ML041130434

Submittal of Preliminary Decommissioning Cost Estimate

ML041130434
Person / Time
Site:	Oyster Creek
Issue date:	04/14/2004
From:	Jamie Benjamin AmerGen Energy Co, Exelon Corp
To:	Document Control Desk, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
2130-04-20085
Download: ML041130434 (163)

Text

AmerGen Energy Company, LLC www.exeloncorp.com AmerGen An Exelon Company SM 4300 Winfield Road Warrenville, IL60555 10 CFR 50.75(0 April 14, 2004 2130-04-20085 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Attn: Document Control Desk Washington, DC 20555 Oyster Creek Generating Station Facility Operating License No. DPR-16 NRC Docket No. 50-219

Subject:

Submittal of Preliminary Decommissioning Cost Estimate In accordance with 10 CFR 50.75(0(2), "Reporting and recordk-eeping for decommissioning planning,"

paragraph (0(2), "each power reactor licensee shall at or about 5 years prior to the projected end of operations submit a preliminary decommissioning cost estimate which includes an up-to-date assessment of the major factors that could affect the cost to decommission." Accordingly, attached is a preliminary decommissioning cost estimate for Oyster Creek Generating Station (OCGS). Although OCGS will be seeking license renewal, this cost estimate is being submitted since the facility operating license for OCGS currently expires on April 9, 2009.

If you have any questions or require additional information, please contact Mr. Tom Loomis at 610-765-5510.

Very truly yours,

~~min Vice President - Licensing and R tory Affairs AmerGen Energy Company, LLC Attachment I - Oyster Creek Generating Station Decommissioning Cost Analysis cc: H. J. Miller, Administrator, USNRC, Region I R. J. Summers, USNRC Senior Resident Inspector, OCGS P. S. Tam, Senior Project Manager, USNRC File No. 03035

• coI

ATTACHMENT 1 OYSTER CREEK GENERATING STATION DECOMMISSIONING COST ESTIMATE

Document E16-1455-006, Rev. 0 DECOMMISSIONING COST ANALYSIS for the OYSTER CREEK NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION preparedfor AmerGen Energy, LLC preparedby TLG Services, Inc.

Bridgewater, Connecticut March 2004

Oyster Creek Nuclear GeneratingStation Document E16-1455-006, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Page ii of xvi APPROVALS President/ D3ate 04 Quality Assurance Manager Thomas S.LaG rdia Date Project Manager 4$zz/o William A. Cloutier, JrJ Date Project Engineer ' H 6 J2 6 S A. Koehl Technical Manager Francis W. ey ore Date TLG Services, Inc.

Oyster Creek Nuclear GeneratingStation Document E16-1455O006,Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Page iii of xvi TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION PAGE EXECUTIVE

SUMMARY

......................................... v ii-xvi

1. INTRODUCTION .......................................... 1-1 1.1 Objectives of Study .......................................... 1-1 1.2 Site Description .......................................... 1-1 1.3 Regulatory Guidance .......................................... 1-2 1.3.1 Nuclear Waste Policy Act ......................................... 1-4 1.3.2 Low-Level Radioactive Waste Acts ......................................... 1-6 1.3.3 Radiological Criteria for License Termination .................................... 1-6

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 ......................................... 2-8 2.1.4 ISFSI Operations and Decommissioning ......................................... 2-9 2.2 SAFSTOR AND DELAYED DECOMMISSIONING . .........................

2-9 2.2.1 Period 1 - Preparations ......................................... 2-10 2.2.2 Period 2 - Dormancy ......................................... 2-11 2.2.3 Periods 3 and 4 - Delayed Decommissioning ..................................... 2-12 2.2.4 Period 5 - Site Restoration ......................................... 2-14

3. COST ESTIMATE .......................................... 3-1 3.1 Basis of Estimate ......................................... 3-1 3.2 Methodology .......................................... 3-1 3.3 Financial Components of the Cost Model ................. ........................ 3-3 3.3.1 Contingency ......................................... 3-3 3.3.2 Financial Risk ......................................... 3-5 3.4 Site-Specific Considerations ......................................... 3-7 3.4.1 Spent Fuel Management ......................................... 3-7 3.4.2 Reactor Vessel and Internal Components ......................................... 3-10 3.4.3 Primary System Components ......................................... 3-11 3.4.4 Main Turbine and Condenser ......................................... 3-12 3.4.5 Transportation Methods ......................................... 3-12 3.4.6 Low-Level Radioactive Waste Disposal ......................................... 3-13 3.4.7 Site Conditions Following Decommissioning .................................... 3-13 TLG Services, Inc.

Oyster Creek Nuclear GeneratingStation Document E16-1455-006, Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Page iv of xvi TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued)

SECTION PAGE 3.5 Assumptions ................................................. 3-14 3.5.1 Estimating Basis ................................................. 3-14 3.5.2 Labor Costs ................................................. 3-14 3.5.3 Design Conditions ................................................. 3-15 3.5.4 General. ................................................. 3-15 3.6 Cost Estimate Summary ................................................. 3-17

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

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

6. RESULTS ................................................. 6-1

7. REFERENCES.......................................................................................................... 7-1 TABLES Summary of Decommissioning Cost Elements, DECON ................. .............. xiv Summary of Decommissioning Cost Elements, Delayed DECON .................. xv Summary of Decommissioning Cost Elements, SAFSTOR ............................ xvi 3.1 Schedule of Annual Expenditures, DECON ................................................. 3-18 3.2 Schedule of Annual Expenditures, Delayed DECON ...................... ............. 3-19 3.3 Schedule of Annual Expenditures, SAFSTOR .............................................. 3-20 5.1 Decommissioning Waste Summary, DECON ................................................. 5-3 5.2 Decommissioning Waste Summary, Delayed DECON ................................... 5-4 5.3 Decommissioning Waste Summary, SAFSTOR .............................................. 5-5 6.1 Summary of Decommissioning Cost Elements, DECON ................. .............. 6-4 6.2 Summary of Decommissioning Cost Elements, Delayed DECON ................. 6-5 6.3 Summary of Decommissioning Cost Elements, SAFSTOR ............................ 6-6 TLG Services, Inc.

Oyster Creek NuclearGeneratingStation Document E16-1455-006, Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Page v of xvi TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued)

SECTION PAGE FIGURES 4.1 Activity Schedule ................................. 4-3 4.2 Decommissioning Timeline, DECON ................................. 4-5 4.3 Decommissioning Timeline, Delayed DECON ................................. 4-6 4.4 Decommissioning Timeline, SAFSTOR ................................. 4-7 APPENDICES A. Unit Cost Factor Development ................................. A-1 B. Unit Cost Factor Listing ................................. B-1 C. Detailed Cost Analyses, DECON ................................. C-1 D. Detailed Cost Analyses, Delayed DECON .......... ....................... D-1 E. Detailed Cost Analyses, SAFSTOR ................................. E-1 F. Work Difficulty Factor Adjustments ................................. F-1 G. Work Area Designation - GPU STN Index.......................................................... G-1 TLG Services, Inc.

Oyster Creek NuclearGeneratingStation Document E16-1455-006, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Pagevi of xvi REVISION LOG No. ,CRA No. Date 11Itei Revised Reason forRevision 0 03-22-04 Original Issue TLG Services, Inc.

Oyster Creek Nuclear GeneratingStation Document E16-1455-006, Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Page vii of xvi EXECUTIVE

SUMMARY

This report presents estimates of the cost to decommission the Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station (Oyster Creek) for the selected decommissioning scenarios following the scheduled cessation of plant operations. The analysis relies upon site-specific, technical information, originally developed in an evaluation for the GPU Nuclear Corporation in 1997-99,I11 updated to reflect current assumptions pertaining to the disposition of the nuclear unit and relevant industry experience in undertaking such projects. The updated estimates are designed to provide AmerGen Energy with sufficient information to assess their financial obligations, as they pertain to the eventual decommissioning of the nuclear unit.

The primary goal of the decommissioning is the removal and disposal of the contaminated systems and structures so that the plant's operating license can be terminated. The analysis recognizes that spent fuel will be stored at the site in the plant's storage pool and/or in an independent spent fuel storage installation (ISFSI) until such time that it can transferred to a U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) facility.

Consequently, the estimates also include those costs to manage and subsequently decommission these storage facilities.

The estimates 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 estimates incorporate a minimum cooling period of approximately 5%/2 years for the spent fuel that resides in the storage pool when operations cease. In two of the scenarios evaluated, any residual fuel remaining in the pool after the 5Y2-year period is relocated to the ISFSI to await transfer to a DOE facility (the fuel is assumed to remain in the storage pool for the third scenario). The estimates also include the dismantling of non-essential structures and limited restoration of the site.

Alternatives and Regulations The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC or Commission) provided initial decommissioning requirements in its rule adopted on June 27, 1988.[2] In this rule, the NRC set forth financial criteria for decommissioning licensed nuclear power facilities.

The regulations addressed planning needs, timing, funding methods, and "Decommissioning Cost Estimate for the Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station," Document No. G01-1271-003, TLG Services, Inc., February 1999.

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, Federal Register Volume 53, Number 123 (p 24018 et seq.), June 27, 1988.

TLG Services, Inc.

Oyster Creek Nuclear GeneratingStation Document E16-1455.006, Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Page viii of xvi 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."[3 1 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."[ 4 ]

Decommissioning is to be completed within 60 years, although longer 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."[ 51 As with the SAFSTOR alternative, decommissioning is currently required to be completed within 60 years.

The 60-year restriction has limited the practicality of the ENTOMB alternative at commercial reactors that generate significant amounts of long-lived radioactive material. In 1997, the Commission 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[ 6] The amendments allow for greater public participation 3 Ibid. Page FR24022, Column 3.

4 Ibid.

5 Ibid. Page FR24023, Column 2.

6 U.S. Code of Federal Regulations, Title 10, Parts 2, 50, and 51, "Decommissioning of Nuclear TLG Services, Inc.

Oyster Creek Nuclear GeneratingStation Document E16-1455-006, Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Page ix of xvi 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.

Decommissioning Scenarios for Oyster Creek Three decommissioning scenarios are evaluated for the nuclear unit. The scenarios selected are representative of alternatives available to the owner and are defined as follows:

1. DECON: The operating license expires in April 2009. The first scenario assumes that the total duration of the physical dismantling process is minimized. The existing ISFSI is expanded to accommodate any residual spent fuel remaining from plant operations so as to facilitate the decontamination and dismantling of the power block structures. Spent fuel storage operations continue at the site until the transfer of the fuel to the DOE is complete, assumed to be in the year 2027.

2. Delayed DECON: In the second scenario, the unit is prepared for an abbreviated period of storage. The spent fuel discharged to the storage pool, once operations cease, remains in the pool until it can be transferred to a DOE facility, i.e., the ISFSI is not used to offload the pool. Decommissioning is delayed until the transfer of the fuel to the DOE is complete, i.e., in the year 2027. The unit is then decommissioned.

3. SAFSTOR: The unit is placed into safe-storage in the third scenario. However, decommissioning is deferred beyond the fuel storage period to the maximum extent possible; termination of the license would conclude within the maximum required 60-year period. Spent fuel remaining in the spent fuel storage pool after a minimum cooling period of 5% years is transferred to the ISFSI for interim storage until the transfer of the fuel to the DOE is complete, assumed to be in the year 2027.

Power Reactors," Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Federal Register Volume 61, (p 39278 et seq.), July 29, 1996.

TLG Services, Inc.

Oyster Creek Nuclear GeneratingStation Document E16-1455-006, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Pagex of xvi Methodolowv The methodology used to develop the estimate described within this document follows the basic approach originally presented in the cost estimating guidelines 17 ] 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. 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 cost estimate.

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."[ 8 ] 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 station.

The use and role of contingency within decommissioning estimates is not a safety factor issue. Safety factors provide additional security and address situations that may never occur. Contingency funds, by contrast, are expected to be fully expended throughout the program. Inclusion of contingency is necessary to provide assurance that sufficient funding will be available to accomplish the intended tasks.

7 T.S. LaGuardia et al., "Guidelines for Producing Commercial Nuclear Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Estimates," AIF/NESP-036, May 1986.

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

TLG Services, Inc.

Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station Document E16-1455-006,'Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Pagexi of xvi 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,I9] and its Amendments of 1985,110] the states became ultimately responsible for the disposition of low-level radioactive waste generated within their own borders.

New Jersey is a member of the three-state Atlantic Interstate Low-Level Radioactive Waste Management Compact, formed after New Jersey formally joined the Northeast Regional Compact. The Barnwell Low-Level Radioactive Waste Management Facility, located in South Carolina, is expected to be available to support the decommissioning of Oyster Creek. It is also assumed that AmerGen Energy can access other disposal sites should it prove cost-effective. As such, rate schedules for both the Barnwell and the Envirocare facility in Utah are used to generate disposal costs.

High-Level Radioactive Waste Management Congress passed the "Nuclear Waste Policy Act"1' 11 (NWPA) in 1982, assigning the responsibility for disposal of the spent nuclear fuel created by the commercial nuclear generating plants to the DOE. Two permanent disposal facilities were envisioned, as well as an interim storage facility. To recover the cost, the legislation created a Nuclear Waste Fund through which money is collected from the sale of electricity generated by the power plants. The NWPA, along with the individual disposal contracts with the utilities, specified that the DOE was to begin accepting spent fuel by January 31, 1998.

Since the original legislation, the DOE has announced several delays in the program schedule. By January 1998, the DOE had failed to initiate the disposal of spent nuclear fuel and high level waste, as required by the NWPA and the utility contracts.

As a result, utilities have initiated legal action against the DOE. While legal actions continue, the DOE has no plans to receive spent fuel prior to completing the construction of its geologic repository.

Operation of DOE's yet-to-be constructed repository is contingent upon the review and approval of the facility's license application by the NRC, the successful resolution of pending litigation, and the development of a national transportation system. By "Low-Level Radioactive Waste Policy Act of 1980," Public Law 96-573, 1980.

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

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

TLG Services, Inc.

Oyster Creek NruclearGeneratingStation Document Ei6-1455-006,Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Pagexii of xvi comparison, the Private Fuel Storage consortium submitted an application for an interim storage facility in 1997. To date, the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board has issued only a partial ruling on one of several issues that need to be resolved prior to the NRC issuing a license for the facility. With a more technically complex and politically sensitive application for permanent disposal, it is not unreasonable to expect that the NRC's approval to construct the repository at Yucca Mountain would require at least as long &'revlewperiod. Construction would therefore begin sometime around the year 2010, at the earliest. The DOE has no plans for receiving spent fuel from commercial nuclear plant sites prior to this date and startup operations may be phased in, creating additional delays. For estimating purposes, AmerGen Energy has assumed that the high-level waste repository, or some interim storage facility, will be fully operational by 2015. This timetable is consistent with the findings of an evaluation recently issued to Congress by the Government Accounting Office.[ 12J 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.E13] Interim storage of the fuel, until the DOE has completed the transfer, will be in the storage pool and/or an ISFSI located on the Oyster Creek site.

The ISFSI, which is independently licensed and operated, will be expanded to support decommissioning operations. For the DECON and SAFSTOR scenarios, the facility is sized to accommodate the inventory of spent fuel residing in the plant's storage pool at the conclusion of the required cooling period. Once emptied, the reactor building can be either decontaminated and dismantled, or prepared for long-term storage. In the Delayed DECON scenario, the existing ISFSI and storage pool remain operational and are used for the interim storage of the fuel until such time that the DOE can complete the transfer.

The DOE's generator allocation/receipt schedules are based upon the oldest fuel receiving the highest priority. Given this scenario and an anticipated rate of transfer, spent fuel is projected to remain at the site for approximately 19 years after the cessation of operations. Consequently, costs are included within the estimates for the long-term caretaking of the spent fuel at the Oyster Creek site until the year 2027.

12 "Technical, Schedule, and Cost Uncertainties of the Yucca Mountain Repository Project," GAO-02-191, December 2001.

13 "Domestic Licensing of Production and Utilization Facilities," U.S. Code of Federal Regulations, Title 10, Part 50.54 (bb).

TLG Services, Inc.

Oyster Creek Nuclear GeneratingStation Document E16-1455-006, Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Pagexiii of xvi 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 will substantially damage power block structures, potentially weakening the footings and structural supports. Prompt demolition once the license is terminated is clearly the most appropriate and cost-effective option. 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 were deferred. Experience at shutdown generating stations has shown that plant facilities quickly degrade 'without maintenance, adding additional expense and creating potential hazards to the public and the demolition work force.

Consequently, this analysis assumes that non-essential site structures within the restricted access area are removed to a nominal depth of three feet below the local grade level wherever possible. The site is then backfilled, graded and stabilized.

Summary The costs to decommission Oyster Creek are evaluated for several decommissioning scenarios, incorporating both the DECON and SAFSTOR decommissioning alternatives. Regardless of the timing of the decommissioning activities, the estimates assume the eventual removal of all the contaminated and activated plant components and structural materials, such that the facility operator may then have unrestricted use of the site with no further requirement for an operating license. Delayed decommissioning (Delayed DECON) is initiated after the spent fuel has been removed from the site and is accomplished within the 60-year period required by current NRC regulations. In the interim, the spent fuel remains in storage at the site until such time that the transfer to a DOE facility can be completed. Once the transfer is complete, the storage facilities are also decommissioned.

The scenarios analyzed for the purpose of generating the estimates 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, D, and E. Cost summaries for the various scenarios are provided at the end of this section for the major cost components.

TLG Services, Inc.

Oyster Creek NuclearGeneratingStation Document E16-1455-006, Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Pagexiv of xvi

SUMMARY

OF DECOMMISSIONING COST ELEMENTS DECON (Thousands of 2003 Dollars)

Activity Total I, I Decontamination 14,149 Removal 106,014 Packaging 12,406 Transportation 5,561 Waste Disposal 96,915 Off-site Waste Processing 36,757 Program Management [1] 236,572 Spent Fuel Pool Isolation 9,332 ISFSI Related (non-operating) 81,723 Insurance and Regulatory Fees 18,601 Energy 4,095 Characterization and Licensing Surveys 10,191 Property Taxes 20,638 Miscellaneous Equipment 5,998 Site O&M 5,526 Total 12] 664,477 NRC License Termination 480,331 Spent Fuel Management 141,648 Site Restoration 42,498 III Includes engineering and security 121Columns may not add due to rounding TLG Services, Inc.

Oyster Creek Nuclear GeneratingStation Document E16-1455-006, Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Pagexv of xvi

SUMMARY

OF DECOMMISSIONING COST ELEMENTS DELAYED DECON (Thousands of 2003 Dollars)

Activity Total Decontamination 18,113 Removal 95,991 Packaging 8,829 Transportation 4,258 Waste Disposal 58,593 Off-site Waste Processing 43,866 Program Management [l] 261,672 Spent Fuel Pool Isolation 9,332 ISFSI Related (non-operating) 38,655 Insurance and Regulatory Fees 31,133 Energy 11,808 Characterization and Licensing Surveys 11,524 Property Taxes 25,513 Miscellaneous Equipment 9,183 Site O&M 6,798 Total (21 635,270 NRC License Termination 414,583 Spent Fuel Management 175,539 Site Restoration 45,148 11]Includes engineering and security 121Columns may not add due to rounding TLG Services, Inc.

Oyster Creek Nuclear GeneratingStation Document E16-1455-006, Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Pagexvi of xvi

SUMMARY

OF DECOMMISSIONING COST ELEMENTS SAFSTOR (Thousands of 2003 Dollars)

Activity Total I.

Decontamination 18,035 Removal 99,217 Packaging 8,949 Transportation 4,282 Waste Disposal 56,405 Off-site Waste Processing 43,468 Program Management [1] 343,367 Spent Fuel Pool Isolation 9,332 ISFSI Related (non-operating) 77,603 Insurance and Regulatory Fees 69,823 Energy 8,933 Characterization and Licensing Surveys 11,524 Property Taxes 67,209 Miscellaneous Equipment 16,269 Site O&M 17,696 Total 12] 852,113 NRC License Termination 610,009 Spent Fuel Management 196,982 Site Restoration 45,122 I'] Includes engineering and security 2J Columns may not add due to rounding TLG Services, Inc.

Oyster Creek Nuclear GeneratingStation r Document E16.1455-006, Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Section 1, Page1 of 7

1. INTRODUCTION' This report presents estimates of the cost to decommission the Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station (Oyster Creek) for the scenarios described in Section 2, following a scheduled cessation of plant operations. The analysis is designed to provide AmerGen Energy with sufficient information to assess its financial obligations, as they pertain to the eventual decommissioning of the nuclear unit. It is not a detailed engineering document, but a financial analysis prepared in advance of the detailed engineering that will be required to carry out the decommissioning.

1.1 OBJECTIVES OF STUDY The objectives of this study are to prepare comprehensive estimates of the cost to deconmmission Oyster Creek, to provide a sequence or schedule for the associated activities, and to develop waste stream projections from the decontamination and dismantling activities. For the purposes of this study, the shutdown date was taken as April 9, 2009, the,expiration date of the current operating license.

1.2 SITE DESCRIPTION The Oyster Creek nuclear unit is about two miles inland from the shore of Barnegat Bay on the coast of New Jersey. The site is approximately nine miles south of Toms River, New Jersey; about fifty miles east of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; and sixty miles south of Newark, New Jersey. The generating station is comprised of a single reactor with supporting facilities.

Oyster Creek was designed and constructed by the General Electric Company Atomic Power Equipment Department as a turnkey project. The reactor is a single-cycle, forced circulation boiling water reactor producing steam for direct use in the steam turbine. The reactor vessel and the recirculation system are contained within the drywell of a pressure absorption containment system housed within the reactor building. The primary containment system consists of the drywell, vent pipes, and a pool of water contained in the absorption chamber (torus). The reactor building encloses the primary containment system, thereby providing a secondary containment.

Oyster Creek presently operates under a full term operating license at a maximum thermal power level of about 1930 MWth with a corresponding TLG Services, Inc.

Oyster Creek Nuclear GeneratingStation. Document E16-1455-006,Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Section 1, Page2 of 7 gross electrical output of approximately 670 MWe. 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 by the reactor into mechanical shaft power and then into electrical energy. The turbine consists of a high-pressure, double-flow turbine element and three double-flow, low-pressure turbine elements all aligned in tandem.

The generator is a direct-driven 60 cycle, 24,000 volt, conductor-cooled, synchronous generator rated at 640,700 kW. The turbine is operated in a closed feedwater cycle which condenses the steam; the heated feedwater is returned to the reactor. Heat rejected in the main condensers is removed by the circulating water system.

The circulating water system provides the heat sink required for removal of waste heat in the power plant's thermal cycle. Water is drawn from Barnegat Bay through a 140 foot wide intake canal which follows the general course of the south branch of Forked River. The system has the principal function of removing heat by absorbing this energy in the main condenser. After passing through the plant condensers, the water is routed through the discharge canal which empties into Barnegat Bay.

1.3 REGULATORY GUIDANCE The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC or Commission) provided initial decommissioning requirements in its rule "General Requirements for Decommissioning Nuclear Facilities," issued in June 1988.[1] 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,"[ 2 J 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, the option evaluated for this analysis, assumes that any contaminated or activated portion of the plant's systems, structures, and facilities are removed TLG Services, Inc.

Oydster Creek NuclearGeneratingStation Document E16-1455-006, Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Section 1, Page3 of 7 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 SAFSTOR, 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. The guidelines for ENTOMB are similar, providing the NRC with both sufficient leverage and flexibility to ensure that these deferred options are only, used in situations where it is reasonable and consistent with the definition of decommissioning. At the conclusion of a 60-year dormancy period (or longer for ENTOMB 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 recent rulemaking permitting the controlled release of a site, the NRC has re-evaluated this alternative.13 1 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. However, 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 entombments.(4] However, the staff has recently 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 Commission has concurred with the staffs recommendation.

The NRC published revisions to the general requirements for decommissioning nuclear power plants in 1996.[5] When the 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 new amendments allow for TLG Services, Inc.

Oyster Creek Nuclear GeneratingStation Document E16.1455-006,-Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Section 1, Page4 of 7 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 will entitle the licensee to a fee reduction and eliminate the obligation to follow certain requirements needed only during operation of the reactor. Within two years of submitting notice of permanent cessation of operations, the licensee is required to 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 will include a License Termination Plan (LTP).

1.3.1 Nuclear Waste Policy Act Congress passed the Nuclear Waste Policy Act[6 1 (NWPA) in 1982, assigning the responsibility for disposal of the spent nuclear fuel created by the commercial nuclear generating plants to the U.S.

Department of Energy (DOE). Two permanent disposal facilities and an interim storage facility were envisioned. To recover the cost, the legislation created a Nuclear Waste Fund through which money is collected from the sale of electricity generated by the power plants. The NWPA, along with the individual disposal contracts with the utilities, specified that the DOE was to begin accepting spent fuel by January 31, 1998.

After pursuing a national site selection process, the NWPA was amended in 1987 to designate Yucca Mountain, Nevada, as the only site to be evaluated for geologic disposal of high-level waste. Also in 1987, the DOE announced a five-year delay (1998 to 2003) in the opening date for the repository. Two years later, in 1989, an additional seven-year delay was announced, primarily due to problems in obtaining the permits necessary from the State of Nevada to perform the required characterization of the site.

Generators have responded to this impasse by initiating legal action and constructing supplemental storage as a means of maintaining necessary operating margins. In an August 2000 ruling,[ 7 J the U.S.

TLG Services, Inc.

Oyster Creek Nuclear GeneratingStation Document E16-1455-006, Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Section 1, Page 5 of 7 Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit keaffirmed the utility position that DOE had breached its contractual obligation. Legal actions with the DOE continue; however, the DOE's position has remained unchanged. The agency continues to maintain that its delayed performance is unavoidable because it does not have an operational repository and does not have authority to provide storage in the interim, Consequently the DOE has no plans to receive spent fuel from the commercial reactors until the repository is operational.

The NRC requires that licensees establish a program to manage and provide funding for the management of all irradiated fuel at the reactor until title of the fuel is transferred to the Secretary of Energy, pursuant to Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR),

§50.54 (bb).18] This funding requirement is fulfilled through inclusion of certain high-level waste cost elements in the decommissioning estimates, as identified in Section 3.

An independent spent fuel storage installation (ISFSI) is currently operational at the site to provide supplenment fuel storage. In two of the scenarios evaluated, the ISFSI is expanded to accommodate the inventory of spent fuel residing in the plant's storage pool at the conclusion of the required cooling period. Once emptied, the reactor building can be either decontaminated and dismantled or prepared for long-term storage. In the Delayed DECON scenario, the storage pool remains operational and is used for the interim storage of the fuel. The ISFSI remains operational; however, it is not used to offload the pool.

Both facilities are maintained until such time that the DOE can complete the transfer.

For estimating purposes, the DOE is assumed to initiate spent fuel receipt in the year 2015. The DOE's generator allocation/receipt schedules are based upon the oldest fuel receiving the highest priority.

Given this scenario and an anticipated rate of transfer, spent fuel is projected to remain at the site for almost 19 years after the cessation of operations. Consequently, costs are included within the analysis for the continued operation of the storage pool and the expansion of the ISFSI, as required, and for the long-term caretaking of the spent fuel at the site until the year 2027.

[This evaluation is prepared without prejudice to the rights of AmerGen Energy to pursue legal and contractual remedies from the DOE in light of recent court decisions.]

TLG Services, Inc.

Oyster Creek Nuclear GeneratingStation Document E16-1455-006,Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Section 1, Page 6 of 7 1.3.2 Low-Level Radioactive Waste Acts 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. Congress passed the "Low-Level Radioactive Waste Policy Act" in 1980,19 declaring the states as being ultimately responsible for the disposition of low-level radioactive waste generated within their own borders. The federal law encouraged the formation of regional groups or compacts to implement this objective safely, efficiently, and economically, and set a target date of 1986 for implementation. After little progress, the "Low-Level Radioactive Waste Policy Amendments Act of 1985,"[11] extended the implementation schedule, with specific milestones and stiff sanctions for non-compliance.

However, to date, no new compact facilities have been successfully sited, licensed, and constructed.

New Jersey is a member of the three-state Atlantic Interstate Low-Level Radioactive Waste Management Compact, formed after New Jersey formally joined the Northeast Regional Compact. The Barnwell Low-Level Radioactive Waste Management Facility, located in South Carolina, is expected to be available to support the decommissioning of Oyster Creek. It is also assumed that AmerGen Energy can access other disposal sites should it prove cost-effective. As such, rate schedules for both the Barnwell and the Envirocare facility in Utah are used to generate disposal costs.

1.3.3 Radiological Criteria for License Termination In 1997, the NRC published Subpart E, "Radiological Criteria for License Termination," 1 1 1 ] amending 10 CFR §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 for Oyster Creek assume that the site will be remediated to a residual level consistent with the NRC-prescribed level.

TLG Services, Inc.

Oydster Creek Nuclear Generating Station Document E16-1455-006, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 1, Page 7 of 7 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). 1 2 1 An additional limit of 4 millirem per year, as defined in 40 CFR

§141.16, is applied to drinking water.j13 ]

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 (MOU) [14]

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.

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.

TLG Services, Inc.

Oydster Creek Nuclear GeneratingStation Document E16.1455-006, Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Section 2, Page1 of 14

2. DECOMMISSIONING ALTERNATIVES Detailed cost estimates were developed to decommission Oyster Creek utilizing .a combination of the approved decommissioning alternatives: DECON and SAFSITOR.

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.

Three decommissioning scenarios were evaluated for the nuclear unit. The scenarios selected are representative of alternatives available to the owner and are defined as follows:

1. DECON: The operating license expires in April 2009. The first scenario assumes that the total duration of the physical dismantling process is minimized. The existing ISFSI is expanded to accommodate any residual spent fuel remaining from plant operations so as to facilitate the decontamination and dismantling of the power block structures. Spent fuel storage operations continue at the site until the transfer of fuel to the DOE is complete, assumed to be in the year 2027.

2. Delayed DECON: In the second scenario, the unit is prepared for an abbreviated period of storage. The spent fuel discharged to the storage pool, once operations cease, remains in the pool until it can be transferred to a DOE facility, i.e., an ISFSI is not used to offload the pool. Decommissioning is delayed until the transfer of the fuel to the DOE is complete, i.e., in the year 2027. The unit is then decommissioned.

3. SAFSTOR: The unit is placed into safe-storage in the third scenario. However, decommissioning is deferred beyond the fuel storage period to the maximum extent possible; termination of the license would conclude within the maximum required 60-year period. Spent fuel remaining in the spent fuel storage pool after a minimum cooling period of 5% years is transferred to the ISFSI for interim storage.

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 TLG Services, Inc.

Oldster Creek Nuclear GeneratingStation Document E16 1455-006, Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Section 2, Page2 of 14 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 would then be prohibited from reactor operation.

The second phase encompasses activities during the storage period or during major decommissioningactivities, or a combination of the two. The third phase pertains to the activities involved in license termination. The decommissioning estimates developed for Oyster Creek 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.

2.1.1 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, required within two years of the notice to cease operations, 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 TLG Services, Inc.

Oyster Creek Nuclear GeneratingStation Document E16-1455-006,Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 2, Page3 of 14 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 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 recirculation system piping, 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:

• foreclose release of the site for possible unrestricted use,

• significantly increase decommissioning costs,

• 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 required 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, work packages and procedures, would be assembled to support the proposed decontamination and dismantling activities.

TLG Services, Inc.

Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station Document E16-1455-006, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 2, Page 4 of 14 Site Preparations Following final plant shutdown, and in preparation for actual decommissioning activities, the following activities are initiated:

• Characterization of the site and surrounding environs. This includes radiation surveys of work areas, major components (including the reactor vessel and its internals), internal piping, and primary shield cores.

• Expansion of the existing ISFSI for the interim storage of spent fuel in wet storage.

• Isolation of the spent fuel storage pool and fuel handling systems, such that decommissioning operations can commence on the balance

'of the plant. The pool will remain operational for approximately 5Y2 years following the cessation of operations before the inventory resident at shutdown can be transferred to either the ISFSI or a DOE facility.

. Specification of transport and disposal requirements for activated materials and/or hazardous materials, including shielding and waste stabilization.

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.

TLG Services, Inc.

Oyster Creek Nuclear GeneratingStation Document E16-1455-006,Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Section 2, Page 5 of 14 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 equipmnent.

Modifications may also be required to the refueling area of the building to support the segmentation of the reactor vessel internals and component extraction.

. 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.

• Procurement Oease or purchase) of shipping canisters, cask liners, and industrial packages.

• Decontamination of components and piping systems as required to control (minimize) worker exposure.

• Removal of piping and components no longer essential to support-decommissioning operations.

• Transfer of the steam separator and dryer assemblies to the dryer-separator pool for segmentation. Segmentation by weight and activity maximizes the loading of the shielded transport casks. The operations are conducted under water using remotely operated tooling and contamination controls.

• Disconnection of the control blades from the drives on the vessel lower head. Blades are transferred to the spent fuel pool for packaging.

• Disassembly, segmentation, and packaging of the core shroud and in-core guide tubes. Some of the material is expected to exceed Class C disposal requirements. As such, those segments are packaged in a modified fuel storage canister for geologic disposal.

. Removal and segmentation of the remaining internals including the fuel support castings and core plate assembly.

TLG Services, Inc.

Oyster Creek Nuclear GeneratingStation Document E16.1455-006, Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Section 2, Page 6 of 14

• Draining and decontamination of 'the reactor well and the permanent sealing of the spent fuel transfer gate. Install shielded platform for segmentation of reactor vessel. Cutting operations are performed in air using remotely operated equipment within a contamination control envelope, with the water level maintained just below the cut to minimize the working area dose rates. Sections are transferred to the dryer-separator pool for packaging and interim storage.

• Disconnection of the control rod drives and instrumentation tubes from reactor vessel lower head. The lower reactor head and vessel supporting structure are then segmented.

• Removal of the reactor recirculation pumps. Exterior surfaces are decontaminated and openings covered. Components can serve as

'their own burial containers provided that all penetrations are properly sealed.

• Demolition of the sacrificial shield activated concrete by controlled demolition.

• Transfer of the spent fuel from the storage pool to the DOE and ISFSI pad for interim storage.

At least two years prior to the anticipated date of license termination, a LTP is required. Submitted as a supplement to the 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 Commission. The licensee may then commence with the final remediation of site facilities and services, including:

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).

TLG Services, Inc.

Oyster Creek NuclearGeneratingStation Document E16-1455.006, Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Section 2, Page 7 of 14

• Removal of the steel liners from the drywell, disposing of the activated and contaminated sections as radioactive waste. Removal of any activated/ contaminated concrete.

. Removal of the steel liners from the steam separator and dryer pool, reactor well, and spent fuel storage pools.

Surveys of the decontaminated areas of the containment structure.

. Removal of the contaminated equipment and material from the turbine and radwaste buildings, and any other contaminated facility. Use radiation and contamination control techniques until radiation surveys indicate that the structures 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 will facilitate 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 segregated for additional off-site processing (disassembly, chemical cleaning, volume reduction, and waste treatment), and/or packaged for controlled disposal at a 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 the "Multi-Agency Radiation Survey and Site Investigation Manual (MARSSIM)."C151 This document incorporates the statistical approaches to survey design and data interpretation used by the EPA. It also identifies state-of-the-art, 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, TLG Services, Inc.

Oyster Creek Nuclear GeneratingStation Document E16-1455-006, Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Section 2, Page 8 of 14 performs an independent confirmation of radiological site conditions, and makes a determination on final termination of the license.

The NRC will terminate the operating license if it determines that site remediation has been performed in accordance with the LTP, and that theterminal radiation survey and associated documentation demonstrate that the facility 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 and radwaste 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.

Prompt dismantling of site structures is clearly the most appropriate and cost-effective option. 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 on site is more efficient than if the process were deferred. Site facilities quickly degrade without maintenance, adding additional expense and creating potential hazards to the public as well as to future workers. Abandonment creates a breeding ground for vermin infestation as well as other biological hazards.

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 TLG Services, Inc.

Oyster Creek Nuclear GeneratingStation Document E16-1455-006, Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Section 2, Page 9 of 14 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.

Concrete rubble produced by demolition activities is processed to remove rebar and miscellaneous embedments. The processed material is then used on site to backfill voids. Excess materials are trucked to an off-site area for disposal as construction debris.

2.1.4 ISFSI Operations and Decommissionin' The ISFSI will continue to operate under a separate and independent license (10 CFR §72) following the termination of the §50 operating license. Assuming the DOE starts accepting fuel in 2015, transfer of spent fuel from Oyster Creek is anticipated to begin in 2025 and continue through the year 2027.

At the conclusion of the spent fuel transfer process, the ISFSI will be decommissioned. The Commission will terminate the §72 license if 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.

The assumed design for the ISFSI is based upon the use of a multi-purpose canister and a concrete overpack for pad storage. For purposes of this cost analysis, it is assumed that once the inner canisters containing the spent fuel assemblies have been removed, any required decontamination performed, and the license for the facility terminated, the modules can be dismantled using conventional techniques for the demolition of reinforced concrete. The concrete storage pad will then be removed, and the area graded and landscaped to conform to the surrounding environment.

2.2 SAFSTOR AND DELAYED DECOMMISSIONING 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 TLG Services, Inc.

Oyster Creek Nuclear GeneratingStation Document E16-1455.006, Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Section 2, Page 10 of 14 (during the dormancy period), with structures maintained in a sound condition.

Systems not required to operate in support of the spent fuel pool 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 a shorter time period is expected for these activities due to the more limited work scope. 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.

The following discussion is appropriate for both the SAFSTOR and Delayed DECON scenarios, the primary differences being in the storage meth6ds for the spent fuel and the length of the dormancy period. Spent fuel is continued to be stored in the wet storage pool for the Delayed DECON scenario until such time that the transfer to a DOE facility can be completed, i.e., the ISFSI is not used to offload the pool. Decommissioning operations are assumed to begin once the transfer is complete. By contrast, all of the fuel remaining in the storage pool after the minimum required cooling period is relocated to the ISFSI in the SAFSTOR scenario and the pool emptied. The nuclear unit remains in storage after fuel transfer operations are completed, with decommissioning operations initiated such that the license is terminated within the required 60-year time period.

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 plant in safe-storage includes, but is not limited to, the following activities:

• Isolation 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 TLG Services, Inc.

Oyster Creek Nuclear GeneratingStation ' Document E16.1455.006,Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 2, Page11 of 14 are scheduled around the fuel handling' systems to the greatest extent possible.

• Draining and de-energizing of the non-contaminated systems not required to support continued site operations or maintenance.

eDisposing 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.

. '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 plant, posting warning signs where appropriate.

• 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, preventive and corrective maintenance on security systems, area lighting, general building maintenance, heating and ventilation of buildings, routine*radiological TLG Services, Inc.

Oyster Creek Nuclear GeneratingStation Document E16-1455-006, Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Section 2, Page12 of 14 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, 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. While remote surveillance is an option, it does not offer the immediate response time of a physical presence.

The transfer of the spent fuel to a DOE facility continues during this period until complete. Fuel is shipped exclusively from the ISFSI in the SAFSTOR scenario and from the pool and the ISFSI in the Delayed DECON scenario.

After an optional period of storage (such that license termination is accomplished within 60 years of final shutdown), 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.

TLG Services, Inc.

Oyster Creek Nuclear GeneratingStation Document E16-1455.006, Rev. 0 DecommissioningCostAnalysis Section 2, Page 13 of 14 Much of the work in developing a termination plan is relevant 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 and deferred scenarios 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 little 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 thirty to 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, i.e., there is no significant reduction in the waste generated from the decommissioning activities. However, due to the lower activity levels, a greater percentage of the waste volume can be designated for off-site processing and recovery.

The delay in decommissioning also yields lower working area radiation levels. As such, the estimates for the delayed scenarios incorporate reduced ALARA controls for the SAFSTOR's lower occupational exposure potential.

Although the initial radiation levels due to 60 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, 59 Ni, and 63 Ni. Therefore, the dismantling procedures described for the DECON alternative would still be employed during deferred scenarios.

Portions of the biological shield will still be radioactive due to the presence of activated trace elements with long half-lives (152 Eu and 154 Eu). 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.

TLG Services, Inc.

Oyster Creek Nuclear GeneratingStation Document E16-1455-006,'Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Section 2, Page 14 of 14 2.2.4 Period 5 - Site Restoration Following completion of decommissioning operations, site-restoration activities can begin. If the site structures are to be dismantled, 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 the deferred scenarios 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.

TLG Services, Inc.

Oyster Creek Nuclear GeneratingStation Document E16-1455-006, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 3, Page 1 of2l

3. COST ESTIMATE The cost estimates prepared for decommissioning Oyster Creek consider the unique features of the site, including the NSSS, p6wer 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 with site-specific, technical information originally developed in an evaluation prepared for the GPU Nuclear Corporation in 1997-99.116] The information was reviewed for the current analysis and updated as deemed aippropriate. 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,"[17 ] and the DOE "Decommissioning Handbook."[18] 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) were developed using local labor rates. The activity-dependent costs were 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 relied upon information available in the industry publication, "Building Construction Cost Data," published by R.S.

Means.[19 ]

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 Pathfinder, Shoreham, Rancho Seco, Trojan, Yankee Rowe, Big Rock Point, Maine Yankee, Humboldt Bay-3, Oyster Creek, Connecticut Yankee, and San Onofre-1 nuclear units have provided additional insight into the process, the TLG Services, Inc.

Oyster Creek Nuclear GeneratingStation Document E16-1455-006, Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Section 3, Pqge2 of2l regulatory aspects, and the technical challenges of decommissioning commercial nuclear units.

The unit factor method provides a demonstrable basis for establishing reliable cost estimates. The detail provided in the unit factors, including adtivity 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.

Work Difficulty Factors WDFs were assigned to each area, commensurate with the inefficiencies associated with working in confined, hazardous environments. The ranges used for the WDFs are as follows:

• Access Factor 0% to 40%

• Respiratory Protection Factor 0% to 50%

• Radiation/ALARA Factor 0% to 100%

. Protective Clothing Factor 0% to 30%

Work Break Factor 8.33%

These factors and their associated range of values were developed in conjunction with the Atomic Industrial Forum's Guideline Study. The factors (and their suggested application) are discussed in more detail in Appendix F.

Scheduling Proe-ram Durations The unit factors, adjusted by the WDFs as described above, are applied against the inventory of materials to be removed in the radiologically 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 are based upon productivity information available from the "Building Construction Cost Data" publication.

An area-by-area activity duration critical path was used to develop the total decommissioning program schedule. The unit cost factors, adjusted for WDF's as described above, were applied against the inventory of materials to be removed in each defined work area. Each work area was assessed for the most efficient number of workers/crews for the decommissioning activities. These adjusted unit cost factors were applied against the available manpower so that TLG Services, Inc.

Oyster Creek Nuclear GeneratingStation Document E16-1455.006, Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Section 3, Page 3 of2l an overall duration for removal of components and piping from each work area could be calculated. Work area identification is consistent with the Survey Tracking Number (STN) system utilized by GPU's radiological services group in the 1997 timeframe. An index of the GPU STN's is provided in Appendix G.

The program schedule is used to determine the period-dependent costs for program management, administration, field engineering, equipment rental, contracted services, etc. The study relies upon regional or site-specific salary and wage rates for the personnel associated with the intended program.

3.3 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.

3.3.1 Contingencv 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"[ 20 ] 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 cost elements in this analysis are based upon ideal conditions and maximum efficiency; therefore, consistent with industry practice, a contingency factor has been applied. 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 TLG Services, Inc.

Oyster Creek Nuclear GeneratingStation Document E16-1455O006,-Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Section 3, Page 4 of2l analysis, does not account for price escalation and inflation in the cost of decommissioning over the remaining operating life of the station.

The use and role of contingency within decommissioning estimates is not a "safety factor issue." Safety factors provide additional sedurity and address situations that may never occur. Contingency funds are expected to be fully expended throughout the program. They also provide assurance that sufficient funding is available to accomplish the intended tasks. An estimate without contingency, or from which contingency has been removed, can disrupt the orderly progression of events and jeopardize a successful conclusion to the decommissioning process.

For example, the most technologically challenging task in decommissioning a commercial nuclear station is the disposition of the reactor vessel and internal components, now highly radioactive after a lifetime of exposure to core activity. The disposition of these components forms the' basis of the critical path (schedule) for decommissioning operations. Cost and schedule are interdependent, and any deviation in schedule has a significant impact on cost for.

performing a specific activity.

Disposition of the reactor vessel internals involves the underwater cutting of complex components that are highly radioactive. Costs are based upon optimum segmentation, handling, and packaging scenarios. The schedule is primarily dependent upon the turnaround time for the heavily shielded shipping casks, including preparation, loading, and decontamination of the containers for transport. The number of casks required is a function of the pieces generated in the segmentation activity, a value calculated on optimum performance of the tooling employed in cutting the various subassemblies. The expected optimization, however, may not be achieved, resulting in delays and additional program costs. For this reason, contingency must be included to mitigate the consequences of the expected inefficiencies inherent in this complex activity, along with related concerns associated with the operation of highly specialized tooling, field conditions, and water clarity.

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 TLG Services, Inc.

Oydster Creek Nuclear GeneratingStation Document E16-1455.006, Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Section 3, Page5 of2l 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%

Contaminated Component Transport 15%

Low-Level Radioactive Waste Disposal 25%

Reactor Segmentation 75%

NSSS Component Removal 25%

Reactor Waste Packaging 25%

Reactor Waste Transport 25%

Reactor Vessel Component Disposal 50%

GTCC Disposal 15%

Non-Radioactive Component Removal .15%

Heavy Equipment and Tooling 15%

Supplies 25%

Engineering 15%

Energy 15%

Characterization and Termination Surveys 30%

Construction 15%

Taxes and Fees 10%

Insurance 10%

Staffing 15%

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 estimate. For example, the composite contingency value reported for the DECON alternative is 18.9%. Values for the other alternatives are delineated within the detailed cost tables in Appendix D and E.

3.3.2 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.

TLG Services, Inc.

Oyster Creek Nuclear GeneratingStation Document E16-1455-006,Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Section 3, Page6 of2l 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 eliminating 50% to 80% of the site labor force shortly after the cessation of plant operations, added cost for worker separation packages throughout the decommissioning program, 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.

