objectives and Scope of Activities," http://w\*iw.brc.gov/index.php?q=oage/charter 15  Ibid.

16 "Blue Ribbon Commission on America's Nuclear Future, Report to the Secretary of Energy," http://w..vw.brc.gov/sites/default/files/documents/brc finalreport jan2012.pd£ p. 32, January 2012 17 Ibid., p.27 EXHIBIT WAC-1 TLG Services, Inc. 000057

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant Document Lll-1703-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Page xv of xxi moving toward a sustainable program to deploy an integrated system capable of transporting, storing, and disposing of used nuclear fuel..."[lBJ "With the appropriate authorizations from Congress, the Administration currently plans to implement a program over the next 10 years that:

Sites, designs and licenses, constructs and begins operations of a pilot interim storage facility by 2021 with an initial focus on accepting used nuclear fuel from shut-down reactor sites; o Advances toward the siting and licensing of a larger interim storage facility to be available by 2025 that will have sufficient capacity to provide flexibility in the waste management system *and allows for acceptance of enough used nuclear fuel to reduce expected government liabilities; and

   !>>  Makes demonstrable progress on the siting and characterization of repository sites to facilitate the availability of a geologic repository by 2048."[19]

The NRC's review of DOE's license application to construct a geologic repository at Yucca Mountain was suspended in 2011 when the Administration significantly reduced the budget for completing that work. However, the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit issued a writ of mandamus (in August 2013)[20l ordering NRC to comply with federal law and resume its review of DOE 1s Yucca Mountain repository license application to the extent allowed by previously appropriated funding for the review. That review is now complete with the publication of the five-volume safety evaluation report. A supplement to DOE's environmental impact statement and an adjudicatory hearing on the contentions filed by interested parties must be completed before a licensing decision can be made. Completion of the decommissioning process is dependent upon the DOE's ability to remove spent fuel from the site in a timely manner. DOE's repository program assumes that spent fuel allocations will be accepted for disposal from the nation's commercial nuclear plants, with certain exceptions defined in the DOE Contract, in the order (the "queue") in which it was discharged from the reactorJ2 1J Luminant's is "Strategy for the Management and Disposal of Used Nuclear Fuel and High-Level Radioactive Waste," U.S. DOE, January 11, 2013 19 Ibid., p.2 20 U.S. Court of Appeals for the District Of Columbia Circuit, In Re: Aiken County, et al, Aug. 2013,http://www.cadc.uscourts.gov/internet/opinions.nsf/BAEOCF34F762EBD985257BC6004DE Bl8/$file/11-1271-145134 7.pdf 21 In 2008, the DOE issued a report to Congress in which it concluded that it did not have authority, EXHIBIT WAC-1 TLG Services, Inc. . 000058

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant Document LJJ-1703-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Page xvi of xxi current spent fuel management plan for the Comanche Peak spent fuel is based in general upon: 1) a 2041 start date for DOE initiating transfer of Comanche Peak spent fuel to a federal facility (not necessarily a final repository), and 2) a spent fuel transfer 2080 completion date. Different DOE acceptance assumptions would result in different completion dates. The 2041 start date for DOE performance at Comanche Peak is based on assumed initial operation of the nation's first geologic repository in 15 years (2030) and Comanche Peak's place in the OFF spent fuel queue per the schedule provided in DOE/RW-0567, Acceptance Priority Ranking & Annual Capacity ReportJ22J DOE/RW-0567 also assumes an annual cap of 3000 metric tons of uranium (MTU) on its ability to accept spent nuclear fuel. Pursuant to that assumption, it is estimated that Luminant Power will be able to ship between 50 and 60 MTU per year from Comanche Peak to the geologic repository. This is an equivalent of 118 to 142 fuel assemblies per year, or approximately 4 dry cask containers (128 spent fuel assemblies) per year. At this rate, all spent fuel is estimated to be removed from the site by 2080. The NRC requires that licensees establish a program to manage and provide f1.mding for the caretaking of all irradiated fuel at the reactor site until title of the fuel is transferred to the DOE.f23l Interim storage of the fuel, until the DOE has completed the transfer, will be in the fuel building's spent fuel storage pool, as well as at an on-site ISFSI. under present law, to accept spent nuclear fuel for interim storage from decommissioned commercial nuclear power reactor sites. However, the Blue Ribbon Commission, in its final report, noted that:

   "[A]ccepting spent fuel according to the OFF [Oldest Fuel First] priority ranking instead of giving priority to shutdown reactor sites could greatly reduce the cost savings that could be achieved through consolidated storage if priority could be given to accepting spent fuel from shutdown reactor sites before accepting fuel from still-operating plants ..... The magnitude of the cost savings that could be achieved by giving priority to shutdown sites appears to be large enough (i.e., in the billions of dollars) to warrant DOE exercising its right under the Standard Contract to move this fuel first." For planning purposes only, this estimate does not assume that Comanche Peak, as a permanently shutdown station, will receive priority; the fuel removal schedule assumed in this estimate is based upon DOE acceptance of fuel according to the "Oldest Fuel First" priority ranking. The plant owner will seek the most expeditious means of removing fuel from the site when DOE commences performance.

22 DOE/RW-0567 was published in July 2004 by the Department of Energy Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management. While based on the proposed capacity of the Yucca Mountain repository, it is the most recent report issued by DOE providing spent fuel queue information. 23 U.S. Code of Federal Regulations, Title 10, Part 50, "Domestic Licensing of Production and Utilization Facilities," Subpart 54 (bb), "Conditions of Licenses" EXHIBIT WAC-1 TLG Services, Inc. 000059

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant Document Lll-1703-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Page xvii of xxi An ISFSI, operated under a Part 50 General License (in accordance with 10 CFR 72, Subpart Kl24l), has been constructed to support continued plant operations. The facility is assumed to be expanded to support future decommissioning operations. Once the spent fuel storage pools are emptied the fuel building can be either decontaminated and dismantled or prepared for long term storage. DOE has breached its obligations to remove fuel from reactor sites, and has also failed to provide Luminant with information about how it will ultimately perform. DOE officials have stated that DOE does not have an obligation to accept already-canistered fuel without an amendment to DOE's contracts with plant licensees to remove the fuel (the "Standard Contract"), but DOE has not explained what any such amendment would involve. Consequently, Luminant has no information or expectations on how DOE will remove fuel from the site in the future. In the absence of information about how DOE will perform, and for purposes of this analysis only, it is assumed that DOE will accept already-canistered fuel. If this assumption is incorrect, it is assumed that DOE will have liability for costs incurred to transfer the fuel to DOE-supplied containers. Lurninant's position is that the DOE has a contractual obligation to accept the spent fuel earlier than the projections set out above consistent with its contract commitments. No assumption made in this study should be interpreted to be inconsistent with this claim. However, at this time, including the cost of storing spent fuel in this study is the most reasonable approach because it insures the availability of sufficient decommissioning funds at the end of the station's life if, contrary to its contractual obligation, the DOE has not performed earlier. Site Restoration The efficient removal of the contaminated materials at the site may result in damage to many of the site structures. Blasting, coring, drilling, and the other decontamination activities can substantially damage power block structures, potentially weakening the footings and structural supports. It is unreasonable to anticipate that these structures would be repaired and preserved after the radiological contamination is removed. The cost to dismantle site structures with a work force already mobilized is more efficient and less costly than if the process is deferred. Consequently, this study assumes that non-essential site structures addressed by this analysis are removed to a nominal depth of three feet below the local grade level wherever possible. The site is then graded and stabilized. 24 U.S. Code of Federal Regulations, Title 10, Part 72, Subpart K, "General License for Storage of Spent Fuel at Power Reactor Sites" EXHIBIT WAC-1 TLG Services, Inc. 000060

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant Document Lll-1703-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Page xviii of xxi Summary The cost to decommission Comanche Peak assumes the removal of all contaminated and activated plant components and structural materials such that the owner may then have unrestricted use of the site with no further requirements for an operating license. Low-level radioactive waste, other than GTCC waste, is sent to a controlled disposal facility. Decommissioning, exclusive of the ISFSI, is accomplished within the 60-year period required by current NRC regulations. Spent fuel remains in storage at the site until such time that the transfer to a DOE facility is complete (assumed to be 2080 for purposes of this analysis). Once the transfer is complete, the ISFSI is decommissioned and the site released for unrestricted use. The decommissioning scenarios are described in Section 2. The assumptions are presented in Section 3, along with schedules of annual expenditures. The major cost contributors are identified in Section 6, with detailed activity costs, waste volumes, and associated manpower requirements delineated in Appendices C and D for the DECON and SAFSTOR alternatives. The major cost components are also identified in the cost summary provided at the end of this section. The cost elements in the estimates are assigned to one of three subcategories: NRC License Termination, Spent Fuel Management, and Site Restoration. The subcategory "NRC License Termination is used to accumulate costs that are consistent with "decommissioning" as defined by the NRC in its financial assurance regulations (i.e., 10 CFR Part 50.75). The cost reported for this subcategory is generally sufficient to terminate the operating licenses for the two reactors, recognizing that there may be some additional cost impact from spent fuel management. This subcategory also includes the costs of disposing of the retired steam gene1*ators and the reactor vessel closure head from Unit 1. The study assumes that the disposal of the components would occur after shutdown; however, the costs are identified separately because the disposal activities could be conducted at any time. The License Termination cost subcategory also includes costs to decommission the ISFSI (as required by 10 CFR §72.30). Section 3.5.l provides the basis for the ISFSI decommissioning cost. The "Spent Fuel Management" subcategory contains costs associated with the containerization and transfer of spent fuel from the wet storage pools to the ISFSI for interim storage, as well as the transfer of the spent fuel in storage at the ISFSI to the DOE. Costs are included for the expansion of the existing ISFSI to accommodate all of the spent fuel generated during plant operations, operation of the fuel building's storage pools until the spent fuel is transferred to the ISFSI, and the management of the ISFSI until such time that the transfer to DOE is complete. It does not include any EXHIBIT WAC-1 TLG Services, Inc. 000061

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant Doczunent Lll-1703-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Page xix of xxi spent fuel management expenses incurred prior to the cessation of plant operations, nor does it include any costs related to the final disposal of the spent fuel. "Site Restoration" is used to capture costs associated with the dismantling and demolition of buildings and facilities demonstrated to be free from contamination. This includes structures never exposed to radioactive materials, as well as those facilities that have been decontaminated to appropriate levels. Structures are removed to a depth of three feet and backfilled to conform to local grade. It should be noted that the costs assigned to these subcategories are allocations. Delegation of cost elements is for the purposes of comparison (e.g., with NRC financial guidelines) or to permit specific financial treatment (e.g., Asset Retirement Obligation determinations). In reality, there can be considerable interaction between the activities in the three subcategories. For example, an owner may decide to remove non-contaminated structures early in the project to improve access to highly contaminated facilities or plant components. In these instances, the non-contaminated removal costs could be reassigned from Site Restoration to an NRC License Termination support activity. However, in general, the allocations represent a reasonable accounting of those costs that can be expected to be incurred for the specific subcomponents of the total estimated program cost, if executed as described. As noted within this document, the estimates were developed and costs are presented in 2014 dollars. As such, the estimates do not reflect the escalation of costs (due to inflationary and market forces) over the remaining operating life of the station or during the decommissioning period. EXHIBIT WAC-1 TLG Services, Inc. 000062

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant Document Lll-1703-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Page xx of xxi DECON COST

SUMMARY

DECOMMISSIONING COST ELEMENTS (thousands of 2014 dollars) rl c;-~tEi~~nt ------_--_-_- ______,____u_rn_*t_1_ _,__u_rn_*t2 -T-To"tU I Decontamination Removal I i I I i 10t851 94,005 I I I I 16,445 i 153,870 I* I t 27,296 247,875

                                                                                                                                             -i l Packaging                                                               l i     29,636 l              29,746 ;                   59,382 l Transportation                                                          !      7,297 Ii               51902 ';                 13,199 Waste Di~osal                                                        !     67,705 !              71,116 '                 138,822 I

Off-site Waste Proces~mg [IJ - i

! Program Management [2l                                       -----+---2_4_,1,_8_20_.I_.__          27_2_,,_7_32.--;--~~___,  514,552 ,I j Security                                                       --~.--1_13~,_46_4___, __1_2_2~,0_4_4--;                     235,507 !

l Spent Fuel Pool Isolation ! 12,434 8,290 20, 724 ! r.::"" U'..E~nt Fuel Management (J.?irect Co~ts)_i~~!__ 140,134 1 111,326 251,460 -{J Linsurance and Regulatory Fees 26,732 22,649 49,380 1

 ! Ene~---                                                                       6,973                  7,327                     14,2991 j_C_h_a_r_a_c_t_en_._z_at_i,_o_n_a_n_d_L_ic_e_n_s_in_,,g,,_S_urv

__e_,,,y_s_ _ _ _2_0'""',_6_0_2_ _ _ 20.,809_ _ _4_1_,,_4_1_1-1j 1Property Taxe_s________ 4,972 4,684 9,656 l

  ; Miscellaneous Enuinment                                                      6,711                  7,059                     13,770 1
  +----                 ~*---~--~--*--~----~--
  )Decommissioning Staff Severance                                              16,041                 16,041                    32,082 LTotal [~---------                                 _______                  79_9..!.376 *-- 870,031.__:_k669,4.15                           1 80-;tEi;~t--*---**------*                                                   ucit"1~=-             urrit 2-=J *... -T-~t~l                *-1
!'-*License Termination                                                               ~-----i,                                                 !
  µexcluding r~!!red large components)                                     . 487,2~- 563,J7fL~_h051,0~~

J-1-~~- Compon_~nts (retiredl [ 1 5 _L_18, 76_~-~--- - ! ---~76~-*-j _§p_~nt Fuel_~~[a!_!~g:_ement__ ___________J __ _+/-_~_h_~L: ___ _g_!_2, 204 ~_?,591 _, _I I*---- Site Restoration

        *-------   *------------*--- ----- -----*----1-------*-..         ! 51,935 ! 94,060 : 145,995 j
                                                                                            *-r------ ------- ----- ---*-- ----- --*-:

t;;* ---*--- - - *- *-- --- -----*- ---- - - - - - -__ .. _________ L__ * - - - - -- ~-- - - - ----- -- : ..... *-- ---- - - __ _,

  *I..__*--*~-

Total l4l ....... -~ ..- i 799,376 i 870,039 ! 1,669,415 :

                                *.,,.,-,~--..~.*----.---*----....~----.....-........~ ....-4-. --*-~-_..-._..._..______ ,, ............oA.<Y-*

111 Not currently cost competitive with direct waste disposal [2J Includes engineering costs [3J Excludes program management costs (staffing) but includes costs for spent fuel loading/transfer/spent fuel pool O&M and EP fees [4J Columns may not add due to rounding [5J Includes retired steam generators and reactor closure head from Unit 1 and turbine rotors from Unit 1. Cost element includes both license termination and site restoration expenses. EXHIBIT WAC-1 TLG Services, Inc. 000063

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant Document Lll-1703-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Page xxi of xxi SAFSTOR eosT

SUMMARY

DECOMMISSIONING COST ELEMENTS (thousands of 2014 dollars) fi;'.--*----- l-Y-ost Element I I i I-Decontamination r------ i' 9,282 I 16,859 I I 26,141 Removal 97,775 i 156,633 ! 254,408 I

                                                                   -                               I Packaging                                                                                    !              25,134                        25,021 I                                        50,156   I TransEortation                                                                                  l 6,017 I,___ 4,367                                                          10,384   I Waste Disposal                                                                                              61,768 i                      63,645                                        125,413    I Off-site Waste Processing [lJ                                                                                              -!                                     -         I l                   - I l

Program Management [21

'. Security
~clF~l Pool Isolation 1
                                                                                              -7*-12:-434:

280,043 r 139,230

338,825 133, 701
8,290 618,868 272,931

                                                                                                                                                                                             *20,724**

l l_§_~nt ~ll:_el Management._(!)ire~~ Costs} [SJ _ _ _ 146,816 _~__101,967 ~=~8,784 _j ! Insurance and Regulatory Fees 61, 119 55, 789 ~116,908 j i Ene~ _ 14,278 14, 768 ~----- 29,046_;

) Characteriz~tion and Licensing Surveys                                                                        21,315                        21,611                                          42,926

j Pr pert.r_Taxes 5,993 5, 704 11,697 .

                  ~neous Equipment                                                                              16,593                        34,179                                          50,772~

i-J?ecommissioning Staff Severanc~ 16,041 16,041 32,082 1 L__ . *~~-~;--~~----~- LTo~l c~-~-----~--~g3,8~ 997,399 1,911,239

 ~-------*----*------*-*--r-----d--:---------------*----,

i_9ost E!ement_

Unit 1 ;_ Unit L __._*__Tot~--!

L.. - -t--------L- ~ j License. Ter~ation , l , ! t-fex~~~ retired lar_g_~co!?'.lponents} -----~- 60~§.~9 __t_ _:~7?, 9.§!_ __ 1,274, 53Q_ i r~~ge ComEonents (~etir~.d) c 1____ *--------l---t~J.Q!5___~ ------=**-*- ________!_~. 7qQ.~ 5

µ?pent         F~~l ly.I~~g:_em~_!!t___________ L _24~i~9~. ~-- _239..L92_Q___ __ _j_'[1,8'.!1_j
~-~i_t-~J1<:..~.2!'~~!on____ -*----------*------*-*------J ____ . §_QL~Q~ _~----* _J):?1~!~ .. *.. __ ~~3, 12_7_*-l

!---*---*----*--*- - ------*--**-----* -*-**-*--*****-*-------1--- *---*-* *-----l-*-*** *-*--*"* *-** ,__ .. -*---*-*-----1 l-..Total

   ..s....-....--....-.... -~a...-****------......--....-- . . . -~.--*--* . . . . ..,0 ............ _ . . ,...................... L......,~~*- .............,.,.. ....
              £41                                                                                ; 913,839

997,399 :_&., ...1,911,239

                                                                                                                                                                        .0 .......         ~ D~.--~

[1J Not currently cost competitive with direct waste disposal [21 Includes engineering costs [31 Excludes program management costs (staffing) but includes costs for spent fuel

loading/transfer/spent fuel pool O&M and EP fees

                !41 Columns may not add due to rounding 151 Includes retired steam generators and reactor closure head from Unit 1 and turbine rotors from Unit 1. Cost element includes both license termination and site restoration expenses.

EXHIBIT WAC-1 TLG Services, Inc. 000064

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant Document Lll-1703-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 1, Page 1of10

1. INTRODUCTION This report presents estimates of the costs to decommission the Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant, (Comanche Peak) for the selected decommissioning alternatives following the scheduled cessation of plant operations. The current estimates are designed to provide Luminant Generation Company LLC (Luminant) with sufficient information to assess their financial obligations, as they pertain to the decommissioning of Comanche Peak.

The analysis relies upon site-specific, technical information from an earlier evaluation prepared in 2010,[11* updated to reflect current assumptions pertaining to the disposition of the nuclear station and relevant industry experience in undertaking such projects. The costs are based on several key assumptions in areas of regulation, component characterization, high-level radioactive waste management, low-level radioactive waste disposal, performance uncertainties (contingency) and site restoration requirements. The analysis is not a detailed engineering evaluation, but rather estimates prepared in advance of the detailed engineering required to carry out the decommissioning of the nuclear station. It may also not reflect the actual plan to decommission Comanche Peak; the plan may differ from the assumptions made in this analysis based on facts that exist at the time of decommissioning. The plant inventory, the basis for the decontamination and dismantling requirements and cost, and the decommiss~oning waste streams, were reviewed for this analysis. The only substantive changes made to the plant inventory from the 2010 analysis (that would impact decommissioning) were the addition of the Flex storage building and RP building. 1.1 OBJECTIVES OF STUDY The objectives of this analysis are to present comprehensive estimates of the costs to decommission Comanche Peak, to provide a sequence or schedule for the associated-activities, and to identify the waste streams expected from the decontamination and dismantling activities. For the purposes of this study, the shutdown dates for the two units are assumed to be on February 8, 2030 for Unit 1 and on February 2, 2033 for Unit 2, based upon the expiration of the current operating licenses.

References provided in Section 7 of the document EXHIBIT WAC-1 TLG Services, Inc. 000065

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant Document Lll-1703-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 1, Page 2 of 10 1.2 SITE DESCRIPTION Comanche Peak is located in Somervell County in North Central Texas, approximately 65 miles southwest of Dallas-Fort Worth area. The nearest communities are Glen Rose and Granbury, about 4 and 10 miles, respectively, from the site. The station is comprised of two nuclear units that are essentially identical except for certain auxiliary systems. The nuclear steam supply systems (NSSS) consist of a pressurized water reactor and a four-loop reactor coolant system. The two units are authorized to operate at 3,612 megawatts (thermal), following approval of a stretch power uprate application in 2008, with a corresponding net electrical rating of 1,205 and 1, 195 megawatts (electric), for Units 1 and 2, respectively, with the reactor at rated power. Each of the four loops of the reactor coolant system contains a vertical U-tube type steam generator and a single speed centrifugal reactor coolant pump. In addition, the system includes an electrically heated pressurizer, a pressurizer relief tank, and interconnected piping. The reactor coolant system is housed within a containment vessel, a free-standing cylindrical steel structure enclosed by a separate reinforced concrete reactor building. The reactor building is designed to provide biological shielding as well as missile protection for the steel containment vessel. A five-foot annulus space is provided between the containment vessel and reactor building for control of containment external temperatures and pressures and also provides a controlled air volume for filtering and access to penetrations for testing and inspection. The containment shell is anchored to the reactor building foundation with a steel liner plate encased in concrete forming the base of the containment. Heat produced in the reactor is converted to electrical energy by the steam and power conversion system. A turbine-generator system converts the thermal energy of steam produced in the steam generators into mechanical shaft power and then into electrical energy. The turbine generators consist of a tandem (single shaft) arrangement of a double-flow high-pressure turbine and two identical double-flow, low-pressure turbines driving a direct-coupled generator at 1800 rpm. The turbines are operated in a closed feedwater cycle, which condenses the steam. The heated feedwater is then returned to the steam generators. The condenser circulating water system removes heat rejected in the main condensers. The heat is dissipated to Squaw Creek Reservoir. EXHIBIT WAC-1 TLG Services, Inc. 000066

Comanche Peah Nuclear Power Plant Document Lll-1703-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 1, Page 3 of 10 1.3 REGULATORY GUIDANCE The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) provided initial decommissioning requirements in its rule "General Requirements for Decommissioning Nuclear Facilities," issued in June 1988J2l This rule set forth financial criteria for decommissioning licensed nuclear power facilities. The regulation addressed decommissioning planning needs, timing, funding methods, and environmental review requirements. The intent of the rule was to ensure that decommissioning would be accomplished in a safe and timely manner and that adequate funds would be available for this purpose. Subsequent to the rule, the NRC issued Regulatory Guide 1.159, "Assuring the Availability of Funds for Decommissioning Nuclear Reactors,[3J which provided additional guidance to the licensees of nuclear facilities on the financial methods acceptable to the NRC staff for complying with the requirements of the rule. The regulatory guide addressed the funding requirements and provided guidance on the content and form of the financial assurance mechanisms indicated in the rule. The rule defined three decommissioning alternatives as being acceptable to the NRC: DECON, SAFSTOR, and ENTOMB. The DECON alternative assumes that any contaminated or activated portion of the plant's systems, structures and facilities are removed or decontaminated to levels that permit the site to be released for unrestricted use shortly after the cessation of plant operations. The rule also placed limits on the time allowed to complete the decommissioning process. For all alternatives, the process is restricted in overall duration to 60 years, unless it can be shown that a longer duration is necessary to protect public health and safety. At the conclusion of a 60-year dormancy period (or longer if the NRC approves such a case), the site would still require significant remediation to meet the unrestricted release limits for license termination. The ENTOMB alternative has not been viewed as a viable option for power reactors due to the significant time required to isolate the long-lived radionuclides for decay to permissible levels. However, with rulemaking permitting the controlled release of a site,[41 the NRC did re"evaluate the alternative. The resulting feasibility study, based upon an assessment by Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, concluded that the method did have conditional merit for some, if not most reactors. The staff also found that additional rulemaking would be needed before this option could be treated as a generic alternative. The NRC had considered rulemaking to alter the 60-year time for completing decommissioning and to clarify the use of engineered barriers for reactor EXHIBIT WAC-1 TLG Services, Inc. 000067

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant Document Lll-1703-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 1, Page 4 of 10 entombments,l5J However, the NRC's staff has subsequently recommended that rulemaking be deferred, based upon several factors (e.g., no licensee has committed to pursuing the entombment option, the unresolved issues associated with the disposition of greater-than-Class C material (GTCC), and the NRC's current priorities), at least until after the additional research studies are complete. The NRC concurred with the staffs recommendation. In 1996, the NRC published revisions to the general requirements for decommissioning nuclear power plants.l6l When the decommissioning regulations were adopted in 1988, it was assumed that the majority of licensees would decommission at the end of the facility's operating licensed life. Since that time, several licensees permanently and prematurely ceased operations. Exemptions from certain operating requirements were required once the reactor was defueled to facilitate the decommissioning. Each case was handled individually, without clearly defined generic requirements. The NRC amended the decommissioning regulations in 1996 to clarify ambiguities and codify procedures and terminology as a means of enhancing efficiency and uniformity in the decommissioning process. The amendments allow for greater public participation and better define the transition process from operations to decommissioning. Under the revised regulations, licensees will submit written certification to the NRC within 30 days after the decision to cease operations. Certification will also be required once the fuel is permanently removed from the reactor vessel. Submittal of these notices, along with related changes to Technical Specifications, entitle the licensee to a fee reduction and eliminate the obligation to follow certain requirements needed only during operation of the reactor. Before or within two years following cessation of operations, the licensee must submit a Post-Shutdown Decommissioning Activities Report (PSDAR) to the NRC. The PSDAR describes the planned decommissioning activities, the associated sequence and schedule, and an estimate of expected costs. Prior to completing decommissioning, the licensee is required to submit an application to the NRC to terminate the license, which includes a license termination plan (LTP). 1.3.1 High-Level Radioactive Waste Management Congress passed the "Nuclear Waste Policy Act"l7J (NWPA) in 1982, assigning the federal government's long-standing responsibility for disposal of the spent nuclear fuel and high level radioactive waste created by the commercial nuclear generating plants to the DOE. The NWPA provides that DOE will enter into contracts with utilities in which DOE promises to take the utilities' spent fuel and high-level radioactive waste EXHIBIT WAC-1 TLG Services, Inc. 000068

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant DocumentLll-1703-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 1, Page 5 of 10 and utilities will pay the cost of the disposition services for that material. The NWPA, along with the individual contracts with the utilities, specifies that the DOE was to begin accepting spent fuel by January 31, 1998. Today, the country is at an impasse on high-level waste disposal, even with the License Application for a geologic repository submitted by the DOE to the NRC in 2008. The current administration cut the budget for the repository program and promised to "conduct a comprehensive review of policies for managing the back end of the nuclear fuel cycle ... and make recommendations for a new plan." Towards this goal, the administration appointed a Blue Ribbon Commission on America's Nuclear Future (Blue Ribbon Commission) to make recommendations for a new plan for nuclear waste disposal. The Blue Ribbon Commission's charter includes a requirement that it consider "[o]ptions for safe storage of used nuclear fuel while final disposition pathways are selected and deployed."[SJ On January 26, 2012, the Blue Ribbon Commission issued its "Report to the Secretary of Energy" containing a number of recommendations on nuclear waste disposal. Two of the recommendations that may impact decommissioning planning are: o "[T]he United States [should] establish a program that leads to the timely development of one or more consolidated storage facilities." o "[T]he United States should undertake an integrated nuclear waste management program that leads to the timely development of one or more permanent deep geological facilities for the safe disposal of spent fuel and high-level nuclear waste."[SJ In January 2013, the DOE issued the "Strategy for the Management and Disposal of Used Nuclear Fuel and High-Level Radioactive Waste," in response to the recommendations made by the Blue Ribbon Commission and as "a framework for moving toward a sustainable program to deploy an integrated system capable of transporting, storing, and disposing of used nuclear fuel.. ."[10]

          "With the appropriate authorizations from Congress, the Administration currently plans to implement a program over the next 10 years that:

EXHIBIT WAC-1 TLG Services, Inc. 000069

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant Document Lll-1703-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 1, Page 6 of 10 G Sites, designs and licenses, constructs and begins operations of a pilot interim storage facility by 2021 with an initial focus on accepting used nuclear fuel from shut-down reactor sites;

             " Advances toward the siting and licensing of a larger interim storage facility to be available by 2025 that will have sufficient capacity to provide flexibility in the waste management system and allows for acceptance of enough used nuclear fuel to reduce expected government liabilities; and
             " Makes demonstrable progress on the siting and characterization of repository sites to facilitate the availability of a geologic repository by 2048."

The NRC's review of DOE's license application to construct a geologic repository at Yucca Mountain was suspended in 2011 when the Administration significantly reduced the budget for completing that work. However, the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit issued a writ of mandamus (in August 2013) ordering NRC to comply with federal law and resume its review of DOE's Yucca Mountain repository license application to the extent allowed by previously appropriated funding for the review. That review is now complete with the publication of the five-volume safety evaluation report. A supplement to DOE's environmental impact statement and an adjudicatory hearing on the contentions filed by interested parties must be completed before a licensing decision can be made. Completion of the decommissioning process is dependent upon the DOE's ability to remove spent fuel from the site in a timely manner. DOE's repository program assumes that spent fuel allocations will be accepted for disposal from the nation's commercial nuclear plants, with certain exceptions defined in the DOE Contract, in the order (the "queue") in which it was discharged from the reactor. Luminant's current spent fuel management plan for the Comanche Peak spent fuel is based in general upon: 1) a 2041 start date for DOE initiating transfer of Comanche Peak spent fuel to a federal facility (not necessarily a final repository), and 2) a spent fuel transfer 2080 completion date. Different DOE acceptance assumptions would result in different completion dates. The 2041 start date for DOE performance at Comanche Peak is based on assumed initial operation of the nation's first geologic repository in 15 years (2030) and Comanche Peak's place in the OFF spent fuel queue per the schedule provided in DOE/RW-0567, Acceptance Priority Ranking & Annual Capacity Report. DOE/RW-0567 also assumes an EXHIBIT WAC-1 TLG Services, Inc. 000070

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant Document Lll-1703-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 1, Page 7 of 10 annual cap of 3000 metric tons of uranium (MTU) on its ability to accept spent nuclear fuel. Pursuant to that assumption, it is estimated that Luminant Power will be able to ship between 50 and 60 MTU per year from Comanche Peak to the geologic repository. This is an equivalent of 118 to 142 fuel assemblies per year, or approximately 4 dry cask containers (128 spent fuel assemblies) per year. At this rate, all spent fuel is estimated to be removed from the site by 2080. The NRC requires that licensees establish a program to manage and provide funding for the caretaking of all irradiated fuel at the reactor site until title of the fuel is transferred to the DOE.f11l Interim storage of the fuel, until the DOE has completed the transfer, will be in the fuel building's spent fuel storage pool, as well as at an on-site ISFSI. An ISFSI, operated under a Part 50 General License (in accordance with 10 CFR 72, Subpart Kfl 2l), has been constructed to support continued plant operations. The facility is assumed to be expanded to support future decommissioning operations. Once the spent fuel storage pools are emptied the fuel building can be either decontaminated and dismantled or prepai*ed for long term storage. DOE has breached its obligations to remove fuel from reactor sites, and has also failed to provide Luminant with information about how it will ultimately perform. DOE officials have stated that DOE does not have an obligation to accept already-canistered fuel without an amendment to DOE's contracts with plant licensees to remove the fuel (the "Standard Contract"), but DOE has not explained what any such amendment would involve. Consequently, Luminant has no information or expectations on how DOE will remove fuel from the site in the future. In the absence of information about how DOE will perform, and for purposes of this analysis only, it is assumed that DOE will accept already-canistered fuel. If this assumption is incorrect, it is assumed that DOE will have liability for costs incurred to transfer the fuel to DOE-supplied containers. Luminant's position is that the DOE has a contractual obligation to accept the spent fuel earlier than the projections set out above consistent with its contract commitments. No assumption made in this study should be interpreted to be inconsistent with this claim. However, at this time, including the cost of storing spent fuel in this study is the most reasonable approach because it insures the availability of sufficient decommissioning funds at the end of the station's life if, contrary to its contractual obligation, the DOE has not performed earlier. EXHIBIT WAC-1 TLG Services, Inc. 000071

Comanche Peah Nuclear Power Plant Document Lll-1703-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 1, Page 8 of JO 1.3.2 Low-Level Radioactive Waste Management The contaminated and activated material generated in the decontamination and dismantling of a commercial nuclear reactor is classified as low-level (radioactive) waste, although not all of the material is suitable for "shallow-land" disposal. With the passage of the "Low-Level Radioactive Waste Policy Act" in 1980,[13] and its Amendments of 1985,[141 the states became ultimately responsible for the disposition of low-level radioactive waste generated within their own borders. Vermont, along with Maine, joined with Texas to form a compact for the disposal of low-level radioactive waste generated by the three states, with Texas as the host state. The Maine Legislature subsequently voted to exit the Texas compact (effective April 5, 2002) following the shutdown and decommissioning of its only commercial nuclear unit (Maine Yankee). Vermont remains a member of the compact. The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ), the environmental agency for the state, is responsible for the licensing of any low-level radioactive waste disposal facility in Texas. In 2004, the agency received an application from Waste Control Specialists (WCS) for authorization to construct and operate a low-level radioactive disposal site in Andrews County. The agency granted WCS a disposal license in 2009 and approval to commence construction in early 2011. Construction of the disposal facility is now complete and is now receiving waste from compact members (and limited quantities from non-compact members). For the purposes of this analysis, low-level radioactive waste generated in the decontamination and dismantling of the plant and remediation of the Comanche Peak site, and designated for direct disposal, is assumed to be shipped to the Texas Compact site. Waste disposal costs are based upon representative rates for the facility consistent with the waste classification. The dismantling of the components residing closest to the reactor core generates radioactive waste that may be considered unsuitable for shallow-land disposal (i.e., low-level radioactive waste with concentrations of radionuclides that exceed the limits established by the NRC for Class C radioactive waste (GTCC)). The Low-Level Radioactive Waste Policy Amendments Act of 1985 assigns the federnl government the respop.sibility for the disposal of this material. The Act also states that the beneficiaries of the activities resulting in the generation of such radioactive waste bear all reasonable costs of disposing of such waste. EXHIBIT WAC-1 TLG Services, Inc. 000072 L__

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant Document Lll-1703-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 1, Page 9 of 10 However, to date, the federal government has not identified a cost for disposing of GTCC or a schedule for acceptance. For purposes of this analysis only, the GTCC radioactive waste is assumed to be packaged and disposed of in a similar manner as high-level waste and at a cost equivalent to that envisioned for the spent fuel. The GTCC is packaged in the same canisters used for spent fuel and stored on site (for example, at the ISFSI). The GTCC is assumed to. be transferred to a designated DOE disposal facility once the spent fuel has been removed from the site. 1.3.3. Radiological Criteria for License Termination In 1997, the NRC published Subpart E, "Radiological Criteria for License Termination,"[15] amending 10 CFR Part 20., This subpart provides radiological criteria for releasing a facility for unrestricted use. The regulation states that the site can be released for unrestricted use if radioactivity levels are such that the average member of a critical group would not receive a Total Effective Dose Equivalent (TEDE) in excess of 25 millirem per year, and provided that residual radioactivity has been reduced to levels that are As Low As Reasonably Achievable (ALARA). The decommissioning estimates assume that the Comanche Peak site will be remediated to a residual level consistent with the NRC-prescribed level. It should be noted that the NRC and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) differ on the amount of residual radioactivity considered acceptable in site remediation. The EPA has two limits that apply to radioactive materials. An EPA limit of 15 millirem per year is derived from criteria established by the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA or Superfund)J 16l An additional and separate limit of 4 millirem per year, as defined in 40 CFR §141.16, is applied to drinking waterJ 17l On October 9, 2002, the NRC signed an agreement with the EPA on the radiological decommissioning and decontamination of NRC-licensed sites. The Memorandum of Understanding (M0U)[l8J provides that EPA will defer exercise of authority under CERCLA for the majority of facilities decommissioned under NRC authority. The MOU also includes provisions for NRC and EPA consultation for certain sites when, at the time of license termination, (1) groundwater contamination exceeds EPA-permitted levels; (2) NRC contemplates restricted release of the site; and/or (3) residual radioactive soil concentrations exceed levels defined in the MOU. EXHIBIT WAC-1 TLG Services, Inc. 000073

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant Document Lll-1703-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 1, Page 10 of 10 The MOU does not impose any new requirements on NRC licensees and should reduce the involvement of the EPA with NRC licensees who are decommissioning. Most sites are expected to meet the NRC criteria for unrestricted use, and the NRC believes that only a few sites will have groundwater or soil contamination in excess of the levels specified in the MOU that trigger consultation with the EPA. However, if there are other hazardous materials on the site, the EPA may be involved in the cleanup. As such, the possibility of dual regulation remains for certain licensees. The present study does not include any costs for this occurrence. EXHIBIT WAC-1 TLG Services, Inc. 000074

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant Document Lll-1703-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 2, Page 1of13

2. DECOMMISSIONING ALTERNATIVES Detailed cost estimates were developed to decommission Comanche Peak based upon the approved decommissioning alternatives: DECON and SAFSTOR.

Although the alternatives differ with respect to technique, process, cost, and schedule, they attain the same result: the ultimate release of the site for unrestricted use. Two decommissioning scenarios were evaluated for Comanche Peak. The scenarios selected are representative of alternatives available to the owner and are defined as follows:

1. The first scenario assumes that the units would be promptly decommissioned (DECON alternative) upon the expiration of the current operating licenses, i.e.,

2030 and 2033 for Units 1 and 2, respectively. Spent fuel in the wet storage pools would be relocated to the ISFSI for interim storage until such time that the DOE can complete the transfer, presumed to be in the year 2080.

2. In the second scenario, the nuclear units are placed into safe-storage (SAFSTOR alternative) at the end of their current operating licenses. Spent fuel in wet storage-pools at that time would be relocated to the ISFSI for interim storage so as to minimize caretaking costs. The fuel would be transferred to the DOE (consistent with the assumptions in the DECON scenario) until the process is presumed to be complete in the year 2080. Decommissioning is deferred to the maximum extent (approximately 50 years) such that the property is released for unrestricted use within the generally required 60-year period (i.e., 2090 based upon the current Unit 1 shutdown date).

The following sections describe the basic activities associated with each alternative. Although detailed procedures for each activity identified are not provided, and the actual sequence of work may vary, the activity descriptions provide a basis not only for estimating but also for the expected scope of work, i.e., engineering and planning at the time of decommissioning. The conceptual approach that the NRC has described in its regulations divides decommissioning into three phases. The initial phase commences with the effective date of permanent cessation of operations and involves the transition of both plant and licensee from reactor operations (i.e., power production) to facility de-activation and closure. During the first phase, notification is to be provided to the NRC certifying the permanent cessation of operations and the removal of fuel from the reactor vessel. The licensee is then prohibited from reactor operation. EXHIBIT WAC-1 TLG Services, Inc. 000075

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant Document Lll-1703-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 2, Page 2 of 13 The second phase encompasses activities during the storage period or during major decommissioning activities, or a combination of the two. The third phase pertains to the activities involved in license termination. The decommissioning estimates developed for Comanche Peak are also divided into phases or periods; however, demarcation of the phases is based upon major milestones within the project or significant changes in the projected expenditures. 2.1 DECON The DECON alternative, as defined by the NRC, is "the alternative in which the equipment, structures, and portions of a facility and site containing radioactive contaminants are removed or decontaminated to a level that permits the property to be released for unrestricted use shortly after cessation of operations." This study does not address the cost to dispose of the spent fuel residing at the site; such costs are funded through a surcharge on electrical generation. However, the study does estimate the costs incurred with the interim on-site storage of the fuel pending shipment by the DOE to an off-site disposal facility. 2.1.l Period 1 - Preparations In anticipation of the cessation of plant operations, detailed preparations are undertaken to provide a smooth transition from plant operations to site decommissioning. Through implementation of a staffing transition plan, the organization required to manage the intended decommissioning activities is assembled from available plant staff and outside resources. Preparations include the planning for permanent defueling of the reactor, revision of technical specifications applicable to the operating conditions and requirements, a characterization of the facility and major components, and the development of the PSDAR. Engineering and Planning The PSDAR provides a description of the licensee's planned decommissioning activities, a timetable, and the associated financial requirements of the intended decommissioning program. Upon receipt of the PSDAR, the NRC will make the document available to the public for comment in a local hearing to be held in the vicinity of the reactor site. Ninety days following submittal and NRC receipt of the PSDAR, the licensee may begin to perform major decommissioning activities under a modified 10 CFR §50.59 procedure, i.e., without specific NRC approval. Major activities are defined as any activity that results in permanent EXHIBIT WAC-1 TLG Services, Inc. 000076

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant Document Lll-1703-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 2, Page 3 of 13 removal of major radioactive components, permanently modifies the structure of the containment, or results in dismantling components (for shipment) containing GTCC, as defined by 10 CFR §61. Major components are further defined as comprising the reactor vessel and internals, large bore reactor coolant system piping, steam generators, and other large components that are radioactive. The NRC includes the following additional criteria for use of the §50.59 process in decommissioning. The proposed activity must not: o foreclose release of the site for possible unrestricted use,

             " significantly increase decommissioning costs, o   cause any significant environmental impact, or
             " violate the terms of the licensee's existing license.

Existing operational technical specifications are reviewed and modified to reflect plant conditions and the safety concerns associated with permanent cessation of operations. The environmental impact associated with the planned decommissioning activities is also considered. Typically, a licensee will not be allowed to proceed if the consequences of a particular decommissioning activity are greater than that bounded by previously evaluated environmental assessments or impact statements. In this instance, the licensee would have to submit a license amendment for the specific activity and update the environmental report. The decommissioning program outlined in the PSDAR will be designed to accomplish the i*equired tasks within the ALARA guidelines (as defined in 10 CFR §20) for protection of personnel from exposure to radiation hazards. It will also address the continued protection of the health and safety of the public and the environment during the dismantling activity. Consequently, with the development of the PSDAR, activity specifications, cost-benefit and safety analyses, and work packages and procedures, would be assembled to support the proposed decontamination and dismantling activities. Site Preparations Following final plant shutdown, and in preparation for actual decommissioning activities, the following activities are initiated: e Characterization of the site and surrounding environs. This includes radiation surveys of work areas, major components (including the EXHIBIT WAC-1 TLG Services, Inc. 000077

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant Document Lll-1703-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 2, Page 4 of 13 reactor vessel and its internals), internal piping, and primary shield cores. c Isolation of the spent fuel storage pools and fuel handling systems, such that decommissioning operations can commence on the balance of the plant. The pools will remain operational for approximately five and one half years following the cessation of Unit 2 operations before the inventory resident in the core at shutdown can be transferred to the ISFSI for interim storage. o Specification of transport and disposal requirements for activated materials and/or hazardous materials, including shielding and waste stabilization. e Development of procedures for occupational exposure control, control and release of liquid and gaseous effluent, processing of radwaste (including dry-active waste, resins, filter media, metallic and non-metallic components generated in decommissioning), site security and emergency programs, and industrial safety. 2.1.2 Period 2 - Decommissioning Operations This period includes the physical decommissioning activities associated with the removal and disposal of contaminated and activated components and structures, including the successful termination of the 10 CFR §50 operating license. Significant decommissioning activities in this phase include:

          "    Construction of temporary facilities and/or modification of existing facilities to support dismantling activities. This may include a centralized processing area to facilitate equipment removal and component preparations for off-site disposal.
          .,   Reconfiguration and modification of site structures and facilities as needed to support decommissioning operations. This may include the upgrading of roads (on- and off-site) to facilitate hauling and transport. Modifications may be required to the containment structure to facilitate access of large/heavy equipment. Modifications may also be required to the refueling area of the building to support the segmentation of the reactor vessel internals and component extraction.

e Design and fabrication of temporary and permanent shielding to support removal and transportation activities, construction of contamination control envelopes, and the procurement of specialty tooling. EXHIBIT WAC-1 TLG Services, Inc. 000078

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant Document Lll-1703-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 2, Page 5 of 13

          .. Procurement (lease or purchase) of shipping canisters, cask liners, and industrial packages.

11 Decontamination of components and piping systems as required to control (minimize) worker exposure. c Removal of piping and components no longer essential to support decommissioning operations. 4il Removal of control rod drive housings and the head service structure from reactor vessel head.

          ~    Removal and segmentation of the upper internals assemblies.

Segmentation will maximize the loading of the shielded transport casks, i.e., by weight and activity. The operations are conducted under water using remotely operated tooling and contamination controls. 0 Disassembly and segmentation of the remaining reactor internals, including the core former and lower core support assembly. Some material is expected to exceed Class C disposal requirements. As such, the segments will be packaged in modified fuel storage canisters for geologic disposal.

          &    Segmentation of the reactor vessel. A shielded platform is installed for segmentation as cutting operations are performed in-air using remotely operated equipment within a contamination control envelope. The water level is maintained just below the cut to minimize the working area dose rates. Segments are transferred in-air to -containers that are stored under water, for example, in an isolated area of the refueling canal.

c Removal of the activated portions of the concrete biological shield and accessible contaminated concrete surfaces. If dictated by the steam generator and pressurizer removal scenarios, those portions of the associated cubicles necessary for access and component extraction are removed. c Removal of the steam generators and pressurizer for material recovery and controlled disposal. The generators will be moved to an on-site processing center and the steam domes removed for transportation. The steam domes, internal components, the lower shell and tube bundle will be packaged for direct disposal. These components can serve as their own burial containers provided that all penetrations are properly sealed and the internal contaminants are stabilized, e.g., with grout. Steel shielding will be added, as necessary, to those external areas of the package to meet transportation limits and regulations. EXHIBIT WAC-1 TLG Services, Inc. 000079

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant Document Lll-1703-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 2, Page 6 of 13 At least two years prior to the anticipated date of license termination, a LTP is required. Submitted as a supplement to the Final Safety Analysis Report (FSAR) or its equivalent, the plan must include: a site characterization, description of the remaining dismantling activities, plans for site remediation, procedures for the final radiation survey, designation of the end use of the site, an updated cost estimate to complete the decommissioning, and any associated environmental concerns. The NRC will notice the receipt of the plan, make the plan available for public comment, and schedule a local hearing. LTP approval will be subject to any conditions and limitations as deemed appropriate by the NRC. The licensee may then commence with the final remediation of site facilities and services, including: 9 Removal of remaining plant systems and associated components as they become nonessential to the decommissioning program or worker health and safety (e.g., waste collection and treatment systems, electrical power and ventilation systems). e Removal of the steel liners from refueling canal, disposing of the activated and contaminated sections as radioactive waste. Removal of any activated/ contaminated concrete.

           ,,   Surveys of the decontaminated areas of the containment structure.
           "    Remediation and removal of the contaminated equipment and material from the auxiliary and fuel buildings and any other contaminated facility. Radiation and contamination controls will be utilized until residual levels indicate that the structures and equipment can be released for unrestricted access and conventional demolition. This activity may necessitate the dismantling and disposition of most of the systems and components (both clean and contaminated) located within these buildings. This activity facilitates surface decontamination and subsequent verification surveys required prior to obtaining release for demolition .
            .,  Routing of material removed in the decontamination and dismantling to a central processing area. Material certified to be free of contamination is released for unrestricted disposition, e.g., as scrap, recycle, or general disposal. Contaminated material is characterized and packaged for controlled disposal at the low-level radioactive waste disposal facility.

Incorporated.into the LTP is the Final Survey Plan. This plan identifies the radiological surveys to be performed once the decontamination activities are completed and is developed using the guidance provided in EXHIBIT WAC-1 TLG Services, Inc. 000080 j

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant Document Lll-1703-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 2, Page 7 of 13 the "Multi-Agency Radiation Survey and Site Investigation Manual (MARSSIM)."l19J This document incorporates the statistical approaches to survey design and data interpretation used by the EPA. It also identifies commercially available instrumentation and procedures for conducting radiological surveys. Use of this guidance ensures that the surveys are conducted in a manner that provides a high degree of confidence that applicable NRC criteria are satisfied. Once the survey is complete, the results are provided to the NRC in a format that can be verified. The NRC then reviews and evaluates the information, performs an independent confirmation of radiological site conditions, and makes a determination on the requested change to the operating licenses (that would release the property, exclusive of the ISFSI, for unrestricted use). The NRC will amend the operating licenses if it determines that site remediation has been performed in accordance with the LTP, and that the terminal radiation survey and associated documentation demonstrate that the property (exclusive of the ISFSI) is suitable for release. 2.1.3 Period 3 - Site Restoration Following completion of decommissioning operations, site restoration activities will begin. Efficient removal of the contaminated materials and verification that residual radionuclide concentrations are below the NRC limits will result in substantial damage to many of the structures. Although performed in a controlled, safe manner, blasting, coring, drilling, scarification (surface removal), and the other decontamination activities will substantially degrade power block structures including the reactor, auxiliary, radwaste warehouse and fuel buildings. Under certain circumstances, verifying that subsurface radionuclide concentrations meet NRC site release requirements will require removal of grade slabs and lower floors, potentially weakening footings and structural supports. This removal activity will be necessary for those facilities and plant areas where historical records, when available, indicate the potential for radionuclides having been present in the soil, where system failures have been recorded, or where it is required to confirm that subsurface process and drain lines were not breached over the operating life of the station. It is not currently anticipated that these structures would be repaired and preserved after the radiological contamination is removed. The cost to dismantle site structures with a work force already mobilized on site is more efficient than if the process is deferred. EXHIBIT WAC-1 TLG Services, Inc. 000081

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant Document Lll-1703-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 2, Page 8 of 13 This cost study presumes that non-essential structures and site facilities are dismantled as a continuation of the decommissioning activity. Foundations and exterior walls are removed to a nominal depth of three feet below grade. The three-foot depth allows for the placement of gravel for drainage, as well as topsoil, so that vegetation can be established for erosion control. Site areas affected by the dismantling activities are restored and the plant area graded as required to prevent ponding and inhibit the refloating of subsurface materials. Non-contaminated concrete rubble produced by demolition activities is processed to remove reinforcing steel and miscellaneous embedments. The processed material is then used on site to backfill foundation voids. Excess non-contaminated materials are trucked to an off-site area for disposal as construction debris. 2.1.4 ISFSI Operations and Decommissioning For purposes only of this estimate, transfer of spent fuel to a DOE repository or interim facility is assumed to be exclusively from the ISFSI. If this assumption is incorrect, it is assumed that DOE will have liability for costs incurred to transfer the fuel to DOE-supplied containers and to dispose of existing containers. The ISFSI will continue to operate under a general license (10 CFR Part 50) following the amendment of the operating licenses to release the adjacent (power block) property. Assuming the DOE starts accepting fuel from Comanche Peak in 2041, transfer of spent fuel from the ISFSI is anticipated to continue through the year 2080. This assumption is made for purposes of this estimate, although it is acknowledged that the plant owner will seek the most expeditious means of removing fuel from the site when DOE commences performance. At the conclusion of the spent fuel transfer process, the ISFSI will be decommissioned. The NRC will terminate the Part 50 license when it determines that the remediation of the ISFSI has been performed in accordance with an ISFSI license termination plan and that the final radiation survey and associated documentation demonstrate that the facility is suitable for release. Once the requirements are satisfied, the NRC can terminate the license for the ISFSI. Spent fuel is stored on the ISFSI in multi-purpose canisters, with a concrete overpack. For purposes of this cost analysis, it is assumed that EXHIBIT WAC-1 TLG Services, Inc. 000082

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant Document Lll-1703-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 2, Page 9 of 13 once the inner canisters containing the spent fuel assemblies have been removed, any required decontamination performed on the storage overpack (some minor activation is assumed), and the license for the facility terminated, the concrete overpacks can be dismantled using conventional techniques for the demolition of reinforced concrete. The concrete storage pad is then removed and the area regraded. 2.2 SAFSTOR The NRC defines SAFSTOR as "the alternative in which the nuclear facility is placed and maintained in a condition that allows the nuclear facility to be safely stored and subsequently decontaminated (deferred decontamination) to levels that permit release for unrestricted use." The facility is left intact (during the dormancy period), with structures maintained in a sound condition. Systems that are not required to support the spent fuel pools or site surveillance and security are drained, de-energized, and secured. Minimal cleaning/removal of loose contamination and/or fixation and sealing of remaining contamination is performed. Access to contaminated areas is secured to provide controlled access for inspection and maintenance. The engineering and planning requirements are similar to those for the DECON alternative, although they are limited in scope with no large scale dismantling activities anticipated. Site preparations are also similar to those for the DECON alternative. However, with the exception of the required radiation surveys and site characterizations, the mobilization and preparation of site facilities is less extensive. 2.2.1 Period 1 - Preparations Preparations for long-term storage include the planning for permanent defueling of the reactor, revision of technical specifications appropriate to the operating conditions and requirements, a characterization of the facility and major components, and the development of the PSDAR. The process of placing the station in safe-storage includes, but is not limited to, the following activities: *

           "'  Isolating of the spent fuel storage services and fuel handling systems so that safe-storage operations may commence on the balance of the plant. This activity may be carried out by plant personnel in accordance with existing operating technical specifications. Activities are scheduled around the fuel handling systems to the greatest extent possible.

EXHIBIT WAC-1 TLG Services, Inc. 000083

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant Document Lll-1703-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 2, Page 10 of 13 fl Transferring of the spent fuel from the storage pools to the ISFSI for interim storage, following the minimum required cooling period in the spent fuel pools. 0 Draining and de-energizing of the non-contaminated systems not required to support continued site operations or maintenance .

          .,   Disposing of contaminated filter elements and resin beds not required for processing wastes from layup activities for future operations.
          $    Draining of the reactor vessel, with the internals left in place and the vessel head secured.
          ~    Draining and de-energizing non-essential, contaminated systems with decontamination as required for future maintenance and inspection.

o Preparing lighting and alarm systems whose continued use is required; de-energizing portions of fire protection, electric power, and HVAC systems whose continued use is not required.

          "    Cleaning of the loose surface contamination from building access pathways.
          ~    Performing an interim radiation survey of the plant, posting warning signs where appropriate.

0 Erecting physical barriers and/or securing all access to radioactive or contaminated areas, except as required for inspection and maintenance.

          "'   Installing security and surveillance monitoring equipment and relocating security fence around secured structures, as required.

2.2.2 Period 2 - Dormancy The second phase identified by the NRC in its rule addresses licensed activities during a storage period and is applicable to the dormancy phases of the deferred decommissioning alternatives. Dormancy activities include a 24-hour security force, preve!1:tive and corrective maintenance on security systems, area lighting, general building maintenance, heating and ventilation of buildings, routine radiological inspections of contaminated structures, maintenance of structural integrity, and a site environmental and radiation monitoring program. Resident maintenance personnel perform equipment maintenance, inspection activities, routine services to maintain safe conditions, EXHIBIT WAC-1 TLG Services, Inc. 000084

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant Document Lll-1703-001, Rev. O Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 2, Page 11of13 adequate lighting, heating, and ventilation, and periodic preventive maintenance on essential site services. An environmental surveillance program is carried out during the dormancy period to ensure that releases of radioactive material to the environment are prevented and/or detected and controlled. Appropriate emergency procedures are established and initiated for potential releases that exceed prescribed limits. The environmental surveillance program constitutes an abbreviated version of the program in effect during normal plant operations. Security during the dormancy period is conducted primarily to prevent unauthorized entry and to protect the public from the consequences of its own actions. The security fence, sensors, alarms, and other surveillance equipment provide security. Fire and radiation alarms are also monitored and maintained. Consistent with the DECON alternative, the spent fuel storage pools are emptied within five and one half years of the cessation of operations. The transfer of the spent fuel to the DOE begins during the dormancy period in year 2041 and continues throughout (and beyond) the delayed decommissioning phase. After a period of storage (such that license termination is accomplished within 60 years of the cessation of Unit 1 operations), it is required that the licensee submit an application to terminate the license, along with an LTP (described in Section 2.1.2), thereby initiating the third phase. 2.2.3 Periods 3 and 4 - Delayed Decommissioning Prior to the commencement of decommissioning operations, preparations are undertaken to reactivate site services and prepare for decommissioning. Preparations include engineering and planning, a detailed site characterization, and the assembly of a decommissioning management organization. Final planning for activities and the writing of activity specifications and detailed procedures are also initiated at this time. Much of the work in developing a termination plan is relevan,t to the development of the detailed engineering plans and procedures. The activities associated with this phase and the follow-on decontamination and dismantling processes are detailed in Sections 2.1.1 and 2.1.2. The primary difference between the sequences anticipated for the DECON EXHIBIT WAC-1 TLG Services, Inc. 000085

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant Document £11-1703-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 2, Page 12 of 13 and this deferred scenario is the absence, in the latter, of any constraint on the availability of the fuel storage facilities for decommissioning. Variations in the length of the dormancy period are expected to have some effect upon the quantities of radioactive wastes generated from system and structure removal operations. Given the levels of radioactivity and spectrum of radionuclides expected from forty years of plant operation, no plant process system identified as being contaminated upon final shutdown will become releasable due to the decay period alone. The delay in decommissioning yields lower working area radiation levels. As such, the estimates for this delayed scenario incorporate reduced ALARA controls for the SAFSTOR's lower occupational exposure potential. Although the initial radiation levels due to 6°Co will decrease during the dormancy period, the internal components of the reactor vessel will still exhibit sufficiently high radiation dose rates to require remote sectioning under water due to the presence of long-lived radionuclides such as 94Nb, 59Ni, and 63Ni. Therefore, the dismantling procedures described for the DECON alternative would still be employed during this scenario. Portions of the biological shield wall will still be radioactive due to the presence of activated trace elements with long half-lives (152Eu and 154Eu). Decontamination will require controlled removal and disposal. It is assumed that radioactive corrosion products on inner surfaces of piping and components will not have decayed to levels that will permit unrestricted use or allow conventional removal. These systems and components will be surveyed as they are removed and disposed of in accordance with the existing radioactive release criteria. 2.2.4 Period 5 - Site Restoration Following completion of decommissioning operations, site-restoration activities can begin. Dismantling, as a continuation of the decommissioning process, is clearly the most appropriate and cost-effective option, as described in Section 2.1.3. The basis for the dismantling cost in this scenario is consistent with that described for DECON, presuming the removal of structures and site facilities to a nominal depth of three feet below grade and the limited restoration of the site. EXHIBIT WAC-1 TLG Services, Inc. 000086

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant Document Lll-1703-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 2, Page 13 of 13 2.2.5 ISFSI Operations and Decommissioning Completion of the spent fuel transfer operations is currently assumed to be in year 2080. Once complete, the ISFSI will be decommissioned as described in Section 2.1.4. TLG Services, Inc. EXHIBIT WAC-1 000087

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant Document Lll-1703-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 3, Page 1 of 52

3. COST ESTIMATE The cost estimates prepared for decommissioning Comanche Peak consider the unique features of the site, including the NSSS, power generation systems, support services, site buildings, and ancillary facilities. The basis of the estimates, including the sources of information relied upon, the estimating methodology employed, site-specific considerations, and other pertinent assumptions, is described in this section.

