ULNRC-05976, 2011 Decommissioning Cost Analysis for the Callaway Energy Center
| ML13088A109 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Callaway  |
| Issue date: | 03/28/2013 |
| From: | Ameren Missouri, TLG Services |
| To: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| Shared Package | |
| ML130880134 | List:
|
| References | |
| ULNRC-05976 A22-1644-001, Rev 0 | |
| Download: ML13088A109 (109) | |
Text
ULNRC-05976 2011 Decommissioning Cost Analysis for the Callaway Energy Center Document A22-1644-001, Rev. 0
DECOMMISSIONING COST ANALYSIS for the CALLAWAY ENERGY CENTER
prepared for Ameren Missouri prepared by TLG Services, Inc.
Bridgewater, Connecticut August 2011 Callaway Energy Center Document A22-1644-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Page ii of xvi TLG Services, Inc.
APPROVALS
Project Manager William A. Cloutier, Jr. Date
Project Engineer Thomas J. Garrett Date
Technical Manager Francis W. Seymore Date
Callaway Energy Center Document A22-1644-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Page iii of xvi TLG Services, Inc.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION PAGE EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY
................................................................................... vii-xvi
- 1. INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................... 1-1 1.1 Objectives of Study ........................................................................................... 1-1 1.2 Site Description ................................................................................................. 1-1 1.3 Regulatory Guidance ........................................................................................ 1-2 1.3.1 Nuclear Waste Policy Act
...................................................................... 1-4 1.3.2 Low-Level Radioa ctive Waste Acts ...................................................... 1-5 1.3.3 Radiological Criteria for License Termination .................................... 1-7
- 2. DECOMMISSIONING ALTERNATIVES .............................................................. 2-1 2.1 DECON .............................................................................................................. 2-1 2.1.1 Period 1 -
Preparations ......................................................................... 2-2 2.1.2 Period 2 - Decommissioning Operations .............................................. 2-4 2.1.3 Period 3 - Sit e Restoration .................................................................... 2-7 2.2 SAFSTOR .......................................................................................................... 2-8 2.2.1 Period 1 - Preparations ......................................................................... 2-8 2.2.2 Period 2 - Dormancy .............................................................................. 2-9 2.2.3 Periods 3 and 4 - Delayed Decommissioning
..................................... 2-10 2.2.4 Period 5 - Sit e Restoration .................................................................. 2-11
- 3. COST ESTIMATE ..................................................................................................... 3-1 3.1 Basis of Estimate .............................................................................................. 3-1 3.2 Method ology ...................................................................................................... 3-1 3.3 Financial Components of the Cost Model ....................................................... 3-3 3.3.1 Contingency ........................................................................................... 3-3 3.3.2 Financial Risk ........................................................................................ 3-5 3.4 Site-Specific Co nsiderations............................................................................. 3-6 3.4.1 Spent Fuel Management
....................................................................... 3-6 3.4.2 Reactor Vessel an d Internal Components ........................................... 3-7 3.4.3 Primary System Components ............................................................... 3-8 3.4.4 Retired Components ............................................................................ 3-10 3.4.5 Main Turbine and Condenser
............................................................. 3-10 3.4.6 Transportation Methods ..................................................................... 3-10 3.4.7 Low-Level Radioactive Waste Disposal ............................................. 3-11 3.4.8 Site Conditions Following Decommissioning .................................... 3-12
Callaway Energy Center Document A22-1644-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Page iv of xvi TLG Services, Inc.
TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued)
SECTION PAGE 3.5 Assumptions .................................................................................................... 3-13 3.5.1 Estimating Basis ................................................................................. 3-13 3.5.2 Labor Costs .......................................................................................... 3-13 3.5.3 Design Co nditions................................................................................ 3-14 3.5.4 General ................................................................................................. 3-14 3.6 Cost Estimate Summary ............................................................................... 3-16
- 4. SCHEDULE ESTIMATE ........................................................................................ 4-1 4.1 Schedule Estimate Assumptions ..................................................................... 4-1 4.2 Project Schedule ................................................................................................ 4-2
- 5. RADIOACTIVE WASTES ........................................................................................ 5-1
- 6. RESULTS ................................................................................................................. 6-1
- 7. REFERENCES .......................................................................................................... 7-1
TABLES DECON Cost Summary, Decommi ssioning Cost Elements ............................ xv SAFSTOR Cost Summary, Decommissioning Cost Elements ....................... xvi 3.1 DECON Alternative, Schedule of Total Annual Expenditures .................... 3-18 3.1a DECON Alternative, Schedule of License Termination Expenditures ....... 3-19 3.1b DECON Alternative, Schedule of Spent Fuel Management Expenditures . 3-20 3.1c DECON Alternative, Schedule of Site Restoration Expenditures ............... 3-21 3.2 SAFSTOR Alternative, Schedule of Total Annual Expenditures ................ 3-22 3.2a SAFSTOR Alternative, Schedule of License Termination Expenditures .... 3-24 3.2b SAFSTOR Alternative, Schd. of Spent Fuel Management Expenditures ... 3-26 3.2c SAFSTOR Alternative, Schedule of Site Restoration Expenditures ........... 3-27
Callaway Energy Center Document A22-1644-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Page v of xvi TLG Services, Inc.
TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued)
SECTION PAGE TABLES 5.1 DECON Alternative, Decommi ssioning Waste Summary ............................. 5-3 5.2 SAFSTOR Alternative, Decommissioning Waste Summary .......................... 5-4 6.1 DECON Alternative, Decommissioning Cost Elements ................................. 6-4 6.2 SAFSTOR Alternative, Decommissioning Cost Elements ............................. 6-5
FIGURES 4.1 Activity Schedule .............................................................................................. 4-3
4.2 Decommissioning Timelines ............................................................................ 4-4
APPENDICES
A. Unit Cost Factor Development ............................................................................. A-1 B. Unit Cost Factor Listing ...................................................................................... B-1 C. Detailed Cost An alysis, DECON .......................................................................... C-1 D. Detailed Cost Anal ysis, SAFSTOR ...................................................................... D-1
Callaway Energy Center Document A22-1644-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Page vi of xvi TLG Services, Inc.
REVISION LOG No. CRA No. Date Item Revised Reason for Revision 0 08-30-11 Original Issue Callaway Energy Center Document A22-1644-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Page vii of xvi TLG Services, Inc.
EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY
This report presents estimates of the cost to decommission the Callaway Energy Center (Callaway) for the selected decommissioning scenarios following the scheduled cessation of plant operations. The analysis relies upon site-specific, technical information from an evaluation prepared in 2008,[1] updated to reflect current assumptions pertaining to the disposition of the nuclear unit and relevant industry experience in undertaking such projects. The current estimates are designed to provide Ameren Missouri with sufficient information to assess its financial obligations, as they pertain to the eventual decommissioning of the nuclear unit. It is not a detailed engineering study, but a financial analysis prepared in advance of the detailed engineering that will be required to carry out
the decommissioning.
The currently projected cost to decommission the station, assuming the DECON alternative, is estimated at $754.5 million, as reported in 2011 dollars. An estimate
for the SAFSTOR alternative is also provided.
The estimates are based on numerous fundamental assumptions that consider current regulations, low-level radioactive waste disposal options, spent fuel management requirements, site restoration practices, and project contingencies.
The estimates incorporate a minimum cooling period of approximately five and one-half years for the spent fuel that resides in the storage pool when operations cease. During this period, it is assumed the spent fuel will be transferred to an Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation (ISFSI) located on the Callaway site.
Alternatives and Regulations
The ultimate objective of the decommissioning process is to reduce the inventory of contaminated and activated material so that the license can be terminated. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC or Commission) provided initial decommissioning requirements in its rule adopted on June 27, 1988.[2] In this rule, the NRC set forth financial criteria for decommissioning licensed nuclear power facilities.
The regulations addressed planning needs, timing, funding methods, and environmental review requirements for decommissioning. The rule also defined three decommissioning alternatives as being acceptable to the NRC: DECON, SAFSTOR, and ENTOMB.
1 "Decommissioning Cost Analysis for the Callaway Plant," Document No. A22-1599-002, Rev. 0, TLG Services, Inc., August 2008 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 Callaway Energy Center Document A22-1644-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Page viii of xvi TLG Services, Inc.
DECON is defined as "the alternative in which the equipment, structures, and portions of a facility and site containing radioactive contaminants are removed or decontaminated to a level that permits the property to be released for unrestricted use shortly after cessation of
operations."[3]
SAFSTOR is defined as "the alternative in which the nuclear facility is placed and maintained in a condition that allows the nuclear facility to be safely stored and subsequently decontaminated (deferred decontamination) to levels that permit release for unrestricted use."[4] Decommissioning is to be completed within 60 years, although longer time periods will be considered when necessary to protect public health
and safety.
ENTOMB is defined as "the alternative in which radioactive contaminants are encased in a structurally long-lived material, such as concrete; the entombed structure is appropriately maintained and continued surveillance is carried out until the radioactive material decays to a level permitting unrestricted release of the property."[5] As with the SAFSTOR alternative, decommissioning is currently required to
be completed within 60 years.
The 60-year restriction has limited the practicality for the ENTOMB alternative at commercial reactors that generate significant amounts of long-lived radioactive material. In 1997, the Commission directed its staff to re-evaluate this alternative and identify the technical requirements and regulatory actions that would be necessary for entombment to become a viable option. The resulting evaluation provided several recommendations; however, rulemaking has been deferred pending the completion of additional research studies, for example, on engineered
barriers.
In 1996, the NRC published revisions to the general requirements for decommissioning nuclear power plants to clarify ambiguities and codify procedures and terminology as a means of enhancing efficiency and uniformity in the decommissioning process.[6] The amendments allow for greater public participation 3 Ibid. Page FR24022, Column 3 4 Ibid. 5 Ibid. Page FR24023, Column 2 6 U.S. Code of Federal Regulations, Title 10, Pa rts 2, 50, and 51, "Decommissioning of Nuclear Power Reactors," Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Federal Register Volume 61, (p 39278 et seq.), July 29, 1996 Callaway Energy Center Document A22-1644-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Page ix of xvi TLG Services, Inc.
and better define the transition process from operations to decommissioning. Regulatory Guide 1.184,[7] issued in July 2000, further described the methods and procedures acceptable to the NRC staff for implementing the requirements of the 1996 revised rule relating to the initial activities and major phases of the decommissioning process. The costs and schedules presented in this analysis follow the general guidance and processes described in the amended regulations. The format and content of the estimates is also consistent with the recommendations of
Regulatory Guide 1.202,[8] issued in February 2005.
Methodology
The methodology used to develop the estimates described within this document follows the basic approach originally presented in the cost estimating guidelines[9] developed by the Atomic Industrial Forum (now Nuclear Energy Institute). This reference describes a unit factor method for determining decommissioning activity costs. The unit factors used in this analysis incorporate site-specific costs and the latest available
information on worker productivity in decommissioning.
An activity duration critical path is used to determine the total decommissioning program schedule. The schedule is relied upon in calculating the carrying costs, which include program management, administration, field engineering, equipment rental, and support services, such as quality control and security.
Contingency
Consistent with cost estimating practice, contingencies are applied to the decontamination and dismantling costs developed as "specific provision for unforeseeable elements of cost within the defined project scope, particularly important where previous experience relating estimates and actual costs has shown that unforeseeable events which will increase costs are likely to occur."[10] The cost elements in the estimates are based on ideal conditions; therefore, the types of unforeseeable events that are almost certain to occur in decommissioning, based on industry experience, are addressed through a percentage contingency applied on a line-item basis. This contingency factor is a nearly universal element in all large-scale construction and demolition projects. It should be noted that contingency, as used in 7 "Decommissioning of Nuclear Power Reactors," Regulatory Guide 1.184, Nuclear Regulatory Commission, July 2000 8 "Standard Format and Content of Decommissioning Cost Estimates of Decommissioning Cost Estimates for Nuclear Power Reactors," Regulatory Guide 1.202, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, February 2005 9 T.S. LaGuardia et al., "Guidelines for Producing Commercial Nuclear Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Estimates," AIF/NESP-036, May 1986 10 Project and Cost Engineers' Handbook, Second Edition, American Association of Cost Engineers, Marcel Dekker, Inc., New York, New York, p. 239 Callaway Energy Center Document A22-1644-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Page x of xvi TLG Services, Inc.
this analysis, does not account for price escalation and inflation in the cost of decommissioning over the remaining operating life of the station.
Contingency funds are expected to be fully expended throughout the program. As such, inclusion of contingency is necessary to provide assurance that sufficient funding will
be available to accomplish the intended tasks.
Low-Level Radioactive Waste Disposal
The contaminated and activated material generated in the decontamination and dismantling of a commercial nuclear reactor is classified as low-level (radioactive) waste, although not all of the material is suitable for "shallow-land" disposal. With the passage of the "Low-Level Radioactive Waste Policy Act" in 1980,[11] and its Amendments of 1985,[12] the states became ultimately responsible for the disposition of low-level radioactive waste generated within their own borders. With the exception of Texas (which has issued a license to Waste Control Specialists for the construction of a new facility in Andrews, Texas), no new compact facilities have been successfully sited, licensed, and constructed.
The disposal facility in Barnwell, South Carolina is currently closed to generators outside the Atlantic Compact (comprising the states of Connecticut, New Jersey and South Carolina). The commercial disposal facility on the Hanford Nuclear Reservation near Richland, Washington accepts low-level radioactive waste from the Northwest (Alaska, Hawaii, Idaho, Montana, Oregon, Utah, Washington and Wyoming) and Rocky Mountain (Colorado, Nevada, and New Mexico) Compact states. This leaves Energy Solutions' disposal facility in Clive, Utah as the only available option for the disposal of the majority of the low-level radioactive waste generated in
decommissioning.
For the purpose of this analysis, Ameren Missouri's Utilities Service Alliance agreement with Energy Solutions is used as the basis for estimating the disposal cost for the majority of the radioactive waste (Class A [13]). Energy Solutions does not have a license to dispose of the more highly radioactive waste (Classes B and C), for example, generated in the dismantling of the reactor vessel. As a proxy, the disposal cost for this material is based upon the last published rate schedule for non-compact waste for the
Barnwell facility.
The dismantling of the components residing closest to the reactor core generates radioactive waste considered unsuitable for shallow-land disposal (i.e., low-level 11 "Low-Level Radioactive Waste Policy Act of 1980," Public Law 96-573, 1980 12 "Low-Level Radioactive Waste Policy Amendments Act of 1985," Public Law 99-240, 1986 13 U.S. Code of Federal Regulations, Title 10, Part 61, "Licensing Requirements for Land Disposal of Radioactive Waste" Callaway Energy Center Document A22-1644-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Page xi of xvi TLG Services, Inc.
radioactive waste with concentrations of radionuclides that exceed the limits established by the NRC for Class C radioactive waste (Greater-than-Class C or GTCC)). The Low-Level Radioactive Waste Policy Amendments Act of 1985 assigned the federal government the responsibility for the disposal of this material. The Act also stated that the beneficiaries of the activities resulting in the generation of such radioactive waste bear all reasonable costs of disposing of such waste. However, to date, the federal government has not identified a cost for disposing of GTCC or a
schedule for acceptance.
For purposes of this study, GTCC is packaged in the same canisters used for spent fuel. The GTCC material is assumed to be stored at the ISFSI along with the spent fuel in the DECON scenario. It is shipped directly to a DOE facility as it is generated in the SAFSTOR scenario since it is assumed that the transfer of the spent fuel has been completed prior to the start of the deferred decontamination and dismantling
activities.
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 estimates for Callaway
reflect the savings from waste recovery/volume reduction.
High-Level Radioactive Waste Management
Congress passed the "Nuclear Waste Policy Act"[14] (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 14 "Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982 and Amendments," DOE's Office of Civilian Radioactive Management, 1982 Callaway Energy Center Document A22-1644-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Page xii of xvi TLG Services, Inc.
result, generators have initiated legal action against the DOE in an attempt to obtain compensation for DOE's breach of contract.
In June 2011, Ameren Missouri and the DOE reached an agreement on a settlement.
The terms include payment to Ameren Missouri for spent fuel storage and related costs through 2010, and thereafter, annual payment of such costs after they are
incurred.
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 five and one-half years the assemblies are packaged into multipurpose canisters for transfer to the ISFSI. It is assumed that this period provides the necessary cooling for the final core to meet the dry storage system's requirements for
decay heat.
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).[15] The post-shutdown costs incurred to satisfy this requirement include the isolation and continued operation of the spent fuel pool and the ISFSI during the five and one-half
years following the cessation of plant operations.
Costs are also included within the decommissioning estimates for offloading the pool.
Cost for the dry storage system, ISFSI construction and/or expansion, and ISFSI operations until such time that the transfer of fuel to the DOE can be completed, are expected to be fully reimbursable and therefore not addressed in this study. The
eventual decommissioning of the ISFSI is also not included.
Relocation of the spent fuel from the pool to the ISFSI will allow Ameren Missouri to proceed with decommissioning (or safe-storage preparations) in the shortest time
possible.
Site Restoration
Prompt dismantling of site structures (once the facilities are decontaminated) is clearly the most appropriate and cost-effective option. It is unreasonable to anticipate that these structures would be repaired and preserved after the radiological contamination is removed. The cost to dismantle site structures with a work force already mobilized on site is more efficient than if the process is deferred.
Site facilities quickly degrade without maintenance, adding additional expense and 15 U.S. Code of Federal Regulations, Title 10, Pa rt 50, "Domestic Licensing of Production and Utilization Facilities," Subpart 54 (bb), "Conditions of Licenses" Callaway Energy Center Document A22-1644-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Page xiii of xvi TLG Services, Inc.
creating potential hazards to the public and the demolition work force. Consequently, this study assumes that site structures are removed to a nominal depth of three feet below the local grade level wherever possible. The site is then to
be graded and stabilized.
Summary The costs to decommission Callaway assume the removal of all contaminated and activated plant components and structural materials such that the owner may then have unrestricted use of the site with no further requirements for an operating license.
Low-level radioactive waste, other than GTCC waste, is sent to a commercial processor
for treatment/conditioning or to a controlled disposal facility.
Decommissioning is accomplished within the 60-year period required by current NRC regulations. Regardless of the timing of the decommissioning activities, the estimates assume the eventual removal of all the contaminated and activated plant components and structural materials, such that the facility operator may then have unrestricted
use of the site with no further requirement for an operating license.
The decommissioning scenarios are described in Section 2. The assumptions are presented in Section 3, along with schedules of annual expenditures. The major cost contributors are identified in Section 6, with detailed activity costs, waste volumes, and associated manpower requirements delineated in Appendices C and D. The major cost components are also identified in the cost summary provided at the end of this
section.
The cost elements in the estimates are assigned to one of three subcategories: NRC License Termination, Spent Fuel Management, and Site Restoration. The subcategory "NRC License Termination" is used to accumulate costs that are consistent with "decommissioning" as defined by the NRC in its financial assurance regulations (i.e.,
10 CFR Part 50.75). The cost reported for this subcategory is generally sufficient to terminate the unit's operating license, recognizing that there may be some additional
cost impact from spent fuel management.
The "Spent Fuel Management" subcategory contains costs associated with the transfer of the spent fuel to the ISFSI as well as the operation of the spent fuel pool until such
time that the transfer is complete.
"Site Restoration" is used to capture costs associated with the dismantling and demolition of buildings and facilities demonstrated to be free from contamination. This includes structures never exposed to radioactive materials, as well as those facilities that have been decontaminated to appropriate levels. Structures are removed to a
depth of three feet and backfilled to conform to local grade.
Callaway Energy Center Document A22-1644-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Page xiv of xvi TLG Services, Inc.
It should be noted that the costs assigned to these subcategories are allocations. Delegation of cost elements is for the purposes of comparison (e.g., with NRC financial guidelines) or to permit specific financial treatment (e.g., Asset Retirement Obligation determinations). In reality, there can be considerable interaction between the activities in the three subcategories. For example, an owner may decide to remove non-contaminated structures early in the project to improve access to highly contaminated facilities or plant components. In these instances, the non-contaminated removal costs could be reassigned from Site Restoration to an NRC License Termination support activity. However, in general, the allocations represent a reasonable accounting of those costs that can be expected to be incurred for the specific subcomponents of the
total estimated program cost, if executed as described.
As noted within this document, the estimates were developed and costs are presented in 2011 dollars. As such, the estimates do not reflect the escalation of costs (due to inflationary and market forces) over the remaining operating life of the reactor or
during the decommissioning period.
Callaway Energy Center Document A22-1644-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Page xv of xvi TLG Services, Inc.
DECON COST
SUMMARY
DECOMMISSIONING COST ELEMENTS (thousands of 2011 dollars)
Cost Element Cost Decontamination 18,215 Removal 161,612 Packaging 24,658 Transportation 13,787 Waste Disposal 65,642 Off-site Waste Processing 25,465 Program Management
[1] 272,613 Security 44,414 Corporate Allocations 40,691 Spent Fuel Pool Isolation 11,822 Spent Fuel Management - Direct Costs
[2] 33,726 Insurance and Regulatory Fees 11,565 Energy 4,901 Characterization and Licensing Surveys 15,843 Property Taxes 2,595 Miscellaneous Equipment 6,948 Total [3] 754,498 Cost Element Cost License Termination 617,324 Spent Fuel Management 33,726 Site Restoration 103,448 Total [3] 754,498 [1] Includes engineering costs
[2] Direct costs only. Excludes program management costs (staffing) but includes costs for spent fuel loading/ spent fuel pool O&M and Emergency Planning fees
[3] Columns may not add due to rounding Callaway Energy Center Document A22-1644-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Page xvi of xvi TLG Services, Inc.
SAFSTOR COST
SUMMARY
DECOMMISSIONING COST ELEMENTS (thousands of 2011 dollars)
Cost Element Cost Decontamination 16,286 Removal 162,821 Packaging 18,857 Transportation 10,639 Waste Disposal 47,737 Off-site Waste Processing 27,479 Program Management
[1] 364,227 Security 156,821 Corporate Allocations 55,341 Spent Fuel Pool Isolation 11,822 Spent Fuel Management
[2] 33,726 Insurance and Regulatory Fees 53,557 Energy 10,144 Characterization and Licensing Surveys 17,246 Property Taxes 18,943 Miscellaneous Equipment 20,738 Total [3] 1,026,384 Cost Element Cost License Termination 849,173 Spent Fuel Management
[4] 73,749 Site Restoration 103,462 Total [3] 1,026,384
[1] Includes engineering costs
[2] Direct costs only. Excludes program management costs (staffing) but includes costs for spent fuel loading/spent fuel pool O&M and Emergency Planning fees
[3] Columns may not add due to rounding
[4] Includes percentage of Period 2a (dormancy) plant operating costs until spent fuel
pool is emptied, in addition to the direct costs.
Callaway Energy Center Document A22-1644-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section1, Page 1 of 7 TLG Services, Inc.
- 1. INTRODUCTION
This report presents estimates of the costs to decommission the Callaway Energy Center (Callaway) following a scheduled cessation of plant operations. The analysis relies upon site-specific, technical information from an earlier evaluation prepared in
2008,[1]* updated to reflect current assumptions pertaining to the disposition of the nuclear unit and relevant industry experience in undertaking such projects. The supporting analysis was designed to provide Ameren Missouri with sufficient information to assess its financial obligations, as they pertain to the eventual decommissioning of the nuclear station. It is not a detailed engineering document, but a financial analysis prepared in advance of the detailed engineering that will be
required to carry out the decommissioning.
1.1 OBJECTIVES OF STUDY The objectives of this study were to prepare comprehensive estimates of the costs to decommission Callaway, to provide a sequence or schedule for the associated activities, and to develop waste stream projections from the
decontamination and dismantling activities.
An operating license was issued for Callaway in 1984 for a 40 year operating period. Ameren Missouri has informed the NRC of their intent to submit a license renewal application in the fourth quarter of 2011 (for an additional 20 years of operation). However, for the purposes of this study, the final shutdown date (license expiration) is projected to be October of 2024, based upon the current (40 year) license. This date was used as input to scheduling the
decommissioning activities.
1.2 SITE DESCRIPTION
The nuclear unit is located in Callaway County, Missouri, approximately 80 miles west of the St. Louis metropolitan area. The nearest population center is Jefferson City, 25 miles west-southwest of the plant site. The station is an 1,171 MWe (net design electrical rating) pressurized water reactor with
supporting facilities.
Westinghouse Electric Company designed the nuclear steam supply system (NSSS). The NSSS consists of a pressurized water reactor with four independent primary coolant loops, each of which contains a reactor coolant pump and a steam generator. An electrically heated pressurizer and
- References provided in Section 7 of the document Callaway Energy Center Document A22-1644-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section1, Page 2 of 7 TLG Services, Inc.
connecting piping complete the system. The NSSS is rated at a thermal power level of 3,579 MWt (3,565 MWt reactor core plus 14 MWt for reactor coolant pumps), with a corresponding turbine-generator gross output of 1284 MWe.
The system is housed within a containment structure, a pre-stressed, post-tensioned concrete structure with cylindrical wall, a hemispherical dome, and a flat foundation slab. The wall and dome form a pre-stressed post-tensioned system. The inside surface of the structure is covered with a carbon steel liner, providing a leak tight membrane.
A power conversion system converts heat produced in the reactor to electrical energy. This system converts the thermal energy of the steam into mechanical shaft power and then into electrical energy. The turbine-generator is a tandem-compound, six-flow, four element, 1800-rpm unit. The unit consists of one high pressure and three low-pressure turbine elements driving a directly coupled generator. The turbine is operated in a closed feedwater cycle that condenses the steam; the feedwater is returned to the steam generators. Heat rejected in the main condensers is removed by the circulating water system.
The circulating water system supplies cooling water to the main condenser, condensing the steam exhausted from the turbine. Cooling for the condenser circulating water system is supplied by a large natural draft cooling tower.
Makeup water for the cooling tower is drawn from the Missouri River.
1.3 REGULATORY GUIDANCE
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC or Commission) provided initial decommissioning requirements in its rule "General Requirements for Decommissioning Nuclear Facilities," issued in June 1988.
[2] This rule set forth financial criteria for decommissioning licensed nuclear power facilities.
The regulation addressed decommissioning planning needs, timing, funding methods, and environmental review requirements. The intent of the rule was to ensure that decommissioning would be accomplished in a safe and timely manner and that adequate funds would be available for this purpose.
Subsequent to the rule, the NRC issued Regulatory Guide 1.159, "Assuring the Availability of Funds for Decommissioning Nuclear Reactors,"
[3] which provided additional guidance to the licensees of nuclear facilities on the financial methods acceptable to the NRC staff for complying with the requirements of the rule. The regulatory guide addressed the funding requirements and provided guidance on the content and form of the financial
assurance mechanisms indicated in the rule.
The rule defined three decommissioning alternatives as being acceptable to the NRC: DECON, SAFSTOR, and ENTOMB. The DECON alternative assumes Callaway Energy Center Document A22-1644-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section1, Page 3 of 7 TLG Services, Inc.
that any contaminated or activated portion of the plant's systems, structures and facilities are removed or decontaminated to levels that permit the site to be released for unrestricted use shortly after the cessation of plant operations.
The rule also placed limits on the time allowed to complete the decommissioning process. For SAFSTOR, the process is restricted in overall duration to 60 years, unless it can be shown that a longer duration is necessary to protect public health and safety. The guidelines for ENTOMB are similar, providing the NRC with both sufficient leverage and flexibility to ensure that these deferred options are only used in situations where it is reasonable and consistent with the definition of decommissioning. At the conclusion of a 60-year dormancy period (or longer for ENTOMB if the NRC approves such a case), the site would still require significant remediation to meet the
unrestricted release limits for license termination.
The ENTOMB alternative has not been viewed as a viable option for power reactors due to the significant time required to isolate the long-lived radionuclides for decay to permissible levels. However, with rulemaking permitting the controlled release of a site,[4] the NRC has re-evaluated this alternative. The resulting feasibility study, based upon an assessment by Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, concluded that the method did have conditional merit for some, if not most reactors. However, the staff also found that additional rulemaking would be needed before this option could be treated as a generic alternative. The NRC had considered rulemaking to alter the 60-year time for completing decommissioning and to clarify the use of engineered
barriers for reactor entombments.
[5]
The NRC's staff has recommended that rulemaking be deferred, based upon several factors, e.g., no licensee has committed to pursuing the entombment option, and the NRC's current priorities, at least until after the additional research studies are complete. The Commission concurred with the staff's
recommendation.
In 1996, the NRC published revisions to the general requirements for decommissioning nuclear power plants.
[6] When the decommissioning regulations were adopted in 1988, it was assumed that the majority of licensees would decommission at the end of the facility's operating licensed life.
Since that time, several licensees permanently and prematurely ceased operations. Exemptions from certain operating requirements were required once the reactor was defueled to facilitate the decommissioning. Each case was
handled individually, without clearly defined generic requirements. The NRC amended the decommissioning regulations in 1996 to clarify ambiguities and codify procedures and terminology as a means of enhancing efficiency and uniformity in the decommissioning process. The amendments allow for greater Callaway Energy Center Document A22-1644-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section1, Page 4 of 7 TLG Services, Inc.
public participation and better define the transition process from operations to decommissioning.
Under the revised regulations, licensees will submit written certification to the NRC within 30 days after the decision to cease operations. Certification will also be required once the fuel is permanently removed from the reactor vessel.
Submittal of these notices will entitle the licensee to a fee reduction and eliminate the obligation to follow certain requirements needed only during operation of the reactor. Within two years of submitting notice of permanent cessation of operations, the licensee is required to submit a Post-Shutdown Decommissioning Activities Report (PSDAR) to the NRC. The PSDAR describes the planned decommissioning activities, the associated sequence and schedule, and an estimate of expected costs. Prior to completing decommissioning, the licensee is required to submit an application to the NRC
to terminate the license, which will include a license termination plan (LTP).
1.3.1 Nuclear Waste Policy Act
Congress passed the "Nuclear Waste Policy Act"
[7] (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 U.S. Department of Energy (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.
In June 2011, Ameren Missouri and the DOE reached an agreement. The terms include payment to Ameren Missouri for spent fuel storage and related costs through 2010, and thereafter, annual payment of such costs
after they are incurred.
At shutdown, the spent fuel pool is expected to contain freshly discharged assemblies (from the most recent refueling cycles) as well as the final Callaway Energy Center Document A22-1644-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section1, Page 5 of 7 TLG Services, Inc.
reactor core. Over the following five and one-half years the assemblies are packaged into multipurpose canisters for transfer to the Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation (ISFSI). It is assumed that this period provides the necessary cooling for the final core to meet the dry storage
system's requirements for decay heat.
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).
[8] The post-shutdown costs incurred to satisfy this requirement include the isolation and continued operation of the spent fuel pool and the ISFSI during the five and one-half years
following the cessation of plant operations.
Costs are also included within the decommissioning estimates for offloading the pool. Cost for the dry storage system, ISFSI construction and/or expansion, and ISFSI operations until such time that the transfer of fuel to the DOE can be completed, are expected to be fully reimbursable and therefore not addressed in this study. The eventual decommissioning
of the ISFSI is also not included.
Relocation of the spent fuel from the pool to the ISFSI will allow Ameren Missouri to proceed with decommissioning (or safe-storage preparations) in
the shortest time possible.
1.3.2 Low-Level Radioactive Waste Acts
The contaminated and activated material generated in the decontamination and dismantling of a commercial nuclear reactor is classified as low-level (radioactive) waste, although not all of the material is suitable for "shallow-land" disposal. With the passage of the "Low-Level Radioactive Waste Policy Act" in 1980,[9] and its Amendments of 1985,[10] the states became ultimately responsible for the disposition of low-level radioactive waste generated within their own
borders.
The disposal facility in Barnwell, South Carolina is currently closed to generators outside the Atlantic Compact (comprising the states of Connecticut, New Jersey and South Carolina). The commercial disposal facility on the Hanford Nuclear Reservation near Richland, Washington accepts low-level radioactive waste from the Northwest (Alaska, Hawaii, Idaho, Montana, Oregon, Utah, Washington and Wyoming) and Rocky Mountain (Colorado, Nevada, and New Mexico) Compact states. This Callaway Energy Center Document A22-1644-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section1, Page 6 of 7 TLG Services, Inc.
leaves Energy Solutions' disposal facility in Clive, Utah as the only available option for the disposal of the majority of the low-level radioactive
waste generated in decommissioning.
For the purpose of this analysis, Ameren Missouri's Utilities Service Alliance agreement with Energy Solutions is used as the basis for estimating the disposal cost for the majority of the radioactive waste (Class A[11]). Energy Solutions does not have a license to dispose of the more highly radioactive waste (Class B and C), for example, generated in the dismantling of the reactor vessel. As a proxy, the disposal cost for this material is based upon the last published rate schedule for non-
compact waste for the Barnwell facility.
The dismantling of the components residing closest to the reactor core generates radioactive waste considered unsuitable for shallow land disposal (i.e., low-level radioactive waste with concentrations of radionuclides that exceed the limits established by the NRC for Class C radioactive waste (Greater-than-Class C or GTCC)). The Low-Level
Radioactive Waste Policy Amendments Act of 1985 assigned the federal government the responsibility for the disposal of this material. The Act also stated that the beneficiaries of the activities resulting in the generation of such radioactive waste bear all reasonable costs of disposing of such waste. However, to date, the federal government has
not identified a cost for disposing of GTCC or a schedule for acceptance.
For purposes of this study, GTCC is packaged in the same canisters used for spent fuel. The GTCC material is assumed to be stored at the ISFSI along with the spent fuel in the DECON scenario. It is shipped directly to a DOE facility as it is generated in the SAFSTOR scenario since it is assumed that the transfer of the spent fuel has been completed prior to
the start of the deferred decontamination and dismantling activities.
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 estimates for Callaway
reflect the savings from waste recovery/volume reduction.
Callaway Energy Center Document A22-1644-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section1, Page 7 of 7 TLG Services, Inc.
