Text

Decommissioning Funding Status Report
	ML15086A337
Person / Time
Site:	Three Mile Island
Issue date:	03/27/2015
From:	Halnon G; GPU Nuclear
To:	; Document Control Desk, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards
References
	TMI-15-036
	Download: ML15086A337 (150)
	v • d • e

{{#Wiki_filter:CPU NUCLEAS GPUNuclear, Nuclear Inc. ThreeMilelsland Station Route441South PostOfficeBox480 Middletown,PA17057-0480 Tel717-948-8461 March27.2015 TMI-15-036 1 0c F R 5 0 . 7 5 1 OC F R5 0 . 8 2 ATTN:Document ControlDesk U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.20555-0001 SU B J EC T : Three Mile lslandNuclearStation,Unit2 DocketNo. 50-320.LicenseNo. DPR-73 Decommissioninq FundinqStatusReportfor the ThreeMile lslandNuclear Station.Unit2 P u r s u a ntto 1 0 C F R 5 0 .7 5a n d 1 0 C FR 50.82,GPU Nuclearlnc. , is her ebysubmitting thr ee (3) reportsto the NuclearRegulatoryCommission(NRC)for ThreeMile lslandNuclear Station,Unit2 for the year endingDecember31, 2014. Attachment1 providesa decommissioning fundingstatusreportbasedon the NuclearRegulatoryCommission (N R C ) f o r m ul ad e scri b e di n 1 0 C F R 50.75( c) Attachm

                                                           .           2 pr ovidesa decom m issioni ng ent fundingstatusreportbasedupon a site-specific                  decommissioning  costestimate. containsa financialassurancestatusreportas requiredby 1 0 C F R 5 0 . 8 2 (a )(B )(v).

EnclosureA providesa copy of the DecommissioningCost Analysisfor Three Mile lsland Unit 2, December2014. EnclosureB providesa copy of the EscalationAnalysisfor Three Mile lsland Unit 2 2013 Sife-SpecificDecommissioningCosf Esfimafe,February2015. Thereare no regulatorycommitmentscontainedin this letter. lf thereare any questionsor if additionalinformation is required,pleasecontactMr. ThomasA. Lentz,Manager- FirstEnergy N u c l e a rO p e ra ti n g at ( 330)315- 6810. C o mp a n yF l e e tL i c ensing, Sincerely, Grdgory Director,Fleet RegulatoryAffairs

ThreeMilelslandNuclearStation,Unit2 TMt-15-036 Page2 Attachments:

1. ThreeMilelslandNuclearStation,Unit2 Decommissioning FundingStatusReport- NRC Formula 2 . ThreeMib lslandNuclearStation,Unit2 Decommissioning FundingStatusReport-Decommissioning Site-Specific CostEstimate 3 . ThreeMilelslandNuclearStation.Unit2 FinancialAssurance StatusReport

Enclosures:

A. Decommissioning CostAnatysisfor ThreeMile lslandUnit2, December2014 Cost B. EscatationAnatylisforThreeMile tstandtJnit2 2013Sife-specificDecommissioning Estimate,February2015 cc: NRCRegionlAdministrator NRCProjectManager NRCResidentInspector

Attachment1 TMt-15-036 ThreeMilelslandNuclearStation,Unit2 Decommissioning Funding StatusReport NRCFormula Page1 of 3 Thisreportreflectsthe FirstEnergy Corp.subsidiary ownershipinterestsin the ThreeMile fslandNuclearStation,Unit2 as of December 31,2014.

1. Theminimumdecommissioning fundestimate, pursuantto 10 CFR50.75(b) and(c)(see Schedule 1):

MetropolitanEdisonCompany $252,161,563 Pennsylvania ElectricCompany 126,08A,782 JerseyCentralPower& LightCompany 126.080,782 FirstEnergyCorp.Consolidated $5q4j23J120

2. The amountaccumulated in externaltrustfundsas of December31,2014:

After Tax MetropolitanEdisonCompany $338,038,657 Pennsylvania ElectricCompany 182,710,464 JerseyCentralPower& LightCompany 211.780,107 FirstEnergyCorp.Consolidated ve-sn-ru 3 . Thereare no longeranyfundsto be collectedfromthe ratepayers. 4 . The assumptions usedregarding escalation in decommissioning cost,ratesof earnings on decommissioning fundi, and ratesof otherfactorsusedin fundingprojections: Consolidated Ownership lnterestin Unit 1A0o/o EstimatedNet InvestmentRate 2.A0o/o Yearof Site Restoration Completion 2053 Yearof ThreeMib lslandNuclearStation,Unit1 Operating 2034 LicenseExpiration An additionalassumption is thatthe decommissioning for ThreeMilelsland activities NuclearStation,Unit2 will commenceafterthe shutdownof ThreeMilelslandNuclear Station,Unit1. ThreeMilelslandNuclearStation,Unit2 transitions froma Post-Defueling Monitored Storagestatusto decommissioning in2040' 5 . Thereare no contractsuponwhlchthe owners/licensees are relyingpursuantto 10 cFR 50.75(e)(1)(v). 6 . Thereare no modifications to the licensee's currentmethodof providing financial assurance sincethe lastsubmittedreport. TMr-15-036 Page2 of 3 7 . Therewereno amendments to the trustagreementsfor the above-mentionedownersof ThreeMilelslandNuclearStation,Unit2. 8 . Mathematicalroundingwas performed duringthe developmentof the supporting calculations. TMr-15-036 Page3 of 3 Schedule1 FIRSTENERGY CORP. Calculationof MinimumFinancial Assurance Amount December 31,2014 THREEMILEISLANDNUCLEARSTATION, UNIT2 PennsvlvaniaRegions Labor(L) = Northeast EnergY(E) = National WasteBurial(B)= Generic For PWRUnit Adjustment Escalation Factor Ratio Factorl l= 2.661 0.65 1.73 f= 2.222 0.13 0.289

                      $=          13.885           0.22              3.055 PWREscalationFactor=                                                5.074 BaseAmountfor PWRbetween1200MWtand 3400MWt= ($ZS+ 0'00BBP)                million
                                     =

(P = powerlevelin megawattsthermal 2772) ($7S+ 0.0088(2772)) million= $99,393,600 EscalatedAmountfor unitl = 99,393,600 x 5.074 $504,323,126 Owner/Licenseel Ownership PennsylvaniaElectricCompany 25o/o $126,080,782 JerseyCentralPower& Light Company 25o/o $126,080,782 MetropolitanEdisonCompany 50o/o $252.161,563 FirstEnergyCorp.Consolidated 10Qo/o $504,323,126 wasperformed rounding Note1: Mathematical duringthedevelopment calculations. of thesupporting

Attachment2 TMt-15-036 ThreeMilelslandNuclearStation, Unit2 Decommissioning Funding StatusReport Site-specific Decommissioning Cost Estimate Page1 of 4

1. Decommissioning fundsestimated to be requiredpursuantto 10 CFR50.75(b)and (c)are basedupona site-specific decommissioning coststudy,Decommissioning CostAnalysis forThreeMile lslandlJnit2, datedDecember2014,and escalatedto 2014dollars:

Radiological $1,180,928,000 Non-Radiological 40.560.000 FirstEnergy Corp.Consolidated gl2zLt88*000

2. The amountaccumulated in externaltrustfundsas of December31,2014:

AfterTax Metropolitan EdisonComPanY $338,038,657 Pennsylvania ElectricCompany 192,710,464 JerseyCentral Power & LightCompany 211,780.107 FirstEnergy Corp.Consolidated s732529.228

3. Thereare no longeranyfundsto be collected fromthe ratepayers'

4. The assumptions usedregarding escalationin decommissioning cost,ratesof earnings on decommissioning funds,and ratesof otherfactorsusedin fundingprojections:

Consolidated Ownership Interestin Unit 100o/o Estimated Rateof Escalation in Decommissioning Costs 2.77o/o EstimatedAfter-TaxRateof Return 2.00o/o Yearof Site Restoration Completion 2053 Yearof ThreeMilelslandNuclearStation.Unit1 endof license 2034 An additional assumption is thatthe decommissioning for ThreeMib lsland activities NuclearStation,Unit2 willcommenceafterthe shutdownof ThreeMilelslandNuclear Station,Unit1. ThreeMilelslandNuclearStation,Unit2 transitions froma Post-Defueling MonitoredStoragestatusto decommissioning in 2040. 5 . Thereare no contractsuponwhichthe owners/licensees are relyingpursuantto 10 cFR 50.75(eX1Xv). 6 . Thereare no modifications to the licensee'scurrentmethodof providing financial assurance sincethe lastsubmittedreport. TMt-15-036 Page2 of 4 7 . Therewere no amendments to the trustagreementsfor the above-mentioned ownersof ThreeMilelslandNuclearStation,Unit2. 8 . Site-SpecificCostAnalysisAssumptions 10 CFR50.75(eX1)(i), states,in part,that: A licenseethathasprepaidfundsbasedon a site-specific estimateunder50.75(bX1) of thissectionmaytakecreditfor projected earningson the prepaiddecommissioning trustfunds,usingup to a 2 percent annual real rateof returnfromthe time of future funds'collection throughthe projected decommissioning period,providedthatthe estimateG basedon a periodof safestoragethat is specifically site-specific describedin the estimate. In accordance w1h Regulatory Guide1.159,Revision2, afacilityspecificanalysismaybe usedto demonstrate the adequacyof decommissioning funds,providedthat:

               -50.2,costestimatefor decommissioning NRC-required                                      costs,as definedin 10 CFR        is equalto or greaterthanthe amountstatedin the formulasin 10 CFR50.75(cX1)     and(2).

The site-specificradiological decommissioning costestimateis $1,180,928,000 whichis greaterthanthe 10 CFd5O.75(c) costestimateof $504,323,126.

                                   'The                                The analysisassumesa 2 percentyearlyrateof return.         analysisalso assumesa periodof safestorage.The cashflowswerecontainedin a decommissioning        costestimatethatwas preparedfor ThreeMilelslandNuclearStation,Unit2. The cashflowanalysisassumesthe yearly expensesare incurredat the beginning     of year.

Schedule1 providesthe site-specific analysis.The analysisvaluesare in 2014dollars. The analysisincludesboththe radiological andsiterestoration costs. 9 . Mathematical roundingwas performed duringthe development of the supporting calculations. 1 0 .

References:

A. Decommissioning CostAnatysis for ThreeMite lstandlJnit2, December2014 B. Esca/ation Anatysisfor ThreeMite tstandlJnit 2 2013 Sife-Specrfrc Decommissioning CostEstimafe,February2015 TMt-15-036 Page3 of 4 Schedule1 FIRSTENERGY CORP. Funding Analysis December 31,2014 THREEMILEISLAND NUCLEAR STATION, UNIT2 After-Tax EstimatedNet InvestmentRate 2.00o/o EstimatedEscalationRate EstimatedAfter-TaxRateof Return 2.00% TrustBalanceon December Qualified 31,2014 $732,529,228 TrustBalanceon December Non-Qualified 31,2014 Total $732,529,228 Beginning Ending Year Balance Deposits Earnings Withdrawall Balance 2015 732.529.228 14,463,385 (9.360.000)2 737,632,613 2016 737.632,613 14.690.092 (3.128.000) 749,194,705 2017 749,194,705 14.921.494 (3.120.000) 760,996,199 2018 760,996,199 15.157.524 (3.120,000) 773.033.723 2019 773,033,723 15.398.274 (3.120.000) 785.311.997 2020 785,311,997 15.643.680 (3.128.000) 797.827.677 2021 797.827.677 15.894.154 (3.120.000) 810,601,831 2022 810,601,831 16.149,637 (3.120.000) 823.631.467 2023 823,631,467 16.410.229 (3.120.000) 836.921.697 2024 836.921.697 16.675.874 (3.128.000) 850.469.571 2025 850.469,571 16.946,991 (3.120,000) 864.296.562

                                            't7.223,531    (3.120,000)     878.400,093 2A26           864.296,562 2027           878.400.093                  17.505.602     (3.120,000)     892,785,695 2028           892.785.695                  17.793.154     (3.128,000)     907.450,849 2029           907.450,849                  18,086,617     (3.120,000)     922.417,466 2030           922.417.466                  18,385,949     (3,120,000)     937.683.415 2031           937.683,415                  18,691,268     (3.120.000)     953,254,684 2032           953.254,684                  19,002,534     (3.128.000)     969,129,217 2033           969,129,217                  19.320.184     (3.120.000)     985,329,402 2034           985,329,402                  19.644.188     (3.120,000)     1.001.853,590 2035           1.001.853.590                19.974.672     (3,120,000)     1.018.708.262 2036           1.018.708,262                20,311,605     (3.128,000)     1.035,891,867 2037           1,035.891.867                20.655.437     (3,120,000)     1.053.427,304 TMt-15-036 Page4 of 4 Schedule1 (Continued)

Beginning Ending Year Balance Deposits Earnings Withdrawall Balance 2038 1.053,427,304 21.006.146 (3,120,000) 1.071.313,450 2039 1.071.313,450 21,363,869 (3.120,000) 1.089.557.319 2040 1,089,557,319 20.693,006 (54.907.000) 1,055,343,326 2041 1.055,343.326 19,291,187 (90,784,000) 983.850.512 2042 983.850.512 17.396,970 (114.002,000) 887,245,482 2043 887.245.482 15.464.870 (114,002,000) 788.708.352 2044 788.708.352 13,487,887 ( 1 1 4 . 3 1 4 , 0 0 0 )687,882,239 2045 687,882,239 11.477.605 ( 1 1 4 . 0 0 2 . 0 0 0 )585,357,844 2046 585.357.844 9.695.777 (100.569.000) 494.484.621 2047 494.484.621 8,387,952 (75.087,000) 427.785.573 2048 427,785,573 7.049.871 (75,292,000) 359.543.445 2049 359.543.445 5,689,129 (75,087,000) 290.145.574 2050 290.145.574 4,301,171 (75,087,000) 219.359.745 2051 219,359,745 2.934,615 f2.629.000) 149.665.360 2052 149.665,360 2.348.847 rc2,223,000) 119.791.207 2053 119.791.207 1,811,724 (29,205,000) 92.397.931 TOTAL n.221.478.000) Notes: are assumedto be madeat the beginning

1. Withdrawal of the period.

2. The Decommissioning CostAnalysisfor ThreeMile lslandUnit2, December2014,had for the years2013and2014.Thosewithdrawals withdrawals wereincludedin the 2015 period.

