ML091170630

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

ML091170630
Person / Time
Site:	Crane
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 prepared for Exelon Generation Company LLC prepared by TLG Services, Inc.

Bridgewater, Connecticut February 2009

Three Mile Island, Unit 1 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 Page ii of xix APPROVALS Project Manager Project Engineer Technical Manager Quality Assurance Manager (acting)

William A. Cloutier, Jr.

J/dfin A. Carlson Frano Jo ph J.

l&Ier Date Date Date Date TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile Island, Unit I Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost 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 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Page iv 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 A ssum 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 G en 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.

A rea M aps..............................................................................................................

G -1 TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile Island, Unit 1 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 Page vi of xix REVISION LOG No I

CRA No z Date 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 Decommissioning Cost 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 Decommissioning Cost 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 Decommissioning Cost 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 is currently scheduled to cease operations in 2014. The owner has, however, applied for 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 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Page x 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 (rad ioactive) 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 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Page xii 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 Page xiii 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 Decommissioning Cost 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 Decommissioning Cost 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 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document E16-1555.011, Rev. 0 Page xvi 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 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Page xvii 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

[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 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

[1M 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 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Page xix 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'I Includes engineering and security 121 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 1, Page 1 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 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 1, Page 2 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 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 1, Page 3 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 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 1, Page 4 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 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 1, Page 5 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 Decommissioning Cost 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 Decommissioning Cost 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 Decommissioning Cost 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 Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost 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 Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 2, Page 2 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 Decommissioning Cost 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 Decommissioning Cost 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 Decommissioning Cost 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 Decommissioning Cost 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 Decommissioning Cost 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 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document E16.1555-011, Rev. 0 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 Decommissioning Cost 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 Decommissioning Cost 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 Decommissioning Cost 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 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 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 Decommissioning Cost 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 60Co will decrease during the dormancy period, the internal components of the reactor vessel will still.

exhibit sufficiently high radiation dose rates to require remote sectioning under water due to the presence of long-lived radionuclides such as 94Nb, 59Ni, and 63Ni. Therefore, the dismantling procedures described for the DECON alternative would still be employed during SAFSTOR scenario. Portions of the biological shield will still be radioactive due to the presence of activated trace elements with long half-lives (152Eu and 154Eu). Decontamination will require controlled removal and disposal. It is assumed that radioactive corrosion products on inner surfaces of piping and components will not have decayed to levels, that will permit unrestricted use-or allow conventional removal.

These. systems and components will be surveyed as they are removed and disposed, of in accordance with the existing radioactive release criteria.

2.2,4 Period 5 - Site Restoration Following completion of decommissioning operations, site-restoration activities can begin. 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,"[191 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 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 3, Page 2 of 24 Removal rates and material costs for the conventional disposition of components and structures relied upon information available in the industry publication, "Building Construction Cost Data," published by R.S. Means.[21]

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 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 3, Page 3 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 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 3, Page 4 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 Association of Cost Engineers "Project and Cost Engineers': Handbook[221 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 Decommissioning Cost 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 Decommissioning Cost 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 Decommissioning Cost 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-year extension, set by Congress for the NRC to decide on whether "to g rant a.

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 Decommissioning Cost 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 year 4, and 3000 MTU/year for year 5 and beyond.[241 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 Decommissioning Cost Analysis 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 Decommissioning Cost 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 using published tariffs from Tri-State Motor Transit.[271 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 Decommissioning Cost 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 Decommissioning Cost 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., 137Cs, 90Sr, or transuranics) has been, prevented:from reaching levels exceeding those that permit the major NSSS components§ to be shipped under current transportation regulations and dispsal requirements.

The curie 'contents of the vessel.and -internals :at final shutdown are 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, Page 18 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 7 disposal 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 Decommissioning Cost 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 Cost Analysis Section 3, Page 21 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 P0 34 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 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 3, Page 22 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 12,967 1,949 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 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document E16-1 555-011, Rev. 0 Section 3, Page 23 of 24 TABLE 3.3 SCHEDULE OF ANNUAL EXPENDITURES

ýSAFSTOR (thousands, 2008 dollars)

Equipment &

Materials Year Labor Energy Burial Other Total 2034 2035 2036 2037 2038 2039 2040 2041 2042 2043 2044 2045 2046 2047 2048 2049 2050 2051 2052 2053 2054 2055 2056 2057 2058 2059 2060 206.1 2062 2063 2064 2065 2066 2067 2068 32,284 40,359 13,779 13,741 13,741 12,521 5,024 5,010 5,010 5,010 5,024 5,010 5,514 5,873 5,879 2,191 2,191 2,191 2,197 2,191 2,191 2,191 2,197 2,191 2,191 2,191 2,197 2,191 2,191 2,191 2,197 2,191 2,191 2,191 2,197 7,516 13,532 9,884 9,857 9,857 8,519 280 279 279 279 280 279 1,788 2,867 2,867 274 274 274 275 274 274 274 275 274 274 274 275 274 274 274 275 274 274 274 275 1,181 1,405 336 335 335 312 168 168 168 168 168 168 168 168 168 168 168 168 168 168 168 168 168 168 168 168 168 168 168 168 168 168 168 168 168 30 1,077 29 29 29 29 27 27 27 27 27 27 27 27 27 26

.26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26

.26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 18,186 22,665 3,067 3,059 3,059 2,935 2,177 2,171 2,171 2,171 2,177 2,171 2,171 2,171 2,176 1,823 1,823 1,823 1,828 1,823 1,823 1,823 1,828 1,823 1,823 1,823 1,828 1,823 1,823 1,823 1,828 1,823 1,823 1,823 1,828 59,197 79,038 27,096 27,022 27,022 24,315 7,676 7,655 7,655 7,655 7,676 7,655 9,667 11,105 11,117 4,481 4,481 4,481 4,494 4,481 4,481 4,481 4,494 4,481 4,481 4,481 4,494 4,481 4,481 4,481 4,494 4,481 4,481 4,481 4,494 TLG Services, Inc.

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

SCHEDULE OF ANNUAL EXPENDITURES SAFSTOR (thousands, 2008 dollars)

Equipment &

Materials Year Labor Energy Burial Other Total 2069 2070 2071 2072 2073 2074 2075 2076 2077 2078 2079 2080 2081 2082 2083 2084 2085 2086 2087 2088 2089 2.090 2091 2092 2093 2094 2095 2096 2,191 2,191 2,191 2,197 2,191 2,191 2,191 2,197 2,191 2,191 2,191 2,197 2,191 2,191 2,191 2,197 2,191 2,191

.2,191 21,633 42,375 50,759 39,359 39,467 34,520 23,390 21,149 5,794 274 274 274 275 274 274 274 275 274 274 274 275 274 274 274 275 274 274 274 874 4,874 23,281 4,175 4,186 2,772 10,618 14,683 4,023 168 168.

168 168 168 168 168 168 168 168 168 168 1.68 168 168 168 168 168 168 1,057 1,670 1,593 1,258 1,261 841 218 168 46 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 32 2,732 30,758 5,213 5,227 2,871 10 0

0 1,823 1,823 1,823 1,828 1,823 1,823 1,823 1,828 1,823 1,823 1,823 1,828 1,823 1,823 1,823 1,828 1,823 1,823 1,823 1,858 6,062 23,561 4,612 4,624 3,485 1,423 1,127 309 4,481 4,481 4,481 4,494 4,481 4,481

.4,481 4,494 4,481 4,481 4,481 4,494 4,481 4,481 4,481 4,494 4,481 4,481

.4,481 25,454 57,712 129,952 54,616 54,766 44,489 35,659 37,126 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 Decommissioning Cost 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 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 4, Page 2 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 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 Section 4, Page 3 of 8 FIGURE 4.1 DECON ACTIVITY SCHEDULE Task Name TMI Umt I DECON schedule Sudown Unit 1 S i!ii 1 I 13 C I Period ia Umit 1 -shutdown through transition I Perod

,*t.Lsh*!*wn 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 of fuel submitted Site specific decommissioning cost estimate submitted DOC staff mobilized Period lb Unit 1 -Decommissioning preparations Fuel storage pool operations Reconfigure plant (crntinued)

Dryifuel stoage operatons Prepare detiled work procedures Decon NSSS Isolate spent fuel pool Period 2a Unit I Large component removal Fuel storage poo. operations Dry fuel storage operations NSSS Removal Preparatin for r'eactor vssel removal Reactor vese & internals Remaining large 11565 conownent, d&opositiott

..... ~ ~..

.~~n n !

..*..* m n o...........

Turbine Building OOB TB$5-E

.. * :W................

TB-95-E

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

TB-%.W TB-322-E TB-5-W TB-WO TB-ROOF T I.R O O..........................................

Turbine/Generator Condenser Intermediate Building IB-ROOF IB.955 IB-SOS

'33 r1m11 A

YE, U

U I,'

U U

U.

U

-I I

U I

• I:

II

~1 M ~ ~ liL

'4 1 4 '21'4 4

[

I S

U DI U

TLG Services, Inc.

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

.(continued)

Task Name 1 'M21L'34 MI5

'3869 4 4 4 Control Tower I OCA Control Tower Crew Loading CNTL-TWR.285 CNTL-TWR-M CNTL-TWR-22 CNTL.TWR-338 CNTL.TWR-35 CNTL-TWR-380 m

CNTL.TWR-388 OCA Dry fuel storage operations Wet fuel storage oeations Period Ab Unit 1-Decontamination (wet fuel)

Auxiliary Building / CC & DG ABCQ 1

AEB-281S2 AS-a 54 P.5-305-S I

I C

ii S

"rn i-I H

2 I

i

-Y i

i i

i fl43

'44 L iner Rein J & qraLing DO 305

............c

• 5........

Reactor Building, Service Building

.o -,, ___..

r RB-INSIDE D-RING RB-346 RB.808 RB-21 Liner Removal & Scabbling SB-S05 STP 2

PA-301 INTAKE Dry fuel storage operations Wet fuel storage operations End of wet fuel storage

-' -1.., -, -I...

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

Period Sc Unit 1 -Decontamination following Wet Fuel Storage Fuei H ~

i*

• i&,*.........................

Fuel Handling Building F ~ f

2

• i.......................

FHE*2*1 FHE-305 S

U H

'-9 C

I TLG Services, Inc.

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

Task Name.

M 1 34 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 storage........

o...

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

s.

Period 2e Unit 1 -Plant license termination Dry fuel storage operations F.inal Site Scu*riVey NRC ereiew & appnr'ovl Pat50 license terminated Period Ab Unit 1 Site Restoration Dry fuel storage operations Building-cemaliticos,

.ck-fill and landscaping I

W V

TLG Services, Inc.

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

DECON (Shutdown April 19, 2034)

ISFSI Operations Period 1 Transition and Period 2 Preparations 1

Decommissioning'-.1 *"

Period 3 Site Restorati6n Fuel Storage Operations/

- Shipping 04/2034 10/2035 05/2041 05/2043 06/2049 Storage*Pool Empty 11/2039 TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile Island, Unit 1 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 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 2 Dormancy Period 4 Decommissioning Period 5 Site 04/2034 10/2035.

07/2047 07/2053 07/2055 Storage Pool Empty 12/2048 TLG Services, Inc.

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

SAFSTOR (Shutdown April 19, 2034)

ISFSI Operations Period 1 Transition and Period 2 Dormancy Period 3 Delayed Period 4 Decommissioning Period 5 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 Document E16-1555-011 Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost 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 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 5, Page 2 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 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document E16-1555-011 Rev. 0 Section 5, Page 3 of 5 TABLE 5.1 DECOMMISSIONING WASTE

SUMMARY

DECON Waste Class' Volume (cubic feet)

Weight (pounds)

Low-Level Radioactive Waste EnergySolutions (Clive, Utah)

Containerized Bulk A

A 159,619 57,110 16,279,712 3,891,428 Future Disposal Facility BC 4,893

517 592,229 61,605 Geologic Repository (Greater-than Class C) 580 105,646 Total 2 222,718

,179,851.

20,930,620, 7,477,298 142,360,000 Processed Waste (off-site)

Scrap Metal 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 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document E16-1555-011 Rev. 0 Section 5, Page 4 of 5 TABLE 5.2 DECOMMISSIONING WASTE

SUMMARY

DELAYED DECON Waste Class' Volume (cubic feet)

Weight (pounds)

Low-Level Radioactive Waste EnergySolutions (Clive, Utah)

Containerized Bulk A

A 107,707 59,929 12,639,275 3,838,940 Future Disposal Facility B

C 2,629 517 337,226 61,605 Geologic Repository (Greater-than Class C) 580 105,646 Total 2 171,361 247,821 16,982,692 10,243,890 142,452,000 Processed Waste (off-site)

Scrap Metal 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 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document E16-1555-011 Rev. 0 Section 5, Page 5 of 5 TABLE 5.3 DECOMMISSIONING WASTE

SUMMARY

SAFSTOR Waste Class' Volume (cubic feet)

Weight (pounds)

Low-Level Radioactive Waste EnergySolutions (Clive, Utah)

Containerized Bulk A

A 105,376 76,527 12,479,?70 4,303,350 Future Disposal Facility B

C 2,824 517 294,791 61,605 Geologic Repository (Greater-than Class C) 580 105,646 Total 2 185,823 248,328 17,244,662 10,300,150 142,452,000 Processed Waste (off-site)

Scrap Metal 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 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 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 6, Page 2 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.

Removal costs reflect the labor-intensive nature of the decommissioning process, as well as the management controls required to ensure a safe and successful program.

Decontamination and packaging costs also have a large labor component that is based upon prevailing union wages. Non-radiological; demolition: is a natural extension of the decommissioning process.

The methods employed in decontamination and dismantling are generally destructive and indiscriminate in inflicting collateral damage.

With a

work force mobilized to support decommissioning operations, non-radiological demolition can be an integrated activity and a logical expansion of the work being performed in the process of terminating the operating license. Prompt demolition reduces future liabilities and can be more cost effective than deferral, due to the deterioration of the facilities (and therefore the working conditions) with time.

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 Decommissioning Cost 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 Decommissioning Cost 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 Decommissioning Cost 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 of 3

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 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 7, Page 3 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 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 Appendix A, Page I of 4 APPENDIX A UNIT COST FACTOR DEVELOPMENT D

TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile Island, Unit 1 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 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):

+ Respiratory protection adjustment (25% of critical duration)

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

Adjusted work duration

+ Protective clothing adjustment (30% of adjusted duration)

Productive work duration

+ Work break adjustment (8.33 % of productive duration)

Total work duration (minutes)

Total duration= 8.683 hr **

• Alpha designatorsindicate activities that can be performed in parallel

• 64 370 481 44 521 TLG Services, Inc.

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

3.

LABOR REQUIRED Duration (Hours)

Rate

($/hr)

Crew Number Cost Laborers Craftsmen Foreman General Foreman Fire Watch Health Physics Technician 3.00 2.00 1.00 0.25 0.05 1.00 8.683 8.683 8.683 8.683 8.683 8.683 30.00 51.30 51.86 53.58 30.00 56.94 781.47 890.88 450.30 116.31 13.02 494.41

$2,746.39 Total labor cost

4.

EQUIPMENT & CONSUMABLES COSTS Equipment Costs none Consumables/Materials Costs

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

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

Gas torch consumables 1 @ $7.51 x 1 /hr {1}

Subtotal cost of equipment and materials Overhead & profit on equipment and materials @ 16.00 %

Total costs, equipment & material

.$21.00

$6.50

$7.51

$35.01

'$5.60

$46.61 TOTAL COST:

..Removal of contaminated heat exchanger <3000 pounds:

Total labor cost:

Total equipment/material costs:

Total craft labor man-hours required per unit:

$2,787.00

$2,746.39

$40.61 63.39 TLG Services, Inc.

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

5.

NOTES AND REFERENCES

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

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 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 Appendix B, Page 1 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 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Appendix B 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

• Removal of 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 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Appendix B, Page 5 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 Decommissioning Cost 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 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 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 Cost of CPC B-12V 12 gauge LSA box & preparation for use Cost of CPC B-144 LSA box & preparation for use Cost of LSA drum & preparation for use Cost of cask liner for CNSI 8 120A cask (resins)

Decontamination of surfaces with vacuuming, $/square foot 1,195.51 1,170.56 7,164.79 111.45 5,621.69 0.51 TLG Services, Inc.

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

Thuree Mile Islanmd, Uneit I Dee eoi-ei-ig Cost Amolysi.

Docueennt R16.155.-011, Rev. 0 Appendix C, Page 2 of 12 Table C Three Mile Island, Unit 1 DECON Decommissioning Cost Estimate (thousands of 2008 dollars)

PI AtityDcn Removal Packaging Transport Processing Disposal Other Toted Total Lic.Te.

Manaement.

Restoration Volume ClassA Mtessa CtesC GTCC Processed craft Con tor Index Activity Description cos ot cost Costs Costs CostsCol Costs Contingency Costs-Cast.

Cost.

Cost.

Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu.Feet 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 1a.1.2 Notification of Cessation of Operations la.1.3 Remove uel & source materia 1a.1.4 Notifcatioon of Permanent Deofeing ta.1.5 Doactivate plant systems & process waste lat1.6 Prepare and submit PSDAR 1,1.7 Re-iew plant dwgs & specs.

1 a 1.8 Perform detailed red survey 1a.1.9 Estimate by-product inventory 1:.1.10 End product description 1.1.11 Deteiled by-product invertory I.1A.12 De~fil major work seeqence la1.13 Perform SER and EA ta.1.14 Pertor Site-Specific Cost Study 1a.1.15 Preparelsobmit License Terminatioc Plan la.1.16 Receive NRC approval of terrination plan Actioity Specificaolns la.1.17.1 plant & temporryt facilities ta.1.17.2 P"ant systems 1a.1.17.3 NSSS Decontemination Flush la.1.17.4 Reactor irterrate l1.1.17.5 Reactor vessel 1a.1.17.6 Biological shield 1a.1.17.7 Steem generators I.1.17.8 Reinforced concrete 1a,1.17.9 Main Turbioe 1, I117.10 Main Condensers la,1.17.11 Plant structures & buidings le.1.17,12 Waste management la.1.17.13 Facility & ite doseout 10.1.17 Tootl Planning & Site Preparations I.1.18 Prepare dismanting sequence 1a.1.19 Rant prep. & temp. "nsc la.1.20 Design water dean-up system la.1.21 Rigging/Cont. Crtd Erosps/loolingetc.

1a.1.22 Procure caskloiners & containers la.1 Sobiofal Period ta Activity Costs 149 22 171 171 a

n/a 1.3OO 229 526 114 114 149 857 354 571 468 562 476 57 all 743 57 355 183 46 46 356 526 103 4,322 274 2,419 160 02,48 141 12,893 34 283 263 79 604 604 17 131 131 17 131 131 22 171 171 129 985 985 53 407 407 86 657 657 70 538 538 a

84 646 582 71 547 493 9

66 66 122 933 933 111 854 054 9

66 66 53 410 410 27 210 105 7

53 7

53 53 410 205 79 604 604 15 118 59 648 4.970 4,376 41 315 315 363 2,782 2.782 24 184 184 307 2355 2,355 21 162 152 1,934 14.827 14,233 6,00 22.0OO 6,000 22,000 1,692 12.973 1,692 12,973 107 1.181 1.181 81 433 433 65 55 105 53 53 205 594 594 2,000 4,600 1.900 1.000 1,300 7,500 3,1DOO 5,000 4,096 4,920 4,167 500 7.100 6,500 500 3,120 1,600 400 400 3,120 4,600 900 37.827 2,400 1,400 1,230 73.753 Period 1a Addional Cost la.2.1 ISFSI Construction la.2 Subtotal PereId 1 Additional Costs Period 1a Collaeral Costs 1:.3.1 Spent Fuel Capital and Transfer 18.3 Subtetal Period 18 Collateral Costs Period 0a Period-Dependent Costs la.4,1 Insurance I a.4.2 Property taxes Ia.4.3 Health physics supplies 16,000 18,000 11,280 11.280 1.074 347" 22,000 22,900 12,973 12.973 TLGServivoe, Ine.

