ML091170630

Rev. 0 to E16-1555-011, Decommissioning Cost Analysis for Three Mile Island, Unit 1.

ML091170630
Person / Time
Site:	Three Mile Island
Issue date:	02/11/2009
From:	TLG Services
To:	Exelon Generation Co, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
Download: ML091170630 (184)

Text

Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 DECOMMISSIONING COST ANALYSIS for THREE MILE ISLAND, UNIT 1 preparedfor Exelon Generation Company LLC prepared by TLG Services, Inc.

Bridgewater, Connecticut February 2009

Three Mile Island, Unit 1 Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 DecommissioningCostAnalysis Pageii of xix APPROVALS Project Manager William A. Cloutier, Jr. Date Project Engineer J/dfin A. Carlson Date Technical Manager Frano . Date Quality Assurance Manager (acting) Jo ph J. l&Ier Date TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile Island, Unit I Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Page iii of xix TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION PAGE EXECUTIVE

SUMMARY

................................... . vii-xix

1. IN TRODUCTION .................................................................................................. 1-1 1.1 Objectives of Study ......................................... 11 1.2 Site D escription ......................................................................... ....................1-1 1.3 Regulatory Guidance 1-2 1.3.1 Nuclear W aste Policy Act 1-4 1-4........................

1.3.2 Low-Level Radioactive Waste Acts 1-6 1.3.3 Radiological Criteria for License Termination .................................... 1-7

2. DECOMMISSIONING ALTERNATIVES .................... .....2-1 2.1 D E C O N .............................................................................................................. 2-2 2.1.1 Period 1 - Preparations ......................................................................... 2-2 2.1.2 Period 2 - Decommissioning Operations............................................. 2-5 2.1.3 Period 3 - Site Restoration ............................... 2-8 2.1.4 ISFSI Operations and Decommissioning ............................................ 2-9 2.2 DELAYED DECON AND SAFSTOR............................ 2-9 2.2.1 Period 1 - Preparations ....................................................................... 2-10 2.2.2 Period 2 - D orm ancy ......................... ................. .... ...................... 2-11 2.2.3 Periods 3 and 4 - Delayed Decommissioning ......................... ........... I 2-12 2.2.4 Period 5 - Site Restoration .................................................................. 2-13

3. COST ESTIM ATE ................................................................................................ . 3-1 3.1 B asis of E stim ate .............................................................................................. 3-1 3.2 Methodology ......................- ....... . ..... 3-1 3.3 Impact of Decommissioning Multiple Reactor Units ................. 3-3 3.4 Financial Components of the Cost Model ............................. 3-4 3.4.1 Contingency ......................................... 3-4 3.4.2 Financial Risk ................................................................................ . 3-7 3.5 Site-Specific Considerations ................................... 3-8 3.5.1 Spent Fuel M anagem ent ....................................................................... 3-8 3.5.2 Reactor Vessel and Internal Components ................... 3-11 3.5.3 Primary System Components ................................. 3-12 3.5.4 Retired Components .... ......... . .............. 3-13 3.5.5 Main Turbine and Condenser ................................ 3-13 3.5.6 Transportation Methods ........... ...................... 3-14 TLG Services,.Inc.

Three Mile Island, Unit 1 Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Pageiv of xix TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued)

SECTION PAGE 3.5.7 Low-Level Radioactive Waste Disposal ............................................. 3-14 3.5.8 Site Conditions Following Decommissioning ................................... 3-16 3.6 Assum ptions .................................................................................................... 3-16 3.6.1 Estim ating Basis ................................................................................. 3-16 3.6.2 L abor C osts .......................................................................................... 3-17

• 3.6.3 D esign Conditions ................................................................................ 3-17 3.6.4 Gen eral ................................................................................................. 3-18 3.7 Cost Estimate Summary .................................... 3-20

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

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

6. R E SU LTS ..................................................................... I................................ ........... 6-1

7. REFEREN CES ......................... ................................. .......... ....................... 7-1 TABLES Summary of Decommissioning Cost *Elements, DECON ............... xvii Summary of Decommissioning Cost Elements, Delayed DECON........:.. xviii Summary of Decommissioning CostElements, SAFSTOR .............-.-............ xix 3.1 Schedule of Annual Expenditures, DECON . ................... .... 3-21 3.2 Schedule of Annual Expenditures, Delayed DECON ................................... 3-22 3.3 Schedule of Annual Expenditures, SAFSTOR ........... ......... .. 3-23 5.1 Decommissioning Waste Summary, DECON... .............. .. .... 5-3 5.2 Decommissioning Waste Summary, Delayed DECON ................. 54 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.

Three Mile Island,Unit 1 Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Page v of xix TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued)

SECTION PAGE FIGURES 4.1 DECON Activity Schedule............................................................................... 4-3 4.2 Decommissioning Timeline, DECON .............................................................. 4-6 4.3 Decommissioning Timeline, Delayed DECON ................................................ 4-7 4.4 Decommissioning Timeline, SAFSTOR .......................................................... 4-8 APPENDICES A. Unit Cost Factor Development ......................................................................... A-1 B. Unit Cost Factor Listing ................................................................................ B-1 C. Detailed Cost Analysis, DECON ....................................................................... C-1 D. Detailed Cost Analysis, Delayed DECON ....................................................... D-1 E. Detailed Cost Analysis, SAFSTOR .................................................................. E-1 F. Work Difficulty Factor Adjustments ................................................................ F-1 G. Area M aps .............................................................................................................. G -1 TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile Island,Unit 1 Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Page vi of xix REVISION LOG No CRA No z Date I Item Revised Reason for R6evison 0 02/11/2009 Original Issue TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile Island, Unit 1 Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Page vii of xix EXECUTIVE

SUMMARY

This report presents estimates of the cost to decommission Three Mile Island, Unit 1 (TMI-1) for the identified decommissioning scenarios following a scheduled cessation of operations. The analysis relies upon site-specific, technical information, developed in an evaluation in 2003-04,11 and 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 Exelon Generation Company LLC (Exelon) with sufficient information to assess its financial obligations as they pertain to the eventual decommissioning of the unit.

The primary goal of the decommissioning is the removal and disposal of the contaminated systems and structures so that the nuclear unit's operating license can be terminated. The analysis recognizes that spent fuel will be stored at the site in a, wet storage pool and/or in an independent spent fuel storage installation (ISFSI) until such time that it can be transferred to a Department of Energy (DOE) facility. Consequently, the estimates also include those costs to manage and subsequently decommission such 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 five and one half years for the spent fuel that resides in the fuel handling building's wet storage pool when operations cease. In the DECON and SAFSTOR scenarios, any residual fuel remaining in the pool after the cooling 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 Delayed DECON scenario and transferred directly from the pool to an off-site DOE facility). The estimates also include the dismantling of non-essential structures and limited restoration of the site.

TMI-1 shares the site with an adjacent and shutdown unit. This analysis, with the exception of site security services, does not consider any additional costs or savings that might be incurred or achieved in coordinating the decommissioning of the two units, in part, due to the unique decontamination and dismantling requirements for the shutdown unit.

1 "Decommissioning Cost Analysis for the Three Mile Island, Unit 1," Document No. E16-1455-005, Rev. 0, TLG Services, Inc., January 2004.

TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile Island, Unit I Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Page viii of xix 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 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."[31 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 *tie 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 entombedstructure is appropriately maintained and continued surveillance.

is carried out until the radioactive material decays to a -level permitting unrestricted release of the property."[5] As with the SAFSTOR alternative, decommissioning is currently required to be completed within 60 years.

The 60-year restriction has limited.' the practicality for the ENTOMB -..

alternative at commercial reactors that generate significant' amounts of long-lived radioactive material. In 1997, the 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 based upon several factors (e.g., no 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 Ibid. Page FR24022, Column 3 4 Ibid.

Ibid. Page FR24023, Column 2 TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile Island, Unit 1 Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Page ix of xix 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 concurred with the staffs recommendation.

In 1996 the NRC amended its decommissioning regulations 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 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 amendments 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 these regulations.

Decommissioning Scenarios TMI-1 appliedisfor currently scheduled to cease operations in 2014. The owner has, however, a 20-year license externsion.[7 ] As such, this analysis assumes that the unit will operate until 2034. The following scenarios were evaluated and are representative of the alternatives available to the owner:

1. DECON: In this scenario, an ISFSI is constructed on site to permit offloading of the spent fuel in the fuel storage facilities so as to facilitate decontamination and dismantling activities within the fuel-handling building. The unit is then promptly decommissioned as an integrated activity. Spent fuel storage operations continue at the site until the transfer of fuel' to the DOE is complete, assumed to be in the year 2048.

2. Delayed DECON: In the second scenario the unit is shutdown and prepared for an abbreviated period of storage prior to the actual start of field activities. The spent fuel discharged to the storage pool once operations cease remains in the pool until it.can be transferred to a DOE facility. Decommissioning is delayed until the transfer of the fuel to the DOE is completed (i.e., in the year 2048).

The unit is then decommissioned.

3. SAFSTOR: The unit is also placed into storage in the third scenario. However, decommissioning is deferred beyond the fuel storage period to the maximum U.S. Code of Federal Regulations, Title 10, Parts 2, 50, and 51, "Decommissioning of Nuclear Power Reactors," NRCI Federal Register Volume 61, (p 39278 et seq.), July 29, 1996 Application for license renewal received by the NRC on January 8, 2008 TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile Island, Unit 1 Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Pagex of xix extent possible; termination of the license would conclude within the maximum required 60-year period. An ISFSI is constructed on site to permit offloading of the spent fuel in the fuel storage facilities; spent fuel remaining in the spent fuel storage pool after a minimum cooling period is transferred to the ISFSI for interim storage. The unit remains in safe-storage after the fuel has been removed from site until decommissioning operations commence (timed to allow the process to be completed and license terminated within the required 60 year period). As with the first two scenarios, decommissioning activities are sequenced and integrated so as to minimize the total duration of the physical dismantling process.

Methodology The methodology used to develop the estimates described within this document follows the basic approach originally presented in the cost estimating guidelines [8]

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.

The estimates are area-based estimates, i.e., the plant inventory has been correlated with site-specific area working conditions, and the plant work activities organized into discrete areas to better reflect the manner in which the decommissioning will be conducted. The areas were determined on the basis of "common" conditions or attributes. Each area was evaluated for work difficulty, including affects of radiation, external surface contamination, and access. This evaluation was used to adjust the work difficulty factors for removing equipment in a given area. A data base was constructed and identified the installed equipment in each area. This data base contains a list of components that have a unique identifier, such as valves, tanks, electrical equipment, and heat exchangers. It also contains bulk commodities such as piping, ventilation ductwork, cable tray, electrical conduit, and supports.

The inventory was organized according to its proposed disposition. There were three primary waste streams identified for the TMI-1 inventory: (1) clean material (expected to meet the release criteria without any decontamination), (2) contaminated material with recovery potential or requiring additional processing for disposal (expected to be sent to an off-site waste processor), and (3) contaminated material designated for direct disposal at a controlled low-level 8 T.S. LaGuardia et al., "Guidelines for Producing Commercial Nuclear Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Estimates," AIFINESP-036, May 1986 TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile Island, Unit 1 Document El16-1555-011, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis. Page xi of xix radioactive waste disposal site (i.e., material expected to exceed waste processor acceptance criteria or uneconomical to process).

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.

Contingencv Consistent with standard cost estimating practice, contingencies are applied to the decontamination and dismantling costs 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."[ 9I 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.

Low-Level Radioactive Waste Disy~osal 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,[1101 and its 9 Project and Cost Engineers' Handbook, Second Edition, American Association of Cost Engineers, Marcel Dekker, Inc., New York, New York, p. 239

'0 "Low-Level Radioactive Waste Policy Act of 1980," Public Law 96-573, 1980 TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile Island, Unit 1 Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Pagexii of xix Amendments of 1985,[11] the states became ultimately responsible for the disposition of low-level radioactive waste generated within their own borders.

Until recently, there were two facilities available to Exelon for the disposal of low-level radioactive waste generated by TMI-1. As of July 1, 2008, however, the facility in Barnwell, South Carolina was closed to generators outside the Atlantic Compact (comprised of the states of Connecticut, New Jersey and South Carolina). This leaves the facility in Clive, Utah, operated by EnergySolutions, as the only available destination for low-level radioactive waste requiring controlled disposal.

EnergySolutions does not have a license to dispose of the more highly radioactive waste (Class B and C as defined by 10 CFR §61) generated in the decontamination and dismantling of the reactor vessel. In the interim (at least until new waste disposal options become available) and for purposes of this analysis, waste disposal costs for this material are based upon previously negotiated costs of disposal at the Barnwell site.

The dismantling of; the components residing closest to the reactor core generates radioactive waste considered unsuitable for shallow-land disposal (i.e., low-level radioactive waste with concentrations of radionuclides that 'exceed the. limits established by the NRC for Class C radioactive waste (GTCC)). The Low-Level Radioactive Waste Policy Amendments Act of 1985 assigned the federal government

the responsibility for the disposal of this material. The Act also stated that the beneficiaries of the activities resulting in the generation of such radioactive waste bear all reasonable costs of disposing of such waste. However, to date, the federal government has not identified a cost for disposing of GTCC or a schedule for "acceptance. As such, the GTCC radioactive waste in this study is assumed to be packaged and disposed of as high-level waste, at a cost equivalent to that envisioned

'for the spent fuel. The GTCC material is either stored with the spent fuel at the ISFSI or shipped directly to a DOE facility as it is generated (depending upon the timing of the decommissioning and whether the spent fuel has been removed from the site prior to the start of decommissioning).

A significant portion of the waste material generated during decommissioning may only be potentially contaminated by radioactive materials. This waste can be analyzed on site or shipped off site to licensed facilities for further analysis, for processing and/or for conditioning/recovery. Reduction in the volume of low-level radioactive waste requiring disposal in a licensed low-level radioactive waste disposal facility can be accomplished through a variety of methods, including analyses and surveys or decontamination to eliminate the portion of waste that does not require disposal as

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

Three Mile Island,Unit 1 Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Pagexiii of xix radioactive waste, compaction, incineration or metal melt. The estimates for TMI- 1 reflect the savings from waste recovery/volume reduction.

High-Level Radioactive Waste Management Congress passed the "Nuclear Waste Policy Act"[12] (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 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 and the successful resolution of pending litigation. The DOE submitted its license application to the NRC on June 3, 2008, seeking authorization to construct the repository at ýYucca Mountain, Nevada. The NRC formally docketed the DOE's license application on September 8, 2008, triggering a three-year deadline, with a possible one-year extension, set by Congress for the NRC to decide on whether. to authorize construction.

Construction, if adequately funded, could take five to six years after the DOE receives authorization to proceed. DOE expects that receipt of fuel could begin as early, as 2017,[131 although 2020 may be more likely according to the director of the DOE's waste program. [14]

12 "Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982 and Amendments," U.S. Department of Energy's Office of Civilian Radioactive Management, 1982 13 "DOE Announces Yucca Mountain LicenseApplication Schedule", U.S. Department of Energy's Office of Public Affairs, Press Release July 19, 2006 14 Statement of OCRWM Director Ward Sproat Edward F. Sproat, III, before the Subcommittee on Energy and Air Quality, Committee on Energy and Commerce, U.S. House of Representatives, July 15, 2008 TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile Island, Unit I Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Page xiv of xix Once the repository is operational, fuel acceptance will be prioritized and spent fuel assemblies will need to meet certain acceptance criteria, including heat output.

These conditions require that the fuel discharged upon the cessation of operations be actively cooled and stored for a minimum period at the generating site prior to transfer (a minimum of five years as defined in 10CFR§961 for standard fuel). As such, 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 10CFR§50.54(bb).[151 This funding requirement is fulfilled through inclusion of certain cost elements in the decommissioning estimates, for example, associated with the isolation and continued operation of the nuclear unit's spent fuel spent pool and/or ISFSI.

At shutdown, the wet storage pool is expected to contain freshly discharged assemblies (from the most recent refueling cycles) as well as the final reactor core.

In the DECON and SAFSTOR scenarios the assemblies are packaged into multipurpose canisters for transfer to the ISFSI. A five and one-half year cooling period following the cessation of operations is provided for the final core to meet the conditions for dry storage.

Once the wet storage pool is emptied, the fuel handling building can be either decontaminated and dismantled or prepared for long-term storage. The ISFSI, which can be operated under the station's general license, will be designed to accommodate the dry storage casks needed to off-load the wet storage pool. In the Delayed DECON scenario, the storage pool remains operational and used for the interim storage of the fuel. No dry storage capacity is assumed to be constructed for decommissioning. The transfer of spent fuel to DOE is performed from the storage pool.

The DOE's generator allocation/receipt schedules are based upon the oldest fuel receiving the highest priority. For purposes of this analysis, acceptance of commercial spent fuel by the DOE is assumed to begin in 2018. With a large fleet of reactors, Exelon is able to re-assign allocations between its units to minimize on-site storage costs. Assuming spent fuel from the older units is given priority and with a maximum rate of transfer of 3,000 metric tons of uranium (MTU) per year, the assemblies residing in the TMI-1 storage pool at the time of shutdown would be scheduled for pickup in the years 2046 through 2048 (assuming the cessation of operations in 2034). This equates to 62 multi-purpose canisters (at 32 assemblies per canister). An additional eight canisters are shipped from the site during plant operations, for a total of 70 canisters generated by TMI- 1 over its lifetime.

15 U.S. Code of Federal Regulations, Title 10, Part 50, "Domestic Licensing of Production and Utilization Facilities,"

Subpart 54 (bb), "Conditions of Licenses" TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile Island, Unit 1 Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis. Page xv of xix Exelon's strongly held position is that the DOE has a contractual obligation to accept TMI-l's fuel in a timely manner and consistent with its contract commitments. No assumption made in this study should be interpreted to be inconsistent with this claim. However, at this time, including the cost of storing spent fuel in this study is the most reasonable approach because it insures the availability of sufficient decommissioning funds at the end of the station's life if the DOE has not met its contractual obligation to take the fuel.

Site Restoration The efficient removal of the contaminated materials at the site will 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 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 siteis then graded and stabilized.

Summary The costs to decommission TMI-1 were evaluated for several decommissioning scenarios, incorporating the attributes of 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 components and structural materials, such that the facility operator may then have unrestricted use of the TMI-1 property with no further requirement for an operating license. Delayed decommissioning is initiated after. the spent fuel has been removed from the site and, as with SAFSTOR, 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.

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 TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile Island, Unit 1 Document E16-1555.011, Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Pagexvi of xix 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.

Three Mile Island, Unit 1 Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Pagexvii of xix

SUMMARY

OF DECOMMISSIONING COST ELEMENTS DECON (thousands of 2008 dollars)

Activity Total Decontamination 10,012 Removal 113,182 Packaging 13,132 Transportation 15,424 Waste Disposal 74,845 Off-site Waste Processing 9,150 Program Management [1] 314,235

.Spent Fuel Pool Isolation 10, 819 Spent Fuel Management 116,016 Insurance and Regulatory Fees 13,997 Energy 10,279 Characterization and Licensing Surveys J13726 Property Taxes 11,079 Miscellaneous Equipment 6,069 Site O&M 4,369 Total (21 736,331.

NRC License Termination 504,115_1 Spent Fuel Management .158,771 Site Restoration 73,445 .

[11 Includes engineering and security

[21Columns may not add due to rounding TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile Island, Unit 1 Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Page xviii of xix

SUMMARY

OF DECOMMISSIONING COST ELEMENTS DELAYED DECON (thousands of 2008 dollars)

Activity Total Decontamination 10,342 Removal 108,206 Packaging 10,250 Transportation 13,888 Waste Disposal 51,527 Off-site Waste Processing 12,650 Program Management [1] 372,473 Spent Fuel Pool Isolation 10,819 Spent Fuel Management 34,249 Insurance and Regulatory Fees 19,002 Energy 14,774 Characterization and Licensing Surveys 15,246 Property Taxes 16,365 Miscellaneous Equipment 10,611 Site O&M 6,107 Total [2] 706,507 NRC License Termination 477,208 Spent Fuel Management 153,263 Site Restoration 76,036

[1MIncludes engineering and security

[2] Columns may not add due to rounding TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile Island,Unit 1 Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Pagexix of xix

SUMMARY

OF DECOMMISSIONING COST ELEMENTS SAFSTOR (thousands of 2008 dollars)

Activity Total Decontamination 9,983 Removal 113,224 Packaging 9,518 Transportation 12,759 Waste Disposal 50,739 Off-site Waste Processing 12,721 Program Management [M] 439,485 Spent Fuel Pool Isolation 10,819 Spent Fuel Management 113,770 Insurance and Regulatory Fees 47,000 Energy 20,075 Characterization and Licensing Surveys 15,246 Property Taxes 49,300 Miscellaneous Equipment 23,920 Site O&M 17,818 Total [2] 946,378 NRC License Termination 692,814 Spent Fuel Management 177,582 Site Restoration 75,982 M'IIncludes engineering and security 121Columns may not add due to rounding TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile Island,Unit 1 Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis. Section 1, Page1 of 8

1. INTRODUCTION This report presents estimates of the cost to decommission the Three Mile Island, Unit 1 (TMI-1), for the scenarios described in Section 2, following a scheduled cessation of operations. The analysis relies upon site-specific, technical information, originally developed in an evaluation for the Exelon Generation Company LLC (Exelon) in 2003-04 [1] and updated to reflect current assumptions pertaining to the disposition of the nuclear unit and relevant industry experience in undertaking such projects. The current estimates are designed to provide Exelon with sufficient information to assess their 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 decommission TMI-1, to provide a sequence or schedule for the associated activities, and to develop waste stream projections from the decontamination and dismantling activities. The nuclear unit's operating license currently expires on April 19, 2014; however, this study assumes that the license will be renewed for an additional 20 years, with shutdown in 2034.

1.2 SITE DESCRIPTION TMI-1 is located on the northern-most section of Three Mile Island near the east shore of the Susquehanna River in Dauphin County, Pennsylvania. The station is comprised of two pressurized water reactors. This study specifically addresses the decommissioning requirements for Unit 1 and its associated facilities, i.e., no consideration have been given to the decommissioning requirements for the adjacent unit in the scheduling of dismantling activities.

TMI-1 was designed by Gilbert Associates and built by United Engineers &

Constructors, Inc. The nuclear steam supply system (NSSS) consists of a pressurized water reactor rated at a core thermal power level of 2568 MWth with a corresponding turbine-generator gross output of 871 MWe. The NSSS consists of the reactor with two independent primary coolant loops, each containing two reactor coolant pumps and a steam generator. An electrically heated pressurizer and connecting piping complete the system. The system is housed within a steel-lined, post-tensioned concrete structure in the shape of a right, vertical cylinder with a hemispherical dome and a flat, reinforced concrete basemat. A welded TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile Island, Unit 1 Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Section 1, Page2 of 8 steel liner plate, anchored to the inside face of containment, serves as a leak-tight membrane.

Heat produced in the reactor is converted to electrical energy by the turbine generator system. This system converts the thermal energy of the steam into mechanical shaft power and then into electrical energy. The turbine-generator is a tandem-compound design, consisting of one double-flow, high pressure turbine and three double-flow, low-pressure turbines driving a directly coupled generator at 1800 rpm. The turbine is operated in a closed feedwater cycle that condenses the steam; the heated feedwater is returned to the steam generators.. Heat rejected in the main condensers is removed by the condenser circulating and river water systems.

The condenser circulating water is cooled in two hyperbolic natural draft cooling towers located to the east of the station. The towers provide the heat sink required for removal of waste heat in the °power plant's, thermal cycle. Cooling tower blowdown is discharged to the Susquehanna River.

1.3 REGULATORY GUIDANCE The Nuclear Regulatory Commissione (NRC or Commission). provided initial decommissioning requirements -in: its rule "General Requirements for Decommissioning Nuclear Facilities," issued- in June 1988.[2]. This rule set forth financial criteria for decommissioning licensed nuclear, power facilities.

The regulation addressed decommissioning planning. needs, timing, funding,,.

methods, and environmental reviewrequirements. 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,[3]"' which provided additional guidance to the licensees of 'nuclear facilities on the financial methods acceptable to the NRC staff for complying with the requirements of the rule. The regulatory guide addressed the funding requirements and provided guidance on the content and form of the financial assurance mechanisms indicated in the rule.

The rule defined three decommissioning alternatives as being acceptable to the NRC: DECON, SAFSTOR, and ENTOMB. The DECON alternative assumes that any contaminated or activated portion of the systems, structures, and facilities are removed or decontaminated to levels that permit the, site to be "Annotated references for citations in Sections 1-6 are provided in Section 7.

TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile Island, Unit 1 Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Section 1, Page3 of 8 released for unrestricted use shortly after the cessation of 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.[41 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.[ 5] However, the NRC's staff has 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 concurred with the staffs recommendation.

The NRC published amendments to its decommissioning regulations in 1996.[61 When the regulations were originally 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 greater public participation and better define the transition process from operations to decommissioning.

TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile Island, Unit 1 Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Section 1, Page4 of 8 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 applications 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"[7] (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. 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 utility contracts. Delays continue and, as a result, generators have initiated legal action against the DOE in an attempt to resolve the impasse.[8 ]

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 and the successful resolution of pending litigation. The DOE submitted its license application to the NRC on June 3, 2008, seeking authorization to construct the repository at Yucca Mountain, Nevada. The NRC formally docketed the DOE's license application on September 8, 2008, triggering a three-year deadline, with a possible one-year extension, set by Congress for the NRC to decide on whether to authorize construction.

TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile Island,Unit I Document E16.1555-011, Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Section 1, Page5 of 8 Construction, if adequately funded, could take five to six years after the DOE receives authorization to proceed. DOE expects that receipt of fuel could begin as early as 2017,[1] although 2020 may be more likely according to the director of the DOE's waste program.110 1 Once the repository is operational, fuel acceptance will be prioritized and spent fuel assemblies will need to meet certain acceptance criteria, including heat output. These conditions require that the fuel discharged upon the cessation of operations be actively cooled and stored for a minimum period at the generating site prior to transfer (five years as defined in 10CFR§961 for standard fuel). As such, 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 10CFR§50.54(bb).["1' This funding requirement is fulfilled through inclusion of certain cost elements in the decommissioning estimate, for example, associated with the isolation and continued operation of the spent fuel pool and ISFSI.

At shutdown, the fuel storage pool is expected to contain freshly discharged assemblies (from the most recent refueling cycles) as well as the final reactor core. Over the next five and one half years the assemblies are packaged into multipurpose canisters for transfer to the ISFSI (DECON and SAFSTOR only). It is assumed that this period provides the necessary cooling for the final core to meet ISFSI cask design requirements for decay heat.

It is anticipated that Exelon will not need to construct an ISFSI at the site to support operations. In two of the scenarios evaluated, it is expected that an ISFSI will be constructed after final shutdown to support decommissioning operations. The ISFSI is built to accommodate the inventory of spent fuel residing in the wet storage pool at the conclusion of the required cooling period. Once emptied, the fuel handling 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 DOE's generator allocation/receipt schedules are based upon the oldest fuel receiving the highest priority. For purposes of this analysis, the acceptance of commercial spent fuel by the DOE is assumed to begin in 2018. Given this scenario and an anticipated rate of transfer, spent fuel is projected to remain at the TMI- 1 site for approximately fourteen years after the cessation of operations. Consequently, costs are included TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile Island, Unit 1 Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Section 1, Page 6 of 8 within the analysis for the continued operation of the storage pool and for the long-term caretaking of the spent fuel at the site until the year 2048.

Exelon's strongly held position is that the DOE has a contractual obligation to accept TMI-I's fuel in a timely manner and consistent with its contract commitments. No assumption made in this study should be interpreted to be inconsistent with this claim. However, at this time, including the cost of storing spent fuel in this study is the most reasonable approach because it insures the availability of sufficient decommissioning funds at the end of the station's life if, contrary to its contractual obligation, the DOE has not performed.

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. With the passage of the "Low-Level Radioactive Waste Policy Act" Ain 1980,[121 and its Amendments of 1985,[131 the states became ultimately responsible for the disposition of low-level radioactive waste generated within their own borders.

Until recently, there were two facilities available to Exelon for the disposal of low-level radioactive waste generated by TMI- 1. As of July 1, 2008, however,, the facility in Barnwell, South Carolina was closed to generators outside the Atlantic Compact (comprised of the states of Connecticut, New Jersey and South Carolina). This leaves the facility in Clive, Utah, operated by EnergySolutions, as the only available destination for low-level radioactive waste requiring controlled :disposal.

EnergySolutions does not have a license to dispose of the more highly radioactive waste (Class B and C as defined by 10 CFR §61) generated in the dismantling of the reactor vessel. In the interim (at least until new waste disposal options become available) and for purposes of this analysis, waste disposal costs for this material are based upon previously negotiated costs of disposal at the Barnwell site.

The dismantling of the components residing closest to the reactor core generates radioactive waste considered unsuitable for shallow-land disposal (i.e., low-level radioactive waste with concentrations of TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile Island, Unit 1 Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Section 1, Page 7 of 8 radionuclides that exceed the limits established by the NRC for Class C radioactive waste (GTCC)). The Low-Level Radioactive Waste Policy.

Amendments Act of 1985 assigned the federal government the responsibility for the disposal of this material. The Act also stated that the beneficiaries of the activities resulting in the generation of such radioactive waste bear all reasonable costs of disposing of such waste.

However, to date, the federal government has not identified a cost for disposing of GTCC or a schedule for acceptance. As such, the GTCC radioactive waste in this study is assumed to be packaged and disposed of as high-level waste, at a cost equivalent to that envisioned for the spent fuel. The GTCC material is either stored with the spent fuel at the ISFSI or shipped directly to a DOE facility as it is generated (depending upon the timing of the decommissioning and whether the spent fuel has been removed from the site prior to the start of decommissioni A significant portion of the waste material generated during.

decommissioning may only be potentially contaminated by. radioactive materials. This waste can be analyzed on site .or shipped off site to licensed facilities for further analysis, for . processing and/or for conditioning/recovery. Reduction hi tthevolume of low-level radioactive waste requiring disposal in a licensed low-level radioactive waste disposal facility can be accomplished through, a variety of methods, including analyses and surveys or decontamination to eliminate; the portion of waste that does. not require disposal as radioactive. waste, .

compaction, incineration or metal melt.- The estimates: for TMI'71 reflect. .:* i :.:t.

the savings from waste recovery/volume reduction.-

1.3.3 Radiological Criteria for License Termination.

In 1997, the NRC published Subpart E,: "Radiological .Criteria for....

License Termination,"[ 141 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 TMI-1 assume that the site will be remediated to a residual level consistent with the NRC-prescribed level.

It should be noted that the NRC and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) differ on the amount of residual radioactivity considered TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile Island, Unit 1 Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Section 1, Page 8 of 8 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 5]

An additional limit of 4 millirem per year, as defined in 40 CFR §141.16, is applied to drinking water.[16]

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)[17] 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 .ý..

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.

Three Mile Island,Unit 1 DocumentE16-1555-011, Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Section 2, Page 1 of 13

2. DECOMMISSIONING ALTERNATIVES Detailed cost estimates were developed to decommission TMI-1 for three variations of the approved decommissioning alternatives: DECON and SAFSTOR. Although the scenarios differ with respect to technique, process, cost, and schedule, they attain the same result: the ultimate release of the site for unrestricted use.

TMI-1 is currently scheduled to cease operations in 2014. The owner has, however, applied for a 20-year extension. As such, this analysis assumes that the unit will operate until 2034. The scenarios selected are representative of alternatives available to the owner and are defined as follows:

1. DECON: In this scenario, an ISFSI is constructed on site to permit offloading of the spent fuel in the fuel storage facilities so as to facilitate decontamination and dismantling activities within the fuel handling building. The unit is then promptly decommissioned as an integrated activity. Spent fuel storage operations continue at the site until the transfer of fuel to the DOE is complete, assumed to be in the year 2048.

2. Delayed DECON: In the second scenario the unit is shutdown and prepared for an abbreviated period of storage prior to the actual start of field activities. The spent fuel discharged to the storage pool once operations cease remains in the pool until it can be transferred to a DOE facility. Decommissioning is delayed until the transfer of the fuel to the DOE is completed (i.e., in the year 2048).

The unit is then decommissioned.

3. SAFSTOR: The unit is also placed into 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. An ISFSI is constructed on site to permit offloading of the spent fuel in the fuel storage facilities; spent fuel remaining in the spent fuel storage pool after a minimum cooling period is transferred to the ISFSI for interim storage. The unit remains in safe-storage after the fuel has been removed from site until decommissioning operations commence (timed to allow the process to be completed and license terminated within the required 60 year period). As with the first two scenarios, decommissioning activities are sequenced and integrated so as to minimize the total duration of the physical dismantling process.

The following sections describe the basic activities associated with each alternative.

Although detailed procedures for each activity identified are not provided, and the TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile Island, Unit I DocumentE16-1555-011, Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Section 2, Page2 of 13 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 nuclear unit and licensee from reactor operations (i.e., power production) to facilitate 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 decommissioning activities, or a combination of the two. The third phase pertains to the activities involved in license termination. The decommissioning estimates developed for TMI-1 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 operations, detailed preparations are undertaken to provide a smooth transition from operations to 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 TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile Island, Unit I Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Section 2, Page 3 of 13 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 NRC will make the document available to the public for comment in a local meeting 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 syst em. piping, and: 6ther large compdnents. .,

that are radioactive. The NRC includes theý 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 existinglicense.

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 TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile Island,Unit 1 Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Section 2, Page 4 of 13 defined in 10 CFR §20) for protection of personnel from exposure to radiation hazards. It will also address the continued protection of the health and safety of the public and the environment during the dismantling activity. Consequently, with the development of the PSDAR, activity specifications, cost-benefit and safety analyses, and work packages and procedures, would be assembled to support the proposed decontamination and dismantling activities.

Site Preparations Following final 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.

Construction of the ISFSI and transfer of the spent fuel from the wet storage pool to the ISFSI pad for interim storage. Spent fuel storage operations continue throughout the active' decommissioning period.

Fuel transfer to the DOE is expected to begin in 2046 and to be completed by the end of the year 2048.

Isolation of the spent fuel storage pool and fuel handling systems, such that decommissioning operations can commence on the balance of the plant. Decommissioning operations are scheduled around the fuel handling area to optimize the overall project schedule. The fuel is transferred to the ISFSI as it decays to the point that it meets the heat load criteria of the containers. Consequently, it is assumed that the fuel pool remains operational for five and one-half years following the cessation of operations.

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.

TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile Island, Unit 1 Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Section 2, Page 5 of 13 2.1.2 Period 2 - Decommissioning Operations This period includes the physical decommissioning activities associated with the removal and disposal of contaminated and activated components and structures, including the successful termination of the 10 CFR §50 operating license. Significant decommissioning activities in this phase include:

" Construction of temporary facilities and/or modification of existing facilities to support dismantling activities. This may include a centralized processing area to facilitate equipment removal and component preparations for off-site disposal.

• Reconfiguration and modification of site structures and facilities as needed to support decommissioning operations. This may include the upgrading of roads (on and off site) to facilitate hauling and transport. Modifications may be required to the containment structure to facilitate access of large/heavy equipment. Modifications may also be required to the refueling canal 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 (lease or purchase) of shipping canisters, cask liners, and industrial packages.

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

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

Removal of control rod drive housings and the head service structure from reactor vessel head. Segmentation of the vessel closure head.

• Removal and segmentation of the upper internals assemblies.

Segmentation will maximize the loading of the shielded transport casks, i.e., by weight and activity. The operations are conducted under water using remotely operated tooling and contamination controls.

• Disassembly and segmentation of the remaining reactor internals, including the core former and lower core support assembly. Some TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile Island, Unit 1 Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Section 2, Page 6 of 13 material is expected to exceed Class C disposal requirements. As such, the segments will be packaged in modified fuel storage canisters for geologic disposal.

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

" Removal of the activated portions of the concrete biological shield and accessible contaminated concrete surfaces. If dictated by the steam generator and pressurizer removal scenarios, those portions of the associated D-rings necessary for access and component extraction are removed.

" Removal of the steam generators and pressurizer for material recovery and controlled disposal. These components can serve as their own burial containers provided that all penetrations are properly sealed and the internal contaminants are stabilized, e.g.,

with grout. Steel shielding will be added, as necessary, to those external areas of the package to meet transportation limits and regulations.

At least two years prior to the anticipated date of license termination, an LTP is required. Submitted as a supplement to the Final Safety Analysis Report (FSAR) or its equivalent, the plan must include: a site characterization, description of the remaining dismantling activities, plans for site remediation, procedures for the final radiation survey, designation of the end use of the site, an updated cost estimate to complete the decommissioning, and any associated environmental concerns. The NRC will notice the receipt of the plan, make the plan available for public comment, and schedule a local meeting. 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 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.

Three Mile Island, Unit 1 Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Section 2, Page 7 of 13

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

a Surveys of the decontaminated areas of the containment structures.

• Removal of the contaminated equipment and material from the auxiliary and fuel 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.

• Removal of the remaining components, equipment, and services in support of the area release survey(s).

o 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. Thisý 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)."[18] This document incorporates' the statistical approaches to survey design and data interpretation used by the EPA. It also identifies commercially available instrumentation and procedures for conducting radiological surveys. Use of this guidance ensures that the surveys are conducted in a manner that provides a high degree of confidence that applicable NRC criteria are satisfied. Once the survey, is complete, the results are provided to the NRC in a format that can be verified. The NRC then reviews and evaluates the information, performs an independent confirmation of radiological site conditions, and makes a determination on final termination of the license.

TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile Island, Unit 1 Document E16.1555-011, Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Section 2, Page 8 of 13 The NRC will terminate the operating license when it determines that site remediation has been performed in accordance with the LTP, and

.that the terminal radiation survey and associated documentation demonstrate that the 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 and safe manner, blasting, coring, drilling, scarification (surface removal), and the other decontamination activities will substantially degrade power block structures including the reactor, and auxiliary 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 areas where historical records, when. .hvailable,6`: in'dicate the potenitial: -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 clealiy 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 vermininfestation 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 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 TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile Island,Unit I Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Section 2, Page 9 of 13 restored and the property 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 Decommissioning The ISFSI will continue to operate under a general 10 CFR §72 license in conjunction with the facility's §50 operating license. Assuming the DOE starts accepting fuel in 2018, transfer of spent fuel from TMI-1 is anticipated to begin in 2046 and continue through the year 2048.

At the conclusion of the spent fuel transfer process, the ISFS will be decommissioned. The Commission will terminate the license when it determines that the remediation of the ISFSI has been performed in accordance with an ISFSI license termination plan and that the final radiation survey and associated' documentation demonstrate that the facility is suitable for release. Once the requirements are satisfied, the NRC can terminate the license for the ISFSI.

The assumed design for the ISFSI is based, upon the use of a multi-purpose canister and a concrete module 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 DELAYED DECON AND SAFSTOR The NRC defines SAFSTOR as "the alternative in which the nuclear facility is placed and maintained in a condition that allows the nuclear facility to be safely stored and subsequently decontaminated. (deferred decontamination) to levels that permit release for unrestricted use." The facility is left intact (during the dormancy period), with structures maintained in a sound condition. Systems not required to operate in support of the spent fuel pool or site surveillance and security are drained, de-energized, and secured. Minimal TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile Island, Unit 1 Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Section 2, Page 10 of 13 cleaning/removal of loose contamination and/or fixation and sealing of remaining contamination are 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 methods 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. Decommissioning operations are assumed to begin once the transfer of the spent fuel 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 a nuclear unit in safe-storage includes, but is not limited to, the following activities:

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

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

TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile Island, Unit 1 Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Section 2, Page 11 of 13 e Disposing of contaminated filter elements and resin beds not required for processing wastes from layup activities for future operations.

• Draining of the reactor vessel, with the internals left in place and the vessel head secured.

• Draining and de-energizing non-essential, contaminated systems with decontamination as required for future maintenance and inspection.

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, posting warning signs where appropriate.

• Erecting physical barriers and/or securing allaccess 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 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 TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile Island, Unit 1 Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 Decommissioning CostAnalysis Section 2, Page 12 of 13 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 operations.

Security during the dormancy period is conducted primarily to prevent unauthorized entry and to protect the public from the consequences of their 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 in the Delayed DECON scenario.

After an optional period of storage (such that license terminations are accomplished within 60 years of final shutdown), it is required that the licensee submit applications to terminate the license, along with an LTP (described in Section 2.1.2), theiebyýinitiitiing the third phase.'

2.2.3 Periods 3 and 4 - Delayed Decommissioning Prior to the commencement of decommissioning operations, preparations are undertaken . to reactivate site services and prepare for decommissioning. Preparations include engineering and planning, a detailed site characterization, and the assembly of a decommissioning-management organization. Final planning for activities and the writing of activity specifications and detailed procedures are also initiated at this time.

Much of the work in developing a termination plan-is 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 located within the fuel handling building for decommissioning.,

Variations in the length of the dormancy period are expected to have little effect upon the quantities of radioactive wastes generated from TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile Island,Unit 1 Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Section 2, Page 13 of 13 system and structure removal operations. Given the levels of radioactivity and spectrum of radionuclides expected from fifty to sixty years of operation, no 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 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, 5 9Ni, and 63Ni. Therefore, the dismantling procedures described for the DECON alternative would still be employed during SAFSTOR scenario. Portions of the biological shield will still be radioactive due to the presence of activated trace elements with long half-lives (152 Eu and 15 4 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.

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 SAFSTOR scenario is consistent with that described for DECON, presuming the removal -of structures and site facilities to a nominal depth of three feet below grade and the limited restoration of the site.

TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile Island, Unit 1 Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 3, Page 1 of 24

3. COST ESTIMATE The cost estimates prepared for decommissioning TMI- 1 consider the unique features of the plant, including the NSSS, power generation systems, support services, site buildings, and ancillary facilities. The basis of the estimates, including the sources of information relied upon, the estimating methodology employed, site-specific considerations, and other pertinent assumptions, is described in this section.

3.1 BASIS OF ESTIMATE The current estimates are area-based estimates, i.e., the plant inventory has been correlated with site-specific area working conditions, and the plant work activities organized into discrete areas to better reflect the manner in which the decommissioning will take place. The areas were determined on the basis of "common" conditions or attributes. Each area was evaluated for work difficulty, including affects of radiation, external surface contamination, and access. This evaluation was used to adjust the work difficulty factors for removing equipment in a given area.

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,"[ 19 1 and the DOE "Decommissioning Handbook."[ 20] 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 then estimated with the item quantities (cubic yards and tons), developed from plant drawings and plant design information. A data base was constructed identifying the installed equipment in each designated work area. This data base contains a list of components that have a unique identifier, such as valves, tanks, electrical equipment, and heat exchangers. It also contains bulk commodities such as piping, ventilation ductwork, cable tray, electrical conduit, and supports. Data base categories were consistent with unit cost factors described previously. Assignment of the radiological status of the components into one of four categories (direct burial, off-site processing, off-site survey and release, or clean) was guided by the area postings. by health physics for the system involved, and the general area.

TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile Island, Unit 1 Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Section 3, Page2 of 24 Removal rates and material costs for the conventional disposition of components and structures relied upon information available in the industry 21 publication, "Building Construction Cost Data," published by R.S. Means.[ ]

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, Connecticut Yankee, and San Onofre-1 nuclear units have provided additional insight into the process, the regulatory aspects, and the technical challenges of decommissioning commercial nuclear units.

The inventory was also organized according to its proposed disposition. There were three primary waste streams identified for the TMI-1 inventory: (1) clean material (expected to meet the release criteria without any decontamination),

(2) contaminated material with recovery potential or requiring additional processing for disposal (expected to be sent to an off-site waste processor), and (3) contaminated material designated for direct disposal at a controlled low-level radioactive waste disposal site (i.e., material expected to exceed waste processor acceptance criteria or uneconomical to process).

The unit factor method provides a demonstrable basis for establishing reliable cost estimates. The detail provided in the unit factors, including activity duration, labor costs (by craft), and equipment and consumable costs, ensures that essential elements have not been omitted. Appendix A presents the detailed development of a typical unit factor. Appendix B provides the values contained within one set of factors developed for this analysis.

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 30%

• Respiratory Protection Factor 0% to 50%

• RadiationlALARA Factor 0% to 100%

• Protective Clothing Factor 0% to 30%

Work Break Factor 8.33%

TLG Services,Inc.

Three Mile Island, Unit I Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Section 3, Page3 of 24 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 Program 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 an overall duration for removal of components and piping from each work area could be calculated. Work area identification is based upon TLG's determination of work area size and location. An index of the work areas 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 IMPACT OF DECOMMISSIONING MULTIPLE REACTORUNITS TMI-1 shares the site with an adjacent and shutdown unit. This analysis, with the exception of site security services, does not consider any additional costs or savings that might be incurred or achieved in coordinating the decommissioning of the two units, in part, due to the unique decontamination and dismantling requirements for the shutdown unit.

Since the security program for the site is likely to be an integrated approach, the security guard force is assumed to be shared to varying degrees between the units, depending upon the level of activities at each TLG Services,Inc.

Three Mile Island, Unit 1 Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Section 3, Page4 of 24 unit. This reduces the security costs for the decommissioning estimates for both units on site.

The final radiological survey schedule is also affected by a two-unit decommissioning schedule. It is impractical to try to complete the final status survey of Unit 1 while Unit 2 still has ongoing radiological remediation work and waste handling in progress. As such, it is assumed that the decommissioning operations at Unit 2 will be completed prior to the start of the license termination survey for Unit 1, i.e., the license termination surveys for both units will run concurrently. No cost impact of this coordination is included in this estimate.

3.4 FINANCIAL COMPONENTS OF THE COST MODEL TLG's proprietary decommissioning *cost model, DECCER, produces a number of distinct cost elements. These direct expenditures, however, do not comprise the total cost to accomplish the project goal, i.e., license termination and site restoration.

Inherent in any cost estimate that-does not, rely on ,historical data is the inability to specify the precise source 6f 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 orimpossible to develop analytically. Such costs are historically inevitable over the duration of a job of this magnitude; therefore, this cost analysis includes funds to cover these types of expenses.

3.4.1 Contingency The activity- and period-dependent costs, are combined to develop the total decommissioning cost. A contingency is then applied on a line-item basis, using one or more of the contingency types listed in the AIF/NESP-036 study. "Contingencies". are defined in the American 22 Association of Cost Engineers "Project and Cost Engineers': Handbook[ 1 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 TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile Island, Unit 1 Document E16.1555-011, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 3, Page 5 of 24 guidelines are provided for percentage contingency in each category. It should be noted that contingency, as used in this analysis, does not account for price escalation and inflation in the cost of decommissioning over the remaining operating life of the station.

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 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 m'itigate 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 TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile Island, Unit 1 Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0)

Decommissioning Cost Analysis, Section 3, Page 6 of 24 successful completion of the intended tasks and, potentially, subsequent related activities. For this study, TLG examined the major activity-related problems (decontamination, segmentation, equipment handling, packaging, transport, and waste disposal) that necessitate a contingency. Individual activity contingencies ranged from 10% to 75%,

depending on the degree of difficulty judged to be appropriate from TLG's actual decommissioning experience. The contingency values used in this study are as follows:

Decontamination 50%

Contaminated Component Removal 25%

Contaminated Component Packaging 10%

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 18.33%. Values for the other alternatives are delineated within the detailed cost tables in Appendices D and E.

TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile Island, Unit 1 Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Section 3, Page 7 of 24 3.4.2 Financial Risk In addition to the routine uncertainties addressed by contingency, another cost element that is sometimes necessary to consider when bounding decommissioning costs relates to uncertainty, or risk.

Examples can include changes in work scope, pricing, job performance, and other variations that could conceivably, but not necessarily, occur.

Consideration is sometimes necessary to generate a level of confidence in the estimate, within a range of probabilities. TLG considers these types of costs under the broad term "financial risk." Included within the category of financial risk are:

Transition activities and costs: ancillary expenses associated with eliminating 50% to 80% of the site labor force shortly after the cessation of 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 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, for example, in the start and rate of acceptance of spent fuel by the DOE).

Pricing changes for basic inputs, such as labor, energy, materials, and burial.

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 being too high is a low probability, and the chances that the estimate is too low is a higher probability. This cost study, however, does not add any additional TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile Island, Unit 1 Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Section 3, Page 8 of 24 cost to the estimate for financial risk since there is insufficient historical data from which to project future liabilities. Consequently, the areas of uncertainty or risk are revisited periodically and addressed through repeated revisions or updates of the base estimate.

3.5 SITE-SPECIFIC CONSIDERATIONS There are a number of site-specific considerations that affect the method for dismantling and removal of equipment from the site and the degree of restoration required. The cost impacts of the considerations identified below are included in this cost study.

3.5.1 Spent Fuel Management The cos to dispose of spent fuel generated from operations is not reflected within the estimates to decommission TMI-1. 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 mill/kWhr surcharge paid into the DOE's waste fund during operations. However, the NRC <requires lcensees 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 estimate, 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 2018. 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 the DECON and SAFSTOR scenarios, ýthe 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 2018, all fuel is projected to be removed from the TMI-1 site by the year 2048. In the Delayed DECON scenario, spent fuel off-loaded from the reactor after operations cease, remains in the pool during the transfer period.

TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile Island, Unit 1 Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Section 3, Page 9 of 24 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. For the DECON and SAFSTOR scenarios, the estimates include the cost to design, license and construct an ISFSI, and also 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. The DOE submitted its license application to the NRC on June 3, 2008, seeking authorization to construct the repository at Yucca Mountain, Nevada.

The NRC formally docketed the DOE's license application on September 8, 2008, triggering a three-year deadline, with a possible one-yeara.

on whether "to g rant extension, set by Congress for the NRC to decide construction authorization.

Construction, if adequately funded, could take five to six years after the DOE receives authorization to proceed. As such, the spent fuel management plan described in this section is predicated upon the DOE,,

initiating the pickup of commercial fuel in the year 2018.

Spent Fuel Management Model.,

The Exelon nuclear fleet 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.

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 ("oldestfuel first").[23]

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 TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile Island, Unit 1 Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Section 3, Page 10 of 24 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 24 year 4, and 3000 MTU/year for year 5 and beyond.[ 1 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. Spent fuel shipments are then made from decommissioning sites in the order of retirement.

Canister Desian The design and capacity of future cask acquisitions for the ISFSI is based upon the NUHOMS system, with a 32-fuel assembly capacity. A unit cost of $500,000 is used for pricing the internal multi-purpose canister (MPC), with. an additional cost of $250,000 for the concrete storage module. 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 $250,000 is used for the labor to load/transport the spent fuel from the pool to the ISFSI pad, based upon Exelon 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 $746,000 and $85,000 are used for operation and maintenance of the spent fuel pool and the ISFSI, respectively.

ISFSI Design Considerations A multi-purpose (storage and transport) dry shielded storage canister with, a horizontal, reinforced concrete storage module. is used as a basis for the cost analysis. The final core off load, equivalent to six modules, is 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). The steel support structure is assumed to be removed from these modules for controlled disposal. The cost of the disposition of this TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile Island, Unit 1 Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 3, Page 11 of 24 material, as well as the demolition of the ISFSJ facility, is included in the estimate.

3.5.2 Reactor Vessel and Internal Components The reactor pressure vessel and internal components are segmented for disposal in shielded, reusable transportation casks. Segmentation is performed in the refueling canal, where a turntable and remote cutter are installed. The vessel is segmented in place, using a mast-mounted cutter supported off the lower head and directed from a shielded work platform installed overhead in the reactor cavity. Transportation cask specifications and transportation regulations 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. [25] 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 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, 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, TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile Island,Unit 1 Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 DecommissioningCostAnalysis Section 3, Page 12 of 24 there were no man-made or natural terrain features between the 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 TMI-1 ceases operation. Future viability of this option will depend upon the ultimate location of the disposal site, as well as the disposal site licensee's ability to accept highly radioactive packages and effectively isolate them from the environment. Consequently, the study assumes the reactor vessel will require segmentation, as a bounding condition.

3.5.3 Primary System Components In the DECON scenario, the reactor coolant system components are assumed to be decontaminated using chemical agents prior to the start of cutting operations. This type of decontamination can be expected to have a significant ALARA impact, since in this scenario the removal work is done within the first few years of shutdown. A decontamination factor (average reduction) of 10 is assumed for the process. Disposal of the decontamination solution effluent is included within the estimate as a "process liquid waste" charge. In the Delayed DECON and SAFSTOR scenarios, radionuclide decay is expected to provide the same benefit and, therefore, a chemical decontamination is not included.

The following discussion deals with the removal and disposition of the steam generators, but the techniques involved are also applicable to other large components, such as heat exchangers, component coolers, and the pressurizer. The steam generators' size and weight, as well as, their location within the reactor building, will ultimately determine the removal strategy.

A trolley crane is set up for the removal of the generators. It can also be used to move portions of the steam generator cubicle walls and floor slabs from the reactor building to a location where they can be TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile Island,Unit 1 Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 3, Page 13 of 24 decontaminated and transported to the material handling area.

Interferences within the work area, such as grating, piping, and other components are removed to create sufficient. laydown space for processing these large components.

The generators are rigged for removal, disconnected from the surrounding piping and supports, and maneuvered into the open area where they are lowered onto a dolly. Each generator is rotated into the horizontal position for extraction from the containment and placed onto a multi-wheeled vehicle for transport to an on-site processing and storage area.

The generators are segmented on-site to facilitate transportation. Each unit is cut in half, across the tube sheet. The exposed ends are capped and sealed. The interior volume is filled with low-density cellular concrete for stabilization of the internal contamination. Each component is then loaded onto a rail car for transport to the disposal facility.

Reactor coolant piping is cut from the reactor vessel once the water level in the vessel (used for personnel shielding: dUring dismantling and cutting operations in and around the vessel) is dropped below the nozzle zone. The piping is boxed and transported by shielded van. The reactor coolant pumps and motors are lifted out intact, packaged, and transported for processing and/or disposal.

3.5A4 Retired Components The estimate includes the cost to dispose of two retired steam generators expected to be in storage at the site upon the cessation of plant operations. The components are processed for. disposal in the! same manner as described for the installed units.

3.5.5 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 TLG Services,Inc.

Three Mile Island, Unit 1 Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Section 3, Page 14 of 24 packaged and readied for transport in accordance with the intended disposition.

3.5.6 Transportation Methods Contaminated piping, components, and structural material other than the highly activated reactor vessel and internal components will qualify as LSA-I, II or III or Surface Contaminated Object, SCO-I or II, as described in Title 49J[261 The contaminated material will be packaged in Industrial Packages (IP-1, 2, or 3, as defined in subpart 173.411) for transport unless demonstrated to qualify as their own shipping containers. The reactor vessel and internal components are expected to be transported as Type B, in accordance with §71. 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.

Transportation costs for material requiring controlled disposal are based upon the mileage to the EnergySolutions facility in Clive, Utah.

Transportation costs for off-site waste processing are based upon the mileage to Memphis, Tennessee. Truck transport costs are estimated 271 using published tariffs from Tri-State Motor Transit.[

3.5.7 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 TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile Island, Unit 1 Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis, Section 3, Page 15 of 24 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.

The mass of radioactive waste generated during the various decommissioning activities is reported by line item in Appendices C, D and E, and summarized in Section 5. The Section 5 waste summaries a re consistent with 10 CFR §61 classifications. Commercially available steel containers are 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 waste volumes are, calculated on the exterior package dimensions for containerized material or a dimensional calculation for components serving as their own waste containers.

The more highly activated reactor components are transported in reusable, shielded truck casks with disposable liners. In calculating disposal costs, the burial fees are applied against the liner volume, with surcharges added for the special handling requirements and the radiological characteristics 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.

Disposal fees are based upon estimated charges, with surcharges added for the highly activated components, for example, generated in the segmentation of the reactor vessel. The cost to dispose of the majority of the material generated from the decontamination and dismantling activities is based upon the current cost for disposal at EnergySolutions' facility in Clive, Utah. Disposal costs for the higher activity waste (Class B and C) were based upon the last available rate schedule for the Barnwell facility (as a proxy).

Material exceeding Class C limits (limited to material closest to the reactor core and comprising less than 0.3% of the total waste volume) is generally not suitable for shallow-land disposal. This material is packaged in the same multipurpose canisters used for spent fuel storage/transport and designated for geologic disposal.

TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile Island,Unit 1 Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Section 3, Page 16 of 24 3.5.8 Site Conditions Following Decommissioning The NRC will terminate (or amend) the site license when 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 include an allowance for the remediation of radioactively contaminated soil. This assumption' may be affected by continued operations and/or future regulatory actions, such as the development of site-specific release criteria.

3.6 ASSUMPTIONS The following are the major assumptions made in the development of the 1 estimates for decommissioning the site.

3.6.1 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.

TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile Island,Unit I Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Section 3, Page 17 of 24 3.6.2 Labor Costs The craft labor required to decontaminate and dismantle the nuclear unit 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 Exelon or from comparable industry information.

Exelon 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 Exelo'n'...

3.6.3 Design Conditions Any fuel cladding failure that occurred dunng the 'lifetime* of thenuclear:

unit is assumed to have released fission- products at sufficiently low levels that the buildup of quantities of long-lived isotopes (e.g., 13 7Cs, 90Sr, or transuranics) has been, prevented:from reaching levels exceeding those that permit the major NSSS components§ to be shipped under current transportation regulations and dispsal requirements.

are The curie 'contents of the vessel .and -internals:at final shutdown derived from those listed ,in NUREG/CR-3474.[ 281 Actual estimates are derived from the curie/gram values' conitainedtherein and adjusted for the different, mass of the TMI!-components', projected operating: lifej, and different periods of decay. Additional short-lived isotopes. were derived from CR-0130[29I and CR-0672,[8 01 and benchmarked to the long-lived values from CR-3474..

The control elements are disposed of along with the spent fuel, i.e., there is no additional cost provided for their disposal.,

Activation of the containment building structure is confined to the biological shield. More extensive activation (at very low levels) of the interior structures within containment has been detected at several reactors and their owners have elected to dispose of the affected material at a controlled facility rather than reuse the material as fill on TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile Island, Unit I Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 3, Page18 of 24 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.

3.6.4 General Transition Activities Existing warehouses will be cleared of non-essential material and remain for use by Exelon and its subcontractors. The 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.

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

Processes operating waste inventories, i.e., the estimates do not address the disposition of any legacy wastes;- theý 7disposal of operating wastes during this initial period is not considered a decommissioning expense.

Scrap andSalvage The existing equipment is considered obsolete and suitable for scrap-as deadweight quantities only. Exelon will make economically reasonable efforts to salvage equipment following final 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 possible salvage 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 TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile Island,Unit 1 Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 3, Page 19 of24 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 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.

Enermy For estimating purposes, the nuclear unit 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 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." [311 NRC's financial protection requirements are based on various reactor (and spent fuel) configurations.

Taxes Property taxes are included for all decommissioning periods. Exelon provided a schedule of decreasing tax payments against the current tax assessment. These reductions continue until reaching a minimum TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile Island, Unit 1 Document E16.1555-011, Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Section 3, Page 20 of 24 property tax payment of $1 million per year; this level is maintained for the balance of the decommissioning program.

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.

3.7 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 2008 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 schedules discussed in Section 4.

TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile Island, Unit I Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 Decommissioning CostAnalysis Section 3, Page21 of 24 TABLE 3.1 SCHEDULE OF ANNUAL EXPENDITURES DECON (thousands, 2008 dollars)

Equipment &

Year Labor Materials Energy Burial Other Total 2034 36,680 7,793 1,180 30 18,174 63,856 2035 59,996. 19,871 2,502 17,398. 26,573 126,341 2036 58,355 30,741 1,598 32,927- 11,195 134,816 2037 47,731 15,893 1,307 .7,984 5,725 78,641 2038 45,953 13,385 1,258 3,763 4,802 69,161 2039 44,014 12,034 1,176 4,010 4,766 66,001 2040 31,512 .2,829 559 3,681 4,011 42,592 2041 26,536 8,479 237 14 2,467 37,733 2042 24,010 13,646 168 0 2,147 39,970 2043 11,421 5,271 85 0 2,183 18,960 2044 3,506 0 34. 0 2,211 5,751 2045 3,496 34 P0 0 -2,205-1 5,735 2046 4,000 1,509 . 34 0 2,205 '7'48 2047 4,359 2,588 34 0.ý 2,205 9,185 2048 4,367 3,003 34 0. 16,348 23,753 2049 1,395 2,665 41 54 1,933 6,089 407,333 139,708 10,279 : "69,862 109,150 736,331.

TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile Island, Unit I Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 DecommissioningCostAnalysis Section 3, Page22 of 24 TABLE 3.2 SCHEDULE OF ANNUAL EXPENDITURES DELAYED DECON (thousands, 2008 dollars)

Equipment &

Year Labor Materials Energy Burial Other Total 2034 29,979 665 1,180 30 2,662 34,517 2035 36,700 3,840 1,406 1,077 16,104 59,127 2036 8,345 296 336 29 2,976 11,982 2037 8,322 295 335 29 2,967. 11,949 2038 8,322 295 335 29 2,967 11,949 2039 8,322 295 335 29 2,967 11,949 2040 8,345 296 336 29 2,976 11,982 2041 8,322 295 335 29 2,967 11,949 2042 8,322 295 335 29 2,967 11,949 2043 8,322 295 335 29 2,967 11,949 2044 8,345 296 336 29 2,976 11,982 2045 8,322 295 335 29 1,949 12,967 2046 9,329 3,314 335 29 2,967 15,974 2047 23,496 5,972 1,007 32 2,984 33,492 2048 42,894 8,174 1,683 114 5,329 58,193 2049 49,556 20,494 1,593., 27,466, 21,321 120,431 2050 41,948 8,513 1,347 11,243- 8,753 71,803 2051 39,194 4,177, 1,258 .5,371 .4,203' 54,203 2052 37,317 3,602 1,087 4,377 3,831 50,214 2053 25,314 6,579 261 18 1,699 33,871 2054 21,023 13,553 168:, 0 1,099.. 35,843 2055 11,289 7,278 .90 0 590 19,247 451,330 89,116 14,774 50,044 101,243 706,507 TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile Islands, Unit 1 Document E16-1 555-011, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 3, Page 23 of 24 TABLE 3.3 SCHEDULE OF ANNUAL EXPENDITURES

ýSAFSTOR (thousands, 2008 dollars)

Equipment &

Year Labor Materials Energy Burial Other Total 2034 32,284 7,516 1,181 30 18,186 59,197 2035 40,359 13,532 1,405 1,077 22,665 79,038 2036 13,779 9,884 336 29 3,067 27,096 2037 13,741 9,857 335 29 3,059 27,022 2038 13,741 9,857 335 29 3,059 27,022 2039 12,521 8,519 312 29 2,935 24,315 2040 5,024 280 168 27 2,177 7,676 2041 5,010 279 168 27 2,171 7,655 2042 5,010 279 168 27 2,171 7,655 2043 5,010 279 168 2,171 7,655 27 2044 5,024 280 168 2,177 7,676 27 2045 5,010 279 168 2,171 7,655 27 2046 5,514 1,788 168 2,171 9,667 27 2047 5,873 2,867 168 2,171 11,105 27 2048 5,879 2,867 168 2,176 11,117 27 2049 2,191 274 168 1,823 4,481 26 2050 2,191 274 168 1,823 4,481

.26 2051 2,191 274 168 1,823 4,481 26 2052 2,197 275 168 1,828 4,494 26 2053 2,191 274 168 1,823 4,481 26 2054 2,191 274 168 1,823 4,481 26 2055 2,191 274 168 1,823 4,481 26 2056 2,197 275 168 1,828 4,494 26 2057 2,191 274 168 1,823 4,481 26 2058 2,191 274 168 .26 1,823 4,481 2059 2,191 274 168 1,823 4,481 26 2060 2,197 275 168 1,828 4,494 26 206.1 2,191 274 168 1,823 4,481 26 2062 2,191 274 168 1,823 4,481 26 2063 2,191 274 168 1,823 4,481 26 2064 2,197 275 168 1,828 4,494 26 2065 2,191 274 168 1,823 4,481 26 2066 2,191 274 168 1,823 4,481 26 2067 2,191 274 168 1,823 4,481 26 2068 2,197 275 168 1,828 4,494 TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile Island, Unit I Document El16-1555-011, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 3, Page 24 of 24 TABLE 3.3 (continued)

SCHEDULE OF ANNUAL EXPENDITURES SAFSTOR (thousands, 2008 dollars)

Equipment &

Year Labor Materials Energy Burial Other Total 2069 2,191 274 168 26 1,823 4,481 2070 2,191 274 168. 26 1,823 4,481 2071 2,191 274 168 26 1,823 4,481 2072 2,197 275 168 26 1,828 4,494 2073 2,191 274 168 26 1,823 4,481 2074 2,191 274 168 26 1,823 4,481 2075 2,191 274 168 26 1,823 .4,481 2076 2,197 275 168 26 1,828 4,494 2077 2,191 274 168 26 1,823 4,481 2078 2,191 274 168 26 1,823 4,481 2079 2,191 274 168 26 1,823 4,481 2080 2,197 275 168 26 1,828 4,494 2081 2,191 274 1.68 26 1,823 4,481 2082 2,191 274 168 26 1,823 4,481 2083 2,191 274 168 26 1,823 4,481 2084 2,197 275 168 26 1,828 4,494 2085 2,191 274 168 26 1,823 4,481 2086 2,191 274 168 26 1,823 4,481 2087 .2,191 274 168 26 1,823 .4,481 2088 21,633 874 1,057 32 1,858 25,454 2089 42,375 4,874 1,670 2,732 6,062 57,712 2.090 50,759 23,281 1,593 30,758 23,561 129,952 2091 39,359 4,175 1,258 5,213 4,612 54,616 2092 39,467 4,186 1,261 5,227 4,624 54,766 2093 34,520 2,772 841 2,871 3,485 44,489 2094 23,390 10,618 218 10 1,423 35,659 2095 21,149 14,683 168 0 1,127 37,126 2096 5,794 4,023 46 0 309 10,172 537,718 148,540 120,075 49,327 190,718 946,378 TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile Island, Unit 1 Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Section 4, Page 1 of 8

4. SCHEDULE ESTIMATE The schedules for the decommissioning scenarios considered in this study follow the sequence presented in the AIF/NESP-036 study, with minor changes to reflect recent experience and site-specific constraints. In addition, the scheduling has been revised to reflect the spent fuel management 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 others for convenience. The schedule was prepared using the "Microsoft Project 2003" computer software. [32]

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 delvelopment-of the DECON decommissioning schedule:,

• The fuel handling building is isolated until such time that all spent fuel has been discharged from the storage 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 DOE or 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.

• Multiple crews work parallel activities to the maximum extent possible, consistent with optimum efficiency, adequate access for cutting, removal TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile Island, Unit 1 Document E16.1555-011, Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Section 4, Page2 of 8 and laydown space, and with the stringent safety measures necessary during demolition of heavy components and structures.

For 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 TMI-1.

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 fuel handling building for final decontamination.',

Project timelines are provided in Figures 4.2 through 4.4; the milestone dates are based on this same shutdown date. The start of.decommissioning .activities in the Delayed Decommissioning scenario is concurrent, with the end ofl the fuel transfer activity (i.e., to an off-site.DOE facility)-...

TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile Island, Unit 1 Document E16-1555-011,Rev. 0 Section 4, Page 3 of 8 Decommissioning Cost Analysis FIGURE 4.1 DECON ACTIVITY SCHEDULE Task Name '33 r1m11 M~ '4 1liL

~ 4 '21'4 4 TMI Umt I DECON schedule Sudown Unit 1 S i!ii 1 I ..... .13..... CI ....... A I Perod *

,*t.Lsh*!*wn Period ia Umit 1 -shutdown through transition t*o~h * =..... ...... ...........

Certificate of permanent cessation of operations submitted Fuel storage pool operations Dry fuel storage operations Reconfigure plant Prepare activity specifications Perform site characterization PSDAR submitted Written certificate of permanent removal offuel submitted Site specific decommissioning cost estimate submitted DOC staff mobilized preparations Period lbUnit 1 - Decommissioning YE, Fuel storage pool operations U

Reconfigure plant (crntinued) U I,'

Dryifuel stoage operatons Prepare detiled work procedures U Decon NSSS U Isolate spent fuel pool U.

Unit I poo. Large component removal Fuel2astorage Period operations Dry fuel storage operations NSSS Removal -

Preparatin for r'eactor vssel removal U Reactor vese &internals -I Remaining ~ n large  !~ 11565 ...... m n d&opositiott

..*conownent,

...~~n

• .. o ...........

Turbine Building OOB

• :W ................

......TB$5-E .......

......... ...... . ............................ I TB-95-E ... . ... ............ .............. .. .... . .. . ... . ... . ........

U

........... . .... ..............i .

TB-%.W I

TB-322-E

• I:

TB-5-W II TB- WO * ~1 TB-ROOF TIO .RO...... . .. . ...... . .. . . ..................... . .. . ...... ....

I Turbine/Generator [

Condenser S

Intermediate Building IB-ROOF IB.955 U DI IB-SOS U

TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile Island,Unit 1 Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Section 4, Page 4 of 8 FIGURE 4.1 DECON ACTIVITY SCHEDULE

.(continued)

Task Name 1 'M21L'34 MI5 '38694 4 4 fl43 '44 Control Tower I OCA m Control Tower Crew Loading CNTL-TWR.285 CNTL-TWR-M I CNTL-TWR-22 I CNTL.TWR-338 CNTL.TWR-35 CNTL-TWR-380 CNTL.TWR-388 OCA Dry fuel storage operations Wet fuel storage oeations Period AbUnit 1- Decontamination (wet fuel) i i "

i i

• Auxiliary Building / CC & DG ABCQ 1 C ii S

AEB-281S2 2

AS-a 54 P.5-305-S I L iner Rein J & qraLing i

... c.* 5........ ...............

DO 305

....... .oBuilding, Reactor -, ___ , Service r.....

Building "rn -Y RB-INSIDE D-RING i-I RB-346 RB.808 H RB-21 2 Liner Removal &Scabbling SB-S05 STP S

PA-301 U INTAKE H Dry fuel storage operations Wet fuel storage operations

-'-1.. of,wet End -, -Ifuel ...

storage ........ .................. .............

I ..I..............

Period Sc Unit 1Fuei i* -Decontamination H Wet ................

Fuel Storage following.............

• ~ i&,*.... ..................... ....... '-9

2...........

Fuel Handling*i.......................

F~Building f .........................

FHE*2*1 C FHE-305 I TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile Island,Unit 1 Document E16.1555-011, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 4, Page 5 of 8 FIGURE 4.1 DECON ACTIVITY SCHEDULE (continued)

Task Name. M 134 1 9 1 9 T 1'38 1 % '40 '41 1 '42 1 '43 1 '44 FHB.3S9 FHB-343 .~

Liner remov~al &scabbling

-YARD

.Dry fu~el o...

storage........ s.

era........io.. .. .....

Period 2e Unit 1 -Plant license termination Dry fuel storage operations F.inal Site Scu*riVey NRC ereiew &appnr'ovl Pat50 license terminated Period AbUnit 1 Site Restoration Dry fuel storage operations Building- cemaliticos, .ck-fill and landscaping I W V TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile Island,Unit 1 Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Section 4, Page 6 of 8 FIGURE 4.2 DECOMMISSIONING TIMELINE DECON (not to scale)

DECON (Shutdown April 19, 2034)

ISFSI Operations Period 1 Period 3 Fuel Storage Transition and Period 2 Site Operations/

Preparations 1 Decommissioning'-.1 *" Restorati6n - Shipping 04/2034 10/2035 05/2041 05/2043 06/2049 Storage*Pool Empty 11/2039 TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile Island,Unit 1 Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 Decommissioning CostAnalysis Section 4, Page 7 of 8 FIGURE 4.3 DECOMMISSIONING TIMELINE DELAYED DECON (not to scale)

Delayed DECON (Shutdown April 19, 2034)

Wet Pool Operations Period 1 Period 3 Period 5 Period 2 Period 4 Site Dormancy Decommissioning 04/2034 10/2035. 07/2047 07/2053 07/2055 Storage Pool Empty 12/2048 TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile fsland, Unit 1 Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Section 4, Page8 of 8 FIGURE 4.4 DECOMMISSIONING TIMELINE SAFSTOR (not to scale)

SAFSTOR (Shutdown April 19, 2034)

ISFSI Operations Period 1 Period 2 Period 3 Period 4 Period 5 Transition and Dormancy Delayed Decommissioning Site 04/2034 10/2035 05/2088 11/2089 04/2094 04/2096 ISFSI Empty 12/2048 Storage Pool Empty 11/2039 TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile Island, Unit 1 DocumentE16-1555-011 Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Section 5, Page 1 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,[33] 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 as it pertains to packaging and transportation 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 Appendices 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.

TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile Island, Unit I Document E16-1555-011 Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Section 5, Page2 of 5 While the dose rates decrease with time, radionuclides such as 137Cs will still control the disposition requirements.

The waste material generated in the decontamination and dismantling of TMI-1 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.

Disposal fees are calculated using current disposal agreements, with surcharges added for the highly activated components, for example, generated in the segmentation of the reactor vessel. The cost to dispose of the majority of the material generated from the decontamination and dismantling activities is based upon the current disposal agreement with EnergySolutions for its facility in Clive, Utah.

Since EnergySolutions is not currently able to receive the more highly radioactive components generated in the decontamination and dismantling of the reactor, disposal costs for the Class B and C material were based upon the last published rate schedule for non-compact waste for. the Barnwell facility (as a proxy).

Additional surcharges were included for activity, dose rate, and/or handling added as appropriate for the particular package.

TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile Island,Unit 1 Document E16-1555-011 Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 5, Page 3 of 5 TABLE 5.1 DECOMMISSIONING WASTE

SUMMARY

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

Low-Level Radioactive Waste EnergySolutions (Clive, Utah)

Containerized A 159,619 16,279,712 Bulk A 57,110 3,891,428 Future Disposal Facility B 4,893 592,229 C

517 61,605 Geologic Repository (Greater-than Class C) 580 105,646 Total 2 222,718 20,930,620, Processed Waste (off-site) ,179,851. 7,477,298 Scrap Metal 142,360,000 1 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.

Three Mile Island, Unit 1 Document E16-1555-011 Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Section 5, Page4 of 5 TABLE 5.2 DECOMMISSIONING WASTE

SUMMARY

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

Low-Level Radioactive Waste EnergySolutions (Clive, Utah)

Containerized A 107,707 12,639,275 Bulk A 59,929 3,838,940 Future Disposal Facility B 2,629 337,226 C 517 61,605 Geologic Repository (Greater-than Class C) 580 105,646 Total 2 171,361 16,982,692 Processed Waste (off-site) 247,821 10,243,890 Scrap Metal 142,452,000 1 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.