1.3.3 Radiological Criteria for License Termination In 1997, the NRC published Subpart E, "Radiological Criteria for
License Termination,"
[12] amending 10 CFR Part 20. This subpart provides radiological criteria for releasing a facility for unrestricted use.
The regulation states that the site can be released for unrestricted use if
radioactivity levels are such that the average member of a critical group would not receive a Total Effective Dose Equivalent (TEDE) in excess of 25 millirem per year, and provided that residual radioactivity has been reduced to levels that are As Low As Reasonably Achievable (ALARA).
The decommissioning estimates assume that the Callaway site will be
remediated to a residual level consistent with the NRC-prescribed level.
It should be noted that the NRC and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) differ on the amount of residual radioactivity considered acceptable in site remediation. The EPA has two limits that apply to radioactive materials. An EPA limit of 15 millirem per year is derived from criteria established by the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA or Superfund).
[13] An additional and separate limit of 4 millirem per year, as defined in 40
CFR §141.16, is applied to drinking water.
[14]
On October 9, 2002, the NRC signed an agreement with the EPA on the radiological decommissioning and decontamination of NRC-licensed sites. The Memorandum of Understanding (MOU)
[15] provides that EPA will defer exercise of authority under CERCLA for the majority of facilities decommissioned under NRC authority. The MOU also includes provisions for NRC and EPA consultation for certain sites when, at the time of license termination, (1) groundwater contamination exceeds EPA-permitted levels; (2) NRC contemplates restricted release of the site; and/or (3) residual radioactive soil concentrations exceed levels
defined in the MOU.
The MOU does not impose any new requirements on NRC licensees and should reduce the involvement of the EPA with NRC licensees who are decommissioning. Most sites are expected to meet the NRC criteria for unrestricted use, and the NRC believes that only a few sites will have groundwater or soil contamination in excess of the levels specified in the MOU that trigger consultation with the EPA. However, if there are other hazardous materials on the site, the EPA may be involved in the cleanup. As such, the possibility of dual regulation remains for certain licensees. The present study does not include any costs for this
occurrence.
Callaway Energy Center Document A22-1644-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 2, Page 1 of 11 TLG Services, Inc.
- 2. DECOMMISSIONING ALTERNATIVES
Detailed cost estimates were developed to decommission the Callaway nuclear unit for the approved decommissioning alternatives: DECON and SAFSTOR. Although the alternatives differ with respect to technique, process, cost, and schedule, they
attain the same result: the ultimate release of the site for unrestricted use.
The following sections describe the basic activities associated with each alternative.
Although detailed procedures for each activity identified are not provided, and the actual sequence of work may vary, the activity descriptions provide a basis not only for estimating but also for the expected scope of work, i.e., engineering and planning
at the time of decommissioning.
The conceptual approach that the NRC has described in its regulations divides decommissioning into three phases. The initial phase commences with the effective date of permanent cessation of operations and involves the transition of both plant and licensee from reactor operations (i.e., power production) to facility de-activation and closure. During the first phase, notification is to be provided to the NRC certifying the permanent cessation of operations and the removal of fuel from the
reactor vessel. The licensee is then prohibited from reactor operation.
The second phase encompasses activities during the storage period or during major decommissioning activities, or a combination of the two. The third phase pertains to the activities involved in license termination. The decommissioning estimates developed for Callaway are also divided into phases or periods; however, demarcation of the phases is based upon major milestones within the project or
significant changes in the projected expenditures.
2.1 DECON The DECON alternative, as defined by the NRC, is "the alternative in which the equipment, structures, and portions of a facility and site containing radioactive contaminants are removed or decontaminated to a level that permits the property to be released for unrestricted use shortly after cessation of operations." This study does not address the cost to dispose of the spent fuel residing at the site; such costs are funded through a surcharge on electrical generation. The study also assumes that the costs incurred with the interim on-site storage of the fuel, pending shipment by the DOE to an off-site disposal
facility, are fully reimbursable.
Callaway Energy Center Document A22-1644-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 2, Page 2 of 11 TLG Services, Inc.
2.1.1 Period 1 - Preparations In anticipation of the cessation of plant operations, detailed preparations are undertaken to provide a smooth transition from plant operations to site decommissioning. Through implementation of a staffing transition plan, the organization required to manage the intended decommissioning activities is assembled from available plant staff and outside resources. Preparations include the planning for
permanent defueling of the reactor, revision of technical specifications applicable to the operating conditions and requirements, a characterization of the facility and major components, and the
development of the PSDAR.
Engineering and Planning
The PSDAR, required within two years of the notice to cease operations, provides a description of the licensee's planned decommissioning activities, a timetable, and the associated financial requirements of the intended decommissioning program. Upon receipt of the PSDAR, the NRC will make the document available to the public for comment in a local hearing to be held in the vicinity of the reactor site. Ninety days following submittal and NRC receipt of the PSDAR, the licensee may begin to perform major decommissioning activities under a modified 10 CFR §50.59 procedure, i.e., without specific NRC approval. Major activities are defined as any activity that results in permanent removal of major radioactive components, permanently modifies the structure of the containment, or results in dismantling components (for shipment) containing GTCC, as defined by 10 CFR §61. Major components are further defined as comprising the reactor vessel and internals, large bore reactor coolant system piping, and other large components that are radioactive. The NRC includes the following additional criteria for use of
the §50.59 process in decommissioning. The proposed activity must not:
foreclose release of the site for possible unrestricted use, significantly increase decommissioning costs, cause any significant environmental impact, or violate the terms of the licensee's existing license.
Existing operational technical specifications are reviewed and modified to reflect plant conditions and the safety concerns associated with permanent cessation of operations. The environmental impact associated with the planned decommissioning activities is also considered.
Callaway Energy Center Document A22-1644-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 2, Page 3 of 11 TLG Services, Inc.
Typically, a licensee will not be allowed to proceed if the consequences of a particular decommissioning activity are greater than that bounded by previously evaluated environmental assessments or impact statements.
In this instance, the licensee would have to submit a license amendment
for the specific activity and update the environmental report.
The decommissioning program outlined in the PSDAR will be designed to accomplish the required tasks within the ALARA guidelines (as defined in 10 CFR §20) for protection of personnel from exposure to radiation hazards. It will also address the continued protection of the health and safety of the public and the environment during the dismantling activity. Consequently, with the development of the PSDAR, activity specifications, cost-benefit and safety analyses, work packages and procedures, would be assembled to support the proposed
decontamination and dismantling activities.
Site Preparations
Following final plant shutdown, and in preparation for actual
decommissioning activities, the following activities are initiated:
Characterization of the site and surrounding environs. This includes radiation surveys of work areas, major components (including the
reactor vessel and its internals), internal piping, and primary shield
cores. Isolation of the spent fuel storage pool and fuel handling systems, such that decommissioning operations can commence on the balance of the plant. The pool will remain operational for approximately five and one-half years following the cessation of operations before the
inventory resident at shutdown can be transferred to the ISFSI. Specification of transport and disposal requirements for activated materials and/or hazardous materials, including shielding and waste
stabilization. Development of procedures for occupational exposure control, control and release of liquid and gaseous effluent, processing of radwaste (including dry-active waste, resins, filter media, metallic and non-metallic components generated in decommissioning), site security
and emergency programs, and industrial safety.
Callaway Energy Center Document A22-1644-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 2, Page 4 of 11 TLG Services, Inc.
2.1.2 Period 2 - Decommissioning Operations This period includes the physical decommissioning activities associated with the removal and disposal of contaminated and activated components and structures, including the successful termination of the 10 CFR §50 operating license. Significant decommissioning activities in
this phase include:
Construction of temporary facilities and/or modification of existing facilities to support dismantling activities. This may include a centralized processing area to facilitate equipment removal and
component preparations for off-site disposal. Reconfiguration and modification of site structures and facilities as needed to support decommissioning operations. This may include the upgrading of roads (on- and off-site) to facilitate hauling and transport. Modifications may be required to the containment structure to facilitate access of large/heavy equipment. Modifications may also be required to the refueling area of the building to support the segmentation of the reactor vessel internals and component
extraction. Design and fabrication of temporary and permanent shielding to support removal and transportation activities, construction of contamination control envelopes, and the procurement of specialty
tooling. Procurement (lease or purchase) of shipping canisters, cask liners, and industrial packages for the disposition of low-level radioactive
waste. Decontamination of components and piping systems as required to control (minimize) worker exposure. Removal of piping and components no longer essential to support decommissioning operations. Removal of control rod drive housings and the head service structure from the reactor vessel head. Segmentation of the vessel closure
head. Removal and segmentation of the upper internals assemblies. Segmentation will maximize the loading of the shielded transport casks, i.e., by weight and activity. The operations are conducted under water using remotely operated tooling and contamination
controls.
Callaway Energy Center Document A22-1644-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 2, Page 5 of 11 TLG Services, Inc.
Disassembly and segmentation of the remaining reactor internals, including the core shroud and lower core support assembly. Some material is expected to exceed Class C disposal requirements. As such, the segments will be packaged in modified fuel storage
canisters for geologic disposal. Segmentation of the reactor vessel. A shielded platform is installed for segmentation as cutting operations are performed in-air using remotely operated equipment within a contamination control envelope. The water level is maintained just below the cut to minimize the working area dose rates. Segments are transferred in-air to containers that are stored under water, for example, in an
isolated area of the refueling canal. Removal of the activated portions of the concrete biological shield and accessible contaminated concrete surfaces. If dictated by the steam generator and pressurizer removal scenarios, those portions of the associated cubicles necessary for access and component extraction
are removed. Removal of the steam generators and pressurizer for material recovery and controlled disposal. The generators will be moved to an
on-site processing center, the steam domes removed and the internal components segregated for recycling. The lower shell and tube bundle will be packaged for direct disposal. These components can serve as their own burial containers provided that all penetrations are properly sealed and the internal contaminants are stabilized, e.g.,
with grout. Steel shielding will be added, as necessary, to those external areas of the package to meet transportation limits and
regulations. The pressurizer is disposed of intact.
At least two years prior to the anticipated date of license termination, an LTP is required. Submitted as a supplement to the Final Safety Analysis Report (FSAR) or its equivalent, the plan must include: a site characterization, description of the remaining dismantling activities, plans for site remediation, procedures for the final radiation survey, designation of the end use of the site, an updated cost estimate to
complete the decommissioning, and any associated environmental concerns. The NRC will notice the receipt of the plan, make the plan available for public comment, and schedule a local hearing. LTP approval will be subject to any conditions and limitations as deemed appropriate by the Commission. The licensee may then commence with
the final remediation of site facilities and services, including:
Callaway Energy Center Document A22-1644-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 2, Page 6 of 11 TLG Services, Inc.
Removal of remaining plant systems and associated components as they become nonessential to the decommissioning program or worker health and safety (e.g., waste collection and treatment systems, electrical power and ventilation systems). Removal of the steel liners from refueling canal, disposing of the activated and contaminated sections as radioactive waste. Removal of
any activated/ contaminated concrete. Surveys of the decontaminated areas of the containment structure. Remediation and removal of the contaminated equipment and material from the fuel building and any other contaminated facility.
Radiation and contamination controls will be utilized until residual levels indicate that the structures and equipment can be released for unrestricted access and conventional demolition. This activity may necessitate the dismantling and disposition of most of the systems and components (both clean and contaminated) located within these buildings. This activity facilitates surface decontamination and subsequent verification surveys required prior to obtaining release
for demolition. Routing of material removed in the decontamination and dismantling to a central processing area. Material certified to be free of contamination is released for unrestricted disposition, e.g., as scrap, recycle, or general disposal. Contaminated material is characterized and segregated for additional off-site processing (disassembly, chemical cleaning, volume reduction, and waste treatment), and/or packaged for controlled disposal at a low-level radioactive waste
disposal facility.
Incorporated into the LTP is the Final Survey Plan. This plan identifies the radiological surveys to be performed once the decontamination activities are completed and is developed using the guidance provided in the "Multi-Agency Radiation Survey and Site Investigation Manual (MARSSIM)."
[16] This document incorporates the statistical approaches to survey design and data interpretation used by the EPA. It also identifies state-of-the-art, commercially available instrumentation and procedures for conducting radiological surveys. Use of this guidance ensures that the surveys are conducted in a manner that provides a high degree of confidence that applicable NRC criteria are satisfied. Once the survey is complete, the results are provided to the NRC in a format that can be verified. The NRC then reviews and evaluates the information, performs an independent confirmation of radiological site conditions, and makes a determination on final termination of the license.
Callaway Energy Center Document A22-1644-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 2, Page 7 of 11 TLG Services, Inc.
The NRC will terminate the operating license if it determines that site remediation has been performed in accordance with the LTP, and that the terminal radiation survey and associated documentation
demonstrate that the facility is suitable for release.
2.1.3 Period 3 - Site Restoration
Following completion of decommissioning operations, site restoration activities will begin. Efficient removal of the contaminated materials and verification that residual radionuclide concentrations are below the NRC limits will result in substantial damage to many of the structures.
Although performed in a controlled, safe manner, blasting, coring, drilling, scarification (surface removal), and the other decontamination activities will substantially degrade power block structures including the reactor, fuel handling, and radioactive waste buildings. Under certain circumstances, verifying that subsurface radionuclide concentrations meet NRC site release requirements will require removal of grade slabs and lower floors, potentially weakening footings and structural supports. This removal activity will be necessary for those facilities and plant areas where historical records, when available, indicate the potential for radionuclides having been present in the soil, where system failures have been recorded, or where it is required to confirm that subsurface process and drain lines were not breached over
the operating life of the station.
Prompt dismantling of site structures is clearly the most appropriate and cost-effective option. It is unreasonable to anticipate that these structures would be repaired and preserved after the radiological contamination is removed. The cost to dismantle site structures with a work force already mobilized on site is more efficient than if the process were deferred. Site facilities quickly degrade without maintenance, adding additional expense and creating potential hazards to the public as well as to future workers. A bandonment creates a breeding ground for vermin infestation as well as other biological hazards.
This cost study presumes that non-essential structures and site facilities are dismantled as a continuation of the decommissioning activity.
Foundations and exterior walls are removed to a nominal depth of three feet below grade. The three-foot depth allows for the placement of gravel for drainage, as well as topsoil, so that vegetation can be established for erosion control. Site areas affected by the dismantling activities are restored and the plant area graded as required to prevent ponding and
inhibit the refloating of subsurface materials.
Callaway Energy Center Document A22-1644-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 2, Page 8 of 11 TLG Services, Inc.
Non-contaminated concrete rubble produced by demolition activities is processed to remove reinforcing steel and miscellaneous embedments.
The processed material is then used on site to backfill foundation voids.
Excess non-contaminated materials are trucked to an off-site area for
disposal as construction debris.
2.2 SAFSTOR
The NRC defines SAFSTOR as "the alternative in which the nuclear facility is placed and maintained in a condition that allows the nuclear facility to be safely stored and subsequently decontaminated (deferred decontamination) to levels that permit release for unrestricted use." The facility is left intact (during the dormancy period), with structures maintained in a sound condition. Systems that are not required to support the spent fuel pool or site surveillance and security are drained, de-energized, and secured. Minimal cleaning/removal of loose contamination and/or fixation and sealing of remaining contamination is performed. Access to contaminated areas is
secured to provide controlled access for inspection and maintenance.
The engineering and planning requirements are similar to those for the DECON alternative, although a shorter time period is expected for these activities due to the more limited work scope. Site preparations are also similar to those for the DECON alternative. However, with the exception of the required radiation surveys and site characterizations, the mobilization and
preparation of site facilities is less extensive.
2.2.1 Period 1 - Preparations
Preparations for long-term storage include the planning for permanent defueling of the reactor, revision of technical specifications appropriate to the operating conditions and requirements, a characterization of the
facility and major components, and the development of the PSDAR.
The process of placing the plant in safe-storage includes, but is not
limited to, the following activities:
Isolation of the spent fuel storage services and fuel handling systems so that safe-storage operations may commence on the balance of the plant. This activity may be carried out by plant personnel in accordance with existing operating technical specifications. Activities are scheduled around the fuel handling systems to the greatest
extent possible.
Callaway Energy Center Document A22-1644-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 2, Page 9 of 11 TLG Services, Inc.
Transfer of the spent fuel from the storage pool to the ISFSI following the minimum required cooling period. Draining and de-energizing of the non-contaminated systems not required to support continued site operations or maintenance. Disposing of contaminated filter elements and resin beds not required for processing wastes from layup activities for future
operations. Draining of the reactor vessel, with the internals left in place and the vessel head secured. Draining and de-energizing non-essential, contaminated systems with decontamination as required for future maintenance and
inspection. Preparing lighting and alarm systems whose continued use is required; de-energizing portions of fire protection, electric power, and
HVAC systems whose continued use is not required. Cleaning of the loose surface contamination from building access pathways. Performing an interim radiation survey of plant, posting warning signs where appropriate. Erecting physical barriers and/or securing all access to radioactive or contaminated areas, except as required for inspection and
maintenance. Installing security and surveillance monitoring equipment and relocating security fence around secured structures, as required.
2.2.2 Period 2 - Dormancy
The second phase identified by the NRC in its rule addresses licensed activities during a storage period and is applicable to the dormancy phases of the deferred decommissioning alternatives. Dormancy activities include a 24-hour security force, preventive and corrective maintenance on security systems, area lighting, general building maintenance, heating and ventilation of buildings, routine radiological inspections of contaminated structures, maintenance of structural integrity, and a site environmental and radiation monitoring program.
Resident maintenance personnel perform equipment maintenance, inspection activities, routine services to maintain safe conditions, adequate lighting, heating, and ventilation, and periodic preventive
maintenance on essential site services.
Callaway Energy Center Document A22-1644-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 2, Page 10 of 11 TLG Services, Inc.
An environmental surveillance program is carried out during the dormancy period to ensure that releases of radioactive material to the environment are prevented and/or detected and controlled. Appropriate emergency procedures are established and initiated for potential releases that exceed prescribed limits. The environmental surveillance program constitutes an abbreviated version of the program in effect
during normal plant operations.
Security during the dormancy period is conducted primarily to prevent unauthorized entry and to protect the public from the consequences of its own actions. The security fence, sensors, alarms, and other surveillance equipment provide security. Fire and radiation alarms are
also monitored and maintained.
Consistent with the DECON scenario, the spent fuel storage pool is emptied within five and one-half years of the cessation of operations.
The pool is secured for storage and decommissioned along with the
power block structures in Period 4.
After an optional period of storage (such that license termination is accomplished within 60 years of final shutdown), it is required that the licensee submit an application to terminate the license, along with an
LTP (described in Section 2.1.2), thereby initiating the third phase.
2.2.3 Periods 3 and 4 - Delayed Decommissioning
Prior to the commencement of decommissioning operations, preparations are undertaken to reactivate site services and prepare for
decommissioning. Preparations include engineering and planning, a
detailed site characterization, and the assembly of a decommissioning management organization. Final planning for activities and the writing of activity specifications and detailed procedures are also initiated at
this time.
Much of the work in developing a termination plan is relevant to the development of the detailed engineering plans and procedures. The activities associated with this phase and the follow-on decontamination and dismantling processes are detailed in Sections 2.1.1 and 2.1.2. The primary difference between the sequences anticipated for the DECON and this deferred scenario is the absence, in the latter, of any constraint
on the availability of the fuel storage facilities for decommissioning.
Callaway Energy Center Document A22-1644-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 2, Page 11 of 11 TLG Services, Inc.
Variations in the length of the dormancy period are expected to have little effect upon the quantities of radioactive wastes generated from system and structure removal operations. Given the levels of radioactivity and spectrum of radionuclides expected from forty years of plant operation, no plant process system identified as being contaminated upon final shutdown will become releasable due to the decay period alone, i.e., there is no significant reduction in the waste generated from the decommissioning activities. However, due to the lower activity levels, a greater percentage of the waste volume can be
designated for off-site processing and recovery.
The delay in decommissioning also yields lower working area radiation levels. As such, the estimate for this delayed scenario incorporates reduced ALARA controls for the SAFSTOR's lower occupational
exposure potential.
Although the initial radiation levels due to 60Co will decrease during the dormancy period, the internal components of the reactor vessel will still exhibit sufficiently high radiation dose rates to require remote sectioning under water due to the presence of long-lived radionuclides
such as 94 Nb, 59Ni, and 63Ni. Therefore, the dismantling procedures described for the DECON alternative would still be employed during
this scenario. Portions of the biological shield will still be radioactive due to the presence of activated trace elements with long half-lives (152 Eu and 154Eu). Decontamination will require controlled removal and disposal. It is assumed that radioactive corrosion products on inner surfaces of piping and components will not have decayed to levels that will permit unrestricted use or allow conventional removal. These systems and components will be surveyed as they are removed and disposed of in accordance with the existing radioactive release criteria.
2.2.4 Period 5 - Site Restoration
Following completion of decommissioning operations, site-restoration activities can begin. Dismantling, as a continuation of the decommissioning process, is clearly the most appropriate and cost-effective option, as described in Section 2.1.3. The basis for the dismantling cost in this scenario is consistent with that described for DECON, presuming the removal of structures and site facilities to a nominal depth of three feet below grade and the limited restoration of
the site.
Callaway Energy Center Document A22-1644-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 3, Page 1 of 27 TLG Services, Inc.
- 3. COST ESTIMATE
The cost estimates prepared for decommissioning Callaway consider the unique features of the site, including the NSSS, power generation systems, support services, site buildings, and ancillary facilities. The basis of the estimates, including the sources of information relied upon, the estimating methodology employed, site-specific considerations, and other pertinent assumptions, is described in this
section.
3.1 BASIS OF ESTIMATE
The estimates were developed using the site-specific, technical information from the 2008 analysis. This information was reviewed for the current analysis and updated as deemed appropriate. The site-specific considerations and assumptions used in the previous evaluation were also revisited. Modifications were incorporated where new information was available or experience from previously completed decommissioning programs provided viable alternatives
or improved processes.
3.2 METHODOLOGY
The methodology used to develop the estimates follows the basic approach originally presented in the AIF/NESP-036 study report, "Guidelines for Producing Commercial Nuclear Power Plant Decommissioning Cost
Estimates,"[17] and the DOE "Decommissioning Handbook."[18] These documents present a unit factor method for estimating decommissioning activity costs, which simplifies the estimating calculations. Unit factors for concrete removal ($/cubic yard), steel removal ($/ton), and cutting costs ($/inch) are developed using local labor rates. The activity-dependent costs are estimated with the item quantities (cubic yards and tons), developed from plant drawings and inventory documents. Removal rates and material costs for the conventional disposition of components and structures rely upon information available in the industry publication, "Building Construction Cost
Data," published by R.S. Means.
[19]
The unit factor method provides a demonstrable basis for establishing reliable cost estimates. The detail provided in the unit factors, including activity duration, labor costs (by craft), and equipment and consumable costs, ensures that essential elements have not been omitted. Appendix A presents the detailed development of a typical unit factor. Appendix B provides the values
contained within one set of factors developed for this analysis.
Callaway Energy Center Document A22-1644-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 3, Page 2 of 27 TLG Services, Inc.
This analysis reflects lessons learned from TLG's involvement in the Shippingport Station Decommissioning Project, completed in 1989, as well as the decommissioning of the Cintichem reactor, hot cells, and associated facilities, completed in 1997. In addition, the planning and engineering for the Pathfinder, Shoreham, Rancho Seco, Trojan, Yankee Rowe, Big Rock Point, Maine Yankee, Humboldt Bay-3, Oyster Creek, Connecticut Yankee, and San Onofre-1 nuclear units have provided additional insight into the process, the regulatory aspects, and the technical challenges of decommissioning
commercial nuclear units.
Work Difficulty Factors
TLG has historically applied work difficulty adjustment factors (WDFs) to account for the inefficiencies in working in a power plant environment. WDFs are assigned to each unique set of unit factors, commensurate with the inefficiencies associated with working in confined, hazardous environments.
The ranges used for the WDFs are as follows:
Access Factor 10% to 20% Respiratory Protection Factor 10% to 50% Radiation/ALARA Factor 10% to 37% Protective Clothing Factor 10% to 30% Work Break Factor 8.33%
The factors and their associated range of values were developed in conjunction with the AIF/NESP-036 study. The application of the factors is discussed in
more detail in that publication.
Scheduling Program Durations
The unit factors, adjusted by the WDFs as described above, are applied against the inventory of materials to be removed in the radiological controlled areas.
The resulting man-hours, or crew-hours, are used in the development of the decommissioning program schedule, using resource loading and event sequencing considerations. The scheduling of conventional removal and dismantling activities is based upon productivity information available from
the "Building Construction Cost Data" publication.
An activity duration critical path is used to determine the total decommissioning program schedule. The schedule is relied upon in calculating the carrying costs, which include program management, administration, field Callaway Energy Center Document A22-1644-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 3, Page 3 of 27 TLG Services, Inc.
engineering, equipment rental, and support services such as quality control and security. This systematic approach for assembling decommissioning estimates ensures a high degree of confidence in the reliability of the resulting
costs.
3.3 FINANCIAL COMPONENTS OF THE COST MODEL TLG's proprietary decommissioning cost model, DECCER, produces a number of distinct cost elements. These direct expenditures, however, do not comprise the total cost to accomplish the project goal, i.e., license termination and site
restoration.
Inherent in any cost estimate that does not rely on historical data is the inability to specify the precise source of costs imposed by factors such as tool breakage, accidents, illnesses, weather delays, and labor stoppages. In the DECCER cost model, contingency fulfills this role. Contingency is added to each line item to account for costs that are difficult or impossible to develop analytically. Such costs are historically inevitable over the duration of a job of this magnitude; therefore, this cost analysis includes funds to cover these types
of expenses.
3.3.1 Contingency
The activity- and period-dependent costs are combined to develop the total decommissioning cost. A contingency is then applied on a line-item basis, using one or more of the contingency types listed in the AIF/NESP-036 study. "Contingencies" are defined in the American Association of Cost Engineers "Project and Cost Engineers'
Handbook"[20] as "specific provision for unforeseeable elements of cost within the defined project scope; particularly important where previous experience relating estimates and actual costs has shown that unforeseeable events which will increase costs are likely to occur." The cost elements in this analysis are based upon ideal conditions and maximum efficiency; therefore, consistent with industry practice, contingency is included. In the AIF/NESP-036 study, the types of unforeseeable events that are likely to occur in decommissioning are discussed and guidelines are provided for percentage contingency in each category. It should be noted that contingency, as used in this analysis, does not account for price escalation and inflation in the cost of
decommissioning over the remaining operating life of the station.
Contingency funds are an integral part of the total cost to complete the decommissioning process. Exclusion of this component puts at risk a Callaway Energy Center Document A22-1644-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 3, Page 4 of 27 TLG Services, Inc.
successful completion of the intended tasks and, potentially, subsequent related activities. For this study, TLG examined the major activity-related problems (decontamination, segmentation, equipment handling, packaging, transport, and waste disposal) that necessitate a contingency. Individual activity contingencies ranged from 10% to 75%,
depending on the degree of difficulty judged to be appropriate from TLG's actual decommissioning experience. The contingency values used
in this study are as follows:
Decontamination 50% Contaminated Component Removal 25% Contaminated Component Packaging 10% Contaminated Component Transport 15% Low-Level Radioactive Waste Disposal 25%
Reactor Segmentation 75% NSSS Component Removal 25% Reactor Waste Packaging 25% Reactor Waste Transport 25% Reactor Vessel Component Disposal 50% GTCC Disposal 15%
Non-Radioactive Component Removal 15% Heavy Equipment and Tooling 15% Supplies 25% Engineering 15% Energy 15%
Characterization and Termination Surveys 30% Construction 15% Taxes and Fees 10% Insurance 10% Staffing 15%
The contingency values are applied to the appropriate components of the estimates on a line item basis. A composite value is then reported at the end of each detailed estimate (as provided in Appendix C and D). For example, the composite contingency value reported for the DECON
alternative in Appendix C is approximately 18.0%.
Callaway Energy Center Document A22-1644-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 3, Page 5 of 27 TLG Services, Inc.
3.3.2 Financial Risk In addition to the routine uncertainties addressed by contingency, another cost element that is sometimes necessary to consider when bounding decommissioning costs relates to uncertainty, or risk.
Examples can include changes in work scope, pricing, job performance, and other variations that could conceivably, but not necessarily, occur.
Consideration is sometimes necessary to generate a level of confidence in the estimate, within a range of probabilities. TLG considers these types of costs under the broad term "financial risk." Included within the
category of financial risk are:
Transition activities and costs: ancillary expenses associated with eliminating 50% to 80% of the site labor force shortly after the cessation of plant operations, added cost for worker separation packages throughout the decommissioning program, national or company-mandated retraining, and retention incentives for key
personnel. Delays in approval of the decommissioning plan due to intervention, public participation in local community meetings, legal challenges, and national and local hearings. Changes in the project work scope from the baseline estimate, involving the discovery of unexpected levels of contaminants, contamination in places not previously expected, contaminated soil previously undiscovered (either radioactive or hazardous material contamination), variations in plant inventory or configuration not
indicated by the as-built drawings. Regulatory changes, for example, affecting worker health and safety, site release criteria, waste transportation, and disposal. Policy decisions altering national commitments (e.g., in the ability to accommodate certain waste forms for disposition), or in the timetable for such, for example, the start and rate of acceptance of spent fuel by
the DOE. Pricing changes for basic inputs such as labor, energy, materials, and disposal. Items subject to widespread price competition (such as materials) may not show significant variation; however, others such as waste disposal could exhibit large pricing uncertainties, particularly in markets where limited access to services is available.
It has been TLG's experience that the results of a risk analysis, when compared with the base case estimate for decommissioning, indicate Callaway Energy Center Document A22-1644-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 3, Page 6 of 27 TLG Services, Inc.
that the chances of the base decommissioning estimate's being too high is a low probability, and the chances that the estimate is too low is a higher probability. This is mostly due to the pricing uncertainty for low-level radioactive waste burial, and to a lesser extent due to schedule increases from changes in plant conditions and to pricing variations in the cost of labor (both craft and staff). This cost study, however, does not add any additional costs to the estimate for financial risk, since there is insufficient historical data from which to project future liabilities. Consequently, the areas of uncertainty or risk are revisited periodically and addressed through repeated revisions or updates of the
base estimates.
3.4 SITE-SPECIFIC CONSIDERATIONS
There are a number of site-specific considerations that affect the method for dismantling and removal of equipment from the site and the degree of restoration required. The cost impact of the considerations identified below is
included in this cost study.
3.4.1 Spent Fuel Management
The cost to dispose the spent fuel generated from plant operations is not reflected within the estimates to decommission Callaway. Ultimate disposition of the spent fuel is within the province of the DOE's Waste Management System, as defined by the Nuclear Waste Policy Act. As such, the disposal cost is financed by a 1 mill/kWhr surcharge paid into the DOE's waste fund during operations. However, the NRC requires licensees to establish a program to manage and provide funding for the management of all irradiated fuel at the reactor until title of the fuel is transferred to the Secretary of Energy. This funding requirement is fulfilled through inclusion of certain high-level waste cost elements
within the estimates, as described below.
For estimating purposes, Ameren Missouri has assumed that all spent fuel will be relocated to an ISFSI on the Callaway site within five and one-half years after shutdown. This will allow Ameren Missouri to proceed with decommissioning (or safe-storage) operations in the
shortest time possible.
It is assumed that the five and one-half years provides the necessary cooling period for the final core to meet storage requirements for decay heat. Once the pool is emptied, the spent fuel storage and handling Callaway Energy Center Document A22-1644-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 3, Page 7 of 27 TLG Services, Inc.
facilities are available for decommissioning. Operation and maintenance costs for the spent fuel pool are included within the estimate.
Canister Loading and Transfer
A cost of $240,000 is used for the labor to load/transport the spent fuel from the pool to the ISFSI. The capital cost for the dry storage system is
not included.
Operations and Maintenance
An annual cost of approximately $764,000 is used for operation and maintenance of the spent fuel pool. Pool operations are expected to continue approximately five and one-half years after the cessation of operations. An annual cost of approximately $90,000 is used for
operation and maintenance of the ISFSI during decommissioning.
GTCC The dismantling of the reactor internals will generate radioactive waste considered unsuitable for shallow land disposal, i.e., low-level radioactive waste with concentrations of radionuclides that exceed the limits established by the Commission for Class C radioactive waste (GTCC). The Low-Level Radioactive Waste Policy Amendments Act of 1985 assigned the federal government the responsibility for the disposal of this material. The Act also stated that the beneficiaries of the activities resulting in the generation of such radioactive waste bear all reasonable costs of disposing of such waste. However, to date, the federal government has not identified a cost for disposing of GTCC or a
schedule for acceptance.
For purposes of this study, GTCC is packaged in the same canisters used to transport spent fuel. The GTCC is assumed to be disposed of as it is
generated during reactor vessel segmentation operations.
3.4.2 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 Callaway Energy Center Document A22-1644-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 3, Page 8 of 27 TLG Services, Inc.
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 currently being decommissioned.
Access to navigable waterways has allowed these large packages to be transported to the Barnwell, South Carolina and Hanford, Washington disposal sites with minimal overland travel. Intact disposal of the reactor vessel and internal components can provide savings in cost and worker exposure by eliminating the complex segmentation requirements, isolation of the GTCC material, and transport/storage of the resulting waste packages. Portland General Electric (PGE) was able to dispose of the Trojan reactor as an intact package (including the internals). However, its location on the Columbia River simplified the
transportation analysis since:
the reactor package could be secured to the transport vehicle for the entire journey, i.e., the package was not lifted during
transport, there were no man-made or natural terrain features between the plant site and the disposal location that could produce a
large drop, and transport speeds were very low, limited by the overland transport vehicle and the river barge.
As a member of the Northwest Compact, PGE had a site available for disposal of the package - the US Ecology facility in Washington State.
The characteristics of this arid site proved favorable in demonstrating
compliance with land disposal regulations.