3.1 BASIS OF ESTIMATE The estimates were developed using the site-specific, technical information from the 2010 analysis. This information was reviewed for the current analysis and updated as deemed appropriate. The site-specific considerations and assumptions used in the previous evaluation were also revisited. Modifications were incorporated where new information was available or experience from ongoing decommissioning programs provided viable alternatives or improved processes. 3.2 METHODOLOGY The methodology used to develop the estimates* follows the basic approach originally presented in the AIF/NESP-036 study report, "Guidelines for Producing Commercial Nuclear Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Estimates,"[20J and the DOE "Decommissioning Handbook."[2ll These documents present a unit factor method for estimating decommissioning activity costs, which simplifies the estimating calculations. Unit factors for concrete removal ($/cubic yard), steel removal ($/ton), and cutting costs ($/inch) are developed using local labor rates. The activity-dependent costs are estimated with the item quantities (cubic yards and tons), developed from plant drawings and inventory documents. Removal rates and material costs for the conventional disposition of components and structures rely upon information available in the industry publication, "Building Construction Cost Data," published by R.S. Means.1221 The unit factor method provides a demonstrable basis for establishing reliable cost estimates. The detail provided in the unit factors, including activity duration, labor costs (by craft), and equipment and consumable costs, ensures that essential elements have not been omitted. Appendix A presents the detailed development of a typical unit factor. Appendix B provides the values contained within one set of factors developed for this analysis. EXHIBIT WAC-1 TLG Services, Inc. 000088

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant Document Lll-1703-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 3, Page 2 of 52 This analysis reflects lessons learned from TLG's involvement in the Shippingport Station Decommissioning Project, completed in 1989, as well as the decommissioning of the Cintichem reactor, hot cells, and associated facilities, completed in 1997. In addition, the planning and engineering for the Rancho Seco, Trojan, Yankee Rowe, Big Rock Point, Maine Yankee, Humboldt Bay-3, Oyster Creek, Connecticut Yankee, Crystal River, San Onofre and Vermont Yankee nuclear units have provided additional insight into the process, the regulatory aspects, and the technical challenges of decommissioning commercial nuclear units. Work Difficulty Factors TLG has historically applied work difficulty adjustment factors (WDFs) to account for the inefficiencies in working in a power plant environment. WDFs are assigned to each unique set of unit factors, commensurate with the inefficiencies associated with working in confined, hazardous environments. The ranges used for the WDFs are as follows: o Access Factor 10% to 20% o Respiratory Protection Factor 10% to 50%

e. Radiation/ALARA Factor 10% to 37%

              " Protective Clothing Factor                        10% to 30%

e Work Break Factor 8.33% The factors and their associated range of values were developed in conjunction with the AIF/NESP-036 study. The application of the factors is discussed in more detail in that publication. Scheduling Program Durations The unit factors, adjusted by the WDFs as described above, are applied against the inventory of materials to be removed in the radiological controlled areas. The resulting man-hours, or crew-hours, are used in the development of the decommissioning program schedule, using resource loading and event sequencing considerations. The scheduling of conventional removal and dismantling activities is based upon productivity information available from the "Building Construction Cost Data" publication. In the DECON alternative, dismantling of the fuel building systems and decontamination of the spent fuel pools are also dependent upon the timetable for the transfer of the spent fuel assemblies from the pool to the ISFSI. EXHIBIT WAC-1 TLG Services, Inc. 000089 l_ ---

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant Document Lll-1703-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 3, Page 3 of 52 An activity duration critical path is used to determine the total decommissioning program schedule. The schedule is relied upon in calculating the carrying costs, which include program management, administration, field engineering, equipment rental, and support services such as quality control and security. This systematic approach for assembling decommissioning estimates ensures a high degree of confidence in the reliability of the resulting costs. 3.3 IMPACT OF DECOMMISSIONING MULTIPLE REACTOR UNITS In estimating the near simultaneous decommissioning of two co-located reactor units there can be opportunities to achieve economies of scale, by sharing costs between units, and coordinating the sequence of work activities. There will also be schedule constraints, particularly where there are requirements for specialty equipment and staff, or practical limitations on when final status surveys can take place. For purposes of the estimates, Units 1 and 2 are assumed to be essentially identical. Common facilities have been assigned to Unit 2. A summary of the principal impacts are listed below .

    ., The sequence of work generally follows the principal that the work is done at Unit 1 first, followed by similar work at Unit 2. This permits the experience gained at Unit 1 to be applied by the workforce at the second unit. It should be noted however, that the estimates do not consider productivity improvements at the second unit, since there is little documented experience with decommissioning two units simultaneously.

The work associated with developing activity specifications and procedures can be considered essentially identical between the two units, therefore the second unit costs are assumed to be a fraction of the first unit(~ 43%). g Segmenting the reactor vessel and internals will require the use of special equipment. The decommissioning project will be scheduled such that Unit 2's reactor internals and vessel are segmented after the activities at Unit 1 have been completed. 0 Some program management and support costs, particularly costs associated with the more senior positions, can be avoided with two reactors undergoing decommissioning simultaneously. As a result, the estimates are based on a "lead" unit that includes these senior positions, and a "second" unit that excludes these positions. The designation as lead is based on the unit undertaking the most complex tasks (for instance vessel segmentation) or performing tasks for the first time.

   "'  The final radiological survey schedule is also affected by a two-unit decommissioning schedule. It would be considered impractical to try to complete the final status survey of Unit 1, while Unit 2 still has ongoing EXHIBIT WAC-1 TLG Services, Inc.                                                               000090

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant Document Ll 1-1703-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 3, Page 4 of 52 radiological remediation work and waste handling in process. As such, the transfer of the spent fuel from the storage pools and subsequent decontamination of the fuel building is coordinated so as to synchronize the final status survey for the station. o The final demolition of buildings at Units 1 and 2 are considered to take place concurrently. This is considered a reasonable assumption since access to the buildings is considered good at the station.

   .. Unit 1, as the first unit to enter decommissioning, incurs the majority of site characterization costs.
   " Shared systems and structures are generally assigned to Unit 2 .
   .,  Station costs such as emergency response fees, regulatory agency fees, corporate overhead, and insurance are generally allocated on an equal basis between the two units.

3.4 FINANCIAL COMPONENTS OF THE COST MODEL TLG's proprietary decommissioning cost model, DECCER, produces a number of distinct cost elements. These direct expenditures, however, do not comprise the total cost to accomplish the project goal, i.e., license termination and site restoration. Inherent in any cost estimate that does not rely on historical data is the inability to specify the precise source of costs imposed by factors such as tool breakage, accidents, illnesses, weather delays, and labor stoppages. In the DECCER cost model, contingency fulfills this role. Contingency is added to each line item to account for costs that are difficult or impossible to develop analytically. Such costs are historically inevitable over the duration of a job of this magnitude; therefore, this cost analysis includes funds to cover these types of expenses. 3.4.1 Contingency The activity- and period-dependent costs are combined to develop the total decommissioning cost. A contingency is then applied on a line-item basis, using one or more of the contingency types listed in the AIF/NESP-036 study. "Contingencies" are defined in the American Association of Cost Engineers "Project and Cost Engineers' Handbook"[23l as "specific provision for unforeseeable elements of cost within the defined project scope; particularly important where previous experience relating estimates and actual costs has shown that unforeseeable events which will increase costs are likely to occur." The EXHIBIT WAC-1 TLG Services, Inc. 000091

Comanche Peak Nitclear Power Plant Document Lll-1703-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 3, Page 5 of 52 cost elements in this analysis are based upon ideal conditions and maximum efficiency; therefore, consistent with industry practice, contingency is included. In the AIF/NESP-036 study, the types of unforeseeable events that are likely to occur in decommissioning are discussed and guidelines are provided for percentage contingency in each category. It should be noted that contingency, as used in this analysis, does not account for price escalation and inflation in the cost of decommissioning over the remaining operating life of the station. Contingency funds are an integral part of the total cost to complete the decommissioning process. Exclusion of this component puts at risk a successful completion of the intended tasks and, potentially, subsequent related activities. For this study, TLG examined the major activity-related problems (decontamination, segmentation, equipment handling, packaging, transport, and waste disposal) that necessitate a contingency. Individual activity contingencies ranged from 10% to 75%, depending on the degree of difficulty judged to be appropriate from TLG's actual decommissioning experience. The contingency values used in this study are as follows:

             " Decontamination                                              50%
             ... Contaminated Component Removal                             25%

Contaminated Component Packaging 10%

o Contaminated Component Transport 15%

             $    Low-Level Radioactive Waste Disposal                      25%
             .,   Reactor Segmentation                                      75%

o NSSS Component Removal 25% e Reactor Waste Packaging 25%

             "'   Reactor Waste Transport                                   25%

o Reactor Vessel Component Disposal 50% e GTCC Disposal 15% o Non-Radioactive Component Removal 15%

              $   Heavy Equipment and Tooling                               15%

o Supplies 25%

              " Engineering                                                 15%
              -0  Energy                                                    15%

o Insurance, Taxes and Fees 10% 0 Staffing 15% ri Characterization and Termination Surveys 30% o Operations and Maintenance Expenses 15% EXHIBIT WAC-1 TLG Services, Inc. 000092

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant Document Lll-1703-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 3, Page 6 of 52 o ISFSI Decommissioning 25% The contingency values are applied to the appropriate components of the estimates on a line item basis. A composite value is then reported at the end of each detailed estimate (as provided in Appendix C and D). 3.4.2 Financial Risk In addition to the routine uncertainties addressed by contingency, another cost element that is sometimes necessary to consider when bounding decommissioning costs relates to uncertainty, or risk. Examples can include changes in work scope, pricing, job performance, and other variations that could conceivably, but not necessarily, occur. Consideration is sometimes necessary to generate a level of confidence in the estimate, within a range of probabilities. TLG considers these types of costs under the broad term "financial risk." Included within the category of financial risk are:

          ~     Transition activities and costs: ancillary expenses associated with outplacement of 50% to 80% of the site labor force shortly after the cessation of plant operations, added cost for national or company-mandated retraining, and retention incentives for key personnel.
          " Delays in approval of the decommissioning plan due to intervention, public participation in local community meetings, legal challenges, and national and local hearings .
          .,    Changes in the project work scope from the baseline estimate, involving the discovery of unexpected levels of contaminants, contamination in places not previously expected, contaminated soil previously undiscovered (either radioactive or hazardous material contamination), variations in plant inventory or configuration not indicated by the as-built drawings.

9 Regulatory changes, for example, affecting worker health and safety, site release criteria, waste transportation, and disposal.

          'II   Policy decisions altering national commitments (e.g., in the ability to accommodate certain waste forms for disposition), or in the timetable for such, for example, the start and rate of acceptance of spent fuel by the DOE.

e Pricing changes for basic inputs such as labor, energy, materials, and disposal. Items subject to widespread price competition (such as materials) may not show signific~nt variation; however, others such EXHIBIT WAC-1 TLG Services, Inc. 000093

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant Document Lll-1703-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 3, Page 7 of 52 as waste disposal could exhibit large pncmg uncertainties, particularly in markets where limited access to services is available. This cost study does not add any additional costs to the estimate for financial risk, since there is insufficient historical data from which to project future liabilities. Consequently, the areas of uncertainty or risk are revisited periodically and addressed through repeated revisions or updates of the base estimates (e.g., in accordance with Regulatory Guide 1.159). 3.5 SITE-SPECIFIC CONSIDERATIONS There are a number of site-specific considerations that affect the method for dismantling and removal of equipment from the site and the degree of restoration required. The cost impact of the considerations identified below is included in this cost study. 3.5.1 Spent Fuel Management The cost to dispose the spent fuel generated from plant operations is not reflected within the estimates to decommission Comanche Peak. Ultimate disposition of the spent fuel is within the province of the DO E's Waste Management System, as defined by the Nuclear Waste Policy Act. As such, the disposal cost is financed by a surcharge paid into the DOE's waste fund during operations. On November 19, 2013, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit ordered the Secretary of the Department of Energy to suspend collecting annual fees for nuclear waste disposal from nuclear power plant operators until the DOE has conducted a legally adequate fee assessment. The NRC does, however, require licensees to establish a program to manage and provide funding for the management of all irradiated fuel at the reactor site until title of the fuel is transferred to the Secretary of Energy. This requirement is prepared for through inclusion of certain high-level waste cost elements within the estimates, as described below. Completion of the decommissioning process is dependent upon the DOE's ability to remove spent fuel from the site in a timely manner. DOE's repository program assumes that spent fuel allocations will be accepted for disposal from the nation's commercial nuclear plants, with limited exceptions, in the order (the "queue") in which it was discharged from the reactor. Luminant's current spent fuel management plan for the Comanche Peak spent fuel is based in general upon: 1) a 2041 start date for DOE initiating transfer of Comanche Peak spent fuel to a EXHIBIT WAC-1 TLG Services, Inc. 000094

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant Document Lll-1703-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 3, Page 8 of 52 federal facility (not necessarily a final repository), and 2) a spent fuel transfer 2080 completion date. The management of the spent fuel inventory is delineated in Table 3.1. Different DOE acceptance assumptions would result in different completion dates. An ISFSI pad has been constructed at Comanche Peak to hold 84 storage casks (overpacks). The ISFSI was licensed by the NRC under the general license provisions of 10 CFR Part 72. The first cask was placed on the ISFSI pad on February 28, 2012. Assuming that the DOE doesn't start accepting spent fuel until 2041; Comanche Peak will need to construct a second pad to accommodate the entire inventory of spent fuel discharged over the reactors' operating life. Construction of a second pad is included within the estimates. Post-shutdown and maintenance costs for the ISFSI pads are also included and address the cost for staffing the facilities, as well as security, insurance, and licensing fees. Costs are provided for the final disposition of the pads once the transfer is complete. Canister Design The design and capacity of the ISFSI is based upon the HOLTEC HI-STORM 1008 Version B dry storage system. The system consists of a multi-purpose canister (MPC) with a nominal capacity of 32 fuel assemblies and a concrete storage overpack. Canister Loading and Transfer The estimates include the cost for the labor and equipment to load and transfer each spent fuel canister to the ISFSI. For estimating purposes, an allowance is used for the cost to transfer the fuel from the ISFSI into the DOE transport cask. Since the DOE has not published details about its cask system, this rough estimate is necessary. However, use of this estimate should not be used to infer that TLG has any detailed information on the cask system DOE will ultimately provide. EXHIBIT WAC-1 TLG Services, Inc. 000095

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant Document Lll-1703-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 3, Page 9 of 52 Operations and Maintenance The estimates include the cost of operating and maintaining the spent fuel pools and the ISFSI, respectively. Pool operations are expected to continue approximately five and one half years after the cessation of Unit 2 operations. ISFSI operating costs are based upon a 2080 end date for spent fuel transfer. ISFSI Decommissioning In accordance with 10 CFR §72.30, licensees must have a proposed decommissioning plan for the ISFSI site and facilities that includes a cost estimate for the plan. The plan should contain sufficient information on the proposed practices and procedures for the decontamination of the ISFSI and for the disposal of residual radioactive materials after all spent fuel, high-level radioactive waste, and reactor-related GTCC waste have been removed. The storage overpacks are assumed to have some level of neutron-induced activation, as a result of the long-term storage of the fuel, i.e., to levels exceeding free-release limits. As an allowance, 14 overpacks are assumed to requi:i;e remediation, equivalent to the number of overpacks required to accommodate the final core off load from both units. The cost of the disposition of this material, as well as the demolition of the ISFSI facility, is included in the estimates. In accordance with the specific requirements of 10 CFR §72.30 for the ISFSI work scope, the cost estimate for decommissioning the ISFSI reflects: 1) the cost of an independent contractor performing the decommissioning activities; 2) an adequate contingency factor; and 3) the cost of meeting the criteria for unrestricted use. The cost summary for decommissioning the ISFSI is presented in Appendix E. GTCC The dismantling of the reactor internals is expected to generate radioactive waste considered unsuitable for shallow land disposal (i.e., low-level radioactive waste with concentrations of radionuclides that exceed the limits established by the NRC for Class C radioactive waste (GTCC)). The Low-Level Radioactive Waste Policy Amendments Act of 1985 assigned the federal government the responsibility for the disposal of this material. The Act also stated that the beneficiaries of the activities resulting in the generation of such radioactive waste bear all EXHIBIT WAC-1 TLG Services, Inc. 000096

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant Document Lll-1703-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 3, Page 10 of 52 reasonable costs of disposing of such waste. Although the DOE is responsible for disposing of GTCC waste, any costs for that service have not been determined. For purposes of this estimate, the GTCC radioactive waste has been assumed to be packaged in the same canisters used to store spent fuel and disposed of as high-level waste, at a cost equivalent to that envisioned for the spent fuel. The number of canisters required and the packaged volume for GTCC was based upon experience at Maine Yankee (e.g., the constraints on loading as identified in the canister's certificate of compliance). It is assumed that the DOE would not accept this waste prior to completing the transfer of spent fuel. Therefore, until such time the DOE is ready to accept GTCC waste, it is assumed that this material would remain in storage at the Comanche Peak site. 3.5.2 Reactor Vessel and Internal Components The reactor pressure vessel and internal components are segmented for disposal in shielded, reusable transportation casks. Segmentation is performed in the refueling canal, where a turntable and remote cutter are installed. The vessel is segmented in place, using a mast-mounted cutter supported off the lower head and directed from a shielded work platform installed overhead in the reactor cavity. Transportation cask specifications and transportation regulations dictate the segmentation and packaging methodology. Intact disposal of reactor vessel shells has been successfully demonstrated at several of the sites that have been decommissioned. Access to navigable waterways has allowed these large packages to be transported to the Barnwell disposal site with minimal overland travel. Intact disposal of the reactor vessel and internal components can provide savings in cost and worker exposure by eliminating the complex segmentation requirements, isolation of the GTCC material, and transport/storage of the resulting waste packages. Portland General Electric (PGE) was able to dispose of the Trojan reactor as an intact package (including the internals). However, its location on the Columbia River simplified the transportation analysis since:

               ., the reactor package could be secured to the transport vehicle for the entire journey, i.e., the package was not lifted during transport, EXHIBIT WAC-1 TLG Services, Inc.                                                                  000097

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant Document Lll-1703-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 3, Page 11 of 52 0 there were no man-made or natural terrain features between the plant site and the disposal location that could produce a large drop, and o transport speeds were very low, limited by the overland transport vehicle and the river barge. As a member of the Northwest Compact, PGE had a site available for disposal of the package - the US Ecology facility in Washington State. The characteristics of this arid site proved favorable in demonstrating compliance with land disposal regulations. It is not known whether this option will be available when the Comanche Peak plant ceases operation. Future viability of this option will depend upon the ultimate location of the disposal site, as well as the disposal site licensee's ability to accept highly radioactive packages and effectively isolate them from the environment. Consequently, the study assumes that the reactor vessel will require segmentation, as a bounding condition. 3.5.3 Primary System Components In the DECON alternative, the reactor coolant system components are assumed to be decontaminated using chemical agents prior to the start of dismantling operations. This type of decontamination can be expected to have a significant ALARA impact, since in this scenario the removal work is done within the first few years of shutdown. A decontamination factor (average reduction) of 10 is assumed for the process. Disposal of the decontamination solution effluent is included within the estimate as a "process liquid waste" charge. In the SAFSTOR alternative, radionuclide decay is expected to provide the same benefit and, therefore, a chemical decontamination is not included. Reactor coolant piping is cut from the reactor vessel once the water level in the vessel (used for personnel shielding during dismantling and cutting operations in and around the vessel) is dropped below the nozzle zone. The piping is boxed and transported by shielded van. The reactor coolant pumps and motors are lifted out intact, packaged, and transported for disposal. The following discussion deals with the removal and disposition of the steam generators, but the techniques involved are also applicable to other large components, such as heat exchangers, component coolers, and the pressurizer. The steam generators' size and weight, as well as EXHIBIT WAC-1 TLG Services, Inc. 000098

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant Document Lll-1703-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 3, Page 12 of 52 their location within the reactor building, will ultimately determine the removal strategy. A trolley crane is set up for the removal of the generators. It can also be used to move portions of the steam generator cubicle walls and floor slabs from the reactor building to a location where they can be decontaminated and transported to the material handling area. Interferences within the work area, such as grating, piping, and other components are removed to create sufficient laydown space for processing these large components. The generators are rigged for removal, disconnected from the surrounding piping and supports, and maneuvered into the open area where they are lowered onto a dolly. Each generator is rotated into the horizontal position for extraction from the containment and placed onto a multi-wheeled vehicle for transport to an on-site processing and storage area. The generators are disassembled on-site for transport to the disposal site. The interior volume is filled with low-density cellular concrete for stabilization of the internal contamination. Each component is then loaded onto a rail car for transport to the disposal facility. 3.5.4 Main Turbine and Condenser The main turbine is dismantled using conventional maintenance procedures. The turbine rotors and shafts are removed to a laydown area. The lower turbine casings are removed from their anchors by controlled demolition. The main condensers are also disassembled and moved to a laydown area. Material is then prepared for transportation to an off-site recycling facility where it is surveyed and designated for either decontamination or volume reduction, conventional disposal, or controlled disposal. Components are packaged and readied for transport in accordance with the intended disposition. 3.5.5 Retired Components The estimates include the disposition of four retired steam generators and a retired reactor vessel closure head from Unit 1. The components, currently in storage at the site, will be prepared for transport and disposal. Similar to the disposition of the operating units, the steam EXHIBIT WAC-1 TLG Services, Inc. 000099

Comanche Peah Nuclear Power Plant Document Lll-1703-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 3, Page 13 of 52 domes of the generators are assumed to be removed to meet transport clearances. The estimates for the retired components include the project management, contractor and supporting costs necessary to execute the tasks assuming that the disposition would be a coordinated effort (i.e., single mobilization effort). The estimates also include the disposition of one high-pressure and two low-pressure turbine rotors as clean scrap. The cost for disposition of the retired components is summarized in the tables on pages xx and xxi and in Tables 6.1 and 6.2. While the study assumes that the disposal of the components would occur after shutdown, the costs are identified separately because the disposal activities could be conducted at any time. 3.5.6 Transportation Methods Contaminated piping, components, and structural material other than the highly activated reactor vessel and internal components will qualify as LSA-I, II or III or Surface Contaminated Object, SCO-I or II, as described in Title 49)24] The contaminated material will be packaged in Industrial Packages (IP-1, IP-2, or IP-3, as defined in subpart 173.411) for transport unless demonstrated to qualify as their own shipping containers. The reactor vessel and internal components are expected to be transported in accordance with Part 71, as Type B containers. It is conceivable that the reactor, due to its limited specific activity, could qualify as LSA II or III. However, the high radiation levels on the outer surface would require that additional shielding be incorporated within the packaging so as to attenuate the dose to levels acceptable for transport. Any fuel cladding failure that occurred during the lifetime of the plant is assumed to have released fission products at sufficiently low levels that the buildup of quantities of long-lived isotopes (e.g., 137Cs, 9DSr, or transuranics) has been prevented from reaching levels exceeding those that perm.it the major reactor components to be shipped under current transportation regulations and disposal requirements. Transport of the highly activated metal, produced in the segmentation of the reactor vessel and internal components, will be by shielded truck cask. Cask shipments may exceed 95,000 pounds, including vessel segm.ent(s), supplementary shielding, cask tie-downs, and tractor-trailer. The maximum. level of activity per shipment assumed EXHIBIT WAC-1 TLG Services, Inc. 000100

Comanche Peah Nuclear Power Plant Document Lll-1703-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 3, Page 14 of 52 permissible was based upon the license limits of the available shielded transport casks. The segmentation scheme for the vessel and internal segments is designed to meet these limits. The transport of large intact components (e.g., large heat exchangers and other oversized components) will be by a combination of truck, rail, and/or multi-wheeled transporter. Transportation costs for material requiring controlled disposal are based upon the mileage to the Andrews County facility in western Texas. Truck transport costs are estimated using published tariffs from Tri-State Motor Transit.l25J 3.5.7 Low-Level Radioactive Waste Disposal The mass of radioactive waste generated during the various decommissioning activities at the site is shown on a line-item basis in the detailed Appendices C and D, and summarized in Section 5. The quantified waste summaries shown in these tables are consistent with 10 CFR Part 61 classifications. Commercially available steel containers are presumed to be used for the disposal of piping, small components, and concrete. Larger components can serve as their own_ containers, with proper closure of all openings, access ways, and penetrations. The volumes are calculated based on the exterior package dimensions for containerized material or a specific calculation for components serving as their own waste containers. The more highly activated reactor components will be shipped in reusable, shielded truck casks with disposable liners. In calculating disposal costs, the burial fees are applied against the liner volume. Packaging efficiencies are lower for the highly activated materials (greater than Type A quantity waste), where high concentrations of gamma-emitting radionuclides limit the capacity of the shipping canisters. The cost to dispose of the low-level radioactive material generated from the decontamination and dismantling activities is based upon Luminant's current cost for disposal at the Texas Compact facility operated by Waste Control Specialists in Andrews County. EXHIBIT WAC-1 TLG Services, Inc. 000101

Comanche Peah Nuclear Power Plant Document Lll-1703-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 3, Page 15 of 52 3.5.8 Site Conditions Following Decommissioning The NRC will terminate the site license if it determines that site remediation has been performed in accordance with the license termination plan, and that the terminal radiation survey and associated documentation demonstrate that the facility* is suitable for release. The NRC's involvement in the decommissioning process will end at this point. Building codes and environmental regulations will dictate the next step in the decommissioning process, as well as owner's own future plans for the site. A significant amount of the below grade piping is located around the perimeter of the power block. The estimate includes a cost to excavate this area to an average depth of four feet so as to expose the piping, duct bank, conduit, and any near-surface grounding grid. The overburden is surveyed and stockpiled on site for future use in backfilling the below grade voids. Only existing site structures are considered in the dismantling cost. The existing electrical switchyard and access roads will remain in support of the electrical transmission and distribution system. The site access road will be left intact. Structures are removed to a nominal depth of three feet below grade. Concrete rubble generated from demolition activities is processed and made available as clean fill for the power block foundations. Additional fill is brought in to cap the power block excavations and to permit seeding for erosion control. 3.6 ASSUMPTIONS The following are the major assumptions made m the development of the estimates for decommissioning the site. 3.6.1 Estimating Basis Decommissioning costs are reported in the year of projected expenditure; however, the values are provided in 2014 dollars. Costs are not inflated, escalated, or discounted over the periods of performance. The estimates rely upon the physical plant inventory that was the basis for the 2010 analysis. EXHIBIT WAC-1 TLG Services, Inc. 000102

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant Document Lll-1703-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 3, Page 16 of 52 The study follows the principles of ALARA through the use of work duration adjustment factors. These factors address the impact of activities such as radiological protection instruction, mock-up training, and the use of i*espiratory protection and protective clothing. The factors lengthen a task's duration, increasing costs and lengthening the overall schedule. ALARA planning is considered in the costs for engineering and planning, and in the development of activity specifications and detailed procedures. Changes to worker exposure limits may impact the decommissioning cost and project schedule. 3.6.2 Labor Costs Luminant will hire a Decommissioning Operations Contractor (DOC) to manage the decommissioning. The owner will provide site security, radiological health and safety, quality assurance and overall site administration during the decommissioning and demolition phases. Costs for site administration, operations, construction, and maintenance personnel are based upon average salary information provided by Luminant. Contract personnel will provide engineering services, e.g., for preparing the activity specifications, work procedures, activation, and structural analyses, under the direction of the owner. The craft labor required to decontaminate and dismantle the nuclear units will be acquired through standard site contracting practices. The current cost of labor at the site is used as an estimating basis. Reductions in the operating organization are handled through normal company practices. No costs have been included for this activity. Severance costs are included for the decommissioning staff as the organization is downsized. Security, while reduced from operating levels, is maintained throughout the decommissioning for access control, material control, and to safeguard the spent fuel (in accordance with the requirements of 10 CFR Part 37, Part 72, and Part 73). Security costs include provisions for recurring expenses. 3.6.3 Design Conditions Any fuel cladding failure that occurred during the lifetime of the plant is assumed to have released fission products at sufficiently low levels that EXHIBIT WAC-1 TLG Services, Inc. 000103

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant Document Lll-1703-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 3, Page 17 of 52 the buildup of quantities of long-lived isotopes (e.g., 137Cs, 90Sr, or transuranics) has been prevented from reaching levels exceeding those that permit the major NSSS components to be shipped under current transportation regulations and disposal requirements. The curie contents of the vessel and internals at final shutdown are derived from those listed in NUREG/CR-3474.(261 Actual estimates are derived from the curie/gram values contained therein and adjusted for the different mass of the Comanche Peak components, projected operating life, and different periods of decay. Additional short-lived isotopes were derived from NUREG/CR-0130(27) and NUREG/CR-0672,l28l and benchmarked to the long-lived values from NUREG/CR-3474. The control elements are disposed of along with the spent fuel, i.e., there is no additional cost provided for their disposal. Activation of the containment building structure is confined to the biological shield. 3.6.4 General Transition Activities Existing warehouses are cleared of non-essential material and remain for use by Luminant and its subcontractors. The plant's operating staff performs the following activities at no additional cost or credit to the project during the transition period:

               " Drain and collect fuel oils, lubricating oils, and transformer oils for recycle and/or sale.

o Drain and collect acids, caustics, and other chemical stores for recycle and/or sale. 0 Process operating waste inventories, i.e., the estimates do not address the disposition of any legacy wastes; the disposal of operating wastes during this initial period is not considered a decommissioning expense. Scrap and Salvage The existing plant equipment is considered obsolete and suitable for scrap as deadweight quantities only. Luminant will make economically EXHIBIT WAC-1 TLG Services, Inc. 000104

Comanche Peah Nuclear Power Plant Document Lll-1703-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 3, Page 18 of 52 reasonable efforts to salvage equipment following final plant shutdown. However, dismantling techniques assumed by TLG for equipment in this analysis are not consistent with removal techniques required for salvage (resale) of equipment. Experience has indicated that some buyers wanted equipment stripped down to very specific requirements before they would consider purchase. This required expensive rework after the equipment had been removed from its installed location. Since placing a salvage value on this machinery and equipment would be speculative, and the value would be small in comparison to the overall decommissioning expenses, this analysis does not attempt to quantify the value that an owner may realize based upon those efforts. It is assumed, for purposes of this analysis, that any value received from the sale of scrap generated in the dismantling process would be more than offset by the on-site processing costs. The dismantling techniques assumed in the decommissioning estimates do not include the additional cost for size reduction and preparation to meet "furnace ready conditions. For example, the recovery of copper from electrical cabling may require the removal and disposition of any contaminated insulation, an added expense. With a volatile market, the potential profit margin in scrap recovery is highly speculative, regardless of the ability to free release this material. This assumption is an implicit recognition of scrap value in the disposal of clean metallic waste at no additional cost to the project. Furniture, tools, mobile equipment such as forklifts, trucks, bulldozers, and other property is removed at no cost or credit to the decommissioning project. Disposition may include relocation to other facilities. Spare parts are also made available for alternative use. Energy For estimating purposes, the plant is assumed to be de-energized, with the exception of those facilities associated with spent fuel storage. Replacement power costs are used to calculate the cost of energy consumed during decommissioning for tooling, lighting, ventilation, and essential services. Emergency Planning FEMA and state fees associated with emergency planning are assumed to continue for approximately 18 months following the cessation of operations. At this time, the fees are discontinued. The timing is based EXHIBIT WAC-1 TLG Services, Inc. 000105

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant Document Lll-1703-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 3, Page 19 of 52 upon the anticipated condition of the spent fuel (i.e., the hottest spent fuel assemblies are assumed to be cool enough that no substantial Zircaloy oxidation and off-site event would occur with the loss of spent fuel pool water). State fees continue until all fuel has been removed from the site. Insurance Costs for continuing coverage (nuclear liability and property insurance) following cessation of plant operations and during decommissioning are included and based upon current operating premiums. Reductions in premiums, throughout the decommissioning process, are based upon the guidance provided in SECY-00-0145, "Integrated Rulemaking Plan for Nuclear Power Plant Decommissioning."[291 The NRC's financial protection requirements are based on various reactor (and spent fuel) configurations. Property taxes are included within the estimates. However, the tax is based upon the land, without any consideration of any ongoing site operations and property assets. Site Modifications The perimeter fence and in-plant security barriers will be moved, as appropriate, to conform to the Site Security Plan in force during the various stages of the project. The on-site dike and earthwork network forming water retention ponds and lagoons will be disabled to relieve ongoing inspection requirements. Site Restoration All structures will be removed except for the switchyard. The switchyard is required for grid operations. Structures to be removed include but are not limited to the reactor, fuel, auxiliary, radwaste warehouse, safeguard, diesel generator, and turbine buildings. EXHIBIT WAC-1 TLG Services, Inc. 000106

Comanche Peah Nuclear Power Plant Document Lll-1703-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 3, Page 20 of 52 3.7 COST ESTIMATE

SUMMARY

Schedules of expenditures are provided in Tables 3.2 through 3.5. The tables delineate the cost contributors by yea1* of expenditures as well as cost contributor (e.g., labor, materials, and waste disposal). Additional tables in Appendices C and D provide detailed costs elements. The cost elements are also assigned to one of three subcategories: "License Termination,"

   "Spent Fuel Management," and "Site Restoration." The subcategory "License Termination is used to accumulate costs . that are consistent with "decommissioning" as defined by the NRC in its financial assurance regulations (i.e., 10 CFR §50. 75). The cost reported for this subcategory is generally sufficient to terminate the plant's operating license, recognizing that there may be some additional cost impact from spent fuel management. This subcategory also includes the costs of disposing of the retired steam generators, the reactor vessel closure head, and spare high and low pressure turbine rotors from Unit 1. The study assumes that the disposal of the components would occm* after shutdown, however, the costs are identified separately because the disposal activities could be conducted at any time.

The License Termination cost subcategory also includes costs to decommission the ISFSI (as required by 10 CFR §72.30). The basis for the ISFSI decommissioning cost that is included in both Appendices C and D is provided in Appendix E. The "Spent Fuel Management" subcategory contains costs anticipated to be incurred once the nuclear units cease operation for the off-loading of the pools to the ISFSI for interim storage, and the eventual transfer of the fuel from the ISFSI to the DOE. Costs are also included for the operation of the ISFSI until such time that the transfer of all fuel from this facility to an off-site location (e.g., geologic repository) is complete.

   "Site Restoration" is used to capture costs associated with the dismantling and demolition of buildings and facilities demonstrated to be free from contamination. This includes structures never exposed to radioactive materials, as well as those facilities that have been decontaminated to appropriate levels. Structures are removed to a depth of three feet and backfilled to conform to local grade.

As discussed in Section 3.5.1, it is not anticipated that the DOE will accept the GTCC waste prior to completing the transfer of spent fuel. Therefore, the cost of GTCC disposal is shown in the final year of ISFSI operation. While designated for disposal at the geologic repository along with the spent fuel, EXHIBIT WAC-1 TLG Services, Inc. 000107

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant Document Lll-1703-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 3, Page 21 of 52 GTCC waste is still classified as low-level radioactive waste and, as such, included as a "License Termination" expense. Decommissioning costs are reported in 2014 dollars. Costs are not inflated, escalated, or discounted over the period of expenditure (or projected lifetime of the plant). The schedules are based upon the detailed activity costs reported in Appendices C and D, along with the timeline presented in Section 4. EXHIBIT WAC-1 TLG Services, Inc. 000108

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant Document Lll-1703-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 3, Page 22 of 52 TABLE 3.1 COMANCHE PEAK NUCLEAR POWER PLANT SPENT FUEL MANAGEMENT

    !---~                                  Fuel Assembly Inventory                                1         D. O-E*-*

I~ _:_ _______ J~d of year) _J_I . L _x_e~r __ j_________ --~Qol *- __ _ L----**- _ __l§i_:[~!. *-* . . . ---~!--*---~~c~pJ~~<;:~--*---~ __j_ __________: I r-2009 2,078 ! 2010 ,__2_,_,_17_1___1 - - - _ i 2011 - 2,353 -j---------*~-----------*

    ~      20_1j___ ______gJ54                                 i          _____28§_________________________ _

2013 .

    ;-------                                 1,959 --r----                         576 1      2014                              2,141                                 576 2015
    -* *-*-*---- ----*------- --**--2,038       *---*----~*---    -----------.---. 768               --*-- ------------------
    ' 2016                                   1,939                                 960 2017                             2,121                                 960 2018                             2,018                              1,152                           --*-

2019 1,919 1,344 *--------------*- ___ gQ~Q_____________ ?1.!.91_____ ----~-*------------!1_~1&_________________________________ 2021 1,998 j 1,536 2022 1,899 ,- 1,728 2023 2,081 1, 728 2024 1,978 1,920 2025 1,879 ____b.112 - 2026 2,061 2,112 2027 1,958 2,304

_ --~02_~--- ---- -- --- _ _1__~_~]__~ ___ _:_ __ --------~.%!.'?________ ~~ -**------------- __,

2029 ___£,041 ___:- - - 2,496 2030 2,131 2,688 2031 ' 1 939 ! 2,880 .

    * - - - - - - - - - - - - - * * -- - ,._::i.=::.:_ _ _ _ ---t------------------***---{-----*-* ------ * - - * - - - . ,
    !      2032                              2 028            i                 2,880

[ 2_ps3 .-l--=~ 1,901 I1

                                                                             --~200 _ _ ~-----------

2034 I 1,517 1 3,584 !

f2035 l - -------* l2o36___T____ '~!~ ~:~:~ ~ 1 I 1--------r------* L 2031 --+- 365 -+ 4, 736

r~~~-t=~=- =+/-----~*--'-:-~~-~-----+----------< EXHIBIT WAC-1 TLG Services, Inc. 000109

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant Document L11-1703-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 3, Page 23 of 52 TABLE 3.1 (continued) COMANCHE PEAK NUCLEAR POWER PLANT SPENT FUEL MANAGEMENT

   !                 .              Fuel Assembly Inventory                       I         DOE              1
   '___________:_**--*------*---**--(e_nd of l.~l!E)-~-----*----~-----------~

__ Year ~------*- Pool ISFSI ~ Acceptance___:

i ! f --,-------*------ *-------------., 2040 5,101 ;

    --2041         ~------*-*--------------4,973---*-:                              -*       128 2042
       --------*------**---**                                     4,845 128           -~

2043 4, 717 128

     -- 2044______                                                4, 589                     128
    --~045_________________________ _Mfil__ ___ ~--- 12~---

__ _go4!i__ _______________________________ 4,333 1_2_8__

    *- 2047 ------------*---------*------ 4,205                                         __1_~---

__ _g94§________________ 4,077 128 2049 3,949 128 ___ :?._950 -** *--- ---*--------**------*****-*- *-----------~,82_!__ __________ 128 ---- --- 2051 ------------*--- 3,693 _1_2_8____ 2052 ~-------- ---------- 3,565 - _J_g~--- _gQ53 - - - - - - - - - - - - 3,437 128 2054 ________:t309 - 128 _JO§_§____________________________________3, 181_________________ 1?_~------------ _ 2056 -----**----~--- 3,053 128 2057 2,925 128 2058 2, 797 - 128 2059 2,669 128 2060 2,541 128 2061 2,413 128 2062 --- *-*--------- 2,285 ~ 128 2063 . 2, 157 : 128 I

    - - 206*4--**-- ... ---- -----*---*---*--1-*----2,029                -----~----------128-*-*        --!
  -------                                                                        *!----                  __J 2065                                                     1,901           i          128             !
   ~-                                                                                        128           j
                                                    ~-----'-1,_77;__3_ _- - - + - - - *             -- --~

I

  .__ _?066 ___;___

2067 1,645 : 128 _ I

   . 2068 :                                                       1,517 1--------t                                                                      r - - - - - - - J, I          128
   ~_0_69 :                                  .                    1,389           I          112288       -1!

i_ __ ;2070 _ J _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 1,261 _, EXHIBIT WAC-1 TLG Services, Inc. 000110

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant Document Lll-1703-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 3, Page 24 of 52 TABLE 3.1 (continued) COMANCHE PEAK NUCLEAR POWER PLANT SPENT FUEL MANAGEMENT Fuel Assembly Inventory I DOE

             ---~-~~~~~~(e_n_d~o~f~y_ea_r~)~~~~~--i~;______                                         ,

Year ' __ J_>ool ----+-*----- i ISFSI ---+!_Acce.E_tance ~ 2071 1, 133 128 ...,

   . 2072                                                1,005           !         128

2073 : ! *---'-8-7-7 -- ! 128 ~

   ~--*--*----+-**-  -----------------1 -*----------* -------+-----**- ----*-------------...
   !   2074                                   ;             749                      128 r--w15               ---*-*_J__                          621           T __1_2_8_ ____.
   ~   2076                                                 493                      128
   !   2077 2078

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _J _ _ 365 237 ----r 128 128 I 2079

   .-------*      -------*-----~--4.-

109 128 ---,

-~

L.__2-080 0 ' 109 r--Total-~- --------------- - - - - - - * - - - - * * - - - * - - - i-----5,-iOl-- --*- EXHIBIT WAC-1 TLG Services, Inc. 000111

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant Document Lll-1703-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 3, Page 25 of 52 TABLE 3.2 COMANCHE PEAK NUCLEAR POWER PLANT, UNIT 1 DECON ALTERNATIVE SCHEDULE OF TOTAL ANNUAL EXPENDITURES (thousands, 2014 dollars) Equipment & Year Labor Materials Energy Burial Other Total 2030 52,776 14,796 : _h089 :_____17__ 1 3,668 72,346

2031 68,617 24,737 1,808; 15,359. 19,724 130,244

-- 2032____ 65,_§73 . 32,917 1,1~8 . 27,483 . 12,341 139,471 .

-~039_ _____ 41,098~--              16,892 ____~~---*---§,0~                                   6,~72 :          70,4~_!~
- 2034       _38,763 --~5,361 _,__ _ _ 911_~                                2,869 .            5,911 .          63,815
-~03_§_ _____g?,4Q§__ ___ 13,397 _;_______Q~~----_?.L4_9j)______ 7,59_~-- _, __53,3_'@_

~§____ 5,542 7,004 . 0 ; 3 1,315 13,865 - 2037 5,527 6,985 0 3 ' 1 312 ___ __:::_i____ 13,827 - .__J038____ 5,5~7 . 6,985 0 3 . 1,312 13,827 - 2032.___ 16,176 . 3,649 145 10 - 2,929 22,909

--~Q_40 --*------~-4i.?l~-- . -_______7__1.<;)_?_7__________ !_4):__ - --***-*--- -~--- -- --- ~1-1~-~------- --~§1-7__Q~--

_ 204~----*-!.~JJ_§_____ l)_.!_!_9~---- 122_______ 0 . 2,523 _ _g4,98_§_ 2042 3,859 1,614 18 0 1,195 6,687 2043 2, 196 224 0 0 959 3,379 2044 2,202 224_____ 0 0 962 :_~?87 2045 2, 196 224 0 . 0 959 3,379 . 2046 2,196 224 0 . 0 959 3,379 2047 2, 196 224 0 0 959 3,379 _ .£.048______ b202._ -**-- _______+/-_2..:L ____ ---- _____ _Q_+----- _________ Q___ ._____ ---~§~--- ___3_.!_ 38?__ 2049 2, 196 224 0 ' 0 959 3,379 2050 2 196 224 0 0 959 3,379 2051 2,196 221:~ 0 0 I 959 3,379 2052 2,202 ' 224 : 0 . 0 _._- --~6g_j_ _ _3,387 ! -- 2053

    -----         2, 196   I             224        :           0 i               0 ;
                                               -L----------l--------..._*---------!----*---1      959 :          3,379 2054            2,196 i                224 i                   0 :              0 !             959 i          3,379 i 224 l                                   0 I             959 !

2055 2,196 : 0 I

                                                                               --#                               3,379 I 2056 2057 2058 2059 2060 I

2,202 ; 2,196 ! 2, 196 2, 196 2,202 I I I 224 l 224 I 224 224 224 I I l 0 i --- 0 I __Q_I _Q_i----

                                                                          --*-__- t

_Q__L _________ 0 -- 0 ---- 959 o 962 !

                                                                                                . 9fil 959 962 I

3,3~ 3,379

                                                                                                           --3,379 3,379 3,387 EXHIBIT WAC-1 TLG Services, Inc.                                                                                                  000112

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant Document Lll-1703-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 3, Page 26 of 52 TABLE 3.2 (continued) COMANCHE PEAK NUCLEAR POWER PLANT, UNIT 1 DECON ALTERNATIVE SCHEDULE OF TOTAL ANNUAL EXPENDITURES (thousands, 2014 dollars) Equipment& Year Labor Materials Energy Burial Other Total I i-- . . I . -------. I 2061 . 2, 196 224 I 0 , 0 959 l 3,379 :

 ~~%}--,-----~+/-~+-------~~:-~---==~~ ~ ~--~=---~~--~------~~-------~:~;~
  ~- 2064 :               2,202 .          224 ;              0 '               0 ; .         962 '          3,387 '.
  -*-----------*-------------.L                                                                                       .
  ~ 2065 ' -~,196-'                        224 I              0   I        ___ __gj.          959 :        __?,379 _~

2066 . 2, 196 224 i 0 0 ! 959 : 3,379

-2061 ----2~----224*;-*--*---*01______0:*---- 959-.---3,379 -:

--20-68 ---~202 ; 224T---==~- o -=----.tl---- 962 , ~~87

 . 2069                  2,196 ;           224 !              0           --- 0 !          . 9~9 .           3,379 '
 ;;*--*--*2070     .      2, 196   i       224  !             0   :              0  .         959    !       3,379 '
           *---**-*------*--------*- ------ *-----*--- ---------.. . . *------*--* r----- - - - - i -

___________.__;

  ;__2071 ____~,196 ~----224                    l             0                  0 ..J__ _ 95~_____3,379 '
  ;__ 207~                2,202 ' --~~ !                      0 .                0  i         962            3,387 '

2073 2, 196 224 ! 0 0 l ___ 959 : 3~9-

2074 2 196 2241 0 0! 959 : 3,379

                                 --:            t-------*          I
  ' 2075 .                2,196            224 !

c*2076________ 2,202 ------- --224-r- -- - ------0-:----- 0 .

                                                                           -----*o-r-*-

0 : 959 '

                                                                                           -~962--=--3~s-1.

3,379

 ; 2077                   2,196 ;          22~ !____          0                  0  L___      959~_~379               '
 ;_ 2078                 2,196 '           224 I              0   I             0   j         959 l          3,379    i r

I
l 2079 2, 196 : 224 ! 0 . 0 l--- 959 : 3,379 :

f-2080 2,205 j 1,1~-- o: ~~- 12,535 I 15,911 . 1 1-2081 1,630 I 72_1 j ____ 63 . 1,95.!_L 2,558 I 6,927 1 :rotai_ :___ ~~~1 974_1_ J'.!1_~~-Q_l-~- -~;~1.~i~~~-~-~_!?_§J _ 119,~~Q.l-=_1~9,376 : EXHIBIT WAC-1 TLG Services, Inc. 000113 L

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant Document Lll-1703-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 3, Page 27 of 52 TABLE 3.2a COMANCHE PEAK NUCLEAR POWER PLANT, UNIT 1 DECON ALTERNATIVE SCHEDULE OF LICENSE TERMINATION EXPENDITURES (thousands, 2014 dollars) Equipment& Year Labor Materials Energy Burial Other Total ~2o3o--:--*-47,894 ! __ 1,964 l ~- 1,089 ~ -- 17 ; 2,366 1--~830 .

_.2031 _ 65,684 I 20,602 1-1§08 _:__ 15,359 18,180 121,633 _

2032 62,638 +- I 28,369 1,158 ; ~i-

27,483 10,650 130,298 .

._~033 ._ _37,240_,_ ___7,950 _____ _l}_?_Q__~ ____M20 ___ 5,218 ~361 -~034 34,816 ! ___.§,995 _______ Jnl __--~ 1§69___ 4,699 _ 49,291 - 2Q_~_g_________ ~_Q!.05_Q __ j__ - ___4,8~!_~ ____ _Q§_~______ --1_l405 _________~_701: ______ jQ,_QJl__ 2036 3,248 124 0 3 1,012 4,388 2037 3,240 . 124 Q__._ _ _ _3_*____1,00~____4,376 __ 2038 3,240 : 124 0 3 . 1,009 4,376 2039 15,249 i 867 145 _____l_Q_____ ~,6~.7______!§,897 __gQ!Q____ - ______.?1_823_ '. _____ *----~-1~--- --- -- _?_~--*--*- ... ----- - --~~--- --* .. __§_9-~- --* -- __1.&'I~- 2041 117 ____Q______Q_,_______Q 0 117 2042 18 I 0 ' 0 0 0 18

2043-79---or- o ------o-.----o-----a*------- 2080 0T 938 0 ~ 11,577 12,515 2081 389 : 73 43 1,954 2,064 - 4,523 Total 302,650 ' 72,168 6, 71_0_.___56, 128 ___6~7,~7_09_~-_5_0_5~,3_6_7_

EXHIBIT WAC-1 TLG Services, Inc. 000114

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant Document Lll-1708-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 8, Page 28 of 52 TABLE3.2b COMANCHE PEAK NUCLEAR POWER PLANT, UNIT 1 DECON ALTERNATIVE SCHEDULE OF SPENT FUEL MANAGEMENT EXPENDITURES (thousands, 2014 dollars) Equipment& Year Labor Materials Energy Burial Other Total I 2030 ! 4,277 I . 12,832 I ----0 : --~-- 1,302 : 18,412 i ! 2031 I 1,361 i 4,082 0 0 1,360 6,803 ; ! 2032 1,471 : 4,412 . 0 0 ' 1,215 7,098 ~ 8,888 -:----6

       ----~'----

!'*----~ 2033 . 2,963 i .~------* 0 . 1 212

                                                                                                      -~------=--~---~-

13,063 2034 ' 3, 107 i' 9,320 ; 0 .

                                      * -..-------.--------------------*--"1                      0                  1,212               13,638
; 2035 ,            2,849   ,     8,548

0 0 . 848 12,246 I

  ----20s6----;------2."2s-s*r-----6:ss-a.**-----------0----------o-----*--303-------*9:41-1~

2037 2,287 ' 6,861 -;--*----0-------0-.---- 302-.-9~ 2038 2,287 ! 6,861 . 0 0 302 9,451 : I 2039 927 : 2,782 0 . 0 302 4,012 I 2040 , 1,826 : 110 *-0*~----0--*-- 770--* 2, 705

  -*---------- -**------r**- *- -------** *--* -*- -----* ---- ___.............. -*-*--..- -- ...... _________.___ . ___ -*-------*--*

2041 2,164. 130 ~________Q_ ______~-- 855 ____?,149' 2042 2,204 -,-----~2_~_____ _Q__, 0 943 ~.396 2043 2, 196 224

o ____o_*___ 959 .. 3,379 .

2044 2,202 I 1 224 : 0 0 962 3,387 ' 2045 2, 196 j ~24 ~-----0___ 0 , 959 3,379 I 2046 2, 196 I 224 ' 0 0 : 959 3,379 I 2047 2,196 : 224 I 0 0 . 959 3,379 I 2048 : 2,202 ! 224 ' 0 0 . 962 , 3,387 , L---*- --r-*-- *------*--*---------~-* - - - - * - - - - - -..* - - -..--.. *---* - - - - - - - - - - - - ----------- - - - - - - - * - - * - * *

2049 ; 2,196 I 224 '. o o: 959 : 3,379 i I 2050 i 2,196 ; 224 I 0 0 : 959 . 3,379;

~2051 :-            2,196J______g_g4        l                      0 *_                           0           -~~-:-~79;

~ 2052 : 2,20? I 224 I 0 . 0 I 962 : 3,3~ 1~-l&-~---*-_b_196 J______ 2~4J ______ _Q+----__Q__~ ---- 959_L __:t379 ; I 2054 j 2,196 I 224 I 0 : 0 \ 959 l 3,379 i 2055 ! 2,196_+- 224 i 0 1 0 i 959 ; 3,379 I 2056 ! . 2,202+ 224 I oi o 1 962 I 3,3871 2057 _j_ ___ 2, 196 I 224+ 0 l 0 ; 959 I 3,379 '1

2058 i 2,196 I 224 1 oI o: 959 I 3,379 2059_~l----2-:-i9s;-- 224 I o! oi 959 3,379 L_?.Q6Q_L_ ___ 2,202} 224 i __Qj_ 0 i 962 3,387 EXHIBIT WAC-1 TLG Services, Inc. 000115

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant Document LJJ-1703-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 3, Page 29 of 52 TABLE 3.2b (continued) COMANCHE PEAK NUCLEAR POWER PLANT, UNIT 1 DECON ALTERNATIVE SCHEDULE OF SPENT FUEL MANAGEMENT EXPENDITURES (thousands, 2014 dollars) Equipment & Year Labor Materials Energy Burial Other Total

- 2061 2, 196 ; 224 0 0 ; 959-~---3,37g:

~- 20§~ _______ 2, 196~-------~24 ~- ~--*--9~--- -----_9__*---**--*~59 _:_ _ __ _1,_?.1~ 2063 2, 196 '. 224 --------*-*------l--- 0 0 . 959 3,379--- 2064 2,202 224 *_____ _Q____,__ 0 962 3,387 __,

__ 2065 2,196 224 ______Q_ _ _ _ _ o ______ 959__:____3379 ~

- 206§__~ 196 - - 224 ..;__ 0 0 959 . _?,379 - 2067 2,196 ___ 224 ----* 0 . 0 959 3,379 ' 2068 2,202 224 .-----*-----------.0 0 962

                                                                                  ----~--------*-**--

3,387 2069 2, 196 224 0 . ___Q_ ____~59 3,379 ___ 1_Q1Q______ ____ ?, 19~-----* ---~-?.'!._ -- ------ ___ _Q_ --- *--*** ___Q_________ ----~59_*---*-***-~i.~7~ - 2011 2, 196 ---~24- ______ _Q__ ________o ______ 959_, ___ ~~79 _ ~_ 2012_ 2,202 224 ______ Q_______o______i)_§~----~ 1 387_ 2073 2:i..:::.::::..:-------~------------------------------- 196 224 . 0 0 . 959 3,379 2074 2,196 . 224 0 0 959 3,379 _207L ____J, ~L__ *- 224_ _______ Q._____o ______ ~5L_ ________ ~1.~79_ 2076 _g,_202 224 0 0 962 3,387 . 2077 2, 196 ' 224 0 0 959 3,379 2078 2, 196 224 0 0 959 --- 3,379 2079 2, 196 224 0 0 959 3,379 _10~Q_ ___2~5 234 0 0 ' 958 3,396 ' T_o_t_a_l___1_13_,_,_529

80,468 , 0 0 !

                                                                   --------------**-----*47,390       241,387 .

EXHIBIT WAC-1 TLG Services, Inc. 000116

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant Document LJJ-1703-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 3, Page 80 of 52 TABLE 8.2c COMANCHE PEAK NUCLEAR POWER PLANT, UNIT 1 DECON ALTERNATIVE SCHEDULE OF SITE RESTORATION EXPENDITURES (thousands, 2014 dollars) Equipment & Year Labor Materials Energy Burial Other Total L 2030 il 2031 604 1 1,572-----5~------0-.- o; o . - - o: ol 604 i i 0 '. 184 . __-1:_,809 i

                                                          -----i               ---.-----

*---f---------*!*---------**

2032 . 1,464 : 136 0 '-

                                                                                    -                        O*             475 i______~J.075 '

l 2033 895 54 0 . 0 ' 42 :, 990 '.

.-*2034--:-~=-_§jo *=~=46 ~-==--- o~-=-~~-o-:-*-----o-;---886:

~ 2035 ' 504 ' 28 ' 0 0 0 ; 532 1** -2036_________ -- -----0~-------*--*-- *--0-------------*a-~-- -*--*-- ____ a___ **---*---- *0 :*--- --* --- --0--

                                                                                         -            -------~-------,

2037 0 0 . 0 0 ; 0 : 0

.                 -------------------=._J*--*-*-----*--*-------*-------*

_~_038 ----* 0 . 0 0 0 0 ~ 0 '

2039

------                                       0      -*         0 -------------*-*-----r-------:-------

0 0 , 0 . 0

----- ______,_..______ *- ---- ___ ___ __ *- -- -- - -- ----*- - *.. -- *---- . ----..--~*--* - -- -- --- *------- --------------- -------------- '.

2040 ' 9:'..]. 170 7,649 ,_,_ 103 0 1,407 : 18,329 2041 .