. Regulatory changes, e.g., affecting worker health and safety, site release criteria, waste transportation, and disposal.

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

• Pricing changes for basic inputs, such as labor, energy, materials, and burial. Some of these inputs may vary slightly, e.g. -10% to

+20%; burial could vary from -50% to +200% or more.

It has been TLG's experience that the results of a risk analysis, when compared with the base case estimate for decommissioning, indicate that the chances of the base decommissioning estimate's being too high is a low probability, and the chances that the estimate is too low is a higher probability. This is mostly due to the pricing uncertainty for TLG Services, Inc.

Oyster Creek Nuclear GeneratingStation Document E16-1455.006, Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Section 3, Page7 of2l low-level radioactive waste burial, and to a lesser extent due' to schedule increases from changes in plant conditions and to pricing variations in the cost of labor (both craft and staff). This cost study, however, does not add any additional costs to the estimate for financial risk since there is insufficient historical data from which to pkoject future liabilities. Consequently, the areas of uncertainty or risk are revisited periodically and addressed through repeated revisions or updates of the base estimate.

3.4 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.

3.4.1 Spent Fuel Management The cost to dispose of spent fuel generated from plant operations is not reflected within the estimates to decommission the Oyster Creek site.

Ultimate disposition of the spent fuel is within the province of the DOE's Waste Management System, as defined by the NWPA. As such, the disposal cost is financed by a 1 milllkWhr surcharge paid into the DOE's waste fund during operations. However, the NRC requires licensees to establish a program to manage and provide funding for the management of all irradiated fuel at the reactors until title of the fuel is transferred to the Secretary of Energy. This funding requirement is fulfilled through inclusion of certain high-level waste cost elements within the estimates, as described below.

The total inventory of assemblies that will require handling during decommissioning is based upon several assumptions. The pickup of commercial fuel is assumed to begin in the year 2015 and will proceed on an oldest fuel first basis. The maximum rate at which the fuel is removed from the commercial sites is based upon an annual capacity at the geologic repository of 3,000 metric tons of uranium (MTU). Any delay in the startup of the repository or decrease in the rate of acceptance will correspondingly prolong the transfer process and result in the fuel remaining at the site longer.

In all three scenarios, the ISFSI will continue to operate until such time that the transfer of spent fuel to the DOE can be completed. Assuming that the DOE commences repository operation in 2015, fuel is projected TLG Services, Inc.

Oyster Creek Nuclear GeneratingStation Document E16-1455-006, Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Section 3, Page 8 of2l to be removed from the Oyster Creek site by the year 2027. In the Delayed Decommissioning scenario, the ISFSI is only used to store fuel placed during plant operations. To reduce caretaking costs, the smaller inventory of fuel assemblies located in the ISFSI is preferentially off-loaded as the allocations permit Operation and maintenance costs for the storage facilities (the ISFSI and the pool for the Delayed DECON scenario) are included within the estimates and address the cost for staffing the facilities, as well as security, insurance, and licensing fees. The estimates include the costs to purchase, load, and transfer the fuel storage canisters. Costs are also provided for the final disposition of the facilities once the transfer is complete.

Repository Startup Operation of the DOE's yet-to-be constructed geologic repository is contingent upon the review and approval of the facility's license application by the NRC, the successful resolution of pending litigation, and the development of a national transportation system. By comparison, the NRC's review of the application for an interim storage facility submitted by the Private Fuel Storage consortium began in 1997 and is still ongoing. With a more technically complex and politically sensitive application for permanent disposal, it is not unreasonable to expect that NRC approval to construct the repository at Yucca Mountain will require at least as long a review period. Construction would therefore begin sometime around the year 2010, at the earliest. Therefore, the spent fuel management plan described in this section is predicated upon the DOE initiating the pickup of commercial fuel in the year 2015. This timetable is consistent with the findings of an evaluation recently issued to Congress by the Government Accounting Office.[ 21 1 Spent Fuel Management Model AmerGen Energy LLC is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Exelon Generation, LLC; the Exelon nuclear fleet, including the AmerGen units, consists of 21 units at 11 sites in Illinois, Pennsylvania, and New Jersey, including the inactive units at Dresden, Peach Bottom, and Zion. The ability to complete the decommissioning of these units, particularly for the DECON and Delayed DECON alternatives, is highly dependent upon when the DOE is assumed to remove spent fuel from the sites.

TLG Services, Inc.

Oyster Creek Nuclear GeneratingStation Document E16-1455-006,Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Section 3, Pqge9 of2l The DOE's repository program assumes that spent fuel will be accepted for disposal from the nation's commercial nuclear plants in the order (the "queue") in which it was removed from service C'oldest fuel first").[221 A computer model developed by Exelon Nuclear was used to determine when the DOE would provide allocations in the queue for removal of spent fuel from the individual sites. Repository operations were based upon annual industry-wide acceptance rates of 400 MTU/year for year 1, 600 MTU/ year for year 2, 1200 MTU/year for year 3, 2000 MTU/year for year 4, and 3000 MTU/year for year 5 and beyond. [23]

ISFSIs are constructed as necessary to maintain full-core discharge capability at the individual sites. Once the DOE begins repository operations, queue allocations are used to ship spent fuel from Exelon's operating sites in the following order: Limerick, Quad Cities, Byron, Braidwood, LaSalle and Clinton. Spent fuel shipments are then made from decommissioning sites in the order of retirement.

Canister Design A multi-purpose storage canister (similar to the HOLTEC HI-STORM system), with a 68-fuel assemblies capacity, is assumed for future cask acquisitions. A unit cost of $420,000 is used for pricing the internal multi-purpose canister (MPC), with an additional cost of $330,000 for the concrete overpack. The DOE is assumed to provide the MPC for fuel transferred directly from the pool to the DOE at no cost to the owner.

Canister Loading and Transfer An average cost of $200,000 is used for the labor to load/transport the spent fuel from the pool to the ISFSI pad, based upon industry experience. For estimating purposes, 50% of this cost is used to estimate the cost to transfer the fuel from the ISFSI to the DOE.

Operations and Maintenance Annual costs (excluding labor) of approximately $969,000 and $71,000 are used for operation and maintenance of the spent fuel pools and the ISFSI, respectively.

ISFSI Design Considerations A multi-purpose (storage and transport) dry shielded storage canister with a vertical, reinforced concrete storage overpack is used as a basis TLG Services, Inc.

Oyster Creek Nuclear GeneratingStation Document E16-1455-006, Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Section 3, Page10 of 21 for the cost analyses. Approximately 50% of the 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.

Approximately 10% of the concrete and steel is assumed to be removed from the overpacks for controlled disposal. The cost to dispose of this material, as well as the demolition of the ISFSI facility, is included in the estimiiates.

3.4.2 Reactor Vessel and Internal Components The NSSS (reactor vessel and reactor recirculation system components) will be decontaminated using chemical agents prior to the start of cutting operations (for DECON alternative only). A decontamination factor (average reduction) of 10 is assumed for the process.

The reactor pressure vessel and internal components are segmented for disposal in shielded, reusable transportation casks. Segmentation is performed in the dryer-separator pool, 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 will dictate segmentation and packaging methodology.

The dismantling of the reactor internals will generate radioactive waste considered unsuitable for shallow land disposal, i.e., GTCC. Although the material is not classified as high-level waste, the DOE has indicated it will accept this waste for disposal at the future high-level waste repository. 124 ] However, the DOE has not been forthcoming with an acceptance criteria or disposition schedule for this material, and numerous questions remain as to the ultimate disposal cost and waste form requirements. As such, for purposes of this study, the GTCC has been packaged and disposed of as high-level waste, at a cost equivalent to that envisioned for the spent fuel. It is not anticipated that the DOE would 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 reasonable to assume that this material would remain in storage at the Oyster Creek site.

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, TLG Services, Inc.

Oyster Creek Nuclear GeneratingStation Document E16-14554006,Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Section 3, Page11 of2l and transport/storage of the resulting waste packages. Portland General Electric (PGE) was able to dispose of the Trojan reactor as an intact package. 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,

. there were no man-made or natural terrain features between the plant site and the disposal location that could produce a large drop, and

. 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 Oyster.

Creek 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. Additionally, with BW.Rs, the diameter of the reactor vessel may severely limit overland transport. Consequently, the study assumes the reactor vessel will require segmentation, as a bounding condition.

3.4.3 Primary System Components Reactor recirculation 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 recirculation pumps and motors are lifted out intact, packaged, and transported for processing and/or disposal.

TLG Services, Inc.

Oyster Creek Nuclear GeneratingStation Document E16-1455-006, Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Section 3, Page 12 of2l 3.4.4 Main Turbine and Condenser The main turbine will be dismantled using conventional maintenance procedures. The turbine rotors and shafts will be removed to a laydown area. The lower turbine casings will be removed from their anchors by controlled demolition. The main condensers will also be disassembled and' moved to a laydown area. Material is then prepared for transportation to an off-site recycling facility where it will be surveyed and designated for either decontamination or volume reduction, conventional disposal, or controlled, disposal. Components will be packaged and readied for transport in accordance with the intended disposition.

3.4.5 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 49.125] The contaminated material will be packaged in Industrial Packages (IP I, fI, or III, 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 §71, as Type B. 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.

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 segment(s), supplementary shielding, cask tie-downs, and tractor-trailer.

The maximum level of activity per shipment assumed 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.

The low-level radioactive waste requiring controlled disposal will be sent to one of two currently available burial facilities. Transportation costs TLG Services, Inc.

Oyster Creek Nuclear GeneratingStation Document E16-1455-006,,Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 3, Page13 of2l are based upon the mileage to either the Envirocare facility in Clive, Utah, or the Barnwell facility in South Carolina. Memphis, Tennessee, is used as the destination for off-site processing. Transportation costs are estimated using published tariffs from Tri-State Motor Transit.12 6 ]

3.4.6 Low-Level Radioactive Waste Disposal To the greatest extent practical, metallic material generated in the decontamination and dismantling processes is treated to reduce the total volume requiring controlled disposal. The treated material, meeting the regulatory and/or site release criterion, is released as scrap, requiring no further cost consideration. Conditioning and recovery of the waste stream is performed off site at a licensed processing center.

Material requiring controlled disposal is packaged and transported to one of two currently available burial facilities. Very low-level radioactive material, e.g., structural steel and contaminated concrete, is sent to Envirocare. More highly'contaminated and activated material is sent to Barnwell. Disposal fees are based upon current charges for operating waste, with surcharges added for the highly activated components, e.g.,

generated in the segmentation of the reactor vessel.

3.4.7 Site Conditions Following Decommissioning The NRC will terminate (or amend) the site licenses 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 the owner's own future plans for the site.

Non-essential structures or buildings severely damaged in decontamination process 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. The excavations will be regraded such that'the power block area will have a final contour consistent with adjacent surroundings.

The estimates assume the remediation of a significant volume of contaminated soil. This assumption may be affected by continued plant TLG Services, Inc.

Oydster Creek Nuclear GeneratingStation Document E16-1455-006,Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Section 3, Page 14 of2l operations and/or future regulatory actions, such as the development of site-specific release criteria.

Asphalt surfaces in the immediate vicinity of the Oyster Creek site buildings are broken up and' the material used for backfill on site if needed.

3.5 ASSUMPTIONS The following are the major assumptions made in the development of the estimates for decommissioning the site.,

3.5.1 Estimating Basis 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 respiratory 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.

3.5.2 Labor Costs 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. Costs for site administration, operations, construction, and maintenance personnel are based upon average salary information provided by AmerGen Energy or from comparable industry information.

AmerGen Energy 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.

Contract personnel will provide engineering services, e.g., for preparing the activity specifications, work procedures, activation, and structural analyses, under the direction of AmerGen Energy.

TLG Services, Inc.

Oyster Creek Nuclear GeneratingStation Document E16-1455.006,'Rev. 0 DecommissioningCostAnalysis Section 3, Page15 of2l 3.5.3 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 the buildup of quantities of long-lived isotopes (e.g., 137Cs, 90 Sr, 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.[271 Actual estimates are derived from the curie/gram values contained therein and adjusted for the different mass of the Oyster Creek components, projected operating life, and different periods of decay. Additional short-lived isotopes were derived from CR-0130128] and CR-0672,[29] and benchmarked to the long-lived values from CR-3474.

The disposal cost for the control blades removed from the vessel with the final core load is included within the estimates. Disposition of any blades stored in the pools from operations is considered an operating expense and therefore not accounted for in the estimates.

Activation of the reactor building structure is confined to the sacrificial shield. More extensive activation (at very low -levels) of the interior structures within containment has been detected at several reactors and the owners have elected to dispose of the affected material at a controlled facility rather than reuse the material as fill on site or send it to a landfill. The ultimate disposition of the material removed from the reactor building will depend upon the site release criteria selected, as well as the designated end use for the site.

3.5.4 General Transition Activities Existing warehouses will be cleared of non-essential material and remain for use by AmerGen Energy and its subcontractors. The plant's operating staff will perform 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.

TLG Services, Inc.

OldsterCreek Nuclear GeneratingStation Document Ei6.1455-006,Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Section 3, Page16 of2l

• Drain and collect acids, caustics, and other chemical stores for recycle and/or sale.

. Process operating waste inventories, i.e., the estimates do not addiess the disposition of any legacy wastes; the disposal of operating wastes during this initial period is not considered a decommissioning expense.

Scran and Salvage The existing plant equipment is considered obsolete and suitable for scrap as deadweight quantities only. AmerGen Energy will make economically 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 owned by AmerGen Energy will be removed at no cost or credit to the decommissioning project. Disposition may include relocation to other facilities. Spare parts will also be made available for alternative use.

TLG Services, Inc.

Oyster Creek NuclearGeneratingStation Document E16-1455.006, Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Section 3, Page 17 of2l Energv 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 for the cost of energy consumption during decommissioning for tooling, lighting, ventilation, and essential services.

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 and the limits for, coverage defined in the NRC's proposed rulemaking "Financial Protection Requirements for Permanently Shutdown Nuclear Power Reactors."[ 3 0 ]

The NRC's financial protection requirements are based on various reactor (and spent fuel) configurations.

Taxes Property taxes are included for all decommissioning periods with the exception of the transition phase.

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.

3.6 COST ESTIMATE

SUMMARY

A schedule of expenditures for each scenario is provided in Tables 3.1 through 3.3. Decommissioning costs are reported in the year of projected expenditure; however, the values are provided in thousands of 2003 dollars. Costs are not inflated, escalated, or discounted over the period of expenditure. The annual expenditures are based upon the detailed activity costs reported in Appendices C through E, along with the schedule discussed in Section 4.

TLG Services, Inc.

Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station Document E16-1455-006, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 3, Page 18 of2l TABLE 3.1 SCHEDULE OF ANNUAL EXPENDITURES DECON (thousands, 2003 dollars)

A, 1 Equipment &

Year Labor Materials Energy Burial Other Total 2009 27,562 448 526

• 21 15,282 43,840 2010 46,627 9,969 711 17,258 32,722 107,286 2011 41,990 14,372 683 48,241 17,993 123,280 2012 37,003 5,622 543 20,919 14,881 78,968 2013 36,832 5,485 539 20,483 14,797 78,135 2014 34,570 4,899 481 17,051 12,204 69,205 2015 21,881 1,794 212 .2,641 7,445 33,973 2016 16,386 8,875 88 7 4,566 29,922 2017 13,124 8,671 61 0 2,674 24,529 2018 2,990 0 22 0 2,543 5,555 2019 2,990 0 22 0 2,543 5,555 2020 2,998 0 22 ' 0 2,552 5,572 2021 2,990 0 22 0

2,543 5,555 2022 2,990 0 22 2,543 5,555 0 22 0

2023 2,990 2,543 5,555

• 0 2024 2,998 0 22 2,552 5,572 0

2025 2,990 0 22 4,153 7,165

.0 2026 2,990 0 22 5,303 8,315 2027 2,991 335 22 6 11,642 14,994 2028 1,493 1,286 35 719 2,414 5,948 307,385 61,755 4,095 127,345 163,897 664,477 TLG Services, Inc.

Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station Document E16-1455-006, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 3, Page 19 of2l TABLE 3.2 SCHEDULE OF ANNUAL EXPENDITURES DELAYED DECON (thousands, 2003 dollars)

Equipment &

Year Labor Materials Energy Burial Other Total 2009 23,621 448 526 21 3,138 27,754 2010 27,331 3,662 678 1,963 15,938 49,571 2011 5,134 74 539 29 4,179 .9,955 2012 5,148 74 541 29 4,192 9,983 2013 5,134 74 539 29 4,179 9,955 2014 5,134 74 539 29 4,179 9,955 2015 5,134 74 539 29 4,179 9,955 2016 5,148 74 541 29 4,192 9,983 2017 5,134 74 539 29 4,179 9,955 2018 5,134 74 539 29 4,179 9,955 2019 5,134 74 539 29 4,179 9,955 2020 5,148 74 541 29 4,192 9,983 2021 5,134 74 539 29 4,179 9,955 2022 5,134 74 539 29 4,179 9,955 2023 5,134 74 539 29 4,179 9,955 2024 5,148 74 541 29 4,192 9,983 2025 5,134 74 539 29 6,019 11,795 2026 15,715 345 539 29 12,193 28,821 2027 40,761 5,655 539 3,534 16,232 66,721 2028 38,665 13,238 541 32,351 9,792 94,585 2029 43,293 8,341 425 35,619 6,211 93,889 2030 33,206 4,825 302 22,169 7,555 68,057 2031 15,505 7,461 98 11 5,212 28,285 2032 14,005 10,365 66 0 1,874 26,310 329,161 55,444 11,808 96,132 142,724 635,270 TLG Services, Inc.

Oyster Creek Nuclear GeneratingStation Document E16-1455-006, Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Section 3, Page20 of2l TABLE 3.3 SCHEDULE OF ANNUAL EXPENDITURES SAFSTOR (thousands, 2003 dollars)

X, 1 Equipment &

Year Labor Materials Energy Burial Other Total 2009 23,621 448 526 21 11,809 36,425 2010 27,331 3,662 678 1,963 27,430 61,063 2011 5,134 74 539 29 14,534 20,309 2012 5,148 74 541 29 14,574 20,365 2013 5,134 74 539 29 14,534 20,309 2014 4,715 74 432 29 11,864 17,113 2015 3,31'4 74 72 29 2,932 6,420 2016 3,323 74 72 29 2,941 6,439 2017 3,314 74 72 29 2,932 6,420 2018 3,314 74 72 29 2,932 6,420 2019 3,314 74 72 29 2,932 6,420 2020 3,323 74 72 29 2,941 6,439 2021 3,314 74 72 29 2,932 6,420 2022 3,314 74 72 29 2,932 6,420 2023 3,314 74 72 29 2,932 6,420 2024 3,323 74 72 29 2,941 6,439 2025 3,314 74 72 29 4,542 8,030 2026 3,314 74 72 29 5,692 9,180 2027 3,312 74 72 29 5,691 9,178 2028 2,871 74 72 29 2,648 5,694 2029 2,863 74 72 29 2,640 5,678 2030 2,863 74 72 29 2,640 5,678 2031 2,863 74 72 29 2,640 5,678 2032 2,871 74 72 29 2,648 5,694 2033 2,863 74 72 29 2,640 5,678 2034 2,863 74 72 29 2,640 5,678 2035 2,863 74 72 29 2,640 5,678 2036 2,871. 74 72 29 2,648 5,694 2037 2,863 74 72 29 2,640 5,678 2038 2,863 74 72 29 2,640 5,678 2039 2,863 74 72 29 2,640 5,678 2040 2,871 74 72 29 2,648 5,694 2041 2,863 74 72 29 2,640 5,678 2042 2,863 74 72 29 2,640 5,678 TLG Services, Inc.

Oydster Creek Nuclear Generating Station Document E16-1455.006, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 3, Page 21 of2l TABLE 3.3 (continued)

SCHEDULE OF ANNUAL EXPENDITURES SAFSTOR (thousands, 2003 dollars)

Equipment &

Year Labor Materials Energy Burial Other Total 2043 2,863 74 72 29 2,640 5,678 2044 2,871 74 72 29 2,648 5,694 2045 2,863 74 72 29 2,640 5,678 2046 2,863 74 72 29 2,640 5,678 2047 2,863 74 72 29 2,640 5,678 2048 2,871 74 72 29 2,648 5,694 2049 2,863 74 72 29 2,640 5,678 2050 2,863 74 72 29 2,640 5,678 2051 2,863 74 72 29 2,640 5,678 2052 2,871 74 72 29 2,648 5,694 2053 2,863 74 72 29 2,640 5,678 2054 2,863 74 72 29 2,640 5,678 2055 2,863 74 72 29 2,640 5,678 2056 2,871 74 72 29 2,648 5,694 2057 2,863 74 72 29 2,640 5,678 2058 2,863 74 72 29 2,640 5,678 2059 2,863 74 72 29 2,640 5,678 2060 2,871 74 72 29 2,648 5,694 2061 2,863 74 72 29 2,640 5,678 2062 2,863 74 72 29 2,640 5,678 2063 2,863 74 72 29 2,640 5,678 2064 10,930 261 235 29 4,416 15,871 2065 36,160 4,088 539 2,400 8,869 52,056 2066 43,816 15,361 539 32,857 11,503 104,076 2067 44,287 8,075 412 36,086 5,993 94,854 2068 30,755 4,247 278 18,643 8,099 62,022 2069 15,478 8,668 91 8 4,377 28,622 2070 12,584 9,505 59 0 1,678 23,827 411,347 58,222 8,933 93,546 280,064 852,113 TLG Services, Inc.

Oyster Creek Nuclear GeneratingStation Document E16-1455.006,*Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 4, Page1 of 7

4. SCHEDULE ESTIMATE The schedules for the decommissioning scenarios considered in this study follow the sequence presented in the AIF1NESP-036 study, with minor changes to reflect iecent experience and site-specific constraints. In addition, the scheduling has been revised to reflect the spent fuel management plans described in Section 3.4.1.

A schedule or sequence of activities is presented in Figure 4.1 for the DECON decommissioning alternative. The schedule is also representative of the work activities identified in the delayed dismantling scenarios, absent any spent fuel constraints. The scheduling sequence assumes that fuel is removed from the spent fuel pool within the first 51/2 years after operations cease. 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 Pthers for convenience. The schedule was prepared using the "Microsoft Project 2002" computer software.i3 11 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 tables, 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 reactor building is isolated until such time that all spent fuel has been discharged from the spent fuel pool to the DOE or to the ISFSI.

Decontamination and dismantling of the storage pool is initiated once the transfer of spent fuel to the ISFSI is complete.

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.

TLG Services, Inc.

Oyster Creek Nuclear GeneratingStation Document E16-1455.006, Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Section 4, Page2 of 7 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.

• For plant systems removal, the systems with the longest removal durations in areas on the critical path are considered to determine the duration of the activity.

4.2 PROJECT SCHEDULE The period-dependent costs presented in the detailed cost tables are based upon the durations developed in the schedule for decommissioning Oyster Creek.

Durations are established between several milestones in each project period; these durations are used to establish a critical 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 also shown for the spent fuel cooling period, which determines the release of the reactor building for final decontamination.

Project timelines are provided in Figures 4.2 through 4.4. Milestone dates are based on a shutdown date of April 9, 2009. The start of decommissioning operations in the Delayed Decommissioning scenario is concurrent with the end of the fuel transfer activity, i.e. to an off-site DOE facility.

TLG Services, Inc.

Oyster Creek Nuclear GeneratingStation Document E16-1455-006, Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Section 4, Page 3 of 7 FIGURE 4.1 ACTIVITY SCHEDULE

[ask Name Oyster Creek schedule

_01 i rw I '1.l6 i 7_16l _19 Shutdown Unit 1 Period la Unit I -Shutdown through transition Certificate of permanent cessation of operations

• I submitted Fuel storage pool operations Dry fuel storage operations Reconfigure plant 4 Prepare activity specifications Perform site characterization PSDAR submitted Written certificate of permanent removal of fuel 4 submitted Site specific decommissioning cost estimate submitted DOC staff mobilized M

Period lb Unit I - Decommissioning preparations Fuel storage pool operations Reconfigure plant (continued)

Dry fuel storage operations Prepare detailed wort procedures 0 Decon NSSS M Isolate spent fuel pool Eli Period 2a Unit 1 -Large component removal Fuel storage pool operations Dry fuel storage operations Preparation for reactor vessel removal Reactor vessel & internals Remaining large NSSS components disposition TLG Services, Inc.

Oyster Creek Nuclear GeneratingStation Document E16-1455-006, Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Section 4, Page4 of 7 FIGURE 4.1 ACTIVITY SCHEDULE (continued)

TaskName I X I v ! 09 ! *1 lFL:!U6 t12 j1 1 1 14 1 15 - '151 17 ! '181 X19° Non-essential systems L_

1, Main turbine/generator Main condenser License termination plan submitted I Period 2b Unit I -Decontamination (wet fuel)

Fuel storage pool operations 0

Dry fuel storage operations Remorve systems 'not supporting wet fuel storage Decon buildings not supporting wet fuel storage License termination plan approved Fuel storage pool available for decommissioning Period 2c Unit 1 - Decontamination following wet fuel storage Dry fuel storage operations Remove remaining systems Decon wet fuel storage area Period 2d Unit I- Delay before license termination Period 2e Unit 1. Plant license termination E3 Dry fuel storage operations Final Site Survey NRC review & approval 3 Part 60 license terminated Period 3b Unit I . Site restoration r.

Dry fuel storage operations Building demolitions backfill and landscaping l

TLG Services, Inc.

Oyster Creek NuclearGeneratingStation Document E16-1455-006,Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Section 4, Page 5 of 7 FIGURE 4.2 DECOMMISSIONING TIMELINE DECON (not to scale)

(Shutdown April 9, 2009)

Pool and ISFSI Operations ISFSI Operations I

Period 1 Period 3 Transition and Period 2 ISFSI ISFSI

. Site Decommissioning Operations 04/2009 10/2010 03/2016 10/2017 12/2027 06/2028 Storage Pool Empty 10/2014 TLG Services, Inc.

Oyster Creek Nuclear GeneratingStation Document E16-1455-006, Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Section 4, Page6 of 7 FIGURE 4.3 DECOMMISSIONING TIMELINE DELAYED DECON (not to scale)

I, I (Shutdown April 9, 2009)

Spent Fuel Storage Period 1 Period 2 Period 3 Period 4 Period 5 Dormancy Decommissioning 04/2009 10/2010 07/2026 12/2027 05/2031 12/2032 Storage Pool Empty 12/2027 TLG Services, Inc.

Oyster Creek Nuclear GeneratingStation Document E16-1455-006, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 4, Page 7 of 7 FIGURE 4.4 DECOMMISSIONING TIMELINE SAFSTOR (not to scale)

(Shutdown April 9, 2009)

Spent Fuel Storage Period 1 Period 2 Period 3 Period 4 Period 5 Transition and Dormancy Delayed Decommissioning Site Preparations I Preparations I Restoration I I 1.

II. I 0I . 20I 04/2009 1012010 08/2064 02/2066 04/2069 10/2070 Storage Pool Empty 10/2014 ISFSI Empty 12/2027 TLG Services, Inc.

Oyster Creek Nuclear GeneratingStation I Document E16-1455-006, Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Section 5, Page1 of 5

5. RADIOACTIVE WASTES 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(s). This currently requires the'remediation of all radioactive material at the site in excess of applicable legal limits. Under the Atomic Energy Act,[32 ] 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, §71 defines radioactive material and §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 §173-178. Shipping containers are required to be Industrial Packages (IP-1, IP-2 or IP-3, as defined in subpart 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 volumes of radioactive waste generated during the various decommissioning activities at the site is shown on a line-item basis in Appendix C, D, and E and summarized in Tables 5.1 through 5.3. The quantified waste volume summaries shown in these tables are consistent with §61 classifications. 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 reactor 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 Wil still control the disposition requirements.

TLG Services, Inc.

Oyster Creek Nuclear GeneratingStation Document E16-1455-006,.Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Section 5, Page 2 of5 The waste material generated in the decontamination and dismantling of Oyster Creek is primarily generated during Period 2 of the DECON alternative and Period 4 of the deferred alternatives. Material that is considered potentially contaminated when removed from the radiologically controlled area is sent to processing facilities in Tennessee for conditioning and disposal. Heavily contaminated components and activated materials are routed for controlled disposal. The disposal volumes reported in the tables reflect the savings resulting from reprocessing and recycling.

For purposes of constructing the analysis, the rate schedule for the Barnwell facility was used as a proxy for the higher activity waste. This schedule was used to estimate the disposal fees for most plant components and all activated concrete unsuitable for processing or recovery. An average disposal rate of approximately $315 per cubic foot was used, with additional surcharges for activity, dose rate, and/or handling added as appropriate for the particular package.

The remaining volume 6f contaminated metallic and concrete debris is processed and conditioned at a Duratek facility. The contaminated metallic waste stream includes the lower activity components such as miscellaneous steel, metal siding, scaffolding, and structural steel. Metals are recycled at a unit rate of $1.99 per pound. Concrete, soil, asbestos and other bulk debris are disposed of at a rate of $1.00 per pound or approximately $100 per cubic foot. Dry active wastes, e.g., cloth, paper and plastics, are sent to the Envirocare facility for direct disposal from the site at $2.87 per pound or $57.40 per cubic foot, at an assumed density of 20 pounds per cubic foot.

TLG Services, Inc.

Oyster Creek NuclearGeneratingStation Document E16-1455-006, Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Section 5, Page3 of 5 TABLE 5.1 DECOMMISSIONING WASTE

SUMMARY

DECON Waste Volume Weight Class' (cubic feet) (pounds)

Low-Level Radioactive Waste Barnwell, South Carolina (contaminated/activated metallic waste and concrete)

A *68,944 5,996,132 B 11,820 1,731,981 C. 631 37,795 Envirocare, Utah (miscellaneous steel, contaminated/activated concrete)

Containerized A 19,647 1,706,435 Bulk A 208,188 17,995,060 Geologic Repository (Greater-than Class C) 411 72,900 Total 2 309,641 27,540,303 Processed Waste (Off-Site) 386,250 Scrap Metal 45,702,000 I Waste is classified according to the requirements as delineated in Title 10 CFR, Part 61.55 2 Columns may not add due to rounding.

TLG Services, Inc.

Oydster Creek Nuclear GeneratingStation Document E16-1455.006, Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Section 5, Page 4 of 5 TABLE 5.2 DECOMMISSIONING WASTE

SUMMARY

DELAYED DECON Waste Volume Weight Class' (cubic feet) (pounds)

Low-Level Radioactive Waste Barnwell, South Carolina (contaminated/activated metallic waste and concrete)

A 37,887 3,312,336, B 6,686 909,192 C 287 32,125 Envirocare, Utah (miscellaneous steel, contaminated/activated concrete)

Containerized A 16,858 1,463,684 Bulk I A 186,753 15,512,240 Geologic Repository (Greater-than Class C)

>C 411 72,900 Total 2 248,882 21,302,477 Processed Waste (Off-Site) 462,227 Scrap Metal 45,702,000 I Waste is classified according to the requirements as delineated in Title 10 CFR, Part 61.55 2 Columns may not add due to rounding.

TLG Services, Inc.

Oyster Creek NuclearGeneratingStation Document E16-14556006, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 5, Page5 of 5 TABLE 5.3 DECOMMISSIONING WASTE

SUMMARY

SAFSTOR Waste Volume Weight Class' (cubic feet) (pounds)

Low-Level Radioactive Waste Barnwell, South Carolina (contaminated/activated metallic waste and concrete)

A 37,456 3,216,877 B 6,405 873,677 C. 287 32,125 Envirocare, Utah (miscellaneous steel, contaminated/activated concrete)

Containerized A 16,591 1,432,314 Bulk A 205,297 16,215,750 Geologic Repository (Greater-than Class C)

>C 411 72,900 Total 2 266,447 21,843,643 Processed Waste (Off-Site) 456,585 Scrap Metal 45,702,000 I Waste is classified according to the requirements as delineated in Title 10 CFR, Part 61.55 2 Columns may not add due to rounding.

TLG Services, Inc.

Oyster Creek NuclearGeneratingStation Document E16-1455-006,.Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Section 6, Page 1 of 6

6. RESULTS The analysis to estimate the costs to decommission Oyster Creek relied upon the site-specific, technical information developed for a previous analysis preparbd in 1997-99. While not an engineering study, the estimates provide AmerGen Energy with sufficient information to assess its 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 plant's spent fuel pool for a minimum of 5V2 years following the cessation of operations for continued cooling of the assemblies. For the DECON and SAFSTOR scenarios, spent fuel will be offloaded to the ISFSI until such time that the DOE can complete the transfer of the assemblies to its repository. The spent fuel remains in the storage pool in the Delayed DECON alternative.

The cost projected to promptly decommission (DECON) Oyster Creek is estimated to be $664:5 million. The majority of this cost (approximately 72.3%) is associated with the physical decontamination and dismantling of the nuclear unit so that the license can be terminated. Another 21.3% is associated with the management, interim storage, and eventual transfer of the spent fuel. The remaining 6.4% is for the demolition of the designated structures and limited restoration of the site.

The primary cost contributors, identified in Tables 6.1 through 6.3, 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 AmerGen Energy will oversee the decommissioning program, using a DOC to manage the decommissioning labor force and the associated subcontractors. The size and composition of the management organization varies with the decommissioning phase and associated site activities.

However, once the operating license is 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).

As described in this report, the spent fuel pool will remain operational for a minimum of 51/2 years following the cessation of operations. The pool will be isolated TLG Services, Inc.

Oyster Creek NuclearGeneratingStation Document E16-1455-006,.Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Section 6, Page2 of 6 and an independent spent fuel island created. This will allow decommissioning operations to proceed in and around the pool area. Over the 5Y2-year period, the spent fuel will be packaged into transportable steel canisters for loading into a DOE-provided transport cask (DECON and SAFSTOR alternatives only). The canisters will be stored in concrete overpacks at the ISFSI until the DOE is able to receive them. Dry storage of the fuel under a separate license provides additional flexibility in the event the DOE is not able to meet the current timetable for completing the transfer of assemblies to an off-site facility, and minimizes the associated caretaking expenses.

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, disposal of the lower level material, including concrete and structural steel, is at the Envirocare facility. The more highly radioactive material is sent to the Barnwell facility, with the exception of selected reactor vessel components. Highly activated components, requiring additional isolation from the environment, are packaged for geologic disposal. The cost of geologic disposal is based upon a cost equivalent for spent fuel.

A significant portion of the metallic waste is designated for additional processing and treatment at an off-site facility. Processing reduces the volume of material requiring controlled disposal through such techniques and processes as survey and' sorting, decontamination, and volume reduction. The material that cannot be unconditionally released is packaged for controlled disposal at one of the currently operating facilities. The cost identified in the summary table for processing is all-inclusive, incorporating the ultimate disposition of the material.

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 union wages. Non-radiological demolition is a natural extension of the decommissioning process. The methods employed in decontamination and dismantling are generally destructive and indiscriminate in inflicting collateral damage. 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.

TLG Services, Inc.

Oyster Creek Nuclear GeneratingStation Document E16-1455-006, Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Section 6, Page3 of 6 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.

Decontaminatioi'is used to reduce the plant's radiation fields and minimize worker exposure. Slightly contaminated material or material located within a contaminated area is sent to an off-site processing center, i.e., this analysis does not assume that contaminated plant components and equipment can be decontaminated for uncontrolled release in-situ. Centralized processing centers have proven to be a more economical means of handling the large volumes of material produced in the dismantling of a nuclear unit.

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.

TLG Services, Inc.

Oyster Creek Nuclear GeneratingStation Document E16-1455-006, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 6, Page4 of 6 TABLE 6.1

SUMMARY

OF DECOMMISSIONING COST ELEMENTS DECON (thousands of 2003 dollars)

Work Category Cost  %

Decontamination 14,149 2.1 Removal 106,014 16.0 Packaging 12,406 1.9 Transportation 5,561 0.8 Waste Disposal 96,915 14.6 Off-site Waste Processing 36,757 5.5 Program Management [1] 236,572 35.6 Spent Fuel Pool Isolation 9,332 1.4 ISFSI Related (non-operating) 81,723 12.3 Insurance and Regulatory Fees 18,601 2.8 Energy 4,095 0.6 Characterization and Licensing Surveys 10,191 1.5 Property Taxes 20,638 3.1 Miscellaneous Equipment 5,998 0.9 Site O&M 5,526 0.8 Total [2] 664,477 100.0 NRC License Termination 480,331 72.3 Spent Fuel Management 141,648 21.3 Site Restoration 42,498 6.4 I'] Includes engineering and security 121Columns may not add due to rounding TLG Services, Inc.

Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station Document E16-1455.006, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 6, Page 5 of 6 TABLE 6.2

SUMMARY

OF DECOMMISSIONING COST ELEMENTS DELAYED DECON (thousands of 2003 dollars)

Work Category Cost  %

Decontamination 18,113 2.9 Removal 95,991 15.1 Packaging 8,829 1.4 Transportation, 4,258 0.7 Waste Disposal 58,593 9.2 Off-site Waste Processing 43,866 6.9 Program Management [1] 261,672 41.2 Spent Fuel Pool Isolation ' 9,332 1.5 ISFSI Related (non-operating) 38,655 6.1 Insurance and Regulatory Fees 31,133 4.9 Energy 11,808 1.9 Characterization and Licensing Surveys 11,524 1.8 Property Taxes 25,513 4.0 Miscellaneous Equipment 9,183 1.4 Site O&M 6,798 1.1 Total 12] 635,270 100.0 NRC License Termination 414,583 65.3 Spent Fuel Management 175,539 27.6 Site Restoration 45,148 7.1 II Includes engineering and security 121 Columns may not add due to rounding TLG Services, Inc.

Oyster Creek NuclearGeneratingStation Document E16.1455 006,.Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 6, Page6 of 6 TABLE 6.3

SUMMARY

OF DECOMMISSIONING COST ELEMENTS SAFSTOR (thousands of 2003 dollars)

Work Category Cost  %

Decontamination 18,035 2.1 Removal 99,217 11.6 Packaging 8,949 1.1 Transportation 4,282 0.5 Waste Disposal 56,405 6.6 Off-site Waste Processing 43,468 5.1 Program Management [I] 343,367 40.3 Spent Fuel Pool Isolation 9,332 1.1 ISFSIRelated (non-operating) 77,603 9.1 Insurance and Regulatory Fees 69,823 8.2 Energy 8,933 1.0 Characterization and Licensing Surveys 11,524 1.4 Property Taxes 67,209 7.9 Miscellaneous Equipment 16,269 1.9 Site O&M 17,696 2.1 Total [2] 852,113 100.0 NRC License Termination 610,009 71.6 Spent Fuel Management 196,982 23.1 Site Restoration 45,122 5.3 Il] Includes engineering and security 121Columns may not add due to rounding TLG Services, Inc.

Oyster Creek Nuclear GeneratingStation Document E16-1455.006, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 7, Page 1 of3

7. REFERENCES

1. 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, Federal Register Volume 53, Number 123 (p 24018 et seq.), June' 27, 1988.

2. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Regulatory Guide 1.159, "Assuring the Availability of Funds for Decommissioning Nuclear Reactors," October 2003.

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

4. U.S. Code of Federal Regulations, Title 10, Parts 20 and 50, "Entombment Options for Power Reactors," Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, Federal Register Volume 66, Number 200, October 16, 2001.

5. 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.

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

7. Maine Yankee Atomic Power Company, Connecticut Yankee Atomic Power Company, and Yankee Atomic Power Company v. United States, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit decision, Docket No. 99-5138, -5139, -5140, August 31, 2000.

8. U.S. Code of Federal Regulations, Title 10, Part 50, "Domestic Licensing of Production and Utilization Facilities," Subpart 54 (bb), "Conditions of Licenses."

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

10. "Low-Level Radioactive Waste Policy Amendments Act of 1985," Public Law 99-240, January 15, 1986.

11. U.S. Code of Federal Regulations, Title 10, Part 20, Subpart E, "Radiological Criteria for License Termination," Federal Register, Volume 62, Number 139 (p 39058 et seq.), July 21, 1997.

TLG Services, Inc.

Oyster Creek Nuclear GeneratingStation Document E16-1455-006, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 7, Page2 of3

7. REFERENCES (continued)

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

13. 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."

14. "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.

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

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

16. "Decommissioning Cost Analysis for the Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station," Document No. GO1-1271-003, TLG Services, Inc., February 1999.

17. T.S. LaGuardia et al., "Guidelines for Producing Commercial Nuclear Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Estimates," AIF/NESP-036, May 1986.

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

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

19. "Building Construction Cost Data 2003," Robert Snow Means Company, Inc.,

Kingston, Massachusetts.

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

21. 'Technical, Schedule, and Cost Uncertainties of the Yucca Mountain Repository Project," GAO-02-191, December 2001.

22. "Acceptance Priority Ranking & Annual Capacity Report," DOE/RW-0457, March 1995.

TLG Services, Inc.

Oyster Creek Nuclear GeneratingStation Document E16-1455-006, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 7, Page 3 of3

7. REFERENCES (continued)

23. "Civilian Radioactive Waste Management System Total System Description,"

Revision 02 (TDR-CRW-SE-000002), DOE/RW-0500, September 2001.

24. "Strategy'for Management and Disposal of Greater-Than-Class C Low-Level Radioactive Waste," Federal Register Volume 60, Number 48 (p 13424 et seq.), March 1995.

25. U.S. Department of Transportation, Title 49 of the Code of Federal Regulations, "Transportation," Parts 173 through 178, 1996.

26. Tri-State Motor Transit Company, published tariffs, Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC), Docket No. MC-109397 and Supplements, 2000.

27. 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.

28. 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.

29. 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.

30. "Financial Protection Requirements for Permanently Shutdown Nuclear Power Reactors," 10 CFR Parts 50 and 140, Federal Register Notice, Vol. 62, No. 210, October 30, 1997.

31. "Microsoft Project 2002," Microsoft Corporation, Redmond, WA, 2002.

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

TLG Services, Inc.

Oldster Creek Nuclear GeneratingStation *Document E16-1455.006,.Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis AppendixA, Page1 of 4 APPENDIX A UNIT COST FACTOR DEVELOPMENT TLG Services, Inc.

Oyster Creek NuclearGeneratingStation Document E16.1455-006, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Appendix A, Page2 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 i Remove, wrap, send to waste processing area 60 60 Totals (Activity/Critical) 355 255 Duration adjustment(s):

+ Respiratory protection adjustment (25% of critical duration) 64

+ Radiation/ALARA adjustment (30% of critical duration) 77 Adjusted work duration 396

+ Protective clothing adjustment (30% of adjusted duration) 119 Productive work duration 515

+ Work break adjustment (8.33 % of productive duration) 43 Total work duration (minutes) 558

• Total duration = 9.300 hr ***

• alpha designators indicate activities that can be performed in parallel TLG Services, Inc.

Oyster Creek Nuclear GeneratingStation Document E16-1455.006,.Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Appendix A, Page3 of4 APPENDIX A (continued)

3. LABOR REQUIRED Crew NumberDuration Rate Cost (hours) ($/hr)

Laborers 3.00 9.300 $38.21 $1,066.06 Craftsmen 2.00 9.300 $52.14 $969.80 Foreman' 1.00 9.300 $54.76 $509.27 General Foreman 0.25 9.300 $57.72 $134.20 Fire Watch 0.05 9.300 $38.21 $17.77 Health Physics Technician 1.00 9.300 $36.12 $335.92 Total labor cost $3,033.02

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

-Blotting paper 50 @ $0.42 sq ft {2} $21.00

-Plastic sheets/bags 50 @ $0.10/sq ft {3) $5.00

-Gas torch consumables 1 @ $4.16/hr x 1 hr {1) $4.16 Subtotal cost of equipment and materials $30.16 Overhead & profit on equipment and materials @ 16.00 % $4.83 Total costs, equipment & material $34.99 TOTAL COST:

Removal of contaminated heat exchanger <3000 pounds: $3,068.01 Total labor cost: $3,033.02 Total equipment/material costs: $34.99 Total craft labor man-hours required per unit: 67.890 TLG Services, Inc.

Oyster Creek Nuclear GeneratingStation Document E16-1455-006, Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis AppendixA, Page4 of4

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 arnd are delineated in Volume 1, Chapter 5 of the "Guidelines for Producihg ' Commercial Nuclear Power Plant Decommfissioning Cost Estimates," AIF/NESP-036, May 1986.

• References for equipment & consumables costs:

1. www.mcmaster.com online catalog, item 7193785

2. R.S. Means (2003) Section 01540-800-0200, page 17

3. R.S. Means (2003) Section 01590-400-6360, page 25

• Mate4al and consumable costs were adjusted using the regional indices for Camden, New Jersey.

TLG Services, Inc.

Oyster Creek Nuclear GeneratingStation *Document E16-1455O006, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Appendix B, Page 1 of 8 APPENDIX B UNIT COST FACTOR LISTING (DECON: Power Block Structures Only)

TLG Services, Inc.

Oyster Creek Nuclear GeneratingStation Docunent E16-1455-006, Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Appendix B, Page 2 of8 APPENDIX B UNIT COST FACTOR LISTING (Power Block Structures Only)

Unit Cost Factor CostlUnit($)

Removal of clean instrument and sampling tubing, $/linear foot 0.43 Removal of clean pipe 0.25 to 2 inches diameter, $/linear foot 4.48 Removal of clean pipe >2 to 4 inches diameter, $/linear foot 6.48 Removal of clean pipe >4 to 8 inches diameter, $/linear foot 12.69 Removal of clean pipe >8 to 14 inches diameter, $/linear foot 24.44 Removal of clean pipe >14 to 20 inches diameter, $/linear foot 31.63 Removal of clean pipe >20 to 36 inches diameter, $/linear foot 46.57 Removal of clean pipe >36 inches diameter, $/linear foot 55.39 Removal of clean valves >2 to 4 inches 83.88 Removal of clean valves >4 to 8 inches 126.92 Removal of clean valves >8 to 14inches 244.35 Removal of clean valves >14 to 20 inches 316.29 Removal of clean valves >20 to 36 inches 465.69 Removal of clean valves >36 inches 553.90 Removal of clean pipe hangers for small bore piping 26.07 Removal of clean pipe hangers for large bore piping 96.42 Removal of clean pumps, <300 pound 211.14 Removal of clean pumps, 300-1000 pound 593.35 Removal of clean pumps, 1000-10,000 pound 2,356.59 Removal of clean pumps, >10,000 pound 4,547.23 Removal of clean pump motors, 300-1000 pound 251.24 Removal of clean pump motors, 1000-10,000 pound 983.97 Removal of clean pump motors, >10,000 pound 2,213.94 Removal of clean heat exchanger <3000 pound 1,261.46 Removal of clean heat exchanger >3000 pound 3,161.00 TLG Services, Inc.