It is not known whether this option will be available when the Callaway unit ceases operation. Future viability of this option will depend upon the ultimate location of the disposal site, as well as the disposal site licensee's ability to accept highly radioactive packages and effectively isolate them from the environment. Consequently, the study assumes
the reactor vessel will require segmentation, as a bounding condition.
3.4.3 Primary System Components In the DECON scenario, the reactor coolant system components are assumed to be decontaminated using chemical agents prior to the start of dismantling operations. This type of decontamination can be expected Callaway Energy Center Document A22-1644-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 3, Page 9 of 27 TLG Services, Inc.
to have a significant ALARA impact, since in this scenario the removal work is done within the first few years of shutdown. A decontamination factor (average reduction) of 10 is assumed for the process. In the SAFSTOR scenario, radionuclide decay is expected to provide the same
benefit and, therefore, a chemical decontamination is not included.
The following discussion deals with the removal and disposition of the steam generators, but the techniques involved are also applicable to other large components, such as heat exchangers, component coolers, and the pressurizer. The steam generators' size and weight, as well as their location within the reactor building, will ultimately determine the
removal strategy.
A trolley crane is set up for the removal of the generators. It can also be used to move portions of the steam generator cubicle walls and floor slabs from the reactor building to a location where they can be decontaminated and transported to the material handling area.
Interferences within the work area, such as grating, piping, and other components are removed to create sufficient laydown space for
processing these large components.
The generators are rigged for removal, disconnected from the surrounding piping and supports, and maneuvered into the open area where they are lowered onto a dolly. Each generator is rotated into the horizontal position for extraction from the containment and placed onto a multi-wheeled vehicle for transport to an on-site processing and
storage area.
The generators are disassembled on-site with the steam dome and lightly contaminated subassemblies designated for off-site recycling. The more highly contaminated tube sheet and tube bundle are packaged for direct disposal. The interior volume is filled with low-density cellular
concrete for stabilization of the internal contamination.
Reactor coolant piping is cut from the reactor vessel once the water level in the vessel (used for personnel shielding during dismantling and cutting operations in and around the vessel) is dropped below the nozzle zone. The piping is boxed and transported by shielded van. The reactor coolant pumps and motors are lifted out intact, packaged, and
transported for processing and/or disposal.
Callaway Energy Center Document A22-1644-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 3, Page 10 of 27 TLG Services, Inc.
3.4.4 Retired Components The estimates include the cost to dispose of the retired steam generators expected to be in storage at the site upon the cessation of plant
operations. The components are size-reduced to facilitate transportation.
3.4.5 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 is surveyed and designated for either decontamination or volume reduction, conventional disposal, or controlled disposal. Components are packaged and readied for transport
in accordance with the intended disposition.
3.4.6 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.
[21] The contaminated material will be packaged in Industrial Packages (IP-1, IP-2, or IP-3, as defined in subpart 173.411) for transport unless demonstrated to qualify as their own shipping containers. The reactor vessel and internal components are expected to be transported in accordance with Part 71, as Type B. It is conceivable that the reactor, due to its limited specific activity, could qualify as LSA II or III. However, the high radiation levels on the outer surface would require that additional shielding be incorporated within the packaging
so as to attenuate the dose to levels acceptable for transport.
Any fuel cladding failure that occurred during the lifetime of the plant is assumed to have released fission products at sufficiently low levels that the buildup of quantities of long-lived isotopes (e.g., 137 Cs, 90 Sr, or transuranics) has been prevented from reaching levels exceeding those that permit the major reactor components to be shipped under current
transportation regulations and disposal requirements.
Transport of the highly activated metal, produced in the segmentation of the reactor vessel and internal components, will be by shielded truck cask. Cask shipments may exceed 95,000 pounds, including vessel Callaway Energy Center Document A22-1644-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 3, Page 11 of 27 TLG Services, Inc.
segment(s), supplementary shielding, cask tie-downs, and tractor-trailer. The maximum level of activity per shipment assumed permissible was based upon the license limits of the available shielded transport casks. The segmentation scheme for the vessel and internal
segments is designed to meet these limits.
The transport of large intact components (e.g., large heat exchangers and other oversized components) will be by a combination of truck, rail, and/or multi-wheeled transporter.
Transportation costs for material requiring controlled disposal are based upon the mileage to the Energy Solutions facility in Clive, Utah. Transportation costs for off-site waste processing are based upon the mileage to Oak Ridge, Tennessee. Truck transport costs are estimated
using published tariffs from Tri-State Motor Transit.
[22] 3.4.7 Low-Level Radioactive Waste Disposal To the greatest extent practical, metallic material generated in the decontamination and dismantling processes is processed to reduce the total cost of controlled disposal. Material meeting the regulatory and/or site release criterion, is released as scrap, requiring no further cost consideration. Conditioning (preparing the material to meet the waste acceptance criteria of the disposal site) and recovery of the waste stream
is performed off site at a licensed processing center. Any material
leaving the site is subject to a survey and release charge, at a minimum.
The mass of radioactive waste generated during the various decommissioning activities at the site is shown on a line-item basis in the detailed Appendices C and D, and summarized in Section 5. The quantified waste summaries shown in these tables are consistent with 10 CFR Part 61 classifications. Commercially available steel containers are presumed to be used for the disposal of piping, small components, and concrete. Larger components can serve as their own containers, with proper closure of all openings, access ways, and penetrations. The volumes are calculated based on the exterior package dimensions for containerized material or a specific calculation for components serving
as their own waste containers.
The more highly activated reactor components will be shipped in reusable, shielded truck casks with disposable liners. In calculating disposal costs, the burial fees are applied against the liner volume, as well as the special handling requirements of the payload. Packaging Callaway Energy Center Document A22-1644-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 3, Page 12 of 27 TLG Services, Inc.
efficiencies are lower for the highly activated materials (greater than Type A quantity waste), where high concentrations of gamma-emitting
radionuclides limit the capacity of the shipping canisters.
Disposal fees are based upon estimated charges, with surcharges added for the highly activated components, for example, generated in the segmentation of the reactor vessel. The cost to dispose of the majority of the material generated from the decontamination and dismantling activities is based upon the current cost for disposal at Energy Solutions facility in Clive, Utah. Disposal costs for the higher activity waste (Class B and C) were based upon the last published rate schedule for non-
compact waste for the Barnwell facility (as a proxy).
3.4.8 Site Conditions Following Decommissioning The NRC will terminate the site license when it determines that site remediation has been performed in accordance with the license termination plan, and that the terminal radiation survey and associated documentation demonstrate that the facility is suitable for release. The NRC's involvement in the decommissioning process will end at this point. Local building codes and state environmental regulations will dictate the next step in the decommissioning process, as well as the
owner's own future plans for the site.
The estimates presented herein include the dismantling of the major structures to just below ground level, backfilling and the collapsing of below grade voids, and regrading such that the site upon which the power block and supplemental structures are located is transformed into
a "grassy plain."
The existing electrical switchyard and access roads will remain in support of the electrical transmission and distribution system. Site restoration does not include the remediation of the water treatment
plant's settling basins, if required.
Sludge removed from the sewage treatment plant lagoon was assumed to contain low levels of contamination that would require controlled disposal. As such, 3,600 cubic feet of material from the lagoon was designated for disposition at Energy Solutions' facility.
The existing and replacement cooling tower discharge pipes will be left in place and flow filled with suitable material to prevent the pipes from
collapsing. The intake line will also be filled.
Callaway Energy Center Document A22-1644-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 3, Page 13 of 27 TLG Services, Inc.
The estimates do not assume the remediation of any significant volume of contaminated soil. This assumption may be affected by continued plant operations and/or future regulatory actions, such as the
development of site-specific release criteria.
3.5 ASSUMPTIONS
The following are the major assumptions made in the development of the
estimates for decommissioning the site.
3.5.1 Estimating Basis
The study follows the principles of ALARA through the use of work duration adjustment factors. These factors address the impact of activities such as radiological protection instruction, mock-up training, and the use of respiratory protection and protective clothing. The factors lengthen a task's duration, increasing costs and lengthening the overall schedule. ALARA planning is considered in the costs for engineering and planning, and in the development of activity specifications and detailed procedures. Changes to worker exposure limits may impact the
decommissioning cost and project schedule.
3.5.2 Labor Costs The craft labor required to decontaminate and dismantle the nuclear unit is acquired through standard site contracting practices. The current
cost of labor at the site is used as an estimating basis.
Ameren Missouri, as the operator, will continue to provide site operations support, including decommissioning program management, licensing, radiological protection, and site security. A Decommissioning Operations Contractor (DOC) will provide the supervisory staff needed to oversee the labor subcontractors, consultants, and specialty contractors needed to perform the work required for the decontamination and dismantling effort. The DOC will also provide the engineering services needed to develop activity specifications, detailed procedures, detailed activation analyses, and support field activities
such as structural modifications.
Personnel costs are based upon average salary information provided by Ameren Missouri. Overhead costs are included for site and corporate
support, reduced commensurate with the staffing of the project.
Callaway Energy Center Document A22-1644-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 3, Page 14 of 27 TLG Services, Inc.
Security, while reduced from operating levels, is maintained throughout the decommissioning for access control, material control, and to
safeguard the spent fuel.
3.5.3 Design Conditions
Any fuel cladding failure that occurred during the lifetime of the plant is assumed to have released fission products at sufficiently low levels that the buildup of quantities of long-lived isotopes (e.g., 137 Cs, 90 Sr, or transuranics) has been prevented from reaching levels exceeding those that permit the major NSSS components to be shipped under current
transportation regulations and disposal requirements.
The curie contents of the vessel and internals at final shutdown are derived from those listed in NUREG/CR-3474.
[23] Actual estimates are derived from the curie/gram values contained therein and adjusted for the different mass of the Callaway components, projected operating life, and different periods of decay. Additional short-lived isotopes were derived from CR-0130
[24] and CR-0672,[25] and benchmarked to the long-lived values from CR-3474.
The control elements are disposed of along with the spent fuel, i.e., there
is no additional cost provided for their disposal.
Activation of the containment building structure is confined to the biological shield. More extensive activation (at very low levels) of the interior structures within containment has been detected at several reactors and the owners have elected to dispose of the affected material at a controlled facility rather than reuse the material as fill on site or send it to a landfill. The ultimate disposition of the material removed from the containment building will depend upon the site release criteria
selected, as well as the designated end use for the site.
3.5.4 General
Transition Activities
Existing warehouses are cleared of non-essential material and remain for use by Ameren Missouri 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:
Callaway Energy Center Document A22-1644-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 3, Page 15 of 27 TLG Services, Inc.
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, i.e., the estimates do not address the disposition of any legacy wastes; the disposal of operating wastes during this initial period is not considered a
decommissioning expense.
Scrap and Salvage The existing plant equipment is considered obsolete and suitable for scrap as deadweight quantities only. Ameren Missouri will make economically reasonable efforts to salvage equipment following final plant shutdown. However, dismantling techniques assumed by TLG for equipment in this analysis are not consistent with removal techniques required for salvage (resale) of equipment. Experience has indicated that some buyers wanted equipment stripped down to very specific requirements before they would consider purchase. This required expensive rework after the equipment had been removed from its installed location. Since placing a salvage value on this machinery and equipment would be speculative, and the value would be small in comparison to the overall decommissioning expenses, this analysis does not attempt to quantify the value that an owner may realize based upon
those efforts.
It is assumed, for purposes of this analysis, that any value received from the sale of scrap generated in the dismantling process would be more than offset by the on-site processing costs. The dismantling techniques assumed in the decommissioning estimates do not include the additional cost for size reduction and preparation to meet "furnace ready" conditions. For example, the recovery of copper from electrical cabling may require the removal and disposition of any contaminated insulation, an added expense. With a volatile market, the potential profit margin in scrap recovery is highly speculative, regardless of the ability to free release this material. This assumption is an implicit recognition of scrap value in the disposal of clean metallic waste at no additional cost to the
project.
Furniture, tools, mobile equipment such as forklifts, trucks, bulldozers, and other property is removed at no cost or credit to the Callaway Energy Center Document A22-1644-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 3, Page 16 of 27 TLG Services, Inc.
decommissioning project. Disposition may include relocation to other facilities. Spare parts are also made available for alternative use.
Energy For estimating purposes, the plant is assumed to be de-energized, with the exception of those facilities associated with spent fuel storage.
Replacement power costs are used to calculate the cost of energy consumed during decommissioning for tooling, lighting, ventilation, and
essential services.
Insurance Costs for continuing coverage (nuclear liability and property insurance) following cessation of plant operations and during decommissioning are included and based upon current operating premiums. Reductions in premiums, throughout the decommissioning process, are based upon the guidance and the limits for coverage defined in the NRC's proposed rulemaking "Financial Protection Requirements for Permanently Shutdown Nuclear Power Reactors."
[26] The NRC's financial protection requirements are based on various reactor (and spent fuel)
configurations.
Taxes Property tax payments are included for the land only and will continue
through the decommissioning project.
Site Modifications The perimeter fence and in-plant security barriers will be moved, as appropriate, to conform to the Site Security Plan in force during the
various stages of the project.
3.6 COST ESTIMATE
SUMMARY
Schedules of expenditures are provided in Tables 3.1 and 3.2. The tables delineate the cost contributors by year of expenditures as well as cost
contributor (e.g., labor, materials, and waste disposal).
The cost elements are also assigned to one of three subcategories: "License Termination," "Spent Fuel Management," and "Site Restoration." The subcategory "License Termination" is used to accumulate costs that are Callaway Energy Center Document A22-1644-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 3, Page 17 of 27 TLG Services, Inc.
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. These costs are identified in Tables 3.1a and 3.2a.
The "Spent Fuel Management" subcategory contains costs associated with the
five and one-half years of post-shutdown pool operations and the transfer of the fuel from the pool to the ISFSI. These costs are identified in Tables 3.1b and 3.2b.
"Site Restoration" is used to capture costs associated with the dismantling and demolition of buildings and facilities demonstrated to be free from contamination. This includes structures never exposed to radioactive materials, as well as those facilities that have been decontaminated to appropriate levels. Structures are removed to a depth of three feet and backfilled to conform to local grade. These costs are identified in Tables 3.1c
and 3.2c.
As discussed in Section 3.4.1, while designated for disposal at the geologic repository along with the spent fuel, GTCC waste is still classified as low-level radioactive waste and, as such, included as a "License Termination" expense.
Decommissioning costs are reported in 2011 dollars. Costs are not inflated, escalated, or discounted over the period of expenditure (or projected lifetime of the plant). The schedules are based upon the detailed activity costs reported in
Appendices C and D, along with the timeline presented in Section 4.
Callaway Energy Center Document A22-1644-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 3, Page 18 of 27 TLG Services, Inc.
TABLE 3.1 DECON ALTERNATIVE SCHEDULE OF TOTAL ANNUAL EXPENDITURES (thousands, 2011 dollars)
Equipment &
Year Labor Materials Energy Burial Other
[1] Total [2] 2024 11,577 978 171 7 1,965 14,699 2025 58,992 7,323 1,003 1,575 15,120 84,013 2026 68,700 25,346 1,052 25,055 29,700 149,853 2027 67,008 26,210 767 29,080 24,429 147,494 2028 58,156 10,262 626 7,944 10,104 87,092 2029 57,997 10,234 624 7,922 10,076 86,854 2030 44,042 6,998 413 6,611 7,058 65,122 2031 32,625 8,686 143 19 3,369 44,842 2032 30,644 26,753 83 0 3,681 61,162 2033 6,698 5,848 18 0 805 13,369 Total 436,438 128,637 4,901 78,214 106,307 754,498
[1] Includes property taxes, insurance, fees, surveys, and GTCC disposal
[2] Columns may not add due to rounding Callaway Energy Center Document A22-1644-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 3, Page 19 of 27 TLG Services, Inc.
TABLE 3.1a DECON ALTERNATIVE SCHEDULE OF LICENSE TERMINATION EXPENDITURES (thousands, 2011 dollars)
Equipment &
Year Labor Materials Energy Burial Other Total 2024 11,240 340 171 7 1,458 13,217 2025 57,149 4,265 1,003 1,575 12,653 76,646 2026 65,441 22,302 1,052 25,055 27,550 141,399 2027 63,309 23,019 767 29,080 22,380 138,556 2028 53,411 6,604 626 7,944 7,841 76,426 2029 53,265 6,586 624 7,922 7,820 76,217 2030 42,642 5,919 413 6,611 6,390 61,975 2031 24,040 1,157 119 19 3,281 28,616 2032 140 0 0 0 3,366 3,506 2033 31 0 0 0 736 766 Total 370,666 70,191 4,776 78,214 93,476 617,324
Callaway Energy Center Document A22-1644-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 3, Page 20 of 27 TLG Services, Inc.
TABLE 3.1b DECON ALTERNATIVE SCHEDULE OF SPENT FUEL MANAGEMENT EXPENDITURES (thousands, 2011 dollars)
Equipment &
Year Labor Materials Energy Burial Other Total 2024 213 638 0 0 507 1,358 2025 1,019 3,058 0 0 2,467 6,543 2026 999 2,997 0 0 2,128 6,124 2027 1,013 3,038 0 0 1,984 6,035 2028 993 2,979 0 0 1,990 5,962 2029 990 2,971 0 0 1,984 5,946 2030 293 879 0 0 587 1,759 2031 0 0 0 0 0 0 2032 0 0 0 0 0 0 2033 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total 5,520 16,560 0 0 11,646 33,726
Callaway Energy Center Document A22-1644-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 3, Page 21 of 27 TLG Services, Inc.
TABLE 3.1c DECON ALTERNATIVE SCHEDULE OF SITE RESTORATION EXPENDITURES (thousands, 2011 dollars)
Equipment &
Year Labor Materials Energy Burial Other Total 2024 125 0 0 0 0 125 2025 824 0 0 0 0 824 2026 2,261 48 0 0 22 2,330 2027 2,686 153 0 0 65 2,904 2028 3,751 679 0 0 273 4,703 2029 3,741 677 0 0 272 4,691 2030 1,107 200 0 0 81 1,388 2031 8,585 7,529 23 0 89 16,226 2032 30,505 26,753 83 0 315 57,656 2033 6,668 5,848 18 0 69 12,602 Total 60,252 41,886 125 0 1,185 103,448
Callaway Energy Center Document A22-1644-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 3, Page 22 of 27 TLG Services, Inc.
TABLE 3.2 SAFSTOR ALTERNATIVE SCHEDULE OF TOTAL ANNUAL EXPENDITURES (thousands, 2011 dollars) Equipment &
Year Labor Materials Energy Burial Other
[1] Total [2] 2024 9,543 879 171 7 1,843 12,444 2025 48,860 7,091 832 447 9,451 66,682 2026 23,651 5,167 365 629 18,659 48,472 2027 13,317 3,369 166 13 4,330 21,196 2028 13,353 3,378 167 13 4,342 21,254 2029 13,317 3,369 166 13 4,330 21,196 2030 6,299 1,203 108 8 2,255 9,874 2031 3,350 293 83 6 1,383 5,116 2032 3,360 294 83 6 1,387 5,130 2033 3,350 293 83 6 1,383 5,116 2034 3,350 293 83 6 1,383 5,116 2035 3,350 293 83 6 1,383 5,116 2036 3,360 294 83 6 1,387 5,130 2037 3,350 293 83 6 1,383 5,116 2038 3,350 293 83 6 1,383 5,116 2039 3,350 293 83 6 1,383 5,116 2040 3,360 294 83 6 1,387 5,130 2041 3,350 293 83 6 1,383 5,116 2042 3,350 293 83 6 1,383 5,116 2043 3,350 293 83 6 1,383 5,116 2044 3,360 294 83 6 1,387 5,130 2045 3,350 293 83 6 1,383 5,116 2046 3,350 293 83 6 1,383 5,116 2047 3,350 293 83 6 1,383 5,116 2048 3,360 294 83 6 1,387 5,130 2049 3,350 293 83 6 1,383 5,116 2050 3,350 293 83 6 1,383 5,116 2051 3,350 293 83 6 1,383 5,116 2052 3,360 294 83 6 1,387 5,130 2053 3,350 293 83 6 1,383 5,116 2054 3,350 293 83 6 1,383 5,116 2055 3,350 293 83 6 1,383 5,116 2056 3,360 294 83 6 1,387 5,130 Callaway Energy Center Document A22-1644-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 3, Page 23 of 27 TLG Services, Inc.
TABLE 3.2 (continued)
SAFSTOR ALTERNATIVE SCHEDULE OF TOTAL ANNUAL EXPENDITURES (thousands, 2011 dollars) Equipment &
Year Labor Materials Energy Burial Other
[1] Total [2] 2057 3,350 293 83 6 1,383 5,116 2058 3,350 293 83 6 1,383 5,116 2059 3,350 293 83 6 1,383 5,116 2060 3,360 294 83 6 1,387 5,130 2061 3,350 293 83 6 1,383 5,116 2062 3,350 293 83 6 1,383 5,116 2063 3,350 293 83 6 1,383 5,116 2064 3,360 294 83 6 1,387 5,130 2065 3,350 293 83 6 1,383 5,116 2066 3,350 293 83 6 1,383 5,116 2067 3,350 293 83 6 1,383 5,116 2068 3,360 294 83 6 1,387 5,130 2069 3,350 293 83 6 1,383 5,116 2070 3,350 293 83 6 1,383 5,116 2071 3,350 293 83 6 1,383 5,116 2072 3,360 294 83 6 1,387 5,130 2073 3,350 293 83 6 1,383 5,116 2074 3,350 293 83 6 1,383 5,116 2075 3,350 293 83 6 1,383 5,116 2076 3,360 294 83 6 1,387 5,130 2077 3,350 293 83 6 1,383 5,116 2078 27,456 1,188 444 18 2,894 31,999 2079 43,085 5,077 832 34 4,135 53,163 2080 60,287 28,908 794 34,110 27,083 151,182 2081 50,850 11,050 657 12,469 10,971 85,998 2082 48,476 6,552 624 6,987 6,905 69,544 2083 48,476 6,552 624 6,987 6,905 69,544 2084 33,183 6,970 169 308 3,483 44,112 2085 30,561 26,679 83 0 3,605 60,929 2086 9,126 7,967 25 0 1,077 18,195 Total 637,419 139,174 10,144 62,323 177,324 1,026,384
[1] Includes property taxes, insurance, fees, surveys, and GTCC disposal
[2] Columns may not add due to rounding Callaway Energy Center Document A22-1644-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 3, Page 24 of 27 TLG Services, Inc.
TABLE 3.2a SAFSTOR ALTERNATIVE SCHEDULE OF LICENSE TERMINATION EXPENDITURES (thousands, 2011 dollars) Equipment &
Year Labor Materials Energy Burial Other Total
2024 9,331 241 171 7 1,336 11,086 2025 47,813 3,949 832 447 6,984 60,026 2026 16,334 2,117 307 629 15,872 35,259 2027 3,351 419 83 13 1,407 5,273 2028 3,360 420 83 13 1,410 5,288 2029 3,351 419 83 13 1,407 5,273 2030 3,350 330 83 8 1,390 5,162 2031 3,350 293 83 6 1,383 5,116 2032 3,360 294 83 6 1,387 5,130 2033 3,350 293 83 6 1,383 5,116 2034 3,350 293 83 6 1,383 5,116 2035 3,350 293 83 6 1,383 5,116 2036 3,360 294 83 6 1,387 5,130 2037 3,350 293 83 6 1,383 5,116 2038 3,350 293 83 6 1,383 5,116 2039 3,350 293 83 6 1,383 5,116 2040 3,360 294 83 6 1,387 5,130 2041 3,350 293 83 6 1,383 5,116 2042 3,350 293 83 6 1,383 5,116 2043 3,350 293 83 6 1,383 5,116 2044 3,360 294 83 6 1,387 5,130 2045 3,350 293 83 6 1,383 5,116 2046 3,350 293 83 6 1,383 5,116 2047 3,350 293 83 6 1,383 5,116 2048 3,360 294 83 6 1,387 5,130 2049 3,350 293 83 6 1,383 5,116 2050 3,350 293 83 6 1,383 5,116 2051 3,350 293 83 6 1,383 5,116 2052 3,360 294 83 6 1,387 5,130 2053 3,350 293 83 6 1,383 5,116 2054 3,350 293 83 6 1,383 5,116 2055 3,350 293 83 6 1,383 5,116 2056 3,360 294 83 6 1,387 5,130 Callaway Energy Center Document A22-1644-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 3, Page 25 of 27 TLG Services, Inc.
TABLE 3.2a (continued)
SAFSTOR ALTERNATIVE SCHEDULE OF LICENSE TERMINATION EXPENDITURES (thousands, 2011 dollars) Equipment &
Year Labor Materials Energy Burial Other Total
2057 3,350 293 83 6 1,383 5,116 2058 3,350 293 83 6 1,383 5,116 2059 3,350 293 83 6 1,383 5,116 2060 3,360 294 83 6 1,387 5,130 2061 3,350 293 83 6 1,383 5,116 2062 3,350 293 83 6 1,383 5,116 2063 3,350 293 83 6 1,383 5,116 2064 3,360 294 83 6 1,387 5,130 2065 3,350 293 83 6 1,383 5,116 2066 3,350 293 83 6 1,383 5,116 2067 3,350 293 83 6 1,383 5,116 2068 3,360 294 83 6 1,387 5,130 2069 3,350 293 83 6 1,383 5,116 2070 3,350 293 83 6 1,383 5,116 2071 3,350 293 83 6 1,383 5,116 2072 3,360 294 83 6 1,387 5,130 2073 3,350 293 83 6 1,383 5,116 2074 3,350 293 83 6 1,383 5,116 2075 3,350 293 83 6 1,383 5,116 2076 3,360 294 83 6 1,387 5,130 2077 3,350 293 83 6 1,383 5,116 2078 26,844 1,188 444 18 2,894 31,387 2079 42,237 5,077 832 34 4,135 52,315 2080 57,000 28,826 794 34,110 27,053 147,782 2081 47,617 10,568 657 12,469 10,778 82,089 2082 45,269 5,971 624 6,987 6,671 65,522 2083 45,269 5,971 624 6,987 6,671 65,522 2084 26,800 1,464 152 308 3,408 32,132 2085 139 0 0 0 3,291 3,430 2086 42 0 0 0 983 1,024 Total 535,683 80,735 9,686 62,323 160,746 849,173
Callaway Energy Center Document A22-1644-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 3, Page 26 of 27 TLG Services, Inc.
TABLE 3.2b SAFSTOR ALTERNATIVE SCHEDULE OF SPENT FUEL MANAGEMENT EXPENDITURES (thousands, 2011 dollars) Equipment &
Year Labor Materials Energy Burial Other Total
2024 213 638 0 0 507 1,358 2025 1,047 3,142 0 0 2,467 6,656 2026 7,317 3,050 58 0 2,787 13,212 2027 9,966 2,950 83 0 2,924 15,923 2028 9,993 2,958 83 0 2,932 15,966 2029 9,966 2,950 83 0 2,924 15,923 2030 2,949 873 25 0 865 4,711 2031-86 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total 41,451 16,560 333 0 15,405 73,749
Callaway Energy Center Document A22-1644-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 3, Page 27 of 27 TLG Services, Inc.
TABLE 3.2c SAFSTOR ALTERNATIVE SCHEDULE OF SITE RESTORATION EXPENDITURES (thousands, 2011 dollars) Equipment &
Year Labor Materials Energy Burial Other Total
2024-77 0 0 0 0 0 0 2078 539 0 0 0 0 539 2079 873 0 0 0 0 873 2080 3,144 77 0 0 28 3,250 2081 3,304 466 0 0 186 3,956 2082 3,293 596 0 0 240 4,129 2083 3,293 596 0 0 240 4,129 2084 6,332 5,497 17 0 70 11,917 2085 30,421 26,679 83 0 314 57,498 2086 9,085 7,967 25 0 94 17,171 Total 60,285 41,879 125 0 1,173 103,462 Callaway Energy Center Document A22-1644-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 4, Page 1 of 4 TLG Services, Inc.
- 4. SCHEDULE ESTIMATE
The schedules for the decommissioning scenarios considered in this study follow the sequences presented in the AIF/NESP-036 study, with minor changes to reflect recent experience and site-specific constraints. In addition, the scheduling has been revised
to reflect the spent fuel management plan described in Section 3.4.1.
A schedule or sequence of activities for the DECON alternative is presented in Figure 4.1. The scheduling sequence assumes that fuel is removed from the spent fuel pool within five and one-half years. The key activities listed in the schedule do not reflect a one-to-one correspondence with those activities in the cost tables, but reflect dividing some activities for clarity and combining others for convenience. The schedule was prepared using the "Microsoft Project Professional 2010" computer
software.[27] 4.1 SCHEDULE ESTIMATE ASSUMPTIONS
The schedule reflects the results of a precedence network developed for the site decommissioning activities, i.e., a PERT (Program Evaluation and Review Technique) Software Package. The work activity durations used in the precedence network reflect the actual man-hour estimates from the cost table, adjusted by stretching certain activities over their slack range and shifting the start and end dates of others. The following assumptions were made in the
development of the decommissioning schedule:
The fuel building is isolated until such time that all spent fuel has been transferred from the spent fuel pool to the DOE. Decontamination and dismantling of the storage pool is initiated once the transfer of spent
fuel is complete (DECON option). All work (except vessel and internals removal) is performed during an 8-hour workday, 5 days per week, with no overtime. There are eleven paid holidays per year. Reactor and internals removal activities are performed by using separate crews for different activities working on different shifts, with a
corresponding backshift charge for the second shift. Multiple crews work parallel activities to the maximum extent possible, consistent with optimum efficiency, adequate access for cutting, removal and laydown space, and with the stringent safety measures
necessary during demolition of heavy components and structures.
Callaway Energy Center Document A22-1644-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 4, Page 2 of 4 TLG Services, Inc.
For plant systems removal, the systems with the longest removal durations in areas on the critical path are considered to determine
the duration of the activity.
4.2 PROJECT SCHEDULE
The period-dependent costs presented in the detailed cost tables are based upon the durations developed in the schedules for decommissioning. Durations are established between several milestones in each project period; these durations are used to establish a critical path for the entire project. In turn, the critical path duration for each period is used as the basis for determining the period-dependent costs. A second critical path is shown for the spent fuel storage period, which determines the release of the Fuel Building for final
decontamination.
Project timelines are provided in Figures 4.2 and 4.3 with milestone dates based on a 2024 shutdown date. The fuel pool is emptied approximately five and one-half years after shutdown. Deferred decommissioning in the SAFSTOR scenarios is assumed to commence so that the operating license is terminated
within a 60-year period from the cessation of plant operations.
Callaway Energy Center Document A22-1644-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 4, Page 3 of 4 TLG Services, Inc.
FIGURE 4.1 ACTIVITY SCHEDULE
Legend: 1. Red text and/or shaded scheduling bars indicate critical path activities
- 2. Shaded scheduling bars associated with major decommissioning periods, e.g., Period 1a, indicate overall duration of that period
- 3. Blue text and/or diamond symbols indicate major milestones
Callaway Energy Center Document A22-1644-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 4, Page 4 of 4 TLG Services, Inc.
FIGURE 4.2 DECOMMISSIONING TIMELINES (not to scale)
DECON Alternative
SAFSTOR Alternative
Pool Operations Storage Pool Empty 04/2030 Period 1 Transition and Preparations 10/2024 04/2026 09/2031 03/2033 Period 2 Decommissioning Period 3 Site Restoration Storage Pool Empty 04/2030 Period 1 Transition and Preparations 10/2024 04/2026 10/2084 04/2086 01/2080 Period 2 Dormancy 07/2078 Period 3 Delayed Preparations Period 4 Decommissioning Period 5 Site Restoration Callaway Energy Center Document A22-1644-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 5, Page 1 of 4 TLG Services, Inc.
- 5. RADIOACTIVE WASTES
The objectives of the decommissioning process are the removal of all radioactive material from the site that would restrict its future use and the termination of the NRC license. This currently requires the remediation of all radioactive material at the site in excess of applicable legal limits. Under the Atomic Energy Act,[28] the NRC is responsible for protecting the public from sources of ionizing radiation. Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations delineates the production, utilization, and disposal of radioactive materials and processes. In particular, Part 71 defines radioactive material as it pertains to transportation and Part 61 specifies its
disposition.
Most of the materials being transported for controlled burial are categorized as Low Specific Activity (LSA) or Surface Contaminated Object (SCO) materials containing Type A quantities, as defined in 49 CFR Parts 173-178. Shipping containers are required to be Industrial Packages (IP-1, IP-2 or IP-3, as defined in 10 CFR
§173.411). For this study, commercially available steel containers are presumed to be used for the disposal of piping, small components, and concrete. Larger components can serve as their own containers, with proper closure of all openings, access ways, and penetrations.
The volumes of radioactive waste generated during the various decommissioning activities at the site are shown on a line-item basis in Appendices C and D, and summarized in Tables 5.1 and 5.2. The quantified waste volume summaries shown in these tables are consistent with Part 61 classifications. The volumes are calculated based on the exterior dimensions for containerized material and on the
displaced volume of components serving as their own waste containers.
The reactor vessel and internals are categorized as large quantity shipments and, accordingly, will be shipped in reusable, shielded truck casks with disposable liners.
In calculating disposal costs, the burial fees are applied against the liner volume, as well as the special handling requirements of the payload. Packaging efficiencies are lower for the highly activated materials (greater than Type A quantity waste),
where high concentrations of gamma-emitting radionuclides limit the capacity of
the shipping canisters.
No process system containing/handling radioactive substances at shutdown is presumed to meet material release criteria by decay alone (i.e., systems radioactive at shutdown will still be radioactive over the time period during which the decommissioning is accomplished, due to the presence of long-lived radionuclides).
Callaway Energy Center Document A22-1644-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 5, Page 2 of 4 TLG Services, Inc.
While the dose rates decrease with time, radionuclides such as 137Cs will still control the disposition requirements.