Attachment3 TMt-15-036 ThreeMib lslandNuclearStation,Unit2 FinancialAssurance StatusReport Page1 of 1 1 . Formaldecommissioning has notstartedat the ThreeMilelslandNuclearStation,Unit2. A specialdisbursement of decommissioning trustfundsoccurredin 2005for $416,400.00. Notification of this useof decommissioning fundswas madeto the NRCby letterdated February1, 2005(Accession No.ML050380143). No fundswerespenton decommissioning tn 2014. activities 2 . Decommissioning fundsestimated to be requiredare basedupona site-specific decommissioning coststudy, Decommissioning CostAnalysisfor ThreeMile lslandUnit2, datedDecember2014.andescalated to 2014dollars: Radiological $1,180,928,000 Non-Radiological 40,560,000 FirstEnergy Corp.Consolidated $l-2ZlJtE8*000

3. The amountaccumulated in externaltrustfundsas of December31,2014:

After Tax Metropolitan EdisonCompany $338,038,657 Pennsylvania ElectricCompany 182,710,464 JerseyCentralPower& LightCompany 211.780.107 FirstEnergy Corp.Consolidated wj2*w.229 4 . Thereare no longerany fundsto be collectedfromthe ratepayers. 5 . Thereare no modifications to the licensee's currentmethodof providing financial assurance sincethe lastsubmittedreport. 6 . Therewere no amendments to the trustagreementsfor the above-mentioned ownersof ThreeMilelslandNuclearStation,Unit2. 7 . Mathematical roundingwas performed duringthe development of the supporting calculations.

8.

References:

A. Decommissioning CostAnatysisfor ThreeMile lslandUnit2, December2414 B. EscalationAnalysisfor ThreeMile lslandlJnit2 2013 Site-Specific DecommissioningCostEstimafe,February2015

Enclosure A TMt-15-036 Cost Analysisfor ThreeMile lsland Unit 2, Decommissioning December2014 (123pagesfollow)

Document F07-1676-001,Rev, 0 DECOMMISSIOMNG COSTANALYSIS for THREE MILE ISLAND UNIT 2 prepared for FirstEnergy Corporation preparedby TLG Services,Inc. Bridgewater, Connecticut December2014

Three Mile Island. Unit 2 Document F07-1676-001, Rev.0 D econtni esion ing Cost An aly si s Page ii of xuiii APPROVALS Fr*je*t*Iaqqg*r 14 ,,L' n{ft,et I Project Engineer {,#i$,#'",, iSatc I Sechnisal&fnmqsrer &at*"*C nl",lwvy D.tG TLG Sen:ices,Inc.

Three Mile Island. Unit 2 Document F07-1676-001, Reu.0 Decommissioning Cost Analysia Page iii of xuiii TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION PAGE EXECUTIVE

SUMMARY

                                                     "'..."""'vii'xviii

1. INTRODUCTION 1-1 1.1 Objectivesof Study ......1'1 L.2 Site Description....... .....I'2 1.3 RegulatoryGuidance ...L'4 1.3.1 NuclearWastePolicyAct........... ........1'5 I.3.2 low-Level Radioactive WasteActs......... .....-.....L'7 1.3.3 RadiologicalCriteria for LicenseTermination.......... .....-...1'9

2. DECOMMISSIONINGALTERNATI\'ES ...........2.I 2 . L D E C ON ... .... .2- 2 2.I.t Period2 - Dormancy........... -....-..........2-2 2.L.2 Period3 - Preparations .....2'3 2.I.3 Period4 - Decommissioning Operations -..........2-5 2.L.4 Period5 - SiteRestoration............... ...................2-8 2.2 SAFSTORand DelavedDECON ...........-......2-9

3. cosr ESTIIVIATE.............. 3-1 3.1 Basisof Estimate .........3-1 3.2 Methodology............. ..--3-1 3.3 Impact of Decommissioning Multiple ReactorUnits ...3-3 3.4 FinancialComponents of the CostModel............... ......3-4 3.4.L Contingency ..-...3'4 3.4.2 FinancialRisk......... ...........3-7 3.5 Site-Specific Considerations......... ....'............3'8 3.5.1 SpentFueIManagement..... ...............3-8 3.5.2 ReactorVesseland Internal Components........... ...............3'9 3.5.3 SteamGenerators............... ..............3'10 3.5.4 Other Primary SystemComponents............... .3-11 3.5.5 Other SystemsKnown to Contain High Levels of Radioactivity.....3-12 3.5.6 ReactorBuilding StructuresDecontamination..... ...........3.13 3.5.7 Demolitionof Other Contaminated Structures ......... ......3'14 3.5.8 MainTurbineand Condenser.......... .................3'14 TLG Seruices, Inc.

Three Mile Island Unit 2 Document F07-1676-001, Reu. 0 Decommissioning CostAna,lysie Page iu of xuiii TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued) SECTION PAGE 3.5.9 TransportationMethods .3'I4 3.5.10Low-LevelRadioactive WasteDisposal ...........3'15 3.5.11AdditionalDecommissioning Facilities ...........3-16 3.5.12Remediationof Soil and UndergroundPiping .................3'17 3.5.13Site ConditionsFollowingDecommissioning ..3'17 3.6 Assumptions............. ..3-L7 3.6.1 EstimatingBasis .............3'17 3.6.2 LaborCosts .....3-19 3.6.3 DesignConditions ............3-18 3.6.4 General... .........3-19 3 . 7 CostEstimateSummarv .......... .3-20 SCHEDULEESTIMATE ............. .......4.1 4.I ScheduleEstimateAssumptions............. .....4'L 4.2 ProjectSchedule.. .........4'2

5. RADIOACTIVEWASTES ...5.1

6. RESLTLTS ...........6-1

7. R E F E R E N C E S ......... ...........7- r TLG Seruices, Inc.

Three Mile Island Unit 2 Document F07-1676-001, Rev. 0 D ecommissioning Cost Analysis Pa,ge v of xviii TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued) SECTION PAGE TABLES Summaryof Decommissioning CostElements,DECON.......... ....xvi Summaryof Decommissioning CostElements,Delayed DECON................ xvii Summary of DecommissioningCost Elements, SAFSTOR...... ...xviii 1.1 Inventory of SpentFuel, Auxiliary and Fuel Handling Buildings ..............1'10 L.2 Inventory of SpentFuel, ReactorBuilding .................1-12 1.3 Inventory of Spent Fuel, ReactorCoolant System .....1'13 3.1 Scheduleof Total Annual Expenditures,DECON............. ..........3-2L 3.2 Scheduleof Total Annual Expenditures,DelayedDECON ........3'23 3.3 Scheduleof Total Annual Expenditures,SAFSTOR........ ...........3'25 5.1 Decommissioning WasteSummary,DECON ................5'5 5.2 Decommissioning WasteSummary,DelayedDECON... ...............5-6 5.3 Decommissioning WasteSummary,SAFSTOR.............. ...............5-7 6.1 Summaryof Decommissioning CostElements,DECON.......... ....6'3 6.2 Summaryof Decommissioning CostElements,DelayedDECON.................6-4 6.3 Summaryof Decommissioning CostElements,SAFSTOR...... .....6-5 FIGURES 4.r Activity Schedule ..........4'3 4.2 Decommissioning Timeline,DECON ...........4'4 4.3 Decommissioning Timeline,DelayedDECON... ...........4'5 4.4 Decommissioning Timeline,SAFSTOR .......4'6 5.1 TMI-2 WasteStreamsSummary ..................5'3 5.2 Decommissioning WasteDestinationsfr,adiological) ...................5-4 APPENDICES A. Unit CostFactorDevelopment............ A'1 B. Unit CostFactorListing..... B-1 C. DetailedCostAnalysis,DECON.............. .........C-l D. DetailedCostAnalysis,DelayedDECON ........D-l E. DetailedCostAnalysis,SAFSTOR........... ........E-l TLG Sensices, Inc.

Three MiIe Island. Unit 2 Document F07-1676-001,Reu. 0 D ecotnmi esionin g Cost An a Iy si s Page vi of xviii REVISION LOG Item nevisCd. 0 T2.TT.L4 Original Issue TLG Serttices, Inc.

Three Mile Island, Unit 2 Document F0 7-16 76-007' Reu. 0 D ecommissioning Cost An aly sie Page vii of xuiii E)GCUTIVE

SUMMARY

This report presentsestimatesof the cost to decommissionthe Three Mile Island, Unit 2 nuclear unit (TMI-2) for the selected decommissioningscenarios following the scheduledcessationof plant operations at the adjacent Unit 1 reactor. This analysis relies upon site-specific,technical information, originally developedin an evaluation for the GPU Nuclear Corporation in 1995-96,t11 and last updated in 2008 for FirstEnergy.tzlfhs analysis has been further updated to reflect current assumptions pertaining to the disposition of the nuclear unit and relevant industry experience in undertaking such projects. The updated estimates are designed to provide the FirstEnerry Corporationwith suffi.cientinformation to assessits financial obligations, as they pertain to the eventual decommissioningof the nuclear unit. The decommissioningof TMI-2 is a continuation of the decontaminationefforts started in the 1980s,following its accident. The ultimate goal of the decommissioningis to remove the radioactive material from the site that would preclude its release for unrestricted use. The estimates are basedon numerous fundamental assumptions,including regulatory requirements, project contingencies, radioactive waste disposal options, and site remediation requirements.The estimatesalso include the dismantling of non-essential structures and limited restoration of the site. Alternatives and Reeulations The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC or Commission) provided initial decommissioningrequirementsin its rule adoptedon June 27, 1988.t31 In this rule, the NRC set forth financial criteria for decommissioninglicensednuclear power facilities. The regulations addressed planning needs, timing, funding methods, and environmental review requirements for decommissioning.The rule also defined three decommissioningalternatives as being acceptableto the NRC: DECON, SAFSTOR, and ENTOMB.

   "DecommissioningCost Estimate for the Three Mile Island, Unit 2," DocumentNo. G01'1196-003,TLG Services,Inc., February 1996.
   "DecommissioningCost Estimate for Three Mile Island lJnit 2," DocumentNo. F07-1601-002, TLG Services,Inc., January 2009.

U.S. Codeof FederalRegulations,Title 10,Parts 30, 40, 50, 51, 70 and 72 "General Requirements for DecommissioningNuclear Facilities," Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Federal RegisterVolume 53, Number 123 (p 24018et seq.),June 27, 1988. TLG Seruices, Inc,

Three MiIe Island. Unit 2 Docurnent F07-1676-001,Rev. 0 D ecorntnissioning Cost Analysis Page uiii of xuiii 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 levet that permits the property to be releasedfor unrestricted use shortly after cessationof opel'4f,ieng.r'[41 SAFSTORis 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 subsequentlydecontaminated(deferreddecontamination)to levels that permit release for unrestricted usg."[5]Decommissioning is to be completedwithin 60 years, although longer time periods will be considered when necessaryto protect public health and safety. ENTOMB is defi.nedas "the alternative in which radioactive contaminants are encased in a structurally long-Iived 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."t6lAs with the SAFSTOR alternative, decommissioningis currently required to be completedwithin 60 years. The 60-year restriction has limited the practicality of the ENTOMB alternative at commercialreactorsthat generatesignificant amounts of long' lived radioactive material. In 1997,the Commissiondirected its staff to re' evaluate this alternative and identifr the technical requirements and regulatory actions that would be necessaryfor entombment to become a viable option. The resulting evaluation provided several recommendations, however,rulemaking has been deferredpending the completionof additional researchstudies,e.9.,on engineeredbarriers. In 1996, the NRC published revisions to the general requirements for decommissioningnuclear power plants to clarify ambiguities and codifr procedures and terminology as a means of enhancing effrciency and uniformity in the decommissioningprocess.tzl The amendments allow for greater public participation and better define the transition process from operations to decommissioning. Regulatory Guide 1.184, issued in July 2000, further described the methods and proceduresacceptableto the NRC stafffor implementing the requirements of the 1996 revised rule relating to the initial activities and major phasesof the decommissioning 4 Ibid. Page FR24022, Column 3. 5 Ibid Ibid. PageFR24023,Column 2. 7 U.S. Codeof Federal Regulations,Title 10,Parts 2,50, and.51,"Decommissioningof Nuclear Power Reactors,"Nuclear RegulatoryCommission,FederalRegisterVolume 61, (p 39278et seq.),July 29,1996. TLG Serttices, Inc.

Three MiIe Island Unit 2 Docurnent F07-1676-001,Reu. 0 D ecotnmissioning Cost An aly eis Page ix of rviii process.The costsand schedulespresentedin this analysis follow the general guidance and processesdescribedin the amendedregulations. DecommissionineScenarios Three decommissioningscenarioswere evaluatedfor the nuclear unit. The two delayed dismantling scenarios,Delayed DECON and SAFSTOR,include someconsiderationof the decommissioningactivities planned at the adjacent Unit 1. The scenariosselected are representativeof alternatives available to the owner and are defined as follows: 1 . DECON: The adjacent TM-l is promptly decommissionedupon the scheduled cessation of operations in 2034. TM-2 transitions from a Post-Defueling Monitored Storage status to decommissioningin 2040. The decommissioning program for TMI-2 runs independentlyfrom the TMI-I decommissioningeffort; licensetermination of Unit 2 occursin 2053, approximately 10 years after Unit 1 completes its decommissioningprogram (exclusive of the on-site ISFSI operationsfor Unit 1 fuel). 2 . DelayedDECON: One of the decommissioningalternatives for Unit 1 is to defer decommissioninguntil the spent fuel has been removed from the site.t8lThis scenarioassumesthat the decontaminationand dismantling activities at TMI-2 are synchronized with the adjacent unit such that the licensesfor both units are terminated concurrently. 3 . SAFSTOR:In the secondscenario,TMI-1 is placedinto long-term storage.TMI-2 remains in storage until such time that decommissioningactivities can be coordinatedwith Unit 1. As with the first scenario,termination of the licensesis coordinated. The scenariosconsiderthat Exelon Generation has extendedthe operating license at the adjacent Unit I to 2034. The scenarios are also based upon the premise that decommissioningwork at Unit 2 would not begin prior to final shutdown of Unit I in 2034,consistentwith the agreementbetweenExelon and FirstEnerry. MethodoloeV The methodologyused to developthe estimatesdescribedwithin this documentfollows the basic approachoriginally presentedin the cost estimating guidelines tsldeveloped by the Atomic Industrial Forum (now Nuclear Enerry Institute). This reference Timelines for the Unit 1 decommissioningscenariosare included in Section 4 of this report. T.S. LaGuardia et al., "Guidelinesfor ProducingCommercialNuclear PowerPlant DecommissioningCostEstimates,"AIF/NESP-036,May 1986. TLG Sentices,Inc.

