ML103550608
| ML103550608 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Indian Point  |
| Issue date: | 12/31/2010 |
| From: | TLG Services |
| To: | Entergy Nuclear Northeast, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| E11-1583-006 | |
| Download: ML103550608 (60) | |
Text
Document Ell-1583-006 PRELIMINARY DECOMMISSIONING COST ANALYSIS for the INDIAN POINT ENERGY CENTER, UNIT 3 preparedfor Entergy Nuclear prepared by TLG Services, Inc.
Bridgewater, Connecticut December 2010
Indian Point Energy Center, Unit 3 Document E1l-1583-006 PreliminaryDecommissioning Cost Analysis Page ii of v APPROVALS Project Manager ,Dat ,
William A. Cloutier, Jr. Date Project Engineer Thomas J.Garrettt Dater Technical Manager arancis W. Se ore TLG Services, Inc.
IndianPoint Energy Center, Unit 3 Document E1l-1583-006 Preliminary Decommissioning Cost Analysis Page iii of v TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION PAGE
- 1. DECOMMISSIONING COST ANALYSIS ............................................................ 1 1.1 Decommissioning Alternatives ....................................................................... 2 1.2 Regulatory Guidance ..................................................................................... 2 1.3 Basis of Cost Estimate ........................................ 3 1.4 Methodology ............. .................................. 3 1.5 Impact of Decommissioning Multiple Reactor Units ................................... 5 1.6 Financial Components of the Cost Model ........................................................... 6 1.6.1 Contingency ........................................... 6 1.6.2 Financial Risk ....................................................................................... 7 1.7 Site-Specific Considerations ............................................................................ 8 1.7.1 Spent Fuel Disposition ......................................................................... 8 1.7.2 Reactor Vessel and Internal Components ....................................... 12 1.7.3 Primary System Components .............................................................. 13 1.7.4 Retired Com ponents............................................................................ 14 1.7.5 Main Turbine and Condenser ............................................................ 14 1.7.6 Transportation Methods .................................................................... 14 1.7.7 Low-Level Radioactive Waste Conditioning and Disposal .............. 16 1.7.8 Site Conditions Following Decommissioning ................................... 17 1.7.9 Site Contam ination ........................................................................... 18 1.8 Assumptions ............................................... 19 1.8.1 Estim ating Basis ............................................................................... 19 1.8.2 Release Criteria ................................................................................ 19 1.8.3 Labor Costs ........................................................................................ 22
.1.8.4 Design Conditions .............................................................................. 22 1.8.5 General ................................................................................................ 23
- 2. RE SUL T S .................................................................................................................. 26 2.1 Decommissioning Trust Fund ...................................................................... 27 2.2 Financial Assurance ......................................... 27 FIGURE 1 Potential Power Block Soil Remediation Areas .............................................. 20 2 SAFSTOR Decommissioning Timeline .......................................................... 28 TLG Services, Inc.
Indian Point Energy Center, Unit 3 Document El1-1583-006 Preliminary Decommissioning Cost Analysis Page iv of v TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION PAGE TABLES 1 Contaminated Soil Disposition Estim ates .......................................................... 21 2 Low-Level Radioactive Waste Disposition ..................................................... 29 3 Summary of M ajor Cost Contributors ............................................................ 30 4 Schedule of Annual Expenditures, Total Decommissioning Cost ................. 31 5 Schedule of Annual Expenditures, License Termination Allocation ............. 33 6 Schedule of Annual Expenditures, Spent Fuel Management Allocation ..... 35 7 Schedule of Annual Expenditures, Site Restoration Allocation .................... 37 8 Funding Requirements for License Termination ............................................ 38 APPENDIX
-A. Detailed Cost Analysis ....................................................................................... A-1 TLG Services, Inc.
Indian Point Energy Center, Unit 3 Document El1-1583-006 PreliminaryDecommissioning Cost Analysis Page v of v REVISION LOG TLG Services, Inc.
Indian Point Energy Center, Unit 3 Document El1-1583-006 PreliminaryDecommissioning Cost Analysis Page 1 of 40
- 1. DECOMMISSIONING COST ANALYSIS This document presents the cost to decommission the Indian Point Energy Center, Unit 3 (IP-3) assuming a cessation of operations after a nominal 40-year operating life in 2015. In accordance with the requirements of 10 CFR 50.75(f)(3), the cost estimate includes an assessment of the major factors that could affect the cost to decommission the IP-3 nuclear unit.
The cost to decommission IP-3 is estimated at $1,141.9 million. The cost is presented in 2010 dollars.
The estimate for IP-3 assumes that it is decommissioned in conjunction with the two adjacent units (the shutdown IP-1 and the currently operating IP-2). As such, there are savings as well as additional costs that are reflected within the estimate from the synergies of site decommissioning and the constraints imposed in working on a complex and congested site. In apportioning site decommissioning costs by unit, not all common costs are shared equitably due to the offset in shutdown dates and some costs elements are impacted by activities or previous operations at the adjacent units.
The cost includes the monies anticipated to be spent for operating license termination, spent fuel storage and site remediation activities. The cost is based on several key assumptions in areas of regulation, component characterization, high-level radioactive waste management, low-level radioactive waste disposal, performance uncertainties (contingency) and site remediation and restoration requirements. Many of these assumptions are discussed in more detail in this document.
Entergy intends to fund the expenditures for license termination (comprising approximately 73% of the total cost) from the decommissioning trust fund currently held by the New York Power Authority (NYPA).[1] The management of the spent fuel, until it can be transferred to the DOE, may be funded from excess trust fund earnings and from proceeds from spent fuel litigation against the Department of Energy (DOE).
Expenditures from the trust fund for the management of the spent fuel will not reduce the value of the decommissioning trust fund to below the amount necessary to place and maintain the reactor in safe storage. The licensee would make the appropriate submittals for an exemption, in accordance with 10 CFR 50.12, from the requirements of 10 CFR 50.82(a)(8)(i)(A) in order to use the decommissioning trust funds for non-decommissioning related expenses, as defined by 10 CFR 50.2.
The decommissioning liability is currently retained, and the trust fund held, by NYPA. This analysis assumes that NYPA will exercise its option to transfer the liability along with the decommissioning trust fund for IP-3 to Entergy on December 12, 2015, in accordance with the terms of the decommissioning agreement for IP-3 between Entergy and NYPA.
TLG Services, Inc.
Indian PointEnergy Center, Unit 3 Document El1-1583-006 PreliminaryDecommissioning Cost Analysis Page 2 of 40 1.1 DECOMMISSIONING ALTERNATIVES The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) provided general decommissioning guidance in a rule adopted on June 27, 1988.[2] In this rule, the NRC set forth technical and financial criteria for decommissioning licensed nuclear 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."[4W Decommissioning is to be completed within 60 years, although longer time periods will be considered when necessary to protect public health and safety.
ENTOMB is defined as "the alternative in which radioactive contaminants are encased in a structurally long-lived material, such as concrete; the entombed structure is appropriately maintained and continued surveillance is carried out until the radioactive material decays to a level permitting unrestricted release of the property."[5] As with the SAFSTOR alternative, decommissioning is currently required to be completed within 60 years.
1.2 REGULATORY GUIDANCE In 1996, the NRC published revisions to its general requirements for decommissioning nuclear power plants to clarify ambiguities and codify procedures and terminology as a means of enhancing efficiency and uniformity in 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 Ibid. page 24022, Column 3.
4 Ibid.
5 Ibid. page 24023, Column 2.
TLG Services, Inc.
Indian Point Energy Center, Unit 3 Document E1l-1583-006 PreliminaryDecommissioning Cost Analysis Page 3 of 40 the decommissioning process.[61 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 that are acceptable to the NRC staff for implementing the requirements of the 1996 revised rule that relate to the initial activities and the major phases of the decommissioning process. The cost estimate for IP-3 follows the general guidance and sequence presented in the amended regulations.
1.3 BASIS OF COST ESTIMATE For the purpose of the analysis, IP-3 was assumed to cease operations in December 2015, after 40 years of operations. The unit would then be placed in safe-storage (SAFSTOR), with the spent fuel relocated to an Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation (ISFSI) to await transfer to a DOE facility. Based upon a 2020 start date for the pickup of spent fuel from the commercial nuclear power generators, Entergy anticipates that the removal of spent fuel from the site could be completed by the year 2047.7 However, for purposes of this analysis, the plant will remain in storage until 2065, at which time it will be decommissioned and the site released for alternative use without restriction. This sequence of events is delineated in Figure 2, along with major milestone dates.
The decommissioning estimate was developed using the site-specific, technical information relied upon in a decommissioning assessment prepared in 2007 for the site and used as a basis for the preliminary decommissioning cost analyses filed. for IP-1 and IP-2.[8s The economic basis was reviewed for the current analysis and updated to reflect current site costs and budgets. The site-specific considerations and assumptions used in the previous evaluation were also revisited. Modifications were incorporated where new information was available.
1.4 METHODOLOGY The methodology used to develop the estimate followed the basic approach originally presented in the AIF/NESP-036 study report, "Guidelines for 6 U.S. Code of Federal Regulations, Title 10, Parts 2, 50, and 51, "Decommissioning of Nuclear Power Reactors," Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Federal Register Volume 61, (p 39278 et seq.), July 29, 1996.
7 Use of the 2020 DOE start date is discussed in Section 2 of the licensee's 10 CFR 50.54(bb) filing submitted concurrently with this cost estimate.
8 Entergy Letter NL-08-144, dated October 27, 2008, "Unit 1 & 2 program for Maintenance of Irradiated Fuel and Preliminary Decommissioning Cost Analysis in accordance with 10 CFR 50.54 (bb) and 10 CFR 50.75(0(3).
TLG Services, Inc.
Indian Point Energy Center, Unit 3 Document El1-1583-006 PreliminaryDecommissioning Cost Analysis Page 4 of 40 Producing Commercial Nuclear Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Estimates,"[9] and the DOE "Decommissioning Handbook."[ 10] These documents present a unit cost factor method for estimating decommissioning activity costs that simplifies the 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 inventory documents. Removal rates and material costs for the conventional disposition of components and structures relied upon information available in the industry publication, "Building Construction Cost Data," published by R.S.
Means.["l]
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.
This analysis reflected lessons learned from TLG's involvement in the Shippingport Station decommissioning, 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.
Work Difficulty Factors TLG has historically applied work difficulty adjustment factors (WDFs) to account for the inefficiencies in working in a power plant environment. WDFs are assigned to each unique set of unit factors, commensurate with the working conditions. The ranges used for the WDFs were as follows:
- Access Factor 0% to 30%
o Respiratory Protection Factor 0% to 50%
9 T.S. LaGuardia et al., "Guidelines for Producing Commercial Nuclear Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Estimates," AIF/NESP-036, May 1986.
10 W.J. Manion and T.S. LaGuardia, "Decommissioning Handbook," U.S. Department of Energy, DOE/EV/10128-1, November 1980.
11 "Building Construction Cost Data 2010," Robert Snow Means Company, Inc., Kingston, Massachusetts.
TLG Services, Inc.
Indian Point Energy Center, Unit 3 Document El1-1583-006 Preliminary Decommissioning Cost Analysis Page 5 of 40
" Radiation/ALARA Factor 0% to 37%
o Protective Clothing Factor 0% to 50%
o Work Break Factor 8.33%
The factors and their associated range of values were originally developed in conjunction with the AIF/NESP-036 study.
Schedulina Program Durations Activity durations are used to develop the total decommissioning program schedule. The unit cost factors, adjusted for WDFs as described above, are applied against the inventory of materials to be removed, resulting in a total labor hour estimate. The work area (or building area) is then evaluated for the most efficient number of workers/crews for the identified decommissioning activities. The estimated labor requirements are then compared against the available manpower so that an overall duration for removal of components and piping from each work area can be calculated.
The schedule is used to assign carrying costs, which include program management, administration, field engineering, equipment rental, and support services such as quality control and security.
1.5 IMPACT OF DECOMMISSIONING MULTIPLE REACTOR UNITS In estimating the near-simultaneous decommissioning of three co-located reactor units there can be opportunities to achieve economies of scale, by sharing costs between units, and coordinating the sequence of work activities.
There will also be schedule constraints, particularly where there are requirements for specialty equipment and staff, or practical limitations on when final status surveys can take place. The estimate for IP-3 considered that:
Savings will be realized in program management; in particular costs associated with the more senior positions, from the sequential decommissioning of two, essentially identical reactors. The estimate assumes that IP-2 is the lead unit in decommissioning through the disposition of its reactor vessel and primary system components, at which time IP-3 assumes the lead for its own reactor vessel and primary component removal. Costs for the senior staff positions are only included for the lead unit.
" It is assumed for purposes of this cost estimate that IP-3 will not transfer spent fuel directly from its pool to the ISFSI. As such, the estimate for IP-3 TLG Services, Inc.
Indian PointEnergy Center, Unit 3 Document El1-1583-006 Preliminary Decommissioning Cost Analysis Page 6 of 40 includes the cost to transfer the fuel from the IP-3 pool to the IP-2 pool. The fuel would then be packaged in the IP-2 pool for storage at the ISFSI.
Decommissioning on a congested site needs to be coordinated. As such, demolition and soil remediation, following the primary decommissioning phase (removal of major source terms and radiological inventory), are conducted as a site-wide activity.
Station costs, such as ISFSI operations, security, emergency response fees, regulatory agency fees, corporate overhead, and insurance, are shared across the units, as appropriate.
1.6 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).
1.6.1 Contingency Inherent in any cost estimate that does not rely on historical data is the inability to specifythe precise source of costs imposed by factors such as tool breakage, accidents, illnesses, weather delays, and labor stoppages.
In the DECCER cost model, contingency fulfills this role. Contingency is added to each line item to account for costs that are difficult or impossible to develop analytically. Such costs are historically inevitable over the duration of a job of this magnitude; therefore, this cost analysis includes funds to cover these types of contingency events.
Consistent with standard cost estimating practices, contingencies were applied to the decontamination and dismantling costs developed as a "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."[121 The cost elements in the estimate were based on ideal conditions; therefore, the types of unforeseeable events that are almost certain to occur in decommissioning, based on industry experience, were 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 12 Project and Cost Engineers' Handbook, Second Edition, American Association of Cost Engineers, Marcel Dekker, Inc., New York, New York, p. 239.
TLG Services, Inc.
Indian PointEnergy Center, Unit 3 Document El1-1583-006 Preliminary DecommissioningCost Analysis Page 7 of 40 and inflation in the cost of decommissioning over the remaining operating life of the nuclear unit or during the extended storage period.
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 the detailed estimate. The composite contingency value reported for the SAFSTOR scenario, and as shown in the detailed cost table in Appendix A, is approximately 17.8%.
1.6.2 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:
e Transition activities and costs: ancillary expenses associated with eliminating 50% to 80% of the site labor force shortly after the cessation of plant operations,' added cost for worker separation packages throughout the decommissioning program, national or company-mandated retraining, and retention incentives for key personnel.
o Delays in approval of the decommissioning plan due to intervention, legal challenges, and national and local hearings.
a Changes in the project work scope from the baseline estimate, involving the discovery of unexpected levels of contaminants, contamination in places not previously expected, contaminated soil previously undiscovered (either radioactive or hazardous material contamination), variations in plant inventory or configuration not indicated by the as-built drawings.
- Regulatory changes (e.g., affecting worker health and safety, site release criteria, waste transportation, and disposal).
" Policy decisions altering national commitments (e.g., in the ability to accommodate certain waste forms for disposition, or in the timetable for the start and rate of acceptance of spent fuel by the DOE).
TLG Services, Inc.
Indian Point Energy Center, Unit 3 Document El1-1583-006 PreliminaryDecommissioning Cost Analysis Page 8 of 40 0 Pricing changes for basic inputs, such as labor, energy, materials, and burial.
This cost study does not add any additional costs to the estimate for financial risk, since there is insufficient historical data from which to project future liabilities.
1.7 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 were included within the estimate.