Oyster Creek Nuclear GeneratingStation Document E16-1455-006, Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Appendix B, Page3 of 8 APPENDIX B (continued)

Unit Cost Factor CostlUnit($)

I. I Removal of clean tanks, <300 gallons 271.95 Removal of clean tanks, 300-3000 gallon 863.17 Removal of clean tanks, >3000 gallons, $/square foot surface area 7.24 Removal of clean electrical equipment, <300 pound 116.97 Removal of clean electrical equipment, 300-1000 pound 409.06 Removal of clean electrical equipment, 1000-10,000 pound 818.12 Removal of clean electrical equipment, >10,000 pound 1,949.14 Removal of clean electrical transformers < 30 tons 1,353.65 Removal of clean electrical transformers > 30 tons 3,898.29 Removal of clean standby diesel-generator, <100 kW 1,382.64 Removal of clean standby diesel-generator, 100 kW to 1 MW 3,086.15 Removal of clean standby diesel-generator, >1 MW 6,388.94 Removal of clean electrical cable tray, $/linear foot 10.81 Removal of clean electrical conduit, $/linear foot 4.71 Removal of clean mechanical equipment, <300 pound 116.97 Removal of clean mechanical equipment, 300-1000 pound 409.06 Removal of clean mechanical equipment, 1000-10,000 pound 818.12 Removal of clean mechanical equipment, >10,000 pound 1,949.14 Removal of clean HVAC equipment, <300 pound 116.97 Removal of clean HVAC equipment, 300-1000 pound 409.06 Removal of clean HVAC equipment, 1000-10,000 pound 818.12 Removal of clean HVAC equipment, >10,000 pound 1,949.14 Removal of clean HVAC ductwork, $/pound 0.45 Removal of contaminated instrument and sampling tubing, $/linear foot 1.08 Removal of contaminated pipe 0.25 to 2 inches diameter, $/linear foot 14.78 TLG Services, Inc.

Oyster Creek Nuclear GeneratingStation Document E16-1455-006,.Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Appendix B, Page 4 of8 APPENDIX B (continued)

Unit Cost Factor CostfLnit($)

Removal of contaminated pipe >2 to 4 inches diameter, $/linear foot 25.53 Removal of contaminated pipe >4 to 8 inches diameter, $/Linear foot 40.90 Removal of contaminated pipe >8 to 14 inches diameter, $/linear foot 80.28 Removal of contaminated pipe >14 to 20 inches diameter, $/linear foot 96.33 Removal of contaminated pipe >20 to 36 inches diameter, $/linear foot 133.86 Removal of contaminated pipe >36 inches diameter, $/linear foot 159.41 Removal of contaminated valves >2 to 4 inches 315.19 Removal of contaminated valves >4 to 8 inches 374.12 Removal of contaminated valves >8 to 14 inches 772.69 Removal of contaminated valves >14 to 20 inches 981.06 Removal of contaminated valves >20 to 36 inches 1,308.47 Removal of contaminated valves >36 inches 1,563.91 Removal of contaminated pipe hangers for small bore piping 83.60 Removal of contaminated pipe hangers for large bore piping 275.50 Removal of contaminated pumps, <300 pound 655.84 Removal of contaminated pumps, 300-1000 pound 1,537.13 Removal of contaminated pumps, 1000-10,000 pound 5,201.62 Removal of contaminated pumps, >10,000 pound 12,630.87 Removal of contaminated pump motors, 300-1000 pound 655.43 Removal of contaminated pump motors, 1000-10,000 pound 2,105.39 Removal of contaminated pump motors, >10,000 pound 4,737.44 Removal of contaminated heat exchanger <3000 pound 3,068.01 Removal of contaminated heat exchanger >3000 pound 8,859.03 Removal of contaminated feedwater heater/deaerator 22,254.36 Removal of contaminated moisture separator/reheater 48,879.96 TLG Services, Inc.

Oyster Creek Nuclear GeneratingStation Document E16-1455-006, Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Appendix B, Page5 of8 APPENDIX B (continued)

Unit Cost Factor Cost/Unit($)

,, I Removal of contaminated tanks, <300 gallons 1,088.77 Removal of contaminated tanks, >300 gallons, $/square foot 22.32 Removal of contaminated electrical equipment, <300 pound 514.43 Removal of contaminated electrical equipment, 300-1000 pound 1,251.83 Removal of contaminated electrical equipment, 1000-10,000 pound 2,403.35 Removal of contaminated electrical equipment, >10,000 pound 4,820.06 Removal of contaminated electrical cable tray, $/linear foot 25.08 Removal of contaminated electrical conduit, $/linear foot 11.69 Removal of contaminated mechanical equipment, <300 pound 577.41 Removal of contaminated mechanical equipment, 300-1000 pound 1,411.23 Removal of contaminated mechanical equipment, 1000-10,000 pound 2,709.06 Removal of contaminated mechanical equipment, >10,000 pound 4,820.06 Removal of contaminated HVAC equipment, <800 pound 577.41 Removal of contaminated HVAC equipment, 300-1000 pound 1,411.23 Removal of contaminated HVAC equipment, 1000-10,000 pound 2,709.06 Removal of contaminated HVAC equipment, >10,000 pound 4,820.06 Removal of contaminated HVAC ductwork, $/pound 2.32 Removal/plasma arc cut of contaminated thin metal components, $/linear in. 2.84 Additional decontamination of surface by washing, $/square foot 5.71 Additional decontamination of surfaces by hydrolasing, $/square foot 26.02 Decontamination rig hook-up and flush 4,912.13 Chemical flush of components/systems, $/gallon 10.63 Removal of clean standard reinforced concrete, $/cubic yard 67.11 Removal of grade slab concrete, $/cubic yard 175.76 Removal of clean concrete floors, $/cubic yard 288.98 TLG Services, Inc.

Oyster Creek Nuclear GeneratingStation Document E16-1455-006, Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Appendix B, Page 6 of8 APPENDIX B (continued)

Unit Cost Factor Cost/Unit($)

Removal of sections of clean concrete floors, $/cubic yard 872.98 Removal of clean heavily rein concrete w/#9 rebar, $/cubic yard 192.04 Removal of contaminated heavily rein concrete w/#9 rebar, $/cubic yard 1,452.40 Removal of clean heavily rein concrete w/#18 rebar, $/cubic yard .242.90 Removal of contaminated heavily rein concrete wt#18 rebar, $/cubic yard 1,918.52 Removal heavily rein concrete wt#18 rebar & steel embedments, $/cu yd , 377.78 Removal of below-grade suspended floors, $/cubic yard 288.98 Removal of clean monolithic concrete structures, $/cubic yard 730.34 Removal of contaminated monolithic concrete structures, $/cubic yard 1,452.56 Removal of clean foundation concrete, $/cubic yard 570.79 Removal of contaminated foundation concrete, $/cubic yard 1,351.06 Explosive demolition of bulk concrete, $/cubic yard 25.86 Removal of clean hollow masonry block wall, $/cubic yard 67.75 Removal of contaminated hollow masonry block wall, $/cubic yard 181.41 Removal of clean solid masonry block wall, $/cubic yard 67.75 Removal of contaminated solid masonry block wall, $/cubic yard 181.41 Backfill of below-grade voids, $/cubic yard 15.19 Removal of subterranean tunnels/voids, $/linear foot 130.08 Placement of concrete for below-grade voids, $/cubic yard 90.96 Excavation of clean material, $/cubic yard 2.45 Excavation of contaminated material, $/cubic yard 27.17 Excavation of submerged concrete rubble, $/cubic yard 11.89 Removal of clean concreterubble (tipping fee included), $/cubic yard 85.06 Removal of contaminated concrete rubble, $/cubic yard 22.01 Removal of building by volume, $/cubic foot 0.23 TLG Services, Inc.

Oyster Creek Nuclear GeneratingStation Document E16-1455-006, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis AppendixB, Page 7 of 8 APPENDIX B

. (continued)

Unit Cost Factor CostlUnit($)

Il I Removal of clean building metal siding, $/square foot 1.24 Removal of contaminated building metal siding, $/square foot 3.24 Removal of standard asphalt roofing, $/square foot 2.00 Removal of transite panels, $/square foot 2.02 Scarifying contaminated concrete surfaces (drill & spall) 9.52 Scabbling contaminated concrete floors, $/square foot 5.55 Scabbling contaminated concrete walls, $/square foot 6.21 Scabbling contaminated ceilings, $/square foot 55.86 Scabbling structural steel, $/square foot 4.72 Removal of clean overhead cranes/monorails < 10 ton capacity 575.52 Removal of contaminated overhead cranes/monorails < 10 ton capacity 1,318.24 Removal of clean overhead cranes/monorails >10-50 ton capacity 1,381.26 Removal of contaminated overhead cranes/monorails >10-50 ton capacity 3,151.81 Removal of polar cranes/> 50 ton capacity, each 5,778.86 Removal of gantry cranes > 50 ton capacity, each 24,364.28 Removal of clean structural steel, $/pound 0.32 Removal of clean steel floor grating, $/square foot 2.95 Removal of contaminated steel floor grating, $/square foot 7.22 Removal of clean free-standing steel liner, $/square foot 10.85 Removal of contaminated free-standing steel liner, $/square foot 25.84 Removal of clean concrete-anchored steel liner, $/square foot 5.42 Removal of contaminated concrete-anchored steel liner, $/square foot 30.05 Placement of scaffolding in clean areas, $/square foot 12.05 Placement of scaffolding in contaminated areas, $/square foot 17.78 Landscaping with topsoil, $/acre 15,370.28 TLG Services, Inc.

Oyster Creek Nuclear GeneratingStation Document E16-1455-006,.Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Appendix B,.Page8 of 8 APPENDIX B (continued)

Unit Cost Factor Cost/Unit($)

Cost of CPC B-88 LSA box & preparation for use 1,051.61 Cost of CPC B-25 LSA box & preparation for use 838.58 Cost of CPC B-12V 12 gauge LSA box & preparation for use 720.97 Cost of CPC B-144 LSA box & preparation for use 3,999.47 Cost of LSA drum & preparation for use 115.13 Cost of cask liner for CNSI 14-195 cask  ! 8,226.15 Cost of cask liner for CNSI 8-120A cask (resins) 5,779.18 Cost of cask liner for CNSI 8-120A cask (filters) 5,779.18 Decontamination of surfaces with vacuuming, $/square foot 0.60 TLG Services, Inc.

Oyster Creek Nuclear GeneratingStation Document E16 1455.006, Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Appendix C, Page I of 15 I, I APPENDIX C DETAILED COST ANALYSES DECON TLG Services, Inc.

cOfrt Crv-k N-ft1rro, SlrHa,,

8nlo ~Waerstl14S5.OA Rt. 0 D.'e,,doofo Col A.Otvd. App"dbr C,Por 2 or 15 Table C Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station DECON Decommissioning Cost Estimate (Thousands of 2003 Dollars) 05.8." LLRW NRC Spo-tF-I S" ProcrI 8,1 Vol .ibmnl U.l. d lAI ts D0.0 Roa PgAing Trnoopot Psisg Dtp"l Od. at. Total Ut T. Il at Rato Vol Cl..A CaS B Cl..iC GTCC P- d Cnft Core:orI I -Ads atf oosatplbn Cast Ca"t Cost Coot Coa. e Casts oCa o Ca, Coat - C". - Costs C. Fas Ca. Fst Co. Fr Cr. Foot C. Fas M Lbs. Mo. Monh.

PERIODI . Shldowr Soit.gl Trrnrallo Peetd 1s Dt Oc.tsiadg Adhks 1.1.1 P p.V *Ay I.CtAst.l g Chas 97 Is 112 112 1100 11.12 Norots ofndsotasofOtato 11.3 Roo l aW..- W.mW nh lI4 No0th5. of Ps I.oADIootg I St 5 OD.ats PWn qsltV4 &>sess 0 1.1e P.*. oKI PSDAR . .150 22 172 172

• 2.000 10.1.?

10.18 R',

P09.

pbl ds A&

dtlod .54ast 4

e

. 3S9 52 396 396 * ~4.600 10.1.9 Erslnot by.sA kbosot . .75 11 M M ' *.000

1. 1.10 Endpodmd dosaleaso 75 11 B 8e 1.1.11 DomW by~~B0hw8 . 97 15 112 112 1.000 10.1.12 Ddhs .,soce _w eoo 84 648 646

• 7.500 1113 P.Etd oSERadoEA * . . 232 35 267 267 .* 3.100 W1.14 PotIo de Cod Sl*tSeadlc .d * .375 56 431 431 10.1.15 P rpstsh Lok Ton lno Ptln * *

• 307 46 313 353 .

• 4.098 ta.lS R".' . NRC a sd o oneo Ae6* Sp09COoo 10.1.17.1 Plant & to. fdlbss . . .369 55 424 3'1 42

• 4.S20

• • 319 1.1.12 PISb Ynl. - 312 47 359 323 36 . 4.167 1.1.17T.3 NSSS D hn Fkah 6 43 43 . 500 80 612 612

• 7.100 10.1.17.1 Rea'-4ssses n 580 M04 I1.1176 Rewfiods--Id 1s.117 Mt1sb1,oso1toisl"d t . 37 6 43 43

• C000

• . . 75 11 M6 as - . 1.00D 10 16RoN1tvoa-stesla . 120' 16 138 69 69 . 1.600 1.1.1.1Pt.t5e

1. 1.1 TS S*i u&ad- aeeastoo D Orstoh

• 312' 47 359 359

• 4.167 22 172 172 2.000 10.1.17.11Dr." . . . 120 1S 139 138 1600 to 1.17.12Pwosbu5.", a k&%w~og *

• 234 35 269 134 134 . . 3.120 10.1.17.13Wo We*snAt 1345 52 396 396 1a.1.17.14 Fed"y& sftd.4

• 6?" 10 78 39 .31 * . 900 10.1.17 ToW 479 3.878 3.35 320

• 42.674 p nnkV & Sb. PFp-A 10.1.18 Ptnpv oSanat 0540.0O . 160 27 207 207 2.400

1. 1.19 P P.. A t. trs 2.419 363 2.782 2.762

- *

• 2. 196 1)120 D0.W .w d-o p m 16 121 121 - . 1.4,00 10.1.21 RlggCn tEMobPWiNoglo -

• 2.048 307 2.355 2.355

.1 .'M 1 .122 Fac -5wt s - . . 92 14 105 106 101 .S0t01tPod 1. AdMrt Coat * * *. 10.354 1.5513 11.97 11.587 320 78.600 Patod 10CUlWI Cost 10.3.1 31 S9 Foo C td o TdT.a .* .10.300 1.545 11.U45 11,845 1.3 Std. PFbd 10 C dbl Coot. . . . 10.300 1.545 11.845 11.645 P0e9410PIttod-oe. Cs%

10.4.1 h 1n 1.907 1.907 1.3 10.42 Plpt bo.os .

1 1 h.4.8 pby gper

• 221 55 8 - 278 .

10.4.4 HNos" osblt -, 2889 43 331 33I .

10*5 Dls d DAWg t 5 1 . 23 5 35 30 8 103 99 1.46 P"" oo "y, 4~p * . . . 9 94 719 719 1A.4.T NRC FOo * * *I371 37 408 408 .

1&.4 Eno-gs, Pb-*V Fo 10 ItI I . . . .

20101 1049 Sk ODAMCodl 37 257 287  :  :  :

TLG73 Rr,., se.

Owl..r Cl* N-owr 1..-.ti,. StaI.H. Dor..tI EIB145S.00 Rrr. 0 Do"^o,~,~I*,IrnIn Co-t A-oGlwr. Appndtr C,Pag.3 of ZS Table C Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station DECON Decommissioning Cost Estimate (Teoosa.da or2003 Dollars)

On1.m4 LLRW NRC Swnl F.n S.. P-d 0,B Vooo a8 I UW/y I I AdF Adl DpNon D..een r e c 0 Pod8 l.0 Tspood e-b P-cosbgn e-~d ee O1.p-o 010

• Totl e--

Toutl L. T

- r-o~

. Va.o.q. -fl aab-

-O V

C F-okmo CAvnA e.rF Clo.o.

er.

Cb..

ezrCW czr CGTCC Pftwes-d C."

• ".n.ou Co-U.nF P.44d1* P dOowndt Comst(t 1 .4.10 SpOe FoeIPoO OU - - * *6. 145 1.113 1.113 1&.4.11 ISFSIOpWqg Cosol .. 71 11 82 82 1*4.12 S.-iry SUNCom 9es w 145 1.114 1.114 . .. . 58.921 124.13 UUiy Stffn Cos 25.908 3.0GM 29.795 29.m7 I . - 412.450 184 S f 01Paod Is Pao.-Dp..dt Co sb S"09 . I 23 30.947 .4.54 36.179 34.873 1.30 404 . 8.103 99 471I311 18.0 TOTALPERIOO s1COST

• S0" 5 1 . 23 51.6S1 7.742 59.931 4*.460 13.151 320 *404 8.103 99 549.471 PERIODlb . D.o IssioM.9g Pnm l.o D0.abd WoO P100d,.

lb.1..1 Pb ltso -

• 30 53 406 387 41 . . . - .. 4.733 lb1.12 NSSS Deemnlo.lbo Fb0 . .. 71 11 a , . 1.000 lb 1.1 RhOWN ls . .. . 300 4" .34t 34t lb.1.1.4 R .. "gb.dp * - 101 10 116 29 .7 - . . . . . 1.350 lb.1.1.5 CRD hos~oANPa ?S l1 as as ,*

• 1,000 l10.1.16 beon honooowl.W . . . 73 11 6 .86 1A00 lb. I.1.r R .. Pr hm * - 150 _ 22 172 172 * . . . .* 2.000 lb 1.1.7 Rone pbo 272 41 313 313 * * . -. 3.630 1b.1.1s FsFVdllrcb . 90 13 103 52 52 . .. . . 1.200 lb.1.1.10SR..fOod . 90 13 103 103

'125 lb.1.011 R do *a. 75 11 9s 43 . 43 . - . . . - . 1.0(00 lbI.1.11 Iobs r * . 312 47 359 359 . .. . . 4.167 lblll R e S10 22 172 172 2.000 lb.1.15 1 e u * . 204 31 235 212 - 24 - - . - 2.730 lb 1.1 ToN . . 204 31 235 212 24 . . . 2730

. 2.527 379 2.906 2.t36 270 33.740 lb 12 Dsob NSSS 625 * . . 312 637 937 . .. . . .. 1.087 1b.1 Su~wdPbdod1b Ad~rt Cof 2.527 _ 691 3.843 3.573 270 1.067 33.740 Plbad lb AMoi-f Co.b lb21 SP1RFo Pod Wota4n . . ".11 1.217 9332 9.332 lb 21 1Re Cbct., 01 no. .

• 3.152 9e 4.098 4.098 Ib21.1 ToDffdLb-id RCRAW n d

• 9 029 * *1 616 619 - 2.019 . . 11S.076 I b.2,4 D* nA of PC9 Sd4RCRAWatt (nobI.M

• 06 1.S20 252 1.930 1.930 . 27.000 . . . 1.620.0m0 b.125 D2oos1of0L0ad

• 2 44 .. . 7 93 03 31 . . . 22.080 lb.2.8 AbWM Ra~ 9.791 1 43 716 2.633 13M1N 13.1S4 - . 19.193 . - 249.915 150230 1b12 S004d Pnrbd lb OAIM Cos. 9.791 1 113 2.192 716 11247 5.135 20.216 29.216 29.050 1.193 . . 2.006.71 150230 Pododlb Cohatn Cost.

lb.3.1 SD o.P-4 629 94 723 m 1b.32 DOC stffeoo 0 n W 1.097 164 121 1.261 lb.3.3 Pes h f W 70 247 . 327 2.38 . 707 3.74 3.754 3.63 5n3208 170 lb.3.4 S-b d 127 . . 19 146 146 lb.3 S P" Rldl so0dole' 957 .143 1,100 .00 lb.3 8 SpaMFu.l CxM &WTn0 5 221 '783 8.00t 6.506 lb..332 DO S4dil16.so*o npnn Ccttn lb P.4 lb C6dnd 698 1.083. 287 327 22384 6.317 1.911 12.987 6.984 6.504

• 3.i39 . 593206 170 P. hd lb Pebd-DbeW4 Ct lb.4-1 Dsomn rW 19 - -. 24 24

. . . 879 M 967 967 lb .S3 Pn.10t U4os . 1.045 10M 1.150 110

l: 470 -. 143 713 713 lb,.4 0.oI'd p lb.4.I Onool 54DW10.

• 146 22 la 168 19.46 Obe.0oDAW00000 3 1 . 13 . 4 19 19 221 . . 4.439 #4 7w Sen.hw, foe.

OIowt,,rb Nuefrr -sratig .SI.tHoo DMaw-t E&I F14St.40 R-. 0 Vh --- lsio*.l.gCootAnetd. ~C App-dia Pogo etlo5 Table C Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station DECON Decommissioning Cost Estimate (TIhousands of 2003 Dollars) 09-0. ULRW NRC Spo,4Fo- Sd4 P.00.4 vbW..oh eB." I U54Y0.d o0. R.. Pbging Tnn p0 t P cso Obopoasal Off, ToNl To4t U.. T. U. ngo-M Rotont Vok C .. A Cboas9 CI.S C CTCC -oood Coot Conbcl l ..e Aa41eyDrlrAbn Coot Coot Coht. Cooft Cooto Coot. Cools Colty c-ot Coot coot. costs C. Foo Co. Foo Ca Foo C. Frot C. Fo Wot Lb.. Monot Moboo Pod40 lb Po404-o.too Coet rn c

• b4 *t.r PotA bodgo . .317 48 364 364 lb.4.8 NRC root . 155 19 207 207 lb .4 E n..g-y P.-4ng Foon 5 6 so lb4.10 StoO&UColl . .1 27 19 146 146 lb4.tI Set FootPod OAt . . . 491 74 064 064 lb 4.n IsS2O opototog Cools 5 41 41 1b.4.13 s-ast lollcos

• 491 74 004 064 lb.4.14 DOC50 Cost . . . 3.420 513 3.433 3,s33 1b.4.15 UMy Sadlcood 7,423 1.013 8.a36 6.S36 lb.4 SvAoto Pad. lb P04odrDepw.04.Cot 19 716 2 I Is 14.467 2.230 17.404 11.792 062

• 4.433 04 106.214 lb 0 TOTALPERIOOlb COST 1.342 11.591 270 440 2.192 3113 34.578 9.973 631499 6.64 270 29.010 14.414 2.6319

• 2.64.316 151.921 211.99 P0ERM1I TOTALS 1.342 12.100 27s 41 2.192 MM13 46229 17,7S 123.431 103.024 19.817 010 29.80s 14.616 3.639

• 2.612.419 151.621 74182 PERIOD2 . Lane C.,*-.4 Roal P~od 2. Dn.d Ousoobto&g Adctt Nu.4w Sto S.rf SoMM R 28.1.1.1 R4 .404. Pvo a Wono 36 87 33 33 42 76S 246 1.244 1.244 . 107 1.053

• 2 27.190 2.934 2 .1.1.2 CROk%& No Rowal 140 124 143 44 *419 230 I.14o 1.140 - 1172.990 0.0039 2 .?B .22 28.1.1.3 Reoa"VeadW 1 2.077 4.643 859 7.00 162 6.724 21.911 2.911 * . 1,127 .378 62 312.379 2-3.434 1.149 2s..14 R.""Vo"o el 4.Y14 1.2sf 47 s.8N2 182 7.424 20.933 20,930 - . 0.800 2204 *

• 1.401.086

• 975 21.434 1.223 1.149 8

2..1.1 Tot. 363 6.943 5.910 1.411 42 15.574 364 14.024 41.329 49.329 . 107 18,109 3,931 63 * . 2.053.461

• 02.50 .ga 59.315 1.7.IA 2299 RnAM of M0Jr Epr<-4

• 1.499

• 966 2.12 Mo, T.vbk1Gio.t

• 267 3 161 S.M 426 1.004 7.415 T.415 . M . 153 .

• 2.670.672 5.691 2s 1.3 Mob.Codn 804 330 100 3.120 201 7T4 6413 5.413 * ~34'.699 I2

• 196.788 17,136 DMt dofPk" Sylft D rVte Syo- C oVt-2..1.4 TotL.

Reloo0 B."fr St.%- C a_

2. 1.5.1 RCIIRC3

• l3

• I 0 1 5 5 *. 14 0 -

• 01 73 21.1.5.2 RCA

• 33 I 1 6 33 14 t4 94 -

• 77 190 12.070 2a.1.5.3 RCS 52 I I 30 27 24 736 138

• 74 so

• 2.432 1,169 2..1.34 RCO

• 271 7 9 250 129 141 SIT el? 3212 3 3M6 . 16.13 6.024 2-.1.8.8 RCA

• 2 2 2 Q2 63 39 n21 n2l 761 190

• 47.021 1.159 28.1.56 RCJ Ss 1 1 36 20 26 146 146 . . 469 76 2a.1.5.7 RCV . 83 3 3 80 43 4 S07 80T MYT 250 28.1.5.8 RCY 186 5 5 122 101 51 610 010

• 1.310 304 2&.1.5.9 RCS as S 3 28 109 61 322 322

• 342 479 28.1.5.10 RCT 42 I 1 25 27 21 116 lie . 306 s0 . 19.,39 923 2.1.5 Totl.

• 644 28 2 651 646 4TT 2.874 8674 M.090 1.06 - 201.0o 3 18.067 NowR e B.d" Soo C..po 20.1:.1 7E9 77 123 3 2 17 90 9s 407 407 *

• 219 272

• 33.090 4.228 2:.1..2 N20 3 2 3 17 17 . 2.0O6 202 2W1A.1 N2P - 0 o1 26 3 10 63 63 * . 324 6

• 3"50 459 28.164 N3A !52 1 1 19 27 23 124 - _24

• 2 483 .

• 17.032 1.104 2a.1.6.5 N430 34 14 24 137 137 . 419 42

• 20.60 I.409 28.1.06 o 431 13 0 2 2 4 21 21 4 19 7 -

• 1.409 294 20.1687 04304 76 1 .1 23 27 29 15S 106 288 8 . 14T964 I.700 20.1.68. N3P 19 0 0 10 10 9 49 49 . 18 lie S _I

• 7.076 426 28.1 8.6. 30 13 0 0

• 2 5 26 26 . 67 sT 7 * .1330 29 T7,.S2Smrlm Me.

Ordtr Crk Nutetror Co-.fiog Stof.. Do...o.,IE -tJ.U Rr. 0 Pt)os.fodf.d.fo Co.t A..o. AppoofLtr C, Pogo 5 f 1s Table C Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station DECON Decommissioning Cost Estimate (Thouslsnds of 2003 Dollars)

Vll4.t LLRW bRC Spool F.l P000--.d0. O..o VolkSo 81 U6&.y *nd Ae.t" Doeon It-*I P0680lo T.-po." Pnlo Dlnpool Ottw - Total ToWl lU. k.T M.... Plootto. Vtomn Cls.A ClssB CI... C CTCC Po d Cntl Conrost.

Wels Asll 0D.-b Cool Coot Co-t. Cot. Coot. Cost Costs C Coos Cot. cot. C..t. Cost C.u Fot C.Foot C. F.M C. Foot CF.oo VtLb. Mont..h. Nk..

N- R lnt. 6Bs* Sym C o noot (otkoM 2 .1.6.10 N3R 13 0 0 5 6 6 30 30 82 6 - 18

• 4.115 293 2:. 6.1l N3S 19 0 0 13 3 6 46 46

• 1S8 10

• 7n7 439 2*.1.6.12 N3T 12 0 0 3 3 4 23 23 42 8 2.442 273 28.1.6.13 N3U 5 3 25 157 6s 340 340 *59.09 1.899 2.1.6.14 NVW a 3 27 171 - 70 384 384

• 333 520 2.1.6.15 N3Y

• 162 7 7 179 142 104 6D1 So1 - 2.216 432 128.17 3,593 20.1 8.1o N51 16 32 0 I 17 4 20 *0 90

• 213 14 9.638 1.080 2&.1.6.17 N52 11 28 1 0 6 1I 17 80 s0

• 7.402 867 28.1J.5.1 N53 18 47 I I 12 32 30 139 138

• 144 'll . 14.43 1.416 28.1 6.19 NS4 4 13 0 0 2

• 8 38 38

• 27 2

• 3.434 34 2a..6o20 NS5 Se I

• 27 13 22 120 120

• 339 40

• 7217 1.269 2&1.621 N5o 84 2 2 32 43 38 207 .?20 491 S 129 31135 1.732 28.1.622 NSA 27 33 I I 16 15 29 124 124

• 224 s8 13.435 1.390 2.1.623 N5i 20 31 0 1 23 4 22 130 100

• 294 13 ,1 88 1.091 2.I.6.24 NSC 14 0 0 4 10 7 34 34 49 29 . 4. 30 2&1.525 NSO 22 1 0 6 13 10 02 52 - 70 40 6.594 482 2..1.6.26 NSE 14 0 0 4 10 7 31 38

• 49 31 . 4.765 315 2a.1.627 NSF 21 1 0 4 18 10 52 . 52

• 1 4 6.308 487 28.1.6.25 NS5 0 1 0 2 3 4 20 .20

• 23 9

• 1.4 242 2a.1.52 NS"

• 5 0 . 6 4 1a 18 1 17 - 1.578 193 2.1.6.30 NSI 7 13 0 0 2 4 8 35 . 35 - 29 13 2228 44 2&1.6.31 NSJ

• 9 0 0 8 6 5 26 25

• W9 17 - 5.47 211

2. 16.32 NSIC

• 12 0 0 3 4 24 24 56 10 .3.12 *291 20.1 8.33 NSN

• 22 0 0 10 3 8 43 43 - 125 I5 . 6698 494 2.1.6.34 NSO 56 I 2 47 16 29 146 I's4 146 48,

• 579 49

• 27.716 1.241 24.1 6.35 NSP 22 ¶ 1 10 23 13 6? 8? - 121 Jo0 . *300 4 2.1.6 38 NSO 21 1 10 22

• 121 9* 10904 479 22.1.6.37 NSS so 3 5 ' 163 31 44 207 237

• 2.012 94

• 90.095 1.128 28.1638 NST 48 S8 2 1 39 29 51 224 224 482 111 - 27=22 230 20.1.4.39 NSU 44 #6 2 I . 39. 29 51 225 22S 483 112

• 27.32 2.245 20.1 6.40 NSY 11 28 0 0 10 9 16 70 75

• 124 29 28.1 6.41 NSZ II 28 O 0 10 9 16 7T 73

• 124 29 7.3618 a0g 2*.1.842 PPA

• 06 I I 35 18 _ 25 41 141 2.3.770 1.291 24.1.6 Tot*la 290 1.616 48 39 946 1.09O 911 4.9e2 4.962 11.707 3.3s0

• 760.01 42.01 01d R8. 0 &b4.5:SSyst. Ccaroeat 21.1.7.1 75A 63 I 1 26 27 27 140 149 *317 62

• 2.22 1.413 28.1.7.2 7DA 37 2 1 5 32 23 II8 116 16.148 813 2.1.7.3 7FA 1 1I 1 1 12 18 11 61 SI 148 05 . 10917 407 28.1.7.4 PBA 79 118 I3 44 135 Io 492 492

• 5.387 *.106 28.1.7.5

2. .7.6 P[A PMA a 41 10 0 I

0 I 22 3

16 4

22 4

112 20 112 20 *

~277 32 4

11 5*.813 2.27T l098 21 2.1.7.7 PRA 65 1 2 62 15 30 175 175

• 76 10 3.144 1.457 28.1.7.8 PTI I PTP 10 -

• 2 0 3 18 le

• 28 1

• 120 232 2.1 .7 Tbst as 360 II 8 179 257 229 I.139 139 - . 2.144 685 . 109.56 9824 Trot. B S5649 SYnto C eVo."

20.t61 7CA l6 214 9 5 94 230 - . 163 691 10198.0 4.401 28.1. 2 Ti2 731 25 26 72t 500 424 2.432 2.42 *

• 8.921 l,525 498.344 1.321 28.1.8.3 To23 4 3 0 . 40 1

• 1734 as

.2 28.1. 4 T893 'I 0 0 a a 6 318 31I * . 79s 2

• 0.297 229 28.1.65 TC2 1.210 12 106 2.4S 3.097 1.471 8.410 8.450 * .30.249 9.311 - 2,083 118 27.18S 201.6.6 TE2

• 131 6 242 94 92 062 062

• 3.000 293

• 144. 2. 60 28.1.6.7 TEE 232 s 9 307 94 4 752 732 t.7s4 160 . 14.697 0.622 2o.I.6 8 TE5

• Is 0 0 7 8 6 42 42 .

• 9 25 0.898 383 2a.189 TP2

• 132 0 6 169 06 84 451 491 *

• 2.62 28

• 10.812 2.957 28.1.8.10 TP3 87 5 3 a4 Io 57 305 305 * . 948 404 51.772 1.962 281 6.11 TPE 77 0 2 3 106 02 275 275

• 408 373 4 dll 1.733 28.1 a Toto, 1ie 2.944 162 lag 4.071 4.29n 2.304 14.205 14.290 *

• 30.378 13.098 33.204.338 697,?

rL So.ie. le.

Ooafrr Cn..k Ntt fr., t7.t..tttin. St. H,., Dor-tttr&t4sS4M)6 Rn,. 0 Ntoa.1.A..*I,.g Cod AtAolyd. ppdL, P.t. otfIS Table C Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station DECON Decommissioning Cost Estimate (Thousands of 2003 Dollars) 0on0.5. 81R.W NRC Sp.n FI .S Pro.....t o 8.-v. 0V . 8.0.i W5.=

I~-

I dl At? 0*f vD riptr- -t D-I.

CoI Rt..M C.t Ct P.6. 9 ig CMt.

T,..n.p.0 Co . PI=C bslg

.t.

Dspoad C.t Oth0w Ct.at Ttl Co.45,M..ne T7..l CotC, Uc.T.

Cttt C.

o 8to.80 Cots Vk C. F4 Cu A C.. FM Cl- B C. F_..

Cl...C C F_..

6CC C. FPt P

Wl. Lb0 od C."4 W.na.n Co-UWonlt I Asgoto , O Sywt-Coto..

2.h1 To04*

M eI-4at Symtn C.opor..t 2.1.10 TOWS?,

28.1.11 S t.ffo4g

h. tq.ladwo.t l6.b 66* 10 3 ss 17 . la? 061 61 ,os07 es 53.46* 14.705 281 SR666.i Ptt d 2h A.ty Ct..? a59 14.37 7,03 1*195 14.124 22.500 344 20.77* 82.018 Blo1s 164.418 40.134 3,831 *31 . 11.064.290 235i2ss 2.29 P.4d 2* AddW-d Cft, h2U1 Cw* S t.dwo (Eo40 RPf) .250 2.063 10.313 10.313 2*2 5.14t,?I P.44d 2a Add d Cttt 8.20 s* 2.083 10.313 10.313 Pedod2* Coa6to Cotas 2tt 31 Po tM _b.tt ISO 62 170 . 0n1 321 1.574 1.574 -

• 1.4*53 200.f74 215 2.312 S4? 5t 171 26 1* 177 - 0 .. .

2h. 3 SO.?pFnr CVI0.1 ttn?Tr. n 12.;5 .913 14.669 . 14,as 2t.3 S t,? P4wW 2. Coftwo COwn 110 171 82 170 ** 12as50 2260 ' 18,439 1.71 14'.We 20 . 1.453 200,574 21s Pefttt 2* P5tdt.P.t4 C060 2.4.1 os o*?pin 48 . 12 60 60 2.42 kt it 1.40 104 1.144 1.14 2 .4 3 Pm"l tboo ,1,.23* I 124 1.361 1.225 2h 4 H4AlIhpIytI et 9*6 . . 247 1.233 1.233

2. 4 5 M.."45 tqttt 1tn1r - 1.930 290 2.220 2220 137. . . .

2*4t Dls. of OAW e W..ootd 5e S 12 269 75 411 41f 2 47 P-4 tt_ bt.l n7 115 846 *46 2h4 t NRC F.*

• 37 54 001 591 l , *** *

• 1.04 28.4.9 E-qefy P b.*rg Ft - .23 12 1S7 284.10 St OSU Co,? *n 3 4 354 356 2h.4.11 St. F-. Poo4O&U . . . 1,195 190 1.379 -

2&.4.12 ISFSiOper04th0 Ct, *

• 13 151 -

2.4.13 S*4YStI4ff C. -1.48 224 1.721 1.721 2 4.14 DOC Sff Cosl - .. 9 963 1.497 1.480 11.400 *

• 10263 2*4. 15 UWa StaffCod 18.136 to20 20.esa 20.856 - -2*217 2* 4 Slblotti 5.442. Pbd-D*ttda Cosa, 4* 2*1 ss s 12 . 209 34.8*6 s.706 43.899 4Z141 .617 ISO 4.ss4 . 93,670 1.100 020.406 2..0 TOTALPERIOD2* COST 1.007 17.454 7201 2.007 14.124 31,920 4,o00s 30.807 152.664 13223 16.286 136 164.41* 44,81* 5.0*4 631 11.360.730 236.865 531.704 PERIOD21tSlt D..SRt..hI P.4dod 21 D1,0 0 - 0*.6 AtWi.

Ditp.Iofs Pbr4 Sys*o IOot4 Syft1 Ctnhat 2b.111 I. MAC 277 265 74 33 334 2.004 760 3.56 3.706 *4.134 4.620 * -70s.iu T.

2b .1.12 ISA 73 130 7 4 30 218 130 007 007 . 42 600 . .7604* 3*11 2b.1.1.3 ICA 1os 218 13 7 89 350 211 004 994 1 . 10 1.052 . . 1 .2 8.44 2tt1 1 4 BEA 62 4 3 40 130 04 28* 29 540 404

• 06.11 5 1.224 2b.1.1. 5 RCs 49 I 1 30 11 20 112 112 373 34 1.8223 1.107 2b.1.1 Tot04. 400 712 04 47 520 2.71 1,183 6.746 .746 6.541 8.174 . . . .351 19.740 no.serofeF.Ioe.

Q*fr,'R Creek X-1-..O..wl~ I~ .. D-w.e.Wg E161455-06R... 0 A,..1y.1s Cofi~e~ttCs Appj-dL. C N.C7.fIS Table C Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station DECON Decommissioning Cost Estimate (TIMousards of 2003 Dollars) i LoRW NRC Sp6.eFl S5 Pe.d 8....IVob"_ Rendi Ut1'17 n4d Ae" Deo R.e... PsheAgleg Trnnpot Pfesen~g DIpod Oth - Tel Tebl L&Tm Me.e-.e Rtot.e. Vob CL. A CLN-e C TCC P csed -CI Conh dv fed.. Adh.*v oDm fe.l Cod C4 C-fl Cove Coete Coaes Cost C1.tI -Y Coet C.t Coth C Coh C. r._ C.. O C Ced CF Ct . ." C-. F..t Zlm. be. e.,he Mh...s.

Reedes &4.SW g Syslt- C.eeea 2b.12.1 RBI 6 162 82 U4 409 489 - . 0O9 248 2103,69 3.36n 2b.122 R8R 3 8M 41 44 257 207 . 1.062 124 2b.1.2.3 RBC 83 4 3 87 8 48 282 Z20

• 1.203 143 *- 6.4 0.839 2b 1224 RSE

• 102 3 as 48 U4 308 366 - . 10.94 148 507.502 2 436 2b1.2.5 RR 3 36 151 6e 36 358 . 41 40 47

• 06.701 2.106 2b.1.28 R80 400 16 20 784 207 287 1.760 1. T6

• 9.702 T72

• 483.23 9.083 2b.127 RCS0 187 8 105 293 143 796 7Ts

• 1.923 890 1106.330 M.263 102 2b.12 8 CROs In 3 102 14 43 256 256 1.258 43

• 84.969 2.062 2b.12.9 RC7 62 2 64 52 39 223 223 n77 159

• 48.428 1.315 2b11210 RD8 9 10 101 643 109 1.040 1.040 - 1.200 1.823 - 224.172 1.820

• .1 . *3 2b.12.11 RD' 191 1 00 04 Is 81 51 lea10 42 - 01.209 784 2M.1.2.12 REC 4 127 65 n 39 439

• 1.571 194 81234 .619 2b.1+/- 13 REF 3 34 213 79 403 413

• 422 829 74.427 1.M 2b.1214 RECHJ 3 8T 42 48 27 27

• 1.07 120 54.981 2i18 2b.12.15 RIEL 163 7 184 169 112 643 643

• 2.291 509.

• 130.330 S.641 2b.12 18 REII 42 1 36 17 20 117 117 . 439 0 . 22.330 980 2

2b12.1T REO 9, 4 62 21t 89 478 479

• 7 60852 0.134 2.104 2b.12.18 RFQ 127 0 3 63 t4 77 418 * - 774 422 ** 69829 2.864 2b.12.19 RER 19 *3 0 1 6 47 33 151 101

-16

• S4 140 16.399 1.2 2b.1220 RET 13 35 0 0 12 10 20 91 147 32 . 8.62 1.102 2b.12.21 REW 21 0 10 3 8 43 43

• 129 S

• 6029 X49 2b.1222 REX 24 0 12 3 9 48 48 - . 0T4 9 *- 6.807 539 2b.12.Z 26 0 9 14 12 81 *107 43 21.11.23 RE CCVIY 124 4 100 00 * . 1.205 187

. - 8.182 06 2b.1.2.24 CR09 61 312 #2 67.524 2.Tr0 25 2b.12.25 RFC 27 so 2 15 9n 80 261 291 . 32.983 Z317 2b.1228 RFF ST 2 59 33 39 222 222

• 728 180 38.452 10.40 2b.1.2.27 RFH

• 116 4 31 226 82 477 477 * - 304 seo

• 76.609 zs0s 2b.1.2.2 RFJ 100

• 31 221 86 449 449 - 3* 6 664 2b.1229 RFL as 2 57 9 27 180 180~ * .

• 702 27 . 9.89 1.47 0

2b.1.2 O RFC 3 76 30 41 240 240 * . 642 9 90 * -- 48.329 1.968 3 * - m7 2b.1.2.31 RFO 123 2 83 29 48 235 260 83 -

• 39.045 2.762 2b.12.32 RGC

• 69 2 4T 18 _28 let 181 ao*08 45 27.005 1.44 2b.12.93 RGO 22 43* 787 317 1.782 1RTs2

• 5.32 2.364 *

• 429.693 4.486 2b.12.04 RCI 40 1 31 S 16 93 Y3 14 16.900 915 2b012.35 RGL 48 1 38 14 21 122 122 *474 42 22.967 1.4 03 2b.12.36 RGP 22 166 1 16 3 9 53 221 10 - 9.741 495 2b.1.2.37 RGR

• 146 4 103 60 68 383 363 * .1276 1802 s60OS4 2243 2b.12.38 RGU 83 1 38 12 25 141 141

• 473 37 *

• 22.555 1.4, 212.139 RC2 32 1 36 18 18 t00 l00 - - 22.807 707 68 3.871 *- 1244I 00 2b.1.2 Tftel 149 3.518 4.186 2.580 14.311 14.31 *4 3.02 1S 2.6011

• 2.89s.020 63.762 Nw Rldweele wdI Syst-w Covwt 2b.1.31 N38 - 133 4 3 8 66 63 349 349 - . 0.09S 199

• 580.09 2.922 2b.1.3.2 N48 I 1 33 21 27 151 101 *406 63 * - 22.130 1.492 2b.1.8.3 N4A 00 23 IO I . 2 18 By 87 *

• 106 84

• 10.100 683 sT *

• 86 74 2b.1.34 N4A9 a 22 1 o 8 20 16 7T 77

• 8.702 as0 2b.1.38 3 N4

• 87 2 1 17 42 30 159 108 - 210 127 *

• 19.928 1.480 2b.1.38 N4E 2 8 *

• 710 120 I I 2b.1.37 N4F - 10 t8 8 8 6 S -. 8 34 4 -* 1 24 -

• 4.239 324 2b.13 8 NAN I 1 15 10 9 51 lo?*18 29 M1016 302 2b.1.3.9 N4K 0 0 0 15 18 8 45 11 *

• 129 26

• 7.389 400 2b.1.810 NIL

• 28 0 0 11 T 10 59

• 130 22 . 7.42 097 el 2b.1.3.11 NSR 1 2 7T 10 30 193 183

• 9h87 30

• 207 I.363 2b.1.3.12 N5V 46 06 3I2 06 86 246 24

• 29 22? 29.107 2.234 2b.1.3.13 NSW 4* 7 2 10 16 -

• 9 0

• 404 189 Zb.1.3.14 N6X 09 69 s 2 64 8 ss 264 246 Ts7 0

• 4.4o 2.763 2b 1.3 Totals 123 0a6 19 14 307 2s7 337 1.720 1720 4,412 942 26.431 10580 3712 S..s e Is..

O CtwA Junal.oa. oi .