Three Mile Island, Unit 1 Document E16-1555-011 Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 5, Page 5 of 5 TABLE 5.3 DECOMMISSIONING WASTE

SUMMARY

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

Low-Level Radioactive Waste EnergySolutions (Clive, Utah)

Containerized A 105,376 12,479,?70 Bulk A 76,527 4,303,350 Future Disposal Facility B 2,824 294,791 C 517 61,605 Geologic Repository (Greater-than Class C) 580 105,646 Total 2 185,823 17,244,662 Processed Waste (off-site) 248,328 10,300,150 Scrap Metal 142,452,000 1 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.

Three Mile Island,Unit 1 Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Section 6, Page I of 6

6. RESULTS The analysis to estimate the costs to decommission TMI-1 relied upon the site-specific, technical information developed for a previous analysis prepared in 2003-

04. While not an engineering study, the estimates provide Exelon with sufficient information to assess their financial obligations, as they pertain to the eventual decommissioning of the nuclear station.

The estimates described in this report are based on numerous fundamental assumptions, including regulatory requirements, project contingencies, low-level radioactive waste disposal practices, high-level radioactive waste management options, and site restoration requirements. The decommissioning scenarios assume continued operation of the spent fuel pool for a minimum of approximately five years following the cessation of operations for continued cooling of the assemblies.

For the DECON and SAFSTOR scenarios, an ISFSI is constructed and used to safeguard the spent fuel, once sufficiently cooled, 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) TMI-1 is estimated to be

$736.3 million. The majority of this cost (approximately 68.5%) is associated with the physical decontamination and dismantling of the nuclear unit so that the license can be terminated. Another 21.6% is associated with the management, interim storage, and eventual transfer of the spent fuel. The remaining 10.0% 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 Exelon 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 approximately five and one-half years following the cessation of operations. The TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile Island, Unit 1 Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Section 6, Page2 of 6 pool will be isolated and an independent spent fuel island created. This will allow decommissioning operations to proceed in and around the poolarea. Within the five and one-half year period, the spent fuel will be packaged into transportable steel canisters for loading into a DOE-provided transport cask (DECON and SAFSTOR alternatives). The canisters will be stored in concrete overpacks at the ISFSI until the DOE is able to receive them. Dry storage of the fuel 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 equipment and components, structural material, filters, resins and dry-active waste. As described in Section 5, disposal of the majority of the radioactive material is at EnergySolutions facility in Clive, Utah or some alternative facility. Highly activated components, requiring additional isolation from the environment, are packaged for geologic disposal. Disposal of these components is based upon a cost equivalent for spent fuel.

significant portion of the metallic wasted is:desigated 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.

as Removal costs reflect the labor-intensive nature of the decommissioning process, 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.

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 TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile Island, Unit I Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Section 6, Page 3 of 6 general expense, e.g., labor and fuel, of transporting material to the destinations identified in this report. For purposes of this analysis, material is primarily moved overland by truck.

Decontamination is used to reduce the 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 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 surface areas and surrounding environs, sampling, isotopic analysis, and documentation of the findings. The status of any 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 operations, certain administrative functions do need to be maintained either at a basic functional or regulatory level."

TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile Islandl, Unit 1 Document El16-1555-011, -Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 6, Page 4 of 6 TABLE 6.1

SUMMARY

OF DECOMMISSIONING COST ELEMENTS DECON (thousands of 2008 dollars)

Work Category Cost%

Decontamination 10,012 1.4%/

Removal 113,182 15.4%

Packaging 13,132 1.8%

Transportation 15,424 2.1%

Waste Disposal 74,845 10.2%

Off-site Waste Processing 9,150 1.2%

Program Management [1 314,235 42.7%

Spent Fuel Pool Isolation 10,819 1.5%

Spent Fuel Management 116,016 15.8%

Insurance and Regulatory Fees 13,997 1.9%

Energy 10,279 1.4%

Characterization and Licensing Surveys 13,726 1.9%

Property Taxes 11,079 1.5%

Miscellaneous Equipment 6,069 0.8%

Site O&M 4,369 0.6%

Total [21 736,331 100.0%

NRC License Termination 504,115 68.5%

Spent Fuel Management 158,771 .21.6%

Site Restoration 73,445 10.0%

['] Includes engineering and security

[21 Columns may not add due to rounding TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile Island, Unit 1 Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis. Section 6, Page 5 of 6 TABLE 6.2

SUMMARY

OF DECOMMISSIONING COST ELEMENTS DELAYED DECON (thousands of 2008 dollars)

Work Category Cost%

Decontamination 10,342 1.5%

Removal 108,206 15.3%

Packaging 10,250 1.5%

Transportation 13,888 2.0%

Waste Disposal 51,527' 7.3%

Off-site Waste Processing 12,650 1.8%

Program Management [R] 372,473 52.7%

Spent Fuel Pool Isolation 10,819 1.5%

Spent Fuel Management 34,249 4.8%

Insurance and Regulatory Fees 19,002 2.7%

Energy 14,1774 2.1%

Characterization and Licensing Surveys 15,246 2.2%

Property Taxes 16,365 2.3%

Miscellaneous Equipment 10,611 1.5%

Site O&M 6,107 0.9%

Total [2] 706,507 100.0%

NRC License Termination 477,208 67.5%

Spent Fuel Management 153,263 2 1.7%

Site Restoration 76,036 10.8%

[R] Includes engineering and security

[2] Columns may not add due to rounding TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile Island,Unit 1 Document E16-1555.011, Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Section 6, Page 6 of 6 TABLE 6.3

SUMMARY

OF DECOMMISSIONING COST ELEMENTS SAFSTOR (thousands of 2008 dollars)

Work Category Cost  %

Decontamination 9,983 1.1%

Removal 113,224 12.0%

Packaging 9,518 1.0%

Transportation 12,759 1.3%

Waste Disposal 50,739 5.4%

Off-site Waste Processing 12,721 1.3%

Program Management [1] 439,485 46.4%

Spent Fuel Pool Isolation 10,819 1.1%

Spent Fuel Management 113,770 12.0%

Insuranceand Regulatory Fees 47,000 5.0%

Energy 20,075 2.1%

Characterization and Licensing Surveys 15,246 1.6%

Property Taxes 49,300 5.2%

Miscellaneous Equipment 23,920 2.5%

Site O&M 17,818 1.9%

Total [2] 946,378 100.0%

NRC License Termination 692,814 73.2%

Spent Fuel Management 177,582 18.8%

Site Restoration 75,982 -8.0%

[1] Includes engineering and security

[2] Columns may not add due to rounding TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile Island,Unit I Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Section 7, Page 1 of 3

7. REFERENCES 1 "Decommissioning Cost Analysis for the Three Mile Island, Unit 1," Document No. E16-1455-006, Rev. 0, TLG Services, Inc., March 2004

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

3. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Regulatory Guide 1.1.59, "Assuring the Availability of Funds for Decommissioning Nuclear Reactors," October 2003

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

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

Register Volume 66, Number 200, October 16,2001.

6. U.S. Code of Federal Regulations, Title 1:0, Parts 2, 50 and 51, "Decommissioning of Nuclear Power Reactors,": Nuclear: Regulatory Commission, Federal Register Volume 61 (p 39278 et seq.), July 29, 1996

7. "Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982 and, Amendments," U.S.. Department of Energy's Office of Civilian Radioactive Management, 41982.

8. U.S. Court of Federal Claims awarded Yankee Atomic,, Connecticut Yankee and Maine Yankee damages over the federal government's failure to remove spent fuel from the sites in a September 2006 ruling

9. "DOE Announces Yucca Mountain License: Application Schedule", U.S.

Department of Energy's Office of Public Affairs, Press Release July 19, 2006

10. Statement of OCRWM Director Edward F. Sproat,:III, before the Subcommittee on Energy and Air Quality, Committee on Energy and Commerce, U.S. House of Representatives, July 15, 2008

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

Three Mile Island, Unit 1 Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 7, Page 2 of3

7. REFERENCES (continued)

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

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

14. 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

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

16. 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"

17. "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

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

NUREG-1575, Rev. 1, EPA 402-R-97-016, Rev. 1, DOE/EH-0624, Rev. 1, August 2000

19. T.S. LaGuardia et al., "Guidelines for Producing Commercial Nuclear Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Estimates," AIFINESP-036, May 1986

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

Department of Energy, DOE/EV/10128-1, November 1980 21 "Building Construction Cost Data 2008," Robert Snow Means Company, Inc.,

Kingston, Massachusetts

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

Three Mile Island, Unit 1 Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Section 7, Page3 of 3

7. REFERENCES (continued)

23. "Acceptance Priority Ranking & Annual Capacity Report," DOE/RW-0567, July 2004

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

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

25. "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

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

27. Tri-State Motor Transit Company, published tariffs, Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC), Docket No. MC-427719 Rules Tariff, March 2004, Radioactive Materials Tariff, January 2004

28. 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

29. 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

30. 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

31. "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

32. "Microsoft Project 2003," Microsoft Corporation, Redmond, WA, 2003

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

TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile Island, Unit 1 Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Appendix A, Page I of 4 APPENDIX A UNIT COST FACTOR DEVELOPMENT D

TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile Island,Unit 1 DocumentE16-1555-011, Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Appendix A, Page 2 of 4 APPENDIX A UNIT COST FACTOR DEVELOPMENT Example: Unit Factor for Removal of Contaminated Heat Exchanger < 3,000 lbs.

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

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

a Remove insulation 60 (b) b Mount pipe cutters 60 60 c Install contamination controls 20 (b).

d Disconnect inlet and outlet lines, --- ý.60 60 e Cap openings 20 (d) f Rig for removal 301 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): *64 "

+ Respiratory protection adjustment (25% of critical duration)

+ Radiation/AJARA adjustment (20% of critical duration)

Adjusted work duration 370

+ Protective clothing adjustment (30% of adjusted duration)

Productive work duration 481

+ Work break adjustment (8.33 % of productive duration) 44 Total work duration (minutes) 521

• Total duration= 8.683 hr **

• Alpha designatorsindicate activities that can be performed in parallel TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile Island, Unit 1 Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 Decommissioning CostAnalysis Appendix A, Page 3 of 4 APPENDIX A (Continued)

3. LABOR REQUIRED Duration Rate Crew Number (Hours) ($/hr) Cost Laborers 3.00 8.683 30.00 781.47 Craftsmen 2.00 8.683 51.30 890.88 Foreman 1.00 8.683 51.86 450.30 General Foreman 0.25 8.683 53.58 116.31 Fire Watch 0.05 8.683 30.00 13.02 Health Physics Technician 1.00 8.683 56.94 494.41 Total labor cost $2,746.39

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

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

• Plastic sheets/bags 50 @ $0.13/sq ft {3} $6.50

• Gas torch consumables 1 @ $7.51 x 1 /hr {1} $7.51 Subtotal cost of equipment and materials $35.01 Overhead & profit on equipment and materials @ 16.00 % '$5.60

$46.61 Total costs, equipment & material TOTAL COST:

..Removal of contaminated heat exchanger <3000 pounds: $2,787.00 Total labor cost: $2,746.39 Total equipment/material costs: $40.61 Total craft labor man-hours required per unit: 63.39 TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile Island,Unit 1 Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Appendix A, Page4 of 4

5. NOTES AND REFERENCES

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

9 References for equipment & consumables costs:

1. www.mcmaster.com online catalog - Spill Control (7193T88)

2. R.S. Means (2008) 01 56 13.60-0200, page 20

3. R.S. Means (2008) 01 54 33.40-6360, page 626 0 Material and consumable costs were adjusted using the regional indices for Middletown, Pennsylvania.

TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile Island, Unit 1 Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Appendix B, Page1 of 7 APPENDIX B UNIT COST FACTOR LISTING (DECON: Power Block Structures Only)

TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile Island,Unit 1 Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Appendix B, Page 2 of 7 APPENDIX B UNIT COST FACTOR LISTING (Power Block Structures Only)

Unit Cost Factor Cost/Unit Removal of clean instrument and sampling tubing, $/linear foot 0.36 Removal of clean pipe 0.25 to 2 inches diameter, $/linear foot 3.66 Removal of clean pipe >2 to 4 inches diameter, $/linear foot 5.38 Removal of clean pipe >4 to 8 inches diameter, $/linear foot 11.21 Removal of clean pipe >8 to 14 inches diameter, $/linear foot 21.12 Removal of clean pipe >14 to 20 inches diameter, $/linear foot 27.41 Removal of clean pipe >20 to 36 inches diameter, $/linear foot 40.34 Removal of clean pipe >36 inches diameter, $/linear foot 47.95 Removal of clean valve >2 to 4 inches 72.30 Removal of clean valve >4 to 8 inches 112.13

... iRemoval of clean valve >8 to 14 inches 211.24, Removal of clean valve >14 to 20 inches 274.08 Removal of clean valve >20 to 36 inches 403.40

Removal of clean valve >36 inches 479.54 Removal of clean pipe hanger for small bore piping 22.88 Removal of clean pipe hanger for large bore piping 80.84 Removal of clean pump, <300 pound 187.89 Removal of clean pump, 300-1000 pound 540.32 Removal of clean pump, 1000-10,000 pound 2,114.97 Removal of clean pump, >10,000 pound 4,085.73 Removal of clean pump motor, 300-1000 pound 227.83 Removal of clean pump motor, 1000-10,000 pound 881.81 Removal of clean pump motor, >10,000 pound 1,984.05 Removal of clean heat exchanger <3000 pound 1,132.50 Removal of clean heat exchanger >3000 pound 2,844.45 Removal of clean feedwater heater/deaerator 8,041.01 Removal of clean moisture separator/reheater 16,560.79 Removal of clean tank, <300 gallons 241.84 Removal of clean tank, 300-3000 gallon 764.94 Removal of clean tank, >3000 gallons, $/square foot surface area 6.61 TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile Island, Unit 1 Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis AppendixB Page 3 of 7 APPENDIX B UNIT COST FACTOR LISTING (Power Block Structures Only)

Unit Cost Factor Cost/Unit Removal of clean electrical equipment, <300 pound 103.19 Removal of clean electrical equipment, 300-1000 pound 370.94 Removal of clean electrical equipment, 1000-10,000 pound 741.86 Removal of clean electrical equipment, >10,000 pound 1,777.27 Removal of clean electrical transformer < 30 tons 1,234.29 Removal of clean electrical transformer > 30 tons 3,554.54 Removal of clean standby diesel generator, <100 kW 1,260.72 Removal of clean standby diesel generator, 100 kW to 1 MW 2.,814.01 Removal of clean standby diesel generator, >1 MW 5,825.56 Removal of clean electrical cable tray, $/linear foot 9.60 Removal of clean electrical conduit, $/linear foot 4.19 Removal of clean mechanical equipment, <300 pound 103.19 Removal of clean mechanical equipment, 300-1000 pound 370.94 Removal of clean mechanical equipment, 1000-10,000 pound '741.86 Removal of clean mechanical equipment, >10,000 pound 1,777.27 Removal of clean HVAC equipment, <300 pound 103.19 Removal of clean HVAC equipment, 300-1000 pound 370.94 Removal of clean HVAC equipment; 1000-10,000 pound 741.86 Removal of clean HVAC equipment, >10,000 pound 1,777.27 Removal of clean HVAC ductwork, $/pound 0.38 Removal of contaminated instrument and sampling tubing, $/linear foot 1.01 Removal of contaminated pipe 0.25 to 2 inches diameter, $/linear foot 13.32 Removal of contaminated pipe >2 to 4 inches diameter, $/linear foot 22.64 Removal of contaminated pipe >4 to 8 inches diameter, $/linear foot 38.70 Removal of contaminated pipe >8 to 14 inches diameter, $/linear foot 73.84 Removal of contaminated pipe >14 to 20 inches diameter, $/linear foot 88.69 Removal of contaminated pipe >20 to 36 inches diameter, $/linear foot 123.25 Removal of contaminated pipe >36 inches diameter, $/linear foot 146.49 Removal of contaminated valve >2 to 4 inches 297.99 Removal of contaminated valve >4 to 8 inches 360.56 TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile Island, Unit 1 Document El16-1555-011, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis AppendixBA Page 4 of 7 APPENDIX B UNIT COST FACTOR LISTING (Power Block Structures Only)

Unit Cost Factor CostlUnit Removal of contaminated valve >8 to 14 inches 706.49 Removal of contaminated valve >14 to 20 inches 901.51 Removal of contaminated valve >20 to 36 inches 1,200.59 Removal of contaminated valve >36 inches 1,432.96 Removal of contaminated pipe hanger for small bore piping 80.88 Removal of contaminated pipe hanger for large bore piping 246.14 Removal of contaminated pump, <300 pound 618.96 Removal of contaminated pump, 300-1000 pound 1,452.09 Removal of contaminated pump, 1000- 10,000 pound 4,697.73 Removal of contaminated pump, >10,000 pound 11,401.74 Removal of contaminated pump motor, 300-1000 pound 618.57 Removal of contaminated pump motor, 1000-10,000 pound 1,898.91 Removal of contaminated pump motor, >10,000 pound 4,289.48 Removal of contaminated heat exchanger <3000 pound 2,787.00 Removal of contaminated heat exchanger >3000 pound 8,080.81 Removal1 of contaminated tank, <300 gallons 1,032.85 Removal of contaminated tank, >300 gallons, $/square foot 20.97 Removal of contaminated electrical equipment, <300 pound 485.85 Removal of contaminated electrical equipment, 300-1000 pound 1,175.05 Removal of contaminated electrical equipment, 1000-10,000 pound 2,261.84 Removal of contaminated electrical equipment, >10,000 pound 4,537.28 Removal of contaminated electrical cable tray, $/linear foot 23.84 Removal of contaminated electrical conduit, $/linear foot 11.29 Removal of contaminated mechanical equipment, <300 pound .552.74 Removal of contaminated mechanical equipment, 300-1000 pound 1,334.68

• Removalof contaminated mechanical equipment, 1000- 10, 000 pound 2,572.77 Removal of contaminated. mechanical equipment, >10,000 pound 4,537.28 Removal of contaminated HVAC equipment, <300 pound 552.74 Removal of contaminated HVAC equipment, 300-1000 pound 1,334.68 Removal of contaminated HVAC equipment, 1000- 10,000 pound. 2,572.77

.TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile Island, Unit I Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Appendix B, Page5 of 7 APPENDIX B UNIT COST FACTOR LISTING (Power Block Structures Only)

Unit Cost Factor Cost/Unit Removal of contaminated HVAC equipment, >10,000 pound 4,537.28 Removal of contaminated HVAC ductwork, $/pound 1.44 Removal/plasma arc cut of contaminated thin metal components, $/linear in. 2.58 Additional decontamination of surface by washing, $/square foot 5.17 Additional decontamination of surfaces by hydrolasing, $/square foot 25.67 Decontamination rig hook up and flush, $/ 250 foot length 4,666.75 Chemical flush of components/systems, $/gallon 11.83 Removal of clean standard reinforced concrete, $/cubic yard 108.70 Removal of grade slab concrete, $/cubic yard 143.01 Removal of clean concrete floors, $/cubic yard 279.92 Removal of sections of clean concrete floors, $/cubic yard 842.15 Removal of clean heavily rein concrete w/#9 rebar, $/cubic yard 186.40 Removal of contaminated heavily rein concrete w/#9 rebar, $/cubic yard 1,381.95 Removal of clean heavily rein concrete w/#18 rebar, $/cubic yard 235.75 Removal of contaminated heavily rein concrete w/#18 rebar, $/cubic yard 1,825.44 Removal heavily rein concrete w/#18 rebar & steel embedments, $/cubic yard 362.49 Removal of below-grade suspended floors, $/cubic yard 279.92 Removal of clean monolithic concrete structures, $/cubic yard 712.10 Removal of contaminated monolithic concrete structures, $/cubic yard 1,379.35 Removal of clean foundation concrete, $/cubic yard 558.52 Removal of contaminated foundation concrete, $/cubic yard 1,284.44 Explosive demolition of bulk concrete, $/cubic yard 25.00 Removal of clean hollow masonry block wall, $/cubic yard 70.15 Removal of contaminated hollow masonry block wall, $/cubic yard 209.50 Removal of clean solid masonry block wall, $/cubic yard 70.15 Removal of contaminated solid masonry block wall, $/cubic yard 209.50 Backfill of below-grade voids, $/cubic yard 20.53 Removal of subterranean tunnels/voids, $/linear foot 86.38 Placement of concrete for below-grade voids, $/cubic yard 108.93 Excavation of clean material, $/cubic yard 2.33 TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile Island,Unit 1 Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Appendix B, Page 6 of 7 APPENDIX B UNIT COST FACTOR LISTING (Power Block Structures Only)

Unit Cost Factor CostfUnit Excavation of contaminated material, $/cubic yard 27.30 Removal of clean concrete rubble (tipping fee included), $/cubic yard 165.03 Removal of contaminated concrete rubble, $/cubic yard 18.59 Removal of building by volume, $/cubic foot 0.24 Removal of clean building metal siding, $/square foot 0.80 Removal of contaminated building metal siding, $/square foot 2.59 Removal of standard asphalt roofing, $/square foot 1.67 Removal of transite panels, $/square foot 1.69 Scarifying Contaminated concrete surfaces (drill & spall), $/square foot 9.26 Scabbling contaminated concrete floors, $/square foot 5.05 Scabbling contaminated concrete Walls, $/square foot 13.32' Scabbling contaminated ceilings, $/square foot 45.30 Scabbling structural steel, $/square foot 4.52 Removal of clean overhead crane/monorail < 10 ton capacity 536.99 Removal of contaminated overhead crane/monorail < 10 ton capacity 1,292.34 Removal of clean overhead crane/monorail >10-50 ton capacity 1,288.77 Removal of contaminated overhead crane/monorail >10-50 ton capacity 3,095.46 Removal of polar crane > 50 ton capacity 5,401.44 Removal of gantry crane > 50 ton capacity 22,215.86 Removal of structural steel, $/pound 0.17 Removal of clean steel floor grating, $/square foot 3.96 Removal of contaminated steel floor grating, $/square foot 9.34 Removal of clean free standing steel liner, $/square foot 9.91 Removal of contaminated free standing steel liner, $/square foot 24.49 Removal of clean concrete-anchored steel liner, $/square foot 4.95 Removal of contaminated concrete-anchored steel liner, $/square foot 28.25 Placement of scaffolding in clean areas, $/square foot 12.28 Placement of scaffolding in contaminated areas, $/square foot 18.71 Landscaping with topsoil, $/acre 18,642.32 Cost of CPC B-88 LSA box & preparation for use 1,357.08 TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile Island, Unit 1 Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Appendix B, Page 7 of 7 APPENDIX B UNITCOST FACTOR LISTING (Power Block Structures Only)

Unit Cost Factor Cost/Unit Cost of CPC B-25 LSA box & preparation for use 1,195.51 Cost of CPC B-12V 12 gauge LSA box & preparation for use 1,170.56 Cost of CPC B- 144 LSA box & preparation for use 7,164.79 Cost of LSA drum & preparation for use 111.45 Cost of cask liner for CNSI 8 120A cask (resins) 5,621.69 Decontamination of surfaces with vacuuming, $/square foot 0.51 TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile Island, Unit 1 Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Appendix C, Page 1 of 12 APPENDIX C DETAILED COST ANALYSIS DECON TLG Services, Inc.

Thuree Mile Islanmd, Uneit I DocueenntR16.155.-011, Rev. 0 Dee eoi-ei-ig Cost Amolysi. Appendix C, Page2 of 12 Table C Three Mile Island, Unit 1 DECON Decommissioning Cost Estimate (thousands of 2008 dollars)

PIAtityDcn Removal Packaging Transport Processing Disposal Other Toted Total Lic.Te. Manaement. Restoration Volume ClassA Mtessa CtesC GTCC Processed Index Activity Description cos ot cost Costs Costs CostsCol Costs Contingency Costs- Cast. Cost. Cost. Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu.Feet craft Con tor Cu.Feet Cu. Feet Wit- Lbs. Mtanhous 1.nou PERIOD la - Shutdown through Transition Period 1a Direct Deco"nrissioning Activities 10a1.1 Prepare preiinary decommissiornrg cost 149 22 171 171 1.3OO 1a.1.2 Notificationof Cessation of Operations a la.1.3 Remove uel & source materia n/a 1a.1.4 Notifcatioonof Permanent Deofeing ta.1.5 Doactivate plantsystems &process waste lat1.6 Prepare and submit PSDAR 229 34 283 263 2,000 1,1.7 Re-iew plant dwgs &specs. 526 79 604 604 4,600 1 a 1.8 Perform detailed red survey 1a.1.9 Estimate by-product inventory 114 17 131 131 1.900 1:.1.10 End product description 114 17 131 131 1.000 1.1.11 Deteiled by-product invertory 149 22 171 171 1,300 I.1A.12 De~fil major work seeqence 857 129 985 985 7,500 la1.13 Perform SER and EA 354 53 407 407 3,1DOO ta.1.14 Pertor Site-Specific Cost Study 571 86 657 657 5,000 1a.1.15 Preparelsobmit License Terminatioc Plan 468 70 538 538 4,096 la.1.16 Receive NRC approval of terrination plan a Actioity Specificaolns la.1.17.1 plant &temporryt facilities 562 84 646 582 65 4,920 ta.1.17.2 P"antsystems 476 71 547 493 55 4,167 1a.1.17.3 NSSS Decontemination Flush 57 9 66 66 500 la.1.17.4 Reactor irterrate -- all 122 933 933 7.100 l1.1.17.5 Reactor vessel 743 111 854 054 6,500 1a.1.17.6 Biological shield 57 9 66 66 500 1a.1.17.7 Steem generators 355 53 410 410 3,120 I.1.17.8 Reinforced concrete 183 27 210 105 105 1,600 1a,1.17.9 MainTurbioe 46 7 53 - 53 400 1, I117.10 Main Condensers 46 7 53 - 53 400 la,1.17.11 Plant structures & buidings - 356 53 410 205 205 3,120 le.1.17,12 Waste management 526 79 604 604 4,600 la.1.17.13 Facility & ite doseout 103 15 118 59 900 10.1.17 Tootl 4,322 648 4.970 4,376 594 37.827 Planning& Site Preparations I .1.18 Prepare dismanting sequence 274 41 315 315 2,400 1a.1.19 Rant prep. & temp. "nsc 2,419 363 2,782 2.782 la.1.20 Design water dean-up system 160 24 184 184 1,400 la.1.21 Rigging/Cont. Crtd Erosps/loolingetc. 02,48 307 2355 2,355 1a.1.22 Procure caskloiners &containers 141 21 162 152 1,230 la.1 Sobiofal Period ta Activity Costs 12,893 1,934 14.827 14,233 594 73.753 Period 1a Addional Cost la.2.1 ISFSI Construction 16,000 6,00 22.0OO - 22,000 18,000 6,000 la.2 Subtotal PereId 1 Additional Costs 22,000 22,900 Period 1a Collaeral Costs 1:.3.1 Spent Fuel Capital and Transfer 11,280 1,692 12.973 12,973 -

18.3 Subtetal Period 18 Collateral Costs 11.280 1,692 12,973 12.973 -

Period 0aPeriod-Dependent Costs la.4,1 1.074 107 1.181 1.181 Insurance Ia.4.2 Property taxes Ia.4.3 Health physics supplies 347" 81 433 433 TLGServivoe, Ine.

77-e MiLe I.1ola', U,.it I Doru~nat E16-15&5-O11, Revo.0 Deco~jsaio,.uieg Coat Ansalysis App~endix C Pa.ge3of 12 Table C Three. Mile Island, Unit 1 DECON Decommissioning Cost Estimate (thousands of 2008 dollars) off-Site LLRW NRC Spent Fuel sit. Processed BurialVolumes Batl.a I Utility and Activity Duoo Removasl Packaging Transport Processing Ospooas Otther Total Total Uc. Tonm. Management Reltoration Volume, Class A Class B Claus C GTCC Processed Craft CoetrutorI Index Astiti Desoription Cost Cast* Costs Costs Costs Costs Costs Con.in anc Costs Costs Costs Costs Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Faet Cu. Feet Wt.. Lbs. Manhours Manhoure Period 1a Perrod-Dependent Costs (cotinued)

Is.4.4 Heavy equipmentrental t346 52 397 397 ta.4.5 Disposal of DAWgeneatled 34 - 9 45 45 610 12.19, 1,459 219 1,677 3 1a*6 Plant energy budg* t 1,677 ta.4.7 NRC Fees 727 73 800 800 1 44.8 Emergency Planning Fees 55O 55 605 - 885

1. A9 Site O&M Costs 250 37 287 287 ia.4.10 Spent Fuel Pool O&M 745 112 857 857 1a.4.11 ISFS1Operating Costs 85 13 98 - 98 1a.4.12 Security Staff Cost 2,587 433 3.320 3,320 84,868 1a4.13 Utlity Staff Cost 27,176 4,076 31,253 31,253 423,400 1a.4 Sublotal Period la Parod-Dependenl Costs 692 34 34,952 5.273 40.953 39.394 1,859 610 12,180 3 508,268 la.0 TOTAL PERIOD 10 COST 692 34 75,126 14,899 90,753 53,627 36.532 594 610 12.190 3 582,020 PERIOD lb - Decomnislioning Praparatlons Period 1b Direct Decomninssioning Activities Detailed Work Procedures lb 1.1.1 Plaut syste0- 541 81 622 560 62 114 17 131 131 4.733 1,000 1b.1.1 .2 NSSS Dectaminaton Rush 1b.1.1.3 Reator iltertels 286 43 328 328 2,500 1b.1.1.4 Remaining 154 23 177 44 133 1,350 ioldings lb 1.1.5 CRD ooling asunrnbly 114 17 131 131

• 1,50G Ib1 .1.6 CRD housings & ICItubes 114 17 131 131 114 17 131 131 - . 1,000 1b.1.1.7 Inoore instrmentation 15b1.1.8 Reactr vessel 415 62 477 4T7 3,630 137 21 158 79 79 1.200 1b.1.1.9 Facility doseout b 1.1.10 Missile shieds 51 8 59 59 450 137 21 158 158 1.200 b1.1.111 Biological shielt 526 79 604 604 4.500 1b51,1,12 Stea gern rators

• 1.080 114 17 131 66 66 b.1113 Reintorced concrts ** 1.580 178 27 205 205 1,0800 lb.1.1.14 Main Turbine 1b,1115 Muin Condensers 178 27 205 - 205 312 47 350 323 36 2,730 lb.1.1.16 Auxiliry. building 2,730 312 47 359 323 36 161117 Reactor builnirg 3.798 570 4.368 3.546 821 33,243 1b11 Total 561 1,683 1,683 1.067 -

l1b.1.2 Docon primar lioop 1,122 1,067 33,243 1b.1 Subtotal Period I b ActivityCosts 1,122 3,798 1.131 6,051 5,230 821 Period lb Additional Costs lb.2.1 Site Characterization 3.373 1.012 4.385 48385 19,8108 7,852 1b.2.2 Spent Fuel Poot ssluatlio 9.407 1,411 10.819 10,819 12.780 2.423 15,203 15.203 19.100 7,852 1b.2 Subtotal Period lb Additional Costs Period Ib Collateral Costs lb.3.1 Decon equipment 667 100 767 767

- 1.113 167 1,280 1.280 lb.3.2 DOC staff relocation expenses 391 2.285 277,072 522 62 125 1.083 8,56308 2,347 12.180 12,180 1b3.3 Pr5ocessld waste 2 0 2 2 1b.3.4 S all too allowanos I

1b.3.5 pipe cutting equipment - 957 153 1,500 1.100 1.243 - 188 1,430 1,430 1b.3.6 Decon rig 6.491

- 5,644 847 6,491 -

b .3.7 Spent Fuel Cepital and Transfer 6.491 391 2.285 277.072 522 1.973 958 125 1,083 8,563 6.757 3.791 23,250 16,760 1I,.3 Sublotal Period lb Collaeal Costs TLG Sevicej, enc.

Throee Mile Islandl, Unit I Documest E16-1555-O11, Ree. 0 DecrommssioninelrgCost Analysis Appendix C, Page 4 of 12 Table C Three Mile Island, Unit 1 DECON Decommissioning Cost Estimate (thousands of 2008 dollars)

Off-Sit. LLRW NRC Spent Fuel Site Processed Burial Volrues Burial I Utility and Activity DeOte Removal Packaging Transport Processing Dsposal Other Total Total Lic. Term. Managementt Restoration Volume Clts A Clases CisS C GTCC Processed Craft Contractor Index Activity Description Coat Cost Costs Costs Csts CoCtlo ens Cats costs Costs costs Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Wt., Lbs. Mtanhours Manhours Period lb Pernod-Dependenl Costs

• b.4A. 000 supplies 20 . -5 26 26 lb,4.2 Insurance 538 54 592 592 1b4.3 Property taxes 368 37 405 405 1b.44 physirs supplies 0ealth 196 - 49 245 245 lb.4.5 Heoay equipment rentls 173 - - 26 199 199 1b.4.8 Disposa of DAWgenerated - ,20 - 5 26 26 358 7,159 2 -

Ib.4.7 Plant energy budget 1,463 219 1.682 1.682 1b4.4 NRC Fees 384 36 401 401 1 b,4.9 Emergency Planning Fees 276 28 303 303 1b.4.10 Site O&MCosts 125 19 144 144 1b.4t11 Spent Fuel PoolO&M - 374 56 430 430 lb.4.12 ISFSI Operating Costs 43

• 49 49 1b,4.13 Security SltffCost - 1 .447 217 1,665 1.665 - * -425500 tb.4.14 DOCStaffCost - 5.024, 754 5.778 5,778 63,789 lb.4.15 UtilitySlan Cost 2 13.684 2.053 15.737 15,737 . - 213,326 lb.4 Sub"oel Period Ib Peroed-Dependent Costs 20 369 .20 23.706 3,564 27.682. .26,90W 782 - 358 - 7,159 2 319.664 10b. TOTAL PERIOD Ib COST 3.115 1.328 126 1,084 8.583 47.042 10,908. 7Z,188 64,092 7,273 821 749 2,285 284.232 20.690 360.759 PERIOD I TOTALS 3,115 2.802 l27" 1.085 "8,617 122.168 25,807,. 162,939 117.720 43.800 1,415 1,358 2,285 296,422 20.693 942.780 PERIOD 2ao Large Coesporrnr Remaorval Period 2a Dlrecd Decommissioning Activities Nuclear Steam Supply System Renmooal" 2a.l.l.1 Reactor Coolant Piping 113 91 i1 33. 163 12N 535 535 826 99,877 4,230 2a.1.1.2 PreSurnzer Relief Tank 15 13 2 7- 34 21' 93 93 188 20.849 581 2-.1.113 Reactor Coolant Pumps & Motors 123 74 35 .162 73 1.398 460 2.333 2,333 509 8,974 925,540 4.828 28.1.1.4 Prsur.ieer. 34 -51 679 596 .551 325- 2`237 2.237 2,588 338,500 2,358 1,875 24.1.1.5 Steam Generators 175 5,424 1.507 1944 4000 3086 16,936 10.938 24,813 2,949,429 11,616 3,500 2a.i.1.6 Retired SteamoGeeratorUnils 725 15940 4,640 1,523 " 8.828 8,828 11,714 2,850,879 5,400 2,250 2a.1.1.7 88 75 171 89 3,002 59,894 3.176 -

CRDMsIICIsIService Structure Remrroval 98 118 639 639 2a.1.1.8 Reactor Vessel Intenals 70, 2.326 4.217 904 6.150 191 6164. 20.023 20,023 626 605 517 219.755 23.517 1.073 2a.1.1.9 Reacor Vessel 71 4,935 1,264' 1.021 0,123 191 7399- 21004. 21,004 - 7,083 2X003 - 980.935 23.517 1,073 691 12990 8,610 16695 73 "23,956 382 19.229 72.628 72,628 509 59,813 2,608 517 8,445,658 79.222 9770 2a.1.1 Totals Removal of Major Equipment 278 Ill' 104 316 205 6,394 . 1.885 456,843 6.072 2a.1.2 Main Turbine/Generrtor 195 1,209 1.209

.1,084. 5,044 1,487 360,419 24,422 28.1 3 Main Condensers 88 82 250 161 , - 370 2.035 Z035 Cascading Costs from Clean Building Demolition 13.690 9,845 2a.1. 1 Reactor . ". '. 104 794 794 2al14.2 Auxiliary 30 3243 280 280 3,371 317 - - 48 365 . 365 4,242 2a.1.4.3 Fuel oandling 17.458 2s.1.4 Total- 1,251 Il-s166 1.439 1.439 Disposal of Plant SysterTm 58 956 308 66.452 1,2816 2a.1.5.1 CNTL-TWR-285_PROCESS 5 16 43 33 32 187 187 69 6 13 - - 46 31, 164 164 - 420 37,709 1.444 2a.1.5.2 CNTL-TWR-305 BURY 24.201 1,051 47 S. 23 4 17 96 86 516 36 2a.1.5.3 CNTt.-TWR-305 PROCESS 177 . -. " ' " " " 4,257 2a.1.5.4 CNTL-TWR-322_CLEAN 27, 203 203

.2a.1.5.5 CNTL-TWR-338_CLEAN 128 -. -- " " .. . 19. 147 147 3,122 128 20 - .3" 23 23 545 28.1.5.6 CNTI.-TWR-355 CLEAN . "

38 1,001 2..1.5.7 CNTL-TWVR-380_CLEAN 2 44 12 245 2a.1.5.8 CNTL-TWR-388 CLEAN 1t0 TLG Servines, Inc.

i - I -

Three Mile Island, Unit I Document E16-1555-O11, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Coat Analysis Appendix C, Page 5 of 12 Table C Three Mile Island, Unit I DECON Decommissioning Cost Estimate (thousands of 2008 dbollrs)

Ott-Sits LLRW NRC Speoo Fuel Site Pross.d Burial Volures Burial I Utilityasod Activity Decon Removal Packaging Transport Processing Disposal Other Total Total Uc. Term. Management Restoration Voluare Class A Class B Class C GTCC Processed Craft Contractor ndex Activlty Descripaon Cost cost Costs ý Costs . Cost. Costs Costs Continoenon Costs Costs Costs Costs Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Fast Cu. Fast Cu. Feet Lbs.