*------------- 10,867 9,064 122 ------

0 1,667 21, 721 ., - -2042 1,638 ___ 136~----- 18 _9__: _______ 251_i ___ 3,273 :

2043-80 0 . - 0 . 0 0 ______Q_:______ _Q_~

2081 . 1,241 : 648 20 . 0 494 _____ _g,404j

                                                  ------;-------------------~
                                                                                                                                 .I                I
~ _T_ot_a_l_-_ 28, 795 _:_ _                        19,043                        262 _:_ _ _o                 _.!,_ _ _ 4.i.§__2_L__ 52,~22 ;

EXHIBIT WAC-I TLG Services, Inc. 000117

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant Document Lll-1703-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 3, Page 31of52 TABLE 3.3 COMANCHE PEAK NUCLEAR POWER PLANT, UNIT 2 DECON ALTERNATIVE SCHEDULE OF TOTAL ANNUAL EXPENDITURES (thousands, 2014 dollars) Equipment & Year Labor Materials Energy Burial Other Total

; 2033                          46,751 :               10,929i--1,109:---~ 18 i -=-- 3,387                                                               62,1941 2034_                      66,521                29,089               ___1_807_* ___14,536 l_ 14, 798 ; 126, 750 !
 -~035 -~--71,576 __ _g_~.§50 : _ _1,155 .;____~_4,2§§.__:___ 10,4_?.!L __146,086 :

2036

-*--*------*--a*                 56,738                17,670                           926      '            5,861
                                                                                           ----l---*----------*

5,033 86,228

----- 2037 55,808 16,534 911 4,892

                                                                                                ~--*-----------*-r-4,739            82,885            'I

__2-_Q.38 _____47,0~Q ______ J_~&:l1._:___________]_:?_?______ - ___5,464__~--- __ §11>1.~---*---]_2,9..Q~-- 2039 28,132 4,92~-------~g__ ____ 2,54_§__ 10,342 46,289 I __2040 _ 20,546 ____!§,430 ________ _!il_ _______g..:_____§J)77 _____!4i.99L _2041 _~935 __ j9,149 -- 122 0 5,979 45,18.!_, ___ 2042 --* 4,882 _:__ ~,115 _____18 0 ~715 _ _ ~130'

 -- ~9_4~---------*--2-.,_l~~ ----- --* -*                  -~~!-*~*-----* - - _____Q_~*-* ----- _____Q_ ----- ---~-~~------.}1_?_1~---'

2044 2,202 _224 - - -

0 0 962 __Q&87 .

 ~'!L,____                          2,196                 __g_~'L______o________Q____ 959 --~,379 2046                          2,196               ---- 224                            0 .

0 959 3,379 2047 2,196 ___ 224 -- 0 0 959 3,379 2048 2,202 224 0 -0 : 962 3,387 2049 2, 196 224 ' 0 . 0 ' 959 3,379 2050 - 2,196____ 224 - 0 0 . 959 3,379 _; 2051 2 196 224 0 0 959 3,379

 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ___=1_ _ _ *--*----- -**- *-------- -- ---**--* *--- --*--*-- --*-*-***--* -------* -*-- --- - -- *-- *--*---*--------- .* --- * - - - - -

2052 2,202 224 o ____ o _: --~6~- 3,387 I 2053 2' 196 224 .*---------**-..::-.+-- 0 0 . 959 - - - - 3,379 2054 2, 196 224_J____ 0 ---- 0 : 959 3,379 :

   . 2055                          2, 196 :                  224 :                          o                ___0_~___959 :                                 3,379 I

!-2056 2,202 : 224 ; ______ _QJ___________ Qj_____962 --~-~87]

2057 2, 196 l 224 ; oi !J-+_ 959 : 3,379 I

_2_05_8~-~2,,___1_96_L__ 224 ! 0 I 0 J_ 959 I 3,379 [

                                                                                               +----- 1

~ 2059 2, 196 I 224 1 o 959 : 3,379 i 2060 2,202 I 224 I 0 I - ____ _Q_L_._ _962 i 3,387 l 2061 2,196 I 224 I 0 j_________ Q__I _____959 I 3,379 I 2062 2,196 j 224 ! Qj__________ ,_Ql-----~§~~9 I 2063 2,196 j 224 I __ Qj _________Q.L ______ _fil)J~9 EXHIBIT WAC-1 TLG Services,. Inc. 000118

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant Document Lll-1703-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 3, Page 32 of 52 TABLE 3.3 (continued) COMANCHE PEAK NUCLEAR POWER PLANT, UNIT 2 DECON ALTERNATIVE SCHEDULE OF TOTAL ANNUAL EXPENDITURES (thousands, 2014 dollars) Equipment& Year Labor Materials Energy Burial Other Total 1-2064____i202: 224 j 0 : 0 ! 962 i 3,387 :

                                                                                                    ---I 2065            2,196 i         224 I           O
               --*----------*-**-**--------+---*------~---*-~-- ~

O i

                                                                       ~----

959 3,379 i 2066 *

  ---~--*

2,196

224I I o- : o !. --

959 3,379 ' 2067 . 2, 196 224 I o o:

-:1*---------------.-------- 959

3,379 -.

2068 2,202 224 I 0 0 : 962 3,387 2069 ----~L19L_ _ _ ~24 ._,_____Q___________~-*---* 959 ~----3,37~ __: 2070 2, 196 ' 224 ; 0 0 : 959 ' 3,379 2011 2,196 224 --a-* o. 959 *~ 3,379 ~

. 2072          *--2,202 ,-----224-:-----0_,_____                   0 i            962          3,387 2073            2, 196 .        224 (           0 .           0 :            959          3,379
  -- -2074*-*--- **-**-2,196- -- -224 i      -~----0**~------*-0*--*-          -**959-***--*-*- 3:379~
 --~07Q___ _A!_96              ___    224 - - - - - 0             __Q_;_ _ _l!.59 -             3,379 .

2076 2,202 . -22ij______ 0 . 0 ' 962 3,387 *- 2077 2, 196 224 I' . o* o: 959 ----~~

  --~on~---*----~..!~----*- 2~4l _________ Q__ :_________ _QJ__ ___ ____Q59 _____ -~?3 ?_§!_:

2079 2, 196 224 I 0 0 I 959 ' 3,379 .

                                           .                         :-r-------------

2080

      ----~

2,144 1,163 ! 0 I 0 l 12,535 15,841 _2_0_81_ _ _1_,_,630 541 I 63 i 1,954 i 2,558 . 6,141 . I Total 503,063 180,131 j 7,327 l EXHIBIT WAC-1 TLG Services, Inc. 000119

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant Document Lll-1703-001, Rev. O Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 3, Page 33 of 52 TABLE 3.3a COMANCHE PEAK NUCLEAR POWER PLANT, UNIT 2 DECON ALTERNATIVE SCHEDULE OF LICENSE TERMINATION EXPENDITURES (thousands, 2014 dollars) Equipment& Year Labor Materials Energy Burial Other Total 2033 43,511 i 2,000 ; 1,109 18 2,061 48,699 2034 62,179 ! 19,470 . 1,807 14,536 - 13,438 111,431 -

--~_Q?~---- 66,593 ____ 28,957_:___ _1155                                                          24,268 **-              9,217 __ _l~.J.8g__

_ 203~ 52,441 9,332 ' 926 . 5,861 --~'818___?2L~78 _

_ 2037 ___ 51,558 _;_ __ ~291____ 911______~_~____ 3,527 ___G~l80__ 2038 44,363 8 119 733

- - - - - - - - - - * - - - - - - * - - - --- _, _ __:::.i____ ,. - - --**--**-- - - - .* -

5,464 5, 141 63,820 2039 27,881 4,213 342 2,545 + ___ 10,040 45,021 ___go40 *-*--376~- 21g_ ____ ~L ____g ___J,884_____5,~64 2041 50 0 0 0 0 50 2042

------                              8 ---------------------------*--------*------

0 0 0 . 0 8 2043-79 0 0

                                       ~------*------*-----*-*--             ---*

0 0 0 0

                                                                                   ---* ... - - *- --**- ___,_ .... _ - -*-*--**- - -r-*-**-*--- -------*

2080 0 - *-*---~-------------------------*---* 938 0 . 0 11,577

                                                                                                                              ~--------------

12,515 2081 389 .-73_______4L__ l,954 ___~~64 _____4,52~-* Total 352,140 . _8_1~,6_6_4_'__ 7,064 59,539 -*_ _ 62,, 767 __,Q63, 77__§__ EXHIBITWAC-1 TLG Services, Inc. 000120

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant Document LJJ-1703-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 3, Page 34 of 52 TABLE 3.3b COMANCHE PEAK NUCLEAR POWER PLANT, UNIT 2 DECON ALTERNATIVE SCHEDULE OF SPENT FUEL MANAGEMENT EXPENDITURES (thousands, 2014 dollars) Equipment& Year Labor Materials Energy Burial Other Total Goss i 2,976 i 8,929 i o : o ~ 1,s26f--13,231 i j2034~-- 3,184 1 9,552 r o : o _i __.__J,S56 ~=--14,o92J i 2035 S,176 ~------g;-529-: 0 : 0 . 1,212 lS,917 ;

.~203--s:_._ _2,141 ~- 8,222 : ____Q_, o 1,215 :_. 12,11~

I 2037 I 2,710 . 8,131 . 0 ' 0 . 1,212 12,054 ; ! 2038 : --l,82i-~----5,462 ~---- o o

831 8,114 -:

r - --*----*---- --~-*- ---* ---------i *- ---*----------"7*---**---*-*--- ------- -----*--;--*--*--*---**---- --- --**-- --*---1 l------*-* 2039 ' 238 l 715 :

                        ---*--*--t----~--------*---------------------

0 0 302 1,256 l ! 2040 1,826 l 110 . ___0-----~- 636 2,571 I 2041 2,164 I 130 *_______Q_ _ _ _ _Q____ 697 1 2,990

,_ 2042                         2,204                  249 ;                   0                      0 ,_ _ ,_ 919_._.__2,S7g_,

- - .~91?__ -.--* *--~.t ~.~JL_.______22~----- _ ****---- _Q_. _____ ----*-- _Q__~ ________ _Q_5_~*-- ___ --~t?J~_;

~__g944 ----~202 _* ____ 224                                                   o                ___   o ______             962 .          _ 3,387....:

2045 2,19~--___g~_L _____Q_____o____ 959

3,379

. 2046                          2, 196 !               224                     0 .                    0                    959 .             3,379
!_ ~041_____;....               2,196 : ___ __g_24 _                           0                      0                    959 -~-~S79 .

1 2048 -,---*- '. ~202 '. 224 0 I 0 962 S,S87 *

2049 : 2,196 ; 224 i 0 ' 0 959 l 3 379 i 2050 ~ 2,196 !___~~--_Q__*______il 959 3,S79 i

!i-* --2051 ; 2,196 : 224 ' 0

                                                                            *-----*-~----*

0 959 ' 3,379 ' ! 2052 : _ 2,2021 224 !--- 0 '. 0 I 962 i __ 3,387 j 1 205s ~ 2,196 I 224 1---------~-----9__; _____ 959_J _ _3.1~7~-~ II 2054 : 2,196 !

                         ----~-----:_--:--;

224 1 O :* Oi 959 ! -'--- 3,379- i! 2055 : 2 196 : 224 0 i 0 959 i S,S79 j I l------r--'.L-1-------~----;-------!------ J I l i-~Q~§_ __ ------~.2Q~ ______ __z24_1_______o~ ____ _Q__;_____~~- 3,38?--J J 2057 : 2,!Jlli_j 224 I 0 : 0 ' 959 I S,379 I i~p58 J_ 2,1961 224 ! 0 ; 0 I 959 ! 3,S79 _! ~ 2059 i_____gJ:.96 : 224 i 0 i 1 0 -l-- 959 I 3,379 I I 2060 ! 2,2~0 224 j o! ol 962 S,387 I 2061 i _____

~
                            -2196

'.}______ - 224 I Oi ol 959 3,379

~062 -~-* _ _b19§_                                     224   I                 ol                     o\                   959               3,379 L     20~_L _____~-L196 ---- 224 I                                             O!                     01                   959               3,379 EXHIBIT WAC-1 TLG Services, Inc.                                                                                                                            000121

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant Document LJJ-1703-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 3, Page 35 of 52 TABLE 3.3b (continued) COMANCHE PEAK NUCLEAR POWER PLANT, UNIT 2 DECON ALTERNATIVE SCHEDULE OF SPENT FUEL MANAGEMENT EXPENDITURES (thousands, 2014 dollars) Equipment & Year Labor Materials Energy Burial Other Total '._~064___ 2,202 ' 224 0 0 ' 962 l 3 387 , I 2065 2, 196 224 I 0 0 ' 959 ' 3,379 *

---2066*--- --*--2,196-----~=- 22i-:-=--=--o--==~-~~~o-==--- --959------3~379-.

 -- 2067__ 2,196                        224                   __Cl.__ _ _,___Q_ ___ ~~-----~'379__;

' 2068 2,202 224

*------------------------*------------- 0 0 962 3,387 '

-~

' 2069 2, 196 224 0 0 -- 95L___ 3,37~_ _ 2070 ------ 2, 196 224 Q________9 959 ___3J..~79 2071 2, 196 224 0 0 959 _3,379 .

 -- 2072              2,202          -- 224 .                   0                     0             962          3,387 2073            2,196             224                     0                     0 .           959          3,379 2074           _2,196 _____ 224 _______Q_ ________Q_____959 ___ ~,379 _

__ _19_7§____ _+/-}_!_96 _ _ _ 224 __________Q_________Q___ 959 ____3,37~. 2016 2,202 224 o __.__o____.96L___ ~387 _, 2077 2, 196 224 0 0 959 . 3,379

 ---~078____ +/-, 19~~---~~----*_Q_ __________ p____ ~~-----_?.l..37~-

2079 2, 196 224 0 ' 0 959 3,37_~_ 2080 2, 144 __225 -- 0 0 958 3,327 . Tot_a_l_ _1_0~6,_4_95~__5_9~,5_4_1_'_ 0 o. 46,169 ' 212,204 ' EXHIBIT WAC-1 TLG Services, Inc. 000122

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant Document Lll-1703-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 3, Page 36 of 52 TABLE 3.3c COMANCHE PEAK NUCLEAR POWER PLANT, UNIT 2 DE CON ALTERNATIVE SCHEDULE OF SITE RESTORATION EXPENDITURES (thousands, 2014 dollars) Equipment& Year Labor Materials Energy Burial Other Total

   -------------~                                                            ----,--                             ----.

L 2033 _________ .~63 _____ o i______o_!__ o :__________Q_ ! 263 :

_ 2034 . 1! 157 -- 67 0 0 : 4_.1_ 1,228 J

  ; 2035 :              1,806 .          164 .               0 '               0 !              10 l         1,980 .

c 2036 ---1-5-57-----l 15--* 0 . 0 \ 0 ~---~672

  !----------~------------------~-*---------~

___2037 _* 1,539 ______ _!_lg___ 0 0 '. ___Q_;__ l,6eyl_J

  . 2038                   907            65 .               0                 0 '                0 :           972 :
  .*2039---"--~===- 12=--=~-- _o______________ -o-~---------*-0-: -~~~~=--- 0~--:---==;2 J
   ~_19______14,95'!______ ~LQ49                           103                 0 .         4,457 ;          35,562 ,
  ,___g_Q41 __ _111_721              19,019 .              122 .               0 '         5,282 .          42,144 ;

2042 2,670 2,866 .. 18 0 . 796 ; 6,350 !

   *-*------*----~-------                       ------*--------~                                     i'------~

2043-80 0 0 0 0 0 0

--*208_i____________ T24i-~------------469-- *- - ------20___ -- ---------0-;-_-*-_--------~i-94-*_----_ 2,-22_~---

  .--------*l-------------------+,- -                                          -                                     -
  ' Total             43,8~-8~_ 3~,925        ._ _ _2-'-6_2 .                  .9:        11,044 '          94,060 ;

EXHIBIT WAC-1 TLG Services, Inc. 000123 l_

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant Document Lll-1703-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 3, Page 37 of 52 TABLE 3.4 COMANCHE PEAK NUCLEAR POWER PLANT, UNIT 1 SAFSTOR ALTERNATIVE SCHEDULE OF TOTAL ANNUAL EXPENDITURES (thousands, 2014 dollars) Equipment & Year Labor Materials Energy Burial Other Total 2030 43,190 14,349 1,089 .,' 17 3,668 62,312 ' ~;g___ 30, 700 10,209 -------r-- 837 ! 529 17,426 59,701 '

-~032 -               8,766             7,93~--- 244 -                              6 :      6,202        23,150 '

2033 __§.i742 ____7,91_0 243 ; 6 6,185 ' 23,087 2034 ?,742 7,910 243 6 6,185 23,087

- 203Q__ ___ ___s 7 4.~ ____ _§&~_1_________~94:_...... _________§___ _1.i?53 ______ !_~+/-8~~

2036 3,770 : 853 122 3 1,357 6,106

-- 2037               3, 760               851               122                    3         1, 354        6,089

_ 2038 3,760 . 851 - 122 ___________Q__ ~54____6,089

~_Q__ _____ 3,760______ 851 :                                122                    3         1,354         6,089

___ g.Q_4Q __________ ?_t~.7_9_~----- ----~.§_?_, __________ !~~------** ----***-- -~ ~----- .!&~1._ __ -----~J_06 - 2041 3,846 1, 110 122 *----~__ _h354 __ ___§i_434 2042 3,846 1,110 122 3 1,354 6,434 2043 3,846 1, 110 122 3 1,354 6,434 2044 3,856 1,112 122 3 1,357 6,451 2045 3,846 1, 110 122 3 1,354 6,434 : 2046 3,846 1, 110 122 3 1,354 ---~434_ 2047 3,846 1,110 . 122 3 1,354 - 6,434 _ _go4_~ _______?. 8§_~------ 1, 11_~ ______1_g~. . . . ___________ ;?.. __________1!357 ------~45 L 2049 3,846 1, 110 122 3 1,354 6,434 2050 3,846 ~. 110 122 3 -~ 1,354 6,434 2051 3,846 1,110 122 . 3 ; * - -1,354 6,434-,' 2052 3,856 1, 112 122 ' 3 i 1,357 ' 6,451 1 2053 3,846; __ _ld!_Q__ ____* -~-----~---- 1,354 i 6,434; r 2054 3,846 ! I 1, 110 i I 122 3

                                                                                  --r-l      1,354   1      6,434 I

2055 3,846 : 1, 110 ' 122 ! 31 1,354 ; 6,434 : I 2056 I 3,856 i 1,112 J 122 ! 3 . 1,357 i 6,451 J 2057 I 3,846 I 1,110 I 1221 3 I 1,354 I 6,434 l 2058 2059 -r-- 3,846 I 3,8461 1,110 1,110 ~~~ :_---~~ : r-~-t::! I ~:!~! I

                 - 3,856 I              1,112 I              122 i--------~---- 1,357 I I

2060 I 6,451 EXHIBIT WAC-1 TLG Services, Inc. 000124

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant Document Lll-1703-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 3, Page 38 of 52 TABLE 3.4 (continued) COMANCHE PEAK NUCLEAR POWER PLANT, UNIT 1 SAFSTOR ALTERNATIVE SCHEDULE OF TOTAL ANNUAL EXPENDITURES (thousands, 2014 dollars) Equipment& Year Labor Materials Energy Burial Other Total ~ 2061 3,846 I 1,110 L___ ___!_g_g__i______ -3 f-=_-~_).,354 ~ 6,434 i . 2062 ; 3,846 l 1, 110 : 122 : 3 i 1,354 6,434 : ~2063 ___ -=~--3~-846. ,__=- i:1 ia*i-~--- *-**122 ~---------3~-----i;354*-----6,434-~ 2064 . 3,856 1, 112 i 122 : 3 i 1,357 . 6,451 .

2065 . ---3,846 1,110 ! ""122~-* 3 ! 1,354 - 6,434-:

~---206~---- 3,846                              1, 110 ; -*- 122 ~_______ p____ l,35_!____~~34 _;

2067 3,846

-----~----*--------*----------------------

1,110 ~ 122 3 1,354 6' 434 2068 ~856 , 1,112 122 3 . 1,357 . 6,451

.---~-                                                             ------------------------

2069 3,~6 ______1,110_;______ _!_22 _ _ _ _?__ _ _!,354 --*--- 6,434 2070 3,846 1, 110 . 122 3 1,354 . 6,434

--207i ___ ------3~846 _____Tii0~--- -*---122 --*---------.. -*--*3:---- *--is54 *-------6434-7

 - - - - - *- - *                           -*-----~                       .       _ _ _ _ _ ----=i_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ~

2072 3,856 1,112 !

 -----*-------------~---*-----*--*-----**----------*-**------

122 ' 3 : 1,357 6,451

 - 2073 .                 3,846 -'              1, 110 !' .        122                3          1,354
                                                                              --------*---------------            6,434

_20_7'-4__*_~31.84_fL _____!L:!__10_:_. _______ 12_2__ 3 ___ _1_,3_5_4 ___ 6,434 . 2075 3 846 ' 1, 110 122 3 . 1,354 . 6,434 '

 - - - - - - - - - ___ ...:::.i___, __ ,__ ,_______,, ---<<---*- *-*--*- *-----*-"**-*-*--* -*---***---- _____ ,, ______ ,

2076 3,856 : __!J)._L____ 122-+--_ _2_ _____ , 1,357 6,451 __ 2077 - - - 3,846 : 1,11_9~----- 122_~_ 3 i 1,354 :__ ~l434 ' 2078 3,846 - - - - 1, - 110, -:- - - -122-- ' 3 l 1,354 ! 6,434 : ! 2079 3,846 l 1, 110 I - 122 . 3 ; 1,354 6,434 I

_ 2080 ' 3,85..§..~_ 1,112 i 122 ~-----~_j___ 1,357 . 6,451 '

'. 2081 : 1,820 ~ 297 I 122 I 3 i 979 3,220 I F;~: j __J;:~~a__ ~:;~_b: ~--2~U_+/-~~i L_ ;~:~;-~ i 2084 54,755 j 31,717 I -~,158 . 32,4951 17,939 ! 138,064_~

2085 '-- 32,559 1 10,982 I 956 . 9,600 . 7,058 : 61,155 i

~_g_Q86 _L 27,603 I 6,339 l ____ 911_~ 4,47211 - 4,623 I 43,949 1 1' ! 2087 ! 14,867 : 3,359 I 474 : 2,329 2,940 I 23,970 I ~ 2088 ! 1,042 _~ 124 [ _________ _Q_L------~-_lL~--- 2,286 -l i 2089

14,829 i 935 r 158_L_ 10 1 _ 1.~ 17,296 1 2090 13,447 I 8,473_____ _134 1_ 1 , 624 22,680 I 2091 12,421 - - 9,298 -*- 12~l _____ __Q_L_ 522 I 22,364J EXHIBIT WAC-1 TLG Services, Inc. 000125

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant DocumentLll-1703-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 3, Page 39 of 52 TABLE 3.4 (continued) COMANCHE PEAK NUCLEAR POWER PLANT, UNIT 1 SAFSTOR ALTERNATIVE SCHEDULE OF TOTAL ANNUAL EXPENDITURES (thousands, 2014 dollars) Equipment & Year Labor Materials Energy Burial Other Total 2092 1,225 l ~-------i *------~I----------';-------*--:----- . Total 521,080 i 183,680 : ____H,278 ;_ 50,191 i 144,609 L__ _913,839_, EXHIBIT WAC-1 TLG Services, Inc. 000126

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant Document Lll-1703-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 3, Page 40 of 52 TABLE 3.4a COMANCHE PEAK NUCLEAR POWER PLANT, UNIT 1 SAFSTOR ALTERNATIVE SCHEDULE OF LICENSE TERMINATION EXPENDITURES (thousands, 2014 dollars) Equipment& Year Labor Materials Energy Burial Other Total 2030 38,912 . 1,517 i 1,089 : 17 ' 2,366 . 43,90.L; 2031 27,217 , _4~,9_2_2_'____7_9_0_ 529: 14,528 _._ 47,985 I i 2032 i------

                  .--1.825_:_______ _1lQ_~                  122 .______§_ ___1021 _ _3,39Q_~

1 2033 ' 1,820 ' 414 : 122 ---~--- 1,0l~ _ _l.i.?80 2034 1,820 414 ' 122 6 1,018 3,380

2035 - 1,820 ; 369 . 122 --5--

1,012 3,328 l

2036 : 1,825 ' 302 122 3 . 1,006 3,258 .

!___ 2037 -* 1,820 301 . 122 3 1,003 3,249 . 2038 : 1,820 301 ' 122 3 1,003 3,249

-2039-l 1~

301 ' 122 --3----1,003 3,249 ' '__ _2-~_9___________ 1~-~---~-- ______.?_9__2- ,____________!~~------ _. ______ §. _____ __ )LQ_Q_~ ____ --*-*_?,2_~?:- 2041 1,820 301 122 3 1,003 3,249 2042 1,820 301 122 3 1,003 3,249 - 2043 1,820 301 122 3 1,003 3,24.Q__; 2044 1,825 302 122 3 1,006 3,258 2045 1,820 ' 301 ; 122 3 1,003 ' 3,249 . 2046 1,820 ; 301 122 3 1,003 3,249_~ ' 2047 1,820 : 301 122 ______ 3___ 1,003 3,249 : ' 2048 : **-*- 1,825

                    *----------         302 : ---- - **----*
                                   *-- ------*-             122 - *- *- --- --*- 3****- - --------------------

1,006 3,258 :

                                                                                                               --*----~

! 2049 ' 1,820 i 301 122 3 1,003 ' 3,249 ~ 2050 : 1,820 ~____;l_Q_l- - 122 3 ; 1~ ~249: i 2051 : 1,820 i______~Ol__. - - - 122 3 1,003 . 3,249 I I 2052 : 1,825 : 302 122 ; 3 ; 1,006 ! 3,258 i L_ 2053 __[

           -r- 1,820         !          301 .

I 122

3 ! 1,003 :

I 3,249 1 r 2054 .: 1,820 I

                             .          301                 122 .                3 :
                                                                                        .       1,003 !
                                                                                                          ---~

s,249 : 2055 1,820 L__ 301 ! 122 3 : 1,003 I 3,249 : 2056 l_ 1,825 I 302 i 122 , 3 l 1,006 1 3,258 , 2057 I__ .___ J,820 I ~01 i 122 ! 3 j 1,0031 3,249 I 5~_J__ ___ -11~20-+-- 301 ! 122 : 3L 1,003 I 3,249 I 59 1 820 301 I 122 ! 3 I 1 003 3,249 I ~06~~+/-.~==~~~25 t +- I 302 I 122 i 3 1:006 I 3,2581 EXHIBIT WAC-1 TLG Services, Inc. 000127

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant Document Lll-1703-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 3, Page 41of52 TABLE 3.4a (continued) COMANCHE PEAK NUCLEAR POWER PLANT, UNIT 1 SAFSTOR ALTERNATIVE SCHEDULE OF LICENSE TERMINATION EXPENDITURES (thousands, 2014 dollars) Equipment& Year Labor Materials Energy Burial Other Total 2061 1,820 301 : 122 3 ~----1,003 i 3,249 I

                                                                                                 .           :::I 2062               1,.f2_~o________:?_Q.L:_________ l~g_____________ ~_;_ ___ _1003______ ~049 ,

2063 1,820 301 _____ 122_ _ _ _~_____ 1,00~_ _ _3,249 : 2064 1,825 302 122 3 1,006 __3,258_ 2065 1,820 301 _______l~L____ 3 1,003 3,249 2066 1,820 301 122 3 1,003 _____ _9,24~* 2067 1,820 301 122 3 1,003 ' 3,249 2068 1,825 302 122 3 1,006 ___3J25ti._, 2069 1,820 301 122 3 1,003 3,249

**-- _2_Q]_Q________ __ JJ_~JQ ___ ---*- 30 L ______ ._!~~--- . --*- ... ---~ --*- __-1:LQ93 --- ---- _;t gj_i)_

2071 1,820 -~1_ _ _ _122 ____ _1_ __ ~003 - 3,249 __g_Q_7_L __ 1,825 __302~--- 122 3 1,006 3,258 2073 1,820 301 122 3 ______1_003 - - 3,24~~ 2074 1,820 301 122 3 1,003 3,249 . ___2075 _____ l_,8~-- - - 301_~_____!_?~-----~------J.,003______ 3,2_1:~_

' 2076                  1,825            302 '           122               3          1,006             3,258

, 2077 1-- 1,820 301 122 3 1,003 3,249 I 2078 1,820 301 122 3 1,003 3,249 2079 1,820 301 122 3 ' 1,003 31249 : 2080 1,825 I 302 122 3 1,006 3,258 : 2081 1,820 297 122 3 979 ! 3,220 l I L 2084 2082 2083 22,512 ' 42,673

52,954 I 2,917 6,253 J 31,555 '

I 694 1,214 1, 158 10 550 32,495 I c__ __1051 I j.,451 =- 27,185 5~.14~~ 17,356 : 135,518 ! 2085 31,492 I 10,912

956 : 9,600 I 6,952 '. -w.g~*

2086 26,700 i 6,290 : 911 4,472 i 4,623 l 42,996 I r-

! 2087 ~ --~Q~§__ 1 ______ ~_gQ_~9 +/-' 14,397 1,042 14,829 I I 3,334 : 124-______ 935 -l 474 : Q_L_ --~ 158 ! 2,329 10 ~ 2,940 i 1'.11s 1 364 r--__ 23,474 I 2.~l!§-1 17,296 r~ ~~~~ 2

                          *~~~ I          ~r-- ~

2

                                                                           ~ 1 ___i_ ~ I -~~-~1~~ _.

1 5 i- 1 EXHIBIT WAC-1 TLG Services, Inc. 000128

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant DocumentLll-1703-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 3, Page 42 of 52 TABLE 3.4a (continued) COMANCHE PEAK NUCLEAR POWER PLANT, UNIT 1 SAFSTOR ALTERNATIVE SCHEDULE OF LICENSE TERMINATION EXPENDITURES (thousands, 2014 dollars) Equipment& Year Labor Materials Energy Burial Other Total

2092 I

12 ! o!i o* < o:I oi t I __ 1 _ _ _ _ _ ..,__ _ _, ______ ! _________._ ___i_. _ __ 1----------+ [___Total 366,366 i 84,357 : 13,551 ' 50,191 104,122 ; 618,587 1 EXHIBIT WAC-1 TLG Services, Inc. 000129

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant Document Lll-1703-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 3, Page 43 of 52 TABLE3.4b COMANCHE PEAK NUCLEAR POWER PLANT, UNIT 1 SAFSTOR ALTERNATIVE SCHEDULE OF SPENT FUEL MANAGEMENT EXPENDITURES (thousands, 2014 dollars) Equipment& Year Labor Materials Energy Burial Other Total 2030 4,277 12,8~_?~----~-----*_gJ__ 1,302 -l8,412 ; 2031 3,483 5,287 47 ______Qj____ 2,898 11, 716 2032 6,940 7,517 ___ _122 ________Q__: __._j>,lfil.___1.~,760 2033 6,921 7,496 _____ 122 ______Q__'__ j?,167 ---~.!106 . 2034 6,921

                      - - - - - - 7,496
                                     ----      ' - - - 122                   _ _0______        5:.i_

167____ 19, _ 706 _ 20~_5--*--------~~~------ . 1L118______ *---*-**-:rn __~*- *-*-*-- ___g__,---*- --~1~!Q.._____ 12.~?9_ 2036 1,945 552

- --------------~----------------------------------

0 '. 0 352 2,848 2037 1,939 550 ____Q___,___Q______3_§_L____ 2,~4Q_. 2038 1,939 - 550 *---*-Q-~. ____9__: ____ 351 ___b~jQ__* 2039 1,939 550

                  -------*------*-----r----------*----*------  0                 0                 351 .            2,840
-*--~Q_!Q _________.!1~1:~-- ----* -- _§j)_?: __ *-*--* ----- .Q__ , __ ----- . _Q __ :_ - --- ----~-§.~. -- --* -...?&48 __

__ 2Q.11_~--~'026 ____§Qg________Q_:_____~--* 351 3,~85 - 2042 _2,026 - - - 809______ jL______Q______l51 _____hl.85 . 2043 2,026 . 809 ______o_______Q_**-------~L__ 3, 185 2044 2,031 810 0 0 352 3,193 2045 2,026 809 0 ____Q___ 351 3,185 2046 2,026 809 0 . 0 351 3,185 2047 2,026 809 o o_____ 35L, 3,185

--2049_. _____io26_____so9 *-*-- - *-----a-**---- **------0;-- -*--- **351-*:- - -3"}85 -:

2048 2,031 810 0 0 352 3, 193 - 2050 2,026 809 0 . 0 351 3,185 2051 , 2,026 ' 809 I 0 ___o_,_ 351 __ 3,185_

2052 : 2~ ____ 810 _____ _L_ ___ _Q_~ 352 ~-3,19~

~---- 2,026 ~

2053 '. *------***-*---;-~------------*---------------t---------, 809 0 : 0 ' 351 : 3,185 ! I 2054 2,026 : 809 : __ _QJ_____ o_i 351 i 3,185~ 809 ! _Q_+-----4 3,185 ! ! 2055 : i 2056 i 2,026 J 2,031 ! 810 i 0 I D 351 ' 352 : 3,193 I ! ~~~~ ! ~:~~~I ~~:; -~--l--*---~&{---- :~~ r- ::~:~ j2059T 2,026 ! 809 I --or---~~~=-*o ----3511--3,1851 I 2060 I __. 2,031 I 810 I _____Ql ____.____Q __ 352 1 3,193 EXHIBIT WAC-1 TLG Services, Inc. 000130

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant Document Lll-1703-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 3, Page 44 of 52 TABLE 3.4b (continued) COMANCHE PEAK NUCLEAR POWER PLANT, UNIT 1 SAFSTOR ALTERNATIVE SCHEDULE OF SPENT FUEL MANAGEMENT EXPENDITURES (thousands, 2014 dollars) Equipment& Year Labor Materials Energy Burial Other Total

2o~-- 2,026' 809 i- 0. 0 ~---: 3511---=~_9,185.;; 2062

-----~------*----~

2,026 :.. - - - * *809

                                        --r-i          0             0 ... ---------1-------------
                                               -*---*--------~-----*-*--

351 : 3,185 . 2063 ' 2,026 . 809 i 0 0 351 3,185 2064 2,031 810 !

               ----------------,-------*----------------0             0 .          352          3,193 2065             2,026 .            809 !            0             0            351          3,185 2066           - 2,026-             809 :         *-o-.--~ o :--=-~~-351-----3,185 2067 2068 2,026 2,031 ----giQT ____

809 : o_. 0

                                                            ----0--

0 . 351 ' 352----3,193 3,185 2069 2,026 809 ' -- 0 ' 0 351 - 3,185 ___?.07_Q__.___ -- --~l02.§_~---*--~Q_9_. __________Q__ -----**--*-*Q _____ -__,_ 3~l______ 9,l~Q __ 2071 2,Q26 809 ! 0 ___o_:____ 351 *___3,185 2072

~-*

2,031 810 : 0 0

                                                                 ------            352          3,193 2073             2,026              809 ! -          0             0            351        ~_!_85~

_ _1074 __ 2,026 __fil).fL_;____ _g______o_. ____ 351 _ 3,18§__ _ 2075 __ ._.__2,02~~-----**--~Q.§!_J_ _____ .____o____ ._. __ _g___

___?i>1~ _____ -3il~~

2076 2,031 ____ 810 L___ o . o 352

3,193 2077 2,026 809 I o o 351 3,185 2078 2,026 809 i 0 , 0 I 351 3,185 2079 2,026 809 ! 0 0 351 3,185 2080 2,031 . 810 i 0 : 0 . 352 i 3,193 i * - - ,- - - - - .

1-----..:____ : -l Total 124,257 : ___§Q1 46..§_L __48~----- o: 38,747 i 243,956 EXHIBITWAC-1 TLG Services, Inc. 000131

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant Document LJJ-1703-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 3, Page 45 of 52 TABLE 3.4c COMANCHE PEAK NUCLEAR POWER PLANT, UNIT 1 SAFSTOR ALTERNATIVE SCHEDULE OF SITE RESTORATION EXPENDITURES (thousands, 2014 dollars) Equipment & Year Labor Materials Energy Burial Other Total .-------,---------r--------~--*---- 2030-81 0 _,l 0 i :..___ 0 0 - - - - : - - - - ___£_082 ---- 372 ;_ 0 0 ___0_ _ _ _ 0 ____ 372_ _ 2083 _____---1.Qo2 ______ J ______Q________o______l_Q__ _ _1,s 1!_ _2084 _____h~Ol __

____ !_@________Q_________Q__ _ ~-- 2,546 2085 1,067 :_. 70 0 ' 0 107 ~.~1:£

-**-- -**--- ---*-- - - --*-- .. -****-***---- - --- **----------**- ----- ------ ----- -----.-----953 2086 903 49 0 . 0 0 --.--.

2087 470

                      ------*-----------        26                      0 * - -----           0-----      496 2088                     0                       0                    0 . -------------*--------*

0 0 0 2089 0 0

                ------------------------------------*                   0   .          0           0              0

__2090 ___!_!,021______8,33_9_______!09 ______ Q______ ., 468______ _!_9,931__ ---~9~_!_______ 1_~1.3_9§_ ~------~1:2~§___ - - __ _l~~ -------*- -.. -- _Q_ ____ . *- ____ §_2_~_ -*- - --~~~i1 - ~g_2___ 1,214 --~XL ____ __!_2______ 0 ------~-----_b.!_94 0 1,741 51,29~- EXHIBIT WAC-1 TLG Services, Inc. 000132

               --   --------~------

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant Document Lll-1703-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 3, Page 46 of 52 TABLE 3.5 COMANCHE PEAK NUCLEAR POWER PLANT, UNIT 2 SAFSTOR ALTERNATIVE SCHEDULE OF TOTAL ANNUAL EXPENDITURES (thousands, 2014 dollars) Equipment& Year Labor Materials Energy Burial Other Total

!-2033~--. 38,2!ti                                 10,473_[                 1,109                         18                ~,387 '.fj3~o5=

! 2034 34,748 ' 15,924 ' 821 5~1_, 12,966 I __ 65,05~

.- 2035                    14,651 l--- 9,168i_____ £i~--------J~----~624 ____g_9,694
! 2036                     14,691 :                   9,193 .                 244                          7 .              5,640           29,775 .

L._.2037 14,651 ; --~ 1 168 _______ __]1_?_==-7 ~~----5,624 =---~-9,6~4-* 2038--- --. *-*** *------- 10,107 5,485 192 6 3,868 19,658

                                 --'---1----- *-*--**- --------* - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -**-- ---*-----** -------- ---* -*-*-
*------~039 ______ _?,811 _____                          3~!____              122                          3                1,434              5, 752
  ---~040 ---                3,822      i                382                  122                          3                1,4~_§____ 5,767
! 2041 .                     3,897 ~                     640                  122                          3                1,434 '            6,097
 ~- 2042 '~---~~] . - - 640_________ ~~---=---3_____ _JJ4?j_~-==-Ji,097 -
;-- 2043
     ---*~*---*---!**-

3,897 i

                       -----*-- ----~*---

640

                                                  - ------- ...   ~**--*

122 3 . 1,434 6,097 .

                                                                                                                       ~
'. 2044 ; _____?.J!Q§ _____ 641 ----                                          122 _____ 1______ _1_438 ------~-p~_

i 2045 3,897 ______§_1Q_____ 122 . 3 1,434 6,097

~ 2046                   -- 3,897              _______§jQ_*- - - 122____ 3                                                  1,434              6,097
. 2047                       3 897                       640 '                122

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ::_i_: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ *---~---------------- 3 1,434 6,097 l _ 2048 3,908 - 641___ 122 3 1,438 6, 112

. 2049                       3,897 .                     640 :                122                          3                1,434 .            6,097 :
~ 2050 i                     3,897 :                     640 -*--122-                                      3                1,434 .            6,097 I r--                                     I                                                                           * - - - - - -

i 2051 : 3,897 ; 640 122 3 1,434 6,097 :

,__ ---*---*-------- ***--*-------!-- -*--**--*-*----------*------------~ *---- ---- --*--------*--------*--***----*---. --------~
. 2052 .                     3,908 I                     641 !                122                          3

1,438 6, 112 :

L 2053 j 3,897 I ---- 640 i__ 122 . 3 1,434 ~---6~<m: I1 -2054

                    .        3,897      I                640    '             122
                                       -..--- ------'-------------*-------------~

3 : 1,434 6,097 I

2055 ; 3,897 I 640 i 122 3 : 1,434 6,097 ;

~-~~~ I 2058

                 -r- -::~----~~----i~-~--------t-;

I 3,897 I 640 I 122 ' 3 '

                                                                                                                   ----~!-+----%.~-\

1,434 : 6,0971

                    !        3,897 i                     640 i                122 ;                        3 !              1,434 !            6,097 I     2060 !                 3,90~                       641    I             122 '.                       3 I              1,438              6,112
~-+/-_Q_fil_+ --3,891 .                                    64~--~g_~                                         3                1,434 1_~6               097 I I 2062 __;____ 3,897                                     640 I                122 i                        3 I              1,4341             6,_097 I- -2063- - - - -i- - - -s,897 -*-- ------                640    I
                                                           ------             122 i                        3 I.             1,434              6::'..l.:::.:::_:_J 091 EXHIBIT WAC-1 TLG Services, Inc.                                                                                                                                000133

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant Document Ll 1-1703-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 3, Page 47 of 52 TABLE 3.5 (continued) COMANCHE PEAK NUCLEAR POWER PLANT, UNIT 2 SAFSTOR ALTERNATIVE SCHEDULE OF TOTAL ANNUAL EXPENDITURES (thousands, 2014 dollars) Equipment & Year Labor Materials Energy Burial Other Total 2064

--~*---**          .

3,908 641 ' 122 3 - - - 1,438

                                                                                    - - - -.         6,112
' 2065               3,897 .             640             122              3         1,434 i          6,097 '
--2066'-*----3~3-97~----640-**-. ---*122-~=~=~i-=--=1Ts4*~---*6:097-,

2067 3,897 640 122 _3____1,434 __.__~_097

-~068 -              3,908               641             122              3         1,438 .          6.!.112 2069            3,897        ___    64_2_,_____     122              3         1,434            6,097 2070            3,897____,____      640             122              3         1,434            6,097

__207!.__ _ _3,897 ,___ 64Q_____)2?______3__:._ 1,434 -*-* 6,097 _ 2072 3,908 641 122 3 1,438 6,112 __: __ ?07_;'.L ________?2 §97 *-*-***----- ~'!Q. _________ J_gg_______ ------~----- __h1:34_______ ~2 097__._ __207_!_____~,897 _____ _§40 ________g_~---------3______1..J...434 ___ 6,091_: 2075 0897 ~---- 640 122 3 1_434 _ _6,097 __ _1.076 - 3,908 ____ §_41 ____~-----~--_1j;38 ____ ji.J._!_12 . ___?077_____3897 . 640 122. 3 1,434 6,097 2078 3,897 640 122 3 1 434

~---*--*-* -----*-" *-- .. - ----------**** ---*----.. -------------------::.1---*------*---*

6,097 2079 3,897 640 122 3 1,434 6,097 . 2080 3,908 641 122 3 1,438 6,112 2081 2,054 . 375 122 3 _l,017 3,571 2082 2,054 375 122 3____1,0~ 7 31..571 . 2083 14,996 1,888 ; 661 9 1,041 18,595 ; _2084.____ 29,985 . 41858 . 1,219 16 1, 136 37,215 . 2085 54,421 : ~1,742 . 1,155 27,409 15,419 : 130,147 . 2086 43,352 12,826-'-------*------*----~--------1

959 . 10, 140 . 6,467 ! 73, 744

' 2087 40,570 ! 8, 108 I 911 5,822 4,228 I 59,639 I i2Q88 __ , 40,681 ! 8, 1~ 914 5,838 I 4,240 ; 59,802 j r r 2089 2090 : 28,691 1 19, 528 1 3,954 i 17,426 I_ 477 134 2,051 i 1 , 5,349 4, 159 _ Ir= 40,523 , 41,248 I I 2091 19,208 I 19,253 I 122 : 0 3,950 . 42,533 . t)a_02.;----l,895r--l,89!JT-12r----o;-390-'=4,~ I I. J9-!;1_ ~t 588, 135 : 196,619 I 14, 768 : 52,068 ! 145,810 -~97~399 j EXHIBIT WAC-1 TLG Services, Inc. 000134

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant Document Lll-1703-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 3, Page 48 of 52 TABLE 3.5a COMANCHE PEAK NUCLEAR POWER PLANT, UNIT 2 SAFSTOR ALTERNATIVE SCHEDULE OF LICENSE TERMINATION EXPENDITURES (thousands, 2014 dollars) Equipment& Year Labor Materials Energy Burial Other Total

----*                                                                               ~-------.------

2033 r--------------**-

35,242 ' 1,544 ! 1,109 18 l 2,061 39,973

2034 27,744 6,732 772 593: 10,243 46,083 '.

=* 2035 -~=-=~.054______§Z.7..~--- 122 7 : 1,039 3, 750 '

__ 2036 _____2,0§0________529 *___ 122 ___1:=J.04z:~*---3~760 ~ 2037 2,054 527

 -*---~*-**--------------. - - - - - - - - - * - - - - - - - -

122 7 ' 1,039 3,750 --*1

 ----~9_38 -----~i.954_ _______________4~Q__________            1~g___________..§ _: ____ - J,0_~4__ ---- --~.§_§].__.

__ _2039 ____?,054 ' 379 122________;?~---~*02t}_ _____ __?,586 - .-* 2040 ___ __?~60 _____ l_~Q.__:_ 122 . 3 ___l,030 ____ _£}59,L

 ~g_04!_ _____ 2,_054 - -

379 ---~ _____£_____ 1,028 - - 3,586~

 ,._104:g______ ~,05.1_ _____;=n9 ------~--------L __ _hQ_~!-__3,586
 ' - ~_9_4~---------~1.9-~!. ____ -- *- _____3_7~_:_ .. _______ J~~- *------ __ _? __ - _____ )::,_Q~§..... --- ____ ?.LQ.8_6 -
 *_~Q-!_4____ __?.i.060 ______ 380 -**---- 122 _                                3             l,O~_Q________~,59~-

2045 2,054 379 122__. ---~ _ __1,028 3,586 . 2046 2,054 _____379 _____ 12~----~-: 1,028 . 3,586 __ 2047 ___ 2,054 ____ 379 _.: _______l.~L 3 __!~28 _ _3,586_, . 2048 2,060 ___illiQ___ 122 3 1,030 ~,595 . 2049 2,054 379 . 122 3 '. 1,028 3,586 : 2050 2,054 379 ' 122 : 3 . 1,028 ' 3,586 '

 -- 2051 '           2,054 .          *--379-;                  122      -      3             1,028 ;                3,586 .

~-- *2052_=~=-2:06Q~~------- 380_:_______,__122--- ---- ---3-~-- ---- l,080- .---------3~*595*~

2053 2,054 37~ i 122 . 3 1,028 . 3,586 .; 2054 2,054 379 i 122 ; 3 ; li028 ! 3,586
--2055- 2,054 . 37.QJ_ 122 3: 1,028!___ 3,586]

2056 2,060 - 380 1

----------*-----~-------~------~----*--***---J 122 -. 1,030 i 3 I__________________ 3,595 li I 2057 , 2,054

379 J 122 : 3 j 1,028 i 3,586 I

                                                   .                                                    ;                      I

~

2058 _;_ 2,054 i 379 ! 122 i 3 i 1,028 ! 3,586 .

I 2059 ; I 3 I

2060 L

2,054 i 2,060 I 1 379 380 1 i 122 122 3 , 3 ~_1,028 1,028 i 1,030 rf----- 3,586 I _3,5951 I 2062 r* 2061 2063 2,054 2,054 2,054 l_ L 379 379 I 37~-- 122 122 122 1+/- 1,0~~-+--- __?,5861 3 __ 1,9~ _____:t_586 3,586 -1 EXHIBIT WAC-1 TLG Services, Inc. 000135

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant Document Lll-1703-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 3, Page 49 of 52 TABLE 3.5a (continued) COMANCHE PEAK NUCLEAR POWER PLANT, UNIT 2 SAFSTOR ALTERNATIVE SCHEDULE OF LICENSE TERMINATION EXPENDITURES (thousands, 2014 dollars) Equipment & Year Labor Materials Energy Burial Other Total

~* *---------

____2064_____+/-,060 -*--- 380 --~~-._____ _E____ 1,030 __;_ ___~,595 _ ____2Q~------ __ g,054 ________379 ________ _l_gg______________ ~-------_1,02~: ____ ~,5_86: --~066 ---~54 _* 379 ' 122 3 1,028 3,586__ __2067______b954 ; ---~79 ---~2_.____ --1____ 1,028 3,586 ---~Q_Q§_ __ __b_Q_6_Q_ ___ ~?:Q____ 12~-----~_____ __1Q30 ___1,_595 - __ 206~ ____ 2,054 ___ 379_______~_L_._____________§ 1,028 3_...§86_ 2070_ 2,054 - - - - 379_.___l~L_ ____ £________ 1,028 - 3,586 2071 2,0~4_' ,.__ 379_______ 122 ______. _3 _____ _1,028 -----~~86 ___307L ______ 2,060 ____380 1___ 122 3 . 1,030 ~95__

~92~----** .. - _g,0§_1 ____ . *-- -~7.§! __ --*--*-- 122_______________ J ________,__ 1_Qg_~----*-***--?. . ~~-~--

2074 ~054 . --- 379 __ 122 3 1,028 ____9-_,5~~ 2075 2,054 379 122 ___3__"_____li_02~------ 3,586_ --~QlL_ __ 2,060 380 12~---_____ 3 --- 1,030 ?,595 - 2077 2,054 - 379 122 3 1,02~ 3,586 __2QJ§_ _____ --~Q~j_____ - _ _?7~________J.~~----------~---*--*--*1, 028 _______3, 5~§__ 2079 2,054 *___ 379 122 3 1,028 __M86 _20_§.Q._ ___2,Q60 - - - 380 - - - 122 3 1,030 ~Q95 2081 2,054 375 122 3 1,017 3,571 2082 2,054 375 122 ___3__ 1,017 3,571 2083 14,846 ___ __1_888 ---~----~;__ 1,041_ _ _18,44~-~ 2084 29,440 4,858 1,219 16 1,!36 36,669 2085 52,221 31,549 : 1,155 ----* 27,409 15,410 1~7,744

-2086

    -------        41,917
                      ----  , - -* 12,----------*----------------*~---*---------=i_

715 959 10,140 I 6,465 72 195 ___ _ 2087 39,326 : 8,018 ' 911 5,822 \ 4,228 : 58,305_:

2088 39,434 . 8,040 : 914 5,838 ! 4,240 ' 58,465 !

i 2089 28,255 l 3,923 ' 477 i 2,051 I 5,349 40,055 I i 2090 2,364 :____11fil 25 ! 1 L - 620 : 3,189 : i 2091 ~ 2092 r 50 ! 0 i

                      *--5T----4---------0~------

0 l

                                                                        --*:q *- - ---*--a*T---------51 0 I                0 I               50 I l_'rotal 1

409.swf---98,161 :-::o-t-- ~~~~~io:*-.961_j EXHIBIT WAC-1 TLG Services, Inc. 000136

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant Document Lll-1703-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 3, Page 50 of 52 TABLE 3.5b. COMANCHE PEAK NUCLEAR POWER PLANT, UN1T 2 SAFSTOR ALTERNATIVE SCHEDULE OF SPENT FUEL MANAGEMENT EXPENDITURES (thousands, 2014 dollars) Equipment& Year Labor Materials Energy Burial Other Total

                                --.------r-*------***-*--------                                                                                    .

_2033 -*___2,976 ___8,929 i _ _ _ _ o_*_.____o_ ______ 1,326 ; ___13,23J_i 2034

1 7,004 ' 9, 192 I 49 o_ _i_.__

2, 723 ; 18,968 . 2035 . 12,597 8,641 : 122 . 0 4,585 25,944 ~- 2036 *. -- 1_2,6l_l ~=--- _§,665 j_ _122_~ _______j______ 4,598 26,015 ~

2037 12,597 ' 8,641 I 122

                                                                      ----~---*--------------*-------

0 : 4,585 ' 25,944 : . 2038

--------~*---*--**

8,053 ' 5,020 71 0 2,834

                        --------.-*----*-*-*-**--**-*t-*--*----*"' -------*----------*---- -----*---------*-----------...

15,977

-- 2039 _:_ ___1_757_____ ,_ _?_.J..______Q__ . ____ _Q_____ 407                                                                           2, 166

'"_2040 -.-- 1, 76g__,_ 2 .\ 0 _______Q______ 40~------ 2, 172

2041 . __h84~---- 261 : 0 _,____ 0 407 . 2,511

__go42 --* 1,843 26L__ _Q______.__Q______407 __ 2,511 _ 2043 ,_,_ -*--*---*-1,843 _.._________ 261 ; 0 0 . 407 2,511

_2044 - - - 1,848 . __ 261 ______ _iL_;__________Q______ _.iQ§______~517__

2045 1,843 -----~61 '----- 0 : 0 .______ 407 *___ 2,511 2046 1,843 . 261 !' 0 0

                                                                                              --------~--*----

407 - -2,511 --- 2047 1,843 261

                                                           !                    0                     0                    407             2,511     .

2048 1,848 . 261 0 0 408 , 2,517 ~ 2049 --* 1,843 261 l 0

                                                             -------------*----<-*-~-~

0 ' 407 : 2,511 2050 1,843 ' 261 : 0 0 407 : 2,511 .

- 2051                   1,843 .                  261 :                         0 :                   0 .                  407 ~           2,511-*

.~:=2052 ~--;-- ~---1.848 ___________ -i6iT___ ---..----a* :_ _=_=-=_~---Q~==~ios _: _____, __2~511-=

. 2053 '                 _1,843 l             - 261 :______2-i________ ~--                                                 407 i           2,511,..

! 2054 .

--------t---~

1,843 i 261 ! 0 ---*-

                                                                                ----!                 0 : . 407 '                          2,511

2055 , 1,843 l 261 I o : o ; 407 : 2,511 ,

j-2056 ~- 1,848T-261T_---O_____ o_! ____ 4o8 i - - 2,5171

----*- -+-*--*----*;-r--- -- - r - - - -- ----*-<-----------:--- - - - - -

L 2057 j__J_!.~43 ~-2058 __~;__ _1,843 1 I l 261 I 261 I __ jl_+--- 0T 0 l 0 i 407 ! 407 I r-*-------. 2,511 ! 2,511 ~ i 2059 I 1,843 l 261 I 0 I 0 : 407 II 2,511 I I 2060 ~ 1,848 I 264 ____Q_~-- o j 408 . 2~ I 2061 i__ 1,84~ _ _ 26..!_L_ o ; ____o

407 1 2,511 J 2062 : 1,843 1 261-f_______ Q_ 1_ _ _ _ _ _ _ 0 I 407 2,511 !

t 2063_ : 1,8~ 1 26l_L_ ____ _gJ _____ O_J_ 407 2,511 I EXHIBIT WAC-1 TLG Services, Inc. 000137

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant Document Lll-1703-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 3, Page 51of52 TABLE 3.5b (continued) COMANCHE PEAK NUCLEAR POWER PLANT, UNIT 2 SAFSTOR ALTERNATIVE SCHEDULE OF SPENT FUEL MANAGEMENT EXPENDITURES (thousands, 2014 dollars) Equipment & Year Labor Materials Energy Burial Other Total

2064 1,848 ' 261 : 0 i 0 408 -*----2,517

- 2065 _ _1;843 )______ 261 :-------0-:--- 0 407 -2,511. -~--------*----- - - - - - - - -*-------*--- -*-------..!..---- --------- ---**--------- - - - - --~ 2066

-----------1----- 1,843 I 261 ' 0 0

                                                       *-**----*------**--*------  407          2,511

- 2061 ~--1843 ;_ _ _261_____Q~*_____Q__ 407 ----~§_!L 2068 1,848 . . 26L____Q._____ o. 408 -~,517_ 2069 __1.§_'&~.___ __g§_! ___________g_*_______ _Q______!Q7______ ~511 _ 2010 !&'!~;_____ ~6l_____ _Q__~ _____ o___ 407 2,511 2011 UH.?__ : ____261 _*______Q___ .________Q___ 407 2,51L 2072 1,848' 261_______Q_ _____ _Q _____ 408__ 2,517 ---~Q?~ ___________ !l_84_?_;______ ~6~----- _. ______ Q_____ -** _____Q______ ____ jO~L__ ---~L5JJ _ 2074 1,843 ! 261 0 0 407 2,511 ~2075*- 1,84.~--*-- 261__

____ _Q,_*-*-*---~- 0 -=--407----2:5ii-2076 1,848 -~!ll. _______Q_____ o_____ __jQ.§_ _ _~,517_

2077 1,843 261 *------ 0 0 407 2,511 2078 1,843 ; 261 0 0

r----- --*------ *-*- -- ------****- ---* ------ -- -- --------------- 407 2,511 .

2079 1,843 ; 261 0 . 0 407 _2,5Ll_ 2080 1,848 261 0 ____Q ______ 408 2,517

                          -r' Total         133,146     I    59,541                485~ ___0__               37,749      _2-30,920 -

EXHIBIT WAC-1 TLG Services, Inc. 000138

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant Document Ll 1-1703-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 3, Page 52 of 52 TABLE 3.5c COMANCHE PEAK NUCLEAR POWER PLANT, UNIT 2 SAFSTOR ALTERNATIVE SCHEDULE OF SITE RESTORATION EXPENDITURES (thousands, 2014 dollars) Equipment& Year Labor Materials Energy Burial Other Total

2033-82 0 0 : 0 0 0 o*

I *

   . 2083                        150 .
                --------------l--*-------------0 o-i                o                                      0              150 :
   ~__gp84 -~---~-45 ________<2~---- 0                                                     0                   o*             545:
   ' 2085                     2,200 ----~4 _ _ _Q______Q__ _______1Q_ ___ 2,403 __.'.

_ 2086 . 1,435 _ _111 *_ _ _ _Q_____Q_ _ _ _ _L___ 1,548

   ,_ __ g087 -- ----- -- .1_?_4_4_ __ ---.------~9--~---- -_______ Q__________ -- __ _9~---------- __Q______1, 334 --
   ~ __g_088 ~---1,24 ?_ ______ _!}o ~ _ _ _ _                          o______            o                   o           1,338 _

2089 436 32 . ___ j>________ _9_* -- 0 . 468 . 2090 1_7)64 17,248 109 .0 3,539 _l_§,060 .

    --~091__                19,158         __19,253 __;____ 12~_______9___~9@_ __ 42_,483
   ,_ --~_Q~_? ___ - -- _____ J,&§)Q ----- -- ..!!..~~~. ----- -- -____1~_ -- --. - ... -----°------- -- __3-~_Q__,_________j,JjtQ__
   . Total                  4~5,~47_0_ _3_8~,9_1_6~.-           __g_4L_ _______9_____ 7,890 ____::_;92=*=51=8=-..

EXHIBIT WAC-1 TLG Services, Inc. 000139

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant Document Lll-1703-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 4, Page 1of8

4. SCHEDULE ESTIMATE The schedules for the decommissioning scenarios considered in this study follow the sequences presented in the AIF/NESP-036 study, with minor changes to reflect recent experience and site-specific constraints. In addition, the scheduling has been revised to reflect the spent fuel management ~lan described in Section 3.5.1.