1.7.1 Spent Fuel Disposition Congress passed the "Nuclear Waste Policy Act"[131 (NWPA) in 1982, assigning the federal government's long-standing responsibility for disposal of the spent nuclear fuel created by the commercial nuclear generating plants to the DOE. The NWPA provided that DOE would enter into contracts with utilities in which DOE would promise to take the utilities' spent fuel and high-level radioactive waste and utilities would pay the cost of the disposition services for that material. NWPA, along with the individual 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 accept any spent fuel or 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 obtain compensation for DOE's breach of contract.
A federal appeals court has ruled that DOE's obligation to take possession of spent nuclear fuel is unconditional and cannot be excused either by the absence of a repository or by a claim of unavoidable delay.
Entergy has filed a lawsuit claiming damages for DOE's failure to perform as originally prescribed in the standard disposal contract.
13 "Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982 and Amendments," U.S. Department of Energy's Office of Civilian Radioactive Management, 1982.
TLG Services, Inc.
Indian Point Energy Center, Unit 3 Document Ell-1583-006 PreliminaryDecommissioningCost Analysis Page 9 of 40 It is expected that, based upon industry experience, the lawsuit will be eventually settled in exchange for payments. The payments would cover those costs incurred for managing and storing the spent fuel that the owner would not have incurred but for DOE's delay in performance.
Until a settlement is reached, certain assumptions are needed to assess the financial impact on the identified decommissioning cost scenario.
It is generally necessary that spent fuel be actively cooled and stored for a minimum period at the generating site prior to transfer. The NRC requires that licensees establish a program to manage and provide funding for the management of all irradiated fuel at the reactor site until title of the fuel is transferred to the Secretary of Energy, pursuant to 10 CFR Part 50.54(bb).[ 14] This funding requirement is fulfilled through inclusion of certain cost elements in the decommissioning estimate, for example, costs associated with the isolation and continued operation of the spent fuel pool and ISFSI.
At shutdown, the spent fuel pool is expected to contain freshly discharged assemblies (from the most recent refueling cycles) as well as the final reactor core. Over the following eight years, the assemblies are transferred to the IP-2 pool where they are packaged into multipurpose canisters for transfer to the ISFSI for interim storage. It is assumed that this period provides the necessary cooling for the transfer canister and for the final core to meet the design requirements for decay heat for the dry storage systems.
DOE's contracts with utilities generally order the acceptance of spent fuel from utilities based upon the oldest fuel receiving the highest priority. For purposes of this analysis, acceptance of commercial spent fuel by the DOE was expected to begin in 2020. The first IP-3 spent fuel assemblies were assumed to be removed from the site in 2023. With an estimated rate of transfer of 3,000 metric tons of uranium (MTU)/year for the commercial industry (based on DOE's latest Acceptance Priority Ranking and Annual Capacity Report, dated June 2004, DOE/RW-0567), completion of the removal of all fuel from the site was projected to be in the year 2047, assuming shutdown of IP-3 in 2015 (and a transfer of approximately 30 additional MTUs in 2047 should IP-3 requiring refueling in 2015 prior to the cessation of operations). Entergy Nuclear's analysis assumes, for purposes only of this report, that Entergy Nuclear does not employ DOE 14 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.
Indian Point Energy Center, Unit 3 Document Eli-1583-006 Preliminary Decommissioning Cost Analysis Page 10 of 40 spent fuel disposal contract allowances for up to 20% additional fuel designation for shipment to DOE each year.
Entergy Nuclear's position is that the DOE has a contractual obligation to accept IPEC fuel earlier than the projections set out above. No assumption made in the study should be interpreted to be inconsistent with this claim.
However, at this time, including the cost of storing spent fuel in this study is the most reasonable approach because it insures the availability of sufficient decommissioning funds at the end of the station's life if, contrary to its contractual obligation, the DOE has not performed earlier.
ISFSI An ISFSI, which is operated under a general (10 CFR Part 50) license, has, been constructed to support site operations. With a capacity of 75 casks, however, the current facility will not be able to accommodate all of the spent fuel from the IP-3 pool. The estimate assumes, therefore, that a second ISFSI will be constructed at the site to support the decommissioning of IP-3. Once the IP-3 pool is emptied, the spent fuel storage and handling facilities are available for decommissioning or readied for long-term storage.
Operation and maintenance costs for the ISFSIs are included within the estimate and address the costs for staffing the facility, as well as security, insurance, and licensing fees.
Article IV.B of Entergy's contract with the DOE for spent fuel disposal requires the DOE to bring a cask "suitable for use at the [IP-3] site." To date, the DOE has failed to provide casks, or even to identify what casks suitable to IP-3 it will provide. In the absence of identifiable DOE transport cask requirements, the design and capacity of the ISFSI is based upon a commercial dry cask storage system. While Entergy's contract with the DOE requires DOE to provide transport canisters to Entergy, for present purposes, this estimate includes this cost.
Storage Canister Design For purposes of this estimate only, and in the absence of DOE cask specifications, the design and capacity of the ISFSI is based upon the Holtec HI-STORM dry cask storage system. The Holtec multi-purpose canister or MPC has a capacity of 32 fuel assemblies.
TLG Services, Inc.
IndianPoint Energy Center, Unit 3 Document El1-1583-006 PreliminaryDecommissioning Cost Analysis Page 11 of 40 Canister Loading and Transfer The estimate includes the costs to transfer the fuel from the IP-3 pool to the IP-2 pool and to purchase, load, and transfer the multi-purpose spent fuel storage canisters (MPCs) from the IP-2 pool to the ISFSIs for interim storage. The estimate also includes costs for the transfer of the fuel at the ISFSIs to the DOE.
Operations and Maintenance The estimate includes costs for the operation of the spent fuel pool until it is emptied and the operation of the ISFSIs until the spent fuel is transferred to the DOE.
The ISFSI operating duration is based upon the previously stated assumptions on fuel transfer schedule expectations.
ISFSI Design Considerations A multi-purpose (storage and transport) dry shielded storage canister with a vertical, reinforced concrete storage overpack is used as a basis for the cost analyses. The overpacks are assumed to have some level of neutron-induced activation as a result of the long-term storage of the fuel, i.e., to levels exceeding free-release limits. The cost of the disposition of this material, as well as the demolition of the ISFSIs facility, is included in the estimate.
GTCC Dismantling of the reactor internals 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)[151).
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, if any, for disposing of GTCC or a 15 U.S. Code of Federal Regulations, Title 10, Part 61, "Licensing Requirements for Land Disposal of Radioactive Waste."
TLG Services, Inc.
Indian Point Energy Center, Unit 3 Document Ell-1583-006 PreliminaryDecommissioning Cost Analysis Page 12 of 40 schedule for acceptance. As such, the estimate to decommission IP-3 includes an allowance for the disposition of GTCC material.
For purposes of this study, GTCC is packaged in the same canisters used for spent fuel. The GTCC material is assumed to be shipped directly to a DOE facility as it is generated (since the fuel has been removed from the site prior to the start of decommissioning and the ISFSI deactivated).
Disposal costs are estimated based upon the fee for spent fuel.
1.7.2 Reactor Vessel and Internal Components The reactor pressure vessel and internal components are segmented for disposal in shielded, reusable transportation casks. Segmentation is performed in the refueling canal, where a turntable and remote cutter are installed. The vessel is segmented in place, using a mast-mounted cutter supported off the lower head and directed from a shielded work platform installed overhead in the reactor cavity. Transportation cask specifications and transportation regulations dictate the segmentation and packaging methodology.
Intact disposal of reactor vessel shells has been successfully demonstrated at several of the sites that have been decommissioned.
Access to navigable waterways has allowed these large packages to be transported, in most instances, to the Barnwell disposal site in South Carolina with minimal overland travel.
Intact disposal of the reactor vessel and internal components can provide additional savings in cost and worker exposure by eliminating the complex segmentation requirements, isolation of the GTCC material, and transport/storage of the resulting waste packages. Portland General Electric (PGE) was able to dispose of the Trojan reactor as an intact package (including the internals). However, its location on the Columbia River simplified the transportation analysis since:
the reactor package could be secured to the transport vehicle for the entire journey, i.e., the package was not lifted during transport, there were no man-made or natural terrain features between the plant site and the disposal location that could produce a large drop, and transport speeds were very low, limited by the overland transport vehicle and the river barge.
TLG Services, Inc.
Indian PointEnergy Center, Unit 3 Document E1l-1583-006 PreliminaryDecommissioning Cost Analysis Page 13 of 40 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 intact disposal (of the vessel shell or the complete vessel and internals) will be available when the IP-3 plant ceases operation. Future viability of this option will depend upon the ultimate location of the disposal site, as well as the disposal site licensee's ability to accept highly radioactive packages and effectively isolate them from the environment. Consequently, this study assumes that the reactor vessel will require segmentation, as a bounding condition.
1.7.3 Primary System Components The current scenario defers decommissioning for approximately 50 years. The delay will result in lower working area dose rate (from natural decay of the radionuclides produced from plant operations). As such, decontamination of the reactor coolant system components and associated reactor water cleanup systems is not anticipated to be necessary and no allowance is included for this activity within the estimate.
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) drops below the nozzle zone. The piping is boxed and shipped by shielded van. The reactor coolant pumps and motors are lifted out intact, packaged, and transported for processing or disposal.
The following discussion deals with the removal and disposition of the steam generators, but the techniques involved are also applicable to other large radioactively-contaminated components, such as heat exchangers and the pressurizer. The steam generators' size and weight, their location within the reactor building, as well as the disposal facility waste acceptance criteria, and access to transportation will ultimately determine the removal, transportation, and disposal strategy.
A crane is set up for the removal of the generators. It can also be used to move portions of the steam generator cubicle walls and floor slabs from the reactor building to a location where they can be decontaminated and transported to the material handling area. Interferences within the TLG Services, Inc.
Indian PointEnergy Center, Unit 3 Document E1l-1583-006 Preliminary Decommissioning Cost Analysis Page 14 of 40 work area, such as grating, piping, and other components are removed to create sufficient lay-down 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 down-ending cradle. 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 preparation area.
Disposal costs are based upon the displaced volume and weight of the primary side portions of the steam generators. Each component is then loaded onto a barge for transport to a rail head and the disposal facility.
The secondary side is assumed to be sent to an off-site waste processor.
1.7.4 Retired Components The estimate includes the cost to dispose of the retired steam generators currently stored on site. Transportation and disposal will occur following the removal of the installed steam generators.
1.7.5 Main Turbine and Condenser The main turbine is dismantled using conventional maintenance procedures. The turbine rotors and shafts are removed to a laydown area. The lower turbine casings are removed from their anchors by controlled demolition. The main condensers are also disassembled and moved to a laydown area. Material is then prepared for transportation to an off-site recycling facility where it will be surveyed and designated for either decontamination or volume reduction, conventional disposal, or controlled disposal. Components are packaged and readied for transport in accordance with the intended disposition.
1.7.6 Transportation Methods Contaminated piping, components, and structural material other than the highly-activated reactor vessel and internal components will qualify as LSA-I, II or III or Surface Contaminated Object, SCO-I or II, as described in Title 49 of the Code of Federal Regulations.[161 The 16 U.S. Department of Transportation, Section 49 of the Code of Federal Regulations, "Transportation," Parts 173 through 178, 2010.
TLG Services, Inc.
Indian Point Energy Center, Unit 3 Document Ell-1583-006 PreliminaryDecommissioning Cost Analysis Page 15 of 40 contaminated material will be packaged in Industrial Packages (IP- 1, IP-2, or IP-3, as defined in 49 CFR 173.411) for transport unless demonstrated to qualify as their own shipping containers. The reactor vessel and internal components are expected to be transported in accordance with 10 CFR Part 71, as Type B. It is conceivable that the reactor, due to its limited specific activity, could qualify as LSA II or III.
However, the high radiation levels on the outer surface would require that additional shielding be incorporated within the packaging so as to attenuate the dose to levels acceptable for transport.
Any fuel cladding failure that occurred during the lifetime of the plant is assumed to have released fission products at sufficiently low levels that the buildup of long-lived isotopes (e.g., 137 Cs, 90Sr, or transuranics) has not reached levels exceeding those that permit the major reactor components to be shipped under current transport regulations requirements.
Transport of the highly activated metal, produced in the segmentation of the reactor vessel and internal components, is 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 shipment assumed permissible per is 4
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.
Considering the location of IPEC (see map) and the potential for restricted road use, it is assumed that transportation of materials requiring controlled disposal will utilize the Hudson River via barge shipment to the nearest transfer point for rail or trucking to the Energy-Solutions' facility in Clive, Utah. However, for estimating purposes, costs to transport the majority of the low-level radioactive waste (excluding large components) were based upon truck transport costs developed from published tariffs from Tri-State Motor Transit.[1 71 Memphis (TN) was 17 Tri-State Motor Transit Company, published tariffs, Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC),
TLG Services, Inc.
Indian Point Energy Center, Unit 3 Document El1-1583-006 PreliminaryDecommissioningCost Analysis Page 16 of 40 used as the destination for off-site processing of potentially recoverable material or conditioning of waste for controlled disposal.
1.7.7 Low-Level Radioactive Waste Conditioning and Disposal The contaminated and activated material generated in the decontamination and dismantling of a commercial nuclear reactor is classified as low-level (radioactive) waste, although not all of the material is suitable for "shallow-land" disposal. With the passage of the "Low-Level Radioactive Waste Policy Act" in 1980,[18I the states became ultimately responsible for the disposition of low-level radioactive waste generated within their own borders.
The federal law encouraged the formation of regional groups or compacts to implement this objective safely, efficiently, and economically, and set a target date of 1986 for implementation. After little progress, the "Low-Level Radioactive Waste Policy Amendments Act of 1985,[191 extended the implementation schedule, with specific milestones and stiff sanctions for non-compliance. Subsequent court rulings have substantially diluted those sanctions and, to date, with the exception of Texas (which has issued a license for a new facility), no new compact facilities have been successfully sited, licensed, and constructed.
In the past, there were two facilities available to Entergy for the disposal of low-level radioactive waste generated by IP-3. 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 currently available destination for low-level radioactive waste requiring controlled disposal, until the construction of Waste Control Specialist's facility in Andrews County, Texas, is complete.
For the purpose of this analysis, the EnergySolutions' facility is used as the basis for estimating the disposal cost for the majority of the radioactive waste (Class A[20]). The costs reported for direct disposal (burial) in the estimate are based upon Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc.
Docket No. MC-427719 Rules Tariff, March 2004, Radioactive Materials Tariff, March 2010.
18 "Low Level Radioactive Waste Policy Act of 1980," Public Law 96-573, 1980.
19 "Low-Level Radioactive Waste Policy Amendments Act of 1985," Public Law 99-240, January 15, 1986.
20 U.S. Code of Federal Regulations, Title 10, Part 61, "Licensing Requirements for Land Disposal of Radioactive Waste."
TLG Services, Inc.
Indian Point Energy Center, Unit 3 Document El1-1583-006 PreliminaryDecommissioning Cost Analysis Page 17 of 40 current Life of Plant Disposal Agreement with EnergySolutions.[ 2 1] This facility was used as the destination for the majority of the waste volume generated by decommissioning (99.85%). EnergySolutions does not have a license to dispose of the more highly radioactive waste (Class B and C) generated in the dismantling of the reactor. As such, disposal costs for this material (representing approximately 0.13% of the waste volume) is based upon the last published rate schedule for non-compact waste for the Barnwell facility, adjusted for escalation of the Atlantic Compact rates (as a proxy).
Material exceeding Class C limits (limited to material closest to the reactor core and comprising approximately 0.02% 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.
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 radioactive waste, compaction, incineration or metal melt. The estimate reflects the savings from waste recovery/volume reduction. Costs for waste processing/reduction were also based upon existing agreements.
Disposition of the low-level radioactive waste generated from decommissioning operations (and cost basis) is summarized in Table 2.