Wit.. Manhours Manhours Disposal of Plant Systems (continued) 2a.1.5.9 IB-295 BURY -. 58 .5' 9 31 24 127 127 - 53 -- 285 25,568 1,292 2a.1.510 IB-295_CLEAN 46 *7 53 - - - 1,100 2a.1.5. 11 IB295_PROCESS 238 14 45 182 63 111 652 652 4,082 584 215,183 5,312 31 2a.1.5.12 1B-30_BURY 2 5 - 18 13 71 71. - 8169 S15,164 690 2a.1.5.13 tB-305 PROCESS 200 8 25 87 43 78 442 442 1,950 397 114:777 4.387 12 2..1.&14 IB-322,BURY 1 2 8 5 29 29 - 74 6,642 262 2o1.5.15 IB-322_CLEAN 38 6 44 44 596 8-28 101f 401 149 2a.1.5.16 IB-322_PROCESS 513 244 1,435 1.435 8-.98 1,375 487,541 11.489 57 3 10 45 11 26 152 152 2a.1.5.17 IB-355 PROCESS 1.012 100 50.026 1,271 2a.5518 IB-ROOF PROCESS 15 3 8 15 19 12 72 72 - 345 174 29,629 344 2a.1.5.19 OCA CLEAN 814 122 936 - 936 - - . 15,978 2a.1.5.20 OCA PROCESS 87 1 6 34.. 4 29 161 161 - 753 38 33,998 1,914 2a.1.5.21 OOB CLEAN - 9 1 11 11 - - 252 2a.1.5.22 TB-3S5-E BURY 136 6 16 37 37 52 284 284 830 342 64,399 2,938 2a.1.5.23 T3B-305-ECLEAN 187 28 215 - 215 - - 4,738 2s.1.5.24 TB-305-EPROCESS 425 37 134 - 549 187 259 1.591 .1.591 12.295 1.726 654,168 9,565 2a.1.5.25 TB-305-W BURY 95 9 . 18 65 44 232 232 - - 599 53.703 2.113 2a.1.5.26 T8-305-W CLEAN 222 33 256 256 5.764 87 13 10D - 100 - 2,150 2a,1.5.27 TB-305-W GIC 20.1.5.28 TB-305-W PROCESS 790 73 262 1.013 398 495 3.031 3,031 22,670 3,670 1,249,032 17,780 2a.1.5,29 TB-322-E_CLEAN 79 12 91 91 1,9960 2a.1.9.30 TB-322-EGIC 4 1 5 - 5 121 2a.1.5.31 T6-322-E PROCESS 483 68 209 534 '462 - 354 2.109 2.109 - 11.945 4,255 866.708 11,046 2a.1.5.32 TB-322-W_CLEAN - 142 21 163 - 163 3,474 2a.1.5.33 Tr-322-W GIC 13 2" 17 - 17 386 2s.1.5.34 TB-322-W-PROCESS 464 121 402 . 1.225 786 569 3,587 3.557 27.417 7.242 .- 1,763.044 10.811 2a.1,5.35 TB-355-ECLEAN 6 1 7 7 - 147 2a.1 .536 TB-355-W CLEAN 23 3 27 27 572 20.1537 TB-355-WGIC 2 0 .2 2 * - 46 2a.1 5.38 TB-355-W PROCESS 460 39 134 445 244 267 1,590 1.590 9,969 2,248 6068318 10,504 20.1.5.39 TB-38SCLEAN 15 2 17 - 17 - - 364 407 35 115 344 229 -

232 1,362 1.362 - 7,702 2,112 - 502.137 9.275 2a.1.5.40 TB-380_PROCESS 20,195,41 TB-ROOF CLFAN 21 :3 24 - 24 - - - 497 6,728 467 '1.533 4.977 2.838 - 3,206 111.411 26,155 6.875.19 S 156,385 2a.1.5 Toots 19,749 17.353 2.395 191 973 973 37 30.276 20,187 20I1.6 ScOffolding Insupport ofdecommissiornng a 68 30 4 599 691 23.065 23.379 98,033 95,637 2,395 123,957 89,377 2.608 517 16,163,390 303,748 9,770 20.1 Subtotal Poed 2a Atvity Costs '9.25. 8,420 . 5,646 27,15, 382 Period 2a Additional Carts 20.2.1 Turtne BldgGICWoste Oisposion - -85

• 232 43. 360 380 10,10-8 01.108 454,855 454.855 2a.2 Subtotal Period 2a AddimonalCosts 85 2232 43 360 360 Period 2a Collateral Costs 106 -2.i 34 ' 207 150 776 -778 72.1 43.286 141 20.3.1 Pro*ss 00-ad -tste 187 .

2a.32 Small toolauowonco 28 216 194 22 -

2a.3.3 Spent Fuel Capital atrd Transfer 15,195 2.279 17,474 - 17,474 - - -

17,474 22 721 43,286 141 20.3 Subtotal Period 2a Collaueral Costs 106 8 187 2o0 207 15,18s 2,457" 18.466 970 Period 2a Peuiod-Depemdent Costs 2a.4.1 Decon supplies 55 - 14. 69 89 2a.4.2 Insurance 64 704 704

- - . - 992 99 1,091 982 2a.4.3 Propertytaxes 109 2 .4.4 Health physics supplies 364 1.820 1,820

'-1,456 2o.4.5 Heavy eouopjnlt rental 2,245

• 7 . . . . "4 337 2.581 2,581 64 328 328 4,437- 88,730 20 2a.4.6 Disposal of DAWgenerated TLG Serieea, lIne.

Three Mile I.1n-4 Unit I Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 DeeoanioioningCoat Anatysia Appendix C, Page 6 of 12 Table C Three Mile Island, Unit 1 DECON Decommissioning Cost Estimate (thousands of 2608 dollars)

Off-Sitl LLRW NRC Spent Fuel sit. Processed Burial Volutes Activity Burial I Utility end Deeon Removal Packaging Transport Processing Disposal Other Total Total Lic. Termn. Managemenrt Index Restoration Voi.ne Class A Class B Class C 0TCC Processed Craft Cdntraotor Actlvitv Descrtltion Cost Cost Coats Coste Costa Costs Costs Cootinn o c Cost Costs Costs Costs Cu. FPst Cu. Foot Co. Foot Cu. Feet Cu. Foot Wt. Lbs. Manhors Maehosirs Period 2. Pedod-Dopeardeat Costs (CO-rl-ed) 2a4.7 Pfanl Ont'gy &04g-t 1,872 281 2,152 2,152 2a.4.8 NRC Foes 918 92 1.009 1,009 2a.4.9 Eoergenoy Planning Fees 27 270 297 - 297 2a.4.10 Site O&MCosts 337 51 388 388 2a.4.1 1 Spent Fuel Pool O&M -- 151 1,158

- - 1,007 1,158 2a.4.12 ISFS1Operating Costs 115 17 132 - 132 2a.4.13 Security Staff Cost 3.325 499 3,824 3,824 96,653 2a.4.14 OOC SWSIICOst - -- 16,698 2.503 19,191 19.191 214,103 2a4.15 Utlity Staf Cos- . * -.- 26,082 3,912 29,994 29.994 2a.4 5b0ta1 Period 2a Period-Dependent Costs 7 9 398.626 58 3,700. 248 52.245 8,474 64,738 63.042 1,587 109 4,437 88,730 20 709.582 2a.0 TOTAL PERIOD 2a COST 852 26.953 9,326 8,793 5,878 27.619 67,822 34,353 181,596 160,009 19,061 2,526 134,065 94,535 24608 517 16,750,270 303,909 719,352 PERIOD 2b - Sita* oeontanination Period 2b Direct Oecontnissiorng Activies Disposal of Plant Systems 2b.1.1.1 AB-261_BURY 149 24 56 - 200D 98 527 527 -

7 16 704 1.844 373 165,398 3.451 2..1.1.2 AB-261_PROCESS 71 31 40 36 202 202 62,046 1,639 2b.1.1.3 AB-271_BURY 78 12 27 98 49 264 -

264 9998 80,591 1.765 2b.1.1.4 AB-271 PROCESS 110 14 47 164 85 81 496 496 3,669 742 215,571 2,6W6 2b.1.1.5 AB-281-I BURY 599 67 123 - 438 284 1,511 1,511 - 4,978 362,114 13.634 2b.1.1.6 AB-281-1-PROCESS 6 S0 0 1 1 2 11 11 20 11 1,830 096 151 2b.1.1.7 AB-281-2 BURY 87 165 - 0587 329 1,763 1,763 6,052 044.727 13,135 2b.1.1,8 AB-281-2_PROCESS 403 23 57 101 1050 164 899 899 2253 1,387 215.864

- .59 8,971 2b.1.1.9 AB-281-3_BURY 169 9 -

17 60 313 313 - 0544 48.748 3,882 2b.1.110 AB-201-3_PROCESS 73 2 5 12 13 24 130 130 258 122 21.461 1,874 2b.1.1.11 AB-305-1_BURY 91 33 81 2188 110 603 603 - 2,650 237.727 . 1,997 2b.1.1.12 AB-305-1-PROCESS 28 0 2 12 2 2 10 55 55 274 15 12,437 814 2b,1.1A3 AB-305-2_BURY 192 23 44 155 96 510 510 1,555 128,368 4.202 2b.1.1.14 AB-305-2 PROCESS 345 11 45 233 30 138 8908 8 5,224 333 242,019 7,715 2b01.1.15 AB-3005-3_BURY 107 7 11 - 40 - 39 204 234 38 - 32"987 2,461 2b.1.1,16 AB-331_BURY 31 4 7 25 15 82 62 251 20.665 678 2b.1.1.17 AB-331_PROCESS 129 4 16 73 16 51 292 292 1,636 .177 81,516 2,823 2b.1.18 CC-3050BURY 407 63 114 405 241 1,290 1,290 - 4.613 334,678 10,438 20.1.1.19 DG-305_BURY 44 6 14 48 26 140 140 560 39,762 987 2b.1.1.20 G-3005_CLEAN 100 15 115 2,441 2b.1.1.21 INTAKECLEAN 221 33 254 - 254 - 5.603 2b01.1.22 iWT-303 PROCESS 906 67 117 485 373 426 2.434 2,434 10,867 3,147 749,692 19,981 20.1.1.23 OCABURY 430 99 165 587 289 1,569 1,569 7,233 485,016 9,645 2b01.1.24 PA-301_BURY 163 37 62 220 109 590 509 2,743 181.570 3,657 20.1.1.25 PA-301_CLEAN 247 37 284 - 288 - 5,969 2b.l.5.26 PA-301_PROCESS 257 6 46 272 20 118 722 6.089 238 263,465 5,879 722 2b.II.,27 RB-281_BURY 450 51 108 - 384 229 1,221 1,221 - 3.555 316.988 10.142 2b.1.1.28 RB-281_PROCESS 142 10 22 18 69 60 320 320 410 633 73,452 3,172 2b 1.1.29 R6-308 BURY 311 35 67 - 238 151 801 801 - 2.328 196,503 6,935 21,1.1.30 RB-308_PROCESS 216 16 53 109 133 114 646 648 2.430 1,.22 208,552 4.978 2b.1.1.31 RB-346,BURY *59 6 13 - 45 29 152 152 - 419 37,577 1,213 2b.1.1.32 RB-346 PROCESS 126 1i 24 10 82 58 310 310 227 763 76,734 2,698 2b.1.1.33 RB-INSIDE 0-RINGBURY 393 26 54 194 158 825 825 1.783 159,948 9,170 292 201,.1.34 SB-305_CLEAN 1 11 - 242 21.1.1.35 STPCLEAN 37 6 43 43 884 101 2b.1.1,36 TB-305-EGIC as 13 101 - - 2,342 53 19 1,193 -13,860 2b.1.1.37 TB-350-EPROCESS 54 4 13 28 171 171 175 1,188

• 7,901 2b.1.1 7otals 766 1,600l 1,575 5,046 3,727 20.667 19,659 808 35,256 52,408 5,602,141 . 178,759 TLG Serv/ea, Inn.

Three Mile lloand, Uinil I Docunsent E16-1555-011. Rev. 0 DeconnosaioningCost Analysis Appendix C, Page 7 of 12 Table C Three Mile Island, Unit 1 DECON Decommissioning Cost Estimate (thousands of 2008 dollars)

IOff-Sie LLRW MRC Spent Fuel Site Processed Burial Volumes Butal I Utility and Activity becon Remonal Packaging Transport Processing Disposal Other Total Total Lit. Trmn. Managa*nent Restoration Volume Class A Class B Class C - GTCC Processed Craft Contractor lindex Actint Desotiptin Cast Cost Casts Costs Costs Costs C Costs . Contingency Costs Costs Costs Costs Cu. Fast Cu. Feet Co. Fast Cu. Feet Cu. Fest Wt., Lie. Manhoure Manhours 2b.1.2 Scaffolding in support of decommissioning - 918 11 7 37 5 - 238 1,216 1,216 - 748 47 - . 37.845 25,234 Decontamination of Site Bultdings 2b.1.3.1 Reactor 816 699 142 346 41 844 866 3,752 3,752 913 10,494 992,342 32,1895 2b.1.3.2 Ausliary 250 144 23 65 34 90 265 818 819 752 1,651 194,204 8,637 21b,.3.3 Classified Waste Storage Facility 13 5 1 3 - 5 9 36 36 - 87 8,697 386 2b.1.3.4 Heat Exchanger V-slt 43 25 4 11 4 15 34 135 135 99 270 30,691 1,464 2b.1.3.5 Interim OSodWaste Staging Fa*ilty 54 21 5 14 1 20 40 154 154 21 362 37,084 1,625 2b.1.3.6 Intermediate 22 33 8 22 -32 31 148 148 590 59,046 1,068 2b.1.3.7 Miscellaneo-s Buildings - Contaminated 134 51 12 34 49 98 377 377 903 90.294 4,0881 -

21. 1.3.8 Respirator Cleaning Facility 25 9 2 6 - 9 - 18 71 71 - 169 16,926 751 2b.1.3 Totals 1,384 987 196 500 80 1,062 - 1,301 5,491 5,491 1.785 14,527 1,429.264 50,125 2b.1 Subtotal Period 25 Activity Costs 1,364 9,007 975 2,157 1.692 6,113 5,267 27,375 26,567 688 37.789 66,981 7,069,250 254,117 -

Period 2b Colateral Coats 2b.3.1 Pross liquid wasla 115 - 37 306 227 164 849 849 - 790 47,393 154 2b.3.2 Small tool allowance 151 23 174 174 2b.3.3 Spent Fool Capital and Transfer - - - - - 29,885 4,483 34,38 - 34,388 2b.3 Subtoal Peod 2b Colateral Costs 115 151 37 306 * - 227 29.885 4,689 35,391 1.023 34.368 79 - 47,393 154 Period 2b Perod-Dependtrd Costs 2b.4.1 176 882 882 Decon supplis 705 2b.42 Insurance 1.286 129 .415 1,415 2b.4.3 Property taxes 1,994 198 2,194 2,194 2b04.4 Health physicssupplies 1,767 442 2,208 2,208 2b.4.5 Heavy equiponant rantsl 4,480 572 5,152 5,152 2b.4.6 Disposal of DAW generated a 10 277 72 366 366 4,963 99,251 23 2b.4.7 Plant energy bodget 2.970 446 3,416 3,416 2b.4.8 NRC Fees 1.844 184 2,029 2,020 2b.4.9 Emergency Planning Fees 543 54 597 - 597 2b.4.10 Site O&MCosts 678 102 780 , 780 2b.4.11 Spent Fuel Pool O&M 2,024 304 2.328 - 2.328 2b.4.12 Radasle Processing Equipment/Seroices 509 76 586 586 25.4.13 ISFSI Operating Costs 230 35 265 - 265 2b.4.14 Sncorty Staff Cost -

• 6.85 1,803 7,887 7,687 194,689 2b.4.15 DOC Stt Cost 32.269 4,840 37,109 37,109 413,389 2b.4.16 UtilitpStaff Cos- 50.433 7,565 57,098 57,998 767,317 2b.4 Subtotel Period 2b Parlodependenl Costs 705 6,247 8 10 2T7 101,486 16,298 125.011 121.821 3,190 - 4,963 99,251 23 1,375,395 2b.0 TOTAL PERIOD 2b COST 2,165 16,205 1,020 2,473 1,692 6,617 131,351 26,234 187,776 149,411 37.557 808 37,789 72,734 7,215.894 254,294 1,375,395 PERIOD 2c - Decontlaeintion Followilg Wet Fuel Storage Pared 2c Direct Oecommeissoning Activities 2c.t.1 Remoe spent Weh-acks 315 41 15 83 - 294 - 264 1,102 1,102 2,707 242,924 1,056 Disposal of Plant Syspteo 2c.1.2.1 FHB-281_BURY 24 44 - 157 91 485 485 - 1,611 129,564 3,740 170 790 445 7 19 35 48 59 319 319 71,968 3,368 2c.1.2.2 FHB-28 I_PROCESS 151 -

6 12

• 43 26 140 140 405 35,492 1,189 2t.2.3 FHB-3G5 BURY 53 254 0 12 i1 36 31 169 169 332 40,100 1,666 2c.1.2.4 FHB-305_PROCESS 74 - 57 1 2 - 6 5 29 29 5,081 319 2c.1.2.5 FHB-329 BURY 14 22 1 2 1 6 - 5 27 27 56 5-907 265 -

2c,1,2.6 FHB-329_PROCESS 12

• 943 -3.967 13 29 - 102 48 260 260 1,497 2c.1.2.7 FHB-348_BURY 68 2 5 6 15 14 73 73 131 148 17,553 699 2c.1.2.8 FHB-348 PROCESS - 32 74 566 566 12.996 2c.1.2.9 YARD CLEAN 492 TLG Serviees, Ine.

Thiree Mile Isla"s UnitdI Dscujmient E16IS-155-01, Rev. 0 IDeeonxoniiioesbng Cast Analdysis Appoendix C, Page 8 of12 Table C .'

Three Mile Island, Unit 1 DECON Decommissioning Cost Estimate (thousands of 2008 dollars)

• Off.Sit. LLRW NRC Spent Fuel Site Prosead Burial Volu.... BrtilI Utlity and Activity Desan Removal" Packaging Transport Processing Disposal Other, Total Total Lk. Tenn. Managerennt Restoration Volumei Class A Class B Class C GTCC Proso*sed Craft Contractor tndoo. A*ivit clesc05put Cost Co.% Cost. Costs Costs Costs Costs Contingenc Costs Costs Costs Costs Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Foot Cu. Feet Wt., tbs. Manhoors Manhoun, 2,.t.2 Totals 1,067 59 124 . 53 413 353 2,068 1,502 560 1,197 3.996 . 389,637 25.739 Decsnltamrlneson of S48 Buildings 2c.1.3.1 Fuel Handling 025 552 33 .59 29. 141 452 1.791 1.791 - 650 1.745 181,173 22,480 2c.1.3 Totals 525 552 33 59"- 29 141 452 1,791 A791 - " 650 1,745 '13,173 22,480 2c.1.4 Scaffolding In suppol of deoommissi.onien - 184 2 1 48 243 243 -. 150 9 7,569 5,047 2c.1 Subtotal Period 2c Adt* Coats 840 1.843 198 266 90 , . 849 1,117 5.203 4,637 568 1.997 8,457- 821,303 54,322 Period 2c Additional Costs 6,240 640 254 1,102 1.102 - -

2,,2.1 LiOnsO Teimnisti. S-eyo P*anni*gr " - - S- 2.716,592 462 -

" 1,930 509 2.589 2.589 - - - 35,745 2c.2.2 Contaminated Sol Remediation 39 2 110 2.71,592 2,- 462 6,240 20c2 Subtotal Period 2c AdditionalCosts - . 39 " 2 110 1,930 848 763 3,091 3,691 35,745 Period 2c Codlateral Costs -

307 222 1,150 1.150 , 1,070. 84,196 209 2.3.1 Process liqundwaste 156 - s0 415 2c.3.2 Small teooallowanoe 38 - 6 43 43 297 "41 73" 560 560 6,000 373 303,507 88 -

2c.3.3 Decommissioning Equipment Disposition - 85 65 367,703 297 297 . 347 300 1,753 1,753 6.000 1.443 2c.3 Subtotal Period 2c Collateral Costs 156 38 135 480 Period 2c Perio-Dapendent Costs

31. 154 154 2c.4.1 Decon supplies 123

- 38 418 418 2c.4.2 Insurance 2c4.3 Property taxes - - 590 09, 649 649

.107 537 537 2c.4.4 Health ptysIs supplies 430 199 1.523 1,523 2c.4.5 Heavy equipment rental 1,325 - 1,301 26,014 6

• 73 - 19 go 96 2c.4.6 Disposal of DAWgenerated - 2 3 . - 406

- , 70 539 539 2c.4.7 Flant energy budget . - 545 55 600 600 2c.4.8 NRC Fees * ". 176

• ". 160 16 176 -

2c.4.9 Enmtgoncy Planning Fees - . . -

2c.4.10 Site O&MCosts"

- 201 30. 231 231 45 346 346 2c.4.11 Radware Processing EquipmentifSetiOes - " 10 78 - 78 20.4.12 ISFSIOperating Costs 30.355 2C.4.13 Security Staff Cost - "

1,098 165 1.263 1,263 83.714

• * . ..

• 6,583 007 7,570 7.570 2C.4.14 DOG StatWCost *. 159,894

• - 10,003 1,935 12.539 12,539 2c.4.15 UtilityStaff Cost - . . ..- " 73* 21.298- 255 - - 1.301 26,014 8 273,963 3,467-, 26.719 26.464.

2c.4 Sultotal Period 2c Period-Dependont Costs 123 " 1,754 2 3 255 566 7.997 46,946 3,931,612 55.086 2800203 387 3.199 22,145 5,947 37,367 36.546 2c.0 TOTALPERIOD 2c COST 1.119 3,674 338- 856 PERIOD 2e - Lionse Teroinationt Period 20 DirectD-eromissioning Actiies-155 4ro 201 201 2.1. ORISE -onrmatorY -.1Y

• 2e.1 2 Terminate ftlicse 155 46 201 201 2s.1 Sobtotal Period 2e AcdvityCosts

• Period 29 Additional Costs. 5,183 124,444 3.120 1,855 8.038 8,038 2e.2.1 Liens Termination Suory - 124,444 3.120 6'1813 1,655 8.038 8,038 2e2 Subtotal Period 26 Additonal Costs -

Period 2e CoWlaters] Costs 167 1,280 1,280 1.113 2e.3.1 DOCsal reocation expenss es 1,113 167 . 1,280 1,280 2e.3 Subtotalt Priod 2e Collateral Costs . .

TLG Ser0i0e, IFne.

Three MieI1. sl4 Unait I Docurment B16-1555-0I1. Rev. 0 Dec-aniaawo-oiagCost Analysi. Ap~pendix gýPage 9 of Z.2 Table C Three Mile Island, Unit I DECON Decommissioning Cost Estimate (thousands of 2008 dollars)

Off-Site LLRW NRC Spent Fuea sita Processed Burial Volumtes Burial I Utility and Astivity Decon Rantovsl Peakasgng Transport Proceseing Disposal Other Totsl Total LUs.Tens. Managenrent Restoration Volume Class A Class B Class C GTCC Processed Craft Contractor Index Activity Description Coot Costa Coats Costs . Costs Cost. Costs Continsncy Costs Costs Costs Csts Cu. Feet Cu. Fost Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Foot WiLlLbs. Manhours Manhours Period 2e Peiod-Dependenlt Costs 2..4.1 Insurance 334 33 368 368 20.4.2 Property taxes - - 551 55 607 607 2e.4.3 Heaah physics surpplies 612 - - ""2 .- 153. 766 766 2a.44 DiposOl of DAW generated , - 01 - 5. 26 26 7,071 *2 2..4.5 Plant energy budget -" 219 33 252 252 2e.4.8 NRC Fees 546 5 50 600 606 2e.4.7 Emergency Planning Fees --- 150 15 165 165 2e.4.8 Site O&MCosts *" "" - 188 28 216 216 20.4.9 ISFSI Operating Costs 73 -

• 354 354 -

. - - 64 10 73 -

2e.4.10 Secunt Staff Cost . - 1.005 151 1.159 1.159 27,791 2e.4.11 DOC Staff Cost 4,650 897 5,347 5,347 57,149 2..4 12 UtilityStaff Cost . . . .. 5.930 889 6.819 6.819 2 ,7634 20.4 Subtotal Period 2e Period-Dependent Costs 612 1 I 20 13.639 2.125 16.398 16,160 238 7.071 2 165,574 2e.0 TOTALPERIOD 2a COST 612 . 1 20 21,091 4.193 25.918 25.679 238 - - 354 - - 7,071 124,446 168,694 PERIOD 2 TOTALS 4,155 47.444 10.684 12.125. 7.957 37,454 242,409 70.428 432,657 371.645 57,111 3,901 179.851 214,569 2,608 517 27,904,840 737,735 2,543.645 PERIOD 3b- Site Restoration Period 3b Direct Deoommissionig Actavlies Demolition of Remaining Site Buildings 3b 1.1.1 Reactor 3,707 - 55 4283 4,263 4.263 52.366 844 3b." .2 Air Intake Tunnel .. 50 8. 58 58 3b.1.1.3 Ausolary 2.088 6 -  : . - . 313 2,399 2,399 28.1722 30.1.1.4 Carpenters Shop #117 14 . . . .2 -16 16 219 3b.1.1.5 Circuslting Watr Chlorinator so0 - . -7" 57 - 57 875

30. 1.6 Circulating Water Chlornator House 54 ' ; 8' 62 62 1,087 3b.1.1.7 COrcuatingWater Intake FlRume 44 - 600 709 50 3b.1.1.8 Circuating WataerPu mthouse

• 121 - - - . -1V 140 140 2,422 612 9,010 3b.1.1,9 Circulating Water Tunnels '22 V2 * -" - : ' 3' 80 26 612 26 452 3b.1.1.10 CiasitfedWaste Storage Facilty 36 , . ' . " 5, 42 3b.1.111 Coagulato 42 726 3,015 35.625 3b'1.1,12 Control Room Tor 2.62 393 3.015 -

964 13,913 3b 1.1t3 Cooling Towors 838 " " 126 064.

77 1,381 3b.1.1.14 Csrtdor 67 -10 77 32 3b.11.15 Desltng 9asin 2 600 90 690 9.233 3b.1.1.186 Diesel Geerator 690 517 6.842 3b.1.1.17 Emergency Diesel Genelrtot 502 . - * - 75 577 -

14 231 3b.1.1.18 Fire Brigade Tranirng Facility

/"111 8 8 109 3b.1.1.19 Fuel Oil Unloading & Pump Station 367 4.093 3b.1,1.20 Heat Exchanger Vault 319 48 367 67 4 "6 . .- ' "5 3b.1.1.21 HighRange Sample Station 1,406 76 11 87 87 3b.1.1.22 IodulsWaste Trlrrn & 59 Sludge tr 1,930 1B,870 3b.1.23 risks Screen & Pumphruses 1,679 . - " 252 1.930 89 - - - 13 103 103 1,752 3b.1.1.24 . interii Solid Waste Staging Facility 17.186 1,287 _-193 1,480 1,480 3b.1.1.25 Intrlmediate -- . . _ . 9 139

. 1 9 -

3b.1.1.26 Lube Oil Storage 1,802 121 1s 139 139 3b.1.1.27 Mechrsncal Draft Coosing Toser 1,006 19,054 3b.0.128 Miscelaneons Buidings - Clean 874 .. .. . . 131 1,005 3,414 3b01.1.29 Mlscataneous Buildgs - Contaminated 166 " , 25 190 1.444 20.519 30.1.1.30 Miscellaneouo Yard Strfctres 2- . 188 1,444 4,920 255 "38 293 293

,3b.1.1.31 Nodh Oftce 62 1,102 3b,1.1.32 OperationsOffice 54 _ . .8-62 4,425 280 3b.1.1.33 Operations Support Fedity 244 37 280 TLG Services. Inc-

Three Mile Island, U. it I Docurnent E16-1555-011, Raev. 0

~e D ooe ia sioning Cost A oolyai. Appendix C, P age 10 of 12 Table C Three Mile Island, Unit 1 DECON Decommissioning Cost Estimate (thousands of 2008 dollars)

Off-Sit. LLRW NRC Spont Fuel Sit. Processed Burial Voturnes Burial I Utility and Activity Decon Remoaal Packaging Transport Processing Disposal Other Total Total Uc. Taom. Mangagemnt Restoration Volume Class A Class 8 Class C GTCC Processed Craft Contractor Index Activli Description Coat Cost Coat$ Cost. Cost. Cost. Costs Continoency Costs Costs Cost. Costs Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Faet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet WL. Lbs. Manhounr Manhours Deroliirt" of Remairing Site Buildings (continued) 3b.1.1.34 Respirator Cleaning Facility a , 59 - 59 1.072 3b.1.1.35 Security Improvements 664 100 763 763 6.957 3bt.1.36 Servce 252 38 290 290 5,003 3b.11 37 Sewage Pumping Station 5 1 6 6 97 3b.1.1.38 Steamr Generator Mausoleum 305 46 351 351 3,900 3b.111.39 Substation Relay Control House 24 4 28 28 489 3b.1.1.40 Training Facility #43 58 9 87 67 1,199 3b.1.1.41 Turbine 1.431 215 1,646 1.646 2G,877 3b.1.1.42 Turbine Pedestal 1128 169. 1,297 1,297 14,441 3b.1.143 Wrreoess #1 377 57 434 434 8,170 3b.1.1.44 Water Pretreatnent House S 115 17 132 132 2,006 3b.1.1.45 Fuel Handling 2.2937 441. 3.378 3,378 40.440 3b.1.1 Total. 25,145 3,772" 28,916 " 28,916 374,203 Site Closeout Activities.

8,707 10,013 7,228 3b.,12 Remome Rubble - .- 1,306 10.013 -

3b.1,3 Grade & landocape site 121 1-1B 140 - 140 531 3.1.4 Final repor to NRC - . 178 - 27 205 205 -S 1,560 3b.1 Suobotal Period 30 ActivityCosta 33,073 - - 178. 5,123, 39,274 205 39.089 381,962 1,560 Period 3b Additional Costs 3b.2.1 Conrerte Processing - . 1.030 8 - **-. 155 1,193 1.193 6,293 3b.2.2 Intake cofferdam -

• 245 37 282 282 2,794 3b.2 Subtotal Period 3b Additonal Costs. -. 1,276 - 8 192 1,475 1,475 9,087 Peiiod 3b Colatteral Costs 3b.3.1 Smrnl tool aoiaonce 23 -8 360 274 274 3b.3 Subt1at0 Peiod 3b Collateral Costa 238 36.. 274 274 Period 3b Period-Dopendent Costs 3b.4.1 lns uronca . -, . - 880 88 g88 968 3b.42 Property laxe; . 1,451 145 1,596 1,596 3b.4.3 Heavy equipment renta 4.367 - . . 655- 5,023 5,023 66 265 3b.4.4 . Plant energy budget- 288, 43 331 (0) 43 474 - 474 .

3b.4.5 NRC ISFSJFees -'..-430 3b.4.6 Emergency Planning Fees . 395 39* 434 434

"" . 168 25 193 193 3b.4.7 ISFS0Operating Costs 493 74 568 568 3b.4.8 Site OSM cost 133.900 4,796 846 3b.4.9 Scurit O Cost ";. 4.907 736: 5,643 (0) - 13,69O 140,080 3b.4.10 DOC Staff Co st " '-11.826 1,774 13,600 112,270 2094 7,010 3b.4.11 Utlty StaffCost 7,917 1,187 9,104 386,250 10,621 27,311 3b.4 Subtotal Period 3b Period-Oependent Costs - 4,367 . 28,754 4,810 37,932 (0) 10,621 68,129 391.049 387,810 30.0 TOTALPERIOO 3b COST 39,854 . 8 - 28.932- 10,161- 78.955 205 PERIOD 3. - Fuel Storage Operaloonsihlpplng Period 3c Direct DecommissionIng Actvitiis.

Period 3c Collateral Costs 8,913 3c.3.1 Spent Fuel Capital and Transfer 7,790 7,750 1,163 1,13 8,913 8.913 8.913 3c.3 Subtotal Period 3c Collateral Cools Period 3cPeriod-Depend"et Costs 2,711 3c.4.1 Insurance 2,465 246 2711 406 4,471 4,471 3c.4.2 Property btoes 4,065 TLG Services, I".

Three Mile Island, Unit I Docunent B16-1555-011, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Appendix C, Page 11 of 12 Table C Three Mile Island, Unit 1 DECON Decommissioning Cost Estimate (thousands or'2008 dollars)

Off-Site LLRW NRC Spent Fuel , Sit. Processed __Burial Volumes Burial I Activity Decon Removal Packaging Transport Processing Disposal Other Total Utl~ly ad Total LUs.Tan. Managemsnt Resteretlon Volume Class A Class B Class C GTCC Processod Craft Coetroctor Cost Cost Costs Costs Costs Costs Costs Contleosnce Costa Costs Cost. Codst Cu. Post Cs. Foot Cu. Feet Cu. Faet Cu. Foee WI. -bs. MuebomnJ Manhhaur n a.Cs...st ...... r- ... cos......cos.

.... . .. .. .. co

... t ..... ..... t costs..

.. . ... . .. .Fast

. ....... C....... C..... . ... Fas

..... ... 111n

....... .. a ...

Period 3c Period-Dependent Costs (continued) 3c.4.3 Plant energy budget 161 24 186 186 3c.4.4 NRC ISFSI Fees 51,22 152 r,674 1,874 3c.4.5 Emergency Planning Fees 1:10 1i1t 1,217 - 1,2r17 3c.4,6 Site O&MCosts 1,383 207 1,590 1,590 3c.4.7 ISFS1Operating Costs 470 70 540 540 3c.4.8 Security Staff Cost 11,698 1,755 13,452 13,452 311.657 3c.4.9 UtilityStaff Cost 5,129 769 5,898 5.89s 77,914 3c.4 Sutotal Period ScPariod-Dependent Costs - 27,998 3,742 31,740 31,740 389.571 3C.0 TOTALPERIOD 3c COST 35,748 4,954 40,552 40,652 389,571 PERIOD 3d - GTCC shipping Period 3d Direct Decommissioning Activitias Nuclear Staar Supply System Removal 3d.1.1.1 Vessel&IoteralssGTCConIspolld 375 12,289 1.581 14,545 14,545 58f 105,646 3d.1.1 Totals 375 12,289 1,881 14,545 14,545 580 105,646 36.1 Subtotal Period 3d Activity Costs 375 12,289 1,881 14,545 14,545 580 105.646 Period 3d Period-Depondeart Costs 3MI.4. Insurance 37 4 40 40 3d.4.2 Properly tanes 60 6 66 66 3d4.3 Plant energy budget - - 2 0 3 3 3dA.44 NRC ISFSI Feas 18 2 20 20 3d.4.5 Emergency Planning Fees 16 2 18 18 3d.4.6 Site O&MCosts 21 3 24 24 3X4.7 ISFSI Operating Costs 7 1 8 3d.4.8 Security Staff Cost 174 26 200 200 4,629 3d .4.9 utiity Staff Cost 76 11 88 88 1,157 3d.4 Subtotal Period 3d Penod-Oopendsnt Costs 411 55 466 - 466 - - - - - 6.756 3d.0 TOTALPERIOD 3d COST 375 - 12,289 411 1,936 15,012 14,545 466 580 105,646 - 5,786 PERIOD 3e - ISFS Oecontteination Period 3e Dirant Decommissioning Aclivities Period 3e Addiuonal Costs 3e.2.1 ISFSI License Temination 457 4 31 44 1,285 323 2,144 2,144 - 802 - 101t008 21,237 2,560 3a.2 Subtotal Period 3d Additional Costs

• 457 4 31 44 1,285 323 2,144 2,144 802 - 101008 21,237 2.560 Period 3e Collateral Costs 3e.3,1 Small laWallowance 5 1 6 6 - - - -

3e.3 Subtotal Period 3d Collateral Costs 5 1 6 a 6

Period 3e PenFd-Dependenl Costs 3e'4.1 Insurancec 146 15 161 161 -

3e.4'2 Propertytaxes -

32 249 249 3..4.3 Heavy equipment rental 217 24 4 28 28 3e.4A Plant onergybudget 72 7 79 79 3..45 NRC ISFSI Fee-52 12 94 94 3e.4.6 Site O&MCosts 4,971 187 28 215 215 3a.4,7 Security Staff Cost 3,771 254 38 293 293 3d4.8 UtilityStaff Cost 8,743 768 136 1,119 1,119 3e.4 Subtotal Perod 3e Peiod-Dependenl Costs 217 TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile 1.1a-4 Unit1 Do.tment B16.1555-011, Rea. 0 DecommissioningCoat Analysis Appendi. C, Page 12 of 12 Table C Three Mile Island, Unit 1 DECON Decommissioning Cost Estimate (thousands of 2008 dollars)

Off-Site LLRW NRC Spent Fuel Sit. Processed Burial Volumes Burial I Utility and Activity Decon Removel Packaging Transport Processing Disposal Other Total Total Lie. Term. Management Restoration Volume Claos A Cs... B Class C OTCC Processed Craft Contracto, Inde Actit Description Cost Cost Cotats Costs . Cot Cs Costs Continoency Costs Costs Costs Costs Cu. Foot Co. Feet Ca. Feet Co. Foot Cu, Foot Wt., Lbs. Ma,,,,, Matrhoctr o

30.0 TOTAL PERIOD 3a COST 679 4 31 44 3.051 460 3.269 3.269 802 -

• 101,008 21.237 11,303 PERIOD 3 - ISFSI Site Restoration Period 36Ditec Decornmissioning Activities Period 3YAddibna Costs 3f.2.1 ISFSI Site Restoration- 2,105 47 323 2,474 2.474 ,372 160 30.2 Subtrta Pernod3fAdditional Costs 2,105 - " 47 323 2,474 2.474 5,372 160 Period 3f Colalater Costs 36.3.1 Small loot alnovanra 3 - .. 0 3 3 36.3 Subtotal Period 3f Collateral Costs 3 - -0 3 3 Period 36Poriod-Dependenl Costs 3t.4.1 Insurar.e .-.