77-e MiLe I.1ola', U,.it I Deco~jsaio,.uieg Coat Ansalysis Doru~nat E16-15&5-O11, Revo. 0 App~endix C Pa.ge3 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 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 ta.4.5 Disposal of DAW geneatled 1a*6 Plant energy budg* t ta.4.7 NRC Fees 1 4.8 Emergency Planning Fees 1.

4A9 Site O&M Costs ia.4.10 Spent Fuel Pool O&M 1a.4.11 ISFS1 Operating Costs 1 a.4.12 Security Staff Cost 1a4.13 Utlity Staff Cost 1a.4 Sublotal Period la Parod-Dependenl Costs 692 34 1,459 727 55O 250 745 85 2,587 27,176 34 34,952 52 397 397 9

45 45 219 1,677 1,677 73 800 800 55 605 37 287 287 112 857 13 98 433 3.320 3,320 4,076 31,253 31,253 5.273 40.953 39.394 885 857 98 1,859 36.532 594 610 610 610 12.19, 12,180 3

84,868 423,400 3

508,268 la.0 TOTAL PERIOD 10 COST PERIOD lb - Decomnislioning Praparatlons Period 1b Direct Decomninssioning Activities Detailed Work Procedures lb 1.1.1 Plaut syste0-1b.1. 1.2 NSSS Dectaminaton Rush 1b.1.1.3 Reator iltertels 1b.1.1.4 Remaining ioldings lb 1.1.5 CRD ooling asunrnbly I b 1.1.6 CRD housings & ICI tubes 1b.1.1.7 Inoore instrmentation 15b1.1.8 Reactr vessel 1b.1.1.9 Facility doseout b 1.1.10 Missile shieds b1.1.111 Biological shielt 1b51,1,12 Stea gern rators b.1113 Reintorced concrts lb.1.1.14 Main Turbine 1b,1115 Muin Condensers lb.1.1.16 Auxiliry. building 161117 Reactor builnirg 1b11 Total l1b.1.2 Docon primar lioop 1b.1 Subtotal Period I b Activity Costs Period lb Additional Costs lb.2.1 Site Characterization 1 b.2.2 Spent Fuel Poot ssluatlio 1b.2 Subtotal Period lb Additional Costs Period I b Collateral Costs lb.3.1 Decon equipment lb.3.2 DOC staff relocation expenses 1b3.3 Pr5ocessld waste 1 b.3.4 S all too I

allowanos 1b.3.5 pipe cutting equipment 1b.3.6 Decon rig b.3.7 Spent Fuel Cepital and Transfer 1I,.3 Sublotal Period lb Collaeal Costs 692 34 75,126 14,899 90,753 53,627 12.190 3

582,020 541 114 286 154 114 114 114 415 137 51 137 526 114 178 178 312 312 3.798 81 622 560 17 131 131 43 328 328 23 177 44 17 131 131 17 131 131 17 131 131 62 477 4T7 21 158 79 8

59 59 21 158 158 79 604 604 17 131 66 27 205 27 205 47 350 323 47 359 323 570 4.368 3.546 561 1,683 1,683 62 133 79 66 205 205 36 36 821 4.733 1,000 2,500 1,350 1,50G 1,000 3,630 1.200 450 1.200 4.500 1.080 1.580 1,0800 2,730 2,730 33,243 1.067 1,067 33,243 1,122 1,122 3,798 1.131 6,051 5,230 821 3.373 1.012 4.385 48385 9.407 1,411 10.819 10,819 12.780 2.423 15,203 15.203 19,8108 7,852 19.100 7,852 667 62 2

957 1.243 1.973 958 125 1.083 125 1,083 1.113 8,56308 5,644 8,563 6.757 100 767 767 167 1,280 1.280 2,347 12.180 12,180 0

2 2

153 1,500 1.100 188 1,430 1,430 847 6,491 3.791 23,250 16,760 6.491 6.491 391 2.285 277,072 391 2.285 277.072 522 522 TLG Sevicej, enc.

Throee Mile Islandl, Unit I Decrommssioninelrg Cost Analysis Documest E16-1555-O11, Ree. 0 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.

lb,4.2 Insurance 1 b4.3 Property taxes 1 b.44 0ealth physirs supplies 196 lb.4.5 Heoay equipment rentls 173 1b.4.8 Disposa of DAW generated Ib.4.7 Plant energy budget 1 b4.4 NRC Fees 1 b,4.9 Emergency Planning Fees 1b.4.10 Site O&M Costs 1b.4t11 Spent Fuel PoolO&M lb.4.12 ISFSI Operating Costs 1b,4.13 Security Sltff Cost tb.4.14 DOC StaffCost lb.4.15 Utility Slan Cost lb.4 Sub"oel Period Ib Peroed-Dependent Costs 20 369

-5 26 26 538 54 592 592 368 37 405 405 49 245 245 26 199 199

,20 5

26 26 1,463 219 1.682 1.682 384 36 401 401 276 28 303 125 19 144 144 374 56 430 43 49 1

.447 217 1,665 1.665 5.024, 754 5.778 5,778 2

13.684 2.053 15.737 15,737

.20 23.706 3,564 27.682.

.26,90W 303 430 49 782 7,273 821 43.800 1,415 358 358 749 2,285 1,358 2,285 10b.

TOTAL PERIOD I b COST PERIOD I TOTALS PERIOD 2a o Large Coesporrnr Remaorval Period 2a Dlrecd Decommissioning Activities Nuclear Steam Supply System Renmooal" 2a.l.l.1 Reactor Coolant Piping 2a.1.1.2 PreSurnzer Relief Tank 2-.1.113 Reactor Coolant Pumps & Motors 28.1.1.4 Prsur.ieer.

24.1.1.5 Steam Generators 2a.i.1.6 Retired SteamoGeeratorUnils 2a.1.1.7 CRDMsIICIsIService Structure Remrroval 2a.1.1.8 Reactor Vessel Intenals 2a.1.1.9 Reacor Vessel 2a.1.1 Totals Removal of Major Equipment 2a.1.2 Main Turbine/Generrtor 28.1 3 Main Condensers Cascading Costs from Clean Building Demolition 2a.1. 1 Reactor 2al14.2 Auxiliary 2a.1.4.3 Fuel oandling 2s.1.4 Total-Disposal of Plant SysterTm 2a.1.5.1 CNTL-TWR-285_PROCESS 2a.1.5.2 CNTL-TWR-305 BURY 2a.1.5.3 CNTt.-TWR-305 PROCESS 2a.1.5.4 CNTL-TWR-322_CLEAN

.2a.1.5.5 CNTL-TWR-338_CLEAN 28.1.5.6 CNTI.-TWR-355 CLEAN 2..1.5.7 CNTL-TWVR-380_CLEAN 2a.1.5.8 CNTL-TWR-388 CLEAN 3.115 1.328 126 1,084 3,115 2.80 2

l27" 1.085 8.583 47.042 10,908.

7Z,188 64,092 "8,617 122.168 25,807,. 162,939 117.720 113 91 i1

33.

163 12N 535 535 15 13 2

7-34 21' 93 93 123 74 35

.162 73 1.398 460 2.333 2,333 34

-51 679 596

.551 325-2`237 2.237 175 5,424 1.507 1944 4000 3086 16,936 10.938 725 15940 4,640 1,523 "

8.828 8,828 88 75 171 89 98 118 639 639 70, 2.326 4.217 904 6.150 191 6164.

20.023 20,023 71 4,935 1,264' 1.021 0, 123 191 7399-21004.

21,004 691 12990 8,610 16695 73 "23,956 382 19.229 72.628 72,628 278 Ill' 104 316 205 195 1,209 1.209

.1,084.

88 82 250 161 370 2.035 Z035 13.690 104 794 794 3243 30 280 280 317 48 365.

365 1,251 Il-s166 1.439 1.439 826 188 509 8,974 2,588 24,813 11,714 3,002 626 605 7,083 2X003 509 59,813 2,608 6,394 1.885 5,044 1,487 7,159 2

-425500 63,789 213,326 7,159 2

319.664 284.232 20.690 360.759 296,422 20.693 942.780 99,877 4,230 20.849 581 925,540 4.828 338,500 2,358 1,875 2,949,429 11,616 3,500 2,850,879 5,400 2,250 59,894 3.176 517 219.755 23.517 1.073 980.935 23.517 1,073 517 8,445,658 79.222 9770 456,843 6.072 360,419 24,422 9,845 3,371 4,242 17.458 66.452 1,2816 37,709 1.444 24.201 1,051 4,257 3,122 545 1,001 245 58 5

16 43 33 69 6

13 46 47 S.

23 4

177 128 128 20 38 1t 0 32 187 187 31, 164 1 64 17 96 86 27, 203

19.

147

.3" 23 2

203 147 23 44 12 956 308 420 516 36 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 Wit..

Lbs.

Manhours Manhours Disposal of Plant Systems (continued) 2a.1.5.9 IB-295 BURY 2a.1.510 IB-295_CLEAN 2a.1.5. 11 IB295_PROCESS 2a.1.5.12 1B-30 _BURY 2a.1.5.13 tB-305 PROCESS 2..1.&14 IB-322,BURY 2o1.5.15 IB-322_CLEAN 2a.1.5.16 IB-322_PROCESS 2a.1.5.17 IB-355 PROCESS 2a.5518 IB-ROOF PROCESS 2a.1.5.19 OCA CLEAN 2a.1.5.20 OCA PROCESS 2a.1.5.21 OOB CLEAN 2a.1.5.22 TB-3S5-E BURY 2a.1.5.23 T3B-305-E CLEAN 2s.1.5.24 TB-305-EPROCESS 2a.1.5.25 TB-305-W BURY 2a.1.5.26 T8-305-W CLEAN 2a,1.5.27 TB-305-W GIC 20.1.5.28 TB-305-W PROCESS 2a.1.5,29 TB-322-E_CLEAN 2a.1.9.30 TB-322-EGIC 2a.1.5.31 T6-322-E PROCESS 2a.1.5.32 TB-322-W_CLEAN 2a.1.5.33 Tr-322-W GIC 2s.1.5.34 TB-322-W-PROCESS 2a.1,5.35 TB-355-ECLEAN 2a.1.536 TB-355-W CLEAN 20.1537 TB-355-WGIC 2a.1 5.38 TB-355-W PROCESS 20.1.5.39 TB-38SCLEAN 2a.1.5.40 TB-380_PROCESS 20,195,41 TB-ROOF CLFAN 2a.1.5 Toots 20I1.6 ScOffolding In support of decommissiornng 20.1 Subtotal Poed 2a Atvity Costs Period 2a Additional Carts 20.2.1 Turtne Bldg GIC Woste Oisposion 2a.2 Subtotal Period 2a Addimonal Costs Period 2a Collateral Costs 20.3.1 Pro*ss 00-ad -tste 2a.32 Small tool auowonco 2a.3.3 Spent Fuel Capital atrd Transfer 20.3 Subtotal Period 2a Collaueral Costs Period 2a Peuiod-Depemdent Costs 2a.4.1 Decon supplies 2a.4.2 Insurance 2a.4.3 Property taxes 2.4.4 Health physics supplies 2o.4.5 Heavy eouopjnlt rental 2a.4.6 Disposal of DAW generated 58 46 238 31 200 12 38 513 57 15 814 87 9

136 187 425 95 22287 790 79 4

483

-142 13 464 6

23 2

460 15 407 21 6,728 691 23.065

.5' 9

31 14 45 182 63 2

5 18 8

25 87 43 1

2 8

28 101f 401 149 3

10 45 11 3

8 15 19 1

6 34..

4 6

16 37 37 37 134 -

549 187 9

18 65 73 262 1.013 398 68 209 534

'462 121 402 1.225 786 39 134 445 244 35 115 344 229 467

'1.533 4.977 2.838 a

68 30 4

'9.25.

8,420 5,646 27,15, 382 24 127 127

• 7 53 111 652 652 13 71 71.

78 442 442 5

29 29 6

44 244 1,435 1.435 26 152 152 12 72 72 122 936 29 161 161 1

11 52 284 284 28 215 259 1.591

.1.591 44 232 232 33 256 13 10D 495 3.031 3,031 12 91 1

5 354 2.109 2.109 21 163 2"

17 569 3,587 3.557 1

7 3

27 0

.2 267 1,590 1.590 2

17 232 1,362 1.362

3 24 3,206 19,749 17.353 191 973 973 23.379 98,033 95,637

43.

360 380 43 360 360 150 776

-778 28 216 194 2.279 17,474 2,457" 18.466 970

14.

69 89 64 704 704 99 1,091 982 364 1.820 1,820 337 2.581 2,581 64 328 328 285 53 4,082 584 8169 1,950 397 74 44 8-.98 1,375 1.012 100 345 174 936 753 38 11 830 342 215 12.295 1.726 599 256 100 22,670 3,670 915 11.945 4,255 163 17 27.417 7.242 7

27 2

9,969 2,248 17 7,702 2,112 24 2.395 111.411 26,155 599 37 2,395 123,957 89,377 2.608 25,568 1,292 1,100 215,183 5,312 S15,164 690 114:777 4.387 6,642 262 8-596 487,541 11.489 50.026 1,271 29,629 344 15,978 33,998 1,914 252 64,399 2,938 4,738 654,168 9,565 53.703 2.113 5.764 2,150 1,249,032 17,780 1,9960 121 866.708 11,046 3,474 386 1,763.044 10.811 147 572 46 6068318 10,504 364 502.137 9.275 497 S

6.875.19 156,385 30.276 20,187 517 16,163,390 303,748 9,770

-85

• 232 85 2232 106 34

-2.i 207 187 15,195 106 8

187 2o0 207 15,18s 55 992

'-1,456 2,245 7.

"4 10,10-8 01.108 72.1 22 17,474 17,474 22 721 109 4,437-454,855 454.855 43.286 141 43,286 141 88,730 20 TLG Serieea, lIne.

Three Mile I.1n-4 Unit I Deeoanioioning Coat Anatysia Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 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 Burial I Utility end Activity Deeon Removal Packaging Transport Processing Disposal Other Total Total Lic. Termn.

Managemenrt Restoration Voi.ne Class A Class B Class C 0TCC Processed Craft Cdntraotor Index 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 2a.4.8 NRC Foes 2a.4.9 Eoergenoy Planning Fees 2a.4.10 Site O&M Costs 2a.4.1 1 Spent Fuel Pool O&M 2a.4.12 ISFS1 Operating Costs 2a.4.13 Security Staff Cost 2a.4.14 OOC SWSII COst 2a4.15 Utlity Staf Cos-2a.4 5b0ta1 Period 2a Period-Dependent Costs 58 3,700.

2a.0 TOTAL PERIOD 2a COST 852 26.953 1,872 918 270 337 1,007 115 3.325 16,698 26,082 7

9 248 52.245 9,326 8,793 5,878 27.619 67,822 PERIOD 2b - Sita* oeontanination Period 2b Direct Oecontnissiorng Activies Disposal of Plant Systems 2b.1.1.1 AB-261_BURY 2..1.1.2 AB-261_PROCESS 2b.1.1.3 AB-271_BURY 2b.1.1.4 AB-271 PROCESS 2b.1.1.5 AB-281-I BURY 2b.1.1.6 AB-281-1-PROCESS 2b.1.1.7 AB-281-2 BURY 2b.1.1,8 AB-281-2_PROCESS 2b.1.1.9 AB-281-3_BURY 2b.1.110 AB-201-3_PROCESS 2b.1.1.11 AB-305-1_BURY 2b.1.1.12 AB-305-1-PROCESS 2b,1.1A3 AB-305-2_BURY 2b.1.1.14 AB-305-2 PROCESS 2b01.1.15 AB-3005-3_BURY 2b.1.1,16 AB-331_BURY 2b.1.1.17 AB-331_PROCESS 2b.1.18 CC-3050BURY 20.1.1.19 DG-305_BURY 2b.1.1.20 G-3005_CLEAN 2b.1.1.21 INTAKECLEAN 2b01.1.22 iWT-303 PROCESS 20.1.1.23 OCABURY 2b01.1.24 PA-301_BURY 20.1.1.25 PA-301_CLEAN 2b.l.5.26 PA-301_PROCESS 2b.II.,27 RB-281_BURY 2b.1.1.28 RB-281_PROCESS 2b 1.1.29 R6-308 BURY 21,1.1.30 RB-308_PROCESS 2b.1.1.31 RB-346,BURY 2b.1.1.32 RB-346 PROCESS 2b.1.1.33 RB-INSIDE 0-RINGBURY 201,.1.34 SB-305_CLEAN 21.1.1.35 STPCLEAN 2b.1.1,36 TB-305-EGIC 2b.1.1.37 TB-350-EPROCESS 2b.1.1 7otals 149 71 78 110 599 6

096 403 169 73 91 28 192 345 107 31 129 407 44 100 221 906 430 163 247 257 450 142 311 216

• 59 126 393 292 37 as 54

• 7,901 24 56 7

16 12 27 14 47 67 123 S0 0

87 165 23 57 9

17 2

5 33 81 0

2 23 44 11 45 7

11 4

7 4

16 63 114 6

14 67 117 99 165 37 62 6

46 51 108 10 22 35 67 16 53 6

13 1i 24 26 54 4

13 766 1,600l 200D 31 40 98 164 85 438 1

1 0587 101 1050

.59 12 13 2188 12 2

2 155 233 30 40 25 73 16 405 48 485 373 587 220 272 20 384 18 69 238 109 133 45 10 82 194 53 19 1,575 5,046 281 2,152 2,152 92 1.009 1,009 27 297 51 388 388 151 1,158 17 132 499 3,824 3,824 2.503 19,191 19.191 3,912 29,994 29.994 8,474 64,738 63.042 34,353 181,596 160,009 98 527 527 36 202 202 49 264 264 81 496 496 284 1,511 1,511 2

11 11 329 1,763 1,763 164 899 899 60 313 313 24 130 130 110 603 603 10 55 55 96 510 510 138 8908 8

39 204 234 15 82 62 51 292 292 241 1,290 1,290 26 140 140 15 115 33 254 426 2.434 2,434 289 1,569 1,569 109 590 509 37 284 118 722 722 229 1,221 1,221 60 320 320 151 801 801 114 646 648 29 152 152 58 310 310 158 825 825 1

11 6

43 13 101 28 171 171 3,727 20.667 19,659 19,061 2,526 134,065 94,535 24608 297 1,158 132 1,587 254 288 43 101 808 1.844 704 373 9998 3,669 742 4,978 20 11 6,052 2253 1,387 0544 258 122 2,650 274 15 1,555 5,224 333 38 251 1,636

.177 4.613 560 10,867 3,147 7,233 2,743 6.089 238 3.555 410 633 2.328 2.430 1,.22 419 227 763 1.783 1,193 175 35,256 52,408 109 4,437 96,653 214,103 398.626 88,730 20 709.582 517 16,750,270 303,909 719,352 165,398 3.451 62,046 1,639 80,591 1.765 215,571 2,6W6 362,114 13.634 1,830 151 044.727 13,135 215.864 8,971 48.748 3,882 21.461 1,874 237.727.

1,997 12,437 814 128,368 4.202 242,019 7,715 32"987 2,461 20.665 678 81,516 2,823 334,678 10,438 39,762 987 2,441 5.603 749,692 19,981 485,016 9,645 181.570 3,657 5,969 263,465 5,879 316.988 10.142 73,452 3,172 196,503 6,935 208,552 4.978 37,577 1,213 76,734 2,698 159,948 9,170 242 884 2,342

-13,860 1,188 5,602,141 178,759 TLG Serv/ea, Inn.