Three Mile Island Unit 2 DocumentF07-1676-001, Reu.0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Pagex of xuiii describes a unit factor method for determining decommissioning activity costs. The unit factors used in this analysis incorporatesite-specificcostsand the latest available information on worker productivity in decommissioning. An activity duration critical path is used to determine the total decommissioning program sched.ule.The scheduleis relied upon in calculating the carrying costs,which include program management, administration, field engineering, equipment rental, and support servicessuch as quality control and security. This systematicapproachfor assembling decommissioningestimates ensures a high degree of confidencein the reliability of the resulting cost estimate. Continsencv Consistent with cost estimating practice, contingencies are applied to the decontamination and. dismantling costs developed as "specific provision for unforeseeableelementsof 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."tt0lThe cost elements in the estimates are based on ideal conditions; therefore, the types of unforeseeableevents that are almost certain to occur in decommissioning,based on ind.ustry experience,are addressedthrough a percentage contingency applied on a line-item basis. This contingencyfactor is a nearly universal element in all large-scale construction and.demolition projects. It should be noted that contingency,as used in this analysis, does not account for price escalation and in{lation in the cost of decommissioningover the time intervals identified for each scenario. The use and role of contingency within decommissioningestimates is not a safety factor issue.Safety factors provide additional security and addresssituations that may never occur. Contingency funds, by contrast, are expected to be fi'rlly expended throughout the program. Inclusion of contingencyis necessarTto provide assurance that sufficient funding will be available to accomplishthe intended tasks. Low-LevelRadioactiveWaste Disposal The contaminated.and activated material generated in the decontamination and dismantling of a commercial nuclear reactor is generally classified as low'level radioactivewaste, although not all of the material is suitable for shallow-landdisposal. With the passageof the "Low-Level RadioactiveWaste Disposal Act' in 1980 and its ro Project and Cost Engineers' Handbook, SecondEdition, American Association of Cost Engineers, Marcel Dekker, Inc., New York, New York, p. 239. TLG Seruices" Inc.

Three Mile Island, Unit 2 Docurnent F07-1676-001,Reu. 0 Decommi ssioning Cost An aly sis Pa.ge xi of xuiii Amendments of 1985,tttl the states becameultimately responsiblefor the disposition of low-level radioactivewaste generatedwithin their own borders.It was expectedthat groups of states would combinetogether to jointly deal with their radioactive wastes; these organizationsare referred to as waste disposalcompacts. Few approved facilities for the disposal of LLW are currently available. Construction of the newest facility, in Texas, is now complete and the facility was declared operational by the operator, Waste Control Specialists 0MCS), in November zOLl. The facility will be able to accept limited quantities of non-Compactwaste; however,at this time the cost for non-Compactgeneratorsis being negotiatedon an individual basis. All options and services currently available to FirstEnerry for disposition of the various waste streams producedby the decommissioningprocesswere considered. The majority of the low-level radioactivewaste designatedfor direct disposal(Class A t121)can be sent to Enerrysolutions'facility in Clive, Utah. Therefore, disposal costs for Class A waste were based upon FirstEnergy's agreement with EnergySolutions. This facility is not licensed to receive the higher activity portion (ClassesB and C) of the decommissioningwaste stream. The Texas facility is licensed to receive the higher activity waste forms (ClassesB and C). As such, for this analysis, disposalcosts for the Class B and C waste were based upon the preliminary and indicative information on the cost for such from WCS. Waste exceedingClass C limits Qimited to material closest to the reactor core, or material contaminated with spent fueI debris from the March 1979 accident) is generally not suitable for shallow-Iand disposal (i.e., low-level radioactive waste with concentrationsof radionuclidesthat exceedthe limits establishedby the NRC for Class C radioactive waste, referred to as Greater Than Class C (GTCC)). The Low'Level RadioactiveWaste Policy Amendments Act of 1985 assignedthe federal government the responsibility for the disposal of this material. The Act also stated that the beneficiariesof the activities resulting in the generationof such radioactivewaste 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. n "Low-LevelRadioactiveWaste Poliry AmendmentsAct of 1985,"Public Law 99-240,January 15, 1986 Waste is classifiedin accordancewith U.S. Codeof FederalRegulations,Title 10,Part 61.55 TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile Island. Unit 2 Document F07-1670-001,Reu. 0 D ecorntni ssioning Cost An aly sis Page xii of xuiii For purposes of this analysis, this material is packaged in the same multipurpose canisters used for spent fuel storage/transport (e.g., at TMI-I) and designated for geologicdisposal.The GTCC is shippeddirectly to a disposalfacility as it is generated. A significant portion of the metallic waste generated during decommissioningmay only be potentially contaminatedby radioactivematerials. This waste can be surveyed 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-Ievel radioactive waste requiring disposalin a licensedlow-level radioactive waste disposalfacility can be accomplishedthrough 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 reflect the savings from waste recovery/volumereduction. Material removed during decommissioning that is free of contamination will be designatedfor conventionaldisposalor reuse/ recovery. Fuel-BearineWaste Management There will be somewastes generatedin the decommissioningof TMI-2 that are not suitable for shallow land burial and therefore cannot be shipped for disposal to EnergySolutions.This material, primarily associatedwith systems and structures contaminated with fuel debris, requires greater isolation from the environment. For estimating purposes,a geologicwaste repository,or someinterim storagefacility, is assumedto be available for the disposalof this material. Congress passed the "Nuclear Waste Policy Act" (NW.PA) in 1982, assigning the federal government'slong-standing responsibility for disposal of the spent nuclear fuel createdby the commercialnuclear generatingplants to the DOE. The DOE was to begin acceptingspent fuel by January 31, 1998;however,to date no progressin the removal of spent fuel from commercialgeneratingsites has been made. Today, the country is at an impasse on high-level waste disposal, even with the License Application for a geologicrepository submitted by the DOE to the NRC in 2008. The current administration has cut the budget for the repository program while promising to "conduct a comprehensivereview of policies for managing the back end of the nuclear fuel cycle ... and make recommendationsfor a new plan."[l3] Towards this goal, the administration appointed a Blue Ribbon Commission on America's Nuclear Future (Blue Ribbon Commission)to make recommendationsfor a new plan for nuclear waste disposal. The Blue Ribbon Commission'scharter 13 Blue Ribbon Commissionon America'sNuclear Future Charter, http://cvbercemeterv.unt.edu/archive/brc/20120620215336/httn:l/brc.eov/index.php?q=paee/charter TLG Services,Inc.

Three Mile Island. Unit Z Docurnent F07-1676-001,Rev. 0 D ecommission ing Cost An aly si s Page xiii of xviii includes a requirement that it consider "[o]ptions for safe storage of used nuclear fuel while final dispositionpathways are selectedand deployed."tt4l On January 26, 2OI2, the Blue Ribbon Commission issued its "Report to the Secretary of Enerry" containing a number of recommendations on nuclear waste disposal.Two of the recommendationsthat may impact decommissioningplanning are: o "[T]he United States [should] establish a program that leads to the timely developmentof one or more consolidatedstorage fsgilfliss"ttrl o "[T]he United States should undertake an integrated nuclear waste management program that leads to the timely developmentof one or more permanent deep geologicalfacilities for the safe disposal of spent fuel and high-level nuclear 1ryasf,s."[16l In January 2013,the DOE issued the "strategy for the Management and Disposal of Used Nuclear Fuel and High-Level Radioactive Waste," in response to the recommendationsmade by the Blue Ribbon Commissionand as 'oaframework for moving toward a sustainable program to deploy an integrated system capable of transporting, storing, and disposingof used nuclear f11s1..."[171 "With the appropriate authorizations from Congress,the Administration currently plans to implement a program over the next L0 years that: o Sites, designs and licenses,constructs and begins operations of a pilot interim storage facility by 2O2l with an initial focus on accepting used nuclear fuel from shut-downreactor sites;

   . Advances toward. the siting and licensing of a larger interim storage facility to be available by 2O25that will have sufficient capacity to provide flexibility in the waste management system and allows for acceptanceof enough used nuclear fuel to reduce expectedgovernment liabilities; and 14 Ibid.
   "Blue Ribbon Commissionon America's Nuclear Future, Report to the Secretary of Energy,"

http://www.brc.gov/sites/default/files/documents/brcfinalreoort ian2012.pdf,p. 32, January 2012 16 Ibid., p.27 17 "strategy for the Management and Disposal of Used Nuclear Fuel and High-Level Radioactive Waste,"U.S. DOE, January 11,2013 TLG Seruices,Inc.

Three MiIe Island. Unit 2 DocutnentF07-rc7e-001'Reu,0 D ecommissioning Cost Analysis Page xiv of xuiii o Makes demonstrable progress on the siting and characterization of repository sites to facilitate the availability of a geologic repository by 2049.Dt18t Completion of the decommissioningprocessis dependent upon the DOE's ability to remove spent fuel from the site in a timely manner. DOE's repository program had assumedthat spent fuel allocations would be acceptedfor disposal from the nation's commercial nuclear plants, with timited exceptions, in the order (the "queue") in which it was dischargedfrom the 1sssfe1.[lel The estimates for TMI-2 assumethe timely removal of waste designatedfor geologic disposal,without the needfor interim on site storage(oncecontainerized). Site Restoration The effi.cientremoval of the contaminated materials at the site may result in damage to many of the site structures. Blasting, coring, drilling, and the other decontamination activities will substantially damage power block structutes, potentially weakening the footings and structural supports. Prompt demolition once the licenseis terminated is clearly the most appropriate and cost-effectiveoption. It is unreasonableto anticipate that these structures would be repaired and preservedafter the radiologicalcontamination is removed.The cost to dismantle site structures with a work force already mobilized is more efficient and less costly than if the processwere deferred. Experienceat shutdown generating stations has shown that plant facilities quickly degrade without maintenance, adding additional expense and creating potential hazards to the public and the demolition work force. Consequently, this analysis assumesthat non-essentialsite structures within the restricted accessarea are removed.The site is then backfilled, gradedand stabilized. Summarv The coststo decommissionTMI-2 are evaluated for three decommissioningscenarios. Regardlessof the timing of the decommissioningactivities, the estimates assumethe eventual removal of all the contaminatedand neutron-activatedplant componentsand 18 Ibid., p.2 19 U.S. Codeof FederalRegulations,Title 10,Part 961.11,Article IV - Responsibilitiesof the Parties,B. DOE Responsibilities,5.(a)... DOE shall issuean annual acceptancepriority ranking for receipt of SNF and/or HLW at the DOE repository. This priority ranking shall be basedon the age of SNF and/or HLW as calculated from the date of discharge of such materials from the civilian nuclear power reactor. The oldest fuel or waste will have the highest priority for acceptance..." TLG Seruices, Ine.

Three Mile Ieland Unit 2 Docutnent F07-1676-001'Reu. 0 D ecomtni ssioning Cost An aly sis Page xv of xuiii structural materials, such that the facility operator may then have unrestricted use of the site with no further requirement for an license. The scenariosanalyznd for the purpose of generating the estimates are describedin Section2. The assumptionsare presentedin Section3, along with schedulesof annual expenditures. The major cost contributors are identifi.ed in Section 6, with detailed activity costs, waste volumes, and associatedmanpower requirements delineated in AppendicesC, D, and E. Cost summaries for the various scenariosare provided at the end of this sectionfor the major cost components. TLG Seruiees,Inc.

Three Mile Island Unit 2 Docum.ent F07-1676-001,Reu. 0 D ecommi seioning Cost An aly sis Page xui of xviii DECON COST SUMMARI DECOMMISSIONING COST ELEMENTS (thousandsof 2013 dollars) CostElement Total Decontamination 35,403 Removal 189.064 Packaeine 28.008 Transportation 26,427 Waste Disnosal 276.1.L2 Off-site Waste Processine 11.053 Program Managemsnf ttl 484.509 Securitv 55,590 Insuranceand ReEulatorvFees r5.766 Enererv 18.061 Characterization and Licensins Surveys L0.844 Propertv Taxes 0 Miscellaneous Equipment 23.851 Site O&M 4,968 PDMS MonitorinE 8"908 fefal tzl 1.188,564 CostElement NRC LicenseTermination 1.149.098 Site Restoration 39.467 fsfsl tzl 1.188.564 trl Includes engineeringcosts I2l Columnsmay not add due to rounding TLG Seruices,Inc.

Three Mile Island Unit 2 Docurnent F07-1676-007, Reu, 0 D ecommissioning Cost An aly si s Page xvii of xuiii DELAYED DECON COST

SUMMARY

DECOMMISSIOMNGCOSTELEMENTS (thousandsof 2013dollars) CostElement fgfalttl Decontamination 35.321 Removal 190.858 Packasine 28.007 Transportation 26.310 Waste Disposal 276.022 Off-site Waste ProcessinE 11.053 Program Managemsnf I2l 472.755 Securitv 46.850 Insuranceand ReEulatorvFees 21.899 Energy L9.459 Characterization and Licensins Surveys L0.844 Propertv Taxes 0 MiscellaneousEouinment 26.259 Site O&M 4.968 PDMS Monitorine 6.949 Total t31 1,L77,554 Cost Element LicenseTermination 1,139,536 Site Restoration 38.018 Total t31 L.r77.554 l1l Includesdormancycostsfollowing TMI-1 shutdown in 2034 l2l Includesengineeringcosts 131 Columnsmay not add due to rounding TLG Sentices, Inc.