A schedule or sequence of activities for the DECON alternative is presented in Figure 4.1. The scheduling sequence is based on the fuel being removed from the spent fuel pools within five and one half years. The key activities listed in the schedule do not reflect a one-to-one correspondence with those activities in the cost tables, but reflect dividing some activities for clarity and combining others for convenience. The schedule was prepared using the "Microsoft Project Professional 2010" computer software.130J 4.1 SCHEDULE ESTIMATE ASSUMPTIONS The schedule reflects the results of a precedence network developed for the site decommissioning activities, i.e., a PERT (Program Evaluation and Review Technique) Software Package. The work activity durations used.in the precedence network reflect the actual man-hour estimates from the cost table, adjusted by stretching certain activities over their slack range and shifting the start and end dates of others. The following assumptions were made in the development of the decommissioning schedule:

The fuel building is isolated until such time that all spent fuel has been discharged from the spent fuel pools to the ISFSI for interim storage.

Decontamination and dismantling of the storage pools is initiated once the transfer of spent fuel is complete (DECON alternative). c All work (except vessel and internals removal) is performed during an 8-hour workday, 5 days per week, with no overtime. There are eleven paid holidays per year.

        " Reactor and internals removal activities are performed by using separate crews for different activities working on different shifts, with a corresponding backshift charge for the second shift.
        " Multiple crews work parallel activities to the maximum extent possible, consistent with optimum efficiency, adequate access for cutting, removal and laydown space, and with the stringent safety measures necessary during demolition of heavy components and structures.

EXHIBIT WAC-1 L_ TLG Services, Inc. 000140

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant Document Lll-1703-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 4, Page 2 of 8 4.2 PROJECT SCHEDULE The period-dependent costs presented in the detailed cost tables are based upon the durations developed in the schedules for decommissioning. Durations are established between several milestones in each project period; these durations are used to establish a critiGal path for the entire project. In turn, the critical path duration for each period is used as the basis for determining the period-dependent costs. A second critical path is shown for the spent fuel storage period, which determines the release of the fuel building for final decontamination. Project timelines are provided in Figures 4.2 and 4.3, with milestone dates based on the 2030 and 2033 shutdown dates for Units 1 and 2, respectively. The fuel pools are emptied approximately five and one half years after Unit 2 shutdown, while ISFSI operations continue until the DOE can complete the transfer of assemblies to its geologic repository. Deferred decommissioning in the SAFSTOR alternative is assumed to commence so that the site can be released for alternative use, excluding the ISFSI, within a 60-year period from the cessation of plant operations. EXHIBIT WAC-1 TLG Services, Inc. 000141

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant Document Lll-1703-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 4, Page 3 of 8 FIGURE 4.1 ACTIVITY SCHEDULE

                                                        'l-1 n   n n Y-i E Yo VJ n n -          * " ~ i: ~J *
~        ~~>T+:eramPW                                        liiii
~        ~-.+wrwr~                                           liil
~        ~-:..,nmi"*Bell                                     t
~        'E"~~dl!""""_._~db.li~                              ~

U- ~~,a,,; 11 "'"*~mim~!!i&*;;" ...Jl >-

DOlt ~.mp;;,'bea ~

fernii llo Cn::i: n. -JIT.e:nvu:mmii;rmxg~ 'iil"i

-u       lf:mJ!~~~                                               liill l5       ~~ ..........rn...el                                    !Iii
--ni     ~!E.a:~~                                                 Iii 17 a-       ~r~
                                                                 ~

lil f!l!lrlbe~ tba:JPmL leciiixiZa r:..mt 1- ~ifWBlf'-~

v """'Iii M~pmn"F""'"'"""' I iili

  -      ~&a:~~
         ~lbir~~~
                                                                     'iiii I

Ra.=..ema:&~ iii liiliiii liiiiii EXHIBIT WAC-1 TLG Services, Inc. 000142

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant Document Lll-1703-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 4, Page 4 of 8 FIGURE 4.1 (continued) ACTIVITY SCHEDULE R-=--~liJema tmei~paD.~

           ~l!E{~c¥uci**m ms-~-"'!f ......1 ;!::llll!!l:EiS~
           ~~'"*'~-au:~
   ~    ~:!.iau:n:.:~~waw~                                                         'ii
--s        Diiibn~~                                                                *
'"""E    . !lilmm..Wil!ll~~:imm                                                    *
~       ~~ilrmm:n-~W-~l!i!cmi
'-Q        ~~
~          !Fmi~                                                                             *
~       U:iUt 2 Opm:io;;_.
~       ~11r=:!?                                                      *,.,..,
~

4ii

~
   -&ti Fuel stora:e pool operanons R~onf.:iue pliat Dry fa.el !tonge op;!ration.;

I ii 49 ~~~ l liiii. Si] Mmm&d:aaaz:e:iu:aci

~          ~w1lj,111jj;WI IJ!;"~rwu5caedl!"'""__.. lll!!mlm!1l.mfmll "'"'""mn=J
                                                                      *~
                                                                     ~

i5 ma::a.aDc C'IC!t'.!-l!b.mmnmi~~ ,...

~          Fu~! atcra:e :i:ool operat:cru                                     Iii
----=--
   ~.,     Rieo:cf~.tre pla:at (co:ati:a11ei)
--s5       ~il21~4P'""i-"                                                     iii EXHIBIT WAC-1 TLG Services, Inc.                                                                                     000143

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant Document Lll-1703-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 4, Page 5 of 8 FIGURE 4.1 (continued) ACTIVITY SCHEDULE lJ IW

     ~:!.et:m?-Iap.............,.m&OW F2i~pad.o~
       ~w:~~

Pr~puation Cof r~actor v~.!;ei Io!.lll.O\"'ai II R~a~to~ ":es.?-l & mt~rn.a!.3 iiiili llta'm~~ ii iii

~~

ii-.-,,,;;,.,.. ;.;eip;:m...Eaimwmrel f12el at-ora;~ pool opeuno1" DI;- fu.~ ston~ ope:rariona Rano..-e .iJ3~e'in.J net .supp~g ~-et fuel sto~.ig~ n~co:a lnrildm.:3 not !Upp~-~et fu~l !tOt3.g~

       ~'ffilf1tia1!1i1,;,,~~

i'.ali~poil~m.r........,nmrsii,.rn,1:

       ~w~!Jl""W1""""
                                      -" ** * ,,., ~IR'ltiaef.stDl!llge                ...

Iii

       ~Vflltilj ij!itsg Epl!Sr.9                                                       Ii ii Deco?> "Xet fu.el storai:e s::ea                                                 Ii ii
                                                                                            *Iii
                                                                                             *~

i EXHIBIT WAC-1 TLG Services, Inc. 000144

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant Document Lll-1703-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 4, Page 6 of 8 FIGURE 4.1 (continued) ACTIVITY SCHEDULE m ]'d.?~

                                                           ~-1 n Y! n n Yi Yi Yi rili! vs      CO*

I! Pl!Cd<flt 1L"'Jmt 11:!-S'Pei:-~ e Builbg d.e~ohrior.3, back£il sr.d. lar..Ucap~ ... EXHIBIT WAC-1 TLG Services, Inc. 000145

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant DocumentLJJ-1703-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 4, Page 7 of 8 FIGURE 4.2 DECOMMISSIONING TIMELINE DE CON (not to scale) Unitl Shutdown END I ,, Period 2 Period 3 Period 1 Decommissioning Site ISFSI Preparations Operations Restoration ISFSI Operations D&D Jun-2081 Feb -2030 Aug-2031 Feb-2040 Feb-2042 Dec-2080 Fuel Pool Operations Spent Fuel Transfer Aug-2038 to DOE ISFSI Operations 2041 Unit2 Shutdown END It Period 2 Period 3 Period 1 Decommissioning Site ISFSI Preparations Operations Restoration ISFSI Operations D&D A"""* "" Feb -2033 Jun-2081 Aug-2034 Feb-2040 Feb-2042 Dec-2080 EXHIBIT WAC-1 TLG Services, Inc. 000146

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant Document Lll-1703-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 4, Page 8 of 8 FIGURE 4.3 DECOMMISSIONING TIMELINE SAFSTOR (not to scale) Unitl Shutdown END I Period 1 Period4 Period S SAFSTOR Period 2 Period 3 Decommissioning Site Preparations Safe-Storage Planning Operations Restoration Feb-2092 Feb-2030 Aug-2031 Jun-2082 Dec-2083 Feb-2090 Fuel Pool Operations Aug-2038 Spent Fuel Transfer to DOE ISFSI Operations 2041 2080 Unit2 Shutdown END I Period 2 Period4 Period 5 ' Period 1 Decommissioning Period 3 Decommissioning Site Preparations Operations Planning Operations Restoration Feb-2033 Feb*2092 Aug-2034 Jul-2083 Jan-2085 Feb-2090 EXHIBIT WAC-1 TLG Services, Inc. 000147

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant Document Lll-1703-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 5, Page 1 of 6

5. RADIOACTIVEWASTES The objectives of the decommissioning process are the removal of all radioactive material from the site that would restrict its future use and the termination of the NRC license. This currently requires the remediation of all radioactive material at the site in excess of applicable legal limits. Under the Atomic Energy Act,!31] the NRC is responsible for protecting the public from sources of ionizing radiation. Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations delineates the production, utilization, and disposal of radioactive materials and processes. In particular, Part 71 defines radioactive material as it pertains to transportation and Part 61 specifies its disposition.

Most of the materials being transported for controlled burial are categorized as Low Specific Activity (LSA) or Surface Contaminated Object (SCO) materials containing Type A quantities, as defined in 49 CFR Parts 173-178. Shipping containers are required to be Industrial Packages (IP-1, IP-2 or IP-3, as defined in 10 CFR §173.411). For this study, commercially available steel containers are presumed to be used for the disposal of piping, small components, and concrete. Larger components can serve as their own containers, with proper closure of all openings, access ways, and penetrations. The destinations for the various waste streams from decommissioning are identified in Figures 5.1 and 5.2. The volumes are shown on a line-item basis in Appendices C and D and summarized in Tables 5.1 and 5.2. The volumes are calculated based on the exterior dimensions for containerized material and on the displaced volume of components serving as their own waste containers. The reactm vessel and internals are categorized as large quantity shipments and, accordingly, will be shipped in reusable, shielded truck casks with disposable liners. In calculating disposal costs, the burial fees are applied against the liner volume, as well as the special handling requirements of the payload. Packaging efficiencies are lower for the highly activated materials (greater than Type A quantity waste), where high concentrations of gamma-emitting radionuclides limit the capacity of the shipping canisters. No process system containing/handling radioactive substances at shutdown is presumed to meet material release criteria by decay alone (i.e., systems radioactive at shutdown will still be radioactive over the time period during which the decommissioning is accomplished, due to the presence of long-lived radionuclides). While the dose rates decrease with time, radionuclides such as 137Cs will still control the disposition requirements. EXHIBIT WAC-1 TLG Services, Inc. 000148

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant Document Lll-1703-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 5, Page 2 of 6 The waste material produced in the decontamination and dismantling of the nuclear plants is primarily generated during Period 2 of DECON and Period 4 of SAFSTOR. Contaminated components and activated materials are routed for controlled disposal. For purposes of constructing the estimates, waste disposal costs are based upon Luminant's current rates for disposal at the Texas Compact facility, operated by Waste Control Specialists. EXHIBIT WAC-1 TLG Services, Inc. 000149

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant Document Lll-1703-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 5, Page 3 of 6 FIGURE 5.1 RADIOACTIVE WASTE DISPOSITION 01\W Re.sin I Filters l (Cassi\)

                                              'i I

Direct Burial l l

                                           . ,. Containerized Waste t

Decommissioning Low-level Radioactive Waste

                                                '\    Bulk Waste
                                                ; (amtaminated Son I

Waste Control Specialists Andrews County, I!

Streams i and Concrete) ! Texas f Reactor Waste t

                                                 '      (Cass A)

I Reactor Waste {Classes 8/Cl Resin L NSSS Decontamination (ClassB/C) Reactor Waste {Class GTCC)

                                                                                       . Geologic Disposal Federal Facility EXHIBIT WAC-1 TLG Services, Inc.                                                                                         000150

1 I Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant Document Lll-1703-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 5, Page 4 of 6 FIGURE 5.2 DECOMMISSIONING WASTE DESTINATIONS RADIOLOGICAL EXHIBIT WAC-1 TLG Services, Inc. 000151

Document Lll-1703-001, Rev. 0 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant Section 5, Page 5 of 6 Decommissioning Cost Analysis TABLE 5.1 DECON ALTERNATIVE DECOMMISSIONING WASTE

SUMMARY

r--~~--- --i-*-- *-~-----,-----*- Waste Volume I Mass i-- Waste --+- Cost Basis I I Class [l] 1 I I (cubic feet) :

(pounds) i----- I Low-Level Radioactive Waste Control \ I 39,443,421 I l1 Waste (near-surface l disposal) II Specialists (WCS) A B 566,077 3,653 l

+-

I 418,723 l I i j l1 l I c 673 I 90,169 1~-- l

                                  \                Ii I

Ii II

                             -+                                                          I j Greater than Class C         I 1

Spent Fuel I l I (geologic repository) I E~alent ! GTCC i I 4,433 l 850,025 l I Il ! l l I I i r-- L~ [2] l ' I

                     ---.~~l--~----J~____L_.____5l'!i83~7_.~..+/-9.t8o1~--l I              I

[lJ Waste is classified according to the requirements as delineated in Title 10 CFR, Part 61.55 [21 Columns may not add due to rounding. EXHIBITWAC-1 000152 TLG Seruices, Inc.

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant Document LJJ-1703-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 5, Page 6 of 6 TABLE 5.2 SAFSTOR ALTERNATIVE DECOMMISSIONING WASTE

SUMMARY

r* ~---1'

                                  ,--    Cost Basis
                                                      ~

I Class [1] I w~~~i~~;:e

                                                                                             . Ma~~

(pounds) I I l el Radioactive Ij Waste Control I I AB

                                                                      ~                                  I Waste (near-surface                     Specialists II,    57 3 38 4

38,824,56~

osal) lj (WCS) ! i 1,002 101,00Lt I C I 673 90,169 I ~reater than Class C Spent Fuel I µg_eo_l_og~i_c_r~ep~o_s_it_o~ry~)___-+-_E__q~u_i_v_al_e_nt,_-+-_G_TCC_ _ _ _ _4.~,4_3_3___ 850,025 f I l. I I i !. !l

                  ------~!                                I            j                I                1 Totall l __ ~*---~!~*---~~~fil~..t 2

l1l Waste is classified according to the requirements as delineated in Title 10 CFR, Part 61.55 121 Columns may not add due to rounding. EXHIBIT WAC-1 TLG Services, Inc. 000153

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant Document Lll-1703-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 6, Page 1 of 5

6. RESULTS The analysis to estimate the costs to decommission Comanche Peak relied upon the site-specific, technical information developed for a previous analysis prepared in 2010, updated to reflect current assumptions pertaining to the disposition of the nuclear station and relevant industry experience in undertaking such projects.

While not an engineering study, the estimates provide Luminant with sufficient information to assess their financial obligations, as they pertain to the eventual decommissioning of the nuclear station. The estimates described in this report are based on numerous fundamental assumptions, including regulatory requirements, project contingencies, low-level radioactive waste disposal practices, high-level radioactive waste management options, and site restoration requirements. The decommissioning scenarios assume continued operation of the station's spent fuel pools for a minimum of five and one half years following the cessation of operations for continued cooling of the assemblies.

The cost projected to promptly decommission the station, manage the spent fuel, and restore the site, is estimated to be $1.669 billion. The majority of this cost (approximately 64.1%) is associated with the physical decontamination and dismantling of the nuclear plant so that the operating license can be terminated.

Another 27.2% is associated with the management, interim storage, and eventual transfer of the spent fuel. The remaining 8. 7% is for the demolition of the designated structures and limited restoration of the site. The cost projected for deferred decommissioning (SAFSTOR) is estimated to be $1.911 billion. The majority of this cost (approximately 67.7%) is associated with placing the plant in storage, ongoing caretaking of the plant during dormancy, and the eventual physical decontamination and dismantling of the nuclear plant so that the operating license can be terminated. Another 24.8% is associated with the management, interim storage, and eventual transfer of the spent fuel. The remaining 7.5% is for the demolition of the designated structures and limited restoration of the site. The primary cost contributors, identified in Tables 6.1 and 6.2, are either labor-related or associated with the management and disposition of the radioactive waste. Program management is the largest single contributor to the overall cost. The magnitude of the expense is a function of both the size of the organization required to manage the decommissioning, as well as the duration of the program. It is assumed, for purposes of this analysis, that Luminant will hire a Decommissioning Operations Contractor (DOC) to manage the decommissioning. The owner will EXHIBIT WAC-1 TLG Services, Inc. 000154

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant Document Lll-1703-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 6, Page 2 of 5 provide site security, radiological health and safety, quality assurance and overall site administration during the decommissioning and demolition phases. Contract personnel will provide engineering services, e.g., for preparing the activity specifications, work procedures, activation, and structural analyses, under the direction of the owner. The size and composition of the management organization varies with the decommissioning phase and associated site activities. However, once the operating licenses are terminated, the staff is substantially reduced for the conventional demolition and restoration of the site, and the long-term care of the spent fuel (for the DECON alternative). Finally, both the estimates for DECON and SAFSTOR include the costs of disposing of the retired steam generators, the reactor vessel closure head, and spare high and low pressure turbine rotors from Unit 1. The study assumes that the disposal of the components would occur after shutdown, however, the costs are identified separately because the disposal activities could be conducted at any time. As described in this report, the spent fuel pools will remain operational for a minimum of five and one half years following the cessation of operations. The pools will be isolated and an independent spent fuel island created. This will allow decommissioning operations to proceed in and around the pool area. Over the five and one half-year period, the spent fuel will be packaged into transportable canisters for relocation to the ISFSI. The cost for waste disposal includes only those costs associated with the controlled disposition of the low-level radioactive waste generated from decontamination and dismantling activities, including plant equipment and components, structural material, filters, resins and dry-active waste. As described in Section 5, disposition of the low-level radioactive material requiring controlled disposal will be at Waste Control Specialists' Andrews County facility. Highly activated components, requiring additional isolation from the environment (GTCC), are packaged for geologic disposal. The cost of geologic disposal is based upon a cost equivalent for spent fuel. Removal costs reflect the labor-intensive nature of the decommissioning process, as well as the management controls required to ensure a safe and successful program. Decontamination and packaging costs also have a large labor component that is based upon prevailing wages. Non-radiological demolition is a natural extension of the decommissioning process. With a work force mobilized to support decommissioning operations, non-radiological demolition can be an integrated activity and a logical expansion of the work being performed in the process of terminating the operating license. Prompt demolition reduces future liabilities and can be more cost effective than deferral, due to the deterioration of the facilities (and therefore the working conditions) with time. EXHIBIT WAC-1 TLG Services, Inc. 000155

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant Document Lll-1703-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 6, Page 3 of 5 The reported cost for transport includes the tariffs and surcharges associated with moving large components and/or overweight shielded casks overland, as well as the general expense, e.g., labor and fuel, of transporting material to the destinations identified in this report. For purposes of this analysis, material is primarily moved overland by truck. Decontamination is used to reduce the plant's radiation fields and minimize worker exposure. License termination survey costs are associated with the labor intensive and complex activity of verifying that contamination has been removed from the site to the levels specified by the regulating agency. This process involves a systematic survey of all remaining plant surface areas and surrounding environs, sampling, isotopic analysis, and documentation of the findings. The status of any plant components and materials not removed in the decommissioning process will also require confirmation and will add to the expense of surveying the facilities alone. The remaining costs include allocations for heavy equipment and temporary services, as well as for other expenses such as regulatory fees and the premiums for nuclear insurance. While site operating costs are greatly reduced following the final cessation of plant operations, certain administrative functions do need to be maintained either at a basic functional or regulatory level. EXHIBIT WAC-1 TLG Services, Inc. 000156

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant Document Lll-1703-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 6, Page 4 of 5 TABLE6.l DECON ALTERNATIVE DECOMMISSIONING COST ELEMENTS (thousands of 2014 dollars) Cost Element

                                                                              ---~-..

Total I P~~~tage I Decontamination 1' 27,296 I 1.6 I Removal I 247,875 14.8 Packaging I 59,382 I 3.6 I Transportation

Waste Disposal i

l 13,199 138,822 0.8 8.3 I Off-site Waste Processing [I] ! 0 0.0 I Pro ram Management [21 Security S ent Fuel Pool Isolation 514,552 235,507 20, 724 30.§_j 14.1 1.2 l S ent Fuel Management (Direct Costs) [SJ 251,460 15.l~ Insurance and Regulatory Fees 49,380 *130 Ener 14,299 9 Characterization and Licensing Surveys 41,411 2~5 ~rty Taxes 9,656 0.6 f~llaneous Equipment ! 13, 770 . 0.8 I Decommissioning Staff Severance . : 32,082 ! ~ ~ i I ~ -..-..---~ Cost Element

                 ~-         ----                     =          ~~*
                                                                         'l Total     ]   Percenta~
                                                                        !I                 I License Termination (excluding retired large components)                I 1,061,064        I        63.0 Large Components (retired) [5]                                          I I

I 18,765 I 1.1 Spent Fuel Management 453,591 I 27.2 ite ~estorat10n

                                                -                        t I

145,995 I *-1 s.1 bTotal [41

--~~~.-....._..~--~-

111

                                                    -~~~~~_,___,1,_6~69,4~

Not currently cost competitive with direct waste disposal l I [2] Includes engineering costs

         !31 Excludes program management costs (staffing) but includes costs for spent fuel loading/transfer/spent fuel pool O&M and EP fees 141 Columns may not add due to rounding l5J Includes retired steam generators and reactor closure head from Unit 1 and turbine rotors from Unit 1. Cost element includes both license termination and site restoration expenses.

EXHlBITWAC-1 TLG Services, Inc. 000157

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant Document Lll-1703-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 6, Page 5 of 5 TABLE6.2 SAFSTOR ALTERNATIVE DECOMMISSIONING COST ELEMENTS (thousands of 2014 dollars) I Cost Element --- -~* -*] T;;w-r- Percentage j I Decontamination I Removal ~ 1 26,141 254,408 I L_ i 1.4 ! 13.3 J I Packaging ' 50,156 2.6 1 Trans ortation 10,384 0.5 I I Waste Disposal Off-site Waste Processing

. Program Management [lJ 125,413 618,868 o

6.6 ! o.o-ij 32.4 Security f Spent Fuel Pool Isolation

Spent Fuel Management (Direct Costs) I2l 272,931 20, 724 248,784 14.3 _

1.1 13.0 : I Insurance and Regulat~ Fees 116,908 6.i1 T.51 I Energy Characterization and Licensing Surveys Property Taxes 29,046 42,926 11,697 5 2.2 0.6 l l Miscellaneous Equipment 50, 772 2.71 f Decommissioning Staff Severance ! 32,082 . 1:71 l I ' 1 ITotall3l

~ ~~~~-~--._..,.,,,>=>O>=N>-.-*-~-                      . -.-,_... .            l 1,911,239
                                                                     ""'~~-* ,...~~*-__,.t
                                                                                                 !      100.01 F~--                                                                       l*-T~--~;ta9 l License Termination (excluding retired large components)                          1, 2 74, 5sg.+_        66. 7 l Large Components (retired) f S *entFuelManagement

[4J J 18, 70_g__+__ 474,877 I 1.0 24.8 Site Restoration ____ I 143,127 i 7.51 - . ! I ITotal l~-~~---~~-~--~-~-~L__loo.o l l 1l Not currently cost competitive with direct waste disposal 121 Includes engineering costs 131 Excludes program management costs (staffing) but includes costs for spent fuel loading/transfer/spent fuel pool O&M and EP fees [41 Columns may not add due to rounding l5J Includes retired steam generators and reactor closure head from Unit 1 and turbine rotors from Unit L Cost element includes both license termination and site restoration expenses. EXHIBITWAC-1 TLG Services, Inc. 000158

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant Document Lll-1703-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 7, Page 1 of 3

7. REFERENCES

1. "Decommissioning Cost Study for the Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant,"

Document Lll-1621-001, Rev. 0, TLG Services, Inc., June 2010

2. U.S. Code of Federal Regulations, Title 10, Parts 30, 40, 50, 51, 70 and 72, "General Requirements for Decommissioning Nuclear Facilities," Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 53 Fed. Reg., 24018-, June 27, 1988

3. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Regulatory Guide 1.159, "Assuring the Availability of Funds for Decommissioning Nuclear Reactors," Rev. 2, October 2011

4. U.S. Code of Federal Regulations, Title 10, Part 20, Subpart E, "Radiological Criteria for License Termination

5. U.S. Code of Federal Regulations, Title 10, Parts 20 and 50, "Entombment Options for Power Reactors," Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 66 Fed.

Reg. 52551, October 16, 2001

6. U.S. Code of Federal Regulations, Title .10, Parts. 2, 50 and 51, "Decommissioning of Nuclear Power Reactors,'1 Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 61 Fed. Reg. 39278, July 29, 1996

7. "Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982 and Amendments, U.S. Department of Energy's Office of Civilian Radioactive Management, 1982

8. Charter of the Blue Ribbon Commission on America's Nuclear Future, "Objectives and Scope of Activities,

http://www.brc.gov/index.php ?q=page/charter

9. "Blue Ribbon Commission on America's Nuclear Future, Report to the Secretary of Energy, http://www.brc.gov/, p. 32, January 2012

10. "Strategy for the Management and Disposal of Used Nuclear Fuel and High-Level Radioactive Waste," U.S. DOE, January 11, 2013

11. U.S. Code of Federal Regulations, Title 10, Part 50, "Domestic Licensing of Production and Utilization Facilities, Subpart 54 (bb), "Conditions of Licenses" EXHIBITWAC-1 TLG Services, Inc.

000159

Comanche Peah Nuclear Power Plant Document Lll-1703-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 7, Page 2 of 3

7. REFERENCES (continued)

12. U.S. Code of Federal Regulations, Title 10, Part 72, Subpart K, "General License for Storage of Spent Fuel at Power Reactor Sites"

13. "Low Level Radioactive Waste Policy Act," Public Law 96-573, 1980

14. "Low-Level Radioactive Waste Policy Amendments Act of 1985," Public Law 99-240, 1986

15. U.S. Code of Federal Regulations, Title 10, Part 20, Subpart E, Final Rule, "Radiological Criteria for License Termination," 62 Fed. Reg. 39058, July 21, 1997

16. "Establishment of Cleanup Levels for CERCLA Sites with Radioactive Contamination," EPA Memorandum OSWER No. 9200.4-18, August 22, 1997

17. U.S. Code of Federal Regulations, Title 40, Part 141.16, "Maximum contaminant levels for beta particle and photon radioactivity from man-made radionuclides in community water systems"

18. "Memorandum of Understanding Between the Environmental Protection Agency and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission: Consultation and Finality on Decommissioning and Decontamination of Contaminated Sites," OSWER 9295.8-06a, October 9, 2002

19. "Multi-Agency Radiation Survey and Site Investigation Manual (MARSSIM),"

NUREG/CR-1575, Rev. 1, EPA 402-R-97-016, Rev. 1, August 2000

20. T.S. LaGuardia et al., "Guidelines for Producing Commercial Nuclear Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Estimates,' 1 AIF/NESP-036, May 1986

21. W.J. Manion and T.S. LaGuardia, "Decommissioning Handbook, 11 U.S.

Department of Energy, DOE/EV/10128-1, November 1980

22. 11 Building Construction Cost Data 2014," Robert Snow Means Company, Inc.,

Kingston, Massachusetts EXHIBIT WAC-1 TLG Services, Inc. 000160

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant Document Lll-1703-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 7, Page 3 of 3

7. REFERENCES (continued)

23. Project and Cost Engineers' Handbook, Second Edition, p. 239, American Association of Cost Engineers, Marcel Dekker, Inc., New York, New York, 1984

24. U.S. Department of Transportation, Title 49 of the Code of Federal Regulations, "Transportation," Parts 173 through 178

25. Tri-State Motor Transit Company, published tariffs

26. J.C. Evans et al., "Long-Lived Activation Products in Reactor Materials" NUREG/CR-3474, Pacific Northwest Laboratory for the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. August 1984

27. R.I. Smith, G.J. Konzek, W.E. Kennedy, Jr., "Technology, Safety and Costs of Decommissioning a Reference Pressurized Water Reactor Power Station,"

NUREG/CR-0130 and addenda, Pacific Northwest Laboratory for the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. June 1978

28. H.D. Oak, et al., "Technology, Safety and Costs of Decommissioning a Reference Boiling Water Reactor Power Station," NUREG/CR-0672 and addenda, Pacific Northwest Laboratory for the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. June 1980

29. SECY-00-0145, '1ntegrated Rulemaking Plan for Nuclear Power Plant Decommissioning," June 2000

30. "Microsoft Project Professional 2010," Microsoft Corporation, Redmond, WA

31. "Atomic Energy Act of 1954," (68 Stat. 919)

EXHIBIT WAC-1 TLG Services, Inc. 000161

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant Document Lll-1703-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Appendix A, Page 1 of 4 APPENDIX A UNIT COST FACTOR DEVELOPMENT EXHIBIT WAC-1 TLG Services, Inc. 000162

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant Document Lll-1703-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Appendix A. Page 2 of 4 APPENDIX A UNIT COST FACTOR DEVELOPMENT Example: Unit Factor for Removal of Contaminated Heat Exchanger< 3,000 lbs.

1. SCOPE Heat exchangers weighing < 3,000 lbs. will be removed in one piece using a crane or small hoist. They will be disconnected from the inlet and outlet piping. The heat exchanger will be sent to the waste processing area.

2. CALCULATIONS Activity Critical Act Activity Duration Duration ID Description (minutes) (minutes)*

a Remove insulation 60 (b) b Mount pipe cutters 60 60 c Install contamination controls 20 (b) d Disconnect inlet and outlet lines 60 60 e Cap openings 20 (d) f Rig for removal 30 30 g Unbolt from mounts 30 30 h Remove contamination controls 15 15 1 Remove, wrap, send to waste processing area _QQ _QQ Totals (Activity/Critical) 355 255 Duration adjustment(s):

+ Respiratory protection adjustment (50% of critical duration)                             128
+ Radiation/ALARA adjustment (37% of critical duration)                                     95 Adjusted work duration                                                                      478
+ Protective clothing adjustment (30% of adjusted duration)                                143 Productive work duration                                                                    621
+Work break adjustment (8.33 % of productive duration)

Total work duration (minutes) 673

                           ***Total duration= 11.217 hr***

alpha designators indicate activities that can be performed in parallel EXHIBITWAC-1 TLG Services, Inc.

000163

Document LJJ-1703-001, Rev. 0 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant Appendix A, Page 3 of 4 Decommissioning Cost Analysis APPENDIX A (continued)

3. LABOR REQUIRED Duration Rate Number (hours) ($/hr) Cost Crew 3.00 11.217 $24.88 $837.24 Laborers 2.00 11.217 $36.56 $820.19 Craftsmen 1.00 11.217 $39.18 $439.48 Foreman 0.25 11.217 $41.58 $116.60 General Foreman 0.05 11.217 $24.88 $13.95 Fire Watch 1.00 11.217 $54.92 $616.04 Health Physics Technician

                                                                                                                                                                 $2,843.50 Total Labor Cost

4. EQUIPMENT & CONSUMABLES COSTS none Equipment Costs Consumables/Materials Costs

                                                                                                                                                                         $32.50
  -Universal Sorbent 50@ $0.65 sq ft (1}
  -Tarpaulins (oil resistant/fire retardant) 50@ $0.29/sq ft                                                                          {2)
                                                                                                                                                                         $14.50
  -Gas torch consumables 1@ $20.46/hr x 1 hr {3}                                                                                                                         $20.46
                                                                                                                                                                         $67.46 Subtotal cost of equipment and materials Overhead & profit on equipment and materials@ 16.25 %                                                                                                                   $10.96
                                                                                                                                                                          $78.42 Total costs, equipment & material TOTAL COST:

Removal of contaminated heat exchanger <3000 pounds: $2,921.92

                                                                                                                                                                    $2,843.50 Total labor cost:                                                                                                                                                        $78.42 Total equipment/material costs:

81.88 Total craft labor man-hours required per unit: EXHIBIT WAC-1 TLG Services, Inc. 000164

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant Document Lll-1703-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Appendix A,, Page 4 of 4

5. NOTES AND REFERENCES

     .. Work difficulty factors were developed in conjunction with the Atomic Industrial Forum's (now NEI) program to standardize nuclear decommissioning cost estimates and are delineated in Volume 1, Chapter 5 of the "Guidelines for Producing Commercial Nuclear Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Estimates," AIF/NESP-036, May 1986.
     >;f References for equipment & consumables costs:

1. www.mcmaster.com online catalog, McMaster Carr Spill Control (7193T88)

2. R.S. Means (2014) Division 01 56, Section 13.60-0600, page 23

3. R.S. Means (2014) Division 015433, Section 40-6360, page 698 Material and consumable costs were adjusted using the regional indices for Dallas, Texas.

TLG Services, Inc. EXHIBIT WAC-1 000165

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant Document Lll-1703-001, Rev. 0 Appendix B, Page 1 of 7 Decommissioning Cost Analysis APPENDIXB UNIT COST FACTOR LISTING (DECON: Power Block Structures Only) EXHIBITWAC-1 TLG Services, Inc. 000166

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant Document Lll-1703-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Appendix B, Page 2 of 7 APPENDIXB UNIT COST FACTOR LISTING (Power Block Structures Only) Unit Cost Factor Cost/Unit($) Removal of clean instrument and sampling tubing, $/linear foot 0.29 Removal of clean pipe 0.25 to 2 inches diameter, $/linear foot 3.04 Removal of clean pipe >2 to 4 inches diameter, $/linear foot 4.42 Removal of clean pipe >4 to 8 inches diameter, $/linear foot 8.78 Removal of clean pipe >8 to 14 inches diameter, $/linear foot 16.67 Removal of clean pipe> 14 to 20 inches diameter, $/linear foot 21.87 Removal of clean pipe >20 to 36 inches diameter, $/linear foot 32.12 Removal of clean pipe >36 inches diameter, $/linear foot 38.08 Removal of clean valve >2 to 4 inches 58.22 Removal of clean valve >4 to 8 inches 87.77 Removal of clean valve >8 to 14 inches 166.66 Removal of clean valve > 14 to 20 inches 218.65 Removal of clean valve >20 to 36 inches 321.22 Removal of clean valve >36 inches 380.78 Removal of clean pipe hanger for small bore piping 22.62 Removal of clean pipe hanger for large bore piping 74.20 Removal of clean pump, <300 pound 152.28 Removal of clean pump, 300-1000 pound 420.47 Removal of clean pump, 1000-10,000 pound 1,631.47 Removal of clean pump, >10,000 pound 3,170.00 Removal of clean pump motor, 300-1000 pound 172.33 Removal of clean pump motor, 1000-10, 000 pound 672.82 Removal of clean pump motor, > 10, 000 pound 1,513.83 Removal of clean heat exchanger <3000 pound 884.23 Removal of clean heat exchanger >3000 pound 2,246.36 Removal of clean feed water heater/deaerator 6,274.72 Removal of clean moisture separator/reheater 12,822.33 Removal of clean tank, <300 gallons 195.36 Removal of clean tank, 300-3000 gallon 608.01 Removal of clean tank, >3000 gallons, $/square foot surface area 5.22 EXHIBIT WAC-1 TLG Services, Inc. 000167

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant Document Lll-1703-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Appendix B, Page 3 of 7 APPENDIXB UNIT COST FACTOR LISTING (Power Block Structures Only) Unit Cost Factor Cost1Unit($) Removal of clean electrical equipment, <300 pound 79.67 Removal of clean electrical equipment, 300-1000 pound 280.57 Removal of clean electrical equipment, 1000-10,000 pound 561.14 Removal of clean electrical equipment, > 10, 000 pound 1,345.15 Removal of clean electrical transformer < 30 tons 934.19 Removal of clean electrical transformer > 30 tons 2,690.30 Removal of clean standby diesel generator, <100 kW 954.19 Removal of clean standby diesel generator, 100 kW to 1 MW 2,129.82 Removal of clean standby diesel generator, > 1 MW 4,409.16 Removal of clean electrical cable tray, $/linear foot 7.70 Removal of clean electrical conduit, $/linear foot 3.38 Removal of clean mechanical equipment, <300 pound 79.67 Removal of clean mechanical equipment, 300-1000 pound 280.57 Removal of clean mechanical equipment, 1000-10,000 pound 561.14 Removal of clean mechanical equipment, >10,000 pound 1,345.15 Removal of clean HVAC equipment, <300 pound 96.33 Removal of clean HVAC equipment, 300-1000 pound 337.12 Removal of clean HVAC equipment, 1000-10, 000 pound 671.89 Removal of clean HVAC equipment, >10,000 pound 1,345.15 Removal of clean HVAC ductwork, $/pound 0.30 Removal of contaminated instrument and sampling tubing, $/linear foot 1.11

Removal of contaminated pipe 0.25 to 2 inches diameter, $/linear foot 16.44 Removal of contaminated pipe >2 to 4 inches diameter, $/linear foot 26.57 Removal of contaminated pipe >4 to 8 inches diameter, $/linear foot 42.98 Removal of contaminated pipe >8 to 14 inches diameter, $/linear foot 81.59 Removal of contaminated pipe> 14 to 20 inches diameter, $/linear foot 97.36 Removal of contaminated pipe >20 to 36 inches diameter, $/linear foot 133.10 Removal of contaminated pipe >36 inches diameter, $/linear foot 156.47 Removal of contaminated valve >2 to 4 inches 323.94 Removal of contaminated valve >4 to 8 inches 383.02 EXHIBIT WAC-1 TLG Services, Inc.

000168

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant Document Lll-1703-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Appendix B, Page 4 of 7 APPENDIXB UNIT COST FACTOR LISTING (Power Block Structures Only) Unit Cost Factor Cost/Unit($) Removal of contaminated valve >8 to 14 inches 761.23 Removal of contaminated valve > 14 to 20 inches 963.69 Removal of contaminated valve >20 to 36 inches 1,276.37 Removal of contaminated valve >36 inches 1,510.02 Removal of contaminated pipe hanger for small bore piping 108.11 Removal of contaminated pipe hanger for large bore piping 331.80 Removal of contaminated pump, <300 pound 688.97 Removal of contaminated pump, 300-1000 pound 1,555.42 Removal of contaminated pump, 1000-10,000 pound 4,720.78 Removal of contaminated pump, > 10, 000 pound 11,497.55 Removal of contaminated pump motor, 300-1000 pound 683.20 Removal of contaminated pump motor, 1000-10,000 pound 1,944.38 Removal of contaminated pump motor, >10,000 pound 4,365.63 Removal of contaminated heat exchanger <3000 pound 2,921.92 Removal of contaminated heat exchanger >3000 pound 8,551.92 Removal of contaminated tank, <300 gallons 1,149.88 Removal of contaminated tank, >300 gallons, $/square foot 21.43 Removal of contaminated electrical equipment, <300 pound 517.63 Removal of contaminated electrical equipment, 300-1000 pound 1,235.67 Removal of contaminated electrical equipment, 1000-10,000 pound 2,380.36 Removal of contaminated electrical equipment, > 10, 000 pound 4,640.34 Removal of contaminated electrical cable tray, $/linear foot 25.16 Removal of contaminated electrical conduit, $/linear foot 12.47 Removal of contaminated mechanical equipment, <300 pound 575.75 Removal of contaminated mechanical equipment, 300-1000 pound 1,364.10 Removal of contaminated mechanical equipment, 1000-10,000 pound 2,623.48 Removal of contaminated mechanical equipment, > 10,000 pound 4,640.34 Removal of contaminated HVAC equipment, <300 pound 575.75 Removal of contaminated HVAC equipment, 300-1000 pound 1,364.10 Removal of contaminatedHVAC equipment, 1000-10,000 pound 2,623.48 EXHIBIT WAC-1 TLG Services, Inc. 000169

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant Document Lll-1703-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Appendix B, Page 5 of 7 APPENDJXB UNIT COST FACTOR LISTING (Power Block Structures Only) Unit Cost Factor Cost/Unit($) Removal of contaminated HVAC equipment, > 10,000 pound 4,640.34 Removal of contaminated HVAC ductwork, $/pound 1.73 Remova1/plasma arc cut of contaminated thin metal components, $/linear in. 2.63 Additional decontamination of surface by washing, $/square foot 5.78 Additional decontamination of surfaces by hydrolasing, $/square foot 24.43 Decontamination rig hook up and flush, $/ 250 foot length 4,845.18 Chemical flush of components/systems, $/gallon 20.76 Removal of clean standard reinforced concrete, $/cubic yard 113.48 Removal of grade slab concrete, $/cubic yard 142.70 Removal of clean concrete floors, $/cubic yard 313.62 Removal of sections of clean concrete floors, $/cubic yard 882.02 Remoyal of clean heavily rein concrete w/#9 rebar, $/cubic yard 210.35 Removal of contaminated heavily rein concrete w/#9 rebar, $/cubic yard 1,680.58 Removal of clean heavily rein concrete w/#18 rebar, $/cubic yard 265.96 Removal of contaminated heavily rein concrete w/#18 rebar, $/cubic yard 2,221.65 Removal heavily rein concrete w/#18 rebar & steel embedments, $/cubic yard 371.77 Removal of below-grade suspended floors, $/cubic yard 313.62 Removal of clean monolithic concrete structures, $/cubic yard 704.07 Removal of contaminated monolithic concrete structures, $/cubic yard 1,670.29 Removal of clean foundation concrete, $/cubic yard 558.68 Removal of contaminated foundation concrete, $/cubic yard 1,557.44 Explosive demolition of bulk concrete, $/cubic yard 25.46 Removal of clean hollow masonry block wall, $/cubic yard 79.54 Removal of contaminated hollow masonry block wall, $/cubic yard 289.44 Removal of clean solid masonry block wall, $/cubic yard 79.54 Removal of contaminated solid masonry block wall, $/cubic yard 289.44 Backfill of below-grade voids, $/cubic yard 34.69 Removal of subterranean tunnels/voids, $/linear foot 90.52 Placement of concrete for below-grade voids, $/cubic yard 130.05 Excavation of clean material, $/cubic yard 3.05 EXHIBIT WAC-1 TLG Services, Inc. 000170

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant Document Lll-1703-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Appendix B, Page 6 of 7 APPENDIXB UNIT COST FACTOR LISTING (Power Block Structures Only) Unit Cost Factor Cost/Unit($) Excavation of contaminated material, $/cubic yard 37.50 Removal of clean concrete rubble (tipping fee included), $/cubic yard 24.18 Removal of contaminated concrete rubble, $/cubic yard 24.10 Removal of building by volume, $/cubic foot 0.27 Removal of clean building metal siding, $/square foot 1.00 Removal of contaminated building metal siding, $/square foot 3.76 Removal of standard asphalt roofing, $/square foot 1.34 Removal of transite panels, $/square foot 1.60 Scarifying contaminated concrete surfaces (drill & spall), $/square foot 10.90 Scabbling contaminated concrete floors, $/square foot 6.22 Scabbling contaminated concrete walls, $/square foot 15.94 Scabbling contaminated ceilings, $/square foot 54.23 Scabbling structural steel, $/square foot 4.99 Removal of clean overhead crane/monorail< 10 ton capacity 399.06 Removal of contaminated overhead crane/monorail< 10 ton capacity 1,297.27 Removal of clean overhead crane/monorail> 10-50 ton capacity 957.74 Removal of contaminated overhead crane/monorail> 10-50 ton capacity 3,112.89 Removal of polar crane > 50 ton capacity 4,028.79 Removal of gantry crane > 50 ton capacity 16,814.36 Removal of structural steel, $/pound 0.15 Removal of clean steel floor grating, $/square foot 3.18 Removal of contaminated steel floor grating, $/square foot 10.06 Removal of clean free standing steel liner, $/square foot 7.83 Removal of contaminated free standing steel liner, $/square foot 24.89 Removal of clean concrete-anchored steel liner, $/square foot 3.91 Removal of contaminated concrete-anchored steel liner, $/square foot 29.06 Placement of scaffolding in clean areas, $/square foot 14.30 Placement of scaffolding in contaminated areas, $/square foot 21.95 Landscaping with topsoil, $/acre 25,364.74 Cost of CPC B-88 LSA box & preparation for use 2,151.16 EXHIBIT WAC-1 TLG Services, Inc. 000171 i__

Document Lll-1703-001, Rev. 0 Comanche Peah Nuclear Power Plant Appendix B, Page 7 of 7 Decommissioning Cost Analysis APPENDIXB UNIT COST FACTOR LISTING (Power Block Structures Only) CostJU nit($) Unit Cost Factor 1,960.86 Cost of CPC B-25 LSA box & preparation for use Cost of CPC B-12V 12 gauge LSA box & preparation for use 1,583.42 11,301.94 Cost of CPC B-144 LSA box & preparation for use 185.82 Cost of LSA drum & preparation for use Cost of cask liner for CNSI 8 120A cask (resins) 12,728.66 Cost of cask liner for CNSI 8 120A cask (filters) 8,988.89 Decontamination of surfaces with vacuuming, $/square foot 0.63 EXHIBIT WAC-1 TLG Services, Inc. 000172

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant Document Lll-1703-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis AppendU: C'.. Page 1 of 20 APPENDIXC DETAILED COST ANALYSIS DE CON Tables C-1 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant, Unit 1 ................................................... 2 C-2 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant, Unit 2 ................................................. 11 EXHIBIT WAC-1 TLG Services, Inc. 000173

Comnnd1e Pen Ir Ni1de"r Poll*l!!',.Plrinl Deconiminionine Co*t Anal.)lsl* Dociime11r L11-J703-00J, lleu. O AppenclU: C. PnI!e 2 of 20

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        -1 Tnble C-1 Comnnche Peak Nuclenr Power Plant, Unit 1 DECON Deconunissioning Cost Estimate (thousands or 201* do11ars)

Orr.She LLR\Y z.mc .Spent J~uel Site l'racened llut'i!ll Volun1es llurioll Utility and Activity necnn Removal P1.clr.1.1ln<< Tra1tsport Prnceninf( Dispo!IA) Other Total Total Llc.Tenu, Management Restoration Yohnne Class A Cl*nll CtaH C CiTCC Proces,.d Cran Conlr11ctor (ndei: ActiY1tvDe.crl tlon Cost CoH Cort* Costs Costs Co sh Cush C1.1nti111nnc Co!lO Costs Costs Cosll Cu. Pent Cu.Feet Cu. Fed Cu. Feet Cu. Feet WL,Lb1. Manhoun J.bnhouu PERIOD hi - Sh11tdown throU(th Tr*nsltu*n P11riod In Dirtd De~nlflliesinnlng Aelh'ities Prepare11reliuilnarydec0U1mbston!ngc<r.1t 1,300 b.11 111.l.2 lal.3 Notifi<:n.tionofCessaliono!Operations Rcmovnfoel&so11rcem:it11riRI 160

                                                                                                                                                           "        1!14 nfa 1111.ot         N0Ufie11tlon orPenPanent Ddueling 111.l.5         De11cti*.11te J1l11nt *Y11Um.A & proc.cu wastii 111.16 h..17 la.l.8 la.1.9 Preptrf and 111bmit PSDAR Re11iewpla11tdwp&1pecs.

Perform datailtdrad suney Ett.imateby~roductinventcry 260 ISO 90 19 G87 ZoOO 4.600 1,000 1,000 lnl 10 End product description

                                                                                                                                      '"                    l9      149 lalll la.112 ta.113 111114 Det1iledby-11rod11ctiUVi!Dtor'J' Df'frnenlllJOrworlr.sequence Perfornl SER and EA Perform Sita-S~i[ic Cost Stud~*

160 403 1'6 GO "80 19' 1,120 1,120 747 1,300

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                ?,~00 3,100 5.000 la 115 lal 16 Prep11refsubmit l.icen" Tcrntinntian Plan Roc&IY* NRC approval o(lermfontion plan                                                                              "'                            '"
                                                                                                                                                                    '"               612                                                                                                                        4.000 ActiYJtySpecifie11t1an11 1111 ll? l b Lt7.2 ln.1113 Plant&((omporlll'yfoeilitin Plllntl)'Gtenu NSSS Deeo11.tantim1hcn J.iur.h 639 5<1                   "

81

                                                                                                                                                                    'i'35 (122 75 GGI
                                                                                                                                                                                     '60 75 G2 4,920 4,167 500 la.11?.4 la 117.5 Reactormtem1la RnctorvH!le1
                                                                                                                                      !l2~

84< "' 10 IZ7 1,000 971 l,OGO 971

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                'i',100 G,600 le l 17.G la.1177 b.117.8 Bialcgiul1hield Ste11mge11er:ators RemCm;-c:('deam:rete C5 405 10 GI      460 75 239              "'

75 110 110 3.120 1,600 la.11?.9 M:1.i11Turhl11e: ""' 5Z 31 8 GO GO 400 11111710 M11i11Condenscrs 400 111.11711 la.11?12 Pln.nt11tructute1&buildinJ-' Wnte mnoagcment "'" 591 8 GI 90 "'" 687 233 687 3,120 4.,600 lal.1'113 Facility&. ~ile d0$eout G1 G1 900 In.117 T°"'I 111 4,911 137 18 6,G4.6 4,97::1

                                                                                                                                                                                                                      '"                                                                                       3'1,82'1 Plannmr & Site Prep11nttatla h.118           Prepnro di1aumtlingaeq11~11ce h.l 19 lal.'lO Plantpn'p,&.t.cmp.lvefl Dul111watttclean.upsy1~m 3,000                   "
                                                                                                                                                          '50        '"',,.

3,450 358 3,450 2110 2,400 1,400

                                                                                                                                       !Bl lal.21 la.1.22 bl Ric-fi11c/Cont. Cntrl En,*lpa/1ool1nr/etc.

Pl'OCUrcc11.*kallinore&conur.in1?tG Sub!.otal Period la Activity Co:lts 2,3DO 160 24 ,... 2,645 2.~5 184 1,230 Peri11d la Collatual Co11!1J H.876 1231 17.107 16,433

                                                                                                                                                                                                                      "'                                                                                       ?3,753 ln.S.l          S1)cntFu"IC11vil1l11ndTranlfer                                                                                   Ul,007              2.491     19,098                             19,098 h.3            Subtotal Ptr1od b ~llnleral Casts                                                                                IG,G07               2.491    19,098                             19.098 Period In. Per:1od-De1nm<lent Co!ll~

11.41 111.4..2 lrl!lllfllUCO Properlytn.:1c1 1,130 88 113 9 1243 87 ,, 1.24::1 la.4..3 Heal1bphylitsa11pphes l.i1A.4. He11V)'D'1u1pmcMrent:il "' 179 135 117 074 674 la.4.5 la..4.6 D18Jlas*lorn.-.wr~erate-d Pliu*t eN!ffY budt:et 13 15

l,215 30 GIO 12.HIO zo la.47 11148 NRCPHs EmergencyPlanoinrFees 1,051 1,181 H5 118 1,216 l,299 l,2!19 489 la-4-9 la..ol 10 S(Mlnl Fue1 Pool O&M ISFSI Opentillg Co!ts 791 48 119 7

91G 55 910 55 111.4.ll s~~urity Sta!fCont 6,057 909 G,9fiG 6,966 H0,786 la.4.12 lltWtySurrCo9t 26,6'10 4.000 30.070 30.670 423,400 h..4 Subt1nnl Pt'ria1l h P ... rlod*Dtp*nrlenl C<m" TOTAL PERIOD lo COS'I' 1,318 1,318 13 13 3'1,4G6 68,948 5,736 10.457 41,549 a0,?54 43,095 69,528 1,4.!14 20,5.!ll 675 010 GIO 12,190 12.UO ,.

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    "         564,186 637,938 EXHIBIT WAC-1 000174 TLG Services, Inc

Doc1UTl1enl Lll-1103-001, Rtu. 0 Cnrnnndu- PtClll N"clt-or Po~*cr Pla11£ Appendix C. Paet! 3 of 20 Dt>commi-ssioJ1ing C'.D.sl Annlysi11 Tobie C-1 Comanche Penk Nuclenr Power Pln11t 1 Unit 1 DECON Deconunissloning Cost Estimate (lhousa.nds 0£201.J do11Rrs) Sponliuol Sito l'roce.ned Burial Voll1mH Burial/ Ulillty1md orr..snl! LLll\Y l'mC dTCC Cr.It ActlvlO* De con namav*I Pa.clr.glng Trau1port Procl!sslng Dl1po11\1 Otbor Toto.I Tnh.I Llc.Tcrn1 Manaogl!mcnt. ReitoHUon Volu1nc ClnnA cl11uB ClanC Proet"Hed Co11tr.clor Co1t1 Cost* <.'otU Cu. Faet Cu Fut. Cu Fl!l!t Cu. Fed Cu. Feet Wt., Lbs. M*nhCJUU Manhours lndl!ll ActlvltyDe11Crl liun Cost Cn1t Coit* Cost* Co!!t11 Coltf Co1ts Cnnttn<<enc:v Co~ts PERIOD lh~Decorumluionln<< rrtpnr.tlnn1 Prriod lbOinct OeClllllll1issionin1Atti\illea Detailed Work Proeed1m!s 4,'133

                                                                                                                                                   ...                             iOi                 GJG                                  '1 lh.11.1 Jb.Ll 2 PlnnLl)'atema NSSS Dtcontr11nin11Uo11 Flush GlS 130                "19                                                                                                                                                            l,(]00 2,500 lb.113 lb.114.

ne*cttlrinlMlllll* Remainingb1111'di11g11 17' "" 373 202 "' 00 1'1 19

                                                                                                                                                                                                       ,.,                                                                                                                           1,000 tb.11.5          CRO rtl(llinr oASombly                                                                                                           130 1,000 Jb.11.6          CRD boust111a & 1(,..1 tubet                                                                                                     130                   19                                                                                                                                                          1,000 lb.117 lb.118 Jocoroin&l1'urneul11llon RelClOrvtHel 130 471 19 71                            "'

3,63!) 1,200 111.!I!> F11icllityc!o1oout 150 23 170 9 lb.11 lO lb.1111 Mi1ail11sh111lihl Uiulogicdshlcld " 150 23 179 l,200

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     '1,6(]()

tb.1112 Slearugeneratora 597 G81 1,000 lb.J 113 lb.1114 RrirlfortC"tlcunmte MninTurhinc 130 203 30 30 1'9 233 233 233 L,!60 l.660 lb.11 J.5 M111nCcmffi!nsero Auxihuybuildini: '" 354 53

                                                                                                                                                                                    "'                 367                                  41                                                                                       2,730 lb.I I JG lb.1.117 Jb.11 Rl!11ctOTbniM1n&:

Tot:ll 354 4,316 047 " *** 4.96~ 367 4,030 41 9'3 2,730 33,24.3 1,14.8 l.<lG7 lb t.2 111.1 Deconprim11cyloop Sul;tot11l Jlerillll lb Attivity Co~lll

                                                                       ;55
                                                                        ;t;G                                                                    4,31G                '"

I O!JO 1H8 G,IU !l,1'19 l,067 33,243 rmod lb Aild1tionel Coalll SprnLCuelpoolUolntion 10,813 J,G'!2 12.04 12,434. lb.21 30,500 10,652 lb.2.2 SiteCh11ntlOrit11Lion S,939 l,'182 7,720 7'120 30,500 10,802 Subtotnl Period lb Add1tlan;,I Caalll IG,'151 3,404 20,150 20,165 tL.2 Period lbColfottrt1lCott.I lb.31 1b.3.2 Docon l"QVipmrnt DOCat.11fftelocat1oneJ1pen~a 969

                                                                                                   ..                                            l,60l 145 2'0 1.114 l,84l 1114 1,8"3 233
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                ,,.                                    19.S38             63 11...S.3        Proce.AA d~mrnL'llliauinr Wl\ter waste                  51                                                                                                                                                                                                                           92,0'10           162 lb.3. .f.

Jb.3.8 Proceas decum1n!Uionm1 cbem!cnl thiah W118l11 Sm11.lltool1Ua.... anee ' 2 196 3,691 165 G 4.939 1.2G5 ' 4,939 1,265 3 "' lb.3.6 I"ipe-cuUincequ1pruent J,100 lb.3.i lh.3.8 Dec-on rig S1irnlY11elC*11llnlont1Tran.s£l'r 1,500

                                                                                                               .,,                               l,0'20               "'

153 l,'125 1,173 1'125 1.173

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           ***                        111,606            .,,

1b.3 Snbtot111Ptriod lbCollateraJCn.sts 2,523 1102 123 3,740 2,623 1.9.tO 12,29<1 11,122 1,173 Period lb Pcriod*Dtpendanl Co~lll lh.41 Decon supplie. 30

                                                                                                                                                    .,,                     7 630   "              "

630 lb.42 lnaursa:e lh..t.3 lb.4.4 lb..15 Pr011orty lRJet lle1lthphy8ic11upplle11 lle1vycquipru11nt rental 307

                                                                                                                                                      "                   17 383
                                                                                                                                                                                           "            ..."'"                                                                                           7,23(

lb.-1.6 lb.4 '1 Dt~posal o£DAW t!nerared P111ntenergybu1lgl!l 1.0'11 !GI 3 1.232 3'5 22 1.232 "' lb.4.8 lli.4Jl NRCFeea EniergencyPJ11nnincFee!I 3"1

                                                                                                                                                    "'                    ""         218                '"                 "'

461 lb.410 lb.-llJ lbA 12 Sp11nt Fuel Pool O&M JSt'SI 01m11ttnc Co.su Seturity St:1IrC0!1l 101 3,0'10 460 60 4 '" 3.530 28 3.~o " 71,357 e-t,486 G,074. 6,014 lbAl3 lb."4H DOC Starr Cost UtililySt::iff~t 5.282 13,592 "' 2.039 Hi.631 l.5.631 215,657 lb.4' S11btolal Period lb I'eriod*Drpendent Costs 30 701 24.,683 3,782 29,IG4 28,427 7,23'1

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           "        351,500
  !bO PEH10D l TOTALS TOTA.I. PERIOD lb COST                             3,318 3,8l8 1804.