Three Mile lloand, Uinil I Deconnosaioning Cost Analysis Docunsent E16-1555-011. Rev. 0 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 C

Costs 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 Decontamination of Site Bultdings 2b.1.3.1 Reactor 816 699 2b.1.3.2 Ausliary 250 144 21b,.3.3 Classified Waste Storage Facility 13 5

2b.1.3.4 Heat Exchanger V-slt 43 25 2b.1.3.5 Interim OSod Waste Staging Fa*ilty 54 21 2b.1.3.6 Intermediate 22 33 2b.1.3.7 Miscellaneo-s Buildings - Contaminated 134 51

21. 1.3.8 Respirator Cleaning Facility 25 9

2b.1.3 Totals 1,384 987 2b.1 Subtotal Period 25 Activity Costs 1,364 9,007 Period 2b Colateral Coats 2b.3.1 Pross liquid wasla 115 2b.3.2 Small tool allowance 151 2b.3.3 Spent Fool Capital and Transfer 2b.3 Subtoal Peod 2b Colateral Costs 115 151 Period 2b Perod-Dependtrd Costs 2b.4.1 Decon supplis 705 2b.42 Insurance 2b.4.3 Property taxes 2b04.4 Health physics supplies 1,767 2b.4.5 Heavy equiponant rantsl 4,480 2b.4.6 Disposal of DAW generated 2b.4.7 Plant energy bodget 2b.4.8 NRC Fees 2b.4.9 Emergency Planning Fees 2b.4.10 Site O&M Costs 2b.4.11 Spent Fuel Pool O&M 2b.4.12 Radasle Processing Equipment/Seroices 25.4.13 ISFSI Operating Costs 2b.4.14 Sncorty Staff Cost 2b.4.15 DOC Stt Cost 2b.4.16 UtilitpStaff Cos-2b.4 Subtotel Period 2b Parlodependenl Costs 705 6,247 2b.0 TOTAL PERIOD 2b COST 2,165 16,205 PERIOD 2c - Decontlaeintion Followilg Wet Fuel Storage Pared 2c Direct Oecommeissoning Activities 2c.t.1 Remoe spent Weh-acks 315 41 Disposal of Plant Syspteo 2c.1.2.1 FHB-281_BURY 170 2c.1.2.2 FHB-28 I_PROCESS 151 2t.2.3 FHB-3G5 BURY 53 2c.1.2.4 FHB-305_PROCESS 74 2c.1.2.5 FHB-329 BURY 14 2c,1,2.6 FHB-329_PROCESS 12 2c.1.2.7 FHB-348_BURY 68 2c.1.2.8 FHB-348 PROCESS 32 2c.1.2.9 YARD CLEAN 492 11 7

37 5

238 1,216 1,216 748 47 37.845 25,234 142 346 23 65 1

3 4

11 5

14 8

22 12 34 2

6 196 500 975 2,157 41 844 34 90 5

4 15 1

20

-32 49 9

80 1,062 1.692 6,113 37 306 227 29,885 37 306 227 29.885 a

10 8

10 1,020 2,473 15 83 24 44 7

19 6

12 0

12 1

2 1

2 13 29 2

5 1.286 1,994 277 2.970 1.844 543 678 2,024 509 230 6.85 32.269 50.433 2T7 101,486 1,692 6,617 131,351 294 157 35 48 43 i1 36 6

1 6

102 6

15 866 3,752 3,752 265 818 819 9

36 36 34 135 135 40 154 154 31 148 148 98 377 377 18 71 71 1,301 5,491 5,491 5,267 27,375 26,567 164 849 849 23 174 174 4,483 34,38 4,689 35,391 1.023 176 882 882 129

.415 1,415 198 2,194 2,194 442 2,208 2,208 572 5,152 5,152 72 366 366 446 3,416 3,416 184 2,029 2,020 54 597 102 780

, 780 304 2.328 76 586 586 35 265 1,803 7,887 7,687 4,840 37,109 37,109 7,565 57,098 57,998 16,298 125.011 121.821 26,234 187,776 149,411 264 1,102 1,102 91 485 485 59 319 319 26 140 140 31 169 169 5

29 29 5

27 27 48 260 260 14 73 73 74 566 688 34,388 34.368 597 2.328 265 3,190 37.557 913 10,494 752 1,651 87 99 270 21 362 590 903 169 1.785 14,527 37.789 66,981 790 79 4,963 4,963 37,789 72,734 808 992,342 32,1895 194,204 8,637 8,697 386 30,691 1,464 37,084 1,625 59,046 1,068 90.294 4,0881 16,926 751 1,429.264 50,125 7,069,250 254,117 47,393 154 47,393 154 99,251 23 194,689 413,389 767,317 99,251 23 1,375,395 7,215.894 254,294 1,375,395 242,924 1,056 2,707 566 1,611 129,564 3,740 790 445 71,968 3,368 405 35,492 1,189 254 332 40,100 1,666 57 5,081 319 22 56 5-907 265 943

-3.967 1,497 131 148 17,553 699 12.996 TLG Serviees, Ine.

Thiree Mile Isla"s Unitd I IDeeonxoniiioesbng Cast Analdysis Dscujmient E16IS-155-01, Rev. 0 Appoendix C, Page 8 of 12 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 2c.1.3 Totals 025 552 33

.59

29.

141 525 552 33 59"-

29 141 2c.1.4 Scaffolding In suppol of deoommissi.onien 184 2

1 2c.1 Subtotal Period 2c Adt*

Coats 840 1.843 198 266 Period 2c Additional Costs 2,,2.1 LiOnsO Teimnisti.

S-eyo P*anni*gr 2c.2.2 Contaminated Sol Remediation 39 2

110 20c2 Subtotal Period 2c Additional Costs 39 "

2 110 Period 2c Codlateral Costs 2.3.1 Process liqund waste 156 s0 415 2c.3.2 Small teoo allowanoe 38 2c.3.3 Decommissioning Equipment Disposition 85 65 2c.3 Subtotal Period 2c Collateral Costs 156 38 135 480 Period 2c Perio-Dapendent Costs 2c.4.1 Decon supplies 123 2c.4.2 Insurance 2c4.3 Property taxes 2c.4.4 Health ptysIs supplies 430 2c.4.5 Heavy equipment rental 1,325 2c.4.6 Disposal of DAW generated 2

3 2c.4.7 Flant energy budget 2c.4.8 NRC Fees 2c.4.9 Enmtgoncy Planning Fees 2c.4.10 Site O&M Costs" 2c.4.11 Radware Processing EquipmentifSetiOes 20.4.12 ISFSI Operating Costs 2C.4.13 Security Staff Cost 2C.4.14 DOG StatW Cost 2c.4.15 Utility Staff Cost 2c.4 Sultotal Period 2c Period-Dependont Costs 123

" 1,754 2

3 2c.0 TOTAL PERIOD 2c COST 1.119 3,674 338-856 PERIOD 2e - Lionse Teroinationt Period 20 Direct D-eromissioning Actiies-2.1.

ORISE -onrmatorY -.1Y 2e.1 2 Terminate ftlicse 2s.1 Sobtotal Period 2e Acdvity Costs Period 29 Additional Costs.

2e.2.1 Liens Termination Suory 2e2 Subtotal Period 26 Additonal Costs Period 2e CoWlaters]

Costs 2e.3.1 DOC sal reocation expenss e s 2e.3 Subtotalt Priod 2e Collateral Costs 90

,. 849 S-640 1,930 1,930 848 307 297 "41 297 347 590 73 406 545 160 201 1,098 6,583 10,003 73*

21.298-387 3.199 22,145 452 1.791 1.791 452 1,791 A 791 48 243 243 1,117 5.203 4,637 254 1,102 1.102 509 2.589 2.589 763 3,091 3,691 222 1,150 1.150 6

43 43 73" 560 560 300 1,753 1,753

31.

154 154 38 418 418 09, 649 649

.107 537 537 199 1.523 1,523 19 go 96 70 539 539 55 600 600 16 176

30.

231 231 45 346 346 10 78 165 1.263 1,263 007 7,570 7.570 1,935 12.539 12,539 3,467-,

26.719 26.464.

5,947 37,367 36.546 650 1.745 650 1,745 150 9

568 1.997 8,457-35,745 35,745 1,070.

6,000 373 6.000 1.443 181,173 22,480

'13,173 22,480 7,569 5,047 821,303 54,322 6,240 2.716,592 462 2,-

2.71,592 462 6,240 84,196 209 303,507 88 367,703 297 26,014 6

30.355 83.714 159,894 26,014 8

273,963 3,931,612 55.086 2800203 176 78 255 255 1,301 1.301 566 7.997 46,946 155 4ro 201 201 155 46 201 201 5,183 1,855 8.038 8,038 6'1813 1,655 8.038 8,038 124,444 3.120 124,444 3.120 1.113 1,113 167 1,280 1,280 167.

1,280 1,280 TLG Ser0i0e, IFne.

Three MieI1. sl4 Unait I Dec-aniaawo-oiag Cost Analysi.

Docurment B16-1555-0I1. Rev. 0 Ap~pendix gý Page 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 WiLl Lbs.

Manhours Manhours Period 2e Peiod-Dependenlt Costs 2..4.1 Insurance 20.4.2 Property taxes 2e.4.3 Heaah physics surpplies 2a.44 DiposOl of DAW generated 2..4.5 Plant energy budget 2e.4.8 NRC Fees 2e.4.7 Emergency Planning Fees 2e.4.8 Site O&M Costs 20.4.9 ISFSI Operating Costs 2e.4.10 Secunt Staff Cost 2e.4.11 DOC Staff Cost 2..4 12 Utility Staff Cost 20.4 Subtotal Period 2e Period-Dependent Costs 2e.0 TOTAL PERIOD 2a COST PERIOD 2 TOTALS PERIOD 3b-Site Restoration Period 3b Direct Deoommissionig Actavlies Demolition of Remaining Site Buildings 3b 1.1.1 Reactor 3b.".2 Air Intake Tunnel 3b.1.1.3 Ausolary 30.1.1.4 Carpenters Shop #117 3b.1.1.5 Circuslting Watr Chlorinator

30. 1.6 Circulating Water Chlornator House 3b.1.1.7 COrcuating Water Intake FlRume 3b.1.1.8 Circuating Wataer Pu mthouse 3b.1.1,9 Circulating Water Tunnels 3b.1.1.10 CiasitfedWaste Storage Facilty 3b.1.111 Coagulato 3b'1.1,12 Control Room Tor 3b 1.1t3 Cooling Towors 3b.1.1.14 Csrtdor 3b.11.15 Desltng 9asin 3b.1.1.186 Diesel Geerator 3b.1.1.17 Emergency Diesel Genelrtot 3b.1.1.18 Fire Brigade Tranirng Facility 3b.1.1.19 Fuel Oil Unloading & Pump Station 3b.1,1.20 Heat Exchanger Vault 3b.1.1.21 High Range Sample Station 3b.1.1.22 Ioduls Waste Trlrrn & Sludge 59 tr 3b.1.23 risks Screen & Pumphruses 3b.1.1.24. interii Solid Waste Staging Facility 3b.1.1.25 Intrlmediate 3b.1.1.26 Lube Oil Storage 3b.1.1.27 Mechrsncal Draft Coosing Toser 3b.0.128 Miscelaneons Buidings - Clean 3b01.1.29 Mlscataneous Buildgs - Contaminated 30.1.1.30 Miscellaneouo Yard Strfctres

,3b.1.1.31 Nodh Oftce 3b,1.1.32 OperationsOffice 3b.1.1.33 Operations Support Fedity 334 33 368 368 551 55 607 607 612

""2 153.

766 766 01

5.

26 26 219 33 252 252 5 546 50 600 606 150 15 165 188 28 216 216 64 10 73 1.005 151 1.159 1.159 4,650 897 5,347 5,347 5.930 889 6.819 6.819 612 1

I 20 13.639 2.125 16.398 16,160 165 73 238 354 354 7,071 7.071

• 2 27,791 57,149 2

,7634 2

165,574 612 1

20 21,091 4.193 25.918 25.679 238 354 57,111 3,901 179.851 214,569 2,608 7,071 124,446 168,694 517 27,904,840 737,735 2,543.645 4,155 47.444 10.684 12.125.

7.957 37,454 242,409 70.428 432,657 371.645 3,707 4,263 55 4283

.. 50

8.

58 2.088 6

313 2,399 14

.2

-16 so0 7

-7" 5

54 8'

62 44 50 121

-1V 140 V2 80 612

'22 3'

26 36 5,

42 2.62 393 3.015 838 126 064.

67

-10 77 600 90 690 502 75 577

/"111 8

319 48 367 4

"6 76 11 87 1,679 252 1.930 89 13 103 1,287

_-193 1,480 1

9 121 1s 139 874 131 1,005 166 "

25 190 2-188 1,444 255 "38 293 54

.8-62 244 37 280 4.263 58 2,399 16 57 62 600 140 612 26 42 3,015 964 77 2

690 517 14 8

367 "5

87 1,930 103 1,480 9

139 1,006 1.444 293 62 280 52.366 844 28.1722 219 875 1,087 709 2,422 9,010 452 726 35.625 13,913 1,381 32 9.233 6.842 231 109 4.093 67 1,406 1B,870 1,752 17.186 139 1,802 19,054 3,414 20.519 4,920 1,102 4,425 TLG Services. Inc-

Three Mile Island, U. it I Docurnent E16-1555-011, Raev. 0 D ~e ooe ia sioning Cos t 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 3b.1.1.35 Security Improvements 3bt.1.36 Servce 3b.11 37 Sewage Pumping Station 3b.1.1.38 Steamr Generator Mausoleum 3b.111.39 Substation Relay Control House 3b.1.1.40 Training Facility #43 3b.1.1.41 Turbine 3b.1.1.42 Turbine Pedestal 3b.1.143 Wrreoess #1 3b.1.1.44 Water Pretreatnent House 3b.1.1.45 Fuel Handling 3b.1.1 Total.

Site Closeout Activities.

3b.,12 Remome Rubble 3b.1,3 Grade & landocape site 3.1.4 Final repor to NRC 3b.1 Suobotal Period 30 Activity Costa Period 3b Additional Costs 3b.2.1 Conrerte Processing 3b.2.2 Intake cofferdam 3b.2 Subtotal Period 3b Additonal Costs.

Peiiod 3b Colatteral Costs 3b.3.1 Smrnl tool aoiaonce 3b.3 Subt1at0 Peiod 3b Collateral Costa 664 252 5

305 24 58 1.431 1128 377 S

115 2.2937 25,145 8,707 121 33,073 1

.030 245 1,276 23

-8 238 a,

59 100 763 38 290 1

6 46 351 4

28 9

87 215 1,646 169.

1,297 57 434 17 132 441.

3.378 3,772" 28,916 59 763 290 6

351 28 67 1.646 1,297 434 132 3,378 28,916 10,013 140 39.089 1.072 6.957 5,003 97 3,900 489 1,199 2G,877 14,441 8,170 2,006 40.440 374,203 7,228 531 S

1,560 381,962 1,560 6,293 2,794 9,087 1,306 10.013 1-1B 140

. 178 -

27 205 205 178.

5,123, 39,274 205 8

8 155 1,193 37 282 192 1,475 1.193 282 1,475 360 274 36..

274 274 274 Period 3b Period-Dopendent Costs 3b.4.1 lns uronca 880 88 g88 3b.42 Property laxe; 1,451 145 1,596 3b.4.3 Heavy equipment renta 4.367 655-5,023 3b.4.4

. Plant energy budget-

288, 43 331 (0) 3b.4.5 NRC ISFSJ Fees

-'..-430 43 474 3b.4.6 Emergency Planning Fees 395 39*

434 3b.4.7 ISFS0 Operating Costs 168 25 193 3b.4.8 Site OSM cost 493 74 568 3b.4.9 Scurit O Cost 4.907 736:

5,643 (0) 3b.4.10 DOC Staff Co st

'-11.826 1,774 13,600 3b.4.11 Utlty Staff Cost 7,917 1,187 9,104 3b.4 Subtotal Period 3b Period-Oependent Costs 4,367 28,754 4,810 37,932 (0) 30.0 TOTAL PERIOO 3b COST 39,854 8

28.932-10,161-78.955 205 PERIOD 3. - Fuel Storage Operaloonsihlpplng Period 3c Direct DecommissionIng Actvitiis.

968 1,596 5,023 66 265 474 434 193 568 4,796 846 13,69O 2094 7,010 10,621 27,311 10,621 68,129 8,913 8.913 2,711 4,471 133.900 140,080 112,270 386,250 391.049 387,810 Period 3c Collateral Costs 3c.3.1 Spent Fuel Capital and Transfer 3c.3 Subtotal Period 3c Collateral Cools Period 3c Period-Depend"et Costs 3c.4.1 Insurance 3c.4.2 Property btoes 7,790 1,163 8,913 7,750 1,13 8.913 2,465 4,065 246 2711 406 4,471 TLG Services, I".

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

Activity Off-Site LLRW NRC Spent Fuel Sit.

Processed

__Burial Volumes Burial I Utl~ly ad Decon Removal Packaging Transport Processing Disposal Other Total 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 cos......cos.

co t

...... r-t costs..

Fast C.......

C.....

Fas 111n a

Period 3c Period-Dependent Costs (continued) 3c.4.3 Plant energy budget 3c.4.4 NRC ISFSI Fees 3c.4.5 Emergency Planning Fees 3c.4,6 Site O&M Costs 3c.4.7 ISFS1 Operating Costs 3c.4.8 Security Staff Cost 3c.4.9 Utility Staff Cost 3c.4 Sutotal Period Sc Pariod-Dependent Costs 3C.0 TOTAL PERIOD 3c COST PERIOD 3d - GTCC shipping Period 3d Direct Decommissioning Activitias Nuclear Staar Supply System Removal 3d.1.1.1 Vessel&IoteralssGTCConIspolld 3d.1.1 Totals 36.1 Subtotal Period 3d Activity Costs Period 3d Period-Depondeart Costs 3MI.4.

Insurance 3d.4.2 Properly tanes 3d4.3 Plant energy budget 3dA.44 NRC ISFSI Feas 3d.4.5 Emergency Planning Fees 3d.4.6 Site O&M Costs 3X4.7 ISFSI Operating Costs 3d.4.8 Security Staff Cost 3d.4.9 utiity Staff Cost 3d.4 Subtotal Period 3d Penod-Oopendsnt Costs 3d.0 TOTAL PERIOD 3d COST PERIOD 3e - ISFS Oecontteination Period 3e Dirant Decommissioning Aclivities Period 3e Addiuonal Costs 3e.2.1 ISFSI License Temination 457 3a.2 Subtotal Period 3d Additional Costs 457 Period 3e Collateral Costs 3e.3,1 Small laW allowance 5

3e.3 Subtotal Period 3d Collateral Costs 5

Period 3e PenFd-Dependenl Costs 3e'4.1 Insurancec 3e.4'2 Propertytaxes 3..4.3 Heavy equipment rental 217 3e.4A Plant onergy budget 3..45 NRC ISFSI Fee-3e.4.6 Site O&M Costs 3a.4,7 Security Staff Cost 3d4.8 Utility Staff Cost 3e.4 Subtotal Perod 3e Peiod-Dependenl Costs 217 161 24 186 186 51,22 152 r,674 1,874 1:10 1 i1t 1,217 1,2r17 1,383 207 1,590 1,590 470 70 540 540 11,698 1,755 13,452 13,452 5,129 769 5,898 5.89s 27,998 3,742 31,740 31,740 35,748 4,954 40,552 40,652 375 12,289 375 12,289 375 12,289 1.581 14,545 14,545 1,881 14,545 14,545 1,881 14,545 14,545 311.657 77,914 389.571 389,571 58f 105,646 580 105,646 580 105.646 4,629 1,157 6.756 580 105,646 5,786 802 101t008 21,237 2,560 802 101008 21,237 2.560 375 37 4

40 60 6

66 2

0 3

18 2

20 16 2

18 21 3

24 7

1 8

174 26 200 76 11 88 411 55 466 12,289 411 1,936 15,012 14,545 40 66 3

20 18 24 200 88 466 466 4

31 44 1,285 323 2,144 4

31 44 1,285 323 2,144 1

6 1

6 2,144 2,144 6

a 6

146 24 72 52 187 254 768 15 161 32 249 4

28 7

79 12 94 28 215 38 293 136 1,119 161 249 28 79 94 215 293 1,119 4,971 3,771 8,743 TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile 1.1a-4 Unit1 Decommissioning Coat Analysis Do.tment B16.1555-011, Rea. 0 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,,,,,

o Matrhoctr 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 36 Ditec Decornmissioning Activities Period 3Y Addibna 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 36 Poriod-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&M Costs 41 6

47 47 3f.4.6 Security Staff Cost 94 14 108 108 2,486 3f.4.7 Utility Staff 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 36 COST 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 TOTAL COST 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 TOTAL COST TO DECOMMISSION WITH 18.33% CONTINGENCY:

$736,331 thousands of 2068 dollats TOTAL NRC LICENSE TERMINATION COST IS 68.46% OR:

$504,115 thousand. of 2008 dollars SPENT FUEL MANAGEMENT COST IS 21.56% OR:

$158,771 thoasants of 2008 dollars NON-NUCLEAR DEMOLITION COST IS 9.97% OR:

$73,445 thousands of 2008 do.ars TOTAL LOW4.EVEL RADIOACT1VE WASTE VOLUME BURIED (EXCLUDING GTCC):

.222,138 cubic feat OTAL GREATER THAN CLASS 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 nmt carged as dOcommissioning expense.

a - indicats that this activity performed by decommissioning staff.