31.4.2 Property tones 36.43 Heavy equipment rental 72 - - 11 82 82 34.4 Plant energy budget - 12 2 14 14 3f.4.5 Sit. O&MCosts 41 6 47 47 3f.4.6 Security Staff Cost 94 14 108 108 2,486 3f.4.7 UtilityStaff Cost - - 104 16 tf19 119 1,543 3t.4 Subtotal Period 3f Poted-delpendent Costs " 72 250 48 370 370 4,029 3K0 TOTAL PERIOD 36COST 2,179 297 371 2,847 2,847 6,372 4,189 PERIOD 3 TOTALS - 42,712 379 38 - 12,333 67,439 17,833 140,735 14,750 57.855 68,129 - 802 - 580 206,654 417.656 79.,659 TOTALCOST TO DECOMMISSION 7,271 92,176 11.191 13,249 7.957 58,404 432,016 114,068 736.331 504.115 158.771 73,445 179,851 216,729 4,893 f17 580 28.407.920 1,176.085 4.285,093 TOTALCOST TO DECOMMISSION WITH 18.33% CONTINGENCY: $736,331 thousands of 2068 dollats TOTALNRC LICENSE TERMINATIONCOST IS 68.46% OR: $504,115 thousand. of 2008 dollars SPENTFUEL MANAGEMENTCOST IS 21.56% OR: $158,771 thoasants of 2008 dollars NON-NUCLEARDEMOLITIONCOST IS 9.97% OR: $73,445 thousands of 2008 do.ars TOTALLOW4.EVEL RADIOACT1VEWASTE VOLUMEBURIED (EXCLUDING GTCC): .222,138 cubic feat OTAL GREATER THANCLASS C RADWASTE VOLUME GENERATED: 580 cubic feet OTAL SCRAP METAL REMOVED: 71.180 tos OTAL CRAFT LABOR REQUIREIMENTS: 1,176,085 man-houra End Notes:

r/a - indicates that this activity nmtcarged as dOcommissioning expense.

a - indicats that this activity performed by decommissioning staff.

0 - indicates thatthis value is less than 0.5 but is non-mros.

a arolontaining '-' indicates a zro ralta TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile Island, Unit 1 Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Appendix D, Page 1 of 13 APPENDIX D DETAILED COST ANALYSIS DELAYED DECON TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile 1.1and, Unit I DocumentEl16-1555-011, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Appendix D, Page2 of 13 Table D Three Mile Island, Unit 1 Delayed DECON Decommissioning Cost Estimate (thousands of 2008 dollars)

Off-Sita LLRW NRC Spent Fuet Site Processed Burial Volurmes Buriall Utility an Activity Decon Removal Packaging.. Transport Processing Disposal Other. Total Total ic., Term. Mansagement Restoration Volume Class A Class B Class C GTCC Processed Craft Conltrctor ind.. Activity Descrii*on Cost . Cost CoCosgs Costs - Costs CCoost sts Costs Costs Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Wtt, Lbs. Manhoum Manhouo PERIOD 1. - Shutdown through Transition Period is Direct Decommissioning Activities lal.. SAFSTORslte characterization survey . - 436 131 567 567 lu1 a2 Propare preliminary decommslsioning co- - 149 22 171 171 1,300 la11.3 Notificationof Cessation of Operations la1.4 Remove fuel &Source material n/a la.1.5 Notificationof Permanent Defueling a la.1.6 .Deactivate plant systems & process waste 1a.1.7 Prepare ond submit PSDAR - 229 34 203 263 2,000 1a.1.8 Review plant dwgs &specs. 149 22 171 171 1,300 1 .1.9 Pefonn detailed rodsurvey lu.1.10 Estimate by-product inventory - 114 17 131 131 1,O000 ul..11 tint product desciption 114 17 131 131 1,000 lu.l.12 Detailed by-product inventory 171 26 197 197 1,500 la.1.13 Define major work sequence 114 17 131 131 1.000 Ia.I1.4 Perform SER and EA -- 354 53 407 407 3.100 la.S.15 Perform Sirt-Specifc Cost Study - 571 86 657 657 5.000 Activity Specifications lua..16.1 Prepare plant and fadlitles for SAFSTOR -. 562 t4 646 646 4,920 lua,.16.2 Plant systemo -- - 476 71 547 547 4,167 la.1 .16.3 Plant structures and buildings 356 53 410 410 3,120 la.1.16.4 Waste managanot - . - 229 34 263 263 2,000 la.l.16.5 Facility and site dormancy - . - . - - 229 34 263 263 2,000 la1.16 Totsl - * - - 1,652 278 2.129 2,129 16,207 Detailed Work Procedures l:..17.1 Plant systanes 135 20 155 155 1-183 la.l.17.2 Focilily cioseout & dormancy 137 21 158 158 1,200 la.1.17 Totas . 272 41 313 313 2.383

- 11- 2 13 13 100 la.1.18 Procure vacuum drying system Ila.119 Drinide-enorgize non-cont. ypteims la.1.20 Drain & dry'NSSS Ia.1.21 Dmrorde-energizecontaminatedsystems .

ta.1.22 teosrdsecuro contaminatad systems 6 tat Subtotal Period loa AuctvityCosts 4,536 746" 5,282 5,282 35,890 Period ilPofod-Dependent Costs Ie.4.1 Insurance S - 1.074 107 1,101 1.181 1a.4,2 Propentytaxes tZ .4.3 HeMathphysics supplies 347 87 433 433 lA.4.4 Heovy equlpmenl rental 346 - 52 397 397 la.5.5 Disposal of DAWgenerated - - 34 - 6 45 45 610 12.190 3 la.4.6 Plant energy budget - ..1 459 219 1.677 1,677 la.4.7 NRC Fees 775 77 852 862 1a.4.8 Emergency Planning Fees 554 55 605 - 605 to.4'9 Site O&M Costs - '- 250 37 287 287 1 .4.10 Spent Fuel Pool O&M 745 112 657 - 857

- 5,378 807 6,185 6,185 157A471 Ia.4.11 Socurdty Staff Cost -

Ia.4.12 UtilityStaff Cost 27,176 4,076 31,253 31,253 423,400 34 37.407 5,838 43,774 42.312 1,462 610 12,190 3 580,871 la.4 Subtotal Period Ia Period-Dependent Costs 692 TLG Servic., Inc.

Three Mile 1.1-4d Unit I Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 D~r,,snioionngCoat Anolysi. Appendix D, Page3 of 13 Table D Three Mile Island, Unit I Delayed DECON Decommissioning Cost Estimate (thousands of 2008 dollars) off-Site LLRW NRC Spent Full Sit. Processed Budal Volumes Budral Utility end Activity Deemn Removal Packaging Transport Processing Disposal Other Total Total U.. Tens. Manregemalnt Restoration Volume Class A Clues B Close C GTCC Procesed Croft Contractor index Activity Description Cost Cost Costs Costs Coats Costa Costs Contngncy Costs costs cst. Costs Cu. Feet Cu. Feet CU. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Wt. Lbs. Manhours Manhours l..0 TOTALPERIOD 10 COST 692 1 1 34 41.943 6.384 49,056 47.594 1.462 610 12.190 3 616,761 PERIOD Its- SAFSTOR Limited DECON Activities Period lb Direct Decomemissioning Actvities Decontamination of Site Buildings 1b.1.1.1 Reactor 759 380 1.139 1,139 16,970 lb.t.1.2 Auxiliary 232 116 348 348 5,397 1b.1.1.3 Classified Waste Storage Facility 12 6 -17 17 272 lb.1.1.4 Heat Exchanger Vault 39 19 58 58 902 tb.1.1.5 Interir Solid Waste Staging Facility 48 24 - 72 .72 1.135 lb.I.1.t Miscellaneous Buildings - Contaminated 120 60 ItS 180 2,825 lb.t.1.7 RespirnatorCleaning Facility.- 22 11 34 34 529 Ib.1.1.8 Fuel Handling 491 245 736 736 9.742 1bl.1 Totals 1.723 881 2,594 2,584 37.772 l1b.1 Subtotal Period lb Activity Costs 1.723 881 2,5134 2.584 37,772 Period Ib Additional Costs Ib.2.1 Spent Foot Pool Isolaton - . -- 9,407 1,411 10.819 10,819 1b.2 Subtotal Period lb Additlonal Costs 9 ,407 1,411 10,819 10,819 Period lb Colataeral Costs 1 b.3.1 Decon equipment 667 - 100 767 767 1b.3.2 Process liquid waste 167 - 53 442 327 237 1,227 1.227 1,140 68.413 222 1 b.3.3 Small tool talowance 24 - 4 27 27 I1.3 Subtotal Period lb Coltateral Costs 835 24 53 442 327 341 2,022 2,022 1.140 68,413 222 Period lb Peeod-Dependent Costs lb.4.1 Decon supplies 632 158 790 790 1b.4.2 Insurance 271 27 298 298 1b.4.3 Propertytaxes 185 19 204 204 1 b.4.4 Health physics supplies 209 52 262 262 1b,4.5 Heavy equipment rental 87 - 13 100 100

- -1 .1 - 29 - 7 38 38 512 10.239 2 1b.4.6 Disposal of DAWgenerated 368 55 423 423 1 b.4.7 Plant energy budget 1b54.8 NRC Fees 195 20 215 215 Ib4.9 Emergency Planning Fees 139 14 152 - 152 IbA 4dlO Sit. O&MCosts 63 9 72 72 Ib.4.11 Spent Fuel Pool O&M 188 28 216 - 216 203 1,559 1.559 * - - - 30,691 Ib.4.12 Secuity StaffCost 1.356 6,850 1,027 7,877 7,877 106.720 1 b.4.13 UtilityStaff Cost 29 9,614 1,633 12,206 11,837 368 512 10,239 2 148,411 1b.4 Subtotal Period 1o Pentod-Oependent Costs 632 297 1 1 3,189 356 19,021 4,249 27.630 27,261 368 -1,52 78,652 37,997 146.411 lb. TOTAL PERIOD Ib COST 320 54 443 PERIOD It -Preparaltons for SAFSTOR Dormancy Period 1c Direct Decommissioning Activates 407 B1 468 468 3,000 10.1 Prepare suppod equipment for storage 700 36 - 5 41 41 I0c-.2 I1.tat containment pressure equal. linea 12,115 lc.1.3 interim survey priorto dormancy 733 220 953 953 1c.1.4 Secure building accesses TLG Services, Inc.

Three We Island, Unit I D-surnewenl E16-1555-011, Rev. 0)

Deomsmissionsing Cost A~solyese Appendix D, Page 4 of 13 Table D Three Mile Island, Unit 1 Delayed DECON Decommissioning Cost Estimate (thousands of 2008 dollars) 011-Site LLRW NRC Spent Fuel Site Processed Burial Volumes Burial/ Utility*a Activity Decen RemOval Pacaging Transport Processing Disposal Other Total Total Lie. Teom. Management Restoretion Volume Class A Cl..s B Class C GTCC Processed Craft Contractor Index Activity Descrtipton Cost Cost Costs Costs Costs Costs Costs Costln n Costs Costs Costs Costs Cu. Fast Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Wt., Lbs. Manhourn Manhours 1c.1.5 Prepare &submit Interim reporl 67 10 77 77 583 lc.1 Subtotal Period 1c Activity Costs - 442 - 800 296 1,538 1,538 15.815 503 Period Ic Collateral Costs 1C.3.1 Process fiquid wasIs 247 - 79 652 483 350 1,811 1,811 1,683 100.960 328 1c.3.2 Small tool alloswance 3 - 0 3 3 lc.3 Subtotal Period lc Collateral Costs 247 3 79 652 483 350 1,814 1.814 1,683 100,960 328 Period 1c Period-Dependent Costs 1c.4.1 Insurance - 268 27 294 294 lc.4.2 Property taxs" 183 10 201 201 1c.4.3 Health physics supplies 138 - 35 173 173 1..4.4 Heavy equipment rental 88 - 13 99 99 1..4.5 Disposalolo DAWgenerated 0 0 - 2 11 11 152 3.039 1 1..4.6 Plant energy budgot 364 55 418 418 10.4.7 NRC Fees 193 19 213 213 lc4.0 Emergency Planning Fees 137 14 151 151 1c.4.9 Site O&M Costs 62 9 72 72 lc.4.10 Spent Fuel Pool O&M 106 28 214 214 1C.4.11 Scurty Staff Cost 1.341 201 1.542 1,542 39,260 1c.4.12 Uit0y Staff Cost 6,775 1.016 79702 7.792 105,560 1c.4 Subtotal Period Ic Pernod-Depandent Costs - 224 0 0 - 90 1.437

'500 11,180 10,815 304 152 3.039 1 144.820 I c.0 TOTAL PERIOD Ic COST 247 670 79 653 491 10,309 2.014 14,532 14,167 384 1,835 103.999 16,144 145,403 PERIOD 1 TOTALS . , 3,436 1,682 134 1,097 881 71,273 12,714 91,217 89.023 2,195 4,096 194.841 4,143 . 908.576 PERIOD 2a - SAFSTOR Dormancy wAthWat Spent Fuel Storage Period 2a Direct Decommissironng ActMtils 2a.1.1 Quarerly Inspection 2a.1.2 Semi-annual environmental survey 2..1.3 Prepare reports 0 2a.1.4 Bituminous roof replacoment 1,729 259 1.908 1,988 2s.1.5 Maintenance supplia- 1.472 380 1,840 1.840 2a.1 Subtotal Period 2a Actty CCosts 3,201 627 3,828 3.828 Period 2a Collateral Costs 2a.3.1 Spent Fuel Capital and Transfur 6,5500 975 7.475 7,475 2a.3 Subtotal Period 28 Collateral Costs 6.500 975 7.475 7.475 Period 2a Peuiod-ependenlt Costs 2a.4.1 Insurancs 5,547 555 6,102 8.102 2a.4.2 - - 8,601 860 9,461 9,461 Property taxes 2a.4.3 Health physics supplies 942 - 236 1,170 1.178 270 .- 70 357 357 4,831 96.622 22 2a.4.4 Disposal oJDAW generated 8 10 Plant energy budget - 3,416 512 3,928 - 3.928 2..4.5 2a.4.6 NRC Fees 2.673 267 2.940 2,940 2,340 234 2,574 - 2,574 2a.4.7 Emergency Planning Fees Site O&MCosts 2,925 439 3,364 3,364 2a.4.8 8,729 1.309 10,036 10,038 2a.4.9 Sponl Fuel Pool O&M - 6.50.381 Securiy Staff Cost 22,721 3,408 26,129 26,129 2a.4.10 - .- 94,703 60.896 9,134 70.030 70,030 2a.4.11 UtilityStaff Cost 270 117,848 17,024 136.101 4,475 131,826 4,831 96.622 22 1,615,084 2a.4 Subtotal Period 2a Period-Dependent Costs 042 8 10 TLG Service=, I1c.

Three-Mile Island, Unit I Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Coat Analysis Appendix D, Page5 of 13 TableD Three Mile Island, Unit 1 Delayed DECON Decommissioning Cost Estimate (thousands of 2008 dollars)

I Off-Sit. LLRW NRC Spent Fuel Sit. Processed B.1.1 aWionars Burial Utility and I I Act Decon to.,I Reerrval

• l~,r Packaging Transporl r.,a*l. tabe Processing C,,.,

Disposal Other Total Total Uc. Teom. Management Restoratioln Volume Class A Claam B Class C GTCC Processed Craft Cotractor I I C,,.,. C"o1,. Co.er,,l,.n C, C,.., C.hr, C.,..l. C,, P.,. C., P.M C,, F.t e. CPaot Cu. Fe WI. Lbs. Monnhours Manhoar. I Ind.. A .- cripem Cost cost costs Costs -is Costs Costs Costs Cu Feell Cu Fast Cu Fast Cu Feet Cu Fast 1111-L. Manhours Idamhours 2a.0 TOTAL PERIOD 2a COST 942 8 . 10 270 127,548 .18,627 147.405 0,303. 139.101 4,a31 96,622 22 1,615.084 PERIOD 2 TOTALS 942 1S 270 127.548 18,627 147,405 8,303 139.101 4,831 98.622 22 1,615,064 PERIOD 3a - Reactilvata Site Followleg SAFSTOR Dormancy Period 3a Direct Decommissioning Actlitlias 3a.1.1 Prepare preliminary decommlssioning cost 149 22 171 171 3a.1.2 Review plant dgs & spe-s. 525 1,300 79 804 604 4,600

• 3a.1.3 Perform detailed red survey *a 3a.1.4 * .114 End product descrdption 17 131 131 1,000 3a.1.5 Detailed by-product inventory 149 22 171 171 1,300 3a.1.6 Define major work sequence 857 129 985 985 7.500 3a.1.7 Perform SER and EA 354 53 407 407 - -3,100 3a.1.8 Perform Sile-Specific Cost Study 571 86 657 657

• 5,000 3a.19 Prepare/submit License Torminetlon Plan 468 70 638 538 4,096 3a.1.10 Receive NRC approval of tlrrnlnation plan Actilvy Specications 3a.1.11.1 Re-activals plant &temporary facilities 842 126 968 871 97 3a.1.11.2 7,370 Plant systems 476 71 547 493 55 4,167 3a.1.11.3 Reactor Internals - all 122 933 933 7,100 3a.1.11.4 Reactor vessel .743 111 854 854 6,500 3a.1.11.5 BSlog.icalshield 57 9 66 66 500 3a.1.11.6 Steam generators 356 03 410 410 3,120 3a.1.11.7 Reanforced concrete 103 27 210 105 105 1,600 3a.1.11.8 Main Turbine 46 7. 53 53 400 3a.1.11.9 Main Condensers 46 7 53 53 400 3a.1.11.10 Planlstru'tureS &buildings 356 53 410 205 205 3.120 3a.1.11.11 W2ste management 6-26 79 604 604 4,600 3a.1.11.12 Facility &site closeoul - 103 15 118 59 59 9oo 3a.1.11 Total 4,544 682 5.226 4,600 626 39,777 Planning & Site Preparations 3a01.12 Prepare dismantling sequence 274 41 315 " 315 2,400 3a.1.13 Plant prep. & temp.s'e.s 2,419 363 2,782 2,782 3a.1.14 Design water clea-oup system

• 160 24 184 184 1,400 3a.1.15 Rigging/Cont. Cntrl Envilpstoollngletc. 2.048 307 2,355 2,355 3a.1.15 Procure cask/llnens &contalners

• 141 21 162 162 1,230 3a.1 Subtotal Period 3a Activity Costs 12,773 1,916 14,609 14,063 626 72.703 Period 3a Collateral Costs 3a.3.1 Spent Fuel Capital and Transfer 8.000, a00 6.900 6.900 3a.3 Subtotal Period 32 Collateral Costs 6.000 900 6.900 .6900 Period 32 Period-Dependent Costs 3a.4.1 Insurance 474 47 521 521 3a.42 Property taxus 734 73 08 808 3a.4.3 Health physics supplies 303 "76 379 379 3a.4.4 Heavy equipment rental 346 -" 2 397 397 3..4.5 Disposal of DAWgeneroled 29 - 7 30 30 514 10,287 3a.4.6 Plant energy budget 1,459 219 1.677 1,677 3a.4.7 NRC Fees 285 28 308 308 3a.4.6 Emergency Planning Fees 200 20 220 220 TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile Island, Unit I Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 DecommsissioningCost Analysis Appendix D, Poge 6 of 13 Table D Three Mile Island, Unit I Delayed DECON Decommissioning Cost Estimate (thousands of 2008 dollars)

Off-Site LLRW NRC Spent Fuel Site Processed Burtel Volumes . uristl I Utility and Activity oitcon Removal Packaging Transpost Processing Disposal Other Total Total Uc. Tem. Management Restoration Volume Class A Class B Class C GTCC Prooelesd Croft Contractor Irdeot Actl oed tion Cost Cost Costs Casts Costs Costs Costs Contlnnenc Costs Costs Costs Costs Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Foot Cu. Fot WLt. Lbs. Manhour Manhours Period 3a Perod-Oepordent Costs (continued) 3a.4.8 Site O&MCosts 250 37 287 287 3a.4.10 Spent Fuel Pool O&M 745 112 8t7 857 3a.4.11 Security Staff Cost I1,301 195 1.496 . 1.496 3a.4.12 UtilityStaff Cost 16,970 2,545 19,515 19,515 - - 258,629 3a.4 Subtotal Period 3a Pesod-Dependent Costs 649 29 22,412 3,412 26,504 25.427 1,077 514 10,287 2 314,171 3a.0 TOTAL PERIOD 3a COST 649 29 41,185 . 6.228 48,093 7,977 626 514 10,287 2 386,874 39,490 PERIOD 3b -Decoontdssionlng Pneparattons Period 3b Diect Decommissioning Activities Detailed Work Procuduros 3b.1.1.1 Plant systems 541 $11 622 560 62 4,733

- .286 43 328 328 3b.1.1.2 Reactor Intemats 2,500

- 154 23 177 133 1,350 3b.1.1.3 Remaining buildings 44 3b.1.1.4 CRD cooling asssmbly 114 17 131 131 1,000 3b.1.1.5. CHD ho*sings & ICItube - 114 "17 131 131 3b.1.1.6 " - - 114 17 131 131 1,000 Incurs instruJmentatlon 3b.1.1.7 Reactor vessel 415 62 477 477 3,630 3b.1.1.8 Facility closeout - 137 21 158 79 79 1,200 3b.1.1.9 Missile shields 51 a 59 59 450 3b.10f Biological shield 137 21, 158 159 1,200 3b.1.1.11 Steam generators - 526 "79 604 604 4,600 3b.1.1.12 Reinforced cooncrto - 114 17 131 *6n 65 1,000 3b.1.1,13 Main Turbinm 27 205 205 1,560

- 178 3b.1.1.14 Main Condensers " *178 27 . 205 - 205 1,560 3b.1.1.15 Auxiliarybuilding - 312 47 359 323 36 2,730 3b.1.1.16 Reactor building 312 47 359 323 36 2,730 3U.1.1 Total 3,6M4 553 4,236 3,415 821 32,243 3,684 553 4,236 3,415 821 32,243 3b.1 Subtotal Period 3b ActivityCosts Period 3b Additional Costs 3,373 1,012 4,385 4,385 19.100 7.852 3b.2.1 Site Characteization 3,373 1,012 4.385 4,385 19,100 7,852 3b.2 Subtotal Period 3b Additdonl Costs Period 3b Collatoral Costs 3b.3.1 Decon equipment 667 100 707 767 3b.3.2 DOC staff relocation expenses 1,113 167 1,280 1,280 3b.3.3 Pipe cutting equipment 66 957 143 11100 1,100 3b3.4 Spent Fuel Capital and Transfer . .. . -3,6000 450 3,450 - 3,450 3b.3 Subtotal Period 3b Collateral Costs 667 957 4.113 861 6,598 3,146 3,450 Period 3b Period-Dependent Costs 5 26 26 3b.4.1 Decon supplies 20 24 261 261 3b.4.2 Insurance .230 326 3b.4.3 Property taxes 37 A05 405 3b.4.4 Heilth phiysics suplPils 167 3t6 42 209 209 3b.4.5 Heavy equipment rental 173 26 199 199

- 4 22 22 292 5,834 3b.4.6 Disposal of DAWgenerated 3b.4.7 Plan energy budget - 731 110 841 841 3b.4.8 NRC Fees

- . . 140 14 154 154 100 10 110 - 110 3b.4.9 Erergency Planning Fees TLO Services',Inc.

t Three Mile Island, UnietI Docue no E16-1555-011, Rev,. 0 Decommissisoning Cost Anaslysis Appendix D, Page 7of 13 Table D Three Mile Island, Unit 1 Delayed DECON Decormmissioning Cost Estimate (thousands of 20018dollars)

Of-S*te LLRW NRC Spent Fuel Site Procssed Burial Volumes Burtal I Utility and I Acivity Deoa Rennovat Packagitng Transport Processing Disposal Other Total Total UL. Term. Management Restoration Volume Class A Class 6 Class C 0TCC Processed Craft Contractor Index Acivlty Description Cost Cast Costs Casts Casts Costs Cast Confinaencs Coste Costs Costs Costs Cu, Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Wt.. Lbs. Manhous. Manhours Period 3b Period-Dependent Costs (contrnued) 3b.4.10 Site O&MCosts 125 19 144 144 3b.4.11 Spent Fuel Pool O&M 374 80 430 - 430 3b.412 Security Staff Cost 652 g0 7M0 750 27,847 3b.4.t3 DOC Staff Cost 4,604 691 5.295 5.295 58,560 3b.4.14 UtilityStaff Coot 8,508 1,276 9.784 9,7a4 - - 129.669 3b4 Subtotal Perrod 3b PerIod-Dependent Costs 16 1,5841 2,411 , 18,631 18,091 540 292 5,834 1 216,076 20 341 68w 1,297 16 27.011 4,836 33.849 29,038 3.990 621 292 5,834 19,101 256,171 3b.0 TOTAL PERIOD 3b COST 688 1,946 45 68.196 11,064 81,942 68,528 11.967 1,44W 8D6 16,121 19,104 643,045 PERIOD 3 TOTALS PERIOD 4a - Large Component Removal Period 4a Direct Decommirelonng Activies Nuclear Steam Supply System Removal

,11 99,877 2,227 4a.I.1.1 Reactor Coolant Piping 19 78 25 163 - 75 371 371 826 2 6 34 14- 69 69 188 20,849 307 4a.1.1.2 Pressunrizer Relief Tank 3 11 25 74 35 162 73 1.398 419 2,186 2,185 509 8,974 925,540 4,386 -

48.1.1.3 Reactor-Coolant Pumps & Motos 6 . 61 483 596 551 -- , 291 1,979 1,979 - 2.588 338,550 1,794 1,500 4.1.1.A Pressurizer 2,850,879 10,254 30 1.107 1,940 4.640, 2,933 16,073 16.073 11,714 2,250 4a.1 1.5 Steem Generators 5,424 668 * .1,540 . 4.640 . 1,518

' 8.765 8,765 - 11,714 2.685.879 5,400 2,250 4a.1.1.6 Retired Steam Generator Units 59.894 171" 68 98 - 78 505 55 3,002 - 1,47 -

4a.1.1.7 CRDMs/ICis/Sarvie Structure Removal 15 75 220,735 43 2,251 3,339 679 4,268 180 4,875 15,635 15,635 888 626 517 21,917 1,009 46.1.1.8 Reactor Vessel Intramals 80

- 12,289 - 1,543 14,133 14,133 105.646 - -

4e.1.1.9 Vessel & Internal&GTCC Disposal 15,583 7,083 2,003 980,935 21,917 1,009 4a..1.10 Reactr Vessel 61 4.080 1,179 1,021 2.686 t15 5,596 15,583 75.298 509 46,976 2,629 517 80 8,453.784 70,049 8,017 4a.11 Totals 201 12.825 6.994 6,436 73 30,767 360 17,641. 75.298 Removal of Major Equipment 4a.1.2 Main Turbine/Generator 259 89 -. 49 333 . 131 861 861 6,730 302.857 5,654 307 1,699 1,699 5.310 238,934 22,942 4a.1.3 Main Condensers 1,020 70 39 263 Cascading Costs from Clean Building Demolition 4a.1.4.1 Reactor 690 154 794 794 280 9,845 3,371 243 36 280 4a.1.4.2 Auxiliary 48 365 365 4,242 4a.1.4.3 Fuel Handling 317 180 1.439 1,439 17,458 4a.1.4 Totals 1,251 Disposal of Plant Systems 27 166 58 2 166 63,829 1,278 4a.1.5.1 CNTL-TWR-285_PROCESS 10 70 - 31 164 164 420 37,709. 1,444 4a.1.5.2 CNTL-TWR-305 BURY 69 8 13 - 46 47 ,16 93 93 587 - 23,851 1,050 4..1.5.3 CNTL-TWR-305_PROCESS 1 4 268 27 203 203 - . 4,257 4a.1.5.4 CNTL-TWR-322_CLEAN 177 19 147 147 3,122 4.1.5.5 CNTL-TWR-338_CLEAN 129 3 - 23 23 545 4a.1.5.6 CNTL-TWR-3564CLEAN 20 38 6 44 - 44 1,001 4a...7 CNTL-TWR-380_CLEAN 2 12 12 S- 245 10 4a.I.5.8 CNTL-TVWR-388_CLEAN 5 9 31 23 123 123 - 285 25,568 1,217 55 4a.1.5.9 IB-295_BURY 7: 53 53 -

_ - 1,100 46 4a.1.5.10 IB-295_CLEAN 4a.1.5.11 I6-295_PROCESS

,222 g ~ 355 234 90 13 592 69 592 69 5,231 169 212,426 15,164 4,930 647 4a.1.5.12 IS-305 BURY 30 2 - 18 S 11,0058 4,073 68 398 398 2,731 48.1.5.13 1B.305_PROCESS 187 3 18'. 122 - 74 ,6.42 247 5 28 28 4a.1.5.14 IB-322 BURY 11 1 2 44 6 .44 -- - . 896 4a.1.5.15 IB-322_CLEAN 38 TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile Island, Unit I DocumenltE16-1555-011,Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Appendix D, Page 8 of 13 Table D Three Mile Island, Unit Delayed DECON Decommissioning Cost Estimate (thousands of 2008 dollars) 4Off-S9is LLRW NRC Spent Fuel Site Processad Burial Volumes Burial I Utility and Activity Decsn Removal Packaging Traenport processing Disposal Other Total Total U.. Tens. Managemaent RastorUon Volume Clans A Class B Class C 0TCC Process.d Craft Cont-oulor Index Atlvy Dscritptlon Cost cost Costs Costs Costs Costs C sts Costs Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Wt., Lbs. Manhours Manhours, Disposal of Plant Systems (continued) 4a.1.5.16 IB-322 PROCESS 481 12 77 522 211 1,303 1.303 11,602 474,418 10,690 4u.1.5.17 8-355 PROCESS 54 I 8 54 23 140 140 1,207 49,022 1,185 4a.1.5.18 1B-ROOFPROCESS 15 1 5 31 9 .60 s0 - 689 27.993 340 4a.1.5.19 OCA_CLEAN 814 122 936 - 936 - 19.978 4a.1.5.20 OCA PROCESS 87 1 5 37 28 158 158 - 828 33.630 1.913 4a.1.5.21 008 CLEAN 9 1 11 - 11 - 252 4a.1.5.22 T8-305-E BURY 136 13 23 83 59 314 314 - 765 68,600 2,953 4a.1.5.23 TB-305-E CLEAN 187 28 215 - 215 - - 4.738 4a.1.524 TB-305-E-PROCESS 425 16 104 701 226 1,474 1.474 - 15.700 - 637,566 9.513 4a.1.5.25 TB&305-WiBURY 96 9 18 65 44 232 232 - - 599 53.703 2,113 4o.1.526 TB-305-W CLEAN 222 33 256 256 . - 5.764 4a.1.5.27 TB-305-W GIC 87 13 100 - 100 - 2.150 4a.1.5.28 TB-305-W PROCESS 790 30 197 1,336 430 2,784 2,784 - 29,913 1.214.787 17,675 4a.1.5.29 T8-322-E.CLEAN 79 12 91 - 91 - - 1.960 4a.1.5.30 TB-322-ECIC 4 1 5 - 5 - 121 4..1.6.31 T8-322-6 PROCESS 483 21 134 909 279 1.827 1,827

• 20,352 826,490 10,932 4a.1.5.32 TB-322-W_CLEAN 142 21 163 163 - 3,474 4a.1.5.33 TB-322-WPGIC 15 2 17 - 17 - - 386 4a.1.5.34 TB-322-WPROCESS 464 42 276 1,064 441 3.087 3,087 - 41,730 1,694,677 10,620 4a.1.5.35 TB-355-5 CLEAN 1 7 7 - 147 4a.1.5.36 TB-355-W CLEAN 23 3 27 27 572 4a.1.5.37 TB-355-WGIC 2 0 2 2 - - 45 4a.1.5.38 TB-355-WPROCESS 460 15 95 644 227 1,441 1,441 - 14,408 585.109 10,445 4a.1.5.39 TB-380 CLEAN 1I 2 17 - 17 - 364 4a.1.5.40 TB-350 PROCESS 407 12 78 530 194 1.222 1,222 11.873 482.176 9,218 4a.1.5.41 TB-ROOF CLEAN 21 3 24 - 24 - - - 497 4a.1.5 Totals 6,680 196 1,117 7,080 25f 2,769 18,072 15,677 2,395 168,495 2,313 6,643,948 154,095 4a.1.6 scoffolding in support of decommrisioning 702 9 5 182 931 931 665 - 29,926 19,345 33 - -

4a.f Subtotal Period 4a ActivityCosts 201 22,717 7.359 7.646 7,782 31,018 360 21,218 98,301 90,906 2,395 171,709 49,209 2,629 517 580 15,669,450 289.547 8.017 Period 4a Additional Costs 4o.2.1 Turbina Bldg GIC Waste Dispostion as 232 43 360 360 10,108 454,855 as 232 43 360 360 - - 10,108 454,855 4a.2 Subtotal Period 4a Additional Costs Penod 4a Coliateral Costs 4a.3.1 Process liquid waste 77 - 25 210 155 112 580 580 - 642 32,03 106 4a.3.2 Small tool allowance - 176 - 28 202 182 20 -

77 176 25 210 155 138 782 762 20 542 32,503 10l 40.3 Subtotal Period 4a Collatersi Costs Period 4a Peri*d-Depondent Costs 4a.4.1 Docon supplies 52 13 65 65 4a.4.2 Insurarce 801 60 661 661 S- 932 93 1,025 922 102 4a.4.3 Property taxes 4a.4.4 Health physics supplies 1,364 341 1,705 1,705 4a.4.5 Neuoyequipment rental 2,108 316 2,424 2,424 4,018 80.356 18 4a.4.5 Disposal of DAWgenerated 8 224 - 5 297 297 4a.4.7 Plant energy budget - 1,758 264 2.021 2,021 4a.4.8 NRC Fees 918 92 1,009 1,009 317 48 364 364 4a.4.9 Site O&MCosts

- 476 71 547 547 4a.4.10 Radwasto Processing Equipment/Sorvicos 48,828 4a.4.Al Security Staff Cost 1,757 264 2,020 2,020 182,554 4o.4.12 14,096 2.114 16,210 16,210 DOCStaff Cost TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile Isla"d, Unit I Docuameni E16-1355-011, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Appendix D, Page 9 of 13 Table D Three Mile Island, Unit I Delayed DECON Decommissioning Cost Estimate (thousands of 2008 dollars)

Off-Site LLRW NRC Spent Fuel Sit. Processed Burial Volumes Burial I Utility and Actloity Decon Remnoval Packaging Transport Procsssn9 Disposal Other Total Total Lic. Torm. Managerient Restoration Volont ClnA s Class B ClasS C GTCC Processed Craft Contractor Index Activty Description Cost Cost Costs Costs Costo Costs Costs Contingency Costs Costs Costs Costs Cu. Feet Cu. Feot Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Wt., Lbs. Manhount Manhours Period au Period-Oependent Costs (coninued) 4a.4.13 UlJfltyStaff Cost - 21,716 3.257 24.974 24.974 4a.4 Subtotal Period 4a Period-Oependart Costs 52 3,472 224 . . . . 330,714 42,569 6,991 53.323 53.220 102 4,018 80,356 1i 561,897 40.0 TOTALPERIOD 4a COST 330 26.365 7,391 7,948 8.014 31,398 42,929 28390. 152.766 150.247 2.518 181.817 53.848 2.629 017 580 16,237,160 289,671 569,914 PERIOD 4b - Site Decosteftbrulon Period 4b Direct DbcommissnIng Acilfi..