3,121 130 1'1 3.'155 3,'1'11

                                                                                                                                                -48,323 117,2'11 10.156

!0,613 67,'126 H8,4.iD 64.883 12*1,410 1009 22,461 933 l',608 6R7 1297 ...

118,842 131,033 31,804

n.a24 395.59.5 1 033,!i33 EXHIBIT WAC-1 000175 TLG Servlee.s, Inc

Documl'nl LI J-1703-001, Rtv. 0 Appendi.:c C, Pace 4 of 20 Comanclle PrRf, Nuclr11rPower Plant Drcammlutanlng Co!£ Analy1Ji11 Tobie C-1 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plaut, Unit 1 DECON Deconunissloning Cost Estimate (thousn.nds of2014. dollnrs) lh1rh1I Vuhnnca Burin!/ Utility and NJlC Spenll-'uel Site l'roceued Proceued Cro.R Co11tractor Orf-Site l,Ll\W r.IPDll.R'l!ment Rut.nrallon Volume Class A cbusn Cl11uC GTCC Dl1po111.I Other Total Tot.al Lie.Term. Cu Fed Cu Feet Cu. Fel't C'.u. Feet Wt., Lbs !lb.nhoun Manhoun Deet1n Removlll Pm:llazjng Tr11.n111ort l'roceulng; CHh Coau Ctt Feet Activity eo... Cosl!' ('ontln~nc* Co*U C'o*ls Cosl Cost Cott! Cosu Costs Jndcll:: .\cllvitv Desert tlon PER10D 211. *Lugo Comttonent Removnl Period 211 Dizcd Dotommlsaionlnf Adhitie11 N1>dror Steam Suppl1 Syat.em RomO'lsl

 'lal.1.1             Re111ct0!' Coatc1nt Pi.pine 03                  16
                                                                                                             ,,,

mo G3 '°'

33 "' 147 1'7 76, m 7231 8'7,-172 36,553 7!12,800 4,301 l,072 4.595 10-0 7 2a.11:!: l're~aufiu:r Ro:lM!CTank. 69 1.225 429 2,330 1,528

!:,330 1.528 3,445 285,853 3,329,768 2,4&0 23,233 938 2,125

 'la.11.3 2a.ll4 Renctor Coolant Punius & MGt<1r11 Preaat1riJ:er 33            37 3,383 518 2,140 117 l,H9 583 6,106                          "'

2,935 JG,258 16,258 H,81.5 41139 3,144,067 10.800 26,500 21111.s S1u1nGe11erator1

                                                                           '"          2,426               U'Z9               1,376                      5Jl92                        2,4!14       13,67'7 l,HO 13,6'7'7 1,140 4,852 337 179.025 335,070 S,214 29,233               1,301 211 l.lG 211.117 Rot1r'Xl .Ste11m G11oer11lor Units CRDMsllCls/Servtt11 Structun Ttemoval                103            217 13,I08                  "

640 300 4732 330 '" 8,?78 30,iH7 30,3-17 1,669 9,391 "' 961,03G 29,233 1,301

Za.l LS ReattorVesu1llnlunab

                                                                             ""        3.167 5,3!HI              2,.&30               m                        4,'JS9          330          '1.005 21,696 l!J.986 85,813 19,986 85.873 U0.636
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     '"         J37              9,151,643          113,163              32,266 2.a.119

!:a.11 ReoctatVcastil Tot.all 753 14.829 20.200 4,289 23,4-lG

                                                                                                                                                                         '"                                                                                                         4,574                                           302,355            7,UBS R11mo\'al orMii.Jor EQui1lmerit                                                                                                                                                       215          1,U2               l,U2                                                        6,64.3                                         372,990          25,600 llO                24                         517 2nl2 211.13 Maii1 T1.ubiae/Oe11trutor Ma111Conrlensel'l\                                                 "'"'                135                29 2,090              2,090 13,!l!>G Caseld1nc CMt11 CTOm Clo~n Ouildln&" Demo1lbo11                                                                                                                                                     l,!!62            1,2,62                                                                                                                         1,088 24.l.41             Rt11ctor 1,091
                                                                                                                                                                                         "'18             13'               130                                                                                                                       lS,684 2a.l4..2 2a.1..4 S11feguord Tot.111.!1                                                          "'

l.:!:IG 1,398 1,3!)8 426,192 13.852 G.511 1,819 Di1po~al 2a.15.l orPJa11t Syett*ma Au~sry Feudw.11.ter {in11ul1;ted)

                                                                                           '6l 12               "'

33 729 344 2 1.8:!9 JI n 1.1 2l 1,396 8,849 1Jl 1,169 2o..l.5.2 21.l.~3 At1dtiarySteom BomnRecycle(io.aulated) 1 31 0 I

                                                                                                                                                              .,"'                         21'              89                89 l33 3'9                                           23,810            2,855 Boron Re')'clo (nnh1auloled) 2'.!i              221                                                      l,O(H                                           70,239            7,113 2111.5.4                                                                   41             81                10                  2 2aU.~               Dorun Thern:ial Regeneration (m11.1loteil)                                                                                           120                          139             G07                G07                                                         n2                                           .SUGG             6,310

io..15.0 Daron Thennid Regetu:ir.11.tion {uninsul~ted)

                                                                             '°'            "

l77 30 21 " UI <83 '83 l,6G7 123.'tGl 12,735 2a.1.l'i.7 211..15.8 2id.5.9 Chemlc.11.l & Yolunie Contf01 (1m1uloted) Cheinkal & Val11n1e Control (1>ninsulated) CbemiWFeed Chemical F~d *RCA l83 7 5l IO 211 l,055

                                                                                                                                                                                                             . 8 1.055
                                                                                                                                                                                                                               ,.                                                          15                                             982 28.298 218 253 139 2,002 2a.1.5.10
    '!o.U.11            Chilled Waler* Safely                                                                                                                  48                           35 I

185 ' "' "' 5,720 2:t.l.5.l2 Cbtl!ed Waler* Sa!cty *RCA 86 117 13

                                                                                                                                                                                            "              204
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               '""                                                                                          709 23.199 211,l!l.13         Clrc11!111lincWat.er                                                                                                                                                  3                                                                                      16,878                                        J,116,352 23                                                                                                        4,065             4.,0GS                                                                                                                        4.155 2n.UU4
     '.!a lJi.ll!.

ZaU.16 Component Coolin1 W1ter Compouellt Ceo\ing Wnler

R.CA C=dent11te(tnsu11ted) 020 128 "'

88 1,909 19 15 1l1 "' 117 112 3,200 3,09~ Conden&11le (.inino:ub.ted) 102 15 112 2,054 211.115.17 211.lfl.18 Condenuu Polishing D7 JO 1'

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 "                                                                                        2,335 7,102 2n.15.l!>

2al.5.20 Condtns.nr Vacuum &. Wnti;r Box Primtni: E1tractianSteam 72 ll 33 "

!54 1.217 80,49fi 1,449 211.15.21 211.15.22 Fecdwr.tcr Feedw11ter*TICA 220 OU 28 138 52 0

280 I 280 l ,., 39 I 9 2,003 2a..l,l\.23 Grnerator&E1c1Ur 8 232 2e.l&.2-t 2al5.25 2a 1.5.26 Oenet11.torGa1Coolin1 Gu1erator Primary W11tcr Gf,11eratcr5.!alOil "' '1 0

                                                                                                                                                                                                              ", 9                                                  9 2

53 1,105 211.lS.27 HydrogunGH Mo.in Steam Rahcot &. St.e:rom Dump 35 2 5

                                                                                                                                                                                                               '° l,53!}             1,53!l                               '°                    l\,739                                         3798'18           10,634 1,390 2111.5.28 211.15.20 2&..1.5.30 Main Steam Reh~at & SWom 01111111 *RCA Miun Turbine Luba Oll m

30 l3 51 102 " 102 2.'f'iB 50 Maio Turbine Oil Punficat1on 88 0 2 2 9'6 222 2111.S.31 Nitrui::enOH I 2 l3 l3

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                              "                                          11,Gfll              :!69 211.15.l2                                                                                   8                 0                0                                                                                                                                                    177 3,898 35.479 2al5.33 2:i.l.5.34 Pou AeaMnt S11m11lln1 Proc.uSam11ling(11ni11sulated) 112 JO 1

3 GI 73' "' 5,891 3898!>4 7.447 211..1.5.35 Reactor Coolant 607 40] 1,812 1,81:!: 95.503 3,'714 232 31 1,443

l:i.15.36 2111.~37 Resldu.11.IHeutRonloval S11fetylnjection(i111ulated) 143 35 163 81 UI ""

303 "' 303 G.414 1,010 2al.15.38 2a.l.5.39 SafotylnjectiOI1(Ulllna11l11.ted) Swlnd11ry Plant Smnpting 71 171 30 no 16

35 12G 35 126 3.483 663

         'la I li.40 211115.41 Stum Gener11lor Blowd01¥n &. Clnoup Turbine ii:\eclrohydrCnlrl(\nsulatcd) 3 IG                                                 "

lG 1,357 2*.1*5.42 2a.I.5.43 Turbine Electrohydr Cnlrl (uninsulated) Turbine Gli\nd Stenm & Drnin11 43 " EXHIBIT WAC-1 000176 TLG Srrviee:<, lue

Comcmcl1f! PtPlr N11dear Powl!r Plant DocumentLJJ.J703*001, Rru, n Decommi.!sio1tint Cost Analysis Append~ C, Pate ~of 20 Tnble C-1 Comanche Penk Nuclear Power Plant, Unit 1 DECON Deconunieslonlng Cost Estimate {thougauda oC 2014 dollnrs) orr-sit111 LLllW NRC SJ1entY11cl Site l'ra<<!ssed nurinl Volun1e1 Durloll Ulllltyand AeUvlty Dcc-on Rc:mavol Poc:k*~lllJ Tr~n1port l'roc:e"lng Dlt1w1al Other Tobi Tohll Lie.Tonn. !Uan*~ed)ent Re1torll.llon Vohtme Cb.HA Cl11.nn Cla~* c GTCC Proc:aned Cun Conlrnctor Index ActlvltyDeserl lion Co11t CoJt Costs Cons C'o11t!I Cost11 Cut' Contlnrenc\' Co~O Corts Costs Costs Cu. Feet Cu. Fnt. C11 Feet Cu Fed Cu Feet Wt., Lb,, Manhoun Manhours Dispo11alofP111ntS)*atem11(to11tinued) 2<\.1.6 ..ol-4 TurbmeHe11.terDr.1in11 211!.45 2aJ.S.<!G Turbine Plnlll Coolinr (lnsula.ted) Turbine PJ:int Coolin( (11ninsuL1ted) 16 1'0 58 21 2 Hi 19 161 19

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    !GI 12,600 533 4,-'195 2a..l.5.47    'l'urhinr11 (Hi1b *Lew) (insulated)                                          3*1                                                                                                                                      39                                                                               1,105 39 211.1-5.48     Turbtne11 (Hi1h

Lo'I'/) {uninaul:11ed}

2ol.!.-49 2o Ui.!JD Vont ChillOO W*ttr

Noo Safety Vent Chilled W11ler. Non Sarety* RC.A IG 8

2 BO 18 60 55,203 1,103 500 2,1.194

.la.1 ..!l.51 2a UI Wc11llnRho11.a11 Procr11a ln1tz"Qm~nl9 Tot.a ls 891 127 5,745 3 "0 1(181 4

0 227 4,!155 2 3,043 I 308 llS,!J.12 7 '°' I3,G17 7 2,325 833 13 43,1'.124 888

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 '2,897,<145       lil,837 95 2*1,G         Sc1tto!cUni;luu11ppcrlc(de.:on1ro.ilsinl\ing                                618                                                                                       'i(ll                                                                 307                                        20,325         17252
,.,            Subtolol l>erin<l 2* Aetivity Cn!u                            1,G-13    23,-183        21.~33       *t.rm 2!1,5!10        GGl 25,B15    107,lM 701 10t83I                             2,925               1G5,0B5          D63         337           12,744,'iG!I       351,322            32,26B Petil\d2aAd(Utlcu1lC<iat.11 2a.2.1

Za.22 Remt1d11IAtticnSuJVtfa R~lin1l Reactor Closure Head

                                                                                                                      ***                     ..,     1,6!19             507      2.19G          2.19G 508,flSO 30,7~2 3,023             zcoo 2o.2.3        lk!tifod HP an.I LP Turbine Rotors                                                        "'                                                              °      l,Bll          l.G11                                                   3.2U
'"             Suhtot111l'enDtl2aAddiUonalColil3                                                         442 5!18 2.28G              827 90       687 4,493          3,&0G                              '"
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    <IA7                3,241                                       150!1,!150 1200 34.976 1.000 3,0()[)

Period 211 Collater11I Costa 2Q:].l Proce11a deQITO.miasi.onini:: water wa*le ,. 2a..3.2 Protellll 1le<:0nlml.S9iolliQC C.h1.'1Die11J fiush \Hlltl' 106 3 115 9D ll7 llM 136 '" 6'8

                                                                                                                                                                                                   <94 846                                                     '"

1,128

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                      -41.<iS::O 120.223              "'

211 2nl3 2a3.4 S11111lltOO)}QJIOt1'llD(C S1ient Fu*I Capital and Transfer 302 "' 7S47 11S2" '" a&10 313

                                                                                                                                                                                                                  *61*

3S 2o3 S11blolol Pc.nnd 211 Collal~ral C03tll 111 161,819 302 189 7,547 1,418 l0,!169 l,GS5 8,619

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     "                   l.822 Period 2a Period*Depeu1hnt Costa 2a.4.1 2n.4.2 2a.4..3 Ottem 111tp11Ue11 lnauruneo rrop~rt)" laua
                                                                                ..                                                                        991 130 13 109 1,090             "'

1,0!10 2a4.4 Hco.lthphyai~auppHu 2,747 687 1'3 3..*04 J2U 3,'13( " 2a46 IJcaVJ'l!<IUipmenll'l'ntal 4,103 4,718 4,718 2r..46 Dill)ltll.Dlo(DAWgen1>rat('11 114 18 133 313 313 5,237 ID4.'i35 171 21147 Pl11nte11eri:rb\ldeet 2n.4.ll 2a.'1.!I NRCFon Emergency Plann\pg Fees 1.'185

                                                                                                                                                          '"             "' 93 1.708 1,QJ9 1708 J,019
!!a.-410 211 ..ol.ll SpcJlt f\lrl Pool O&M ISFSI Operaune CCl!UJ 333 1,170 11             "'"

II 36' J,34G 81 1,346 81 24.412 Soveru11eo 4,295 4,939 2a4 13 Soc*mlj .Stnn'Coat !l,14!1 '" l,372 4.939 10.521 10,521 208,28G 2a414 2a415 2a.0 nocs1a11cnst Utility StaO" Cost Suhtotal l'criod 2* l>eriod*De1}(!ndo11t C:C,ts TOTAL PERIOD Zs COST l,8.t2 G,85U 30,635 114 22,277 l8 S.A19 133 30,634 18.G14

                                                                                                                                                    .28,257 lil\481 75,975 2.801 4,239 11.n111 3.~.9!M 21,475 32,496 83,158 20S,i7G 21,415 J2,49G 81,951 192,2-12 1.793 10,47!?

3,002 5,237 175,38~ 963 337 104,735 13,520,320 3&6,814 171 23.ol,51'1 436,629 87!1,<129 914 694 PERIOD 2h ~Site n,conlamln*tlon Period 2b Drrnt Dea1n1miseioning -'<tivihe* DiaJ>O!lalorPlanlSy*l~me 211.111 Au11:illaey D1:1ll1hng HVAC (ln&blated) 2b.1U ,\11xilior7 Duil<ling llVAC {uninsulotcd) 63 4,176 218

lb.113 211 I l ~

Bau llrna & Mi1c Uncontrolled Acc. HVAC OlrnpreS!e1IAir*lnstr Air(in1ulated) 2 0 21 2 58 2b.116

Zbl l.O 2b.117 Comprouad Air* fosll"Ul!le.nt Air* RCA (i Comprusc1\ Air* lnstrument AiJ *RCA (u Co111pn:1:1cd Alf* Sel'Vltt Air 10 117 27 2

10

                                                                                                                                                "'                          46 240 31 240 31 513 3.-114 J.t,013 233 2,823 663 2.b.118       Cumpremid Ak

Sen*1ce Air* RCA 135 058 -13,622 3,229 2b.ll9 Corupteucd. Alr *lnslr Nr (unin~ulated) 20

                                                                                                                                                "                           55 31 287 31 2b.1.llO      Contai.n1nentH1tehes                                                            8            I           0                                                    3                                                                                                                           2,6l6            191
 ~hl 111                                                                                                                                         '                                      17            17 28,301          1,057 Ca11bmllle11t llrdrocen Puf"E'9 UVAC                                                       II            2                       48                          23 2b.1112       Contoinment Spray Conuunmnt VenUla.tlon HVAC (lnsula.ted) 332
                                                                                                                       "                    1493 2,769 124 2,769                                                 13,197 5,503 813,ll2           9,916 2b.l 1 l3 2bl 114       Cont111nrf!nt VentihltiOl'O HVAC(unifl8tala.tc<I) 219 "so'         "'

10 29 3 "'57 227 1.222 1.222 12' 3G4.D411 33,%91 5.521 804 i!b.1115

'.1b.l I 16 Co11trol RO<lm. HVAC Don1in~rolitcd & RCS Make11p Wattr 0        "

3*1 ' 34 62 911 EXHIBIT WAC-1 000177 TLG Srniicrs, lne.

Comanche Pralt Nnctrar Power- Plant Doc11111.mt LII-1103-001, Rev. a Decommissl.on.lnt Cost Ano(rd:: Appendix C. Paci!! (;of 20 Tobie C-1 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant, Unit 1 DECON Dccotnmissioning Cost Estimate (tbouga11d!1 or 2014 dollnn) OU.Site LLlt\V NllC Bpent Fuel ~111'1 l'rocu11u~d Burial Volumca lforial I UtiUt)'and Aetlvtty Do con Iten1oval Packal(lng Tmnlport Procenlng Disposal Otl1or Tola I Total Lie.Term. Mo.naremcnL Rutnrotlon Volu1ne Clo.as A Cll\Hll Cl1111C GTCC Pr<teeued Cran Contr11etor Index Activity Duerl lion Coit Cost Coals Co111s Costs Co!ls Costs Cantin enr: Cv1t1 C'-01U {:Olitll Cosu Cu. F.,et Cu Feet Cu.Feet Cu Feet Cu. Fl'lot Wt"Lb1. l\larihour1 M1mhouu Du1pcnl ~(Plant Systems (contlrit1t"d)

\?.li.1117       Dunincra,lb:ed & RCS M21Jn,u11 Wlltr. RCA 211.l 118 2b.1U9 Dietel. Oen & Auibnrles {insulnt.td)

Dle1cl Gen & Auxilinrles (unh13ul11it.ed)

                                                                                       " 0 71 15
                                                                                                                                        "                            39 II I

20< 82 7 20*1 82 7 "' 32,585 2,095 182 2,239 2b.l l 20 Ditml Generator l'ltel Oil 12

                                                                                         *                                                                              '       "                                                   13 2b.L.l.21 2b.1122 2b.1 J 23 2h.l.12<1 Dk>.el Room HVAC
                 £lctlriol 0 Cl~n ElectrlCJ1l-Co11lnmi1111ted Eleetricnl*RCA 1,588
                                                                                      '22 1'

1" * .. 238

                                                                                                                                                                      '9 I

1,826 307 307 l,8'.16 745 6,'179 49,276 4~&049 117 49.165 3,491 21.014 2b.ll:Z5 2b.ll.W fireProlecuon Fir<: Pr<<eetlon

RCA "

102 41

                                                                                                                "                      766 IG2 "2

12 2,309 OS 497 2,3Cl9

                                                                                                                                                                                              .,,                                  OS 1.434                                    95,0U 2,628 U85 1b.t l 27 2b.1J28 LenkRllloTHt i'crt.11bleW*tu lO I           '                                  "                            " 6 0

81 I 31 104 6,914 ,6, 39 2\Jll29

?b.Ll.30 2b.llS1 2b.] 1.32 2b.J 1.33 R.ldiolionM011itar!.nf Sufcgvud.5 DuJlding IIVAC (in1J1Jl11lecl)

S1feguards 8ni\1line HVAC (uni11wl1led) SeniceWntor Sernco Watar. RCA 17 38 ISO I 78 19 405 lO loo 0 6 .. 51 127 I 127 8<0 3.578 lloo\95 27021 236,1.\SO 33 360 1,104 1,:140 4,958 2b.J l 34

~b.11.35 T11rb!tto Building HVAC (i1U111latc1\)                                   3 8"

3

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                   .,3 Turbine Duilding llVAC {11nuu11l11te<\)

2b.l 136 2b.l.l 37

                 \*enl.ll&Dr111n1 Vrnt* & Dra1111 *RCA 16 3

2 18 122 Zb.11.38 2b.l.1.&l w..tu M11.n1cement (llnmsulated) Wut*Pructs11ngl.iquid(in:m1nte'1) 81

                                                                                      '"  3         "                                    81                         102 0          3                                                                     "'                                     41.3:?0          5,4'ii SI
                                                                           ""                       "                                                                                                                                                     508
                                                                                      "'"                          3
                                                                                                                                         "                           82       356
                                                                                                                                                                                              "'                                                                                                 33.G11          4,811 2\J.l i..to 2b.t 1.41 2h.l l 2b.J.2
                 \VuteProcessln1Llq\lid(un1nBU.111.t.ed)

Wasto l'nxe.ni.111: Sclnl Totals

                 ~atraldin&"i"*urol'O!'toCrlecammisllionine 180       4,83.t'        860 8

0 2 0

                                                                                                                                    ....'33 2,244 I

181 J2,410 ' 181 I0,J83 5 2.226 291 14 36,19G 19.203 695 2.394..632 2,31G 53 134.868 Deconbnmuitfon oCS\te Huild.in~

                                                                                      ""                                                 43                         174       816             870
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         "'                                     :!5.-4011       2l.56:S 2b.l.3.l        J\1'11.ctar 2\.J.13.2 2b.13 S11terunrd Tato.b l,'.i!10 158 1,358 7BO 77          "14 71 6

l,:!71l 138 1,138 135 4,56.t 631 4,564 531 13.395 l,SOG 851,036 98,799

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                <19,395 5,6'i0 2b.l            Subtotal P~riaol 2b Attiv:ity Cos~                   U48 6,338 103 08:!

79 1,4lS 5,553 1,274. 3,692 6,006 18,381 6,006 16,165 2,226 14,751 51,332 0-19,835 3,369,813 55,065 211,498 l'eriod!!bAddlt1<malCmu 2u:u Remedial AC11on Survey1 2,868 860 3,'i2S 3,128 52,!!22 Ob.2 Subtntal Period 2b Addittonal Com 2.668 3,723 3,128 52,222 Pennd 2b Collalcnl Co*ll

                                                                                                                                                                    ° 2b.3.l          Pn;ic:ug decomm~toning water ,.,Cllli:

lb.3.2

 ?h.3.3 Procn~o dC'Ulriimilllloning chemiCJ1! Ilueh WHl*

S11uilltool11llowance "0 130 58 12 71 26 93 34 81 14 386 85 '"" '" 113 32,831 12,0-12 107 21 2b.3A 2b.3 Spont Fuel Copil11.l 11nd Trun~rcr Subtala.I Perioll 2b Colfatenl Costs '3 130 70 27,141 4.()12 19 31,2.19 "' 31,219 Period 2li l'*rind.Depcindonl Co~la'

                                                                                                                 "                     127    27,147             4.166     31,839              '20         31,210                                         GGO                                    44,874             128 2b.4.l          Dec.on eupplies 21> ..C.2 2b.4.3 Jnauranc~

Property taxa1

                                                                          "'                                                                   1.633 221
                                                                                                                                                                    !GS 22 l,OH I.Ml 1,0H 1,851 243 2b.U             Hultb pbyaie11up11lin                                             2,567                                                                           642     3.20D           3,209
 ?b.45           Henvyequfpinentrental                                              7,152                                                                         l.Oi3     8,225           !,225 2b.4.G 2b.47 2b..J.8 Di.s]lCls11l of DAW s:enerat,d Pl.:intenernrbudij:et NRCFeu
                                                                                                     "           12                      86 1991 1,513
                                                                                                                                                                    ,,.31      202 2,290 202 2,290 1,130 3,388                                     G7'iG2             111
                                                                                                                                                                     "'      1.130 2b.4.D           Emergencyl'Jacn1nrfces 2bA.10 2b ..Sll Spent fuel Pool O&M liquid Rnd*H*le Procee!ing Eqo.lpmentf.';ervice1 1,987 76 2,2.SG

,;9 ,,.

621 2,26.G 2b.U2 ISF'SI Opt>nillng Co~u 120 18 138 138 2b.<i.13 S1verance 2,817 423 3.240 3.2~0 2b.4U SecurityS10IrCosi 15,53& 2,330 17,666 17,866 353,7(10 2b.u~r DOC StR<<Cott 21.292 3.19*1 24.48G 24,466 282,960 2b.4.16 UtilltyStairCost 33,362 M0-1 38,367 38,367 1126,620 2b.4 Subtot1l Period 2b l'criod*Dcpenclent Cost* 2b.O TOTAL l'EHIOD 2b COST 635 2.466 9,719 16,181 1125 12 379 5,W6 86 81,GIH 111,GGG 14,000

                                                                                                                                                               !!2.73S 106,876 160.32<1 103,331 123,83<1 3,045 3~.264             2.?26 3,3B6 05,360 G7i<l2 3,482,509 l11    1,163,280 263,959     1,103,280 EXHIBIT WAC-1 TLG Sen*'ee-', Inc                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                   000178

Comnnd~r Prall Nucl11arPowrr Plant Docume11t LJI-1703-001, R11:11. 0 Decominfssiortlng CoJt AnnlJ'6'1J Appendb: C, Page 1 o/ 20 Tobie C-1 Comnnchc Penk Nuclear Power Pinnt, Unit 1 DECON Decommissioning Cost Estimnte (thousa.nds 0!2014 do Ila.rs) Off-Sito Ll.lt\V NUC Sp1mL1uel Sltfl Prflcencd Duri*I Volumu Durio.I/ Utility and

    /!.cUvUy                                                          Deegn    ncrnn,.nl  1'11ckaglng  Tro.nspon   l"roc11&11lng Dlspn11i.l  Other          Totnl            TotRI        Llc.T11r1n     Mnnagement     Restoration  VnlunHI  Cl11.uA     cla1sll   CIH1C   GTCG   Proceued        era rt      Conlr*ctnr lnd<'X                                  Actl,.JI

D<'scrlptlon Cost Coit co,ts C'osu Costs Crisis Cost1 Cantln1umcv Costs C:osu Co1ts Co111t' Cu.Feet. Cu Feet Cu, Fc!!L Cu.Fut Cu Feet Wt. Lt.1 M1mhour11 Manhou:s PF.RJOD 2d
Decontamlrilltion Followlng\V.t Ful!I Storaire Penod 2d Direct Decnmmi11111on1ng: Aclirilies 2d.IJ Remol'e&llPUtC1.1el!"llch

                                                                         "'           26          137           16
                                                                                                                                        "'                         '"           1,0~9           1,04!1                                            3,0-l2                              201,oas Ditpoeal oCPl11.nl Syttem1 2,787            170
 ?d.12.1 2d.12.2 ll'ul'I Building HVAC (uninsttlated)

Fuell11111d1inr ' G I I 3 3 15 18 " 18 2'0 GI 508 4,040 33,611 152 3,144 2d.l.2.3 Spent Fuel Pool Coolinc & Cleanup 127 60 40,498 3,465 Zd.I 2 Totals

                                                                                     "'             17 77                                 5,0SJ         4,313 2111   ~        Sc111Tolt1lngll'lallp11ortor1focom111lasionb1r                      120                                                                             35           I75 l,507 1,507                                             3,730                               2fG,6H          8,GIG 3d1             Subtotalt'eriotl21!AclMtyC11sh' Period 2tl Addltfonal Coct.a
                                                                          '"         "'           156           19
                                                                                                                                        "'                          331 292         l,2G5           1265                                                                                                                   G,240 2tl2.l 2tl12 Uce11te Term1n1lion S11rvor Pl.:11u1mg Remetl1t1l Acnon Survey*                                                                                                         """'               "            118              118 3'1                                             5,855                               146.375 t,65Z 16 Zd.2.3 2tl2 Opcr11tfonal Toole and FA1uipmC11t Subtotal Pl'riotl :!d Alldilional Cootn lG 250     1,064 66 385 3<1 l,i23           1,723                                             5,855                               146,315          1,667           6,240 Pe1iod:!dCollateralC°'ta 280                                                398                                23.869             78 2d.3.1 2d.3.3 Procesa decommJS5IOTJini: ll>'ater \l'Hfe Smallt~\1llowance 60 10 42
                                                                                                                "                         67
                                                                                                                                                                     "     I 280 II              II 5,290                               3~9.G78              89 2d3.4 2d.3.5 Dl!tornmis9ioning Equ1pnient Dbl)O!ilion SpeniFt11!lCat11tal1111d'J'1aufu 127
                                                                                                                "                       '"        878               '"'

132 919 l,010 919 1,010 373,547 Subtotal PHiotl 2d Collateral Costs Period 2d rmoil-Drp*ndl!11t Cotti 60 10 169 79

                                                                                                                                        '"        878               358         2.21!1          1,210            1.010                            5,G8ll 21l4.l          Deconauppliee                                                                                                                                             I           G               6 2dU 21\.4.3 I1111.1roncl!"

Propmytni:es " ' I 59 8 "' U.4.4 2d.4.ll lleolthph1olce 1uppllea McaV)*equipmf!ntrenW

                                                                                     '""                                                                             "",           110 260 110 260 2d-t.G 2d4.'J 2d.4.B 2d.411 Dispotel orDAW pMrntl!'<I Phrot eriergy budcet NRCFoea Emerg*rn~y Plllnnmc- Fota 18 2
                                                                                                                                                                                    "39 22 39 366                                 i,811             12 2d.410

Zd.411 Liquid Rndwute Ptoceuing Ettu1pmenu'Semces ISFSI Operoitng Costs "* *1 3,161 3,lGl 2(l412 2ll.*113 Severa.nco Se~rltJ Stair Cost 2,'140 102 "' 23 Iill 3,4RO 6,049 2d.414 2d..i1e OOCStarfCa.L Utility St11ff Coot 61' 710 "'

710 366 7,311 12 10.D2S 19,554 S11btotnl reriCld 2d PenOll* Dependenl Coat. 9 l,3fi 4,JGI G,J03 679 1.15!1 11,177 10,627 6,153 9.594 1034 l:i.63.9 173,876 10,461 21i.79C 2d.O rERIOD TOTAi. I1ERIOD 2d COST

ze- DelA1 before I.Iceni" Tl!rm.lnatlon

                                                                          "'         618
                                                                                                   "'          116 Period2eD1rectDrcom!lllsslonin1Act1vitles Period le Col111orsl Co9tl 2c.3.l          Spent Fuel C1pital ind Tunarer                                                                                                29,663             4,450       M,113                             34,113 2e.3            S11\.lr.ot11l l'ertod :.le CoUutunl Cosu                                                                                      29,663             4.450       3*1113                            34,113 P1mod 2e Period*Depenilent Costs 2e.4l            Insur.met                                                                                                                      2,1'1.7             215         2,362           2.362 2r.4.2 211<1.3 Pr!IJl('rtyta*H Henlthphystcaauppllu 91 360 7,434             12
 !l<.<4 2e.4.6 DilP'"*I of DAW gl!nemt"d NRCF!!ce 1041 22 1,on                                                 "'

2e.47 2e.~ 8 2o 4.9 Emergency Plunni.ni; Fee! ISFSl 0p1"rot1n1 Co.!lb StcuritJ StQ(f Co:it 830 178 7,1-10 l,071 922 205 8,211 8,21] 205 163,320 54,440

 'le.410 Ze.4 UtilityS11!l'CCllt SuhtDtal Period 21' Perlod*Dependent Costs 14,9*1D               '"
                                                                                                                                                                  '2.122 3,867 17,444 3,867 16,317            1,127
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          '1,434            12       !U7,760 HG(M               0,572        .SU57            16,317          35,2~0                                372                                 7.~34.            12       217.760 2e.O            TOTAL PERIOD 2e COST                                                362 EXHIBIT WAC-1 000179 TLG StrvicH, Inc,

Doctiment L11*1703-00I, nev. 0

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        .Appendir. C, Page 8 of 2n Comanr::11e Pt-t11i Nur::lt-orPowerPlant Dl!cornrnlssiouing Cost .Ana (ysllii' Tnble C-1 Co01011che Penk Nuclenr Power Plnnt, Un.it 1 DE CON Decommissioning Cost. Estimate (thousands oC2014 dollnrs)
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          !Juria Volu1ncu                 Hurinl                       Utility and NllU        Spcntl-'uel           Sile           l'rocencd                                                             Cun          Contractor DCC-Site      LLll\Y                                                                                                                   Class A    C!asaB     Cltl.1sC     GTCC    Proct1ucd Man11.ge1Uent. Restora.tlon       Volume                                                             MnnbourJ       M11.ohotU'~

Disposnl Other Total Tnt11.I Lie.Tenn. Cu.Fed Cu. Feet Cu Feet. Cu.Ft1et Wt .* Lhs. Doeon Remnvnl Pa~kai:lni: Transport Procel!illlPZ Costs Costs Cu. Feet Actlvlly Cost! Costs Con11ntcnc* Cost!I Costs Cost Cost Co11t111 Cost' Cosb In die* Activ1tv DeRerl11llon PEnlOD 2C- L1ceu111 Termln ..don Period 2fDirect Ducommu31oninl:' Activities 2!11 ORISEcunfir11rnlorysunoey 1G7 50

                                                                                                                                                                                         '" .            217 2r.u            Termlnatehcc?lllc Subtots;I Period 'lf Adhoity Cost*                                                                                                 "'                    "             "'

Period 2f .-\dditioni1J Costs 4,122 1,237 5,359 5,359 86,835 BG,835 3.120 3,120 Lltense-Trrml11111.JGn S\1rvey 4,122 t,2a1 8,359 6.309 2r.2.1 2U Subtotal Period 2f Additional Cl)S,!a Period 2C Colhlcrnl Costt 1,603 240 1,843 1,843 2(3,l OOCetucrrelocatione:tpenseii 1.G03 240 1,843 1,843 Subtotlll Period 2rColhteral Casts

  "'                                                                                                                                                                                      417 Pcnod 2fPer1od*De1Wlntlent Cootll 2f,(,l           lneurnttce PrU]lerlytHe5
                                                                                                                                                      "' (l6                "'

14G 73 729 " 729 6,734 11 2!.4.2 583 331 2£.4.3 Health phy*ica aurplie~ 20 183 2£4-4 2f.45

it.4.8 DisrlosulofDAWtc:-nerate1l Plant e1mrgy btulret NRCFees U9 455 urn ""

17 501 186 501 1'6 2!.4.7 2£4..S En1ergi:1tcy Plonn1ng Ftts I.SFSJ CJriuatlnr Coots ,.,." 229' 1758 1,041

                                                                                                                                                                                             "          L758 1.541
                                                                                                                                                                                                                            "                                                                                                                  33,000 46,750
   !!C.4.9         Scvar.mee                                                                                                                        1,340                  201 4.319           4,319                                                                                                                                  60,107 2£4.10

.if,4..11 SPCurityStaffCost DOC St111I Coet 3,756 4 0 00!:1 "'

4,679 4,Gn 6.134 11 139.8~7 2(4.12 2f.4 UtilllySta!fCost Subtotal P1:riod -ir l'ertOO.*Depundent C°"la 12.014 1,1!95 14,509 21,927 14,281 21,700

?21! 337 6,134 86,846 142.977 17,905 3,422 583 74S.092 2,464,506 2{.0 TOT!\L PERIOD zt COST 5,288 247,112 053 337 17,'790.870 73.4S4 450.212 363.686 81,237 48,385 '23.'159 5915 37,765 256,252 4,G51 PERIOD 2 TOTALS I'ERJOD :lb-Site Ret!lorRtion Period 3b Direct Dt'contmla_"'lcntni: AcbvitlH 79,426 7,156 Dernoli~lun of Rlltuainlnt Site Builtlinp 3b.111 Reactor 6,223 933 7,156 17 17 8,908

                                                                                    "'"                                                                                                                                                        "'                                                                              11,858 3li.l.l.2       Ciri::WnterY11rdPl11\ng                                                                                                                                  98             752 1,184                                              1,184                                                                             30,287 3b,1 l 3        DieselGener11tor                                                                                                                                        1'4 3b.114          Old Ste*m Genel'lllDr Stor11.i:e F1cllity 1,0:!0 2,Z5G 335         '2,594.

2,5~4 2,049 3b.11.5 3b.\ t.G 3b..117 Sofeg-iurd Swl1ehge11r Turbine "' 603 l,316 19 90 107 603 1,514. 693 1,51' 14..055 11.258 15,907 159.129 3b.ll.B Turbine P~estd 1,833 14,055 12,222 3b.l 1 Tolab 1,292 Sita Clueriut Acbvilice 3b.l 2 Grode. & bnds(a11e site

                                                                                     '"                                                                   203 84 30            '"

233 1410{) 161.o21 UGO IMO 3b 1.3 3b.l Find re(ICrt lo NRC Subtotal Penod 3b Activ:it.y Cosu l~.783 "3 1,948 14,933

                                                                                                                                                                                                            '"                                                                                                                   2,483 569                                               560 r~rfod 3h A1l1l1tional.Cosu                                                                                                                            2                 74 ConcntoCtushing
                                                                                     '"                                                                                                       380                                               380                                                                              2.483
                                                                                                                                                                              '"'° 3b.2.1                                                                                                                                              330 3b.2.'J 3b.2 Com1truct1onDe>brisOispos11\

Subtotal Period 3b AddiLiooal Ccst.s <93 332 949 115 llG Penod 3b Collateral Co11t.e Sn1a1ltoolal11n.,..nn JOI 345 345 3b.3.l 300 2,94-1 Spent 1uel Capit.al ind Transfor 2JJ44 3b.3.2 3b.3.3 3b3

                      ~ ... eranc@

SubtotalPeriod3bCGl\otera1CostR 101 2.5ti0 2,SGO '" 3,405 3.060 P~iod 3b Period*Da11cindent C-OsU 3b.4 l lnsunmtb l'Top~rly taxes 115 57 18 1.158 532 8,877 19.1 8,877 3b.4.2 7,120 3b4.3 He11.vyeq1npmontrentnl EXHIBIT WAC-1 000180 TLC Seruice.s, Inc

Cvm1mch~ Peal1 Nnclecrr Pou*rr Plant Docrim1mf Lll-1103-001, Rev. D Decommi.uionlnc Cast A11alysis Appendi% C, Pallr 9 of .20 Table C-1 Comnnche Peak NucleAr Power Pinnt, Unit l DECON Deco1nn11ssio11ing Cost Estimntc (thousands of 2014 dollRrs) Off.She LLltW NRC Sp1u1.tl-'ucl Silo l'roc11i;st1d lh1ri1d Volumt's Duri*I/ Utility 1l11d Activity Decon Reroovnl Pll.cknl{inl( Trnm1port I'roee.11lng Dl*pus11.I Other Toh I Totnl Lie.Tenn Manageme11t Restoro.tlon Volumo Clo.uA ClnuD Ci*H C GTCC Prcceued Croft Contractor lncfo* Activltv Duer! tl11n Con Cost Costs Costs Coit! Costs Costs Contlnl(f!ncv Cosu Co*l* Cost1 Cost* Cu Fut Cu. Feot Cu Foot Cu P .. nt Cu. Feat WL,Lb*, M*nh.,un M*nhours P!!fiod 3b Period-DPpenrleot CosU {eiontinuerl) 3M( rlan\emr[Q'bmlget 3h..l.S 3b.48 NRC ISFSI Fl'll1 Enier~ncy Pli:inning Fl!f!s 211 32 242 278 218 '" lb.47

tb.'4.8 ISFSI ()pl'!'11t1nr Coeu SteuntySl1dTCollt

                                                                                                                                       "'9, 3,5(8 14 493 110                             "'

110 Si,360 3b.-l.9 3h..J 10 DOC Sl1dTCDbt Ulilll.rStnffC01t 8,930 4,673 l,339 70l 4,080 10,269 5,374 (0) 3.101 1129 10,269 4,2*15 110,240 70,221 Jh.-1 Subtol11I rcrfod :lb Pcriod*Dqitndent C°""' 7,720 18,!JO? 3,921 30,MS (0) l!>.935 24,614 2G7,821 3b.O TOTAL PERIOD 3b COST 21.096 22,302 6,437 G,280 .j:J,322 163,50'1 269,381 PERIOD 3e-Fucl Storfl.1(1: OJMr.. uon,tShlppinp: 49.&35 renod & Diroct Dei:ommJssioninr Attn-itie.!! Period 3c Coll11tcr*I CoatJ 3eal S!}'nl Fuel Cupltul 11n1I TrRn!(er J0,125 l.519 11,643 11,6~3 3*3 Sul:ltctal Puiod 3c C<il111.l.cr11l ~11 10.J25 1,519 11.G43 11,GU Period 3c Prrlod-Dcpen1lrnt CosU 3c...(.1 lnturance lJ,182 1,118 12,301 12,301 3c.of.2 PTopartyt.n"es 3.4.11 3') 3i52 3,752

tc.of.4 NRC ISFS] Ftea 9,<153 Broergency Pl11.nni11g P~~s 8,ri94

                                                                                                                                                         '"        9,<163 9,606 3c..IG Jc.4.7 ISFSI Opeu,ting Cosl.e SceuritySlntl'Co.11t 8,733 1.85*1 52,539 273 7,881 9,606 2,132 G0.420 2,132 6o,.(20                                                                                                       l,255,589 Jc.4.8           Utilit1*S10IrCo1t Subtotal Period 3c Prrlod Depenllrnl Co.sll 0

19,109 10IS,4~:Z 2,860 H,217 21,976 119.640 21,97G 119.640 273,199 1,529,388 TOTAL PERIOD 3c COST pJo:RIOD 3J GTCC shipping p 116,547 15,7:16 131.283 131,283 I.529,388 r.inod 3d Di.r11<l ~omnduionin: Activitit.a Nuclnr Ste11.m SupJllJ Syatom Removal 3d.lll Veuel & lnt.cm11h GTCC DispMal 7!50 10.0S7 l,698 12,515 12.SlS 2,217 425,012 ad.I) ToW. 700 10,06i 1,6!18 12,515 12,515 2,21i 421!>,012 3dl Subtot11.I Period 3d Activity CNts 750 10.067 1.698 12,515 12.515 2,211 425,012 Penod 3d Cnlh1.ler11l Co,t9 3tl.3.l S1K'nl Jo"uel Capital and Transfer JO 1l II 303 Subtotal Puiod 3d C111lateral Costa JO 11 II Penod 3d t'eriod*Dcpendent Cata 31L.t.l 3d.4.2 Jd.45 lnsun.nr.e Propertyh"llea NRC ISFSI Feoe1 Emueencyl'lanning-ftts II 3 0 l 5 3d.4..6 ISFSI Opnalinr Costs 9 9 0 2 311.4 7 Security StRrfCo~t Utility St11U Co$t

60 GO 22 1,2<1.0 210 3d.4fl 31\il Suhtotal Ptnod3tl Poriod-Dopt111font Cotta 10 JOO "

114 ll< l,SlO 3d.O TOTAL PERIOD 3d COST 750 l0,067 llO 1,713 12,640 12.515 126 2.2li 425.012 1,510 PERIOD :tn-ISFSI Deet1nllmln11tlo11 Period le Du-ect Dreommi~foninr Act:lvitie::i PcnlKI !lo Addltiouftl Costa 3e.2.1 Lu:enu Termin1tion ISFSl 59 4,14~ 13,885 t,12-t,934 10,302

                                                                                                     ""                                                   829 115                                            1,563       J,-19(                                      41.'14                                                                                                                             1,044.

Sul*wtal Period 3e Adddtonal Cost.a 13.88~ t,124..93-1 1044 3".2 l'enori3e Penoil*DepandentCl!.!Lts 115

                                                                                          "                                l,563      1494                829      4.14-1         4,14.4.                                                                                                            10.302 hu*.m1nce 3c.41 3e.42            Prcpertytuas r1~nt encrrYbudriet 4<

11 7 36 3e.4.3 9

                                                                                                                                                                                      "                                                                                                EXHIBIT WAC-1 000181 TLG Services, Inc

Camanclu Ptar1 /'ludtcrr Pawtr Pinnt Docunu.-nt Lll-170~-00J, R41u. 0 Decomrnisslonin~ CosLAnolJ1si' App~ndi% C. Po/!e 10of110 Tnble C-1 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant, Unit 1 DEC ON Decommissioning Cost Estimate (thousands of2014 dollars) Ort-Sll11 LLllW NUC Spcntt'1.1'1 Site Pcoc<?ueod llur al Voluml!I llurinl I Utility and Activity Dt!con Removal Packaging' Tran1port Procening Dispo1al Other Tota.I Lie, Tcrn1. M*n11gemcnt R.estor.11.tlon Volume ~c~,,-.,~i-°"cl"'

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         ..~,"'u="'c1""u=,=c-=a~Tc~c~ Procuud          Cro.n      Contrac:toc Index                                   AetlvltyDr:scr'I tlon                   Cent.      eo ..       Cast*      Cosu            ('-0st*      Cost*       C01h                Cons        Cos;t*          Co!t.s          Co1u            Cu Fe11t  Cu Feet C:u. Fec*t Cu. Feat Cu. Feet        Wt.. Lb!    Manboun       Monl1ours Period 3e Perloct-Deperidont Co,u (continued) 3eA.-4            Sct11rlt7 Stoff Cost 63       16                                                                                                                                                    1,714 3e:.4.5           UtilitySufi'Cost                                                                                                                                                33                                                                                                                                                     1,886 Se,d-Dependcnt ~t*

3f4.2 3f.4,3 3£.4.4 l'roportJ'l:t!CU Heuyequipmc11trcnt1I Planl11neri;yb11dtet "' " 11 l 23 3 lG 20 IG 3r.4.5 ~riiyS1alI'Cll:1L 13 2 15 3('4.6 Utility Stoia Cost 63 G3 3f.4 Sublot.al l'onod3f Pericd*DeFCndent C113l5 156 ' 38
'" 293 771 1,114 3(0 PElUOD 3 TOTALS TOTAL PERIOD 3C COST T01'AL COST TO DECOMMISSION i,51G 22.'187 '" . 11,630 1-10.211 313 2~103 2.404 200.GB~ 1'1270 137.689 Z.404 45,726 13,885 262,193 l,8Z7 Z..217 ~,217 l,IB9,947 15,266 189,073 l,1D4 l,80G,U7 '1,!>70 74,193 H,112 6,Ul 53,165 513,794 119,200 7'9,3711 r.llS,367 ZH,:187 62,622 "' 19,<111,BSn 968,988 G,304,UC 1 1AI, 'O TI' UJi:COMMlSSlON \ 'I'll 11.6t"X. CONTINGf,;NC\'. $1,9,376 L1ouso.n I of 2014 dol 11.U TAL Nnc LICENSE TERMINATION COST IS 63.H" on SSOS,31i7 tho11s11ndsof :znu do1lart S!!41,SB7 thou,ands or :znu do11An NON-NUCLEAR DEMOI.JTION COST IS U8% OTL l~'!,62i lhou1nn1h o( 1014 dollllfl OTAL LOW-LEVEL RADIOACTIVE WASTE VOLUME nunmn (FXCLUD1NG GTCC) ~Gof,4liG eublc f'cct TOTAL GREATER THAN CLASS c lL\DWASTE vo1.u:im GENERATED*
OTAL SCRAP METAL REMOVED* Ge.':160 tons OTAL CRAFT LABOR RE UIREMENTS 968,,B& m11n-hot1r9 EodNctts: rila. indlt1te& that thls 1tllvity notc:h:irgedas decomrnis11onint e*nse 11
indic:11us tbat thb sctivitJ pcr!orme.d by dtc01nm!Jsl.oninc 1hff.
0° lndic11n that.this Vlllue is less lb~n 0.5 but con-iero. 11 C<!U contll.lning' -
indic11ll'1111 r..erovnlu~
EXHIBIT WAC-1 TLG Strviua, lne 000182
Coman~he Pea/, N1,denr' l'owtr Plant Docununt LIJ-1703-(101, lleu. O DceommiHionz'n(/ C..ottAnalyris Appendi~ C, Par:e 11of20 Table C-2 Comnnche Peak Nuclear Power Plant, Unit 2. DECON Decommissioning Cost Estimntc (thousnnds oCZ014 dollitrs) Oil-Sil* LLllW NUC Sp1mt111cl Stto 1'rocossed nurial Vnlumu Purlnl/ Utlll1.yt1n{j Activity De con Removll Packaging Transport Proce~!lng Dlspo&al Other Total Total Lie.Term. M11nase01cnt Rcstorntlon Volnme Clo.ssA Ctmssn ClouC GTCC Proce111cd Cu.rt Contractor Index Activity nescri Uan Cort Ccis~ Costs CMu Costs Casts Costs C'.ontlni;rcncy r-0su Co1tu Cost* Cnst* Cu.Feet C11.Fct!t Cu. Ft!ct Cu.Jo'cet Cu. Feet Wt., Lbs. Man hours Man1iaurs PF.RJOD la *.Sll1Udown through Transition PeriOO la Direc:tDl"COm1niniomngAelmbea h.1.1 Jal.2 la.1.3 Prer.ue preho1in*l'J' decommiuinning cmt Notification ofCe11911tilm o!Opt!nibnn1 R.movt0fu.el&11iu.m:malerlal 12 It .. ., 14.1.4 11115 N1;1ti[icatlon 1;1(Petm1nf'nt Dafoeling Ih>Bcllvat.eplant l)'Ateml & proceu wash! lal.6 1Ftl7 la.LB lal.9 Pnoporci and 1ubmit PS DAR Rrview plont dwgs & 11pct1. Puformdalbiltdradau.noy F..Blnn11teby*pr0o.luctinvenlm1 lll 06 17
" 8 6'
850 1,969
-128 lo.110 111..lll EnQ.producldcacript\on DetBiledlly productinventory 12 8
556 0 It h.112 Dl'fine majtir work sequence 3,210 la.113 le.114 Pcrl'tmn SER and EA Perform S!te-Sptcific Cmt Study 172 03 26
'" "' 1,327 2,HO la.l.15 Prcparc/1u.brnit Li~nse Term.in4tion Pl11n "' " "' 320 1.7~3 3(
111.116 ltf'C!ive NltCapproval cfterminnti1>n plan "' '" Activity Srl.'Cilicnhon1 Ja.1171 Ja.117.7 Pliint & temporlU')' !ndhtie-9 Plantayetsms 273 41 314 31 27 2,106 1,783 NSSS DecontamlMllon Fluah ln.1173 32 2l4 32 Jo..1174. Re1td1>rinl0rnal1 lR.l,17.6 Rendor\*cstiel 361 "'
"' '" S,039 2.78:Z foll7.G Biologic4labield ,8 32 lal 177 Stcamgener11ton1 1,3311 la.117.8 Reinfon:ll'da:incrcote >.fain Turbine 173 13 199 102 51 61 68' lal17.9 22 171 Ja.11710 M11inCoudcn.er1 3
3 " 171 lll.1.1711 Plantatnicture11&1:ui!din1:3 173 26 100 100 l,33S 111.11712 Wft1tem11n11~rnent 29' 2.. 1,969 l1d17l3 1a117 F11cilityhalleclo1ecut Total
'l,102 38 31' 8
2,417 2'J 2,12!) " 28!> a85 IG.100 Planning & Sito ~pnr11ttot111 l.1118 lal.19 la J.20 111.121 Prepore dis1nontling ~equenC() Plsntpnip.&terop,8\'&eS De-aign watef dean.up system Rir:irini:/Cont,CntrllfovlpVl:1111lini;letc. 133 aooo
Z,300 20 12 .
1'3 3,4riO 163 3oUO 2.645 l,027 ll\.1.22 11"1 Procure cnka/li11en & wntainenr Su.btoul Ilctrlod. la Activity Cost" 68 9,399
"'IO 1,410 2,6415 10.BOS" "
J0,520 289 "' 31,566 PcriBd Ja Cdli11ert1l Coeu l8S.I Spent Fuel C1p1tal and Trnnsfor 11,347 1,702 13,M9 13,049 lfl..3 Su.Mc1el reriod 14 Collatrrnl c.om 11,3-f.7 1,702 13.049 13,049 Period la PPriod*Ikpendent Casi.II 1841 (111ur11nce l.UIO llS 1,243 1,243 la.42 lP.<1..3 la.4.-1 Propertylllll.tfll H11allhphyaicaaupplie11 Heavy oqu.lpment ttnt11l 539 7i!J
" 135 9 97 Gi.ol.
97 G1' ln4.5 la.4.6 Di*poo11lorDAW genarnt~d Plant enora bud eel " 1,057 117 159 * '" l21S 36 895 1,215 010 1!,190 20 la-17 NRCFeea 83~ 83 917 Dl7 la.4.8 EmcrJ:1!.DC)' Pbinning" Fo~ 489 IL4.9 Spent Fuel Pool O&M JSFSl Or*nll.i11r Cos1.11
"'48 "
119 910 "' 010 la.410 Secu.rllySl&(fCm, 6,IS-4 7
" 55 ln*lll la412 to<
UtilitySlalfCost Subtotl\l Penod la Period* Ikpend.ent Costs 1,318 13 2' 1* 26,670 372*15 4,000
.5,719 7,Ul 30.670 44.,313 7,111 30.670 42,B59 1,-154. GIG 12.lSO ,.
H0.786 423.400 SIH,lSG TOTAL. l'ERIOO IR COST 1.318 68,170 6IO 20 1*0
" " 57,991 8,831 53,378 1-1,503 289 12,190 595.752 EXHIBIT WAC-1 000183 TLG Sen>ices, fne.
C.omnnche Peali Nudttor Powt'r Plrmt Document Lll*l70:J.001, Ret*. O Decorrimis.sloning Cost A11nlysi8 Appendix C. Pcit:tt 12 of 20 Tobie C-2 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant, Unit 2 DECON Dccon1.missioniug Cost Estimate (thousnnds or 2014 dollnrs} Off-Sile LLRW Nl\C Spont.Fncl Sile l 1 roccuc llurlal Vo unn** nurinll Uti!ityo.nd A-=tivity Decon Removal 1'.acko~ng' Tro.nsporl Procculcg Dlsposal Other Total Tot..n.I Lie.Term. Mon*gemo11t Restoration Volume Cla.ssA Cfo.tsD Ci1usC GTCC Proc*Hed Crnrt. Contractor Index Acllvltv D<:scrl Uon (°<(1st Cast Cust' Coso Cos II c.... Co1t1 C'.nntln(enc Costs Com Costs CCKl! Cu. Feet. Cu F<ll!l Cu Feet Cu. Feat Cu.. Frei WL,Lhs. M11nhour' Monllour11 PEllJOD lb* Deenrnmisslonlng Prcport\llOne Period lb DirC'Cl Decommis~lonint: /..ctivitie4 Detailed Work Pro:11d11res Plant.IS}'Ettll!ll 30 2,02G lb.l.ll lb.112 lb.11.3 NSSS Decont.11.m1011tion Flnsh Reactorintcm11la 2G3 130 21 8 302 IGO 6< 272 6*1 160 "' 1,070 lb.l 14 1b.l 1.6 lhl.U Remaining lluildmi:s CRDcoollni;:as:icrt1bly CRD housings & lCI t.ubcs 7' 6G II 8 GS lb.117 Tni:orelm:itrumcmtoliim Ruct.orvcssel 20:! 30 l,&54 lb.11.8 lb.118 Factlitrclnscout. 67 10 232 77 "' 38 38 014 tb.1110 lb.Ll ll Missile&h\clda Biologlalebield " 67 JO * ,,. 29 77 29 77 1'3 514 Jb.Ul2 StMm~eratora Reinroradconcrete 256 38 32 .,. l,96D lb.1113 lb.l,l J.& MainTurbino "" 87 13 ' 6J 100 " 100 GSS lb.1115 lb.1116 lb.LI 17 MninCondenscn Auxili11rylmildi11g Rc,,ctnrbuilding 87 152 l!i2 13 23 23 m 100 11< ,., 100 17 11 1,1138 l,lGS lb.l l lli.12 Total Dei:ontn1mory\oop ,., 1,847 217 383 2,124 1,1'18 1.725 1,J.18
'"' 1,067 14.228 <00 1,007 l~l ~riod S ... Ltot.nl Pe!no<l lb Acti\"ity Cosll lb Militional Coote '" 1,8~7 GGO 3,273 2.873 l.4,2:?B 1,mn 111.2.1 Jb.2,2 lh.2 Spentfuelpoolisob.tlon SiluClu1.taetr1ni11.lion SubtotRI Period lb Additional Costs 7.208 'l,639 9.748 762 1.843 3,301 11,591 8,290 3,301 11,591 13,042 13,0-12 4.6~0 4,04.0 Period lb Collat.eral Coi\11 lb.3.1 Deeon equipnltmt ., 1,114 1114 lb.3.2 lb.3.3 Jb.3.4 lb.3.5 tb.3.6 DOCat.a.rrrelo::Rtionnpen.ttl Process dctommissloning WRter w1111le Proeee dceomrnlulon.ing: chemic11I nnsh 11o*nste Srn:n1lloo11tllawanre PipeC\1ltincoqu1pml'nt 106 "
3,69J 1,603 240 "a 962 1,848 233 4,939 3 l,843 233 4,93'J 3 32B 19,638 92,070 G3 lb.3.7 lb.3.8 D~rlg Spent Fuel C11plt111 nnd Transfer uoo l,100 3,GOO
840 1,2G5 l,i2S G,440 1.2G5 1,72.S 6,440 lb.3 Subtotal Period lbColbtera.\ Coats 2.1123 1,102 123 2'38 3.74.6 1,203 2,G27 17.~52 11.122 5,UO 326 864 111,flOS 225 Period lb Perind-Dependt'l'l Coste lb.4.1 lb.4.2 tb ..f..'3 lb.4,,
Jb.45 01:consupplite lnautanco PrapertytaJ.cll Ho111th f'hysiu aupp\Jes Heu)' cqu\pmtnl tcntol 30 307 395 573 57 71 4 G30 383 49 .." G30 393 lh4.6 OispCISlllcCDAW gl"nented " 3 22
'" 7,234 12 lb.4.7 lb ... 8 lb.4.9 Plant en era budget NltCFcea Emergency Planninr Fets l,Oil IGl 1,232 ° l.'232 260 Jb.4.10 Spmt Fuel PC!Ol O!:M 225 <OJ GO
48 461 lb.4.ll lb.412 JSFSI Operat1J1.g Cn.~ts Sa::urlty StatrCost 3,131 2-\
'70
3,604 3,60-I " 71,357 1\l.413 DOCStnfrCost 5,282 li,014 G,074 lh.4.14.
lh.4 UtibtvSts.ffCollt Subtotal Penod lb Perilld*IJ('pendent Cnsu. 30 701 13,59'l 2"'589 2,039 3,78(1 1~ 1 G31 29,113 15,631 28.316 131 3G~ 1,2:H 12 04,486 215,657 351,500 lb.O TOTAL PERIOD lb COST 3.318 1.1104 130 239 3.155 4.3.381 8,911 611139 53,9G2 7,111 400 087 86' 118,842 14,346 370.368 PEil!OD 1 TOTf\LS 3,318 3,121 1'4 241 3.771 101,372 17,741 12.!l,70!) 107,3~0 21,680 GB8 1,297 864 131,033 14,3G5 MB.120 EXHIBIT WAC-1 000184 TLC Sr:tvices, Ine-
CrJmarrche Peal1 Nudenr Power Pinnt Doc1'111er1J LI 1-1103-00], Rev. 0 Drcamml1slo11iflg C"st Annlys(s Appe.ndb: C,. Pae~ 13 of 20 Table C-2 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant, Unit 2 DECON Decommissioning Cost Estimate {tbousnnds or 201.4 dollnrs) Off-Site LLll\V NllC fipcntluel .Site Procesi;cd DurlBIVolume!I IJuriall Utllltynnd Activity Docon neft'loVa! PRckR10ng Transport Processing Dbpo!lnl Other Toto I Tot111 Lie.Term Mana.iremcnt h:estor11.tlon Volume Cla1111A Clo.uB Clo.ss C GTCC ProeHSed Craft Contractor lnrln AcllvltvDe:i11:ri lhm Cost Cost Cortg Costs CMO C(lsts Co!!lS Cnntinjlencv Cost9' Costs Costs Costs Cu Feel Cu.Feet Cu Feet Cu Feet C11.Feet \Vt.,l.bs. Mn.nhours Mnnboun PERIOD 2a-Lnrga Component Removnl Pe rind 2a Direct Decomml9~ionln(! Actiritiea NudeRrfittnn1 Supply Syutem Ren111YRI Rea~lOr Coohmt Piping
a111 Zn.112 PreseuriierRi:liefTank "22 9J ID IG 1
150 105 329 87472 S6,15!'i3 4,ao1 1,072 03 1'7 1<1 211113 Reactor Coolant Pu.mpa & Mol1m1 1231 792,800 4,595 100 2o..ll.4
'211115 Preaeu:riter Steam Generators 270 68 37 3.383 212 2,145 21!.:!
117 l,419 J,225 583 G,lOG
'41 2,!l35 2,330 1,528 ICi,258 2,330 1,528 16,258 3,445 41,8115 285,8!53 3.329,768 2,480 23,233 038 2.125 CRDMs/JCJa/Scrvi~e Stnu;tun: Removal l'i9,025 8,21-1 21111.6 .21t.117 2a.ll.8 Rt"11ctorVl'11Scllnt.ern11l9 Rea~torVeRael "'" 217 S,187 274 13,108 23 6<0 300 4,732 330 21B 8,278 1,146 30,347 l.146 30.317 4,852 J,669 9,3!ll 063 337 335,070 961,036 29,233 29,233 1,301 l,aOl 21111 Tcitalt. "
753 5,399 12,403 2,430 18,770 "' 2,£113 4.289 17,454 330 661 7.005 l!l,24.2 19,986 7:!.100 Hl,966 72,UJG 6!lA97
"' 337 6,007,516 JOZ,363 5,766 ni:imovnlcirM11}orF.:qulpm1;>nt MnJn Turbine/Generatnr m a02.ass 7,936 2111.2 2-ill:J M~inConrlensera 284 888 110 Ia5 "29 517 038 3'9 l,14.9 2,090 1.149 2.090 4,514 fi.643 372,990 25,!500 Cnsouling CostS from Clean Buildin:Demol1tion 211.141 21.1.4.2 ReRctor Att~lillJ'Y 1,097 021 IG5 I,2fi2 1,262 13,99G 6,783 2n.l.1a 2a.l.4.4 S11fegt11ml !""lei 119 m
78 18 17 136 1592 136 1592 1,MS G.652
?n.14. Totnls 2.252 338 2,589 2,589 W,019 Dispvs11.I ofI'lant 5,1'4tl'lns