Three fuIiIe Island. Unit 2 Docurnent F07-167G001,Reu,0 D ecommissioning Cost An aly si s Page xuiii of xuiii SAFSTOR COST

SUMMARY

DECOMMISSIOMNG COST ELEMENTS (thousandsof 2013 dollars) CostElement Totalttl Decontamination 35,286 Removal 196.595 Packaeine 28.065 Transportation 26.298 Waste Disnosal 275.884 Off-site Waste Processins 11,206 Prosram Manasemsnf [21 482.930 Securitv 56.699 Insurance and Reeulatory Fees 4t.497 EnerEv 28,227 Characterization and Licensing Surveys 1,0,844 Pronertv Taxes 0 MiscellaneousEquipment 33,617 Site O&M 4,968 PDMS Monitorins 6,949 Total t3I 1,239,065 Cost Element License Termination L,20L,047 Site Restoration 38.018 Total tsl 1.239.065 t{ Includesdormanry costsfollowing TMI-1 shutdown in2034 t2) Includesengineeringcosts t3I Columnsmay not add due to rounding TLG Seruices,Inc.

Three Mile Island. Unit 2 Document F07-1670-001,Reu. 0 D ecomtniesioning Coet Analyeis Section 1, Page I of 13

1. INTRODUCTION This report presents estimatesof the cost to decommissionthe Three Mile Island Unit 2 nuclear unit (lMI -2) fot the scenariosdescribedin Section 2. This analysis relies upon site-specific,technical information, originally developedin an evaluation for the GPU Nuclear Corporation in 1995-96[1]*,and last updated in 2008 for FirstEnergy Corporation.tzlJhs analysis is designedto provide the FirstEnerry Corporation with sufficient information to assessits financial obligations,as they pertain to the eventual decommissioningof the nuclear unit. It is not a detailed engineering document,but a financial analysisprepared in advanceof the detailed engineeringthat will be required to carry out the decommissioning.

1.1 OBJECTIVES OF STUDY The objectiveof this study was to prepare estimates of the cost, schedule,and waste volumes generatedto decommissionTMI-Z, including all areas affected by the March 1979accident. Three decommissioningscenarioswere evaluated for TMI-2. In the delayed scenarios (Delayed DECON and SAFSTOR) decommissioningactivities are coordinatedto someextent with the adjacentoperating unit (TMI-1 or Unit 1). The scenarios consider that Exelon Generation has extended the operating licensefor Unit I to 2034.The three scenariosare also basedupon the premise that decommissioningwork at Unit 2 would not begin prior to final shutdown of Unit 1 in 2034, consistent with the agreement between Exelon and FirstEnergy. DECON The adjacent TMI-I is promptly decommissionedupon the scheduled cessation of operations in 2034. TMI-2 transitions from a Post-Defueling Monitored Storage status to decommissioning in 2040. The decommissioning program for TMI-2 runs independentfrom the TMI-I decommissioningeffort; license termination of Unit 2 occurs in 2053, approximately 10 years after Unit 1 completes its decommissioningprogram (exclusive of the on-site ISFSI operations for Unit I fuel). Delayed DECON Decommissioningof TMI-2 commencesupon the removal of TMI-1's spent fuel from the site in 2051. The decommissioningprogram for TMI-2 runs concurrently with the TMI-I decommissioningeffort and concludes with the termination of both licenses.

            " Annotated referencesfor citations in Sections 1-6 are provided in Section 7.

TLG Serpices,Inc.

Three Mile Island Unit 2 Docutnent F07-1670-001'Reu.0 D ecomrnissioning Cost Analysis Section 7,Page 2 of 13 SAFSTOR TMI-I is placed into safe-storagewith decommissioningdeferred 60 years. TMI-2 remains in storagewith decommissioningdeferreduntil it can be sequencedwith TMI-I. The decommissioningprogram for TMI-2 runs concurrently with the TMI-I decommissioning effort and concludes with the termination of both licenses. L.2 SITE DESCRIPTION TMI-Z is located on the northern-most section of Three Mile Island near the east shore of the SusquehannaRiver in Dauphin County, Pennsylvania. The station is comprisedof two pressurizedwater reactors. This study specifically addressesthe decommissioningrequirements for Unit 2, although the timing of each scenario is dependent upon the associatedactivities at the adjacent unit. The nuclear steam supply system (NSSS) consists of a pressurized water reactor rated at a core thermal power level of 2772MWth with a corresponding turbine-generator gross output of 959 MWe. The NSSS consistsof the reactor with two independent primary coolant loops, each containing two reactor coolant pumps and a steam generator.An electrically heated pressurizer and connectingpiping completethe system. The system is housed within a steel' lined, post-tensioned concrete structure (reactor building) in the shape of a right, vertical cylinder with a hemispherical dome and a flat, reinforced concretebasemat.A welded steel liner plate, anchoredto the inside face of the reactor building, servesas a leak-tight membrane. Heat produced in the reactor was converted to electrical energy by the turbine generator system.This system convertedthe thermal energy of the steam into mechanical shaft power and then into electrical energy. The turbine-generator is a tandem-compounddesign, consisting of one double-flow, high pressure turbine and two double-flow, low-pressure turbines driving a directly coupled generatorat 1800rpm. The turbine operatedin a closedfeedwatercyclewhere steam was condensed,feedwaterheated,and ultimately returned to the steam generators. Heat rejected in the main condensers was removed by the condensercirculating and river water systems. The condenser circulating water was cooled in two hyperbolic natural draft cooling towers located to the east of the station. The towers provided the heat sink required for removal of waste heat in the power plant's thermal cycle. Coolingtower blowdownwas dischargedto the SusquehannaRiver. TMI-2's operating license was issued on February 8, 1978, with commercial operation declared on December 30, 1978. On March 28, 1979, the unit TLG Seruices,Inc.

Three Mile Island Unit 2 Document F07-1676-007,Reu. 0 D ecotnmi seioning Cost,4n alyeie Section 7,Page 3 of I3 experienced an accident initiated by interruption of secondaryfeedwater flow. The steam generator boiled dry, resulting in the reducti.on of primary-to-secondary heat exchange.This caused an increase in the primary coolant temperature, creating a surge into the pressurizer, and an increasein system pressure. The pilot operated relief valve (POR\D openedto relieve the pressure, but failed to close when the pressure decreased.The reactor coolant pumps were turned off and a core heat-up began as the water level decreasedto uncover the top of the core. The melting temperature of the zircaloy fuel cladding was exceeded,resulting in relocation of the molten zfucaloyand some liquefied fuel to the lower core regions, solidifying near the coolant interface. Based on the end-state core and core support assembly configuration and supporting analysis of the degraded core heat-up, it is believed that as the crust failed, molten core material migrated to the lower internals. The majority of the molten material flowed down through the region of the southeastern assembliesand into the core bypass region. A portion of the molten core material flowed around the bypass region and migrated down into the lower internals and lower head region. Limited damageto the core support assembly occuruedas the core material flowed to the lower plenum. It is estimated that about L7 - 20 tons of material relocatedto the lower internals and lower head region. Several in-core instrument guide tubes were melted but overall vessel integrity was maintained throughout the accident. As a result of this accident,small quantities of core debris and fission products were transported through the RCS and the reactor building as a result of the coolant flow through the PORV and the makeup and purification system (X{U&P) during the accident. In addition, a small quantity of core debris was transported to the auxiliary and fuel handling buildings (AFHB) via the MU&P. Further spread of the debris also occurredas part of the post-accident water processingcleanup activities. GPU Nuclear conducteda substantial program to defuel the reactor vesseland decontaminate the facility. As a result, TMI-2 has been placed in a safe, inherently stable condition suitable for long-term management, and any threat to the public heatth and safety has been eliminated. Fuel and core material removed in the defueling has been shipped off site. The current long-term management condition is termed Post-DefuelingMonitored Storage (PDMS). The costs for maintaining TMI-2 in this state from 2013 until the shutdown of Unit 1 in 2034 (PDMS is continued until 204O for the DECON scenario) is included in the costestimatesin this analysis. Substantial contaminatedareas still exist on site, as well as trace quantities of spent nuclear fuel (SNF). Several cubicles in the auxiliary and fuel handling buildings remain locked, and the basement of the reactor building has been TLG Sentices,Ine.

Three Mile Island, Unit 2 Document F07-1676-001, Rev.0 Decomm.issioning Cost Analysis Seeti'on I, Page 4 of I3 uninhabitable since the accident. The quantity of fuel remaining at TMI'2 is a small fraction of the initial fuel load; approximately 99% was successfully removed in the defueling. Additionally large quantities of radioactive fi.ssion products were released into various systems and structures. Most of this radioactivity was removed as part of the waste processingactivities during the TMI-2 Clean-up Program which concluded with entry into Post-Defueling Monitored Storage in December 1993. Significant quantities of radioactive fission products were removed from the reactor coolant system in preparation for the PDMS. However, the remaintng Lo/oof the fuel and the remaining fission products pose unique problems in completing the decommissioningof TMI-2. A summary of the quantity and suspectedlocation of the remaining fuel debris is provided in Tables 1.1 through 1.3. 1.3 REGULATORY GUIDANCE The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC or Commission) provided initial d.ecommissioning requirements in its rule "General Requirements for DecommissioningNuclear Facilities," issued in June 1988 t31.This rule set forth fi.nancial criteria for decommissioning licensed nuclear power facilities. The regulation ad.dresseddecommissioning planning needs, timing, funding methods, and environmental review requirements. The intent of the rule was to ensure that decommissioning would be accomplishedin a safe and timely manner and that adequate funds would be available for this purpose.

                                                                        'Assuring the Subsequentto the rule, the NRC issuedRegulatoryGuide 1.159, Availability of Funds for Decommissioning Nuclear Reactors,"[al 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 assurancemechanismsindicated in the rule.

The rule defi.nedthree decommissioningalternatives as being acceptableto the NRC: DECON, SAFSTOR,and ENTOMB. The DECON alternative, the option evaluated. for this analysis, assumes that any contaminated or activated portion of the plant's systems, structures, and facilities are removed or d.econtaminatedto 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 decommissioningprocess.For SAFSTOR, the processis restricted in overall duration to 60 years, unless it can be shown that a longer duration is necessaryto protect public health and safety. The guidelines for ENTOMB are similar, providing the NRC with both sufficient Ieverage and flexibility to ensure that these deferred options are only used in situations where it is reasonable and consistent with the defrnition of TLG Seruices,Inc.

Three Mile Island. Unit 2 Document F07-1676-001,Rev. 0 D ecommi ssionin g Cost An aly ei e Section 7, Page 5 of I3 decommissioning.At the conclusionof a 60-year dormancy period (or longer for ENTOMB if the NRC approves such a case), the site would still require signifrcant remediation to meet the unrestricted release limits for license termination. To use a decommissioningscenario in which the license has not been terminated within 60 years of the frnal shutdown date, FirstEnergy will need Commissionapproval pursuant to 10 CFR 50.82(a)(3)for completion of decommissioningbeyond60 years. The ENTOMB alternative has not been viewed as a viable option for power reactors due to the significant time required to isolate the long-lived radionuclides for decay to permissible levels. However, with recent rulemaking permitting the controlled release of a site, the NRC has re-evaluated this alternative.Fl The resulting feasibility study, based upon an assessmentby Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, concluded that the method did have conditional merit for some, if not most, reactors.[6] However, the staff also found that additional rulemaking would be neededbefore this option could be treated as a generic alternative. Rulemaking has been deferred pending the completion of additional research studies, e.g., on engineered barriers. However, this study assumesthat the ENTOMB alternative is a viable option for TMI-2 and that a storageperiod of 100years would be acceptable. The NRC published revisionsto the general requirementsfor decommissioning nuclear power plants in 1996.t71 When the regulations were adoptedin 1988,it was assumedthat the majority of licenseeswould decommissionat the end of the facility's licensed life. Since that time, several licenseespermanently 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 decommissioningregulations in 1996 to clarify ambiguities and codifu proceduresand terminology as a means of enhancing efficiency and uniformity in the decommissioning process. The new amendments allow for greater public participation and better define the transition processfrom operationsto decommissioning. 1.3.1 Nuclear Waste Policv Act Congresspassedthe Nuclear Waste Policy Actt8lin 1982, assigningthe federal government's long-standing responsibility for disposal of the spent nuclear fuel created by the commercial nuclear generating plants to the DOE. The DOE was to begin acceptingspent fuel by January 31, 1998; however, to date no progress in the removal of spent fuel from commercialgeneratingsites has been made. TLG Services, Inc.

Three MiIe Island. Unit 2 Docutnent F07-1676-001'Reu.0 Decommissioning Cost Anabeis Section I, Page 6 of 18 Today, the country is at an impasse on high-level waste disposal,even with the License Application for a geologicrepositoly submitted by the DOE to the NRC in 2008. The current administration has cut the budget for the repository program while promising to "conduct a comprehensive review of policies for managing the back end of the nuclear fuel cycle ... and make recommendationsfor a new plan."[e]Towards this goal, the administration appointed a Blue Ribbon Commission on America's Nuclear Future (Blue Ribbon Commission) to make recommendations for a new plan for nuclear waste disposal. The Blue Ribbon Commission'scharter includes a requirement that it consider"[o]ptions for safe storage of used nuclear fuel while final disposition pathways are selectedand deployed." On Januaty 26,2012, the Blue Ribbon Commissionissued its "Report to the Secretary of Enerry" containing a number of recommendations on nuclear waste disposal.Two of the recommendationsthat may impact decommissioningplanning are: o "[T]he United States [should] establish a program that leads to the timely development of one or more consolidated storage facilities"[10] o "[T]he United States should undertake an integrated nuclear waste managementprogram that leads to the timely development of one or more permanent deep geological facilities for the safe disposalof spent fuel and high-level nuclear waste." In January 2013,the DOE issuedthe "strategy for the Managementand Disposal of Used Nuclear Fuel and High-Level RadioactiveWaste," in responseto the recommendationsmade by the Blue Ribbon Commission and as "a framework for moving toward a sustainable program to deploy an integrated system capableof transporting, storing, and disposingof used nucls6l fus1..."[l11 "With the appropriate authorizations from Congress,the Administration currently plans to implement a program over the next L0 years that:

            . Sites, designsand licenses,constructs and begins operationsof a pilot interim storage facility by 2021,with an initial focus on acceptingused nuclear fuel from shut-downreactor sites; o Advances toward the siting and licensing of a larger interim storage facility to be available by 2025 that will have sufficient capacity to provide flexibility in the waste management system TLG Seruices,Inc.