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

a arol ontaining '-' indicates a zro ralta TLG Services, Inc.

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

Three Mile 1.1and, Unit I Decommissioning Cost Analysis DocumentEl16-1555-011, Rev. 0 Appendix D, Page 2 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 Costs CoCosgs 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..

SAFSTOR slte characterization survey lu1 a2 Propare preliminary decommslsioning co-la11.3 Notification of Cessation of Operations la1.4 Remove fuel & Source material la.1.5 Notification of Permanent Defueling la.1.6

.Deactivate plant systems & process waste 1a.1.7 Prepare ond submit PSDAR 1 a.1.8 Review plant dwgs & specs.

1.1.9 Pefonn detailed rod survey lu.1.10 Estimate by-product inventory ul..11 tint product desciption lu.l.12 Detailed by-product inventory la.1.13 Define major work sequence Ia.I1.4 Perform SER and EA la.S.15 Perform Sirt-Specifc Cost Study Activity Specifications lua..16.1 Prepare plant and fadlitles for SAFSTOR lua,.16.2 Plant systemo la.1.16.3 Plant structures and buildings la.1.16.4 Waste managanot la.l.16.5 Facility and site dormancy la1.16 Totsl Detailed Work Procedures l:..17.1 Plant systanes la.l.17.2 Focilily cioseout & dormancy la.1.17 Totas la.1.18 Procure vacuum drying system Ila.119 Drinide-enorgize non-cont. ypteims la.1.20 Drain & dry'NSSS Ia.1.21 Dmrorde-energize contaminated systems ta.1.22 teosrdsecuro contaminatad systems tat Subtotal Period loa Auctvity Costs Period il Pofod-Dependent Costs Ie.4.1 Insurance 1a.4,2 Propentytaxes tZ.4.3 HeMath physics supplies 347 lA.4.4 Heovy equlpmenl rental 346 la.5.5 Disposal of DAW generated la.4.6 Plant energy budget la.4.7 NRC Fees 1a.4.8 Emergency Planning Fees to.4'9 Site O&M Costs 1.4.10 Spent Fuel Pool O&M Ia.4.11 Socurdty Staff Cost Ia.4.12 Utility Staff Cost la.4 Subtotal Period Ia Period-Dependent Costs 692 436 149 229 149 114 114 171 114 354 571 131 567 567 22 171 171 n/a a

34 203 263 22 171 171 17 131 131 17 131 131 26 197 197 17 131 131 53 407 407 86 657 657 t4 646 646 71 547 547 53 410 410 34 263 263 34 263 263 278 2.129 2,129 20 155 155 21 158 158 41 313 313 2

13 13 1,300 2,000 1,300 1,O000 1,000 1,500 1.000 3.100 5.000 562 476 356 229 229 1,652 4,920 4,167 3,120 2,000 2,000 16,207 1-183 1,200 2.383 100 135 137

. 272 11-6 4,536 746" 5,282 5,282 35,890 S

1.074

-34 1

.. 459 775 554 250 745 5,378 27,176 34 37.407 107 1,101 1.181 87 433 433 52 397 397 6

45 45 219 1.677 1,677 77 852 862 55 605 37 287 287 112 657 807 6,185 6,185 4,076 31,253 31,253 5,838 43,774 42.312 605 857 1,462 610 12.190 610 12,190 3

157A471 423,400 3

580,871 TLG Servic., Inc.

Three Mile 1.1-4d Unit I D~r,,snioionngCoat Anolysi.

Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 Appendix D, Page 3 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 TOTAL PERIOD 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 lb.t.1.2 Auxiliary 1b.1.1.3 Classified Waste Storage Facility lb.1.1.4 Heat Exchanger Vault tb.1.1.5 Interir Solid Waste Staging Facility lb.I.1.t Miscellaneous Buildings - Contaminated lb.t.1.7 Respirnator Cleaning Facility.-

Ib.1.1.8 Fuel Handling 1bl.1 Totals l1b.1 Subtotal Period lb Activity Costs Period Ib Additional Costs Ib.2.1 Spent Foot Pool Isolaton 1b.2 Subtotal Period lb Additlonal Costs Period lb Colataeral Costs 1 b.3.1 Decon equipment 1b.3.2 Process liquid waste 1 b.3.3 Small tool talowance I1.3 Subtotal Period lb Coltateral Costs Period lb Peeod-Dependent Costs lb.4.1 Decon supplies 1b.4.2 Insurance 1 b.4.3 Property taxes 1 b.4.4 Health physics supplies 1 b,4.5 Heavy equipment rental 1 b.4.6 Disposal of DAW generated 1 b.4.7 Plant energy budget 1b54.8 NRC Fees I b4.9 Emergency Planning Fees IbA 4dlO Sit. O&M Costs Ib.4.11 Spent Fuel Pool O&M I b.4.12 Secuity Staff Cost 1 b.4.13 Utility Staff Cost 1b.4 Subtotal Period 1o Pentod-Oependent Costs lb.

TOTAL PERIOD Ib COST PERIOD It -Preparaltons for SAFSTOR Dormancy Period 1c Direct Decommissioning Activates 10.1 Prepare suppod equipment for storage I0c-.2 I1.tat containment pressure equal. linea lc.1.3 interim survey prior to dormancy 1c.1.4 Secure building accesses 759 232 12 39 48 120 22 491 1.723 1.723 380 1.139 1,139 116 348 348 6

-17 17 19 58 58 24 72

.72 60 ItS 180 11 34 34 245 736 736 881 2,594 2,584 881 2,5134 2.584 16,970 5,397 272 902 1.135 2,825 529 9.742 37.772 37,772 9,407 1,411 10.819 10,819 9,407 1,411 10,819 10,819 667 167 53 442 24 835 24 53 442 632 209 87

-1

.1 632 297 1

1 3,189 320 54 443 407 36 327 327 271 185 29 368 195 139 63 188 1.356 6,850 29 9,614 356 19,021 100 767 767 237 1,227 1.227 4

27 27 341 2,022 2,022 158 790 790 27 298 298 19 204 204 52 262 262 13 100 100 7

38 38 55 423 423 20 215 215 14 152 9

72 72 28 216 203 1,559 1.559 1,027 7,877 7,877 1,633 12,206 11,837 4,249 27.630 27,261 1,140 1.140 512 512

-1,52 68.413 222 68,413 222 10.239 2

30,691 106.720 10,239 2

148,411 78,652 37,997 146.411 152 216 368 368 B1 468 468 5

41 41 733 220 953 953 3,000 700 12,115 TLG Services, Inc.

Three We Island, Unit I Deomsmissionsing Cost A~solyese D-surnewenl E16-1555-011, Rev. 0)

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 lc.1 Subtotal Period 1c Activity Costs 442 Period Ic Collateral Costs 1C.3.1 Process fiquid wasIs 247 79 652 1c.3.2 Small tool alloswance 3

lc.3 Subtotal Period lc Collateral Costs 247 3

79 652 Period 1c Period-Dependent Costs 1c.4.1 Insurance lc.4.2 Property taxs" 1c.4.3 Health physics supplies 138 1..4.4 Heavy equipment rental 88 1..4.5 Disposalolo DAW generated 0

0 1..4.6 Plant energy budgot 10.4.7 NRC Fees lc4.0 Emergency Planning Fees 1 c.4.9 Site O&M Costs lc.4.10 Spent Fuel Pool O&M 1C.4.11 Scurty Staff Cost 1c.4.12 Uit0y Staff Cost 1c.4 Subtotal Period Ic Pernod-Depandent Costs 224 0

0 I c.0 TOTAL PERIOD Ic COST 247 670 79 653 PERIOD 1 TOTALS.

, 3,436 1,682 134 1,097 PERIOD 2a - SAFSTOR Dormancy wAth Wat 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 2a.1.4 Bituminous roof replacoment 2s.1.5 Maintenance supplia-2a.1 Subtotal Period 2a Actty CCosts Period 2a Collateral Costs 2a.3.1 Spent Fuel Capital and Transfur 2a.3 Subtotal Period 28 Collateral Costs Period 2a Peuiod-ependenlt Costs 2a.4.1 Insurancs 2a.4.2 Property taxes 2a.4.3 Health physics supplies 942 2a.4.4 Disposal oJDAW generated 8

10 2..4.5 Plant energy budget 2a.4.6 NRC Fees 2a.4.7 Emergency Planning Fees 2a.4.8 Site O&M Costs 2a.4.9 Sponl Fuel Pool O&M 2a.4.10 Securiy Staff Cost 2a.4.11 Utility Staff Cost 2a.4 Subtotal Period 2a Period-Dependent Costs 042 8

10 67 10 77 77 800 296 1,538 1,538 583 15.815 503 483 483 350 1,811 1,811 0

3 3

350 1,814 1.814 1,683 1,683 100.960 328 100,960 328 268 27 294 294 183 10 201 201 35 173 173 13 99 99 2

11 11 364 55 418 418 193 19 213 213 137 14 151 62 9

72 72 106 28 214 1.341 201 1.542 1,542 6,775 1.016 79702 7.792 90

'500 1.437 11,180 10,815 491 10,309 2.014 14,532 14,167 881 71,273 12,714 91,217 89.023 151 214 304 384 2,195 152 3.039 1

39,260 105,560 152 3.039 1

144.820 1,835 103.999 16,144 145,403 4,096 194.841 4,143 908.576 0

1,729 259 1.908 1,988 1.472 380 1,840 1.840 3,201 627 3,828 3.828 6,5500 6.500 975 7.475 975 7.475 7,475 7.475 5,547 555 6,102 8,601 860 9,461 236 1,170 1.178 270 70 357 357 3,416 512 3,928 2.673 267 2.940 2,940 2,340 234 2,574 2,925 439 3,364 8,729 1.309 10,036 22,721 3,408 26,129 60.896 9,134 70.030 270 117,848 17,024 136.101 4,475 8.102 9,461 3.928 2,574 3,364 10,038 26,129 70,030 131,826 4,831 96.622 22 6.50.381 94,703 4,831 96.622 22 1,615,084 TLG Service=, I1c.

Three-Mile Island, Unit I Decommissioning Coat Analysis Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 Appendix D, Page 5 of 13 TableD Three Mile Island, Unit 1 Delayed DECON Decommissioning Cost Estimate (thousands of 2008 dollars)

I I Act Off-Sit.

LLRW NRC Spent Fuel Sit.

Processed B.1.1 aWionars Burial Utility and I Decon Reerrval Packaging Transporl Processing Disposal Other Total Total Uc. Teom.

Management Restoratioln Volume Class A Claam B Class C GTCC Processed Craft Cotractor I to.,I

• l~,r r.,a*l.

tabe C,,.,

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 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 PERIOD 2 TOTALS PERIOD 3a - Reactilvata Site Followleg SAFSTOR Dormancy Period 3a Direct Decommissioning Actlitlias 3a.1.1 Prepare preliminary decommlssioning cost 3a.1.2 Review plant dgs & spe-s.

• 3a.1.3 Perform detailed red survey 3a.1.4 End product descrdption 3a.1.5 Detailed by-product inventory 3a.1.6 Define major work sequence 3a.1.7 Perform SER and EA 3a.1.8 Perform Sile-Specific Cost Study 3a.19 Prepare/submit License Torminetlon Plan 3a.1.10 Receive NRC approval of tlrrnlnation plan Actilvy Specications 3a.1.11.1 Re-activals plant & temporary facilities 3a.1.11.2 Plant systems 3a.1.11.3 Reactor Internals 3a.1.11.4 Reactor vessel 3a.1.11.5 BSlog.ical shield 3a.1.11.6 Steam generators 3a.1.11.7 Reanforced concrete 3a.1.11.8 Main Turbine 3a.1.11.9 Main Condensers 3a.1.11.10 Planlstru'tureS &buildings 3a.1.11.11 W2ste management 3a.1.11.12 Facility & site closeoul 3a.1.11 Total Planning & Site Preparations 3a01.12 Prepare dismantling sequence 3a.1.13 Plant prep. & temp. s'e.s 3a.1.14 Design water clea-oup system 3a.1.15 Rigging/Cont. Cntrl Envilpstoollngletc.

3a.1.15 Procure cask/llnens & contalners 3a.1 Subtotal Period 3a Activity Costs Period 3a Collateral Costs 3a.3.1 Spent Fuel Capital and Transfer 3a.3 Subtotal Period 32 Collateral Costs Period 32 Period-Dependent Costs 3a.4.1 Insurance 3a.42 Property taxus 3a.4.3 Health physics supplies 3a.4.4 Heavy equipment rental 3..4.5 Disposal of DAW generoled 3a.4.6 Plant energy budget 3a.4.7 NRC Fees 3a.4.6 Emergency Planning Fees 942 8

10 270 127,548

.18,627 147.405 0,303.

270 127.548 18,627 147,405 8,303 139.101 139.101 4,a31 4,831 96,622 22 1,615.084 98.622 22 1,615,064 942 1S 149 525

.114 149 857 354 571 468 842 476 all

.743 57 356 103 46 46 356 6-26 103 4,544 274 2,419 160 2.048 141 12,773 22 171 171 79 804 604

• a 17 131 131 22 171 171 129 985 985 53 407 407 86 657 657 70 638 538 126 968 871 71 547 493 122 933 933 111 854 854 9

66 66 03 410 410 27 210 105

7.

53 7

53 53 410 205 79 604 604 15 118 59 682 5.226 4,600 41 315

" 315 363 2,782 2,782 24 184 184 307 2,355 2,355 21 162 162 1,916 14,609 14,063 1,300 4,600 1,000 1,300 7.500

-3,100 5,000 4,096 97 55 105 53 53 205 59 626 626 7,370 4,167 7,100 6,500 500 3,120 1,600 400 400 3.120 4,600 9oo 39,777 2,400 1,400 1,230 72.703 303 346 8.000, a00 6.900 6.000 900 6.900 474 47 521 521 734 73 08 808 "76 379 379 2

397 397 29 7

30 30 1,459 219 1.677 1,677 285 28 308 308 200 20 220 220 6.900

.6900 514 10,287 TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile Island, Unit I Decommsissioning Cost Analysis Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 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&M Costs 3a.4.10 Spent Fuel Pool O&M 3a.4.11 Security Staff Cost 3a.4.12 Utility Staff Cost 3a.4 Subtotal Period 3a Pesod-Dependent Costs 3a.0 TOTAL PERIOD 3a COST PERIOD 3b -Decoontdssionlng Pneparattons Period 3b Diect Decommissioning Activities Detailed Work Procuduros 3b.1.1.1 Plant systems 3b.1.1.2 Reactor Intemats 3b.1.1.3 Remaining buildings 3b.1.1.4 CRD cooling asssmbly 3b.1.1.5.

CHD ho*sings & ICI tube 3b.1.1.6 Incurs instruJmentatlon 3b.1.1.7 Reactor vessel 3b.1.1.8 Facility closeout 3b.1.1.9 Missile shields 3b.10f Biological shield 3b.1.1.11 Steam generators 3b.1.1.12 Reinforced cooncrto 3b.1.1,13 Main Turbinm 3b.1.1.14 Main Condensers 3b.1.1.15 Auxiliary building 3b.1.1.16 Reactor building 3U.1.1 Total 3b.1 Subtotal Period 3b Activity Costs Period 3b Additional Costs 3b.2.1 Site Characteization 3b.2 Subtotal Period 3b Additdonl Costs Period 3b Collatoral Costs 3b.3.1 Decon equipment 3b.3.2 DOC staff relocation expenses 3b.3.3 Pipe cutting equipment 3b3.4 Spent Fuel Capital and Transfer 3b.3 Subtotal Period 3b Collateral Costs Period 3b Period-Dependent Costs 3b.4.1 Decon supplies 3b.4.2 Insurance 3b.4.3 Property taxes 3b.4.4 Heilth phiysics suplPils 3b.4.5 Heavy equipment rental 3b.4.6 Disposal of DAW generated 3b.4.7 Plan energy budget 3b.4.8 NRC Fees 3b.4.9 Erergency Planning Fees 649 649 250 745 I1,301 16,970 29 22,412 37 287 287 112 8t7 195 1.496.

1.496 2,545 19,515 19,515 3,412 26,504 25.427 857 1,077 7,977 626 514 514 258,629 10,287 2

314,171 10,287 2

386,874 29 41,185 6.228 48,093 39,490 541

.286 154 114 114

" - - 114 415 137 51 137 526 114 178

• 178 312 312 3,6M4 3,684

$11 622 560 43 328 328 23 177 44 17 131 131 "17 131 131 17 131 131 62 477 477 21 158 79 a

59 59 21, 158 159 "79 604 604 17 131

• 6n 27 205 27 205 47 359 323 47 359 323 553 4,236 3,415 553 4,236 3,415 62 133 79 65 205 205 36 36 821 821 4,733 2,500 1,350 1,000 1,000 3,630 1,200 450 1,200 4,600 1,000 1,560 1,560 2,730 2,730 32,243 32,243 19.100 7.852 19,100 7,852 3,373 1,012 4,385 4,385 3,373 1,012 4.385 4,385 667 66 957 667 957 1,113

-3,6000 4.113 20 167 173

.230 326 3t6 731

. 140 100 100 707 767 167 1,280 1,280 143 11100 1,100 450 3,450 861 6,598 3,146 5

26 26 24 261 261 37 A05 405 42 209 209 26 199 199 4

22 22 110 841 841 14 154 154 10 110 110 3,450 3,450 292 5,834 TLO Services', Inc.

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

I Acivity Index Acivlty Description Period 3b Period-Dependent Costs (contrnued) 3b.4.10 Site O&M Costs 3b.4.11 Spent Fuel Pool O&M 3b.412 Security Staff Cost 3b.4.t3 DOC Staff Cost 3b.4.14 Utility Staff Coot 3b4 Subtotal Perrod 3b PerIod-Dependent Costs 3b.0 TOTAL PERIOD 3b COST PERIOD 3 TOTALS PERIOD 4a - Large Component Removal Period 4a Direct Decommirelonng Activies Nuclear Steam Supply System Removal 4a.I.1.1 Reactor Coolant Piping 4a.1.1.2 Pressunrizer Relief Tank 48.1.1.3 Reactor-Coolant Pumps & Motos 4.1.

1.A Pressurizer 4a.1 1.5 Steem Generators 4a.1.1.6 Retired Steam Generator Units 4a.1.1.7 CRDMs/ICis/Sarvie Structure Removal 46.1.1.8 Reactor Vessel Intramals 4e.1.1.9 Vessel & Internal& GTCC Disposal 4a..1.10 Reactr Vessel 4a.11 Totals Removal of Major Equipment 4a.1.2 Main Turbine/Generator 4a.1.3 Main Condensers Cascading Costs from Clean Building Demolition 4a.1.4.1 Reactor 4a.1.4.2 Auxiliary 4a.1.4.3 Fuel Handling 4a.1.4 Totals Disposal of Plant Systems 4a.1.5.1 CNTL-TWR-285_PROCESS 4a.1.5.2 CNTL-TWR-305 BURY 4..1.5.3 CNTL-TWR-305_PROCESS 4a.1.5.4 CNTL-TWR-322_CLEAN 4.1.5.5 CNTL-TWR-338_CLEAN 4a.1.5.6 CNTL-TWR-3564CLEAN 4a...7 CNTL-TWR-380_CLEAN 4a.I.5.8 CNTL-TVWR-388_CLEAN 4a.1.5.9 IB-295_BURY 4a.1.5.10 IB-295_CLEAN 4a.1.5.11 I6-295_PROCESS 4a.1.5.12 IS-305 BURY 48.1.5.13 1B.305_PROCESS 4a.1.5.14 IB-322 BURY 4a.1.5.15 IB-322_CLEAN Of-S*te LLRW NRC Spent Fuel Site Procssed Burial Volumes Burtal I Utility and Deoa Rennovat Packagitng Transport Processing Disposal Other Total Total UL. Term.