0t-afr 5tntSbus Donaan. Et!b143510OI R". 0 lhtaovaniadt, Cal A.s.y-ni Appn di. Ca P.R. o° 1t Table C Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station DECON Decommissioning Cost Estimate (Thousands o0 2003 Dollars)

• o~d 040 Stl 95ttl 0 ICCSIMV~bn9001104 n I._.. Dana Rtaa Panalg TYsnnpot Pnlne Dnpanal Oh. Totl Tobl Uc.T M.g..tn Reto.nlon Vaoa Cla. A Class 9 Clss C CTCC P0nsed C." C I =

tne"- zonnb unsenpilon cao clnC Cnt. cfnt Cat C Ca Cont. Cntnnn Cant. CoCt. Ca. clet C. F C. rF_ Co.r4 C. Faa C-Fn r OAh. Ulan Mranhu I Old R86.". 6U S Syltn Cenbpft 2b.1.4.1 OR55PM D&DDanbdge nd De"n - 140 24 1R 18" *3.197 2b.1.42 PRO 12 0 5 12 1 O 1 1 . 143 S . .'18 274 2b.1.4.3 PS8 107 2 3 7n 42 49 290 260 950 127 s49.52 Z398 2b.1.4.4 PTA

• 30 I I 22 16 15 85 89 276 48 15.552 687 2.l.4.S PUA 159 4 3 70 90 74 399 399 *600 270 59,I37 3.521 118 el 2b.148 PUU 112 0 4 67 395 365 1.441 331 80.278 2.500 2b.14.7 PVA

• 6 I 0 2 12 0 522 148 2h.IA.o UA9

• 240 3 5 174 37 96 556 556 Z148 131 97.159 5.M 2b.149 UAS

• 165 3 S l72 25 74 444 444 *

• 2.126 915 93,177 3,B19 2b.1.4 Totak

• 992 19 22 943 292 4*7 2.374 2.74

• 7.9 100S z401.8 21.567 Tw66a RSn Synta.. Coroaa 211l.5.1 T02 49 1 1 It 25 21 112 112

• 241 77 18,631 977 2ho1l52 TF2 251 17 22 650 271 223 1.4a 1.443

• 8.047 814 ** 399.789 0.550 2b.1 .33 TFG

• 20 0 0 II 3 o 42 42 *

• 134 S *8.191 457 2b.1..4 TG2

• 186 13 17 *81 271 190 1.19 1.159 .957 914 *

• 314.99S" 205 351 20 IT 390 520 281 1.579 *

• 24627 1.564 36.18 7.838 1.07 30 2b.1.5aTIIA is 0 0 4 5 6 30

• 47 14 3.147 349 2hlI 5.7 TL2

• 7n 3 2 29 67 40 216 216

• 358 200 32.660 1.648 2b.1.58 TUA 47 2 2 56 32 29 170 170 *690 1

• 37,402 1.034 2b.1.59 TN2

• 244 9 10 263 250 153 990 Rao 166.391 3.260 B06 5.426 2b.1.5.10 T02

• 136 20 157 160

• 15S *

• 41. 6 3.169 2b.1.5.11 TOA 68 1 2 74 la 33 1"

• 5* 917 49 . 41.699 1.496 2b.1.5.12 TOCR 49 2 4 129 17 37 22 227 . 1.590 S1 *9.191 1.060 2h.1.5.13 TOR 49 2 2 58 36 30 177 177 717 109 s3.865 1.098 2hl.5.14 TOV *1 0 O 7 I

• 27 27 . - 90 4 4.016 295 2b.1.5.15 TOWN * "a 3 8 190 36 60 380 300 2.346

• 157

• 104.864 1.894 2b.1.5.18 TOXITOY

• 22 0 0 9 3 8 42 42

• 108 9 *

• S.146 458 2b.1.5.17 TS2 154 9 9 210 198 123 710 710 -754 -594 163. 051 3.389 2b.1.5.18 TTA 46 2 2 5S 36 30 171 171 * - 6755T 114 1 37.651 1.042 2h.1.5.19 TU2 145 3 5 148 46 71 416 416 . 1.829 137 6.451 3.237 2b.1.5 Tnt.'. 2.000 as 1.0 2.791 1.7M 1J376 S.143 7.09 107 34.531 S.384 1.oM4.160 as22 AelanInd Olfn Sys5t. Cw at9 2b.1.81 Aye 109 4 3 M4 93 64 329 359 1.044 280 67.503 2.447 2b.1 6.2 AYA 24 1 1 31 21 16 9n 9s 364 64 21,3N 926 2b.1.o.8 AY9 22 1 1 17 10 1 60 60 208 30 11.152 493 2b.1.6.4 AYC S7 1 2 73 19 30 183 183 M99 63 41.612 1.279 2b.1.85 AYE

• 20 0 0 4 10 8 42 42 . 43 31

• 4.526 427 2b.1.88 AZ8

• 43 1 1 40 20 22 128 126 492 60 . 2.0 949 2b.1.6.7 AZA

• 10 0 2 3 3 1I 18 24 9 1. 731 218 2b.188 AZC 60 2 3 84 17 37 223 m

• 1.046 51 ** 47 .000 1.762 2b.1 6.9 A2M

• 14 0 0 3 6 5 29 29 s0 18 3.242 307 2b.1.6.10 AZE 13 0 0 3 5 5 27 27

• 9 16 3 029 294 21 6.11 AZF 12 0 0 5 4 5 27 27 *3,610 267 2l 6.12 AZI 24 0 1 26 4 66 322 11

• 14.041 541 2hI.6 T0tam 429 11 13 372 213 219 1209 1256 4 807 ea 244.484 9.530 MA.aan SyenrnC.n.t 2b.1.7.1 9AA

• 199 5 7 191 91 102 s91 591 2.367 277 120,744 4.319 2b.1.72 6BA

• 72 3 5 Ia 24 sO 319 319 Z039 73 69 359 1.599 2b.1.7.3 BDA 2 1 3 14 14 21 3 1 ,112 190 2b.1.7.4 CAA

• 34 10 16 200 1292 -1292 7.381 265 32001 8 1, 2b.1.7.5 DAA so0 I I 22 17 20 112 112 277 51 s 15.7 1.43 2b.1.7.6 DAC 1? 2 3 a8 23 49 282 282 1,094 69 5 5602 2 64s 2b.1.7.7 DG8

• 56 a 65  : 685 2b.1.7.8 DOT

• 10 2 12

• 12

• 223 15 .-

2b.1.7.9 OPH 10 77 77 1.501 2b.1.7.10 DWF

• 16 2 18 is1 3s9

?W SAnnle Ian.

0esfr, C,-. NorItnrs. -11tr. Staf.,, Dt #Flid E145115. R. tJ Dnn -iofonIN Cost An..vi. Appt-dn C, nPoe9 ots Table C Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station DECON Decommissioning Cost Estimate (Thousands cr2003 Dollars) 09... LLRW NRC Spol ntsF S.. Po-.d a...I V.kv 5-l UOIsysd Acthhy - D. -- a9TrnP'ln9g eopos Noe.ss, Dtsw 0.. Te.l Toebl LIs . RIsts.e V.ts Cl.sA Ctsss6 Cb .. C CTCC P - d Cft C o 0,4.. 9 o Cost Cesd Cost Coot. Cos. Cost. CostS Ceonls Cots Co. C"sTs Costs C. F." C.. Frt Ce--. Cs. F C.F. WLb. Lho, Mon hw. S Cnn.. ONm. fl C.(ca).. -t css Cst -. c"q-Y Cf ot 2b.1.7.11 FWP 90

• 104 . _- 2.013 2M.1.7.12INTAKESTRUCTURE 142 14 21 100 163 IN . * -*

- 3.208 2b.1.7.18 MA1 9e 3 3 62 7? S? 320 320 * . 1.013 231 61.938 2185 20.1.7.14 LIA 35 1 1 23 21 1I 98 98 290 53 17.638 792 2b.1.r. MeS MTr 28 0 0 S 8 9 47 47

• 71 19 * . *.5 939 2b..7R1S MS 2? 4 31 31 * - . . #54 2b.1.7.17 NM9 ROOF 13 2 10 20.1.7.19 es 32 241

• 249 * . . *.916 2.1.7.19 POT' 20 5 39

• 39 2b.1.720 RSF ROOF 21 0 0 13 1 a 44 44 1. 4 7.138 462 2b.1.721 UYARC 1.324 1i 14 243 322 467 2.486 2.486 *

• 4250 1.177 299.386 21.772 2b.1.7.22 wAA

• 113 3 3 71 54 #2 296 295 67 V* 162 - . 50.170 Z496 2h.1.723 WVS 13 2 1I

• 19 .. . .300 2b.1.724 YARDAREAS

• 243 36 279

• 2m 2 . * *

• 390 5.499 2h.1.728 YDAIYFAIYLA I 0 1 4 4 *

• 16 1 * . 791 3 20.1.7 Tots 3.365 44 U 1.605 712 1.181 6.962 S.909 1.65 19.915 2.424 . 99.996 87.610 2b.1.8 S-%"g hI _cw of fodd o. 13 4 116 2t 234 122 1226 . 1.321 82 96.838 20.881 D

• 2h.1.9.1

~ ol SMs6 B."

Rdnt No wRadoas 609..71.

SY.

Ro-sJe T4 37 24 1 382 12? 969 e6e *

• 6 3.819 . 382.164 2.127 2b.1.92 ON Rogvos &A6. . Syfh-s R.oj

• 2 4 3 1 41 ¶2 of o1 40.794 .8

• 8 649 . . U4.800 - 97 2b.1.98 Resets Bottr. Svsd R.s. 3 6 4 6. 19 96 96 * . . 9144 2b.1.94 Tbrn SBt . Sysem Rw ael 317 90 57 . 919 327 1.710 1.710 * *9 9s.1 129.390 6.061 2b.1.9.5 AVo&d O~RGOF. Dson 28 111 11 7 4 111 72 344 344 5 As I 05 112.336 2.691 2b.1.9.6. Dt.t . D. 3 94 131 120 . 2.174 913 4.186 4.196 *

• 13793 1.301.33T 10.409 951.929 93,718 2b.19 7 D0o.4 .LhUs.Rss. 1.620 947 30 s0 1.787 1S4 1.398 5.966 5.96N

• 22.108 001 2b.1.s5 LLRW aSlo

• DetC- 7 4* . 7 41 196 196 * . 54 665.90 1.486 2b.19 9 Mlascol B did . D t 16 626 6 4 . 96 41 199 19I * . . 616 as.s58 1.490 2b.1.9.10 Nes R "d-s& g . Doem 2 428 42 27 19. 428 2S0 1927 1.27n *

• 235 4249 . 434.114 9.354 2b.1.9.11 Old Rad"eslo &Ad.WV .0Ds 700 172 110 12 1.754 649 S3396 3.396 *12 17.532 1.709.162 10.764 2b.1.9.12 RBooog R.s.s..s 2.184 1.085 4s 75 2.649 22m 1.833 8.099 8.099

• 324 891 1.410 755 67.92S 2b.1913 Rsets, B g .191.DOC00 05 232 19 19 196 1"1 1I0 814 914 2.052 1.747 *. 255.51s 5.584 2b.1.9.14 R.50 B5 V 239.0D n3 139 14 9 . 140 69 420 420 *

• 1.400 140.034 3.239 2b.1.9.15 ReSbr PS" .51f. D- 37 1s0 19 10 . 115 9S 4?7 467 * * . 1.92

• 5.192

. 3.593 0522 2b.1.916 R ..... s.O 75. Doe. 12 #3 5 3 . 52 34 1SO 100 .. 523 . 2272 12U64 20.1.9.17 R""" B." 919. DeCn 27 109 II 7 . 112 71 338 339 * * . 1,11802 - . 111.534 2.902 119 320 26 17 . 268 221 1.011 1.011 267.7J5 9.417 2h.1.9.18 Stad httol T vb Ro &Ds

• M *. 29.73 2b.1.9.19 T.b0 40.g 0 . Do.o. 104 447 41 28 92 413 2"9 1.415 1.415 -

• 1.144 *.095 - . *54.no9 *0.tl8 2b.1.920 Tvbok 9Pg V23tI* D 73 35 31 22 90 314 219 1.083 1.093 - 1,109 3.109 353.651 7.997 2b.1.9.21 T70b0. ,dg 499. Dso 49 177 1. 12 . 1a9 117 558 558

• 1.888 199.626 4.291 2b.1.922 Cos..0t.d Sot 78 1.039 663 . 10. 20 2.897 19.275 19.270 * . 106.202 10.619.990 6.020 2b.1.9 Tolb 4.444 6.431 1.801 1.26 4.819 19.232 9.7231 47,72? 47,72?

• 59.802 . 17tM69 20.109.100 229.646 20.1 54t P4d 2b Ad"ey Costs 5.094 19.22 2.2S8 .672 14n752 29.4,9 17228 9.487 88.252

• 1.2U4 192.399 209.139 - . 27,855,150 904.142 P.ndod2b Colatetsl Cost.

2b.3.1 Pts. "id - 19 . 182 2# . 1.690 S9 2.793 2.7 2J57T

• 15.275 211 2b2 p-3.2d01- 9i0onl do5o deo Sn ;lo . . . .

I . . . 29 0 2b.3 3 Sr0odu h 250 2 - S3 403 403 20.3.4 SPs.4 Fool CWe~RA nrd TM. 3.464 26.704 2b.3 S.lA4, P.cd 2b Coftoid Costs 118 250 182 23 . 1990 23224 4.075 29.904 3&196 29.79 . 1 2.677 . . 415.304 211 P.nd2b P~ ..d Costs 204.1 D , 6w"" 9289 321 1.607 1.60T 2b042 ls- 2.317 a22 2.548 2.548 2b.4.3 Pnrty boo 4 2.757 276 3.033 2.032 20.4* HosS 1 ww t*femal

• 2.13S 534 2.,70 2.670 204 llossyewlp renl r~t 4.326 s649 4975 4.975 7to Smrfre. 1-4.

OtYrr Crsl NJld,ar -offl,. SlatE.. Do.a.. E M14S-5430Rrv. 0 flDeoasa_ nabla Ca- A. -lyo. App..dIx C. Pa 1 10.fIS Table C Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station DlECON Decommissioning Cost Estimate (Thousands or2003 Dollars)

O54,S. £.R8v NRC Spa F4Foo S.. P.....

e d 8- Vo BSna UtitWRYd AC"aty Dea. R .l PaFsoglog T.oopat P-oo.oIg Oapoool o Toal Tobtl Lk. Ta. M.oo o.s R.fto.Go Voe Ct..A Cl..l CI..sC GTCC PFne d Cral Coe .

Ird.. Adl lr Iba C."t Coot C-a. Coas Cn b Coot. Cont Coal Coot Co Cats Cats C.e Fot C.. Foo C. Fal C. NFO C. Foot WL L9 MAtthss Ua.4,oo.

Patlod 2b P.FIto&tMdt Coot (-t.)

2b 4.6 Dispe lo dDAW g&MtOd 102 23 . 497 8.631 2b.4.7 Pla sagy bW * -

• 204 1 16 lASt 1.40 2b.4 5 NRC Fo . . 1.106 120 0.316 1,318 2b.4 E mqatgaY PFt*V Fees 275 21 30 . 30 2b.4.10 Sts OSU Cost 103 793 M3 2b 4.11 Sprd Fl Pat O&U * *

• 2.671 40l 3.07o2 3.072 2b4.12 Ratost PFhOVg Eql._oKSAt

-

• sos 496 74 01 * . . 1. .8 2b4.13 1SFSIOp tg Cats * .

• 106 29 225 22 2b.4.14 Seaty StaldCool 2.671 401 3,072 2.072 2b4.15 DOCSteffcod ** 21,sD2 3270 2s.072 2S.072 3 034220 2b.4.18

-I saty SaNfCost * - 38.8.3 S.82 44.0a 4.4.809 * . 6all,03 2b.4 Sfctot P.F d 2b PFt4Oa Coas 1.290 6.4t2 102 23 407 n70230 i2.509 O610" 9594 3.;0 7.356 2.124 1.118.231 2b.0 TOTALPERIO 2b COST SASS8 25.83S 2.543 1.9s5 1.752 31.636 98.454 33.902 218.68 194.042 30.311 1.214 102.200 217.791 2.677 2S.a44810 500.476 1.116.331

S:

FTR1002.. O abIlor Foss.. 9 Wtt Fad Sto P..d 2eDnd D 9Oa-ria

" Aclottsa 2s.1.1 Ra seap l Wacts 423 44 57 6S . .0450 850 2.80 2.80

• 573.110 1.071 olvosi of PbSyat5 D r.. SyatsmCopo 2cl12 Tott Reodor5 B.A, Syotm ConVsal 2c1.31 tRH1

• 37 I 1 23 10 15 57 87

• U4 77

• . 14.041 847 2c1l.12 RH3/RH4IRH8 2 1 20 25 35 100 1900

• 24.800 2.005 2C.1.3.3 RHA

• 5 22 66 1 0 3 15 tO 69 6s A.1 . SO 6,71 80s 2C.314 RHJ

• 33 0 1 I9 7 13 73 75 *. 11.61 744 2C1J.5 RHL .2 o o 7 S 8 42 42 . 92 .1 .* 8.068 483 2c1.3.6 RHX

• 40 1 1 28 1S It 104 104

• 345 4 18.532 3 800 2C1.3J7 RHY  : :3 1 1 28 5 Is as es - - 343 14 *

• 11.144 829 2c.1+/-8 RMCC 2 2 62 37 36 205 200

• 771 ItO

• 41.218 1.472 2cl .3 Teoa 5 348 7 7 207 122 ISO S"5 503 M06 38 - * . 128.913 8.015 NM. Rdoso BLautgSot C.swsern 2c.4 TOtS Old Radwata 9B&g Sytt C howt 2c1.8 Totals Tthtea B. g Syals. Catanrto 2c1.6 Tout Ad.Vot O" SytmCosgeta 2cl.7 Total Mksfta SyotamCerobt 2cl.8.1 GAAIOCA 1 l . . . 2 l8

• I- . 350 2o.1 Totl I1 . .2 18

• It . . . 350 Oa as d SR58 .B 2s.1.1 ReaS l II9l.as.D 3t0 467 10 12 91 341 1.403 1.403 * .63 542 - 147.20 17,34 2M.l Totl 3b0 4Q7 10 1262 341 1.405 9.405 . 1.16 842 - 147.206 17.344 2X1.10 Soafolig h. rW80ootr do A.ck 167 3 1 24 4 47 245 245 . 2 1s4 * . 13.367 4.176 .

2C.1 Ss Fhd P.W 2c Att Comtt 702 1.043 78 es 357 1.962 1m100 0.411 5.03n

• Is 49.4 r.64 * . 70.597 30.920 TLG Snfrmtt r".

OyWt C,.-k Nwe-. r-l.,.ai. St.Ms. )-..._ ,16.14S1&t R1.,. O N..o....dosid Codt Atrrlyd Appdfrt caPog. 11.f 1S Table C Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station DECON Decommissioning Cost Estimate (Thousands of 2003 Dollars)

I Ott"t LLRW NRC $poneF.s S4 P"s=sd .lvole.s Bw U1Ity asd D0.. R.osl dig T.-spos l MP-0 Ott. TrA I Toed 10 Ts. 4.n Rst.. . C...A C-. S C ... C GTCC Possd Cnfl C.er IA C.e Ce C- C-en Cost c-s Cost. Cest, eh

-t c..s e Cost. C..n Cs. Fr C. Ft C.. F.0 C. Fst C-.F. Wr_. bs.be .sIa M-,n I Ind*w Arlhes D ecKp be P.4d 2X CoislolI COWS 2c.11 PFos SWd4d wi 57 21 54 268 108 500 508 421 53274 02 2c.3 2 S." ld es . 28 4 33 33 2ci33 Dw b.L Ea 4 DIstson sO 23 537 8 114 030 830 80DO 3n - 303.507 739 2&s3 Sulekl P. bd 2. C eUtW Costs S7 28 8o T? 537 304 224 1.305 1.38 * (1000 73n 421 3* .781 821 Po 102c P..Id.Doeos,.o costs 2cA 1 D.n., ..fd 03 . . . 21 103 103 2s.4.2 lo.s"Wnc -. 03 50 554 5Y4

2. 4.3 PMe"yo . . 701 70 771 nl1 2c4 4 H-M pePda

• 251 e3 314 314 2c4.5 Hff SWOWNMM0 1.100 -

• 100 1.2S 1265 2e 4.0 DMo" OfDAWg td 10 s 3 . 77 21 117 117 2c47T Pb.4..og

• rgs * . . . 75 20 202 202 2C4J N9C Fo * . . . 304 30 334 334 2c4.9 E nMOcYPI.s Fr.s . 71 7 79 2c4.10 SOt.O&MCast , *175 28 202 202 . . . . . . . 132 24.11 R n.dProcea E 2s2 38, 290 290

• . . . 00 7 07 57 . . . . . .

2A.412 tSFSOt ctsc..ot.

2C4.13 S.*V StoffCost e79 102 781 7n1 13 .. 1.3 . . . 2078 32. 0.0 14 071 *.375 * .79 . ..

2s4.14 DO0 Staf Cosd *. . 3.807 1.482 11.302 11 362 . .. . . . . 429 2e.4.is Vtty Stbd CoA 20.4 5510010Pald 2e Ptd.Deped. Costs 83 t,3S1 15 3 7 16.598 2.6e0 20.008 20.73 13 1 10 32 . 20,750 329 255269 2e.0 TOTALPERIOC2e COST 932 2.423 172 16¶ 094 230 10.590 4.019 27.587 27.434 135 Is 10.37 9.3n *21 . , 1254,120 32105 255.289 PEPHOO 2.. L b-**T*.stktn Pretd 2. Dcd DOho...slon Ac*,Nl 2.1.1 ORtSE e en . lie 35 10 10 2.1.2 T r-Aws.. - * . . * . 110.

20.1 SutOd P.iod 2 Actet CWos * . . . . . 115 35 140 150 Paled 2e Adls-M Cost.

2e.21 MM0S" s ys * . . . . . 4.572 I.371 0.943 8.943 98A4 2.2 Sul.d l Pe0,d 2e A4dtt9a Cot Vn 2* 1.371 S942 5.943 9844 a Pedod 20 Cot.e Cots 2:.231 DOCsttf bluf evn sss - 1.097 184 1.20 1261 2 3 Sutddld Pelod 2. Cdete Cost. 1.027 104 1201 1.281 P,. 2. P.d-Oselod Costs 2 .41 bosme . . . . . Y41 St 59 S9"

2. 42 P vet os- 753 7n 428 828 2.4.3 Hsldh pW s 116t: SW S0 2 .44 Doosad d DAW;ed -

• 1 . 17

• 27 27 2.14. P -W bM 601d9 . . . . . 94 14 109 100

2. 4 NORCr. 327 33 359 359 2.4 .7 Evncy PIsng Fos a 84 * . . . . . . . . 2.55 2.4J Slt OW Cod 185 20 210 210 2.*.9 ISFSt opn&q Coth S 61

2. A1O S.dAY SteCod . . .

• 00

• .090 0o 440 40 * . *24.307 2.4.11 DOCStowCo *

• 4.090 14 4.704 4.704

• • . 3D5 8,105 78 107 2 .4.12 Udy Stff Cos * , 0 .70 083 4010 J66i 204 Su'ddw Paed 2. Po Deod.4 Cos.

• 404 4 1 . 17 12.2ne 1878 1 6403 14.497 4 . 30 . . . .S -7 69.321 444 4 1 17 18.052 3.449 21.097 21.052 14 . . . . . 0,10 19 1 .32 2 .0 TOTALPERMO 2. COST PERIOD2 TOTALS 8.476 40.178 9.919 4,221 29.770 0.087 181,119 72.257 417.818 368.551 44.877 1.389 307.200 272230 8.101 031 41.001.770 073.765 2.072.706

77. - i.nie re.

.ef.r Cnsrk Nodlrt frb,,tafIf Stao." Dorornl EIS.143 014e Rf,.0 D-n-lo"Mg Ca lA."a. Appep.dtx C, Pge 12 of D Table C Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station DECON Decommissioning Cost Estimate (Thousands of 2003 Dollars)

On-smo ILRW NRC Sp.M F-I s5. Pc---d e-n it."1 Utity l Aelhity D0cn R-d PosogleIq Tttpo Prflect:.g Dtpes On1 . Tobl Totl UtL.Ts M. .oto Rnt..9 Ve$.,. CIl A Cl".3 B C--.. C 0rCC P sd Crat Co.Uto

1. Ad" D.t lot, C."t C.e Coet. Cot. Co-ts Cota co"t Cosov et Cot. Cotta cott C Ft C.. .t c. Poet Pi

r. CuF..t WI Lb. Mot..h M o PERIODSb. S31 Roo0t-e PFttd 3b Di.. Dnoistve." Aa.

O-DI.. of RtSt* S . tksE 3b 1 It Stokb/EOt,. T- . Roe 0

• 840

• 128 984 9S8 Sb. .¶.2 Ad 4e bo&V - 41 . t8 507 507

• 96.33 3b.t lJ AgeMWd OIfGfon9" 241 * - 3 277 277 . . 3.488 39t.1.4 04.*tot 068 28 *

• 4 30 * .434 3b. I.I. OtetI CG-osl B.W.8' D

• 1tO * . . 1.15

• 9t . . 14 105 105 bt.1.1.8 5 IM S0t1 C _ 1r 133 133 . .. 17273

• * . 17 133 410 II . . 178

• 4 . 1I I

• 4 - . . ,34 Sb3ttJt.1.10aS Wm* PtAar I

• Is 21t *

• 330 32 * .- .. 21*4 37 37 *

• 578 So. I.1.11 htA* S~te.d. 383 * *5 .854 3b.t.t.12 L Lwel Rdvft * *

• 2 208 YO SWp * . . 14.81 Sb.1.11.I Modt* Sheo

• m3 ..

• 77 *27 203

• 203 - * * . 3.021 Wb. 1.14 Win GC. SB.*p -. 82 *

• 12 95 95 *.257 275

• 41 318 318 *

• 4.84 3b,1118 ttt MA" 692 104 M1 796 * . *. 10.17 Sbe.1.17 ai.11-aoe SMe0oo 304 * *

• 8 3498

• 348 * * *4.807 Sb.t118 Na R&doot OSd 480 n *2 * . . 7.33 b1.1.19 No S. PU H.o - 9 . _ . . 148 20 0k.1.1 nS

• 214 * *

• 32 240

• 246 * . . . 3.675 Db.1. 21 Old R"dwoltoBA*V 361 54 415

• 410 * *

• t5,45 3b.t., 22 Pbd4 E rs.O. 139 . 21 180 . 180 *

• 2tl20 3b.t.1.23 PNttttM &Ag 27 * . 4 31 s31 . . 49s 8b.t.1t24 RIoM, SI40g 4.157 624 4.781 4.781 . 838.44 3b.1.l.25 SV4 Ped 12

• 2 14 ,14 - * . 201 Db.1.1.28 Sr. E nwgtcB"D * . 250 * . 38 209 288 *.

• 3.0 Sb.1.t.27 T.* Pos&A MitC Ywd

• 698

• 105 8W3 803 9.514 S.1.1.28 Tbw tb"s 3.438 *

• 518 3.9"4 I O.U - * . 51.425 bt.t1.129 Tubh. P4 407 * . 61 498 468 *

• S.050 3b.I.1 Tdtob 14.227 *

• 2.134 1.381 968 MM.394 . - . 20M.785 Sa. Clcaes A.046.

b~i2 Rs-. R.414 8.680 * . . . 1.002 7,882

• 7.002 10.759 Sb.1.3 On4.t&bde f. *345 . 52 397 1.483 Sb.I.4 FF dM.

totNRC *. . . . 117 18 134 134 Sb.1 Sdaf.1 Potd Sb Ad" Cost 21252 * . . . 3205 24.574 *.,D

• 23.;44

• 2.

219.028 1.50 1.040 Poted Sb Ad d COst.

Sb 2.1 Ca.t- Cenek 430as . . . . 48 - 499 . . . - 2.857 Sb 2 S t Ptd Sb A oCot *430 5 . e8 499

• 489 . . . . -

• 2 Y87 P.ted Sb Co4tWd CoWt Sb 3.1 S-1 toWo&-

td 102 . . 24. 188

• 188 Sb.S SU0o1dPot Sb CdW.od Cst. 102 . .

• 24 18I rto .%rrest e.

"MtI, C,..& Nsef- G0-tsot.. StaHio Do.a.ssot Fl&143S3 sJ4, Rev. e

&t mmooelaIosl-rg Co-l A...?yt Ap,-dIoG C, rnt9 1tof 15 Table C Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station DECON Demommissioning Cost Estimate (Thousands of 2003 Dollars) r UT.t L5 55, Opf it st fboOOOmlVoo0 oElotly*

I .- _ D0s Rf.."a pd40ag T.tsw PFqrs Diposa MM Totl Toa T... -alq.t

.. Rass"os Vlota C AA CI-S Cl.. C GTCC Psosd Cft Con66ot I = Co." Coo Cot. C-" Cost Cost Cot. Co. e C-t Cot Codnt Co-t. Cur.Ft Co..Fo Cs Fo C. F-t C Foot > L- M .- Ms.onh-o FCtT U-pr PF1 31bPOq-d.4 Coals 3b.4.1 F01V0t 1.03 123 . .

• 1.01 11ff 1.7 3, A 2 Ppt" Is-

• 1,70 . . .

- -,s lS9 3.625 3b 3 Hnty a oqt-A nnW

• 3.127 8 3.6 . -. . . . . .

3b44 *F-ta , b.odM . 7 1 112 026 . .

3b.4 NltC tSFSIFas .

• 40 48 5 b4 a En-y FPh. Fss 172 . . . .

30.4.7 ISFSIOPmS Cool * . ISI' IlI 17T 112

'27 127

• 8 3tA6 sOeSUCodt -

• 305 06 446 3b049 S S tAtCot ld - - 6825 124 040 636 313 . . . , 50220 3b.4.0 DOCStaff Cost *.510 677 "As?

• 7.487 . . . 980,20 3b.4.1 WiUytff Coot *4.177 627 4.tmg 2.402 2402 , - . -. 6.s00 8b

• S5td P.t 8b P. Dependent CoWs 3.327 - - 40.412 2.z4u 21.'34 5,02 14.360 - . . 20srU0 3bD TOTALP5ER0O1 3 COST

• 25.1711 . 10,28 0.90 46.644 5,024 40.20- . * . 221.683 207.340 PER OD SC. Fwlst lotga op olllp P.d 30cDrot D-ft*41Vs AeOwnb Pedtod3 Coctl Coats X3.1 Sp.6 Fa Car6 ad TMssW *. *

• 6200 020 7.130 7,30 30s Sl PlOWd3CCdw Coa * .6200 92 7.130 7.130 P. SCPt -.O.,I Cools 304.1 kataWc

• s.r85 079 6.364 5.34 . . . .

o4.2 P.1 0 tso 10.1? 1.018 1.1094 3A43 Pho.W bod . 191 I 29 220 220 , . . . .

04.4 NRC SFS1Fe" 3.145 314 3.459 I.49 . . .

3c 4 5 E~b-y P-ksV Fsst . 1,02- 103 1.131 1.131 . . . . .

34 6 Se COAM Cos 2.044 382 2.928 2.926 . . . . . .

304. IYSI1OWS" Cot. 73 106 631 6 .1 . . . .

304.6 S-Ay Stal Coo

• s.6es 6 00 4.210 4.210 . . . . - 223.020 X 49 Ufty Saff Com

• 22.611 3.422 20.233 26.22 - - . . . . . 350.,40 304 SL&C40Perod 3xP~Ome4dM Cost 50.068 6.504 58.s72 ss.sn * . - . 5.73,480 3X.0 TOTALPERIOD3XCOST * * .58206 7.4A ra.02 .7 02 . . - . - - . . 73.480 PER100 3d . GTCC shItptg P.d1d 3d Dned t Aais Nbdt Sloan St y SysMt Rnnoi 3d t. Vlslv &Ftt GTCCDhosl 300 . . .00 655  :.6t7 s.6s7 * . . 411 72.st 341. T.tas *

• 300 . . .001 655 aesr e.657 411 72.o0o 3M.1 SI o Psed 3dAd"t Coest - 300 .01 655 6.6s7 6,607 411 72.0o P.4d4 3d P.a t CestS 3 4.1 htst..os . .

• 20 2 27 27 34.42 PtptAy t . . 4 41 3d4.3 Ph" aTt budgot . . 0 I 344 4 NRC ISFSIFM 1 10 14 3d.4.5 E"twt y PWV Foss  :  :  :  : 4 0 5 . . . . . 1.0 3d.46 6 Sk O4UCod .

4I 11 2 13 13 34 .7 ISF#t Opo g costa  :  :  :  : . 03 O 4 _,

3d4 908sty St Cod . .

2 4I 34.9 Uny Saff coa . .

1I 113 113 3 44 SkdI PtWt 3d P WDmwnk Coot . . 216 28 244 24 . . . . 2.49 3X.0 TOTALPERtOD3d COST . . 300 0.001 f 216 603 6.900 s.6t7 244 . - 411

. 72. . 2.4 TLO S I~e.

NerF

07.1,rC..kl Nodo-r G.oIsg Sed.,. v-.oootsl&IESS-(MK46 Rm. 0 Decms.(W~o.Wog C-tA.IA,olyo Appesdi Cr P.,.14 of 1 Table C Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station DECON Decommissioning Cost Estimate (Tousands of200J Dollars)

I., " +/-R6W NRC Spo Foo 5. Ps..o BWl Volt. BttsodI Utl..dI Attdtty D -o .t-on R Poiostog T.tpod P..td Otp-sl Olr.. T ofta .I U.Too UIooto.s.st Rno Vo4nn Ct..-A Ct_.*1 CI.. C OTCC PFttd Cnt CcV.n te.. Aafttv D-Ap/tb. Co. Co.t Coot. Coot Coott Cost. Cot. CDos Cst. Cost Cot Cot. C os C Foo c os F C c o oFlt Co.Fot nLb. n.s MUntso PFRtOD 30. SFSI D.oootot Potod 300Dld D t A.Mln P.bd e3Addsttos Costs 3 2.1 1fSS1Lk.s. Ttt- oo 849 . 7 53 . MO 1.292 95M 3.MO0 3,M10 . , n4 . . 506.171 lt.895 2,Y0 3.2 S.tb, Psott 3S AdXIm4 Costs U09 7 53 . 5Y0 1.212 Ss 3.M0 3.00 . . 4.72 * *

• 50.171 10.88S 2.50 Pndcd 3 Clotd Cost 3013.1 Smaltbd

• 5 1 7 7 . . . . . . . .

30.3 Swktow Pnd030 C.hWod Ct.

• 5 I 7 7 . . . - - .

P. 0osd St .OopoSd Costs 37 So4..1 bW0,.

• 33 3 37 367 . . . . . .

3n.4.2 P np ts.

• 334 33 367 202 . '. . . . . ..

30.4.3 Hsa7 op4 r 210 * - 32 202 242 . . . .

3.4 4 PtMttb..d p , . 21 3 -24 110 . -. . . . . . . .

304.5 NRC ISFSI FI' . 103 10 114 114 . . - . .

30.4.6 SRt OsU Cod U4. 1 98 300.7 6S006* lCool so0 9 r 3n 4 DMC Sff Cot 202 36 279 279 - - . . - . . 3.688 31..9 Utilty SotafCos - 253 30 234 234 . . . . . . . . 2.0 30.4 S.low P5. 03 P.d.Owp4&os Costs 210 - 1.081 170 1.081 1.41 .- 2510 30.0 TOTALPERIOD3 COST 80 7 53 o60 2.362 479 4.948 4.508 . . . *.724 . . 508,171 19.985 - 1+/-146 PERtOo nf IsFrss1f SR*s oat Pe,13d 1SD.4 Otoel Ots Ao".

P.dod 3 Addkkos Costs 36 2 . *_ .

X2.1 ISFSI SkoR-I..t..5 e6 . 107 622 312 S P.t 31Addwai Cost.

tN61,1 ft97 .* 38 107 822 622 2- . . . .,147 Ptdod r1Colo,4 Coost 2-31.3t S, tod to WIs - 2 0 2 822 ' . . -* .. U 8 313 Su.0tW14 PW 3t Cootostt Como 2 0 2 2 Po 31 0Ii DmIe Ps Cost X4.1 t . . 1s. 2 18 12 . . . . . . . .

31.4.2 Pm5ty tot 182 18 178 310.i 1-q -P 4 nta* 68 * . 10 75 18 78 . . . . . . . .

S04.4 Plta.W budget . 10 I 2 12 133 . . . .7 31.4 aSsOaM Coo . - 400 6 44 X4.0 SsNyStoff Coot - - 29 0 33 112 . . . . . . . . .6 31047 DOC8tTf Cost . . . 117 It 136 135 . . . . . . . 0.636 St.0.5 1.15111St!ff Cost I113 1.180 31.4 SutddWPn0d 31P.Io&Os Cost. t . . . . 472 72 613 Y0 TOTAt PERIODY COST 749 . . . . 509 180 1,437 1,437 . . . . . . . 3.147 ,798 PFRIOD3 TOTAF8 - 26.785 307 58 . 6.M1 74.683 15.118 123.231 7.7T7 70.10 40i20 *724 . . 11 t 57.071 235.915 940.190 TI.G S.ik I.e.

Oysfrr Cmlk Nucleo, Gn 00 fi..g Shfid.. D.,.tR E18 14$S-eo6, Rt". 0 Dottt...d..irn fg Cotl A,.i.f. Appe..dXisnqC, 11 .1lS Table C Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station DECON Decommissioning Cost Estimate (Thousands eo z003 Dollars)

U.RW NRC Sp.tt F-i S. F0o.d BWV SonlI UtIIRY. l On-S£"

Doooa Rttd Pr N gsa Troospst Pn.lng DttPtAd oith TOWI Tll UL. Te MIb.. Re Vo Cl.. A Cl..* C GTCC P... d Cft Coovodo A"Iy 04.0 Al NO.-AP11 C." Cost Coa CoC Coat. C-t. Cost. Cots Cs F." C.. F_0 Cw Foo C.. Fo C.. Fr_ wa!L-. M M..

o..hoo TOTALCOSTTO DECOWASSION 9818 85.082 10.501 *.12 31,982 75.094 34231 105,088 684,477 4*0.331 1418648 42.406 383.250 268,r77 11t20 031 411 .257.20 1281.301 3.654.821 TOTALCOSTTOOOCOMMISStON WITH 1870% CONTItNGENCY S144.4T7 IMosnds. 2003 don..

OTALNRC UCENSETERMYMATION COSTIS 7T29% O S4048.31 0fftt. of 20n dolrN, PENT FUELMANIAGEMENT COSTIS 2132% OR: 0141.64 th-d. . 2D0 d..N OONt.UCLEARDEMOLITIONCOST nS68% OR: 14249 _O od d 200n dolo.

rOTAL Pr6MARYsaIt RADWASTEVOLUMEBURIED 1," ftbl F..t AL SECONOARYSI!t RADWASTEVOLUMEBuRIED 221.830 rbkl Foot CLASSC RADWASTI!VOLtUE GOTA.OREATERTIHAN GENERATED 411 ee Foor OTALSCRAPMETAL REMOVED 22,811 Mm OTAI CRAFT LABORRCOUIREMENTS: .

1.281.8D1 Eod Nohte.

tth h4ote bZI Hst odytd~ rcl t~atoe doeToldolote _0

a. i tn th0s s0*y peotnod by d-_.dog t0.ff

0. botote. tI64tts t.h. bJ ttt01,

10. Wh

• 001OtI5'& ' hdkttt,,

• ZttO tsl TT77 Rerk. Ile.

Oyster Creek Nuclear GeneratingStation Document E16-1455.006, Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis AppendixD, Page 1 of 15 I,

APPENDIX D DETAILED COST ANALYSES DELAYED DECON TLG Services, Inc.

0.,ter Crwk Notar,Or-o.ogM.fain.. Dota..t IS- 14.-O6 Rrr. 0 ltodooio Coat A-ytl.. Appard6 D. Pot S ofIfS Table D Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station Delayed DECON Decommissioning Cost Estimate (Thousands ot2003 Dollars)

O0115n LURW NRC Spool Fl .Sd ft-.o0d unn Vob.o B1I UOIy ood As4ty D. RosWd Pkahot.. T-.oopot P ng Disosal Olth- Total T l To- M.a Rnot VOv CassA CnB CO-nC GTCC P-d Cnft ConWeo A

A.0Y D.%nd .n CootCoot Cot, Cot. Cot Costa Coot. Cooth- Cot Co.t" Costs Costs Co.Foo C. Foo Co. Foot C. Foot Co.Foot W, Mls. Mtoht W--ot PERIOD1. Sthtdooot t-oMgt Tt.oott 1t.1.1 SAFSTOR o50 d .. d.to- sroy . 202 tS "3 380 1.12 posi aFC, d eofOonor o - . * . . . 97 15 112 112 1.300 1013 No44iauosCwnOlootp..atst..

1.14 R.. h &b69 .088

1. 15 Ibn odPF sd Dd..nS r',

1 1016 DMaoto PtiNy tytoma P1 ,00 1017t IN F Sod t PSDAR *. . . . . 150 22 72 172 1168 R.4- pbhodp &wVos. . . . . . 97 1S 112 112 *

• 2 0;0 I., 'S FnI dotlw nt a y tat 'IO E.WWO y lrt . . . . . 75 II 56 86 * . 1.000

10. End P1 p4, 1 do01014b 11 "s rt 1-.112 Detaht dby-plOdohbo..O, . . . . . 112 17 126 129 * . 1.500 10.1.13 D0-** t*s ..o sao * . . . . . 75 II a5 88 *

• 1.669 1&I.14 P""kbSER

• EA * . . . . . 232 35. 267 267 *

• 3.159 10115 P1SF Sko.Spedt CeodShdy .* . . * . 375 *8 431 431 Adko*y Stod fr-1&.1t.1 P OMn pbdtV 0.41.00 br SAFSTOR 3t9 06 424 424  : . 4.920 10.1.62 PbO B~0 . 312 47 359 206 * . 4.167 10..1*1.3 Pttd sd ad lbu*V. . 214 35 2r9 269 3.120 1.1.le.4 W Woo"oltowt nty . 100 22 172 172 * . zoos 10.1.185 FKUal md 000ed1tancey * . 100 22 172 172 *

• 2000 1.1.15 Ttar *

• 1.214 162 1.30s 1.30

• 16207 Dou"d Wei P-0o 1-1171 PbL.11 bo * * . . . . 89 13 102 102 . 1,183 1* .1172 Facily debeodt1 doy. . * . * . 90 13 103 103 12;0 10.117 TdA 27 205 200 -

• 2.383 9.s1 Aonnw 0*g rpys * . . . . . 7 I 9 9 1¶,1.19 D-k"m-Wgtzom -.- st la-

-10.20 Dnh S d-t NSSS 10121 Oh*M-anheI- OM0tod 0at I10.22 Dowheewo eV&caootd *g0 I10 StWSt PFd Is A"y Coos 2.9t0 491 3.471 3.471 35.8.0 P101*41 Pottd.Oebd. Cost 104.1 hbovn 1.734 173 1.907 1.07 1.*42 Popty1os * ?2 * * * * .2 1.4.3 MOB" #"Lc KAT4o

• 221 . 55 276 276 * . . 40 . . . .10 .0 104.4 Hwq oltot 15Oa

• 2t8 *

• 43 331 331 a 4* D, d DAW otd . 5 1 . 23 6 35 39 404 . 1al 99 1.4.6 Ptwd oM gy bodoot as 94 716 719 104.7 NRC reos * * * *

• 371 37 406 408 62 . . . . . . .

1o4 8 E-w-y Pk.4. Fmoo . 101 10 III -

1049 Ste O&M Coot * . . . . . 200 37 287 287 1.4.10 Spoo Fod POst08U * . . . . . 001 14S 9.113 1.4.11 ISFSI Orw1 Coot. . . . . . 71 It 9 104.12 SovySoff Coot . . . . . 006 145 1.114 1.114 . . . . . 5921 104.13 JIty StaffCod . . . . 24 422 2 0063 280.5 -289.08 8230 .. . 4. .. .. .. 10.. 9 46.

. . 37.421 1-4 S.blotal P00 1a P04&O.Pom Coot

• sos 5 1

• 23 29.510 4.421 34.470 33.164 10 404 4;03 099 22343 100 TOTALPERIOD 1I COST

• 509 5 . I 23 32.491 4.912 37.941 36.635 1.306 *

• 404 - -

• 103 g 482.233 PERIODlb. SAFSTORU.mHd DECONAetlbbos TEL Smnfrnt, I-.

Oy.fw,Crook Noel.., roos ,s.Ols, SI~tfi Dects-t.. EI1$SE t -. 0 flo~osssoi..isg CostAs..kvi. App-odi~. APait3o(15 Table D Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station Delayed DECON Decommissioning Cost Estimate (Thousands offOO( Dollars) 09-,"' LiRts NRC SI st4 Net S.. P--.s 5.0.51VokoC,.. B.s i Uldy sod Aol." Doemi Ss-1o PsobsbTg 1'.osPoo Pt-s108 Disposal =ta - .Tol- Tolol Ls. Toot ...Mots-tss I.tt.teoldt Vke,,tt Cl..*A ClasB C1assC GCC P-.ss.d. Cteot Cos."Wst I W4&. Aot D-ol.cost Co." Cost Coste Ot C.".tCeet ots Cssts Csfts Costs Cost C..P.0 C.. Post Co.FP.6 Co.FP. Co.FMst Lbs. Mhootot Mnts..

P.4. lb Dood LI s~sob 5 Ac#.Yst Deowo-"s*..o sf 04. Btid*vs W1.1.1. N.- Rodwtes 5tItdnV Systoos RO.lWod lIb.11. dCRasostel %"4M. Systtt Sooo . . . I b5..13 Aog.t,,efd 0OR GM. ssD * . . 1 2 3

• 37 1628. . . 814 2.443 2.443 3Zt53 lbII1 Dwo6a B."0.1 RetnoDtol 2.184 - *

• 1092 3.275 3.275 43.1M

• 3. 8 .8 108 lb,1.1.7 StocbISAl-a~tTottosts Rsoo. 8 D-st 42

• 21 83 63 952 lbII1 6 Tto4. s3og. DU* on so. * .