1.7.8 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 final status survey and associated documentation demonstrate that the facility is suitable for release. The NRC's involvement in the decommissioning process ends at this point.
21 General Services Agreement 10160239 between Entergy Nuclear Operations and EnergySolutions, June 2007.
TLG Services, Inc.
Indian PointEnergy Center, Unit 3 Document El1-1583-006 PreliminaryDecommissioning Cost Analysis Page 18 of 40 However, this cost estimate includes certain costs for site restoration beyond that necessary for NRC license termination.
Only existing site structures are considered in the dismantling cost. The current analysis includes all structures as defined in the site plot plan.[221 The electrical switchyard remains after Indian Point is decommissioned in support of the regional transmission and distribution system. The Generation Support Building and IPEC Training Center remain in place for future use. Clean non-contaminated structures are removed to a nominal depth of three feet below grade. The voids are backfilled with clean debris and capped with soil. The site is then re-graded to conform to the adjacent landscape. Vegetation is established to inhibit erosion. These "non-radiological costs" are included in the total cost of decommissioning.
Site utility and service piping are abandoned in place. Electrical manholes are backfilled with suitable earthen material. Asphalt surfaces in the immediate vicinity of site buildings are broken up and the material used for fill, as required. The site access road remains in place.
1.7.9 Site Contamination As indicated by the IPEC Groundwater Investigation Project,[23] it is likely that radionuclides in the soil has contaminated portions of the subsurface power block structures. As such, sub-grade surfaces of the following IP-3 structures are designated for removal:
Discharge Canal o Fuel Storage Building, and Reactor Containment Primary Auxiliary Building (approximately 50%).
All other structures or buildings expect to be impacted in the decontamination process are removed to a nominal depth of three feet below grade.
Site remediation costs include the removal and disposition of approximately 2.4 million cubic feet of potentially contaminated soil on the IP-3 site. This volume includes soil contaminated by IP-1 located 22 Entergy Nuclear Northeast "Buildings and Structures Identification Plan" ER-04-2-012, Rev. 01.
23 "Hydrogeologic Site Investigation Report," GZA GeoEnvironmental, Inc., January 2008.
TLG Services, Inc.
Indian Point Energy Center, Unit 3 Document El1-1583-006 PreliminaryDecommissioning Cost Analysis Page 19 of 40 within the boundaries of the IP-3 site. The areas are identified on Figure 1; the assumed volumes and costs are identified in Table 1.
1.8 ASSUMPTIONS The following assumptions were made in the development of the estimate for decommissioning IP-3.
1.8.1 Estimating Basis Decommissioning costs are reported in the year of projected expenditure; however, the values are provided in 2010 dollars. Costs are not inflated, escalated, or discounted over the periods of performance.
The estimates rely upon the physical plant inventory that was the basis for the 2007 site decommissioning analysis.
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.
1.8.2 Release Criteria This estimate assumes that the site will be remediated to the levels specified in 10 CFR 20.1402, "Radiological criteria for unrestricted use,"
although the remediation measures included in this estimate are believed to be sufficient to result in substantially lower levels than required by the foregoing regulation.
TLG Services, Inc.
Indian Point Energy Center, Unit 2 Document E1-1583-006 PreliminaryDecommissioning Cost Analysis Page20 of 40 Figure 1 Potential Power Block Soil Remediation Areas TLG Services, Inc.
Indian Point Energy Center, Unit 3 Document E1l-1583-006 PreliminaryDecommissioningCost Analysis Page21 of 40 Table 1 Contaminated Soil Disposition Estimates Activity Volume Cost Index Area (cubic feet) (million, $2010) 4b.2.3 Septic Soils Storage Area Remediation 81,000 $4.361 4b.2.5 Outfall Remediation 183,240 $9.897 4b.2.6 Main Transformer Yard Remediation 22,800 $1.264 Subtotal 287,040 $15.522 5b.2.3 Unit 1 Legacy Soil Remediation 1 D 925,394 E 752,000 F 115,000 G 110,000 H 105,000 I - Storm Drains 90,000 Reactor Building (footprint) 38,000 Subtotal 2,135,394 $116.730 TOTAL 2,422,434 $132.252 Note 1: Refer to Figure 1 for the location of these areas TLG Services, Inc.
Indian Point Energy Center, Unit 3 Document El1-1583-006 PreliminaryDecommissioningCost Analysis Page22 of 40 1.8.3 Labor Costs Entergy will manage the decontamination and dismantling of the nuclear unit in addition to maintaining site security, radiological health and safety, quality assurance and overall site administration during the decommissioning. Entergy will provide the supervisory staff needed to oversee the labor subcontractors, consultants, and specialty contractors engaged to perform the field work associated with the decontamination and dismantling efforts.
Personnel costs are based upon average salary information made available by Entergy. Overhead costs are included for site and corporate support; they were reduced commensurate with the staffing levels envisioned for the project.
Severance and retention costs are not included in the estimates.
Reduction in the operating organization is assumed to be handled through normal staffing processes (e.g., reassignment and outplacement).
The craft labor required to decontaminate and dismantle the nuclear unit is acquired through standard site contracting practices. The current cost of site labor is used as an estimating basis.
Security, while reduced from operating levels, is maintained throughout the decommissioning for access control, material control, and to safeguard the spent fuel.
1.8.4 Design Conditions Activation levels in the vessel and internal components are modeled using NUREG/CR-3474.[ 2 41 Estimates are derived from the curie/gram values contained therein and adjusted for the different mass of the IP-3 components, projected operating life, and different period of decay.
Additional short-lived isotopes were derived from NUREG/CR-0130[251 24 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.
25 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.
TLG Services, Inc.
Indian Point Energy Center, Unit 3 Document El1-1583-006 PreliminaryDecommissioning Cost Analysis Page 23 of 40 and NUREG/CR-0672,[ 261 and benchmarked to the long-lived values from NUREG/CR-3474.
The control elements are disposed of along with the spent fuel (i.e., there is no additional cost provided for their disposal). Disposition of any control elements stored in the pools from operations, or any other legacy waste, is considered an operating expense and therefore not accounted for in the decommissioning estimates.
Activation of the reactor building structures was assumed to be confined to the biological shield.
1.8.5 General Transition Activities Existing warehouses are cleared of non-essential material and remain for use by IPEC and its subcontractors. The plant's operating staff performs the following activities at no additional cost or credit to the project during the transition period.
- Drain and collect fuel oils, lubricating oils, and transformer oils for recycle and/or sale.
- Drain and collect acids, caustics, and other chemical stores for recycle and/or sale.
Process operating Waste inventories. Disposal of operating wastes during this initial period is not considered a decommissioning expense; however, the estimate does include the disposition of the retired steam generators currently in storage.
Scrap and Salvage The existing plant equipment is considered obsolete and suitable for scrap as deadweight quantities only. Entergy will make economically reasonable efforts to salvage equipment following final plant shutdown.
However, dismantling techniques assumed by TLG for equipment in this analysis are not consistent with removal techniques required for salvage (resale) of equipment. Experience has indicated that buyers prefer equipment stripped down to very specific requirements before they 26 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.
TLG Services, Inc.
Indian Point Energy Center, Unit 3 Document El1-1583-006 Preliminary Decommissioning Cost Analysis Page 24 of 40 would consider purchase. This can require expensive rework after the equipment had been removed from its installed location. Since placing salvage value on this machinery and equipment would be speculative, and the value would be small in comparison to the overall cost of decommissioning, this analysis does not attempt to quantify the value that an owner may realize based upon those efforts.
It is assumed, for purposes of this analysis, that any value received from the sale of scrap generated in the dismantling process would be more than offset by the on-site processing costs. The dismantling techniques assumed in the decommissioning estimates do not include the additional cost for size reduction and preparation to meet "furnace ready" conditions. With a volatile market, the potential profit margin in scrap recovery is highly speculative, regardless of the ability to free release this material.
Furniture, tools, mobile equipment such as forklifts, trucks, bulldozers, and other property is removed at no cost or credit to the decommissioning project. Disposition may include relocation to other facilities. Spare parts are made available for alternative use.
Spent Fuel Pool Isolation The decommissioning cost estimate for IP-3 assumes that the spent fuel handling building will be used for the interim storage of spent fuel once plant operations cease until the fuel can be transferred to the ISFSI (via IP-2). Therefore, so that the adjacent power block structures can be de-energized and configured for long-term storage, the spent fuel handling building, and in particular the spent fuel storage area, will be isolated, creating a spent fuel island. This process can involve: establishing a local operator control area, installing in-situ pool cooling and water cleanup systems, establishing and routing independent power and control systems, redesigning the heating and ventilation systems, reconfiguring the area monitoring systems and relocating the security boundary. Costs for these activities are based upon experience at plants that have undergone decommissioning and, in the process, isolated their spent fuel pool operations.
TLG Services, Inc.
Indian Point Energy Center, Unit 3 Document Eli-1583-006 PreliminaryDecommissioning Cost Analysis Page 25 of 40 Energy For estimating purposes, the plant is assumed to be de-energized, with the exception of those facilities associated with spent fuel storage (temporary power is run throughout the plant, as needed). Replacement power costs are used to calculate the cost of energy consumed during decommissioning for tooling, lighting, ventilation, and essential services.
Insurance Costs for continuing coverage (nuclear liability and property insurance) following cessation of plant operations and during decommissioning are included and based upon current operating premiums. Reductions in premiums, throughout the decommissioning process, are consistent with the guidance and the limits for coverage defined in the NRC's proposed rulemaking "Financial Protection Requirements for Permanently Shutdown Nuclear Power Reactors."[ 271 The NRC's financial protection requirements are based on various reactor (and spent fuel) configurations.
Property Tax Property taxes or fees in lieu of taxes are not included within the estimate.
Emergency Planning Fees Emergency planning costs are estimated from FEMA, state, and local fees, as provided in the IPEC budget accounts. Maintenance and service costs are included with the annual fees.
Site Modifications The perimeter fence and in-plant security barriers are moved, as appropriate, to conform to the site security plan in force during the various stages of the project.
27 "Financial Protection Requirements for Permanently Shutdown Nuclear Power Reactors," 10 CFR Parts 50 and 140, Federal Register Notice, Vol. 62, No. 210, p. 58690 et seq., October 30, 1997.
TLG Services, Inc.
Indian Point Energy Center, Unit 3 Document El1-1583-006 PreliminaryDecommissioning Cost Analysis Page 26 of 40
- 2. RESULTS The proposed decommissioning scenario, major cost contributors and schedule of annual expenditures are summarized in Figure 2 and in Tables 3 and 4. The summaries are based upon the 2010 detailed cost estimate provided in Appendix A.
The cost elements are assigned to one of three subcategories: NRC License Termination, Spent Fuel Management, and Site Restoration. The subcategory "NRC License Termination" is used to accumulate costs that are consistent with "decommissioning" as defined by the NRC in its financial assurance regulations (i.e., 10 CFR §50.75). The cost reported for this subcategory is generally sufficient to terminate the unit's operating license, recognizing that there may be some additional cost impact from spent fuel management. The costs for license termination are shown in Table 5.
The "Spent Fuel Management" subcategory contains costs associated with post-shutdown spent fuel pool operations, the containerization and transfer of spent fuel to the ISFSIs (via IP-2), and the management of the ISFSIs until such time that the transfer of all fuel from the facilities to an off-site location (e.g., geologic repository) is complete. It does not include any spent fuel management expenses incurred prior to the cessation of plant operations. The costs for spent fuel management are shown in Table 6.
"Site Restoration" is used to capture costs associated with the dismantling and demolition of buildings and facilities demonstrated to be free from contamination.
This includes structures never exposed to radioactive materials, as well as those facilities that have been decontaminated to appropriate levels. Non-contaminated structures are removed to a depth of three feet and backfilled to conform to the local grade. Contaminated foundations are removed to bedrock. The costs for site restoration are shown in Table 7.
It should be noted that the costs assigned to these subcategories are allocations.
Delegation of costs is for the purposes of comparison (e.g., with NRC financial guidelines) or to permit specific financial treatment (e.g., Asset Retirement Obligation determinations). In reality, there can be considerable interaction between the activities in the three subcategories. For example, an owner may decide to remove non-contaminated structures early in the project to improve access to highly contaminated facilities or plant components. In these instances, the non-contaminated removal costs could be reassigned from Site Restoration to an NRC License Termination support activity. However, in general, the allocations represent a reasonable accounting of those costs that can be expected to be incurred for the specific subcomponents of the total estimated program cost, if executed as described.
TLG Services, Inc.
Indian Point Energy Center, Unit 3 Document El1-1583-006 PreliminaryDecommissioning Cost Analysis Page27 of 40 While designated for disposal at the geologic repository along with the spent fuel, GTCC waste is still classified herein as low-level radioactive, waste and, as such, included as a "License Termination" expense.
2.1 Decommissioning Trust Fund The decommissioning liability is currently retained, and the trust fund held, by NYPA. This analysis assumes that NYPA will exercise its option to transfer the liability along with the decommissioning trust fund for IP-3 to Entergy on December 12, 2015, in accordance with the terms of the decommissioning agreement for IP-3 between Entergy and NYPA. The decommissioning trust fund, as reported in NYPA's latest status report, was $486.4 million, as of October 31, 2010.
2.2 Financial Assurance It is the current plan, based on the growth of the funds in the IP-3 decommissioning trust, to fund the expenditures for license termination from the currently existing decommissioning trust fund.
Table 5 identifies the cost projected for license termination (in accordance with 10 CFR 50.75). Table 8 provides the details of the proposed funding plan for decommissioning IP-3 based on a 2% real rate of return on the decommissioning trust fund. As shown in Table 8, the current trust fund (as of October 31, 2010) is sufficient to accomplish the intended tasks and terminate the operating license for IP-3. The analysis also shows a surplus in the fund at the completion of decommissioning. This surplus could be made available to fund other activities at the site (e.g., spent fuel management and/or restoration activities), recognizing that the licensee would need to make the appropriate submittals for an exemption in accordance with 10 CFR 50.12 from the requirements of 10 CFR 50.82(a)(8)(i)(A) in order to use the decommissioning trust funds for non-decommissioning related expenses, as defined by 10 CFR 50.2.
TLG Services, Inc.
Indian Point Energy Center, Unit 3 Document E1l-1583-006 PreliminaryDecommissioning Cost Analysis Page 28 of 40 Figure 2 SAFSTOR Decommissioning Timeline (not to scale)
Shutdown: December 12, 2015 Period 1 Period 4 Period 5 Transition and Period 2 Period 3 Decommissioning Site Preparations Safe-Storage Preparations Operations Remediation 1 1 /
12/2015 06/2017 12/2047 10/2066 09/2069 04/2065 09/2073 ISFSI Construction Canister and overpack fabrication License Terminated Fuel to ISFSI 12/2023 Storage Pool Empty ISFSI Operations All Spent Fuel Off Site TLG Services, Inc.
Indian Point Energy Center, Unit 3 Document E1l-1583-006 Page 29 of PreliminaryDecommissioning Cost Analysis 40 Table 2 Low-Level Radioactive Waste Disposition Waste Volume Mass Waste Cost Basis Class [M1 (cubic feet) (pounds)
Low-Level Radioactive Waste (near-surface disposal) EnergySolutions A 2,845,622 224,900,261 Barnwell B 3,330 352,433 Barnwell C 480 47,068 Greater than Class C Spent Fuel (geologic repository) Equivalent GTCC 496 104,146 Processed/Conditioned Recycling (off-site recycling center) Vendors A 379,943 14,982,260 Total [2] 3,229,870 240,386,168
[1] Waste is classified according to the requirements as delineated in Title 10 CFR, Part 61.55
[21 Columns may not add due to rounding.
TLG Services, Inc.