Management Restoration Volume Class A Class 6 Class C 0TCC Processed Craft Contractor 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 125 19 144 144 374 80 430 652 g0 7M0 750 4,604 691 5.295 5.295 8,508 1,276 9.784 9,7a4 16 1,5841 2,411,

18,631 18,091 16 27.011 4,836 33.849 29,038 45 68.196 11,064 81,942 68,528 430 540 3.990 621 11.967 1,44W 292 292 8D6 20 341 68w 1,297 688 1,946 27,847 58,560 129.669 5,834 1

216,076 5,834 19,101 256,171 16,121 19,104 643,045 99,877 2,227 20,849 307 925,540 4,386 338,550 1,794 1,500 2,850,879 10,254 2,250 2.685.879 5,400 2,250 59.894 1,47 220,735 21,917 1,009 80 105.646 980,935 21,917 1,009 80 8,453.784 70,049 8,017 19 78 3

11 25 74 6

61 30 5,424 15 75 43 2,251 61 4.080 201 12.825

,11 25 2

6 35 162 483 596 1.107 1,940 668 *

.1,540 171" 68 3,339 679 1,179 1,021 6.994 6,436 163 75 371 34 14-69 73 1.398 419 2,186 551 291 1,979 4.640, 2,933 16,073 4.640 1,518 8.765 98 78 505 4,268 180 4,875 15,635 12,289 1,543 14,133 2.686 t15 5,596 15,583 73 30,767 360 17,641.

75.298 371 69 2,185 1,979 16.073 8,765 55 15,635 14,133 15,583 75.298 826 1 88 509 8,974 2.588 11,714 11,714 3,002 888 626 7,083 2,003 509 46,976 2,629 517 517 259 89 49 333 1,020 70 39 263 131 861 861 307 1,699 1,699 6,730 5.310 302.857 5,654 238,934 22,942 690 243 317 1,251 58 69 47 177 129 20 38 10 55 46

,222 30 187 11 38 2

10 70 8

13 46 1

4 268 5

9 31 g ~ 35 234 2

5 18 3

18'.

122 1

2 154 794 36 280 48 365 180 1.439 27 166 31 164

,16 93 27 203 19 147 3 -

23 6

44 2

12 23 123 7:

53 90 592 13 69 68 398 5

28 6

.44 794 280 365 1,439 166 164 93 123 592 69 398 28 420 587 203 147 23 44 12 285 53 5,231 169 2,731 74 44 63,829 1,278 37,709.

1,444 23,851 1,050 4,257 3,122 545 1,001 S -

245 25,568 1,217 1,100 212,426 4,930 1 5,164 647 S

11,0058 4,073

,6.42 247 896 9,845 3,371 4,242 17,458 TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile Island, Unit I Decommissioning Cost Analysis DocumenltE16-1555-011, Rev. 0 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 4u.1.5.17 8-355 PROCESS 4a.1.5.18 1B-ROOFPROCESS 4a.1.5.19 OCA_CLEAN 4a.1.5.20 OCA PROCESS 4a.1.5.21 008 CLEAN 4a.1.5.22 T8-305-E BURY 4a.1.5.23 TB-305-E CLEAN 4a.1.524 TB-305-E-PROCESS 4a.1.5.25 TB&305-WiBURY 4o.1.526 TB-305-W CLEAN 4a.1.5.27 TB-305-W GIC 4a.1.5.28 TB-305-W PROCESS 4a.1.5.29 T8-322-E.CLEAN 4a.1.5.30 TB-322-ECIC 4..1.6.31 T8-322-6 PROCESS 4a.1.5.32 TB-322-W_CLEAN 4a.1.5.33 TB-322-WPGIC 4a.1.5.34 TB-322-WPROCESS 4a.1.5.35 TB-355-5 CLEAN 4a.1.5.36 TB-355-W CLEAN 4a.1.5.37 TB-355-WGIC 4a.1.5.38 TB-355-WPROCESS 4a.1.5.39 TB-380 CLEAN 4a.1.5.40 TB-350 PROCESS 4a.1.5.41 TB-ROOF CLEAN 4a.1.5 Totals 4a.1.6 scoffolding in support of decommrisioning 4a.f Subtotal Period 4a Activity Costs Period 4a Additional Costs 4o.2.1 Turbina Bldg GIC Waste Dispostion 4a.2 Subtotal Period 4a Additional Costs Penod 4a Coliateral Costs 4a.3.1 Process liquid waste 4a.3.2 Small tool allowance 40.3 Subtotal Period 4a Collatersi Costs Period 4a Peri*d-Depondent Costs 4a.4.1 Docon supplies 4a.4.2 Insurarce 4a.4.3 Property taxes 4a.4.4 Health physics supplies 4a.4.5 Neuoy equipment rental 4a.4.5 Disposal of DAW generated 4a.4.7 Plant energy budget 4a.4.8 NRC Fees 4a.4.9 Site O&M Costs 4a.4.10 Radwasto Processing Equipment/Sorvicos 4a.4.Al Security Staff Cost 4o.4.12 DOC Staff Cost 481 54 15 814 87 9

136 187 425 96 222 87 790 79 4

483 142 15 464 23 2

460 1I 407 21 6,680 12 77 522 I

8 54 1

5 31 1

5 37 13 23 83 16 104 701 9

18 65 30 197 1,336 21 134 909 42 276 1,064 15 95 644 12 78 530 196 1,117 7,080 25f 211 1,303 1.303 23 140 140 9

.60 s0 122 936 28 158 158 1

11 59 314 314 28 215 226 1,474 1.474 44 232 232 33 256 13 100 430 2,784 2,784 12 91 1

5 279 1.827 1,827 21 163 2

17 441 3.087 3,087 1

7 3

27 0

2 227 1,441 1,441 2

17 194 1.222 1,222 3

24 2,769 18,072 15,677 182 931 931 21,218 98,301 90,906 11,602 1,207 689 936 828 11 765 215 15.700 599 256 100 29,913 91 5

20,352 163 17 41,730 7

27 2

14,408 17 11.873 24 2,395 168,495 2,313 665 2,395 171,709 49,209 2,629 474,418 10,690 49,022 1,185 27.993 340 19.978 33.630 1.913 252 68,600 2,953 4.738 637,566 9.513 53.703 2,113 5.764 2.150 1.214.787 17,675 1.960 121 826,490 10,932 3,474 386 1,694,677 10,620 147 572 45 585.109 10,445 364 482.176 9,218 497 6,643,948 154,095 29,926 19,345 517 580 15,669,450 289.547 702 9

5 33 201 22,717 7.359 7.646 7,782 31,018 360 8.017 as 232 as 232 43 360 360 43 360 360 10,108 10,108 454,855 454,855 77 25 210 155 176 77 176 25 210 155 52 1,364 2,108 801 S-932 8

224 1,758 918 317 476 1,757 14,096 112 580 580 28 202 182 138 782 762 13 65 65 60 661 661 93 1,025 922 341 1,705 1,705 316 2,424 2,424 5

297 297 264 2.021 2,021 92 1,009 1,009 48 364 364 71 547 547 264 2,020 2,020 2.114 16,210 16,210 102 4,018 642 20 20 542 32,03 106 32,503 10l 80.356 18 48,828 182,554 TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile Isla"d, Unit I Decommissioning Cost Analysis Docuameni E16-1355-011, Rev. 0 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 s

ClnA 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 UlJflty Staff Cost 4a.4 Subtotal Period 4a Period-Oependart Costs 52 3,472 21,716 3.257 24.974 24.974 224 42,569 6,991 53.323 53.220 102 4,018 2.518 181.817 53.848 2.629 330,714 80,356 1i 561,897 017 580 16,237,160 289,671 569,914 40.0 TOTAL PERIOD 4a COST PERIOD 4b - Site Decosteftbrulon Period 4b Direct DbcommissnIng Acilfi..

4b.1.1 Remove spent fuel racks Disposal of Plant Systems 45.1.2.1 AB-261-BURY 45.1.2.2 AB-251-PROCESS 45.1.2.3 AB-271_BURY 45.1.2.4 ABO271_PROCESS 45.1.2.5 AB-281-1 BURY 4b.12.6 A.-281-1 PROCESS 45.127 AIB-281-2 BURY 45.1.2.8 AB-281-2_PROCESS 4b.1.2.9 AB-281-3-BURY 4b.1.2.10 AB-281-3_PROCESS 4b.1.2.11 AB-305- _BURY 45.1212 AB-305-1_PROCESS 45.1.2.13 AB-305-2-BURY 4b.1.2.14 A.13305-2_PROCESS 45.1.2.15 AB-305-3_BURY 45.1.2.16 AB.331 BURY 4b.1.2.17 AB-331_PROCESS 4b.1.2.18 CC-305 BURY 45.1.2.19 DG-365_BURY 45.1.2.20 0G-305 CLEAN 45.1.2.21 FHBI-281_BURY 4b.1.2.22 FHB-281-PROCESS 4b.1.2.23 FHB-365_BURY 4b.1.2.24 FHB-3D5_PROCESS 45.1.2.25 FHB-329 BURY 45.1.2.26 FHB-329_PROCESS 4b.1.2.27 FHB-348.BURY 45.1.2,28 FHB-348._PROCESS 4b.1.2.29 INTAKECLEAN 45.1.2.30 IWT-303 PROCESS 4,11.2.31 OCA BURY 45.1.2.32 PA-301_BURY 4b.1.2.33 PA-3DtCLEAN 4b.1.2.34 PA-301_PROCESS 4b.1.2.35 RB-281_BURY 45.1.2.36 RB-281_PROCESS 45.1,2.37 RB-308_BURY 45.1.2.38 RB-3508PROCESS 41.1.2.39 RB-346_BURY 4b.1.2.40 RB-346_PROCESS 45.1.2.41 RB-INSIOE 0-RINGBURY 4b.1.2.42 SB-305_CLEAN 45.1.2.43 STPCLEAN 330 26.365 7,391 7,948 8.014 31,398 42,929 28390.

152.766 150.247 297

.41 105 3..

0 294 126 74

' 103 413 4

567 375 117

• 50 26 183 319 74 31 129 441 44 100 161 140 51 68 14 It 64 30 221 906

- 430 163 247 257 428 131 295 205 56 120 271 9

37 24 56 1

9 12 27 5

34 67 123 01 0

87 165 5

33 9

17 1

3.

33 01 0

2 23 44 6

39 7

11 4

7 2

13 63 114 o

14 24 44 2

tt 6

12 2

7.

1 2

0" 1

13 29 1

3 18 117 99 165 37 62 6

43 51 108

• 4 13 35 67 5

32 0

13 0

18 26 54 200 04 229 438 2

507 223 59 22 14 155 263 40 25 88 405 48 157 74

-43 34 8

i6 4

2 102 15 3

789 7

587 220 288

.384 62 Is

. 238 217 45 42 43 194 255 1,074 1,074 92 499 409 26 102 162 48 259 259 66 437 437 238 1,278 1,270 1

8 a

322 1.727 1,727 133 768 760 47 248 248 "16 93 93 109 596 596 9

51 51 93 498 498 120 751 751 31 162 162 15 82 82 48 280 200 235 1,257 1.257 26 140 140 15 115 88 474 474 4B 275

-275 26 137 137 25 145 145 5

28 28 4

23 23 47 255 205 11 63 63 33 254 324 2,193 2,193 289 1,569 1,569 109 590 590 37 204 115 7Og 709 224 1,194 1,194 48 274 274 147 781 781 09 547 547 20 148 140 50 279 279 127 672 672

,1 11 a

43 2,707 242,924 1.056 1,844 1,436 898 5.133 4.978 42 6-,052 4.984 4904 500 2,

~2.&5W 303 1,555 5,878 3

251 1.967 4.613 565 115 1.611 1,657 405 7613 73 57 91 21 943 344 30 254 17,653 7,233 S-.

2.743 284 6.446 3,555 1,379 143 2,328 4,850 S -

419 934 395 11-783 43 165,308 2,914 58,327 1,367 00,591 1,663 208,455 2,424 362.114 9,277 1.725 100 484.727 12.421 202.399 8,273 48,749 2,582 20,292 1,114 237,727 1,877

'12,298 558 128,368 3,977 238.721 7,092

.32.987 1,629 20.665 675 79,879 2,810 334,678 9,025 39.762 987 2,441 129.564 3.528 607.53 3.10m 35,492 1,126 37.657 1.529 5,081 303 5,574 249 a3,57 1.400 10,521 043 5.603 716.882 19,B68 485,018 9.04W 181.570 3,657 S -

5,969

'261.756 5.672 315,988 9,602 68.778 2,=22 196,583 6.561 196.969 4,613 37.577 1,135 73.371 2,548 159,948 6.114 242 084 TLG Services, Inc.

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

O,-St.

LLRW NRC Spen Foal Sit. PrssodBt~ltVala--

ans--t Utility e,

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 Cost Cas t tCsts 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 4b.1.2.45 TB-355-EPROCESS 4b.1.2.46 YARDCLEAN 4b.1.2 Totals 4b.1.3 Scaffolding in support of decommissioning Decontamination of Site Buildings 4b.1.4-1 Reactor 4b.1.4.2 Auxilanw 4b.1.4.3 Ciassifed Waste Storage Facility 4b.1.4.4 Heat Exchanger Vault 4b.1.4.5 Interim Solid Waste Staging Fadlity 4b.1.4.6 Intermediate 4b.1*4.7 Miscllaneosus Buildings - Contaminated 4b.1.4.8 Respirator Cleaning Facility 4b.1.4.9 Fuel Handling 45b.A.

Totals 54 492 8,272 1.054 767 606 239 93 12 2

40 16 so 10 18 16 123 24 23 4

494 500 1.765 1.271 2

10 698 1.l01 13 7

129 319 12 35 1

2 2

6 2

7 4

11 6

17 1

3 28 46 185 445 1,001 2.137 2

110 "2

110

-67 552 99 602 15 612 2.497 4.388 49 41

.673 34 46 2

4 7

1 10

" 16 24 5

29 122 109 906 2,656 5,588 13 101 25 159 159 74 566 3,730 21,187 19.812 273 1,397 1.397 770 3.305 3.305 166 624 624 7

26 26 28 103 103 31 111 111 19 83 83 77 271,

271 14 51 51 416 1,635 1,635 1.529 6,210 6,210 5,787:

29,867 28.493 4b.1 Subtotal Period 4b Activity Costs

,2.062 10,637 Period 4b Additional Costs 4b.2.1 License Tertmititon Suvley Planning 4b.2.2 Contaminated Soil Remedtation 39.

4b.2 Subtotal Period 4b Additonal Costs 39 Period 4b Collateral Costs 40.3.1 Process liqud waste 203 4b.3.2 Small tool allowan-

-173 4b.3.3 Decommissioning Equlpment Disposition 4b.3 Subtotal Period 4b Coltateral Costs 203 173 Period 4b Perio-Depenydent Costs 4b.4.1 Decon supplies

. 725 4b.4.2 Insurance 4b.4.3 Properly taxes..

4b.4.4 Hesith physcs supplies 1.769 4b.4.5 Heavy equipmeot rental 4.204 4b.4.6 Disposal of DAW generated 4b.4.7 Plant energy budget 4b.4.8 NRC Fees 4b.4.9 Site O&M Costs 4b.4.10 Radw-ste Processing Equilpmnt/SentIces 4b.4.11 Security Staff Cost 4b.4.12 DOC Staff Cost 4b.4.13 Utility Staff Cost 4b.4 Sutotal Period 4b Period-Dependent Costs 725 5,973 4b.0 TOTAL PERIOD 4b COST 2,990 16.822 PERIOD 4e - License Tertnination Period 4e Direct DecommnlstenIng Actvities 4e.1.1 ORISE confirmatory survey 848 254 1.102 1,102 1.930 509 2,589 2.589 1.930 848 763 3.691 3.691 101 S

1,532 856 1.374 55.905 46,055 698 913 9.415 752 842 43 99 138

• -21 182

-295 451 1-85 650 1,399 2.435 12,850 1.374 59,338 61.612 35,745 35,745 1,425 6.667 6.667 1,425 4,g23 4,923 1,374 66,004 103,706 2.342 52,212 1.183

• -12,996 5.897,056 187.449 44,889 29,024 905,593 29.350 113.287 7,302 4,349 319 17,468 1,243 18,988 1,345 29,523 685 45.147 3.312

• 8.463 621 146.822 20.809 1,289.439 64.987 7,474,307 282,516 6,240 2,716,592 462 2,716,592 482 6,240 B5,497 278 309,000 68 385,497 366 98,469 23 97.677 356,057

• 627,086 99,469 23 1.080,819 10.674,80 283.367 1.087.059 330 330 409 1,207 1,871 8

10 275 2,787 1.843 637 956 3,529 27,598 41,494 a

10 275 81.921 1,167 29868 2,986 8,201 82.769 293 1.524 1,524

.26 199 199 67 545 545 386 2.268 "

2,268 11e 907 907 121 1,328 1,328 187.

2,059 2,059 442

• 2,211 2,211 631 4,835 4.835 71 364 364 418 3,205 3,205 184 2.627 2,027 95 732 732 143 1.099 1.099 529 4,058 4.058 4,149 31,737 31,737 8,224 47,718 47,718 13,367 102T279 102,279 20,303 138,106 136.732 155 46 201 201 TLG Se*i.ea, Inc.

Three Mile Islanod, Unidt I Decrormisioninotg Cost Anaslysis Doctarroert E16-1556-011, Rev. 0 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 C oa 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 ActiVity Costs Period 40 Additional Costs

.4e.2.1 License Termination Survey 4e.2 Subtotal Period 4e Addlltooal Costs Period 4e Collateral Costs 40.3.1 DOC staff rolociaon expenses 4e.3 Subtotal Poriod 40 Cotlateral Costs Perod 40 Period-Depondent Costs 40.4.1 Irnsurance 4a.4.2 Propoery taxes 4e.4.3 Health physics supplies 4e.4.4 Disposal of DAW generated 40.4.5 Plant energy budget 4e.4.6 NRC Fees 4e.4.7 Sitl O&M Costs 4e.4.8 Security Staff Cost 4e.4.9 oc Staff Cost.".

4..4.10 Utility Staff Coat 4e.4 Subtotal Period 4e Pe:od-Dependent Costs 40.0 TOTAL PERIOD 4. COST PERIOD 4 TOTALS PERIOD Sb - Site Restoration Perod 5b Oirect Decommissioning Actlivit6s Denicilton of Remaining Site Buildings 5b.1.1.1 Reactor 5b.1..12 Air Intske Tunnel 5b.1.1.3 Auxiliary 5b.1.1.4 Carpenters Shop #117 5b.1.1.5 Circulating Water Choinatosr 5b.1.1.6 Circulating Water Chloriaotor House 5b,1.1.7 Cirolating Water Intake Flume 58.1.1.t C

aWiaatingWater Pumphouse 5b.1.1.8 CirClatling Water Tunnels 5b.1.1.10 Classified Waste Storg Facility 5b.1.1.11 Coaguollor 5b.1.1.12 Control Room Toer 5b1.1.13 Cooling Towers 5b.1.1.14 Corridor 5b.1.1.15 DeslSing Basin 5b.1.1.16 Diesel Generator 5b.1.1.17 Emergerny 01..0I Generator 5b.1.1.18 Fire Brigade Training Facility 5b.1.1.19 Fuel 0 Unlnoading

& Pump Stotion 5b.1.1.20 Heat Exchanger Vault 5b.1.1.21 High Range Sample Station 5p.1.1.22 Indust Waste Trtmnt & Sludge Filr 155 46 201 201 6,183 1,855 8.038 8,038 6,183 1.855 8,038 8,038 1113 167 1,280 1.280 1.113 167 1.280 1.280 124.444 3.120 124.444 3.120 610 1

610 1I 610 1

3,321 43,797

.558 549 1

19 218 580 1811 443 4,633 5,493 1

19 12.103 55 604 604 153 763 763 5

26 26 33 251 251 58 638 638 28 215 215 66 509 509 695 5,328 5,328 024 6,317 6.317 1.917 14,650 14.650 19 19,554 3,985 24,170 24,170 11,000 39,618-145,252 52.679 315.041 311,149 3,707 2,086 14 50 54 44 121 532 22 36 2,622 838 67 62 600 502' S 12 7

. 319 4

76 556 4.263 8

58 313 2,399

2.