?a.1.5.l Aiull1nryF<<dwatt>r(insulated) 678 166 3< 7'9 353 1,881 1,881 G,7i15 43i,922 14S12 A1:uuliary Stl'am ll"i 134 3,G1B 2a.l.5.2 2R,J.5.3 Boron Recyclo(i111111lllh*dJ ., 17 13' 135 8,924 1,295 2R,J 5.4 Boron Rscycla (uninaulatt!d) "
269 36 18 I 11 " 976 22 327 1,422" " 1,422 3,420 219,725 15,708 2B.1..5.6 Boron Thermal Rl!r;ener11Uon (lns111ntEnl) 41 82
,, 2 23,189 2,817 10 11 228 228 211.lli.G 2a.15.7 2B,l.6.8 Boron 1'henn11l Regenerfltion (11nlns11bted)
C&rbonDioxideG11a Cbemical & Volume Control (inJ.ul11te.I) Cheni11:.a.I &. Volume Contr!'.11 (umn:snllated} 114 BIO 221 103 1 G 4 86 120 0 661 023 I 661 523 1,216 779 3.'i'i4 79,910 51.634 24.5,356 1.885 G.8711 20,090 2a.l 5.9 2a.l.5.10 2a.l.5.ll Cberni~a\Fred Chen1i~BI feed* RCA
'17 IS 0
93 19
'" 402 z
3 1,761 16 14 1,761 14 15 15 982 421 253 2a.1.IU2 Chilled Wntllt
SaMy 6 6 1'9 Chilled Water - Safety RCA ' 205 205 m 31,253 2,232
.!.a.1.5.13 2.a.,1,5.H 2a15.l!i Chlorine Circulating Water 12 323
" " 39 2
371 H 971 369 Hl.429 21,t~.lB 2111.5.17 Component. Cooling Wnt.er Conipont-nt Co:iliiig W11ter
RCA 1,0U" 418
" 2.012 820 4
4.,386 4,380 " 17.786 1,176.581 763 2G,a19 2a,J 5111 2n.1S.19 Condena11te01111ulated) Con.don1111to(uuin1111lnled) 135 112 20 17 105 m 120
<l,573 a,54.l 2a.1 !5.20 CQndensa.te Poliahtng 10 120 120 3,327 2~.i.s.21 Conden$tl' V11e11um & Wnte-r Do!t Prlft\\ng 63 0 73 2,017 E1>tr11r:tumSttam g 1,806 2111.!>.22 2B l.f1.23 Feed.water 55 220 33 " "' '" 1,250 82,654 7,084 l,502 2a1Jj24 2111525 Feedwater- RCA G*.nerator&En*iter GS I
28 141 "0 '" I '" I 21115.2() GtmerntorCaoCooling 8 I
' .,* 241 2a.lli27 211.15.28 2111..5.29 Genera~or Primary Wnter GaneratorSedOil Hydrogen Gu 55 7
2 g I 0 63 8 2 B 2 . l,7'15 218 l,136 211 L~SO Main Stoam Rtheat & Steam D11mp 5 42 2111.531 211.15.32 2n.15.33 2a.l.15.a4. 211.16.~ MRin Sl.llttm Reh!!fll & S1011m Dump* RCA Main Turbine Luba Oil M11inT\1rbintOil?llrUicobon Nitro(enCas 86 I 142
" 638 28<
7 13 0 1,1516 50 98 I 1,516
" 1 5,6.n 373,381 10.S.t2 1,383 2,6G3 so O:irygen G11.s 1 0 I I D60 " 222 2a..15.3G PMtAedi.U!ntSampliitK B 0 2 13 211.Ui.31 Proc121aS11wpling(uninaulnled) 10
20

171 11,691 '69 2a.Ui38
.?a.15.39 211.115..tO 2a.l 15.4.l 2n.l.5.42 ReactotC!>Olaut Rl!BervOlrMakeupWater Reservoir Rehun Wnier Rf.ser1oir Sorvice 'rower Rntdu11\ Ha11L Removnl 318 113 87 23l 9
16 1'7 30 661 73 13 10 401 I 3lB 100 ll 1,788 l,7!l6 100 II 63' 5,833 3!5.397 386,272 3,921 2,190 2,095 308 7,176 EXHIBITWAC-1 000185 TLG Sen*lcee, Inc,
Docunien£ LJJ-1703-001, Ru*, O Appendix C, Page 1-l of 20 Comnndte Peal1 Nuclear Power Plant Deco111mtssfoF1fnt Cost Analylli11 Tnblc C-2 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant, Unit 2. DECON Decommissioning Cost Estlmnte (tltousn.nds or 2014 dollars) lhu*lal Vo\ume5 Um*h.11 \Jtllity*11d rrnc Spent 1~ucl Site l'roccned Crnn. Conlractor mt.Sile LLRW Ma.no;cmenl Restnrallnn Volnrue ClllllsA Cla.n.U claud GTCC Procened Mnnhuurs Other Tolnl Tot.nl Lie.Term. Cu.Fel!t Cu. Fet>t Cu.Fe-et Wt., Lbs, Mnnhoun Remov11.l f'nckaS(lnlt Tr1msporl. ProceuinB Dbposnl Cos\.s Cu.J<'ect Cu.Feel. llecon C.ontln,:cncy C°'ts Cost1 Costs Acll.,ll)' Cost. Costs Costs Cost! Co"' Com Cost Index. Ac11'111 nl'scrl l.h>n 9<,056 2,765 1,46~ 475,220 9,.'119 Di!p0$alofPll11tSy1le1ns(cont1nuell) 37
* !GG " '°' 7,40G 111 313 l,G82 l,G82 1,040 211.U5.43 Safety1PjDCIJon(ina11lated) 813 Jti2 165 37 " 4,265 2Rl,544 Sa(ecy-!11jecUon(*111lnaulated) 1'5 30 2n.l.fH5 2n.LM6 SCU1ndafJ'l'l1111tSaropli11g Steam Generator DlOll'doWn & C\e!lllUP 135 30 30 21 552
!11.15-47 Turblne EIP'Ctrohydr Cntrl (inslllated) 18 3 21 1,1S3 12,206 2n.l.6.ol8 Turbine Elei:tmhydr Cnlrl (unlnsulaled) 437 549 Turbine Gland Sham & DraiM 2e.l.Sol9 211.u.r,o Turbine Heat01' On.Int as*17 3 20 158 4,420 2&.J.5.51 2aL6.52 Tur bi no Pl1111l Coo line (insu.lnted)
Tubine 1'111.nt Coohog (unl111;u\eted) 138 21 1 "' G 17 6 "' m 2 17 2,423 2a.l.5.li3 Turbinl'!l (HIGH. LOW) (i11911l11ted) 87 11 81 337,089 lS,980 211.1.6.64 Turbl.11133 (HIOll - LOW) {11nin11ul11ted) l!i,088 76 :106 1,626 1,626 1,03.i 111 211..1.5.65 2:1.1.5.66 Vont Chilled Water* Non Safely Vent- Chilled Water* Non SaFety. RCA Westlngboue.eITocualnstrome-nlll 576 141
* " 0 '16 G,971 2
4.,176 1 21,681 ' 18,850 8 2,830 62,132 '" 4.,07G,'13G 226,622 211.115.~7 1,218 7,476 1,520 320 40,258 1,157 76,495 211.l 6 Tot11\s 131 355 1,7!>3 l,7!13 1.2N 28 10,836,150 431,698 MGG 211.lG Sea!foldinr in !tlPflOJ"I. ot dtcamm1ssionlng 2,830 143,00<1 963. 337 GGI 24,724 101,.'1!>9 98,669 3,2!12 ~.'111 1.971 24..578 20.663 211.l Subtotal Period 2a Activity C~lll 30,240 Period 2a Additio1111\ Com
.!a.2.1 2a.Z flem~dia\ Actiun Surveys S\1btotal Period 211 Additional Costs 1,661 l,GGl ..."' 2,Hi!>
2.l!i!) 2,159 2,159 30.240 Period 2a Colla.teral Co$ta 207
...'" 87' 872 1,225 1,19.'I ; 73,493 127197 "'
2!!:3 2a.3.l 2a..3.2 Proceu dl'CD.mmiuiOlllngwai.erwastl' Procem dettr1T1m1alomng ch£>mical nueh "'111te 191 3 130 1~2 "' 270
"' 48 807 307 807 330 37 Za.3.3 Small tool allowaoce Spent. Fu.el Cnpltal and Tr11n11frr "' 16,073 16,073 2,111 2.787 18,4.B3 Z0,619 2,0~9 18,483 IS.-:83 37 2,419 200,600 '62 2a3.4 2*3 Subtolal Pertod 2.t Cn1l111.1!n:l Catita 19.'I 319 251 22 108 I08 Penod 2a Period.Dependent. Cost.II 86 974 97 1.072 1,072 2a.41 Dec.on.au.ppbe1 2a..4.2 2a.(.3 lllll"lrtnN Propertytaaes 3,112 1Z8 778 13 1'1 3,S90 126 3.890 4.,64.0 " 128.041 200 ol,(t.10 2a.4.4 2D.4.f:i HealthphysiuaupflllPR Hoal')'8i!,'-'1Pm~trl'lllnl Disyuaalol'DAWgcnerl\led 4,03!.
130 22 163 1..161 219 382 1,680 382 1,680 G,H12 2a..-l.G 697 G3 697 2114.7 2a.4.8 Plantenerg)' bullg;et HRCFeu '" 327 33 360 SGO l,3ZJ 2a..t.9 211.410 2a.-4.11
'2a.4.l2 Eme~encf Planntnc Fees Spent Fuel Pool O&M ISFS1 Operating Cost.!
Severance 1,151 G9 4,295 13,797 173 2,070 2,7M 10 1,323 4,931J rn,866 21,118 4,939 Hi,866 21,HS 80 315,!i66 230,600 429.35) 2a.413 Sl'CUritySl!!.trCost L8,3G3 97M29 2ri.414
'la.4.16 DOCStalI"Coet UUlitySt.airCott Subtotal Pnriod 211 'Period Depcnd,nt C115l.! 86 7,146 139 22 163 27,78G 68,984 .i.,168 11,707 31,954 88,248 31,954 86,471 l,7G~
6,402 963 337 128,041 11,164.880 462,609 98\,289 l!'>l,825
'*' ~.251 32.G43 20,9M 3..744 U,4.39 87,378 39,'116 212,526 189,398 20,2'17 2,881 2!!..0 1'0TAL PERIOD 211 COST PERIOO 'lb-Sita necont11ruln11linn Period 2b DirllCt Decommbs1onl11e: Aetivibes 36,281 1,137 DispOMlofPl11ntSystem5 2b.lll AuxibatY Uuildlne: HVAC (insublcd) 5< 11 "" 31 3G 161 191 !GI 1'1 "'
638 42,174 1,483 91
" " 83 2b.11.2 Au;d}iary Building HVAC (unir>Sulllled) 0 3 Batt R(llll & Mi~ Uncontrolled Aec. HVAC 3 0 3 8,051 1,178 2b.ll3 3 121 78 78 43,049 2,97'1 2h.l.l.4. Compre.&S<>dAir*lnatr /Ur(ineulnted) 14 278 2bll?i 211.l l.B Compressed Air lnstn1m1mt Air. RCA (i Com11reaed Air * )nstrurnont Air RCA (u 128 27 "
53 278 31 270 275 31 083 38.TO:l '"' 3,21N 1.267 Com11resa~d Air* Service Air 2b.l.17 2b.l.l.S Co:rnpre:M"U A~* Scr.-k-e Air. RCA Comprl!S$ed AU* iHll" Air(uninsulntffi) 135 39 16 llG 11 "a7 "S7 37 " 03 6,l!ll 38,282 414 1,-164. 2b.l l 9 2b.l l 10 2b.l l ll Containmaot llRtr.h~ Contnin1nent1lytltogcnl'11r1?"ellVAC 17 2 32 171 171
'" EXHIBIT WAC-1 000186 TLG Senikes, Ine
Doc,,mcmt LJJ~J103*00I, Re:u. 0 Comrmchc l'~al1 Nudcor Power Plnnl Dccamnlis:drmlng Co.~t Anolyds Appendix C. Poge 15 of 20 Tnhle C-Z Comanche Penk Nuclear Power Pinnt, Unit 2 DECON Decommissioning Cost Estimnt.e (thousands oC2014. dollars) orr.su.. LLRW NRC Sp1mti-'i1cl She l'roceHed B11ri11!Voh11ncs Uurh1ll Utility and D<<on Rcmov11.l r11.elrnslng TrDh:!rport Proccs!lng Disposal Other Total Total Lie.Term Man1uremcnt uu1orqllon Volume Class A ClasslJ Cl4St C GTCC l'roccssod Crall Contrecl.rir Activity Actlv1tvnc1crl lion Cost Cost Co1b Costio Cods Cous Cosh Contlni1:cnc Cons Co:1ts Costs Cods Cu. Fe..t Cl.l.Fert. Cu Feet Cu Feet Cu.Feel \Vl.,Lbs. ?lt.nhours M1mhours lndu Diapo11d of Pl.1u1t Syatl'ms (crmt11111ed) 2.b.111'Z ContainmcnlSprny 3i7 33' 69 1,507 m
,. 2,801 2,801 13,alB 881,057 83,291 lll,156 804 2b.l.113 2b.l1H Contoinineont \'~ntlh1lion I JVAC (11nins11l)
Contlllnmenl Vcn11la1!11n HVAC(ins11lal.ed) 32 214 10 127 ' 2!) 57 636 230 "'., 1,236 '" 1,236 '" 5,623 371,9711 e,365 2.b.1116 2b.1.l.16 Control Room HVAC Dl!lninnAIW'd & RCS Mskeup Wolt'T " 120 ,.' 11*1 138 917 138 2,253 149.391'. 1,14-t 3.6G2 9,641 2b.l l 11 2h.1118 2h.l 119 Demir1erali:ted & RCS Makeup Water* RCA Dinel Gen &. A11:dlinice (intulat~) Oieeel G1m & Auxtliarica (uninsuln1etl)
<08 73 G " 12 255 11 I '"85 7 1 85 185 2,314 365 2b.IUO Dleee.1G11n11fl!.torF111110il 2 .. I 4 117 2b.I 1 ~l Dl~sel Room HVAC 1,835 2,lll 2.111 56,766 2b.1122 Elcdritnl*Cle11.n 2b.1.t23 2b.11.H
?b.JJ,25 Eleclrit11l- Contaminated Ele(lrical-RCA FiTePJOtecfoln 2,654.
<75 381 ,.
I! 2,092 138 123!J 71 2 722 6,<IG2 546 12 7!!2 6,402 12
, . 2,073 18,51 l 136.997 1,2::3,557 2.261 7.400 60,381 14,858 123
lb.112(1 k.akRiltaTest
!diae Plant HVAC (in*1ll'1ed) 0 2 2 72 2b.1127 2b.1 l28 Misc: Plant HV AC (llninsub.tetl) 27 " " 4,972 "'
178
Zb.1129 Milll!ollnnenwi Equipment 7 21 21 2b.1.130 2b.l l.31 2b.l.l.32.