Indian PointEnergy Center, Unit 3 Document E1l-1583-006 PreliminaryDecommissioning Cost Analysis Page 30 of 40 Table 3 Summary of Major Cost Contributors (thousands, 2010 dollars)
License Spent Fuel Site Termination Management Restoration Total Decontamination 15,315 - - .15,315 Removal 126,758 1,960 37,996 166,715 Packaging 24,991 10 - 25,001 Transportation 61,929 46 - 61,975 Waste Disposal 151,520 59 - 151,579 Off-site Waste Processing 36,095 - 36,095 Program Management R] 224,824 44,029 38,063 306,915 Corporate A&G 28,428 - - 28,428 Site O&M 20,770 1,104 - 21,874 Spent Fuel Management [21 - 176,008 - 176,008 Spent Fuel Pool Isolation 7,652 - - 7,652 Insurance and Regulatory Fees 48,689 761 - 49,450 Energy 34,060 2,291 1,401 37,752 Radiological Surveys 19,778 - - 19,778 Property Taxes _ _ _ _
Miscellaneous Equipment 16,542 - 5 16,547 Environmental Monitoring 19,096 1,687 - 20,782 Total 836,445 227,954 77,465 1,141,864
[1] Includes security and engineering
[21 Includes capital costs for the construction of a second ISFSI, multi-purpose dry storage containers and storage overpacks, packaging and handling (transfer from IP-3 pool to IP-2 pool and then to ISFSI, ISFSI to DOE transfer)
TLG Services, Inc.
Indian Point Energy Center, Unit 3 Document Ell1-1583-006 Preliminary Decommissioning Cost Analysis Page 31 of 40 Table 4 Schedule of Annual Expenditures Total Decommnissioning Cost (thousands, 2010 dollars)
Equip & Yearly Year Labor Materials Energy Burial Other Totals 2015 2,089 1,052 192 16 591 3,940 2016 38,742 19,123 3,505 371 10,928 72,669 2017 22,928 11,300 1,948 818 15,872 52,866 2018 9,007 10,359 699 23 4,438 24,526 2019 9,007 10,359 699 23 4,438 24,526 2020 9,031 10,387 701 23 4,450 24,593 2021 9,007 10,359 699 23 4,438 24,526 2022 9,007 10,359 699 23 4,438 24,526 2023 8,988 10,332 698 23 4,433 24,474 2024 2,152 494 351 22 2,796 5,815 2025 2,146 493 350 22 2,788 5,799 2026 2,146 493 350 22 2,788 5,799 2027 2,146 493 350 .22 2,788 5,799 2028 2,152 494 351 22 2,796 5,815 2029 2,146 493 350 22 2,788 5,799 2030 2,146 493 350 22 2,788 5,799 2031 2,146 493 350 22 2,788 5,799 2032 2,152 494 351 22 2,796 5,815 2033 2,146 493 350 22 2,788 5,799 2034 2,146 493 350 22 2,788 5,799 2035 2,146 493 350 22 2,788 5,799 2036 2,152 494 351 22 2,796 5,815 2037 2,146 493 350 22 2,788 5,799 2038 2,146 493 350 22 2,788 5,799 2039 2,146 493 350 22 2,788 5,799 2040 2,152 494 351 22 2,796 5,815 2041 2,146 493 350 22 2,788 5,799 2042 2,146 493 350 22 2,788 5,799 2043 2,146 493 350 22 2,788 5,799 2044 2,152 494 351 221 2,796 5,815_
2045 2,146 493 3501 22 1 2,788 5,.799 2046 2,146 493 3501 22 1 2,7881 5,799 TLG Services, Inc.
Indian Point Energy Center, Unit 3 Document E1l-1583-006 PreliminaryDecommissioning Cost Analysis' Page 32 of 40 Table 4 (continued)
Schedule of Annual Expenditures Total Decommissioning Cost (thousands, 2010 dollars)
Equip & Yearly Year Labor Materials Energy Burial Other Totals 2047 2,112 484 350 22 2,723 5,690 2048 1,408 291 351 22 1,388 3,460 2049 1,404 291 350 22 1,384 3,450 2050 1,404 291 350 22 1,384 3,450 2051 1,404 291 350 22 1,384 3,450 2052 1,408 291 351 22 1,388 3,460 2053 1,404 291 350 22 1,384 3,450 2054 1,404 291 350 22 .1,384 3,450 2055 1,404 291 350 22 1,384 3,450 2056 1,408 291 351 22 1,388 3,460 2057 1,404 291 350 22 1,384 3,450 2058 1,404 291 350 22 1,384 3,450 2059 1,404 291 350 22 1,384 3,450 2060 1,408 291 351 22 1,388 3,460 2061 1,404 291 350 22 1,384 3,450 2062 1,404 291 350 22 1,384 3,450 2063 1,404 291 350 22 1,384 3,450 2064 1,408 291 351 22 1,388 3,460 2065 15,763 1,321 2,513 26 3,970 23,594 2066 37,382 13,241 3,464 13,608 16,993 84,687 2067 78,603 37,003 3,091 59,258 32,126 210,080 2068 54,425 15,472 2,587 26,361 18,608 117,452 2069 24,172 2,759 605 4,943 11,386 43,866 2070 13,227 6,616 350 18,341 11,647 50,182 2071 13,227 6,616 350 18,341 11,647 50,182 2072 13,264 6,634 351 18,391 11,679 50,319 2073 9,748 4,876 258 13,517 8,584 36,983 Total 453,027 204,946 37,752 175,028 271,111 1,141,864 TLG Services, Inc.
Indian Point Energy Center, Unit 3 Document Ell-1583-006 Preliminary Decommissioning Cost Analysis Page 33 of 40 Table 5 Schedule of Annual Expenditures License Termination Allocation (thousands, 2010 dollars)
Equip & Yearly Year Labor Materials Energy Burial Other Totals 2015 1,762 71 192 16 450 2,490 2016 33,016 1,944 3,505 371 8,355 47,191 2017 18,077 3,804 1,755 818 13,036 37,490 2018 1,404 306 350 23 1,384 3,466 2019 1,404 306 350 23 1,384 3,466 2020 1,408 306 351 23 1,388 3,476 2021 1,404 298 350 22 1,384 3,458 2022 1,404 291 350 22 1343,450 2023 1,404 291 350 22 1,384 3,450 2024 1,408 291 351 22 1,388 3,460 2025 1,404 291 350 22 1,384 3,450 2026 1,404 291 350 22 1,384 3,450 2027 1,404 291 350 22 1,384 3,450 2028 1,408 291 351 22 1,388 3,460 2029 1,404 291 350 22 1,384 3,450 2030 1,404 291 350 22 1,384 3,450 2031 1,404 291 350 22 1,384 3,450 2032 1,408 291 351 22 1,388 3,460 2033 1,404 291 350 22 1,384 3,450 2034 1,404 .291 350 22 1,384 3,450 2035 1,404 291 350 22 1,384 3,450 2036 1,408 291 351 22 1,388 3,460 2037 1,404 291 350 22 1,384 3,450 2038 1,404 291 350 22 1,384 3,450 2039 1,404 291 350 22 1,384 3,450 2040 1,408 291 351 22 1,388 3,460 2041 1,404 291 350 22 1,384 3,450 2042 1,404 291 350 22 1,384 3,450 2043 1,404 291 350 22 1,384, 3,450 2044 1,408 291 351 22 1,388 3,460 2045 1,404 291 3501 221 1,384 3,450 2046 1,404 291 3501 221 1,384 3,450 TLG Services, Inc.
Indian Point Energy Center, Unit 3 Document Ell-1583-006 Preliminary Decommissioning Cost Analysis IPage 34 of 40 Table 5 (continued)
Schedule of Annual Expenditures License Termination Allocation (thousands, 2010 dollars)
Equip & Yearly Year Labor Materials Energy Burial Other Totals 2047 1,404 291 350 22 1,384 3,450 2048 1,408 291 351 22 1,388 3,460 2049 1,404 291 350 22 1,384 3,450 2050 1,404 291 350 22 1,384 3,450 2051 1,404 291 350 22 1,384 3,450 2052 1,408 291 351 22 1,388 3,460 2053 1,404 291 350 22 1,384 3,450 2054 1,404 291 350 22 1,384 3,450 2055 1,404 291 350 22 1,384 3,450 2056 1,408 291 351 22 1,388 3,460 2057 1,404 291 350 22 1,384 3,450 2058 1,404 291 350 22 1,384 3,450 2059 1,404 .291 350 22 1,384 3,450 2060 1,408 291 351 22 1,388 3,460 2061 1,404 291 350 22 1,384 3,450 2062 1,404 291 350 22 1,384 3,450 2063 1,404 291 350 22 1,384 3,450 2064 1,408 291 351 22 1,388 3,460 2065 15,588 1,321 2,513 26 3,970 23,419 2066 36,188 13,214 3,464 13,608 16,993 83,467 2067 75,635 36,877 3,091 59,243 31,892 206,738 2068. 51,871 15,391 2,587 26,317 17,911 114,077 2069 20,936 1,245 511 4,943 11,384 39,020 2070 1,177 977 0 18,341 11,640 32,134 2071 1,177 977 0 18,341 11,640 32,134 2072 1,180 979 0 18,391 11,672 32,222 2073 867 7201 01 13,517 8,578 23,682 Total 323,529 91,2771 34,0601 174,9691 212,611 83,4 TLG Services, Inc.
Indian Point Energy Center, Unit 3 Document Ell-1583-006 Preliminary Decommissioning Cost Analysis Page 35 of 40 Table 6 Schedule of Annual Expenditures Spent Fuel Management Allocation (thousands, 2010 dollars)
Equip & Yearly Year Labor Materials Energy Burial Other Totals 2015 327 981 0 0 141 1,449 2016 5,726 17,179 0 0 2,572 25,477 2017 4,851 7,496 193 0 2,836 15,376 2018 7,0 10,053 350 0 3,054 21,059 2019 7,602 10,053 350 0 3,054 21,059 2020 7,623 10,081 351 0 3,062 21,117 2021 7,602 10,053 350 0 3,054 21,059 2022 7,602 10,053 350 0 3,054 21,059 2023 7,584 10,027 349 0 3,049. 21,008 2024 744 203 0 0 1,408 2,355 2025 742 203 0 0 1,404 2,349 2026 742 203 0 0 1,404 2,349 2027 742 203 0 0 1,404 2,349 2028 744 203 0 0 1,408 2,355 2029 742 203 0 0 1,404 2,349 2030 742 203 0 0 1,404 2,349 2031 742 203 0 0 1,404 2,349 2032 744 203 0 0 1,408 2,355 2033 742 203 0 0 1,404 2,349 2034 742 203 0 0 1,404 2,349 2035 742 203 0 0 1,404 2,349 2036 744 203 0 0 1,408 2,355 2037 742 203 0 0 1,404 2,349 2038 742 203 0 0 1,404 2,349 2039 742 203 0 0 1,404 2,349 2040 744 203 0 0 1,408 2,355 2041 742 203 0 0 1,404 2,349 2042 742 203 0 0 1,404 2,349 2043 742 203 0 0 1,404 2,349 2044 744 203 0 0 1,408 2,355 2045742 03 0 1404 ,34 20461 742 203 0 0, 1,404 2,3497 TLG Services, Inc.
Indian Point Energy Center, Unit 3 Document Ell-1583-006 Preliminary Decommissioning Cost Analysis Page 36 of 40 Table 6 (continued)
Schedule of Annual Expenditures Spent Fuel Management Allocation (thousands, 2010 dollars)
Equip & Yearly Year Labor Materials Enrg Burial Other Totals 2047 707 193 0 0 1,339 2,240 2048 0 0 0 0 0 0 2049 0 0 0 0 0 0 2050 0 0 0 0 0 0 2051 0 0 0 0 0 0 2052 0 0 0 0 0 0 2053 .0 0 0 .0 0 0 2054 0 0 0 0 0 0 2055 0 0 0 0 0 0 2056 0 0 0 0 0 0 2057 0 0 0 0 0 0 2058 0 0 0 0 0 0 2059 0 0 0 0 0 0 2060 0 0 0 0 0 0 2061 0 0 0 0 0 0 2062 0 0 0 0 0 0 2063 0 0 0 0 0 0 2064 0 0 0 0 0 0 2065 0 0 0 0 0 0 2066 0 0 0 0 0 0 2067 1 17 0 15 234 267 2068 4 52 0 45 697 797 2069 99 28 0 0 2 129 2070 368 105 0 0 7 480 2071 368 105 0 0 7 480 2072 369 106 0 0 7 481 2073 271 78 01 0. 5 354 Total 75,784 91,324 2,291 59 .58,496 227,954 TLG Services, Inc.
Indian PointEnergy Center, Unit 3 Document El1-1583-006 PreliminaryDecommissioning Cost Analysis Page 37of40 Table 7 Schedule of Annual Expenditures Site Restoration Allocation (thousands, 2010 dollars)
Equip & Yearly Year Labor Materials Energy Burial Other Totals 2015-2064 0 0 0 0 0 0 2065 175 0 0 0 0 175 2066 1,193 27 0 0 0 1,220 2067 2,967 108 0 0 0 3,075 2068 2,550 29 0 0 0 2,579 2069 3,137 1,486 94 0 0 4,717 2070 11,683 5,534 350 0 1 17,568 2071 11,683 5,534 350 0 1 17,568 2072 11,715 5,549 351 0 1 17,616 2073 8,610 4,079 258 0 1 12,948 Total 53,714 22,345 1,401 0 5 77,465 TLG Services, Inc.
Indian Point Energy Center, Unit 3 Document El1-1583-006 PreliminaryDecommissioning Cost Analysis Page 38 of 40 Table 8 Funding Requirements for License Termination 2015 Shutdown, 60-Year SAFSTOR Basis Year 2010 Fund Balance (10/31/2010) $486.380 (millions)
Annual Escalation 0.00%
Annual Earnings 2.00%
A B C Decommissioning License Escalated License Trust Fund Termination Termination Cost Escalated at 2%
Cost Escalated at 0% (minus expenses)
Year (millions) (millions) (millions) 2010 0 0 486.380 2011 0 0 496.108 2012 0 0 506.030 2013 0 0 516.151 2014 0 0 526.474 2015 2.490 2.490 534.513 2016 47.191 47.191 498.012 2017 37.490 37.490 470.482 2018 3.466 3.466 476.425 2019 3.466 3.466 482.487 2020 3.476 3.476 488.661 2021 3.466 3.466 494.968 2022 3.466 3.466 501.401 2023 3.466 3.466 507.963 2024 3.460 3.460 514.662 2025 3.450 3.450 521.505 2026 3.450 3.450 528.485 2027 3.450 3.450 535.604 2028 3.460 3.460 542.856 2029 3.450 3.450 550.263 2030 3.450 3.450 557.818 2031 3.450 3.450 565.524 2032 3.460 3.460 573.375 2033 3.450 3.450 581.392 2034 3.450 3.450 589.569 2035 3.450 3.450 597.910 2036 3.460 3.460 606.408 TLG Services, Inc.
Indian PointEnergy Center, Unit 3 Document El1-1583-006 PreliminaryDecommissioning Cost Analysis Page 39 of 40 Table 8 (continued)
Funding Requirements for License Termination 2015 Shutdown, 60-Year SAFSTOR Basis Year 2010 Fund Balance (10/31/2010) $486.380 (millions)
Annual Escalation 0.00%
Annual Earnings 2.00%
A B C Decommissioning License Escalated License Trust Fund Termination Termination Cost Escalated at 2%
Cost Escalated at 0% (minus expenses)
Year (millions) (millions) (millions) 2037 3.450 3.450 615.086 2038 3.450 3.450 623.937 2039 3.450 3.450 632.965 2040 3.460 3.460 642.164 2041 3.450 3.450 651.557 2042 3.450 3.450 661.138 2043 3.450 3.450 670.910 2044 3.460 3.460 680.868 2045 3.450 3.450 691.035 2046 3.450 3.450 701.405 2047 3.450 3.450 711.983 2048 3.460 3.460 722.763 2049 3.450 3.450 733.768 2050 3.450 3.450 744.993 2051 3.450 3.450 756.442 2052 3.460 3.460 768.111 2053. 3.450 3.450 780.023 2054 3.450 3.450 792.173 2055 3.450 3.450 804.566 2056 3.460 3.460 817.197 2057 3.450 3.450 830.091 2058 3.450 3.450 843.242 2059 3.450 3.450 856.656 2060 3.460 3.460 .870.329 2061 3.450 3.450 884.285 2062 3.450 3.450 898.520 TLG Services, Inc.