The waste material produced in the decontamination and dismantling of the nuclear units is primarily generated during Period 2 of DECON and Period 4 of SAFSTOR. Material that is considered potentially contaminated when removed from the radiological controlled area is sent to processing facilities in Tennessee for conditioning and disposal. Heavily contaminated components and activated materials are routed for controlled disposal. The disposal volumes reported in the
tables reflect the savings resulting from reprocessing and recycling.
For purposes of constructing the estimates, the cost for disposal at the Energy Solutions facility was used as a proxy for future disposal facilities. Separate rates were used for containerized waste and large components, including the steam generators and reactor coolant pump motors. Demolition debris including miscellaneous steel, scaffolding, and concrete was disposed of at a bulk rate. The
decommissioning waste stream also included resins and dry active waste.
Since Energy Solutions is not currently able to receive the more highly radioactive components generated in the decontamination and dismantling of the reactor, disposal costs for the Class B and C material were based upon the last published rate schedule for non-compact waste for the Barnwell facility (as a proxy).
Additional surcharges were included for activity, dose rate, and/or handling added
as appropriate for the particular package.
A small quantity of material generated during the decommissioning will not be considered suitable for near-surface disposal, and is assumed to be disposed of in a geologic repository, in a manner similar to that envisioned for spent fuel disposal.
Such material, known as Greater-Than-Class-C or GTCC material, is estimated to require six spent fuel storage canisters (or the equivalent) to dispose of the most radioactive portions of the reactor vessel internals. The volume and weight reported in Tables 5.1 and 5.2 represent the packaged weight and volume of the spent fuel
storage canisters.
Callaway Energy Center Document A22-1644-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 5, Page 3 of 4 TLG Services, Inc.
TABLE 5.1 DECON ALTERNATIVE DECOMMISSIONING WASTE
SUMMARY
Waste Cost Basis Class
[1] Waste Volume (cubic feet)
Mass (pounds) Low-Level Radioactive
Waste (near-surface
disposal)
Energy Solutions A 146,443 12,358,063 Barnwell B 1,690 191,293 Barnwell C 459 48,448 Greater than Class C (geologic repository)
Spent Fuel Equivalent GTCC 2,142 422,146 Processed/Conditioned (off-site recycling center)
Recycling Vendors A 281,077 10,863,740 Totals [2] 431,812 23,883,690
[1] Waste is classified according to the requirements as delineated in Title 10 CFR, Part 61.55
[2] Columns may not add due to rounding.
Callaway Energy Center Document A22-1644-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 5, Page 4 of 4 TLG Services, Inc.
TABLE 5.2 SAFSTOR ALTERNATIVE DECOMMISSIONING WASTE
SUMMARY
Waste Cost Basis Class
[1] Waste Volume (cubic feet)
Mass (pounds) Low-Level Radioactive
Waste (near-surface
disposal) EnergySolutions A 123,652 9,946,932 Barnwell B 376 49,054 Barnwell C 470 47,758 Greater than Class C (geologic repository)
Spent Fuel Equivalent GTCC 2,142 422,146 Processed/Conditioned (off-site recycling center)
Recycling Vendors A 301,556 11,730,720 Totals [2] 428,196 22,196,610
[1] Waste is classified according to the requirements as delineated in Title 10 CFR, Part 61.55
[2] Columns may not add due to rounding.
Callaway Energy Center Document A22-1644-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 6, Page 1 of 5 TLG Services, Inc.
- 6. RESULTS
The analysis to estimate the costs to decommission Callaway relied upon the site-specific, technical information developed for a previous analysis prepared in 2008.
While not an engineering study, the estimates provide the plant owner with sufficient information to assess its financial obligations, as they pertain to the
eventual decommissioning of the nuclear station.
The estimates described in this report are based on numerous fundamental assumptions, including regulatory requirements, project contingencies, low-level radioactive waste disposal practices, high-level radioactive waste management options, and site restoration requirements. The decommissioning scenarios assume continued operation of the station's spent fuel pool for a minimum of five and on-half years following the cessation of operations for continued cooling of the assemblies. Once sufficiently cooled, the assemblies will be moved to the ISFSI for interim storage and to await transfer to a DOE facility (e.g., geologic repository).
The cost projected to promptly decommission (DECON) Callaway is estimated to be
$754.5 million. The majority of this cost (approximately 81.8%) is associated with the physical decontamination and dismantling of the nuclear unit so that the operating license can be terminated. Another 4.5% is associated with the management, interim storage, and eventual transfer of the spent fuel. The remaining 13.7% is for the demolition of the designated structures and limited
restoration of the site.
The cost projected for deferred decommissioning (SAFSTOR) is estimated to be
$1,026.4 million. The majority of this cost (approximately 82.7%) is associated with
placing the unit in storage, ongoing caretaking of the unit during dormancy, and the eventual physical decontamination and dismantling of the nuclear unit so that the operating license can be terminated. Another 7.2% is associated with the management, interim storage, and eventual transfer of the spent fuel. The remaining 10.1% is for the demolition of the designated structures and limited
restoration of the site.
The primary cost contributors, identified in Tables 6.1 and 6.2, are either labor-related or associated with the management and disposition of the radioactive waste.
Program management is the largest single contributor to the overall cost. The magnitude of the expense is a function of both the size of the organization required to manage the decommissioning, as well as the duration of the program. It is assumed, for purposes of this analysis, that Ameren Missouri will oversee the decommissioning program, using a DOC to manage the decommissioning labor force
and the associated subcontractors. The size and composition of the management Callaway Energy Center Document A22-1644-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 6, Page 2 of 5 TLG Services, Inc.
organization varies with the decommissioning phase and associated site activities. However, once the operating license is terminated, the staff is substantially reduced for the conventional demolition and restoration of the site (for the DECON
alternative).
As described in this report, the spent fuel pool will remain operational for a minimum of five and one-half years following the cessation of operations. The pool will be isolated and an independent spent fuel island created. This will allow decommissioning operations to proceed in and around the pool area. Over the five and one-half year period, the spent fuel will be packaged into multi-purpose canisters and transferred to the ISFSI. The ISFSI will continue to operate until
such time that the transfer of spent fuel to a DOE facility is complete.
The cost for waste disposal includes only those costs associated with the controlled disposition of the low-level radioactive waste generated from decontamination and dismantling activities, including plant equipment and components, structural material, filters, resins and dry-active waste. As described in Section 5, disposition of the low-level radioactive material required controlled disposal is at the Energy Solutions' facility. Highly activated components, requiring additional isolation from the environment (GTCC), are packaged for geologic disposal. The cost
of geologic disposal is based upon a cost equivalent for spent fuel.
A significant portion of the metallic waste is designated for additional processing and treatment at an off-site facility. Processing reduces the volume of material requiring controlled disposal through such techniques and processes as survey and sorting, decontamination, and volume reduction. The material that cannot be unconditionally released is packaged for controlled disposal at one of the currently operating facilities. The cost identified in the summary tables for processing is all-
inclusive, incorporating the ultimate disposition of the material.
Removal costs reflect the labor-intensive nature of the decommissioning process, as well as the management controls required to ensure a safe and successful program.
Decontamination and packaging costs also have a large labor component that is based upon prevailing union wages. Non-radiological demolition is a natural extension of the decommissioning process. The methods employed in decontamination and dismantling are generally destructive and indiscriminate in inflicting collateral damage. With a work force mobilized to support decommissioning operations, non-radiological demolition can be an integrated activity and a logical expansion of the work being performed in the process of terminating the operating license. Prompt demolition reduces future liabilities and can be more cost effective than deferral, due to the deterioration of the facilities (and therefore the working conditions) with time.
Callaway Energy Center Document A22-1644-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 6, Page 3 of 5 TLG Services, Inc.
The reported cost for transport includes the tariffs and surcharges associated with moving large components and/or overweight shielded casks overland, as well as the general expense, e.g., labor and fuel, of transporting material to the destinations identified in this report. For purposes of this analysis, material is primarily moved
overland by truck.
Decontamination is used to reduce the plant's radiation fields and minimize worker exposure. Slightly contaminated material or material located within a contaminated area is sent to an off-site processing center, i.e., this analysis does not assume that contaminated plant components and equipment can be decontaminated for uncontrolled release in-situ. Centralized processing centers have proven to be a more economical means of handling the large volumes of material produced in the
dismantling of a nuclear unit.
License termination survey costs are associated with the labor intensive and complex activity of verifying that contamination has been removed from the site to the levels specified by the regulating agency. This process involves a systematic survey of all remaining plant surface areas and surrounding environs, sampling, isotopic analysis, and documentation of the findings. The status of any plant components and materials not removed in the decommissioning process will also require confirmation and will add to the expense of surveying the facilities alone.
The remaining costs include allocations for heavy equipment and temporary services, as well as for other expenses such as regulatory fees and the premiums for nuclear insurance. While site operating costs are greatly reduced following the final cessation of plant operations, certain administrative functions do need to be
maintained either at a basic functional or regulatory level.
Callaway Energy Center Document A22-1644-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 6, Page 4 of 5 TLG Services, Inc.
TABLE 6.1 DECON ALTERNATIVE DECOMMISSIONING COST ELEMENTS (thousands of 2011 dollars)
Cost Element Total Percentage Decontamination 18,215 2.4 Removal 161,612 21.4 Packaging 24,658 3.3 Transportation 13,787 1.8 Waste Disposal 65,642 8.7 Off-site Waste Processing 25,465 3.4 Program Management
[1] 272,613 36.1 Security 44,414 5.9 Corporate Allocations 40,691 5.4 Spent Fuel Pool Isolation 11,822 1.6 Spent Fuel Management
[2] 33,726 4.5 Insurance and Regulatory Fees 11,565 1.5 Energy 4,901 0.6 Characterization and Licensing Surveys 15,843 2.1 Property Taxes 2,595 0.3 Miscellaneous Equipment 6,948 0.9 Total [3] 754,498 100 Cost Element Total Percentage License Termination 617,324 81.8 Spent Fuel Management 33,726 4.5 Site Restoration 103,448 13.7 Total [3] 754,498 100.0
[1] Includes engineering costs
[2] Direct costs only. Excludes program management costs (staffing) but includes costs for spent fuel loading/spent fuel pool O&M and Emergency Planning fees
[3] Columns may not add due to rounding
Callaway Energy Center Document A22-1644-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 6, Page 5 of 5 TLG Services, Inc.
TABLE 6.2 SAFSTOR ALTERNATIVE DECOMMISSIONING COST ELEMENTS (thousands of 2011 dollars)
Cost Element Total Percentage Decontamination 16,286 1.6 Removal 162,821 15.9 Packaging 18,857 1.8 Transportation 10,639 1.0 Waste Disposal 47,737 4.7 Off-site Waste Processing 27,479 2.7 Program Management
[1] 364,227 35.5 Security 156,821 15.3 Corporate Allocations 55,341 5.4 Spent Fuel Pool Isolation 11,822 1.2 Spent Fuel Management
[2] 33,726 3.3 Insurance and Regulatory Fees 53,557 5.2 Energy 10,144 1.0 Characterization and Licensing Surveys 17,246 1.7 Property Taxes 18,943 1.8 Miscellaneous Equipment 20,738 2.0 Total [3] 1,026,384 100.0 Cost Element Total Percentage License Termination 849,173 82.73 Spent Fuel Management
[4] 73,749 7.19 Site Restoration 103,462 10.08 Total [3] 1,026,384 100.0
[1] Includes engineering costs
[2] Direct costs only. Excludes program management costs (staffing) but includes costs for spent fuel loading/spent fuel pool O&M and Emergency Planning fees
[3] Columns may not add due to rounding
[4] Includes percentage of Period 2a (dormancy) plant operating costs until spent fuel
pool is emptied, in addition to the direct costs.
Callaway Energy Center Document A22-1644-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 7, Page 1 of 3 TLG Services, Inc.
- 7. REFERENCES
- 1. "Decommissioning Cost Analysis for the Callaway Plant," Document No. A22-1599-002, Rev. 0, TLG Services, Inc., August 2008
- 2. U.S. Code of Federal Regulations, Title 10, Parts 30, 40, 50, 51, 70 and 72, "General Requirements for Decommissioning Nuclear Facilities," Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Federal Register Volume 53, Number 123 (p 24018 et
seq.), June 27, 1988
- 3. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Regulatory Guide 1.159, "Assuring the Availability of Funds for Decommissioning Nuclear Reactors," October 2003
- 4. U.S. Code of Federal Regulations, Title 10, Part 20, Subpart E, "Radiological Criteria for License Termination"
- 5. U.S. Code of Federal Regulations, Title 10, Parts 20 and 50, "Entombment Options for Power Reactors," Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, Federal
Register Volume 66, Number 200, October 16, 2001
- 6. U.S. Code of Federal Regulations, Title 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. "Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982 and Amendments," U.S. Department of Energy's Office of Civilian Radioactive Management, 1982
- 8. U.S. Code of Federal Regulations, Title 10, Part 50, "Domestic Licensing of Production and Utilization Facilities," Subpart 54 (bb), "Conditions of Licenses"
- 9. "Low Level Radioactive Waste Policy Act," Public Law 96-573, 1980
- 10. "Low-Level Radioactive Waste Policy Amendments Act of 1985," Public Law 99-240, 1986
- 11. Waste is classified in accordance with U.S. Code of Federal Regulations, Title 10, Part 61.55
- 12. U.S. Code of Federal Regulations, Title 10, Part 20, Subpart E, "Radiological Criteria for License Termination," Federal Register, Volume 62, Number 139 (p
39058 et seq.), July 21, 1997 Callaway Energy Center Document A22-1644-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 7, Page 2 of 3 TLG Services, Inc.
- 7. REFERENCES (continued)
- 13. "Establishment of Cleanup Levels for CERCLA Sites with Radioactive Contamination," EPA Memorandum OSWER No. 9200.4-18, August 22, 1997.
- 14. U.S. Code of Federal Regulations, Title 40, Part 141.16, "Maximum contaminant levels for beta particle and photon radioactivity from man-made
radionuclides in community water systems"
- 15. "Memorandum of Understanding Between the Environmental Protection Agency and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission: Consultation and Finality on Decommissioning and Decontamination of Contaminated Sites," OSWER
9295.8-06a, October 9, 2002
- 16. "Multi-Agency Radiation Survey and Site Investigation Manual (MARSSIM),"
NUREG/CR-1575, Rev. 1, EPA 402-R-97-016, Rev. 1, August 2000
- 17. T.S. LaGuardia et al., "Guidelines for Producing Commercial Nuclear Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Estimates," AIF/NESP-036, May 1986
- 18. W.J. Manion and T.S. LaGuardia, "Decommissioning Handbook," U.S.
Department of Energy, DOE/EV/10128-1, November 1980
- 19. "Building Construction Cost Data 2011," Robert Snow Means Company, Inc., Kingston, Massachusetts
- 20. Project and Cost Engineers' Handbook, Second Edition, p. 239, American Association of Cost Engineers, Marcel Dekker, Inc., New York, New York, 1984
- 21. U.S. Department of Transportation, Title 49 of the Code of Federal Regulations, "Transportation," Parts 173 through 178
- 22. Tri-State Motor Transit Company, published tariffs, Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC), Docket No. MC-427719 Rules Tariff, March 2004, Radioactive Materials Tariff, February 2011
- 23. 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
Callaway Energy Center Document A22-1644-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 7, Page 3 of 3 TLG Services, Inc.
- 7. REFERENCES (continued)
- 24. 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
- 25. 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
- 26. "Financial Protection Requirements for Permanently Shutdown Nuclear Power Reactors," 10 CFR Parts 50 and 140, Federal Register Notice, Vol. 62, No. 210, October 30, 1997
- 27. "Microsoft Project Professional 2011," Microsoft Corporation, Redmond, WA.
- 28. "Atomic Energy Act of 1954," (68 Stat. 919)
Callaway Energy Center Document A22-1644-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Appendix A, Page 1 of 4 TLG Services, Inc.
APPENDIX A UNIT COST FACTOR DEVELOPMENT Callaway Energy Center Document A22-1644-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Appendix A, Page 2 of 4 TLG Services, Inc.
APPENDIX A UNIT COST FACTOR DEVELOPMENT Example: Unit Factor for Removal of Contaminated Heat Exchanger < 3,000 lbs.
- 1. SCOPE Heat exchangers weighing < 3,000 lbs. will be removed in one piece using a crane or small hoist. They will be disconnected from the inlet and outlet piping. The heat
exchanger will be sent to the waste processing area.
- 2. CALCULATIONS Activity Critical Act Activity Duration Duration ID Description (minutes) (minutes)*
a Remove insulation 60 (b) b Mount pipe cutters 60 60 c Install contamination controls 20 (b) d Disconnect inlet and outlet lines 60 60 e Cap openings 20 (d) f Rig for removal 30 30 g Unbolt from mounts 30 30 h Remove contamination controls 15 15 i Remove, wrap, send to waste processing area 60 60
Totals (Activity/Critical) 355 255
Duration adjustment(s):
+ Respiratory protection adjustment (50% of critical duration) 128
+ Radiation/ALARA adjustment (37% of critical duration) 95 Adjusted work duration 478
+ Protective clothing adjustment (30% of adjusted duration) 143 Productive work duration 621
+ Work break adjustment (8.33 % of productive duration) 52
Total work duration (minutes) 673
- Total duration = 11.217 hr ***
- alpha designators indicate activities that can be performed in parallel Callaway Energy Center Document A22-1644-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Appendix A, Page 3 of 4 TLG Services, Inc.
APPENDIX A (continued)
- 3. LABOR REQUIRED
Duration Rate Crew Number (hours) ($/hr) Cost
Laborers 3.00 11.217 $40.00 $1,346.04 Craftsmen 2.00 11.217 $55.71 $1,249.80 Foreman 1.00 11.217 $60.00 $673.02 General Foreman 0.25 11.217 $61.00 $171.06 Fire Watch 0.05 11.217 $40.00 $22.43 Health Physics Technician 1.00 11.217 $44.00 $493.55
Total Labor Cost $3,955.90
- 4. EQUIPMENT & CONSUMABLES COSTS
Equipment Costs none
Consumables/Materials Costs Universal Polypropylene Sorbent 50 @ $0.56/sq ft
[1] $28.00 Tarpaulin, oil resistant, fire retardant 50 @ $0.41/sq ft
[2] $20.50 Gas torch consumables 1 @ $10.71 x 1 /hr
[3] $10.71
Subtotal cost of equipment and materials $59.21 Overhead & profit on equipment and materials @ 15.30 % $8.43
Total costs, equipment & material $67.64
TOTAL COST:
Removal of contaminated heat exchanger <3000 pounds: $4,023.54
Total labor cost: $3,955.90 Total equipment/material costs: $67.64 Total craft labor man-hours required per unit: 81.88
Callaway Energy Center Document A22-1644-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Appendix A, Page 4 of 4 TLG Services, Inc.
- 5. NOTES AND REFERENCES Work difficulty factors were developed in conjunction with the Atomic Industrial Forum's (now NEI) program to standardize nuclear decommissioning cost estimates and are delineated in Volume 1, Chapter 5 of the "Guidelines for Producing Commercial Nuclear Power Plant
Decommissioning Cost Estimates," AIF/NESP-036, May 1986.
References for equipment & consumables costs:
- 1. www.mcmaster.com online catalog, McMaster Carr Spill Control (7193T88) 2. R.S. Means (2011) Division 01 56, Section 13.60-0600, page 20
- 3. R.S. Means (2011) Division 01 54 33, Section 40-6 360, page 664 Material and consumable costs were adjusted using the regional indices for Columbia, Missouri.
Callaway Energy Center Document A22-1644-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Appendix B, Page 1 of 7 TLG Services, Inc.
APPENDIX B UNIT COST FACTOR LISTING (DECON: Power Block Structures Only)
Callaway Energy Center Document A22-1644-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Appendix B, Page 2 of 7
APPENDIX B UNIT COST FACTOR LISTING (Power Block Structures Only)
Unit Cost Factor Cost/Unit($)
TLG Services, Inc. Removal of clean instrument and sampling tubing, $/linear foot 0.45 Removal of clean pipe 0.25 to 2 inches diameter, $/linear foot 4.75 Removal of clean pipe >2 to 4 inches diameter, $/linear foot 6.84 Removal of clean pipe >4 to 8 inches diameter, $/linear foot 13.53 Removal of clean pipe >8 to 14 inches diameter, $/linear foot 25.94
Removal of clean pipe >14 to 20 inches diameter, $/linear foot 33.68 Removal of clean pipe >20 to 36 inches diameter, $/linear foot 49.57 Removal of clean pipe >36 inches diameter, $/linear foot 58.91 Removal of clean valve >2 to 4 inches 89.78 Removal of clean valve >4 to 8 inches 135.30
Removal of clean valve >8 to 14 inches 259.42 Removal of clean valve >14 to 20 inches 336.83 Removal of clean valve >20 to 36 inches 495.70 Removal of clean valve >36 inches 589.14 Removal of clean pipe hanger for small bore piping 29.39
Removal of clean pipe hanger for large bore piping 105.22 Removal of clean pump, <300 pound 227.25 Removal of clean pump, 300-1000 pound 635.91 Removal of clean pump, 1000-10,000 pound 2,512.51 Removal of clean pump, >10,000 pound 4,855.69
Removal of clean pump motor, 300-1000 pound 267.30 Removal of clean pump motor, 1000-10,000 pound 1,046.19 Removal of clean pump motor, >10,000 pound 2,353.92 Removal of clean heat exchanger <3000 pound 1,349.70 Removal of clean heat exchanger >3000 pound 3,392.76
Removal of clean feedwater heater/deaerator 9,560.36 Removal of clean moisture separator/reheater 19,650.32 Removal of clean tank, <300 gallons 292.44 Removal of clean tank, 300-3000 gallon 923.97 Removal of clean tank, >3000 gallons, $/square foot surface area 7.79 Callaway Energy Center Document A22-1644-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Appendix B, Page 3 of 7
APPENDIX B UNIT COST FACTOR LISTING (Power Block Structures Only)
Unit Cost Factor Cost/Unit($)
TLG Services, Inc. Removal of clean electrical equipment, <300 pound 124.28 Removal of clean electrical equipment, 300-1000 pound 435.19 Removal of clean electrical equipment, 1000-10,000 pound 870.37 Removal of clean electrical equipment, >10,000 pound 2,080.03 Removal of clean electrical transformer < 30 tons 1,444.55
Removal of clean electrical transformer > 30 tons 4,160.05 Removal of clean standby diesel generator, <100 kW 1,475.49 Removal of clean standby diesel generator, 100 kW to 1 MW 3,293.38 Removal of clean standby diesel generator, >1 MW 6,817.96 Removal of clean electrical cable tray, $/linear foot 11.60
Removal of clean electrical conduit, $/linear foot 5.07 Removal of clean mechanical equipment, <300 pound 124.28 Removal of clean mechanical equipment, 300-1000 pound 435.19 Removal of clean mechanical equipment, 1000-10,000 pound 870.37 Removal of clean mechanical equipment, >10,000 pound 2,080.03
Removal of clean HVAC equipment, <300 pound 150.28 Removal of clean HVAC equipment, 300-1000 pound 522.91 Removal of clean HVAC equipment, 1000-10,000 pound 1,042.15 Removal of clean HVAC equipment, >10,000 pound 2,080.03 Removal of clean HVAC ductwork, $/pound 0.48
Removal of contaminated instrument and sampling tubing, $/linear foot 1.39 Removal of contaminated pipe 0.25 to 2 inches diameter, $/linear foot 20.32 Removal of contaminated pipe >2 to 4 inches diameter, $/linear foot 34.39 Removal of contaminated pipe >4 to 8 inches diameter, $/linear foot 54.67 Removal of contaminated pipe >8 to 14 inches diameter, $/linear foot 106.28
Removal of contaminated pipe >14 to 20 inches diameter, $/linear foot 127.23 Removal of contaminated pipe >20 to 36 inches diameter, $/linear foot 175.31 Removal of contaminated pipe >36 inches diameter, $/linear foot 206.84 Removal of contaminated valve >2 to 4 inches 410.69 Removal of contaminated valve >4 to 8 inches 492.85 Callaway Energy Center Document A22-1644-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Appendix B, Page 4 of 7
APPENDIX B UNIT COST FACTOR LISTING (Power Block Structures Only)
Unit Cost Factor Cost/Unit($)
TLG Services, Inc. Removal of contaminated valve >8 to 14 inches 1,007.40 Removal of contaminated valve >14 to 20 inches 1,277.34 Removal of contaminated valve >20 to 36 inches 1,697.70 Removal of contaminated valve >36 inches 2,013.05 Removal of contaminated pipe hanger for small bore piping 132.03
Removal of contaminated pipe hanger for large bore piping 439.82 Removal of contaminated pump, <300 pound 879.29 Removal of contaminated pump, 300-1000 pound 2,048.94 Removal of contaminated pump, 1000-10,000 pound 6,654.59 Removal of contaminated pump, >10,000 pound 16,203.50
Removal of contaminated pump motor, 300-1000 pound 884.33 Removal of contaminated pump motor, 1000-10,000 pound 2,722.12 Removal of contaminated pump motor, >10,000 pound 6,111.62 Removal of contaminated heat exchanger <3000 pound 4,023.54 Removal of contaminated heat exchanger >3000 pound 11,690.42
Removal of contaminated tank, <300 gallons 1,465.84 Removal of contaminated tank, >300 gallons, $/square foot 28.52 Removal of contaminated electrical equipment, <300 pound 678.28 Removal of contaminated electrical equipment, 300-1000 pound 1,666.80 Removal of contaminated electrical equipment, 1000-10,000 pound 3,211.02
Removal of contaminated electrical equipment, >10,000 pound 6,344.12 Removal of contaminated electrical cable tray, $/linear foot 32.70 Removal of contaminated electrical conduit, $/linear foot 16.33 Removal of contaminated mechanical equipment, <300 pound 754.34 Removal of contaminated mechanical equipment, 300-1000 pound 1,839.92
Removal of contaminated mechanical equipment, 1000-10,000 pound 3,538.68 Removal of contaminated mechanical equipment, >10,000 pound 6,344.12 Removal of contaminated HVAC equipment, <300 pound 754.34 Removal of contaminated HVAC equipment, 300-1000 pound 1,839.92 Removal of contaminated HVAC equipment, 1000-10,000 pound 3,538.68 Callaway Energy Center Document A22-1644-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Appendix B, Page 5 of 7
APPENDIX B UNIT COST FACTOR LISTING (Power Block Structures Only)
Unit Cost Factor Cost/Unit($)
TLG Services, Inc. Removal of contaminated HVAC equipment, >10,000 pound 6,344.12 Removal of contaminated HVAC ductwork, $/pound 1.98 Removal/plasma arc cut of contaminated thin metal components, $/linear in. 3.65 Additional decontamination of surface by washing, $/square foot 7.55 Additional decontamination of surfaces by hydrolasing, $/square foot 33.34
Decontamination rig hook up and flush, $/ 250 foot length 6,342.48 Chemical flush of components/systems, $/gallon 17.41 Removal of clean standard reinforced concrete, $/cubic yard 134.03 Removal of grade slab concrete, $/cubic yard 175.15 Removal of clean concrete floors, $/cubic yard 345.59
Removal of sections of clean concrete floors, $/cubic yard 1,032.77 Removal of clean heavily rein concrete w/#9 rebar, $/cubic yard 228.56 Removal of contaminated heavily rein concrete w/#9 rebar, $/cubic yard 2,006.85 Removal of clean heavily rein concrete w/#18 rebar, $/cubic yard 288.92 Removal of contaminated heavily rein concrete w/#18 rebar, $/cubic yard 2,653.13
Removal heavily rein concrete w/#18 rebar & steel embedments, $/cubic yard 441.58 Removal of below-grade suspended floors, $/cubic yard 345.59 Removal of clean monolithic concrete structures, $/cubic yard 855.56 Removal of contaminated monolithic concrete structures, $/cubic yard 1,995.44 Removal of clean foundation concrete, $/cubic yard 671.85
Removal of contaminated foundation concrete, $/cubic yard 1,859.02 Explosive demolition of bulk concrete, $/cubic yard 29.60 Removal of clean hollow masonry block wall, $/cubic yard 90.64 Removal of contaminated hollow masonry block wall, $/cubic yard 297.33 Removal of clean solid masonry block wall, $/cubic yard 90.64
Removal of contaminated solid masonry block wall, $/cubic yard 297.33 Backfill of below-grade voids, $/cubic yard 31.19 Removal of subterranean tunnels/voids, $/linear foot 107.71 Placement of concrete for below-grade voids, $/cubic yard 126.91 Excavation of clean material, $/cubic yard 3.19 Callaway Energy Center Document A22-1644-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Appendix B, Page 6 of 7
APPENDIX B UNIT COST FACTOR LISTING (Power Block Structures Only)
Unit Cost Factor Cost/Unit($)
TLG Services, Inc. Excavation of contaminated material, $/cubic yard 39.88 Removal of clean concrete rubble (tipping fee included), $/cubic yard 22.91 Removal of contaminated concrete rubble, $/cubic yard 24.11 Removal of building by volume, $/cubic foot 0.29 Removal of clean building metal siding, $/square foot 1.08
Removal of contaminated building metal siding, $/square foot 3.71 Removal of standard asphalt roofing, $/square foot 2.11 Removal of transite panels, $/square foot 2.04 Scarifying contaminated concrete surfaces (drill & spall), $/square foot 12.08 Scabbling contaminated concrete floors, $/square foot 7.27
Scabbling contaminated concrete walls, $/square foot 19.08 Scabbling contaminated ceilings, $/square foot 65.35 Scabbling structural steel, $/square foot 5.97 Removal of clean overhead crane/monorail < 10 ton capacity 614.39 Removal of contaminated overhead crane/monorail < 10 ton capacity 1,701.23
Removal of clean overhead crane/monorail >10-50 ton capacity 1,474.56 Removal of contaminated overhead crane/monorail >10-50 ton capacity 4,082.25 Removal of polar crane > 50 ton capacity 6,188.09 Removal of gantry crane > 50 ton capacity 26,000.33 Removal of structural steel, $/pound 0.20
Removal of clean steel floor grating, $/square foot 4.43 Removal of contaminated steel floor grating, $/square foot 12.63 Removal of clean free standing steel liner, $/square foot 11.68 Removal of contaminated free standing steel liner, $/square foot 33.34 Removal of clean concrete-anchored steel liner, $/square foot 5.84
Removal of contaminated concrete-anchored steel liner, $/square foot 38.83 Placement of scaffolding in clean areas, $/square foot 16.80 Placement of scaffolding in contaminated areas, $/square foot 26.01 Landscaping with topsoil, $/acre 28,266.82 Cost of CPC B-88 LSA box & preparation for use 2,113.50 Callaway Energy Center Document A22-1644-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Appendix B, Page 7 of 7
APPENDIX B UNIT COST FACTOR LISTING (Power Block Structures Only)
Unit Cost Factor Cost/Unit($)
TLG Services, Inc. Cost of CPC B-25 LSA box & preparation for use 1,933.79 Cost of CPC B-12V 12 gauge LSA box & preparation for use 1,569.88 Cost of CPC B-144 LSA box & preparation for use 10,784.62 Cost of LSA drum & preparation for use 194.44 Cost of cask liner for CNSI 8 120A cask (resins) 7,742.32
Cost of cask liner for CNSI 8 120A cask (filters) 8,101.54 Decontamination of surfaces with vacuuming, $/square foot 0.75
Callaway Energy Center Document A22-1644-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Appendix C, Page 1 of 9 TLG Services, Inc.