Three MiIe Island, Unit 2 Docurnent F07-1670-001'Reu.0 D ecomnt ission ing Cost An aly si s Section 1, Page 7 of 13 and allows for acceptanceof enough used nuclear fuel to reduce expectedgovernment liabilities; and o Makes demonstrableprogress on the siting and characterization of repository sites to facilitate the availability of a geologic repository by 2O48." Completion of the decommissioning process is dependent upon the DOE's ability to remove spent fuel from the site in a timely manner. DOE's repository program had assumed that spent fuel allocations would be accepted for disposal from the nation's commercial nuclear plants, with limited exceptions, in the order (the "queue") in which it was dischargedfrom the lsssfsr.u2l The estimatesfor TMI-2 assumethe timely removal of waste designated for geologicdisposal, without the need for interim on site storage (once containerized). 1.3.2 Low-LevelRadioactiveWasteActs The contaminated and activated material generated in the decontamination and dismantling of a commercial nuclear reactor is generally classified as low-level radioactive waste, although not all of the material is suitable for shallow-land disposal. With the passageof the "Low-Level Radioactive Waste Disposal Acl"[13]1111980 and its Amendments of 1985, ttal the states becameultimately responsiblefor the disposition of low-level radioactive waste generated within their own borders.It was expectedthat groupsof states would combinetogether to jointly deal with their radioactive wastes; these organizations are referred to as waste disposalcompacts. Few approved facilities for the disposal of LLW are currently available. Construction of the newest facility, in Texas, is now complete and the facility was declared operational by the operator, Waste Control SpecialistsflMCS),in November2011. The facility will be able to accept limited quantities of non-Compactwaste; however,at this time the cost for non-Compactgeneratorsis being negotiatedon an individual basis. AII options and services currently available to FirstEnergy for d.isposition of the various waste streams produced by the decommissioningprocesswere considered.The majority of the low'level radioactivewaste designatedfor direct disposal(ClassA t15l)can be sent to Energy Solutions' facility in Clive, Utah. Therefore, disposal costs for Class A waste were based upon FirstEnergy's agreement with TLG Serpicee, Inc.

Three Mile IslandUnit 2 Document F07-1676-001, Reu, 0 D ecommissioning Cost Analysie Section I, Page 8 of I3 EnergySolutions. This facility is not licensed to receive the higher activity portion (ClassesB and C) of the decommissioningwaste stream. The Texas facility is licensed to receive the higher activity waste forms (ClassesB and C). As such, for this analysis, disposalcostsfor the Class B and C waste were based upon the preliminary and indicative information on the cost for such from WCS. Waste exceedingClass C limits (imited to material closestto the reactor core, or material contaminated with spent fuel debris from the March 1979 accident) is generally not suitable for shallow-land disposal (i.e., low-level radioactive waste with concentrations of radionuclides that exceedthe limits established by the NRC for Class C radioactive waste, referred to as Greater Than Class C (GTCC). The Low-Level RadioactiveWaste Policy AmendmentsAct of 1985 assignedthe 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 schedulefor acceptance. For purposes of this analysis, this material is packaged in the same multipurpose canisters used for spent fuel storage/transport (e.g.' at TMI-I) and designated for geologic disposal. The GTCC is shipped directly to a disposal facility as it is generated. A significant portion of the metallic waste generated during decommissioning may only be potentially contaminated by radioactive materials. This waste can be surveyed 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-Ievel 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 reflect the savings from waste recovery/volumereduction. TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile Island. Unit 2 Document F07-1676-007, Reu.0 D ecommi.ssioning Coat .$t alyeia Section 1, Page I of 13 1.3.3 RadioloeicalCriteria for LicenseTermination In 1997, the NRC published Subpart E, "Radiological Criteria for License Termination," amending 10 CFR S20. 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 excessof 25 millirem per year, and provided that residual radioactivity has been reduced to levels that are As Low As ReasonablyAchievable (AI"ARA). The decommissioningestimates for TMI-2 assume that the site will be remediatedto a residual level consistentwith the NR0-prescribedlevel. 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).ttel An additional limit of 4 millirem per year, as defined in 40 CFR S141.16, is applied to drinking water.trzl On October9,2OO2,the NRC signed an agreementwith the EPA on the radiological decommissioning and decontamination of NRC-Iicensed sites. The Memorandum of Understanding (N{OIDttelprovidesthat EPA will defer exercise of authority under CERCLA for the majority of facilities decommissionedunder 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 contemplatesrestricted release of the site; and/or (3) residual radioactive soil concentrations exceed levels defined in the MOU. The MOU doesnot impose any new requirementson NRC licenseesand should reduce the involvement of the EPA with NRC licenseeswho are decommissioning.Most sites are expectedto meet the NRC criteria for unrestricted use, and the NRC believes that only a few sites will have groundwater or soil contamination in excessof the levels specified in the MOU that trigger consultation with the EPA. However, if there are other hazardousmaterials on the site, the EPA may be involved in the cleanup. As such, the possibility of dual regulation remains for certain licensees. The present study does not include any costs for this occurrence. TLG Seruices,Inc.

Three Mile Island. Unit 2 Document F07-1676-007,Reu. 0 D ecomrnissioning Coet Analysis Sectinn 7, Page 10 of 13 TABLE 1.1 INI\MNTORYOF SPENT FUEL AI.XILIARYAND FUEL HANDLING BUILDINGS I19] SNF Cubical Location Quantity (s) AX004 Seal Injection Valve Room 30 AX006 Make-up Pump 18 70 AX007 Make-up Pump 1A 230 AX015a CleanupFilters 50 AX015b CleanupFilters 50 AX114 MU&P Demineralizer1A 1,060 AX115 MU&P Demineralizer18 130 AX019 Waste DisposalLiquid Valve Room 10 FH001 MU Suction Valve Room 460 AX012 AB Sump Tank Room 100 AX020 ReactorCoolantBleed Tank 18 I,754 AX020 ReactorCoolantBleed Tank lC L,754 AX021 ReactorCoolantBleed Tank 1A 310 AX024 AB Sump Filters 20 AX112 Seal Return Coolersand Filter Room 300 AX116 Makeup Tank Room 310 AX117 MU&P Filter Room 60 AX131 MiscellaneousWasteTank Room 100 AX128 Instrument and Valve Room 10 AX218 ConcentratedWaste StorageTanks 10 AX501 RB Spray Pump 1A 10 AX502 RB Spray Pump 18 10 AX503 DHR Pump 1A 10 AX504 DHR Pump 18 10 FH003a MU DischargeValves 10 FH003b MU DischargeValves 100 FH004 WestinghouseValve Room 160 TLG Services,Inc.

Three MiIe Island Unit 2 Rev. 0 Document F07-1676-001, Decommissioning Cost Analysis Seetion l,Page 11 of 13 TABLE 1.1 (continued) INVENTORY OF SPENT FUEL AI.XILIARY AND FUEL HANDLING BUILDINGS SNF Cubical Location Quantity (.e\ FH101 MU&P Valve Room 324 FH112 Annulus 10 FH1O9 Spent Fuel Pool "A" 3,800 EmbeddedValves & Piping L70 ([tIU System) EmbeddedValves & Piping 40 (WDL System) TOTAL I1,460 TLG Seruices, Inc.

Three MiIe laland. Unit 2 DocumentF07-1676401, Reu,0 D ecomnr.issioning Cost An aly sis SectionI,Page 12 of 13 TABLE 1.2 II\IVENTORYOF SPENT FUEL REACTORBUILDING SNF Area/Component Quantity (g) ReactorVessel 925,000 RV Head Assembly 1,300 RV Upper Plenum Assembly 2,r00 FueI Transfer Canal 18,900 Core Flood System 4,900 "A" D-ring 21,000 Upper Endfitting StorageArea 5,900 Reactor Coolant Drain Tank 100 Letdown Coolers 3,700 RB Basementand Sump 1,300 Tool Decontamination Facility (347') 100 Defueling Water CleanupSystem 3,700 Defueling Tool Rack 600 Temp ReactVesselFiltration System 4,400 RB Drains 5,100 Total 998,100 TLG Seruices, Inc.

Three Mile Island Unit 2 Docwnent F07-1676-001,Reu. 0 Decommissioning CoetAnolysis Section 7,Page 13 of I3 TABLE 1.3 INVENTORY OF SPENT FUEL REACTORCOOLANT SYSTEM SNF Component Quantitv (s) Pressurizer (including surge line) 500 DecayHeat Drop Line 1,500 "A" SIDE OTSG Upper Tubesheet 1,400 Tube Bundle 1,700 Lower Head and J-legs 4,000 Hot Legs 900 Cold Legs 7,200 Core Flood Line 600 UB"SIDE OTSGUpper Tubesheet 36,000 Tube Bundle 9,100 Lower Head and J-legs 10,100 Hot Legs 1,800 CoId Legs 2,400 Core Flood Line 400 RCS SurfaceFilms 4,600 ReactorCoolantPumps 6,200 TotaI 88,400 TLG Sert:ices, Inc.

Three Mile Island Unit 2 Document F07-1676407, Reu. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 2, Page I of I

2. DECOMMISSIOMNG ALTERNATIVES Detailed cost estimates were developedto decommissionTMI-2 for three scenarios.

Although the alternatives differ with respect to technique, process, cost, and schedule, they attain the same result: the ultimate release of the site for unrestricted use. Three decommissioningcost scenarioswere evaluated for the nuclear unit. The scenarios assume that Exelon will operate the adjacent Unit 1 until its license expiration date in 2034.The scenariosare defrnedas follows: 1 . DECON: The adjacent TMI-I is promptly decommissioned upon the scheduledcessationof operations in 2034. TMI-2 transitions from a PDMS status to decommissioningin 2040. The decommissioningprogram for TMI'2 runs concurrently with the TMI-1 decommissioning effort; license termination of Unit 2 occurs in 2053, approximately 10 years after Unit 1 completes its decommissioning program (exclusive of the on-site ISFSI operations for Unit 1 fuel).

2. DelayedDECON: Unit 1 defersdecommissioninguntil its spent fuel has been removedfrom the site. This scenarioassumesthat the decontaminationand dismantling activities at TMI-2 are synchronizedwith the adjacent unit such that the licensesfor both units are terminated concurrently.

3 . SAFSTOR:TMI-I is placed into long-term storage.TMI-2 remains in storage until such time that decommissioningactivities can be coordinated with Unit

1. As with the first scenario.termination of the licensesis coordinated.

The nomenclature for these three scenarios is consistent with the Unit 1 decommissioningcost estimate. For each of the scenarios,Post-DefuelingMonitored Storage (PDMS) costs of approximately $3.1 million per year have been included from 2013 until Unit 1 shutdown in 2034 (DECON continues the PDMS charges until 2040).Other decommissioningcosts (including dormancy costs for the Delayed DECON and SAFSTORscenarios)are only accruedfollowing TMI-1 shutdown. The conceptual approach that the NRC has described in its regulations divides decommissioninginto three phases.The initial phase addressesthe transition of reactor operations (i.e., power production) to facility de-activationand closure.The second phase encompassesactivities during the storage period or during major decommissioningactivities, or a combinationof the two. The third phasepertains to the activities involved in license termination. TLG Serwices,Inc,

Three Mile Island. Unit 2 Docurnent F07-1676-001'Rev. 0 D ecotnmissioning Cost Analysis Section 2, Page 2 of I The decommissioningestimatesdevelopedfor TMI-Z are also divided into phasesor periods;however,demarcationof the phasesis basedupon major milestoneswithin the project or significant changesin the projectedexpenditures. The following sections describethe basic activities associatedwith each alternative. The three scenarios are essentiatly identical; all being variations of the NRC's SAFSTOR scenario following a dormancy period. The technical assumptions are unchanged with the only difference in the second and third scenarios being the delay in start of decommissioningexpenditures and the additional storage cost during the delay period. Although detailed procedures for each activity identified are not provided, and the actual sequenceof work may vary, the activity descriptions provide a basis not only for estimating but also for the expectedscopeof work, i.e., engineeringand planning at the time of decommissioning. The conceptual approach that the NRC has described in its regulations divides decommissioninginto three phases. The initial phase commenceswith the effective date of permanent cessation of operations and involves the transition of both nuclear unit and licensee from reactor operations (i.e., power production) to facilitate de-activation and closure. This phase was completedwhen TMI-2 began the PDMS phase;the plant is in SAFSTORdormancy. The secondphase encompassesactivities during the storageperiod or during major decommissioningactivities, or a combinationof the two. The third phasepertains to the activities involved in license termination. The decommissioning estimates developedfor TMI-2 are also divided into phasesor periods; however, demarcation of the phases is based upon major milestones within the project or significant changesin the projectedexpenditures. 2.1 DECON As stated previously, the naming convention of the three Unit 2 decommissioningscenarios is consistent with the Unit 1 decommissioning scenarios.This scenarioruns concurrentwith the Unit 1 DECON scenario,and therefore is referred to as DECON for Unit 2, even though the unit is currently in SAFSTORdormancy. 2.7.7 Period2 - Dormancy The secondphase identified by the NRC in its rule addresseslicensed activities during a storageperiod and is applicableto the PDMS phase from 2013 to 2040 for the DECON alternative (the delayed scenarios TLG Seruices, Inc.

Three Mile Island. Unit 2 Docurnent F07-1676-001, Reu.0 D ecomtnissioning Cost Analysis Seetion 2, Page 3 of I terminate PDMS with Unit 1 shutdown, and begin a standard SAFSTOR dormancy program in 2034). TMI-2 has been in a dormant condition since entry into PDMS in December 1993. This estimate includes the yearly g3.1 million PDMS costsfor maintaining TMI-2 until the start of decommissioningin 2040. Dormancy activities during PDMS includ.e a 24-hour security force (primarily provided by the operating Unit 1), 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. 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. Most site labor activities are provided by Exelon personnelunder contract to FirstEnergy. 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 releasesthat exceedprescribedlimits. Security during the dormancy period is conducted primarily to prevent unauthorized entry and to protect the public from the consequencesof its own actions. Security is provided by fences, sensors, alarms, and other surveillance equipment. Fire and radiation alarms are also monitored. 2.L.2 Period3 - Preparations Preparations include the planning for the removal of the remaining fuel' bearing components, decontamination of the structures and the dismantling of the remaining equipment and facilities. Typically, the processis describedwithin a Post-Shutdown DecommissioningActivities Report (PSDAR) or a Decommissioning Plan (DP). Although the exact format and content of the decommissioningplanning document has not been identified, as a minimum Technical Specification3.2.l.L requires NRC approval prior to removal of greater than 42 kilograms of fuel from the reactor vessel.Thus in addition to the planning document,changes may be required to the existing technical specificationsprior to the start of major decommissioningactivities. TLG Seruices, Inc.