Indian PointEnergy Center, Unit 3 Document El1-1583-006 PreliminaryDecommissioning Cost Analysis Page 40 of 40 Table 8 (continued)
Funding Requirements for License Termination 2015 Shutdown, 60-Year SAFSTOR Basis Year 2010 Fund Balance (10/31/2010) $486.380 (millions)
Annual Escalation 0.00%
Annual Earnings 2.00%
A B C Decommissioning License Escalated License Trust Fund Termination Termination Cost Escalated at 2%
Cost Escalated at 0% (minus expenses)
Year (millions) (millions) (millions) 2063 3.450 3.450 913.040 2064 3.460 3.460 927.841 2065 23.419 23.419 922.978 2066 83.467 83.467 857.970 2067 206.738 206.738 668.392 2068 114.077 114.077 567.683 2069 39.020 39.020 540.017 2070 32.134 32.134 518.684 2071 32.134 32.134 496.924 2072 32.222 32.222 474.641 2073 23.682 23.682 460.452 2074 0.000 0.000 469.661 Total 836.445 836.445 Calculations:
Column B = (A)*(l+.00)^(current year - 2010) or for 0%, B = A Column C = (Previous year's fund balance) * (1 + .02) - B (current year's decommissioning expenditures)
TLG Services, Inc.
Indian Point Energy Center, Unit 3 Document El1-1583-006 PreliminaryDecommissioning Cost Analysis Appendix A, Page 1 of 15 APPENDIX A DETAILED COST ANALYSIS TLG Services, Inc.
Indian Point Energy Center, Unit 3 Document Ell-1583-006 PreliminaryDecommissioning Cost Analysis Appendix A Page 2 of 15 Table A Indian Point Nuclear Plant, Unit 3 SAFSTOR Decommissioning Cost Estimate (thousands of 2010 dollars)
Off-Sits LLRW NRC SpentFuel Sits Proes.sed BurialVolumes BurialI Utiity and Activity Dacon Remosl Packaging Transport Processing Disposal Other Total Total Lic.Tanm. Management Restoraeion Volume Class A Class B Class C GTCC Processed Craft Contractor Index Actvit Description Cost Cost Cmst Cssa Costs Costs ts Cs Coesnsens Costs Costs Costs Costs Cu. Feet Cu.Fast Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Wt, Lbs. Manhouro Manhours PERIOD la - Shutdownr through Transilion Period la Direct Decommissioning Activities la.1.1 SAFSTOR site characterization survey 636 191 826 826 la.1.2 Prepare preliminary decommissioning cost 60 9 69 69 928 la.1.3 Notification of Cessation of Operations 1a.1.4 Remove fuel & source material Va la.1.5 Notification of Permanent Defueling la.1.6 Deactivate plant systems &process waste 93 14 107 107 1,428 la.1.7 Prepare and submit PSDAR la.1.8 Review plant dwgs & specs. 60 9 69 69 928 la.1.9 Perform detailed red survey 7 6*3 63 ia.1.10 Estimate by-product inventory 46 7 53 53 714 la.1.11 End product description 46 714 la.1.12 Detailed by-product inventory 70 10 80 80 1,071 la.i.13 Define major work sequenc- 46 -7 53 53 714 la.1.14 Perform SER and EA 144 22 165 165 2,213 la.1.15 Perform Sits-Specific Cost Study 232 35 267 267 3,570 Activity Specifications la.1.16.1 Prepaie plant aond facilities for SAFSTOR 228 34 263 263 3,513 1a.1.16.2 Plant systems 193 29 222 222 2,975 la.1.16.3 Plant structures and buildings 145 22 167 167 2,228 la.1.16.4 Waste management 93 14 107 107 1,428 la.1.16.5 Facility and site dormancy 93 14 107 107 1,428 1a.1.16 Total 752 113 565 865 11,572 Detailed Work Pmcedures la.1.17.1 Plant systems 55 8 63 63 845 la.1.17.2 Facility closeout & dormancy 56 8 64 64 857 la.1.17 Total
- - - 111 17 127 127 1,702 la.1.18 Procre vacuum drying system 5 1 5 5 - - 71 la.1.19 Drainlde-energize non-cont, systems 1a.1.20 Drain & dry NSSS la.1.21 Drain/de-energize contaminated systems la.1.22 Deconusecure contaminated systems la.1 Subtotal Period Is Activity Costs 2,301 441 2,742 2,742 25,625 Period Is Additional Costs la.2.1 Asbestos Rmemdaoton 1,379 0 78 203 407 2,067 2,067 6,580 85,540 13,572 la.2 Subtotal Period ia Additional Costs 1,379 0 70 203 407 2,067 2,067 6,580 85,540 13,572 Period ia Collateral Costs la.3.1 Small tood allowance 22 - 3 25 25 la.3.2 Spent Fuel Capital and Transfer 20,767 3,115 23,882 - 23,882 ta.3.3 Outfall Lease 999 100 1,099 1,099 la.3 Subtotal Period la Collateral Costs 22 21,766 3,218 25,006 1,124 23,882 TLG Services, Inc.
Indian Point Energy Center, Unit 3 Document El1-1583-006 PreliminaryDecommissioning Cost Analysis Appendix A, Page 3 of 15 Table A Indian Point Nuclear Plant, Unit 3 SAFSTOR Decommissioning Cost Estimate (thousands of 2010 dollars)
Off-Site LLRW NRC Spent Fuel Site Processed Burial Volumes Burial I Uatlityand Activity Decon Removal Packaging Transport Processing Disposal Other Total Total Lic. Te. Management Restoration Volume Class A Class 8 Class C GTCC Processed Craft Contractor Index Activity Description Cast Cost Costa Costs Costs Costa Costs Continyency csts Costs Costs Costs Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Wt., Lbs. Manhours Manhours Period Ia Period-Dependent Costs la.4.1 Insurance 1,149 115 1,264 1,264 la.4.2 Property toses -
la.4.3 Health physics supplies 549 - 137 687 687 Ia.4.4 Disposal of DAW generated - 1 - 27 - 7 36 . 36 565 11,299 3 la.4.5 Plant energy budget 3,040 456 3,496 3,496 la.4.6 NRC Fees 251 25 277 277 -
la.4.7 Emergency Planning Fees 1,487 149 1,636 - 1,636 la.4.8 Site O&M 2.646 397 3.043 3,043 -
1a.4.9 Spent Fuel Pool O&M 764 115 878 - 878 la.4.10 ISFSI Operating Costs 44 7 51 - 51 la.4.11 Environmental 448 67 515 515 -
Ia.4.12 Corporate A&G 1,679 252 1,931 1,931 la.4.13 Security Staff Cost 7,551 1,133 8,684 8,684 -157,471 la.4.14 Utility Staff Cost - 17,030 2,555 19,585 19,585 - - 346,229 la.4 Subtotal Period Ia Period-Dependent Costs 549 1 - 27 368089 5,413 42,082 39,516 2,565 565 11,299 3 503,700 1,950 2 79 230 60,157 9,479 71,897 45,450 26,447 7,'145 96,839 13.575 529,325 la.0 TOTAL PERIOD ia COST PERIOD lb - SAFSTOR Limited DECON Activities Period lb Direct Decommissioning Activities Decontamination of Site Buildings lb.1.1.1 Reactor Containment 2,032 1,016 3,049 3,049 22,977 314 943 943 6,818 lb.1.1.2 Fuel Storage Building 629 lb.1.1.3 Primary Auviliary Building 320 160 479 479 3,670 lb.1.1.4 Waste Holdup Tank Pit 61 30 91 91 700 l1b.1.1 Totals 3,042 1,521 4,563 4,563 34,165 1b.1 Subtotal Period lb Activity Costs 3,042 1,521 4,563 4,563 34,165 Period lb Collateral Costs 1b.3.1 Decon equipment 991 149 1,140 1,140 1b.3.2 Process liquid waste 179 - 87 453 328 248 1,295 1,295 1,121 67,278 219 1b.3.3 Small tool allowance - 061 9 70 70 -
1b.3.4 Spent Fuel Capital and Transfer 1,264 190 1,454 - 1,454 lb.3.5 Outfall Lease - 252 25 277 277. -
1b.3 Subtotal Period lb Collateral Costs 1,170 61 87 453 328 1,516 621 4,235 2.782 1,454 1,121 67,278 219 Period lb Period-Dependent Costs lb.4.1 Decon supplies 687 172 859 859 lb.4.2 Insurance 290 29 319 319 1b.4.3 Property tacos 1b.4.4 Health physics supplies 286 72 358 358 1b.4.5 Heavy equipment rental 149 22 171 171 Ib.4.6 Disposal of DAW generated 1 - 22 - 6 30 30 458 9,152 1b.4.7 Plant energy budget 766 115 881 881 1b.4.0 NRC Fees 63 6 70 70 1b.4.9 Emergency Planning Fees 375 37 412 - 412 1b.4.10 Site O&M 667 100 767 767 lb.4.11 Spent Fuel Pool O&M 193 29 221 - 221 TLG Services, Inc.
Indian PointEnergy Center, Unit 3 Document El1-1583-006 Preliminary Decommissioning Cost Analysis Appendix A, Page 4 of 15 Table A Indian Point Nuclear Plant, Unit 3 SAFSTOR Decommissioning Cost Estimate (thousands of 2010 dollars)
, l LLRW NRC SpentFuel site Processed BurialVom....sBriall end utility Activity Down Removal Packaging Transport Processing Disposal Other Total Total Lie. Term. Management Restoration Volume Class A Class B Class C GTCC Processed Craft Contractor Index Atnit Desrilpton Cost Cost Costs Costs Costs Costs Costs Continoenc Costs Costs Costs Costs Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Wt, Lbs. Manhours Manhours Period lb Period-Dependent Costs (continued) lb.4.12 - ISFS Operating Costs 11 2 13 - 13 -
- 113 17 130 130 lb.4.13 Environmental 1b.4.14 Corporate A&G 423 63 487 487 1 b.4.15 Security Staff Cost 1,903 2M5 2,189 2,189 39,691 il1 UtilityStaff Cost - - 4,293 644 4,936 4,936 - 87,269 lb.4 Subtotal Period lb Period-Dependent Costs 687 435 1 -
22 9,096 1,599 11,842 11,195 647 458 9.152 2 126,960 1,579 76,430 34,386 126,960 lb.0 TOTAL PERIOD l b COST 4,899 496 89 454 349 10,612 3,741 20,640 18,539 2.100 PERIOD Ic - Preparations for SAFSTOR Dormancy Period l Direct Decommissioning Activities 82 632 632 - 3,000 lc.l.1 Prepare support equipment for storage 549 lc.1.2 Install containment pressure equal. lines 65 10 75 75 700 lc.1.3 Interim survey prior to dormancy 733 220 953 953 8,031 lc.1.4 Secure building accesses lc.1.5 Prepare & submit interim report 27 4 31 31 - - 416 lc.1 Subtotal Period lc Activity Costs 614 760 316 1,690 1,690 11,731 416 Period 1c Additional Costs 1c.2.1 Spent fuel pool isolation - - - - 6,654 906 7,652 7,652 1..2 Subtotal Period I c Additional Costs - - - - 6,654 998 7,652 7,652 Period lc Collateral Costs 1c.3.1 Process liquid waste 201 - 98 509 368 279 1,454 1,454 1,259 75,549 245 lc.3.2 Small tool allowance 7 1 8 8 1c.3.3 Spent Fuel Capital and Transfer 1,264 190 1,454 - 1,454 1c.3.4 Outfall Lease - 252 25 277 277 1c.3 Subtotal Period ic Collateral Costs 201 7 98 509 368 1,516 494 3,193 1,740 1,454 1,259 75,549 245 Period ic Period-Dependent Costs lc.4.1 Insurance 290 29 319 319 lc.4.2 Property taxes lc.4.3 Health physics supplies 179 45 224 224 lc.4.4 Heavy equipment rental 149 22 171 171 2,848 1 -
lc.4.5 Disposal of DAW generated - 0 0 7 2 9 9 142 lc.4.6 Plant energy budget 766 115 881 881 1c.4.7 NRC Fees 63 6 70 70 Ic.4.8 Emergency Planning Fees - - 375 37 412 - 412 1c.4.9 Site O&M 667 100 767 767 lc.4.10 Spent Fuel Pool O&M 193 29 221 - 221 1c.4.11 ISFSI Operating Costs 11 2 13 - 13 lc.4.12 Environmental 113 17 130 130 lc.4.13 Corporate A&G 423 63 487 487 lc.4.14 Security Staff Cost 1,903 285 2,189 2,189 39,691 lc.4.15 Utility Staff Cost - 4,293 644 4,936 4,936 87,269 lc.4 Subtotal Period 1 c Period-Dependent Costs 328 0 0 7 9,096 1,397 10,829 10,183 647 142 2,848 1 126,960 lc.O TOTAL PERIOD ic COST 201 949 98 509 375 18,026 3,206 23,364 21,264 2,100 1,402 78,397 11,977 127,377 TLG Services, nc.
Indian PointEnergy Center, Unit 3 Document EII-1583-006 PreliminaryDecaomnmissioningCost Anaiysis Appendix A, Page 5 of 15 Table A Indian Point Nuclear Plant, Unit 3 SAFSTOR Decommissioning Cost Estimate (thousands of 2010 dollars)
Off-Site LLRW NRC SpentFuel Site Processed BurialVolumes Buaal I Utilityand Activity Decon Removal Packaging Transport Processing Disposal Other Total Total LIe.Tenm. Management Restoration Volume Class A ClsneB Class C GTCC Processed Craft Contractor Index ActivityDescription Cest Cost Caost Costa Costs Cost Costs Canontaenc Costs Costs Costa Costs Co.Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feat Cu. Feet Cu. Feat WL,Lbs. Manhouos Manhours PERIOD I TOTALS 5,100 3,395 189 1,042 054 88,795 16,426 115,901 85,253 30,647 10,125 251,666 59,938 783,662 PERIOD 2a - SAFSTOR Dormancy with Wet Spent Fuel Storage Period 2a Direct Decommissioning Activities 2a.1.1 Quarterly Inspection 2a.1.2 Semi-annual environmental survey 2a.1.3 Prepare reports -
2a.1.4 Bituminous roof replacement - - - - 208 31 239 239 -
2a.1.5 Maintenance supplies - - - - 884 221 1.105 1.105 -
2a.1 Subtotal Perod 2a Activity Casts - - - - 1,092 252 1,345 1,345 Period 2a Collateral Costs 2a.3.1 Spent Fuel Capital and Transfer - - - - - - 76,388 11,458 87,846 - 87.M4 2a.3 Subtotal Period 2a Collateral Costs - - - - - - 76,388 11,458 87.846 - 87,646 Perod 2a Perod-Dependent Costs 2a.4.1 Insurance 4,318 432 4,750 4,337 413 2a.4.2 Property taxes -
2a.4.3 Health physics supplies 670 168 838 838 2a.4.4 Disposal of DAW generated - 7 5 - 120 - 32 164 164 2,538 50,761 12 2a.4.5 Plant energy budget - 3,984 598 4,582 2.291 2,291 2a.4.6 NRC Fees 1,308 131 1,439 1,439 -
2a.4.7 Emergency Planning Fees 9,745 974 10,719 - 10,719 2a.4.8 Site O&M 1,224 184 1,408 304 1.164 2a.4.9 Spent Fuel Pool O&M 5,006 751 5,757 - 5,757 2a.4.10 ISFSI Operating Costs 291 44 334 - 334 2a.4.11 Environmental 2,934 440 3,374 1,687 1,687 2a.4.12 Corporate A&G 1,100 165 1,265 1,265 -
2..4.13 Secourity Staff Cost 19,298 2,895 22,192 6,169 16,023 399,806 2a.4.14 Utility Staff Cost - 12,795 1,919 14,714 2,877 11,837 -- 252,869 2a.4 Subtotal Period 2a Period-Dependent Costs 670 7 5 120 62,003 8,731 71,536 21,373 50,164 2,538 50,761 12 652.674 2a.0 TOTAL PERIOD 2a COST 670 120 139,483 20,441 160,727 22,717 . 138,010 2,538 - - 50,761 12 652,674 PERIOD 2b - SAFSTOR Dormancy with Dry Spent Fuel Storage Period 2b Direct Decommissioning Activities 2b.1.1 Quarterly Inspection 2b.1.2 Semi-annual environmental survey 2b.1.3 Prepare reports 2b.1.4 Bituminous roof replacement 761 114 876 876 2b.1.5 Maintenance supplies 3,234 809 4,043 4,043 2b.1 Subtotal Period 2b Activity Costs 3,996 923 4,918 4,918 Pedod 2b Collateral Costs 2b.3.1 Spent Fuel Capital and Transfer 5,630 844 6,474 6,474 2b.3 . Subtotal Period 2b Collateral Costs 5,630 844 6,474 - 6.474 Period 2b Pedod-Dopendent Costs 2b.4.1 Insurance 14,740 1,474 16,214 15,866 348 2b.4.2 Property taxes TLG Servies, Inc.