16

7.

57 6

62 7

50 18 140 80 612 3

26 5"

42 393 3,015 126 9864 1

77 T

0 2

90 690 75 577 2

14 48 367 1

5 11 87 349 349 349 3,893 247,821 157.903 2.629 517 4,263 58 2,399 16 57 62 5O 140 612 26 42 3,015 964

.77 2

690 577 14 8

367 5

87 52,366 844 28,722 219 875 1.0 7 709 2,422 9,010 452 726 35,625 13.913 1,381 32 9.233 8,842 231 109 4,093 67 1,406 6,974 6.974 2

11,700 56,940 74,100 2

142,740 6,974 124,446 145,860 580 26.919.000 697,483 1,802,834 TLG Servicea, Inc.

Three Mile Island, Unit I Decommissioning Cost Analysis Docuunent E164555-011, Rev. 0 Appendix D, Page 12 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 CUm Feet Co. Feet Cu. Feet Wt., Lbs.

Manhours Manhours Demolition of Remaining Sits Buildings (continued) 5b.1.123 Intake Screen & Pumphouse 5b.1.1.24 Interim Solid Waste Staging Facility 5b.1.1,25 Intermediate 5b.1.1.26 Lube Oil Storage 5b.1.127 Mechanical Dralf Cooling Tower 50.1.1.28 Miscellaneous Buildings - Clean 5b.11.29 Miscelianeous Buildings - Contaminated 5.1.1.30 Miscellaneous Yard Structures 5b.1.1.31 North Off"u 5b.1.1.32 Operations Office 5b.1.1.33 Operations Support Facility 5b.1.1.34 Respirator Cleaning Facility 51.1.1.35 Scurity Improvements 51,1.1.36 Service 5b.1.1.37 Sewoge Pumping Station 5b.1.1.38 Steam Generator Mausoleum 5b.1.1.39 Substation Relay Control House 5b.1.1.40 Training Facility #43 5b.1.1.41 Turbine 5b.1.1.42 Turbion Pedestal 5b.1.1.43 Warehouse #1 5b.1.1.44 Water Pretreatment House 5b.1,1.45 Fuel Handling 5b51.1 Totals Site Cioseout Activities 5b.1.2 Remove Rubble 5b.1.3 Grade & landscape site 5b.1,4 Final roport to NRC 5b.1 Subtotal Peiod 5b Activity Costs Period 5b Addiltonal Costs 5b.2.1 Concrete Processing 5b.2 Subtotal Period 5b Additional Costs Period 5b Collateral Costs 5b.3.1 Small tool allowance 5b.3 Subtotal Peulud Sb Collateral Costs 1,679 89 1,287 8

121 874 166 1.256 255 54 244 51 664 252 5

305 24 58 1,431 1,120 377 115 2,937 25.145 252 1,930 13 103 193 1,480 1

09 it 139 131 1,005 25 190 188 1,444 38 293 8

62 37 280 8

59 100 763 38 290 1

6 46 351 4

20 9

67 215 1,04' 160 1,297 57 434 17 132 441 3,378 3,772 28.916 1,306 10.013 18 140 27 205 205 5,123 39.274 205 155 1,193 155 1.193 1,930 103 1,480 9

139 1,005 190 1,444 293 62 280

• 59 763 290 351 28 67 1,046 1,297 434 132 3,378 20,916 10.013 140 39,069 18,870 1,752 17,189 139 1.802 10,054 3,414 20,519 4,920 1,102 4,425 1,072 6.957 5.003 97 3.900 489 1.199 26,877 14,441 8,170 2.006 40,4.40 374.203 8,707 121 33,973 176 178 7,220 531 1,560 381,962 1.560 1t0308 1,193 1,193 6,293 6,293 237 237 35 272 35 272 272 272 Period 5b Period-Dependent Costs 51.4.1 Insurance 5b.4.2 Property taoes 5b.4.3 Heavy equipment rental 4,374 5b.4.4 Plant energy budget 5b.4.5 Site O&M Cost 5b.4.6 Security Staff Cost 5b.4.7 DOC Staff Cost 05b4.

Utility Staff Cost 5b.4 Subtotal Period 5b Peuod-Dependent Costs 4,374 1,453 289 494 1,943 11,842 SI5,7 21,010 145 1,598 656 5,030 43 332 74 568 291 2,234 1,776 13.619 885 6,702 3,071 30,102 1,598 5,030 332 5%8 2,234 13,519 6,782 30,162 70.696 70,696 49509 140,274

-0,451 270,234 388,255 271,794 388,255 271,794 65.0 TOTAL PERIOD 5b COST PERIOD S TOTALS 39,613 39,613 8

8 22,096 9,185 70,901 205 22,096 9,185 70,901 205 TLG Services, Inc.

Th-n Mile Ialoand Unit 1 Denonornmissoning Cost Annalysis Docurne~nl E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 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 TOTAL COST TO DECOMMISSION WITH 17.31% CONTINGENCY:

$7086.507 thousands of 2008 dollar.

TOTAL NRC 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-NUCLEAR DEMOLITION COST IS 10.76% OR:

$76.036 thousands of 2008 dollars TOTAL LOW-LEVEL RADIOACTIVE WASTE VOLUME BURIED (EXCLUDING GTCC):

170,782 cubic feet tOTAL GREATER THAN CLASS C RADWASTE VOLUME GENERATED:

50 cubic feet TOTAL SCRAP METAL REMOVED:

71,226 tons TOTAL CRAFT 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 0.65 but is non-zero.

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

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

Three Mile I.La-4 Unit I Deros~i~ioaogC-9t Aounlysi.

Documnent E16-1555-01 1, Rev. 0 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 1.1.2 Prepare preliminary deoonnilssioning cost I.,1.3 Notificatioe of Cessation of Operations

,a.1.4 R=move fuel & source material 1..1.5 Notification of Pernanent Dofuelng 1:.1.6 Deactivate plant sys1e-0 & ptocess este 1

e1.7 Prepare and submit PSDAR 10.1.8 Review plant dgs &t pes...

1a..9 Portomn detiled rtd survey 1a.1.10 Estimnte by-product iuvrtony 10.1.11' End product desriptllon, 1a.1.12 Detaied by-product invennory 10.1.13 Defne mnajor wot sequence 1a.1.14 Perfor SER and EA 10 1.15 Perform SitwSpwefhc Coat Study Actiity Spacficamors la.16.1 Prepare plant and fcilities fo SAFSTOR

.,1.,16.2 Plant sytlans la.1.16.3 Plant stuctures and burilings a1.i16.4 Waste managenros 10.1.16.5 Facility and SA4 dormancy la.1.16 Total Detailed Work Procedures 10.1.17.1 Plant ystems 10.1.17.2 Facilitycdsooul6&donronoy 10.1.17 Total 436 149 229 149 131 567 567 22 171 171 IV.

34 263 263 22 171 171 114 17 131 131 114 17 131 131 171 26 197 197

114.

17 131 131 354 53 407 407 571 86 657 657 052

84.

646 646 476 71 547 547

-356

.53 410 410 229 34 263

.263 229 34 263 263 1.852 278 2,129 2,129 1,300 2.000 1,300 1.000 1,000 1,500 1,000 3,100 5.000 4,020 4.167 3,120 2.000 2`000 16,207 1,183 S -

1,200 2.383 100 135 137 272 20 165 155

21.

169 158 41 313 313 l.I.1B Pro-ure vacuum drying yasyt.

'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 Subtotal Period la Ativity Costs Period 1a Addiltional Costs 1a.2.1 ISFSI Construction 10.2 Subtotal Pernod Ia Add~tiwal Costs Period Ia Collateral Costs 10.3.1 Spent Fuel Capital and Transfer 1a.3 Subtotal Pe=od ta Collteral Costs Period la PerindC-ependent Costs la.4.1 Insurance I.4.2 Property taxes 1n.4.3 He Ilh phyScs supple$

1a.4.4 Heavy equiprnent rental 1:.4.5 Disposal of DAW generated 1.4.6 Plant energy budget

.10.4.7 NRC Fees 1.48 Emergency Planning Fees

.11 2

13 13 4.538 746 5.282 5,282 35.090 16,000 6,000 22,000(3 16.000 6,000 22.008 11,2W3 1.692 129573

.11,21K0 1,692 12.973 22.000 22,000 12.973 12,973 605 347 346

~1 1,074 107 1,181 1,181 07 433 433 52 397 397 34 9

45 45 1.459 219 1.677 1,677

,.727 73 800 900 5

50 0

605.

610 12,190 3

TLG Semri*-e, i-n.

Three Mile Island, Unit I Decommissioning Coot Analysis Doia ent E16-1555.011, Rev. 0 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 C

Costs 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&M Costs la,4.10 Spent Fuel Pool O&M la.4.11 ISFSI Operaling Costs Iu.4.12 Security Staff Cost la.4.13 Ut1iltyStaff Cost Ia.4 Subtotal Period ia Period-oepandenl Costs 692 t

t 250 745 85 5,378 27,176 34 37,444 37 287 287 112 857 13 98 807 6.185 6,185 4,076 31.253 31,253 5.64" 43,819 42,259 857 98 1.559 157,471 423,4D0 610 12,190 3

580,871 1a.0 TOTAL PERIOD 1 a COST PERIOD lb -SAFSTOR Litettad DECON Activities Period 1 b Direct Decommissioning Activities 692 1

1 34 69,260 14,084 84,073 47,541 35,532 610 Decontamination of Site Buildings 1b.1.1.1 Reactor 759 lb.1.1.2 Auxiliary 232 lb.1.1.3 Classified Waste Storage Facility 12 1b..1.1.4 Ha*, EAchanger Vault 39.

1b.1.1.5 Inteore Solid Wasle Staging Facility 48 lb.t.1.6 BMt nos utldngs-Contaminated 120 1b.1.1.7 Respirator Cleaning Facility 22.

1b.1.1.8 Fuel Handling 491 1b.1.1 Totals 1.723 lb.1 Subtotal Perod 1t AcOity Costs Period lb Additional Costs lb.2.1 Spent FueP Pool Isolation 1b.2 Subtotal Period lb Additional Costs Period lb Collateral Costs 1b.3.1 Decon equip-[l Ib.3.2 Process liquid wasts 18o.3.3 Smano lo a tiakno-1b.3.4 Spent Fuea Capital and Transier lb.3 Subtotal Period lb Colloteral Costs 1,723 9.407 9,407 667 167 53 24 835 24 53 442 442 Period lb Period-Dependent Costs 1b.4.1 Deco-supplies 632 1.4.2 Insurance l b4.3 Propety taxes I b.44 Health physics supplies 209 I b04.5 Heavy equipment rental 86 11,.4.6 Disposal of DAW generated 1b.4.7 Plant energy budget 115A.8 NRC Fest 1 b.4.9 Emergency Planning Fees lb.4,10 Site O&M Costs Ib.4.11 Span Fual Pool O&M 1b,4.12 ISFSI Operating Costs 1b.4.13 Security Staff Cost 1b.4.14 Utility Staff Cost 1b.4 Subtotal Period 1b Period-Dependent Costs 632 295 327 2,810 327 2,810 268 183 28 364 181 137 62 186 21 1,341 6,775 28 9,518 380 1,139 1.139 116 348 348 6

17 17 19 58 58 24 72 72 60 180 180 11 34 34 245 738 738 881 2,584 2.584 861 2.564 2,564 1,411 10,819 10,819 1,411 10.819 10,819 100 767 767 237 1,227 1,227 4

27 27 422-3.232 762 5,254 2,022 158 789 789 27 294 294 18 201 201 52 261 261 13 99 99 7

38 38 55 418 418 18 199 199 14 151 9

72 72 28 214 3

24 201 1,542 1,542 1,016 7.792 7.792 1.620 12,095 11,706 3,232 3,232 151 214 24 389 3,621 1,140 68,417 222 1,140 68.417 222 510 10.206 2

39,260 105,560 510 10,206 2

144,820 1,651 78,622 37,997 144,820 12,190 3

616.761 16.970 5,397 272 902 1,135 2.825 529 9,742 37.772 37,772 1b.0 TOTAL PERIOD 1 b COST 3.189 318 54 443 3568 21,736 4.654 30,751 27.130 TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile 1s.and, Unit I Decommissioning Coot Anolysis Document E16.155&5-0l I, Rev. 0 Appendix A Page 4 of"14 Table E Three Mile Island, Unit 1 SAFSTOR Decommissioning Cost Estimate (thousands of 2008 dollars)

SAo.e~y OffSi.*t ULIrW

...(

tipot! Fuel sit.

procmse B~urial voiumes Burial 1 Urlt y oniW o I Devon Removal Packaging Transport Processing oDsposal Other Total Total Uc. Toem.

Management R.sthrtion Vetou.

Co... A Clas. B Class C GTCC Processed CraS ContractorI C,,.

Coet C,...

Ce.,o r.,e 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..,.

B E InlAY A*T*I*

• l*

n *Yl*

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 I 1 - Phiparations for SAFSTOR Domancy Period Ic Direct Decommissioning Actvities 1C.1.1 Prepare support equipment for storage 407 61 468 468 1c.1.2 Inrsts5 containment pressure equal. lines 38 5

41 41 1 c.1.3 Interim survey prior to dormancy 733 220 953 953 1c.1.4 Secure building accesses a

lc. 1.5 Prepare & submit interim report 67 10 77 77 1c.1 Subtotal Period 1c Activity Costs 442 800 286 1,538 1,538 Period Ic Collateral Costs lc.3.1 Process liquid vasta 247 79 652 483 350 1,811 1,811 lc3.2 Small tool alowanco 3

0 3

3 1c.3.3 Spent Fuet Capital and Transfer 2.841 428 3,268 1.3 Subtotal Period 1c Colateral Costs 247 3

79 652 483 2,841 777 5,081 1,814 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 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 1 C49 Site OZM Costs 63 9

72 72 1.4.10 Spent Fuel Pool O&M 188 28 216 1c.4.11 ISFSI Operating Costs 21 3

25 1.4.12 Secufrty Stan Cost 1,356 203 1.559 1,559 1C.4.13 Utility Staff Cost 6,80 1,027 7.877 7.877 1c.4 Subtotal Period ic Pdod-Oependent Costs 226 0

0 9

9.623 1,455 11,313 10,920 lc.0 TOTAL PERIOD Ic COST 247 672 79 653 491 13,264 2.527 17,933 14.272 PERIOD I TOTALS 3.436 1.682 134 1,097 881 104,261 21,266 132,757 88.943 3,000 700 12,115 s883 15,615 583 1,683 100,960 328 3.268 3.268 1,5183 100,960 328 152 216 25 393 3,661 43,813 154 3.073 1

39.891 106.720 154 3,073 1

146,411 1.835 1G4.033 16.144 146.995 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 0ua0erly Inspectn 2a.1.2 Semi-annual environmental survey 2a.1.3 Prepare reports 2a. 1.4 Bituminous root replacement 2e.1.5 Mainlenc supplies 2a.1 Subtotal Period 2a Activity Costs Period 2a Co6ateral Costs 2a 3.1 Spent Fuel Capital and Transfer 2a.3 Subtotal Period 2a Collateral Costs Period 2a Period-Dependent Costs 2.4.1 Insurance 2a.4.2 Property saxes 2a.4.3 Health physic supplies 2a.4.4 Disposal of SAW D

generated 600-88 90 6902 690 511 128 839 639 111 218 1,329 1,329 45.072 6.761 51.833 45,072 6,761 51,833 51.833 51,833 161

-7 3349 1,677 33.889 I

327 1,926 183 2,119 1,954 2,986 299 3,285 3.285 82 409 409 94 24 124 124 TLG Sericese Ile.

Three Mile Ilrund, [Milt I JIeoinotisioning Cost Analysis Document EI6-1 555-011, Rev. 0 Appendix F Page 5ofI14 Table E Three Mile Island, Unit I SAFSTOR Decommissioning Cost Estimate (thousands of 2008 dollars) iOff-Bi1m FINRE spend Fuel 5ire Acticity ivOon R.o-ai Packaging Transport Processing Disposal Other Total Total UL. Term.

Man beet Restoration Indo.

Activity Descriptlio Cool Coat Costs Costs Costs Costs

Cost, Caontinge..y Costs Costs Costs Costs 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&M Costs 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 2a.4.12 Utility Staff Cost

° 21,144 3,172 24.316 5.403 18.913 2a.4 Subtotal Period 2a Period-Deoendent Costs 327 3

3 94 49,130 7,144 56,701 17.074 39.627 2a.0 TOTAL PERIOD 2a COST 327 3

3 94 95.314 14.123 109.863 18.403 91.460 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 21b Activity 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 SudSotal Period 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 DAW generaeld 6

7 1986 1

260 280 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&M CoTs 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 2b.4.11 UtililyStaff Cot 19,634 2,945 22.579 12,153 10,426 2b.4 Subtotal Period 2b Period-Oep0ndror Costs 617 6

7 196 58,013 8.174 67,014 38,236 28,777 2b.0 TOTAL PERIOD 2b COST 617 6

7 196 85,283 9,827 78.916 41.226 37,690 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 Processed burial Volumtes Burial I Utilit1=n01 Volu"e Cltso A Cl.ss B Class C GTCC processed Craft Co.traotor a

Cu. Fast Cu. Foot Cu. Feet Cu. Foot Cu. Foot Wt., Lbs.

Manhounr Manhous I 451,560 5334,960 1,677 33.549 8

786,520 1,677 33.549 a

786,520 3.514 70,285 16

-515,006 305,189 3,514 70,285 16 820,194 3,514 70,285 16 820,194 TLG Services, Ine.

Three Mile Island, Unit I Decomsi.i.ening Cost Analysi Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 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 DAW goveraled 2c.4.5 Rant energy buoget 2c.4.6 NRC Foes 2c.4.7 Site O&M Costs 2c.4.8 Securty Staff Cost 2c.4.9 Utiliy Staff Coot 2c.4 Subtotal Period 2c Ponivd-Dnpendent Costs 2c.0 TOTAL PERIOD 2c COST PERIOD 2 TOTALS PERIOD 3a - Reactivate Site Following SAFSTOR Doinarecy Period 3a Direct Decommisskinlng Activities 3a.1.1 Prepare pratiminary decommissioning cost 3a.1.2 Review plani dwgs & specs.