4b.1.1 Remove spent fuel racks 297 .41 105 03.. 294 255 1,074 1,074 2,707 242,924 1.056 Disposal of Plant Systems 45.1.2.1 AB-261-BURY 126 24 56 200 92 499 409 1,844 165,308 2,914 45.1.2.2 AB-251-PROCESS 1 9 04 - 26 102 162 -

1,436 58,327 1,367 45.1.2.3 AB-271_BURY - 74 12 27 48 259 259 898 00,591 1,663 45.1.2.4 ABO271_PROCESS '

103 5 34 229 - 66 437 437 5.133 - 208,455 2,424 45.1.2.5 AB-281-1 BURY 413 67 123 438 238 1,278 1,270 - 4.978 362.114 9,277 4b.12.6 A.-281-1 PROCESS 4 01 0 2 - 1 8 a 42 1.725 100 45.127 AIB-281-2 BURY 567 87 165 507 322 1.727 1,727 6-,052 484.727 12.421 45.1.2.8 AB-281-2_PROCESS 375 5 33 223 - 133 768 760 4.984 202.399 47 248 8,273 4b.1.2.9 AB-281-3-BURY 117 9 17 59 248 4904 "16 93 93 48,749 2,582 4b.1.2.10 AB-281-3_PROCESS

• 50 1 3. 22 - 500 2, - 20,292 1,114 4b.1.2.11 AB-305- _BURY 45.1212 AB-305-1_PROCESS 26 33 0

01 2 14 -

109 9

596 51 596 51 303

~2.&5W 237,727

'12,298 1,877 558 45.1.2.13 AB-305-2-BURY 183 23 44 155 93 498 498 - 1,555 128,368 3,977 4b.1.2.14 A.13305-2_PROCESS 319 6 39 263 - 120 751 751 5,878 3 - 238.721 7,092 45.1.2.15 AB-305-3_BURY 74 7 11 40 31 162 162 .32.987 1,629 45.1.2.16 AB.331 BURY 31 4 7 25 15 82 82 - - 251 20.665 675 4b.1.2.17 AB-331_PROCESS 129 2 13 88 - 48 280 200 1.967 79,879 2,810 4b.1.2.18 CC-305 BURY 441 63 114 405 235 1,257 1.257 - 4.613 334,678 9,025 45.1.2.19 DG-365_BURY 44 o 14 48 26 140 140 565 39.762 987 45.1.2.20 0G-305 CLEAN 100 15 115 - 115 . 2,441 45.1.2.21 FHBI-281_BURY 161 24 44 157 88 474 474 1.611 129.564 3.528 4b.1.2.22 FHB-281-PROCESS 140 2 tt 74 4B 275 -275 1,657 - 607.53 3.10m 4b.1.2.23 FHB-365_BURY 51 6 12 -43 26 137 137 405 35,492 1,126 4b.1.2.24 FHB-3D5_PROCESS 68 2 7. 34 8 25 145 145 7613 73 37.657 1.529 45.1.2.25 FHB-329 BURY 14 1 2 - i6 5 28 28 - 57 5,081 303 45.1.2.26 FHB-329_PROCESS - It 0" 1 4 2 4 23 23 91 21 5,574 249 4b.1.2.27 FHB-348.BURY 64 13 29 - 102 47 255 205 - 943 a3,57 1.400 45.1.2,28 FHB-348._PROCESS 30 1 3 15 3 11 63 63 344 30 10,521 043 4b.1.2.29 INTAKECLEAN 221 33 254 - 254 -. - - 5.603 45.1.2.30 IWT-303 PROCESS 906 18 117 789 7 324 2,193 2,193 17,653 - 716.882 19,B68 4,11.2.31 OCA BURY - 430 99 165 587 289 1,569 1,569 - 485,018 9.04W 7,233 45.1.2.32 PA-301_BURY 163 37 62 220 109 590 590 S- . 2.743 181.570 3,657 4b.1.2.33 PA-3DtCLEAN 247 37 204 - 284 - S - 5,969 4b.1.2.34 PA-301_PROCESS 257 6 43 288 115 7Og 709 6.446 - '261.756 5.672 4b.1.2.35 RB-281_BURY 428 51 108 - .384 224 1,194 1,194 3,555 315,988 9,602 45.1.2.36 RB-281_PROCESS 131 *4 13 62 48 274 1,379 143 68.778 2,=22 Is 274 295 35 67 - . . 238 147 781 - 2,328 196,583 6.561 45.1,2.37 RB-308_BURY 781 45.1.2.38 RB-3508PROCESS 205 5 32 217 09 547 547 4,850 - 196.969 4,613 41.1.2.39 RB-346_BURY 56 0 13 45 20 148 140 S- 419 37.577 1,135 4b.1.2.40 RB-346_PROCESS 120 0 18 42 43 50 279 279 934 395 73.371 2,548 45.1.2.41 RB-INSIOE 0-RINGBURY -. 271 26 54 194 127 672 672 11-783 159,948 6.114 9 ,1 11 - 242 4b.1.2.42 SB-305_CLEAN 45.1.2.43 STPCLEAN 37 a 43 43 - - - - 084 TLG Services, Inc.

Docunment E16-1555-011, Reu. 0 Thr~ee Mile Isloand Unist I Appendix D, Page 10 of 13 Decowun.ioousig Cost Analysis Table D Three Mile Island, Unit I Delayed DECON Decommissioning Cost Estimate (thousands of 2008 dollars)

O,-St. LLRW NRCSpen Foal Sit. PrssodBt~ltVala-- ans--t Utilitye, Activity Decon Removal Packaging Transport processing Disposal Other Total Total LUc.Tenm. Managesment Restoration Volume Class A Class B Class C GTCC processed Craft Cont.ector Index Activity Desciptin CosttCsts Cas t Coats Co sts Costs Canien Casts Costs Casts Costs Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Fast Cu. Feet Cu. Fast Wt., Lbs. Manhours Manhours Disposal of Plant Systems (continued) 4b.1.2.44 TB-305-E_GIC 13 101 - 101 - - 2.342 54 2 10 25 159 159 -

S 1,532 52,212 1.183 4b.1.2.45 TB-355-EPROCESS 4b.1.2.46 YARDCLEAN 492 74 566 - 856 - *-12,996 4b.1.2 Totals 8,272 698 1.l01 2.497 4.388 3,730 21,187 19.812 1.374 55.905 46,055 5.897,056 187.449 1.054 13 7 49 273 1,397 1.397 -* 698 - 44,889 29,024 *-

4b.1.3 Scaffolding insupport of decommissioning Decontamination of Site Buildings 4b.1.4-1 Reactor 767 606 129 319 41 .673 770 3.305 3.305 913 9.415 -" 905,593 29.350 4b.1.4.2 Auxilanw 239 93 12 35 34 46 166 624 624 752 842 113.287 7,302 4b.1.4.3 Ciassifed Waste Storage Facility 12 2 1 2 2 7 26 26 - 43 4,349 319 4b.1.4.4 Heat Exchanger Vault 40 16 2 6 4 7 28 103 103 99 138 17,468 1,243 4b.1.4.5 Interim Solid Waste Staging Fadlity so 10 2 7 1 10 31 111 111 *-21 182 18,988 1,345 Intermediate 18 16 4 11 " 16 19 83 83 - -295 29,523 685 4b.1.4.6 4b.1*4.7 Miscllaneosus Buildings - Contaminated 123 24 6 17 24 77 271 , 271 451 45.147 3.312 23 4 1 3 5 14 51 51 85 1- *8.463 621 4b.1.4.8 Respirator Cleaning Facility 494 500 28 46 29 122 416 1,635 1,635 650 1,399 146.822 20.809 -

4b.1 .4.9 Fuel Handling Totals 1.765 1.271 185 445 109 906 1.529 6,210 6,210 - 2.435 12,850 1,289.439 64.987 45b.A.

1,001 2.137 2,656 5,588 5,787: 29,867 28.493 1.374 59,338 61.612 7,474,307 282,516 4b.1 Subtotal Period 4b Activity Costs ,2.062 10,637 Period 4b Additional Costs - 6,240 848 254 1.102 1,102 -

4b.2.1 License Tertmititon Suvley Planning *- * - 35,745 2 110 1.930 - 509 2,589 2.589 2,716,592 462 -

4b.2.2 Contaminated Soil Remedtation 39.

"2 110 1.930 848 763 3.691 3.691 35,745 2,716,592 482 6,240 4b.2 Subtotal Period 4b Additonal Costs - 39 Period 4b Collateral Costs B5,497 278 -

203 - -67 552 293 1.524 1,524 1,425 40.3.1 Process liqud waste

-173 .26 199 199 4b.3.2 Small tool allowan- 6.667

- 602 330 67 545 545 309,000 68 4b.3.3 Decommissioning Equlpment Disposition 99 366 330 409 386 2.268 " 2,268 - 6.667 1,425 385,497 4b.3 Subtotal Period 4b Coltateral Costs . 203 173 15 612 Period 4b Perio-Depenydent Costs 11e 907 907 4b.4.1 Decon supplies . 725 1,207 121 1,328 1,328 4b.4.2 Insurance

- 1,871 187. 2,059 2,059 4b.4.3 Properly taxes .. .

442

• 2,211 2,211 4b.4.4 Hesith physcs supplies 1.769 631 4,835 4.835 4b.4.5 Heavy equipmeot rental 4.204 98,469 23

- 8 10 275 71 364 364 4,g23 4b.4.6 Disposal of DAW generated

- 2,787 418 3,205 3,205 4b.4.7 Plant energy budget 1.843 184 2.627 2,027 4b.4.8 NRC Fees 637 95 732 732 4b.4.9 Site O&MCosts 956 143 1.099 1.099 4b.4.10 Radw-ste Processing Equilpmnt/SentIces 97.677 3,529 529 4,058 4.058 4b.4.11 Security Staff Cost 356,057 27,598 4,149 31,737 31,737 4b.4.12 DOC Staff Cost

• 627,086

- 41,494 8,224 47,718 47,718 4b.4.13 UtilityStaff Cost - " 4,923 99,469 23 1.080,819 a 10 275 81.921 13,367 102T279 102,279 4b.4 Sutotal Period 4b Period-Dependent Costs 725 5,973 138,106 136.732 1,374 66,004 103,706 10.674,80 283.367 1.087.059 1,167 29868 2,986 8,201 82.769 20,303 4b.0 TOTALPERIOD 4b COST 2,990 16.822 PERIOD 4e - License Tertnination Period 4e Direct DecommnlstenIng Actvities 155 46 201 201 4e.1.1 ORISE confirmatory survey TLG Se*i.ea, Inc.

Three Mile Islanod, Unidt I DoctarroertE16-1556-011, Rev. 0 Decrormisioninotg Cost Anaslysis Appenodix D, Page 11 of 1.

Table D Three Mile Island, Unit 1 Delayed DECON Decommissioning Cost Estimate (thousands of 2008 dollars)

-Sits LLRW NRC Spent Foel Sit. Processed Burial Volumes Burial I Utility and Actiity Dion Remnoval

. Paekaging. Transport Processing . Disposal Oten. Total . Total Lic. Ter. Mlaagannert Restoration Volums Class A Cl.ss B Cla.. C GTCC Processed Craft Contractor Index Actvit Descrittion Cost Coa Cost. Costs Costs Costs Costs Contlhoencv Costs Costs Costs Cost. Cu. Feet Cu. Foot Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Foat Wl.l Lbs. Manhours; Manhours 4e.1.2 Terminatl license 4e.1 Subtotal Period 44 ActiVityCosts 155 46 201 201 Period 40 Additional Costs

.4e.2.1 License Termination Survey 6,183 1,855 8.038 8,038 124.444 3.120 4e.2 6,183 1.855 8,038 8,038 124.444 3.120 Subtotal Period 4e Addlltooal Costs Period 4e Collateral Costs 40.3.1 DOC staff rolociaon expenses 1113 167 1,280 1.280 4e.3 Subtotal Poriod 40 Cotlateral Costs 1.113 167 1.280 1.280 Perod 40 Period-Depondent Costs 40.4.1 Irnsurance 4a.4.2 Propoery taxes 549 55 604 604 4e.4.3 Health physics supplies .- 610 - 153 763 763

• - 1 1 - 19 - 5 26 26 349 6,974 2 4e.4.4 Disposal of DAWgenerated 40.4.5 Plant energy budget 218 33 251 . 251 4e.4.6 NRC Fees 580 58 638 638 4e.4.7 Sitl O&M Costs 1811 28 215 215

- 443 66 509 509 11,700 4e.4.8 Security Staff Cost 56,940 4e.4 .9 oc Staff Cost.". 4,633 695 5,328 5,328

- . - 5,493 024 6,317 6.317 74,100 4..4.10 UtilityStaffCoat 2 1 19 12.103 1.917 14,650 14.650

• 349 6.974 142,740 4e.4 Subtotal Period 4e Pe:od-Dependent Costs 610 1I 40.0 610 1 19 19,554 349 -

TOTAL PERIOD 4. COST 3,985 24,170 24,170 6,974 124,446 145,860 3,321 43,797 . .558 11,000 39,618- 3,893 247,821 157.903 2.629 517 580 26.919.000 697,483 1,802,834 PERIOD 4 TOTALS 145,252 52.679 315.041 311,149 PERIOD Sb - Site Restoration . .

Perod 5b Oirect Decommissioning Actlivit6s Denicilton of Remaining Site Buildings 4,263 52,366 5b.1.1.1 Reactor 3,707 556 4.263 844 8 58 - 58 5b.1..12 Air Intske Tunnel 28,722 2,086 313 2,399 2,399 5b.1.1.3 Auxiliary 219 14 2. 16 16 "-

5b.1.1.4 Carpenters Shop #117 875 5b.1.1.5 50 7. 57 57 Circulating Water Choinatosr 54 6 62 62 5b.1.1.6 Circulating Water Chloriaotor House 1.0 7 5b,1.1.7 Cirolating Water Intake Flume 44 7 50 5O 709 18 140 140 2,422 58.1.1.t C aWiaatingWater Pumphouse 121 9,010 532 80 612 612 5b.1.1.8 CirClatling Water Tunnels 26 452 22 3 26 5b.1.1.10 Classified Waste Storg Facility 726 36 5" 42 42 5b.1.1.11 Coaguollor 35,625 2,622 393 3,015 3,015 5b.1.1.12 Control Room Toer 964 13.913 838 126 9864 5b1.1.13 Cooling Towers 1,381 5b.1.1.14 Corridor 67 1 T 77 .77

- 62 2 32 5b.1.1.15 DeslSing Basin 0 2 690 9.233 5b.1.1.16 Diesel Generator 600 90 690 8,842 502' 75 577 577 5b.1.1.17 Emergerny 01..0I Generator S 12 14 231 2 14 5b.1.1.18 Fire Brigade Training Facility 8 109 5b.1.1.19 Fuel 0 Unlnoading & Pump Stotion 7 4,093 48 367 367 5b.1.1 .20 Heat Exchanger Vault . 319 67 1 5 5 5b.1.1.21 High Range Sample Station 4 1,406

- - 76 - 11 87 87 5p.1.1.22 Indust Waste Trtmnt& Sludge Filr TLG Servicea, Inc.

Three Mile Island, Unit I Docuunent E164555-011, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Appendix D, Page12 of 13 Table D Three Mile Island, Unit 1 Delayed DECON Decommissioning Cost Estimate (thousands of 2008 dollars)

Off-Sits LLRW NRC Spent Fuel Site Procnssed Buril Volumes BSura I Utility and Activity Decon Removal Packasing Transport Processing Dilsposal Other Total Total Uc. Toem. Managemsent Restoration Volume Class A Class B Class C GTCC Processed Craft Contractor Index Activ Description Cost Cost Costs CosCosts Costs Cts Costs Conlln on ts C osts Costs Costs Cu. Feet Cu. Feet CUmFeet Co. Feet Cu. Feet Wt., Lbs. Manhours Manhours Demolition of Remaining Sits Buildings (continued) 5b.1.123 Intake Screen & Pumphouse 1,679 252 1,930 1,930 89 18,870 5b.1.1.24 Interim Solid Waste Staging Facility 13 103 103 1,752 5b.1.1,25 Intermediate 1,287 193 1,480 1,480 17,189 5b.1.1.26 Lube Oil Storage 8 1 09 9 139 5b.1.127 Mechanical Dralf Cooling Tower 121 it 139 139 1.802 50.1.1.28 Miscellaneous Buildings - Clean 874 131 1,005 1,005 10,054 5b.11.29 Miscelianeous Buildings - Contaminated 166 25 190 190 3,414 5.1.1.30 Miscellaneous Yard Structures 1.256 188 1,444 1,444 20,519 5b.1.1.31 North Off"u 255 38 293 293 4,920 5b.1.1.32 Operations Office 54 8 62 62 1,102 5b.1.1.33 Operations Support Facility 244 37 280 4,425 280 5b.1.1.34 Respirator Cleaning Facility 51 8 59 *59 1,072 51.1.1.35 Scurity Improvements 664 100 763 763 6.957 51,1.1.36 Service 252 38 290 290 5.003 5b.1.1.37 Sewoge Pumping Station 5 1 6 97 5b.1.1.38 Steam Generator Mausoleum 305 46 351 351 3.900 5b.1.1.39 Substation Relay Control House 24 4 20 28 489 5b.1.1.40 Training Facility #43 58 9 67 67 1.199 5b.1.1.41 Turbine 1,431 215 1,04' 1,046 - 26,877 5b.1.1.42 Turbion Pedestal

• 1,120 160 1,297 1,297 14,441 5b.1.1.43 Warehouse #1 377 57 434 434 8,170 5b.1.1.44 Water Pretreatment House 115 17 132 . 132 2.006 5b.1,1.45 Fuel Handling 2,937 441 3,378 3,378 40,4.40 5b51.1 Totals 25.145 3,772 28.916 20,916 374.203 Site Cioseout Activities 5b.1.2 Remove Rubble 8,707 1,306 10.013 10.013 7,220 5b.1.3 Grade & landscape site 121 18 140 - 140 531 5b.1,4 Final roport to NRC 176 27 205 205 - - 1,560 5b.1 Subtotal Peiod 5b Activity Costs 33,973 178 5,123 39.274 205 39,069 381,962 1.560 Period 5b Addiltonal Costs 5b.2.1 Concrete Processing 155 1,193 - 1,193 6,293 1t0308 155 1.193 - 1,193 6,293 5b.2 Subtotal Period 5b Additional Costs Period 5b Collateral Costs 5b.3.1 Small tool allowance 237 35 272 272 5b.3 Subtotal Peulud SbCollateral Costs 237 35 272 272 Period 5b Period-Dependent Costs 51.4.1 Insurance 5b.4.2 Property taoes - 1,453 145 1,598 1,598 656 5,030 5b.4.3 Heavy equipment rental 4,374 5,030 289 43 332 332 5b.4.4 Plant energy budget 494 74 568 5%8 5b.4.5 Site O&MCost 5b.4.6 Security Staff Cost 1,943 291 2,234 2,234 49509 11,842 1,776 13.619 13,519 140,274 5b.4.7 DOC Staff Cost - 0,451 SI5,7 885 6,702 6,782 05b4. UtilityStaff Cost - 270,234

- - 21,010 3,071 30,102 30,162 5b.4 Subtotal Period 5b Peuod-Dependent Costs 4,374 70.696 388,255 271,794 65.0 TOTALPERIOD 5b COST 39,613 8 22,096 9,185 70,901 205 70,696 388,255 271,794 PERIOD S TOTALS 39,613 8 22,096 9,185 70,901 205 TLG Services, Inc.

Th-n Mile Ialoand Unit 1 Docurne~nl E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 Denonornmissoning Cost Annalysis Appendixr D, Pajg. 13 of'13 Table D Three Mile Island, Unit 1 Delayed DECON Decommissioning Cost Estimate (thousands of 2008 dollars)

Off-Sit. LLRW NRC Spent Fuel Site Processed Burial Voluanes Burial I Utility and Activity Decon Reoael Packaging Transport Processing Disposal Other Total Total Lie. Torm. Managemrent Restoration Voluae Class A Class B Class C GTCC Proe.se.d Craft Contractor Index Actnvt Description Cost Cost Costs Costs Costs Costs Costs Contlinency Costs Costs Costs Costs Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Wt., Lbs. Manhours ManhoumI TOTAL COST TO DECOMMISSION 7,444 87,981 8,702 11,932 " 11.000 40,814 434,365 104,268 706,507 477.208 153,263 76,036 247,821 167,636 2,629 517 580 27,226,590 1,159,007 5,241,332 TOTALCOST TO DECOMMISSION WITH 17.31% CONTINGENCY: $7086.507 thousands of 2008 dollar.

TOTALNRC LICENSE TERMINATION COST IS 67.54% OR. $477.20S thousands of 2005 dolls SPENT FUEL MANAGEMENT COST IS 21.69% OR: $153,263 thousands of 2008 dollars NON-NUCLEARDEMOLITION COST IS 10.76% OR: $76.036 thousands of 2008 dollars TOTALLOW-LEVELRADIOACTIVE WASTE VOLUME BURIED (EXCLUDING GTCC): 170,782 cubic feet tOTAL GREATER THAN CLASS C RADWASTE VOLUME GENERATED: 50 cubic feet TOTALSCRAP METAL REMOVED: 71,226 tons TOTALCRAFT LABOR REQUIREMENTS:. 1.159.007 loan-hours End Notes:

n/a - indicates that this activity not charged as decronmissioning expenrse.

- - indicates that this actity perfonmed by decomlssionihg staff.

0 - Indicates that this value is less than 0.65but is non-zero.

a rail enitainng"." Indicates a zero vlue TLG Se*ices, lIn.

Three Mile Island,Unit 1 Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Appendix E, Page I of 14 APPENDIX E DETAILED COST ANALYSIS SAFSTOR TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile I.La-4 Unit I Documnent E16-1555-01 1, Rev. 0 Deros~i~ioaogC-9t Aounlysi. AppendirER. Page 2 of 14 Table E Three Mile Island, Unit 1 SAFSTOR Decommissioning Cost Estimate (thousands of 2008 dollars) off-sr. LLRW NRC Spent Fuel Site Paocessed Burial Volumne Burial I Utlity and Activity Dooon Reovlno Packaging TranspotI Pro.-slng Disposal Other Total Total Lb. Term, Monageennt Restoration Volut,. Cl... A Class B Cias. C GTCC Proc.od Craft Contractor Index Actilty Dnri ptIon Cost Cost Coot. Cost. Coeto Coots Costo Cortin on, Coot. Cost. Co. Cost. Cua.

Fet Cu. Feet Cu. Feot Cu. Feet Cu. Fo Wt., Lbs, Manhouro Manhout.

PERIOD 1a - Shutdown through Tranitlion Period la Direct Dcoisns*ionltlg AActivities 10,1.1 SAFSTOR ali characterizuation.srvey 436 131 567 567 1.1.2 Prepare preliminarydeoonnilssioning cost ..... 149 22 171 171 1,300 I.,1.3 Notificatioe of Cessation of Operations

,a.1.4 R=move fuel & source material IV.

1..1.5 Notification of PernanentDofuelng 1:.1.6 Deactivate plantsys1e-0 & ptocess este e1.7 1 Prepare and submit PSDAR 229 34 263 263 2.000 10.1.8 Review plant dgs &t pes... 149 22 171 171 1,300 1a. .9 Portomn detiled rtd survey 1a.1.10 Estimnte by-product iuvrtony 114 17 131 131 1.000 10.1.11' End product desriptllon, 114 17 131 131 1,000 1a.1.12 Detaied by-product invennory 171 26 197 197 1,500 10.1.13 Defne mnajorwot sequence .  : 114. 17 131 131 1,000 1a.1.14 Perfor SER and EA 354 53 407 407 3,100 10 1.15 Perform SitwSpwefhc Coat Study - . . . 571 86 657 657 5.000 Actiity Spacficamors la.16.1 Prepare plantand fcilities fo SAFSTOR . . - - 052 84. 646 646 - . 4,020

.,1.,16.2 Plant sytlans 476 71 547 547 4.167 la.1.16.3 Plant stuctures and burilings -356 .53 410 410 3,120 2.000 a1.i16.4 Waste managenros 229 34 263 .263 10.1.16.5 Facility and SA4dormancy . . . 229 34 263 263 2`000 la.1.16 Total -

• 1.852 278 2,129 2,129 16,207 Detailed Work Procedures 10.1.17.1 Plant ystems -. . - 135 20 165 155 1,183 10.1.17.2 Facilitycdsooul6&donronoy . - . - 137 21. 169 158 S - 1,200 10.1.17 Total * - . 272 41 313 313 2.383 100 l.I.1B Pro-ure vacuum drying yasyt. .11 2 13 13

'a.1.19 DWirde-enotgze non-coni. syslorro la.1.20 rain & dry NSSS la.1.21 Drain/do-onergize oonlaminaltd systems 1n.1.22 DOeconisecure contaminated systems 1a.1 5,282 35.090 Subtotal Period la Ativity Costs 4.538 746 5.282 Period 1a AddiltionalCosts 1a.2.1 ISFSI Construction 16,000 6,000 22,000(3 22.000 10.2 Subtotal PernodIa Add~tiwal Costs 16.000 6,000 22.008 22,000 Period Ia Collateral Costs

- . 11,2W3 1.692 129573 12.973 10.3.1 Spent Fuel Capital and Transfer

- .11,21K0 1,692 12.973 12,973 1a.3 Subtotal Pe=od ta Collteral Costs Period la PerindC-ependent Costs la.4.1 Insurance 1,074 107 1,181 1,181 I .4.2 Property taxes 347 07 433 433 1n.4.3 He Ilh phyScs supple$

52 397 397 1a.4.4 1:.4.5 Heavy equiprnent rental Disposal of DAWgenerated 346

~1 34 - 9 45 45 610 12,190 3 1 .4.6 Plant energy budget . . 1.459 219 1.677 1,677

.10.4.7 NRC Fees .. , . ,.727 73 800 900 605 5 50 0 605. -

1.48 Emergency Planning Fees TLG Semri*-e, i-n.

Three Mile Island, Unit I Doia ent E16-1555.011, Rev. 0 Decommissioning CootAnalysis Appendie E, Page 3 of 14 Table E Three Mile Island, Unit 1 SAFSTOR Decommissioning Cost Estimate (thousands of 2008 dollars)

Off-Site LLRW NRC Spenl Fuel Site Processed Buriol Volurms Burial I Utility sad Activity Oecon Removal Packaging Transport Processing Disposal Other Total Total Lk. Tune. Meanagement Restoretboo Volume ClassA CloseB Class C GTCC Proessd Crilt Conrinetor Index Activl *e sripton Cot Cost Costs Colts Costs Costa Costsot Costs C Cost Costa Costa Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet WI.. Lbs. Manhours Ms1hours Penod la Period-Oependonl Costs (continued) la.4.9 Site O&MCosts - 250 37 287 287 la,4.10 Spent Fuel Pool O&M 745 112 857 - 857 la.4.11 ISFSI Operaling Costs 85 13 98 - 98 Iu.4.12 Security Staff Cost 5,378 807 6.185 6,185 157,471 la.4.13 Ut1iltyStaffCost - - 27,176 4,076 31.253 31,253 - --.- - 423,4D0 Ia.4 Subtotal Period ia Period-oepandenl Costs t 692 t 34 37,444 5.64" 43,819 42,259 1.559 610 12,190 3 580,871 1a.0 TOTALPERIOD 1a COST 692 1 1 34 69,260 14,084 84,073 47,541 35,532 - 610 12,190 3 616.761 PERIOD lb -SAFSTOR Litettad DECONActivities Period 1b Direct Decommissioning Activities Decontamination of Site Buildings 1b.1.1.1 Reactor 759 380 1,139 1.139 16.970 -

lb.1.1.2 Auxiliary 232 116 348 348 5,397 lb.1.1.3 Classified Waste Storage Facility 12 6 17 17 272 1b..1.1.4 Ha*, EAchanger Vault 39. 19 58 58 902 1b.1.1.5 Inteore Solid Wasle Staging Facility 48 24 72 72 1,135 lb.t.1.6 nos BMt utldngs- Contaminated 120 60 180 180 2.825 1b.1.1.7 Respirator Cleaning Facility 22. 11 34 34 529 1b.1.1.8 Fuel Handling 491 245 738 738 9,742 1b.1.1 Totals 1.723 881 2,584 2.584 37.772 lb.1 Subtotal Perod 1tAcOity Costs 1,723 861 2.564 2,564 37,772 Period lb Additional Costs lb.2.1 Spent FueP Pool Isolation 9.407 1,411 10,819 10,819 1b.2 Subtotal Period lb Additional Costs - 9,407 1,411 10.819 10,819 Period lb Collateral Costs 1b.3.1 Decon equip-[l 667 - . - 100 767 767 Ib.3.2 Process liquid wasts 167 53 442 327 237 1,227 1,227 1,140 68,417 222 18o.3.3 Smano lo a tiakno- 24 4 27 27 1b.3.4 Spent Fuea Capital and Transier - 2,810 422- 3.232 - 3,232 lb.3 Subtotal Period lb Colloteral Costs 835 24 53 442 327 2,810 762 5,254 2,022 3,232 1,140 68.417 222 Period lb Period-Dependent Costs 1b.4.1 Deco- supplies 632 158 789 789 1.4.2 Insurance - 268 27 294 294 l b4.3 Propety taxes 183 18 201 201 I b.44 Health physics supplies 209 52 261 261 I b04.5 Heavy equipment rental 86 - 13 99 99 11,.4.6 Disposal of DAWgenerated 28 7 38 38 510 10.206 2 1b.4.7 Plant energy budget 364 55 418 418 115A.8 NRC Fest 181 18 199 199 1 b.4.9 Emergency Planning Fees 137 14 151 151 lb.4,10 Site O&MCosts 62 9 72 72 Ib.4.11 Span FualPool O&M 186 28 214 214 1b,4.12 ISFSI Operating Costs 21 3 24 24 1b.4.13 Security Staff Cost 1,341 201 1,542 1,542 39,260 1b.4.14 UtilityStaff Cost 6,775 1,016 7.792 7.792 -

• 105,560 1b.4 Subtotal Period 1b Period-Dependent Costs 632 295 28 9,518 1.620 12,095 11,706 389 510 10,206 2 144,820 1b.0 TOTAL PERIOD 1b COST 3.189 318 54 443 3568 21,736 4.654 30,751 27.130 3,621 1,651 78,622 37,997 144,820 TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile 1s.and, Unit I Document E16.155&5-0lI, Rev. 0 DecommissioningCoot Anolysis Appendix A Page4 of"14 Table E Three Mile Island, Unit 1 SAFSTOR Decommissioning Cost Estimate (thousands of 2008 dollars)

B SAo.e~y OffSi.*t ULIrW ...( tipot! Fuel sit. procmse Devon Removal Packaging Transport Processing oDsposal Other Total Total Uc. Toem. Management B~urialvoiumes Burial 1 Urlt oniWy oI C,,. Coet C,... Ce.,o r.,e R.sthrtion Vetou. Co... A Clas. B Class C GTCC Processed CraS ContractorI E InlAY A*T*I* *l* n *Yl* Cebe C..., C~orin.un.v C...t. erots C.,.. C,,.s Cu F., C,, F.., C,, F... C,. F..* C,, F..t Wt IS U.,lenhu Mneh..,.

nde. -1 - C:y Cost Co:ts Coses Cost. Costs Cost. Cost. Cu Feet Cu Feet Cu. Feet Cu t Cu Fast oura Manhours PERIOD I1 - Phiparations for SAFSTOR Domancy Period Ic Direct Decommissioning Actvities 1C.1.1 Prepare support equipment for storage 407 61 468 468 1c.1.2 3,000 Inrsts5 containmentpressure equal. lines 38 " 5 41 41 1c.1.3 Interim survey priorto dormancy 700 733 220 953 953 1c.1.4 Secure building accesses 12,115 a

lc. 1.5 Prepare &submit interim report 67 10 77 77 - s883 1c.1 Subtotal Period 1c ActivityCosts 442 800 286 1,538 1,538 15,615 583 Period Ic Collateral Costs lc.3.1 Process liquid vasta 247 - 79 652 483 - 350 1,811 1,811 1,683 100,960 328 -

lc3.2 Small tool alowanco - 3 - 0 3 3 1c.3.3 Spent Fuet Capital and Transfer . . . .- 2.841 428 3,268 - 3.268 - - --

1.3 Subtotal Period 1c Colateral Costs 247 3 79 652 483 2,841 777 5,081 1,814 3.268 1,5183 100,960 328 Period 10 Period-Dependoet Costs 1c4.1 Insuornce - - - 271 27 298 298 1C.4.2 Property taxes - 185 19 204 204 1C.4.3 Health physics supplies 139 - 35 174 174 lc.44 Heavy equipment rental 87 - 13 100 100 1c.4.5 Disposal of pAW generated 0 0 9 - 2 11 11 154 3.073 1 -

1c.4.6 Ptont energy budget 368 55 423 423 lc,4.7 NRC Foes 183 18 202 202 1c.4.8 Emergency Planning Fees 139 14 152 - 152 1C49 Site OZM Costs 63 9 72 72 1.4.10 Spent Fuel PoolO&M 188 28 216 216 1c.4.11 ISFSI Operating Costs 21 3 25 - 25 1.4.12 Secufrty Stan Cost 1,356 203 1.559 1,559

- - - . 39.891 1C.4.13 UtilityStaff Cost 6,80 1,027 7.877 7.877 -- - - 106.720 1c.4 Subtotal Period ic Pdod-Oependent Costs 226 0 0 9 9.623 1,455 11,313 10,920 393 154 3,073 1 146,411 lc.0 TOTALPERIOD Ic COST 247 672 79 653 491 13,264 2.527 17,933 14.272 3,661 1.835 1G4.033 16.144 146.995 PERIOD I TOTALS 3.436 1.682 134 1,097 881 104,261 21,266 132,757 88.943 43,813 4,096 194.845 54.143 908,576 PERIOD 2a - SAFSTOR Dormancy with Wet Spent Fuel Storage Period 2a Dired Docommissioning Activities 2.1.1 0ua0erlyInspectn 2a.1.2 Semi-annual environmental survey 2a.1.3 Prepare reports 2a. 1.4 Bituminous root replacement 600-88 90 6902 690 2e.1 .5 Mainlenc supplies - - - . - 511 128 839 639 2a.1 Subtotal Period 2a ActivityCosts - * . 111 218 1,329 1,329 Period 2a Co6ateral Costs 2a 3.1 Spent Fuel Capital and Transfer -. - - 45.072 6.761 51.833 51.833 51,833 - - - - - -

2a.3 SubtotalPeriod 2a Collateral Costs * - - 45,072 6,761 51,833 Period 2a Period-Dependent Costs 2.4.1 Insurance 1,926 183 2,119 1,954 161 -7 3349 2a.4.2 Property saxes 2,986 299 3,285 3.285 2a.4.3 Health physic supplies 327 - - 82 409 409 2a.4.4 Disposal of DSAW generated 94 - 24 124 124 - . - 1,677 - - . 33.889 I TLG Sericese Ile.

Three Mile Ilrund, [Milt I Document EI6-1 555-011, Rev. 0 JIeoinotisioningCost Analysis Appendix F Page5ofI14 Table E Three Mile Island, Unit I SAFSTOR Decommissioning Cost Estimate (thousands of 2008 dollars)

Acticity ivOon iOff-Bi1m R.o-ai Packaging Transport Processing Disposal Other Volu"e Processed Cltso A Cl.ss B Volumtes burial Class C GTCC processed Burial I Craft Co.traotor a

Utilit1=n01 Total Total UL.FINRE Term. Man beet spend Fuel Restoration 5ire Indo. Activity Descriptlio Cool Coat Costs Costs Costs Costs Cost, Caontinge..y Costs Costs Costs Costs Cu. Fast Cu. Foot Cu. Feet Cu. Foot Cu. Foot Wt., Lbs. Manhounr Manhous I Period 2a Poriod-Dopendont Costs (continued) 2a.45 Ptard energy budget 1,188 178 1.364 682 682 2a.4.6 NRC F... 905 91 996 996 -

2a.4.7 Emergency Planning Fees 813 81 894 894 20.4.8 Site O&MCosts 1,016 152 1,168 1,168 -

2a4.9 Spent Fuel Pool O&M 3.031 455 3.485 - 3,485 2a.4.10 ISFSI Operating Costs 345 52 397 - 397 2a4.11 Scanly Staff Cost 15,778 2.367 18,145 3.053 15.092 451,560 2a.4.12 UtilityStaff Cost - ° 21,144 3,172 24.316 5.403 18.913 - 5334,960 2a.4 Subtotal Period 2a Period-Deoendent Costs 327 3 3 - 94 49,130 7,144 56,701 17.074 39.627 1,677 33.549 8 786,520 2a.0 TOTAL PERIOD 2a COST 327 3 3 94 95.314 14.123 109.863 18.403 91.460 1,677 - 33.549 a 786,520 PERIOD 2b - SAFSTOR Domosncy with Dry Spent Fuel Storage Peiod 20 Dired Decommissioning Activites 261.1 Quately Inspection a 2b.1.2 Semi-aoouol enrvironmntal srvey 2b.1.3 Prepare reports .a 2b.1.4 Bituminous roof oplacnmedn - .. 1,350 203 1,553 1,553 2b.1.5 Maintenance supplies . 1,150 287 1,437 1,437 2b.1 Subtotal Period 21bActivity Costs 2,500 490 2,990 2,990 -

Period 21, C4liatal Costs 2b.3.1 Spent Fuel Capital and Transfer. - . 7,75 1.183 6,913 8,913 20.3 SudSotalPeriod 2b Collateral Costs - 7,750 1,185 8.913 8,913 Period 2b Period-Dependent Costs 2b.41 . Insurance - 4.073 407 4,480 4,395 86 2642 Property taxes . - , - 6,717 672 7,389 7,389 2b.4.3 Health physics supplies 617 - 154 771 771 2b.4.4 Disposal of DAWgeneraeld 6 7 1986 - 1 260 280 3.514 70,285 16 2b.4.5 Plant energy budget . " - - 1.334 200 1,534 1,534 204.6 NRC Fees . -2,037 204 2,240 2,240 20.47 EnrooonPlanning Feas -1,828 183 2.011 2.011 2b.48 Site O&MCoTs 28285 343 2.627 2.627 -

2b.4 9 ISFSI Operating Costs 116 893 - 893 2b.4.10 Seonly Staff Coo- - 19,330 2.899 22,229 6,867 15,362 . -515,006 2b.4.11 UtililyStaff Cot . . . - 19,634 2,945 22.579 12,153 10,426 305,189 2b.4 Subtotal Period 2b Period-Oep0ndror Costs . - 617 6 7 196 58,013 8.174 67,014 38,236 28,777 3,514 70,285 16 820,194 2b.0 TOTALPERIOD 2b COST 617 6 7 * . 196 85,283 9,827 78.916 41.226 37,690 3,514 70,285 16 820,194 PERIOD 2c . SAFSTOR Dormaoncy without Spent Fuel Storage Period 2c Diroc Decommissiornig Activities 2c.1,1 QuCartey Inspection a 2c.1 2 Snmi-annual environmental 0ury0 2C.1.3 Prepare reports a 2c.1 4 Biturinous roof replacemenl . . 5,824 874 6,697 6.697 2c.1.5 Maintenance supplies - 4,959 1,239 6.197 6,197 2c0 Subtotal Period 2c Activity Costs. 10782 2.113 12.895 12.895 Period 2c Period-Depardeto Col 1s 2c.4.1 n Is a . . 17,230 1,723 . 18,953 18,853 2c4.2 proty laxe -28.969 2,897" 31,866 31,866 2c.4.3 Health physics spplies 2,504 - 626 3,129 3,129 TLG Services, Ine.