Three Mile Island. Unit 2 Document F07-1676-001, Reu.0 D econm.issioning Cost An aly si s Section 2, Page 4 of I Eneineerine and Plannine The decommissioning program outlined in the PSDAR or DP will be designedto accomplishthe required tasks within the AI,ARA guidelines (as defined in 10 CFR S20)for protection of personnelfrom exposureto radiation hazards. It wiII 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 decommissioningplan, activity specifrcations,cost-benefit and safety analyses, and work packages and procedures,would be assembledto support the proposeddecontamination and dismantling activities. The estimate assumesthat FirstEnergy will provide project oversight. However, the majority of the professional, managerial, technical and administrative support staff will be provided by a decommissioning operationscontractor @OC). Site Preparations In preparation for active decommissioning, the following are initiated: Characterization of the site and surrounding environs. This includes radiation surveys of the reactor building including: the basement and elevator block wall area, areas surrounding major components(including the reactor vessel and its internals, steam generators),internal piping, and primary shield cores. Surveys of the auxiliary and fuel handling building with emphasis on areas with known and potential alpha contamination and know fission products. Surveys and sample analysis will also be performed on exterior buildings, land areas surrounding the facility, subsurface soil and groundwater. Specification of transport and disposal requirements for highly radioactive waste and/or hazardous waste, including shielding and waste stabilization. Development of procedures for occupational exposure control, control and release of liquid and gaseouseffluent, processingof radwaste (including dry-active waste, resins, filter media, metallic and non-metallic componentsgenerated in decommissioning),site security and emergencyprograms,and industrial safety. TLG Senticee, Inc.

Three Mile Island Unit 2 Document F07-1676-001, Reu.0 D ecommissioning Cost Analysis Section 2, Page 5 of I 2.L.3 Period 4 - DecommissionineOperations This period includes the physical decommissioningactivities associated with the removal and disposal of contaminated and highly radioactive components and structures, including the successfultermination of the license. Significant decommissioningactivities 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 componentpreparationsfor off-site disposal. Refurbishment of the containment air control envelope building located outside the reactor building equipment hatch. A prefabricated metal containment building located on the 305' level of the reactor building will be required for the handling of highly contaminated material being removed from the basement or the operating deck elevations. Modification of the containment structure to facilitate handling of large equipment. This will include an evaluation to determine whether a temporary crane should be installed or whether the existing polar crane should be refurbished (the reactor vesselhead wiII be the heaviest lift under the current removal scenariowith the in-situ segmentationof the reactor vesseland steam generators). Reconfiguration and modification of site structures and facilities as needed to support decommissioningoperations. This may include the upgrading of roads and rail facilities (on' and off'site) to facilitate hauling and transport. Modifications may also be required to the refueling area of the building to support the segmentation of the reactor vesselinternals and componentextraction. 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 Qeaseor purchase)of shipping canisters, cask liners, and industrial packages. Decontamination of components and structures as required to control (minimize) worker exposure. Decontamination of the reactor building so as to reduce working area dose rates and improve working conditions. The reactor building basement is known to be highty contaminated and will TLG Services,Inc.

Three Mile Island Unit 2 Document F07-1676-001'Reu. 0 D ecommissioning Cost Analysia Section 2, Page 6 of I require remote operations and tooling for the initial decontamination effort. Inventory, decontamination and removal of legacy equipment inventory lefb over from the defueling campaign. Installation of a water processingsystem to filter and treat water from the reactor coolant system and fuel handling pool. Removal of piping and components no longer essential to support decommissioningoperations. Removal of control rod drive housings and the head service structure from reactor vessel head. Segmentation of the vessel closurehead. Segmentation of the upper internals assemblies.The plenum is currently stored in the fuel transfer canal. Segmentation will maximize the loading of the shieldedtransport casks,i.e., by weight and activity. The operations are conducted under water using remotely operated tooling and contamination controls. Disassemblyand segmentationof the remaining reactor internals, including the core former and lower core support assembty. All internals components below the top of the fuel are expected to exceedClass C disposal requirements due to fuel contamination. As such, the segments will be packaged in modifi.ed fuel storage canistersfor geologicdisposal. Segmentationof the reactor vessel.A shieldedplatform 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 doserates. Segmentsare transferred in' air to containers that are stored under water, for example, in an isolated area of the refueling canal. Removal of the steam generators and pressurizer for material recovery and controlled disposal. Due to the high internal and external radioactivity, these componentscan not serve as their own shipping containers. The steam generators are assumed to be segmentedin-place. The pressurizer is assumed to be cut in half and shippedin a sealedand shieldedshipping and burial container. Steel shielding will be added,as necessary,to those external areas of the packageto meet transportation limits and regulations. Removal of free standing concrete structures in the reactor building. TLG Services,Inc.

Three Mile Island Unit 2 Document F07-1676-001,Rev, 0 D ecom,missioning Cost Analysis Section 2, Page 7 of I Removal of the remaining internal structures within the reactor building including: the polar crane, inner pools and waII liners, biologicalshield, D-rings, floors and walls. At least two years prior to the anticipated date of license termination' a License Termination Plan (LTP) is required. Submitted as a supplement to the FSAR or its equivalent, the plan must include: a site characterization, description of the remaining dismantling activities, plans for site remediation, procedures for the final radiation survey, designation of the end use of the site, an updated cost estimate to complete the decommissioning, and any associated environmental concerns. The NRC wiII 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 licenseemay then commencewith the final remediation of site facilities and services,including: Removalof remaining plant systemsand associatedcomponentsas they become nonessential to the decommissioning program or worker health and safety (e.g., waste collection and treatment systems,electricalpower and ventilation systems). Processing of the structural material in the reactor, auxiliary and fuel handling buildings. Approximately 90% of the concrete removed at this stage is assumedto meet free releasecriteria. The remainder is sent to a waste processor.The free-releasedconcreteis available as fill. Excess concrete is disposed of in an industrial landfill. o Removal of contaminated yard piping and.any contaminated soil. a Transfer of greater-than-ClassC (GTCC)material to the DOE. a Surveys of the decontaminated areas not designated for complete removal and disposal. Remediation and removal of the contaminated equipment and mateiial from the auxiliary and fuel buildings and any other contaminated facility. Certain areas in the auxiliary and spent fuel handling buildings contain very high contamination and radiation levels and will require additional resource and increased radiological protection to complete the decontamination. Radiation and. contamination controls will be utilized until residual levels indicate that the structures and equipment can be released for unrestricted accessand conventional demolition. This activity may necessitate the dismantling and disposition of most of the systems TLG Seruices,Inc.

Three Mile Island, Unit 2 Doeument F07-1676-001,Rev. 0 Decomrnissioning Cost Ana,lysis Section 2, Page I of I and components(both clean and contaminated) located within these buildings. This activity facilitates surface decontamination and subsequent verifi.cation surveys required prior to obtaining release for demolition. Most of the power block structures @eactor, Auxiliary and Fuel Handling) will be removed to below the building foundations / basematto ensurethat no radioactivematerial remains on site. Material that is designatedas scrap or general disposal(survey and release)is transferred to a designedwaste processingvendor for a confirmatory survey and, if permitted, released for unrestricted disposition.Contaminatedmaterial is characterizedand 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 developedusing the guidance provided in the "Multi-Agency Radiation Survey and Site Investigation Manual (MARSSI[0'"[20] 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 conductedin a manner that provides a high degreeof confidencethat 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. The NRC wiII terminate the license if it determines that site remediation has been performed in accordancewith the LTP, and that the terminal radiation survey and associated documentation demonstrate that the facilitv is suitable for release. 2.I.4 Period5 - Site Restoration Following completion of decommissioningoperations, site restoration activities will begin. Efficient removal of the contaminated materials and verification that residual radionuclide concentrations are below the NRC limits wiII result in substantial damage to many of the remaining structures. TLG Serttices, Inc.

Three Mile Island, Unit 2 Docurnent F07-fi7e00\ Reu. 0 Decornmissioning Cost Analysis Section 2, Page I of I This cost study presumesthat non-essentialstructures 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 vegetationcan be establishedfor 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 subsurfacematerials. Concreterubble produced by demolition activities is processedto remove rebar and miscellaneousembedments.The processedmaterial is then used on site to backfill voids. Excessmaterials are trucked to an off-site area for disposalas constructiondebris. 2.2 SAFSTOR and Delayed DECON The decontamination and. dismantling activities in this scenario are identical to those described in Section 2.L for DECON. However, the start of active decommissioning is deferred to coordinate with the timing of the Unit 1 Delayed DECON and SAFSTOR scenarios. As such, the presence of the dormancy period incurs storage costs (correspondingly greater for the SAFSTORscenario,with its longer dormancyperiod). While it is expectedthat radiation dose levels will decreaseover the duration of the longer dormancy period, the nature of radionuclides involved and the difficulties in working in plant areas contaminated with these radionuclides will require similar operational and radiological controls to those envisioned for earlier scenario.As such, there have been no changesincorporated into the costs to perform the field decommissioningactivities identified in Section 2.1 for this scenario. Note that, with Unit I permanently shut down, there are dormancy costs for Unit 2 included in the estimate following the cessation of the PDMS chargesin 2034. TLG Services,Inc.

Three Mile Island Unit 2 Document F07-1676-001,Reu, 0 D ecomrn i ssioning Cost An aly si s Section 3, Page I of 27

3. COST ESTIMATE The cost estimates prepared for decommissioningTMI-2 consider the radiological status, unique conditions 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 describedin this section.

3.1 BASIS OF ESTIMATE The estimates rely upon site-specific, technical information originally developedin an evaluation preparedfor the GPU Nuclear Corporationin 1995' 96, and last updated for FirstEnergy in 2008. The 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 ongoing decommissioningprograms provided viable alternatives or improvedprocesses. Someof the technical assumptions that were used are due to the unique nature and characteristics of the plant as a result of the March 1979 accident. Following the accident, TMI-2 was defueled and extensive decontamination activities were performed. This successfullyremoved approximately 99o/oof the original fuel and resulting fuel debris. Removalof the residual 1% was neither cost effective nor warranted due to the high radiation fields in the reactor building and adjoining auxiliary and fuel handling buildings. The remaining equipment and components containing spent nuclear fuel (SNF) will be removed, sealed and./orencapsulatedin preparation for disposal during the decommissioningprogram. 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 pgf,imafss,r'[21]and the DOE "Decommissioning Handbook."t22] These documents present a unit factor method for estimating decommissioning activity costs, which simplifies the estimating calculations. Unit factors for concreteremoval ($/cubicyard), steel removal ($/ton), and cutting costs ($/inch) were developedusing local labor rates. The activity-dependent costs were estimated with the item quantities (cubic yards and tons), developedfrom TLG Seruices,Inc,

Three Mile Island Unit 2 Document F0 7-16 76-001, Rev. 0 D ecommissioning Cost Analyeis Section 3, Page 2 of 27 plant drawings and inventory documents.Removalrates and material costsfor the conventional disposition of components and structures relied upon information available in the industry publication, "Building Construction Cost Data," publishedby R.S. Means.t2sl This analysis reflects lessons learned from TLG's involvement in the Shippingport Station DecommissioningProject, completedin 1989, as well as the decommissioning of the Cintichem reactor, hot cells, and associated facilities, completedin 1997. In addition, the planning and engineeringfor the Pathfinder, Shoreham, Rancho Seco,Trojan, Yankee Rowe, Big Rock Point, Maine Yankee, Humboldt Bay-3, Oyster Creek, ConnecticutYankee, and San Onofre-l nuclear units have provided additional insight into the process,the regulatory aspects, and the technical challenges of decommissioning commercialnuclear units. 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 consumablecosts,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 developedfor this analysis. Work Difficultv Factors TLG has historically applied work difficulty adjustment factors (WDFs) to account for the inefficiencies in working in a power plant environment and increase the time required to perform the activity. WDFs were assigned to each unique set of unit factors, commensurate with the inefficiencies associatedwith working in confrned,hazardousenvironments. The WDF sets were developed considering the extremely difficult working conditions associatedwith working in high radiation areas and in areas with high alpha particle contamination. The same work difficulty factor sets were used for all three scenarios.This assumptionwas based upon the relatively high levels of long-lived radioactivity that exists today plus the high levels of alpha contamination. The factors and their associatedrange of values were developedin conjunction with the AIFA{ESP-036 study. The application of the factors is discussed in more detail in that publication. Given the radiological status of some areas at TMI-2, the range of the WDF's was increased.The ranges used for the WDFs are identified in the following table. TLG Serpices, Inc.

Three Mile Island, Unit 2 Document F07-1676-001'Reu. 0 D ec onrniseion ing Cost An oly aie Section S, Page 3 of 27 Work Difficulty Factors Other FueUAux Reactor NSSS Power Block Buildings Building Components Access 20o/o 30% 30% 40o/o RespiratoryProtection 0-25o/o 200o/o 50% 200% Radiation/ALARA L0-25o/o 40% 40% l00o/o Protective Clothing 0-30% 50o/o 50o/o 50% Work Break 8.33o/o 8.33% 8.33o/o 8.33% Schedulins Program Durations The unit factors,adjustedby the WDFs as describedabove,are applied against the inventory of materials to be removed in the radiologically controlled areas. As shown above,higher WDF's sets were assignedto systems located in the reactor building and to systems which contain SNF and/or high levels of radioactive materials. The resulting man-hours,or crew-hours,are used in the development of the decommissioningprogram schedule,using resource loading and event sequencingconsiderations. The scheduling of conventional removal and dismantling activities are based upon productivity information available from the "Building ConstructionCost Data" publication. An activity duration critical path is used to determine the total decommissioningprogram schedule. The scheduleis relied upon in calculating the carrying costs,which include program management,administration, field engineering, equipment rental, and support services such as quality control and security. This systematic approach for assembling decommissioning estimates ensures a high degreeof confidencein the reliability of the resulting cost estimate. 3.3 IMPACT OF DECOMMISSIONING MULTIPLE REACTOR UNITS The DECON scenariofor TMI-2 decommissioningoperatesindependentlyfrom the adjacent Unit 2. The delayed decommissioningmodes, Delayed DECON and SAFSTOR, consider opportunities to achieve economies of scale, by sharing costs between units, and coordinating the sequenceof work activities. There will also be schedule constraints, particularly where there are requirements for specialty equipment and staff, or practical limitations on when final status surveys can take place. A summary of the principal impacts are listed below. TLG Seruices, Inc.