3a.1t3 Pertoov detailed red survey 3a. 1.4 End product description 3a. 1.5 Detadd by-product inventory 3a.1.6 Dtive miijo work seuence 3a.1.7 Perform SER and EA 3a. 1.8 Perform Sito-Specific Cost Study 3a.1.9 Peparylrtubmil License Termination Plan 3a.1.0 Receive NRC appyoval of termination plan Activity Spodficalions 3a. 1.11.1 Re-aclivate plant & temporary facilities 3a.1.t1.2 Plan systems 3a.1.11.3 Reactor intenals 33.t.11.4 Roactor vessel 3a..tt1.5 Biological shield 3a.1.11.6 Stores generators 3a l.1.17 Reinforcad concrete 3a.1.11a8 Main Turbine 3a.1.11.9 Maio Condessers 3a,.111,10 Plant structures & buildings 3a.1.it,11 Waste monogoment 3 a.1.1 1.1 2 F a c iity & s it ec "Jo s " "t 3a.1,l1 Total Planning & Site Preparations 3a.1.12 Prepare disvmavnlg sequence 3a.1.13 Plant prep. &8emy.' svs s 3a. 1.14 Design "Oter deac-op system 3a.1.15 Riggingt

t. CotH Envipsffoolingletc 3a.1.16 Procure casksfliners & containers 3a.1 Subtlotal Period 3a Activity Costs Period 3a Peried-Dependenl Costs 3a.4.1 Ivnsranco 3a.4.2 Property taxes 3a.4.3 Heelth physics supplies 3a.4.4 Heavy equipmenl rental 3a.4.S Disposal of DAW generated 25' 2,504 25 29 29 826 5.753 6.033 9.853 25.753 45,578

- 26 141,169 213 1.094 1,094 863 6,616 6,616 803 8,836 8,836 1.478 11,332 11.332 3,863 29,616 29,616 6,837 62,414 52,414 19,303 163,856 163,856 14,812 14,812 14,812 296,234 296,234 68 616,971 719,800 68 1,336,771 2,504 25 29 3,448 33 39 826 151,951 21,416 176,750 176,750 1,116 315,527 45.365 365.529 236,379 296,234 68 1,336,771 129,150 20,003 400,057 92 2.943,486

- -149 526 114 149

-57 354 571 468 842 476 743 57 356

.- 183 46

'46 356 526 103 4.544 274 2Z419 18D 2.048 141 12,773 22 171 171 79 604 604 17 131 131 22 171 171 129 985 9685 53 407 407 86 657 657 79 531 538 126 968 871 71 547 493 122 933 933 ill 854 854 9

66 66 53 410 410

,27 210 105 7

53

,7 63 53 410 205 79 604 604 15 118 59 682 5,226 4.600 41 315 315 363 2.762 2.782 24 184

.184 307 2,355 2.355 21 162 162 1,916 14,689 14.063 44 481 481 73 806 806 76 379 379 52 397" 397

<7 38 38 1,300 4,600 1,000 1.300 7,500 3,100 5.000 4.096 97 65 105 53 53

.205 59 626 626 514 7,370 4.167 7,100 6,500 BOO 3.120 1.600 400 490 3,120 4,600 900 39,777 2,400 1,400

- -1,230 72,703 303 346 437 S

-734 1

1.

"29 10,287 TLG Servi-e., Inc.

Thre Mite Island, Unit I Document E16-1555-0I1, Rev. 0 Decomniaianirsg Cost 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!

1Utit and I

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 3a.4,7 NRC Fees 3a.48 Sit. O&M Cots 3a.4.9 Security Staff Cost 3a.4.10 Utitiy Staff Cost 3a.4 Subtoots Period 3a Poriod-Depndoent Costs 3a.0 TOTAL PERIOD 3a COST PERIOD 3b - Decommissioning Preparations Period 3b Direct Decommissioning Activities Detailed Work Procedures 3b.1.11 Plant systems 3b 1.1.2 Reactor internals 3b.1.1,3 Remaining buildings 3b 1.1.4 CRD coding assembly 3b.l.I.S CRD housings & ICI tsbas 3b.1.6 n.re instrumentation 36.1,1.7 Reator -veWss 3b.1.1 8 Facility doseout 3b.1,1.9 Missile shields 3b.1jt.10 Biological shield 36.1.1.11 Steam generators 31b.1.112 Ranlforced concrte 3bI.t.t3 Main Turbine 3b,1.1.14 Main Condensers 3b.11.15 Auliary beilding 3b.1.t16 Reactorbuilding 3b1.1 Total 3b.1 Subtotal Period 3b Activity Costs Period 3b Additional Costs 3b,2.1 Site Characterization 3b.2 Subtotal Period 3Sb Additional Costs Period 3S Coliat*rol Costs b.3,.1 Deon equipment 3b.3.2 DOC staff rslocation espenses 3b 3.3 Pipe cutting aqsipmanl 3b3 Subtotal Period 31, Collateral Costs Period 30 Peaod-Dependent Costs 3b.4.1 De-on spplites 3b.4.2 Insurarne 3b 43 Property taxes 3b.4.4 Health physics supplies 3b.4.5 Heavy equipment rental 3b.4.6 Disposal of CAW generated 3b4.7 Plaid energy budget 3b.4,8 NRC Fees 3b.48g Site OSM Costs 3b.4.10 Sectaity Staff Cost 3b.4.11 DOC Staff Cost 649 1.459 270

. 250 1.301 16.970 I

29 21.420

- 219 1,677 1,677 27 297 297 37 287 287 195 1,466 1.496 2,545 16,515 19,515 3.276 -

25,376 25,376 514 10,287 35.728 258.629 2

294,357 649 1

1 29 34,194 5,192 40,065 39,439 626 514 10,287 2

367,080 541 286 114 114 114 415 137 51 137 526 11 4 178 178 312 312 3,684 81 622 560 43 328 328 23 177 44 17 131 131 17 131 131 17-131 131 62 477 477 21 108 79 8

59 59 21 158 158 78 604 604 17 131 66 27 206 27 205 47 359 323

-47 359 323 553 4.236 3,415 62 133 79 66 205 205 36 36 821 821 4,733 2,500 1.350 1,000 1,000 3,630 1.200 450

-.200 4,600 1:000 1 500O 1,5860 1,560 2,736 2,730 32,243 32.243 3,684 553 4.236 3,415 3,373 3.373 957 667 957 20 167 173 0

- 1,113 1.113

-368 1 3S 125 4,604.

1.012 4,385 4.385 1,012 4.385 4.385 15 767 767 167-1.280 1,210 143 1,100 1,100 411 3,148 3,148 5

26 26 24 261 261 37 405 405 42 209 209 26 188 199 4

22 22 110 841 841 14 149 149 18 144 144 g8 750 750 691 S.295 5,295 19,100 7,852 19,100 7.852 292 0.634 1

17,913 58,560 TLG Services, Ine.

Three Mile Ilan4 Unit I Decomniaaieoing Coat Analyaio Document EI6-1555-011, Rev. 0 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 NRC Spent Fuel Sit Procassed Burial Volumes Burial I Utiity and ContRmoaractorg rasor Ttl ACtivity Devon Removal Packaging Traesport Procesoing Disposal Other Total Total LIe. Teon.

Management Restoration Volume Clas A Class B Class C GTCC Preoessod Craf t

-Index Activity Description Cost Cost Costs Costs Costs Costs Costs Contingc Costs Costs Costs Costs Cuy Fool C. Post Ca. Foot Co. osst Ca. Foat WI. Lbs.

Manhous Manhours cast.~~~~~~

~ ~ ~ ~

cot Cot 120,u1at159e u-etCuFs C.etWtUo.Mnoue o

Period 3b Period-Dopendenl Costs (continued) 3b.4.12 Utility Staff Cost 3b.4 Subtotal Period 3b Poriod-Dependent Costs 3b.0 TOTAL PERIOD 3b COST PERIOD 3 TOTALS PERIOD 4a -Large Component Removal Period 4a Direct Decomnrissioning Acticiies Nuclear Steam Supfly System Removal 4a1 11 Reactor Coolant Piping 4a.I.1.2 Pressuriz Relief Tank 4a..1.3 Reactor Coolant Pumps & Motors 4a.1.1.4 Pressurizar 4a.1.1.5 Steam Generators 4a.1.1.6 Retired Steam Generator Units 4a.1.l.7 CRDKs/ICIslSeor-ic Structure Remocal 4a.11.18 Reactor Vessel Internals 4a.I. 9 Vessel & Internlss GTCC Disposel 4a.5.1.10 Reactor Vessel 4a.1.1 Totals Removal of Major Equipment a.. 1 Main TurbinioGerntster 4o.1.3 Main Condensers Cascading Cosds from Clean Building Demolition 4a.1.4.1 Ruaclor 4a.1,4.2 Auciliary 4a.1.4.3 Fuel Handliag 4a,1.4 Totals Disposal of Plant Systemn 4a.1 5.1 CNTL-TWR-2855PROCESS 4a.1.5.2 CNTL-TWR-305 BURY 4a.1.5.3 CNTL.IWR-305 PROCESS 4a.1.5.4 CNTL-TWR-322_CLEAN 4a 1.5.5 CNTL-TWR.33t CLEAN 48.1.6.6 CNTL-TWR-355_CLEAN 4a.I *57 CNTL-TWR-380,.CLEAN 4a.1.5.8 CNTL-TWR-388_CLEAN 4a.1.5.9 l0-295OBURY 4a1.5.1 IB-295_CLEAN 4a.1.5.11 le-295_PROCESS 4a.1.5.12 IB-3055BURY

4. 15.13 IB-305_PROCESS 4a.1.5.14 15-322_SURY 4a.1.5.I3 IB-322_CLEAN 4a 1.5.16 0-3322_PROCESS 4a 1.5.17 IB-355_PROCESS 4a.1.5'18 IB-ROOFPROCESS 4a. 1.519 OCA_CLEAN 4a.1.5.20 OCAPROCESS 4a.1.5.21 OOBtCLEAN 20 341 551 1,297 688 1,946 19 78 3

11 25 74 6

51 30 5,424 15 75 39 2.042 4.651 137 12.457 8,050 16 15,362 1,276 9,784 9,784 2,344 1t.0115 10,085 292 821 292

÷ 129,669 5,0834 1

206,142 5,834 190101 246,237 16,121 19.104 613,296 16 23.532 4.319 29,854 29,033 45 57,726 9,511 69,919 68,472 2

1,447 806 11 18 2

.4 35 162 483 596 1,107 1,940 668 1,940 171 68 3,098 649 857 483 6.431 5,861 50 81 11 17 73 1.398 551 4,640 4,640 98 3.558 148 12,289 2,590 148 135 29.862 296 61 319 11 60 419 2,186 291 1,979 2,933 16,073

• 1,518 8,765 78 505 4,289 13,124 1,043 14,133 5,140 13,868 16,503 71,712 319 60 2,186 1,979 16,073 8,765 505 13.824 14,133 13,868 71.712 413

.413t 94 94 509 8.974 2,588 11,714 11,714 3.002 1:329 250 7,148 2,573 1.016 46.976 2,124 517 517 95,775 2,227 20.849 307 925,540 4.386 338,550 1,794 2,850,879 10,254 2.850.879 5,400 59.894 1,847 221.325 17,467 580 105,040 986,490 17,467 580 8,455,827 61,149 1,500 2,250 2,250 831 831 7,661 259 89 49 333 1,020 70 39 263 131 861 861 307 1,699 1,699 104 794 794 36 250 280 48 365 365 188 1,439 1,439 6,730 5,310 302,857 5,654 238,934 22,942 690 243 317 1,251 58 69

• 47 177 S

128 20 38 10 55 46 222 30 1817 It 38 481 54 15

- 14 87 9

2 10 70 6

13 46 1

4 21 5

9 31 5

35 234 2

5 18 3

1a8 122 1

2 12 77 522 1

"a 54 1

5 31 1

5 37 27 166 31 104 16 9

27 253 19 147 3

23 6

44 2

12 23 123 7

53 96 592 13 69 68 398 5

28 6

44 211 1,303 23 140 9

60 122 936 28 158 1

11 166 164 93 123 592 69 359 29 1,303 140 SD 150 1,564 420 587 203 147 23 44 12 53 5,231 169 2,731 74 44 11.682 1,207 689 936 828 11 9,845 3,371 4,242 17,458 63,529 1,278 37,709 1,444 23,851 1,050 4,257 3,122 545 1,001 245 25,560 1,217 1,100 212,426 4,930 S

15,164 647 110,815 4,573 6,642 247

÷ 896 474,418 10,690 49,022 1,185 27.993 340 19,9758

-33,030 1,913 252 T7,0 Services, Inr.

Three Mtile Moand, Unit I D-eomi.ssianing Cost Analysis DowaunentE16-1555-011, Rev. 8 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 Spent Fast all.

Procese V oura

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 Toetal Cost 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 4a.15.23 TB-305-E_CLEAN 4a.1.5.24 TB-305-E PROCESS 4a.1.5.25 TB-305-W-BURY 4a.1.5.26 TB-305-WCLEAN 4a.1.5.27 TB-305.WGIC 4.a1.5.28 TB-305-WPROCESS 4a.15.29 TB-322-ECLEAN 4a.t.5.30 TB-322-EGIC 40.15.31 TB-322-EPROCESS 4s.1,5.32 TB-322-WCLEAN 4a.1.5.33 TB-322-WGIC 4a.1.5.34 TB-322-W PROCESS 4a.1.5.35 TB-355-E CLEAN 4a.1.536 TB-355-WCLEAN 4a.1.5.37 TB-355-W_GIC 4n.15.38 TB-3556W PROCESS 4a.1.5.39 TB-380 CLEAN 4a.1.5.40 TB-380oPROCESS 4a.1.541 TB-ROOFCLEAN 4o.1.5 Totals 4a.1.6 Scaffolding in support of decommisstoning 4a.

Subtotal Period 4a Actioty Costs Period 4a Additional Costs 4a.2.1 Turbine Bldg GIC Waste Disposition 4a.2 Subtotal Period 4a Addilional Costs Peiod 4a Collateral Costs 4a.3.1 Process liquid waste 4a.3.2 Small tool atowance 4a.3 Subtotal Period 4a Collateral Costs Period 4a Psriod-Dnponodnt Costs 4.4.1 tDecn supplies 4o.4.2 Insurance 4o.4.3 Property taxes 4a.4.4 Heolth physics supplies 4a.4.5 Heocy equipment rental 4a 4.6 Disposal of DAW generated 4n.4.7 PlanR energy budget 4n.4.8 NRC Fees 4o.4.9 Site O&M Costs 4.4,410 Radwasto Processing Equipvnert/Snrices 4a4. 1 Sociaity Staff Cost 49.4.12 DOC Staff Cost 4".4.13 Utility Staff Cost 4a4 Subtotal Period 4a Period-Depe*dent Costs 4a.0 TOTAL PERIOD 4a COST 136 187 425 96 222 87 790 79 4

483 142 is 464 6

23 2

460 15 407 21 6,660 13 23 83 16 104 701 9

18 65 30 197 1,336 21 134 909 42 276 1,864 18 95 844 12 78 530 196 1,117 7.080 251 702 9

5 33 137 22,299 6,785 7.070 7,844 30,113 296 85 232 85 232 30 11 94 69 169 30 169 11 94 69 59 314 314 28 215 228 1.474 1.474 44 232 232 33 256 13 100 430 2,784 2,784 12 91 1

0 279 1,827 1,827 21 163 2

17 441 3,087 3.087 1

7 3

27 0

2 227 1,441 1.441 2

17 194 1,222 1.222 3

24 2,769 18,072 15.677 182 831 931 20.i60 94,715 92,320 43 360 360 43 360 360 48 252 252 25 194 175 73 448 427 11 55 55 52 567 567 80 879 791 318 1,5892 1,592 271 2.079 2,079 55 280 280 226 1,733 1,733 74 813 813 41 312 312 61 469 469 226 1,732 1,732 1,813 13.899 13,899 2,793 21,414 21,414 6,020 48,824 45,736 26.297 141,345 138.842 15 765 215 15,700 0599 255 29,913 91 20.352 17 41,730 7

27 2

14,408 11,873 24 2.395 158,495 2.313

-665 2,395 172,216 49,288 2,824

-8,600 2,953 4,738 637,566 9,513 53,703 2,113 5,764 2,150 1.214.787 17,675 1,960 121 826.490 108932 3.474 386 1,694.677 10.620 147 672 46 585,109 10.445 364 482,176 9,218 497 6,643,948 154,095 29,926 18,349 517 580 15,671,490 280,647 7,661

.44 1,274 1,008 44 3,081 515 799 8

7 211 1,507 739 272 408 1,506 12,086 18,620 8

7 211 36,453 10,108 10,108

-19 241 19 241 88 3.785 88 3.785 2,503 182,324 53,315 2,824 454,855 464,855 14,482 47 14.482 47 75,699 17 41,696 156,531 283,571 75,699 17 481,799 517 580 16,216,530 285,712 489,461 212 25,540 6,813 7,256 8,076 30,393 35,749 TLG Services, 1ne.

• Three Mile Island, Unit I Deoaoi.eioning Co-t Analyoi.

Documnent E16-1555-011, Reu. 0 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 USity and I

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 Disposal ouPlant Systems 4b.1.2.1 AB-261_BURY 4b.1.2.2 AB-261_PROCESS 41.1.2.3 AB-271 BURY 4b6. 2.4 AB-271 PROCESS 4b.1-2.5 AB-261-i-1,BURY 4.3.2.6 AB-2611 _PROCESS 4b.1.2.7 AB-281-2_BURY 4b.1.2.8 AB-281-2 PROCESS 4b.1.2.9 AB-281-3-BURY 4b.1.2.10 AB-281-3 PROCESS 4b.1.2.11 AB-305-1_BURY 4b.1.2.12 AB-305-1 PROCESS 4b.1.2.13 AB-305-2-BURY 4b.1.2.14 AB-305-2 PROCESS 41..2.15 AB-305-3 BURY 41.t12.16 AB-331 BURY 4b.12.17 AB-331 PROCESS 4b.1.2.18 CC-30G5BURY 4b.1.2.19 DG-305 BURY 4b.1.2.20 DG-305_CLEAN 40.1.2.21 FHB-281_AURY 4b.1.2.22 FHB-261 PROCESS 4b.1.2.23 FHB-305 BURY 4b.

1.2.24 FHB-305.PROCESS 4b.1.2.25 FHB-329 BURY 41.1.2.26 FHB-329 PROCESS 41.1.2.27 FHB-348 BURY 4b.1.2.28 FHB-348 PROCESS 4b.1.2.29 INTAKE CLEAN 4b.1.2.34 iWT-303_PROCESS 4b.1.2.31 OCA BURY 41.1.2.32 PA-301 BURY 4b.1.2.33 PA-301-CLEAN 4b.1.2.34 PA-301_PROCESS 4b.1.2.35 RB-281 BURY 4b.1.2.36 RS-281_PROCESS 4b.1.2.37 RB-368_BURY 4b.1.2.38 RB-308_PROCESS 40.1.2.39 RB-346_BURY 4b.1.2.40 RB-346_PROCESS 4b0..241 RB-INSIDE D-RINGSURY 4b.1.2.42 SB-305 CLEAN 4b.1.2.43 STPCLEAN 4".1.2.44 TB-3O5-E-GIC 4b.1.2.45 TB-355-E_.:PROCESS 4b.1.2.46 YARDCLEAN 4b.1.2 Tlatls 4b.t.3 Scaffolding in support of decommissioning 297 41 105 83 294 126 60 74 103

.413 4

567 375 117 50 86 26 183 310 74 31 129 441 44 100 161 140 51 66 14 I I 64 30 221 906 430 1 63 247 257 428 131 290 205 58 S 120 271 9

37 68 54 492 0.272 24 56 t

0 12 27 5

34 67 123 0

0 87 165 5

33 9

17 1

3 33 t1 O

2 23 44

,6 39 7

11

.4 7

2 13 63 114 a

14 24 44 2

11 6

-12 2

7 1

2 0

1 13 29 1

3 18 117 99 165 37 62

.6 43 51 108 4

13 35 67 5

32 6

13

• 6 18

• 26 54 2

10 698 1,601 200 64 98 229 438 2

587 223 22 288 14 155 263 40 25 88 405 48 157 74 43 34 8

S6 4

2 102 15 3

769 587 220 280 384 62 15 238 217

- 49 42 43 194 68

• 2,497 4,388 255 1,074 1,074 92 499 499 26 162 162 48 259 259 50 437 437 238 1,278 1.278 1

a 8

322 1,727 1,727 133 768 768 47 248 240 16 R3 93 109 596 596 9

51 51 93 498 498 125 751 751 31 162 162 15 82 82 48 290 280 235 1.257 1,257 26 140 140 15 115 88 474 474 48 275 275 26 137 137 20 145 145 5

29 28 4

23 23 47 255 255 11 63 63 33 254 3648 2,193 2,193 289 1,569 1,5f9 109 590 690 37 284 115 709 759 224 1.194 1,194 48 274 274 147 781 781 89 547 547 28 148 148 s0 279 279 127 672 672 1

11 6

43 13 101 25 159 159 74 566 3.730 21,187 19,812 273 1.397 1.397 115 254 204 11 43 101 566 1,374 2.707 242,924 1,056 1,844 1.436 0898 5.133 4,978 42 6.052 4,9114 544 500 2,650 303 1,555 5,870 368 251 1,967 4,613 565 1,611 1.667 405 766 73 67 91 21 943 344 30 17,653 7,233 2,743 6,446 3,555 1,379 143 2.328 4.850 419 934 395 1,7 783 1,532 55.905 46.055 998 165.398 2,914 58,327 1,367 80,591 1,663 208,455 2.424 362,114 9.277 1.725 100 1484,727 12,421 202,399 8.273 48.749 2,582 20.292 1.114 237.727 1.877 12,298 558 128,368 3,977 238,721 7,D92 32,987 1.629 20.665 678 79.879 2,818 334.678.