• 4 12 12

• 15 341 . . 170 511 511 8.Tr2 lb.I.1 TROWS 4210 . 2 .105 6.315 4.21I 83.993 1IM S~ktstotPttod lb AC"~6 COst 4210 tlO2 "315 0.1S g83s P~eR~d lb AMdottd Costa lb.2.1 Sost NetSPodl 11015M55 . 8.115 1.217 9.332 .32 Ib.2 SMiObsP.to lb AdIdMsot Costs . 8.115 1.217 9.332 9.332 P.to lb Co.1swelCosts e23 94 m m tb32 Pooo sq.4dwoO0 19" . e5 175 .. 734 314 1.485 148s - . . . *.1.348 . . 189.835 269 1b.13 S.0 100 toolOOwt 68 . . .- 10 70 78 . . . . . . I_ . .20 WS. 5.488151 Potl~d lb CR641.5 Costs 824 68 65 I75 . 734 41: 2.2SS 2.285 . . 1 3,48 . - 18 i-9.33 2`65 Podod lb Pb4Osdtd~, Colts lb.4.2 heoss,14,os 735 . . . . . . 14 919 819

. . . . 37 U 481 481 lb 4.3 PtsP.tly sto 527 03 07 sn Ib.4.4 Healthphylks atPo 11

1. . . . . . 8 388 338 IbOs Hs.-Y qsilo'-tto-"s

• 73 * * .

• 1 U 84 lb.4 5 Diotto ef DlAWQtos~ 1 0 . 7 . 2 10 10

• 17 . .2.339 20 lb.47 P04500007&AV"0 . . . . . 158 24 181 161 1b.45 NRCPsea . . . 9.4 8 103 103 lb,49 Entgotts Ptot-kVt Pess * - * - . 25 3 28 28 Ib4.10 SiMOtt Cost .3 9 72 72 lb.4.'II SPot4Pol Pod 0CM * * * . . 244 37 281 281 lbe412 ISFSIOpost.*k Costs . . . . 1 I. 3 21 21 lbdI 4.S-ety SloffCoID . . . . . 2u 37 281 281 . . . . 14.81 lb . I Udfy StoffCost 321 72.41.

4..38 850 5216 5218 lbh4 &4,tot Pellet! lb PIt Awod.Op-Mo Costs 735 383 t 0 . 7 .345 1.172 8.644 .315

• 117 . .2.339 29 87.2 lb.0 TOTALPER=O lb COST .775 451 67 1T7 740 14,460 4,913 28.578 28247 325 .117 1.348 172272 64.239 672 PERIODle. Pft.psotlss sorSAFSTORDots-ty PetlodIc D8,0 Ae.ttsitlg0,55..

101.1 P P.eo 'sttp0o 59.4stt1 ,r stos." * . . 61 47* 470 3.00

-10.2 Metaltctwsgt.,0t we..estreodw W, 36 - . . 5 42 42 o70 101.3 weet s~bs.t-eltpi. tss ..sy * . 33 220 983 953 21n,098 lot 4 Se-, b.%*v~ Ssrsoos 1lat.5 P mm& otuS1505 wdwst.m n . U 7 560 s0 093 I&I S~btotolt.tto leAC8Ny Costs 448 T". 293 1.515 1.515

• 22.708 093 PettedIC Cocltot'd Cost.

21 . 73 196

• 613 349 1.610 1.650 * . . . 1.606 . . 189.882 298 3 . . 0 4 4 103 SfttoM P.01odIc ColoMto Cots 219 3 73 18 . 813 350 1.854 1.654 . . . 1.508 I . 189,882 298 7.0.Rh-.. Ie.

.rCo-.kANol., r-otior.fot.o D~onowt EIO.1425453, Rev. 0 DssolsolgCoot Aoalyl Appendfc D,P I,*of. El Table D Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station Delayed DECON Decommissioning Cost Estimate (Thousands at 2003 Dollars)

I-O. gLLRW p-F-3RG oS 4.

d N-o-d 60Vol0 Bt.. I UA44 0 0d A.y Do).c Rotoo Pooogbg Tosospolt P-s.ssg Dsofosal Oltt Tds Telel UeT. gad R ntt Vd Cl.-. A Cl..S Ca-. C GTCC PoeWetd Cos Csn*cl Wd- Adtt.*DrOI-o Cos Cod Cost Costs Co.st Colts Costs Cost Cot Cost Cos" Cat Cs.Pos Co.F C. Fot C..FE CFost tt .Lh. Moelooo P04odle P~DepwOtn* Cost 104.1 husooc 32

3. 43 475 47*

lc.2 Pp.Itosm 521 52 5713 573 lc4.3 He0h s"kg a"

• 123 31 156 1SS C 4.4 tt-y to

• 72 11 63 62 c.45 DspodsiDAWg O-Vd I 0

• 6  ; 2 9 5 - 01 . . . 2.020 25 1C.4.6 P d0olWgy bsdg" 23 179 179 iSe.4 NRC Foss 93 3 102 102 .7 . . . . . . .

1lc 8 EnsPncy Ph.g PFot .25 3 29 20 . . . . .

23 . . . . . . . .

1t4.0 SRs0IU Cod 62 9 72 n * . . . . . . . . 1.0 Ic.4.1 Sp.0 Fuo Pod O&U

• 201 36 276 1.4.11 Isrso Ows-tshCoft - . 18 3 20 241 *7 * . . . 163 lec 412 SomptyStaffcod *

• 36 278 276 1.4.133 UatySRCos 4.431 ass 5.096 S.09 lc SPPett PododIePsf4-Oo.W t Cosdt .19 1 0 6 .221 623 7.349 7.023 326 . . .101 . . . 2.20 2 .32 100 TOTALPERIOOle COST 216 646 74 196

• 1s9 6.997 1.068 10.317 10.192 32 * . 131 l.96 . . 191.902 23.119 86.903 PERIMOI TOTALS 5.986 IAN0 let 373

• 1.382 03.04S 11.391 73.03S 73.074 1.9s1 . 622 2.655 37.277n 107.504 656.405 PERIOD2 . SAFSTORDoeocy M Wt Spat Fat Stg Ped 2.Ohd h Osst.Wbg Af~ft 2.1.1 Ocsohtospoctilt 2K1.2 SenAo-%s tha y 20 1 3 P- scats 20 14 BSno s nM repbctsm * . * . . . 59 90 0S mg . .

2&1.5 Uft q-Lfi_ * * . . . 1970 297 2.273 2.275 . .

281 S,&&" Ptd 2h Ae0.4yCols * . . .2. 577 387 2.963 2.993 . .

Pe0d 2. CosAsodCogs 2 S31 Sptd Fo Cm"o e x Tbrw * .. . . 6000 DO 4.6000 4.839 . .

2o S S~hOto P0dod22 ColRt Costs * *. . . 4.000 600 4.000 4.1000 P~ 520 Peetd.Ov-od.4 Cots 204.1 hw oa . 13.214 1.321 5 14.33 14.533 2.4 2 Ply lyses 1.573 17 29 17.29

• . 1.72 20 4.3 Hoedt phyls soPp" 217 1.006 1.000 gm. 75 17 204 4 DbPd of DAW eno0ed l0t 5ss 508 2.4.s PI`* "sogybodste . 7,37 1.107 8.406 20.46 NRC Fos . 9350 53 s.u05s 5.505 2047 Esgnoy Plw 0g Foss * . 1.066 159 1.767 1.77 * . . . . . . . 0.6 2.4.S Sil OSMCoe * . 31932 590 4.321 4.621 2.46 Sp.,* Pevlfd OSU

• 13.235 226S 17.620 17.520 2 4.10 ISFSIOpg.sth Cost 1.117 166 1200 1.290 204 11 Soaoy Staff Cosd * . 6.361 1.254 8.619 6.615 . . . . . . 5 4 2s.4.12 ULty StaffCos 9.262 71,162 71.162 20.4 Sobbt PlM 2. P.t d Cas%

• 6 7 17 .365 13762 103.700 *6.363 . 127,317 1.502 1.460.617 18.092 133.700 2,0 TOTALPERIOO2h COST mg50 73 17 - 365 140.359 19.076 161203 161263 . 6.363 . . 27.51 1.5.2 1.0.67 PERIOD2 TOTALS M6 7n 17 .36 140.399 19.576 161231 101293 . 6.363 . .12.17 1.2 1,460.617 PERIODS.. R ... -osl 500 Fell. SAFSTORDOstsc P.44 3. Di0d Df-hhlt9 Ac~ifs 201.1 Pedo p.s oy end Is 112 112

• 1300 381.2 RWo p0W4dogs S *poc. 52 398 2q9 * - 4.000 30 1.3 Pwfb- d.ld nd a.0y * . 97 Sc.1 Ed pseo dona 0 5 11 e s6 *

• 1.000 3.1.0 De bddy.dd I 1,y 1s 112 112 * - 1.3" 2.5Sn frI, io.

Ow"l.r Crk Nutt", Oorait Stati Daant E5143455.006 RD. O Daeromasldoztug Coal A.ayOf. Appr.dlxrD Pace 5 otl5 Table D Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station Delayed DECON Decommissioning Cost Estimate (Thouasands og2003 Dollars) off-r* tLRW sRC SpolF.a st 7CCa . 8SUaVoum aa I dIAlysd l Adtiviy OsD R-a Poagleg Traspd Pcesg Diobs Ott-. - TotI Todal L.T&T Ma l fto-st- Vdu Cla*sA CIs,aB ClassC GTCC P-ossad Cvt Cotn Itotn ALodg Cost Cst d Co eCt Ca.st Cos Cast Cast Casts Costa Costs Cat C. F.4" CaFol Cs..Fas CaF.

ct C. rs.t Wi. bs".. V 1..s tsalr, Sal.6 DeS;ealot .ss'o 562 84 "at "a

• 7?S00 3St.7 Padia SERold EA . .* . . . 232 35 267 26?

• 5.3100 3&a.8 Paft SteSoecfit CostStudy - ** * *

• 370 se 431 431 *

• 0.009 3a 1.9 PpWefthl bee- Toaat- Pla . . . . .* ?S 46 353 3S3 *

• 4.006 3.4.10 Raas NRC eosSfltao -

-cf SpoMcalwe 3 t.11.1 Rt*vi - &b.. y foSde. * * * -

• 5*2 3 63 571 - * . 7T370 3-1.112 ph"r.y.l- . . . . 312 47 SOS 323 * *

• 4.16?

3a1.t.il. R..ctclaad 532 8o 612 812 . . 7 100

3. ItIA R w d * * * *

• 487 73 s80 se0 * * . e.soo 3U1.11.5 S lCk ~i * * * . *

• 37 i 43 43 * * . sce

.. . * . - . 7S n1 ee iS * . - ucyS Sal1. ii? Ret`osdaepastomoea * * - * *

• 120 18 18 e6 * .- eoo1 Sit.11 aDTta 0`sa . . . . 312 3 47 359 359 - . 4167 a1.115 PReoupp"aN' sbuabr 150 22 172 I??

3Sal11.10 DOyeIt * * *

• 120 Is 1M3 13M - * . 1.609

• . .

• 234 35 259 134

• 134 - * * * *

• 3.120 32.tillS Ww oW a UAtt

• 345 - 52 3as 596 - *

• 900 Sa. 1. 13 Facty& aft daoat .67 10 70 39 . * . TT550 t1i11 Told -* . *

• 3342 501 .844 3.02

• M1 - * .* . *

• 44.624 PtmFh a SwoFPradoes St12 PeP.dle ssauab * . * - *

• 180 27 207 20o * -

• 2.43.

3.1.13 FPht"e pF I.e o 363 2.782 3.782 3t 1lt Detig aM deonup yAl lI * . - .4

. . *- .

• 52 121 121 U. 1 15 RlgaCat CMdEnOsbo&VAM 507 2.355 2.353 - .

• 123 3a.1I FP s asftsn oArdMa.s - 92 It 106 106

• *

• 77.z00 32.1 Spaloid PFld 3i AC" Costs 10.275 lslt 11.817 11.47s . 341 - - -

FW 3 Cabld Coat 3Sai SpeeoFud CaW d T-sfe * * * * * *.00 - no 8.520 5.520 * .

St3 Subtol Fatal 3. Che S" Coaso * * * * - *.sco n2o 5.20 3.520 .

• Pwiot 3. PFd-Oepedo Cose 3.414 'IWsoo

• U0 U4 924 924 384.2 PaFsyes * . 999 100 1.0o9 1.0"9 31.43 HAMMpyiys spgen

• 221 * *

• 5' 276 276 3.84A MessyeqAao -'

• 288 - -43 331 331 3.45 Dp oflAWgeerad - . 5 I 23

• 6 5 35 404 * -

• 8.103 9 3.4.6 3 4.7 Flt ~eey NRC FM budget

• 371

. 9g 70 37 539 406 539 toe Il . . . .

3h 4 e EFg-y PW- F- *

• 101 10 lII

3. 4 9 S ObMCost

• 250 37 267 267 34a1o sew Fud Fad Oam . 988 1450 Pr13 1.113 * * .-

SW .

3a.It Sawky VARtCod 536 es11o 611 -32.

3h4 12 U yStff C as 1378

• 3.45 18.833 18.633 3S4 stt Fetad3S FP~dp-Oe Cast 23 20.906 3.120 2469 23.34s 1.224 * - 404

• 1103 99 20.564

• 09 8 I 3S.0 TOTALPFdOO 3. COST

• 23 3.961 139 41.9 34.820 6.a 341 * £04 ,103 89 3719114 PERIODSb . Deaooessag

- Pajsla Fated3h Dkd D.Madt*a AcMafe Detaile Wa.t PFadAss 3b.t.1.1 Flats * - * . - - 355 53 406 347

• 41

• 4 733 3b.1.l.2 Raclltorsals * - - * * - 3D0 4s 34S 345 4. 009 3561.1.J Reeob&'gbink 101 10 118 29 ?7 . ..

- * - - * - *

• 1.310 T7L .nfirn. Ic.

DeoaotIasiosf Coo-Aolo-Dos-.tt8 EI&IdS35.01t R". I?

App-d..L D, P.C. 0 aris Table D Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station Delayed DECON Decommissioning Cost Estimate (Thousands of 2003 Dollars)

Ot-Otou.W NRC Spoo Foo St. Pls-.4Baa V. 0.a I o dt AC"bf Deo Rost PaUqht Tm-p-o Poss.t Disposal fw0 Totl Total UW.Ts. Msott s1 RIt V- V .. A CIs8 CI... C TCC P Ss dl Coi Cotondl 0d,4I AtMI l" Cst Cost Csts costs cCosts Costs Cotat Cost Costs Costs Cots Cots C.F.ot Cs.FedCs.FV..t Ca. . Foo WtLSs. Ilnhows Ma.o Deod Wok Fonkss (<O d) 3.114 CROls h..p & Ms

• 75 11 6 88 70 11 61 88 201.1.5 S00105 h 150 22 l72 172 * - 2.000 30.1.1.6 losco d09sfst0etAt 3b1.1.J RoOC65 -e4W 41 313 313 * . 3.630 Yb1111 T 3b01.1.9 RbW losool 5fty owde *

• 90 90 13 13 103 103 52 103

• 52

• ~1210 12CO

. 70 1I 60 43

• 43 - . 1.000

. 312 47 359 359

• 4.167 ItO 22 172 172 * . 2:000 s1 MIA1 1 13 T Ru &eve tS6*bdt 04 2* 31 235 212

• 24

• t730 9b015114 Roec65astg . Z04 31 235 212

• 24

• 2.730 b 1.1 Todil t412 3Y 2.820 2.tS0

• 70 a32.740 36.1 MANtWF.b 9btAsWy Cot t452 3N 2.820 2550 270 . . . 32.1740 P.ttod 3b A htol Cost 39b2Zl Sftt C bWadt.toalo 9408. 4.098 4.098 3b02 DZZO n of Ltad RCRAWest. (od load) 9 29 52 61 616 861 * - 2.019 . . 110.076 30.2 OesoWn d FPCS Se4RCRAW"tt (to Ind) 56 1.320 252 1.930 1.930 - 27.*00 . 1.020.00 .

3b.2.4 ODleotstt of tLd ab- t-y

• 2 44 7 03 53 31 -

• 22.080 3b02 AZd st5 R-nda400

• 9791 1 43 . 71 2.033 13.104 13.184 *

• 19.193 249.5t5 150.230

• 9.791 1 113 2.192 ?8 3.916 19.803 19.e83 3t.2 Sdlts! Pettod3b Addlmd Costs 152 * . 29.050 16.t . - . 2.t09.871 10.23r Padld 3b COsoeb Cosh 3h.31 On *qtyMs 628 94 m m 3bl32 DOC staRlocatos &nb 1.097 164 1261 1261 3b.33 Snv4 ad o 1 149 145 .. . . . . . . .

3b0l34 Plpnaddnag ed~so

• 957 143 l,1D 1.1100 3bR2 I Srenl Fool C47lbl and Ttn. 2.400 390 2,7`0 Z760 3b.3 Sdrlo Ptlwod3bC d110" Costs 828 1082 * *

• 3.49? 781 5.968 3.228 Podod 3b PtOIbd-O. Dtsos Cost 3b.4.1 Dttnntg 19 5 24 24 3b.42 tsma * * . . 421 42 403 403 3b.4.3 P apt to." 501 50 551 551 3b 44 H.ofthtdrt A" 141 707 707 3b 4 8aanY qdtosas Hasnl *145 22 166 166 3b.4.8 Dispoal of DAW 0 2 1 12 3 16 16 203 4.083 s0 30.4.7 PMO Sta 7 h." * *235 35 270 270 3b,4 8 NRC Fss * .. 1M 19 205 205 3b.4.9 Elrqw Pi.n Foos .. 51 s 8 se 3b.4.10 SRO05U Cost 12S 16 144 lot 3b4.11 Sp. FoelPtdO&M a4s 73 559 3.4.12 Sald Staff Cost 200 40 306 306 18.209 3b 4.13 DOCStal Cosd * *383 507 I.610 3.890 - 52.288 3b.4.14 Ula SbslffCosd 8 .376 1.258 9.633 9.832 * *

• 34.113 3b4 S.ltot Pe'od 3b Peed D.P.W.s Cots t19 ;to 2 1 12 14.029 2Z21T 18.993 18.176 814 .06 50 so203 202.807 30.0 TOTALPERIOD3b COST 686 1 1.06 3 I13 2.192 728 2&130 7.260 45.682 42.039 3.374 270 29050 19.398 2.10.734 150.200 235147 PtRIOD3 TOTALt 648 12.09 a 11t Z192 7n1 W9i11l 12.671 87588 78858 10.118 611 29.050 16.010 . 2,016.837 110.372 86.461 71 G Sem gFI/e.

• Ossfr,* Cn.. ?Jsolt, Ot-olo'aM R~H.. D-.~.ttt EI&14&5.1E4.( nb. I A -oo.4-al.jr~ Cool A-alyst, App.'Jdt D. Pal. 70f 15 Table D Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station Delayed DECON Decommissioning Cost Estimate (Thousands of 2003 Dollars) o06S." LRW NRC S"t F.,. So. Prsod anal V1s Balst I Ut,10yand Adty Do R1atd Psd.s T.nspod P o=ssar Dispos. OtN_ TOal Total Us. Tans Mast-agsat R1tlotota Vatun. Clan A C- . 6 Cln*C GTCC Pas .d Cstt Coo8-.

54.5: Adftt es Coll Cant Costs Cot colts Cast Cost Coo Costs Cot s Cobat Costs CU Fost CVlFas C. Fs Cs. rast C ls Wl.tb. I,-t-a MantI,.

PERIDDA . Lio C0oWmp Rat Patid a Did Do cmWssixft AcMW Nosd- Sloas S4p* Orost" R-at l 45.1.1.1 Racoka.01aoPws.5 S Wnto 7 77 j 33 l7 42 765

• 229 1.167 1.167 107 1.093 . . M .150 l15o 4.1.12 C DUsS VRolR -attss 27 124 181 17 . 419 170 40 940 *

• 179 .

• 112.850 3.338 4.1.1.3 R=an V.nsd hSt~s.e 84 1.741 2.685 482 . 3.1 132 3.5t2 12.230 12.230

• 1.502 1.377 287 . 300.825 17.509 832 46.1.1.4 Vos11a4 S tn-ott1, GTCC Dtbteoa . 300 - . 5.501 o55 a.5a7 6.6r7 * *. A- 7-.9100 48,111.5 R-Cad, V."s 4318 77M 209 . . 5.1 M32 4.089 18.oY sr 694 . . 1.203 . - 1.94.750 57.509 832 4.1.I Totas S9 68281 3.979 704 42 15,169 263 11.103 37.681 37.689

• 107 23.939 1.377 287 411 2.348,475 40.512 1.885 pot at4.J. fqs*o-td alond As 1.2 Mat,.Tulk*A~O6MtMWn 232 549 II1 9.24 . 292 7.144 7144 - 59.003 . 2.5.154 4.957 A4.1.3 MAMc-A-4ssa 714 342 94 3290 72 5.159 5.159 - 38. * *- 1.o53,126 18510O Olseosid PWN,Sstotn 4.14

~t6SYat.M.

Tofs Coneansal 401.5.1 RCI/RC3

• 3 * . I 1A - , 577 63 4s.I 5.2 RCA 1 I 1I I *

• 147 .9 _

12 21 1S 80 80 - 147 U4 .- . -11731 8890 48.1.5.3 RCR

• 41 1 1 45 5 19 112 112 . .01 16 - - 21.99 1.009 4a.1.5 4RCO 240 4

• 321 110 M83 69

• 3.97 . 161.354 5273 4" .1.:. RCG 4S I 3 92 29 167 1.87 1.13  : 46,13 1.020 45.155 FCJ 48 1 1 50 20 120 120 . . l7I

• 25.044 1.068 45.1I.5. RCM 73 I S 120 V7 235 230 48.1.5.8 6CN

• tl1 *1 * . 60.130 1l34 16s 2 5 170 s 4*10 410 2.107 asSal 3,.10 das .5 OPCs 58 4 3 *1 110 . 51 277 277 . 639 330 - . 55442 1.313 A.1I5.10 RCT 37 0 1 3O 55 91 91 . 44 .. 18.858 807 4W1. Totals 745 1 27 895 137 360 tl79 2.179 11,078 412 * . *88.708 16.488 508 2 2 48 253 253

• 362 196 . 32.343 2.373 4s1.. R20 2 .6 29 3 Is I5 . 49 - 2.007 178

8. . 0 4s.1S.3 2P 19 0 1 28 9 7 57 . 345 13.630 406 4' 1.5.4 R 48 0 1 32 16 96 S4 . 309 . *. 18 1911 1999 Al' .::. R30 55 0 1 412 20 117 117 501 20.342

• 1.237 4.166 N3t 11 . 2 1 3 1a 16 . - 27 3 1.398 209 4.1. SS NIR 0 I7 1 38 22 127 127 . 447

" 16.140 1.492 57 0 0 14 7 39 39 . 179 - - 7.257 374

40. .8 N301 12

• 0 4 22 22 . . 80

• 3.260 261

• 12 - 0 4 24 24 . 97 .

• 3.934 256 15 .

57 0 0

55. 7 40 *0 .* 187 . 797.3 387 4s.1.6.12 N3T 3 59 19 . 58 *

• 357 210 78

• 0 4.11.613 NYJ 49 107 - 54 293 293 650 324 03.705 1.67.

4.1.6.14 NYW SS. W4a 18 4&I .6.15 MOY 74 4 52 158 58 315 315 *643 359

• 89.024 1.740

• 143 3 7 247 74 474 474 3.014 - 124.029 3 141 4s.1 8,56 N5l I9 10 87 57 239

• 9.707 621 23 0 0 10 6 10 52 52 . 121 1 28 *

• 7. 54 539 4a.1.6,18 N53 40 S I 20 15 57 93 n3 248 52 4.1S.To NPS4 . 14.050 915 12 0 0 4 8 5 28 28 . 46 15 3347 209

45. .S.20 NSt 50 0 1 33 18 102 102 . 44 . *1.609 1.114 4Ls.1621 NSO 74 I 2 59 28 194 184 . . 34

• 29.828 1.527 4.&6.22 NSA

• 21 0 1 23 5 12 70 70 .

• 290 16 . 13.130 842

4. 1 23 NSB - 27 0 1 25 10 63 83 . 307 -

• 12.480 503 4A. .5.24 N5C 12 . 0 4 24 28 156

• 294 267 45.1.825 NSD - 19 8 0 12 7 39 39 152 6190 6, 428 SW Ront*leeo14.

Oyle- Crr k N-I, -l..f Staffon Doru.... EIF1'1455-008 Rrr. 0 Dlro..-t~o~fo. Cool A.ooWf AppeodtA D. Page 1 oflS Table D Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station Delayed DECON Decommissioning Cost Estimate (Thousands of2003 Dollars)

Ot ts.w LLR.W "RC Sp Fos So fPot Boos Vo.. Btl 1Ut4 y osd ACs"8 D eos R.o Ptkn"g Trpot Disp 0prsss Oth TOMi Td-l LlsTT W. Rs Vdu Ci.66 A CGI.. B Cl.- C CTCC .od Cnft conttso hd# ACst Coob CCu o t Costs Coot Cost. Co." Co.s Cost Cost Co.st C. .4 Cu.F..t C. Fo_ C. PFot C. rst _t.Lbs. M-h-u Mo.o.t N- R8*&too&'S Syjt Co.bo-t (dW) 4&1.626 NSE *13 00 0 9 5 27 27 *. 110

• 4.43 278 40.1.6.27 N5F 19 0 7 9 8 44 44 . 91 27 . 6.103 41l 41 8.28 4NSG 49 0 3 .5 3 15 15 . 400 . 1.645 2DS 4a.1.6.29 NS1 0 5 3 17 17

• 5 18

• 1.555 172

- 61 4'1.8.30 NS 0 4. 3 18 18

• 1 * *

• tO90 238 4..1.6.31 NSJ

• 8 0 11 .

• 23 23 . 121 .

• S 5.328 17 "18 .32 NSK 10 0

• 20 20 *

• 75 *

• 3.00 224 4".1.8.33 NSN 19 0 12 7 38 38 * . 14*3

• 8.803 S 433 4*.11.34 N50 49 2 54 21 127 127 867 * . 27.221 1.083 4*18.35 NSP 19 15 12 - 10 57 57

• 183 '8

• 10.712 *19 41.1.8 38 NS(3 I5 12 10 56 56 . 182 47 . 10..15 413 T 1m7 4 1.rJ7 1NS5 11 39 287 287

• t195 * . 89.151 93 40.18.38 NIT Il49 49 8 22 11 131 SO?8 28 *

• 25.708 12118 4.1.8639 NSJ

• 50 49 a 22 131 131 *. 77 28 *

• 28.767 1.128 da 1.640 N5Y

• 24 0 12 4 9 49 49 13 I. 12 * - 7.230 545 40.1141 NS2

• 24 10 10 12 4 9 48 *9 . . 153 12 . 7230 548 4&1.t.62 POA 48 . 20. 118 119 5720 *

• 23.240 1.124 4&1.6 Tdxbt

• 1.417 28 41 1.268 387 Om0 3.788 3 788 . 10.660 1.219 *

• 740.255 31.435 Old Radoe B9MA Syph Cam-woo 401.7.1 "SA

• 55 0 t 39 20 117 117

• 4500 41981 1.246 4*1.7.2 7DA

• 22 1 1 10 *0 20 105 105 . 122 121 . 15.829 718 401.7.3 TFA 15 0 1 17 S 9 50 50 . 20D 25 . 10 642 349 4-1.74 MSA 100 4 3 72 76 55 310 310 893 258 s M8 2.2238

4. 1.7.5 PDA 38 0 1 30 14 81 e1 *

• 373

• 15.150 800 4&1.7.6 PMA 3 15 16 *

• 54

• 2.174 190 401.7.7 PFA

• 58 t 2 6g 25 155 155 855 . 34.703 1.294

• 305 .

401.7.8 P1IFP(0 S9 . 22 3 14 14 * . 30 *

• 1.199 202 401.7 Tcbals 315 7 a 243 125 148 847 847 3..011 404 155.9101 7.838 T u.otk NA&g Svt- C&Vnbs 4&I.S.1 7CA s185 I 142 130 101 570 570 . 1.755 390

• 10.219 4.0M8 40.18 2 T32 848 I1 27 9f2 311 1M.97 1."7 1. 1.905 . 483.529 14.232 4.18.3 T823

• 4 . . 3 1 9 9 . 42

• I.8n 85 40.1.8.4 TS38 11 0 0 10 4 25 25 .* 124 *

• 5.034 229 01.8.5 TC2 1.07 45 112 39.2 879 6,038 6.038 * *8.809 1.974.54 23.615

" 18s. TE2 131 2 8 202 ?7 501 501

• 3.491 141.941 2.83 40.1.8.7 TEE 220 4 9 333 107 73 673 4.115 *' 187124 4.883 40.1.6.8 TEO

• 18 0 0 11 6 35 35 *. 139 . 5.640 385 40.1.69 T°2 118 2 6 215 62 402 402

• 2.519 . 107.977 t578 4018.10 TF3 77 3 3 as 57 45 254 254 . 859 209

• 50293 1.738 40.1.8.11 TPE 98 3 2 52 66 42 234 234 . 647 225 43.953 1.519 4.1 8 Td..h 2.548 7n 174 6.009 253 1.636 10.698 10.989

• 74.350 624

• 3.057.483 m8l" Augtwsed Offos Systm Cop..of 4&.1.9 TotAI Mi.o&o S M. Co o 401.O Totl,

40. 1.11 S3tdr"g h, dV ofdrhdor.hgtt09 583 10 3 95 1t 188 874 874 1.057 M - 53.469 14.559 40.1 SkMM P.4o 44 Ady Cooto 119 12.016 5.D5 1202 17.122 16.087 243 15.781 56.378 -e8.378

• 201.002 28.M2 .1.377 287 411 11.20.550 188.371 i.r.5 Potld 4.5Addft Co b 4 .21 Cub Sue. tgo (¢oolg RPv) 428 2.139 2.139 4: 2 SdloW P.40 o aul Coos * . . .

• 1.711 428 t139 2.139 Trr.n ,i,. itc.

tM-t- C-h C-11oo Aootlvd Dotesnt El614455,-Rrr. 0

&r ld C"CotA..vd. Appretdi D. Polo 4 ofls Table D Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station Delayed DECON Decommissioning Cost Estimate (Thousands of 2003 Dollars) 014. L.RW NRG Spmo Foot S.. ocosood 6.I 0-1,,.,- S.oot UtIdy - I A."t~ Dsmo, Ro.,ow RC Pk.6.5M Costs 7,.-ptpnn4 Costs oos-kvMq Cost lsos Col Cots Coot 04 Ttal CTd 706*

T Col tIc.

CosdoTsm s Sboao.o6 Cols R..stfol4 R Cos CVs.,,. CIs CO.oCA A sss S CaI5 si c TCTCC 7C s P06.. . CttRC9~o C.tot bd*W Aelsry 0-ilb end C.-Cod Cosft Costs Co Cof clz Cof cbs,*Wy C s costs C.o bC b Cw.

cf C vF.. .. rlCz c.F. r..' C.Fr Mbl,. Mnb U.0 P.0 44. C dlots.Cosot 4&*1 Pmess saw s, 21 . 10 28 15 35 270 270

• 202 250507 40 4,32 SaN sod os-e 135 20 154 140 403. Sbkf 0 P.4 *0 Ccd0id Coos 21 135 1o 24 . 15s 75 425 410 - 1s 202 - 25.507 40 Pt sa P~dOvso,40 Cost 404.1 Osotono 45 11 5e s5 4.4. 3 PtWt bn .

~7 1.16 84 117 921 1.283 921

• .1m 12

• 4 44 H"M PIt UVPIo - 822 205 1.027 1.027

• 4.4. Hat obpt..rot

• 1.019 273 2.092 2.092 1.4.6 D= l d 0DAW gesotd 45 10 220. e1 337 337 3.839 . 70.938 943

. . 47 62 829 62s 4.4.J NRC FP0 soe S1 557 S57 4.49 Sa OSM Cool - - 554 44 335 335 4.4.10 Rsdost P osh E9*o. ot,*O*os *  : 420 83 483 483 4.4.11 Se"tAyStaSICod 1 200 IS0 1.3s0 1380

• 73.-0--29nm

• .t2 DC SWlsCod . . 9,409 1.411 10.820 0.820 - - . .- 47274 4a.4.153 Uiy Stiff Co 16.720 20s0 19.22 19220 . . 283.511 4.4 S406 I Pedod4a Pt _d-D Cost 45 2.641 45 10 220 31.097 5.000 39.149 39.020 120 . 3.839 7.9s 943 4*3.814 4*0 TOTALPERIOD48 COST Ins 15,592 0.003 1238 17.122 181T6 31.361 21.353 110.091 109.94? 144 201.002 350701 1.5M0 207 411 11.302.990 187.3s4 455.479 P5O0 46. l 51bDOb.ol SIM P.4d4b Dkeo DOsvsn.o.*Vh AcO61o

• bD.1 RetS spoM904odo 378 44 57 se 1.645 927 2.821 2.821 573.110 1.071 O qsposs of P1bdSYttt

. ast C oowts 4b.1.Z1 "A.AC 273 2 5s 34 575 1.499 a4s 5.332 3.332 - 7.111 4.507 692.839 4.005

• h122 ISA e8 112 5 4 71 144 109 513 513 74.4s3 3.32 4b.1.2.3 ICA a9 1s 1o 7 149 220 ITS 851 601 . 1.41 67 - 1 304 0.037 44 3 3 715 635 * .509er 82 4b. 1.24 1EA 39 229 229 04.47n 1.081

• b. I1 ZSace . 43 o 1 34 16 96 se *

• n l440 . 17.09 962 4b.1.2 700.1 439 6e6 78 48 905 1.930 1.007 0.021 5.021

• 11.199 5.502 94 r74. 16.r47 ROKW ctafh SWslo C,..oo 4*h1.1 RB1 12 61 202 64 409 404 - . 2.495 . - 10130 2.913 72 3 109 34 216 216

• 1.354 53.019 1.089 4A"3. RaB

• 70 3 120 S7 235 235 - . 1.485 r 0294 1.60 4*h.13 40.1.345 RaE R9F 3 112 41 254 254 * .1.201 6.083 2.122 83 II

• h13S.5 RBF * . 3 Se 101 se 307 307 740 310 57.301 1.863 Ab.1.3.8 Rao 354 24 507 230 1.530 1.530 -

• 11.229

• 456.005 a.01

• b.1.3.7 RaS 17 a 223 142 113 8sW 840

• 2.757 428 - 150.334 3.774 41.35 8 RBSW 23 3 109 40 244 244 . 1.343 * . . 545 2.081 4b.1.19 RC7

• 62 55 3 89 . 29 Ins 1R5 ,.foe a 44.81 1.308 4*t1.310 RDS

• 2 11 Iso 541 17 957 957

• 1.841 1.624 - 221. 1.434

• h.1.3.11 RDOt - 32 1 22 11 es es 26e . 10. 870 e6O

• bhl.12 REC

• 142 5 155 , . so 367 347 * . 1.953 * - 79.329 3.132 4*.1.113 REF 4 54 171 69 371 371 - - s7 515 73233 1.504

• h.1.114 RE.RE

• 4 S 107 38 23 233 * - 1.320 S03.80

"* 1851 h15.315 REL

• 144 5 208 T7 497 - 497 a133.45 3.177 4t.1.115 REM 37 1 43 1s go as

• 3386 21.646 426 46' I1. REO

• 4 4 90 182 74 422 42 *. . 1.115 48M 4b.1.11I REO 112 4 109 50 S7 331 331 . 1.311 ISO es8

.644 i 4h61.3.19 RER 17 37 1 14 33 29 131 131

• 1S * - - 15.995 1.114 4b1.J20 RET O 1S 3 13 83 63 * . ¶80 11 8.443 6s7 h10.321 REW 0 12 7 39 38 16 . s.93 422

• h.1.122 REX 21 0 13 7 42 42 * * .710 46*

TLo S.,de. Mr.

Oohr C-& NrreolGeerolHog Stafo- DoAs..dsL 145J46. Ros O D.

D0,..oUido.f.g Coot A..I o. A~pp.odlt D, rog 10s 1t5 Table D Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station Delayed DECON Decommissioning Cost Estimate (Thousands ot2OO Dollar) 0l4 .p. ULRW NRC Sp Fuol So. PoF " 5.n8- Vo.. 5* IUAy .nd A."oy D. Pt.o- ftt#g2g Tno.,.Po.0 PD. Dip - O Totol Tot Lk.Tss. U.....s Rotoio Vo.u ClissA c.. Cl-.c W ree.. d Ceft CO Ik.._ Ad"o Cost CO. Cst Cols Cool Costs Cost" Co.4 Coss Cots Cos Costs C. roo C. F .. s C_.eFst Cu..F_0 Wt..b. Uoto.n Ro.-h, S.dk Syslo Cosroo4 (osott 461.123 REY 23 15 6 47 '7 . 192-. 7.781 512 45.13 24 RFS 109 20 131 46 293 2937 . l .22

• 65.869 2.414 4b1.325 RFC 24 se 27 69 51 24 244 337 207 32210 1.978 61.312S RFF 76 2 31 185 106 923 3.7.469 1.8 h1 3.27 RFM 102 56 175 79 422 *22 M* 6 026

• 75.17 2.271 4b.. 128 RFJ 89 54 170 74 397 397 s60 010 73.713 1.97I 4h1.321 ARR 07 2 61 24 144 14*

• 754 30.625 1.282

• 61i.130) P71

• 77 90 33 200 205 * . 1.1lie 45'.41s 1.712 4*h1.131 RFO 76

• 101 22 220

• 42 382a V79 4h1.132 RGC eo 56 23 ¶39 * . 667

• 27.107 1.343 4 1.333 RGO 3 613 170 .16N 1 0 056 *. 406.453 3.961 46.334 RCO

• 31 3 14 84 84 * . 414 .

• 16862S 794

• 1.137 RGL

• 41 I? 105 106

• 0551 . 22.541 917 A461.136 ROP 20 Is 8 As 48 * . 238 9,61 437 4b61.13? ROR 0 128 132 53 31S 316 N12 . 6.314 2.623 4*1.135 RGU 21 122 122 547 22.199 1249 4h 1.3.39 RH1 33 27 12 74 74 *. 339 13.7f4 733 461.140 RH2 28 14 69 * . 5500

• 22.340 G1s 4b.1.141 RH31PH41RHA 28 1se * . 592 * . 24.061 1.780 4b.1.342 RHA 6 14 7 11 1 s0 50 83 * * . 6.374 .I 4*1. 143 REJ

• 29 23 11 63 63

• 282 . 11.43 U

• hl.44 RHL 19 2 10 6 35 13 121 41 4b 1.3 45 RHX

• 36 36 14 67 .7 a o 46.1.146 RHY 32 30 13 7n 715

• 369 14.998 716 46t1.3.47 AICC 00 29 178 178 . 09 12.62e 40. 185 1446 4b.13 Tot1.4 00 3.556 108 r.2 5.009 1r627 24110 12.620 61.983 4.901 2. w .733 0.238 NC. Rad-so S1*VSYoto C aos.lo 4b14.1 N38 116 1 3 113 47 261 281 1.392 8.536 2U547 46 1.4.2 NAB 59 0 1 43 21 121 125 * ** 0 .30 21.506 1.295 u6.h 3 N*A 9 20 1 1 15 12 72 IS.10 '42 10.701 067

• l61

• NeS 7 19 1 0 13 10 1 6 . 162 36 461.4 5 N40 r6 50 1 37 - 21 1t9 * . 459 . 5018.630 1.300 4&1.4.5 NAE

• S . . 1I I 7 7 * . 17 607 106 4*1 4.7 NMF 13 0 8 5 29 2S 96 "a 289 61U4.8 N4N 15 0 I 16 9 8 41 40 217 14 10.036 337

• h1.4.9 NKIK 'I1 0 0 14 6 37 37 * . 176 7.138 352 41.1.4.10 Ni4L 23 0 0 14 a 46 46 * . 177 . 7.195 525 4*1 411 NIL 03 I 2 83 29 106 106 1. 029 41.782 1.16 461.4.12 NWV 39 49 2 1 39 29 4S 200 206 482 1II 27292 1.918

• b1.4.13 .41W r . 1 2 9 * . 105 401 14

• 61.4.14 N5X 60 1 2 66 9 51 11 232 34.178 2. 378 461.4 Tdols 107 516 8 1 467 56 269 1.438 1.436 S.774 203 249.545 13.525 Old A96oot 8.*Ng Syotos Cohvno

• A1A1 ORW Pr. DID 0 0. 04 Do.- - 143 21 1U4 184 231 2,0 4b61.2 PRO 11 0 0 12 5 28 26 ;51

• hl I 3 PSS

• 4 1 3 97 39 234 234 1.10 . *48,6 2096 4b51.54 PTA 27 0 I 30 11 so g9 371 * . 10.04 603

• h1.55 PIA 142 1 3 112 53 311 311 0632 3. 66 461.5 PUU 100 2 A 147 16 52 322 322 1,825 66 *

• 78.471 2.224 4*1.57 PVA 2 9 *

• 13

• 19 149 4*l. 5a UAS 5 191 ^9 216 2 64 40 406 2.367 96.117 4.84 461.659 UAS 147 2 6s 404 *04 2.277 92.46 3.221 4*1.5 Tonb Uss 15 9 '44 -18 332 2.041 2.041 9.S90 66 u393 19120 TrL SfTt4F lo

O.tr,Crook Nrl or Orerotattf.g SoH.. DTrn.-.s BI 16445414K, R,. 0 D....oaatad, Codt A-tydo A4ppestLr D.P..gt 1 o 15 Table D Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station Delayed DECON Decommissioning Cost Estimate (Thousand. of 200S3iollars) 4.g-& ILRW NRC Spot.Ifl S4 PoA.d 81a1 Val Bol-l UI",t j0 Adty D- R.olo Pk.0 . g Tnt.opog Prmobssl 0topol 0th, T. T88Ue.T.t UM&-q-M R tkoatso1Ata V sa8dC.C GTCC Pwacd C. Co IndAlot o Co.t Cost Costo Csts Coo Co Coal. Coot lCoats Coa. Co ab Co Co. Foa Ca. Foa C. Foa C. .FCa C. Foat wt.. L Mbc ohoo h~s..

Tulinr B&I SYsto C hoft 4b1.&I T02 40 0 1 32 Is B 87 *. 390 * . 10.800 N01

• bd 8.2 Tr2 222 9 22 780 177 120 1.209 21.743 39* 4.842

• b18.4 TFO 4 37 37 . 8.106 300

• 18 o o7 all 451.60 TG2 128 937 8T7 *

• 1056 - . 307170 3.70

• b168 5TH2

• 31 7 ¶ 640 177 1.154 1.1U4 * . 7.914 * . 221.303 6.83

• b 168 TKA

• 27 27 *

• 74. * . 2.998 348 0A.sr TL2

• 64 2 2 42 20 233 80 18I -

• 520 119 - . 31.82a 1.AO b,1ss aTMA .. e 42 2 72 22 128 1¶3 - RIO

• 3 s.37 30 5 4b 1.6.9 TN2 21 4 10 359 110 700 no0 IN- 4.447 . * . ¶80.585 4.74*

4b.1.6.s 1T02

• 110 *

• I8 137 2m73

• b18.11 TOA

• 09 1 2 82 2a 172 12 .014 41.172 1.302 b.1.612 1OCR - 40 2 4 127 23 224 224 1892 * . 8.8079 1.0 4b51.13 TOR 4

• 1 2 70 22 144 144 * . 931 4b58614 TOV

• 13 0 6 5 20 20 * . 58 . 370 3 2"5

• b8.6.15 TOW 76 2 8 207 51 342 342 - . 2.ssr . 103.80 1.828

• b 1.818 TOX I TOY 19 0 0 I0 * * . 124 . 0.052 5 423

• b1.6.17 TS2 127 4 313 8. 545 545 * . 2.s87

• 107 2 2ts4

• b181.&S TTA 41 1 2 73 21 138 138 . 895 . 38.008 921 4b1.6.1s TU2 127 2 S 1M0 58 381 S8o 2,096 . 8.13 2.827

• .778 Ud 104 3.828 1o007 86800 48.2 1327 448 119 . 1.833.091 39.193 A.VMd 0Rgf SySt C.e-f 4b.1.7.1 AY" le 1 4 129 a 274 274 1 598 4.6.812 2.120 45.1.7.2 AYA 21 0 1 4l 12 78 re *. 512 *

• 20.TT5 483

• b 1.7.3 AYB 0 1 22 8 50 I0 2a7 . 10.8ez 43 51b.7.4 AYC 01 t 2 82 20 141 ¶81 1.012 * . 41.078 1.124

• b 1.7.5 AYE 17

• 0 8 8 33 32 *. 103

• 4.199 375 4b1.7.8 AZA 17 107 107 . 2,.78 829 4b1.r.e AZA 0 15 15 * - 48. 1.838 190

• 70

• b l.7.8 AZC 1 3 * -- 32 ¶98 18 1.145 . 48.00s 1.547 4b.1.7.9 ArD - 0 8

• 4 22 22 *

• 3.03 287 12

• 0 . 4 21 21 *

• 70 * . 2. 2 4hI .t11 AZE 1.1 10 4 22 22 * . 090 . 2762 233

• 51.7.10 AZI 45It712 A26 21 0 1 24 ¶0 so 80 343 . 13.938 473 4b51.7 TtM. 277 0 14 474 Is 1.037 1.037 238.198 8.315 t..o8.oo SytotC.'oos

b. 1 &1 BAA 172 3 7 235 75 488 498 * . 2.908 110.031 3n27 4b.182 :BA 64 2 0 176 43 291 291 - . 2.183 ssM.es 1.403

• b 1.8 BOA T7 . .2 2 12 12 *. 27 1.002 187 184 COAA 341 7 I8 833 1u4 1.182 1.¶82 *

• 7.828 . 317.88 7.00

• 4 o 1 30 18 82 82 - . .378 MM¶2 1.004 4b .8.8 DAC 103 1 0 998 . 41 247 247 1.230 4.940

9. 2.302 4&t58. DGB

• 08 . B 85

• 0

• 1277 Ab.1s8 DOT - 1 . . . . 2 12

• 12 * .