?b.U.33 2b.11S4 Office & Sttv1ce HVAC rotab!.Wate-r Primary P111nt HVAC (1nsnl*~dl Prill'H'J Pl*nllNAC (t1nit1t1ulnted)
R*d1abon Monitoring 62 JOI 3 3 12 Z7 ** 6G 0 I 11 167 3 4 167 3'0 71 3
,70 1,312 37,652 86.6fl2 1.892 1,180 2,436 102 51 174 11.495 360 2b.t.185 Sefit£Ullrd.! Bnildlng HVAC (lnrmlatcid) 17 20 10 409 27.021 1,164 21J.113G Zb.1137 2b.l 1S8 21J.1.l.39 S11!eguud11 Building HVAC (11nit1011latcd)
SerliceW11.ter Sorvice!WatoJ"*RCA Turbine Build.in&: HVAC (inaulatcdl 58
'°'3 l!G 27 ...
46 0 G7 1,H'i1 3 127 1,151 GT 3 li,178 342,406 l,882 a,480 2b.1 l.40 2b-11Al T1nbin1t BniMillg HVAC (uoinsidatcd) Ul'SllVAC 26 I 0 30
.,1 3G 1
840 39 1.092 2b.11.42 2b.l 143 Vtnlll&Dralne Vente & Dnlnt. RCA 231 " 453 GO 11 240 297 5 1,292 l,:?Dl " 2,118 H.0.433 H!,760 399 2b.l 1.44 WuteManllg<lmonl(lnaulated) 12 2b.l.l.4!1 Waat11ManR&1Jrntnl(nnh11111\11t11d) 123
** 8 181 19 147 394 ,... l,G58 105,uri 4,043 0:,637 2b.ll.4G Wo.ate Proecuuic Ona (un1nHbted) 74 l,075 71,288 10,244 2b.l 1.47 Zb.1148 Wnte Pf'lxcaatng: Liq11id (in.sub.led)
Wute Procenini:- l.iquicl (unirmi!a1ed) 137 30< "' 382 100 6 23 122 17' 756 1,688 '"' l,688 4,505 288,858 28..811 17,449 673 2b.1149 W.11.1te Processinc Soild 6 22 9 2 Ill 64 Ill 64 "' 1.780 2b.ll.M 2b.l 151 2b.l,I WaterTrelltment (ln1ulated) W1ttorTre11tmenl(11ninsulated) Tntale 070 591 9,799
" 1,451 326 7,108 89 4,396 8
670 23.i59 19.5i4 670 4.185 sa,o:m 4,156,fi90 18,71G 282,99(;
,., ?.,241 2,241 1,447 95,619 rio,323 2bl2 ScarJoldinc bi t11pporl ct' ilecornn1~,Joning Deeonlaminntion of Sile B111ldin1:"11 1,092 8!11,036 4!1,395 2b.l 3.l Ruetor 1,210 780 89 71 1,27fi 1,138 4.!164 4,!SM 13.395 .. ,. 720 2,832 2,832 7,257 569,032 29,165 778 2b.l 3.2 2b.13.3 2b.13.-C Auxilillry R.adwntto Safegnud Wanhou~l'I 816 2GG 422 77 "I
14
" 2 8 138 149 135 531 '"
531 311 l.3!SG 28,9G4 98,79!1 7,497 5,G70 2,227 2.143 8.408 8.408 22,319 1,565,831 !ll,72'7 21J.]3 Tot.11!11 2,4MI 1,300 149 133 S,129 12,6!18 1,63~ 467 9,4!18 G,"'3 3HOD S0.224 4,J85 SG,805 !l,818,Hl 42M47 2b.I Sulitotal Period 2b Aethit)' Cost.5 Ponod 2b A1hlillon11l Cost.11 3,761 li2,678 2b,2,t 2b.2.2 2b.2 Ramedi:tl Acliim SutWI!)'* Underground UUliUea EllCDYnt1on Subtot.11.l PcriOO 2b J\dclitional Coata 1.33.!I l.3SS 2,893 2,893 335 1.202 3,761 l,673 5,433 1.673 5,433 6,269 60,946 reriod 2b Collaternl Cost.11 2b.3.l Proceudeeornmlss1onlnr*11tervou111 150 105 129 108 147 6'8 698 990 5!1,427 3"'656 ., 193 2b.3.2 P~!IJI dtCOITllQJ,,~Ollin(ebemie!IJ fl11Bh Wl'l~I! I 33
" 98 39 40 "'
308 '" 308 "' 21l.3,3 2b.3.4 Small toolallowAnee Spent Fuel Capil~I and Transfer "' ,,. 2(15 23,892
!:3,892 3,584 3,810 27.475 2B,72G 1250 2.7,.f.15 27,-t75 13113 94.,08'2. 2M 2b.3 Suhtntal Perio.l 2b Collateral Co!!~
P1?nod 2.b l"t1riod-Dtpmdent Costa 151 :!:GB 2b.41 Dcoonaupplll!.'1 1,59l 398 t,9!11 1,9!11 2b.4.2 Jnsurnn.co l.G97 170 t,867 1,867 EXHIBIT WAC-1 000187 TLG Seruicer, Irie.
Docr1ment LJJ-1103-001, Reu. 0 Comnneht! Pt!aT1 Nuc~arPolM'r- Plflnt Appt!ndi:r: C, Pare J& of 20 Deeom111is:rlonb1e Cost Anal.)':Jl11 Tobie C-2 Comonche Peak Nuclear Power Pinnt, Unit 2 DECON Decommissioning Cost Estimate (!.11ou1mt1ds or 2014. dollnr5) Site l'roce$Rtd llurb.IVolumf!I Uud1\I/ UUlltyrrnd Off-Sito LLll\\' rrnc Spentt'1.1cl Clmnll 1 ClassC GTCC Procested Cron Contractor Tab.I Llc.Tc~in. Man11grme1:1t Restorollo11 VoluTDe ClonA Decon Re1riovnl l'Ach;\ng Transport Proc~dng Dlspus11I Other Totnl Cu.Feet Cu.Feet Cu. Feet Cu.Feet \VL.,Lbs. Mon.hours Monl1olln Co,u Cu.Feet Activity Co*" Contlnrrencv Co*" Costs Costs lndcx AcUvlt DescrlnUon Co!'t Cost Costs Costs Co'tH I'eriod 2b Puiod-Dl'pcatlent C111ta (continued) 22 245 24!i 223 2b.U Property taxes 0~2 4,758 4,158 HHllh pbymca 11:1ppl1ca S,801 2li..4A 1.082 B.2SG 8,296 2b.4.li 2h..f..G Ilea'#}' ~quipmentrental Dt.pouil of DAW p11~rated Plaflteaergyliudr;et 1,21-t
'" 21 154 2.009 55 301 362 2,510 362 2.310 (1,0119 121,189 2h..f.7 1.104 110 l,:W!i 1,21&
2h.U NRCFee11 57 627 Emergency Plonntng Feell
'" '" 2,305 2b,4.(I 2,005 301 2,305 2b.<IJI) Spent F11el Pool O&M 2h *.U1 2b.U2 Liquid Radwuto Procusi11g Eq11ipma11tlServ:iL:es ISFSI Operalinr Cosu 508 121 16 18 '"
139 '" 139 2b.4.l3 2b.414 Sever11nce Security surreo..,t. 4t2 2"-03..f 30,116 3.G05 4.601 27,639 35,922 21,G39 35,322 5-49,114. 385,857 71G,2U 2b.U:O DOCSt11ffCcat. 46,389 6.958 53,341 113,347 1,651,;sa 6,0119 121,189 19S 211.416 UrilityStaffCmt. ID!l,780 18,7'i5 1.Cl,482 138.410 3,071 2b.4 Subtot..al Period 2b Perind Depende11l Coel6 l,fi!IS 4,812 11,021 25,325 132 l,!l04 21 9,918 13G,1170 ao.110 210,050 175,318 a0,547 4,185 ouao 6,033,'112 486,.f..l.5 1,65\786 TOTAL PERIOD 21.i COST rERIOD 2d-DecontQlnlnnUon F'ollowlngWet Fuel Stor11.i;-e 201,0G~ Period 2d Diroct Decornmlllloniri'&' AcUvitil!ll 2d.11 Rernoveaptonlfuelradi:* 270
" m 10 1,Q.19 1.0~9 B,0-12 27,206 1,682 Disp0!iuloffl11ntSy11tema 412 1"
2d.J'2.l 2d.12.2 Eli?ctricol - Cantaminal!d FHB Eleo:tfic11l- RCA F'HB GB 435 8 82 47 438 30 230
<ti l,20G 2.182 1,206 2.182 3,BT9 6,803 25M03 4!'16,605 10,214 18,575 2d.l.2.3 2d.l.2.4 FirePrOtt>Cticn HCA Fuel Building HVAC (insulated) 1G6 " " " l "'"
33 " 17 " 87 13 87 "' 290 lG.~03 l!l.191 4.040 152 2d.1.2.li 2d.1.2.6 Fu11l Building HVAC (t1ni.,s11lated) Fuel Handling 31
' 'l 7 18 25 " 25 GI 5U790 078 22.215 2d.J.27 Scw11ce. Trc11l1110'fll 8,090 ,., 910 473 2,611 2,511 34,773 1,315,638 2d.l 2.8 2d.12 Spent Fuel Pool Coollnr & Cleanup Toto~
2,217 "' 2.250 l.181 6,251 G,232 19,873 Decont.atnln11t1on oCSite BuilWnrs 2d.1.3.l Fu~1 BOG ... 98 27 27 603 503 "' 1G6 3,094 3.09*J 3,09.\ 3,094 4,629 4,629 328,265 328,266 43,733 4.3,733 2d.1.3 1'ol.lllS BOG 894
" 19.124 10,0GS 2dl.4 Scaffolding in lllJ'IJ!Ort ofd~comrniuio11in11 33 448 27 833 1,8G4,09l 109,409
?d.l Sub!lll.al Pennd 2d Activity Coth 1,085 3oHiG ;;19 3.120 2,283 10,84D 10,824 6,2-tO I'eriod 2d Addition11l Cm.LI 292 J,21i5 1,26!
2d.z.l 2d.2.2 Lkeoee Termin1t!011 Sun*ey Manning RernediolActianSurveye '" 041 1,224 1.22<1 5,855 l-lG,375 11.142 16 2d.2.3 24..2 01'er11uonal Tools and Equipment Subt.ot11l 1'1"nod 2d Additional Ca11.tt " 16 250
'" l.01-1 G39 2,S:Z8 '"
2,828 6,855 146,375 17.157 6.240 P-..:nod 2d Col111lenl Cmt* ,. '" "' 21,SSG 91 2il.3.] Procesa de.comm1uioning woU'r ..,a ale 70 49 GI G9 ll "' 87 87 5,29D 34!J,G18 88 2d.S.3 Srn111l1.00l11Ucwance 919 2d.3.4 2d.3 ~ Dtcommumoninr Equlpm('/1l Dispo:51t\on SpontF\ie\Capit11lnndTron&fer 127 27 617 1,087 l,G8f 499 919 1,040 3.272 l,33l! 1,!140 l,940 5,757 377,67'1 17!l 2d.3 St1btnttl Period 2d Collateral Co5ta 70 I'eriod 2d Jleriod-Dependent CCl:'lts 2dA.1 Zd.4.2 DeeonaUJ'l(llil!S Insura11oee Propert)'tDXea 275
.552 72 69 55 7
808 BO GOS 80 2d..4.3 259 1,21JG l,290 2d.4..4 Healthphy1icaturpllet 1,037 2.3~R 3!12 2,700 2,700 2d.4.!i Heavyequlpm*ntreotnl 2,811 50.341
!GB 2d.4..G 2d4..7 Di$pasal of DAW g~erated PIAnll'nCrgyb11d1ct " " " 340 2G 52 "'
40l 331 401 301 2d.4..8 NRCFcello 19 204 204 185 2d..49 Emer~ncy l'111nnmi: Fee!! 380 380 2dA.10 Liqtdd Radwnle Pnduinl: Equipmllnt/Ser.ices
'"" " 45 2d4 l l 1SFS1011arnti11i;CO!lt11 3,161 3.lBl 2.740 2d4.12 Scvcrantt' EXHIBIT WAC-1 000188 TLG Servfcu, Inc.
Cornnnclre Peal' Nnclcur PawerPlttlll Documrnt Ll Jd103*00J, Reu, 0 DeeornmlHioninc Cod Analysii:i Appendix l; Pa.gc 11 of lO Table C-2 Conmnchc Penh: Nuclcnr Power Plant, Unit 2 DECON Decommissioning Cost Estimate (thou11andi1 of 2014 dollnrs) OIT.Sitc LLllW NllC S~nt1uel Sito l'roeeucd Bt11'i<d Ollmell llurhHI Utilitynnd Activity Dccon Rcmovnl Pncka.gtng Tr1111511orl Proccnlng Dlspos1d Other Total Toi al Lie.Term. !lftlJ\lll[CDll!Dt Rlli!SloroUon Volume cl11nA ClllnD Cl**' C G'l'CC Processed CT11.ft Con1toctor lndc11 Actlvlh* Dcscrlptlon Cnst Co11t Costs co,ts Co11CS Coii;h Costs Contlnsrcnev Costs Cast!! Cost!! Cosis Cu. Pi:!el Cu. Feet ('u, Feel Cu Fo~t Cu.Fed \\'L,l.bs M11.nh1ntrs Mnnhourt PenOO 2d Period* Dependent Co!!1s (mntlnued)
?d.413 Security StaCJ'Cost 1,467 220 1.687 1,687 36,120 2d.-U" DOCStftCf'Coat G.857 1,0:!9 7.886 'USG 8G,OOO 2dA.15 UUlitySta<<C.O.St Sublotd Period 2d PeriOO*l>QJ-iPndenl r..a.ta ,, 10,853 t,G2B t2.*l81 12.481 W,341 16.UGO 2d.4 2d.O TOTAL PERIOD ~d COST 215 1,429 3,384 G,9111 61 lD 23.75& 4,213 7,63~
31.171 31,521 249 2.817 42,262 2,444.,4:81 J26,8l7 286,3BO 292,620 l'F.RIOD 2f
L\cenae TerruinatJon
'" 2GI <:1,128 27,957 48,720 46,500 2.189 25 Period !!(Dini cl DccommiH!o1ung ActMll~
2r.11 CRISE conru:m*loty 11urvr7 167 50 217 217
.?r.12 2(.1
'rrrmln11.tel1Ct1n=t Subtotal Perioi.12( A'tMl,vCoel9 167 ,. 217 217 P11riod :zr Additionnl Coi:t.a 2r.2.1 UcenseTennlnationSurvey 6,533 :?,050 8,883 8,1!83 Hi3,1124 3,120 2r.2 Subtotal Period :zr Mditional Cool.9 6,833 2,0r>a B,1!83 8.883 1113,624 :U20 Period 2(Collatual Coste 2(.3.l DOC M11<<relocatf011 ei:JU"n11,111. 1,603 240 1.843 1,843 2(.3 S11bt.o111l Period 2fCollnttir11l CO!lt~ l,G03 240 1.843 1,343 PeriQ(l 2f Period*lk1wndonc COl!ta 2r.-t.1 1Mt1t'ft11Celo 4~4 ., <77 '77 2(.42 Propertytuea 1*
2(.-43 llnlr.h ph)'l'liet aupplie3 'iB7 " 191 7 983 73 983 2f.44 2f.U. Disposal of'DA\V geiit>n1led Phml 1mergy budgr~ 159 ,. 3 183 20 183 337 6.794 11 2r.ia NRCioi>r:!ll 302 3D 339 333 21'.4.7 Eaurpncy Planoing Fen 2r." 8 2!.49 lSFSI Operaling emu Sever11netr 169 3.ua.i 600 186 4,524 U24 186 41
?r".JO Sti:untyStctrC.0.Sl 1.340 201 1,541 l,MI 33,000
~r4.11 DOC SlftffCost 3,766 f63 4.319 4.319 46;7fi0 2'.4.12 Utility Stoff Cast -4,0G9 DIO ",679 4,G79 60,107 Suhl.ctd P~riod 2f Peril)ll. Dependent Ca1tt 781 337 6,734. 11 139,857
irn "1'0TA1. PERIOD 2fCOST 'i87 14.2GG 22,SGB 2,291 4,631 11.:lGO 28,303 17.132 28,075 2'.!8 228 337 6,734 Hil,535 142,9i7 PERIOD:.?. TOTALS 8,55'.1 G~,070 23.861 4,697 40,493 !?74,17:.l 82,i.52 409.~!l!) 439,208 53,210 ?,091 288.603 !l63 337 19,649,!110 1,229.426 3,0GB,611 rF.RIOD :lb *Sito Restorntlon Period 31> Direct D~mmiuianing Acliviliea Demolition of Rem11.inin1t Sita Duildinga 3b,111 I\eaetor G,2!?3 7,1!56 7,ISfi 79,426 3b.112 3b.ll:.t Admintstr11.Uon Auriliary ".691
'"1G 704 122 .5,3!)5 t2l 5,3!:i5 2,1Xl2 61,157 Chlarinr.tion(CWlntoke] H3 3b.ll4 3b.l l 5 Ch.IMinaliou(SWfuteb) 20 7
3 I "8 " 8 3b.l 1.6 3b.U7 CircWuerintake Cire Wocer Yard Plpinc ,. l,44G 217 2 1,Gll3 17 1,GG3 17 17,143 3G 3b.ll.8 Dlescl Genoratll!'
'" 98 7'2 7'2 Flex Stor~i:e Buidlni:
3b.l l.9 1,102 179 1,310 l,3'10 1UB4 252 "'321 Sb.1110 3b.Ul1 3b.I t 12
>.fointcn11nce Merewntt Suri port Ctr & M11terial Slal!'inc Mi&ei!llaneona Sile Sln1c1urea 210 388 9,986 l,<198 252 11,4.83 "'
11 4.83 7,4'i6!J 174,325 3b.1l13 RPDuiJdirlG 63
73 287 73 287 1,223
!i.615 3bJ11" 'lb.dw111te W11rehouro 7'9 3b.lllS s~r~C'IJnrd 2,256 2,5!?4 2.594 30,287 1,115 3b.1116 3b.l l 17 ScrriceWaterlntabStrncturo Sw1tchr.ear Switc:hyard RelayHnllsD 071 12G 19 657 1" "' "' 2,04.9 m
3b.l l 18 3b,t.1.1!> Taub & Tunnel~ " 1,032 155 3 1,187 " 1,187 15,724 3b,t.UO 3b.Jl2l Turbine illrblnePcdestnl GOJ 1,SIG 1'7 1.1114 '" 1,514 Jl,208 15,907
,.,,.1 ~.320 5,329 59,867 3b.lt.:?2 4,634 '" EXHIBITWAC-1 000189 TLG Servfrra, lne.
DocHment L11~1703-001, Reu. 0 Appendi% G. Pate 16 of !O Comanche Pea Ir N11cltarP01cer Plan.i Deeo111n1tssianinc Co3t Arrnr1a:ls Tnble C-Z Comanche Penk Nuchmr Powet' Plnnt, Unit 2 DECON Deconunissioning Cost Estimate (thousnnd'!! ot 2014 dollars) UuTh,lf Utilitya.nd l'niceucd UurlalVoluin"s NllC Sp1mt l-'11el Site GTCC Proceued CrnCt. Contractor Orf-till<: LLltW Vnlume ClnnA Ch1ll11ll Cla.nC Ltc.T.,rm.. MAn11~ment Re&lorntlnn Cu. Feet "'t., Lbs. Ma.nhour.r Mrmhoun PTOCCnlnlt D11pos11.I Otlnr Tot.al Toto I Cu. Peet Cu. Jo'el!t Cu. FePt Cu Feet Oecon Ucmovnl l"nckm~tng TTansport Codi Co1h Cosll ConUnl(l"Til!Y Cott*
/\ctiYity h1de1:: AcllYlt De!'lc:d Uon Co"it Cott Co5ts Cost~ Co~ts Co*t! """" ~.372 41,181 41.187 518,860 85,810 9b.ll Tota le 6,053 4,025 1.292 4,025 Site CloseoutActiV1tio11 3b.1.2 BnckFUIS!to 3,500
i(il 100 100 '" 626,206 GG8 6SB Bb.1.!l 31.i.14 Grn<lo&IR1to;bc:llpe*ite Finni nport to NRC Subtllllll Pcnod.st. Activity Omt*
39,816 81 "
~.9!J-& *U,957 100 45,8~1 3b.I 7,435 1,105 m 1,705 3,89-t f'ertod 3b Addilion*I Cosll 3b.2.l Concnte Cru1bme:
l,47S 501 m 3,726 31.i.2.2 C!<<ulallng Wtiter CaCl'erdiim G3 7268
'l,2G8 15,054 Sb.2.3 3\J.2.4 Serntu Water Cofferdan1 Constl"\lttloi:i Ol-brla Di1pcm1.I Subtotal Period 3b Additional Cm111 2,3%8 G,320 6,3'..?1 '"
1,298 9,953 9,953 31>.2 Period 3bCollater11ICoste 373 3h.:U Smalltoolo.Ucrwonc11 Spenl Fuel Capltul 1111.d Trnnsfer
\24 300 2,560 2,914 '" 2,944 3b.3.2 3b.3.3 Severance
.9nbtola1Pc:rii:id3bC:illat:e?1d Ctl$ll ,,. 2,860 3,6132 34' 3,316 31..s 316 316 57 032 Penod 3b Period 0DependentC~t3
ib.41 lrui:unrtc.e ProJ)!lrt)' tau.!I li6 1158 18 193 6.817 193 8,871 242 3b.42 7,720 3b,ol.3 3b.4.4 Heavy equipment rlltltll PlnnLencra"bUdlt{lt 211 2' "'
278 3b.4..5 1-mc ISFST Fre* '48 493 110 '" 110 87,360 3b.4.6 3h.47 Emergency Planning Feee ISFSl OpeP1tiAG" Ccsti! Security Stnff Cott 3,548 8,930
" 532 1,330 4,080 10,269 9.101 979 10,260 4,245 110,240 70,221 Bb.-1.11 li,374 (0) 1,129 267,821 DOC Staff Cost C,673 701 2~,929 3b.4S 30,648 (0) 11,619 UlilltyStnfl"COllt 18,907 3,921 3b.4.10 7.720 541,260 268,480 3b..4 Subto~al E'eriod 3b rericd-Dependent CaBI$ 84,056 11,692 90,120 100 5,96*1 28,181 50,247 !11.0 TOTALl'ERlODS\iCOST l"EU100 :le- Fuel Storolfa Opero.tlons/Sbipplng Period 3c Direct Ueemnmi.ll&llnl1:1g Activitle.
1,520 U.655 11,655 fln';od 3c Coll*tnOI Cml.9 10.195 11,655 Spent Tuel Cnpl1al and TniMrer 10,135 l.520 U,G55 Sc.3.1 So.3 Subtool Period ScC.C.ll.alenU Costa 1,116 12,301 12.301 Period 3c Pcncnl* Depenthtot Coats 11,182 3,752 hisurnnce 3.411 3U 3,752
&..4..1 9,453 9,453 So.'2 3c:.4..4 3c.4.5 Proptrtytallee NRC ISFSI Fees Eroer~ncy Ph1nnini;- Fee:i 8.~!M ll,733 1.854 873 278 9,GOti 2,132 9,606 2,132 1,255,589 7,881 60,420 {l0,420 273,799 ~.-16 lSFSI Openiline: Costs 52,539 1,529,388 2,866 21,0iG lU,976
!c.4 7 SeamLyStoffCost 19,109 14.~11 119,640 119,640 Bc.4.8 UtihLy SLalTCoat IO!i,-122 Ui29,388 3'.< S11btota.l Pm.od Sc Pi:riod-Depend1m1 (A,UI 15,738 lSl,295 131.295 llll,5G1 3'.0 TO'l'AL PERIOD 3c COST t1ERTOO Sd-GTCC 1hlpp\nlf Period 3d Direct Ue~mmi1storun1 AcUVities 2,217 425,012 1,698 12.515 12.515 2,217 426,0\2 Nuclanr Steam Suppl>' System Removal 700 10,067 12,515 12,515 2,217 42~.0l:!
3d.111 Veas11i & lnt.ern11l11 GTCC 01BJ10Snl 10,0Gi 1.698 700 1.. 698 12,515 IU15 311.11 Tots la 750 1D,OC7 3~1 SulitotlllPeriocl3tl"ttivityC09ts 12 Period 3d Pcriod*Dtpendent Costs II a "' 3d.4.I 3d.4.2 3d..t *.J Jnn1n.neo Prop~rtyt.Q:i;ea NRC ISFSI F~llS s
EXHIBIT WAC-1 000190 TLG Snvke.,, Inc.
Comanche l~l!all Nuclear Power Plant Doe11n1entLI1*1703-0DJ, Rev. 0 Deeonunissioni.ng Coal Anrzl.nls Appcndi.:i: ~Page 19 of JD Tnblc C-2 Comanche Peak Nuclenr Power Plant, Unit 2 DECON Decommissioning Cost Estimnte (thousands or2014 dolln.ts) orr-suc LLllW NltC Spent Fuel Site Processed llurio.IVolumt?s Uurlal/ Utilltynnd A.ctlvlty Dl"COD Removal rnclcr1glnt Transport I'roecisslng Dispo51nl Other Tot11.I Total Llc.Ternt Management Restoration Volume Chi.saA CJnuD Cfo~s C GTCC Pror:esscd Crn.ft Contractor ludc11 /\r:tlvitv De~cd tfon Cost. Coit Costs Costs Cnst11 Costs Costs C:ontin enc\' Cons Co*" Costs Costs Cu. Feet Cn. Fret Cu.Feet Cu. F.. et Cu.Feet \Vt.,Lhs. MAnhours M11.nhoun Ponod 3J P!!riod* Dl:<pEndl.lnt Cll!ta (tontinued) 3<140 Em11trgency Plnnning Fees 3d.4.G Jd.47 ISFSI 0p!!rntitig Coeta Secun!y StaH'Cost 2 I 2 I I 1.24() 3d.4.8 UUlityStafrCo:il 3d.-I S11btotnl I'nriod 3d Perlod-Dopetnlenl Co9ls ID
'°50 "
116 " 56 ° UIID 3J.O TOTllI. PERIOD ad COST 2,217 425,012 PER(OD :te -1SFSI Defi>ntnmlnnlinn
'"' 10.0&'I 1,104 12,S'iO 12,516 56 1,510 Period 3e Direel Decommissioninr: ktivitie:i Period 8c Add!tlonnl Cooata 3e.2.l U('.en.ae Torminotlnn JSFSI Subtolal Period 3eAdditlonnl C'.o$f' Period 3e PcMod-Drpendcnt Cost&
115 59
" ." l.S63 1,663 1,494 1494 829 4.H4 UH 4,1'1.I.
4,144 13,885 13,885 1.124:,934 L,L24,934 10,302 10,302 1,044 1,04( 3e.4.I lnsurnnce Sc.'1.2 Property tans "" 11 36
lt!.4.3 Plantenuft!Y but!.gPt 3e.4.4 3l'.-i.5 Security Sui<<Cost lJtU1tySt11frCost 63 16 79 "'"
165 1,714 1,BSG 3aA Subtonl PeriM 3e Per!OO. 0Ppendenl Costs "' 303 " 76 '"
'" 379 8,600 ,,, TOTAL PERIOD 3e COST 1,124,931 FER?OD :!t- ISFSI Sltl!' Rutorntfon "' " " U63 1,'197 905 U23 4..523 13,861!1 10,302 4,64-1 Period 3CDirect Decoromias!mlnr Activities Period Bf Addltlonal Co~lls sr.2.1 Demolltioll and Site RestllmUon ISFSI 1,399 416 2,067 2,087 Hi.26G Sf.2 Subtotal Period 3( Mditimrnl C11!itlll 1,399 "' 2,087 2,087 10,2GG 80 80 Perind 3fColhtlf!ul CMU !lr.3.1 3(.3 Small l.QOlallownnee Sul.itot>il Period 3iCollateral Co11l15 21 21 ",. ,.
24 Pniod :ir Period*D~~ndent Ccslll 3f"2 PrnpertylUl'8 I JG 16 3f.U Pinnt energy b11dgii~ a 20 3f.<l.4 Sec11ri1vs1.ancost 3f.45 Uli.lity Staff Cost 13 2 15 3(.4 Sul.itot11l P~irlGll. 3f Period Depe.ndont Costs "" " 8 113 63 53 113 771 l,114 am TOTAL PERIOD ar COST 1.42() 515 289 2,224 2,22-l 15.:Z6G 1.191 PEnlOD 3 TOTAL.<:; 51,7Ei2 11,(130 13,88;5 2,217 TOTAL COST TO DECOMMISSION' 11,87!1 119,!173 24,814 5,0!3 55,894 146.099 G:tt,645 30,327 130,82.l 240,732 870,039 J1,137 5G3,77& ISi,314
U2,2GI>
86,280 94,0liiO 30~,784 1,82.7 337 2,2.17 1,!i19.947 21,330,<!JO 566.828 U10,li2o 1,8[]5,225 S.840,0lG EXHIBIT WAC-1 TLGSen.ifcl!s,/rtt: 000191
Cormuu:l~e Pcal1 Nuel.e:orPowrr Plant 1'oc1tment Lll-1703-00J, Reu. O Deconmdssio11ing Cod Anaty1i* Appendi!t C. Page zo of 20 Tnblo C-2 Comnnche Peak Nuclear Power Pinnt, Unit 2 DECON Deconuni::i::iiouiug Cost Estimnta (thous11nds or 2014 doll11rs) i*~:~:::d ~c1-.,-,A--c='!~~~~~1"'~~"~~""u1~~",'.-,,'c~'-~u*1~*c~c- P~ ~~~:~d 01!-Slfc LLRW rmc Spontt'ucl Slto 1 1 0 1 Uttlllyand Activity Dccan Removal Packt1ginir Tnnuport Procenlng oi.pmi:nl Olher Toto.I Lie.Term. Man11gcment RestornOon Contractor lndell: Aeth11tvDescrl tlon Cost Coit. Co!llt Cost1 Cosb c.... Cost' Contlnt:encr CoslS Cosu Costs C\1. Feet Cu. Feel Cu Fel!t C11. FHt Cu. F~et Wt.. Ll:1!1. Mnnhnun
'OTAL. i;OSTTO DECOMl\USSlON WITH 1'17~~ CONTINGENCY $870,039 lhousauds or :t.Ol-1 dollnrs ITOTAL NRC LICENSE 'TERMINATION COST IS 6U~' Oil. SG63,1'1S thousnndsar 101" da\lan \sPENT FUEL MANAGEMENT COST IS 24.39% OR.
NON-NUCLEAR DEMOLITION COST IS 1o.81%01l. $~4.060 t.housand1 or !OU dollnra troTAL PRIMARY SITE UADWASTE VOLUME nunmD* :!O!i,9.&B Cl.lbicfeet iroTAL LOW-l.EVEL RADIOACTIVE WASTE V'OLUME GEN~RATED (EXCLUDING GTCC}: rQTAL SCRAP METAL REl\IOVED: 94,338 tans iToTAL CRArl' I.Anon REOUmEMEt-.-rs: 1,810620 man-honrs EndNotl'9.' ri/a
lndlcntea that tbill netivily not charged 1a doeamrn1s9ionine e:itpens11.
a
indiutes that. this activity performed by doeommmaiauing !laff.
O .Jndleatesthnt tbisvnlu1! it leas th.an O.!i butia no'IMero. ftte!lcontni11ing***indi.C11t('ll*urovalu1 EXHIBIT WAC-1 000192
Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant Document Lll-1703-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Appendix D, Page 1 of 22 APPENDIXD DETAILED COST ANALYSIS SAFSTOR Tables D-1 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant, Unit 1 ................................................... 2 D-2 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant, Unit 2 ................................................. 12 EXHIBIT WAC-1 TLG Services, Inc. 000193
Conaanchir P~all Nuclear Power l'font Document LJJ-1103-DOJ, Re11. D Dccomnaiirsioning C.osl Analysl!!! - DRAF'I' ISStTE' Appirnrll:itl>, Pt1ge :ta/22 Tnble D-1 Comancho Penk Nuclear Power Plant, Unit 1 SAFSTOR Decommissioning Cost E~timnte (thotunnds or 20H dollars) Off.Sita 1.1,ll\ NUC Spent fue Si1.e l'rocc11u?d llur111.l\'ohuue1 Duriall Utili~y 11.nd Activity De con lll!IUOYl\I 1111cl&aglntr Tr11nsport l'rocesslng DlspoS111 Other Total Tottll Llc.Tnrm Han11Remcnt Re1loratio11 Volu111e Cl11uA Clau 11 Ciu.sc GT Cc P~sed Cr11n. Contract.or lndoa: Actlvtt Dncrl lion Cost Co" ('.cuts Ca~ts Cods Cosu Costs ConUn encv Costs Co1t11 Costs Costs Cu. Foet C11. Feet Cu. Peet Cu, FeeL Cu.Feet Wt..Lb1 Mauhoun Manhours l'lmlOD lo *Shutdo*n through Transition Period I a Direct Dtocontnusslonlng Actlvltln
.(:,?~
hdl laL2 la..l.3 SAFSTOR s.ite charactcrtiatflm a\1rvey Pnvare prdhninary d.ecom1IU8!loning cost tloti[ju,llon ofCessat1nu oCOpemtlac.'J 169 "'" fi*IR
"' "' 1300 la.L-t la.Ir.
la.1.G RemoY11!ncl&eouramateriAI Notification of Perm11nenl Th!ruel1nr: Deatt1v11.te pl;int syGtcma & pr<<eas WIU'te lal'J 111.l.8 la.l.!t lsl.10 la.111 Pre~nre and 1l1hmit PSDAR Review11lnntdwgs&apccs Perform det11lled nd 111.r,oey Eltimalelly-11roducttn~otory Endproductdcsctipti= 200 130 130 39 25 19 19 194 149
. 2!19 149 140 2,000 l,300 1,000 1,000 22"4 l,MJO la.112 la.113 Detalledl1y.productinvenlory Definsmnjor11.*ork1equ1mce '" "' "ID 224 149 463 1.000 3,100 la.IH hltli Pcrluna SER 11.nd EA Perform Slte*Speci!ic CQst Study <o3 649 GO 91 "'
147 747 5,000
~tlvit;'S11ecUications h.116.l hl.lG.2 ln116.3 Prepare plnnt and facllitien ror SAFSTOR Plsn.Leyi;le1:n1 P\ant1tntc1.ureaandlluilding*
Bl GI ..."' 735 406 4,9:!0
.(167 3.120 la.116.-1 la.1.16.r.
la.llG Wutemaaagement F11cility.1111dsite dormnncy Totnl 2GO 260 2,IM 39
'10
?99 2,420 209 2,420 2,000 2.000 16.207 Detailed Wotlr. P~dUl"CI 1idl71 Plantsysloll\ll 23 l,l&B la.1172.
h .. t.17 Facil:itycl11.Bcout&dorm11.ncy Total 1'6 309 " 40 117 179 31\0 117
'" l.200 2,SB3 1td18 Proeure vacuum dryinr S}'!!tem 100 la.ll!l Drain/de-energti.o non..conL fiY*lem*
13 lol.'20 la.11.l lii.. J.22 lol Drain &. di)' NSSS D.ralof1h,*t'llcrgitecontalllin11tcdor11tems
~on/e*euro <<111U11ninat.ed ayatemr Subtotal Porii;od 14 Activity C:O,ts 0.082 '" ~.907 . 5,907 35.890 Pcriod111.Col111.tcrnlCoota h.3.1 Spent. Fuel Cnpttal 11.nd Transfer IG,607 2,491 lfl,()g8 19.098 la . 3 Subtotal Period la Collatentl C~ta l<i,601 2,491 Hl.09!! 19,098 Puiod la Period-Dependent. Cosu 1** 4.l b.42 la.4.3 laA.<I Tn111ro.ncv Pro11ert)'t11Xes lleallh physlcsoupp1iee m.**vy equipment. rental 039 i79 1.130 .. 113 135 9
l.243
., 1,243 97 la-4.~ Dicponlo!DAWgencrated 13 117 6 '"36 895 36 010 12.190 20 h.4.6 la.47 Plant onllfi:Y budge\
NfiCFcc~ t,0:;7 1,1a1 159 118 .,,, 1,216 J,215 1,299 la.4..8 la4..9 la.410 EroergeneyPlanningFeee Spent Fuel I'ool O&M ISFSI Opel"nting Co1ta . 791 119 '" 010
<89 910 la.411 Security Stoff Coot 6,057 6,!)66 G,9GG 140.78G laA.12 Utilit,v StaO"C~t '213.670 4,DDD 30,670 30.670 423,400 h..4 Subtotal Period la Period*Dl'ltt'ndent Co!its 1,918 13 37,4GCS 6,735 *44,5'49 43,095 UM 610 12.100 20 :i6~.1aa ILO TOTAi. PERIOD la COST l,318 13 " 59.IM 9,0!il G9.5M '49,002 20,551 610 12.190 20 60G,076 PERlOD lb-SAF!:lTOR Limited DF.CON ActMliH Period lb Direct Dccomn:11ssion1ng ht!lvitie1 Docontaminatson oCSite Buildings lh.1Ll lb.11.2 lb.11 Reactor s.re{\111.111 Totals 1,196 1'2 1,3-i&
76 67* 1,79( 227 2,022 1,794 227 2.02'.2 30,661 3,960 31,821 EXHIBIT WAC-1 TLG Sen1it:es, Int: 000194
Comanr.hll" Pll"rrli N11clt.!a.rPoU1r.r Plat1t Docu/llent L11-1703-001. Rt11. O Decommln11lo11t11g Cost Anolys(s *DRAFT ISSUE Appendix D, Page. 3 of 22 Tnble D-1 Comanche Penk NucJenr Power Plant. Unit 1 SAFSTOR Decommissioning Cost Estimate (thousnnds or 2014 dollnrs) o" l.LRW NitC Spenl fuel Sito Procenod lJurh1\Vulu111.is Duri*dl Utllityn.nd Activity lndcit Aclivft Derer( t.lol\ IJPCU" Cost. Romovlll Cost raekriglns Costs Tnn1port Coats Procenlog Ca1t1 Dlspo111,I Costs Other Costs Total Contln enc'V Total CosL<1 Lie.Torm Costs Monagoment Costs Restoration Com Volun1e Cu.Feet Cl11.1aA Cu. Feet Cl.onli Cu. F11.<et Cio11C Cl1 Feet GTCC Cu, Peet l'rocessed Wt Lb, Craft.
"Mon hours Cont.raclor Manho"u lb.I Su\Jfot1JPeriorllll.AciMtyCcsle 1,3411 2,0?:! 2,022 34.821 rerioJ lb AiJdiLinnal COBt9 lb.U SpenlfoelJlOOlisolatfon 10,!'13 1,G22 12,.(34 12.434 lb,2 Subtot..I Period lb Addition11l Costa I0,813 I G22 12.(34 12.43-1 renod lb Colh1teul CMl.8 lb.3.1 lb.3.2 DtcOD.equipment Pro:::esa decommiolonlng:waterwnste °
170 11<
'" lB2 "'
163 1,11'1 770 1.114 770 l,07G G4,67S 210 lb.3.-1 lb.3 . .5 lb.3 Smalltoolallow11ne11 Spent Fui>J Ca1111.al 11nd Trans(er Sublote.T Period lb Collnte1'nl Costs Pniod lb Period*Dep~mdflnt Coste 1.HO
" 111 140 !S2 ,.,
507
..76 3
26
,83 2,493 26 1,910 583 583 l,Q76 64Ji75 210 Jb.<f.l De<:on1upplin 670 lb.42 lb ..C.3 Jn1J11r11nce Propi>rlyt.tues "'22 168 " 2 313 "'
313 lloo.lthphya1caauppl1ee lb.4.4. lb.4.b lh.46 Henvreqltipincntrentnl D!.pouel ofDAW~er*ll'il 31i 106 "' 226 226 10,540 17 lb . .C1 lh..i& Pl*ntenercrbudget NRCFN!a ll 13 266 17*1 "' l7 31 30G
!DI 31 300 1'l Jb..C9 EmtrgrncyPJannlng-Feea lb...(10 lb.411 S11ent Fuel P(lllJ Ol:.M lSFS! Operatlng Coal.I 112 109 12 11 30 2
1'3 229 11 229 14 tb..C 12 S~curitrS111fTCout 1,756 1,756 35,486 lb.4.13 utility Stoa Cost 1,1127 6,722' "' 1,00S 7,131 1.731 108,120 I~< lb.O Subt11Ul Period lb Period Dependent Cmta TOTAL PERIOD tbCOST G10 3,158 530 II 12G H2
'*' 9,S'ZO 1.64S 12.171 29,121 11.805 36G 1.603 10.540 75,115 17 85,048 142,205 H2,20G PERIOD lc::-Prcpuatfun9 ror SAFSTOR Dt1rm11nc)'
105 20,G39 4,332 2!.171 rcriod le Direct Decomm!Mloalng Acllvitl!!! lc,1.1 lc.12 lc.13
'Pre po.re !ll}lport eq111pmlnt for Sltmtge lnatallcontainmentprenureequnl lines llltenm aurvey pnor t.n dorm11ncy 26 733 3.000 700 12.!>61 le..14 Sccurab11ndtng:11eceaees 220 1c.l.5 Prepare & submit Interim report 7G 11 87 583 JG,261 1<1 Subtotal Period le .AcU*1ty Cmtn PeriodlcColl11ten.l~t11 <15 '" " 1,517 1,51, l.30:Z 78,130 2'4 lc.3.l lc.3.3 h.S..C Process decomrnissicmlni: w.aler WllSle Small tool allowem:e Spent Fuol C1pd1d and Tr11nsror '°' "' 169 "' 197 11 0
931 3 931 3 lc.3 Subllltal Poriod le Coll*teral Costa 2(16 138 IG9 220
'13 513 J.11:!3 589 1,302 78,130 Period le Pcriod-Depeadeat Cmt11 lnaur11.nco ,. 317 lcAl Pnipertytuea 2es lcA:Z Jfonllh phy:uc:!ll si1pplie1 Jc,'1.3 220 le.44 lc.4 5 lc.'1.G lc..f.7 HP11\')'o~uipmenlr1mt11l Oiapn!'lalo!DAWtconerated Pl*ntencrgybudi:et NRCFl!l'.a ErnergeneyPlo.nnini: Pee.a J76 30 19 310 193 310 103 9 1" 3,IOG lc:.48 lc..t9 1c..c to Spent Fuel Poal O&t.~
lSFSI Oper11ting Cosu 113 202 12 II 30 2 125 232 14 232 14 lc..lll SecntitySlll.rTCost 10-13 231 J,775 J,775 35,871 Jc,4.12 Utlllty St.11.tf Cos~ G,791:1 1,019 7,Slli 7,815 107.880 3.IOG I<< kO Subtotal Period le Pcnod.Depe11Jcnt Costt TOTALPERJOD le COST 200 418 836 1'2 170 224 9,421 10,742 1,46!> 2,037 11,316 14,357 10.946 13,3!l7 370 960 1,457 81,23G lG,520 143,751 144,335 22,4Gl 3,610 16860 51,588 881J,61G
~'"
00.~71 PERIOD l TOTALS 3.363 280
'" "' 90,a35 lfi.4:0 113,032 EXHIBIT WAC-1 000195 TLG Seroit.es, Inc.
Co111nucf1e Pea7l N11cler1rPou1erPlonl Documf'nt Lll*l10J-OOJ, Rev. O Dtcom111llaian1'n11 Cast Annly.sis* DRAFT ISSUE Apptndi.<t D, Pn~t 4 of ~2 Table D-1 Comanche Pcnk Nuclear Power Pinnt, Unit 1 SAFSTOR Decommissioning Cost Estimate (thausrrnds of 201*1 dollArs) Off.Site LLH\Y NllC Spent Fuel Site Processed lluriol Voh1mu Burin II Utillty*nd Activity Ocean Remov11.1 l'nckn11lng Transport Proce!lslnt Dlapus11.I Olbcr Totnl Tot.n1 Lie.Tum Mnnngi.otent Reslorntlon Volume Clo.ts A Class D ClassC GTCC Proceued Cran Contr11.ctor Actlvlf Dctcri lion Co~t. Coat11 Co!ls Costs Cu.Feet Cu. Feet Cu. 1eet Cu. Feet Cu.Feet Wt,, Lbs. M1mhours MqnhourJ In doll PERIOD 2n. SAFSTOU normo.ncy with Wet Spent Fuel Storage Cost Costs Cosls
°"'" Costs Conllml'enc Costs Co*hi 11eriod 2a Olreet DeeammisJtoninr Ac ti viii~
Za.11 Qt1*rt.ulyl1U1peetion
!a.12 Seini*11nnu11l envkonmenhl survey 2a.13 Prtparen11ort11 211.1.4. Bltnrninot1eroofnplacem11nt 2 0 2 189 603 693 2a.l.5 211..l Mllintennncesupplies Sublotal Period 2a Act.ivitr Cast.a '"
556 139 Period b Collaleral Cost.a 2o.31 SpGnt Fuel Capital and Transfer 34,69-I s,20.t 39.8!18 39,895 2a.3 S11brot.el Period 211 Col\at.crd ~ls 34,6!M 5,204 39,89A 89,8!18 Period 2a Peraod*De~ndcut Cos11 21vU Insurance 2,674 267 2,941 2,*t05 2o.42
'ln...t.:l 2a.4A ZL<f.5 2a.4.6 Propertytuea Healthphyeiui;upplies DUr.oa111orDAW~ncrakd Plant energy imdi:t"t NRCFeea 753 17 19 1,15~
188 121 116 1 . 910 1,211 l,271 "' "' lll.291 2a.4.7 Einergencr Plonnu1g FCi!os 89' 90 987 957 2a.. .t8 Sperit Yuol l'ooJ O&M' 3,6:11 B,1118
"'" 3,631 2nA.9 lSFSl Oparnting Costa 191 219 21.410 Sevttance 13.2GZ 1,989 111,251 15.251 211.Ul Ser;urhySt11.ffCost 1'1.SSO 2,0'18 20,!i28 3,!118 11,009 3950 471 'la.412 Utility St.alI Cost S,819 073 4.392 S,147 02,.143 2** Stlbuiul Puriod 2a I'criod-Dtp<"ndoal CCllta 753 17 19 44.200 0,571 IH,563 12.'HIS 38,705 15.291 " 407,!114 2a..0 TOTAL PERIOD 2a COST PERfOO 2b-SAFSTOR Dormancy .... 1th Dr)' Spent Fuel St1>rngc 153 17 19 79,450 11,914 9:!,J51 18,494 18.,663 1s.:rn1 " 457,9\.1 Period 2b Dinci. Dealmmis!ionlrig -'cllvities Zb.Ll 2b.1.2 2\:i.1.9 2b.1.4 2b.l 6 Quartetlyln~1cttlon Sorni-11nn1111le1wnonmental11urvef Prep11tort1porl3 Bitvininouaroo(nplactornent M1t1oter111.ncea:uppli111 6,311" 1,578 3
1,a89
. 25 '7.889 Subtotal Perioil 2b Activity Costii 6,333 '1,9H rertod 2b c~nawal Coiiu 1.681 1.9H 2b3.J Spent Fuel Cepitn\ ond Transfer 40,976 G,1'10 47,122 47,12'2 2b.3 Subtot.al l'eriod 2b Collateri'll Coats 40.97G 6,J.IG 47,122 47,J22 Puiod 2b Penod-Dependent Cost.s 2b.41 luura11ce 26,162 2,616 28,178 27,3G9 1,409 2h4.2 Pnwertyl.Ul'a 3,!l90 399 4,381> 4,389 2b.U Healthph)'6iCSGllppliea 4,532 ,. 1,133 5,66!1 &,GG5 2b.4.4 2b.U 2b.4.G Oi11pos11l or DAW genen1ted Plent energy bud~t NR.C Fel!fl '" ll9 4.801 J2.,llB9 720 l,2M 290 5,521 13,193 280 .5,G21 13,703 4,693 03,860 l53 2.b.4.7 Emarreni;yl'tanninrFcea 10,:115 1,022 11,231 11,'237 2b,4..8 2b.-t.9 JSFS1 Operntine Cmtll Severa111:a 2,1Ci9 691 325 103 2,49.t 2,-194 '1!10 2b.-tl0 Security 81..&f!Cmt 110,812 12.12:.i 9Z,934 40.044 !12,890 l,989,!l60 !!b.4.11 Utllitr suia <mi 60,402 9,06!1 69.591 42,6"2 26,889 947.600 2b.4 S11bUltal Period 21> Period.Dependent CD5ta 4,5a2 l03 28,BOG 235,412 4,693 93,860 'Zb.0 TOTAL PERIOD 2b COST 4,532 102 lG lG 119 llO 201,837 249,146 36,533 290.44.9 13!1,102 147,616 95,710 142.833 4,693 93,860 l53 Z,931,560 2,93'1',!160 PERIOD 2c-SAFSTOR Dorn>nncywlthoutSpent Fuel Stornire Period '.!c Dlrec;t Deeornl!lii!a:ioninJ AetMtiu 2~.l 1 Quarterly1aspcct1on 2c I 2 Scmt*annu*I e11vircmrnental survey 2c.l3 Preparorepona 2c.14 Blturo!DDU9rool'~l~a:rn."1t Mniriten1um18llppllu 205 l 0 5l ,,.'l 2'6 1
EXHIBIT WAC-1 000196 TLG Seroices, Ine.
Conrnnche Ptal1 N11clr!nr Poflltr Pinnt Dociimrtd LJJ.JT03*001, Rev. 0 De.commissioni"ng Cost Arurlyais*DRAFT ISSUE Apptndix D, Pagf'1 S of 22 TableD-1 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power PI;:int, Unit 1 SAFSTOR Decommissioning Cost Estimate (tbousn.nds or 2014 dollnra) UIT..Sltc LLltW NltC Spentr'u.. J Sile Proeos,.ecl Durio\ Volmnet llurinll Utllityo11d Acthlty De can Rcrnnvnl P11.clu1gini Tu.nsport T'rocceslng Disposnl Olher Totnl Totnl Lie.Term. Monll(e11u!nt RHtor.atlon Volume clossA Closs II Cl11.ssC GTCC Procesud Cran Contr11c14r Tnde1: Actlvltv Description Cost Co5t Costs Costs Cosh Costs Costs Casts Cu.Feet Cu. Peel Cu. Feet Cu. F.:et \Vt,,I,hs. Monhours Msnhours 2c.I Snbtot:il Period 2c Acti'l'lty Costs
""'" Contlns:enc}' Collts "7
Co9lS Cu. Feet Per10tl 2c Perh1d*Depen1lent COlitS 206 51 2c.ot.2 2c.U Jnaoranco Ptopertytu.ea Jll.'.'e)tb pbysia s11ppllea 809 130 81 13 690 H3 '""'
!c.U 019poGalcfDAWgennat.ed "' ,,.
3G 1 118 178 l<G 2,922 2(.4,5 2c.4G PJ1u1i energy budr;et. NRCFea.a 375 23 37 "' 412 9 179 412 2c.4.7 S!.'Curily StnIT Co!Jt 1,132 170 1,302 l.302 23,100 2c..t.8 UlililyShlTCott Subtotal Period 2c Period-IJ('Jlemlcnl Cm.rs 1,205 181 1,386 1,386 l!J,650 Z<.0 TOTAL PERIOD 2c COST 143 3,BOG 4,498 t,4tl3 14G 2.022 42,750 PERIOIJ 21'0TALS 5,428 122 20 4',012
"" 4.750 4.'HiG 5,604 2.922 112.0;3 42.1llO PERIOD 311.. Re11cllv*I~ Situ Followfl'lg SAFS'J'OR Dormancy '" 332.603 49,0U 387.361 165,!'.G!'i 221.496 "' 3,438,225 Period 31 Dind Docomm1u1oning Activ!Uet1 3a.11 3a,U
in.l.3 3n.l.4 311.]6 Pftp11re prellm1nl\ry decommWHlnlng cost Reviewplantdwi;s&!pecs Perrorm detal\sd rtld eurvey End proUuct descriptkm Det1iledby prad11ctinve11tory 597 25 00 19 19' 687 1<9 lP<
687 M!I 1,3110 4,600 1,000 1,:ioo 25 0 1'4 3a.16 Delinemojor.,..urksequence 146 1,120 1.120 7.500 31a.1.7 Perform SER and EA 311.l,8 aa.19 Perform Site-Specific Cost St11dy J>r.,.pnrc/eubmitLlccnseTerralnati!ln Phin 408 649 532 GO 97 80
*163 612 747 81:!
3.100
!!i,000 4.09G 3a 110 Receive NilC 1pprovel of lenrun11tion pbn ActivitySpP.Cilic1tion11 3a.11ll Ile-ectivato pl11nt & temporary facilities 957 14' 1.100 990 110 7,370 3a.lll.2 Pl11ntaystetr11 4,161 3fi..l113 3a.l 114 Re11ctorinlern11\~
Re11ctorveuel 541 92:2 S*M "' Bl 127 l,OGO 071 1,060 971
" 7,100 G.500 311.Jll.5 B!.ologic.al1hicld 10 75 75 500 3alll.6 Steamgen11nlm11 Gl 4GG 4fi6 3,120 3aJ.J17 lle!n(orcedcuncrcte 119 1,600 3a 1.11.8 MstnTurblne 208 52 31 a
239 60 "' 60 400 3o.l ll.9 MainCondenser:a 8 GO 60 400 3a.l.JI.10 Pl11ntstructureii&bu1ldinp 3a.lllll Wastomana~mcnt 3a.lll12 Fnt.ilily & 11\e cl°'<<Nt 097 117 61 18 687 134 687 61 67 3,120 4,600 900 Snl.11 Toto.I 5,165 7" M13!> 5,228 711 3!>,777 Pl11nnlng&Sit11Prepanllon1 30112 Prtpnre dinn.untllni: Hquence 3nU3 3n.JJ.1 Pliml prep. &:. temp. 1vce1 Desrgn w11ter clenn*up 11ystem 312
~000 47 '50 358 3,4!5\} '""
3.450 2,400 l,<100 3a.1.15 31116 fligging/Cont. Cntrl &nvlpsltooling/tte. Procurecnsksll.inen &conUtinel'!I 2,300 27 345 209 2,645 ""' 2,G4r, 311.l Sub10111! Period 311 Activity Costs 160 H,7"0 " 2.211 '" IG,9!11 184 IG,239 7ll 1,230 72,703 Pi:riud Sa Addltio111l COKt11 S..2.1 SiteCbaractori1nlinn ~.939 U82 7,720 7,720 30,500 10,852 3a2 Subtotol Pulod 31 Additional Coour S,939 J,782. '7,720 1.120 30,500 10,852 Period Jo Period*Otipendmt. CO!.~ 3n..f.1 Jn,11nnell 3n.<l.2 3n.4.3 Prorie.rtytn:ces lleallhphyaiceauppl\e, 472 88 "9 602 97 '"97 311.4.4 S;i.45 HeaV1 equipm11nt. r'!!ntsl Db~111 or DAW l:'enerated 7'i9 11 13 118 117 5 590 3l
'"31 010 10,311 17 3114G Plentcnerao budtel NRCFees 1,057 "' 1,215 1,215 31147 3a.C8 3a4!1 Security StaffCoat.
UlllilySlolTCost 1,748 Hi,6!16 "' 38 2,5()1 416 2,010 19,200
~.010 19,200 35,728 260,?H EXHIBIT WAC-1 000197 TLG Sewlcu, lne.
Conu:inche Ptn11 Nudf!:arPOUllf',. Plnnt Doc11nu!nt LIJ-1703-001, Reu. O Dee1unr11i1flli1:1ninl! Cost Aunlyds- DRAFT ISSUE Appendi~ D, Paee Sof Z2 TnblcD-1 Comnnche Penlt Nuclenr Power Plnne, Unit 1 SAFSTOR Decommissioning Cost Estimate (t.holusands or2014 dallars) Orf-Site LLJl\V rmc Spe11' l~llel Sit., l'roccnud Durl1tlV11h1111c1 Uurloll UUIJty i:and ActlvltY Dceon Re1t1n'll11I Paclulging Tnmtport. Procenlng Dl9posal 0Lher Tot11.l Tot<1I Lic,Torrt1 Man*if<lment Rettorotlon Volume Clan A C!nHU CloasC GTCC l'roce9sed Cran. Contractor Index Acd'llllYDcsCTI tlon Cast Cost Costs Costs Co, ts C11sU CHl* Conlln1t111ncy Cnlll11 Cnst9 Cnt1ts Costs Cn. Faet Cu. Fer-l Cu,Feei Cu. Feet Cu. Fellt Wt.. Lbs, Mnnhoun Mo.nhours S11blotal Period. :J1 Period*D-Opendcnt Cost9 2~,0SG 10,311 3o4 TOTAL PERIOD 3a COST 1,261 1,2!;1 11 11
" 20,6H 3.2CiG 7,2~8
?5,D~G 49,127 49,016 711 516 10,311 17 30.ril7 296.443 379,997 3*0 PERJQD :lb* Drconuntsslonlnrrrep11.ra.llu11s
" 4.1,192 Period Sb Direct Duommwwntni:: Actlv1tllhl Detailed Wn!"k Proced11rt1' 3b.1.l l 3b.l.1%
Pl*nt1rstem11 Rut:torinternals 615 325 .. 02 ?07 71 4,13S 2,l!OO 20:;! IOI 1,350 3b.l.1.3 Sb.1.1.4 Rmnal1Jlng buildini;' CRDcooling11!18omhly 1'0 " 19 19 l<O
"' 1,000 3b.1I,6 3b.l t.G CRD houmup & ICI tu\.Jcs Incaromal.rument.atlon Reatt.arves~cl 1'0 "° 19 HO 5<2 I 000 1,000 3,630 Bb.117
Jb.118 Fnei\ityclOlleo1:1t "fo.!i5s1lesbields 166 11
" 179 67 90 67 90 l.200 Sb.11!>
ab.1 i.10 BiolO{lc.al1hield 58 156 9
"' 179 ° 1,200 Sb.l.111 3b.l.112 Stalm~nerntou Rein(orcedcancrete '97 190 00 19 687 "' '"75 75 4,600 l,000 Sb.l.1,13 Main'Turblne l,560 3b.lll4 Mal11Conden11ers 203 '° 30 "' '" 307 41 1,560
,no 3\J.1116 3b.111G 3b.J l A11xlliaryb11lld1ng Renctorbullding To111l 4,186 ,,.""
408 408 4,814 367 3,H8l 9'3 41 2,730 32,243 Subtotal Pertod 3b Acll\'ity Cos~ Sb.I Period 3b Cnllateral Cooto U86 6:?8 U14 3,881
'" S2,U3 Jb.3.l Deeanequipm!nt 969 l<O 1,114 l,lU.
OOC11U1ffre\0C11tioniexpell8ll1! Sb.3.2 3b.3.3 Plpo cuttln I!: eq11lpme11t S11bt11t.al Period 3b CoU.ot.eral Cosu 960 1,100 1,100 l,G03
"° IG5 1.843 1,265 1,643 1265 3b.3 Period Sh Period-Dependent CMt1 L,G03 "' 4,223 4,223 3h.4.l 3b:U 3h.4.3 3b.4...4 Dctonsuppliee Insurance Propertyl1111e5 llealthj:Jhyeic11.11Upplies 36 339 45 "
7 4 37 310 3b.il.5 Sb..4.6 3b.'4.7 Heo.vyequipmeotrenta.I Di1p03alo!DAW ~erntrd PlantenettY budl!:Ct NRCF'ees
"' ... 80 3 <04 18 616 211 <04 18 616 2\1 "' 5,910 10 3b.U 3b.4.9 Sb.410 SccuritySt11rrCost DOC Stail"Coot 886 4.880 133 732 19 1,019 5,612 1.019 5,Gl2 18.109 59,200 3b.4.11 31'4 UlilityStarreost SublO~al Period 3b Period-Dependant Crnit& ,. 658 8,<!G2 15,339 1.269 2,4.07 9.732 18,400 9.732 18,450 29G 5,910 10 13'2.1-43 209,452 TO'l'AL l'ERIOD 3b COST !.19!1 1,758
lb.O 21,129 :J,586 27,487 2G,~53 933
'" 5,910 10 241,G95 PERIOD :I TOTALS PERIOD 411-La.rge Component llcmo'llal '" 3,009 18 2( G2.321 10,84~ 77,21~ 7~.569 1,6,,.5 811 16,221 30,526 G2'l 692 Period *to. Dind Dcccrnminiomng Acti'llitiu Nu~le11r 4alll Steam Supply Syttom Ral!'oYal Reactor Coolant Piping 18 86 lG 100 10 344 , . '" 87,-172 2,449 4a.112' 4a...113 Prca.sunz:u RelierTank Roacto~ Cool act Pumps & Moton! 19 ' 17 61 7
69 ' 201 1,22~ 23 1,943 117 l,!M3 "' 7,231 36,653 792,&lO 596 4'.11.4 Prcuurir.er 7
" 359 107 !183 "'
210 1,303 l,:>OJ 3.445 240,508 2,801 1,626 80 760 4111115 411.ll.6 4.nll1 SteamGonerstol"ll KeUrt!d Steam Oener11tcr Units CIIDMs/IClslSftvie1t Structure Removal .." 40 3,383 2,<12G 191 1.375 l,3i!'i J,376 1.316 16 Ml!l2 5,992 2,717 2,4.48 lllll 14.,901 13,617 g71 14.001 1:J,Gl7 9'11 41.816 41,139 4..852 3,144.,067 3,l44,0G7
\'i9.025 20,508 10,600 5,442 1.~00 26.500 4a.l11! <lii..11.9 4a.1110 UeacLOrVeuse11nternnl!ii Vetsel & lnwrn11.lt GTCC Di&flO.qaJ ReattorVt5scl 2,51-1 4,7Z7 12,181 l.4Sl 123 3,672 10.0ti7 .(,310 238 6,911 1,510 6,137 25,939 ll,577 11,015 2!..939 11,677 17.016 '2..431 9.~3G 001 "' 2,2J7 33Ml8 425,012 !lG0,876 20,100 20,100 936 4a.ll Totnls 171 13,H2 17,131 3,58.( 32,3~9 4i5 20.561 87,'iM 87,73.! 1114.49 501 397 2,217 9,345,7!19 84,323 30,702 EXHIBIT WAC-1 000198 TLG Seruicu, Int'
Comancl&t P~rtll Nucl~or P<1u*itrPlant Docunumi LJ:r*l70~-00J, Rev. 0 Decommkdoning Cost Arial.Yaia - DRAFT ISSUE App,ndlx D, PaJZe 1 of :Z TnblcD-1 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant, Unit 1 SAFSTOR Decommissioning Cost Estimate (thousnnds or 2014 dollars) OIT-SiLc LLRW NRC Spellt1'"ucl sue l'rocesscd Hurla! Volumo* Uurl11ll Utility end Actlvlt)' Dec:on nemo,*al Puck.llgfn(I' Tr1u1spor1. Jlroccsslnr DlspqHI Olher Tot*l Total Lie.Term. MrinAgc1nent Restorntion Volume C1u.A ClnnD CluaC GTCC JlrocuStd c..~ Contractor Index ActivitvOc11trl lion Cost Co!t CetlU Cos ls Cos ls Cos ls Contlngencv Cost.s Costs Co~ts Costs Cu l-'i!et Cu.Feet Cu.Feet Cu. Peet C11.Feet WL.Lh1. Manl1oura M*nheura Ren1ov11.lofM11jnrEquiprnn1t
*fol2 MalnTttrllln11/GenArnlllr 253 110 :?07 1.110 1,110 302,3.5.5 7,045 4a.1.3 MainConden!litl'!!I 708 29 >I7 '" 317 1,977 I,n7 U74 5.ll~ll 372,990 22,781 CEL9Clldfn£ Costs Crom Clean DuilWni: Domol1Uoo .fo.l.41 Re at tor l,OCl7 IGS 1,262 l,2G!! 13,!196 '1.R.1.4.2 Safeguard 4nl.-I Totals '"
l,21G \82 18 136 1,3!18 136 l.308 Ui86 15,584 Dis11011alofPlnntSyst.ema 411..l.5.l A1t'.l'.ilh1ey Fc~w11.tOT (lnaula.~) '6\ 1,829 6,li17 426,192 13,852 4a.U.2 Auxiliary Stearn 12 "' " '" 3'4 l,829 I< 39' 4n.U.3 4a.l.l.i.4 Bnmn Rtctcle(inoul1tod) Boren Recycle (11ninaulntml.) 28' ' I 0 I 2 11 IO IO 133 1,300 8,849 118 4a.l.55 Roron Thermal Rt-g:en!T:lllion (lns1d1led) 23,815 4a.l.5.G Boron Therm RI lle£l"nP!'Rtion (11nln111l11.lfld) " 187 IO 30 ' 6
<l 120 30 157 422 359 l,OGl 70,23!1 l,832 4.602 <22 411..1..5.7 Cliemita\ & V'olqmu Control {iim1h~l!ltl) 21 122 4a.I 6.8 411.15.!J Cheinital & Volume Cnntrol (uninsul11tcd)
ChrmlcalFee~ IG2 327 7 " ' IO 141 1 332
"' 8 332 m l,867 *47.SGG 123.461 3,961l 8.087 218 *111 l ~.10 Chemieal Feoil - RCA 411..Ull ~11..1.5.12 Chilled Wat.er* Safely Chilled WAI.er* Snfely *RCA 9
3 l " 8 14 15 139
*h 15.13 eaUl.M Circuloting-Waler Component Cooling Wattt 117 23 " 48 35 27 185 185 20*1 "' 28,2!13 2,002 &,720 4a.J.5.I5 4a.15,IG Cc1T1[!0nentCoo1lncW11.ler RCA CondenJllte(insulated) 920 128 389 88 1,909 7'9 3
19 26 4.,0G5 148 4,065 2G l< 2,33.5 41.1.5.22 41.15.'13 i'CC?dwater-RCA Geoer11tcr&E:w;clter "'I 28 138 33
'" :!80 '" l,'?17 !!0,4:96 7.102 1,449 4.A.16.:2<! G<inerntor0111Coolins Gener11lor Ptim*'J' W11.ler
0 1
I 1 247 4'1525
-ta.U.26 .C.16.27 Gener11.torSeo.10ll Hydro;tl1n G110 "*2 9
I 73 73 2,003 0
.fal.5.28 Main Steam Jleheat & Steam 01Jmp 1,10!
411111.29 MlliD Sleam Rehut &. Steam Dump* RCA H5 30 GOO 288 1,1138 1,113!1 5,739 379,878 10,634 411. 1.5 JO M11iu. Turbi.n11 Lulie OU 7 1,390
-1015.31 M1in T11rbin11 Oil PurUie11ti'ln "8 13 2,778 4n.l.5.3:! Nitrogen Gaa 1 -!al.5.33 <lal.5.34 Poat Atcident Sampling:
Proeen Samp1Jn1 (unimmlaled) 9
** 0 I '
0
'8 13 13 2
15 177 966 11,691 222 20 ReactorCool11nl
.f111.5.35 4al.5.36 -la.1.5.37 R1:111idualUeatltem'IVO.I Snret7 lnjecUon (in.sul11.Led)
I03 210 " 1<9 31 3 61 667 43 1.294 223 1,29-t '" 5.891 35,479 389,894 95,503 2,522
~722 3,30!)
4o 15.31! 4.at 5.as SnfolJ lnjoclion (urdnMuloted) Saccn11uy Plant Sampling 130 118 26 7 \63 570 78 1,190 '" 1,100 l,4'13 5,176 333,446 G,701 4a.l 8.40 S1um Generator Bl,,.,..down & Cleon up 30 110 16 126 " 126 l,040 3,,83 4n.l.5.4.I 41t.15.4:1
-ta.15.43 ~a15.U *In I ~.<15 TurbinaEleoetrohydrCntrl(in1ulnterl)
T11rbinoElectrohydrCntrl(untnsuluted) Turbioe Gll:n1od Steam & Drains Turbine Heater Dr1un&
'J'urblna Plant Cmlini: (insuloted) 389 58 3
16 447 49 4.\7 063 1.3111 12,600 19 19
~a I 5.4.6 411111 ..(7 TurblnePlsnt.Co:iling(unin,ulet.N)
Turbine11 (High ta.J(lnsubted) HO 31 5 161 161 '" of,495 1,105
<111l.M8 411.1.11.49 Turbtnee(Hlsh Low) (1mln1t1!Bt&d)
Vent Chilled Water* ~on Safely "IO 8 2 GO 18 39 18 1703 500 4111.5.50 Vent Chilled Water. Nan Safety- llCi\ 127 0.1 llS,20.1 4.n 15.51 Wcstlni:hou.~o l'roce~e Jn1tnzmenle 3 "' 0
' " I "' 6 308 13 88G 2,9!)4 .(a 15 4ot.G ~n. l Totals Sc11trolning"ina11pportofdl'COntmis'ioni11g Sublotal Poriod 4a Activity Costa 171 5,707 21,!JO!I 1.l!JB 18,597 3,8!!2 s.525 39073 475 2,7G4 132 24,228 U,448 108,331 13,122 106,006 2,32&
2,325 49100 307 171,074 501 337 2,217 3.230,8!)1 20,3211 13.272,360 157,880 16,373 303,4.85 30,702 EXHJBJTWAC-1 000199 Tl.G Sen1ice1, lne,
Camanche Pc.011 Nudr:nr Po1JJer Pinnt Dccument 1.11-1703-001, Reu. O Drcommls:rloning Coat Anolysi* - DRAFT ISSUE Appendix D, Page 8 of !2
*rnbleD-1 Comnnchc Pcnk N\tclenr Power Plant, Unit 1 SAFSTOR. Decommissioning Cost Estimntc (thousnnds or 2014 dollars)
Off.Sit.a LLllW NltC Spo11tFual Silo l'rucoi!1>1ed Uurlal Volun1e1 Burial/ UUlityand Actl~lty De con Reniuval Paclu1glnl( Transport Processing: Dilpotol Other Tot..I Total Lte.Term. Pif.no.e:~nnnt Ile1tnrmllon Volume Closs A Clossll Cla:;, C GTCC Procused Crnn. Contnctor lndeil Actl,..itY Dc~cr\ tion Cou Cost Cu11t11 c.. st:r Co't' Co:rts Costs Contlnl(Onc
CnJO, Costs Cost1 Costs Cu.Feet Cu Feet Cu FHt Cu.Feet Cu Feet Wt..f,bs. !\fllnhours M1nhoun Period 4a Addltlonol Cast.a
'8.2.1 R'1ntd1ol Action SUIVll)'ll 1,373 m 1,785 1785 2ri.001 ReUrtd Rea~tor Clo,,utt Head 1,611 l,Gll 3,241 508,950 :l.023 11.000 4o.2.2 o!.112.3 Rctil'Qtl HP and LP 'l'urhlne Rntlml Subtotn.I Period o!.11 Additional Costs '" "' "" 598 230 00 687 3,39G 687 '87 :u.n ~5,1)50 1.200 29,'J!!3 l.000
l,000 4a.2 Period4t\Co\1111eralCo:st11
"' '" 4'5 1,971 "' -1,083 85 M22 17 "'14 "
Pru:cndeeomm!.8,,io111n;wt1urw.,,.te II 411.3.1 411..3.3 Small tool aUawance 252 3S' 290 " 261
>JO ,.
20 85 5,122 17 411..3 Subtols..I I'criod 41\ CollntenilCot<t.s Period 4a Period-Dcpnndeat ~Ill 2'2 II
" 339 41\,4.l De-co11a\lpplte.s 11 18 89 806 4aA2 ln1urance Proputyliu:ea 106 81 11 110 886 105 12 4a.4.4 *RAfi l:leallhphya1csauppllc11 I1a11Y)'eq111lpmenLrc11td 2,302 11,33G ,.,
5i5 2.817 3,83G 2,877 3.83(3 4,30!! 8G,l'l0 4:i.4.G o!.e.4.7 4oA8 Dispoanl ofDAW1enentcd Plantnnergybudi:;llt NJlCFeua
" 15 100 1,207 726 181 73 "1
1,389 799 "1 1,389 199 4o.49 4o.UO
-ta.411 Liquid llt11!waste Pro:es!inir Equipml!'11t&fvitr11 S.Xunl)' Staff Coa~
DOC Stall' Cost 2,?1'17 13,728 72 381 2,059 U,788
'2,D&3 554 1003 16,788 52.GBO 1?9.091 4a.4.12 Utility Stall" Con 20.'1.!ifl 3,03S 2a2u:i 23.299 31G.080 Sublotal Penod 4a Pcrlod*Dtl"endcnt ~le 4,309 8G,1'10 1<1 54.1.Srit 4aA .... TOTAL PF.RIOD .ta COST 11 247 5,637 2'1,'19-t 19,132 4,4.02 1'9 3!J.G52 39,887 42,333 7,03.t 32.04.1 52,IH8 1G5,GOJ 62,836 162.~48 12 3.053 1'18,701) 001 337 2,217 13,8'12.GOO 332,BG6 5'16.553 PERIOD .f.b-Slte Deconumlm,Uon P~riod 4b Dir<<:!: D~mmiaaionlP'i' Act.lvlt!H Re~11peotf11elrii.ckll 314 3,042 201,065 838 -&b,t.1 Oisposlllofl'lantSyaterns 255 " 137 16 236 1,0I:! 1.012 4h.12.l Atndliary Dulldlng HVAC (insulated) 4,176 .f;b.l.2.2 otb.l.2.3 ,\u.iciliary Build.ins; HVAC (uniH11lltctl)
Dntt R1J111 & Misc Uncontrolled Acc. HVAC 2 2D 2 20 G.1
"'03 4h.l.2.4 Cb.1.2..5 CompreseedA11*In111t Air(ineulated)
Compresaad Air - lnatrurnent Aiz- RCA (i 10 2 2 G
"' 22 " !J,414 "
2'3 41.J.l,2.G Ccimptea1111d Air - Instrument Nr *RCA (11 111 1G
"' ** 2-10 240 513 3-t.013 2,8!!3 o!.b.U.7 *lb.l!?.8 Com pre_,} A1J *Service Air Ccmpreas,d Air *Service Air* RCA 27 20 75 ' 31 287 287 31 43,G22 '"
3,229 olb.12.9 4b.l.2.10
.\b.l..211 <!b,l,2.12 CompreSMd Air -lulr Air (1.1oi11Sul:i.u1d)
Contnlnment Hlllehtll Containment Hydnlf:ln l'nri:11 HVAC Coat11inment SI" ray 21 7 I II 332 0 M!ra 509 31 16 120 11.769 16 120 2,76~ 31 13,197 40 2,636 28,301 873,112 9,916 110 4.h.12.13 Containmnt Venti\aUon HV'AC {!n111lntl'd) 100 20 023 l,l!IG 1,190 5.503 364,Q.45 <1.889
"' 222 33,291 4b.1214 4b.l.2.1!'i Conuinmnl Veotilatloo HVAC(uninaul11tl"d}
Control Room lN AC Deruiru:ralhed& RCS Make1.1p W111er 28 2 30 1D
' 57 " D 121 2
121 2 "' 62 911 4b.l.2.IG 4.b.1 Z.17 4b.l,2.1& Demmeraliied & RCS Malieup Water* RCA Dleecl Gen & Auxillario11 {iu111!a1ed) 6 " OG "1 204 1 204 " 1 491 32,585 2,095 182 Dies~) Ceo & A111'J.l1h1rie.t (i:n1inaulaled) 11 o!.b.1.2.19 11 82
" 2.239 Diesol Conerator Fi.el Oil 4b.l.Z.20 12 2 13 13 4.b.l.2.21 o!.bl.2.22 4b.1,2.23 Dli:snl }IQ(Kll HVAC Electrl.cal-Cll:lln Eleetrieal - Containh111ted UBS 144 " .
238 1 l,82G 1,826
' i4&
6.7"19 40,275 117 o!.9,lG~ 3,126
" 7GG .\b.l.2.24. Eleetnclll RCA 442 2.309 2,309 .f48,049 21,0H 4.b.1.2.25 Fire Protectie11 2,628 4b.l.!!.26 Finl Protection* RCA 192 0 162 12 491 491 1,43<1 9!5,0H 4,585 4b.l.2.27 Fuel nuildinll' HVAC (umneulated) 6 1 ,' " "" " 2,787 4b.12.28 4b.12.29 F1.111lHandllo11 Lealllt!.leTest Pot11b1eWater 9
1 1 3
" 17 " 1 30 61 10*
4,040 6,914. "' Cb.1.2.30 0 4h.U.31 o!.b.1.2.32
~b.1.2 33 4.b.1.2.34 IU\dlntlonMenil.Orln' Snrci:"uanls Building HVAC (insulated)
Safo(1111rds Building l IVAC (unin1ul11ted) SemecWatar
."1 16 20 0
9 49 122 1
"'" 44 174 11,495 27.021 311 1.030 1,240 .ihU.35 &-rvics Water - llCA 18 3,518 '" "' "' '" 236.580 EXHIBIT WAC-1 '4,~67 Tl.0 Serofc~s, l11c 000200
C.omandle Pea It N11cleor Powi?.- Plllnt Doeume11l LJJ.1703-001, Ret*, 0 Dfl!cammiHioning Cast Annl,.si.s
DRAFI' lSSUS Appendi:ie D, Page 9 of 22 Tnblo D-1 Comnnche Peak Nuclenr Power Pinnt, Unit 1 SAFSTOR Decommissioning Cost Estimnte Acn ... uy Dll'Ci>n RtmoY"I r"clcni::lng Trunsporl Orf-Site Pro~Hinlt (thousnnds of2014 dollars)
LLRW Dl1pou) Oth111r Totnl Total NllC Llc.T11r111.
Spen\l'uel M11.m1irement Rost.orntion l'roce:ised VolunH ClnuA Durlol\'o u1nea Cl11uD clou: c GTCC Huri11.ll Procossr:d Cra.n Utilltyand Conh'llctor lmlca Act\.,.ih*Dl!~crl lion Cosl Cost Cost!! Cotl.s Costs Costs Costs Contlnaenc\I Costs Costs Costs Cost! Cu Feet Cu Fut Cu Fllet Cu.Fed Cu Fl!~t. WL,Lh!, ?ib.nhours Manhourg OIBpOaalol'l'llnlSyatenui(eanllnufd)
Spfnl Fuol l'ool Caol:ing & C\ennnp 83,G71 2,817 4b.12.3G 4b.1.2.31 Turbine Dllilding HVAC (lni:mlated) 110 3 " " " 0 237 3 237
' "' 02 41.i.12.38 4b.l 2.3!l 4hl 2.40 ~b.1.2..fl Turbine D11ild.inG HVAC (uniDSu!a~d)
Venll!ltlDtain11 Vente & Drams
RCA Wt1Ste ManaJem~t(un1n1ulated) 16 l<l:l 3
20 . ' 58 0 3 305 18 305 2.u 25 18 714 47,320 33,611 722 S,457 9l 2,980 Waste Proce5'ing Uqu\d (ln$ulated) 508
-lb.l.'l.'12 <lb.l.2..C3 WHtc Pro.;eednr f.i<Jmd (unin:iul1ded) 122 "' "8 '
2 58 47
" 1" 120 :!ll ltl,203 895 l,<128 olb,l.2.f..f 4b.12 W111teProcuainrScl1d Totnla <!,SM 0
1'1 0 4,IM 2,181 l 1:?,288 ' 10,0Gl ' 2,226 3G,807 2,435,130 131,251" 30,487 2{,559 4b,t3 Sc11ffoldlngin.1511J11wn11r1IOOJmmi!l!fiiminG 733 11
" 1'8 9!17 997 Doenntamlnalion or Site Dulldlogs -lb.141 Renctor 1,092 141 "' "
13
., 1,181'.i 1,022 4,0!l7 4,097 12.&72 065 11D.1io 64,9-U 43,0lG 4,625 <lh.1.42 4b,l4 Sa£cru11rd Totula 1233 48 100 1,282 109 1.131 4l2 4,509 "'
4.~9 13,538 84<.Gtll 47,G<ll 41.i.1 Sublolal Ptri0tl 4bAr.tivity Com. 1,4!18 6,317 1,131 2j!) 5,842 3,745 18.BOG 16.!!80 2,2:?G 63,818 UJl,373 204,2!!0 Period 4b Ad<lllio-nal ~ll!I 4b.:?.l Llct1nseTern1inaUonSurveyMann1ni; 292 l,2G5 6,240 973 l.205 4b.2,2 Remedial Action Surveys 2,6Gll 800 a,..rG8 3,468 48,577 4b.2.3 Operolinn11l Toala ond £11.lllpment Llcn.se Tenninnlion tSFSI m .,9 lG l,5G3 341 311 5,8M 13,885 146,37~ 1.12-l,934 10,302 10 2,844 4b.2.4 4b.2 Sublolnl Period 4.b Additional C09ts 110 6~,.. 1()0 1.813 J,107 fi.-137 2,llG3 4,523 9,51)6 4.523 9,590 JD.140 1.271,3011 58,896 9,084 Peri00'1bCol111eralCoi!ts 4b.3.l 4b.3.3 4b.3.4 Proceu decommissioning w*hrv.*IU<<! SmalltooleUO\t'tnco D11cl)mmb11ionlnr Equipm*nt Dispc.sition Subtulal Perind ~b Ccllntcr11\ Cos1..1 10 10 130 18 127 1'5 22 27 2B 20 166 95 150 019 .., 95 150 "' S,2!JO 5,-457 349,678 359,GGB 32 88 121 4b.3 Period 4b Peri11cl.Dope11dl!1ll Cns111 130
" 626 203 1,163 l,lGS 4b.4.I Decon 111ppli~ 791 198 992 002 4.b.4..2 hi.auu.neo 1,565 m 1,722 1,722 21 4b.4.3 4b.4.4 P-roJll!rtylau11 He11lthphy1icaa11pplic' 2,430 205 608 "'
3,038 "' 3,038 4bA.5
-tb.4.G 4b,4.7 Henvy cquipmenl l'l!nlal Di11poe11I ofDAW gcnn11ted Pinnt fnergy budi;e1 6,65::1 68 II 79 1,852 ~78 1,651 185 ~130 7,Ml 2,130 3.104 G2,080 101 '4b.4.B NRCFeee 1.411 141 1,5!!2 1,552 4b.4.!J Uq11idRntl..,nstoPt0t.esslng£quipnnntlSuvireoS 937 1'1 1,077 1,077 4b.4.IO SctnrltyStarrCoet 5,007 751 !l,75!1 5,71!8 t02.3GO 4L.-1.11 OOCSt11frC06~ JG,983 ~.$47 19,531 19,531 229,091 4b.4.J2 Utll1tyStnffCnal 25,461 3,819 29,280 29,280 409,4-10 Period*Dcpl!nd~nt Cwt.I 62,086 101 740,891 .ib.4 olb.O Subtotol Period 4b TOTAL PERIOD oib COST 2291 9.0113 15,MI!
68 1,41;5 II 439 79 8,361 53,42:'. 58,850 9,686 15,607 73,142 102,708 73,142 100,481 2,226 3.104 82,HS 5,204,435 263,407 149,9711
'PERIOD Ce- Dch1y he Core~ Llecnt" T*r1nln11tlari Period 411 l'enod*D~pendenl C0&to 4e.41 lnsllfnnce 1.228 123 1,350 l,:!50 .fe.42 Propert1 taco 161 10 177 177 411.43 ole.4.4 Healtbphyaicsaup11lm~
OispaenlofDAWgen(ltolcd "' ... ", 223 11 223 11 511 183 3,6S4
<!1t,4G 4o.41 -ie.48 NRCFeca SecurilySlllfrCo~t Utility Starr Cost 1,653' "
248 l Oil 1,901
1,001