9,825 39,762 9 87 2.441

- 129,564 3,528 67,683 3J100 35,492 1,125 37,657 1,529 5,081

.303 5,574 249 83.967 1,400 16,521 643 5,603 716,882 19,868 485,016 9,645 181,570 3,657 5-.969 261,756 6,672 31 0,888 9602 68,778 2.922 196,583 6,561 196.969 4,613 37,577 1,135 73.371 2,548 159,948 6,114 242 M84 2.342 62,212 1,183 12,996 65,97.056 167,449 44,889 29.024 1.054

. 13 7

49 TLG Service, Ino.

Three Mile slaond, Unit I Decommisiaioning Cost Analysis Document E16-1555-011. Rev. 0 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

Ictfn",

• O u-*fi LLRW NM*;

Spent Fast site Procs-d BuUiaI VOlumes Butlrm i U*enI Oecos Reamoval Packaging Transport Processing Disposal Other Total Total Lic. Term.

Mainagemeat Restoration Volume Ctass A Class B Clas C 0TCC Procassad Craft CaslrsotoI SCMI

-a

.. C

-. 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 4b. 1.412 Auxisiary 4b. 1.43 Classified Waste Storage Fociity 4.1b414 Heat Exchanger Vault 4b.1.4.5 Inteirim Solid Waste Staging Facilty 4t.14.6 lntoenrodiate 4b. 14.7 Misaolaneoaus Buildings - Contaminted 4b.14s8 Respirator Cleasing Facility 4b.1 4.9 Fuel Handling 40.14,

Totals 767.

606 239 93.

12 2

40 16 50 10 18 16 123 24 23 4

494 500 1,765 1.271 125 316 12 35 1

2 2

6 2

7.

4 11 6

17 1

3 28 46 151

.444 997 2,136 41 539 34 46 2

4.

7.

I in0 16 24 5

29 122 109 771 2.656 5.494 4b 1 Subtotal Period 4b Activity Costs 2.062 10,637 Period 45 Additional CoGsts 4b.2.1 License Teoninalion Survey Planning 4b.2.2 ISFSI Lincnsa Termnination 457 45.2.3 Contaminated Soil Ramadiatlon 39 4b.2 Subtotal Period 4b Additional Costs 496 Period 4b Collaeral Costs 4b.31 Process liquid wste 81 4b.32 Small alloance 179 4533 Decommissioning Equipment Disposition 4b3 Subtotal Period 4b Collatsral Costs 5

179 Period 45 Period-Dependent Costs 4b541 fecon supplies 725 4b54.2 Insurance 41.4.3 Property taxes 4b,4.4 Health physics supplies 1,837 4b.4.5 Heavy equipment rental 4,209 45.4.6 Disposal of DAW genorated 4b4.7 Plant energy budget 4b.4.8 NRC Fans 45.4 9 Site O&M Costs 4b 4.10 Radwaste Processing Equipment/Ser-vcos 45.4.11 Sacurity Staff Cost 4b,4.12 DOC Staff ost 4b.4.13 Utloty Staff Cos-4b.4 Subtotal Period 4b Period.Dependent Costs 725 6,046 4b.0 TOTAL PERIOD 4b COST 2,869 17.358 PERIOD 4e -Ucnseo Tanalsbtion Perod 4e Drect Deconmissioning Activities 4e.1.1 ORISE confirmatory survey 48.1.2 Teminate license 4..1 Subtotal Period 4e Activily Costs Period 4e Additional Costs 44.2.1 License Terninebian Survey 4e.2 Subtotal Period 4e Additional Costs 648 4

31 44 1.2a5 2

110 1,930 7

140 1,974 2,133 31 253 167 "88 60 330 119 313 330 17 736 3,131 3,131 166 624 624 7

26 26 28 103 103 31 Ill 111 19 a3 83 77 271

• 271 14 51 51 416 1,635 1,635 1,494 6.037 6,037 5,753 29,694 28,320 254 1,102 1,102 323 2,144 509 2,989 2,589 1,086 5,635 3,691 129 681 681 27 205 205 67 545 545 223 1,432 1,432 181 907 907 121 1,329 1,329 187 2,061 2,061 459 2,297 2,297 631 4,840 4,840 71 364 364 419 3,209 3.209 173 1,906 1,906 96 733 733 144 1,159 1,100 630 4,063 4,063 4,144 31,772 31,772 6.231, 47,769 47,769 13.387 102,348 102.348 20,448 139,309 135,791 1,374 2,144 2.144 913 9,010 752 842 43 99 138 21 182 295 451 690 1.399 2,435 12.445 59,338 61,207 802 35,745 36,547 653 6.667.

6,667 6S3 4,925 4,925 66,004 103,333 886,240 29,340 113.287 7,302 4.349 319 17,468 1.243 16,999 1,349 29.523 685 45,147 3.312

,6463 621 146,622 20,809 1,270,086 64.977 7,454,954 262,506 6,240 101,008 21.237 2,560 2,716,592 462 2,817,600 21,699 8,800 39,202 127 300,00 688 339,202 216 98,501 23 97.782 356,440 627,760 94,501 23 1,081,982 10,710,260 304,444 1,090,782 a

Is.

a,3 10 1.131 2.599 1.208 1,873 275 2.790 1,733 637 957 3.533 27,627 41,538 275 81.897 2.986 7,89D 84.030 2,144 1,374 155 46 201 201 155 46 201 201

-6 6,183 1,855 8,038 8,038 6,183 1,655 8,038 8.036 124,444 3,120 124.444 3,120 TLG Services, 1nc.

Thinee Mile Isla~nd, Unit I D--esnieoiooisg Cost An.1.ye.i Dodumsent E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 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 40.3 Subtotal Period o4 CoatLeral Costs Period 49 Period-Deperdent Costs 4s.4.1 Insurance 4a.4.2 Property taxes 4e.4.3 Heaoth physica supplies 4e.4.4 Disposal of DAW gneratled 4e.4.5 Plant energy budget 4a.4.6 NRC Fees 4:.4.7 Site O&M Costs 4e.4.8 Secunly Staff Cost 4a.4.9 DOC Staff Cost 4o.4.10 Utility Staff Cost 4:.4 Sublotoal Period 4e Period-Dapendent Costs 4e.0 TOTAL PERIOD 4. COST PERIOD 4 TOTALS PERIOD Sb - Site Restoration Period 5b Direct Decommissioning Activities Demolition of Remaining Site Buidlings 5b1.1.1 Rea.tor 5b.1..2 Air Inlake Tunnel 5b.1.1.3 AuxiliarI 5.1.1..4 Carpenters Shop #117 5b,1.1.5 Circudalirg Water Chlorinaoor 5b.1.1.6 Circudating Water Chlorinator House 5b.1i.1.7 Circulatig Water Intake Flu*es 5b.1.1.8 Circolating Water Purmlphova.

5b.1..9 Circusaiong Water Tunnels 51,1.1.10 Classified Waste Storage Faolity Ob.I.1.

Coaguglor 5b.1.12 Contro Room Tower 5b. 1.113 Cooling Toe rs 5bt1.114 Corridor 5b.1.1.15 Desiring Basin 5b1,.1.16 Diesel Generator 51 1.1.17 Emergency Disel Generator 5b.1.1.18 Fire SBgade Training Facility 5pl.1.119 Fuel OUlrdouding & Pusrp Station 5b.1.1.20 Heal Exchanger Vault 5b.1.1.21 High Range Sample Station 5b.1.1.22 IoostWostorrtmnt & Sludge Fltr 51b1.1.23 ntske Screen & Pumphrpuse 5b,1.1.24 Interim Solid Waste Staging FIacity 59 11.25 Inerrddmodlt 5b.1.1.26 Luba Oil Sloraga 5b 11 27 Macharical Draft Cooling Tower 5b.1.1 2 Miscatneouts BidsIgs - Clean 5b.1.1.29 Miscella neouJs ail dd nng s - Con taminasted 5b1.11.30 Miscellanouos Yard Structures 5b. 1.31 North Offi.e 611 611 611 1.113 1,113 551 20 219 546 188 444 4,650 S. 5.13 20 12,111 167 1.280 1.280 167 1.280 1,280 95 607 907 153 763 763 5

26 26 33 252 252 55 600 600 28 216 216 67 511 611 697 5.347 5,347 827 6,340 6.340 1.920 14,662 14,662 350 350 4

3 2

350 2,144 3,877 248,328 156,997 2.824 6.999 2

11.743 57,149 74,371 6,999 2

143.263 6,999 124,446 146,383 517 580 26,933,780 709,601 1,726.625 20 19.562 3,988 24,182 24.182 3,080 43.517 7,945 9,855 11.062 38,303 140,342 3.707o5 2,086 14 s0 54 44 121 532 22.

36 2.622 67 2

600 502 12 7

319 4

76 1.679 89 1.287 121 874 166 I.256 255 50,733 304.836 298,815 556 4.263 6

58 313 2399 2

16 7

57 8

62 7

50 18 140 s0 612 3

26 5

42 393 3.015 126 964 10 77 0

2 90 690 75 577 2

14 48 367 1

5 11 87 252 1.930 13 103 193 1,485 1

9 18 139 131 1,005 25 190 168 1,444 38 293 4.263 2,399 16 57 62 59 140 612 29 42 3,015 864 77 2

690 577 14 367 5

87 1,930 103 1.480 9

139 1.005 190 1.444 293 52.366 844 28.722 219 675 1,087 709 2 2'422 9.010 452 726 35,625 13,913 1,381 32 9.233 6.842 231 109 4,093 67 1.406 18,870 1,752 17.189 139 1.802 19.884

,3414 20,519 4,920 TLG Seltimse Ine.

Thr Mile I1.1-d. Unit 1 Decomnimioning Cost Anolysis Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 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 56.1 1,33 Operations Su pport Facility 5b.1.1.34 Respirator Cleaning fatility 5b.1,1.35 Security Impro-erments 5b.i.1.36 Service 5b.1.1:37 Sewage PurMing Station 5b.1.1.38 Sleam Generator Mauosotsum 5b.1.1.39 Substation Relay Control House 5b.1.40 Training Facility 043 51,1.1.41 Turbine 5b.1.1.42 Turbine Pedestal 5b 1.1.43 Warehouse #1.

5b.1.144 Water Pretreatment House 5b.1.1.45 Fuel Handling 5b.1.1 Totals Site Closeout Autiwities 5b.1.2 Remove Rubble 5b.1.3 Grade & landscape site 5b.1.4 Final report to NRC 5b.1 Subtotal Period 51b Activity Costs Period 51, Additional Costs 5b.2.1 Concrtte Processing 5b.2.2 ISFSI Sits Restoration 5b.2 Subtotal Period 5b Additional Costs Period 5b Collteral Costs 5b 3.1 Smol tool ottowarco 5b.3 Subtotal Period Sb Cotalerat Costs 54 244 51 664 252 5

305 24 58 1.431 1.128 377 115 2.937 25,145 8.707 121 33.973 1.030 2,105 3.135 239 239

~178 1 78 47 8

-47 8

62.

37 280 8

59 100 "763 38 290 1

6 46 351 4

28 9

67 215 1,646 169 1,297 57 434 17 132 441 3,378 3,772 28,916 1,306 10.013 18 140 27 205 205 5,123 30.274 205 155 1,193 323 2,474 478 3,667 280 59 763 290 6

351 28 67 1.646 1.297 434 132 3,378 28,916 10,013 140 39,069 1,1393 2,474 2.474 1,193 1.102 4.425 1.072 6.957 5.003 97 3,900 489 1,199 26,877 14.441 8,170 2.006 40.440 374.203 7.228 531 1.560 381,962 1,560 6.293 S-

, 95,372 160 11,665 160 36 275 36 275 275 275 Period 5b Pesod-Oependent COsts 5b.4.1 Insorance 5b.4.2 Property taxes 5b.4.3 Heavy equipment rental 4,367 5b.4.4 Plant energy budtget 5b.4.5 site O&M Cost 5b,4.6 Security Staff Cost 5b,4.7 DOC Stasf Cost 5b.4.8 Utility Staff Cost 50.4 Subtol Period 00 Period-Dependerl Costs 4,367 1.451 288 493 S1,8940 11.826 5,0 21,887 145 1.596 655 5,023 43 331 74 568 291 2,231 1,774 13,600 083 6,772 3,865 30,121 1.590 5.023 331 568 2,231 13.600 6,T72 30,121 2,474 70,658 2,474 70,658 177,582 75,982 248.328 181.903 2.824 49,440 140.080 80,340 2609,60 303.627 271,580 393.627 271,580 517 580 27,544.820 1,176.056 6,463,563 5bO TOTAL PERIOD 5b COST PERIOO 5 TOTALS TOTAL COST TO DECOMMISSION 41,715 41,715 8

22,112 9,502 73.337 205 22,112 9,502 73,337 205 639,907 136,378 946,378 692.814 7,204 92,308 8,114 11,001 11,062 40.344 TLG Service.. Inc.

Three Mile belantd, Unit I Deroos,,.iaiorsing Coast Atnalysis DocunuentEl16-1555-011, Rev. 0 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 Utility 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 MANAGEMENT COST IS 18.76% OR:

$177,582 thonutands of 2008 dollars NON-NUCLEAR DEMOLITION COST IS 8.03% OR:

$75,982 thousands o0 2008 dollars OTAL LOW-LEVEL RADIOACTIVE WASTE VOLUME BURIED (EXCLUDING GTCC):

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 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 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 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Appendix F, Page 2 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 Factor Adjustments:

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 Decommissioning Cost 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 Respiratory Protection Factor Adjustments:

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 Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Appendix F, Page 4 of 9 Range of Radiation /ALARA Factor Adjustments:

(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 Factor Adjustments (alternate site-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 Decommissioning Cost 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 Factor Adjustments:

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

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

2 4

5 2

4 5

5 2

21 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 G-24 Turbine Building Ground Floor 305' Elevation [South].................

25 G-25 Turbine Building Mezzanine 322' Elevation [North].................

26 G-26 Turbine Building Mezzanine 322' Elevation [South]......................

27......

.... 2T G-27 Turbine Building Operating Floor 355' Elevation [North]............................ 28 G-28 Turbine Building Operating Floor 355' Elevation [South].............

29 G-29 Turbine Building Heater Bay 380' Elevation 30 G-30 Protected 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 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 Appendix G, Page 2 of 32 VIANT FIGURE G-1 AUX-261 DECAY HEAT & BUILDING SPRAY VAULT 7/

AB-261

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

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

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

Three Mile Island, Unit 1 Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Appendix G, Page 5 of 32 FIGURE G-4 AUXILIARY & FUEL HANDLING BUILDING 305' ELEVATION

,..j ZEN" r,'

IkV, TLG Services, Inc.

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

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

Is

%n*

I I -L ~

• 1 41 Z ev.o C

~~1J ir~TE~

g~n.~n4fl1nn Iii U~ý 1.

=.--

A L-A"4 UL

~

~v~'

0"0 t1 U.'

-w~

mail*

~

to j,

1~l oft L JJ~.I~

Al L

oww two,"

war

• 000 a C01%.

1!

012 1ý *&

C&6*4 ý-,V" al-I If.wo rc Výok K.2 mum. S-w-AL M

%NWUM a"

us.

Z&

PLAN-FLOOR ELEV.306ý-V K SLOV4 TLG Services, Inc.

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

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

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

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

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

Three Mile Island, Unit 1 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 Appendix G, Page 14 of 32 FIGURE G-13 INTAKE & SCREENWASH

& PUMPHOUSE 2

r TLG Services, Inc.

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

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

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

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

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

Three Mile Island, Unit 1 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 Appendix G, Page 20 of 32 FIGURE G-19 REACTOR BUILDING BASEMENT 281' ELEVATION TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile Island, Unit 1 Document E16.1555-011, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis 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 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 Appendix G, Page 22 of 32 FIGURE G-21 REACTOR BUILDING OPERATING FLOOR 346' ELEVATION AcAc1~ft W40Aa 0A) arA11Uork S TEEL

..rk" AMD

• TAIR 4

LA-jo Up T, IL" 2=0 m

.- ujc4m we*

AN

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

&AM Wj*r. r1KA4*

to=&"-no A=

AUM P:IJM-F.

WOW, PM-A-ma CA" UMPCW

• Mug 6ADMN-AV AU4 IL wls&"

Wr-w.,%

rcouVAKY

&WAD V"LL IX ss, 4ýft j

bPAWfLj COLC421 LALjDT'jQ EL-a-5d. I

-'jV-jC IV70*

TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile Island, Unit 1 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 Appendix Q, Page 23 of 32 FIGURE G-22 REACTOR BUILDING INSIDE D-RING ALL ELEVATIONS RB-I NS IDE D-RING

.LL*A;',C2 i

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 REAGMR COOLAAIr DISCAV.

N-WWI`

C UTLET AWS.

rAA4 QCýMýIA 306'.9.

EL..

PLAW RE;icron

_W40 r EL VE55EL q

PA'?F.

EL.

TGAEACTOR

.:I:

LZ8,0 PIPE TO RALTIM TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile Island, Unit 1 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 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" WCAM calla VO*M WA+ý "WIft N.P M.Vý T

---

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

Eta f

[Jim Wk=

i4st Migm

%Rft-rLown r

f".10 H.

COO 3S 4Mý SU'" I. U-Aft

ý-4 Xý TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile Island, Unit 1 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 Appendix G, Page 25 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"_,+

'-'.7i SS-

-it

~r S.

Fix."

0i7]1

• .CVY 4.

V Y, -All-1.

C94TLLL 1~

i Q2 I

/

~&tz Isari TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile Island, Unit 1 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 Appendix G, Page 26 of 32 FIGURE G-25 TURBINE BUILDING MEZZANINE 322' ELEVATION [NORTH]

___I

r.

7-JB-227' W

V I / F

-J

~

~

~§;i~

==

.W

-1 AL W t~ T

'It'

mI"* I*

• lf "i'i " "*--**

F I~~ \\

r

-~~r s

Ki 71

1111, 11 TLG Services, Inc.

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

7k 17=7

01 lIl II J*

low 19 M, r2 I

k~

I1*11*

F~

fl..44~O I

1'~

J

.~

4f

§4

.4

~u..

-~-'-~'--

~..--

-. i

~

X" I.

Ii-4, It J.

I.

I I

LJ~

fi U~L

.i a

MCI*

WN 14 i

A 1

J-4 i

3~fr~a Il

• a I

1; TLG Services, Inc.

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

TLG Services, Inc.

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

TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile Island, Unit 1 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document E16-1555.011, Rev. 0 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 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 Appendix G, Page 31 of 32 FIGURE G-30 PROTECTED AREA 301' ELEVATION TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile Island, Unit 1 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document E16-1555-011, Rev. 0 Appendix G, Page 32 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)

Year 2050 2051 2052 2053 2054 2055 2056 2057 2058 2059 2060 2061 2062 2063 2064 2065 2066 2067 2068 2069 2070 2071 2072 2073 2074 2075 2076 License Termination Spent Fuel Cost Management Cost 4,481 4,481 4,494 4,481 4,481 4,481

.4,494 4,481 4,481 4,481 4,494 4,481 4,481 4,481 4,494 4,481 4,481 4,481 25,085 56,432 127,651 53,237 841 53,383 843 43,733 461 9,693 878 104 1,252 28 343 Site Restoration Cost Total Cost 4,481 4,481 4,494 4,481 4,481 4,481 4,494 4,481 4,481 4,481 4,494 4,481 4,481 4,481 4,494 4,481 4,481 4,481 25,454 57,712 129,952 54,616 54,766 44,489 35,659 37,126 10,172 369 1,280 2,301 539 540 295 25,088 35,770 9.800 Totals 692,814 177,582 75,982 946,378