• 223 4b1.&89 DPII sT8 . . . . 10 T7

• n7 4b.1.810 DWF

• 18 . . 2 1I 359 b 1.8.11 FP

• 0 . . . . 14 104

• 104 . * . . 2.013 4b51.8.12 GAA1OCA

• 18 - * . 2 18

• 18 . . _- 30 4bJ.18 INTAKESTRUCTURE 1-2 21 183

• 83

• - 1.8 4b.18.14 mAA

• 8T 1 3 1195 40 251 2SI 5965.0 1.918

• b1.8.S5 MBA

• 35 0 1 33 14 83 83 * . 413 . 18 77s 7r5 Ab.1.8.18 MBSIMBT

• 20 0 0 B 8 42 42 . 4.271 070 Atli17 MS - 27. 4 31

• 10 10 * -

• 430

• 311

• b.1 s t NMBROOF

• 12 . . . . 2 10 41 . . * . . 204 413 451.6.19 Oa

• 21 .. 22 240 * .25 4b1.8.20 PTO 9 30 1* . 17 30 . . .9187

• b 1.8 21 RSFROOF

• 21 0 0 14 7 543 42 - . 1T507 T707 463

• b 1.8 22 UYARD 1.324 8 14 4*8 408 2.250 2.250 210282 21.728 4b1.8.23 WAA - 813 1 2 W7 43 257 257 4.8e03 2.491 TLr2 .%-r..fe.

oytter Crow MNorel t rno-ost Ritetoer D-.E.I Elt,143SAK R-. 0 Iloeb, sfo.Ilg Cnd A.o.ydo AppsdLv D, Pofe 12 o*'IS Table D Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station Delayed DECON Decommissioning Cost Estimate (Thousands of 2003 Dollars) 0-.' LLRW NRC Sp. Fs 84i Coo... B-1 VoN.t BoJ I 01,447m Ons R..o PwA.ging Tm.pol P- ng DMapose Othe Td Totdi 16Tts Li.. Ts- M.s69..M Restonttd. Vod-0 CO...A Cla.s B C... C GTCC P--d. Crft Co.of I ^ CosC Coot Cests Cods Costs Co C Cool. 6041.. V Coot. Coos Cot - Costs Cs. Feet Co. Fos Co. Pod Co. Cod Cs. Foet 0 4b1. Mo n oboo hou I I tOCit DYoV epo wwso-s syste., Cftlv 010fcolr'od 4,1.8 24 MS

• 13 - 2 1s 10 . . w30 4*t1.825 YAROAREAS 241 34 27r 279 .. 499

• b.l.8.25 YDAIVFAIYLA

• I 2 1 4 4 19 783 30

• b1, 8 04Td 3271 . 21 04 t.947 1,027 4.325 5.249 1.o76 2.093 - . 978.424 65.37 4t1,.9 S 1dbt.n hgvW fds- g 879 l 5 142 25 240 1.312 1.312 *

• a00 99 . 80203 o 21,839 b-*-s son d She1e'","

• t11.10.1 N4,,Rbot 85*50. 5~04 Roosi a- 1x3 24 1 342 124 411 601 e 1819 32,18 1.8IS

,,1.10.2 C01Ros li 5 . lSyw. Rt 2 4 3 1 41 . 11 el 8l e *05 *** 40.1784 64.0 53 so lb I10.R903 1,8 uAo-:Sy9,4sb

• e 4 60 . s8 go 90 e48 4b 1.10* Tw.4 0B4g. Sy.s R 283 90 s7 919 . 31 1.668 e66 * .194 . 919.3so 5.447 lb 1.10.5 A _sdOtt .Obo 4 4 50 . 35 167 15T

• 7.140 1236 4b.1.10.6 00y .bO= .1 491 1.4 9 . 269 . 7r4 4.09 4.09 * . . 13,738

• IM.817 6.202

• . . 213s 41,1.10.7 Dry-.8.4- 0. Ro-st 1.448 848 30 SO 1.787 104 la2s4 8.073 ss Woe.10 601 ,9. 1.620 47.81 41,I.108 ttRW 0 S.0.Dow 7 27 3 2 - 1 . 19 n92 x33

• 2 330 891 4b.l.10.9 MWt .oos 8.1"g Dcons 7 27 3 2 . 33 - 19 92 92 . 3 328

• 2.78o 68s e3

• b.1.10.10 NowRodoote 9* . Os- 33 1X3 21 14 19 214 129 18 68M - 35 zl 29 * . 222101 4207 4bAl10.10I1O1RsBtosg.W Stcsgmbo, SS 12 s8T 317 1.042 1.62 * - l 2 &179

• 882.850 4.7*8 4b.1 1012 R0 . Tovs Reo-.i 1.942 9`9 4 75 2.649 229 - 1.8s 7.599 T799 1.410.M 60.082

• b l 10.13 RoseBLA*g.1t91. boDs 23 132 22 10 I6 988 - 9e 53 036 Z*032 911 -. 171.870 3.192 4b11 10.14 R _tto 901Ag 23F. bDom 1s sO 7 4 70 1 197 197 -* ro700 *70 .017 1.427 4bl.10.15 R. lBdbn 51.00 17 as 5 . 76 . 46 218 219 *. 81 . -70.09 1.82 -

41,1.00

, , R 80o04o 75ft oos, a 24 3 2 - 2 18 70s 7r * . . 261 - . 24.136 560 4"'.1.0.17 Roose 5&Afogift. 0De" 12 48 5 3 . s . 33 158 150 58 ** 09767 1.148 4b,1.10A18 SIdEtt^oost Tone Rote-a A Ds, 72 161 II 8 . 1134 112 Sol 501 * -. 1.339 . 133.870 4626 4b I.10.19 Tbi- u&09 0. Da o 50 217 21 1s 92 211 1 77 707 1.144 2.069

• 251.969 0 240 Ab.1. 1020 TbW* B 9o6 23f . DOtO, 33 103s 1 12 90 laI

• d 589 sa9 1.109 1.0?0 200.663 3855 4b 10.21 T4bs S h4e6f o ota, 20 7n e . 94 ss 202 242 944 94.413 1:86F Ab,1.10o22C dt So*. 0i 70 0.039 bS1 10.420 207 2.* 002M75 10275 - . 4108200 ,109,9M0 6.020

• b,1.1023 R""009814bvg l19f.-ow. 110 302 6 6 124 S1 . 2U 1.164 1.164 *,13 442 T107.24s 14.5T7 Abt1.10 Tdaol 4.008 4695 1.00 1.14 4.946 17.170 8.544 4.l06 4zl21 18 I" 107.1982 . 18.103.570 18O.725 4b.1 S,4.. Pdod W 4b Aoy Coo 40e7 16.616 1944 1.636 18.22 22.008 1s.339 81.325 90,112 1.211 228.175 174.750

• 24.381,130 *e6.360 P.40 4b Axdi Coot.

b Z21 Isrsi M-o T.o.

• 18 6 ¶2 23 1203 24 1.9239 1.929 1.409 r107s59 2.964 2.500 41,2 SLbW4 P.4 4b Ad*4doWCto -18 6 12 zx233 1.203 288 1.92 . I.939 . 1,49 . I107.8 2s6 2te60 P04.44,bCdlsl Cots 4b11 l0 l "O"t 43 162 208 1.478 439 2.328 2.326 - . Z2.22 -32,070 124 4b0l.2 Dhlosd oaudidoel d4s ft- doos whion - . . 1I 29 0 119 48 327 367

• b,3 4 . i..o gs Ec0> ostdw w4n so 23 037 96 114 830 830

• 8,002 17 . 303.007 r 41,3 s.tO Pedd 41,CoF0.M Cot. 43 309 221 230 037 1.574 Mo0 3.1521 1.529 ,o000 274 2252 . 06 ns0 TIn .q,,,iow,ise.

Oyot r Ctw N 1rm, tr-tssis ff.c -.. D-.0t.1 FIB&7S5450S Rf". O 12.eossos -l..Ios.Cft A..oafy. Apptsix D.Nesw 13of 15 Table D Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station Delayed DECON Decommissioning Cost Estimate (housands of 2003 Mhlars) 0D1.84" LLRW hRC Spat F-s S. p . Bot VbVoas sI0.14. I "

D e_ R-dl P-aoba Tnsapost Prssitsg DI."po Otht- T.d4 Tol ... T . U0 W d0 Rst..to VkI-iI Cbs. A Cbs. S Cl-. C GTCC P~s d Cm" Cov8"a AdiO6 I Fvcs

• vvl^_

Adlv*

D

-_ -_ff -

_C T

_v_- wz-C

-_iif-V I - Cv eh

__v __v

-v e_*h

_vvow

-vz-

-. ts

__o _vw

- v l -

v F v _

- ~ -zr c-r .

r_

. -r

_w z

_ v

.r c-v w_

c.,.

W t.r4 l

-- n

_lar F

P.d.d LbP.4odtpeooeM Costs

• b 4.1 D- an &6 781 . . . 195 9T7 977 4b.4.2 h-oI, - * * . . 1.049 104 .144 1,I44 4b.4.3 P op" ta11 * . . 1,4 I.. 145 1.593 1.59 -

• . 7, 6 . . . 14 .0 1 .7 4b 44 viih tl pI s a4,f s 1.e82 . . . . . *21 2.103 2.103

• b 4.5 Ha.yOwA.." W t 2.2.2 . . 341 2.613 2.613

• bA4.6 D hO Mof DAW 9sd.t 64 19 . Lit - 114 282 625 * . . . . . . 9. 5 4b4. Pt.4 d-V0gyfb.Ld .07 76 Su4 54 . . . . . . . 7. 6 4b.48 NRC s_ r*26 63 e91 691 4b4.9 SR*OSICcost .. 2 54 416 416 * . . . . . . . 1. 2 4b 410 ROs& t, P S. , Eq I - . . 821 76 60o 600 *

• 7.184 .

• 143,653 1,TS9 06 67 4b4.11 SaooY StffCoo -9 . 0.400 224 1.714 1,714 Lb4.12 DOC StaffCost . . . . 11.453 t.718 13.171 13.17 '

4b4.123 Ul, SbtffCost . . . . 1994t 2.992 22.990 22.wO0 1.21 23 .1 .0 2.20 . . 2 . 9 .10 4 0 .6 0 6 .2 4.4 S&6oMW PsL 4b Pftf"p&4 Cost 70l 3.,ss 64 19 . 41 37.30 6.525 49.17*3 49*,1 4b.0 TOTALPERICO4b COST .8.11 21.07t 22M 1.697 16.629 24.72t 28.601 22.752 121,903 132,811 1.929 PERIOO4L. t ok Ts u.bs.a Po 4L Dsod Do fstso*V MOW 4L.1.1 OR1SEm b0 a .s . 110 35 1SO 150 L 1.2 T vsn*L1-ss 441 3.bblWl Prtd L* Ad,*y Costs s11 35 150 1SO P~ 4 LA~ddfi Cost

. . . . . 4. 72 1.371 0.943 5.54 98.444 Le2 S&ktotM P.od 4* ALLr-W Cos. . 4.572 1371 5.943 .943

• 9 8.

P. 4L CdaftsWCotS A t3.1 DOCstafftresocaet7i- * . . . * .007 164 1.2e1 1.261 L4 3 SL,6a P.,4 4# Colata C-ot * * * * . 1.097 164 1291 1.26I P.-10 LOP.,I4OoDfto.nl Cot La4.1 b,5L50 * *

• 049 1* 04 091 099 La4 2 Pp to.s" .'7 a29 829 4L...3 Heefth oPysOM a'4 494 . . . . . 116 0o 5e0 4L4 4 DIblr4 of DAW glMd 4 . 17 . 5 27 27 4 4.5 . .

• . . . . . . . 4. 4 Pt -. pybdsbgot . 94 14 106 106 4.4.6 NRC Pen , . . . . 327 23 306 359 LOL.4. SOOOSMCoa 28

• . . . . . . . 6. 3 s19 2t5 216 4L.4 t S otv S"affCosd - .

• 232 31 247 247 4L.4.9 DOC Staf"CtAs 4.090 614 4.704 4.704 . . . . . . . .57 4L4.10 Ufty Sft Cost 5.019 753 0.772 5.m 4e 4 5.1w Pvo LaP 4L-DoCos 494 4 1 . 17 11.244 1.72 13,457 13.407 . 6.10 . 636 eo.0 TOTALPERIOO4L COST 494 4 1 . 17 17.026 3.297 20.811 20.811 20 6.100 56.519 1L6.53 PERIOD 4 TOTALtS 5,st 37.134 7.321 3.136 35.912 42.919 94.09 47,402 2MA.eSS 2z3.s6s 1.929 1.37 423.177 214.712 2.822 207 411 2S.607.2so 737.629 9.230.253 rLr .Sai. l..

• l .

Oy.1-v C-ok N-l", o o~i~Stl.

Dvsd.oigCost Analysto DoApp-di* D.Pg541. Rev.

Table D Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station Delayed DECON Decommissioning Cost Estimate (Thousands of2003 Dollars) 08-SO. U.8W NRC SPoot Foot S.. Prossod B-Io~ Vo.... 8oool WUl1pood AdioDoo.I. Reorosot Po*.t.9. T.o-pod P-" Disposdl 01 Tdot 7Ttal E. 7..,. Ms p... t R.-t Vol.e. Chs A Cl. B Cl... C CTCC 9orsad. Cnft Cotora l kd. AtC.thD Coot coots C-oo Coos Costs Costs cost coast Co.t. Coot. Coot C.. Foot C..F.ot CerFt Cv.FP5.t Wt.L... Mot. Usot,o PERIDD lb. SmtsRtosftI t C). ftOhlro SR.5B.Mq0s

§8os.4R 51,11.1.1 Stas .wdljo ssTW.oot . Ro.ooet 5 Cos. 824

• 124 847 s47 2.421-Bh.1.1. Al.vF 0tdoOf G5.t.Bg

• 441 66 so?

• 507 8.313

• 241 28 277 o77

• 3. 488 5.14 C*bstbs4.18 28 4 32 - 03 431

• 91 ll51 14 105 105 1-197 511.1.5 Glob S50. 17 133

• 133 * - 1.723 SbA.1..7 OomsiosWmatsFodofy

• 10

• II Its I4 1 4 511 1.1.8 Fashb wast,P."o Ho~s 3 21 330 R1,1.1..10 IHoa 'I So.4. Ho. 22 8 27 .17 **

• 54 578 Mb1.1.11 b-.5s528.

• 383 s7 440

• 440

• 83.858 Wb.l..12 4..L- os 84451 Ston" 304 46 210 *

• 4.818 S&1.1..13 Msdotb SWo - I?? 27 203 203 3.021 82 12 95

- 275 41 218 218 z127 ObIXIAI kss~toalw -SBVddo 692 104 796 798 304t 48 349 249 .807

51. II' 17 tSaOatooo NM 8,.. 480 72 552

• 552 1 9

• 3 148 Sb1.1.21 Old.8.18R 214 32 248 318 54 415 415 8.45 2t 180 I . . 2.120 5b.1.1.2144 R-b ,dost .5k, 27 4 31

• 231 Sbt12PSIV110o8 .ol*

41,187 824 4.781

• 4.781

• 8z4s 83.4a8 5b.1.1.284 ftEwg.sl 9,dto 12 2 14 14 9201 250 38 28 298

,4O 5b.t.1.27 7T.* Pft.A Iktla&Y*, 105 803 . 80 -

5bht.1.28 T1wbI B."41 3 .428 818 3.954 - 3.9U 81.425

• 457 1l 468 488 _

• 5.000 511.1.1.2 T~ot.00ol 3 14.211 Z132 168.34 s47 1 8.38 - - 208.428 St. C108804Acboo 5bl12 Ro-a.8.1804 - 8.880 I.02 7.8e2 . 7.82

• 10.758 so.1.3 Gd. &st.docwoaoe$ 345 82 327 3s7

• 1.453, oo.~oR 5b111.4 sh1 =~tooPolt bVoo ot 21 213

• . 11 117? 18 2203 124 24.556 134 1.842 23.474

• 28.848 1.280 1.580

• . II PeeM1,4SAMNIbossCoot.

Sb 2.1 Co-ost Co.1os - 430 . 5 8s 49 . 4 2.857 Sb 22 ISFStl t.Rtttomdo.

• 187 -38 35 2a

• 288 1.439 160 Sb.2 S~ktot Potto Sb Ad~Alot coasts

• 27 . 38 10o 7 - 2e8 499 4.295 18o Potlod Sb,Cot.tto costs 5b 3.1 5.AW s .002 182 24 57

• 187 lbS S.44Ot PottodSb, Cotottd Cost -2 - 24 1ST . 187 rraSon{o. io.

0ftrr Crook Ntrea, rtetIH.j St.Ho. D-WRI RL'1485Il6.S, Re. 6)

Drrliaa-foa C-t A.t.". App-tie D,Poe. IS r.IS5 Table D Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station Delayed DECON Decommissioning Cost Estimate (Thousands of 2003 Dollars) olt.54` LLRW NRC Sp. Fwt S.. PFo..o B-1 Va.k Buarl I UJ101ad Ad" Dc R-l Prgb9 T.a-rpadt Pror.Iq DOSIAl Ottw Twt Total LtiT.a M.Tapnn ft-baSoA Vd.1 CI... A CI-B Cta., C GTCC P.--d Cet C,..a Ik.. Abl D. Coa C C-e..O Chl Colh Ca CCal, CotC CChta Co-. Ceoat Co-% F._M C Ch,,. .. F.e Cr.Fo etLb.. C., Pa 4anom M,.nt.oaI P.t s P..d-0..MM Cat.

Sb.4.1 FdWsc 882 88 971 971 * * -

5b *2 PmaOy aoa * * . 1.52 151 1r08 I.r08 5b.4 3 Ha-Yqiw p. ata

• 3.327 409 9 3.82 *. 3.520 . .

5b.4.4 PlaN a In b0,00 . . .7 r s 112 112 5b.4.5 Stl O8A Cou * * *5 3t8 N a

44. .

5b.48 StAv SW Corn

• 479 72 551 - 011 . 29'180 Sb.4.7 DOCstaff Cost 6,510

.1 nr77 8r 747- .8 7.401 . . . . . 9.

• Is00.20 5b 4 8 Usty StaR Ceoa 3.49 40 511 3.020 . 3.M20 - * . -

• 4800 3b.4 00 o d4)lpa Coat, 3.22 11318 Z3.75 19.020 . 19.020 . 176.*0s 5b.0 TOTALPERtOD soCOST 25.352 5 . 1*

11471 Sr.02 ast0o 1.02 260 41186 - 2.964 178.300 PE00o0 5 TOTALS 25.352 . 5 1471t 1702 4.530 1.002 268 4161 . 22..964 178.t00 TOTALCOSTTO DECOLt.tSMOSS 12.632 27.054 7.554 3.645 38.144 45.618 3.877 90.745 t6.20 414KtA3 175.5t1 45,148 462227 24t.496 s.888 267 411 41.125.80 122024 4,122.036 TOTALCOSTTODECOMMttSSON WITH I170.% CONTINGENCY: t6352r70 tnabd. 2003 4066d TOTALNRC LICeNsE TRMIONATION COST MS 5S0% 04 0414.593 It.aads 20et do8 n SPENT FUEL MANAGE6ENTCOST 1 27.63% OR- 0175.03 559 S. of 20d3 do!.e N.NJCNUCLARDEMOLmTION COST IS .111%OR: 0451140 tto.ode of 2003 d40..

rOTAL PRIMARYSITERADWASTEVOLUMEBURIED 44.11 cublc Fat oTAL SECONDARYSIT RADWASTEVOLUMESURIED 203,616 cubic Foot oTAL GREATERTHAN CLASSC RADWASTEVOLUMEGENERATED 411 cble Fact OTALSCRAPMETAL REMOVED: 22.65t loI.

OTALCRAFT LABORREOtREMONTS: 1.22034 r _.6 Eld Notec s.kbftl 60l Oftw a.r d b. =c g S. h.St0 Itha Ihh Ball llun O- 5 bat M noar a C cmuk",tae0 . N.ta. oa oa-k Th2 Sa,Crm . M.

Oyster Creek Nuclear GeneratingStation Document E16-1455.006, Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis AppendixE, Page 1 of 16 I ,

APPENDIX E DETAILED COST ANALYSES SAFSTOR TLG Services, Inc.

Oof.,_ CW.& NsClea, G,.-a.f~fqt.sHSs_~ D-.o-.f £l&1S.0.435t6Rev. a N'asloosgCool A..olsI. App.-di F.,Poe.2 rig Table E Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station SAFSTOR Decommissioning Cost Estimate (Thouoands of 2003 Dollars) o0040. LLRW NRC SepMFPW St. PFrd a_.Iu oVd.. a- uIy.nt Lftl At o. Ra- PasO t Topott Plossslsq OIspes I Ott- Totul Tota U. Ta V .w.* R. Vok CI A Cl." 9 CLossC GTCC P.o--d cft Coodoo A 0d..

Drbe so" Cosl coat C Cos Co coas Cota Cot Costs Coot eCoss C.oss Co Costs C.. Pt Ct.F-t c. .6 Co. Pt Ce. ost wrb.. Uas... Mht PERIOD1..-Shtsdoos ftttgtt Trasotto P.1041is 0.6 *.Ac01015o ost,M 181. SAFSTORSUachoctsdratts .. Mo * *- .. 292 tt 350 3t0

. . . 97 11.2' INo.. 01 05~4.y...~ols. IS 112 112 1..60 101.3 Ns adasooftn0aOIO1pMOOO6.1f W.

18.1.4 Rotoos to*S 0ts 'a.4 18.1.5 MWsaleoo-d Pototsos 0sS.o&.

I.oll. Dod..o.s p0. ays.4 £ pt~os 0.a8ls 18.1.7 Pow a. Old GL .. PSDAR * * * . . ISO 22 172 1n 18.1.6 R,'t..oP1Is dog, a pams

• 97 is 112 112 1.300 1.1.9 PowbosdKt84.d suraivy 18.1.10 5,6016.bY-p.s40d 4 k.."n, * * * . 75 II11 M 86 as Be * * *.000 18.11.1I EM po d 4.8Vfo * * * .* 75 *

• 6030 1.1.12 D.Wa~d by-54.dM kVst"e ** *

• 112 I7 29 129

. . . 75 It t 4 t 6 - 1.600 18.1.14 PoflooSERos,IEA . . . . 232 tS 2t7 261 * * . ,000 tsoo 18.1.15 P5,0.0 Ss-tSwfdte Comst * * * *375 50 431 431 *

• 5.030 Adoty Spr.W"o 1.1.1611.1Pwoaw p18.*4I,ac~ms..oSArSTOR 515 24 424 *- . .920 10.1.16.2 PI" yoo, ** *

• 312 47 359 319 . *.167 1.1.163 P0.4 0waa &c,dIAft1*19 * *234 3s 269 269 *

• 3.120 1.1.16.4 Wast. masagooto ** 150.ss 22 17 172

• t2000 18..15 Fa.CfW.17 0 0 eon.V 22 1n 172

.. 162 1.396 1.396 *

• 16070 1.214 16207 O01080 Wo.5 P.sodooo 10.71P1.4 "yttt . . . 9 13 102 102 18117acity too.."A d--"ss * * ** 90 13 103 103 * . 1 t0 18.1.17 Uotm . . . . . 179 27 209 205 *

• 2.383 tIl Pot.,. p r-ot .osyat.. . .. 7 I 9 a *

• 100 18-1.20 DOoInA yNMSSS 1.121 dtis4e.wtqogt oo,.tsoold 5¶5I~o 11 SbmwtoPodOla8Ac"5yOt 2.980 491 3.471 3.471 Pottodl18Coto.01Cost.

183.1I Sp.4 P.84CoPkal804Ttasl to . . . 10.307 1.546 1t.t53 11.013 183 SMtotal Pettod18 CoaotoaoCoats * * *

• 10.307 8.546 Yt S3 11.53 P04041. Po.Iodm-Oood.. Cools 1.734 172n 1.807 8.907 1.4.1 b3He.M .. o 1.414 -Ytoo.-eO 09 t 221 t2t *55 2i7t 27t

• 2tt * . . 43 331 331 18 4.5 Opottoo 0 f DAWgettd 5 1

• 23 . 6 35 35 404 . .103 99 625 94 71, 719

• . 371 37 406 406

1. I0 E -ooas Pl-ftoFg - 101 10 111 III * . . . 6493 1.9 sla otam(Cost -

• 200 37 2t7 207 18.4.10 pswoot PdooOaU to

• g6 145 1.113 1.113 184.11 ISFSIop"* 6 Co$t. 71 11 6 -

62 184.12 Saatysta~lff cms . 68 145 1.114 .114

• 103 99 6921 18..4.13 LIMT S180RCod *

• 24422 3663 2t.060 2t .06 18 4 S~ktotiP840418P.W04.0ep4040.4Cost 50s 8 1 23 29.010 4.421 34.470 33.140 1.306 404 . . . 99 46.343 18.0 TOTAL.PERM1.01COST - 0so O I 23 *2.79t 6.45 49.794 3t,635 13.159 404 . .103 . 4 .233 TL.0 9.-i-a C.e

O,'.fr CIow N-s- r-,~tigqftfis~.. Dw-osof SM1&4SS.,6O ll.-' I Appn.d. Par. 3t1 Table E Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station SAFSTOR Decommissioning Cost Estimate (Thousands cr2003 Dollars) r ,.... SLO _~t S5fl OUt ._t_ rmcosos_ _a . _50._._ 0000505 5.511. _ _ 11 0 IAdNR0Y D s.- 5.n,., PoobostgM Tosopot Poososto Disoosa Otts Total Toosi LI. Ton~t M.osg.o.wd4S stois Volkts Cloo. A Cu. S VCb. C GTCC P -oss d C ost Cs= o I bd*t A O"be ,,.. -m t Ce -.t ro- cost- C -st Eos boI C ost c ost. c Iot cost C.. F..t C.. Foot C.. FMo C.. F."8 Co. Foot WI..Lbs. MUn.. b5 l sobot PERIODlb.- SAFSTORLbftd DECONAotW*It" Pe80 lb odDeowo."ssto.*.gAc~Oft6

• . . . . . . . I 1211 OlIdR so ss- t. . 4 0 . S s to R m o l 1 3 3 . . . . . . . 37 lb.I.1.3 &Vgl ftd4 0R60n,.D -ou 2 - . . * . . . . . . . 3241 16.1.1A D 17568.L b,. Rm o ,. 1.629 814 2.443 2.U3 32 453 16.1.15 RBO0.T00 .R -nS. tlU 1.092 3.275 3.27 lb.1.1. 05.Roo, B.Afrg .191t. Cocos 3 5 8 . . . . . . . 109 Ib.1l.1.7 OtacbEA,4"sTtffl ft . Rooton 5 Otto *2 21 63 63 912 IbAl. 5 TtobA" bidog ont. D - 4 12 12  : - 151 5 . . 9752 341 t 70 III lii lb0..1 Totals 4.210

• 210M .15 "i1s . . 83.995 lb1l SstAo0IMP.to lbAcdstyC~ft5 4210 . 21M 6.315 6.315 *. 83,9 9

Pb2.1 AM.al

$Pb Cost 8.115 121 0.332 9.332 lb.2 Sftottifot PIbld6*.M01t5 6.111 - 1.217 9.332 9.332 P.44lb CobO~d Const lb.3.1 De o lt, b o 828

• 94 m 723 lb.32 Ptocosst M -tos 734 . 314 1.485 1.465 lb. 33 So ul Wa s.11 0 5 11 .688 6e .is 1  ; 171

• 10 7o T8 1 .3 . . 10 .9 2 95 W .34 SF0.4FsotCM*M. VA Ttod0. 2077 387 2.963 2.963 lb,3 Sb.W Pt.,iootdlb Co1,ot.Ws COOSt 824 68 e5 175 734 2577 801 s248 2.285 2.9.3 1348 . . 169.933 265 lb 4.1 D eco sts4VIo 735 7 1 . . .

1U4 l19 919 lb dj 1 0. ot. 437 44 4*1 *81 lb' .3 P l ptot tone 527 53 579 575 311 78 388 588 lb.:45S H -ss Wlpsss. toos 73 11 U4 84 lbA4 5 O4posOfoDAWq..slW 1 0 7 2 10 10 17 . . 2.33 29 lb 4.7 P t.i os. yb5149 158 24 181 181 94 9 153 103 lb5.15 NRC Foss lb.A.9 EntoogeCV PIs.-tsg Foeil 25 3 28 29 63 9 72 72 15.4.1 S F5.1 FOU P od OSM 244 37 281 281 21 lb.4.12 ISF11 OPMO.5t Costs 16 2 21 lb 4.I3 S -ooty 5109Cost 244 3T 281 281 14.651 4.538 60 S.216 *.218 72'.417 lb.4 = 4o=tliP10 b Pet1D. .p.t4t4 Cost. 735 383 1 0 7 6.345 1.172 8644 8.315 329 . . . 2.33 29 872 lb0 TOTMLPERIOOlb COST 5.770 451 o7 176 740 17.037 5292 29,539 26.24? 3292 117 1.349 . . I.272 84.29 97 PERIODIC *Plpsostaft.* ft SAFSTORDo-s-ny P. 4 0 41, OcsolD -o o 4 s o 40 Oo 1 0 1.10 5 0 .. . oodt

• t, o toos-t os 409 61 470 470 3.001 10.12 bol S o -obsO P. 5.. " s o.L VoW 38 S 42 42 700 1 I.13 hftfttstsst y pfim .4ottS O y 733 220 953 913 19,098 10..4 140.00hs.541g - ;nto 10.15 F Mps. 55.4A, I0td.o ,t ptotl 44 7 50 50 583 1ICA ~ loo P.I4d 1cAoc"y Costs 448 m 293 1.919 1"15 22.79S S83 7 I .nfres, Ine.

Ow,, Cr-h Nrel .. Aoofyle Doe.wr.1 El6.14Z55 .S, Rar. O 17Z1 "lt'o A~sey-f App.odb. A ren 4 ofl6 Table E Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station SAFSTOR Decommissioning Cost Estimate (Thousands of 2003 Dottors) 04 LLRW NRC Sponl Fo SW P e.-.4 r.n. Vd. hvo U.t. 0e AtWIRY 0. ft ld Pd.tlgtI Tr nwopo Pt voolnq Oepord Otiw Told Tobl tIe T.1 . U n R ee Volumo C A Cl--. a cI. C cTCC Precee od Crlt Ceneor kb.. AeO . I.d. Cot Cool Co. Coot. Coton Coos Cootl Coot Cot. Cool. Co-t. Cee C. Foot C.. F.._ C.. Fo F_- C.. Fo W9t.,

1 W.ntl. Mot Pedod ICCda.l"Coots 1.3.1 Pn.-r t.Aid oto 219 73 198 613 349 1.650 1.650 - . 1508 19.882 296 1c32 SMl odt

• 3 2. 0 4 4 2.9 . . . . .-

Ie 553 Spoo Funl Co" or4 Trond 387 2.96S 2 91 2 1c3 Sobt P. ICColttoCosts 219 3 7 196 736 4*617 1,654 2'.e . 150 - 19.

Io S2 2Ms 61 2.577 PeW0 lC P eoto-protCoos 16c4.1 h-Cs 432 43 475 475 Ic 4.2 Pto tan, 521 52 573 573 lcJ.3 HtlM p0qsks s.4 . .I .0 31 16 1se lc,4 4 H1. 7." .or.t

• 72- . 11 83 83 lc4.5 Momsd OfDAW gotd 2 9 9 . 2.020 .25 ce4.6 Plllnay bg

• 156 23 17n 179 lcA. NRC to_ 93 9 102 102 1C.4.8 Efw tooy Pttsg Fo 25 3 28 26 10.49 MISOIM Cod - 62 9 72 72 lC 4.10 Spot Fo Pod OIM 241 M 276 27 1c4.11 ISFSIOpoStp Coot a1 * . lot101 101 1.00 3 20 20 16.6.12 Soa9Y Staff C." 21 36 278 278 * . 2 2 .5

• 14.690 Ic 4.13 UV" Sld Cost

• 4.431 665 0.006 5.096 . 71.63 1e4 &6tobl P"d IC Pd. Dopeo t Cwoo 6 .221 923 7.46s 7.023 226 * . 1. 8 *2.020 26 96.320 lc.0 TOTALPERICO1 tCOST 219 .54 74 19. 819 9.574 1.953 13.481 10.192 328 - 191.902 23.1 1 .0 PERIOD1 TOTALS 5.966 1.60 106 373 1.502 69409 13.710 92.814 o.074 19.740 . 372.27 107.506 656.45 PERIOD2. SAFsTOR OtttonY t Wdt Spol F.W Sos.

Potld 2. D1.d .o s log AC#tAt 2a.1.1 Out" MloWl0o 201.2 -tst t -M 2 1.3 Pr poctr.pols 20.14 sit*o wol 0K 152 23 170 170 22.1 5 M*"o-c qAps s~ .. . . . 503 75 B79 579 2a.1 St&to P.,oW 20 ACMI Cost . . . . . 655 go 754 796 P.kd 20 Ctdboo Coot 203.1 Sp. Fue Cap1d end TNrotfr *

• 3.539 0.406 4.449 41445 22.3 &6tolw P~t 20 C dltoCos * . .36, 039 5.406 4.4 414A4 . .

PtW 20 P od.ODodoM Cogs 204.1 twst 3.361 336 3.697 3.697 204 2 P.opy ts.o" 4.00 400 4*00 4.450 204.3 Hot.h psy.s Moppn 221 27r 05 276 2 44 Dio olo(CAWd td I1s .4 .92 26 142 142 .* 1.9 *32.434 357 20.4 S PLopt meogy t.0t0

• 1.677 282 Z.15 2.158 20.*6 NRC Fo-

• 1.361 136 1.497 i.457

2. r Eff"- PIMM F-f 221 404 40 444 444 2a 4.8 S8* OIM Co'a - 1.00 150 1,100 1.150 2.4.9 Spo Co Fot Pod OCM 3,875 #61 *4#.6 4.416 2 4.10 ISFSI Opog Cots - 294 43 327 327 2.4.11 S-.ky Sto C0o6 1.2.127 315 2.44S 2.446 129.403

'~no * . 1.4 20.4.12 ULfly StoldCod 2.361 18.150 18.100 *

• 2 2.109 204* sM Podo 20 P04.od PodW Cots 1 4 93 34.028 4*729 39 094 29.084 1.619 32.4'34 397 3471.511 2&.0 TOTALPERIOD2. COST 221 19 4 93 70.723 10.233 81.293 81293 *

• 3Z434 397 37I.S1 Ti.Gsl-t- Ire.

O,.te. Cwk .Ve1srr--.eqtfi..gSa,. Dst.aoot EISI4SS.004 Re.. 0 feobomiCoot Aealysla Appe-&l. E Page S of 19 Table E Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station SAFSTOR Decommissioning Cost Estimate (Thousands of2002 Dollars)

Oll3i LLRVf NRG Sp..t F. r t. P--d -W V d- B..I7 thlity nd Do R. . Pd9gtng Topont P-oog Dieposal Otdo . Tot.1 Tbtl UL.Tst Ms R..ta-.. Vksa Ci. A C... a CtaoC CTCC F7PM--d Cft Coder Coot Coot coo. coot. coot. Cot. Cot. Coo Coot. Csts Costs Coot. eFt C.. C. Foot C.. Foo C. Foo C,. Fo WI. Lb,. M.nh- W1to. I PER0020lb SAFSTORDo,,,,amy RhtDry,Spent NOo Steg..

Petod 2b Deed D--*W4O 0 AC4.I0 lb1,'.1 Oble,11 bspecti0 26.'1 2 S-.,-aW~o. gwke.-,oo a"oo 29.1:3 Pta,0.

26,.14 OsOOestef."tW * .. . . 04 75 7sn 1.393 . .

2b1 I5 MAk0004-0 530985 * .. . . 1.54 230 1.913 2b.1 &5tk6tWP.4d lb AdoIV Coots - . . . 2.167 323 2.492 2.492 .

P.00 lb, Cattttd Cost.

2b.3.1 Sp.4 NM. CapWd.t Tm,fwol * . . . . 6.200 930 T.130 2b.3 Sblota Ptttod 2b Cob.A.W Coats * . . . . 6.200 030 7,130 71I P.tl2b Pb&Od-toodto Costs * .2 . . 107.2 1.3 2..1) teass-eo 0.407 gm la'"? 10.447 29.4.2 Pepett ta-o 13.227 1.323 14.040 14.040 2b.4.3 H..tO pt98e oe - 731 . . . 102 614 9 914 2b.41.41 DI10osatof AW ot-sted - - 63 14 . 307 .0 409 409 * . . . . . ... .

-M86 6.15 PtRsr. t.9W balgo 827 124 002 632 2,6 NRC Fss *

• 4.-00 4 450 4.9n 4.950

26. Et.wposny Platoat Fe" -* .

• 1.33 134 1.409 1.409 2b.468 S" 200MCM~ .* 307 490 36803 2b.4.9 tSFS1 sooo Coots - . 939 141 1.080 1.680 2b.4.10 S800^ Staff Cost . . . . 479 715 5.478 5.478.

2bA1 VftSt.R U.I Cod - * *

• 2336 5 M109 3 n.273 38 373 . . . 90.001 294 Sbbtstl P.W0 lb P ~d4).O.6.o4.

Coist m71 63 14 . n77 910 807 2.44 82.484 S.252 107.245 1.314 779.001 29.0 TOTALPERIM0 lb COST 731 63 14 207 00121 10.800 92.106 92.106

• 5.32 . 107.248 1.214 77m.81l PERIM0 2. . SAFSTOR Do,-.oncy wfttot Spool Foot Sto.."

Paftod2c0060.oooo,4ooto.4 AcO.40.

20.1. O-n.6i 0he-eodo 20.1I.2 S o-nisnoo -ooodae" 20.1 .3 NraP-t 1,1 0o 2c .14 0.Oatl*.O~ tolMd 400t' 1.39 209 1.805 .eo 2,o1 . MLd4oAoV o aepoA

• 4,*11 692 5.303 l.303 20.I S.,".ta Pette 20 Aclk cost. a0.07 901 6.907 6.907 Pedol 20 P404.30ooddo Costs 204 .1 o... 23020 2.302 2s.322 2sm=

2:.42 Ptpmaltao" . . . . . 30657 365r 40.323 40.323 20.4.3 Ho Physict.bs 50016'5 2.025 .

• 508 2. 52 2.032

. 1. . . . .42 20.4 4 DW*ooooofDAWg n9 tad *

• 170 39 851

• 236 1.301 1.301 20.4 5 Ptad a.M godoot * . . 2293 344 2.537 2.037 2CAS. NRC Fees . . . . . 12.471 1.247 1371s 13.IS1 . . . . . . . . .2.2 20.4.7 Sto cam coot . . . 9.14 1,37 150.039 10.539 20.4 DooS-. StoWCoat * -. 6.01 090 7.091 7.591 . . . . . 401,70 20.4.9 Utov tf camloo . . . . 40712 12.70 7 97.410 I7.419

. 1.3 ... 297.236 32 1.02907 20.4 R~tttPeem4 20 Petto4...pss,s Cot. 2.023 175 39

• 01 174.919 23.2S3 201.383 201.383 20.0 TOTAL PERIM 20 COST 2.029 17T 39 . "11 180.925 24274 206290 2082-0 . - 14.833 297.236 3.042 1.625.807 PERIMS 2 TOTALS 2.97s 2s7 57 . 1251 331.779 45.8.7 391.609 208210 17.399

• 21.803 4-38.18 0.232 2.77.18 TL7l Se,-.. f-e.

Oya.r.CroA, N-aafrer4oi Staffs. Doeeeaoa E1&.1433.004,So' 0 DoaesfI, Cost A-4oo.1 Aopp-dls' K. P odSeri Table E Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station SAFSTOR Decommissioning Cost Estimate (Thousands of 2003 Dollars)

O5L5 R.W NOC &ooetFos S..s P---d sasI Bsn40ssO.ahII Lftfltysd Ad" Oase Raos Psoghg T"aso Paasbssog Diposal Othn Told TOtl Us.T M-9-4 R sto Voti C A CI-S CassC GTC a d Caft Cotatl Ahd. . lceeb Cot Cos Costs Casts Costs Cots Costs CoI.. Cot Cotsts Costs Cost C. Fa C.. Fss -C.. Fat C. Fos C.. Fast 0ft, Wl,. nts4.. Ma1ntsl PERIOD2.. 6.adi..ot. St Fosing SAFSTORDo,,-uy Paed 2. Ohio Doteem-sOriog Ar.tse 3t.1.1 Pleesn Vbf ydas-s-s-sdsrk CMs - 07 15 112 - 112 * . . . . - 1.300 3.12 Ras.,i . 44 Ings & seasa. Y3 52 396 398 * . 4.D00 31.1.3 Peosn,,n 6.48att dsstarey 3.1.4 Edtpn44d d--"-lo .. 75 IIt 4 M6 1.000 34.1.5 Dstold tlayeritc mst~sy . .. . 97 15 112 112 1,2300 31.1. Defl. -slosnt..ok . 512 84 u46 u4s . 7.500 30.11.7 Pe1os- SEtS04 EA * . . 232 35 267 287 - 3.100 U8.16 Pstts- SRa-SeaCNC CostS"od . . . .37S 50 421 431 -

3a.l.9 NPrswninstb Lies.. To.*...5a Pa.. *.. *095 4.016

. . ., .7 46 S30 313 30.1.10 R..". NRC alrpoosa h .44to Wk p Adsiy Sp~feasfoM U..111I Roeitsst pho~ £ lo May Wnytsdl . . . . 552 62 635 571 7,370 38.1.112 PtwAS.MMyle *

• 212 47 39 333

• 19 * . 4.167 308.1I112Resdethlhnds 90 612 612 7.100 25.1I11.4 Ileado sIt,1al n3 No 580

• 6.5000 3 1I .1.1 SBoOVI~l fjlde . . -70.5s a 43 43 - . 600 1.1116a lts 321.111.7 R"1ornadosot

~s9htstt . . .120

.75 1t M6 06

.69

• 1.00 l

1I 139 06 * * .Sooo1.600 3S1.1118 sTwbbw &0,tosse *

• 212 47 309 339 * . .167 3a..1119 Posm egossssta, 22 172 172 31 .11:110Oro . . * .120 16 138 138 * - 1.600 311111Pta.t S&WK,,oss 5 8.4-50 234 35 2M9 134

• 2.120

3. 1.11.12West. ,.na.ari-

• 340 02 206 296 *

• 4.600 31.1.11.13 FnIfty & Mocdosesor to 7's 9 900 31.1.11 TOWa * *

• 23642 001 3.644 3.502 341 . .

• 44.624 Pla-nin & SitePneea&6Dos

~*

• 1u2 38.1.12 PA. d,.-.M"at0 e2ots 27 207 207 2.400 38.1.13 Pla.SM p .

A.sV. ** 2.419 433 2.782 2.782 31.1.14 Oasip. ontr dssn- synitos . .105 16 121 121 1.400 31.1.10 R6gg*'gCsn Cr41EsritO.'i * *

• 2.00 307 2.355 2.355

. . .92 14 106 106 *

• 1.230 38.1 s.motd Poted 31Ac~Ift. Costs - .* 10.270 1.541 11.817 11,470 3,41 .* 77550 PetdW38Pwb&dDM-d.0dr Costs 3.4.1 kaan . .718 72 700 799 3142 P oselty tn.o *

• 999 100 1.099 1.099 314.3 Ita-tO 1,11ynksftwls 221 55 276 278 311 4 H."s astnrW.1da - - 288 43 331 331 3.4.

31.46 DFsposalof DAWgeas PU.t naeaysdW

• 20 0 1 23 4s9 6 35 31 * ~40 9.103 99 70 539 S39

3. 4.7 NIOCFaes * *

• 371 37 408 408 3448 sit.O&M cod 509 . . . 250 37 287 287

3. 4.9 SeoulityStsffCne

• 00 . . *. 44 67 512 012 27.114 SoA,10 IU~l~sfwTCs- . 16. 70 2419 18.823 18 033 - . . 261234

• 00 384 subktt Psio Ss Peto-D.OP.,otd Cools, S I 23 19.629 2.945 23.112 23.112 *

• 404 8.103 99 288.350 31.0 TOTALPE560003. COST S I 23 2n9.04 4.46 34.926 34.587

• 341 401 8.103 99 20.00 T77Snles. In.

O,.i., Crok Nate~eorOeooroHg Swi-4r Dsnoott lt15S044 R-. 0 flro.-Ud..ig Cool A..1yoi. APp-odto A,Ps4 . 7.ris Table E Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station SAFSTOR Decommissioning Cost Estimate (Thousands of 2003 Dollars) o0So R.W NRC Spo,,F.ot W. PoosodS Vodoo. 49.1 ta khUty,7

.I0 IAdly Docs.. Root.-i P.48oghog T~soot P,oossto DIapose Ottoo - Teed TlI Le Tonmt M-os9-ao Roto.tioo Vak.. Cl... A CI. B Cl... C GTCC Peead al Clt.I

-s -O Coot Co." C-oo coot. coot. cooft. . Cott .Mwg-oo.s coo. ot. C-tto co sts oots Ct.. .. F. Foo

.4 FCo. t. ooCo.Foo . st

.Pot WI..Lbs,. Monos ohoo-o I PERIOD 31,0 . C.-Wot.ooaaol Ptop-6-tot Pottod 31bM04od to4ol. Aedolfoo Deftled WoNk Pmecodtvi;

• 355 53 40 347 - dl . . . . * . 4.733 301.1.1 Ph.d4 " r-d 30 0. 5 340 345 41000 X01.1.3 Ro.not." StlaoA 101 15 116 29 * . . .

X1..1 4 CRD otoWWsA " 75 r . 8I M 1.5000 3b 1.1.5 low ioM.atMt hots T7 11 54 Be 2.1 .1.5 IonOltbys9so4 - 150 22 72 172 *

• 2eo00 20A117 Rood. ooo m 41 313 312

• 2.030 20.1.1. Faolftydoootd - S0 13 103 52 . 3 *. . . . 1200 WS.1lS saawkdul5ot 00 9 15 103 103 270 1200 2.1.1.10 R4setst T5 11 08 43 .2 . . . .

31,1111 TwLt*aoomeoooeoo 3812 47 359 359 * . * *.16?

2000

• 252 . . . .