APPENDIX C DETAILED COST ANALYSIS DECON
Callaway Energy Center D ecommissioning Cost Analysi s Document A22-1644-001, Rev. 0 Appendix C, Page 2 of 9 Table C Callaway Energy Center DECON Decommissioning Cost Estimat e (thousands of 2011 dollars)
Costs run: Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 10:45:06Off-SiteLLRWNRCSpent FuelSiteProcessedBurial VolumesBurial /Utility and Activity DECCER Version 2010.09.09aDeconRemovalPackagingTransportProcessingDisposalOtherTotalTotalLic. Term.ManagementRestorationVolumeClass AClass BClass CGTCCProcessedCraftContractorIndexActivity DescriptionCostCostCostsCostsCostsCostsCostsContingencyCostsCostsCostsCostsCu. FeetCu. FeetCu. FeetCu. FeetCu. FeetWt., Lbs.ManhoursManhours PERIOD 1a - Shutdown through Transition Period 1a Direct Decommissioning Activities1a.1.1Prepare preliminary decommissioning cost- - - - -
- 152 23 174 174 - - - - - - - - - 1,300 1a.1.2Notification of Cessation of Operations a 1a.1.3Remove fuel & source material n/a1a.1.4Notification of Permanent Defueling a 1a.1.5Deactivate plant systems & process waste a 1a.1.6Prepare and submit PSDAR- - - - - - 233 35 268 268 - - - - - - - - - 2,000 1a.1.7Review plant dwgs & specs.- - - - - - 537 81 617 617 - - - - - - - - - 4,600 1a.1.8Perform detailed rad survey a 1a.1.9Estimate by-product inventory- - - - -
- 117 18 134 134 - - - - - - - - - 1,000 1a.1.10End product description- - - - - - 117 18 134 134 - - - - - - - - - 1,000 1a.1.11Detailed by-product inventory- - - - - - 152 23 174 174 - - - - - - - - - 1,300 1a.1.12Define major work sequence- - - - - - 875 131 1,007 1,007 - - - - - - - - - 7,500 1a.1.13Perform SER and EA- - - - - - 362 54 416 416 - - - - - - - - - 3,100 1a.1.14Perform Site-Specific Cost Study- - - - - - 584 88 671 671 - - - - - - - - - 5,000 1a.1.15Prepare/submit License Termination Plan- - - - - - 478 72 550 550 - - - - - - - - - 4,096 1a.1.16Receive NRC approval of termination plan a A ctivity Specifications1a.1.17.1Plant & temporary facilities- - - - - - 574 86 660 594 - 66 - - - - - - - 4,920 1a.1.17.2Plant systems- - - - - - 486 73 559 503 - 56 - - - - - - - 4,167 1a.1.17.3NSSS Decontamination Flush- - - - - - 58 9 67 67 - - - - - - - - - 500 1a.1.17.4Reactor internals- - - - - - 829 124 953 953 - - - - - - - - - 7,100 1a.1.17.5Reactor vessel- - - - - - 759 114 872 872 - - - - - - - - - 6,500 1a.1.17.6Biological shield- - - - - - 58 9 67 67 - - - - - - - - - 500 1a.1.17.7Steam generators- - - - - - 364 55 419 419 - - - - - - - - - 3,120 1a.1.17.8Reinforced concrete- - - - - - 187 28 215 107 - 107 - - - - - - - 1,600 1a.1.17.9Main Turbine- - - - - - 47 7 54 - - 54 - - - - - - - 400
1a.1.17.1 0Main Condensers- - - - - - 47 7 54 - - 54 - - - - - - - 400 1a.1.17.11Plant structures & buildings- - - - - - 364 55 419 209 - 209 - - - - - - - 3,120 1a.1.17.12Waste management- - - - - - 537 81 617 617 - - - - - - - - - 4,600 1a.1.17.13Facility & site closeout- - - - - - 105 16 121 60 - 60 - - - - - - - 900 1a.1.17Total- - - - - - 4,415 662 5,077 4,471 - 607 - - - - - - - 37,827
Planning & Site Preparations1a.1.18Prepare dismantling sequence- - - - - - 280 42 322 322 - - - - - - - - - 2,400 1a.1.19Plant prep. & temp. svces- - - - - - 2,800 420 3,220 3,220 - - - - - - - - - -
1a.1.20Design water clean-up system- - - - - - 163 25 188 188 - - - - - - - - - 1,400 1a.1.21Rigging/Cont. Cntrl Envlps/tooling/etc.- - - - - - 2,200 330 2,530 2,530 - - - - - - - - - -
1a.1.22Procure casks/liners & containers- - - - - - 144 22 165 165 - - - - - - - - - 1,230 1a.1Subtotal Period 1a Activity Costs- - - - - - 13,608 2,041 15,650 15,043 - 607 - - - - - - - 73,753
Period 1a Collateral Costs1a.3.1Spent Fuel Capital and Transfer- - - - - - 3,600 540 4,140 - 4,140 - - - - - - - - -
1a.3Subtotal Period 1a Collateral Costs- - - - - - 3,600 540 4,140 - 4,140 - - - - - - - - -
Period 1a Period-Dependent Costs1a.4.1Insurance- - - - - - 1,589 159 1,747 1,747 - - - - - - - - - -
1a.4.2Property taxes- - - - - - 280 28 308 308 - - - - - - - - - -
1a.4.3Health physics supplies- 454 - - - - - 113 567 567 - - - - - - - - - -
1a.4.4Heavy equipment rental- 436 - - - - - 65 502 502 - - - - - - - - - -
1a.4.5Disposal of DAW generated- - 13 2 - 28 - 9 53 53 - - - 610 - - - 12,190 20 -
1a.4.6Plant energy budget- - - - - - 724 109 832 832 - - - - - - - - - -
1a.4.7NRC Fees- - - - - - 769 77 846 846 - - - - - - - - - -
1a.4.8Emergency Planning Fees- - - - - - 1,351 135 1,486 - 1,486 - - - - - - - - -
1a.4.9INPO Fees- - - - - - 289 43 332 332 - - - - - - - - - -
1a.4.10Spent Fuel Pool O&M- - - - - - 763 114 878 - 878 - - - - - - - - -
1a.4.11ISFSI Operating Costs- - - - - - 89 13 103 - 103 - - - - - - - - -
1a.4.12Corporate Allocations- - - - - - 3,510 351 3,861 3,861 - - - - - - - - - -
1a.4.13Security Staff Cost- - - - - - 6,892 1,034 7,926 7,926 - - - - - - - - - 157,471 1a.4.14Utility Staff Cost- - - - - - 28,091 4,214 32,305 32,305 - - - - - - - - - 423,400 1a.4Subtotal Period 1a Period-Dependent Costs- 890 13 2 - 28 44,347 6,465 51,745 49,279 2,467 - - 610 - - - 12,190 20 580,871 1a.0TOTAL PERIOD 1a COST- 890 13 2 - 28 61,555 9,046 71,535 64,322 6,607 607 - 610 - - - 12,190 20 654,624 TLG Services, Inc.
Callaway Energy Center D ecommissioning Cost Analysi s Document A22-1644-001, Rev. 0 Appendix C, Page 3 of 9 Table C Callaway Energy Center DECON Decommissioning Cost Estimat e (thousands of 2011 dollars)
Costs run: Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 10:45:06Off-SiteLLRWNRCSpent FuelSiteProcessedBurial VolumesBurial /Utility and Activity DECCER Version 2010.09.09aDeconRemovalPackagingTransportProcessingDisposalOtherTotalTotalLic. Term.ManagementRestorationVolumeClass AClass BClass CGTCCProcessedCraftContractorIndexActivity DescriptionCostCostCostsCostsCostsCostsCostsContingencyCostsCostsCostsCostsCu. FeetCu. FeetCu. FeetCu. FeetCu. FeetWt., Lbs.ManhoursManhours PERIOD 1b - Decommissioning Preparations Period 1b Direct Decommissioning Activities
Detailed Work Procedures1b.1.1.1Plant systems- - - - - - 552 83 635 572 - 64 - - - - - - - 4,733 1b.1.1.2NSSS Decontamination Flush- - - - - - 117 18 134 134 - - - - - - - - - 1,000 1b.1.1.3Reactor internals- - - - - - 292 44 336 336 - - - - - - - - - 2,500 1b.1.1.4Remaining buildings- - - - - - 158 24 181 45 - 136 - - - - - - - 1,350 1b.1.1.5CRD cooling assembly- - - - - - 117 18 134 134 - - - - - - - - - 1,000 1b.1.1.6CRD housings & ICI tubes- - - - - - 117 18 134 134 - - - - - - - - - 1,000 1b.1.1.7Incore instrumentation- - - - - - 117 18 134 134 - - - - - - - - - 1,000 1b.1.1.8Reactor vessel- - - - - - 424 64 487 487 - - - - - - - - - 3,630 1b.1.1.9Facility closeout- - - - - - 140 21 161 81 - 81 - - - - - - - 1,200 1b.1.1.10Missile shields- - - - - - 53 8 60 60 - - - - - - - - - 450 1b.1.1.11Biological shield- - - - - - 140 21 161 161 - - - - - - - - - 1,200 1b.1.1.12Steam generators- - - - - - 537 81 617 617 - - - - - - - - - 4,600 1b.1.1.13Reinforced concrete- - - - - - 117 18 134 67 - 67 - - - - - - - 1,000 1b.1.1.14Main Turbine- - - - - - 182 27 209 - - 209 - - - - - - - 1,560 1b.1.1.15Main Condensers- - - - - - 182 27 209 - - 209 - - - - - - - 1,560
1b.1.1.16 Auxiliary building- - - - - - 319 48 366 330 - 37 - - - - - - - 2,730 1b.1.1.17Reactor building- - - - - - 319 48 366 330 - 37 - - - - - - - 2,730 1b.1.1Total- - - - - - 3,880 582 4,462 3,623 - 839 - - - - - - - 33,243 1b.1.2Decon primary loop600 - - - - - - 300 900 900 - - - - - - - - 1,067 -
1b.1Subtotal Period 1b Activity Costs600 - - - - - 3,880 882 5,362 4,522 - 839 - - - - - - 1,067 33,243
Period 1b Additional Costs1b.2.1Spent fuel pool isolation- - - - -
- 10,280 1,542 11,822 11,822 - - - - - - - - - -
1b.2.2Site Characterization- - - - - - 2,551 765 3,316 3,316 - - - - - - - - 19,100 7,852 1b.2Subtotal Period 1b Additional Costs- - - - - - 12,830 2,307 15,137 15,137 - - - - - - - - 19,100 7,852
Period 1b Collateral Costs1b.3.1Decon equipment872 - - - - - - 131 1,003 1,003 - - - - - - - - - -
1b.3.2DOC staff relocation expenses- - - - - - 1,080 162 1,242 1,242 - - - - - - - - - -
1b.3.3Process decommissioning water waste45 - 18 70 - 99 - 59 291 291 - - - 283 - - - 16,989 55 -
1b.3.4Process decommissioning chemical flush waste2 - 49 243 - 2,921 - 772 3,987 3,987 - - - - 788 - - 83,917 147 -
1b.3.5Small tool allowance- 2 - - - - - 0 2 2 - - - - - - - - - -
1b.3.6Pipe cutting equipment- 1,100 - - - - - 165 1,265 1,265 - - - - - - - - - -
1b.3.7Decon rig1,500 - - - - - - 225 1,725 1,725 - - - - - - - - - -
1b.3.8Spent Fuel Capital and Transfer- - - - - - 1,680 252 1,932 - 1,932 - - - - - - - - -
1b.3Subtotal Period 1b Collateral Costs2,419 1,102 67 313 - 3,020 2,760 1,767 11,447 9,515 1,932 - - 283 788 - - 100,906 203 -
Period 1b Period-Dependent Costs1b.4.1Decon supplies27 - - - - - - 7 34 34 - - - - - - - - - -
1b.4.2Insurance- - - - - - 801 80 881 881 - - - - - - - - - -
1b.4.3Property taxes- - - - - - 141 14 155 155 - - - - - - - - - -
1b.4.4Health physics supplies- 257 - - - - - 64 321 321 - - - - - - - - - -
1b.4.5Heavy equipment rental- 220 - - - - - 33 253 253 - - - - - - - - - -
1b.4.6Disposal of DAW generated- - 8 1 - 17 - 5 31 31 - - - 360 - - - 7,197 12 -
1b.4.7Plant energy budget- - - - - - 730 109 839 839 - - - - - - - - - -
1b.4.8NRC Fees- - - - - - 388 39 426 426 - - - - - - - - - -
1b.4.9Emergency Planning Fees- - - - - - 681 68 749 - 749 - - - - - - - - -
1b.4.10Spent Fuel Pool O&M- - - - - - 385 58 442 - 442 - - - - - - - - -
1b.4.11ISFSI Operating Costs- - - - - - 45 7 52 - 52 - - - - - - - - -
1b.4.12Corporate Allocations- - - - - - 3,240 324 3,564 3,564 - - - - - - - - - -
1b.4.13Security Staff Cost- - - - - - 3,474 521 3,996 3,996 - - - - - - - - - 79,383 1b.4.14DOC Staff Cost- - - - - - 5,750 863 6,613 6,613 - - - - - - - - - 64,137 1b.4.15Utility Staff Cost- - - - - - 14,237 2,136 16,373 16,373 - - - - - - - - - 214,491 1b.4Subtotal Period 1b Period-Dependent Costs27 476 8 1 - 17 29,872 4,327 34,728 33,485 1,243 - - 360 - - - 7,197 12 358,011 1b.0TOTAL PERIOD 1b COST3,045 1,578 75 314 - 3,037 49,342 9,283 66,675 62,660 3,175 839 - 643 788 - - 108,103 20,381 399,106 PERIOD 1 TOTALS 3,045 2,468 88 317 - 3,065 110,897 18,329 138,210 126,982 9,782 1,446 - 1,253 788 - - 120,293 20,401 1,053,731 TLG Services, Inc.
Callaway Energy Center D ecommissioning Cost Analysi s Document A22-1644-001, Rev. 0 Appendix C, Page 4 of 9 Table C Callaway Energy Center DECON Decommissioning Cost Estimat e (thousands of 2011 dollars)
Costs run: Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 10:45:06Off-SiteLLRWNRCSpent FuelSiteProcessedBurial VolumesBurial /Utility and Activity DECCER Version 2010.09.09aDeconRemovalPackagingTransportProcessingDisposalOtherTotalTotalLic. Term.ManagementRestorationVolumeClass AClass BClass CGTCCProcessedCraftContractorIndexActivity DescriptionCostCostCostsCostsCostsCostsCostsContingencyCostsCostsCostsCostsCu. FeetCu. FeetCu. FeetCu. FeetCu. FeetWt., Lbs.ManhoursManhours PERIOD 2a - Large Component Removal Period 2a Direct Decommissioning Activities
Nuclear Steam Supply System Removal2a.1.1.1Reactor Coolant Piping176 188 25 27 - 363 - 232 1,012 1,012 - - - 1,227 - - - 140,300 6,838 -
2a.1.1.2Pressurizer Relief Tank30 25 7 8 - 94 - 47 211 211 - - - 328 - - - 36,395 1,068 -
2a.1.1.3Reactor Coolant Pumps & Motors90 94 79 188 - 889 - 327 1,666 1,666 - - - 3,386 - - - 816,140 4,188 100 2a.1.1.4Pressurizer44 56 509 145 - 982 - 354 2,089 2,089 - - - 3,739 - - - 267,393 2,470 1,875 2a.1.1.5Steam Generators373 4,985 3,067 2,540 2,549 6,094 - 4,027 23,635 23,635 - - 40,262 23,217 - - - 3,570,150 23,233 3,500 2a.1.1.6Retired Steam Generator Units- - 2,252 2,497 2,549 5,918 - 2,462 15,678 15,678 - - 40,262 22,546 - - - 3,349,305 10,800 2,250 2a.1.1.7CRDMs/ICIs/Service Structure Removal149 83 237 47 - 223 - 182 921 921 - - - 3,881 - - - 86,025 4,285 -
2a.1.1.8Reactor Vessel Internals116 3,239 9,590 1,371 - 8,225 267 9,380 32,188 32,188 - - - 1,377 903 459 - 326,029 29,600 1,316
2a.1.1.9 Vessel & Internals GTCC Disposal- - - - - 10,743 - 1,611 12,355 12,355 - - - - - - 2,142 422,146 - -
2a.1.1.10Reactor Vessel83 6,218 2,113 838 - 2,095 267 6,530 18,144 18,144 - - - 8,735 - - - 954,909 29,600 1,316 2a.1.1Totals1,061 14,888 17,879 7,661 5,098 35,627 533 25,152 107,900 107,900 - - 80,523 68,436 903 459 2,142 9,968,791 112,083 10,357
Removal of Major Equipment2a.1.2Main Turbine/Generator- 501 420 85 795 568 - 441 2,810 2,810 - - 4,921 2,740 - - - 626,627 9,888 -
2a.1.3Main Condensers- 1,409 220 69 700 531 - 622 3,552 3,552 - - 7,701 2,412 - - - 551,564 27,762 -
Cascading Costs from Clean Building Demolition2a.1.4.1Reactor - 902 - - - - - 135 1,037 1,037 - - - - - - - - 10,575 -
2a.1.4.2 Auxiliary - 457 - - - - - 69 525 525 - - - - - - - - 5,551 -
2a.1.4.3Hot Machine Shop - 1 - - - - - 0 1 1 - - - - - - - - 16 -
2a.1.4.4Radwaste - 95 - - - - - 14 109 109 - - - - - - - - 1,108 -
2a.1.4.5Fuel Building - 220 - - - - - 33 253 253 - - - - - - - - 2,395 -
2a.1.4Totals- 1,675 - - - - - 251 1,926 1,926 - - - - - - - - 19,645 -
Disposal of Plant Systems2a.1.5.1100 Aux.Bldg Non-System Specific RCA - 705 11 26 626 - - 275 1,644 1,644 - - 7,629 - - - - 309,812 13,471 -
2a.1.5.2100 Auxiliary Bldg Non-System Specific - 115 5 5 39 47 - 47 258 258 - - 474 211 - - - 37,227 2,280 -
2a.1.5.3 AB - Main Steam - 270 - - - - - 40 310 - - 310 - - - - - - 5,833 -
2a.1.5.4 AB - Main Steam RCA - 79 3 7 177 - - 48 315 315 - - 2,156 - - - - 87,550 1,515 -
2a.1.5.5 AC - Main Turbine - 265 - - - - - 40 305 - - 305 - - - - - - 5,641 -
2a.1.5.6 AD - Condensate - 293 - - - - - 44 337 - - 337 - - - - - - 6,144 -
2a.1.5.7 AE - Feedwater - 202 - - - - - 30 232 - - 232 - - - - - - 4,271 -
2a.1.5.8 AF - Feedwater Heater Extraction - 249 - - - - - 37 286 - - 286 - - - - - - 5,352 -
2a.1.5.9 AK - Condensate Demineralizer - 92 - - - - - 14 105 - - 105 - - - - - - 1,944 -
2a.1.5.10 AL - Auxiliary Feedwater - 40 - - - - - 6 46 - - 46 - - - - - - 852 -
2a.1.5.11 AQ - Condensate & Feedwater Chem Addtn - 22 - - - - - 3 26 - - 26 - - - - - - 468 -
2a.1.5.12BM - Steam Generator Blowdown - 121 5 5 73 31 - 50 286 286 - - 892 147 - - - 48,384 2,392 -
2a.1.5.13BM - Steam Generator Blowdown - RCA - 380 6 14 337 - - 148 885 885 - - 4,109 - - - - 166,857 7,066 -
2a.1.5.14BN - Borated Refueling Water Storage - 343 17 26 452 88 - 181 1,107 1,107 - - 5,512 433 - - - 257,752 6,935 -
2a.1.5.15CA - Steam Seal - 21 - - - - - 3 24 - - 24 - - - - - - 455 -
2a.1.5.16CB - Main Turbine Lube Oil - 60 - - - - - 9 69 - - 69 - - - - - - 1,207 -
2a.1.5.17CC - Generator Hydrogen Seal & CO2 - 10 - - - - - 1 11 - - 11 - - - - - - 198 -
2a.1.5.18CD - Generator Seal Oil - 14 - - - - - 2 16 - - 16 - - - - - - 287 -
2a.1.5.19CE - Stator Cooling Water - 12 - - - - - 2 14 - - 14 - - - - - - 241 -
2a.1.5.20CF - Lube Oil Storage Xfer & Prfication- 39 - - - - - 6 44 - - 44 - - - - - - 812 -
2a.1.5.21CG - Condenser Air Removal - 31 - - - - - 5 36 - - 36 - - - - - - 657 -
2a.1.5.22CH - Main Turbine Control Oil - 61 - - - - - 9 70 - - 70 - - - - - - 1,219 -
2a.1.5.23DA - Circulating Water - 349 - - - - - 52 401 - - 401 - - - - - - 7,502 -
2a.1.5.24DB - Cooling Tower Makeup & Blowdown - 59 - - - - - 9 68 - - 68 - - - - - - 1,260 -
2a.1.5.25DD - Cooling Water Chemical Control Sys - 52 - - - - - 8 60 - - 60 - - - - - - 1,084 -
2a.1.5.26DD - Cooling Wtr Chem Control RCA - 280 5 12 292 - - 116 706 706 - - 3,555 - - - - 144,376 4,951 -
2a.1.5.27EJ - Residual Heat Removal - 401 44 39 225 398 - 244 1,352 1,352 - - 2,744 1,819 - - - 265,217 8,021 -
2a.1.5.28EM - High Pressure Coolant Injection - 340 14 13 108 107 - 131 712 712 - - 1,315 487 - - - 94,721 6,626 -
2a.1.5.29EN - Containment Spray - 223 5 10 248 - - 95 581 581 - - 3,026 - - - - 122,874 4,134 -
2a.1.5.30EP - Accumulator Safety Injection - 177 8 9 131 47 - 78 450 450 - - 1,599 219 - - - 82,910 3,475 -
2a.1.5.31FA - Auxiliary Steam Generator - 24 - - - - - 4 27 - - 27 - - - - - - 521 -
2a.1.5.32FB - Auxiliary Steam - 98 - - - - - 15 112 - - 112 - - - - - - 2,106 -
2a.1.5.33FB - Auxiliary Steam RCA - 84 1 3 67 - - 32 187 187 - - 816 - - - - 33,148 1,537 -
2a.1.5.34FC - Auxiliary Turbines - 63 - - - - - 9 73 - - 73 - - - - - - 1,320 -
2a.1.5.35FE - Auxiliary Steam Chemical Addition - 5 - - - - - 1 6 - - 6 - - - - - - 105 -
2a.1.5.36GE - Turbine Building HVAC - 180 - - - - - 27 207 - - 207 - - - - - - 3,957 -
2a.1.5.37GS - Containment Hydrogen Control - 78 3 4 54 17 - 33 189 189 - - 658 78 - - - 33,357 1,558 -
2a.1.5.38HE - Boron Recycle 380 514 31 26 213 232 - 416 1,813 1,813 - - 2,600 1,154 - - - 195,348 16,649 -
TLG Services, Inc.
Callaway Energy Center D ecommissioning Cost Analysi s Document A22-1644-001, Rev. 0 Appendix C, Page 5 of 9 Table C Callaway Energy Center DECON Decommissioning Cost Estimat e (thousands of 2011 dollars)
Costs run: Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 10:45:06Off-SiteLLRWNRCSpent FuelSiteProcessedBurial VolumesBurial /Utility and Activity DECCER Version 2010.09.09aDeconRemovalPackagingTransportProcessingDisposalOtherTotalTotalLic. Term.ManagementRestorationVolumeClass AClass BClass CGTCCProcessedCraftContractorIndexActivity DescriptionCostCostCostsCostsCostsCostsCostsContingencyCostsCostsCostsCostsCu. FeetCu. FeetCu. FeetCu. FeetCu. FeetWt., Lbs.ManhoursManhours Disposal of Plant Systems (continued)2a.1.5.39HF - Secondary Liquid Waste 697 1,008 70 61 507 528 - 825 3,696 3,696 - - 6,186 2,619 - - - 454,900 31,872 -
2a.1.5.40JA - Auxiliary Oil & Transfer - 32 - - - - - 5 37 - - 37 - - - - - - 690 -
2a.1.5.41KS - Bulk Chemical Storage - 92 10 22 529 - - 107 760 760 - - 6,449 - - - - 261,890 1,825 -
2a.1.5.42LE - Oily Waste - 181 - - - - - 27 208 - - 208 - - - - - - 3,865 -
2a.1.5.43LE - Oily Waste RCA - 244 3 8 185 - - 90 530 530 - - 2,256 - - - - 91,628 4,296 -
2a.1.5.44Turbine Bldg Non-System Specific - 751 - - - - - 113 863 - - 863 - - - - - - 15,405 -
2a.1.5Totals1,077 8,657 242 291 4,264 1,495 - 3,437 19,464 15,471 - 3,993 51,976 7,167 - - - 2,687,951 192,002 - 2a.1.6Scaffolding in support of decommissioning- 1,600 28 6 112 18 - 425 2,189 2,189 - - 1,233 82 - - - 62,415 36,741 -
2a.1Subtotal Period 2a Activity Costs2,139 28,730 18,790 8,113 10,969 38,239 533 30,328 137,841 133,848 - 3,993 146,354 80,837 903 459 2,142 13,897,350 398,120 10,357
Period 2a Collateral Costs2a.3.1Process decommissioning water waste198 - 82 313 - 443 - 265 1,300 1,300 - - - 1,270 - - - 76,188 248 -
2a.3.2Process decommissioning chemical flush waste1 - 25 127 - 254 - 85 492 492 - - - 410 - - - 43,711 77 -
2a.3.3Small tool allowance- 348 - - - - - 52 401 361 - 40 - - - - - - - -
2a.3.4Spent Fuel Capital and Transfer- - - - - - 5,520 828 6,348 - 6,348 - - - - - - - - -
2a.3.5On-site survey and release of 60.87 tons clean metallic waste- - - - - - 62 6 68 68 - - - - - - - - - -
2a.3Subtotal Period 2a Collateral Costs199 348 107 440 - 697 5,582 1,237 8,609 2,221 6,348 40 - 1,680 - - - 119,898 324 -
Period 2a Period-Dependent Costs2a.4.1Decon supplies83 - - - - - - 21 104 104 - - - - - - - - - -
2a.4.2Insurance- - - - - - 916 92 1,008 1,008 - - - - - - - - - -
2a.4.3Property taxes- - - - - - 437 44 481 433 - 48 - - - - - - - -
2a.4.4Health physics supplies- 2,399 - - - - - 600 2,999 2,999 - - - - - - - - - -
2a.4.5Heavy equipment rental- 2,964 - - - - - 445 3,408 3,408 - - - - - - - - - -
2a.4.6Disposal of DAW generated- - 127 22 - 275 - 85 509 509 - - - 5,911 - - - 118,222 193 -
2a.4.7Plant energy budget- - - - - - 1,074 161 1,235 1,235 - - - - - - - - - -
2a.4.8NRC Fees- - - - - - 1,120 112 1,232 1,232 - - - - - - - - - -
2a.4.9Emergency Planning Fees- - - - - - 1,425 142 1,567 - 1,567 - - - - - - - - -
2a.4.10Spent Fuel Pool O&M- - - - - - 1,192 179 1,371 - 1,371 - - - - - - - - -
2a.4.11Liquid Radwaste Processing Equipment/Services- - - - - - 303 45 348 348 - - - - - - - - - -
2a.4.12ISFSI Operating Costs- - - - - - 140 21 161 - 161 - - - - - - - - -
2a.4.13Corporate Allocations- - - - - - 11,970 1,197 13,167 13,167 - - - - - - - - - -
2a.4.14Security Staff Cost- - - - - - 9,273 1,391 10,664 10,664 - - - - - - - - - 206,014 2a.4.15DOC Staff Cost- - - - - - 21,806 3,271 25,077 25,077 - - - - - - - - - 247,543 2a.4.16Utility Staff Cost- - - - - - 31,246 4,687 35,933 35,933 - - - - - - - - - 460,886 2a.4Subtotal Period 2a Period-Dependent Costs83 5,363 127 22 - 275 80,901 12,492 99,263 96,117 3,098 48 - 5,911 - - - 118,222 193 914,443 2a.0TOTAL PERIOD 2a COST2,420 34,441 19,024 8,575 10,969 39,211 87,017 44,057 245,714 232,186 9,446 4,081 146,354 88,428 903 459 2,142 14,135,470 398,637 924,800 PERIOD 2b - Site Decontamination Period 2b Direct Decommissioning Activities Disposal of Plant Systems2b.1.1.1200 Reactor Bldg Non-System Specific - 93 3 3 22 31 - 35 187 187 - - 269 139 - - - 22,768 1,758 -
2b.1.1.2200 Reactor Bldg Non-System Specific RCA- 583 7 16 391 - - 208 1,205 1,205 - - 4,768 - - - - 193,612 10,425 -
2b.1.1.3300 Control Bldg Non-System Specific - 181 3 7 175 - - 73 440 440 - - 2,139 - - - - 86,849 3,413 -
2b.1.1.4300 Control Bldg Non-System Specific Cln- 1,382 - - - - - 207 1,589 - - 1,589 - - - - - - 29,076 -
2b.1.1.5700 Radwaste Bldg Non-Sys Specific RCA - 1,163 19 43 1,041 - - 455 2,721 2,721 - - 12,684 - - - - 515,103 21,919 -
2b.1.1.6700 Radwaste Bldg Non-System Specific - 186 9 9 58 82 - 78 421 421 - - 705 372 - - - 60,301 3,650 -
2b.1.1.7 AN - Demineralized Wtr Storage & Xfer - 153 - - - - - 23 176 - - 176 - - - - - - 3,283 -
2b.1.1.8 AN - Demineralized Wtr Strg & Xfer RCA - 41 0 1 26 - - 14 83 83 - - 314 - - - - 12,759 740 -
2b.1.1.9 AP - Condensate Storage & Transfer - 89 - - - - - 13 103 - - 103 - - - - - - 1,794 -
2b.1.1.10BB - Reactor Coolant System - 345 33 27 149 277 - 185 1,016 1,016 - - 1,812 1,437 - - - 180,661 7,066 -
2b.1.1.11BG - Chemical & Volume Control 767 984 93 78 405 813 - 915 4,055 4,055 - - 4,931 3,765 - - - 514,242 28,104 -
2b.1.1.12BL - Reactor Makeup Water - 312 20 17 158 140 - 141 788 788 - - 1,928 720 - - - 132,297 6,130 -
2b.1.1.13DE - Intake & Water Treatment - 121 - - - - - 18 140 - - 140 - - - - - - 2,517 -
2b.1.1.14DE - Intake & Water Treatment RCA - 253 18 41 978 - - 218 1,508 1,508 - - 11,923 - - - - 484,206 5,014 -
2b.1.1.15EA - Service Water - 146 - - - - - 22 168 - - 168 - - - - - - 3,145 -
2b.1.1.16EA - Service Water RCA - 46 2 4 102 - - 28 182 182 - - 1,248 - - - - 50,693 839 -
2b.1.1.17EB - Closed Cooling Water - 59 - - - - - 9 68 - - 68 - - - - - - 1,267 -
2b.1.1.18EF - Essential Service Water - 337 - - - - - 51 388 - - 388 - - - - - - 7,244 -
2b.1.1.19EF - Essential Service Water RCA - 203 8 18 437 - - 120 786 786 - - 5,326 - - - - 216,287 3,862 -
2b.1.1.20EG - Component Cooling Water RCA - 247 - - - - - 37 285 - - 285 - - - - - - 5,335 -
2b.1.1.21GA - Plant Heating - 88 - - - - - 13 102 - - 102 - - - - - - 1,912 -
TLG Services, Inc.