Three Mile Island, Unit I Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 Decomsi.i.ening Cost Analysi Appendix E, Page 6 of 14 Table E Three Mile Island, Unit I SAFSTOR Decommissioning Cost Estimate (thotusands of 2008 dollars)

Off-Site L.RW NRC Spent Fuel Site Processed Burial Volumes Berdell Utility and Activity Decon Removal Pectukaging Transport Processing Disposal Other Totsl Total it. Tenr. Men.gement Restolraon Volo.1e Chlss A Class B Class C GTCC Processed Craft Contractor index Actilvi Description Coot Coot Costs Costi Costs Cost. Costs Contingency Costs Costs Costs Costa Cu. Feet Cu. FPet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Wt. Ls.d Manhours Menhtos.I Period 2c Period-Dependent Costs (continsed) 2c.4.4 Disposal of DAWgoveraled 25' 29 826 - 213 1.094 1,094 14,812 - - - 296,234 68 2c.4.5 Rant energy buoget - 5.753 863 6,616 6,616 2c.4.6 NRC Foes 6.033 803 8,836 8,836 2c.4.7 Site O&MCosts 9.853 1.478 11,332 11.332 2c.4.8 Securty Staff Cost 25.753 3,863 29,616 29,616 616,971 2c.4.9 Utiliy Staff Coot - 45,578 6,837 62,414 52,414 - 719,800 2c.4 Subtotal Period 2c Ponivd-Dnpendent Costs 2,504 25 29 - 26 141,169 19,303 163,856 163,856 14,812 - - - 296,234 68 1,336,771 2c.0 TOTAL PERIOD 2c COST 2,504 25 29 826 151,951 21,416 176,750 176,750 14,812 - - - 296,234 68 1,336,771 PERIOD 2 TOTALS 3,448 33 39 1,116 315,527 45.365 365.529 236,379 129,150 20,003 400,057 92 2.943,486 PERIOD 3a - Reactivate Site Following SAFSTOR Doinarecy Period 3a DirectDecommisskinlng Activities 3a.1.1 Prepare pratiminary decommissioning cost - -149 22 171 171 1,300

- 526 79 604 604 4,600 3a.1.2 Review plani dwgs & specs.

3a.1t3 Pertoov detailed red survey 3a.1.4 End product description - . -- 114 17 131 131 1,000 3a.1.5 Detadd by-product inventory . - 149 22 171 171 1.300 3a.1.6 Dtive miijo work seuence -57 129 985 9685 7,500

- . - 354 53 407 407 3,100 3a.1.7 Perform SER and EA 3a. 1.8 Perform Sito-Specific Cost Study 571 86 657 657 5.000 3a.1.9 Peparylrtubmil License Termination Plan - - 468 79 531 538 4.096 3a.1.0 Receive NRC appyoval of termination plan ActivitySpodficalions 3a. 1.11.1 Re-aclivate plant &temporary facilities 842 126 968 871 97 7,370 476 71 547 493 65 4.167 3a.1.t1.2 Plan systems 7,100 3a.1.11.3 Reactor intenals 122 933 933

- 743 ill 854 854 6,500 33.t.11.4 Roactor vessel BOO 3a..tt1.5 Biological shield -- - 57 9 66 66

- * - - . 356 53 410 410 3.120 3a.1.11.6 Stores generators 1.600

- . , . .- 183 ,27 210 105 105 3a l.1.17 Reinforcad concrete 400

- - 46 7 53 - 53 3a.1.11a8 Main Turbine 490

'46 ,7 63 53 3a.1.11.9 Maio Condessers 3,120 356 53 410 205 .205 3a,.111,10 Plant structures & buildings 4,600

- - 526 79 604 604 3a.1 .it,11 Waste monogoment 900 3 a .1.11 .1 2 F ac iity& s it ec"Jo s " "t -. * - 103 15 118 59 59 4.544 682 5,226 4.600 626 39,777 3a.1,l1 Total Planning &Site Preparations 2,400 3a.1.12 Prepare disvmavnlg sequence - - 274 41 315 315 3a.1.13 Plant prep. &8emy.'svs s 2Z419 363 2.762 2.782 18D 24 184 .184 1,400 3a. 1.14 Design "Oter deac-op system 3a.1.15 Riggingt t. CotH Envipsffoolingletc 2.048 307 2,355 2.355 141 - -1,230 3a.1.16 Procure casksfliners & containers 21 162 162 1,916 14,689 14.063 626 72,703 3a.1 SubtlotalPeriod 3a ActivityCosts 12,773 Period 3a Peried-Dependenl Costs 44 481 481 437 3a.4.1 Ivnsranco S - .. -734 73 806 806 3a.4.2 Property taxes 303 76 379 379 3a.4.3 Heelth physics supplies 3a.4.4 Heavy equipmenl rental 346 52 397" 397

<7 38 38 514 - - 10,287 3a.4.S Disposal of DAWgenerated 1

1. * " - "29 -

TLG Servi-e., Inc.

Thre Mite Island, Unit I Document E16-1555-0I1, Rev. 0 DecomniaianirsgCost Anoalysz. Appendix A Page 7 of 14 Table E Three Mile Island, Unit I SAFSTOR Decommissioning Cost Estimate

...... . ........-. (thousands of 2008 dollars)

Off-she LLRW NRC Spent Fuel Bite Processad Burial Votfrna. Burial!I 1Utit and Activity " Decoy Removal Packaging Transport Processing Disposal . OtWe TOW Total tLic. Termn. Management Restorafion Volume Class A Class B Class C GTCC Processed Craft CsoJrsctar Indes Activity Description Cost Coast Costa Costs Costs Costa Costs Continoency Costs Costs Costs Costs Cu. Feet Cu. Font Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Wt., Lbs. Manhoum Mabhours Period 3a Period-Depandent Costs (continued) 3S 4.6 Plant energy budget - - - . . 1.459 - 219 1,677 1,677 3a.4,7 NRC Fees -- 270 27 297 297 3a.48 Sit. O&MCots - " -. * . 250 37 287 287 3a.4.9 Security Staff Cost - - 1.301 195 1,466 1.496 35.728 3a.4.10 Utitiy Staff Cost 16.970 2,545 16,515 19,515 - 258.629 3a.4 Subtoots Period 3a Poriod-Depndoent Costs 649 I - 29 21.420 3.276 - 25,376 25,376 514 10,287 2 294,357 3a.0 TOTAL PERIOD 3a COST 649 1 1 29 34,194 5,192 40,065 39,439 626 514 10,287 2 367,080 PERIOD 3b - Decommissioning Preparations Period 3b Direct Decommissioning Activities Detailed Work Procedures 3b.1.11 Plant systems 541 81 622 560 62 4,733 3b 1.1.2 Reactor internals 286 43 328 328 2,500 3b.1.1,3 Remaining buildings 23 177 44 133 1.350 3b 1.1.4 CRD coding assembly 114 17 131 131 17 131 131 1,000 3b.l.I.S CRD housings & ICItsbas 114 3b.1.6 n.re instrumentation 114 17- 131 131 1,000 415 62 477 477 3,630 36.1,1.7 Reator -veWss 137 21 108 79 79 1.200 3b.1.1 8 Facility doseout 3b.1,1.9 Missile shields 51 8 59 59 450 21 158 158 - .200 3b.1jt.10 Biological shield 137 526 78 604 604 4,600 36.1.1.11 Steam generators 31b.1.112 Ranlforced concrte 114 17 131 66 66 - 11:000 500O 3bI.t.t3 Main Turbine 178 27 206 205 1,5860 178 27 205 - 205 1,560 3b,1.1.14 Main Condensers 2,736 3b.11.15 Auliary beilding - - 312 47 359 323 36 312 -47 359 323 36 2,730 3b.1.t16 Reactorbuilding 32,243 3b1.1 Total 3,684 553 4.236 3,415 821 821 32.243 3b.1 Subtotal Period 3b ActivityCosts 3,684 553 4.236 3,415 Period 3b Additional Costs 3b,2.1 Site Characterization 3,373 1.012 4,385 4.385 19,100 7,852 3.373 1,012 4.385 4.385 19,100 7.852 3b.2 Subtotal Period 3SbAdditional Costs Period 3S Coliat*rol Costs 15 . 767 767 b.3,.1 Deon equipment 3b.3.2 DOC staff rslocation espenses - 1,113 167- 1.280 1,210 957 143 1,100 1,100 3b 3.3 Pipe cutting aqsipmanl 667 957 1.113 411 3,148 3,148 3b3 SubtotalPeriod 31, Collateral Costs Period 30 Peaod-DependentCosts 20 - 5 26 26 3b.4.1 De-on spplites "

24 261 261 3b.4.2 Insurarne

'- - -368 37 405 405 3b 43 Property taxes 42 209 209 3b.4.4 Health physics supplies 167 173 26 188 199 3b.4.5 Heavy equipment rental 292 0.634 1 -

0 13S 4 22 22 3b.4.6 Disposalof CAW generated 110 841 841 3b4.7 Plaid energy budget 14 149 149 3b.4,8 NRC Fees 18 144 144 125 17,913 3b.48g Site OSM Costs g8 750 750 3b.4.10 Sectaity Staff Cost 58,560

. 4,604. 691 S.295 5,295 3b.4.11 DOC Staff Cost TLG Services, Ine.

Three Mile Ilan4 Unit I Document EI6-1555-011, Rev. 0 Decomniaaieoing Coat Analyaio Appendix h Page 8 of 14 Table E Three Mile Island, Unit 1 SAFSTOR Decommissioning Cost Estimate (thousands of 2008 dollars) i Off-Site LLRW rasor Ttl NRC Spent Fuel Sit Procassed Burial Volumes Burial I Utiity and ACtivity Devon Removal Packaging Traesport Procesoing Disposal Other Total Total ContRmoaractorg

-Index Activity Description Cost Cost Costs LIe.Teon. Management Restoration Volume Clas A Class B Class C GTCC Preoessod Craf t Costs Costs Costs Costs Contingc Costs Costs Costs Costs Cuy Fool C. Post Ca. Foot Co. osst Ca. Foat Period 3b Period-Dopendenl Costs (continued)

~

cast.~~~~~~

Cot ~ ~ ~ cot u-etCuFs WI. Lbs.

C.etWtUo.Mnoue Manhous Manhours 120,u1at159e o

3b.4.12 UtilityStaff Cost - 8,050 1,276 9,784 9,784 3b.4 Subtotal Period 3b Poriod-Dependent Costs 20 341 ÷ . 129,669 16 15,362 2,344 1t.0115 10,085 - - 292 5,0834 1 206,142 3b.0 TOTAL PERIOD 3b COST 551 1,297 16 23.532 4.319 29,854 29,033 821 292 5,834 190101 246,237 PERIOD 3 TOTALS 688 1,946 2 45 57,726 9,511 69,919 68,472 1,447 806 16,121 19.104 613,296 PERIOD 4a -Large Component Removal Period 4a Direct Decomnrissioning Acticiies Nuclear Steam Supfly System Removal 4a1 11 Reactor Coolant Piping 19 78 11 18 50 81 61 319 319 413 .413t 2 95,775 2,227 4a.I.1.2 Pressuriz Relief Tank 3 11 .4 11 17 11 60 60 94 94 20.849 307 4a. .1.3 Reactor Coolant Pumps & Motors 25 74 35 162 73 1.398 419 2,186 2,186 509 8.974 925,540 4.386 4a.1.1.4 Pressurizar 6 51 483 596 551 291 1,979 1,979 338,550 1,794 1,500 2,588 4a.1.1.5 Steam Generators 30 5,424 1,107 1,940 4,640 2,933 16,073 16,073 11,714 2,850,879 10,254 2,250 4a.1.1.6 Retired Steam Generator Units 668 1,940 4,640 *1,518 8,765 8,765 11,714 2.850.879 2,250 5,400 4a.1.l.7 CRDKs/ICIslSeor-ic Structure Remocal 15 75 171 68 78 505 505 59.894 1,847 39 98 3.002 4a.11.18 Reactor Vessel Internals 2.042 3,098 649 3.558 148 4,289 13,124 13.824 1:329 250 517 221.325 17,467 831 4a . I. 9 Vessel & Internlss GTCC Disposel 12,289 - 1,043 14,133 14,133 580 105,040 4a.5.1.10 Reactor Vessel - 4.651 857 483 2,590 148 5,140 13,868 13,868 7,148 2,573 986,490 17,467 831 4a.1.1 Totals 137 12.457 6.431 5,861 135 29.862 296 16,503 71,712 71.712 1.016 46.976 2,124 517 580 8,455,827 61,149 7,661 Removal of MajorEquipment a.. 1 Main TurbinioGerntster 259 89 49 333 131 861 861 6,730 302,857 5,654 4o.1.3 Main Condensers 1,020 70 39 263 307 1,699 1,699 5,310 238,934 22,942 Cascading Cosds from Clean Building Demolition 4a.1.4.1 Ruaclor 690 104 794 794 9,845 4a.1,4.2 Auciliary 243 36 250 280 3,371 4a.1.4.3 Fuel Handliag 317 48 365 365 - . 4,242 4a,1.4 Totals 1,251 188 1,439 1,439 17,458 Disposal of Plant Systemn 4a.1 5.1 CNTL-TWR-2855PROCESS 58 2 10 70 - 27 166 166 1,564 63,529 1,278 4a.1.5.2 CNTL-TWR-305 BURY 69 6 13 - 46 31 104 164 - . 420 37,709 1,444 4a.1 .5.3 CNTL.IWR-305 PROCESS

• 47 1 4 16 9 93 587 - 23,851 1,050 21 203 4a.1.5.4 CNTL-TWR-322_CLEAN 177 27 253 4,257 4a 1.5.5 CNTL-TWR.33t CLEAN S 128 19 147 147 3,122 48.1.6.6 CNTL-TWR-355_CLEAN 20 3 23 23 545 6 44 44 . - - 1,001 4a.I*57 CNTL-TWR-380,.CLEAN 38 4a.1.5.8 CNTL-TWR-388_CLEAN 10 2 12 12 - 245 4a.1.5.9 l0-295OBURY 55 5 9 31 23 123 123 25,560 1,217 4a1.5.1 IB-295_CLEAN 46 7 53 53 - 1,100 4a.1.5.11 le-295_PROCESS 222 5 35 234 - 96 592 592 5,231 212,426 4,930 4a.1.5.12 IB-3055BURY 30 2 5 - 18 13 69 69 169 S 15,164 647

4. 15.13 IB-305_PROCESS 1817 3 1a8 122 - 68 398 359 2,731 110,815 4,573 4a.1 .5.14 15-322_SURY It 1 2 - 5 28 29 -. 74 6,642 247 38 6 44 44 ÷ 896 4a.1.5.I3 IB-322_CLEAN 4a 1.5.16 0-3322_PROCESS 481 12 77 522 211 1,303 1,303 - 11.682 474,418 10,690 1 23 140 140 - 1,207 49,022 1,185 4a 1 .5.17 IB-355_PROCESS 54 "a 54 4a.1.5'18 IB-ROOFPROCESS - 15 1 5 31 9 60 SD 689 27.993 340 936

• 19,9758 4a.1.519 OCA_CLEAN - 14 122 936 828 -33,030 1,913 4a.1.5.20 OCAPROCESS 87 1 5 37 28 158 150 11 -

4a.1.5.21 OOBtCLEAN 9 1 11 252 T7,0 Services, Inr.

Three Mtile Moand, Unit I DowaunentE16-1555-011,Rev. 8 D-eomi.ssianingCost Analysis Appendix E, Page 9 of 14 Table E Three Mile Island, Unit 1 SAFSTOR Decommissioning Cost Estimate (thousands of 2008 dollars)

SOff.-St LLRW NRC SpentFast all. Procese

. .... Voura

l. Boose Ui ityand Autivity Decon Removal Packaging Transport Procesinog. D Ispol Other Total Total Lal. Toen. Manemere Restoration Volume Class A Closo B Class C OTCC Procssad Craft CotrautorI Index Activity DescrlptIon Cot Cost Costs Costs Costs Costs Costs cTotln Cost Toetal Coss Csts Cstson Foo C Foot

$. Co. Feet Cs. Feet Ca. Poet Wt.tLbs. Mantoars Manhours Disposal of Plant Systems (coneinued) 4a.1.5.22 TB-30SE BURY 136 13 23 83 59 314 314 -8,600 2,953 4a.15.23 TB-305-E_CLEAN 15 765 187 28 215 - 215 - - - - 4,738 4a.1.5.24 TB-305-E PROCESS 425 16 104 701 - 228 1.474 1.474 - 15,700 - 637,566 9,513 4a.1.5.25 TB-305-W-BURY 96 9 18 65 44 232 232 - - 0599 53,703 2,113 4a.1.5.26 TB-305-WCLEAN - 222 33 256 - 255 - - 5,764 4a.1.5.27 TB-305.WGIC 87 13 100 - - 2,150 4.a1.5.28 TB-305-WPROCESS 790 30 197 1,336 430 2,784 2,784 - 29,913 1.214.787 17,675 4a.15.29 TB-322-ECLEAN 79 12 91 91 1,960 4a.t.5.30 TB-322-EGIC 4 1 0 - - - 121 40.15.31 TB-322-EPROCESS 483 21 134 909 279 1,827 1,827 - 20.352 826.490 108932 4s.1,5.32 TB-322-WCLEAN 142 21 163 - 3.474 4a.1.5.33 TB-322-WGIC is 2 17 17 - - 386 4a.1.5.34 TB-322-W PROCESS 464 42 276 1,864 441 3,087 3.087 - 41,730 1,694.677 10.620 4a.1.5.35 TB-355-E CLEAN 6 1 7 7 -- 147 4a.1.536 TB-355-WCLEAN 23 3 27 27 672 4a.1.5.37 TB-355-W_GIC 2 0 2 2 - - 46 4n.15.38 TB-3556W PROCESS 460 18 95 844 227 1,441 1.441 - 14,408 585,109 10.445 4a.1.5.39 TB-380 CLEAN 15 2 17 - - 364 4a.1.5.40 TB-380oPROCESS 407 12 78 530 194 1,222 1.222 - 11,873 482,176 9,218 4a.1.541 TB-ROOFCLEAN 21 3 24 - 24 - - 497 4o.1.5 Totals 6,660 196 1,117 7.080 251 2,769 18,072 15.677 2.395 158,495 2.313 6,643,948 154,095 4a.1.6 Scaffolding in support of decommisstoning 702 9 5 33 - - 182 831 931 - -665 - 29,926 18,349 4a. Subtotal Period 4a Actioty Costs 137 22,299 6,785 7.070 7,844 30,113 296 20.i60 94,715 92,320 2,395 172,216 49,288 2,824 517 580 15,671,490 280,647 7,661 Period 4a Additional Costs 4a.2.1 Turbine Bldg GICWaste Disposition - - - 85 232 - - 43 360 360 - - 10,108 - -

454,855 4a.2 Subtotal Period 4a Addilional Costs 85 232 43 360 360 - - 10,108 464,855 Peiod 4a Collateral Costs 4a.3.1 Process liquid waste 30 48 252 252 - 19 - 241 14,482 47

- 11 94 - 69 4a.3.2 Small tool atowance 169 25 194 175 4a.3 Subtotal Period 4a Collateral Costs 30 169 11 94 69 73 448 427 19 241 14.482 47 Period 4a Psriod-Dnponodnt Costs 4.4.1 tDecn supplies .44 11 55 55 4o.4.2 Insurance 515 52 567 567 799 80 879 791 88 4o.4.3 Property taxes 4a.4.4 Heolth physics supplies 1,274 318 1,5892 1,592 4a.4.5 Heocy equipment rental 1,008 271 2.079 2,079 4a 4.6 Disposal of DAWgenerated 8 7 211 - 55 280 280 - 3.785 75,699 17 4n.4.7 PlanRenergy budget - 1,507 226 1,733 1,733 4n.4.8 NRC Fees 739 74 813 813 4o.4.9 Site O&MCosts 272 41 312 312 4.4,410 Radwasto Processing Equipvnert/Snrices 408 61 469 469 4a4. 1 Sociaity Staff Cost 1,506 226 1,732 1,732 41,696 49.4.12 DOCStaff Cost 12,086 1,813 13.899 13,899 156,531 4".4.13 UtilityStaff Cost 18,620 2,793 21,414 21,414 283,571 4a4 Subtotal Period 4a Period-Depe*dent Costs 44 3,081 8 7 211 36,453 6,020 48,824 45,736 88 - 3.785 - 75,699 17 481,799 4a.0 TOTAL PERIOD 4a COST 212 25,540 6,813 7,256 8,076 30,393 35,749 26.297 141,345 138.842 2,503 182,324 53,315 2,824 517 580 16,216,530 285,712 489,461 TLG Services, 1ne.

• Three Mile Island, Unit I Documnent E16-1555-011, Reu. 0 Deoaoi.eioning Co-t Analyoi. Appendix E, Page 10 of 14 Table E Three Mile Island, Unit I SAFSTOR Decommissioning Cost Estimate (thousands of 2008 dollars)

Iff-Site LLRW NRC Spent Fool Sit. Procesesd Buria, Volumes Borloll I USity and Activity Decon Rerovoal Pockagfng Transport Processing Disposal Other Total Total Lic. Tenn. Managemnent Restoration Volurme Class A Class 8 Class C GTCC Procenssd Craft CotractorI Index Astlty Description Cost Cost Cost. Costs Cost. Costa Cost. Cantnenon Cost. Cost. Cost. Costs Cu. Feet Cu. Fest Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Foot Wt. Lbs. Manhours Manhours PERIOD 4b - Site Decontarninalion Period 4b Direct Decommissioning Activillos 4b.1. Re-o spent fuel racks 297 41 105 83 294 255 1,074 1,074 2.707 242,924 1,056 Disposal ouPlant Systems 4b.1.2.1 AB-261_BURY 126 24 56 - 200 - 92 499 499 - 1,844 165.398 2,914 4b.1.2.2 AB-261_PROCESS 60 t 0 64 26 162 162 1.436 - 58,327 1,367 41.1.2.3 AB-271 BURY 74 12 27 -- . 98 - 48 259 259 - 0898 80,591 1,663 4b6. 2.4 AB-271 PROCESS 103 5 34 229 - 50 437 437 5.133 208,455 2.424 4b.1-2.5 AB-261-i-1,BURY - .413 67 123 - 438 238 1,278 1.278 - 4,978 362,114 9.277 4.3 .2.6 AB-2611 _PROCESS 4 0 0 2 - 1 a 8 42 - 1.725 100 4b.1 .2.7 AB-281-2_BURY 567 87 165 587 322 1,727 1,727 - 6.052 1484,727 12,421 4b.1 .2.8 AB-281-2 PROCESS 375 5 33 223 - 133 768 768 4,9114 202,399 8.273 4b.1.2.9 AB-281-3-BURY 117 9 17 47 248 240 - 544 48.749 2,582 4b.1 .2.10 AB-281-3 PROCESS - 50 1 3 22 - 16 R3 93 500 20.292 1.114 4b.1.2.11 AB-305-1_BURY 86 33 t1 288 109 596 596 - 2,650 237.727 1.877 4b.1.2.12 AB-305-1 PROCESS 26 O 2 14 - 9 51 51 303 12,298 558 4b.1.2.13 AB-305-2-BURY 183 23 44 155 93 498 498 - 1,555 128,368 3,977 4b.1.2.14 AB-305-2 PROCESS 310 ,6 39 263 - 125 751 751 5,870 238,721 7,D92 41..2.15 AB-305-3 BURY 74 7 11 40 31 162 162 - 368 32,987 1.629 41.t12.16 AB-331 BURY 31 .4 7 - . 25 15 82 82 - 251 - 20.665 678 4b.12.17 AB-331 PROCESS . 129 2 13 88 - - 48 290 280 1,967 - . 79.879 2,818 4b.1.2.18 CC-30G5BURY 441 63 114 405 235 1.257 1,257 - 4,613 334.678 . 9,825 4b.1.2.19 DG-305 BURY 44 a 14 48 26 140 140 565 39,762 9 87 4b.1.2.20 DG-305_CLEAN 100 15 115 - 115 - 2.441 40.1.2.21 FHB-281_AURY 161 24 44 157 88 474 474 1,611 - 129,564 3,528 4b.1.2.22 FHB-261 PROCESS 140 2 11 74 - 48 275 275 1.667 - 67,683 3J100 6 -12 4b.1.2.23 FHB-305 BURY 51 43 26 137 137 - 405 35,492 1,125 4b.1.2.24 FHB-305.PROCESS 66 2 7 34 8 " 20 145 145 766 73 37,657 1,529 4b.1.2.25 FHB-329 BURY 14 1 2 - S6 5 29 28 - 67 5,081 .303 41.1.2.26 FHB-329 PROCESS II 0 1 4 2 4 23 23 91 21 5,574 249 41.1.2.27 FHB-348 BURY 64 13 29 - 102 47 255 255 - 943 83.967 1,400 4b.1 .2.28 FHB-348 PROCESS 30 1 3 15 3 11 63 63 344 30 16,521 643 4b.1.2.29 INTAKE CLEAN 221 33 254 254 - 5,603 4b.1.2.34 iWT-303_PROCESS 906 18 117 769 - 3648 2,193 2,193 17,653 - 716,882 19,868 4b.1.2.31 OCA BURY 430 99 165 587 289 1,569 1,5f9 - 7,233 485,016 9,645 1 63 37 220 109 590 690 - 2,743 181,570 41.1.2.32 PA-301 BURY 62 3,657 4b.1.2.33 PA-301-CLEAN 247 37 284 - 204 5-.969 4b.1.2.34 PA-301_PROCESS 257 .6 43 280 - 115 709 759 6,446 - 261,756 6,672 4b.1.2.35 RB-281 BURY 428 51 108 384 224 1.194 1,194 - 3,555 310,888 9602 4b.1.2.36 RS-281_PROCESS 131 4 13 62 15 48 274 274 1,379 143 68,778 2.922 4b.1.2.37 RB-368_BURY 290 35 67 - 238 147 781 781 - 2.328 196,583 6,561 4b.1.2.38 RB-308_PROCESS 205 5 32 217 " 89 547 547 4.850 - 196.969 4,613 40.1.2.39 RB-346_BURY 58 6 13 - 49 28 148 148 - 419 37,577 1,135 4b.1.2.40 RB-346_PROCESS S120 *6 18 42 43 s0 279 279 934 395 73.371 2,548 4b0..241 RB-INSIDE D-RINGSURY 271 *26 54 194 127 672 672 - 1,7783 159,948 6,114 4b.1.2.42 SB-305 CLEAN 9 1 11 11 242 37 6 43 43 M84 4b.1.2.43 STPCLEAN 68 13 101 - 101 . 2.342 4".1.2.44 TB-3O5-E-GIC 4b.1.2.45 TB-355-E_.:PROCESS 54 2 10 68 25 159 159 1,532 62,212 1,183 4b.1.2.46 YARDCLEAN 492 74 566 - 566 . 12,996

• 2,497 4,388 1,374 55.905 46.055 65,97.056 167,449 4b.1.2 Tlatls - 0.272 698 1,601 3.730 21,187 19,812 4b.t .3 Scaffolding insupport of decommissioning 1.054 . 13 7 49 273 1.397 1.397 998 - 44,889 29.024 TLG Service, Ino.

Three Mile slaond, Unit I Document E16-1555-011. Rev. 0 DecommisiaioningCost Analysis Appedix E, Page 11 of 14 TableE Three Mile Island, Unit 1 SAFSTOR Decommissioning Cost Estimate (thousands of 2008 dollars) unas LOV. sptI-o 55 roa*sobnl o.la bnl..ly 0

• *O u-*fi

• LLRW NM*; Spent Fast site Procs-d BuUiaI VOlumes Oecos Reamoval Packaging Transport Processing Disposal Other Total Total Lic. Term. Mainagemeat Butlrmi U*enI Ictfn", -a ..C Restoration Volume Ctass A Class B Clas C 0TCC Procassad Craft CaslrsotoI SCMI -.Ca~l." Costs Cool. naost Ca.lnseea Caess l. Ca.l. Ca. Cua Ial Cu Fast Cu Fast C. Fe.t Cu Peet Wt LF.. Maahar. Manha.,.

..In. e .. ..-, ! . . . .. . . . .. . . . . .. . . . . .. ... i -"r. . . .. . . .. .. . . . . .. . . . . .. . . . . . . . . .. .. . . ... . .

Decontaminalion of Site Buildings 4b.1.4.1 Reaclor 767. 606 125 316 41 539 736 3,131 3,131 913 9,010 886,240 29,340 4b. 1.412 Auxisiary 239 93. 12 35 34 46 166 624 624 752 842 113.287 7,302 4b. 1.43 Classified Waste Storage Fociity 12 2 1 2 - 2 7 26 26 - 43 4.349 319 4.1b414 Heat Exchanger Vault 40 16 2 6 4. 7. 28 103 103 99 138 17,468 1.243 4b.1.4.5 InteirimSolid Waste Staging Facilty 50 10 2 7. I in0 31 Ill 111 21 182 16,999 1,349 4t.14.6 lntoenrodiate 18 16 4 11 16 19 a3 83 295 29.523 685 4b. 14.7 Misaolaneoaus Buildings - Contaminted 123 24 6 17 24 77 271 *271 451 45,147 3.312 4b.14s8 Respirator Cleasing Facility 23 4 1 3 - 5 14 51 51 ,6463 621 4b.1 4.9 Fuel Handling 494 500 28 46 29 122 416 1,635 1,635 690 1.399 146,622 20,809 40.14 , Totals 1,765 1.271 151 .444 109 771 1,494 6.037 6,037 2,435 12.445 1,270,086 64.977 4b 1 Subtotal Period 4b ActivityCosts 2.062 10,637 997 2,136 2.656 5.494 - 5,753 29,694 28,320 1,374 59,338 61,207 7,454,954 262,506 Period 45 Additional CoGsts 4b.2.1 License Teoninalion Survey Planning - - .... 648 254 1,102 - - 6,240 1,102 4b.2.2 ISFSI Lincnsa Termnination 457 4 31 44 1.2a5 323 2,144 2,144 802 101,008 21.237 2,560 45.2.3 Contaminated Soil Ramadiatlon 39 2 110 1,930 - 509 2,989 2,589 35,745 2,716,592 462 -

4b.2 Subtotal Period 4b Additional Costs 496 7 140 1,974 2,133 1,086 5,635 3,691 2.144 36,547 2,817,600 21,699 8,800 Period 4b Collaeral Costs 4b.31 Process liquid wste 81 - 31 253 167 129 681 681 653 39,202 127 4b.32 Small alloance 179 27 205 205 4533 Decommissioning Equipment Disposition - "88 60 330 - 67 545 545 6.667. 300,00 688 4b3 Subtotal Period 4b Collatsral Costs . 5 179 119 313 330 17 223 1,432 1,432 6,667 6S3 339,202 216 Period 45 Period-Dependent Costs 4b541 fecon supplies 725 181 907 907 1.208 121 1,329 1,329 4b54.2 Insurance 41.4.3 Property taxes 1,873 187 2,061 2,061 4b,4.4 Health physics supplies 1,837 459 2,297 2,297 4b.4.5 Heavy equipment rental 4,209 631 4,840 4,840 45.4.6 Disposal of DAWgenorated 275 71 364 364 4,925 98,501 23 4b4.7 Plantenergy budget - 2.790 419 3,209 3.209 4b.4.8 NRC Fans 1,733 173 1,906 1,906 45.4 9 Site O&MCosts 637 96 733 733 4b 4.10 Radwaste Processing Equipment/Ser-vcos 957 144 1,159 1,100 45.4.11 Sacurity Staff Cost - 3.533 630 4,063 4,063 97.782 4b,4.12 DOC Staff ost 27,627 4,144 31,772 31,772 356,440 41,538 4b.4.13 UtlotyStaff Cos- a Is. 6.231, 47,769 47,769 627,760 4b.4 Subtotal Period 4b Period.Dependent Costs 725 6,046 a,3 10 275 81.897 13.387 102,348 102.348 - 4,925 94,501 23 1,081,982 4b.0 TOTAL PERIOD 4b COST 2,869 17.358 1.131 2.599 2.986 7,89D 84.030 20,448 139,309 135,791 2,144 1,374 66,004 103,333 10,710,260 304,444 1,090,782 PERIOD 4e -Ucnseo Tanalsbtion Perod 4e Drect Deconmissioning Activities -

4e.1.1 ORISE confirmatory survey 155 46 201 201 48.1.2 Teminate license 4..1 Subtotal Period 4e ActivilyCosts 155 46 201 201 Period 4e Additional Costs 44.2.1 License Terninebian Survey -6 . 6,183 1,855 8,038 8,038 124,444 3,120 4e.2 " . . 6,183 1,655 8,038 8.036 124.444 3,120 Subtotal Period 4e Additional Costs -

TLG Services, 1nc.

Thinee Mile Isla~nd, Unit I Dodumsent E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 D--esnieoiooisg Cost An.1.ye.i Appendix E, Page 12 of 14 Table E Three Mile Island, Unit 1 SAFSTOR Decommissioning Cost Estimate (thousands of 2008 dollars)

Off-Site U.RW NRC Spent Fuel Site Protosesod Burial Volumtes Burail I Utility and Acehlty Decon Reomoval Packaging Transport Processing Disposal other Total Total Lie. Terin. Managernent Retoration Voles. Class A Class B Cleas C GTCC Pr.-oed Craft Contractor Inldex Activity Description Coast Cost Cost. Coats Cost. Costs Cost. Contingency Costs Costs Costs Costs Cu, Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Fest Cu. Feet Wt. Lbs. Manhours Manhours Period 40 Collateral Costs 4e.3.1 DOC staff relocaion expenses 1.113 167 1.280 1.280 40.3 Subtotal Period o4CoatLeral Costs 1,113 167 1.280 1,280 Period 49 Period-Deperdent Costs 4s.4.1 Insurance 4a.4.2 Property taxes 551 95 607 907 4e.4.3 Heaoth physica supplies 611 153 763 763 4e.4.4 Disposal of DAW gneratled 20 - 5 26 26 350 - 6.999 2 4e.4.5 Plant energy budget 219 33 252 252 4a.4.6 NRC Fees 546 55 600 600 4:.4.7 Site O&MCosts 188 28 216 216 4e.4.8 Secunly Staff Cost 444 67 511 611 11.743 4a.4.9 DOC Staff Cost 4,650 697 5.347 5,347 57,149 4o.4.10 UtilityStaff Cost S.5.13 827 6,340 6.340 - 74,371 4:.4 SublotoalPeriod 4e Period-Dapendent Costs 611 20 12,111 1.920 14,662 14,662 6,999 2 143.263

-- 350 4e.0 TOTAL PERIOD 4. COST 611 20 19.562 3,988 24,182 24.182 4 3 2 350 - - 6,999 124,446 146,383 PERIOD4 TOTALS 3,080 43.517 7,945 9,855 11.062 38,303 140,342 50,733 304.836 298,815 2,144 3,877 248,328 156,997 2.824 517 580 26,933,780 709,601 1,726.625 PERIOD Sb - Site Restoration Period 5b Direct Decommissioning Activities Demolition of Remaining Site Buidlings 5b1.1.1 Rea.tor 3.707 556 4.263 - 4.263 52.366 o5 6 58 844 5b.1..2 AirInlake Tunnel 5b.1.1.3 AuxiliarI 2,086 313 2399 2,399 28.722 5.1.1..4 Carpenters Shop #117 14 2 16 16 219 5b,1.1.5 Circudalirg Water Chlorinaoor s0 7 57 57 675 5b.1.1.6 CircudatingWater Chlorinator House 54 8 62 62 1,087 5b.1i.1.7 Circulatig Water Intake Flu*es

• 44 7 50 59 709 5b.1.1.8 Circolating Water Purmlphova . 121 18 140 140 2'422 2

5b.1. .9 CircusaiongWater Tunnels 532 s0 612 612 9.010 51,1.1.10 Classified Waste Storage Faolity 22. 3 26 29 452 Ob.I.1. Coaguglor 36 5 42 42 726 2.622 393 3.015 3,015 35,625 5b.1.12 Contro Room Tower 5b. 1.113 Cooling Toe rs 126 964 864 13,913 5bt1.114 Corridor 67 10 77 77 1,381 2 0 2 2 32 5b.1.1.15 Desiring Basin 600 90 690 690 9.233 5b1,.1.16 Diesel Generator 502 75 577 577 6.842 51 1.1.17 Emergency Disel Generator 12 2 14 14 231 5b.1.1.18 Fire SBgade Training Facility 5pl.1.119 Fuel OUlrdouding & Pusrp Station 7 109

• 319 48 367 367 4,093 5b.1.1.20 Heal Exchanger Vault 5b.1 .1.21 High Range Sample Station 4 1 5 5 67 76 11 87 87 1.406 5b.1.1.22 IoostWostorrtmnt &Sludge Fltr 1.679 252 1.930 1,930 18,870 51b1.1.23 ntske Screen &Pumphrpuse 89 13 103 103 1,752 5b,1.1.24 Interim Solid Waste Staging FIacity 1.287 193 1,485 1.480 17.189 59 11.25 Inerrddmodlt 139 1 9 9 5b.1.1.26 Luba Oil Sloraga 1.802 121 18 139 139 5b 11 27 Macharical Draft Cooling Tower - 19.884 874 131 1,005 1.005 5b.1.1 2 Miscatneouts BidsIgs - Clean 190 ,3414 5b.1.1.29 MiscellaneouJs ail ddnngs - Contaminasted 166 25 190 168 1,444 1.444 20,519 5b1.11.30 Miscellanouos Yard Structures I.256 38 293 293 4,920 5b. 1.31 North Offi.e 255 TLG Seltimse Ine.