2.1.1.12 LMc"' 11"Pt-slo'sO4,at, - 150 22 172 172 2.1.1.13 R4otbt5.

• 204 31 235 212 - 2n30 3k01114 Roed"bxb"Vo

• 204 31 235 212 261.1 Towl - - 2.452 348 2.820 2.550 * . 32.740

• . 270 . . . .

• Z452 3 2820 2.00 3740 Poeod 3b AddM-M Cools 8b.2.1 SlO hClado"t - 3152 904 4.098 4.098 3b.22 Doolh . onLd M RCRAWo. (roohod

• 0 0290 . 01 410 515

• 2.01 . . * ¶S1.074 20.2.3 O.

M dMn d PCS SoSRCRAWat ( Wlod) 58 1.820 . . 252 1.130 1.9130

• 27T000 . . . 1.620.500 31b2.4 DI,111o d Load h.-y

• 2 44 . . 7 55 53

• 31 * - 22.0S0 3S2.5 A400,11 Rood. 9 .791 I 45* ;714 . 2.033 13.1US 13.1U - 10.103 - *

• 249.515 150.230 20,2 S5btotl Pdd 20 Ad,§God Costs 9 .79? I its 102 7M4 3.152 Iota 10.083 10..83 - - 29.050 1.193 . * - W2.50671 150.30 . .

Polod Sb Collsto Costs 203.1 DO- od 4 428 * * . 94 723 723 31,32 DOCCst l *Vef6 . 1.097 - 104 1.21 1281 203.3 50.5 lod M 1128 19 140 140 s 34 PIs W" MqAP- 143 1.100 1.100 WS. SLtt5 Ptiod Sb Coolotol Cost 828 1.0!2 1.C097 421 3.228 3228 Pet t b P2 OD- d.d COOt 3b 4.1 Do, Wveo It 5 24 24 3b,42 ob * - 30 0 394 394 20 4.3 PtY _t. 501 50 051 051 20 4 4 Hoots phsis KVPS 141 7n0 757 3204.5 Me" OWW O -*tId "145 *

• 22 l14 144 20 3b Dpweot of DWAgNowd 2 1 112

• S 1 15 . . 3 . . 4 50

• . . . . . . . . 3.0 204 7 Pt.M -o7bWdos

• 230 20 270 275

20. 8 NRC F. I8" I 20S 205

-

• 144 10 209 259 20.4.9 S5t O&MCos *. 120 ¶0 144 IMI 3b.4.10 S5 5S1ffCoot

• 22 34 257 207 MA.4.11 DMCStlldCod * * .3 1507 3. s4 3.890 . . . . . . . 522 so.4.12 Ly Staff Cco * - 0s7. 1.254 9.632 9.632 . . . . . . . 34113 3bPJ svdd 8b0P.O Cots 19 710 2 1

• 12 13.389 2127 16240 1 M260 . . 3 . . . 4.3 50 19.93 3b.0 TOTALPERID 0b COST 48 11.584 3 13 2.103 n7 20.090 6.4 42.12 41.92

• 20 2.5 1.39 . 2.010.734 5.20 232.733 PRIOOD 3 TOTALS 840 12.093 0 114 2.192 751 49.00 . 11.330 77120 74.000 *1 29.050 19.800 . .

• 018.837 150.37 0 5984.33 TL.%rt4.. MFe.

OCoIr Crrok Nver, OEr'Hmff Sftufl-f D-.,.1 E164145l4W R-o. O D-i-n-i ffof Coot A..Iyyd. Appe-dl. A,Pago a /r'I Table F Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station SAFSTOR Decommissioning Cost Estimate (Thousands of 2003 Dollars) 06-84. LLRW NRC Spool F.,A4 54 Pooo.do B.01 Vodon,. Bonol ItIy 0 IAet D oo. R.14 Pdog Tropod Pwsc$l DhlSAAI o0*6 T Totl ob Ue.7 M.an....4 fRt t Voes Clus AmA A CI... 11 l C 0CC GTd Cft Con I

[ 0o.or D~eopbn co ct c e et.

Cot. c-t, c Coo Ce. Cost, c Co t. .

Coot. c C.F C. F C. F c F. t C..Fo WI. Lb.. M.tAs t1.4 PERtO 48 .-L5 Ceonlt R.ol P.f4d ASDOe D A&.L .

PAdr. Sstf.. S Sy.%. Rono0 4a..1. RPd-otin Pvu,.& UMw 7 77 33 10 247 363 l6t 623 923 *

• 633 527 227.1*0 2.158 4a41.12 CRDM7&NbsRe'sI 27 124 183 17 . 419 170 940 * *

• 5179 l126so 0 . 38 41.1.3 R4do,VasesNh4ft* 64 l.741 2.680 462 2.0'4 132 3.457 11.1.4 940 II.164 I.02 1.377 287 300.82S 17.509 832 4A.I.1 4 V4.d & F.lht CTCC D1.PoM 8D0 . . 655 6a6I 5.601 . 411 72.900 40.1.5 R..d VA%.o 4.316 776 209 6.5169 132 6.0t 16J64 36.378 .

• 16.2063 . 1. 4.750 17.;09 832 4.t.1 TotAls 915 62.. .976 702 247 14.07T 263 1o32 36378 63 24li 1.377 287 41l 2.668.475 400512 1.665 R.vwod ofMajo. ESowmt 4412 Matn Tu _ ro/,ow

• 232 549 lst 5264 92 7.144 7.14 . 59.503 2 es55.154 4.957 4a 13 MU Co4a

• 714 342 94 320 . 720 5.109 5.19 * . 36738 * .63126 10140 Dloo4 of Pb.4 Systo Dq.6 Sots Coow'as 4SL1.4 Total1 R"" B.4Sq Syimm C aowo A4.1.51 RC16RC3 *3 I 6s S * . 14 . * . 577 63 4.1.5.2 RCA 1 12 21 I'147 -64

• 11.731 6 40.1.5.3 RC9 1 I 41 5 512 to 501 is - 21.619 P.009 44t.S.4 RCO 240 110 683 . 3.974 *16l. 354 S.27 4415 RCG 4 5 321

• 46 1 1 62 26 167 167 . 45.136 1.O0 4 t srRCJ

• 48 I 1 -00 20 120 120 . 617 2s. 044 I.088 48 1.5.7 RCM 73 I 3 120 37 235 230

• a0.36 1.636 41.5 a RCS es1 2 5 175 . - 6s 410 410 2.107 - .

• 5.541 3.610 48.1.5.9 Res 658 4 3 51 110 . SI 277 277 636

-3. 330 S .4A2 1.313 441510 RCT 37 0 1 38 15 91 91 . 464 * - 18.858 807 4a.1.5 TotLs 745 15 27 69 137 360 .170 2.17n . 11.078 412 . 4670. M64N N4 Rs&l-e a," *9 Syitt Caoe.t4 4.1.6.l 7Es 106 2 2 29 65 46 253 253 362 196 32.343 2.373 40.1.6.2 N20 '* 0 4 3 15 Is *

• 49 . 2.007 176 4A.16.3 WPP 1 o I 2 . 6 57 57 * * -41 *3. 1.6 406 44.164 3N2A - 46 0 I 322 16 96 96

• 306 - 16.151 999 4a.I.6.5 POD0

• 60 o 1 41 20 1I7 117 - . 501 20. 382 1237 4.1 66 N" 11 ss 1 21 . 3 I1 16 3 l8 is - - 27 3 1.366 259 4a.6.7 "Y4 67 o 1 36 22 127 127 * . 447 18.140 1.492 4.1.6.6 N8P

• 17 5 0 1 7 39 39 179 - 7287 374 "Aa16 N30

• 12 0 6 4 22 22 3.260 261 4*.1610 N3R

• 12 0o 6 4 24 24 - 934 258 44.16.ll NOS 17 o 0. 15 7 40 4* - 7.583 367 44.1.6.12 NPT * . 167 10 . 3 19 19 23S7 23 240 44.1 6.13 N83U s7 I 3 46 107 54 293 293 610 326 53.705 1.673 44.1.6.14 NSW

• 79 4 S 52 11 s0 315 315 643 359 . 6024 s 1.740 4A.1.6.15 NY

• 143 3 7 247 . 74 474 474 *

• 3.0534 - - 124..08 3.161 44.1.6.16 NP1

• 27 0 1 I 10 57 7 * - 239 9,770- 621

4. 16 17 NS2

• 23 0 0 10 8 10 62 02 - 121 28 ,:7,154 539 44.16.16 P4N3 40 1 1 20 15 17 93 23 *248 52 14.050 815 40.1.6.19 NP5

• 12 o 0 4 6 a 26 26 * - 46 19 3.347 259 44.16.20 MS5 0 0 1 33 1s 102 102 * . 414 . 16.809 1.014 4.16.21 NP5 - 74 I 2 56 28 164 164 * . 29.826 1.527 4a.1.J.22 NSA 26 1 . 1 18 16 14 78 7T *226 65 3.435 8U 4&.16_23 N5s

• 27 o 1 25 - 10 63 63 307

• I2485 I WS 4.16 24 NMC

• 12 . 0 9 4 26 26 106 4294 267 4o.I.6.25 NSD 19 0 0 12 7 39 39 152 86.190 428 2*LOSen fr.. I.e.

0O.#'rCree Nouel", Or-rHn.C~totlo Dov.I EI&14&4WK R. 0 lCo-ldoitCo A.olyd. Api-di. e rPog 9 ofic Table E Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station SAFSTOR Decommissioning Cost Estimate (Thousands of 2003 Dollars) 004" 1+/-0W MRC 3p.Mt F.W. A,.. P-ao.. 8-1.tVo4-o~ 6.-t I MU,r .nd Ae.lI. D. Roal Paclksl.. Trtwd PO g PW.. 0. TOW To~l LM. .YC -ng Fwl ft-dn Vk-.. ClP. A Ca 6 VCl. C eC ;.. l a4.udsr Id... 0eb..I. Cnd C."

Co Ct.M. C...l. COt's C. Cot. cat - C.o Col. C-st Ce1s Cu.F._ C.u.. 1 C..rM. F.. C...F.. WlLS.. U.-h Muho N4 R%. 5.b. Sp.bm. _..,4 (eo l

• 13 o 0 9 27 27 110

• 4453 278 As, 1627 NSF 19 0 0 7 9 8 4 *44 91 27 . 6.103 411 4.14r28 NSO

• 9 * . 3 3 15 10

• 40 1.645 209 4.l.8.29 N51 3 17 1I

• 5 15 *1.556 1n o 4 3 1 19 2.0q0 238 4.18.00 Nll I

11. o 0 11 4 23 23 - . 131 s.3a2 187 4.1J.832 NIIK *10

• 0 a 4 20 20 *. 70 - . 3050 224 41.1 6.33 N5H 7 38 38 *

• 143 . 803 433 4& 1.84 NS0 49 1 2 54 21 127 127 *

• 670 27,221 1.083 41..6.35 NSP 10

• 19 1 1 11 12' 07 07 . 83 48 10712 419 41.1.6.36 NSO 10 12 10 Ss 56

• 162 47 - 10.-a 413 4z. 1.S.D3 NSS 2 5 1'7 39 267 257 *

• 3.195 * - 69.10 989 4.1.6.38 NST

• 9 I 1 49 a 22 131 131 ros 29 - . 26.709 1.116 so 1 1 4 22 131 131 - 607 28 25.787 1,12 4.1.6.40 NSY I.~.^

NSZ 24 0 0 12 4 O 49 49 1153 12 7.230 54 41.1..41 N2Z 24 0 0 12 4 9 49 49 .153 12

• 7230 540 41.1642 PPA 51 1 1 .'8 1 23. 132 132 . 23.775 1.127 41.1.6 Tol

• 1MT17 29 41 1.252 415 651 3.09 3.809 . 15.491 1.3143 741.09 S1a43 Old RPM . &fl SyW Ch.mo_h 46.1.7.1 7BA

• 56 0 1 39 20 117 II? 490 *1.481 1245 4.1.7.2 7TDA

• 33 1 1 1O 40 20 100 1Os 122 1 121 10.829 718 41.7I. 7F'A s1 0 1 1I S * - 208 25 10.642 340 15 Slo slo 4.1.7.4 PBA 100 4 3 72 76 SS 310 310

• 93 206

• m3 2.23 41..7.5 PDA - 38 0 1 30 14 61 61 -

• s373 ** 18.100 809 41.7 6 PMA 3 1 18

• 2 74 190 44.17.7 PRA 8 1 2 8, 25 119 lss

• 655 - 34703 1.294 41.78 FFP7 TP 9 . 2 3 14 14 *

• 30 - 1.199 202 4.5.7 Tobb 31 7 8 243 125 ¶48 847 847 - - 3.011 404

• Il901 7,038 T u.0*Sh" Sy¶, Co-.4 4.1.8.1 7CA 1s5 5 6 142 130 101 570 570

• 1.700 390 .109.21 4.086 4.1.82T92 .11 I'l 41 M5 311 I.957 1.07 1.906 4831529 14.232 4&1.. 3 T923

• 4

• 3 I 9 0 .42 I1699 8s 4.1 8 4 TE8

• II 0 0 10 4 20 25 124 - - .034 220 41.1 8 TE2 - 1.073 4 112 3.928 879 6.038 6.038 434.09 - . 1.74.054 23.61s 131 3 6 282 77 501 501 * * .4095 141.841 2.803 4.1.8.7 TEE 220 4 9 333 107 673 673 * . 167.1294.683 4.1.8.8 4.1.8.9 TEG TP2 1I 0 Io 6 35 3S

~139 4.115

- S 840 384 116 2 S 2'1 62 402 402 - . 2.619 n107.9772.578 4.118.10 TP3 77 3 3 69 S7 45 254 254 5M 209 5023 I3738 4.1.8.11 TPE 69 3 2 52 se 42 234 234 487 225 43.953 :Si19 4 1.8. Tol 2,048 79 174 S.009 253 1.636 10.698 10.609 74.330 824 3.087.463 55.199 Anvou.4d OflgasSysteo Cw.po f 4.1.9 Totls Moo9oa SoulboC 'Fssd 4.1.10 Totals 411.11 S.lO. 9 h66,g dd ew.4ssbrq 580 10 09 17 1a 874 874 1.07 66 53.469 14.519 4a.1 S&uW P.do 4. Ay Co-h 119 12.816 5.009 i20w 17.314 10,022 263 18.046 67.090 97.090 201.36 26.431 1.37 287 li l 11201.390 106.378 P.d44A .

tA,- CotW 4.121 Cut. SuoOd- (ECd. RO) 177 U 222 m2 412 SMOM P.td 41 AIddb. Cost. mT1 222 m TLG S-t.c, Me.

O..g, Ct-rl N- ., fjrtiJr Strfo. lev. .i Elb14155 eo, Re. O Dh..odaalmnei,.g Cot A.At,.oft. App-d&&h Page w0.f Table E Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station SAFSTOR Decommissioning Cost Estimate (Thousands of 2003 Dollars) pn P..w -e li

.RW -Rrt- BMa.IF

... I Itut wtv . d I Adtn COao ltta Pad&tWg Ttm-.npo P=ocn D-po-at Ott,.e Tod Teom LlCTa Hanatat tr.tlSnd.t Vr. Cnan A , B. Cl.C CTCC Posoad 0. Cottendo noww AnY _ensn C-st Codot C. t Cost cots Cods CMt. Coolao Cast Coat. Cant. Ct. C. F d CA. F d Ca. Fst C... T dtCGT.Ca WP bdit. CtI.t 24tsUount P.AW 4a Cdtdt.W C-%t.

4*.3.1 PMOnctBnd taos S 5 13

• 106 32 184 1U4 * . - 103 - 13.045 20 4a3.2 S&-a bd ao 135 20 158 140 16 . .

4. 3 SdW Ptdod 41 Cflnd CoWa 5 135 a Is 108 53 320 304 a1 . 103 13.045 20 Pelc4 'a PodOepad Coas 35 *

• 6 44 64 4.4421 4* 0..oah~ tgnA ;657 6 2 2 4.4.3 Pv..ttafs . . . 814 91 1.006 905

• 101 -

. U. .A;i 4.44 Hta pSI 9 rpp I 7M . 192 m 9t58 44.. Hane" eqtw fwnt - 1.428 . . . 214 1.640 1.640 4.4.6 Dlso ofDAWg d a 10 . 215 60 328 326 414.7 Plod--1 as.1gy..da 4 429 64 403 *3 41.4.S NRC Foss * . 397 40 406 436 4.4. st. O6M Cod - . 2 34 263 293 4a.4.10 Radwt P- *.g Eo0p0,VS*A. **329 49 373 379 4.4.11 4.4.12 S

DOCSrICoc

~taff COs *

• 41 9 7.37T 141 1.107 1.0Q2 8.183 1.082 8.483 414.13 uLOtyStffCod * . 13109 1896 15.076 15.076 44A Sbl Petn 4. P etd.t.4 Cot. 3S Z.112 44 10 215 24.381 4,033 30.910 30.860 *-

01 6.397 7. 918

.6 379.329 3.737 4L.o TOTAL PERIOD4. COST 163 15.144 5.008 1.224 17314 15.572 24.645 19.475 96.041 986425 li11 201.361 3018 1.461 297 411 11269.330 167.34 380.983 PERIOD4b . S8* DftarM P.trb4641 D D.anb.f At 41..1 Rt. SM ra t 378 46 07 Bs 1.645 627 2.621 2.821

• 73.115 1.071 Dips PbdntSW*t 11 8261e 3186 8

- St- Cttt-wo 4b2.2.1 MAC 273 228 58 34 575 1.99 - 66M .312 3.332 . 7.111 4.07 *612.63 6.009 4b.1.2.2 toA es 112 5 4 71 t44 10" 513 513 Sao8 432 74.839 39362 4b1.2.3 ICA 06 188 10 7 149 225 _ 178 851 651 1 10641 V7 - 1 . 1.037

.4 4b.12.4 lEA 3 3 75 63 39 229 229 . 0.479 1.091 4b.12.5 RCS

• 43 0 1 36 18 96 95 - 440 . . 862

.89 4b.12 Totl 43" 616 76 4 803 S 1.930 1.007 5.021 *.021 11.199 5802 *971.049 14.067 Res" BoIW.5 Syr.. Cnpnt.

4b.1.3.1 R8I 132 2 6 202 64 406 *06

• 2.40 495 -101.306 2.-13 41.1.3.2 ReB

• 72 I 3 106 34 216 216

• 1206

• 0,19 1.069 4b.1.3.3 R8C

• 73 1 3 120 37 235 235 .

• 1.485 4b.1.34 R8E 1 3 112 41 254 254 . 1.381 56.20963 2.123 4b.1.3 5 RIF

• 3 4 3 60 101 06 307 307

• 740 315 - 57,301 1.063 4b.1.3.8 R8O 11 29 907 230 1.030 1.030 - 11229 . . 406,39 6.0051 4b.1.3.7 Res 7 a 223 142 113 OM0 6O0 . 2.757 428 100.334 3.774 4b.1.3 6 RSW

• 93 1 3 109 40 246 246 1.343 046.0 5SIMS9 2.081 4b.1.3.9 RC7

• 62 1 3 9 . 185 1.S091 29 16s

• 1.106 44.17 1.306 4b.1.3.10 RO8

• 62 17 11 100 541 176 807 t57 - 1.861 1 24 - 5t3.06 221.264 1.651 1.434 4b.1.3.11 RQ1 - 32 0 1 22 It 6s 85 *

• 296 10.670 680

• b.1.3.12 REC

• 142 2 5 18 . 80 367 367 1.953 *31329 31,32 4b.1.3.13 REF 6 4 0 171 09 371 371 - 8 5615 *- 73.233 1.004 41.1.3.14 REVROEI 184 1 3 107 38 23m 233

• 1.325 . . s 9,17 1,0 4b 1.3.15 REL 3 8 2M6 77 497 497

• 3.256 . , 133.445 3.177 4b.1.3.18 REM 37 I 1 43 18 06 9 538 *21.6146 62 1..3.17 REO

• 64 6 4 90 162 76 422 422 . 1.115 486 886.669 1.606S 4b.1.3.1 REO 112 3 4 106 50 07 331 331 . 1.:11 150

• 6.646 2.010 4b.1.3.19 RER I? 37 1 1 14 13 28 131 131 . 17T go 4b.1.3.20 RET 8 23 0 0 15 3 13 63 83 e18 II 4b.1.321 REW 19 0 0 12 7 38 38 146 * . 5,836 422

• b.1.322 REX 21 0 S 13 . 7 42 42 e16 . 6.8710 406 m

w Setfrrr 7m.51.

O~Wer Crek NlearGew..raffhj StaH.. Dneotoe.. E19-143StM RS. 0

-r.-ooloeiodaCo.. A..yot. App.drL OFPr. It orfs Table E Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station SAFSTOR Decommissioning Cost Estimate (Thousasnds ot 2003 Dollars)

OS.Soo .LRW NRC SpmnFl f s1. Pfeoe.d 8-d Vd.1. DooiJ Ul1.ty e.d Aotl.Oy Don. R--W P.44sghq T-n pe ng. Dapood 0ttr Total Total Li. T. Mbn4qa. Rt.ton Veo Ck-. A C1..B C.. C CTCC P-.d e.ft COO ted.. A. oo I. Coot Coot Co Coot.

Co. Coot. Coot. Ct Co Coot Coel Coot. Coot. Cu. Fet C..Coto Fo C Foot C. Fo WtLb.. Munh-. M-hoI Rood. *Oos Garom Cow ls (W0.wod) 4b.1.323 REY 23 0 135. 0 47 47 192 7.781 512 4b.1.324 RFs 109 2 0 131 40 293 293 1.622

• 60.

es 69 2.414 4b.1.325 RFC 24 U8 3 27 8 S1 24 2a 337 207 -

• 32.210 1.978 4b.1.3J2 RFF - 78 1 70 31 161 1 5

• 23

• 37.469 1.690 40b1.3270 RrH 102 7 23 79 422 422 . 692 525 * . 70170 2.21 4b.1.328 RFJ 69 6 42 56 170 74 397 397 60

• 510 * - 73.713 1.97, el 4b1.3.29 rt.L ST I 2 61 - 24 1a 14 . 754 . 30.625 1282 4b01.30 RFN

• 77 1 90 33 200 205 4-5.418 17 12 4b.1.331 RFo 107 I 2 76 39 225 225 * - *42 - . 38.243 2.379 b.1.3.32 RGC 2 04

• Usa o0 I 23 139 139

• 27.107 1.34 4b.1.3.33 RGD 173 5 23 a13 . - 170 1.,1a 1.1,a 10.058 409.453 3.no1 4b.1.3.34 Rai

• 35 0 23 33 14 U4 U4 . 414 4b.1.3.35 ROL 41 1 4 17 105 105 .

• 005 2tS45 794 4b.1.336 RGf 20 0 19 6 46 4* 238 *

• 9.881 493 4b0.1_37 RCR 128 2 132 63 316 316 1.633 . . 8 6314 2.623 4b.1.3.338ROU O

- I 21 122 122 *

• 047 22.109 1.249 0.1.39 RHI

• 33 0 27 12. 74 74 .339 -* . s4 733 4.1340 RH2 - 28 1 14 as B 550 - - 22.340 415

- I 'a 20 158 1S 592 24.091 1.765 4b.1.342 RtA 6 14 0 0 11 50 50 . 63 34 6.374 440 4b.1.3.43 RtJ - 29 0 23 II 63 63 212 411.43 6u 4b.1.3.44 RM11 19 0 10 10 6 31 30 .

• 121 . 4.913 416 4b.1.34* RHX 35 0 34 14 07 47

• 440 I?.r1t 782 4b.1.3144 RHY

• 32 0 30 II 70 70 14.00 714 U I

• 099 4b.1.3.47 RVCC Be 2 s0 29 176 170 .a 4 .40160 1.468 40.1.3 T'do1 01 3.500 109 182 S.009 1t27 2110 12.624 12.628 . 1,983 4.901 *

• 2.- 0.733 80.238 NCwRd'osete fhg Soo.. Coea40 4b.1.4I N0 116 1 3 113 47 281 281 TJ1.392 58 U38 2.u47 4b.1.42 N448 s9 0 1 43 . 21 125 125 * . 030 . 21508 1295 4b.1.:.3 N4A 9 20 1 1 15 12 72 . 183 42 * .

• o.071 587 4b.1.44 N48 7 19 .1 0 13 10 13 64 64 - . 182 34 . . l90 I009

• b.1.4 5WO4 60 O 1 37 21 119 119 ** 11.400 1.300 4b.1.4.6 ME4 * . 1I 1 7 . . *17 . . 607 106 lb.14.7 N4F

• 0 a, 5 24 28 * . 98 * * - 3.994 285 10 4b.14 8 NMH 0 1 1 S S 45 217 14 10.03 337

• 16 0 41 37 4b.I.0 N4X 0 0 14 - ry.136 3352 8 As 4b.1.4.10 N4L 23 0 0 14 r l. 525 4b.1.4.11 NsR 53 I 2 03 26 37e 165

• 1.029 41.72 1.188 4b.1.4.12 NSV 39 40 2 1 .39 29 45 205 205 . 482 111 27.292 1.916 4b.1.413 NSW *

• 1I 2 I . 10

• 401 4 146 4b.1.4.14 NSX 01 10 1 2 6 . 01 233 .4.17 2.378 4b.1.4 Total. 107 S16 6 14 467 SS 249 1.436 1.430 . s 077 203 249.54s 13.525 OldRadota BOe Syos Cr..ft 4b.1.51 ORWPf 0nD DeSDogoD4 D0n 143 21 164 104 2.839 4t.1.5.2 PRO 11 0 0 12 S 28 28 151 6.112 245

• b.1.5.3 rSs

• 94 1 3 47 39 234 234 1.196 408.34 2.09 -

4b1.04 PTA

• 27 0 I 30 . It 69 69

• 371

• JS.04 603 .

4b.1.5.0 PJUA 142 1 3 112 53 "II 311 00.392 3.006 100 2 4 147 16 52 322 322 . . 1.825 6 87.471 2.224 4b.1.,.7 CUA 2 6 9 - 13 519 148 ..

4b.1.58UAs 214. 2 5 191 U4 4" 404 US38r7 *

• 49.11? 4.448 40.1.0.9 UAS 147 2 5 104 6S 404 404 2277

• 92455 3221 4b.1.S To0h16 8 8 10 22 77 16 332 2.041 2.041 9,590 88

• 393n3 19.120 rrL sa lee.

OyWr Ch Nwel.., 42.trtlio Statn lno..,..nre"gel 5J.o0 Rr. e Do~nnIoi Cot Aatlod. AppedS F. rnj.f i 1f8 Table E Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station SAFSTOR Decommissioning Cost Estimate (Thousands of 2003 Dollars)

I .- D.O Itc. . P.cogho Tlcspal PFnag DOpeosal Oth . Tol To I TM t M-T9- .ttfisa Vobk CL.. A CI.- BV.. C GTCC PI , - C8CIA =aI I I=l Coo Cod C-ot. Coto CoC. C cot CIr C- Cft. Coo Co Cu. F_ CU. F c. FoC _ Fo t C. Fo vWbL.. U.Ml MUn...

t --- DeBetun - ---- ---- - - - , --- - - - - . -- - - --- - -- - .

Twbhe 6i*.9 Sysbt CoVot4 0.1X.e. 1 TO2 40 1 32 II 67 67 * . 30 - . M150 511 4b.1.e2 TF2

• 2m 8 22 7To 177 1.2 1209

• 9.48 9591.743 4.642 48.13 TFG Is1 0 0 12 8 27 27 . ISO 01S 3n9 4b.1.A TF2 165 7 17 611 13n 937 63? - . 7.144 *

• 307.17 3.878 311 7 1l T77 1.154 1.114

• 7.914 321.393 6.639 4b.1.e TKA 1e 0 0 27 27

• 74 2.96 348 4b.1.0.7 71.2 ee 2 2 42 39 23 186 15s * - 523 119 U31 82 1440

'4b1e "^

• 42 1 2 72 22 139 138 eff W.9.37 ON 40' .9 1142

• 216 4 10 359 110 700 7M0 4.447 160.58s 4.743 4b.1.1 1o T02 119 16 137

• 137 . . - - - 2.773 4b.1.5.11 TOA o9 1 2 82 20 172 172 . .014 - 41.172 .302 4b.0.e12 TOCR

• 49 2 4 137 33 224 224 * . 1.992 ee.8.e97 1,058

.en *7.795 97 4b0. 6.13 TOR

• 1 2 79 22 1" 144 Ab.1.S14 TO" II o 6 e 28 28 * . 8s.8 * - 278 25 4b.11.1 Tow 76 2 e 2.0057

• 193.07 0.620 4b.1..16 TOXITOY 19 0 0 207 10 81 5 ~ 940 342 39 342 36 124 5..052 423 40.1.5.17 TS2 137 4 9 213 83 841 * - 157.32 2.984 40.1.6.la TIA 41 1 2 21 103 .138 *. 6se e.0s 21 4b0.1.619 e 1.T2

• 27 2 9 189 08 391 .391 as8.139 2.627 4b.1 e Total - 1.77 44 10. n.826 29 1.007 6.600 6.482 137 44"eo l19 .931097 39.193 A.w-od OS2" 5yst- C aMeont 4b.1.7.1 AY8 go 129 44 274 274 *

• 1.sss . - 64.13 2125 40.1.72 AYA 21 1 0O 41 41 12 7e 7r * - 912 . - 20 nTS *e3 4b.017.3 AYS 19 0 1I 22 o 10 s0 287 10.682 430 4b.1.7.4 AYC - 1 1 2 62 21 161 181 - . 1.012 4410780 1.126 4b.1.7.s AYE 17 . .103 . 4 199 375 4b.1.76 AZ$ 38 O 1' 49 17 107 107 e11 . ' . . 24.706 829 4b.1.7.7 AZA 3 3 10 13 I15 .* 40 1 eis no0 4b.1.7.8 AZC

• 79 1 3 93 n2 19 198 * - . 1.145 *e809 1547 aX .

4b.1.7.9 AZD *12 4 22 22 *

• 70 3063

3. 267

• 0.

• 2.es 206 4b.1.7.10 AZE 1.1 6 4 21 21 * . 70 40.17.11 AZF

• 10 4 22 22 * . 90 en.72 233 4b.1.7.12 AZI 21 0 1 28 10 60 60 *

• 343 . 13.938 473 4b.1.7 To18s

• 77 6 14 474 10 1.037 1.037 - 238.198 .315 Lt SOyb C.

4b.1.5.1 BAA

• 172 3 7 235 79 4s 496 - .. 2.908 e118031 3.779 40.0 6.2 eDA 64 2 5 178 43 291 201 * - 2.193 s ess. 1.403 ft.1.3 BOA

• 7 2 2 12 12 .* 27 * .063 167 4b 1.e4 CAA

• 41 7 18 633 164 101e2 1.182 *. 317.69 7.50

.1

• s7.28 b.18I CsAA 0 1 30 1e 82 92 5 . 376 - 1.27 1.004 4b.1.68 CAC 103 1 3 09 41 247 247 49,960 2.302 4b.1.8.7 OGB 04 e 65 1.277 4b.1.8.8 00T 10 2 12

• 12 * *

• 223 -

401 9 OPH 87 10 77

• 77 . . * * ,1.501 4b.1 0.10 o01

• 18 2 1e - 18 - - 359 4b0.t5..l FWP

• 90 14 104 - 104

• 2013 4b. .12 GAA I GCA 16 2 1e

• 18 . . 350 4b.1 e 13 INAKE STRUC1URE 142 21 163 163 * . . 3208 4b.1.8.14 MA 40 201 201

• b.1.e.11 MOA 35 1 .e 3 .

119 .8 14 83 6 413 1.776 759 4b.1 1 s I MBT 2e e 2 42 44.371 575

• b.le.17 MS

• 27 4 31 * *2* *

• 8e30 4b0.116es MBROOF

• 13 2 is IIs 294 4b.1.8.19 00

• 213 32 245

• 245 * * . 4.818 40.1 I 20 PTO

• 30 5 30 * .. . 897 4b0s1..21 RSF ROOF

• 21 7 45 43

• 17 . 7.097 463 Ab01.6.22 UYARD 1.324 408 2.250 22-0 *8.162 .20262 21.729

• b.1 6 23 WAA

• 113 1 3 97 43 257 257 1.197 .48.03 2.491 naLl .s,,l,.. rMe.

O,,Mr C- , /rrairm CooL Docnn.a6 E16- 14045-, R"O. 0 l) dni#

rnnm A .4nnr. Appr.dLn E, Pore 13 ofif Table E Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station SAFSTOR Decommissioning Cost Estimate (Thousands of 2003 Dollabr)

OI-Sa bLRW NRC SpmrFasl Sta. P-ananod . -n1 Vd,-. Barbi i ULan..d Dac Raod Ctort TiratnPet Ps.ndng Dl pooi ott. Tow T k.Ta. Maowt RoststC Va.. C1-.A Cba..B C C C...

GTCC Csat lAIlhty l~~- , l D- Coot cant Cant. Coat. Caata Cnt C..te a7~t**a-Coamt" Cto coott Conta Cant. Co. Can C.. Fant C.. FW. Co o C.. Pan Wt. tha. Mot.. VIhato I WU141e SYntM CMentn (eC ad) 4b.1 ".24WHS 13 2 1s

• IS . . . . . . 300 4b.1.825 YARDAROAS 2.3 38 279 -

• 279 . . . . . . 5.99 4b.1.628 YDA/YFA I YLA 3 1 - 2 1 4 4

• 19 * * . . 783 30 4b.18 Tott

• 327 23 58 1.947 1.027 6.325 5.209 1.07s 2403 . . . . 978.424 65.3 Ab.1.9 Swffo*,g h taw da gtow-4.dnq srs l s 102 25 249 1.312 1.312 1.50 99 . . 00.203 8 21.839 D _..*bd Sh BA*"

4b.1.10.1 NM Rodnoot B." . Synlo," R.M e3 37 24 1 382 124 051 651 0 3.819 * *

• 30.i14 1875 b..1.10.2 Old RPantn_ 86ddhg

• SytWnr4R a 2 4 3 1 A1 11 61 61 0 405 . . . *e784 53 4b.1.10.3 Rooar &At

• Syto,,,* Ratan

• 3 a 4 . es 10 06 96 640 * * * - 64.s00 e0 4bA10.4 Tntebt* 8a.9 . Syten Roost goff s2r 310 1.006 18600 9.194 * *

• 15,M S."?7 4b.1.10.5 hntd OR Gto . D. 1 51 s 4 4 56 30 16? 16? *s 45 . . . 57.145 .23z 4b.1.106 Drfll.oDann I 401 130 119 . 2.5069 794 4.09 4.000 13.7

• . * . . 1.0817 9202 4b.1.10.T Dryd . t RLb- 1.449 u4 30 so 1.76 154 1.254 .73 5.ns3 22.108 801 * . . 951.2s 47.881 b URW S1.10i 5 . Dan. 7 27 3 2 33 19 n2 92 333 * *

• 3i330 651 4b.1.109 I 1oan,Og . D een 7 27 3 2 . 33 19 92 n 2 *28 * *

• 327s 6ss 4b.1710.10 Nte Radt o - D an 33 193 21 10 19 2tL 125 61S 616 235 2.129 * . . 22Z101 45207 4b.0.110.11 CtdR t.gDana. 315 e ss 12 077 317 1.662 1.662 152 0.7 * *

• se 92550 4.766 4b.1.10.12RB0 . To R. W. 1.942 973 40 7S 2.649 229 t.sa5 7.599  ?'s" 3274 891 . . . 1.10.755 sos.02 45.1.10 Ol3Fdot .A 6. 1st.00. 23 132 II 10 16bS 96 530 530 2.052 010 . . 171.8n7 3.192 4b.1 12.1 Renr B.d5 29t. Dn9 Is 60 7 4 70 41 19? 1o 700 . . . 70.017 1.027 451.10.10 R..do , S0,5 +11D 17 66 5 . 78 06 210 210 781 . . . 78.06 1.02 4b.1.10.18Re"dS. BS4 75t. Da a 24 3 2 26 200 * *

• 20.130 s06 Lb.1.1017Rd.. a.ag" o.-, 12 48 s 3 se 33 1ss lOS e55 . . . 55.707 1.140 451.10.1S St.dltaIrOi Ttn o. R &Dec 72 161 13 . 134 112 001 001 1.339 * * . 133.070 4.620 4b.1.10.19Tu1, *Mdn 0t. Dect0 so 217 21 1s 03 211 150 757 70? 1.104 2.069 * . . 21.9 50240 4b.1.1020 Twt*. BS*n 23t. nD 33 163 la 12 90 161 IlL 589 389 1,109 1.570 . .

• 200.63 3.0855 4b.1.10.21 T.ob* Bo Lt. Deo 20 7T 9 6 94 00 202 262 .41 . . . 9.13 1.808 4b.1.1022Cet.to.5td Sol

• 76 1.039 663 10.020 2.077 10275 15275 106.200 . . . t0.619.990 6.020 4b.1.1023 Rood .*aVng 11tf. D- 310 382 a a 128 s1 204 194 I104 1.0 442 . . . 107.208 14.570 4b 1t10 Tto 4.006 4.695 1.600 1.144 4.946 1t.170 t.04A 42.100 42.100 61.196 107.182 . . . 18.103.570 10o,7 ob.1 stt Patd 4b Atdhb Canto *.9A 16.619 1.946 1.636 18202 22.008 15.339 60.325 60.112 10213 228,170 174.709 . 26.381.130 44a.3v Pa.d At,AddMM Cost, 4b 2.1 ISFI U a Tl, n 64 7 53 . 00o 1.27 s00 3.070 3.074 . . 4.23 ts60 Lb2 swtto P..bd LbAdMat Costs 940 7 53

• S06 1m 507 3.074 3.074 . . 4.723 006.151 100:.601 2.50s P.Wd *b Crltd Catb t.:31 Pt o wo nt 14 . 153 . 1.36 300 2.133 2.133 2.069 339.017 90 4bb.32 3.2 Disposl tw dfodttoiLNt a, Lantta45,da 20 0 Lb_33 Stoa Wdafton. 324 . . . . '49 373 ;37 Lb.3 Stw Pwd 4LbCod d Cost, 14 324 003 104 . 1.306 445 2.506 2.506 1 2.069 339.006 o0 Pt *bPtD- .. MMCost Lb4.1 De er 701I 100 977 V77 4b.42 ba 1.0 104 1.1a 1,14 4b.4.3 P4nenlytooe 1.44. 140 1.093 1.93

• 1.700 Ab.4.4 Nnld, t4yda g,* 426 2.130 2.130 4b A.S Hno n ant 22n2 341 2.613 2.013

• tb4 ot D old DAW eW 64 19

• 11 ;D t04 620 628 7.164 143.563 1.759 05.4.7 Plta. -- W bt 76 S"4 - s4 Lb6. NRC Fr. 626 63 691 691 4b 4 9 si. O&l Cost 302 04 410 416 AbA.10 Rad.o P w.ocs..0EWt tSwo, 521 70 600 600 4b.L.11 so.oy Stot Cant 1.90 224 1.71 0.l4

• 90.686 4b.L.12 DOC Stall Coa 1.718 13.171 13.171 1798tO Lb.4.13 =yaffcost 40. 137,39 Z.02 22 940 22.940 315.133 4b.4 s. Ptd Lb 4 tPbd-Do.t.4 Coatb 781 3.970 04 lO

• 11 37.398 8.530 49*2e 49.20 143.63 1.75 5t6.679 T7(2 RSr-r Mne.

O~frCn-h N-1-s O--f.eafl fiSal. 1?-, 0 Eln..Oso-USS-I&Ko DessfsalgCa-l A,.alkol Appos.dia EPag. 14of 1#

Table E Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station SAF8TOR Decommissioning Cost Estimate (Thousands of 2003 Dollars) 05-3" LLRW NRC Fw Spt Fast ts P.54*55.d B-nd Vd.- 1B-1t ulty nd Co-t R.saal Padgn Ttept P-.9t Oapas Ott. -Tta Ttal Li.b on W..,s-a Rtt. Vd r ClasA Cca B CI.4-C GTCC Pr d4. Cos." d Cost C.5S Cas19 Casts casts Caste Costs C.ot- Casts CS.tS Casto Cast. C.a C2 1Mai

. Ca.Fas C. PsC. CPOsft Lb. 0 U OSat M. h 4b0 TOTALPFERIOO b COST 5.783 21.506 2.101 1.892 Is=5 24.88S 389.75 22.822 136,100 121.810 3.074 1.213 - 226.175 186647 2.069. 27.369.890 459.010 58823 PERIMO4.. Lk-se Tonstatta Petd 4* Ded Deosws.*ta A0*sbla 4@.1.0 0SE r 5, . 6 . 35 1SO ISO 4.5.2 T. ult.l s 4.1 Slb P5 44 ACM"yCota

• 116 35 1SO 1SO Pand 4. Addld Cat 4421 FPt4 Skt Suy . . . . . 4.572 1.371 8.9 5.943

• 444 44.2 S0.*vW P.td 4 Add4Strai Costs 4 S42 1.37 5:.93 4 .89463 98.444 P.1o*d4*Calote Coats 4e.31 DOCasof to . . . 1.097 164 1261 1261 4.3 Sob Pabd 4e CWds Csts . .. . . 1.097 164 1261 1261 PtW 4# PF.1Db.r Cost 404.1 bo * * . . 41 54 9n 899n 4.4A2 PtWp. tLa" J753 75 828 62 4 43 Htst tpbyslas a"

• 464 . . . . - 156 S60 580 * . . .9 . 6.1 .7 4.44 Disps soDAWgsd 4 1

• 17 . 5 27 27 4.4.5 Pbn9 ay bdpt * . . 94 1* 18 106 4 46 NRCFs . . . . 327 33 359 359 4 4.T SitOSM Coa * . . 188 25 216 216 46A4.8 SeewityStf Clt

• 232 35 287 267 * . . 39 * .* 6.1* - 73 14.143 4.9 DOCSutf COO * . . 4.M0 614 4.m700 4.706 . . . 2.5 4.4.10 Lily aIff Cod

• 5.019 713 SM 1.772 *

• 9.536 40.4 SuWd Pe*0d A4 Pelod.odpesdM Costs

• 464 4 1

• 17 11.244 1.72 13.457 13.457 . . 30 . 0. . 11419.53 40.0 TOTALPERIODAs COST 464 4 1 - 17 .17.028 3.297 20.811 20.611 6.105 "'Sig 146.836 PERIO04 TOTALS 5.642 37.170 7252 3.11 35.606 40.424 80.3*8 451.94 255.457 251.054 3.074 1.326 427.535 217.120 .1 267 411 38.66S.320 744,643 1.1,768 PERIOD51 . SIt R-tstWb * .9 . *

• 1. . .

Potod 5b Dl5 D.sss h9aV Adc*Ae D.v.olt dt Ra..bks SOt bSl4 * .1 . -o 3S3 50.1.1.5 Sta,*En-T.-*,l . R- Is DG

• 24 * . . 124 947 94 * *

• 2.421 5b.1.12 Ado*ftdim s&Af 4451 N6 507 * . . 8,353 So.1.1.3 AIogwtod Off GMs EfIg *

• 24126 * . . 38 277 . 277 . . ** 3.486S 20.1.5.4 CP rtrtts

.*b 4 s3 . . 4 .34 Sb.1.1 4Dasa. a OA"

• 91 14 105 * . . 1.597 Sb2t1.s D S b 17 133 - 133 * . . 1.722 5b.1.1.7 0 6 Wmt rs ly

• 1. * *

• 51 Sb.1.1.8 Fhi P-r* HItvs - . . 1 41 4I *.

• 64 5b.1.1.9 FneslWst PwsoHs

• 27T.8

• . . 3 21

• 21 . . 330 Sb.1.1.10 H,.*gB.A H-s - 32 * * . 37 578 5b.1.1.11 tIto Stbf *

• 87 4a0 5.856 sb.t112 Lro L-a Rs&-4M*Stomp

• 304 48 350 350 4.918 49 . .

2b.1.1.13 Muao St.p 27 203 . I .02. -

Sb.1.1.14 U= Gft S...tI 82 * * .

282 12 9n 1257 2b.1.1.15 Mta. '

• 278 *

• 41 316 * *316 - 4.943 sb.1.1.1s Mmeds WSMswaeh( , 692 . . 104 72

• 788 * * . 10.317 5b.1.1.17 MLsolSts tt 304

• s Y349

• 52 4.807 5b.1.1.18 Na R _l B,I se 48 * *

• 72 052 *

• 7.234 Sb.1~.1D9 NewS&re PwD MM" * . . 5 8 148 S.0.1.120 0 BNg 2148 * . . 32 246

• 246 * -3.s.875 5b.1.121 Old R Bg Al 361 -*4 415 * * .15 * * . .456 5b.I.122 PIlEegks." 137 * -

• 21 180

• 10S . *

• 2.120 nTO S. , s..

tyo.rCrak No1trrr M. rasSta40fl P I ,Ot.

VAIpendi. s O5 Deeostatsf..ot.I Cnt A.alIyd App~dXE. Pg. 1 f to Table E Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station SAFSTOR Decommissioning Cost Estimate (MTousands of2003 Dollars)

P .0t t..tW NRC SpontFUM S to Psd on- Vo.oo. B.10I ,l =iy .,I DOoto R _.-M th.Osft Topt snsg DiSpOs Ottwr ToW Tolol ELItTots UMt Rs., Voktv Cl-.A Cl.. aCl.. C GTCC Pr. Cft CIoto IAtteY Aanny uzowt CoI Cost Co-. Cot. Cn tt Ct. Cn Coat tlo..-e onth C-t. Cr-t, Cooe. tnt5. a. ro a. C ta. e- t. - Cr Ve-tbo t h

• tn&"

Daol. o R-.ok~ Slt &&Vts (tosnta 5b.1.123 P IS "t Bottsn 4 31

• 31 .- *45 5b..1524 R.." K Sdtdo

• 4.107 824 4.7I1 6.446 5.1.120.5 S.V%Pod 12 2 14

• 14

• 201 5b1.1.12b Sft E nfq."BS.Ad

• 250 39 283 2se 3.940 Sb.1.127 Tot* Pad & *.UY Ysd 699 1os 003

• 803 .