Callaway Energy Center D ecommissioning Cost Analysi s Document A22-1644-001, Rev. 0 Appendix C, Page 6 of 9 Table C Callaway Energy Center DECON Decommissioning Cost Estimat e (thousands of 2011 dollars)
Costs run: Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 10:45:06Off-SiteLLRWNRCSpent FuelSiteProcessedBurial VolumesBurial /Utility and Activity DECCER Version 2010.09.09aDeconRemovalPackagingTransportProcessingDisposalOtherTotalTotalLic. Term.ManagementRestorationVolumeClass AClass BClass CGTCCProcessedCraftContractorIndexActivity DescriptionCostCostCostsCostsCostsCostsCostsContingencyCostsCostsCostsCostsCu. FeetCu. FeetCu. FeetCu. FeetCu. FeetWt., Lbs.ManhoursManhours Disposal of Plant Systems (continued)2b.1.1.22GA - Plant Heating RCA - 99 1 2 52 - - 33 187 187 - - 638 - - - - 25,924 1,765 -
2b.1.1.23GB - Central Chilled Water - 83 - - - - - 12 96 - - 96 - - - - - - 1,803 -
2b.1.1.24GB - Central Chilled Water RCA - 27 0 1 15 - - 9 52 52 - - 187 - - - - 7,591 482 -
2b.1.1.25GD - Essential Serv Wtr Pumphouse HVAC - 19 - - - - - 3 22 - - 22 - - - - - - 427 -
2b.1.1.26GF - Miscellaneous Building HVAC - 119 3 7 167 - - 56 353 353 - - 2,034 - - - - 82,602 2,026 -
2b.1.1.27GH - Radwaste Building HVAC - 185 5 10 199 16 - 82 496 496 - - 2,425 73 - - - 104,709 3,454 -
2b.1.1.28GK - Control Building HVAC - 175 - - - - - 26 201 - - 201 - - - - - - 3,959 -
2b.1.1.29GL - Auxiliary Building HVAC - 457 11 20 415 38 - 190 1,132 1,132 - - 5,064 171 - - - 220,163 8,489 -
2b.1.1.30GM - Diesel Generator Building HVAC - 30 - - - - - 5 35 - - 35 - - - - - - 695 -
2b.1.1.31GN - Containment Cooling - 510 21 33 604 106 - 252 1,526 1,526 - - 7,367 482 - - - 340,176 9,596 -
2b.1.1.32GP - Containment Intgratd Leak Rate Test- 40 1 2 48 - - 17 108 108 - - 580 - - - - 23,570 750 -
2b.1.1.33GR - Containment Atmospheric Control - 20 2 4 89 7 - 21 143 143 - - 1,086 31 - - - 46,696 392 -
2b.1.1.34GT - Containment Purge HVAC - 119 6 9 160 28 - 63 384 384 - - 1,948 128 - - - 89,958 2,257 -
2b.1.1.35HA - Gaseous Radwaste - 366 19 18 228 110 - 158 898 898 - - 2,782 512 - - - 155,375 7,029 -
2b.1.1.36HB - Liquid Radwaste 761 888 64 53 456 452 - 798 3,472 3,472 - - 5,560 2,280 - - - 400,250 30,882 -
2b.1.1.37HC - Solid Radwaste - 381 29 26 173 245 - 189 1,044 1,044 - - 2,114 1,156 - - - 180,557 7,433 -
2b.1.1.38HD - Decontamination - 105 5 6 81 28 - 47 271 271 - - 983 132 - - - 50,841 2,049 -
2b.1.1.39JE - Emergency Fuel Oil - 62 - - - - - 9 72 - - 72 - - - - - - 1,260 -
2b.1.1.40KA - Compressed Air - 193 - - - - - 29 222 - - 222 - - - - - - 4,187 -
2b.1.1.41KA - Compressed Air RCA - 132 1 3 66 - - 43 246 246 - - 801 - - - - 32,538 2,339 -
2b.1.1.42KB - Breathing Air - 24 - - - - - 4 28 - - 28 - - - - - - 516 -
2b.1.1.43KB - Breathing Air RCA - 20 0 0 6 - - 6 32 32 - - 71 - - - - 2,874 402 -
2b.1.1.44KC - Fire Protection - 382 - - - - - 57 439 - - 439 - - - - - - 8,376 -
2b.1.1.45KC - Fire Protection RCA - 414 7 15 362 - - 161 958 958 - - 4,411 - - - - 179,151 7,064 -
2b.1.1.46KD - Domestic Water - 177 - - - - - 27 204 - - 204 - - - - - - 3,837 -
2b.1.1.47KD - Domestic Water RCA - 27 0 1 20 - - 10 58 58 - - 247 - - - - 10,039 459 -
2b.1.1.48KE - Fuel Handling & Storage Rctor vssl - 19 3 4 54 26 - 20 127 127 - - 661 118 - - - 36,924 374 -
2b.1.1.49KH - Service Gas (CO2 N2 H2 & O2) - 56 - - - - - 8 65 - - 65 - - - - - - 1,226 -
2b.1.1.50KH - Service Gas (CO2 N2 H2 & O2) RCA- 260 4 8 200 - - 96 568 568 - - 2,433 - - - - 98,813 4,481 -
2b.1.1.51KJ - Standby Diesel Engine - 330 - - - - - 50 380 - - 380 - - - - - - 6,749 -
2b.1.1.52LA - Sanitary Drains - 45 - - - - - 7 52 - - 52 - - - - - - 972 -
2b.1.1.53LA - Sanitary Drains RCA - 109 2 4 104 - - 44 264 264 - - 1,273 - - - - 51,684 1,811 -
2b.1.1.54LB - Roof Drains - 60 - - - - - 9 68 - - 68 - - - - - - 1,276 -
2b.1.1.55LB - Roof Drains RCA - 147 3 7 175 - - 64 397 397 - - 2,139 - - - - 86,858 2,694 -
2b.1.1.56LD - Chemical & Detergent Waste 66 123 4 4 41 35 - 80 353 353 - - 504 159 - - - 33,900 3,488 -
2b.1.1.57LF - Floor & Equipment Drains - 1,520 98 84 307 945 - 684 3,637 3,637 - - 3,739 4,320 - - - 516,638 29,273 -
2b.1.1.58RM - Process Sampling & Analysis - 138 7 5 54 40 - 54 298 298 - - 661 180 - - - 42,123 2,771 -
2b.1.1.59SJ - Nuclear Sampling - 80 5 4 35 30 - 34 187 187 - - 423 138 - - - 28,947 1,618 -
2b.1.1.60UB - Servces Stores Site Security Bldg- 181 - - - - - 27 208 - - 208 - - - - - - 3,815 -
2b.1.1.61Yard Non-System Specific - 30 - - - - - 4 34 - - 34 - - - - - - 603 -
2b.1.1Totals1,594 15,162 515 597 8,054 3,449 - 6,352 35,723 30,582 - 5,141 98,179 16,315 - - - 5,318,678 321,572 - 2b.1.2Scaffolding in support of decommissioning- 2,000 35 8 140 22 - 531 2,736 2,736 - - 1,541 102 - - - 78,019 45,926 -
Decontamination of Site Buildings2b.1.3.1Reactor 1,254 1,102 33 170 492 1,097 - 1,279 5,427 5,427 - - 5,995 10,039 - - - 972,803 44,361 -
2b.1.3.2 Auxiliary 665 375 14 78 169 207 - 517 2,024 2,024 - - 2,058 3,820 - - - 412,073 19,424 -
2b.1.3.3Communication Corridor - Contaminated 15 6 0 2 1 4 - 11 39 39 - - 17 83 - - - 7,854 395 -
2b.1.3.4Hot Machine Shop 18 14 0 2 - 5 - 14 54 54 - - - 103 - - - 8,892 597 -
2b.1.3.5RAM Storage Building 45 16 1 4 2 11 - 30 109 109 - - 19 213 - - - 19,136 1,162 -
2b.1.3.6Radioactive and Personnel Tunnel 6 12 0 1 - 3 - 7 30 30 - - - 58 - - - 5,022 334 -
2b.1.3.7Radwaste 354 181 7 41 69 109 - 267 1,028 1,028 - - 844 2,021 - - - 208,610 9,997 -
2b.1.3.8Radwaste Drum Storage 40 19 1 4 5 12 - 29 110 110 - - 66 226 - - - 22,242 1,092 -
2b.1.3.9Steam Generator Replacement Bldgs 239 - - - - - - 119 358 358 - - - - - - - - 4,358 -
2b.1.3Totals2,637 1,725 55 302 738 1,448 - 2,273 9,179 9,179 - - 8,999 16,563 - - - 1,656,632 81,719 -
2b.1Subtotal Period 2b Activity Costs4,231 18,887 606 906 8,932 4,919 - 9,156 47,638 42,497 - 5,141 108,720 32,981 - - - 7,053,329 449,217 -
Period 2b Additional Costs2b.2.1Sanitary Treatment Lagoon LLW- 5 75 781 - 207 - 178 1,247 1,247 - - - 3,600 - - - 345,600 388 -
2b.2.2Cooling Tower Asbestos Panel Removal- 4,898 - 109 - - 469 821 6,296 - - 6,296 - - - - - - 101,822 - 2b.2Subtotal Period 2b Additional Costs- 4,903 75 890 - 207 469 999 7,543 1,247 - 6,296 - 3,600 - - - 345,600 102,209 -
Period 2b Collateral Costs2b.3.1Process decommissioning water waste168 - 72 274 - 387 - 229 1,130 1,130 - - - 1,110 - - - 66,617 216 -
2b.3.2Process decommissioning chemical flush waste3 - 83 413 - 828 - 279 1,606 1,606 - - - 1,338 - - - 142,540 250 -
2b.3.3Small tool allowance- 429 - - - - - 64 494 494 - - - - - - - - - -
TLG Services, Inc.
Callaway Energy Center D ecommissioning Cost Analysi s Document A22-1644-001, Rev. 0 Appendix C, Page 7 of 9 Table C Callaway Energy Center DECON Decommissioning Cost Estimat e (thousands of 2011 dollars)
Costs run: Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 10:45:06Off-SiteLLRWNRCSpent FuelSiteProcessedBurial VolumesBurial /Utility and Activity DECCER Version 2010.09.09aDeconRemovalPackagingTransportProcessingDisposalOtherTotalTotalLic. Term.ManagementRestorationVolumeClass AClass BClass CGTCCProcessedCraftContractorIndexActivity DescriptionCostCostCostsCostsCostsCostsCostsContingencyCostsCostsCostsCostsCu. FeetCu. FeetCu. FeetCu. FeetCu. FeetWt., Lbs.ManhoursManhours Period 2b Collateral Costs (continued)2b.3.4Decommissioning Equipment Disposition- - 138 34 545 87 - 123 928 928 - - 6,000 397 - - - 303,726 88 -
2b.3.5Spent Fuel Capital and Transfer- - - - - - 8,400 1,260 9,660 - 9,660 - - - - - - - - -
2b.3.6On-site survey and release of 297.3 tons clean metallic waste- - - - - - 303 30 334 334 - - - - - - - - - -
2b.3Subtotal Period 2b Collateral Costs171 429 292 721 545 1,303 8,703 1,985 14,150 4,490 9,660 - 6,000 2,845 - - - 512,884 555 -
Period 2b Period-Dependent Costs2b.4.1Decon supplies1,190 - - - - - - 297 1,487 1,487 - - - - - - - - - -
2b.4.2Insurance- - - - - - 1,431 143 1,574 1,574 - - - - - - - - - -
2b.4.3Property taxes- - - - - - 682 68 751 751 - - - - - - - - - -
2b.4.4Health physics supplies- 3,435 - - - - - 859 4,294 4,294 - - - - - - - - - -
2b.4.5Heavy equipment rental- 4,590 - - - - - 689 5,279 5,279 - - - - - - - - - -
2b.4.6Disposal of DAW generated- - 141 25 - 305 - 94 564 564 - - - 6,547 - - - 130,948 214 -
2b.4.7Plant energy budget- - - - - - 1,324 199 1,522 1,522 - - - - - - - - - -
2b.4.8NRC Fees- - - - - - 1,749 175 1,924 1,924 - - - - - - - - - -
2b.4.9Emergency Planning Fees- - - - - - 2,225 222 2,447 - 2,447 - - - - - - - - -
2b.4.10Spent Fuel Pool O&M- - - - - - 1,861 279 2,140 - 2,140 - - - - - - - - -
2b.4.11Liquid Radwaste Processing Equipment/Services- - - - - - 473 71 543 543 - - - - - - - - - -
2b.4.12ISFSI Operating Costs- - - - - - 218 33 251 - 251 - - - - - - - - -
2b.4.13Corporate Allocations- - - - - - 10,351 1,035 11,387 11,387 - - - - - - - - - -
2b.4.14Security Staff Cost- - - - - - 14,479 2,172 16,651 16,651 - - - - - - - - - 321,671 2b.4.15DOC Staff Cost- - - - - - 32,819 4,923 37,742 37,742 - - - - - - - - - 371,257 2b.4.16Utility Staff Cost- - - - - - 46,864 7,030 53,893 53,893 - - - - - - - - - 689,114 2b.4Subtotal Period 2b Period-Dependent Costs1,190 8,025 141 25 - 305 114,475 18,288 142,448 137,611 4,838 - - 6,547 - - - 130,948 214 1,382,043 2b.0TOTAL PERIOD 2b COST5,591 32,245 1,115 2,542 9,478 6,735 123,647 30,429 211,780 185,845 14,498 11,437 114,720 45,973 - - - 8,042,761 552,194 1,382,043 PERIOD 2d - Decontamination Following Wet Fuel Storage Period 2d Direct Decommissioning Activities2d.1.1Remove spent fuel racks838 83 310 87 - 1,154 - 772 3,244 3,244 - - - 5,241 - - - 445,519 1,925 -
Disposal of Plant Systems2d.1.2.1600 Fuel Bldg Non-Specific Systems RCA - 317 5 11 263 - - 121 716 716 - - 3,200 - - - - 129,974 5,859 -
2d.1.2.2600 Fuel Bldg Non-System Specific - 49 2 2 14 20 - 20 107 107 - - 170 90 - - - 14,594 953 -
2d.1.2.3EC - Fuel Pool Cooling & Cleanup - 412 22 22 213 180 - 186 1,035 1,035 - - 2,602 818 - - - 175,143 8,042 -
2d.1.2.4GA- Plant Heating Fuel Building - 23 1 1 4 7 - 8 44 44 - - 50 31 - - - 4,665 448 -
2d.1.2.5GG - Fuel Building HVAC - 252 8 15 306 26 - 118 724 724 - - 3,729 116 - - - 161,302 4,671 -
2d.1.2.6KC- Fire Protection Fuel Building - 122 2 4 102 - - 47 277 277 - - 1,239 - - - - 50,329 2,115 -
2d.1.2Totals- 1,175 39 55 902 232 - 499 2,903 2,903 - - 10,991 1,056 - - - 536,007 22,089 -
Decontamination of Site Buildings2d.1.3.1Fuel Building 785 851 9 28 222 67 - 660 2,621 2,621 - - 2,705 1,041 - - - 199,583 31,559 -
2d.1.3Totals785 851 9 28 222 67 - 660 2,621 2,621 - - 2,705 1,041 - - - 199,583 31,559 -
2d.1.4Scaffolding in support of decommissioning- 400 7 2 28 4 - 106 547 547 - - 308 20 - - - 15,604 9,185 -
2d.1Subtotal Period 2d Activity Costs1,623 2,509 365 171 1,151 1,458 - 2,038 9,315 9,315 - - 14,004 7,359 - - - 1,196,713 64,759 -
Period 2d Additional Costs2d.2.1License Termination Survey Program Management- - - - - - 1,366 410 1,776 1,776 - - - - - - - - - 12,480 2d.2Subtotal Period 2d Additional Costs- - - - - - 1,366 410 1,776 1,776 - - - - - - - - - 12,480
Period 2d Collateral Costs2d.3.1Process decommissioning water waste90 - 39 148 - 209 - 124 610 610 - - - 601 - - - 36,055 117 -
2d.3.3Small tool allowance- 68 - - - - - 10 78 78 - - - - - - - - - -
2d.3.4Decommissioning Equipment Disposition- - 138 34 545 87 - 123 928 928 - - 6,000 397 - - - 303,726 88 -
2d.3Subtotal Period 2d Collateral Costs90 68 177 183 545 297 - 256 1,616 1,616 - - 6,000 998 - - - 339,781 205 -
Period 2d Period-Dependent Costs2d.4.1Decon supplies172 - - - - - - 43 215 215 - - - - - - - - - -
2d.4.2Insurance- - - - - - 391 39 430 430 - - - - - - - - - -
2d.4.3Property taxes- - - - - - 186 19 205 205 - - - - - - - - - -
2d.4.4Health physics supplies- 547 - - - - - 137 683 683 - - - - - - - - - -
2d.4.5Heavy equipment rental- 1,253 - - - - - 188 1,441 1,441 - - - - - - - - - -
2d.4.6Disposal of DAW generated- - 45 8 - 97 - 30 179 179 - - - 2,081 - - - 41,624 68 -
2d.4.7Plant energy budget- - - - - - 193 29 222 222 - - - - - - - - - -
2d.4.8NRC Fees- - - - - - 478 48 525 525 - - - - - - - - - -
TLG Services, Inc.
Callaway Energy Center D ecommissioning Cost Analysi s Document A22-1644-001, Rev. 0 Appendix C, Page 8 of 9 Table C Callaway Energy Center DECON Decommissioning Cost Estimat e (thousands of 2011 dollars)
Costs run: Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 10:45:06Off-SiteLLRWNRCSpent FuelSiteProcessedBurial VolumesBurial /Utility and Activity DECCER Version 2010.09.09aDeconRemovalPackagingTransportProcessingDisposalOtherTotalTotalLic. Term.ManagementRestorationVolumeClass AClass BClass CGTCCProcessedCraftContractorIndexActivity DescriptionCostCostCostsCostsCostsCostsCostsContingencyCostsCostsCostsCostsCu. FeetCu. FeetCu. FeetCu. FeetCu. FeetWt., Lbs.ManhoursManhours Period 2d Period-Dependent Costs (continued)2d.4.9Liquid Radwaste Processing Equipment/Services- - - - - - 258 39 297 297 - - - - - - - - - -
2d.4.10Corporate Allocations- - - - - - 1,890 189 2,079 2,079 - - - - - - - - - -
2d.4.11Security Staff Cost- - - - - - 1,171 176 1,347 1,347 - - - - - - - - - 20,829 2d.4.12DOC Staff Cost- - - - - - 6,144 922 7,066 7,066 - - - - - - - - - 69,429 2d.4.13Utility Staff Cost- - - - - - 9,174 1,376 10,551 10,551 - - - - - - - - - 131,220 2d.4Subtotal Period 2d Period-Dependent Costs172 1,800 45 8 - 97 19,885 3,233 25,240 25,240 - - - 2,081 - - - 41,624 68 221,477 2d.0TOTAL PERIOD 2d COST1,885 4,377 587 362 1,697 1,851 21,250 5,937 37,946 37,946 - - 20,004 10,438 - - - 1,578,117 65,032 233,957 PERIOD 2f - License Termination Period 2f Direct Decommissioning Activities2f.1.1ORISE confirmatory survey- - - - - - 154 46 200 200 - - - - - - - - - -
2f.1.2Terminate license a 2f.1Subtotal Period 2f Activity Costs- - - - - - 154 46 200 200 - - - - - - - - - -
Period 2f Additional Costs2f.2.1License Termination Survey- - - - - - 7,808 2,342 10,150 10,150 - - - - - - - - 149,339 6,240 2f.2Subtotal Period 2f Additional Costs- - - - - - 7,808 2,342 10,150 10,150 - - - - - - - - 149,339 6,240
Period 2f Collateral Costs2f.3.1DOC staff relocation expenses- - - - - - 1,080 162 1,242 1,242 - - - - - - - - - -
2f.3Subtotal Period 2f Collateral Costs- - - - - - 1,080 162 1,242 1,242 - - - - - - - - - -
Period 2f Period-Dependent Costs2f.4.1Insurance- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
2f.4.2Property taxes- - - - - - 212 21 233 233 - - - - - - - - - -
2f.4.3Health physics supplies- 661 - - - - - 165 826 826 - - - - - - - - - -
2f.4.4Disposal of DAW generated- - 8 1 - 16 - 5 30 30 - - - 353 - - - 7,050 11 -
2f.4.5Plant energy budget- - - - - - 109 16 126 126 - - - - - - - - - -
2f.4.6NRC Fees- - - - - - 582 58 640 640 - - - - - - - - - -
2f.4.7Corporate Allocations- - - - - - 1,440 144 1,584 1,584 - - - - - - - - - -
2f.4.8Security Staff Cost- - - - - - 1,330 199 1,529 1,529 - - - - - - - - - 23,657 2f.4.9DOC Staff Cost- - - - - - 5,171 776 5,946 5,946 - - - - - - - - - 57,566 2f.4.10Utility Staff Cost- - - - - - 5,739 861 6,600 6,600 - - - - - - - - - 74,914 2f.4Subtotal Period 2f Period-Dependent Costs- 661 8 1 - 16 14,583 2,246 17,515 17,515 - - - 353 - - - 7,050 11 156,137 2f.0TOTAL PERIOD 2f COST- 661 8 1 - 16 23,624 4,796 29,106 29,106 - - - 353 - - - 7,050 149,350 162,377 PERIOD 2 TOTALS 9,897 71,723 20,733 11,480 22,144 47,813 255,537 85,219 524,547 485,084 23,944 15,518 281,077 145,191 903 459 2,142 23,763,400 1,165,214 2,703,177 PERIOD 3b - Site Restoration Period 3b Direct Decommissioning Activities Demolition of Remaining Site Buildings3b.1.1.1Reactor - 5,121
- - - - - 768 5,889 - - 5,889 - - - - - - 60,047 -
3b.1.1.2 Auxiliary - 4,111 - - - - - 617 4,728 - - 4,728 - - - - - - 49,968 -
3b.1.1.3 Auxiliary Boiler - 38 - - - - - 6 43 - - 43 - - - - - - 619 -
3b.1.1.4Barge Facility - 1,561 - - - - - 234 1,795 - - 1,795 - - - - - - 18,771 -
3b.1.1.5Circulating & Service Water Pumphouse - 314 - - - - - 47 361 - - 361 - - - - - - 4,345 -
3b.1.1.6Communication Corridor - Clean - 1,324 - - - - - 199 1,523 - - 1,523 - - - - - - 17,215 -
3b.1.1.7Communication Corridor - Contaminated - 57 - - - - - 9 66 - - 66 - - - - - - 674 -
3b.1.1.8Cooling Tower Basemat - 894 - - - - - 134 1,028 - - 1,028 - - - - - - 13,472 -
3b.1.1.9Diesel Generator - 486 - - - - - 73 559 - - 559 - - - - - - 5,492 -
3b.1.1.10Essential Service Water Pumphouse - 299 - - - - - 45 343 - - 343 - - - - - - 3,938 -
3b.1.1.11Fire Water Pumphouse - 28 - - - - - 4 32 - - 32 - - - - - - 382 -
3b.1.1.12Hot Machine Shop - 24 - - - - - 4 27 - - 27 - - - - - - 417 -
3b.1.1.13Intake - 369 - - - - - 55 424 - - 424 - - - - - - 4,224 -
3b.1.1.14Misc. Structures - 2,357 - - - - - 353 2,710 - - 2,710 - - - - - - 27,921 -
3b.1.1.15Miscellaneous Site Foundations - 372 - - - - - 56 428 - - 428 - - - - - - 5,483 -
3b.1.1.16Outage Maintenance - 185 - - - - - 28 213 - - 213 - - - - - - 3,190 -
3b.1.1.17RAM Storage Building - 69 - - - - - 10 79 - - 79 - - - - - - 1,081 -
3b.1.1.18Radioactive and Personnel Tunnel - 28 - - - - - 4 33 - - 33 - - - - - - 386 -
3b.1.1.19Radwaste - 1,831 - - - - - 275 2,106 - - 2,106 - - - - - - 21,798 -
3b.1.1.20Radwaste Drum Storage - 272 - - - - - 41 313 - - 313 - - - - - - 3,840 -
3b.1.1.21Security Additions - 2,224 - - - - - 334 2,557 - - 2,557 - - - - - - 20,977 -
TLG Services, Inc.
Callaway Energy Center D ecommissioning Cost Analysi s Document A22-1644-001, Rev. 0 Appendix C, Page 9 of 9 Table C Callaway Energy Center DECON Decommissioning Cost Estimat e (thousands of 2011 dollars)
Costs run: Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 10:45:06Off-SiteLLRWNRCSpent FuelSiteProcessedBurial VolumesBurial /Utility and Activity DECCER Version 2010.09.09aDeconRemovalPackagingTransportProcessingDisposalOtherTotalTotalLic. Term.ManagementRestorationVolumeClass AClass BClass CGTCCProcessedCraftContractorIndexActivity DescriptionCostCostCostsCostsCostsCostsCostsContingencyCostsCostsCostsCostsCu. FeetCu. FeetCu. FeetCu. FeetCu. FeetWt., Lbs.ManhoursManhours Demolition of Remaining Site Buildings (continued)3b.1.1.22Service - 502 - - - - - 75 577 - - 577 - - - - - - 6,045 -
3b.1.1.23Sludge Pump Station & Lagoon - 25 - - - - - 4 29 - - 29 - - - - - - 313 -
3b.1.1.24Steam Generator Replacement Bldgs - 1,187 - - - - - 178 1,365 - - 1,365 - - - - - - 15,693 -
3b.1.1.25Turbine Building - 3,648 - - - - - 547 4,195 - - 4,195 - - - - - - 55,694 -
3b.1.1.26Turbine Pedestal - 1,053 - - - - - 158 1,211 - - 1,211 - - - - - - 10,928 -
3b.1.1.27U.H.S. Cooling Tower - 638 - - - - - 96 734 - - 734 - - - - - - 6,681 -
3b.1.1.28Water Treatment Plant - 1 - - - - - 0 1 - - 1 - - - - - - 9 -
3b.1.1.29Fuel Building - 2,035 - - - - - 305 2,340 - - 2,340 - - - - - - 22,580 -
3b.1.1Totals- 31,051 - - - - - 4,658 35,708 - - 35,708 - - - - - - 382,179 -
Site Closeout Activities3b.1.2BackFill Site- 9,320 - - - - - 1,398 10,718 - - 10,718 - - - - - - 17,928 -
3b.1.3Grade & landscape site- 124 - - - - - 19 142 - - 142 - - - - - - 592 -
3b.1.4Final report to NRC- - - - - - 182 27 209 209 - - - - - - - - - 1,560 3b.1Subtotal Period 3b Activity Costs- 40,494 - - - - 182 6,101 46,778 209 - 46,568 - - - - - - 400,700 1,560
Period 3b Additional Costs3b.2.1Concrete Crushing- 1,226 - - - - 9 185 1,419 - - 1,419 - - - - - - 5,830 -
3b.2.2Mine Area Backfill- 4,219 - - - - - 633 4,852 - - 4,852 - - - - - - 15,960 -
3b.2.3Cooling Tower Discharge & Intake Pipe Flow Fill- 3,779 - - - - - 567 4,346 - - 4,346 - - - - - - 9,588 -
3b.2.4Cooling Tower Demolition- 3,846 - - - - - 577 4,423 - - 4,423 - - - - - - 20,462 -
3b.2Subtotal Period 3b Additional Costs- 13,070 - - - - 9 1,962 15,040 - - 15,040 - - - - - - 51,840 -
Period 3b Collateral Costs3b.3.1Small tool allowance- 410 - - - - - 62 472 - - 472 - - - - - - - -
3b.3Subtotal Period 3b Collateral Costs- 410 - - - - - 62 472 - - 472 - - - - - - - -
Period 3b Period-Dependent Costs3b.4.1Insurance- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
3b.4.2Property taxes- - - - - - 421 42 463 - - 463 - - - - - - - -
3b.4.3Heavy equipment rental- 4,058 - - - - - 609 4,667 - - 4,667 - - - - - - - -
3b.4.4Plant energy budget- - - - - - 109 16 125 - - 125 - - - - - - - -
3b.4.5Corporate Allocations- - - - - - 4,590 459 5,049 5,049 - - - - - - - - - -
3b.4.6Security Staff Cost- - - - - - 2,002 300 2,302 - - 2,302 - - - - - - - 37,646 3b.4.7DOC Staff Cost- - - - - - 10,006 1,501 11,507 - - 11,507 - - - - - - - 106,663 3b.4.8Utility Staff Cost- - - - - - 4,643 697 5,340 - - 5,340 - - - - - - - 61,174 3b.4Subtotal Period 3b Period-Dependent Costs- 4,058 - - - - 21,771 3,624 29,453 5,049 - 24,404 - - - - - - - 205,483 3b.0TOTAL PERIOD 3b COST- 58,032 - - - - 21,961 11,749 91,742 5,258 - 86,484 - - - - - - 452,540 207,043 PERIOD 3 TOTALS
- 58,032 - - - - 21,961 11,749 91,742 5,258 - 86,484 - - - - - - 452,540 207,043 TOTAL COST TO DECOMMISSION12,942 132,224 20,821 11,797 22,144 50,878 388,396 115,297 754,498 617,324 33,726 103,448 281,077 146,444 1,690 459 2,142 23,883,690 1,638,154 3,963,950 TOTAL COST TO DECOMMISSION WITH 18.04% CONTINGENCY:$754,498 thousands of 2011 dollarsTOTAL NRC LICENSE TERMINATION COST IS 81.82% OR:$617,324 thousands of 2011 dollarsSPENT FUEL MANAGEMENT COST IS 4.47% OR:$33,726 thousands of 2011 dollars NON-NUCLEAR DEMOLITION COST IS 13.71% OR:$103,448 thousands of 2011 dollars TOTAL LOW-LEVEL RADIOACTIVE WASTE VOLUME BURIED (EXCLUDING GTCC):148,593 cubic feetTOTAL GREATER THAN CLASS C RADWASTE VOLUME GENERATED:2,142 cubic feet TOTAL SCRAP METAL REMOVED:71,335 tons TOTAL CRAFT LABOR REQUIREMENTS:1,638,154 man-hours End Notes:
n/a - 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 cell containing " - " indicates a zero value TLG Services, Inc.
Callaway Energy Center Document A22-1644-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Appendix D, Page 1 of 11 TLG Services, Inc.
APPENDIX D DETAILED COST ANALYSIS SAFSTOR Callaway Energy Center D ecommissioning Cost Analysis Document A22-1644-001, Rev. 0 Appendix D, Page 2 of 11 Table D Callaway Energy Center SAFSTOR Decommissioning Cost Estimate (thousands of 2011 dollars)
Costs run: Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 10:50:4 0Off-SiteLLR WNRCSpent Fue lSiteProcessedBurial VolumesBurial /Utility and Activity DECCER Version 2010.09.09 a Deco nRemovalPackagin gTransportProcessin gDisposalOtherTotalTotalLic. Term.Managemen tRestorationVolumeClass AClass BClass CGTCCProcessedCraftContractorIndexActivity DescriptionCostCostCostsCostsCostsCostsCostsContingenc yCostsCostsCostsCostsCu. FeetCu. FeetCu. FeetCu. FeetCu. FeetWt., Lbs.ManhoursManhours PERIOD 1a - Shutdown through Transitio n Period 1a Direct Decommissioning Activities1a.1.1SAFSTOR site characterization survey- - - - - - 347 104 451 451 - - - - - - - - - -
1a.1.2Prepare preliminary decommissioning cost- - - - - - 152 23 174 174 - - - - - - - - - 1,300 1a.1.3Notification of Cessation of Operations a 1a.1.4Remove fuel & source material n/a1a.1.5Notification of Permanent Defueling a 1a.1.6Deactivate plant systems & process waste a 1a.1.7Prepare and submit PSDA R- - - - - - 233 35 268 268 - - - - - - - - - 2,000 1a.1.8Review plant dwgs & specs.- - - - - - 152 23 174 174 - - - - - - - - - 1,300 1a.1.9Perform detailed rad survey a 1a.1.10Estimate by-product inventory- - - - - - 117 18 134 134 - - - - - - - - - 1,000 1a.1.11End product description- - - - - - 117 18 134 134 - - - - - - - - - 1,000 1a.1.12Detailed by-product inventory- - - - - - 175 26 201 201 - - - - - - - - - 1,500 1a.1.13Define major work sequence- - - - - - 117 18 134 134 - - - - - - - - - 1,000
1a.1.1 4Perform SER and EA- - - - - - 362 54 416 416 - - - - - - - - - 3,100 1a.1.15Perform Site-Specific Cost Study- - - - - - 584 88 671 671 - - - - - - - - - 5,000
A ctivity Specifications1a.1.16.1Prepare plant and facilities for SAFSTOR- - - - - - 574 86 660 660 - - - - - - - - - 4,920 1a.1.16.2Plant systems- - - - - - 486 73 559 559 - - - - - - - - - 4,167 1a.1.16.3Plant structures and buildings- - - - - - 364 55 419 419 - - - - - - - - - 3,120
1a.1.16.4Waste management- - - - - - 233 35 268 268 - - - - - - - - - 2,000 1a.1.16.5Facility and site dormancy- - - - - - 233 35 268 268 - - - - - - - - - 2,000
1a.1.1 6 Total- - - - - - 1,892 284 2,175 2,175 - - - - - - - - - 16,20 7
Detailed Work Procedures1a.1.17.1Plant systems- - - - - - 138 21 159 159 - - - - - - - - - 1,183 1a.1.17.2Facility closeout & dormancy- - - - - - 140 21 161 161 - - - - - - - - - 1,200 1a.1.17Total
- - - - - - 278 42 320 320 - - - - - - - - - 2,383
1a.1.1 8Procure vacuum drying system- - - - - - 12 2 13 13 - - - - - - - - - 100 1a.1.19Drain/de-energize non-cont. systems a 1a.1.20Drain & dry NSSS a 1a.1.21Drain/de-energize contaminated systems a 1a.1.22Decon/secure contaminated systems a 1a.1Subtotal Period 1a Activity Costs- - - - - - 4,536 732 5,268 5,268 - - - - - - - - - 35,89 0
Period 1a Collateral Costs1a.3.1Spent Fuel Capital and Transfer- - - - - - 3,600 540 4,140 - 4,140 - - - - - - - - -
1a.3Subtotal Period 1a Collateral Costs- - - - - - 3,600 540 4,140 - 4,140 - - - - - - - - -
Period 1a Period-Dependent Costs1a.4.1Insurance- - - - - - 1,589 159 1,747 1,747 - - - - - - - - - -
1a.4.2Property taxes- - - - - - 280 28 308 308 - - - - - - - - - -
1a.4.3Health physics supplies- 454 - - - - - 113 567 567 - - - - - - - - - -
1a.4.4Heavy equipment rental- 436 - - - - - 65 502 502 - - - - - - - - - -
1a.4.5Disposal of DAW generated- - 13 2 - 28 - 9 53 53 - - - 610 - - - 12,19 0 20 -
1a.4.6Plant energy budget- - - - - - 724 109 832 832 - - - - - - - - - -
1a.4.7NRC Fees- - - - - - 769 77 846 846 - - - - - - - - - -
1a.4.8Emergency Planning Fees- - - - - - 1,351 135 1,486 - 1,486 - - - - - - - - -
1a.4.9INPO Fees- - - - - - 289 43 332 332 - - - - - - - - - -
1a.4.10Spent Fuel Pool O&M- - - - - - 763 114 878 - 878 - - - - - - - - -
1a.4.11ISFSI Operating Costs- - - - - - 89 13 103 - 103 - - - - - - - - -
1a.4.12Corporate Allocations- - - - - - 2,970 297 3,267 3,267 - - - - - - - - - -
1a.4.13Security Staff Cost- - - - - - 6,892 1,034 7,926 7,926 - - - - - - - - - 157,471 1a.4.1 4Utility Staff Cost- - - - - - 28,091 4,214 32,305 32,305 - - - - - - - - - 423,40 0 1a.4Subtotal Period 1a Period-Dependent Costs- 890 13 2 - 28 43,80 7 6,411 51,151 48,685 2,467 - - 610 - - - 12,19 0 20 580,871 1a.0TOTAL PERIOD 1a COS T- 890 13 2 - 28 51,943 7,683 60,55 9 53,953 6,607 - - 610 - - - 12,19 0 20 616,761 TLG Services, Inc.