Thr Mile I1.1-d. Unit 1 Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 Decomnimioning Cost Anolysis Appendix E, Page 13 of 14 Table E Three Mile Island, Unit 1 SAFSTOR Decommissioning Cost Estimate (thousands of 2008 dollars)

Off-Sit. LLRW NRC Spent Fuel Site Processed Bsurial Volues Burial I Utility and Activity Decon Removal Pactkaging Transporl Processing Disposal Other Total Total LUs.Teem. Managenentt Restoraton Volume Class A Class B Class C GTCC Processed Craft Contractor Index Activi Da..rpti-O Cost Cost Costs Costs Cnsts Coat. Costs Continenc Coats Costs Coat. Costs Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Wt., Lbs. Manhous, Manhours Demolition of Remaining Site Buildings (continued) 5.1.1.32 Operations Otfice 54 8 62. 1.102 56.1 1,33 Operations Su pport Facility 244 37 280 280 4.425 5b.1.1.34 Respirator Cleaning fatility 51 8 59 59 1.072 5b.1,1.35 Security Impro-erments 664 100 "763 763 6.957 5b.i.1.36 Service 252 38 290 290 5.003 5b.1.1:37 Sewage PurMing Station 5 1 6 6 97 5b.1.1.38 Sleam Generator Mauosotsum 305 46 351 351 3,900 5b.1.1.39 Substation Relay Control House 24 4 28 28 489 5b.1.40 Training Facility 043 58 9 67 67 1,199 51,1.1.41 Turbine 1.431 215 1,646 1.646 26,877 5b.1.1.42 Turbine Pedestal 1.128 169 1,297 1.297 14.441 5b 1.1.43 Warehouse #1. 377 57 434 434 8,170 5b.1 .144 Water Pretreatment House 115 17 132 132 2.006 5b.1.1.45 Fuel Handling 2.937 441 3,378 3,378 40.440 5b.1.1 Totals 25,145 3,772 28,916 28,916 374.203 Site Closeout Autiwities 5b.1.2 Remove Rubble 8.707 1,306 10.013 10,013 7.228 121 5b.1.3 5b.1.4 Grade & landscape site Final report to NRC ~178 18 27 140 205 205 140 531 1.560 5b.1 Subtotal Period 51bActivity Costs 33.973 1 78 5,123 30.274 205 39,069 381,962 1,560 Period 51,Additional Costs 5b.2.1 Concrtte Processing 1.030 155 1,193 - 1,1393 6.293 5b.2.2 ISFSISits Restoration 2,105 47 323 2,474 2,474 - S- , 95,372 160 5b.2 Subtotal Period 5b Additional Costs 3.135 8 -47 478 3,667 2.474 1,193 11,665 160 Period 5b Collteral Costs 5b 3.1 Smol tool ottowarco 239 36 275 275 5b.3 Subtotal Period SbCotalerat Costs 239 36 275 275 Period 5b Pesod-Oependent COsts 5b.4.1 Insorance 5b.4.2 Property taxes 1.451 145 1.596 1.590 655 5,023 5.023 5b.4.3 Heavy equipment rental 4,367 288 43 331 331 5b.4.4 Plant energy budtget 5b.4.5 site O&MCost 493 74 568 568 S1,8940 291 2,231 -. 2,231 49,440 5b,4.6 Security Staff Cost "

11.826 1,774 13,600 13.600 140.080 5b,4.7 DOC Stasf Cost 5,0 083 6,772 6,T72 80,340 5b.4.8 UtilityStaff Cost 50.4 Subtol Period 00 Period-Dependerl Costs 4,367 21,887 3,865 30,121 30,121 2609,60 41,715 22,112 2,474 70,658 303.627 271,580 5bO TOTALPERIOD 5b COST 9,502 73.337 205 41,715 8 22,112 9,502 73,337 205 2,474 70,658 393.627 271,580 PERIOO 5 TOTALS 7,204 92,308 8,114 11,001 11,062 40.344 639,907 136,378 946,378 692.814 177,582 75,982 248.328 181.903 2.824 517 580 27,544.820 1,176.056 6,463,563 TOTALCOST TO DECOMMISSION TLG Service.. Inc.

Three Mile belantd, Unit I DocunuentEl16-1555-011, Rev. 0 Deroos,,.iaiorsing CoastAtnalysis Appendix E, Page 14 of14 Table E Three Mile Island, Unit 1 SAFSTOR Decommissioning Cost Estimate (thousands of 2008 dollars)

Off-Sit. LLRW NRC Spent Fuel Site Processed Burial Vtoumes Burial I Utilit y andr Aetinity Decen Removal Packaging Transport Processtng Disposal Other Total Total Lie. T . Maenagemtent Restortion Vo.er. Class A Clans B . class C GTCC Processed Craft Contastor thde= Activity Descrtleon Coost Coot Costs Costs Costs Costs Costs Contingency Costs Costs Costs Costs Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet tWLt Lbs. Manhours Mantocrs OTAL COST TO DECOMMISSION WITH 16.84%CONTINGENCY: $946,378 thousands 01 2008 dollars TOAL NRC LICENSE TERMINATION COST IS 73.21% OR: $692,814 thousands of 2008 dollars PENT FUEL MANAGEMENTCOST IS 18.76% OR: $177,582 thonutands of 2008 dollars NON-NUCLEARDEMOLITIONCOST IS 8.03% OR: $75,982 thousands o0 2008 dollars OTAL LOW-LEVELRADIOACTIVEWASTE VOLUMEBURIED (EXCLUDINGGTCC): 185,201 cubic feet OTAL GREATER THAN CLASS C RADWASTE VOLUME GENERATED: 580 cubic faet OTAL SCRAP METAL REMOVED:" 71,226 taom fOTAL CRAFT LABOR REQUIREMENTS: 1,176,566 man-hours End Noten:

rVa- indicates that this activity not charged as decommissioning experne..

a - indicates that this activity performed by decommissioning staff.

0 - indicates that this value is less than 0.5 but is non-zero.

a call containing - indicrtes a zero value TLG Sericee Itne.

Three Mile Island,Unit 1 Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Appendix F, Page 1 of 9 APPENDIX F WORK DIFFICULTY FACTOR ADJUSTMENTS TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile Island, Unit 1 Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Appendix F, Page2 of 9 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 radiologically controlled environment. In performing an area-by-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 TMI-1 nuclear unit.

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 is extremely congested.

TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile Island, Unit 1 Document E16.1555-011, Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Appendix F, Page 3 of 9 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:

Controlling Variables:

• 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.

Three Mile Island,Unit I DocumentE16-1555-011, Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Appendix F, Page4 of 9 Range of Radiation/ALARA 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 not 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 alternate adjustments):

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 the requirements of an RWP, which specifies a single or double set of "PCs", or "PCs" with plastics.

TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile Island,Unit 1 Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Appendix F, Page 5 of 9 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.

Three Mile Island,Unit 1 Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Appendix F, Page 6 of 9 TABLE F-1 UNIT COST FACTOR SETS AND THEIR WORK DIFFICULTY ADJUSTMENT FACTORS DECON / Clean DECON / Contaminated Percentage Percentage UCF Set ID Access Resp. PCs ALARA Access Resp. PCs ALARA 1 10 0 0 0 10 0 0 0 2 20 0 0 0 20 0 0 0 3 30 0 0 0 30 0 0 0 4 20 0 0 0 20 0 30 10 5 20 0 0 0 20 25 30 10 6 20 0 0 0 20 25 30 20 7 30 0 0 0 30 25 30 20 8 30 0 0 0 30 25 30 40 9 30 0 0 0 30 50 30- 100 10 20 0 0 0 20 25 30 20 SAFSTOR / Clean SAFSTOR I Contaminated Percentage Percentage UCF Set ID Access Resp. PCs ALARA Access Resp. PCs ALARA 1 10 0 0 0 10 0 0 0 2 20 0 0 0 20 0 0 0 3 30 0 0 0 30 0 0 0 4 20 0 0 0 20 0 30 10 5 20 0 0 0 20 25 30 10 6 20 0 0 0 20 25 30 10 30 0 0 0 30 25 30 10 8 30 0 0 0 30 25 30 10 9 30 0 0 0 30 50 30 10 10 20 0 0 0 20 25 30 10 TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile Island, Unit 1 Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Appendix F, Page 7 of 9 TABLE F-2 TMI-1 AREA DESIGNATIONS AND ASSOCIATED UNIT COST FACTORS AREA AREA DESCRIPTION UCF SET AB-261_BURY AUX BLDG EL 261 DECAY HEAT & BLDG SPRAY VAULT AB-261_PROCESS AUX BLDG EL 261 DECAY HEAT & BLDG SPRAY VAULT AB-271_BURY AUX BLDG EL 271 HEAT EXCHANGER VAULT AB-271_PROCESS AUX BLDG EL 271 HEAT EXCHANGER VAULT AB-281-1_BURY AUX BLDG EL 281 RX COOLANT BLEED TANK ROOM AB-281-1_PROCESS AUX BLDG EL 281 RX COOLANT BLEED TANK ROOM AB-281-2_BURY AUX BLDG EL 281 MAIN HALL AB-281-2_PROCESS AUX BLDG EL 281 MAIN HALL AB-281-3_BURY AUX BLDG EL 281 MAKEUP PUMP CUB. & TANK ROOMS AB-281-3_PROCESS AUX BLDG EL 281 MAKEUP PUMP CUB. & TANK ROOMS AB-305-1_BURY AUX BLDG EL 305 AUX & FH EXHAUST AIR FILTERS AB-305-1PROCESS AUX BLDG EL 305 AUX & FH EXHAUST AIR FILTERS AB-305-2_BURY AUX BLDG EL 305 MAIN HALL AB-305-2_PROCESS AUX BLDG EL 305 MAIN HALL AB-305-3_BURY AUX BLDG EL 305 MAKEUP PURIFICATION DEMINS AB-331_BURY AUX BLDG EL 305 MAKEUP PURIFICATION DEMINS AB-331_PROCESS AUX BLDG EL 331 CHEMICAL ADDITION CC-305_BURY CHEMICAL CLEANING CNTL-TWR-285_PROCESS CONTROL ROOM TOWER EL 285 CNTL-TWR-305_BURY CONTROL ROOM TOWER EL 305 CNTL-TWR-305_PROCESS CONTROL ROOM TOWER EL 305 CNTL-TWR-322_CLEAN CONTROL ROOM TOWER EL 322 CNTL-TWR-338_CLEAN CONTROL ROOM TOWER EL 338 CNTL-TWR-355_CLEAN CONTROL ROOM TOWER EL 355 CNTL-TWR-380_CLEAN CONTROL ROOM TOWER EL 380 DG-305_CLEAN DIESEL GENERATOR EL 305 DG-305_BURY DIESEL GENERATOR EL 305 FHB-281_BURY FUEL HDLNG BLDG EL 281 FHB-281_PROCESS FUEL HDLNG BLDG EL 281 FHB-305_BURY FUEL HDLNG BLDG EL 305 FHB-305_PROCESS FUEL HDLNG BLDG EL 305 FHB-329_BURY FUEL HDLNG BLDG EL 329 FHB-329 PROCESS FUEL HDLNG BLDG EL 329 FHB-348_BURY FUEL HDLNG BLDG EL 348 FHB-348_PROCESS FUEL HDLNG BLDG EL 348 IB-295_BURY INTERMEDIATE BLDG EL 295 IB-295_PROCESS INTERMEDIATE BLDG EL 295 IB-305_BURY INTERMEDIATE BLDG EL 305 IB-305_PROCESS INTERMEDIATE BLDG EL 305 IB-322_BURY INTERMEDIATE BLDG EL 322 IB-322_PROCESS INTERMEDIATE BLDG EL 322 TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile Island, Unit 1 Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Appendix F, Page 8 of 9 TABLE F-2 TMI-1 AREA DESIGNATIONS AND ASSOCIATED UNIT COST FACTORS AREA AREA DESCRIPTION I

UCF SET IB-355_PROCESS INTERMEDIATE BLDG EL 355 IB-360-PROCESS INTERMEDIATE BLDG EL 360 IB-ROOFPROCESS INTERMEDIATE BLDG ROOF INTAKECLEAN INTAKE & SCREENHOUSE & PUMPHOUSE IWT-303-PROCESS INDUSTRIAL WASTE TREATMENT OCACLEAN OWNER CONTROLLED AREA OCABURY OWNER CONTROLLED AREA OOBCLEAN OPERATIONS OFFICE BUILDING OCAPROCESS OWNER CONTROLLED AREA PA-301_CLEAN PROTECTED AREA PA-301-BURY PROTECTED AREA PA-301_PROCESS PROTECTED AREA RB-281_BURY REACTOR BLDG EL 281 BASEMENT RB-281_PROCESS REACTOR BLDG EL 281 BASEMENT RB-308_BURY REACTOR BLDG EL 308 MEZZANINE RB-308-PROCESS REACTOR BLDG EL 308 MEZZANINE RB-346_BURY REACTOR BLDG EL 346 OPERATING FLOOR RB-346_PROCESS REACTOR BLDG EL 346 OPERATING FLOOR RB-INSIDE D-RINGBURY INSIDE D-RING ALL ELEVATIONS SB-305_CLEAN SERVICE BUILDING STPCLEAN SEWAGE TREATMENT TB-295-CLEAN TURBINE BLDG EL 295 BASEMENT TB-295-BURY TURBINE BLDG EL 295 BASEMENT TB-295_PROCESS TURBINE BLDG EL 295 BASEMENT TB-305-ECLEAN TURBINE BLDG EL 305 GROUND FLOOR EAST TB-305-EGIC TURBINE BLDG EL 305 GROUND FLOOR EAST TB-305-E BURY TURBINE BLDG EL 305 GROUND FLOOR EAST TB-305-EPROCESS TURBINE BLDG EL 305 GROUND FLOOR EAST TB-305-WCLEAN TURBINE BLDG EL 305 GROUND FLOOR WEST TB-305-WGIC TURBINE BLDG EL 305 GROUND FLOOR WEST TB-305-WBURY TURBINE BLDG EL 305 GROUND FLOOR WEST TB-305-WPROCESS TURBINE BLDG EL 305 GROUND FLOOR WEST TB-322-ECLEAN TURBINE BLDG EL 322 MEZZANINE EAST TB-322-EGIC TURBINE BLDG EL 322 MEZZANINE EAST TB-322-EBURY TURBINE BLDG EL 322 MEZZANINE EAST TB-322-EPROCESS TURBINE BLDG EL 322 MEZZANINE EAST TB-322-WCLEAN TURBINE BLDG EL 322 MEZZANINE WEST TB-322-WGIC TURBINE BLDG EL 322 MEZZANINE WEST TB-322-WBURY TURBINE BLDG EL 322 MEZZANINE WEST TB-322-WPROCESS TURBINE BLDG EL 322 MEZZANINE WEST TB-355-E-CLEAN TURBINE BLDG EL 355 OPERATING FLOOR EAST TB-355-E-GIC TURBINE BLDG EL 355 OPERATING FLOOR EAST TB-355-E-BURY TURBINE BLDG EL 355 OPERATING FLOOR EAST TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile Island,Unit 1 Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Appendix F, Page 9 of 9 TABLE F-2 TMI-1 AREA DESIGNATIONS AND ASSOCIATED UNIT COST FACTORS AREA AREA DESCRIPTION UCF SET TB-355-EPROCESS TURBINE BLDG EL 355 OPERATING FLOOR EAST 5 TB-355-WCLEAN TURBINE BLDG EL 355 OPERATING FLOOR WEST 2 TB-355-WGIC TURBINE BLDG EL 355 OPERATING FLOOR WEST 4 TB-355-WPROCESS TURBINE BLDG EL 355 OPERATING FLOOR WEST 5 TB-380_CLEAN TURBINE BLDG EL 380 HEATER BAY 2 TB-380_GIC TURBINE BLDG EL 380 HEATER BAY 4 TB-380_BURY TURBINE BLDG EL 380 HEATER BAY 5 TB-380_PROCESS TURBINE BLDG EL 380 HEATER BAY 5 TB-ROOFCLEAN TURBINE BUILDING ROOF 2 WPB CLEAN WATER PRETREATMENT BUILDING 2 YARDCLEAN OWNER CONTROLLED AREA 1 TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile Island, Unit 1 Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Appendix G, Page 1 of 32 APPENDIX G AREA MAPS Figure Page G-1 Aux-261 Decay Heat & Building Spray Vault ............................................ 2 G-2 Aux-271 Heat Exchanger Vault .................................. 3 G-3 Auxiliary & Fuel Handling Building 281' Elevation ................................... 4 G-4 Auxiliary & Fuel Handling Building 305' Elevation .................................... 5 G-5 Auxiliary Building 331' Elevation & Fuel Handling 329' Elevation ........... 6 G -6 Chem ical Cleaning ......................................................................................... 7 G-7 Control Room Tower 306' Elevation ............................................................. 8 G-8 Control Room Tower 322' Elevation ............................................................ 9 G-9 Control Room Tower 338' Elevation ........................................................... 10 G-10 Control Room Tower 355' Elevation ........................................................... 11 G-11 Control Room Tower 380' Elevation ........................................................... 12 G-12 Diesel Generator 305' Elevation . 1 ..............:... ....................... I... .... 13 G-13 Intake & Screenwash & Pumphouse ........ ..................... 14 G-14 Industrial Waste & Sewage Treatment Buildings ...................... 15 G-15 Intermediate Building 295' Elevation ............................ .................... ... 16 G-16 Interm ediate Building 305' Elevation ............................................................ 17 G- 17 Interm ediate Building 322' Elevation ........................................................... 18 G-18 Intermediate Building 355' Elevation ..... 1...............................

9 G-19 Reactor Building Basement 281' Elevation ............................................... 20 G-20 Reactor Building Mezzanine 308' Elevation ................ 21 G-21 Reactor Building Operating Floor 346' Elevation .................... 22 G-22 Reactor Building Inside D-Ring All Elevations ........................... 23 G-23 Turbine Building Ground Floor 305' Elevation [North] ...................... 24 Floor 305' Elevation [South] ................. 25 G-24 Turbine Building Ground G-25 Turbine Building Mezzanine 322' Elevation [North] ................. 26 G-26 Turbine Building Mezzanine 322' Elevation [South] ......................  ; .... 2T 27......

G-27 Turbine Building Operating Floor 355' Elevation [North] ............................ 28 G-28 Turbine Building Operating Floor 355' Elevation [South] ............. 29 Heater Bay 380' Elevation ....................... 30 G-29 ProtectedBuilding G-30 Turbine Area 301' Elvaio".3 G-30 owner Conrol Elevat. n ................................ 31 G -31 Owner Controlled Area ........... ...... .................... ..............................32 TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile Island,Unit 1 Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Appendix G, Page 2 of 32 FIGURE G-1 AUX-261 DECAY HEAT & BUILDING SPRAY VAULT VIANT -

7/

- =TIAL-PLAW EL 2(I:0' AB-261 TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile Island, Unit 1 Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Appendix G, Page 3 of 32 FIGURE G-2 AUX-271 HEAT EXCHANGER VAULT TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile Island, Unit 1 Document E16-1555-011,Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Appendix G, Page 4 of 32 FIGURE G-3 AUXILIARY & FUEL HANDLING BUILDING 281' ELEVATION TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile Island, Unit 1 Document Appendix of 320 G, Page 5Rev.

E16-1555-011, DecommissioningCost Analysis FIGURE G-4 BUILDING AUXILIARY & FUEL HANDLING 305' ELEVATION ZEN"

,..j r,'

IkV, TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile Island, Unit 1 Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Appendix G, Page 6 of 32 FIGURE G-5 AUXILIARY BUILDING 331' ELEVATION &

FUEL HANDLING 329' ELEVATION TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile Island, Unit 1 Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 Appendix G, Page 7 of 32 DecommissioningCost Analysis FIGURE G-6 CHEMICAL CLEANING TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile Island,Unit 1 Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Appendix G, Page 8 of 32 FIGURE G-7 CONTROL ROOM TOWER 306' ELEVATION "AKT 140"" Is I

--. %n*

. I -L~

~~1J U~ý 1.

C ir~TE~

g~n.~n4fl1nn Iii - =.--

A L-A"4 UL ' ~ ~v~'

Zev.o 0"0 ..

t1

• 1 U.' L JJ~.I~

41 mail*

-w~

• ~ to j, 1~l

"* oft Al oww two,"

war *000 a C01%. 1!

012 1ý C&6*4 ý-,V" L al-I If.wo Výok rc K.2 mum. S-w-AL M %NWUM a" us.

... Z&

PLAN-FLOOR ELEV.306ý-V KSLOV4 TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile Island, Unit 1 Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Appendix G, Page 9 of 32 FIGURE G-8 CONTROL ROOM TOWER 322' ELEVATION TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile Island, Unit 1 Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Appendix G, Page 10 of 32 FIGURE G-9 CONTROL ROOM TOWER 338' ELEVATION TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile Island, Unit 1 Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Appendix G, Page 11 of 32 FIGURE G-10 CONTROL ROOM TOWER 355' ELEVATION TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile Island, Unit 1 Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Appendix G, Page 12 of 32 FIGURE G-11 CONTROL ROOM TOWER 380' ELEVATION TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile Island,Unit 1 Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Appendix G, Page 13 of 32 FIGURE G-12 DIESEL GENERATOR 305' ELEVATION TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile Island, Unit 1 DocumentE16-1555-011, Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Appendix G, Page 14 of 32 FIGURE G-13 INTAKE & SCREENWASH

& PUMPHOUSE 2

r TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile Island, Unit 1 Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Appendix G, Page 15 of 32 FIGURE G-14 INDUSTRIAL WASTE & SEWAGE TREATMENT BUILDINGS TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile Island,Unit 1 Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Appendix G, Page 16 of 32 FIGURE G-15 INTERMEDIATE BUILDING 295' ELEVATION TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile Island, Unit 1 Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Appendix G, Page 17 of 32 FIGURE G-16 INTERMEDIATE BUILDING 305' ELEVATION TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile Island,Unit 1 Document E161555-011, Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Appendix G, Page 18 of 32 FIGURE G-17 INTERMEDIATE BUILDING 322' ELEVATION TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile Island,Unit 1 Document E16-1555-011,Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Appendix G, Page 19 of 32 FIGURE G-18 INTERMEDIATE BUILDING 355' ELEVATION TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile Island,Unit 1 Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Appendix G, Page20 of 32 FIGURE G-19 REACTOR BUILDING BASEMENT 281' ELEVATION TLG Services, Inc.

Decommissioning Three Mile Island,Cost UnitAnalysis 1 Document E16.1555-011, Rev. 0 Appendix Q, Page 21 of 32 FIGURE G-20 REACTOR BUILDING MEZZANINE 308' ELEVATION

,"mi!%

FIL*

ELiff! .!.

'~w 1c, 1..< .,*"

40. .,2Al TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile Island, Unit 1 Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Appendix G, Page22 of 32 FIGURE G-21 REACTOR BUILDING OPERATING FLOOR 346' ELEVATION AcAc1~ft W40Aa

• TAIR 4 LA-jo Up T, IL" 2=0 m

.- ujc4m we*

-srut AN PAIL 0A) FIM PLO# EL"I!,4c AWO ILA170- 111,1111 80" A7+ V0-0 CýA&Aft

&AM Wj*r. r1KA4*

to=&"-no A= F.

AUM P:IJM-WOW, PM-A-ma CA" UMPCW

• Mug 6ADMN-AV AU4 IL wls&"

Wr-w.,%

rcouVAKY

&WAD V"LL IX ss, 4ýft j bPAWfLj arA11Uork S TEEL COLC421 LALjDT'jQ EL- a-5d. I

.. rk" AMD

-'jV-jC IV70*

TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile Island, Unit 1 Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Appendix Q, Page 23 of 32 FIGURE G-22 REACTOR BUILDING INSIDE D-RING ALL ELEVATIONS RB-I NS IDE .LL*A;',C2 D-RING PL&TV. MA.- 3561- 31 IN EL.%"-' CROM. AOISSIL I SWRLO SNIFLO

&L. 3"f pRess"Rizza CAALS SaPftffr gc-rv RACK I

I I fL IE1

-4 r

PAAj:IQAA i

REAGMR COOLAAIr DISCAV.

N-WWI`

C UTLET AWS. rAA4 QCýMýIA 306'.9. EL..

PLAW RE;icron _W40 r EL q VE55EL PA'?F.

EL.

TGAEACTOR .:I: LZ8,0 PIPE TO RALTIM TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile Island, Unit 1 Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Appendix G, Page 24 of 32 FIGURE G-23 TURBINE BUILDING GROUND FLOOR 305' ELEVATION [NORTH]

4!,u 12 "M8.4 boop Lobe 4ý ORIN

.0-WW AC-0-ý ---------

Ll 4 +

aw."A ow" calla WCAM VO*M WA+ý "WIft N.P M.Vý T

---

j-- -----------

Eta

[Jim f

Wk=

i4st Migm

%Rft-rLown H.

r f".10 COO 3S 4Mý SU'" I. U-Aft

ý-4 _ Xý TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile Island, Unit 1 Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Appendix G, Page25 of 32 FIGURE G-24 TURBINE BUILDING GROUND FLOOR 305' ELEVATION [SOUTH]

Z ~

.KM U-NSR

-TB-405-E

__

• I ~~~--=Now ---- -- -

~ 4e~Aac~-IW3dAFrUA C"_,+

SS-'-'.7i -it

~r S.

• .CVY

- . V Y, -All-1.

C94TLLL 0i7]1 Fix."

1~

4.

/  ! ~&tz Isari i

Q2I TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile Island, Unit 1 Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Appendix G, Page26 of 32 FIGURE G-25 TURBINE BUILDING MEZZANINE 322' ELEVATION [NORTH]

___I

r. 7-W F

JB-227' IV/

-J _

~ ______

~ ~§;i~

== .W -1 W t~ T AL

m I"* I* *lf *,..........

"i'i" "*--** * * . ... .,

• F

'It' r

• I~~ \ '

71

-~~r Ki 11 1111, s

TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile Island, Unit 1 Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Appendix G, Page 27 of 32 FIGURE G-26 TURBINE BUILDING MEZZANINE 322' ELEVATION [SOUTH]

lIl II

... J*

low 19 M, r2 7k 17=7 ;01 I k~ I1*11*

X" I.

4, Ii-It J. I. I I * *. * * * . _*"

LJ~

I

~u.. -~-'-~'-- ~..--

F~

-. i J

fl..44~O

.~

~

4f 1'~

§4

.4 fiU~L .i a

MCI*

WN -- 14 -

i A 1

! Il J-4 i 3~fr~a

. -. .. . . . . . ... * *a I " 1; TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile Island, Unit 1 Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Appendix G, Page 28 of 32 FIGURE G-27 TURBINE BUILDING OPERATING FLOOR 355' ELEVATION [NORTH]

TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile Island,Unit 1 Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Appendix G, Page 29 of 32 FIGURE G-28 TURBINE BUILDING OPERATING FLOOR 355' ELEVATION [SOUTH]

TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile Island,Unit 1 Document E16-1555.011, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Appendix G, Page 30 of 32 FIGURE G-29 TURBINE BUILDING HEATER BAY 380' ELEVATION P1 fcýr* 0 4. fOR 146'ra. CX-Ml Vt3!)3;-O,(stCP)

TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile Island, Unit 1 DocumentE16-1555-011, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Appendix G, Page 31 of 32 FIGURE G-30 PROTECTED AREA 301' ELEVATION TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile Island,Unit 1 Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 DecommissioningCost Analysis Appendix G, Page32 of 32 FIGURE G-31 OWNER CONTROLED AREA TLG Services, Inc.

ATTACHMENT 2 SPENT FUEL MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR.

THREE MILE ISLAND NUCLEAR STATION, UNIT 1

Spent Fuel Management Plan April 17, 2009 Page 1 ATTACHMENT 2 SPENT FUEL MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR THREE MILE ISLAND NUCLEAR STATION, UNIT 1

Background

Exelon Generation Company, LLC (EGC) is seeking license renewal for TMI, Unit 1.

The facility operating license for TMI, Unit 1 currently expires on April 19, 2014. is a preliminary decommissioning cost estimate provided in accordance with 10 CFR 50.75(f)(3) for Three Mile Island Nuclear Station (TMI), Unit 1. This preliminary decommissioning cost estimate evaluated three (3) options for decommissioning TMI, Unit 1 and assumes that TMI, Unit 1 is granted license extension. This assumption was used in the cost estimate, since it is intended to reflect the most likely decommissioning scenario for TMI, Unit 1.

For the purpose of demonstrating the adequacy of funding to meet regulatory requirements, the SAFSTOR decommissioning option has been selected and evaluated based on the current license expiration date. This spent fuel management plan is similarly based on the SAFSTOR analysis and premised on the current license term, although the discussion below includes all three decommissioning options. EGC has not made a final determination of the decommissioning approach for TMI, Unit 1. EGC reserves the right to choose the ultimate decommissioning option in accordance with our business needs, recognizing that we need to assure the chosen option meets U. S.

Nuclear Regulatory Commission requirements for decommissioning funding. contains the projected annual cash flow required for decommissioning TMI, Unit 1 based on the SAFSTOR scenario from the Attachment 1 cost estimate, in thousands of 2008 dollars, including projected spent fuel management costs. The costs presented in Attachment 3 occur 20 years earlier than those in the Attachment 1 preliminary decommissioning cost estimate to model the current shutdown license expiration date.

Spent Fuel Management Strategy The U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission requires (as discussed in 10 CFR 50.54(bb))

that licensees establish a program to manage and provide funding for the caretaking of all irradiated fuel at the reactor site until title and possession of the fuel is transferred to the U. S. Department of Energy (DOE). Interim storage of the fuel, until the DOE has completed the transfer, will be in the storage pool and/or an Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation (ISFSI) located on the TMI, Unit 1 site.

Spent Fuel Management Plan April 17, 2009 Page 2 An ISFSI, operated independent of power reactor operations, will be built to support decommissioning operations. For the DECON and SAFSTOR scenarios, the ISFSI facility is sized to accommodate the inventory of spent fuel generated during operation of the facility, at the conclusion of the required cooling period. Once emptied of fuel, the reactor building can be either decontaminated and dismantled or prepared for long-term storage. In the delayed DECON scenario, only the spent fuel pool would remain operational and used for the interim storage of the fuel until such time that the DOE can complete the transfer. The balance of the facility will be placed in a SAFSTOR condition.

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 14 years after the cessation of operations at the end of the current license term, assuming DOE begins removing spent fuel from commercial facilities in 2018. Consequently, costs are included within the estimate noted below for the long-term caretaking of spent fuel at the TMI, Unit 1 site through the year 2028.

The total inventory of assemblies that will require handling during decommissioning is based upon several assumptions. The pickup of spent fuel from TMI, Unit 1 is assumed to begin in the year 2026. The maximum rate at which spent fuel is removed from the commercial sites is based upon an annual capacity of 3,000 metric tons of uranium (MTU). Any further delay in DOE operations or decrease in the rate of acceptance will correspondingly prolong the transfer process and result in spent fuel remaining at the site longer.

In the DECON and SAFSTOR decommissioning 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 operation in 2018, spent fuel is projected to be removed from the TMI, Unit 1 site by the end of the year 2028. In the delayed DECON scenario, the spent fuel pool is used to store spent fuel. Operation and maintenance costs for the storage facilities are included in the cost estimate and address the cost for staffing the facilities, maintenance of necessary operational requirements as well as security, insurance, and licensing fees. The estimate includes the costs to purchase, load, and transfer the fuel storage canisters to the ISFSI, as required by the decommissioning scenario.

A discussion of site-specific considerations for the management of spent fuel at TMI, Unit 1 under each decommissioning scenario may be found in Section 3.5.1 of .

In the event that TMI, Unit 1 does cease operations in 2014, TMI, Unit 1 will continue to comply with existing NRC licensing requirements, including the operation and maintenance of the systems and structures needed to support continued operation of the TMI, Unit 1 spent fuel pool and ISFSI, as necessary, under the decommissioning scenario ultimately selected. In addition, TMI, Unit 1 will also comply with applicable license termination requirements in accordance with 10 CFR 50.82, "Termination of

Spent Fuel Management Plan April 17, 2009 Page 3 license," with respect to plant shutdown and post-shutdown activities including seeking U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission approvals and on schedules as necessary to satisfy these requirements consistent with the continued storage of irradiated fuel.

Cost Estimate and Funding For Spent Fuel Management Based on the SAFSTOR Decommissioning Option As of December 31, 2008, the TMI, Unit 1 decommissioning trust fund balance was

$371.4 million. The projected amount necessary at shutdown (April 19, 2014) for radiological decommissioning costs is $358.9 million for the SAFSTOR scenario (assuming a 2% real rate of return through the decommissioning period). To the extent that the trust fund balance exceeds costs required for radiological decommissioning, trust fund monies, in conjunction with EGC operating revenues, will be used to pay for spent fuel management costs.

Annual costs for spent fuel management range from approximately $3 million to $12 million, depending upon the decommissioning scenario selected.

NRC Approvals This spent fuel management plan contemplates potential withdrawals from the decommissioning trust for spent fuel management purposes. 'Prior to any such

• withdrawals, EGC will make appropriate submittals for an exemption in accordance with 10 CFR 50.12, "Specific exemptions," from the requirements of 10 CFR 50.82(a)(8)(i)(A) in order to use the decommissioning trust funds forspent fuel management expenses.

EGC will monitor the funding level of the decommissioning fund toensure that spent fuel management withdrawals will not inhibit the ability of the. licensee to complete, radiological decommissioning.

ATTACHMENT 3 ANNUAL SAFSTOR DECOMMISSIONING CASH FLOW FOR THREE MILE ISLAND NUCLEAR STATION, UNIT 1

Decommissioning Cash Flow April 17, 2009 Page 1 ATTACHMENT 3 ANNUAL SAFSTOR DECOMMISSIONING CASH FLOW FOR THREE MILE ISLAND NUCLEAR STATION, UNIT 1 (thousands of 2008 dollars)

License Termination Spent Fuel Site Restoration Year Cost Management Cost Cost Total Cost 2014 33,474 25,723 - 59,197 2015 56,387 22,652 - 79,038 2016 4,539 22,557 - 27,096 2017 4,526 22,495 - 27,022 2018 4,526 22,495 - 27,022 2019 4,524 19,792 - 24,315 2020 4,520 3,155 - 7,676 2021 4,508 3,147 - 7,655 2022 4,508 3,147 , 7,655 2023 4,508 3,147 7,655 2024 4,520 3,155 7,676 2025 4,508 3,147 7,655 2026 4,508 5,159 9,667 2027 4,508 6,597 11,105 2028 4,520 6,597 11,117 2029 4,481 4,481 2030 4,481 4,481 2031 4,481 4,481 2032 4,494 4,494 2033 4,481 4,481 2034 4,481 4,481 2035 4,481 4,481 2036 4,494 4,494 2037 4,481 4,481 2038 4,481 4,481 2039 4,481 4,481 2040 4,494 4,494 2041 4,481 4,481 2042 4,481 4,481 2043 4,481 4,481 2044 4,494 4,494 2045 4,481 4,481 2046 4,481 4,481 2047 4,481 4,481 2048 4,494. 4,494 2049 4,481 4,481

Decommissioning Cash Flow April 17, 2009 Page 2 ATTACHMENT 3 ANNUAL SAFSTOR DECOMMISSIONING CASH FLOW FOR THREE MILE ISLAND NUCLEAR STATION, UNIT 1 (thousands of 2008 dollars)

(Continued)

License Termination Spent Fuel Site Restoration Year Cost Management Cost Cost Total Cost 2050 4,481 4,481 2051 4,481 4,481 2052 4,494 4,494 2053 4,481 4,481 2054 4,481 4,481 2055 4,481 4,481 2056 .4,494 4,494 2057 4,481 4,481 2058 4,481 4,481 2059 4,481 4,481 2060 4,494 4,494 2061 4,481 4,481 2062 4,481 4,481 2063 4,481 4,481 2064 4,494 4,494 2065 4,481 4,481 2066 4,481 4,481 2067 4,481 4,481 2068 25,085 369 25,454 2069 56,432 1,280 57,712 2070 127,651 2,301 129,952 2071 53,237 841 539 54,616 2072 53,383 843 540 54,766 2073 43,733 461 295 44,489 2074 9,693 878 25,088 35,659 2075 104 1,252 35,770 37,126 2076 28 343 9.800 10,172 Totals 692,814 177,582 75,982 946,378