• 9 514 5ht1.28 Tvbnr40 etht I ., 38 016 3.954 3.94 e 1.42S 50.1.12S T.t"*t Ptoad 407 of 48e a46 5tt011 Tot.% 14211 2Z132 16.343 947

• 15.39 *

• 2 6 S06 CMGsM AAfits 5 .12 Rto Rtk44 s6.e0

• 1,002 7.er2 r U2 107059 5.12 G'dt & _be" sit. 345 *

• 52 397

• a 1.403 5b 1.4 FWni o t t t NRC 117? 16 134 134 , . 1.560 5S.1 S0tM P.,Id 5b AdstY Co.tt 21236 II? 3.203 24.556 1.062

• 23.474 *216.65 1.500 Pabd 5b Adal CosMt 5se2.1 Colotol COsa 420 0 es. 499

• 499 2.875 5b22 . sr2 SiMt Rtnt4. M 3

• 36 1oo 709 7 * . . 2.5011 1SO 5S2 Skwao Pt,,bd St Addlto Coot. 1.0M2 0 36 165 1.268 709 499

• 0.858 0 60 P.1v 5b Cd.ond Cott 5b 3.1 Sotol tIdoIstB 563 20 165 503 Sv.h Pood S C dto Costs 163 2s "a5 185 ."M P.nbd 5b Psbd.OepWMt ColS 5 4.1 b rmi * * . ee2 e8 971 Sb43 P2 pstytso"l I9n

.1.52 150 1.709

• 1.709 5b.4.3 M"t OtWt &*tati 3.327 * * - 450" se.2

• a826 se eb 4 4 P1t.4 r. bt.4t . .7 1s 112

• 12

• 51,45 Sit O&MCM.0 *. . 380 58 44

• e44 .. .

5S.45 sos0uy Slocoot 479 72 I1

• 29.150 S04.7 DMOC St Cow .* . .620

- . e.10 977 7.47

• 7.467

• 5b.4* Lyftsir Cot * * * .409 S 2,20 5b.4 Satot Pvt 50 P.Iod-Dpood.o Conts 3.327 is3.1 2.37 193020 19.020 . . 17.50 5b.0 TOTALPERIOO5b COST - 2r,789 0 13.471 5.70e 45.032 1.042 75 43.182 *24.524 179.350 PERIODS TOTALS O 13.471 0.760 45.032 1.082 7 43.102 * - *

• 224.24 17.300 TLr m.qim. tAc.

0otl Ch.k Nodel", Qe-.. ttg Station Dotor,.l EIS ISS432om Rr. 0 Ncla osfoxf t Corl A.,.si,. App..dx E, Pg. 1Sof at Table E Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station SAFSTOR Decommissioning Cost Estimate (Thousands ofr2003 Dollatr) 05.34. LLRW NRC Spo lFoo S.. Pr0td BonoVoNt. B.ot UtWitnd 5

AdFt Do.- R-oo Pototuto Trspst PeoTsdog DOps Olh r - 04.9 Tobta Lb Tann. M.q.odt Rntonorf Vokt Cl. .A CL.r Cl. C GTCC Pr.c1otd. Crt Cotnod.I

t. Ar trllto.. Co t Co.t Cods Coot. Cootb Cost Cst. Conlr Cot. Cot Ca Codt- Co Fo C.. o C. F..t C.. F C Foot Itb.. M tL.... Mt o TOTALCOSTTOCDEcOcMtSSION 12.571 nr.3s 7.3 3.065 37.7r 44.0D9 545.000 121.759 s52.113 610.09 19549.2 45.122 - 4585.5 25.234t t.40s 297 411 41.491250 1232.00? 5.32.254 SALCOSTTODECOMUtSSIONWTHlg6% CONTtt4OsttCY: 052.IS tso~odu ob 253 dol.

TALNRCLtCEt4SETERM4NATIONCOSTts of r571.5% 96115. thtods of 200t do4.

ET FUEL.MANAGEMENTCOSTts 23.5% ROt $19tt9 os>oood 25t dott NCLEAR DEMOtLT1ot COSTts 4.11% OR: u5.122 thosoo sf 20N3 doW.1 rOTALPIARY SITERAOWAST! VOLUMEBURIED 44.t441ebte F"t TALSECONDARYSITSrADWAST! VOL.UMEBURIED: 221.1118 st

.. Fo.t ALGREATERTHAN CLASSC RADWAST!VOLUMEGENERATED itt rtebt Foot TALSCRAPMETAL REMOVEM 22.899 tol A. CRAFT LASORREOUIREMENTS: 1.23210T7a r.t EndNote, 4.. kftwo lotha thd kty o d- rt Asdd dcalo.-stsdog opeo.

a.ka.esto Ns9400049potfvt. bydoco4ot*Wgsi.

O ttdg "1* 1 st "S M 1oI- toA 05b 8cr~qt- si a ko tU2 S~to, foe.

Oyster Creek NuclearGeneratingStation

• Document E16-1455 006,.Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Appendix F, Page 1 of 12 APPENDIX F WORK DIFFICULTY FACTOR ADJUSTMENTS I TLG Services, Inc.

Oyster Creek Nuclear GeneratingStation Document E16-1455-006, Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Appendix F, Page2 of 12 GUIDELINES FOR APPLYING WORK DURATION ADJUSTMENT FACTORS TLG has historically applied work duration adjustment factors in determining unit cost factors to account for working in a radiblogically controlled environment. In performing an aiea-lby-area decommissioning estimate, the work duration factors are applied on an "area" basis based on the nominal area conditions. Where practical, areas are established based on similar working conditions.

The WDFs fall into five categories: access, respiratory protection, ALARA, protective clothing (PC), and work breaks. The guidelines of how these factors are assessed for each area is described below. Table F-1 details the WDFs used for each of the seven unit cost factor sets contained in the estimates. Table F-2 outlines the unit cost factors used for each area of the Oyster Creek plant.

1) Access Factor:

Controlling Variables:

• Height of the component above' the working floor

. Difficulty in working around the component (restricted access)

Source of Variable Information:

• Estimators observation or judgment

• Plant drawings Range of Access FactorAdjustments:

0% - Components are accessible and located near a working level floor or platform 10% - Scaffolding (component less than <12 feet above floor) is required to access the majority of the components or the area around the components is congested.

20% - Scaffolding (component less than <12 feet above floor) is required to access the majority of the components and the area around the components is congested.

30% - Scaffolding (component between 12 - 20 feet above floor) is required to access the majority of the components or the area around the components are extremely congested.

.TLG Services, Inc.

Oyster Creek Nuclear GeneratingStation Document E16-1455.006,.Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Appendix F, Page 3 of 12 40% - Scaffolding (component between 20 - 45 feet above floor) is required to access the majority of the components).

50% - Scaffolding (component greater than 45 feet above floor) is required to access the majority of the components).

2) Respiratory Protection Factor:

ControllingVariables:

• Component surface contamination levels (internal or external)

• Type of work (potential to create an airborne problem)

. General area surface contamination levels Site specific requirements for maintaining respirator qualifications (initial qualification, requalification, etc.)

. Personal air sampler requirements Sources of Variable Information:

• Radiation Work Permit Requirements

. Area Survey Maps

. Site Radiation Protection Program Manual Range of RespiratoryProtection FactorAdjustments:

0% - Respiratory protection is not required (clean system or loose surface contamination has been removed).

25% - Respiratory protection is only required during limited segments of the work (i.e. physical cutting) 50% - Respiratory protection is continuously required while working on the component.

3) Radiation/ALARA Factor:

Controlling Variables:

• Component contact dose rate

• General area dose rate

• Site specific requirements for maintaining radiation worker qualification (initial qualification, requalification, etc.)

• Dosimetry requirements Sources of Variable Information:

• Area Survey Maps

• Site Radiation Protection Program Manual

• Radiation Work Permit Requirements TLG Services, Inc.

Oyster Creek Nuclear GeneratingStation Document E16-1455.006, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Appendix F, Page4 of 12 Range of RadiationIALARA FactorAdjustments:

(Note that surface contamination levels are principally accounted for in protective clothing requirements and respiratory protection requirements) 0% - The component is clean and is nbt located in a radiologically controlled area 10% - The component is located in a radiologically controlled area (General Area Radiation field < 2 .5 mrem/hr).

20% - The component is located in a radiologically controlled area (General Area Radiation field between 2. 5 to 15 mrem/hr).

40% - The component is located in a radiologically controlled area (General Area Radiation field between 16 and 99 mrem/hr).

100% - The component is located in a radiologically controlled area (General Area Radiation field > 100 mrem/hr).

4) Protective Clothing Factor:

Controlling Variables:

• Component surface contamination levels (internal or external)

• General area surface contamination levels

• Type of activity (wet/dry work, potential to create a surface contamination problem)

• Site specific work schedule arrangements Sources of Variable Information:

• Radiation Work Permit Requirements

• Area Survey Maps

• Site Radiation Protection Program Manual Range of Protective Clothing FactorAdjustments (alternatesite-specific schedules may dictate alternateadjustments):

0% - The component is clean and is not located in a radiologically controlled area.

30% - The component is clean or contaminated and is located in a surface contamination controlled area . Work is to be completed in accordance with TLG Services, Inc.

Oyster Creek NuclearGeneratingStation Document E16-1455.006, Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Appendix F, Page5 of 12 the requirements of an RWP, which specifies a single or double set of "PCs",

or "PCs" with plastics.

50% - The components is located in a surface contamination controlled area.

Work is to be completed in accordance with the requirements of an RWP,*

which specifies "plastics" in addition to double PCs for protective clothing.

100% - The component is located in a surface contamination controlled area.

Work is to be completed in accordance with the requirements of an RWP, which specifies double "PCs" and double "plastics". (extremely wet or humid working environment).

5) Work Break Factor:

Controlling Variables:

• Site specific work schedule arrangements Sources of Variable Information:

. Typical site work schedule Range of Work Break FactorAdjustments:

8.33% - Workday schedule outlined in AIF/NESP-036 (alternate site-specific schedules may dictate alternate adjustments).

TLG Services, Inc.

Oyster Creek NuclearGeneratingStation Document E16-1455.006, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Appendix F, Page 6 of 12 TABLE F-1 UNIT COST FACTOR SETS AND THEIR WORK DIFFICULTY ADJUSTMENT FACTORS DECON I Clean DECON / Contarn.

Percentage Percentage UCF Set ID Access Resp. PCs ALARA Access Resp. PCs ALARA 1 10.0 0.0 0 10 10.0 0.0 0 10 2 20.0 0.0 30 10 20.0 0.0 30 10 3 20.0 25.0 30 30 20.0 25.0 30 30 4 30.0 25.0 50 30 30.0 25.0 50 30 5 50.0 25.0 50 40 50.0 25.0 50 40 6 I30.0 25.0 50 50 30.0 25.0 50 100 7 20.0 0.0 0 0 20.0 25.0 30 30 SAFSTOR / Clean l SAFSTOR / Contain.

Percentage Percentage Access Resp. PCs ALARA Access Resp. PCs ALARA 1 10.0 0.0 0 10 10.0 0.0 0 10 2 20.0 0.0 30 10 20.0 0.0 30 10 3 20.0 25.0 30 10 20.0 25.0 30 10 4 30.0 25.0 50 10 30.0 25.0 50 10 5 50.0 25.0 50 10 50.0 25.0 50 10 6 30.0 25.0 50 10 30.0 25.0 50 10 7 20.0 0.0 0 0 20.0 25.0 30 10 TLG Services, Inc.

Oyster Creek NuclearGeneratingStation DocumentE16-1455-006, Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Appendix F, Page 7 of 12 TABLE F-2 OYSTER CREEK STN DESIGNATIONS AND ASSOCIATED UNIT COST FACTORS AREA AREA DESCRIPTION UCF SET Drvwell System Components IAA DRYWELL RECIRC LOOP 5 IAC DRYWELL EL. 13 - SUB PILE ROOM 5 ICA DRYWELL EL. 51 & 75' 5 IEA DRYWELL EL. 95 4 RC6 DRYWELL LABRYNTH 3 Reactor Building System Components RB1 REACTOR BUILDING - 19' GENERAL 3 RBB 19' NE 3 RBC 19'SE 3 RBE CRD SYSTEM PUMP ROOM 3 RBF REACTOR BUILDING EQUIPMENT DRAIN TANK ROOM 3 RBO 19' INSIDE TORUS 4 RBS TOP OF TORUS SEGMENT N/E 4 RBSW REACTOR BUILDING SWITCHGEAR ROOM 2 RC1 SOUTHEAST AIRLOCK 3 RC7 SW RAD MONITOR ENCLOSURE 2 RCA NORTH SCRAM DISCHARGE VOLUME 3 RCB LAUNDRY & LAB DRAIN TANKS/PUMPS 3 RCD NORTH BANK HCU's 3 RCG NORTH CONTAINMENT SPRAY HEAT EXCHANGERS 3 RCJ CRD SYSTEM FILTER/VALVING AREA 3 RCM SOUTH BANK CSS HEAT EXCHANGERS 3 RCN SOUTH BANK CONTROL ROD DRIVE MODULES 3 RCS SOUTH SCRAM DISCHARGE VOLUME (RCS15VM) 3 RCT REACTOR BUILDING EL.23 ALL AREAS GENERAL 3 RD8 RX33' SHUTDOWN COOLING RM GENERAL ALL AREAS 3 RDM TIP DRIVE ROOM WEST 3 REC CORE SPRAY BOOSTER PUMPS 3 REF SHUTDOWN COOLING HEAT EXCHANGER ROOM 1 REH NITROGEN COMPRESSOR AREA 3 REI REACTOR 51' TOOL CRIB 3 REL RBCCW HEAT EXCHANGER/PUMP AREA 3 REM SOUTHEAST ACCESS AREA 3 REO CLEANUP SYSTEM HEAT EXCHANGER ROOM 4 REQ CLEANUP SYSTEM PUMP AREA 3 RER CLEANUP SYSTEM VALVE NEST EL.64 5 RET CLEANUP FILTER SLUDGE PUMP HALLWAY 6 REW INSTRUMENT RACK RK01 3 TLG Services, Inc.

Oyster Creek Nuclear GeneratingStation Document E16-1455.006, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Appendix F, Page8 of 12 TABLE F-2 OYSTER CREEK STN DESIGNATIONS AND ASSOCIATED UNIT COST FACTORS (continued)

AREA AREA DESCRIPTION UCFSET Reactor Building System Components (continued)

REX INSTRUMENT RACK RK02 AREA 3 REY REACTOR BUILDING 51' GENERAL ALL AREAS 3 RFB SOUTH EAST GENERAL AREA (C.U. SURGE TANK) 3 RFC RWCU VALVE AISLE AND CONTROL AREA 5 RFF CLEANUP SYSTEM FILTER AID/PRECOAT TANK AREA 3 RFH OLD FUEL POOL HEAT EXCHANGERS & PUMPS AREA 3 RFJ ASFP HEAT EXCHANGERS/PUMPS AREA 3 RFL CONTROL ROD DRIVE REBUILD ROOM 3 RFN EMERGENCY CONDENSER VALVE AREA 3 RFQ REACTOR BUILDING 75' GENERAL ALL AREAS 3 RGC NORTHEAST ACCESS AREA 3 RGD "B" EMERGENCY CONDENSER NE01-B 3 RGI SOUTHEAST ACCESS AREA 3 RGL SOUTHWEST ACCESS AREA 3 RGP CLEANUP DEMINERALIZER VAULT (RGP16FM) 4 RGR LIQUID POISON TANKIPUMPS AREA 3 RGU REACTOR BUILDING EL.95 - GENERAL ALL AREAS 3 RH1 NORTH FLOOR AREA 3 RH2 WEST FLOOR AREA 3 RH3 RB EL119ALLAREAS 3 RH4 REACTOR BUILDING CRANE 3 RH6 ELEVATOR CONTROL EQUIP AREA 3 RHA REACTOR CAVITY 6 RHJ CASK WASHDOWN / DECONTAMINATION AREA 3 RHL BRIDGE CRANE AND TRACKS 3 RHX SOUTH FLOOR AREA 3 RHY SOUTH EAST FLOOR AREA 3 RMCC REACTOR BUILDING MCC ROOM 2 New Radwaste Building System Components 7EB NRW TUNNEL GENERAL ALL AREAS 5 N2G NRW BUILDING GENERAL ALL ELEVATIONS 3 N2P NRW BUILDING PENTHOUSE 3 N38 NRW 23' GENERAL ALL AREAS 3 N3A NRW TRUCK BAY 3 N3D NEW RADWASTE FILL AISLE 4 N31 NRW #2 SUMP ROOM 4 N3N NRW SOUTH OPERATING GALLERY EAST 4 TLG Services, Inc.

Oyster Creek NuclearGeneratingStation Document E16-1455-006,.Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Appendix F, Page9 of 12 TABLE F-2 OYSTER CREEK STN DESIGNATIONS AND ASSOCIATED UNIT COST FACTORS (continued)

AREA AREA DESCRIPTION UCFSET New Radwaste Buildina System Commonents (continued)

N3P NRW HIGH PURITY PUMP ROOM 3 N3Q NRW WC-P-1B WASTE CHEM PUMP ROOM 3 N3R NRW VALVE AREA WEST 3 N3S NRW WC-P-1A WASTE CHEM PUMP ROOM 4 N3T NRW #1 SUMP ROOM 4 N3U NRW CONCENTRATOR SKID ROOM 'A' ' 4 N3W NRW CONCENTRATOR SKID ROOM 'B' 4 N3Y NRW HEAT EXCHANGER BUILDING 3 N48 NRW 38' GENERAL ALL AREAS 3 N4A NRW 'A' HOLD-UP TANK SL-T-3A ROOM 5 N4B. B' HOLD-UP TANK SL-T-3B ROOM 5 N4D LARGE CONTAINER FILL SKID ROOM SL-Y-6 4 N4E NRW LARGE CONTAINER FILL SKID ROOM 3 N4F CLW PROCESS AREA 4 N4H SPENT RESIN TRANSFER PIPING 4 N4K. NRW SPENT RESIN VALVE GALLERY 4 N4L PIPE GALLERY WEST 4 N51 NRW HP-D-1A DEMINERALIZER ROOM 5 N52 NRW HP-F-2A RESIN TRAP ROOM 5 N53 NRW HP-D-1B DEMINERALIZER ROOM 5 N54 NRW HP-F-2B RESIN TRAP ROOM 5 N55 NRW MEZZANINE/VALVING AREA 4 N56 NRW 48-0 ELEVATION GENERAL ALL AREAS 3 N5A NRW "A" CONCENTRATED LIQUID WASTE TANK ROOM SL-T-1A 5 N5B NRW "B" CONCENTRATED LIQUID WASTE TANK ROOM SL-T-1B 5 N5C NRW CHEMICAL WASTE FILTER ROOM 1A 4 N5D NRW HIGH PURITY FILTER ROOM 1A . 4 N5E NRW CHEMICAL WASTE FILTER ROOM 1B 4 N5F NRW HIGH PURITY FILTER ROOM 1B 4 N5G NRW CONCENTRATED LIQUID WASTE PUMP SL-P-1A ROOM 5 N5H NRW VALVE GALLERY EAST 4 N5I NRW CONCENTRATED LIQUID WASTE PUMP SL-P-1B ROOM 5 N5J NRW SAMPLE SINK AREA 3 N5K NRW NEUTRALIZATION FEED SKID AREA 3 N5N NRW LAUNDRY/DECON AREA 3 N50 NRW FILTER PRECOAT/BODY FEED ROOM 3 N5P NRW SL-T-2A SPENT RESIN TANK 5 N5Q NRW SL-T-2B SPENT RESIN TANK 5 N5R NRW CONTROL ROOM 3 TLG Services, Inc.

Ojyster Creek Nuclear GeneratingStation Document E16-1455-006, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Appendix F, Page10 of 12 TABLE F-2 OYSTER CREEK STN DESIGNATIONS AND ASSOCIATED UNIT COST FACTORS (continued)

AREA AREA DESCRIPTION UCF SET New Radwaste Building System ComDonents (continued)

N5S NRW BUILDING HVAC ROOM 3 N5T NRW CHEM WASTE/FLR DRAIN TANK ROOM WC-T-1A 5 N5U NRW CHEM WASTE/FLR DRAIN TANK ROOM WC-T-1B 5 N5V NRW CHEM WASTEIFLR DRAIN TANK ROOM WC-T-1C 5 N5W NRW CRANE BAY-STORAGE/LAYDOWN ROOM 3 N5X NRW HIGH PURITY TANK & ROOM 1A 5 N5Y NRW WC-D-1A DEMISTER ROOM 5 N5Z NRW WC-D-1B DEMISTER ROOM 5 PAA OLD RADWASTE BUILDING GENERAL ALL AREAS 3 Old Radwaste Building System Commonents 7BA 1-12 SUMP AREA GENERAL 4 7DA ORW TUNNEL GENERAL ALL AREAS 4 7FA ORW AIR FILTER ROOM 5 PBA ORW SMALL PUMP ROOM 5 PDA ORW 35' & 45' CENTRIFUGE AND HOPPER 5 PMA ORW OVERBOARD DISCHARGE MONITOR 3 PRA ORW ROOF GENERAL ALL AREAS 4 PRD ORW FUEL POOL FILTERS / KELLY BUILDING 4 PSB ORW CONTROL ROOM OPERATION AREA 3 PTA ORW COMPACTOR AREA 3 PTK ORW - NORTH ANNEX 3 PTP DRUM STORAGE AREA GENERAL 3 PUA ORW LARGE PUMP ROOM 4 PUU ORW INSIDE TANK ROOM GENERAL 4 PVA ORW NORTH ANNEX KELLY BUILDING 2 UAB ORW OUTSIDE TANKS & MOAT AREA 4 UAS ORW SURGE TANK & PUMP AREA 4 ORW ORW PRE D&D DESLUDGE AND DECON 4 Turbine Building System Components 7CA TURBINE TUNNEL GENERAL ALL AREAS 5 TB2 TURBINE BUILDING BASEMENT GENERAL ALL AREAS 3 TB23 TB23 HALLWAY AREA 1 TB38 TB38 HALLWAY AREA 1 TC2 CONDENSER BAY OVERHEAD GENERAL ALL AREAS 3 TD2 CONDENSER BAY DRAIN TANK PIT 3 TLG Services, Inc.

Oyster Creek NuclearGeneratingStation Document E16-1455-006, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis AppendixF, Page 11 of 12 TABLE F-2 OYSTER CREEK STN DESIGNATIONS AND ASSOCIATED UNIT COST FACTORS (continued)

I

,, I AREA AREA DESCRIPTION UCF SET Turbine Building System Components (continued)

TE2 SPARE EXCITER GENERAL ALL AREAS TEE 4160 VOLT ROOM TEG RCA EXIT TF2 FEED PUMP ROOM GENERAL ALL AREAS TFG OFF GAS SAMPLE AREA TG2 , CONDENSATE PUMP PIT TH2 HEATER BAY AREA TKA TB EAST AND WEST PASSAGEWAY TL2 HI-LO CONDUCTIVITY ROOM TMA MECHANICAL VACUUM PUMP ROOM TN2 TB BASEMENT NORTH T02 OPERATING FLOOR TOA HEATER BAY ROOF TOCRIDCA TURBINE BUILDING CONTROL ROOM TOR TURBINE BYPASS VALVE AREA TOV CONTAMINATED INSTRUMENT SHOP EL.55-4 TOW EL.46-6 WEST ROOF AREA TOX TURBINE RAGEMS II BUILDING TOY TURBINE REPAIR OFFICE TP2 CONDENSATE DEMINERALIZER AREA TP3 CONDENSATE DEMINERALIZER TANK ROOM TPE REGEN TANK ROOM ENTRANCE AREA TS2 STEAM JET AIR EJECTOR ROOM TTA TRUNNION ROOM GENERAL ALL AREAS TU2 TB NORTH MEZZANINE Augmented Offgas SVstem Components AY8 AOG NORTH ACCESS AREA (AYFOGZI) 3 AYA RECOMBINER ROOM 'A' 3 AYB RECOMBINER ROOM 'B' 3 AYC CHARCOAL ADSORBER ROOM 3 AYE AOG PIPE TUNNEL & SUMP AREA 4 AZ8 REFRIGERATION EQOT AREA ALL AREAS 3 AZA HEPA FILTER ROOM 'A' 3 AZC AOG CONTROL ROOM AREA 3 AZD WATER REMOVAL TRAIN #1 ROOM 3 AZE WATER REMOVAL TRAIN #2 ROOM 3 AZF WATER REMOVAL TRAIN #3 ROOM 3 TLG Services, Inc.

Oyster Creek Nuclear GeneratingStation Document E16-1455.006,.Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Appendix F, Page 12 of 12 TABLE F-2 OYSTER CREEK STN DESIGNATIONS AND ASSOCIATED UNIT COST FACTORS (continued)

AREA AREA DESCRIPTION UCF SET Augmented Offcas System Components (continued)

AZI AOG BUILDING HVAC ROOM 3 Miscellaneous System Components BAA BOILER HOUSE ALL AREAS 3 BBA STACK ALL AREAS #3 BDA RAGEMS I BUILDING 3 CAA CONDENSATE STORAGE TANK 3 DAA CHEMISTRY LA GENERAL ALL AREAS 3 DAC CABLE SPREADING ROOM EL.36-0 3 DGB DIESEL GENERATOR #1 & #2 W/ STORAGE TANK 1 DOT. DIRTY OIL TANK 1 DPH14-6 DILUTION PUMP HOUSE 1 DPH6-0 DILUTION PUMP HOUSE 1 DWF DOMESTIC WATER FACILITY 1 FWP FRESH WATER PUMP HOUSE 1 GAA NORTH GUARD HOUSE AND PARKING LOT 1 GCA MAIN GATE SECURITY BUILDING AND PARKING LOT 1 MAA NMB ;HOT MACHINE SHOP 3 MBA NMB RWP OFFICE 2 MBS NMB HOT TOOL ROOM 2 MBT RESP MAINT FACILITY 2 MS23-6 MACHINE SHOP 1 MS34-6 HEALTH PHYSICS STORAGE AREA 1 MSROOF MACHINE SHOP ROOF 1 NMBROOF HOT MACHINE SHOP ROOF AREA 1 OB35-0 OFFICE BUILDING A/B BATTERY ROOM 1 OB46-6 OFFICE BUILDING 1 OBROOF OFFICE BUILDING ROOF 1 PTB23-6 PRETREATMENT BLDG 1 RSF'ROOF SERVICE HEAD ROOF 2 WAA LLRWSF 2 WHS CONTROL ROOM 1 YDA DRYWELL PROCESSING FACILITY 2 YFA YARD LAUNDRY TRAILER 2 YLA YARD RADWASTE SHIPPING CENTER 2 INTAKE STR INTAKE STRUCTURE 1 UYARD YARD 2 YARD AREAS YARD AREAS 1 TLG Services, Inc.

Oyster Creek Nuclear GeneratingStation Document E16-1455.006, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Appendix G, Page 1 of 12 APPENDIX G I WORK AREA DESIGNATION GPU SURVEY TRACKING NUMBER (STN) INDEX TLG Services, Inc.

Oyster Creek Nuclear GeneratingStation Document E16-1455-006,.Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Appendix G, Page 2 of 12 GPU STN INDEX INDEX REACTOR BUILDING RAA .RX BLDG.-GENERAL ALL AREAS BELOW 23' ELEVATION RB I -19' ELEVATION TORUS ROOM-GENERAL ALL AREAS RBB CONTAINMENT SPRAY PUMP ROOM NE (1-1 & 1-2) AND 1-6 SUMP RBC CONTAINMENT SPRAY PUMP ROOM SE (1-3 & 1-4) AND 1-7 SUMP RBE CONTROL ROD DRIVE (CRD) SYSTEM PUMP ROOM (RK-04) AND "A" & -C" CORE SPRAY PUMPS RBF RX BLDG. EQUIPMENT DRAIN TANK (RBEDT)

ROOM AND "B" & "D" CORE SPRAY PUMPS RBO INSIDE TORUS-GENERAL ALL AREAS RBS TOP OF TORUS-GENERAL ALL AREAS 23' ELEVATION RCT 23' ELEVATION-GENERAL ALL AREAS RCI SE AIRLOCK AND STAIRS RC2 ELEVATOR PIT RCS RX BLDG. TRUCK (RAILROAD) BAY AIRLOCK RC6 DRYWELL LABYRINTH & FRONT OF DRYWELL SHIELD DOORS RCA NORTH SCRAM DISCHARGE VOLUME(TORUS ACCESS/NORTH WEST CORNER RCB LAB DRAIN TANK/LAUNDRY (NV-36) DRAIN TANK & PUMP (NV40)

RCD NORTH BANK CRD ACCUMULATORS (HUC'S)

& NORTH WEST ACCESS RCG NORTH CONTAINMENT SPRAY HEAT EXCHANGERS (1-1 & 1-2)

RCJ CONTROL ROD DRIVE (CRD) SYSTEM FILTER

& VALVING AREA TLG Services, Inc.

Oyster Creek NuclearGeneratingStation Document E16-1455-006,.Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Appendix G, Page 3 of 12 GPU STN INDEX (Continued)

INDEX REACTOR BUILDING 23' ELEVATION - CONTINUED RCM SOUTH CONTAINMENT SPRAY HEAT EXCHANGERS (1-3 & 1-4) & FRONT OF TRUCK (RAILROAD) BAY AIRLOCK RCN SOUTH BANK OF CRD ACCUMULATORS (HCU'S)

RCS SOUTH SCRAM DISCHARGE VOLUME AREA/

CORE SPRAY BOOSTER PUMPS /TORUS VACUUM BREAKERS 38' ELEVATION RDM TIP SYSTEM AREA-GENERAL RD8 SHUTDOWN COOLING PUMP ROOM-GENERAL 51' ELEVATION REY 51' ELEVATION-GENERAL ALL AREAS REC INSTRUMENT RACK RK-03 AREA & CORE SPRAY BOOSTER PUMPS REF SHUTDOWN COOLING HEAT EXCHANGER ROOM REH QA/QC STORAGE AREA & NITROGEN COMPRESSOR AREA REI TOOL CRIB & LAYDOWN AREA REL RX BLDG. CLOSED COOLING WATER (RBCCW)

HEAT EXCHANGER & PUMP AREA REM SOUTH EAST ACCESS AREA REO CLEANUP SYSTEM HEAT EXCHANGER ROOM REQ CLEANUP SYSTEM PUMP AREA RER CLEANUP SYSTEM VALVE NEST RET CLEANUP FILTER SLUDGE TANK ROOM AND HALLWAY REV AREA OVER STEAM TUNNEL REW RK-01 INSTRUMENT RACK REX RK-02 INSTRUMENT RACK TLG Services, Inc.

Oyster Creek Nuclear GeneratingStation Document E16-1455-006, Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Appendix G, Page 4 of 12 GPU STN INDEX (Continued)

INDEX REACTOR BUILDING - CONTINUED 75' ELEVATION RFB SE GENERAL AREA (CLEANUP SURGE TANK IN OVERHEAD)

RFC CLEANUP VALVE AISLE & CONTROL AREA RFF CLEANUP SYSTEM FILTER TANK/RK-05 INSTRUMENT RACK/TANK AREA RFH OLD FUEL POOL HEAT EXCHANGER & PUMP AREA RFJ AUGMENTED (NEW) SPENT FUEL POOL HEAT EXCHANGER & PUMP AREA, RFL CONTROL ROD DRIVE (CRD) REBUILD ROOM/

WASH TANK AREA RFN EMERGENCY CONDENSER VALVE (OVERHEAD)

AREAICRD STORAGE & STAGING AREA RFQ 75' ELEVATION-GENERAL ALL AREAS REW RK-0 1 INSTRUMENT RACK-SEE 5 ' RX BLDG. MAP 95' ELEVATION RGA LICENSED SOURCE STORAGE CAGE RGC NE ACCESS AREA/REACTOR BLDG. CLOSED COOLING WATER (RBCCW) SURGE TANK RGD "A" & "B" EMERGENCY CONDENSER AREA RGF RECIRC SEAL REBUILD ROOM RGI SOUTH EAST AREA RGL SOUTH WEST AREA RGP CLEANUP DEMINERALIZER VAULT RGR LIQUID POISON TO NORTH CORRIDOR RGU 95' ELEVATION-GENERAL ALL AREAS 119' ELEVATION RHI NORTH FLOOR AREA/SKIMMER SURGE TANK/

OBSERVATION TOWER RH2 WEST FLOOR AREA RH3 119' ELEVATION-GENERAL ALL AREAS TLG Services, Inc.

Oyster Creek Nuclear GeneratingStation Document E16-1455-006,.Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Appendix G, Page 5 of 12 GPU STN INDEX (Continued)

INDEX REACTOR BUILDING 119' ELEVATION - CONTINUED RH4 RX BLDG. CRANE RH5 RX BLDG. ROOF RH6 ELEVATOR CONTROL/EQUIPMENT LANDING AREA RHA REACTOR CAVITY RHB SPENT FUEL POOL RHC NEW FUEL STORAGE RHD EQUIPMENT STORAGE POOL (ESP)

RHJ CASK WASHDOWN/DECONTAMINATION/

NORTH EAST FLOOR AREA RHX - SOUTH FLOOR AREA..

RHY SOUTH EAST FLOOR AREA RHL REFUEL BRIDGE DRY WELL IGA DRYWELL-GENERAL ALL AREAS IAA 13' ELEVATION-ALL AREAS EXCEPT CRD ROOM IAC 13' ELEVATION - CRD ROOM IBA 23' ELEVATION IBB DRYWELL AIRLOCK ICA 46' ELEVATION IEA 82' ELEVATION RC6 DRYWELL LABYRINTH & FRONT OF DRYWELL SHIELD DOORS TURBINE BUILDING TAA TURBINE BLDG.-GENERAL ALL AREAS TB2 BASEMENT SOUTH-GENERAL ALL AREAS TC2 CONDENSER BAY-GENERAL ALL AREAS TE2 SPARE EXCITER AREA-GENERAL ALL AREAS TEE 4160 VOLT ROOM TEG RAD CON COUNT ROOMITURBINE BLDG. EXIT TF2 FEEDPUMP ROOM-GENERAL ALL AREAS TLG Services, Inc.

Oyster Creek Nuclear GeneratingStation Document E16-1455-006, Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Appendix G, Page 6 of 12 GPU STN INDEX (Continued)

INDEX TURBINE BUILDING - CONTINUED TFG OFF GAS SAMPLE AREA TG2 CONDENSATE PUMP PIT-GENERAL ALL AREAS TH2 HEATER BAY-GENERAL ALL AREAS TKA NE PASSAGEWAY & NE HALLWAY TL2 HI/LO CONDUCTIVITY ROOM-GENERAL ALL AREAS TMA MECHANICAL VACUUM PUMP ROOM TN2 BASEMENT NORTH-GENERAL ALL AREAS T02 TURBINE BLDG. OPERATING FLOOR (TBOF)-

GENERAL ALL AREAS TOW WEST & NORTH WEST ROOF AREA TOX TURBINE RAGEMS BUILDIN4G TOY TURBINE REPAIR OFFICE TOA HEATER BAY ROOF TOS TURBINE FLOOR TOOL ROOM

.TOV CONTAMINATED (HOT) I & C SHOP.

TOR BYPASS VALVE AREA BELOW TBOF TP2 CONDENSATE DEMINERALIZER CONTROL ROOM-ALL AREAS TP3 CONDENSATE DEMINERALIZER TANK ROOM-ALL AREAS TPE CONDENSATE DEMINERALIZER REGEN TANK ROOM-ALL AREAS TS2 STEAM JET AIR EJECTOR ROOM-ALL AREAS TrA TRUNNION ROOM-GENERAL ALL AREAS TU2 NORTH MEZZANINE-ALL AREAS NEW RAD WASTE N2G NEW RAD WASTE-GENERAL ALL AREAS N2P PENTHOUSE & ROOF 23' ELEVATION N38 23' ELEVATION-GENERAL ALL AREAS N3A TRUCK BAY & CATALYST/PROCESSING ROOM N3D FILL AISLE/LINER STORAGE & RB2 CONTROL PANEL

. TLG Services, Inc.

Oyster Creek Nuclear GeneratingStation Document E16-1455-006,.Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Appendix G, Page 7 of 12 GPU STN INDEX (Continued)

INDEX NEW RAD WASTE 23' ELEVATION - CONTINUED N31 #2 SUMP ROOM - DS-P-4A, DS-P-4B N3N SOUTH OPERATING GALLERYNVALVE AREA/

PIPE CHASE N3P HP-P-IA HIGH PURITY PUMP ROOM N3Q WC-P-IB WASTE CHEM PUMP ROOM N3R VALVE AREA WEST/WASTE CHEM VALVE AREA N3S WC-P-IA WASTE CHEM PUMP ROOM N3T #1 SUMP ROOM DS-P-3A, DS-P-3B N3U "A" EVAPORATOR N3W "B" EVAPORATOR N3Y NRW HEAT EXCHANGER BLDG.-GENERAL ALL AREAS 7EB 1-3 SUMP 38' ELEVATION N48 38' ELEVATION-GENERAL ALL AREAS N4A "A" HOLD-UP TANK/SL-T-3A ROOM (ACCESS FROM FILL AISLE)

N4B "B" HOLD-UP TANK/SL-T-3B ROOM (ACCESS FROM FILL AISLE)

N4D PIPEIVALVE GALLERY SOUTH & EAST N4E LARGE CONTAINER FILL SKID ROOM SL-Y-6 N4F CLW PROCESS VALVE AREA N4G CLW VALVING ROOM N4H SPENT RESIN TRANSFER PIPING ROOM N4K SPENT RESIN VALVE GALLERY N4L PIPE GALLERY WESTNVALVE AREA RESURGE REGEN 48' & 58' ELEVATIONS N5 I HP-D-IA DEMINERALIZER ROOM N52 HP-F-2A RESIN TRAP ROOM N53 HP-D-IB DEMINERALIZER ROOM N54 HP-F-2B RESIN TRAP ROOM N55 MEZZANINEIVALVING AREA-58'ELEVATION TLG Services, Inc.

Oyster Creek NuclearGeneratingStation Document E16-1455-006,.Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Appendix G, Page 8 of 12 GPU STN INDEX (Continued)

INDEX NEW RAD WASTE 48' & 58' ELEVATIONS - CONTINUED N56 48' ELEVATION-GENERAL ALL AREAS N5A "A" CONCENTRATED LIQUID WASTE TANK ROOM SL-T-IA I N5B -B" CONCENTRATED LIQUID WASTE TANK ROOM SL-T-IB N5C WC-F-IA CHEMICAL WASTE FILTER ROOM N5D HP-F-1A HIGH PURITY FILTER ROOM N5E WC-F-IB CHEMICAL WASTE FILTER ROOM N5F HP-F-lB HIGH PURITY FILTER ROOM N5G CONCENTRATED LIQUID WASTE PUMP S-P-IA ROOM NSH SL-T-IA/lB VALVE ALLEY N51 CONCENTRATED LIQUID WASTE PUMP S-P-1B ROOM N5J SAMPLE SINK AREA N5K NEUTRALIZATION FEED SKID AREA N5N ' LAUNDRY/DECON AREA N50 FILTER PRECOAT/BODY FEED ROOM N5P SL-T-2A SPENT RESIN TANK N5Q SL-.T-2B SPENT RESIN TANK N5R CONTROL ROOM (NEW RAD WASTE)

NSS HVAC ROOM N5T WC-T-IA CHEM WASTE/FLOOR DRAIN TANK NSU WC-T-1B CHEM WASTE/FLOOR DRAIN TANK N5V WC-T-IC CHEM WASTE/FLOOR DRAIN TANK N5W CRANE BAY/STORAGE LAYDOWN AREA N5X HP-T-1A HIGH PURITY TANK ROOM N5Y WC-D-IA DEMISTER ROOM

.N5Z WC-D-1B DEM]STER ROOM 7EB 1-3 SUMP TLG Services, Inc.

Oyster Creek Nuclear GeneratingStation Document E16-1455-006, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Appendix G, Page 9 of 12 GPU STN INDEX (Continued)

INDEX OLD RAD WASTE PAA OLD RAD WASTE-GENERAL ALL AREAS PBA SMALL PUMP ROOM - ALL AREAS PDA 35' & 45' ELEVATION-CENTRIFUGE & HOPPER ROOMS -ALL AREAS PMA OVERBOARD DISCHARGE MONITOR PRD KELLY BLDG. /NV-37 FUEL POOL FILTERS PRA ROOF-ALL AREAS PSB CONTROL ROOM (OLD RAD WASTE) & PRECOAT ROOM-ALL AREAS PTA COMPACTOR ROOM-ALL AREAS PTK NORTH ACCESS OPERATING AISLE PTP DRUM STORAGE & SCAFFOLD PLANNING-ALL AREAS PUA LARGE PUMP ROOM & MEZZANINE-ALL AREAS PUU TANK ROOM-ALL AREAS PVA NORTH ANNEX KELLY BLDG.

AUGMENTED OFF GAS (AOG) 23' ELEVATION AXA AOG -GENERAL ALL AREAS AY8 23' ELEVATION-GENERAL ALL AREAS AYA "A" RECOMBINER ROOM AYB "B" RECOMBINER ROOM AYC CHARCOAL ABSORBER ROOM AYE PIPE TUNNEL & SUMP AREA 38' ELEVATION AZ8 38' ELEVATION-GENERAL ALL AREAS AZA HEPA FILTER ROOM AZC CONTROL ROOM (AOG)

AZD #1 WATER REMOVAL TRAIN ROOM AZE #2 WATER REMOVAL TRAIN ROOM AZF #3 WATER REMOVAL TRAIN ROOM TLG Services, Inc.

Oyster Creek NuclearGeneratingStation Document E16-1455-006,.Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Appendix G, Page 10 of 12 GPU STN INDEX (Continued)

INDEX AUGMENTED OFF GAS (AOGM 38' ELEVATION - CONTINUED AZH FLAME ARRESTOR ROOM AZI HVAC ROOM AZJ 38' STAIRWELL & LANDING AREA YARD YAA YARD-GENERAL ALL AREAS YDA DRYWELL (DW) PROCESS FACIUTY &

BRIEF AREA YFA LAUNDRY TRAILERS YHA RCTIGATE 20 TRAILER YKA SCAFFOLD STORAGE SHED YLA SHIPPING SURVEYS BAA BOILER HOUSE-ALL AREAS BBA STACK - ALL AREAS BCA STACK PAD - ALL AREAS BDA RAGEMS BUILDING-GENERAL ALL AREAS PPA NRW PUMP HOUSE - ALL AREAS UAB ORW OUTSIDE TANK MOAT AREA (HP-T-2A/2B

& WC-T-3A/3B)

UAS ORW SURGE TANK NV-04 & PUMP AREA 7BA 1-12 SUMP AREA - GENERAL ALL AREAS 7CA TURBINE & RX BLDG. TUNNELS-GENERAL ALL AREAS 7DA ORW TUNNEL-GENERAL ALL AREAS 7EB NRW TUNNEL-GENERAL ALL AREAS & 1-3 SUMP 7FA HEPA FILTER ROOM UNDER ORW 7EB NRW 1-3 SUMP CONDENSATE TRANSFER/TORUS WATER STORAGE CAA CONDENSATE WATER STORAGE TANK/

TORUS WATER STORAGE TANK (TWST) -

GENERAL ALL AREAS TLG Services, Inc.

Oyster Creek Nuclear GeneratingStation Document E16-1455-006,Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Appendix G, Page 11 of 12 GPU STN INDEX (Continued)

INDEX CONDENSATE TRANSFER/TORUS WATER STORAGE - CONTINUED CBA CONDENSATE TRANSFER PUMP HOUSE -

GENERAL ALL AREAS MAC/NEW MAINTENANCE BUILDING MAA HOT MACHINE SHOP MAB CLEAN TOOL ROOM MBA RWP OFFICE/MAC MBS HOT TOOL ROOM MBT RESPIRATOR MAINTENANCE FACILITY MGG NEW MAINTENANCE BLDG.-GENERAL ALL AREAS LOW LEVEL RAD WASTE WAA LOW LEVEL RAD WASTE STORAGE FACILITY MAIN OFFICE/SERVICE BUILDING DAA CHEM LAB/PASS ROOM DBA 480 VOLT ROOM DCA CONTROL ROOM DDA THIRD FLOOR M&C/EXIT DEA MAIN OFFICE BLDG. ROOF DFA OLD CABLE SPREADING ROOM DQQ BATTERY ROOM/MG SET ROOM/

NEW CABLE SPREADING ROOM/OPS COORDINATION OFFICE/OFFICE BLDG.J SERVICE BLDG.-GENERAL ALL AREAS MISCELLANEOUS GAA NORTH GATE GUARD HOUSE & NORTH PARKING LOT TLG Services, Inc.

Oyster Creek NuclearGeneratingStation Document E16-1455-006,.Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Appendix G, Page 12 of 12 GPU STN INDEX (Continued)

INDEX MISCELLANEOUS - CONTINUED GCA MAIN GATE GUARD HOUSE & MAIN PARKING LOT XEA AUXILIARY OFFICE BUILDING (AOB)

RAD CON & SAFETY XFA BLDG. 3 - STATION SERVICES (SSY INSTRUMENT & CALIBRATION (I&C) SHOP/

FIRE PROTECTION DEPT.-NOT INCLUDING COUNTROOM/TURBINEBLDG. EXIT)

XGA SITE EMERGENCY BUILDING (SEB)

XIA TOOL CALIBRATION TRAILER (OLD SS TRAILER)

XJA REFUEL CAFE XLA MAINTENANCE FAB SHOPS XMA WAREHOUSE YCA AUXILIARY OFFICE BLDG. (AOB) CHEMISTRY LAB YJA BLDG. 4/MECHANICAL WELDING SHOP YSA RADIAC TRAILER ZFA CONTRACTOR TRAILERS90-105 @ NORTH GATE ZHA TRAILER 300 COMPLEX @ NORTH GATE ZJA FORKED RIVER SITE QQQ MISCELLANEOUS - GENERAL ALL AREAS TLG Services, Inc.