Document El1-1583-006 Indian Point Energy Center, Unit 3 Appendix A, Page6 of 15 PreliminaryDecommissioning Cost Analysis Table A Indian Point Nuclear Plant, Unit 3 SAFSTOR Decommissioning Cost Estimate (thousands of 2010 dollars)
NRC Spent Fuel Sit. Proc-sd Burial Volumes Burial I Utlt nd Off-Site LLKW craft Contctor Packaging Transport Processing Disposal Other Total Total Lic. Term. Management Restoration Volume Class A Class 8 Class C GTCC Processed Dsown Removal C,, Foot W~t ho M~nout*~o M5ihu,,,.
IAciviy flot flou Costs Costs Clotsb Costs Caste 12,nanuoarco flots flouts Coot. fotu flu Feet flu Foot fl,,Foet C,, Foot B I*X *HVI* *lcnDIIon Cu Feet Cu Fast Cu Feet WI. Lbs Manho . Manhours
,on Cast Cast "is Costs Costs Costs Costs Contingency costs Cost. Costs Costs Cu Feet Cu Feet rules - ,
Period 2b Period-Dependent Costa (continued) 2b.4.3 Health physics supplies 2,167 - - 542 2.708 2,708 16 420 110 572 572 8,866 -177,310 41 2b.4.4 Disposal of DAW generated - 26 Plant energy budget - 7,287 1,093 8,380 8,380 2b.4.5 4,706 479 5,265 5,265 -
2b.4.6 NRC Fees Emergency Planning Fees 29,177 2,918 32,095 - 32,095 2b.4.7 Site O&M 968 145 1,114 1,114 -
2b.4.8 ISFSI Operating Costs 1,064 160 1,223 - 1,223 2b.4.9 Environmental 5,365 805 6,170 6,170 -
2b.4.10 2b.4.11 Corporate A&G 4,025 604 4,628 4,628 -
33,684 5,053 38,737 22,568 16,169 675,000 2b.4.12 Security Staff Cost 9,153 1,373 10,525 10,525 - 200,000 2b.4.13 UtilityStaff Cost 14,754 127,633 77,798 49,835 8,866 177,310 41 875,000 2b.4 Subtotal Period 2b Period-Dependent Costs 2,167 26 16 420 110,250 420 119,875 16,521 139,026 82,716 56,310 8,866 177,310 41 875,000 2b.0 TOTAL PERIOD 2b COST - 2,167 26 16 PERIOD 2 - SAFSTOR Dormancy without Spent Fuel Storage Period 2c Direct Decommissioning Activities 2c.1.1 Quarterly Inspection 2c.1.2 Semi-annual environmental survey 2c.1.3 Prepare reports Bituminous roof replacement 552 83 635 635 2c.1.4 2c.1.5 Maintenance supplies 2,344 586 2,930 2,930 2c.1 Subtotal Period 2c Activity Costs 2,895 669 3,564 3,564 Period 2c Period-Dependent Costs 2c.4.1 Insurance 10,453 1,045 11,498 11,498 2c.4.2 Property taxes 2c.4.3 Health physics supplies 1,570 - 393 1.963 1,963 12 305 - 80 415 415 6,425 128,494 29 2c.4.4 Disposal of DAW generated - 19 2c.4.5 Plant energy budget - 5,281 792 6,073 6,073 2c.4.6 NRC Fees 3,469 347 3,816 3,816 2c.4.7 Site O&M 702 105 807 807 2c.4.8 Environmental 3,888 583 4,471 4,471 2c.4.9 Corporate A&G 2,917 437 3,354 3,354 14,221 2,133 16,355 16,355 271,757 2c.4.10 Security Staff Cost 6,633 995 7,628 7,626 - 144,937 2c.4.11 Utility Staff Cost 1,570 19 12 305 47,563 6,911 56,379 56,379 6,425 128,494 29 416,694 2c.4 Subtotal Period 2c Period-Dependent Costs 1,570 19 12 305 50,458 7,579 59.943 59,943 6,425 128,494 29 416,694 2c.0 - TOTAL PERIOD 2c COST 845 309.817 44,542 359,696 165,376 194,320 17,828 356,565 82 1,944,369 PERIOD 2 TOTALS 4,407 52 33 PERIOD 3a - Reactivate Site Following SAFSTOR Dormancy Period 3a Direct Decommissioning Activities 60 9 69 69 928 3a.1.1 Prepare preliminary decommissioning cost -
213 32 246 246 3,284 3a.1.2 Review plant dwgs & specs.
3a.1.3 Perform detailed rad survey 7 53 53 714 3a.1.4 End product description 46 60 9 69 69 926 3a.1.5 Detailed by-product inventory TLG Services, Inc.
Indian Point Energy Center, Unit 3 DocumentE11-1583-006 PreliminaryDecommissioning Cost Analysis Appendix A, Page 7 of 15 Table A Indian Point Nuclear Plant, Unit 3 SAFSTOR Decommissioning Cost Estimate (thousands of 2010 dollars) n a g-Sitn OisiW NRC Spent Fuel Site Procesosd BuOsalVolumes Burial/ utility and Activty Decon c t Remova C as t Packaging c
Transport c - ta Processing Disposal C is asf Other c is Total senty onfl Total Costs Ca t Lic. Teom.
Costs Costs.
Managemnent Costs Restoration Costs Volume Ca. Feet Class A CU.Foot Fa...t Class B Clam C Cu. Fast Ca. Feet cM GTCC Cs. Fast Promssed Wt. Lbs.
Craft Msnhoorn Contractor Mnntrusrs I
......... I n..... .. . n in n 3a.1.6 Define major work sequencer 348 52 400 400 5,355
- 144 22 165 165 2,213 3a.1.7 Perform SER and EA 3a.1.8 Perform Sits-Specific Cost Study 232 35 267 267 3,570 190 29 219 219 2,925 3a.1.9 Prepare/submit Lacense Termination Plan 3a.1.10 Receive NRC approval of termination plan Activity Specifications 51 393 354 5,262 3a.1.11.1 Re-ac.inate plant & temporary facilities 342 39 3a.1.11.2 Plant systems 193 29 222 200 22 2,975 330 49 379 379 5,069 3a.1.11.3 Reactor internals 3a.1.1 1.4 Reactor vesasel 302 45 347 347 4,641 3a.1.11.5 Biological shield 23 3 27 27 357 3a.1.11.6 Steam generators 145 22 167 167 2,228 3a.1.11.7 Reinforced concrete 74 11 85 43 43 1,142 21 - 21 286 3a.1.11.8 Main Turbine 19 3
- 21 286 3a.1.11.9 Main Condensers 19 3 21 3a.1.11.10 Plant structures & buildings 145 22 167 83 83 2,228 Sa.1.11.11 Waste management 213 32 246 246 3,284 3a.1.11.12 Facility & site closeout 42 6 48 24 24 643 3a.1.11 Total 1,846 277 2,123 1,869 254 28,401 Planning &Site Preparations 3a.1.12 Prepare dismantling sequence 17 120 128 1.714 3a.1.13 Plant prep. & temp. svces 2,800 420 3,220 3,220 3a.1.14 Design water clean-up system 65 10 75 75 1,000 3a.1.15 Rigging/Cant. Cnt4 Envips/tooling/etc. 2,200 330 2,530 2,530 57 878 3a.1.16 Procure casks/liners & containers 9 66 66 Za.l Subtotal Peorid 3a Activity Costs 8.374 1,256 9,630 9.376 254 51,910 Period 3a Perod-Dependent Costs 602 60 662 662 3a.4.1 Insurance 3a.4.2 Property taxes 3a.4.3 Health physics supplies 427 107 534 534 3a.4.4 Heavy equipment rental 591 89 679 679
- 31 481 9,613 3a.4.5 Disposal of DAW generated 1 - 23 6 31 3a.4.6 Plant energy budget 3,040 456 3.496 3,496 3a.4.7 NRC Fees 251 25 277 277 3a.4.8 Site ODM 1,530 230 '1,760 1,760
- a4.4 Environmental 448 67 515 515 Sa.4.10 Corporate A&G 1,679 252 1,931 1,931 3a.4.11 Security Staff Cost 293 44 337 337 6,257 3a.4.12 UtilityStaff Cost 11,211 1,62 12,892 12,892 - 200,229 1 23 19,053 3,017 23,113 23,113 481 9,613 2 206,486 3a.4 Subtotal Period 3a Period-Dependent Costs 1,018 -
1.018 23 27,427 4,273 32,743 32,489 254 481 9,613 2 258,395 3a.0 TOTAL PERIOD 3a COST TLG Services, Inc.
Document El1-1583-006 Indian PointEnergy Center, Unit 3 Appendix A, Page 8 of 15 PreliminaryDoL nsiaoning C .lAnalysio Table A Indian Point Nuclear Plant, Unit 3 SAFSTOR Decommissioning Cost Estimate (thousands of 2010 dollars) on-Sitm LLRW NRC SpentFool Sit, Procassed BurialVolumes Buriai I utilityan Transport Processing Disposal Other Total Total Tomn. Management Lie. Restoration Volume Class A Class B Class C GTCC Procesod Croft Contractor Activity Decoan Removal Packaging Wt..Lbs. Moh Manhours Cost Cat Costs Costs Costs Costs Continaency Csts Costs Costs Costs Cu.Feet Cu. Fast Cu.Feet Cu. Foot Cu.Foot Index Acvity DOescripton PERIOD 3b - Decommissioning Preparations Perod 3b Direct Decommissioning Activities Detailed Work Procedures 359 54 412 371 41 3,379 3b.1.1.1 Plant systems 1,785 189 28 218 218 3b1.1.2 Reactor internals 964 102 15 118 29 88 3b.1.1.3 Remaining buildings 714 76 11 87 87 3b.1.1.4 CR0 cooling assembly 714 76 11 87 87 3b.1.1.5 CRD housings & ICI tubes 714 76 11 87 87 3b.1.1.6 Incore instrumentation 2,592 275 41 316 316 3b.1.1.7 Reactor vessel 857 91 14 105 52 52 3b,.1.8 Facility closeout 321 34 5 39 39 3b.1.1.9 Missile shields 857 91 14 105 105 3b.11.10 Biological shield 3.284 349 52 401 401 3b.1I1.11 Steam generators 714 76 11 87 44 44 3b.1.1.12 Reinforced concrete 118 18 136 - 136 1,114 3b.1.1.13 Main Turbine 1,114 118 18 136 - 136 3b.1.1.14 Main Condensers 1,949 207 31 - 238 214 24 3b.1.1.15 Auxiliary building 1,949 207 31 238 214 24 3b.1.1'16 Reactor building 2,443 366 2,809 2,265 545 23,022 3b.1.1 Total 545 23,022 3b.1 Subtotal Period 3b Activity Costs 2,443 366 2,009 2,265 Period 3b Additional Costs 3b.2.1 Site Characterization - - - - 2.003 601 2,004 2,604 10,604 3,999 3b.2.2 Staff relocations expenses - - - - 4,718 708 5,425 5,425 10,604 3,999 3b.2 Subtotal Period 3b Additional Costs - - -6,-0720 1,3016 6,029 8,029 Period 3b Collateral Costs 3b.3.1 Decon equipment 991 - 149 1,140 1,140 Pipe cutting equipment - 1,100 165 1,265 1,265 3b.3.2 3b.3 Subtotal Period 3b Collateral Costs 991 1,100 314 2,405 2,405 Period 3b Period-Dependent Costs 3b.4.1 Decon supplies 31 2 8 38 38 3b.4.2 Insurance 334 33 367 367 3b.4.3 Property taxes 3b.4.4 Health physics supplies - 231 58 289 289 Heavy equipment rental 299 45 344 344 3b.4.5 5,300 13 - 3 17 17 265 3b.4.6 Disposal of DAW generated 3b.4.7 Plant energy budget 1,541 231 1,772 1,772 3b.4.8 NRC Fees 127 13 140 140 1,058 159 1,217 1,217 3b.4.9 Site O&M 3b.4.10 Environmental 0 - 227 34 261 261 851 128 979 979 3b.4.11 Corporate A&G 149 22 171 171 3,171 3b.4.12 Security Staff Cost 8,306 1,246 9,552 9.552 138,486 3b.4.13 Utility Staff Cost 13 12,593 1,980 15,148 15,148 - - 265 5,300 1 141,657 3b.4 Subtotal Period 3b Period-Dependent Costs 31 531 1,022 1,631 13 21,757 3,968 28,391 27,846 545 265 5,300 10,605 168,678 3b.0 TOTAL PERIOD 3b COST TLG Services, Inc.