26,7GO S11btot11l l'erind -ii.' Period*Depet'ldent Com 3,510 4,178 183 3,654 20,760 4e.4 178
uto
'" 4,178 3,GM '10.0 TOTAL PERIOD 4e COST 118 480 4,J78 4,178 "' 26,160 EXHIBIT WAC-1 000201 TI.G Servius, fnc,
1Jacum4!nl. Lll-1703-001, Rcu. O Appendi.xD, Pagf! JO tJ( 2Z Cam nnche Peal1 Nm:lenl"' Pa wot.I"' Plant De~amrr11SBlanlng CosLAnalpifl-DllAFT ISSU'l! TnbleD-1 Comanche Peak Nuclcnr Power Plnnt, Unit 1 SAFSTOR Decommissioning Cost Estimnto (thom1ends or 2014 doHnn) 1.hirlal Volumes llurl11ll Ulilitynnd NltC Sp1mtFuc sue l'rocc!lscd CIHsC GTCC Prt>eesnd Cran Cont.ro.ctar OIT-Site Ll.ll\V R111tou.tlon Volume ci*uA cl11.ull Manhoun Total Tot.Al Lie.Tenn. M*narament Cu. Feet Cu Feet Cu.Feet Wt. Lb!. Monhours Runovnl rack*gl1>g Tnn*poM. Praeessing Dlspotcil Other Cos ls Cintt Cu. Feet Cu.Fut Dccon Costs Cor.tln ani:v Cosl..!I Coils
}..dlv\ty Costs Co1ts Costs C<nh Aetlvll DesCrlpUon Co't Cosl Index l 1ERIOD 4t-1.lr.ente Termlnntlon Period -UDin-et Dec11mmi11sfoninr Activihes 4r.l.l OlUSE co11r... m111cry aurvr)'
161
,. . 217 217 217 .ttl2 4U Term1nRtelieen;e S11b101AI Periocl 4C Activity Coslll 167 00 "' 86,835 3.12D 4,122 1.2:17 0,35!l 5.35!) saeas 3.120 Pl!Tiod .f.f Mditlonnl CosLI 5,35!)
Llcenso Tetll'lin*tion Suni:y 4,122 1,237 5,35D 4C2.1
-it.2 Subtotzll Period 4C AddiUonn.1 Costs Period 4fColllltu1I CMU .CC.3.1 DOC11affreloe11ticnexpPnac:a 1,G03 1,G03 2'0 1,843 1,843 l.8.i3 1,SC3 Snbtotnl Period -tf Colt11ter11l Cosl!I "' 6'5 Period -4tPcriad-Do!pondont Cost*
lnturRUCC "' 66 " 7 73 73 4(4.. l
-1r...:.2 Property t.u.ea 146 729 337 G,734 11 4t4 3 Health pbyaice 11UppliH '" 183 20 20 183 -ttU olr.4.5 Dl5posalorDAW genenled Plant enoTgy b1u!i:ot '" <65 "4G 0()1 50l 11,76(1' 46,750 <tr.4.G NRCF11:1:1 87 4,319 '"
4.319 60,107
.(f.4.7 .((4.8 Sec11r11yStnffCosl DOC Staff Coal 3,71i6 4,069 '"
6l0 4.,G'l9 11.724 4,G70 11,124 337 6,134 11 ll8,G43
<\(*.f..!l Utility Staff Cost S11htotlll Period 4rPerlod*~mlont Costa 583 !l.~87 '"' 337 6,734 80,846 121,7G3 4C.O TOT/l.LPERlOD <tCCOST 083 15,4.'iD 3,063 51,281 19,142 291.628 19,142 286,349 5.2&1 261,377 001 331 2.217 19,087420 683,125 1,474,052 2D,558 4.84! 48,025 120,161 2,539 4.4,201 l'ERIOD 4 TOTALS PERIOD t.b-Slte RHtarntion Pcnod Sb Dired-D.eommissioni11.i::Atl1V1lie1 Demolition oCRomaintni: S1t.e D11ildincs 6,223 .,, 7,156 1,\SG 17 70,426 8,flD8 !lb.1.11 Reactor 2
75'2 752 11,658 lib.112 5b.l.l.3 ClreWo.lerYardPlping f)leac\~l\erntor GS< l,030 m" 1,184
'2,5iM 1,184 2,69-l 30,287 2,0.(9 llb.l.l.4 5\J.1]5 llb.11.6 Old Stearn Generator Stomg<' Fnci1ily Safogutrd Switchgear 2.256 126 '"l9 DO 11' 603 14' 693 1,614 11,258 l&,907 603 191 \,5U 1119,729 6b.1 l 7 Turbine l,316 14.055 1,833 H,055 llb,l.l.S Sb lJ TurbinePede!tlll StteC!~utActivities Tot11t 12,2'.!!Z " .,,'" ... 1,292 1.MiO 1,1560 5h.L2 5b.l.3 Gr11de&.latid6CllF11iile Fino.lf'PporttoNRC "
12.'783 203 203 30 l,!J.48 14.033 233 14.100 161,1)21 6b.l Subtotal Penod llbAc~Mty Co:!its 2,483 Period !lb Addltlon11I Costa .,, 2 74 368 "' 368 15,2GG 80 llh.2.1 Conueu Cfll3hi.ng 320 2,087 5b.2.2 Constrttctlon Debris Disposal l.3119 ,,. 2.0117 3,025 3,025 17,749 80 6b.2.3 51.i.::! Demohl.1011 and Site Restoration lst'Sl Subtotal Period .Sh Addition Ill Costs 1,800.
"' l38 Period !lb Co!l1ter*I CO$ls 18 138 5b.3.1 !lb.a Sm111ltOl'.ll*lloY111nca Subtoto.1 Period !lb Co111u.1ral Co~u 120 l'lO lB 138 1" 193 l8 reriod 6b Periad*Di:pondent Cosl9 6b.ol2 Prof)ertyt.nxes 7720 "' 1,158 8,877 8,877 2'2 27.GBl llbA.3 Sb.4...C lleoryeq11lpmct1tl'llnt111I Plant enrrgy bud pt 211 1.351 8,930 32 203 l,339 1,5S3 10,2!>9 l,M3 10,209 110.240 70,221 5b.4.~ Scc11ntJ StalTCoat !1,374 4,673 701 5,374 208,042 6b.4.6 DOC Sttr.ffCost 26,509 Ut!.lltyStaffCD':lt. 15,339 9,4!10 26.609 Sb4.'I 5b.4 Subtot111\ Period lib Pi>riod-Jkpt'lndt>trot Costs 7720 EXHIBIT WAC-1 000202 TLG Srn1ieu, Irie:.
Comanc/11! Ptal1 .N11dror Power Plant Doenmrn£ LlJ-1703-001, Rei>, 0 nteornmlssfoninl! Out Analyses - DRAFT ISSUE Apptndlz D, Pnct 11 of II TnbleD-1 Comnnche Penk Nuclear Power Pinnt, Unit 1 SAFSTOR Decommissioning Cost Estimate (tbousande or 2014 dollnrs) Olf-Slt"' LJ..R\V NRC Spent.Puel Site Proceued IJurial Yolu111es llurhd/ Ulllityt1nd Ac:t.1.,lty n .. cno Ro:movl'll Pac:kaglnl{ TranlJlort Proc:nalnl Dl1posal Other Total Total Uc.Term Mana1ernent ne1tor11Uon Volu1111t C!usA Cl111!1D ClnnC GTCC Proccued Cr*R Co11tractor Jndu /\ctl"lt Di!acrl tlon Cn1t C'.01t. Cnd* Co sh Cash ConUn~enr Cods Cash Com Cu.Fert Cu. Feet Cu.Fed Cu Feet Cu.Fed Wi.,Lb1, M11nhonrs Manhau11 M:i.O TOTAL PERIOD Ill! COST
"" Cnsts """' 178,770 209,682 2!!,Sl-4 16,280 5,810 44,GOS 233 44,3'12 rF.RIOD 6 TOTAI.S 22,614 JG.280 5,810 44.605 233 44372 178,770 209.682 (1,901 9U,192 TOTAL COST TO DECOMMISSION 77,835 ~0.978 5,179 4!1.,G~ol 6%1J>2[o 132.3!17 913,839 1>1!,&87 2"3,956 151,296 271,46! "' "' 1.21'1 19.38-1.21>0 6,630.266 01'AL C0$1"1'0 IH-.:COM!'dlSSION Wl'l'll IG.94~ CONTING1'~NC\': $!'13,8a~ lhouannds oC !OU Joll,.n TOTAL NRC LICENSETERJ\ONATJON COST JS G7.G9% on UUl,1587 thou5.11nds or :ou dnll11.rs SPENT 1'~EL MANAGEMENT COST IS 26. 'I"" OR: SZ"3.~S6 tlmusands or 201 ( dollars NON-NUCLEAR DEMOLITION COST IS 15.IW~ Olh S!'il,2:90 thonsi:mds or 2014 dollnra TOTAL LOW-LEVEL RADJOACTl\'E WASTE vor.U~f.E nURIEO CEXCLUDING GTCC) t7!,!99 cublc (11.t OTAL GREATER THAN CLASS C RADWASTEVOLUME GENERATED: 2,!17 cublcreot OTAL SCRAP METAL REMOVED: SB,80.1 tnnr TOTAL CRAFT LABOR REOUIREMF.N'J"S; 94.f 1~2 mnn-baurs EndN01e3:
n/a-l11dicate11th1tthlllattivatrnntth11r~da1decomml:i1Hlningu.pensr. 11
indie11tn that thlt at1Mt1 pt"rlorrut'(! by decommittioning ttd(
0 \ndltatestbl'.tdlit ~P.)Ue la !Ca! tbal1 0,?I but le llOll*J:t*n>, acellcontairnng*-*ind\cnt.eaacefO\lllue EXHIBIT WAC-1 000203 TLG San*lcu, Inc
Con10nche Ptah Nuclear Power Plant D~111nenl L11*11D3-00I, neu. O Decomm,nlonlne Cost Arud_ysil' - DRAFT ISSUE ApperidLt:D.Pnze l:of2Z TableD-2 Comanche Penlt Nuclear Power Pinnt, Unit 2 SAFSTOR Decommissioning Cost Estimate (tl1ommnds of2014 dollars) Off.Site LLltW NltC ::!111?n~Futl Site P.-oceued llur111IVohu11"" llurinlf Utllltyo.nd Activity Decvn Uc:mov*I l'11du1.glng Transport. Pr~enlng: m,pnsnl Otl1er Total Total Lie. Tenn, Ma.na.~l?nt Restor11.llon Volume Class A ClnHJ1 Clasi1C GTC<.': Processed Cran Cont.t"actor ActlTity Dencrl Uon Corl C'.nst CM ts Co1ts Cons C'.osts C'.onllnr.:cmcy Costs Costs Cnslll Costs C11.Pc1?t Cu. Feet Cu.Feet Cu. Feet Cu.. Feet Wt..Lbt. Manhours M*nhour1 Inc\ ex PERIOD b-Shutdown through Trnn1ltion
°"'"
Period lr1 DiTCd DecommiS11i011i111: AetJvitles ln.11 ln.l,l la.1.3 la.l.C SAFSTOR sito characlal'iZll.lion aurvey Pr@pare proUminnry decommluioning e03t Nutlfic*tlon of Ctsanboo of()peralHina Remove foal & aou:n:e ma~\
"'" "' II "' 83 83 ...
la.l.5 la.1.6 Noli1ic:*tion of Penn1nent De Cue ling Det1etwa'e plnnt 8Jlilcn1a & P!"OCCU w1ate lB.17 Prepare ind aubroit PSDAR Ill 17 128 128 Rcviewril*ntd.,p&apuca. II 83 bt.8 b.1-q Pcrl'orm dctttllcd nd auney " 111.110 11.lll la.II?. h.113 Eatimataby-productlnvanlm)" Endproductdeiicn11tlon Detailed by*product in~nlol')' De Go' major work aoquenco 5G 83 5G 17:? 8 (3 8 9G 198 428
*'28 1,327 la.1.U Ja.115 Perform SER nnd EA Peri'orm Sit.Specific Cost Study "' "" 198 320 320 2.l40 Acliv;ly SpeeUic1tiM11 Prtpare plant and facilities (ar SAFSTOR 41 2,100 la.lJG.1 la.116.2 Plantqtlosna "'
23Z 173 35 199 199 1,783 l,33~ ta.t lG.3 111.1.16,4 Plsnt 1U'llcturea snd boildln1>3 Wamte1nnn11gement Ill " 17 1::!8 128 128 85G 111.. 116.a 111] lG Facilit)'Rndaitadorniancy T""1 l1l 901 17 l.Ol!G '" l,03G '" 6,936 DetslledW0tk~durc1 la.1171 l!l.1172 ta.117 Plantayate,n9 F111:ilitycloseout&d11rmancy Totul 132 10 IO 20 152
" IH "" '°'
1,020 Proc:urev11cuumdryincay.stem la.Ll8 la.J J9 Drsinfile*ener;:iEGnon-cnnt.11,v1temn " le.120 la.l:Zl b,122 l>rain & dry NSSS Drt1.1nlde-el'leqiz.etontaminal.edsystem Deca11hecure eontami111tl!d ll)'atems Subtotal l'artod l* Activity Colltt 2,41G 426 2,8'42
. 2,8-12 15.361 Period la Collate-r.al Cnsui la.al Spent Fuel Capita) t1nd Tr1111.sCer 11,347 1,702 IS.0-19 13,049 la3 S11btoto.l reriod la Collateial Cosu 11.347 l,702 13.0-19 13,049 Period la Penod-Dependl'ntCo.sl*
ta.U lnsuronco 1,130 1!3 l,:M3 1,243 97 Propertyto,;;(!3 la.-1.2 h.4.3 Haallh phJ11ca 8'tlf1flhe' Ueaytequlpn:ieotrcntal 539
'i'19 m
la.t4 la.4.11 Dls11o.o1aloCDAWgenernted 13 l5 G " 30 89' 510 12,190 20 h.4.G la.4.7 l&.. 4.8 la.4:.9 h .. .UO f'lnntsntr'1budget NRCFe"' EmergeneyPlannm,Fees Spent Fuel Pool O&M ISFS1 Operallng Cosui 1,057
'91 48 "'
1'9 83 1,21s 917 489
'10 1,21!1 910 SeturttySt11(fCo!t ' "
la.4..11 la..i.12 UtilityStatrCO!lt. Subtot&I Period. I* Puiod*DepP.ndentCosis 1.:us l3 4,M3 26,G'JO "' 4,000
.5..413 6.'J:211 30,6'10 4~.426 5,22S 30,670 40,912 1,.(54 510 12,1!10 D9,071 423,400 laA.
TOTAL [IERIOD h. cosr
" 3$.SO!i 113.81:~ 14,503 GIO 12,\90 " 522,471 ILO rEnlOD tb- SAFSTOn Limltcd DECON Acllvlllea 1.a1s " " 49.368 7,601 llB.SJ7 20 537832.
Period lb Di reel Decommis!nOninr ,l.ctivitlcs D()CmllD.mlnatlonofSitoU1.1ildings lb.1.1.l Reactor 1,196 lb.l.1.% lb.113 Auslliary RadwosU Warchous<> 709 2GO 130 1,794 l,153 '"" l,153
l0,861 20,(}89 3'0
'" EXHIBIT WAC-1 G.187 000204 TLG Strvkes, lrtc.
Comanc/te Pea It Nnekar Po111~,. Plan I Dncmne"I Lll*l10J.OOJ. Reu, () Df!c:ommjnion!ng Coit AnnlJ'sls-DRAFI' ISSUE Appendir D, Page 13 of 1~ TnbloD-2 Comanche Peak Nuclear Powor Pinnt, Unit 2 SAFSTOR Decommissioning Cost Estimntc (thoU5ands o( 2014 doJIAt'S) mr.s1ie LLRW NRC SponlFuel Sito l'roeouod llurh1l Volum111 ll\lrlal/ lJtlJit.yAnd Activity De con Hem.oval 1'11.ckoging Tran1pori Pro~nlng Dlspasal Other Toto.I Toi.I Lie.Term. Management Restor.tlon Volume Ch1.99A Cinn U Cias&:C GTCC Processed Cran Contrmctor lnde,.; Act.Mt nucrl tlon Coat Cott Co*t!I Cosl9 Co1t1 Costs Costs ConllnJZenc:y Cosh C05tB Costs Costs C'lL Feat Cu Feet Cu.Fett Cu.Fed Cu. Feet. Wt.,Lbs. Mui hours Man hours O!.'COnt.aminnLion oCSito Bu11Jinpi (eonti11ued) lb.LJ.4 sar~11.rd. 1'2 7G 227 3.9GO Jb.1.)5 lb.II Fuel To111l1 703 3,169 396 l,585 1,189 4,754 1,189
'4,7!14 19,958 81.65~
lb.I S11btot1I Period lb .r\clMty CMte 3,169 l,SS5 4,754 4,154 81,655 rariod lb Additional Coata lb,'2.l Spent ruol pool i1ofot1on 1,208 1,081 B,WO 8.290 ll.1.2 Subtat11 reriod lb Atldilion111 Caso 7.208 1,081 8,200 8,290 Period lbColl*liir.IC;.su lb.3.1 Decon ~1dpment Proeeu dewn1miuionlng 111111.er waste "' 14' l,114 1,11'4
?8,570 lb.3.2 lb.3.(
lb.3.5 Sm1U tnol nll!M'an~ Speat Fuel C11pltd nnd Tnnsrer 201 53 139 170
'" 2,785 190 418 3,203 937 61 ~203 l,310 lb.3 SubtGtal Poriod lb Coll1tiiral Ccsu 18,570 1,l'i'G " 139 170 ""' 2.755 770 5.315 2.113 3,203 1,310 J>Clriod lb Period*Dependiint Costa lb.41 lh.42 DPCOn1upplll'!ll In:iuranc:e 1,552 285 ,,. 1,939 1,039 313 lb.43 Proptirtytuiet 22 "' 313 24 lb.44 lb.4.5 11t4.6 Healthphy1Jics1upp\ioa Henvyequipmentrent1l nbpO!lal ot DAW pncrsted l"
136 681 661 2211 964 19,288 31 lb.4.1 lb.4.8 Plant energy budget NRCFeea 9 300 300 Jb.-1.9 lh.410 Emerpncy rlnnnin~ Feet Spent Fuel rm! O.!:M 117 112 " II 30 129 123 229 129 m 229 lb.411 lb.4.12 ISFSl Opera1in; ~t.9 Security St.alrCoet. t,145 12 172 2 1,31?" 1,311 " 24,9i1 tb.4.13 UtJ'bty su.aeos1 6,722 LOOB 7,731 ?,731 106,720 lb.4 S11btotel Poriod lb Perio1lDrpende11t.Co:ib 1.5~~ 21 8,882 1,868 IS,091 12,12-1 004 19,288 31 131.691 Jb.O TOTALPERlOD th COST ~.897 70
" 18,875 11,303 21,880 31l6 3,569 2,274 9?,M9 Bl.M2 131,691 PERIOD tc* l'.reparntlona (or SAFSTOR Dormancy "' 160 174 "' 31.450 Period le Direct Decommiastnn111r Act1vittea lc.11 Prop are aupport equipment !or 1totllEt> 3,000 lcl 2 lc.1.3 lu&t11U i;cnainmeM prea::iure eq1111L Jin~
lnlerim a~y prior to dormancy 399
" " "'29 "' 7CO 12,561 lc.l4 Sec:11rebuUdingaCC1!11501I 133 "" '"37 953 le.Ill 11repan &111bmiti11tcrim l't'port " 37 lol Subt.ntal Penod le Activity Costa Period le Collnleral Co1ts "' "' "' t.~G8 l.~G8 lG.261 lc.S.1 P~H decomm(uionn1gwa!er WllSIG 29G 138 187 1,302 78,130 ic.3.3 Smalltool11llowaneo "' '" 9 '31 3 '"s lc.3.4 S11ent Fuol Capittl .nd Tninafer 2,811!1 422 S,238 ,,. 3,238 3,238 1,302 78,130 254 lo3 Subtotnl P"riod le Col11tel'lll Costa l'ttlod le Period-Depen.dtnl Cll!ll '"' "' IG9 "" 'l,81fi '" 4,l'il lc.4.1 lc.'412 lnauranco ProperlytA'lel 288 "' 317 317 22 lc.'413 lc.4.'41 Heollhphyaics1.ippUee Ht1vyequ!pmenlrf11tal ,,.
220 39 "' 228 lc.4!1 le.~ 6 lc.'417 DiRpo111lo!DAW generated Ph.nten*rn-liudi;::el NRCFtoela '" 40 I 9 319 9
"' llOG 119 "39 131 131 lc.'48 Emeri;::ency PtanniocFeca 113 II 12' 125 Spent Fuel Pocl O&.M lc.49 "" 232 JSF.81 Open.tinr Coste 2 lc.4 IO lc.4-11 See\1rltySlorTCo*l 1,158 174 "
1,:131 l,33] 25.243
,lc.412 UtilltyStatrCmt Subtotal Period le Period DopendonlCoate ... 6,7D5 8,918 1.019 l,406 7,815 10,810 7,815 10,439 370 l55 3,105 107,880 153,123 EXHIBITWAC-1 000205 TLG Servfoes, lnc.
Comonche P1ml1 Nuelr.or Power Plant D<1c1tment L11-1103-tJOJ0 Rev, O Deeonunluio.n ing Cost Analysis - DRAFT ISSUE Appr.nJ.i~D, Page J.t of :J!! Tnble D~2 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant, Unit Z SAFSTOR Decommissioning Cost Eseimnte (tbousands or 2014 dollars) Off.Site LLll\V NUC Sp11ntPud Slt11 l'roCC!SSCd 81*rlnlVolunu:s Uurh1ll Utllity1u1d AcUvlty D<rcon Rerut1vP.I l'*ckaging T!'11ns1111rt rr.,ceuing Dlspo!al Other Tot11l Total Llc.'ferm. Manageuu:mt Rastor*tlon Volume Clan A ClassU CJ.u.uC GfCC Processed Crnft. Contractor lndu: Actlvlt De!crl Uon Cost Cost Costs Costs Co.sts Coats CostJ Costs Cu.Feet Cu.Feet C11 Feet Cu. Feel Cu. i.~~eL Wt. l,bg, M11nhours Costs Co!!tJ Continicencv
"'"" Manbours 200 1'2 t,4Di kO rEmon l TOTALPER10DlcCOsr 6,100 2,9.fS 170 224 12,55D 2,313 16,44.9 12.811 3,608 21,(180 4.,341 81,236 191.23~
lG.620 gs,4a1 133.373 TOTALS Pl?RIOO 2a-SAFSTOR Dorm1tnC)' with Wet Sp.:nt Fuel Storngn
"' 346 '" S0,802 15,217 IOG,216 84..530 802,SgG Period 2a Dlrccl Decumm1S&fcmin1: /u:tMliea 2atl 2 ** 1.2.
2a.l 3 2fl.14 2a.U Qu11.rterlyl11.spectfou Semi*annu11l envirllnmtintal s1uvey Prerarerei.lorta Bitut!linouaruofrcplacement Malnll!n11.11c:oauprliea l,24G 187 13' 1,433 608
. 1,433 693
Z11l SubtGtol Period 'h.AtlivitJ Costa "'
1,800
"' 2..126 2,126 Period 2a Coll11ter11l Cosr.
211..3.I Spont Fu'1 C11pll11l and Tr11.ll.9.for 39,9(1.t 5,995 45,959 4G,959
,211.3 Subtotal Period 211. Ccllaceral Cost9 39,964 5,99& 45,959 *1JS,959 Poriod2aPariod-DcpendeutCC!!llll' 2e..4.l Insurance 2,6'l2 267 2,939 2,403 '30 2a42 211.4.S 2o..4..4 211.45 2a.4.G Property ~aires Healthphy6iCDfllJPPlk!s ~alofDAWzen.erated Plnntenergybude'!t NRCf'eca 8Ga 20 23 350 1,060 216 126 IOG 8 ..
l,0'18 1,IGG 1.078 1.100 485 018 18,3l!G so Em11rceney Planning FeWI 081 2o..47 20..'118 2a.4.!'.I SJ!(lnt Fuel Pool O&M lSl'SIOperatiagCnst1 3,15CI 190 "' 90 20 987 3,6429 219 3,0:?9 219 2e..41D Sewra11cE1 11.235 1,685 12:,920 l2,fl20
!11--111 Security Stnfl'Cosl 18,124 2.719 !?0.842 3,516 17,320 395,200 l!n..4.12 Utility Sll!.IT Coal 21,8!12 3,284 25,1713 3,144 21,(32 328.640 2a.4 Subtotal Period "'21 Period-Dependel'll Costs cosr 863 20
" Go.rn1 9,035 70,3GG 12,832 57,534 918 18,3~G ** 723,840 2a.O TOTAL PERIOD 211 PERIOD Zb-SA.FSTOR Donuancy w1t11 Dry Spent F11el Storagv '" 20 " 102,18-t 15.358 118,451 14.9~8 103,493 918 18,3SG 30 723,840 Perloil 2b Dirl!d Decommissioning Al:tivltle9 2b.ll 2b.J.2 2b.I.3 2b.l 4 2b.l.6 Quarterly lnspcetiOl'l Semi-annual environrnentlll aurYe)'
Preparereporta Bituni.ino11arootreplReement Mainten1111<< auppliea 13,l!GI 0.896 1.989 1,474 IS,250 7,371
. 15,250 7,371 2b.l Subtouil Poriod 2h.Activity Costa 10,\58 3,463 22,621 22,621 Period 2b Colb1ter.J Cmtl
!b.3.l Spen\ Fuel Cripital and Trans!er 12,121 1.818 13,tl<IO 13,94.0 2b.3 Subtotal Period 2b Collltcra\ Cn'l.9 12,121 1818 13,040 13,940 Period 2bPeriod*Dependcnt. Cost.a 2b.4.1 2b.42 2b.U Inc.urante Propm7tnsee Health phyait! sorplie.s 4,23-t 24,.&44 3,'12.8 ,,,
2,4-14 26,888 4,101 2:S,572 4,101 l,316 l.0~9 IS,293 6.293 2b.4A 21.i.4.5 DiapoulcrDAWgtinernlcd Plant energy budget 95 15 Ill 4,486 613 U59"' '" 5,169
<l,385 87,G9G 143 li!b.4Ji NRCF"' 10,857 1.086 ll,942 11942 2b.47 Emorgency Plannine, F~e9 0,M~ 10,<!9!) 10,499 2b.4.IS 2b.4.9 JSFSI Operating Cmilll Severn nee 2,027
.1,714 401 2,331 3,121 2,331 3,121 2b.4.10 2b.4.lJ.
2b.4 2b.O S~cunty Su fr Cast Uti1UySt11I'l'Coat Subtotal Period. 2b Period*Depen1lent Cost!I
'l'OTAL PERIOD 2b COST ~.:23-4 4,23-t ..., 15 15 Ill Ill 7ll,505 156,491 l89.7llG 221075 11,3'.!G 8,474 27.JSO 32,42.l 86.831 M,9G5 221,$2 251,952 37.4H 39,8.U 120,li84 152.2!15 49,411 2~,124 !>I.BOS 105,748 4.385 4285 87696 8761lG 1,859,280 88&,S'll 2,744,651 "' 2,744..651 EXHIBIT WAC-1 TLG Servlcu, Inc.
000206
Document Lll-IUJJ-001, Reu, 0 Camondie Prnl1 Nuclear Power Pinnt Appendix D, Pate lS nf 22 Dtcammissio11U1c CostAnol)'sis-DllAFT ISSUE Tnble D-2 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant, Unit 2 SAFSTOR Decommissioning Cost Estimnto (thousnnds 0£ 2014 dollnrs) UU\ity and i*~:::d ~c~,..~,~.-,.:c:"'~~~~,.,;.'~"-";"~iii"1:";':"-;c~-G'°T"'c"'c~ l'~;;!:~~d Off-Site LLRW NUC Spl'nll-'u!'!I Silt1 1 Decon Removol Packaging Transport Procuislng Dhposal Toto! Tut.a.I Lie.Term. Mnnngeanenl. Re1loratlCJn Cr11l'L Contractor Activlt)' lndt* J\cti'WUV Desr.rl Uon Cost Con Coats Costs Cnste Costs C".ontlnl!!fn c.,,,, Cri10 Co1ll Co1t1 Cu Feet Cu. F~et C11. FacL Cu J'eet CU- F*et Wt.. Lb1. Mnnhriur1 Mnnhours l'EnIOTl ::.c
SAFSTOn Tlor111nncy without Spent 1'"'uc1 Stomgc Period :?c D:ired Oecommtu1c1ning Aclivill~
2c.11 Quarr.erly ln~pceho11 Zc.12 &!1nl-o.11nunle11vlronmeu1rila11rvcy
?c.13

!cl4

?c.1-5 21:.l PrPpnrerepom B1tuminou1 roclnp1.:i.c11\nenl r.f11inten11nce1uppbea Subtotal Pttlod 2e Activity Cost!!
783 1,131 117 20> 901 1,336 SOI l,33ll Period 2c Period.Jkpendent Cnsls 1,373 l,GIO 1,:510 2".41 l111ur11nee
'2e4Z ProperfJ la:itl!IJ l?e.ol.3 2c.-IA.
2.c.4 ~ 2e.4.6 2~.4 7 Jle11.lth phyHai 1uppllc11 Dl1p1J1111l dllAW renernted Pl11.nlenel'IYb111llJ(lt NRCFt"e1 Serun1,.St11R'C0t:1t 2*12 617 1.921 61 28B 2 303 2,20!1 303 15 305 2.20~ 248 '4,!l60 39,21-1 2.0~G 307 2,3:13 2,3!13 33,358 2c.48 Ub1*tySt*CfCo9t Si:ibtotiil Period 2c Period-Dependent Cosl.ll
'" G,442 91' 7,616 7616 "' '"" 'i2,573 72,573 2'.D TOTALPF.RlODZcCOST 242 ~.339 121 7,57-1 1,123 48,902 8,!IS2 3115.3515 8,952 178,lU. 20~.240 5,551 111,012 181 3,5-11,064 PEIUOTl 2 TOTALS PERIOD ~t1
Ile.!!cUvate Site 1nlfowln1J SAFSTOD Dornmney ID
"' 330.993 Pll>riod 3" Direct DttommLPloni11g Adlvitir.a ll 83 550 3nll l'l'epl\le preUminllry deccnnmbsioning cost 72 l.969 Ja.1.2 311.1.3 311..l.4 Rovtc'lllplDnttl.,p&*pcai.
Pot!ormdaltlil(ldrad1urvey F.ndprodud.dcKriptiora 25G 5G "a " G4 428 3.o.lli 811.,1.6 D!!l:lilPdby*prodnctiaventoey rlelinemnjor'llorkmequenco " 417 m 11 63 .,.83 83 470 198 3,210 1.327 h.11 Ptrl'orm SER and EA 198 2i8 320 320 2,1.CO "18 Perl'onn S1to-Spoctfie Cost Stud1 l,753 3n 1.9 Pttp*refsubmit Lieense Tenninabon l'lan 228 262 262 311.110 Rt>teive NHC e.pproHI 0Cterm1n1t1on plnn ActlvityS11ed!ic11lion11 47 3.1114 3!1.l ll 1 R11-activo18plant&.ternf1MBryfacililic!I 410 61 411 3al11.2 31,111.3 Salll4 Pl11nt1ye1cn11 Rear:t.orintern*ls Re1tlor\les&el 232 3" m ."* 35
"'32 "'"51 27 1,783 3,039 2,78:t 214 3a.ll1.5 Biologicalahiold 173 " 1119 1,335 311..llt.6 Ste11tngenentar11 3*1117 3a.l ltB Reinforcedconcnot11 MalnTurbl11e 89 22 13 101 26 "
20 '" 171 171 3.a.l lUl Mn.inConden"ra 22 3 100 1,3311 lA.11110 Pl11nletructur~&huiblincs 173 190 100 311.lllll Waderoanage.ment
"' * "', 29' 29 ""
3A.11112 311111 F1cilily&1itoc~oul TlllAl OD 2,2!0 332 2,238" '" 17,024 Pl1nnmi: & Sile P1eparo.tl011.1 1,027 153 311.112 3n.I !3
JR.JU Pnipuediam11nllingaeq11tnce.
Plnntprep.&temp,aveet Doslg:ri tuat1<f clean-up ayatem 133 3,000 78 "'" 20 3,.f.5() 89 3,450 89 599
?,6.U

la.115 la.116 a..1 R1uu1g/ConL Cnl?I Envlpsltoollng/ctc.
Procurecukalliner11&contU11ers Sohtotnl Period ll AclMty C~le 2,300 9.3~0" "' l,401 10 2.6U 10.741 " 10,437" reriocl 3n Additional CG5t1 13,0i2 4,G-40 311..U Sita ChanctentAtinn 2,153!1 7G2 a301 S,SOI 2.539 762 3,301 3,301 13,0-12 4,640
"'*' Snblat111Periad3a.Addiliona1Costs EXHIBIT WAC-1 000207 TLG Sen*fces, In.e.
Doc:umenl LJJ*I101J.00l, Reu. O Appendix D, Pac1. lfi of zz ComonC'hl!' Penh Nuclco r- Pou>er- Plm1e Dt!comml#sicnin& Cost Ancd,sis- DRAFT ISSUE TableD-2 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Pinnt, Unit 2 SAFSTOR Decommissioning Cost Estimate (thousnnds or 2014 dollars) Utilitynnd llurhal Volmuc11 Ilurial/ Spentl/uel Sile Proccned GTCC Proccsacd Craft Contractor NllC Volume Clan It. C1.iaull Clo.ssC Olf.Slte LLlt\V Manageruent Reatorntlon Cu. Fed \VL,Lbs. M11.nhoun Mllnhours Other Tota.I Total Lie. Teml. Cu.FHt. Cu.t'cd Cu.Ped Cu Feeot Paelu:r.glnlf Transpcrt Prottulng Dlspon.1 Cosl.9 Co'tl o~o Removd ContlngenC\' Costs Coatl Co1lt1 Cottll Costs C'.otilt Activity ActlvltT 0Dscrl Uon eo.. Cost Co't" Index Period Sa Perlod*Depimdcnt Ccsu lla.41 3a.4.2 lnauraoco "PropertyUllet .., 548 55 112 111 602 602 97 895 m 0,613 16 31.4.3 a..u He11llhphyaica1uppliH Heavy eq11lfltD1lnt renlnl Dispo*11l ot DAW ganer11wd 779 10
" 1,C:l7 169
29 J,21!'i "
l,2Hi 35,728 aa.4.1; aa.4.G 3a.4.7 Pia Pt en em budget NRCPeu 332 1,7-18 " 262 1,8~ aGG 2,010 14.221 2,010 14,221 9,613 IG 200,229 231!1,!l.57 311..4.8 39.~ 9 St!curitySla[fCost Utllity&11.l1Cost l."2::!.0 lO 12 12.366 16,138 2.GOS 19,!193 19,9113
"' 9,Gl3 13,058 271,714 3a.4 S11btot..I Period 3n Period-Dependent Co~tfl TOTAL PERIOD 3a COST l,220 lO 12 2.8,018 4.'iG8 3-t.,03G 33,731 304 3a.D rERtOD 3b-Decommlsalonlrig Pnpnrl\tlon1 Prrtod lb Direct Decommi~ion111g ActMti~ 2,<Y.!G 30 1.010 263 39 302 "' 618 Detalled Warlr. Pnxedu"11
lb.111 3h.l.l :!
3b.ll.3 Pl11ntsy11terna Ileecwtlnternllls Remaiuinf bui1dh~p 139 75 06 21 ll 8 8 IGO BG
!GO 22 " 428 428 Jb.1.1.C 3b.1U CRD cooling 11Uembly CRD hDUtinp & ICI labl-1 lncorelnstrumru,11tton 06 202 8
90 232 6' 232 38 H54 193 Sb.11.6 3b.l.l 7 nuctorv11ucl 67 lO 4 77 28 " 29 Sb.Ll.8 Fscilityclosoout G7 10 77 77 1,969 428 Sb.11.9 Sb.1110 3b.l.l ll Miinlleshieti!1 Biological1hleld Sto1mrener11.tot"ll 255 13 100 32 32 166 GGB GGB ST 100 1.16B Reinforccd.concreto 3b.l.l 12 81 13 160 17 1,16B 3b.l.11S Mtit1Turllln0 m 157 Sb.11 14
*3b.ll.lfi Mun Condon1<1rs AuxaHaryliuilding 1,792 29 260 "'
2,0Gl 1'1 1,601 17 400 13,SOO 13,800 3b.l l Hi Ru;et11rbuiJdinJ 269 2,061 l,6Gl Total 1.792 Sb.I.I 3b.l Si:abtotlll ~riod :lb Actlvity Coet11 1,1U 1,114 Period 3'b Cotl1teral CO'lll Sb.~l Deconequi(lment 969 l,G03 "' 1,843 1,265 t,8"3 1,265 3b.3.2 3b.3.3 DOCata((re\ocali11nei:pt"nBt'S Pi11e .:uttinl' equipment S11btotal Period 3b Collatcn1I c;o,u 069 1,100 1,100 1.,G03 "' 4,223 4,223 3b,3 Period 3b reriod-Depeodent Cnsts 39 34 7 37 3'i3 " 373 DeOQllellpp\lee 8b.".J 3b.4.2 lnsunnte Propert1 taxes Gl' 300
$.373 3b.4.3 3b.4..4 3b.4.Ji Hoalthphystui11uppbe11 Heo\')'oqu!p1nentrental '" "2 80 lG 016 Ol6 269 3b.4.6 3bC.7 DirpoaaloCDAWgenu111ted.
Ple.ntener1;1budf11t "" 11 133 1,019 '" "' 1,019 18,109 43,M3 3b.4.8 3b.49 NRCF~* SeocurltyStarrCmt nocsincr<:.ost 3,355 G,2G& 563 9'0 3,858 7,208 8,858 7,208 269 5,573 101.480 lG2,93T 3b.4.IO 1,842 14.121 lf,121 Utility.StalJ"Cost 11,597 11,373 176,737 llb.411 90 639 3bA Subt.Ollll Periud Sb Pe-riod Oepende11t Coat.I 99!1 1,73!1 H,991 2,662 20,4.05 20,005 <OO 70< 149 HS85 13,0GG CCS.4!11 3b.O 1"0TAL PERIOD 9b COST 5'1,<141 53.737 19 4.3,009 T,430 999 2.965 l6 PER100 3 TOTALS EXHIBIT WAC-1 000208 TLG Serviees, lnc.
Coma.nrlie Peak Nuclenr Power Plane Document L11*1703-00J, Rev. 0 Drco111rnl1doning Cost Anal1r1is*DllAFT ISSUE Appendi: D, Paze 17 of ZZ TableD*2 Comanche Penk Nuclenr Power Plant, Unit 2 SAFSTOR Decommissioning Cost Estimate (thousands or2014 doUnrs) Off-Site! LLRW NltC Spent Fuel Sile l'roc:cssad DurlalVoluiues llurh1.ll Utilityond Activity n~. Tic111oval Pacluag\nl![ Trnnaport Procen:lng Dl!iposa.I Other Tata.I Totnl Lie. Tenn. M*n11rement. RestornUon Volume CluaA Cta1sll Cl.r11C GTCC Proeeued Crnrt Contraetor 1ndei: Actlvltv D1;>u:rl Uon Cost Cmrt Costs r.oru Coth: Corti Cog ts C:nnt.in enr:v C'.rutts Cost! Costs Cons Cu. Feet Ctt.Fel!t. Ca.Feet Cu. FC!et Cu, Feet Wt., Lbs Mnnhours Manboun: PERIOD h
Lnrge Cn1npommt. Re1nOYnl ruiod 4D Dited [)ccommiJsionin!' ActiViliU Nucleu Steam Supply Sy~wrn Removal RenctorCoob1atPiping 3,14 765 87.472 2.4*19 4*1.ll 4a.ll2 Pm.surlier RelierTanlr "* " JG 1
1'0 70 34' 329 SG,553 596 17 63 117 117 411.11-S Re11etor Coolllnt Ptunpa &. Mo1U1':i 19 G1 69 201 1,225 1,9>!3 l,943 7,231 792,800 2.801 ao 1 3,-145 240,608 1,!126 150
-lnll.S ofn.115 l'nlU\lrber Steam Oenontora CRDMsnCb/Servi~e Strutture Ramcval ""
37 3,383 191 1,375 21< 101 1,376 "" 5,992 210 2.111 1303 l-l,901 l,303 14,901 41,815 4,B!i2 3,144,067 17!!.025 20,508 5,H2 1,500 4a.ll.6 ol*.Ll 7 ol/\.11.8 ReaetorVeusellntern11la VUllel & lnterr111le OTCC Diriposal 40 2,t11" t:?,181 16 377 306 3,672 10,0G7 2ae "' 6,917 l,li10 977 23,939 11,577 917 25,939 11,1577 2,437 501 337 2,217 335,08 425,01% 20,100 936 9,436 960,876 20,100 4*.ll,9 4*.11 Re11c1orVeu!!I 1'ot11ls 171 4,727 11016 1,481 15,761 123 2,208 4,310 26,367 233 475 6,137 18,118 17,015 74,llG 17,0Ui 74,116 'l0,310 SOI 337 2,21'7 6,201.732 '13,523 "' 4,202 Ri:moYal i;ifM11jor Equipment 41112 41l,l.3 MalnTurbine/Ocnerntll?' M1dn Condeneers '" 110 135 " 29 .,,"' 207 377 1,108 1,977 1,108 1,977 4,574
.5,643 302,355 372.990 6,9!19 22,781 C11se11din1: C08!s from Clonn Duild{n~ Domolltion 41114.1 Read or 1,097 160 1,262 1,262 13,!l9G 4el4.2 4n.14.3 Auxiliary SnftgU11rd 521 119 "
18 ,,. 099 599
)36 6,783 1,1588 4Ll '"'
b.U Fuel Tot.u.ls "' 2.2~2 77 338 '" 2,M9 '" 2,589 6,6li2 29,0lD DlspoaalofPlantS)'lltoma
-t11l5.l 4.. Ui.2 4a.1.5.3 41.l.M AuxiliaryF&edwater(irumlaled}
Aunl.i11rySte11m Boron Rre,*cle(i119u\11tcd) Boron Rtc}'1!1e(unln~11.latl!d) 117 32 322 166
"'I 17 7<9 376 353 17 12 185 1,881 13' 1881 134 13,'l~
3,420 437,922 8,924 219,726 2l789 14,312 3,676 191 8,307 4a l.&.fi 4a.l.5.6 4*Ui.7 Boron Thermal Rerenel'lltion (Insulated) Daron Thennal Regeneration (unlnsulnted) Cnboa Diol<lde On* 201 l 10 6 137 30 89 0 I"
"' 1 108 465 U15"' 79,910 1,851 5,034 20 4*Ui.8 4a.Ul.D CberniClll & Volume Control (inaulat~)
Chemical & Volume Control (llni11.iiuh1ted} 177 470 23 93 l9 88 420 69 361 l,236 361 I,236 779 3,774 61,634 24.5,3156 4,3'16 U,D61
*h.. l.fi.lO Cht'miet1IF&ed " '"' "" " 421 in.16.ll Chennc*I Feod RCA 9 3 15 9'2 2!53 4e.15.12 Chill!!dWall"r-SRrety 5 I Chilled W11ter. Safety* HCA 471 31,253 2,232 4*.15.13 4a.lfi.l4 Chlorine CireulntmgWater 12 323 " 39 2 "' "
371 369 10,429 4a.J.IU6 4a,J.5.16 Component CocUng Weter l,OU 25 "* 820 371 28 4,.9BG 28 17,78G 1,176,681 763 26,319
.CaUS.17 <tsl.5.18 .CnJ5.J9 Co"1f'OU&nt Cooling Water - RCA Condeos11te(in.,,ulated)
Condennte (uninsulated) "' 112
"' " 2,01:!
20 17 4,386 129 '" 129 4,373 3,541 IOI 3,327
*b..15.20 Conden1111le Polishing Condenxr Vacuum & WAter Doi Priming " 120 120 2,0l'l 411.u.21 9 73 73 8 1,800 -411.1...5.22 E11:tnetinn Ste*m Feedw1ter 220 "' "
253 '1'084 4R.l.IS.23 411.lli.24 411.l!i.::!5 Feodlll'alM RCA G!!aetator&.Ex.ciler I " "' ""0 253 288 I 288 I 1,250 82,654 l,!!02 39 Oeoer11.tor G~ Coohng I 247 4a.l 6.26 9 4n.l..5.27
-IR.l.~.28 4a.15.2!t 4a.Ui.30 Ganeutor Primary Wuter Oe11eratt1rSe11IOil JJrihogenGu Malo Steam Reheat & Steam Dump 1
8 I 0 5 63 42 8 2 5,Gn 373,381 1,746 218 1,136 10,542 (a.l.6,31 Main Stenm Reheat.&. Steam Dump* RCA Main Turbine Lube Oil 44 '" " '" '" l.Sl6 l,51G 50 1,383
.fn.1.6.32 7 ~a.I 6 33 Milin Turbine Oil Purifie11tJon as l3 98 2,663 41.16.M Niuo;en Gne I 0 I l 39 <la. l li.35 4nlll.3S 4aJ.5.37 4aJ.5.:18 Oi:11:en011.11 PostAccldt>nlSRmpllng Prouu S11mpling {uninsul11ll'd)
ReadorConhnl 103 8 9 l 0 15 0 8 43 ,,...I 13 13 4l 1 15 177 "' 11,691 35,397 222. 2,542
.ia.15.J!t Reser1oir Makeup Wat.er Resenoir Re~urn Wawr 87 18 100 100 2,700 2,095 <11116.*m 4111.5.41 Reeerv01r Service Tower 64 10 l "II II 308 EXHIBIT WAC-1 000209 TLG Sen.tic-l's, Ine.
Comanche Pt.et11 N11dl!<1r Po11ier P/<1nt Dociimenl LJJ-1703-001, Rtu, 0 Drcommlsdoning Cosr Aranly1iJ - DUAFI' ISSUE Apptndil: D, Pare 18 of :s Tnble D-2 Comnnche Penk Nuclcnr Power Plant, Unit 2 SAFSTOR Decommissioning Cost Estimntc (thousn11ds o[ 2014 dollnrs) OU.Site LLltW NllC Spent Yue! 8itt1 l'rol!essed llurlo!Vnlun1es lluriall Uclllt:r 1md ActiVlt)' De can Removal r.11.ebging THn1pcirL t'roCC!srlng DhpoaRI Other Total Total Lie.Term. 1.f.,ll111gl!n1ent Rcstara.llon Volume Clan/I. Clo.esll Cliui1C GTcc lJroceued Cran Contuctor h1dcx AcUvltyDe!icrl lion Cosl Cost. Co*" Cost.5 Co1t1 Costs Costs Cir-ntln ene eo... Costs Costs Costs Cu. Feet Cu,Fel't Cu.Feet Cu Feet Cu.Feet Wt.,LM. Manhours Manhours Diaponl nrl'lant.Syeleam. (conlirmt>d)
.fa.1.5.42 Re1idu11l He11t RemnYn\ 209 147 30 661 237 128< 1.:!8.f !S,833 386,272 IS,70-l SafctylnjecUon{iuulatetl) Ill !GG -ta.1.6.43 S7 ' 7' "',, "' 1,4.6:1 00,956 2,765 4a.l.5.44 SafetylnjcctiMluninsuhill'dl 35:.! IGG 37 813 313 1,G82 1,682 7,406 4'15,2:?0 9.419 4*1.5..4.15 ..ia.1s.<10 U.1.5.47 SecondaJY Planl S1unp\ing S1c11m Gcnar11tor B\o.ofd_.n & Cleanup Turbine Eleetrohydr Cntrl (lri11ul11ted) 30 "" 20 155 SD 155 30 1,040 <l.2G5 4o..l.!IAS Tudiill.fl EloctrohJd:r Cntrl (u11inau\n1ed) tB "u "'
3 bUl.49
-tau.~
Turbine Gland Sl(!11m & Dr11.lns
'Turbinellc.11.tulJraint 35 360 07 437 437 1,133 12,2~6 4a.l.15.51 '!'urblne Pb.ct Coaling: (in1ul:ned) 17 3 20 20 4a.l.15,62 -4a.J.5.53 4&U.6-t 411.1.5.615 .fa.1.5.56 Tur\dne Planl Coo1ing (unio11uln1ed)
Turbines (HIGH
WW) (i1111ul11ud)
Turbin~ (H10H
LOW) (unin11ul11~cl)
Venl Chilled Water - tlon Safety Vent Cbillhl Waler* Non S11CclJ' RCA 13* 76 I<! 20 576 21 II I 2 15S l,62G 11 87 l,6:?G 158 17 G
&7 5,088 331,089 4.420 156 2.423 30* 13.000 4a.1.6.!!o1 -4a.l.5 We1ringhmueProce11aln,trurnent11 1otal.t 7.318
1,1510 0
320 0 6,971 2 9.526 I 1!~615:1 7 16,825 7 2,830 62,132 16 1.034 4,07G,736 201,:.iss 99
'la.1.6 Stnrrold.ing:in support ofdeoommisilloniog 1,16:1 28 131 328 1,(i58 1,658 1,157 75,495 38,951 Subtotal Period ~11 Activity Costs 171 22.70!1 17.554 Z,587 34,624 m 22,893 2,880 143.817 337 2.217 u,o:ro.:no Period fo Add.ition11.l Cost9 101.103 98,213 501 370,571 4,202.
4a.2.l Remedial l\Clion Surveyi:s 1,854 400 1,7GO 1,7GO 24,G59 4n.2 Subtct.11.l Perii;wl. ..in Additional casts !3M 406 1,'iGO 1,760 24,G59 Period .Ce Collateral Co:sui 4a.3.l 4a.3.8 ProC(!..llS deC011lltli6siOhlt1gWalMWU!11 Smallloolallowsnce OGO 10 12
" 39 9
299
. 51 269 so 90 5,375 17 411.3 Su!Jtntal Period <la CoJlalrral COSI.!I ° IO 12 10 " 350 321 30 90 6,375 17 Pt-rind -'la.4.1 4a.4.2 4.a.4..3 ta Perbi*Depcndenl Cos.ta Decon*upplle,,
ln1utonce PrD]lertytuca 76 795 19 70 10 874 11* 88 87<1 103 II 4n.4.4 He11.lthphyaicatt1pp\lca 2,605
-4a.45 llilllyY eq1lipm.ent rental 3,290 '"
3,257 3,783 S,257 3,783
*h-t..6 4a..S7 48.4.8 b.4.9 4a.410 Ifu;posr.lo(DAWgnnrrnted Plant enern budr;ct NRCFoee
_Liquid Radw.111te Pr<<eSSlni EqolpmenUSuvices Sewnt.yStafrCoSl 113 18 152 1.101 497 476 2,M2 41 179 71 311 t,870 311 1.310 2,023 5,211 104,222 170 381 51,000 411 . .f,.ll DOCStafTCDllt 13,Ml 2,031 15,572 15.572 170,726 4a.-U2 UtilitySt..airCO$l 19,97S 2,991 22.975 22.,976 311,760 Subtot&l Period -111 Period Depondont COAL! 70 5,8:15 113 IS 132 30,123 7,0011 52,BGO 52,349 II 5,211 104,222 170 :i34,HG
'111.0 TOTAL PE!UOD 4a COST 247 28,tl!i5 17,677 2,617 3-1.771 40,!152 30.35£ Ui5,57~ 152,703 2,872 MD,118 001 337 'Z,217 11.139.910 3915,417 ~38.fi48 I'F.RlOD o&b-Slte De con lllmin.a.Uon Period -tb D~t. Derommiuionin& Activitie11 -lb.l.l RcinoYl!l!JlenLfuelrackl! '" " 137 IG 3'4 23G 1,012 1,012 a0<2 201,065 83&
Di.apllllll o{Plont. Synoma 4bl.2.1 4b.L2.2 4h12..3
/\ui:iliaJ)' Dulldlag: HV AC (in!Ulll!cd)
Au*ili:uylluUdin~ llVAC(unir15ulal.cd) Batt Rrne & Misc Uncontrolled Atc..1-IVAC "'"3 II
" "n 29 " 0 184 3
184 G3B 36,281 42.174 '" 1,291 91 4b.1.2.'i Compressed Air - Jnetr Air (in~ulated) 3 0 8 4b.l.H 4b.l.2.G Compreesed Air* Jn5trumont J\ir - RCA. O Conipre3SlldAir*l1U1trumoot.AiJ RCA(u " 128 20' 14 15 18 78 121 8,0(;1 " 1,178
-tb.1.27 <b.t.2.8 Compreucd Air Service Mr Camptt.9lled Air* Servtta /JJ"I- RCA 27 1:rn IS GG 53 278 31 21&
m " 049 083 43.0-19 2.977 4b.l.29 ib.J 2,10 Ccmprea&ed Air* instr Air{aninsubted) Containment lbtche.1 39 IG 2 0 II
" 1 6 "'"
30 35 " 93 38,703 8.191 3.284 l,267 M9 4b.l,2..11 Ccntainmonl Hydrogen Purge HVAC 3 4b.1212 4b.l,Z.13 Ccnt.ainmcnt Spny Containmcinc Vontilii.tlon UVAC (unl1u1ul) 377" IS 334 10 G9 a
"57 1,507 " !il5 165 2,801 '"
2,801 078 13.318 38,2G2 881,051 1.312 10,l~S
.(b.1214 ContlliJUn11nt Ventibltoo HVAC(intiulnted) "
19'
"' ~1G 23 121 121 S,G23 33,291 713 127 "' 1,211 1,211 371,975 EXHIBIT WAC-1 4,753 TLG S,.n,kP11, ln~.
000210
Comnnchc Pral' Nudcar PmP~r Plant Docur11cnt LJJ-1103-00I, RtP. 0 Dtcommlaalorilnt: Coat Anal)'t1f1- DllAF'l' ISSUE Appendix D,Page 19of Z2 Tnblc D-2 Com1mche Pcuk Nuclenr Power Plnnt, Unit 2 SAFSTOR Decommissioning Cost Estimate (tltottsl\nds or 2014 dollnrs) Uff*Slte LLRW rrnc SpeMFu*I Sito Proceued llorlalYoll*nh*ll Uurh1I/ Uti11ty11..11d Acllvll)* De con Removal Paclu*ging Trans-port Prnc11nh11J Tl11pou.I Other To tat Toto! Lio. Term. Mann1C,m1tnt Ro11loratlon Volume Ciu1A tla1111i clauC GTcc ProceHed Craft Contractor lodes ActivitvDe1cri tion Cost Cn1l Cos ls Cosur Cosi11. Costs Cons Contlni;t"en~ r:n,ts Cn11ts Cosh Co11t1 Cu.Feet Cu. Feet Cn, Fe.t Cu. Feet Cu. p,ct WL,Lb1. Man\iouu llfanho11rs Diepoul orPlnol Systenu (eonlinucd) 4b.1 2 HS Control Roum llVAC 38 l,H4 4hl.2.16 Domincnliud & RCS Makeup W:iter 120 18 ' 41 138 " l3S 3,662 4bl.2.17 4b.i,2.18 4b.l.2.19 4h.l.2.20 0..11Unaraliud & RCS Mnhup We~r - RCA D11tt111l Cun&. Atnri1it1rie.s (inenleted) Dit'S81 Gen & Au.~liari68 (11n1na11lated} Dieeel Cet1oeratw Fnel Oil 73 12 G " 12 205 174 ll l 917
., 7 917 13 1
Z2S3 149,3!18 9,6.fl 180 2.,SH
~h.l.2.21 Die110J Room HVAC l "* 111 4b.l2.22 o!.b.l.2.23 4b.12.24 4b.1225 4b.l22CJ Elect.rleal*Cleen Electrical* Conl.!tminaled Eleciriul - Coni..mh:u11ed l'HB EJutrical*RCA Elemic1d- RCA FHB 1,8'5 2G8 62 2,403 82 11 2 !JO 20 131 1,176 2.Ill 687 U7 G,f-48 1,206 681 117 6,148 2,111 2,013 412 18,.liJl 3,87!1 136,!J97 27.200 l,22!U57 2!>8,408 5G,765 6.612 1,504 5g,311 10,214 '"" 1,206 4b.12.27 PirE"Protection H5 14,8fl8 4b.1.2.28 ~b.l 2.29 flN~tlon-RC.A Fuel Dwldinr INAC (in.e11l11,tt>d) 1GG 22 188 3G "i81 411 '"
2,182 2,182 '" 6,893 41iG,G05 18,!m'i 4b.12.SO Fuel Dlu]din( HVAC (unlnsuleted) 28 ' 6 l 28 S3 13 16 10 2*t8 lG,403 19,l!ll 4b.123l
.ih.12.82 Fuel11andlinr Leak RP.ti 1\111t
4 l
I 0 0 1
*
17 17 GI 4,040 2,261 ""
110 4b.l.2.33 4b.12.34 Mile Plant 1-IVAC (inaulatlld) Ui1r Plant HVAC (11nln.sl'llalt'd) 27 ' 0' 11 2 11 2 72 31 950 4b.l 23?1 MuicellnnL'OUtEqulpment G 20 20 75 4,!172 157 4b.12.3G Olli~ & Servlco HVAC
3 3 B<
4b.12.37 Potnbl*Water 62 71 71 1.892 4b.l.2.38 l'rimRry Pl11nt HVAC (in5'11nte1\)
" 12 ' 161 570 37,6.112 l,019 4b.U!.S9 }'rimory T'lent UVAC (tminsulatl'tfl 92 27 HS" 161 1,812 8G,6D2 2.144.
3 4h.I.2.40 RediallanMonitoriDg I 100 4h.12.41 Safeg11arde Duildsng HVAC (hm1Jat~ 16 174 11,493 311 4b.l 2A:Z 5a(1?g1111rd!i Building HVAC (uninaulotad) 42 122 122 27,021 1.080 4b.U.43 SorviceWnter ServicoWa~r.RCA ,.,** 67 67 1,882
-tb.U.44 116 " 6,178 342,406 5,48{1 4b.12.45 Se.ar:c Treatment 22 '" 21' 3
1,151 1.UI 678 Spent Fuel Pool Cootinr: & Clennup 4b.J 2.46 Turbin' Duil1ling IIVAC (inaiilaled) '" 215
" 916 4'4 2,416 2,4.16 S,090 635,7!10 19.899 92 4b.12.H 3 0 3 4h1.2.48 4b.l.2.49 <lb.12.00 TurbiM D11\ldinr:HV/l.C (nninsul11ted) tJPSHVAC Venta&Dtalna Vmta& Drains RCA 2G l
60 II 0 4 30 l 30 40 l 140,433 1,092 10,24.5 414 2,118 4b.l.UJ 4b.U *.52 4b.12..5S Waat.e>.fonagemeot(ineuJntecl) WflfJt.e Management (unirnubted) 12 128
"' 171 19 896 147 147 -4,043 .tb.l.2.M WHt.el'rlXeatingGa1(l1ninziub1ed) 87 35
18! 72 382 l,G&B 105,746 2,376 4li.l.2..llG 4h.1.2.~
Wult! Procualng Liquid (insulated) Waot.e Procee11ing Liquid (uninsulated) 100 6 122 100 223 520 l,186 520 1,JSG 1,075 4,.5CJO 71,288 2-68,8SS 6.396 9,097 4b.l.2 *.li7 4b.12.li8 olb.12.!U 4.b.1.2 WasteProct11\ngSolld Waur Treatment (lnsubted) WaterTnatmanl (uninanbttid)
'rotalt1 '91 11,473 1.957 9
430 2 9,SS8 19 5.102: 100 G70 28,323 100 24,113 67fl 4,2!0 82,1112 28,871
.5,472.829 307,216 1,780 18,'716 4b 13 Sa.ffold1ng in st1pport of deeommf.!Slcmni: l.748 42 ,., 492 2,483 2,48G 1,73G 114,743 Mi,426 Dceoot11m1n111ion or Sue Dui1dn11r9 4b.14 l Reactor l,O!l2 .., 87 G4 1,186 1,022 4,0S7 4,007 12,572 7'19,7Ml 43,016 ~b.l-42 .\b.143 AwdliaQ" Rl!ldWHteWarehouel" saregu*rd 'i23 240 222 12 37 13 0
29 l 453 17 127 ,,. 2,008 412 2,008 4,321 156 965 33il,638 13,482 64.!141 22,'159 0.380 4b.14.4 141 4.625 26S,105
-tb.14.li 4b.14 Fuel TOU1111 719 2.!115 1,676 "
23*1 21 121 2,178 GG5 2,462 2,671 9,586 2,G71 0,586 3,877 21,Bfll t 4.&5.916 37.975 114,766 4b.l Sub1.ot11l l'ert[ld 4h Activ:lty Costll 3,169 14,926 2,370 57' 12,01~ 8,292 41408 37,197 4,210 109,ri!IJ 7 244,052 '78,236 Period 4b Additl[ln1l C015U License Tcrmin1l11m Survey Planning 1.265 4b.2.1 4b.2.2 Reme<li11l Action Suneya '" 3,603 292 1.nBI 1,205 4,684 4.684 65,60~ 6,2"0 4b.2.3 fb.2..1 4b.U
<l>.2 Op<'Tnlh11111I Toots and Equ.ipm'at Un1forground UtilitiH Excavatiqn ~tense Tetmtn1Uon ISFSI S11btotal p.,nad 4b AdditiOflal Cost1 1,338 1458 59 GS 16 100 2'0 l.Sl:i 1.797 6,373 G8 335 905 !?,67!1 341 1,673 4,523 12,41!6 341 1,673 4.523 12,485 5,855 13,885 19,740 146,875 1.l24,!J34 1,271309 10,302 H,192 16 l!,21i9 2,8'14 EXHIBIT WAC-1 000211 TLG Sl!!rvrcu, Inc.
Comanche Pcaf1 N11cfoar Power Pinnt Doc11ment LIJ-1703-001, Heu. 0 Dccon1missioni11g Co..dAnnly*U'
DllAliT ISSUE Appcndt.x D, Pnge 20 of !2 Tnble D-2 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Pinnt, Unit 2 SAFSTOR Decommissioning Cost Estimate (thousands o[ 2014 dollnrs)
Off.Site LLll\V NltC Spent l~uel Site: Proeesred llurlo.I Vulu11111:s Burial/ UUlilynnd Activity De con Renu1val Padr.ai;inll' T?*ll-sport Procus!na: DilPft!!:nl Othi:!r Tota.I Tolll.I Lie.Tum. M11..n11.gf:mtnt. RcstonUon Vohune Clem A CJanU clan c GTcc P1'1K:eued Cran Contractof Ind es Activlt Descri tlon Crun. Cost Ccsts co.ts Costs Co't' r..o.,o Ccnllnl!!encv C(lsl! Cosu Cnstl Coils Cu. l'cnt Cu. Feet Cu. fl!'et Cu. Feet Cu.Feet Wt., Lb~ M1mho11n Manhours Period ;lb Col\11.tera.l Cosb 4b.31 4b . 3.J Pmt.ill!sclt!Clllflru.bsionintwatorwa!te Small tool aUo,.-ance Docommisliiminr Equipme.nt DlsposiUon 13 22 27 21 117 35' 117 353 205 5,290 1'2.2!1B 3~9.678 40 4b.3..f.
.f.b.3 Subtotal Period 4b CoJl11tn11.t Ccels 13 307 127 27 633 IG6 1,38!1 919 1,389 5,495 361,974 88 128 Period 4\l reri!Jd*DPpendenl Costs *lb.U Decont1upplioa 1,723 431 2,15.& 2,15.f.
4b.4.2 losurance 2,IU 211 2,325 2,325 PropertytUCt'S 4b.4.3 4b..f..4 4b *.f..5 Healthphyalesim11plies Haavy equipn:ieni rent.Al 4.465 8,985
"' 28 1,116 1.3.f.5 805 5,581 J0,332 305 S,581 I0,332 4b.4.G 4b . 4.7 4b..C..8 DitP°'a.lo!DAWgoneratRd Plnritenergybudg~t NRCFees 153 " 178 1,322 ""
63 18:! 419 2.877 l,454 419 2.871 1,454 7.012 H0,237 229
-&b.4.D Ltqlfld RRdwo.ste Processil'I& Equlpm~ntJ&.rvlcea J,205 190 1,455 l,.f.55 'lh.UO Secu.ritySta!rCo.t 6,7G2 1,014 7,'170 7,176 136.240 .f.h.Ul DOCSttr.rrCou 35,071 d.261 40,332 40,332 -141,051 'ib.U2 UtilitrSlo.£rCC1$l &1.380 7,557 57,937 117,937 783,360 Subtatal Period ~b PCTlod*Dtiriendent Cesa 1,72:\ H0,237 4b.4 13.450 l53 118 99,69.f. 17,727 I32,949 132,940 7,012 220 l,302,651 4b.O TOTALPERIOD4bCOsr 4,905 30,135 2,739 1.f.,699 106,066 28.030 188,230 18.1,019 4,210 Hl,827 !l,Ot'l,1173 llB2,785 1.371,735 PERIOD 4( .Ll~nse Tonnlnntlon Period 4fDirect Decorom!Woning Activillaa 4U1 CRISE eonrirlM.tory 5Ul'Vl')' 107 50 m 217 .,!1.2 Termin11t1!UeanM 4fl Snhtetal Period *U Aeth1ty Costs 50 2l7 Period .U Add.itlonnl Costa 167 4r2.1 m
LlainoeTermln11lionS!U'1'11f Sublotal Period 4f Addit10111I Costt '*"' G,833 2,050 2,C50 8,883 8,883 8,683 8,883 HiS,0'24 1113,1)24 3,120 3.120 l'enod. 4.fCoU1ttra1 Costa
.cf3.1 DOC1t1Cl'reltie11.lion Mpen!H l603 2'0 1.843 1,843 .,r.s Sublotnl Pcmod 4fCoU.ti!t11 Cosh 1,003 1,8.f.3 1,843 Period .f.f Pcriod-Ikpcndent Com U4.1 Jriaurance m 4(.4'?
4(.43
?TopertJla~
HentthpbJsic:aaup11lle1 787 685 58 7 73 '"73 4(.4.ol 4f4.5 DiapwialofDAWgeneriltf<l Pl*ntoncrgybudg*l 197 3 983
" "'20 331 6.?34 l1 4.f.;16 4.f.-t.?
NKCFee1 Security starrCO!.it 159 303 "30 183 333 183 333 664
.f,f.4.8 4l.tD DOCStarrCoat Utility St1rrCost 3,7~
4,069 87 610 4.319 4,G79 4,319 4,679 Il,186 4G,7aO 60,107 S11hlotal Period 4fl"enod*0ej!t'ndpnl Com
<<* TOTAL PERIOD 1rcoST 787 787 9,.f.35 1S.a37 1,1m 3,912 11,600 22,7!12 11,809 22,7&2 337 6,73.4 .,,. 153,535 ll 118,643 l!?l,763 l'ERIOD 4 TOTALS 5,152 59,877 20,424 3,872 .f.9,479 105,005 63,198 300.()M 359,475 7,082 291,282 501 337 2,217 20.154,210 1,111,737 2.032,146 PERIOD &b
Slte IlesWrotltui.
Period 51i Dlred. Ocecminia!1ening A~livitiea Demolition ol Rero11.inint Site DuUdin(ll Ob.1 l l l'ib.112 511.l.1.S Sb.11.4 Reactor Admlni11tr11tiet1 Aurili*ry ChlorinsdOl'I (CW Intake) G.223 H91 106 20 933 l6 7,156 5,39:i 23 7,15S 122 5,305 23 79,426
'692 61,157 51>.115 6b.11.G Chlorin1.tion fSW Intake)
CiTcW111.crh1t.aJie 7 1,4.ZG 217 I 8 l,GG.'l 8 1.663 141 17,1.f.3 CircWaterYArd.Pivfnl Ob.117 2 17 l7 36 l)b,11.8 Diesel Generator lib.119 5111110 Fle:1St.ora~DuildinJ Mah1tenauce 1,192
!!19 98 179 "'
l,3'10 752 1,370 252 8,9()3 13.584
" 252 EXHIBIT WAC-1 4,321 TLG S~n.!ICtS. Inc.
000212
Cornanche Peal1 Nuclear P<Jr"rr Plant Docllmenf LJJ-1703-001, Re11. 0 Decomnaiuioru'ng Cnst Ana 1)-sis - DRAFT ISSUE Appendh: D, Page 21 of :z TnbleD-2 Comnnche Peak Nuclear Power Pinnt, Unit 2 SAFSTOR Decommissioning Cost Estimate (thousnnds or 2014 dollars) OIT..Sile LLRW NRC Spa11t1'~ucil Site Prace""d Uurill.IVcilumcs Huriul/ Utility and hctlvltr Decon Removol Paclu.p;ln" Tr11nspnrt Proce11ln<< Dispo111I Other Total Tntnl Lie.Tum. M1m11,gement Restoration Voluine Claas1\ Claull CJ1159C GTCC Processed Crnl\ Coatrnctor Index ActlvltvD!l'*cirl tlnn Co!lt Cost Co1ts Cosu Costs Costs Coeb CC1ntln.:enc C"'t1 Costs Coeb Costa Cu, Feet Cu, }'ect Cu Peel Cu. Feet Cu F'e<!t Wl.,Lha. M11nhourr Monhoure Demollt!o11 nfRemainins Sile Drnlilinp (continued) Sb.1111 5b.t.112 M(.>(RW&lt S11ppotl Ctr & Maton11I St.ngini: Mixellane9W Site Structutt1 388 a,g8s 1,498" "'73
)1,433 11,483 7,6S!l 174,325 5b.1 l l3 RPD1.nltlin1 9 73 1,223 Sb.llU 6b.ll115 Radwa!te W11rehouse S1rrgu11rd "'
2,25G ,,. 37 237 2.594 287 2.159'1 Mi'15 30,287 7,175 5b.ll16 ServiooW11tcrl11l!lbStructun1 657 15h.l.J 17 Switch par "' 126 BG 19 "' 145
"' Z049 6h,I 118 5\l,LI 19 lib.LI 20 5h.l 121 SwitchyarJnct11yH01100 T1nkl & Tunnels Turblno TurllinoPodrstnl Fuel 21 1.032 663 1,316 15' 197 9
1,187 1,1514 '" 1.5H 24 1,187 "' 15,724 U,2158 115,907
.59,867 lib.l.l 22 5h.11 T11t1la 463.&
35,815 '" 5,372 15,32!1 41,187 15,329
.f.1,187 518,860 Site Cloeeo11t.Ac:livitie1 !:lb.12 D11cllFfilS1t.e 3,11()() 4,0215 4,025 G.0153 Sb.1.3 Craile&l1111dte11pe1ile 061 1,292 5b.l.-4. FinalreporttuNRC Sulltotal Peri0tl 5b Ac:tMly C~u1 87 IS "
100 100 4~.857 r.211.200 668 5b.l Pen oil fib Adilitionol Coats 39,676
" 5,99*1 4&,957 100 !lb.2.1 Come?eteCnrahin; 1,05 1,705 1.705 7,43.5 llb.:?.2 CIJ'culatin1tWl'terC'.orfardarn Service Walar Col'!erdam 436 417 3,894 B,725 6b.2.3 5b.2.ol llb.2.5 Conatrucllon Debris Dillposal Demollllo11 a11d Site Reelm"ntion ISfSI 1,399 .,,
8,260 " 939 272 7.199 2,087 479}}

CP-201700223, Decommissioning Funding Status Report for Financial Assurance as of 12/31/2016

Contents

Text

SUBJECT:

Dear Sir or Madam:

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

Navigation menu

CP-201700223, Decommissioning Funding Status Report for Financial Assurance as of 12/31/2016

Text

SUBJECT:

Dear Sir or Madam:

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

Navigation menu

Search