Callaway Energy Center D ecommissioning Cost Analysis Document A22-1644-001, Rev. 0 Appendix D, Page 3 of 11 Table D Callaway Energy Center SAFSTOR Decommissioning Cost Estimate (thousands of 2011 dollars)
Costs run: Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 10:50:4 0Off-SiteLLR WNRCSpent Fue lSiteProcessedBurial VolumesBurial /Utility and Activity DECCER Version 2010.09.09 a Deco nRemovalPackagin gTransportProcessin gDisposalOtherTotalTotalLic. Term.Managemen tRestorationVolumeClass AClass BClass CGTCCProcessedCraftContractorIndexActivity DescriptionCostCostCostsCostsCostsCostsCostsContingenc yCostsCostsCostsCostsCu. FeetCu. FeetCu. FeetCu. FeetCu. FeetWt., Lbs.ManhoursManhours PERIOD 1b - SAFSTOR Limited DECON Activitie s Period 1b Direct Decommissioning Activities Decontamination of Site Buildings1b.1.1.1Reactor 1,235 - - - - - - 618 1,853 1,853 - - - - - - - - 24,102 -
1b.1.1.2 Auxiliary 626 - - - - - - 313 940 940 - - - - - - - - 12,52 7 -
1b.1.1.3Communication Corridor - Contaminated 14 - - - - - - 7 21 21 - - - - - - - - 276 -
1b.1.1.4Fuel Building 774 - - - - - - 387 1,161 1,161 - - - - - - - - 14,371 -
1b.1.1.5Hot Machine Shop 17 - - - - - - 9 26 26 - - - - - - - - 344 -
1b.1.1.6RAM Storage Building 43 - - - - - - 22 65 65 - - - - - - - - 865 -
1b.1.1.7Radioactive and Personnel Tunnel 5 - - - - - - 2 7 7 - - - - - - - - 91 -
1b.1.1.8Radwaste 303 - - - - - - 151 454 454 - - - - - - - - 5,964 -
1b.1.1.9Radwaste Drum Storage 34 - - - - - - 17 51 51 - - - - - - - - 671 -
1b.1.1Totals3,051 - - - - - - 1,525 4,576 4,576 - - - - - - - - 59,211 -
1b.1Subtotal Period 1b Activity Costs3,051 - - - - - - 1,525 4,576 4,576 - - - - - - - - 59,211 -
Period 1b Collateral Costs1b.3.1Decon equipment872 - - - - - - 131 1,003 1,003 - - - - - - - - - -
1b.3.2Process decommissioning water waste171 - 70 267 - 377 - 227 1,113 1,113 - - - 1,082 - - - 64,942 211 -
1b.3.4Small tool allowance- 50 - - - - - 8 58 58 - - - - - - - - - -
1b.3.5Spent Fuel Capital and Transfer- - - - - - 960 144 1,104 - 1,104 - - - - - - - - -
1b.3Subtotal Period 1b Collateral Costs1,044 50 70 267 - 377 960 509 3,278 2,174 1,104 - - 1,082 - - - 64,942 211 -
Period 1b Period-Dependent Costs1b.4.1Decon supplies1,108 - - - - - - 277 1,385 1,385 - - - - - - - - - -
1b.4.2Insurance- - - - - - 400 40 440 440 - - - - - - - - - -
1b.4.3Property taxes- - - - - - 71 7 78 78 - - - - - - - - - -
1b.4.4Health physics supplies- 364 - - - - - 91 455 455 - - - - - - - - - -
1b.4.5Heavy equipment rental- 110 - - - - - 16 126 126 - - - - - - - - - -
1b.4.6Disposal of DAW generated- - 16 3 - 34 - 11 63 63 - - - 731 - - - 14,62 6 24 -
1b.4.7Plant energy budget- - - - - - 182 27 210 210 - - - - - - - - - -
1b.4.8NRC Fees- - - - - - 194 19 213 213 - - - - - - - - - -
1b.4.9Emergency Planning Fees- - - - - - 341 34 375 - 375 - - - - - - - - -
1b.4.10Spent Fuel Pool O&M- - - - - - 192 29 221 - 221 - - - - - - - - -
1b.4.11ISFSI Operating Costs- - - - - - 23 3 26 - 26 - - - - - - - - -
1b.4.12Corporate Allocations- - - - - - 1,080 108 1,188 1,188 - - - - - - - - - -
1b.4.13Security Staff Cost- - - - - - 1,737 261 1,998 1,998 - - - - - - - - - 39,691
1b.4.1 4Utility Staff Cost- - - - - - 7,081 1,062 8,143 8,143 - - - - - - - - - 106,72 0 1b.4Subtotal Period 1b Period-Dependent Costs1,108 474 16 3 - 34 11,30 0 1,986 14,921 14,29 9 622 - - 731 - - - 14,62 6 24 146,411 1b.0TOTAL PERIOD 1b COS T 5,203 524 86 270 - 411 12,26 0 4,021 22,77 4 21,04 9 1,726 - - 1,814 - - - 79,56 8 59,44 6 146,411 PERIOD 1c - Preparations for SAFSTOR Dormanc y Period 1c Direct Decommissioning Activities1c.1.1Prepare support equipment for storage- 437 - - - - - 66 503 503 - - - - - - - - 3,000 -
1c.1.2Install containment pressure equal. lines- 39 - - - - - 6 45 45 - - - - - - - - 700 -
1c.1.3Interim survey prior to dormancy- - - - - - 733 220 953 953 - - - - - - - - 15,67 8 -
1c.1.4Secure building accesses a 1c.1.5Prepare & submit interim report- - - - - - 68 10 78 78 - - - - - - - - - 583 1c.1Subtotal Period 1c Activity Costs- 476 - - - - 801 301 1,579 1,579 - - - - - - - - 19,37 8 583
Period 1c Additional Costs1c.2.1Spent Fuel Isolation- - - - - - 10,28 0 1,542 11,822 11,822 - - - - - - - - - -
1c.2Subtotal Period 1c Additional Costs- - - - - - 10,28 0 1,542 11,822 11,822 - - - - - - - - - -
Period 1c Collateral Costs1c.3.1Process decommissioning water waste187 - 76 292 - 413 - 248 1,216 1,216 - - - 1,183 - - - 71,001 231 -
1c.3.3Small tool allowance- 4 - - - - - 1 4 4 - - - - - - - - - -
1c.3.4Spent Fuel Capital and Transfer- - - - - - 960 144 1,104 - 1,104 - - - - - - - - -
1c.3Subtotal Period 1c Collateral Costs187 4 76 292 - 413 960 393 2,324 1,220 1,104 - - 1,183 - - - 71,001 231 -
Period 1c Period-Dependent Costs1c.4.1Insurance- - - - - - 400 40 440 440 - - - - - - - - - -
1c.4.2Property taxes- - - - - - 71 7 78 78 - - - - - - - - - -
TLG Services, Inc.
Callaway Energy Center D ecommissioning Cost Analysis Document A22-1644-001, Rev. 0 Appendix D, Page 4 of 11 Table D Callaway Energy Center SAFSTOR Decommissioning Cost Estimate (thousands of 2011 dollars)
Costs run: Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 10:50:4 0Off-SiteLLR WNRCSpent Fue lSiteProcessedBurial VolumesBurial /Utility and Activity DECCER Version 2010.09.09 a Deco nRemovalPackagin gTransportProcessin gDisposalOtherTotalTotalLic. Term.Managemen tRestorationVolumeClass AClass BClass CGTCCProcessedCraftContractorIndexActivity DescriptionCostCostCostsCostsCostsCostsCostsContingenc yCostsCostsCostsCostsCu. FeetCu. FeetCu. FeetCu. FeetCu. FeetWt., Lbs.ManhoursManhours Period 1c Period-Dependent Costs (continued)1c.4.3Health physics supplies- 197 - - - - - 49 246 246 - - - - - - - - - -
1c.4.4Heavy equipment rental- 110 - - - - - 16 126 126 - - - - - - - - - -
1c.4.5Disposal of DAW generated- - 3 1 - 7 - 2 13 13 - - - 154 - - - 3,073 5 -
1c.4.6Plant energy budget- - - - - - 182 27 210 210 - - - - - - - - - -
1c.4.7NRC Fees- - - - - - 194 19 213 213 - - - - - - - - - -
1c.4.8Emergency Planning Fees- - - - - - 341 34 375 - 375 - - - - - - - - -
1c.4.9Spent Fuel Pool O&M- - - - - - 192 29 221 - 221 - - - - - - - - -
1c.4.10ISFSI Operating Costs- - - - - - 23 3 26 - 26 - - - - - - - - -
1c.4.11Corporate Allocations- - - - - - 1,440 144 1,584 1,584 - - - - - - - - - -
1c.4.12Security Staff Cost- - - - - - 1,737 261 1,998 1,998 - - - - - - - - - 39,691 1c.4.13Utility Staff Cost- - - - - - 7,081 1,062 8,143 8,143 - - - - - - - - - 106,72 0 1c.4Subtotal Period 1c Period-Dependent Costs- 307 3 1 - 7 11,66 0 1,695 13,673 13,051 622 - - 154 - - - 3,073 5 146,411 1c.0TOTAL PERIOD 1c COS T 187 786 80 293 - 420 23,701 3,931 29,39 7 27,671 1,726 - - 1,337 - - - 74,073 19,61 4 146,99 5
PERIOD 1 TOTAL S 5,390 2,200 178 565 - 859 87,90 4 15,63 4 112,731 102,67 3 10,05 8 - - 3,760 - - - 165,832 79,08 0 910,16 8
PERIOD 2a - SAFSTOR Dormancy with Wet Spent Fuel Storag e Period 2a Direct Decommissioning Activities2a.1.1Quarterly Inspection a 2a.1.2Semi-annual environmental survey a 2a.1.3Prepare reports a 2a.1.4Bituminous roof replacement- - - - - - 291 44 335 335 - - - - - - - - - -
2a.1.5Maintenance supplies- - - - - - 540 135 675 675 - - - - - - - - - -
2a.1Subtotal Period 2a Activity Costs- - - - - - 831 179 1,009 1,009 - - - - - - - - - -
Period 2a Collateral Costs2a.3.1Spent Fuel Capital and Transfer- - - - - - 13,68 0 2,052 15,732 - 15,732 - - - - - - - - -
2a.3Subtotal Period 2a Collateral Costs- - - - - - 13,68 0 2,052 15,732 - 15,732 - - - - - - - - -
Period 2a Period-Dependent Costs2a.4.1Insurance- - - - - - 2,347 235 2,582 2,270 312 - - - - - - - - -
2a.4.2Property taxes- - - - - - 1,119 112 1,231 1,231 - - - - - - - - - -
2a.4.3Health physics supplies- 728 - - - - - 182 910 910 - - - - - - - - - -
2a.4.4Disposal of DAW generated- - 20 3 - 43 - 13 79 79 - - - 920 - - - 18,40 6 30 -
2a.4.5Plant energy budget- - - - - - 579 87 666 333 333 - - - - - - - - -
2a.4.6NRC Fees- - - - - - 881 88 970 970 - - - - - - - - - -
2a.4.7Emergency Planning Fees- - - - - - 3,650 365 4,014 - 4,014 - - - - - - - - -
2a.4.8Spent Fuel Pool O&M- - - - - - 3,053 458 3,510 - 3,510 - - - - - - - - -
2a.4.9ISFSI Operating Costs- - - - - - 358 54 411 - 411 - - - - - - - - -
2a.4.10Corporate Allocations- - - - - - 4,140 414 4,554 1,108 3,447 - - - - - - - - -
2a.4.11Security Staff Cost- - - - - - 20,63 6 3,095 23,731 8,090 15,641 - - - - - - - - 444,25 7 2a.4.12Utility Staff Cost- - - - - - 22,072 3,311 25,383 5,092 20,291 - - - - - - - - 329,54 3 2a.4Subtotal Period 2a Period-Dependent Costs- 728 20 3 - 43 58,835 8,414 68,042 20,083 47,95 9 - - 920 - - - 18,40 6 30 773,80 0 2a.0TOTAL PERIOD 2a COS T- 728 20 3 - 43 73,34 6 10,64 4 84,78 4 21,092 63,691 - - 920 - - - 18,40 6 30 773,80 0
PERIOD 2c - SAFSTOR Dormancy without Spent Fuel Storag e Period 2c Direct Decommissioning Activities2c.1.1Quarterly Inspection a 2c.1.2Semi-annual environmental survey a 2c.1.3Prepare reports a 2c.1.4Bituminous roof replacement- - - - - - 3,512 527 4,039 4,039 - - - - - - - - - -
2c.1.5Maintenance supplies- - - - - - 6,510 1,627 8,137 8,137 - - - - - - - - - -
2c.1Subtotal Period 2c Activity Costs- - - - - - 10,022 2,154 12,17 6 12,17 6 - - - - - - - - - -
Period 2c Period-Dependent Costs2c.4.1Insurance- -
- - - - 24,89 4 2,489 27,38 4 27,38 4 - - - - - - - - - -
2c.4.2Property taxes- - - - - - 13,502 1,350 14,852 14,852 - - - - - - - - - -
2c.4.3Health physics supplies- 4,006 - - - - - 1,001 5,007 5,007 - - - - - - - - - -
2c.4.4Disposal of DAW generated- - 105 18 - 229 - 71 423 423 - - - 4,912 - - - 98,23 7 160 -
2c.4.5Plant energy budget- - - - - - 3,493 524 4,017 4,017 - - - - - - - - - -
2c.4.6NRC Fees- - - - - - 9,635 963 10,59 8 10,59 8 - - - - - - - - - -
2c.4.7Corporate Allocations- - - - - - 12,15 0 1,215 13,365 13,365 - - - - - - - - - -
2c.4.8Security Staff Cost- - - - - - 84,86 7 12,730 97,59 7 97,59 7 - - - - - - - - - 1,509,68 6 2c.4.9Utility Staff Cost- - - - - - 53,42 0 8,013 61,433 61,433 - - - - - - - - - 880,65 0
TLG Services, Inc.
Callaway Energy Center D ecommissioning Cost Analysis Document A22-1644-001, Rev. 0 Appendix D, Page 5 of 11 Table D Callaway Energy Center SAFSTOR Decommissioning Cost Estimate (thousands of 2011 dollars)
Costs run: Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 10:50:4 0Off-SiteLLR WNRCSpent Fue lSiteProcessedBurial VolumesBurial /Utility and Activity DECCER Version 2010.09.09 a Deco nRemovalPackagin gTransportProcessin gDisposalOtherTotalTotalLic. Term.Managemen tRestorationVolumeClass AClass BClass CGTCCProcessedCraftContractorIndexActivity DescriptionCostCostCostsCostsCostsCostsCostsContingenc yCostsCostsCostsCostsCu. FeetCu. FeetCu. FeetCu. FeetCu. FeetWt., Lbs.ManhoursManhours2c.4Subtotal Period 2c Period-Dependent Costs- 4,006 105 18 - 229 201,962 28,35 7 234,67 7 234,67 7 - - - 4,912 - - - 98,23 7 160 2,390,33 6 2c.0TOTAL PERIOD 2c COS T- 4,006 105 18 - 229 211,98 3 30,511 246,85 3 246,85 3 - - - 4,912 - - - 98,23 7 160 2,390,33 6 PERIOD 2 TOTAL S- 4,734 125 22 - 272 285,32 9 41,155 331,63 7 267,94 6 63,691 - - 5,832 - - - 116,64 3 190 3,164,13 6 PERIOD 3a - Reactivate Site Following SAFSTOR Dormanc y Period 3a Direct Decommissioning Activities3a.1.1Prepare preliminary decommissioning cost- -
- - - - 152 23 174 174 - - - - - - - - - 1,300 3a.1.2Review plant dwgs & specs.- - - - - - 537 81 617 617 - - - - - - - - - 4,600 3a.1.3Perform detailed rad survey a 3a.1.4End product description- - - - - - 117 18 134 134 - - - - - - - - - 1,000 3a.1.5Detailed by-product inventory- - - - - - 152 23 174 174 - - - - - - - - - 1,300 3a.1.6Define major work sequence- - - - - - 875 131 1,007 1,007 - - - - - - - - - 7,500 3a.1.7Perform SER and EA- - - - - - 362 54 416 416 - - - - - - - - - 3,100 3a.1.8Perform Site-Specific Cost Study- - - - - - 584 88 671 671 - - - - - - - - - 5,000 3a.1.9Prepare/submit License Termination Plan- - - - - - 478 72 550 550 - - - - - - - - - 4,096 3a.1.10Receive NRC approval of termination plan a A ctivity Specifications3a.1.11.1Re-activate plant & temporary facilities- - - - - - 860 129 989 890 - 99 - - - - - - - 7,370 3a.1.11.2Plant systems- - - - - - 486 73 559 503 - 56 - - - - - - - 4,167 3a.1.11.3Reactor internals- - - - - - 829 124 953 953 - - - - - - - - - 7,100
3a.1.11.4Reactor vessel- - - - - - 759 114 872 872 - - - - - - - - - 6,500 3a.1.11.5Biological shield- - - - - - 58 9 67 67 - - - - - - - - - 500
3a.1.11.6Steam generators- - - - - - 364 55 419 419 - - - - - - - - - 3,120
3a.1.11.7Reinforced concrete- - - - - - 187 28 215 107 - 107 - - - - - - - 1,600
3a.1.11.8Main Turbine- - - - - - 47 7 54 - - 54 - - - - - - - 400 3a.1.11.9Main Condensers- - - - - - 47 7 54 - - 54 - - - - - - - 400
3a.1.11.1 0Plant structures & buildings- - - - - - 364 55 419 209 - 209 - - - - - - - 3,120 3a.1.11.11Waste management- - - - - - 537 81 617 617 - - - - - - - - - 4,600 3a.1.11.12Facility & site closeout- - - - - - 105 16 121 60 - 60 - - - - - - - 900 3a.1.11Total
- - - - - - 4,643 696 5,339 4,700 - 639 - - - - - - - 39,77 7
Planning & Site Preparations3a.1.12Prepare dismantling sequence- - - - - - 280 42 322 322 - - - - - - - - - 2,400 3a.1.13Plant prep. & temp. svces- - - - - - 2,800 420 3,220 3,220 - - - - - - - - - -
3a.1.1 4Design water clean-up system- - - - - - 163 25 188 188 - - - - - - - - - 1,400 3a.1.15Rigging/Cont. Cntrl Envlps/tooling/etc.- - - - - - 2,200 330 2,530 2,530 - - - - - - - - - -
3a.1.1 6Procure casks/liners & containers- - - - - - 144 22 165 165 - - - - - - - - - 1,230 3a.1Subtotal Period 3a Activity Costs- - - - - - 13,48 6 2,023 15,50 9 14,86 9 - 639 - - - - - - - 72,703
Period 3a Period-Dependent Costs3a.4.1Insurance- - - - - - 260 26 286 286 - - - - - - - - - -
3a.4.2Property taxes- - - - - - 141 14 155 155 - - - - - - - - - -
3a.4.3Health physics supplies- 200 - - - - - 50 250 250 - - - - - - - - - -
3a.4.4Heavy equipment rental- 220 - - - - - 33 253 253 - - - - - - - - - -
3a.4.5Disposal of DAW generated- - 6 1 - 12 - 4 22 22 - - - 259 - - - 5,186 8 -
3a.4.6Plant energy budget- - - - - - 365 55 420 420 - - - - - - - - - -
3a.4.7NRC Fees- - - - - - 137 14 151 151 - - - - - - - - - -
3a.4.8Corporate Allocations- - - - - - 1,530 153 1,683 1,683 - - - - - - - - - -
3a.4.9Security Staff Cost- - - - - - 1,595 239 1,835 1,835 - - - - - - - - - 32,85 7 3a.4.10Utility Staff Cost- - - - - - 8,801 1,320 10,121 10,121 - - - - - - - - - 130,37 7 3a.4Subtotal Period 3a Period-Dependent Costs- 420 6 1 - 12 12,82 9 1,908 15,175 15,175 - - - 259 - - - 5,186 8 163,23 4 3a.0TOTAL PERIOD 3a COS T- 420 6 1 - 12 26,315 3,931 30,68 4 30,045 - 639 - 259 - - - 5,186 8 235,93 7
PERIOD 3b - Decommissioning Preparation s Period 3b Direct Decommissioning Activities
Detailed Work Procedures3b.1.1.1Plant systems- - - - - - 552 83 635 572 - 64 - - - - - - - 4,733 3b.1.1.2Reactor internals- - - - - - 292 44 336 336 - - - - - - - - - 2,500 3b.1.1.3Remaining buildings- - - - - - 158 24 181 45 - 136 - - - - - - - 1,350 3b.1.1.4CRD cooling assembly- - - - - - 117 18 134 134 - - - - - - - - - 1,000 3b.1.1.5CRD housings & ICI tubes- - - - - - 117 18 134 134 - - - - - - - - - 1,000
TLG Services, Inc.
Callaway Energy Center D ecommissioning Cost Analysis Document A22-1644-001, Rev. 0 Appendix D, Page 6 of 11 Table D Callaway Energy Center SAFSTOR Decommissioning Cost Estimate (thousands of 2011 dollars)
Costs run: Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 10:50:4 0Off-SiteLLR WNRCSpent Fue lSiteProcessedBurial VolumesBurial /Utility and Activity DECCER Version 2010.09.09 a Deco nRemovalPackagin gTransportProcessin gDisposalOtherTotalTotalLic. Term.Managemen tRestorationVolumeClass AClass BClass CGTCCProcessedCraftContractorIndexActivity DescriptionCostCostCostsCostsCostsCostsCostsContingenc yCostsCostsCostsCostsCu. FeetCu. FeetCu. FeetCu. FeetCu. FeetWt., Lbs.ManhoursManhours Detailed Work Procedures (continued)3b.1.1.6Incore instrumentation- - - - - - 117 18 134 134 - - - - - - - - - 1,000 3b.1.1.7Reactor vessel- - - - - - 424 64 487 487 - - - - - - - - - 3,630 3b.1.1.8Facility closeout- - - - - - 140 21 161 81 - 81 - - - - - - - 1,200 3b.1.1.9Missile shields- - - - - - 53 8 60 60 - - - - - - - - - 450 3b.1.1.10Biological shield- - - - - - 140 21 161 161 - - - - - - - - - 1,200 3b.1.1.11Steam generators- - - - - - 537 81 617 617 - - - - - - - - - 4,600 3b.1.1.12Reinforced concrete- - - - - - 117 18 134 67 - 67 - - - - - - - 1,000 3b.1.1.13Main Turbine- - - - - - 182 27 209 - - 209 - - - - - - - 1,560
3b.1.1.1 4Main Condensers- - - - - - 182 27 209 - - 209 - - - - - - - 1,560
3b.1.1.15 A uxiliary buildin g- - - - - - 319 48 366 330 - 37 - - - - - - - 2,730
3b.1.1.1 6Reactor building- - - - - - 319 48 366 330 - 37 - - - - - - - 2,730 3b.1.1Total
- - - - - - 3,763 565 4,328 3,489 - 839 - - - - - - - 32,243 3b.1Subtotal Period 3b Activity Costs- - - - - - 3,763 565 4,328 3,489 - 839 - - - - - - - 32,243
Period 3b Additional Costs3b.2.1Site Characterization- - - - - - 2,551 765 3,316 3,316 - - - - - - - - 19,10 0 7,852 3b.2Subtotal Period 3b Additional Costs- - - - - - 2,551 765 3,316 3,316 - - - - - - - - 19,10 0 7,852
Period 3b Collateral Costs3b.3.1Decon equipment872 - - - - - - 131 1,003 1,003 - - - - - - - - - -
3b.3.2DOC staff relocation expenses- - - - - - 1,080 162 1,242 1,242 - - - - - - - - - -
3b.3.3Pipe cutting equipment- 1,100 - - - - - 165 1,265 1,265 - - - - - - - - - -
3b.3Subtotal Period 3b Collateral Costs872 1,100 - - - - 1,080 458 3,510 3,510 - - - - - - - - - -
Period 3b Period-Dependent Costs3b.4.1Decon supplies53 -
- - - - - 13 67 67 - - - - - - - - - -
3b.4.2Insurance- - - - - - 587 59 645 645 - - - - - - - - - -
3b.4.3Property taxes- - - - - - 280 28 308 308 - - - - - - - - - -
3b.4.4Health physics supplies- 437 - - - - - 109 546 546 - - - - - - - - - -
3b.4.5Heavy equipment rental- 436 - - - - - 65 502 502 - - - - - - - - - -
3b.4.6Disposal of DAW generated- - 12 2 - 27 - 8 50 50 - - - 582 - - - 11,63 6 19 -
3b.4.7Plant energy budget- - - - - - 724 109 832 832 - - - - - - - - - -
3b.4.8NRC Fees- - - - - - 272 27 299 299 - - - - - - - - - -
3b.4.9Corporate Allocations- - - - - - 2,610 261 2,871 2,871 - - - - - - - - - -
3b.4.10Security Staff Cost- - - - - - 3,165 475 3,640 3,640 - - - - - - - - - 65,17 9 3b.4.11DOC Staff Cost- - - - - - 10,435 1,565 12,000 12,000 - - - - - - - - - 116,80 0 3b.4.12Utility Staff Cost- - - - - - 17,45 8 2,619 20,07 7 20,07 7 - - - - - - - - - 258,62 9 3b.4Subtotal Period 3b Period-Dependent Costs53 873 12 2 - 27 35,53 0 5,338 41,83 7 41,83 7 - - - 582 - - - 11,63 6 19 440,60 7 3b.0TOTAL PERIOD 3b COS T 926 1,973 12 2 - 27 42,92 4 7,126 52,990 52,151 - 839 - 582 - - - 11,63 6 19,11 9 480,702 PERIOD 3 TOTAL S 926 2,393 18 3 - 39 69,23 9 11,05 6 83,675 82,19 6 - 1,479 - 841 - - - 16,822 19,12 7 716,63 9
PERIOD 4a - Large Component Remova l Period 4a Direct Decommissioning Activities Nuclear Steam Supply System Removal4a.1.1.1Reactor Coolant Piping36 171 25 14 130 182 - 130 689 689 - - 580 614 - - - 134,53 8 3,957 -
4a.1.1.2Pressurizer Relief Tank6 23 7 4 37 47 - 27 151 151 - - 164 164 - - - 36,395 594 -
4a.1.1.3Reactor Coolant Pumps & Motors20 83 48 175 - 889 - 284 1,500 1,500 - - - 3,386 - - - 816,14 0 2,700 80 4a.1.1.4Pressurizer9 56 413 140 - 982 - 326 1,926 1,926 - - - 3,739 - - - 240,91 5 1,524 1,500 4a.1.1.5Steam Generators77 4,985 2,179 2,497 2,549 5,918 - 3,739 21,94 4 21,94 4 - - 40,262 22,54 6 - - - 3,349,30 5 20,50 8 2,250 4a.1.1.6Retired Steam Generator Units- - 2,179 2,497 2,549 5,918 - 2,454 15,59 8 15,59 8 - - 40,262 22,54 6 - - - 3,349,30 5 10,80 0 2,250 4a.1.1.7CRDMs/ICIs/Service Structure Removal31 81 233 33 56 139 - 107 681 681 - - 753 2,947 - - - 81,66 6 2,134 -
4a.1.1.8Reactor Vessel Internals50 2,685 7,310 671 - 3,778 195 5,952 20,641 20,641 - - - 2,312 376 470 - 326,12 9 20,81 7 965
4a.1.1.9 Vessel & Internals GTCC Disposal- - - - - 10,743 - 1,611 12,355 12,355 - - - - - - 2,142 422,14 6 - -
4a.1.1.10Reactor Vessel- 5,663 1,350 280 - 1,975 195 5,672 15,135 15,135 - - - 9,531 - - - 961,94 9 20,81 7 965 4a.1.1Totals229 13,74 7 13,743 6,313 5,321 30,571 391 20,30 4 90,61 9 90,61 9 - - 82,02 0 67,785 376 470 2,142 9,718,48 6 83,85 0 8,009
Removal of Major Equipment4a.1.2Main Turbine/Generator- 442 284 37 837 - - 270 1,871 1,871 - - 5,180 - - - - 414,40 9 8,721 -
4a.1.3Main Condensers- 1,263 174 31 737 - - 448 2,653 2,653 - - 8,106 - - - - 364,76 7 24,802 -
Cascading Costs from Clean Building Demolition4a.1.4.1Reactor - 902 - - - - - 135 1,037 1,037 - - - - - - - - 10,575 -
4a.1.4.2 Auxiliary - 457 - - - - - 69 525 525 - - - - - - - - 5,551 -
4a.1.4.3Fuel Building - 220 - - - - - 33 253 253 - - - - - - - - 2,395 -
TLG Services, Inc.
Callaway Energy Center D ecommissioning Cost Analysis Document A22-1644-001, Rev. 0 Appendix D, Page 7 of 11 Table D Callaway Energy Center SAFSTOR Decommissioning Cost Estimate (thousands of 2011 dollars)
Costs run: Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 10:50:4 0Off-SiteLLR WNRCSpent Fue lSiteProcessedBurial VolumesBurial /Utility and Activity DECCER Version 2010.09.09 a Deco nRemovalPackagin gTransportProcessin gDisposalOtherTotalTotalLic. Term.Managemen tRestorationVolumeClass AClass BClass CGTCCProcessedCraftContractorIndexActivity DescriptionCostCostCostsCostsCostsCostsCostsContingenc yCostsCostsCostsCostsCu. FeetCu. FeetCu. FeetCu. FeetCu. FeetWt., Lbs.ManhoursManhours Cascading Costs from Clean Building Demolition (continued)4a.1.4.4Hot Machine Shop - 1 - - - - - 0 1 1 - - - - - - - - 16 -
4a.1.4.5Radwaste - 95 - - - - - 14 109 109 - - - - - - - - 1,108 -
4a.1.4Totals
- 1,675 - - - - - 251 1,926 1,926 - - - - - - - - 19,645 -
Disposal of Plant Systems4a.1.5.1100 Aux.Bldg Non-System Specific RCA - 705 11 26 626 - - 275 1,644 1,644 - - 7,629 - - - - 309,812 13,471 -
4a.1.5.2100 Auxiliary Bldg Non-System Specific - 104 2 3 68 5 - 38 219 219 - - 824 23 - - - 35,461 2,030 -
4a.1.5.3 AB - Main Steam - 270 - - - - - 40 310 - - 310 - - - - - - 5,833 -
4a.1.5.4 AB - Main Steam RCA - 79 3 7 177 - - 48 315 315 - - 2,156 - - - - 87,55 0 1,515 -
4a.1.5.5 AC - Main Turbine - 265 - - - - - 40 305 - - 305 - - - - - - 5,641 -
4a.1.5.6 AD - Condensate - 293 - - - - - 44 337 - - 337 - - - - - - 6,144 -
4a.1.5.7 AE - Feedwater - 202 - - - - - 30 232 - - 232 - - - - - - 4,271 -
4a.1.5.8 AF - Feedwater Heater Extraction - 249 - - - - - 37 286 - - 286 - - - - - - 5,352 -
4a.1.5.9 AK - Condensate Demineralizer - 92 - - - - - 14 105 - - 105 - - - - - - 1,944 -
4a.1.5.10 AL - Auxiliary Feedwater - 40 - - - - - 6 46 - - 46 - - - - - - 852 -
4a.1.5.11 AQ - Condensate & Feedwater Chem Addtn - 22 - - - - - 3 26 - - 26 - - - - - - 468 -
4a.1.5.12BM - Steam Generator Blowdown - 109 2 4 95 - - 42 252 252 - - 1,157 - - - - 46,993 2,137 -
4a.1.5.13BM - Steam Generator Blowdown - RCA - 380 6 14 337 - - 148 885 885 - - 4,109 - - - - 166,85 7 7,066 -
4a.1.5.1 4BN - Borated Refueling Water Storage - 307 9 21 513 - - 158 1,009 1,009 - - 6,255 - - - - 254,02 4 6,161 -
4a.1.5.15CA - Steam Seal - 21 - - - - - 3 24 - - 24 - - - - - - 455 -
4a.1.5.1 6CB - Main Turbine Lube Oil - 60 - - - - - 9 69 - - 69 - - - - - - 1,207 -
4a.1.5.1 7CC - Generator Hydrogen Seal & CO2 - 10 - - - - - 1 11 - - 11 - - - - - - 198 -
4a.1.5.1 8CD - Generator Seal Oil - 14 - - - - - 2 16 - - 16 - - - - - - 287 -
4a.1.5.19CE - Stator Cooling Water - 12 - - - - - 2 14 - - 14 - - - - - - 241 -
4a.1.5.20CF - Lube Oil Storage Xfer & Prfication- 39 - - - - - 6 44 - - 44 - - - - - - 812 -
4a.1.5.21CG - Condenser Air Removal - 31 - - - - - 5 36 - - 36 - - - - - - 657 -
4a.1.5.22CH - Main Turbine Control Oil - 61 - - - - - 9 70 - - 70 - - - - - - 1,219 -
4a.1.5.23DA - Circulating Water - 349 - - - - - 52 401 - - 401 - - - - - - 7,502 -
4a.1.5.2 4DB - Cooling Tower Makeup & Blowdown - 59 - - - - - 9 68 - - 68 - - - - - - 1,260 -
4a.1.5.25DD - Cooling Water Chemical Control Sys - 52 - - - - - 8 60 - - 60 - - - - - - 1,084 -
4a.1.5.2 6DD - Cooling Wtr Chem Control RCA - 280 5 12 292 - - 116 706 706 - - 3,555 - - - - 144,37 6 4,951 -
4a.1.5.2 7EJ - Residual Heat Removal - 362 26 30 368 192 - 201 1,179 1,179 - - 4,481 876 - - - 256,27 0 7,137 -
4a.1.5.2 8EM - High Pressure Coolant Injection - 309 3 8 182 - - 106 607 607 - - 2,214 - - - - 89,903 5,913 -
4a.1.5.29EN - Containment Spray - 223 5 10 248 - - 95 581 581 - - 3,026 - - - - 122,87 4 4,134 -
4a.1.5.30EP - Accumulator Safety Injection - 161 3 7 163 - - 66 400 400 - - 1,989 - - - - 80,762 3,112 -
4a.1.5.31FA - Auxiliary Steam Generator - 24 - - - - - 4 27 - - 27 - - - - - - 521 -
4a.1.5.32FB - Auxiliary Steam - 98 - - - - - 15 112 - - 112 - - - - - - 2,106 -
4a.1.5.33FB - Auxiliary Steam RCA - 84 1 3 67 - - 32 187 187 - - 816 - - - - 33,14 8 1,537 -
4a.1.5.3 4FC - Auxiliary Turbines - 63 - - - - - 9 73 - - 73 - - - - - - 1,320 -
4a.1.5.35FE - Auxiliary Steam Chemical Addition - 5 - - - - - 1 6 - - 6 - - - - - - 105 -
4a.1.5.3 6GE - Turbine Building HVAC - 180 - - - - - 27 207 - - 207 - - - - - - 3,957 -
4a.1.5.3 7GS - Containment Hydrogen Control - 71 1 3 66 - - 28 168 168 - - 801 - - - - 32,53 9 1,395 -
4a.1.5.3 8HE - Boron Recycle - 467 20 22 284 131 - 197 1,121 1,121 - - 3,460 614 - - - 191,03 5 8,962 -
4a.1.5.39HF - Secondary Liquid Waste - 913 42 49 692 262 - 409 2,365 2,365 - - 8,431 1,234 - - - 443,53 7 17,81 7 -
4a.1.5.40JA - Auxiliary Oil & Transfer - 32 - - - - - 5 37 - - 37 - - - - - - 690 -
4a.1.5.41KS - Bulk Chemical Storage - 92 10 22 529 - - 107 760 760 - - 6,449 - - - - 261,89 0 1,825 -
4a.1.5.42LE - Oily Waste - 181 - - - - - 27 208 - - 208 - - - - - - 3,865 -
4a.1.5.43LE - Oily Waste RCA - 244 3 8 185 - - 90 530 530 - - 2,256 - - - - 91,62 8 4,296 -
4a.1.5.4 4Turbine Bldg Non-System Specific - 751 - - - - - 113 863 - - 863 - - - - - - 15,405 -
4a.1.5Totals
- 8,362 153 249 4,890 590 - 2,677 16,921 12,92 8 - 3,993 59,60 8 2,748 - - - 2,648,65 8 166,85 7 -
4a.1.6Scaffolding in support of decommissioning- 1,467 28 6 112 18 - 392 2,023 2,023 - - 1,233 82 - - - 62,415 33,63 4 -
4a.1Subtotal Period 4a Activity Costs229 26,95 7 14,382 6,636 11,89 7 31,17 9 391 24,342 116,01 3 112,02 0 - 3,993 156,14 7 70,61 4 376 470 2,142 13,208,74 0 337,50 9 8,009
Period 4a Collateral Costs4a.3.1Process decommissioning water waste5 - 5 19 - 27 - 12 68 68 - - - 77 - - - 4,593 15 -
4a.3.3Small tool allowance- 285 - - - - - 43 328 295 - 33 - - - - - - - -
4a.3.4On-site survey and release of 60.87 tons clean metallic waste- - - - - - 62 6 68 68 - - - - - - - - - -
4a.3Subtotal Period 4a Collateral Costs5 285 5 19 - 27 62 61 464 431 - 33 - 77 - - - 4,593 15 -
Period 4a Period-Dependent Costs4a.4.1Decon supplies63 - - - - - - 16 78 78 - - - - - - - - - -
4a.4.2Insurance- - - - - - 691 69 760 760 - - - - - - - - - -
4a.4.3Property taxes- - - - - - 330 33 363 326 - 36 - - - - - - - -
4a.4.4Health physics supplies- 1,945 - - - - - 486 2,431 2,431 - - - - - - - - - -
4a.4.5Heavy equipment rental- 2,236 - - - - - 335 2,571 2,571 - - - - - - - - - -
4a.4.6Disposal of DAW generated- - 100 17 - 217 - 67 401 401 - - - 4,658 - - - 93,16 7 152 -
TLG Services, Inc.