Indian Point Energy Center, Unit S Document E11-1583-006-PreliminaryDecommissioning Cost Analysis Appendix A Page 9 of 15 Table A
- Indian Point Nuclear Plant, Unit 3 SAFSTOR Decommissioning Cost Estimate (thousands of 2010 dollars)
Off-Sit, LLRW NRC Spent Fuel Sit. Processed Burial Volumes Burial I Utility and Activity Decon Removal Packaging Transport Processing Disposal Other Tatol Total Lts. Teom. Management Restoration Volume Class A Class B Class C GTCC Processed Craft Contractor Index Activity Description Cost Cost Costs Cast. Costs Costs Costs Contingeny Costs Costs Costs Costs Cu. Feat Cu. Fast Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Wt., Lbs. Manhours Manhousr PERIOD 3 TOTALS 1,022 2,648 2 1 - 35 49,184 8,241 61,134 60,335 - 799 - 746 - - 14,912 10,607 427,073 PERIOD 4a - Large Component Removal Period 4a Direct Decommissioning Activities Nuclear Steam Supply System Removal 4a.1.1.1 Reactor Coolant Piping 98 413 40 33 176 237 247 1,245 1,245 766 766 177,710 5,650 4a.1.1.2 pressurizer Relief Tank 3 11 2 2 10 12 9 49 49 43 43 9,557 156 4a.1.1.3 Reactor Coolant Pumps & Motors 40 141 79 245 - 1,942 586 3,033 3,033 - 7,052 1,158,455 2,755 80 4a.1.1.4 Pressurizer 17 93 354 751 - 844 391 2,449 2,449 - 3,066 268,367 1,535 750 4a.1.1.5 Steam Generators 126 5,249 2,458 3,940 2,420 5,955 4,064 24,212 24,212 37,344 16,301 3,111,693 20,508 2,250 4a.1.1-6 Retired Steam Generator Units - - 2,458 3,940 2,420 5,955 2,689 17,462 17,462 37,344 18,301 3,111,693 10,800 2,250 4a.1.1.7 CRDMs/ICls/Service Structure Removal 53 139 238 56 58 138 136 817 817 753 2,947 81,666 2,134 4a.1.1.8 ReactorVessel Internals 82 2,846 4,366 712 4,640 178 5,792 18,617 18,617 - 2,312 376 480 - 325,439 17,433 829 4a.1.1.9 Vessel & Intornals GTCC Disposal - - - 10,997 - 1,649 12,646 12,646 - 496 104,146 -
4a.1.1.10 Reactor Vessel - 6,741 1.155 448 7,518 178 9,242 25,283 25,283 - 6,481 2,955 - - 954.563 17,433 829 4a.1.1 Totals 419 15,631 11.149 10,128 5,085 38,238 357 24,805 105,812 105.812 76,250 55,268 3,330 480 496 9,303,288 78.404 6,989 Removal of Major Equipment 4a.1.2 Main Turbine/Generator 644 292 60 770 315 2,080 2.080 4.374 - - 371,814 7,364 4a.1.3 Main Condensers 2,467 175 48 623 735 4,048 4,048 6,687 - - 300.932 28.205 Cascading Costs from Clean Building Demolition 4a.1.4.1 Reactor Containment 13,202 1,980 15,182 15,182 104,998 4a.1.4.2 Fuel Storage Building 340 51 391 391 2,487 4a.1.4.3 Primary Auxiliary Building 446 67 513 513 3,561 4a.1.4.4 Waste Holdup Tank Pit 18 3 20 20 142 4a..1.4 Totals 14.006" 2,101 16,107 16,107 111,189 Disposal of Plant Systems 4a.1.5-1 Ass Steam & Air Removal 556 5 19 240 178 998 998 2,856 115.977 6,231 4a.1.5.2 Aux Steam &Air Removal (RCA) 99 1 4 52 33 190 190 624 25,326 1,075 4a.1.5.3 Aux Steam-Primary Plant 60 1 2 29 20 112 112 347 14,081 674 4a.1.5.4 Aux Steam-Primary Plant (RCA) 86 1 3 36 28 154 154 - 431 17.506 925 4a.1.5.5 Bearing Cooling Water 362 54 417 - 417 - *- 4,420 4a.1.5.6 Chemical Cleaning 769 115 884 884 9,466 4a.1.5.7 Chemical Feed 13 - - 2 14 - 14 S - 155 4a.1.5.8 Chemical Feed (RCA) 70 1 2 25 21 118 118 - 292 11,867 682 4a.1.5.9 Chemistry Monitoring 4 0 0 1 0 1 6 6 7 1 384 46 4a.1.5.10 Circulating & Service Water 2,153 71 283 3.395 1,094 8,977 6,977 40,386 1,640,086 24,732 4a.1.5.11 Circulating & Service Water (RCA) 93 3 10 123 43 272 272 1,464 59,459 1,067 4a.1.5.12 Compressed Air 146 - - 22 168 - 168 - - 1,791 4a.1.5.13 Condensate 2,952 69 253 3,266 1,273 7,812 7.812 - 38,847 1,577,580 33,847 4a.1.5.14 Demineralizer Regeneration 70 1 2 24 21 118 118 289 11,751 749 4a-1.5.15 Electra Hydraulic Fluid 12 0 0 6 4 22 22 71 2,899 127 4a.1.5.16 Extraction Steam 993 23 86 1,112 430 2,644 2,644
- 13,226 537,096 11,462 4a.1.5.17 Feedwater 1,577 53 97 895 337 603 3,363 3,363 - 8,272 1,485 467.630 17,908 4a.1.5.18 Feedwater Emergency Make-Up 95 - - 14 110 - 110 - - - 1,129 4a.1.5.19 FlashEvaporator 316 - 47 363 - 363 - - 3,863 4a.1.5.20 HVAC - Clean 1,251 18 68 080 457 2,675 2,675 - 10,472 425,265 13,376 4a.1.5.21 Heating Steam & Condensate 328 3 10 131 103 575 575 - 1,555 63,162 3,658 TLG Services,Inc.
Indian Point Energy Center, Unit 3 Document EII-1583-006 PreliminaryDecommissioning Cost Analysis Appendix A, Page 10 of 15 Table A Indian Point Nuclear Plant, Unit 3 SAFSTOR Decommissioning Cost Estimate (thousands of 2010 dollars)
Off-Sit. LLRW NRC Spent Fuel Site Processed BurialVolumes Bural I Utilityand Activity Decen Removal Packaging Transport Processing Disposal Other Total Total Lit. Teom. Management Restoration Volume Clams A Class B Class C GTCC Processed Craft Contractor Ind.x Activity Description Cost Cost Costs Costs Costs Costs Costs Contdngency Costs Costs Costs Costs Cu. Feat Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Foot Cu. Feet WL, Lbs. Manhours Manhours Disposal of Plant Systems (continued) 4a.1.5.22 Heating Steam & Condensate (RCA) 39 0 1 18 13 71 71 209 8,489 421 4a.1.5.23 Heating Steam & Condensate - FHB 145 1 3 43 43 236 236 - 510 20,715 1,501 4i1.5.24 Helium & Vacuum Drying 5 1 5 57 4a.1.5.25 Hypochlriate Feed 1 0 1 -15 95 -
4a.1.5.26 IP3 Petroleum Storage Tanks 14 110 - 110 - - 1,104 4a.1.5.27 LP Heater Drains &Vents 1,069 11 40 510 351 1,980 1,980 - 6,067 246,398 12,050 4a.1.5.28 Lam Level Intake Fish Screen Wash 19 3 22 - 22 - 230 4a.1.5.29 Low Level Vacuum Priming House 4 1 5 5 47 4a.1.5.30 Lube Oil 13 2 15 15 165 4a.1.5.31 Lube Oil Lines 25 - 4 29 29 305 3 0 4 - 4 - - 38 4a.1.5.32 Main Gen Hydrogen Gas 4a.1.5.33 Main Steam 1,659 31 113 1,457 653 3,913 3,913 17,328 703,710 18,974 4a.1.5.34 Main Steam (RCA) 412 9 28 358 162 968 968 4,261 173,056 4,716 4a.1.5.35 Misc. Drains-Secondary Plant 3 0 0 1 1 4 4 9 352 32 4a.1.5.36 Moisture Separator & HP HTR DR & V 2,230 64 236 3,048 1,056 6,635 6,635 36,260 1,472,533 25,505 4a.1.5.37 Polymer Feed 1 0 1 - -16 4a.1.5.38 Red Monitor Circ & Ser Wtr 3 0 0 1 1 4 4 6 249 31 4a.1.5.39 Red Monitor Cont Particulate 1 0 0 0 0 2 2 3 125 15 4a.1.5.40 River Water Filtration 121 18 139 139 1,467 4a.1.5.41 Service Water Fuel Oil 26 4 30 30 307 4a.1.5.42 St Gen Fd Pmp Luba Oil & Seal Water 29 4 34 34 344 4a.1.5.43 Steam Gen Nitrogen Conn 11 2 13 13 -- 140 4a.1.5.44 Steam Generator Slowdons 57 1 2 26 18 104 104 310 12,591 609 4a.1.5.45 Steam Generator Blowdown (RCA) 3 0 0 1 1 5 5 13 525 30 4a.1.5.46 Steam Generator Blowdown Reotra &Xfer 548 3 13 195 164 892 892 1,957 79,489 5.940 4a.1.5.47 Turbine Generator Seal Oil 7 1 9 9 88 4a.1.5.48 Turbine Gland Steam 57 9 66 66 - - - 715 4a.1.5.49 Vacuum Priming 245 - - 37 2a2 - 282 - - - 2,990 4a.1.5.50 Waste Holdup Tank Pit 399 33 47 324 174 202 1,179 1,179 - 3,855 994 224,597 4,57B 4a.1.5 Totals 19.235 401 1,303 15.966 512 7,331 44,747 42,027 2,720 189,928 2,479 7,912,897 219,811 4a.1.6 Scaffolding in support of decommissioning 633 10 34 166 853 853 - " 369 23 18,663 7,939 4a.1 Subtotal Period 4a Activity Costs 419 52,617 12,027 11,542 22,478 38,755 357 35,452 173,647 170,927 2.720 277,609 57,770 3,330 480 496 17,907,590 452,912 6,989 Period 4a Collateral Costs 4a.31 Procero liquid waste 43 - 24 123 89 64 342 342 - - 304 - 18,212 59 -
4a.3.2 Small tool allowance 750 112 862 776 86 4a.3.3 Survey and Release of Scrap Metal 115 34 149 149 4a.3 Subtotal Period 4a Collateral Costs 43 750 24 123 89 115 211 1,353 1,267 86 304 18,212 59 -
Period 4a Period-Dependent Costs 4a.4.1 Decon supplies 52 13 64 64 4a.4.2 Insurance 561 56 618 618 4a.4.3 Property taxes 4a.4.4 Health physics supplies 2,587 647 3,233 3,233 4a.4.5 Heavy equipment rental 2,075 311 2,386 2,386 5,0176 - 103,519 24 4a.4.6 Disposal of DAW generated 15 9 - 245 64 334 334 4a.4.7 Plant energy budget 2,461 369 2,830 2,830 4a.4.8 NRC Fees 302 30 333 333 4a.4.9 Site O&M 2,797 420 3,216 3,216 TLG Servicese Inc.
Document EIl-1583-006 Indian Point Energy Center, Unit 3 Appendix A, Page 11 of 15 Prfl1mninary Decomwiejoning Cost Anofysa Table A Indian Point Nuclear Plant, Unit 3 SAFSTOR Decommissioning Cost Estimate (thousands of 2010 dollars)
Spent Fuel Sit. Processed Burial Volumes Burial I " Utilityandr off-sit. LLRW *NRC Processed Craft Contractor Class C GTCC I Aciviy m
t IM*X t
- IVI* *BCNDI[*n Decan Coot Removal Coot Packaging Coot.
Transport Coot.
Processing Coot Disposal Coto Cter Coot.
=
Total Coninoantcv Conlflotg-A Total Coot.
Costs Lic. Toem.
Ct.t Cast.
Management Coot, Costs Restoration Coot.
Costs Volume C,, Foot Cu Feet Class A C,,z IFa Cu Feet Class B C,, Fot Cu Feet CF.' "
CU Feet C,, Foot CU Feet oo VVL IIto I Lbs .
ta.nht,,..,
Manhoua. Ma, Manhours Cost Cast. Cast. Costs Costs Index - - -- in- Cost Period 4a Period-Dependent Costs (continued) 4a.4.10 Radwaste Processing EquipmentjServices 331 50 380 380 381 57 439 439 4a.4.11 Environmental 1,430 215 1,645 1,045 4a.4.12 Corporate A&G 2,748 412 3,161 3,161 55,536 4a.4.13 Security Staff Cost
- 20,388 3,058 23,446 23,446 - - - - 325,217 4a.4.14 UtilityStaff Cost 4,661 15 245 31,400 5,702 42,085 42,085 - - 5,176 - - - 103,519 24 380,753 4a.4 Subtotal Period 4a Period-Dependent Costs 52 41,365 217,085 214,279 2,806 277,609 63,250 3,330 480 496 18,029,330 452,995 387,742 4a.0 TOTAL PERIOD 4a COST 513 58,028 12.066 11,675 22,478 39,089 31,872 PERIOD 4b - Site Decontamination Period 4rb Direct Decommissioning Activities 196 75 589 540 2,162 2,162 - 2,565 230,191 1,001 4b.1.1 Remove spent fuel racks 686 75 Disposal of Plant Systems 1,302 42 85 771 202 509 2,912 2,912 9,177 959 451,542 14,768 4b.1.2.1 Boron Recovery 165 161 246 1,325 1,325 1,961 710 142,481 7,733 4b.1.2.2 Chemical & Volume Control 696 24 33 222 323 1,924 1,924 7,455 971 389.526 7,312 4b.1.2.3 Component Cooling Water 633 41 77 627 77 127 795 513 778 4,305 4,305 9,452 2,236 584,390 22,697 4b.1.2.4 Component Cooling Water (RCA) 2,016 5 8 44 34 57 306 306 519 147 34,230 1,790 4b.1.2.5 Component Cooling Water - RHO 160 3 42 - 48 259 259 501 20,360 1,789 4b.1.2.6 Compressed Air (RCA) 165 1 19 0 0 5 6 30 30 - 65 2,637 194 4b.1.2.7 Containment Hydrogen Analyzer (RCA) 19 - 3 21 - 21 - - 233 4b.1.2.8 Containment Instrument Air 31 0 1 11 10 52 52 - 130 5,274 303 4b.1.2.9 Containment Instrsment Air (RCA) 35 270 - 270 - - 2,790 4b.1.2.10 Containment Spray 235 -
229 3 9 119 77 437 437 - 1,412 57,345 2,428 4b.1.2.11 Containment Spray (RCA) 3 36 27 150 150 431 '17,512 876 4b.1.2.12 Containment Vacuum & Leakage Monitor 83 1 13 73 73 - 240 10,000
- 388 4b.1.2.13 Decontamination 38 0 2 21 2,192 - - 329 2,521 - 2,521 - 25,964 4b.1.2.14 Electrical - Clean Non RCA 3,984 51 178 2,290 1,371 7,873 7,873 - 27,243 1,106,350 42,545 4b.1.2.15 Electrical - Clean RCA 585 7 21 243 10 191 1,065 1,065 2,891 77 124,323 6,419 4b.1.2.16 Electrical - Contaminated 4b.1.2.17 Electrical - FHB 40 0 1 13 1 12 67 67 149 4 6,410 433 219 - - - 33 252 - 252 - - 2,619 4b.1.2.10 Fire Protecton & Domeskic Water 17 100 100 431 17,501 460 4b.1.2.19 Fire Protection & Domestic Water (RCA) 43 1 3 36 33 275 94 139 826 826 3,273 408 169,518 3,030 4b.1.2.20 Fuel Pit (RCA) 269 17 2 2 3 11 13 68 68 38 47 5,790 392 4b.1.2.21 Fuel Pit - FHB 38 5 44 15 30 170 170 525 67 27,151 036 4b.1.2.22 Gaseous Waste Disposal 73 3 4 22 19 32 171 171 265 82 18,116 1.027 4b.1 .2.23 Gaseous Waste Disposal (RCA) 91 3 1 0 1 5 5 18 1 812 25 4b.1.2.24 Gaseous Waste Disposal - FHB 2 0 0 1 7 *4 23 23 87 3,526 110 4b.1.2.25 HVAC - RCA (FHB) 11 0 6 22 285 126 758 758 3,386 137,500 3,176 4b.1.2.26 HVAC - RCA (Other) 319 0 0 2 2 3 125 11 4b.1.2.27 Hydraulic Ruid -Personnel Hatch 1 0 0 2 1 6 6 19 767 36 4b.1.2.28 Oxygen (RCA) 3 0 0 28 2 3 10 .16 1,152 120 4b.1.2.29 Radiation Monitoring 11 0 0 0 0 2 2 12 12 26 1,061 79 4b.1.2.30 Radiation Monitoring (RCA) 8 83 4 4 9 25 29 153 153 106 100 13,973 874 4b.1.2.31 Reactor Cavity Purification 135 211 162 895 895 1,607 920 147,766 3,713 4b.1.2.32 Reactor Coolant 323 26 37 94 819 238 319 1,989 1,989 9,746 1,038 488,849 5,293 4b.1.2.33 Recirculating Spray 471 48 66 574 173 290 1,726 1,726 - 6,825 755 344,858 6,760 4b.1.2.34 Residual Heat Removal 590 33 329 . - - - 49 378 - 378 - - - 4,011 4b.1.2.35 Safety Injection 1 1 3 4 12 60 60 - 40 19 3,369 467 4b.1.2.36 Sampling 39 TLG Service, Inc.