Three MiIe Island. Unit 2 Doeument F0 7-I 676-00l, Reu. 0 D ecotnm i ssion in g Cost An aly si e Section 3, Page 4 of 27 Consistent with the agreement between FirstEnergy and Exelon regarding the timing of decommissioning activities at TMI'2, it is assumed that decommissioningat TMI-2 will not begin prior to 2O34. Under the terms of this agreement, decommissioningactivities at Unit 2 cannot begin while Unit 1 is still in commercial operation. The decommissioning scenarios used in this analysis are structured to integrate to the extent possiblewith a Unit 1 decommissioningscenario. Since the security program for the site is likely to be an integrated approach, the security guard force is assumed to be shared to varying degreesbetween the units, dependingupon the level of activities at each unit. This reduces the security costs for the decommissioningestimates for both units on site. The final radiological survey schedule is also affected by a two-unit decommissioningschedule.It would be consideredimpractical to try to complete the final status survey of Unit 1, while Unit 2 still has ongoing radiological remediation work and waste handling in process.As such, this analysis has structured the decommissioningscenarios for Unit 2 to coordinate the final status survev for the station. 3.4 FINANCIAL COMPONENTS OF THE COST MODEL TLG's proprietary decommissioningcost model, DECCER, producesa number of distinct cost elements. These direct expenditures, however, do not comprise the total cost to accomplishthe project goal, i.e., license termination and site restoration. 3.4.1 Contineency Inherent in any cost estimate that doesnot 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 coverthese types of expenses. The activity- and period-dependent costs are combined to develop the total decommissioningcost. A contingencyis 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' TLG Services, Inc.

Three MiIe Island Unit 2 Docunrent F07-1676-001,Rev, 0 D ecotnnt i ssionin g Coet An a ly si s Section 3, Page 5 of 27 Handbook"[24] as "specific provision for unforeseeableelements of cost within the defined project scope;particularly important where previous experience relating estimates and actual costs has shown that unforeseeableevents which will increase costs are likely to occur." The cost elements in this analysis are based upon ideal conditions and maximum efficiency; therefore, consistent with industry practice, a contingencyfactor has been applied. In the AIF/NESP-036 study, the types of unforeseeableevents that are likely to occur in decommissioning are discussedand guidelines are provided for percentage contingency in each category. It should be noted that contingency, as used in this analysis, doesnot account for price escalation and inflation in the cost of decommissioningover the time intervals identffied for each scenario. The use and role of contingencywithin decommissioningestimates is not a "safety factor issue." Safety factors provide additional security and address situations that may never occur. Contingency funds are expected to be fully expended throughout the program. They also provide assurance that sufficient funding is available to accomplish the intended tasks. An estimate without contingency, or from which contingency has been removed, can disrupt the orderly progression of events and jeopardize a successfulconclusionto the decommissioning process. For example, the most technologically challenging task in decommissioning a commercial nuclear station is the disposition of the reactor vessel and internal components,highly radioactive following the accident. The disposition of these componentsforms the basis of the critical path (schedule) for decommissioning operations. Cost and schedule are interdependent, and any deviation in schedule has a significant impact on cost for performing a specific activity. Disposition of the reactor vessel internals involves the underwater cutting of complex components that are radioactive and highly contaminated with fuel debris. Costs are based upon optimum segmentation, handling, and packaging scenarios. The schedule is primarily dependent upon the turnaround time for the heavily shielded shipping casks, including preparation, loading, and decontaminationof the containers for transport. The number of casks required is a function of the pieces generated in the segmentation activity, a value calculated on optimum performance of the tooling employed in cutting the various subassemblies. The expected optimization, however, may not be achieved, resulting in delays and additional program costs. For this reason, contingencymust be included to mitigate the consequencesof TLG Seruices, Inc,

Three Mile Island Unit 2 Document F07-1676-001,Reu. 0 D ecommissioning Coet Analysis Seetian 3, Page 6 of 27 the expected inefficiencies inherent in this complex activity, along with related concerns associated with the operation of highly specialized tooling, field conditions, and water clarity. Contingency funds are an integral part of the total cost to complete the decommissioningprocess.Exclusion of this component puts at risk a successfulcompletion 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 contingenciesranged from I0o/oto 75Yo, depending on the degree of difficulty judged to be appropriate foom TLG's actual decommissioningexperience.The contingencyvalues used in this study are as follows: Decontamination 50o/o ContaminatedComponentRemoval 25o/o ContaminatedComponentPackaging to% ContaminatedComponentTransport L5o/o Low-LevelRadioactiveWaste Disposal 25% ReactorSegmentation 75% NSSS ComponentRemoval 25o/o ReactorWaste Packaging 25% Reactor Waste Transport 25% ReactorVesselComponentDisposal 5oo/o GTCC Disposal I5o/o Non-RadioactiveComponentRemoval t5% Heavy Equipment and Tooling L5% Supplies 25o/o Engineering 15% Energy $% Characterization and Termination Surveys 30% Construction L5% Taxes and Fees L0% Insurance 10% Staffing rc% Operationsand MaintenanceExpenses L5% The contingency values are applied to the appropriate componentsof the estimateson a line item basis. A compositevalue is then reported at the end of each estimate. For example, the composite contingency value TLG Sentices, Inc.

Three Mile Island Unit 2 Docurnent F07-1676-001'frev, 0 D ecotnrni s sion ing Cost An aly eis Section 3, Page 7 of 27 reported for the DECON alternative is 20.3%. Values for the other alternatives are delineated within the detailed cost tables in Appendices D and E. 3.4.2 Financial Risk In addition to the routine uncertainties addressed by contingency, another cost element that is sometimes necessary to consider when bounding decommissioning costs relates to uncertainty, or risk. Examples can include changesin work scope,pricing, job performance, and other variations that could conceivably, but not necessarily, occur. Consideration is sometimes necessarTto generate a level of confidence in the estimate, within a range of probabilities. TLG considersthese types of costsunder the broad term "frnancial risk." Included within the categoryoffinancial risk are: Delays in approval of the decommissioning plan due to intervention, public participation in local community meetings, Iegal 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,contaminatedsoil previously undiscovered (either radioactive or hazardous material contamination), variations in plant inventory or configuration not indicated by the as-built drawings. Regulatory changes,e.g., affecting worker health and safety, site releasecriteria, waste transportation, and disposal. Policy decisions altering national commitments, e.g., in the ability to accommodatecertain waste forms for disposition or in the timetable for such, e.g., the start and rate of acceptanceof spent fuel by the DOE. Pricing changesfor basic inputs, such as labor, energ'y,materials, and burial. Some of these inputs may vary slightly, e.g. 'L0o/oto

                    +20%;burial could vary from -50% ta+204o/oor more.

It has been TLG's experiencethat the results of a risk analysis, when compared with the base case estimate for decommissioning,indicate that the chancesof the base decommissioningestimate'sbeing 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 TLG Seruices,Inc.

Three Mile Island Unit 2 Doeurnent F0 7-1676-00I, Reu. 0 D ecommi ssionin g Cost An aly sis Section 3, Page 8 of 27 increases from changes in plant conditions and to pricing variations in the cost of labor (both crafb and staft). This cost study, however, does not include any additional costs for financial risk since there is insufficient historical data from which to project future liabilities. Consequently, the areas of uncertainty or risk should be revisited periodically and addressedthrough repeatedrevisions or updates ofthe baseestimate. 3.5 SITE-SPECIFIC CONSIDERATIONS There are a number of site-specific considerations that affect the method for dismantling and removal of equipment from the site and the degree of restoration required. The cost impact of the considerations identified below is included in this cost study. Unless otherwise noted, these assumptions are applicableto all three scenarios. 3.5.1 SpentFuel Manaeement The cost to dispose of spent fuel generated from plant operations is not reflected within the estimates to decommission the TMI-2 site. The majority of the spent fuel was removed during the TMI'2 Clean'up Program's reactor vessel defueling effort which concluded in January 1990. Title to the spent fueI that was removed was transfened to the DOE. The remainder of the fuel (about lo/o)is dispersed within the primary system and to a lesser extent in other systems and structures. This residual material will be removed as radioactive waste and is included in the waste disposalvolumesdiscussedin Section5. RepositoryAvailabilitlz There will be some wastes generatedin the decommissioningof TMI-Z that are not suitable for shallow land burial and therefore cannot be shipped for disposal to either Waste Control Specialists or EnergySolutions.This material, primarily associatedwith systems and structures contaminated with fuel debris, requires greater isolation from the environment. The estimatesfor TMI-2 assumethe timely removal of waste designated for geologicdisposal, without the need for interim on site storage (once containerized). TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile Island Unit 2 Document F07-1676-001,Rev. 0 D ecornrnissioning Cost Analysis Section 3, Page I of 27 3.5.2 ReactorVesseland Internal Comoonents The majority of the reactor internal components have already been removed as a result of the accident recoveryeffort in the 1980's.These componentsare currently being stored within the reactor building. This estimate assumesthat these componentsare segmentedand shipped in shielded, reusable transportation casks commensurate with the start of major reactor vesselremoval activities, i.e., Period 4a of each scenario. The reactor pressure vessel and remaining internal components (essentially the core barrel, core former, thermal shield, and flow distributor) are segmented and packaged for disposal in shielded, reusable transportation casks. Segmentationof the remaining internal componentsis performed in the refueling canal, where a turntable and remote cutter are installed. The vessel is segmentedin place, using a mast-mountedcutter supported off the lower head and directed from a shielded work platform installed overhead in the reactor cavity. Transportation cask specifications and transportation regulations will dictate segmentation and packaging methodology. It is anticipated that all neutron-activated componentsin the reactor vessel and internals would meet existing disposal requirements as delineatedin 10 CFR 561, due to the short operating history. However, the fission products and transuranic material present on all surfaces in the vessel and internals are expected to exceed Class C limits, in particular for those components located below the top of the core. The reactor vessel and the upper portions of the internals are assumedto meet ClassA limits following decontamination. The dismantling of the reactor internals will generate radioactive waste consideredunsuitable for shallow land disposal, i.e., GTCC. Although the material is not classifi.edas high-level waste, the DOE has indieated it will accept this waste for disposal at the future high-Ievel waste repository.t2slHowever, the DOE has not been forthcoming with an acceptance criteria or disposition schedule for this material, and numerous questionsremain as to the ultimate disposal cost and waste form requirements. For purposes of this analysis, the GTC0 has been packaged and disposedof as high-level waste. It is also assumed that the DOE will accept the GTCC material in a timely manner so as not to affect the TMI-2 decommissioningschedule.No additional costs are included for the temporary storageof GTCC material. TLG Seruices,Inc.

Three Mile Island. Unit 2 Document F07-1676-001,Reu. 0 D ecomm i ssion ing Cost An aly ais Section 3, Page 10 af 27 Intact disposal of the reactor vessel and internal components can provide savings in cost and worker exposureby eliminating the complex segmentation requirements, isolation of the GTCC material, and transport/storage of the resulting waste packages. Portland General Electric GGE) was able to disposeof the Trojan reactor as an intact package. However, its location on the Columbia River simplified the transportation analysis since: the reactor packagecould be securedto the transport vehicle for the entire journey, i.e., the packagewas 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 speedswere 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 compliancewith land disposalregulations. It is not known whether this option will be available for TMI-2. Future viability of this option will depend upon the ultimate location of the disposal site, as well as the disposal site licensee'sability to accept highly radioactive packages and effectively isolate them from the environment. Consequently, the study assumes the reactor vessel will require segmentation, as a bounding condition. 3.5.3 SteamGenerators With the high levels of radioactivity and contamination both in the reactor building and within the steam generators,this estimate assumes that the steam generators will be segmentedin place instead of one pieceremoval. The removal sequenceassumedfor the estimate is as follows: Remove the upper steam generator channel head by wire sawing the shell and tubes immediately below the upper tube sheet. Segment and decontaminate the upper channel head in the fuel transfer pool. TLG Seruices, Inc.

Three Mile Island. Unit 2 Docurnent F07-1676-001,Reu. 0 D ecom.missioning Cost Analyeis Section 3,Page 11of27 Install a steam generator work platform to allow in'place underwater segmentationof the steam generatorinternals. Remove the steam generator tubing and associatedshroud and support plates. a Removethe steam generator cylindrical shell. o Removethe lower steam generatorchannel head. a Segment and decontaminate the lower channel head in the fuel transfer pool. The steam generator tubing is packaged and shipped and buried as Class B waste. Steam generatortube support plates, shrouds,and shell plates are transported and buried as Class A waste. The estimate assumesthat the steam generatorchannel headswill be decontaminated using a combination of machining and ultra high pressure (UHP) water sprays such that the componentscan be shipped and buried as ClassA waste. Waste that is generated as a result of the machining and normal filtering of the water in the steam generators and the fuel transfer pool is assumedto be highly radioactive and is packagedand transferred to the DOE as GTCC waste. 3.5.4 Other Primarv SvstemComponents The following discussion deals with the decontamination, removal and disposition of the pressurizer, reactor coolant piping, reactor coolant pumps and motors, and the coreflood tanks. A combination of in-place decontamination, and remote decontamination of componentsin the fuel transfer pool was assumedin the estimate. The pressurizer and the core flood tanks are decontaminated in'place using UHP. Once decontaminated, the pressurizer is cut in half, removed from the reactor building, grouted, and packaged in a shielded container for rail shipment and burial as Class A waste. The core flood tanks are assumedto be segmented,packagedand shipped as Class A waste. Hot leg piping is accessedby cutting a hole in the core barrel. A combination of underwater remote retrieval and vacuuming is used to remove fuel and fi.ssionproduct material. Hot and cold leg piping and TLG Seruices, Inc.