Callaway Energy Center D ecommissioning Cost Analysis Document A22-1644-001, Rev. 0 Appendix D, Page 8 of 11 Table D Callaway Energy Center SAFSTOR Decommissioning Cost Estimate (thousands of 2011 dollars)
Costs run: Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 10:50:4 0Off-SiteLLR WNRCSpent Fue lSiteProcessedBurial VolumesBurial /Utility and Activity DECCER Version 2010.09.09 a Deco nRemovalPackagin gTransportProcessin gDisposalOtherTotalTotalLic. Term.Managemen tRestorationVolumeClass AClass BClass CGTCCProcessedCraftContractorIndexActivity DescriptionCostCostCostsCostsCostsCostsCostsContingenc yCostsCostsCostsCostsCu. FeetCu. FeetCu. FeetCu. FeetCu. FeetWt., Lbs.ManhoursManhours Period 4a Period-Dependent Costs (continued)4a.4.7Plant energy budget- - - - - - 810 122 932 932 - - - - - - - - - -
4a.4.8NRC Fees- - - - - - 845 85 930 930 - - - - - - - - - -
4a.4.9Liquid Radwaste Processing Equipment/Services- - - - - - 457 68 525 525 - - - - - - - - - -
4a.4.10Corporate Allocations- - - - - - 8,820 882 9,702 9,702 - - - - - - - - - -
4a.4.11Security Staff Cost- - - - - - 3,728 559 4,288 4,288 - - - - - - - - - 76,78 6 4a.4.12DOC Staff Cost- - - - - - 14,731 2,210 16,941 16,941 - - - - - - - - - 169,54 3 4a.4.13Utility Staff Cost- - - - - - 20,691 3,104 23,79 4 23,79 4 - - - - - - - - - 307,14 3 4a.4Subtotal Period 4a Period-Dependent Costs63 4,181 100 17 - 217 51,103 8,035 63,71 6 63,680 - 36 - 4,658 - - - 93,16 7 152 553,471 4a.0TOTAL PERIOD 4a COS T 296 31,423 14,48 7 6,672 11,89 7 31,423 51,55 6 32,43 9 180,19 3 176,131 - 4,062 156,14 7 75,34 9 376 470 2,142 13,306,50 0 337,67 6 561,481 PERIOD 4b - Site Decontaminatio n Period 4b Direct Decommissioning Activities4b.1.1Remove spent fuel racks760 83 310 87 - 1,154 - 733 3,127 3,127 - - - 5,241 - - - 445,51 9 1,925 -
Disposal of Plant Systems4b.1.2.1200 Reactor Bldg Non-System Specific - 84 1 2 41 3 - 28 160 160 - - 502 14 - - - 21,595 1,569 -
4b.1.2.2200 Reactor Bldg Non-System Specific RCA- 583 7 16 391 - - 208 1,205 1,205 - - 4,768 - - - - 193,612 10,425 -
4b.1.2.3300 Control Bldg Non-System Specific - 181 3 7 175 - - 73 440 440 - - 2,139 - - - - 86,84 9 3,413 -
4b.1.2.4300 Control Bldg Non-System Specific Cln- 1,382 - - - - - 207 1,589 - - 1,589 - - - - - - 29,07 6 -
4b.1.2.5600 Fuel Bldg Non-Specific Systems RCA - 317 5 11 263 - - 121 716 716 - - 3,200 - - - - 129,97 4 5,859 -
4b.1.2.6600 Fuel Bldg Non-System Specific - 44 1 1 26 2 - 16 91 91 - - 322 9 - - - 13,832 850 -
4b.1.2.7700 Radwaste Bldg Non-Sys Specific RCA - 1,163 19 43 1,041 - - 455 2,721 2,721 - - 12,68 4 - - - - 515,10 3 21,91 9 -
4b.1.2.8700 Radwaste Bldg Non-System Specific - 168 3 5 109 8 - 61 354 354 - - 1,329 38 - - - 57,15 6 3,252 -
4b.1.2.9 AN - Demineralized Wtr Storage & Xfer - 153 - - - - - 23 176 - - 176 - - - - - - 3,283 -
4b.1.2.10 AN - Demineralized Wtr Strg & Xfer RCA - 41 0 1 26 - - 14 83 83 - - 314 - - - - 12,75 9 740 -
4b.1.2.11 AP - Condensate Storage & Transfer - 89 - - - - - 13 103 - - 103 - - - - - - 1,794 -
4b.1.2.12BB - Reactor Coolant System - 311 23 23 212 186 - 162 917 917 - - 2,586 935 - - - 176,90 8 6,317 -
4b.1.2.13BG - Chemical & Volume Control - 893 58 60 672 427 - 446 2,555 2,555 - - 8,192 1,954 - - - 497,48 7 17,25 0 -
4b.1.2.1 4BL - Reactor Makeup Water - 283 12 14 207 69 - 122 708 708 - - 2,529 330 - - - 129,32 5 5,490 -
4b.1.2.15DE - Intake & Water Treatment - 121 - - - - - 18 140 - - 140 - - - - - - 2,517 -
4b.1.2.1 6DE - Intake & Water Treatment RCA - 253 18 41 978 - - 218 1,508 1,508 - - 11,923 - - - - 484,20 6 5,014 -
4b.1.2.1 7EA - Service Water - 146 - - - - - 22 168 - - 168 - - - - - - 3,145 -
4b.1.2.1 8EA - Service Water RCA - 46 2 4 102 - - 28 182 182 - - 1,248 - - - - 50,693 839 -
4b.1.2.19EB - Closed Cooling Water - 59 - - - - - 9 68 - - 68 - - - - - - 1,267 -
4b.1.2.20EC - Fuel Pool Cooling & Cleanup - 374 6 14 338 - - 147 878 878 - - 4,119 - - - - 167,29 3 7,163 -
4b.1.2.21EF - Essential Service Water - 337 - - - - - 51 388 - - 388 - - - - - - 7,244 -
4b.1.2.22EF - Essential Service Water RCA - 203 8 18 437 - - 120 786 786 - - 5,326 - - - - 216,28 7 3,862 -
4b.1.2.23EG - Component Cooling Water RCA - 247 - - - - - 37 285 - - 285 - - - - - - 5,335 -
4b.1.2.2 4GA - Plant Heating - 88 - - - - - 13 102 - - 102 - - - - - - 1,912 -
4b.1.2.25GA - Plant Heating RCA - 99 1 2 52 - - 33 187 187 - - 638 - - - - 25,92 4 1,765 -
4b.1.2.2 6GA- Plant Heating Fuel Building - 21 0 0 9 - - 7 37 37 - - 107 - - - - 4,351 400 -
4b.1.2.2 7GB - Central Chilled Water - 83 - - - - - 12 96 - - 96 - - - - - - 1,803 -
4b.1.2.2 8GB - Central Chilled Water RCA - 27 0 1 15 - - 9 52 52 - - 187 - - - - 7,591 482 -
4b.1.2.29GD - Essential Serv Wtr Pumphouse HVAC - 19 - - - - - 3 22 - - 22 - - - - - - 427 -
4b.1.2.30GF - Miscellaneous Building HVAC - 119 3 7 167 - - 56 353 353 - - 2,034 - - - - 82,602 2,026 -
4b.1.2.31GG - Fuel Building HVAC - 227 6 14 324 - - 108 678 678 - - 3,945 - - - - 160,19 5 4,052 -
4b.1.2.32GH - Radwaste Building HVAC - 167 4 9 210 - - 75 464 464 - - 2,561 - - - - 104,012 3,004 -
4b.1.2.33GK - Control Building HVAC - 175 - - - - - 26 201 - - 201 - - - - - - 3,959 -
4b.1.2.3 4GL - Auxiliary Building HVAC - 413 8 18 441 - - 173 1,054 1,054 - - 5,381 - - - - 218,51 4 7,364 -
4b.1.2.35GM - Diesel Generator Building HVAC - 30 - - - - - 5 35 - - 35 - - - - - - 695 -
4b.1.2.3 6GN - Containment Cooling - 461 12 28 678 - - 222 1,402 1,402 - - 8,264 - - - - 335,602 8,405 -
4b.1.2.3 7GP - Containment Intgratd Leak Rate Test- 40 1 2 48 - - 17 108 108 - - 580 - - - - 23,57 0 750 -
4b.1.2.3 8GR - Containment Atmospheric Control - 18 2 4 94 - - 19 136 136 - - 1,143 - - - - 46,40 7 350 -
4b.1.2.39GT - Containment Purge HVAC - 108 3 7 179 - - 55 353 353 - - 2,185 - - - - 88,74 6 1,973 -
4b.1.2.40HA - Gaseous Radwaste - 334 5 13 303 - - 131 786 786 - - 3,699 - - - - 150,21 9 6,296 -
4b.1.2.41HB - Liquid Radwaste - 807 40 43 604 239 - 363 2,097 2,097 - - 7,362 1,131 - - - 391,23 0 15,491 -
4b.1.2.42HC - Solid Radwaste - 346 19 21 245 142 - 164 938 938 - - 2,985 654 - - - 176,12 9 6,644 -
4b.1.2.43HD - Decontamination - 95 5 6 81 28 - 44 258 258 - - 983 132 - - - 50,841 1,833 -
4b.1.2.4 4JE - Emergency Fuel Oil - 62 - - - - - 9 72 - - 72 - - - - - - 1,260 -
4b.1.2.45KA - Compressed Air - 193 - - - - - 29 222 - - 222 - - - - - - 4,187 -
4b.1.2.4 6KA - Compressed Air RCA - 132 1 3 66 - - 43 246 246 - - 801 - - - - 32,53 8 2,339 -
4b.1.2.4 7KB - Breathing Air - 24 - - - - - 4 28 - - 28 - - - - - - 516 -
4b.1.2.4 8KB - Breathing Air RCA - 20 0 0 6 - - 6 32 32 - - 71 - - - - 2,874 402 -
4b.1.2.49KC - Fire Protection - 382 - - - - - 57 439 - - 439 - - - - - - 8,376 -
4b.1.2.50KC - Fire Protection RCA - 414 7 15 362 - - 161 958 958 - - 4,411 - - - - 179,151 7,064 -
4b.1.2.51KC- Fire Protection Fuel Building - 122 2 4 102 - - 47 277 277 - - 1,239 - - - - 50,32 9 2,115 -
TLG Services, Inc.
Callaway Energy Center D ecommissioning Cost Analysis Document A22-1644-001, Rev. 0 Appendix D, Page 9 of 11 Table D Callaway Energy Center SAFSTOR Decommissioning Cost Estimate (thousands of 2011 dollars)
Costs run: Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 10:50:4 0Off-SiteLLR WNRCSpent Fue lSiteProcessedBurial VolumesBurial /Utility and Activity DECCER Version 2010.09.09 a Deco nRemovalPackagin gTransportProcessin gDisposalOtherTotalTotalLic. Term.Managemen tRestorationVolumeClass AClass BClass CGTCCProcessedCraftContractorIndexActivity DescriptionCostCostCostsCostsCostsCostsCostsContingenc yCostsCostsCostsCostsCu. FeetCu. FeetCu. FeetCu. FeetCu. FeetWt., Lbs.ManhoursManhours Disposal of Plant Systems (continued)4b.1.2.52KD - Domestic Water - 177 - - - - - 27 204 - - 204 - - - - - - 3,837 -
4b.1.2.53KD - Domestic Water RCA - 27 0 1 20 - - 10 58 58 - - 247 - - - - 10,03 9 459 -
4b.1.2.5 4KE - Fuel Handling & Storage Rctor vssl - 17 1 3 72 - - 16 109 109 - - 882 - - - - 35,813 332 -
4b.1.2.55KH - Service Gas (CO2 N2 H2 & O2) - 56 - - - - - 8 65 - - 65 - - - - - - 1,226 -
4b.1.2.5 6KH - Service Gas (CO2 N2 H2 & O2) RCA- 260 4 8 200 - - 96 568 568 - - 2,433 - - - - 98,813 4,481 -
4b.1.2.5 7KJ - Standby Diesel Engine - 330 - - - - - 50 380 - - 380 - - - - - - 6,749 -
4b.1.2.5 8LA - Sanitary Drains - 45 - - - - - 7 52 - - 52 - - - - - - 972 -
4b.1.2.59LA - Sanitary Drains RCA - 109 2 4 104 - - 44 264 264 - - 1,273 - - - - 51,68 4 1,811 -
4b.1.2.60LB - Roof Drains - 60 - - - - - 9 68 - - 68 - - - - - - 1,276 -
4b.1.2.61LB - Roof Drains RCA - 147 3 7 175 - - 64 397 397 - - 2,139 - - - - 86,85 8 2,694 -
4b.1.2.62LD - Chemical & Detergent Waste - 112 1 3 65 - - 38 219 219 - - 797 - - - - 32,36 9 2,139 -
4b.1.2.63LF - Floor & Equipment Drains - 1,380 67 68 546 599 - 594 3,254 3,254 - - 6,660 2,726 - - - 501,64 6 26,13 4 -
4b.1.2.6 4RM - Process Sampling & Analysis - 123 1 3 81 - - 44 253 253 - - 990 - - - - 40,20 0 2,450 -
4b.1.2.65SJ - Nuclear Sampling - 71 1 2 56 - - 27 157 157 - - 677 - - - - 27,501 1,430 -
4b.1.2.6 6UB - Servces Stores Site Security Bldg- 181 - - - - - 27 208 - - 208 - - - - - - 3,815 -
4b.1.2.6 7 Yard Non-System Specific - 30 - - - - - 4 34 - - 34 - - - - - - 603 -
4b.1.2Totals
- 15,62 9 367 560 10,32 4 1,704 - 5,555 34,13 9 28,99 8 - 5,141 125,85 6 7,923 - - - 5,768,82 5 303,92 4 -
4b.1.3Scaffolding in support of decommissioning- 2,200 42 9 168 27 - 588 3,034 3,034 - - 1,849 122 - - - 93,623 50,451 -
Decontamination of Site Buildings4b.1.4.1Reactor 1,125 911 31 157 492 1,061 - 1,156 4,934 4,934 - - 5,995 9,355 - - - 913,50 5 38,232 -
4b.1.4.2 Auxiliary 586 221 9 43 169 110 - 408 1,546 1,546 - - 2,058 1,954 - - - 250,301 15,24 7 -
4b.1.4.3Communication Corridor - Contaminated 13 3 0 1 1 2 - 8 29 29 - - 17 42 - - - 4,296 306 -
4b.1.4.4Fuel Building 700 721 8 18 222 42 - 578 2,288 2,288 - - 2,705 562 - - - 158,021 27,45 4 -
4b.1.4.5Hot Machine Shop 16 6 0 1 - 3 - 10 36 36 - - - 51 - - - 4,446 421 -
4b.1.4.6RAM Storage Building 40 8 0 2 2 6 - 24 82 82 - - 19 107 - - - 9,974 919 -
4b.1.4.7Radioactive and Personnel Tunnel 5 5 0 1 - 2 - 4 17 17 - - - 29 - - - 2,532 195 -
4b.1.4.8Radwaste 312 102 4 22 69 57 - 210 776 776 - - 844 1,027 - - - 122,462 7,811 -
4b.1.4.9Radwaste Drum Storage 35 10 0 2 5 6 - 23 82 82 - - 66 114 - - - 12,56 4 850 -
4b.1.4.10Steam Generator Replacement Bldgs 213 - - - - - - 106 319 319 - - - - - - - - 3,885 -
4b.1.4Totals3,046 1,987 54 246 960 1,288 - 2,528 10,10 9 10,10 9 - - 11,70 4 13,241 - - - 1,478,101 95,32 0 -
4b.1Subtotal Period 4b Activity Costs3,806 19,89 9 773 903 11,453 4,173 - 9,404 50,410 45,26 9 - 5,141 139,40 9 26,52 7 - - - 7,786,06 7 451,61 9 -
Period 4b Additional Costs4b.2.1License Termination Survey Program Management- - - - - - 1,366 410 1,776 1,776 - - - - - - - - - 12,48 0 4b.2.2Sanitary Treatment Lagoon LL W- 5 75 781 - 207 - 178 1,247 1,247 - - - 3,600 - - - 345,60 0 388 -
4b.2.3Cooling Tower Asbestos Panel Removal- 4,898 - 109 - - 469 821 6,296 - - 6,296 - - - - - - 101,822 -
4b.2Subtotal Period 4b Additional Costs- 4,903 75 890 - 207 1,834 1,409 9,319 3,023 - 6,296 - 3,600 - - - 345,60 0 102,20 9 12,48 0
Period 4b Collateral Costs4b.3.1Process decommissioning water waste13 -
14 53 - 74 - 34 187 187 - - - 213 - - - 12,77 9 42 -
4b.3.3Small tool allowance- 444 - - - - - 67 510 510 - - - - - - - - - -
4b.3.4Decommissioning Equipment Disposition- - 138 34 545 87 - 123 928 928 - - 6,000 397 - - - 303,72 6 88 -
4b.3.5On-site survey and release of 297.3 tons clean metallic waste- - - - - - 303 30 334 334 - - - - - - - - - -
4b.3Subtotal Period 4b Collateral Costs13 444 152 87 545 162 303 254 1,959 1,959 - - 6,000 610 - - - 316,50 5 130 -
Period 4b Period-Dependent Costs4b.4.1Decon supplies1,246 - - - - - - 311 1,557 1,557 - - - - - - - - - -
4b.4.2Insurance- - - - - - 1,669 167 1,836 1,836 - - - - - - - - - -
4b.4.3Property taxes- - - - - - 796 80 875 875 - - - - - - - - - -
4b.4.4Health physics supplies- 3,581 - - - - - 895 4,476 4,476 - - - - - - - - - -
4b.4.5Heavy equipment rental- 5,354 - - - - - 803 6,157 6,157 - - - - - - - - - -
4b.4.6Disposal of DAW generated- - 146 25 - 316 - 97 584 584 - - - 6,780 - - - 135,59 6 221 -
4b.4.7Plant energy budget- - - - - - 1,544 232 1,775 1,775 - - - - - - - - - -
4b.4.8NRC Fees- - - - - - 2,040 204 2,244 2,244 - - - - - - - - - -
4b.4.9Liquid Radwaste Processing Equipment/Services- - - - - - 1,102 165 1,267 1,267 - - - - - - - - - -
4b.4.10Corporate Allocations- - - - - - 9,630 963 10,593 10,593 - - - - - - - - - -
4b.4.11Security Staff Cost- - - - - - 9,000 1,350 10,350 10,350 - - - - - - - - - 185,35 7 4b.4.12DOC Staff Cost- - - - - - 34,682 5,202 39,88 4 39,88 4 - - - - - - - - - 397,40 6 4b.4.13Utility Staff Cost- - - - - - 47,37 8 7,107 54,485 54,485 - - - - - - - - - 699,90 9 4b.4Subtotal Period 4b Period-Dependent Costs1,246 8,934 146 25 - 316 107,841 17,57 6 136,08 4 136,08 4 - - - 6,780 - - - 135,59 6 221 1,282,671 4b.0TOTAL PERIOD 4b COS T 5,065 34,18 0 1,145 1,905 11,99 8 4,858 109,97 8 28,643 197,772 186,33 4 - 11,43 7 145,40 9 37,51 7 - - - 8,583,76 8 554,17 9 1,295,151 TLG Services, Inc.
Callaway Energy Center D ecommissioning Cost Analysis Document A22-1644-001, Rev. 0 Appendix D, Page 10 of 11 Table D Callaway Energy Center SAFSTOR Decommissioning Cost Estimate (thousands of 2011 dollars)
Costs run: Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 10:50:4 0Off-SiteLLR WNRCSpent Fue lSiteProcessedBurial VolumesBurial /Utility and Activity DECCER Version 2010.09.09 a Deco nRemovalPackagin gTransportProcessin gDisposalOtherTotalTotalLic. Term.Managemen tRestorationVolumeClass AClass BClass CGTCCProcessedCraftContractorIndexActivity DescriptionCostCostCostsCostsCostsCostsCostsContingenc yCostsCostsCostsCostsCu. FeetCu. FeetCu. FeetCu. FeetCu. FeetWt., Lbs.ManhoursManhours PERIOD 4f - License Terminatio n Period 4f Direct Decommissioning Activities4f.1.1ORISE confirmatory survey- - - - - - 154 46 200 200 - - - - - - - - - -
4f.1.2Terminate license a 4f.1Subtotal Period 4f Activity Costs- - - - - - 154 46 200 200 - - - - - - - - - -
Period 4f Additional Costs4f.2.1License Termination Survey- - - - - - 7,808 2,342 10,150 10,150 - - - - - - - - 149,33 9 6,240 4f.2Subtotal Period 4f Additional Costs- - - - - - 7,808 2,342 10,150 10,150 - - - - - - - - 149,33 9 6,240
Period 4f Collateral Costs4f.3.1DOC staff relocation expenses- - - - - - 1,080 162 1,242 1,242 - - - - - - - - - -
4f.3Subtotal Period 4f Collateral Costs- - - - - - 1,080 162 1,242 1,242 - - - - - - - - - -
Period 4f Period-Dependent Costs4f.4.1Insurance- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
4f.4.2Property taxes- - - - - - 212 21 233 233 - - - - - - - - - -
4f.4.3Health physics supplies- 661 - - - - - 165 826 826 - - - - - - - - - -
4f.4.4Disposal of DAW generated- - 8 1 - 16 - 5 30 30 - - - 353 - - - 7,050 11 -
4f.4.5Plant energy budget- - - - - - 109 16 126 126 - - - - - - - - - -
4f.4.6NRC Fees- - - - - - 582 58 640 640 - - - - - - - - - -
4f.4.7Corporate Allocations- - - - - - 1,440 144 1,584 1,584 - - - - - - - - - -
4f.4.8Security Staff Cost- - - - - - 1,006 151 1,157 1,157 - - - - - - - - - 18,92 6 4f.4.9DOC Staff Cost- - - - - - 5,171 776 5,946 5,946 - - - - - - - - - 57,56 6 4f.4.10Utility Staff Cost- - - - - - 5,739 861 6,600 6,600 - - - - - - - - - 74,91 4 4f.4Subtotal Period 4f Period-Dependent Costs- 661 8 1 - 16 14,25 9 2,197 17,143 17,143 - - - 353 - - - 7,050 11 151,40 6 4f.0TOTAL PERIOD 4f COS T- 661 8 1 - 16 23,30 0 4,748 28,73 4 28,73 4 - - - 353 - - - 7,050 149,35 0 157,64 6
PERIOD 4 TOTAL S 5,361 66,263 15,640 8,578 23,895 36,29 7 184,83 4 65,830 406,69 8 391,19 9 - 15,49 9 301,55 6 113,21 9 376 470 2,142 21,897,31 0 1,041,20 5 2,014,27 8 PERIOD 5b - Site Restoratio n Period 5b Direct Decommissioning Activities
Demolition of Remaining Site Buildings5b.1.1.1Reactor - 5,121 - - - - - 768 5,889 - - 5,889 - - - - - - 60,04 7 -
5b.1.1.2 Auxiliary - 4,111 - - - - - 617 4,728 - - 4,728 - - - - - - 49,96 8 -
5b.1.1.3 Auxiliary Boiler - 38 - - - - - 6 43 - - 43 - - - - - - 619 -
5b.1.1.4Barge Facility - 1,561 - - - - - 234 1,795 - - 1,795 - - - - - - 18,771 -
5b.1.1.5Circulating & Service Water Pumphouse - 314 - - - - - 47 361 - - 361 - - - - - - 4,345 -
5b.1.1.6Communication Corridor - Clean - 1,324 - - - - - 199 1,523 - - 1,523 - - - - - - 17,215 -
5b.1.1.7Communication Corridor - Contaminated - 57 - - - - - 9 66 - - 66 - - - - - - 674 -
5b.1.1.8Cooling Tower Basemat - 894 - - - - - 134 1,028 - - 1,028 - - - - - - 13,472 -
5b.1.1.9Diesel Generator - 486 - - - - - 73 559 - - 559 - - - - - - 5,492 -
5b.1.1.10Essential Service Water Pumphouse - 299 - - - - - 45 343 - - 343 - - - - - - 3,938 -
5b.1.1.11Fire Water Pumphouse - 28 - - - - - 4 32 - - 32 - - - - - - 382 -
5b.1.1.12Fuel Building - 2,035 - - - - - 305 2,340 - - 2,340 - - - - - - 22,58 0 -
5b.1.1.13Hot Machine Shop - 24 - - - - - 4 27 - - 27 - - - - - - 417 -
5b.1.1.1 4Intake - 369 - - - - - 55 424 - - 424 - - - - - - 4,224 -
5b.1.1.15Misc. Structures - 2,357 - - - - - 353 2,710 - - 2,710 - - - - - - 27,921 -
5b.1.1.1 6Miscellaneous Site Foundations - 372 - - - - - 56 428 - - 428 - - - - - - 5,483 -
5b.1.1.1 7Outage Maintenance - 185 - - - - - 28 213 - - 213 - - - - - - 3,190 -
5b.1.1.1 8RAM Storage Building - 69 - - - - - 10 79 - - 79 - - - - - - 1,081 -
5b.1.1.19Radioactive and Personnel Tunnel - 28 - - - - - 4 33 - - 33 - - - - - - 386 -
5b.1.1.20Radwaste - 1,831 - - - - - 275 2,106 - - 2,106 - - - - - - 21,79 8 -
5b.1.1.21Radwaste Drum Storage - 272 - - - - - 41 313 - - 313 - - - - - - 3,840 -
5b.1.1.22Security Additions - 2,224 - - - - - 334 2,557 - - 2,557 - - - - - - 20,97 7 -
5b.1.1.23Service - 502 - - - - - 75 577 - - 577 - - - - - - 6,045 -
5b.1.1.2 4Sludge Pump Station & Lagoon - 25 - - - - - 4 29 - - 29 - - - - - - 313 -
5b.1.1.25Steam Generator Replacement Bldgs - 1,187 - - - - - 178 1,365 - - 1,365 - - - - - - 15,693 -
5b.1.1.2 6Turbine Building - 3,648 - - - - - 547 4,195 - - 4,195 - - - - - - 55,69 4 -
5b.1.1.2 7Turbine Pedestal - 1,053 - - - - - 158 1,211 - - 1,211 - - - - - - 10,92 8 -
5b.1.1.2 8U.H.S. Cooling Tower - 638 - - - - - 96 734 - - 734 - - - - - - 6,681 -
5b.1.1.29Water Treatment Plant - 1 - - - - - 0 1 - - 1 - - - - - - 9 -
5b.1.1Totals
- 31,051 - - - - - 4,658 35,70 8 - - 35,70 8 - - - - - - 382,17 9 -
TLG Services, Inc.
Callaway Energy Center D ecommissioning Cost Analysis Document A22-1644-001, Rev. 0 Appendix D, Page 11 of 11 Table D Callaway Energy Center SAFSTOR Decommissioning Cost Estimate (thousands of 2011 dollars)
Costs run: Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 10:50:4 0Off-SiteLLR WNRCSpent Fue lSiteProcessedBurial VolumesBurial /Utility and Activity DECCER Version 2010.09.09 a Deco nRemovalPackagin gTransportProcessin gDisposalOtherTotalTotalLic. Term.Managemen tRestorationVolumeClass AClass BClass CGTCCProcessedCraftContractorIndexActivity DescriptionCostCostCostsCostsCostsCostsCostsContingenc yCostsCostsCostsCostsCu. FeetCu. FeetCu. FeetCu. FeetCu. FeetWt., Lbs.ManhoursManhours Site Closeout Activities5b.1.2BackFill Site- 9,320 - - - - - 1,398 10,71 8 - - 10,71 8 - - - - - - 17,92 8 -
5b.1.3Grade & landscape site- 124 - - - - - 19 142 - - 142 - - - - - - 592 -
5b.1.4Final report to NRC- - - - - - 182 27 209 209 - - - - - - - - - 1,560 5b.1Subtotal Period 5b Activity Costs- 40,49 4 - - - - 182 6,101 46,77 8 209 - 46,56 8 - - - - - - 400,70 0 1,560
Period 5b Additional Costs5b.2.1Concrete Crushing- 1,226 - - - - 9 185 1,419 - - 1,419 - - - - - - 5,830 -
5b.2.2Mine Area Backfill- 4,219 - - - - - 633 4,852 - - 4,852 - - - - - - 15,96 0 -
5b.2.3Cooling Tower Discharge & Intake Pipe Flow Fill- 3,779 - - - - - 567 4,346 - - 4,346 - - - - - - 9,588 -
5b.2.4Cooling Tower Demolition- 3,846 - - - - - 577 4,423 - - 4,423 - - - - - - 20,462 -
5b.2Subtotal Period 5b Additional Costs- 13,07 0 - - - - 9 1,962 15,040 - - 15,040 - - - - - - 51,84 0 -
Period 5b Collateral Costs5b.3.1Small tool allowance- 410 - - - - - 62 472 - - 472 - - - - - - - -
5b.3Subtotal Period 5b Collateral Costs- 410 - - - - - 62 472 - - 472 - - - - - - - -
Period 5b Period-Dependent Costs5b.4.1Insurance- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
5b.4.2Property taxes- - - - - - 421 42 463 - - 463 - - - - - - - -
5b.4.3Heavy equipment rental- 4,058 - - - - - 609 4,667 - - 4,667 - - - - - - - -
5b.4.4Plant energy budget- - - - - - 109 16 125 - - 125 - - - - - - - -
5b.4.5Corporate Allocations- - - - - - 4,500 450 4,950 4,950 - - - - - - - - - -
5b.4.6Security Staff Cost- - - - - - 2,002 300 2,302 - - 2,302 - - - - - - - 37,64 6 5b.4.7DOC Staff Cost- - - - - - 10,00 6 1,501 11,50 7 - - 11,50 7 - - - - - - - 106,66 3 5b.4.8Utility Staff Cost- - - - - - 4,643 697 5,340 - - 5,340 - - - - - - - 61,17 4 5b.4Subtotal Period 5b Period-Dependent Costs- 4,058 - - - - 21,681 3,615 29,35 4 4,950 - 24,40 4 - - - - - - - 205,48 3 5b.0TOTAL PERIOD 5b COS T- 58,032 - - - - 21,871 11,740 91,643 5,159 - 86,48 4 - - - - - - 452,54 0 207,04 3
PERIOD 5 TOTAL S- 58,032 - - - - 21,871 11,740 91,643 5,159 - 86,48 4 - - - - - - 452,54 0 207,04 3
TOTAL COST TO DECOMMISSIO N 11,676 133,622 15,962 9,168 23,895 37,468 649,17 8 145,41 6 1,026,384 849,173 73,749 103,462 301,55 6 123,652 376 470 2,142 22,196,61 0 1,592,143 7,012,263 TOTAL COST TO DECOMMISSION WITH 16.51% CONTINGENCY:$1,026,384 thousands of 2011 dollars TOTAL NRC LICENSE TERMINATION COST IS 82.73% OR
- $849,173 thousands of 2011 dollar s SPENT FUEL MANAGEMENT COST IS 7.19% OR
- $73,74 9 thousands of 2011 dollar s NON-NUCLEAR DEMOLITION COST IS 10.08% OR
- $103,462 thousands of 2011 dollar s TOTAL LOW-LEVEL RADIOACTIVE WASTE VOLUME BURIED (EXCLUDING GTCC)
- 124,497 cubic fee t TOTAL GREATER THAN CLASS C RADWASTE VOLUME GENERATED
- 2,142 cubic fee t TOTAL SCRAP METAL REMOVED
- 71,407 tons TOTAL CRAFT LABOR REQUIREMENTS
- 1,592,143 man-hours End Notes:
n/a - 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 cell containing " - " indicates a zero value TLG Services, Inc.