Indian Point Energy Center, Unit 3 Document Ell-1583-008 Preliminary Decommissioning Cost Analysis Appendix A, Page12 of 15 Table A Indian Point Nuclear Plant, Unit 3 SAFSTOR Decommissioning Cost Estimate (thousands of 2010 dollars)
Off-Sit. LLRW NRC Spent Fuel Sit. Processed Burial Volumes Burial I Ututy ano Decon Removal Packaging Transport Procoesoing Disposal Oter Total Total Lic. Tatm. Management Reotorafion Volume Class A Class B Class C GTCC Processed Craft Contractor i
IActivity InlAY
- I*MntiNn Cast Cast Casts Costs Casr. Casts C ConTlnoenc Coats Costs Costs Costs Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Co. Feat Cu. Feet Wt_.Lsn. Menhaurs Manhoura I Index -. vv ues-pnon Disposal of Plant Systems (continued)'
4b. 1.2.37 Sampling (RCA) 113 3 2 2 14 33 167 167 23 63 6,598 1,359 4b.1.2.38 Service Air -Station Black Out 4 0 1 9 2 16 16 103 4,104 48 4b.1.2.39 Vent& Drain 100 1 3 37 - 31 171 171 442 - 17,945 1,088 4b.1.2.40 Vent & Drain (RCA) 37 2 2 4 13 14 71 71 49 58 7,169 395 4b.1.2.41 Waste Disposal 213 14 18 64 100 92 501 501 - 762 458 70,158 2,374 45.1.2.42 Waste Disposal (RCA) 270 20 19 17 139 109 573 073 200 605 62,389 2,748 4b.1.2.43 Waste Neutralization - 4 1 3 38 - 27 152 102 448 - 18,194 869 4b.1.2 Totals 16,170 435 s67 7,573 2,208 5,605 32,058 29,415 3,443 90,085 9,733 4,520,849 180,582 4b.1.3 Scaffolding in support of decommissioning 950 10 5 52 a 249 1.279 1,279 553 34 . - - 27,995 11,907 Decontamination of Site Buildings 4b.1.4.1 Reactor Containment 1,852 2,987 3,876 2,624 259 4,162 3,533 19,294 19,294 3,084 148.074 14,929,850 54,036 4b.1.4.2 Discharge Canal - 197 409 275 - 438 241 1,559 1,559 - 15,633 1,563.300 2,236 4b.1.4.3 Fuel Storage Building 567 2,266 3,410 2,305 162 3,659 2,476 14,.45 14,845 1.924 130,315 13,108,770 32,012 4b.1.4.4 Misc Structures Contaminated 5 18 3 2 - 3 8 39 39 - 102 10,200 236 446 2,347 2,347 434 17,502 1,767,050 6,736 4b.1.4.5 Primary Auxiliary Building 298 305 458 311 36 492 4b.1.4.6 Waste Holdup Tank Pit 57 15 3 2 5 3 34 117 117 54 92 11,371 788 4b.1.4 Totals 2,779 5,788 8,109 5,519 462 8,757 6,739 38,202 38,202 5,496 311,718 31,390,540 96,044 4b.1 Subtotal Period 4b Activity Costs 3,465 22,983 8,806 6,466 8,086 11,562 13,133 74,500 71,057 3,443 96.134 324,051 36,169,580 289,535 Period 4b Additional Costs 4b.2.1 License Termination Survey - - - 564 169 733 733 - - - - 6,240 4b.2.2 ISFSI License Termination 51 9 40 48 769 147 1,064 - 1,064 1,702 142,546 2,663 1,280 4b.2.3 Septic Soils Storage Area Remediation 205 6 1,139 2,231 - 780 4,361 4,361 - 81,000 6,156,000 1,658 -
4b.2.4 Equipment Storage Yard DU Cask 2 - 13 243 - 63 .321 321 200 - 45.000 -
4b.2.5 Outfali Remediation 457 49 2.577 - 5,047 1.767 9,897 9,897 - 183,240 13,926,240 3,677 4b.2.6 Main Transformer Yard Remediation 86 2 321 - 628 . 227 1,264 1,264 - 22,800 1,732,800 565 4b.2 Subtotal Period 41bAdditional Costs 1,064 200 288,742 22,002,590 8,564 7,520 802 . 66 4,090 243 7,953 1,333 3.154 17,640 16,576 Period 4b Collateral Costs 4b.3.1 Process liquid waste 76 - 42 220 159 115 611 611 543 32,596 106 4b.3.2 Small too( altowance 510 - - - 76 586 586 4b.3.3 Decommissioning Equipment Disposition - 167 64 559 86 - 132 1,007 1,007 6,000 373 303,507 88 4b.3.4 Survey and Release of Scrap Metal - - - - - 930 279 1.200 1,200 4b.3 Subtotal Period 4b Collateral Costs 76 510 209 203 559 245 930 602 3,413 3,413 6,000 917 336,103 194 Period 4b Period-Dependent Costs 4b.4.1 Decon supplies 751 - 188 939 939 4b.4.2 Insurance - 863 06 949 949 4b.4.3 Property taxes 4b.4.4 Health physics supplies 2,067 517 2,504 2,584 4b.4.5 _ Heavy equipment rental 3,165 - 475 3,640 3,640 4b.4.6 Disposal of DAW generated 12 8 201 - 53 274 274 4,239 84,784 19 4b.4.7 Plant energy budget - 2,986 448 3.434 3,434 4b.4.8 NRC Fees. 465 46 511 511 4b.4.9 Site O&M 4,087 613 4,700 4,700 4b.4.10 Radwaste Processing Equipment/Services 508 76 585 585 4b.4.11 Environmental 566 88 674 674 4b.4.12 Corporate A&G 2,199 330 2,528 2,528 TLG Services, Inc.
Insdian Point Energy, Center, Unit 2 Itocum,oot Ell-15.62-006 Preloiminay Decommsoisioning Cost Aaysis pssedi A, Paeg 1.7uof15 Table A Indian Point Nuclear Plant, Unit 3 SAFSTOR Decommissioning Cost Estimate (thousands of 2010 dollars) off-sit. LLRW NRC SpentFuot sit. Procsse~~sd BurialVoismene Buriatf Utility and Activity Decon Removal Packaging Transport Processing Disposal other Total Total LUc.
Teom, Mangement Restoration Votume Ctss. A Class B Class C GTCC Processed Craft Contractor Ind"Ati escription Cost Cost Costs Costs Cssts CosTS COts Contsgenscy Costs Costs Costs C-csts Co.Feet Cu. Feet Cu.Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Foet W, Lbs. Manhouhs Manthours Period 4b Period-Dependent Costs (continued) 4b.4.13 Security Staff Cost - 4,224 634 4.858 . 4,858 - - - - - - -88,357 4b.414 Utility Staff Cost -- - 29,894 4,484 34,376 34,378 - - - 475,269 4b.4 Subtotal Period 4b Period-Depenident Costs 751 5,232 12 a 201 45,812 8,037 60,053 60,053 - 4,239 84,784 19 560,626 4b.0 TOTAL PERIOD 4b COST 4,291 29,526 9.094 10,847 8.888 19,961 48,074 24,925 155,66 151.099 1,064 3,443 102,334 617,949 58,593,050 298,312 568,146 PERIOD 4e - License Termination Period 4a Direct Decommissioning Activities 4e.1.1 ORISE confirmatory survey 180 54 234 234 40.1.2 Terminte license a 4e.1 Subtotal Period 4e Activity Costs 180 54 234 234 Period 49 Additional Costs 4e.2.1 . License Temination Survey - .- 10,054 3,016 13,070 13,070 - 114,326 3,120 4e.2.2 Staff relocations expenses 4,718 708 5,425 5,425 4e.2 Subtotal Peioed 4e Additional Costs 14.772 3.724 18,496 18,496 - 114,326 3,120 Period 4e Period-Dependent Costs 4e.4.1 Insurance 4e.4.2 Property taxes . - -
4a.4.3 Health physics supplies - 633 - - 158 791 791 68,603 2 4e.4.4 Disposal of DAW generated I 1 16 - 4 21 21 330 4a.4.5 Plant energy budget 458 69 . 527 527 4a.4.6 , NRC Fees 267 27 294 294 4&.4.7 Site O&M 821 123 944 944 4e.4.8 Environmental 337 51 388 388 40.4.9 Corporate A&G 1,265 190 1,455 1,455 4a.4.10 Security Staff Cost 595 89 684 684 111,788 4e.4.11 UtilityStaff Cost 6,496 974 7.470 7,470 S - 95,464 4e.4 Subtotal Period 4e Period-Dependent Costs 633 1 1 16 10,239 1,685 12,574 12,574 330 6,603 2 107,250 40.0 TOTAL PERIOD 4e COST - 633 1 1 16 25,190 5,463 31,303 31,303 330 6,603 114,328 110,370 PERIOD 4 TOTALS 4,804 88,187. 21,161 22,522 31,366 5,065 105.136 71,753 403,994 396.681 1,064 6,249 379,943 681,529 3,330 480 496 76,628,980 865,634 1,066,257 PERIOD 5b - Site Restoration Period 5b Direct Decommissioning Activities Demolition of Remaining Site Buildings 5b.1.1.1 Reactor Containment 10 2 12 12 118 5b.1.1.2 Aux Feedwater Building 54 8 62 62 424 5b.1.1.3 Buried Fuel Oil Tanks 6 1 6 6 50 5b.1.1.4 Control Building 33 5 38 38 335 5b.1.1.5 Diesel Generator Building 172 26 198 198 1,688 5b.1.1.6 Electrical Penetrations Building 194 298 223 223 1,487 5b.1.1.7 Electrical Tunnel& Retaining Walls 63 9 72 72 507 5b.1.1.8 Equipment Hatch Enclosure 43 6 s8 506 325 8b.1.1.9 Fan House 220 33 253 253 1,656 5b.1.1.10 Fuei Storage Building 64 10 74 74 754 TLG Sricjses, Inc.
Indian Point Energy Center, Unit 3 Document El1-1583-006 PreliminaryDecommissioning Cost Analysis Appendix A, Page 14 of 15 Table A Indian Point Nuclear Plant, Unit 3 SAFSTOR Decommissioning Cost Estimate (thousands of 2010 dollars) 08f-Sit. LLRW NRC Spoot Foel Sito Proceseosd aarialVoloumes BurialI Utilityand Decon Removal Packaging Transport Processing Disposal Other Total Total Lie. Toem. Management Restoration Volume Class A Class B Class C GTCC Proesosed Craft Contractor Activity Activity Description Cost Cost Costs Costs Cost. Costs Costs Contin00enc Costs Costs Costs Costs Cu. Feot Cu. Foot Cu. Feot Cu. Fast Cu. Feet Wt, Lbs. Manhours Manhours index Demolition of Remaining Site Buildings (continued) 5b.1.1.11 Misc Structures 2,713 407 3,119 3,119 20,703 5b.1.1.12 Misc Structures Contaminated 639 96 735 735 5,160 5b1.i.13 Petroleum Tank Excavation 0 0 0 -0 - 1 5b.1.1.14 Primary Axinliary Building 478 72 550 550 3,932 5b.l.1.15 Screenwoel Structure 1,540 231 1,771 1,771 9,322 5b.1.1.16 Steam Generator Storage Facility 841 126 967 967 7,527 5b.1.1.17 Tank Pads & Foundations 195 29 224 224 1,814 5b.1.1.18 Transformer Pad 149 22 171 171 1,382 5b.1.1.19 Turbine Building 1,577 237 1,814 1,814 14,818 5b.1.1.20 Turbine Pedestal 1,298 195 1,492 1,492 8,915 100 115 806 5b.1.1.21 Wasto Holdup Tank Pit 15 115 5b.1.1 Totals 10,388 1,558 11,946 .11,946 81,724 Site Closeout Activities 5b.1.2 BackFill Site 5,897 885 6,781 6,781 11,961 5b.1.3 Grade & landscape site 7 1 8 - 8 27 118 18 136 136 - - 1,114 5b.1.4 Final report to NRC 5b.1 Subtotal Period 5b Activity Costs 16,292 118 2,461 18.871 136 18,735 93,713 1,114 Period 5b Additional Costs 5b.2.1 Concrete Processing' 616 4 93 713 - 713 2,181 5b.2.2 ISFSI Demolition and Site Restoration 1,649 23 251 1,923 - 1,923 - 15,244 80 5b.2.3 Unit 1 Legacy Soil Remediation , 6,293 571 30,192 58,812 - 20,862 116,730 116,730 - - 2,135,394 163,134,000 42,917 5b.2 Subtotal Period 5b Additional Costs 8,557 571 30,192 58,812 27 21,206 119,366 116,730 1,923 713 2,135,394 163,134,000 60,342 80 Period 5b Collateral Costs Small tool allowance 277 - 42 318 - 318 - - - . - -
5b.3.1 S 5b.3 Subtotal Period 5b Collateral Costs 277 - 42 318 - 318 - - - - - -
Period 5b Period-Dependent Costs 5b.4.1 Insurance 5b.4.2 Property taxes 5b.4.3 Heavy equipment rental 10,422 1,563 11,98156 11,986 5b.4.4 Plant energy budget 1,218 183 1,401 - 1,401 5b.4.5 Site O&M 1,853 278 2,131 2,131 5b.4.6 Environmental 1,794 269 2,063 2,063 5b.4.7 Corporate A&G 6,729 1,009 7,739 7,739 5b.4.8 Security Staff Cost 2,820 423 3,243 3,243 - 55,427 5b.4.9 Utility Staff Cost 29,583 4,437 34,021 - 34,021- 426,360 8,163 62,584 11,933 50,651 481,787 5b.4 Subtotal Period 5b Period-Dependent Costs 10,422 43,999 5b.0 TOTAL PERIOD 5b COST 35,548 571 30,192 58,812 44,144 31,872 201,139 128,799 1,923 70,417 2,135,394 163,134,000 154,055 482,981 PERIOD 5 TOTALS 35,548 571 30,192 58,812 44,144 31,872 201,139 128,799 1.923 70,417 2,135,394 163,134,000 154,055 482,981 TOTAL COST TO DECOMMISSION 10,926 134,186 21,975 53,790 31,366 119,711 597,077 172,834 1,141,864 836,445 227,954 77,465 379,943 2,845.621 3,330 480 496 240,386,100 1,090,315 4,704,341 TLG Sereices, Inc.
Docuritent ElI-1583-006 Indian Point Energy Center, Unit 3 AppendixA Page15 of 15 PreliminaryDecommunissioning Cost Analysis Table A Indian Point Nuclear Plant, Unit 3 SAFSTOR Decommissioning Cost Estimate (thousands of 2010 dollars)
Spent Fuel Sit. Processed BurialBVolumes Burial I Utility and Decon Removal Packaging Transport Off-Sit.
Processing LLRW Disposal Other Total Total Lie.NRC Teno. Management Restoration Volume Class A Class Class C GTCC Processed Craft Contor Actioty Cu. Feet Cu. Faot Cu. Feet Wt., Lbs. Manhours Manhoors I coot Coot Cost. Costs Costs Costs Costs Contingency Costs Costs Coast Costs Cu. Fast Cu. Foot Actisity Desription Index I
TOTALCOST TO DECOMMISSION WITH 17.84% CONTINGENCY: $1,141,864 thousands of 2010 dollars TOTALNRC LICENSE TERMINATtON COST IS 73.25% OR: $836,445 thousands of 2010 dollars SPENT FUEL MANAGEMENT COST IS 19.96% OR: $227,954 thousands of 2010 dollars NON-NUCLEARDEMOLITION COST IS 6.78% OR: $77,465 thousands of 2010 dollars IOTAL LOW-LEVEL RADIOACTIVE WASTE VOLUME BURIED (EXCLUDING GTCC): 2,849,432' cubic feet OTAL GREATER THAN CLASS C RADWASTE VOLUME GENERATED: 496 cubic feet TOTALSCRAP METAL REMOVED: 37,254 tons TOTALCRAFT LABOR REQUIREMENTS: 1.035,139 man-hours End Note:
nra - indicates that this activity not charged as decommissioning expense.
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 - indicates a zero value TLG Services, Inc.