Three Mile Island. Unit 2 Docurnent F07-1676-001,Reu. 0 D ecommissioning Cost Analysie Section 3, Page 12 of 27 fittings are removed and placed in the fuel transfer pool for additional decontamination. Hydrolasing is used to remove radioactive materials. Removed material is collected using filters and demineralizers, packaged, and transferred to the DOE as GTCC material. Decontaminated piping is packaged, shipped and buried as Class A waste. The reactor coolant pump motors are removed intact and placed in shieldedcontainersfor rail transport and burial as ClassA material. Reactorcoolant pumps are disassembledand placed in the fuel transfer pool for decontamination. Pump components are decontaminated using UHP to remove the majority of the radioactive material. Following decontamination,the componentsare packaged in shielded containers for rail transport and buried as ClassA material. Material removedas a result of the decontamination process is collected using frlters and shipped as GTCC material. The estimates also assume that process water used.for reactor coolant system decontamination and in the fuel transfer pool is processed using cesium/strontium preferential cation demineralizers. The resin waste is processedand buried as Class C radioactivewaste. 3.5.5 Other SvstemsKnown to Contain Hieh Levels of Radioactivity Systems in the reactor building and portions of systems in the auxiliary and fuel handling buildings are known to contain high levels of rad.ioactivity and potentially spent fuel material from the accident. The estimates recognize the difficulty in removing these components by increasing the work difficulty factors associatedwith removal of these systems. The estimates also assume that these components will be packaged for direct disposal (no recycling). The disposal costs of these waste streams were also adjusted, as appropriate, to include curie surchargescommensuratewith the higher radioactivity levels. These systems and. components will be decontaminated with UHP sprays to removal fuel solids and sludge from fuel bearing componentsin the fuel and auxiliary buildings. Solids and sludge resulting from the UHP processwill be transferred to the reactor building to be packaged in canistersused for NSSS decontamination. TLG Services,Inc.

Three Mile Island Unit 2 Docurnent F07-1676-001,Reu. 0 D ecommissioning Cost Analysis Section 8, Page 13 of 27 3.5.6 ReactorBuildine Structures Decontamination Significant radioactive contamination exists throughout the TMI'2 reactor building. This contamination is due to fission products (eoSrand 137Cs in particular) released from the damaged fuel. The radiation levels are not expectedto decreasesignificantly from current levels due to the long half lives of these elements. The dispersion of spent fuel within the reactor buitding includes alpha-decayingisotopesin addition to the beta and gamma radiation normally encountered during decommissioning. These unusual conditions require additional controls and more engineered decommissioning methods to perform the structure decontaminationand demolition. Based upon these conditions, the estimates assume that the entire interior structure of the reactor building is removed and disposed as potentially contaminatedmaterial. The lower elevations of the reactor building are highly contaminated. Significant activity has been absorbedin the concreteblock walls, in the four-foot thick D-ring concrete walls, and on the lower level concrete floors. Initial decontaminationof this area (Period 4a) is assumedto be performed using remotely-operatedmachines. Surface material will be bulk removed from the concrete walls, packaged in shielded casks and, on average concentration, buried as Class B waste (i.e., most of the debris mass will be ClassA, but there will be hot spots ranging to Class C or GTCC). Once the highly contaminated surfaces are decontaminated, free standing concrete walls will be removed (in Period 4b using more conventional means) and shipped for direct burial as radioactive waste. The upper portion of the containment inner steel liner and the entire polar crane will be removed using conventional radioactive demolition techniques (in Period 4b) and packaged, shipped and buried as rad.ioactive waste. Following liner removal, the outer reactor building concrete walls wiII be demolished. This remaining structural material from the reactor building will be surveyed on site, with 90% of the concretevolume assumedto meet free release criteria. The remaining 10%is sent to a waste processor.The free releasedconcreteis acceptable for use as frll. Excessmaterial will be sent to an industrial landfill. TLG Services,Inc.

Three Mile Island Unit 2 Doeument F07-1676-001,Reu. 0 D ecommissioning Cost Analysis Section 3, Page 14 of 27 3.5.7 Demolition of Other ContaminatedStructures Significant contamination exists within the auxiliary and fuel buildings. Similar to the reactor building, locations within these buildings will require special engineered methods to safely decontaminate and dispose ofthe structures. The estimate assumes that the entire auxiliary and fuel building structures (all walls and floors down to the footings) will be removed and the resultant structural material monitored and processedwith the same criteria as the reactor building. Selected areas of the buildings will require remote operated machines and dedicated engineeredventilation systems and enclosuresto allow decontamination and material removal. 3.5.8 Main Turbine and Condenser The main turbine will be dismantled using conventional maintenance procedures. The remaining turbine internals wiII be removed to a laydown area. The lower turbine casings will be removed from their anchors by controlled demolition. This study recognizesthat one of the Iow pressure turbine rotors and the main electrical generator has already been removed from the site. The main condenserswill also be disassembledand moved to a laydown area. Material is then prepared for transportation to an off-site recycling facility where it will be surveyed and designated for either decontamination or volume reduction,conventionaldisposal,or controlleddisposal.Componentswill be packaged and readied for transport in accordancewith the intended disposition. 3.5.9 Transportation Methods Contaminated piping, components, and structural material other than the highly contaminated reactor coolant system componentsand reactor building structures will qualifr as LSA-I, II or III or Surface Contaminated Object, SCO-I or II, as described in Title 49.tza1The contaminated material will be packagedin Industrial Packages(IP'l, IP-z or IP-3, as defined in subpart t73.4LL) for transport unless demonstrated to qualifu as their own shipping containers. It is anticipated that the reactor vessel, after decontamination with UHP water sprays, and due to its limited operating lifetime, will qualify as LSA II or III, once the reactor internals and remaining fuel debris is TLG Seruices,Inc.

Three Mile Island Unit 2 Document F07-1676-001'Rev. 0 D econr,m,issi onin g Cost An aly sis Section 3, Page 15 of 27 removed. Portions of the reactor vessel internal components ate expectedto be transported to the DOE's geologicrepository in spent fuel casksbv rail. Waste resulting from fi.ltering and demineralization of the reactor coolant system, and processingthe fuel transfer pool water is assumed to require shipment in shielded truck casks. Transport of other highly radioactivewaste such as reactor coolant system components,and waste from the decontamination of the reactor building basement are by shielded truck cask. Truck cask shipments may exceed95,000 pounds, including payload,supplementaryshielding, 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 segmentationschemefor the vessel and internal segmentsis designedto meet these limits. The transport of large intact components,e.g., large heat exchangers and other oversized components are by a combination of truck, rail, and/or multi-wheeledtransporter. Truck transportation costs are estimated using published tariffs from Tri-State Motor Transit.t271 The low-level radioactive waste requiring controlled disposal will be sent to the EnergySolutions facility in Clive, Utah. Memphis, Tennessee,is used as the destination for off-site processing.BuIk material shipped off site to the waste processoror to EnergySolutions is primarily moved via gondolarailcars. 3.5.10Low-LevelRadioactiveWaste Disposal To the greatest extent practical, metallic material generated in the decontaminationand dismantling processesis treated to reducethe total volume requiring controlled disposal. The treated material, meeting the regulatory and"/orsite releasecriterion, is released as scrap, requiring no further cost consideration. Conditioning and recovery of the waste stream is performedoff site at a licensedprocessingcenter. All options and. services currently available to FirstEnergy for d.isposition of the various waste streams produced by the decommissioningprocesswere considered.The majority of the low-Ievel radioactive waste designated for direct disposal can be sent to EnergySolutions' facility in Clive, Utah. Therefore, disposal costs for TLG Seruices,Inc.

Three Mile Island. Unit 2 Docurnent F0 7-I 6 76-00I, Reu. 0 D ecommissioning Cost Analysis Section 3, Page 16 of 27 Class A waste were based upon Firstfinergy's agreement with EnergySolutions. This facility is not licensed to receive the higher activity portion (ClassesB and C) of the decommissioningwaste stream. Very low-level radioactivewaste, e.g., structural steel and contaminated concrete, is sent to a waste processing facility. More highty contaminated and activated material is sent to EnergySolutions. Disposalfeesare basedupon current chargesfor operating waste. Waste Control Specialists (WCS) is licensed to receive the higher activity waste forms (Classes B and C). As such, for this analysis, disposal costs for the Class B and C waste were based upon the preliminary and indicative information on the cost for such from WCS. The Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory (INEEL) is currently storing waste from the TMI-2 defueling operation. Costs have been included in this estimate to pay INEEL for the final disposal of this waste; the timing of when this payment occurs will be dependent upon the DoE's schedule for cleanup of INEEL. This estimate assumesthat the payment occursduring Period 4 of each cost scenario. This study assumes that most of the concrete resulting from the demolition of the reactor, auxiliary and fueI handling buildings can be surveyedand"releasedon site for fill of below grade voids, or shipped off site to a local construction debris landfill. Should there be restrictions to this approach; the cost impact on the decommissioning program could becomequite large, potentially up to tens of millions of dollars. 3.5.11 Additional DecommissionineFacilities Additional specialized facilities are required in support of the d.ecommissioning. These include refurbishment of the containment air control envelopebuilding located outside the reactor building equipment hatch, and the contamination control cubicle located outside the other personnel airlock, for reactor building radiological control and access. Construction of a prefabricated metal enclosure at the 305 foot elevation within the reactor build.ing for the handling of highly-contaminated material will be required. A radioactivewaste packaging and processing facility will also be required (Note that such a facility already exists on site, but wiII require refurbishment). TLG Seruices,Inc.

Three Mile Island Unit 2 Document F07-1676-001' Reu. 0 D ecomrnissionin g Cost An aly eis Section 3, Page 17 of 27 3.5.12Remediationof Soil and Undersround Pipine The estimates include the cost to remove certain underground piping. An allowance is also included for the removal, packaging, transportation and disposalof approximately49,000cubic feet of contaminatedsoil. 3.5.13 Site ConditionsFollowing Decommissionine The NRC will terminate (or amend) the site licensesif it determines that site remediation has been performed in accordance with the license termination plan, and that the termination survey and associated documentation d.emonstratethat the facility is suitable for release. The NRC's involvement in the decommissioning process will end at this point. Building codes and environmental regulations will dictate the next step in the decommissioningprocess, as well as the owner's own future plans for the site. Non-essential structures or buildings severely damaged in decontamination process are removed to a nominal depth of three feet below grade. Concrete rubble generated from demolition activities is processed and made available as clean fill. The excavations will be regrad.ed such that the power block area will have a frnal contour consistentwith adjacentsurroundings. This estimate assumes the reactor, auxiliary, fuel buildings will be removed completely, i.e., down to and including their foundations and basemats. Concretefrom these buildings will be surveyedon-site using conventional monitoring equipment; concrete which meets the release criteria will be disposedof either on site as fill, or in an off'site landfill. 3.6 ASSUMPTIONS The following are the major assumptions made in the development of the estimatesfor decommissioningthe site. 3.6.1 Estimatine Basis The study follows the principles of AI"ARA through the use of work duration ad.justment 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 Iengthen a task's duration, increasing costs and lengthening the overall schedule.AT.ARAplanning is consideredin the costsfor engineeringand TLG Services,Inc.

Three Mile Island. Unit 2 Document F07-1676-001,Rev. 0 D ecomrnissioning Cost Ana,ly si s Section 3, Page 18 of 27 planning, and in the development of activity specifications and detailed procedures. Changes to worker exposure limits may impact the decommissioningcost and project schedule. All costsare reported in 2013 dollars. No costs have been included for the preparation of an environmental impact statement, should it be required. 3.6.2 Labor Costs The craft labor required to decontaminate and dismantle the nuclear units will be acquired through standard site contracting practices. The current cost of labor at the site is used as an estimating basis. Costsfor site administration, operations, construction, and maintenance personnel are based upon average salary information provided by FirstEnergy or from comparableindustry information. FirstEnergy will provide limited oversight support staff in the areas of overall management, licensing, radiological and industrial safety and engineering. It will also hire a DOC to provide the balance of the professional, management, administrative and physical staff. This study assumes that there is some sharing of security staffing positions with the adjacent Unit 1. This has the effect of lowering site security costs. 3.6.3 Desien Conditions Fuel cladding failure as a result of the accident will most likely prevent shipment of untreated major NSSS components under current transportation regulations and disposal requirements. Therefore, this estimate assumes that aggressive mechanical decontamination of reactor coolant systemcomponentsis required prior to shipment. The estimated curie contents of the vessel and internals are neutron activation products derived from those listed in NIIREGICP,'3474.I281 Actual estimates are derived from the curie/gram values contained therein and adjusted for the different mass of the TMI-2 components, the operating history of 95 effective full-power days, and different period.sof decay. Additional short-Iived isotopes were derived from CR-0130 t2e1and CR-0672t301and benchmarkedto the long-livedvalues from CR-3474.The activation products present in the reactor vessel base TLG Seruices, Ine.

Three Mile Island Unit 2 Docurnent F0 7-I 6 76-001, Rev. 0 D ecommi ssionin g Cost An aly eis Section 3, Page 19 of 27 metal are assumed to be the controlling factor in their disposal, following surface decontamination of fuel debris. Reactorvesselinternals whoseelevation in the reactor placesthem at or below the original top of the fuel assembliesare assumed to be both sufficiently geometrically complex to preclude effective decontamination and contaminated with spent fuel so as to require disposal as GTCC material. Control elements and incore detector assembliesare assumedto have been removedwith the damagedfuel. Neutron activation of the reactor building structure and the biological shield is consideredminimal due to the short operating life of TMI'2. 3.6.4 General The plant staff will perform the following activities (FirstEnergy staff wiII be augmented as necessary, either by direct hiring, or: b y subcontracting to fulfiIl the staff requirements): a Drain and collect lubricating oils for recycle and./orsale. a Processdefuelingwaste inventories,i.e., the estimatesinclude costs for the removal of lead shielding and spent fuel handling equipment that remains in the reactor building. Scrap and Salvase Material located within the rad.iation controlled area, and not shipped for direct disposal,is sent off-site for survey and release. Furniture, tools, mobile equipment such as forklifts, trucks, bulldozers, and other property owned by FirstEnergy (and outside the radiation controlled area) is removed at no cost or credit to the decommissioning project. Disposition may include relocation to other facilities. Spare parts are also available for alternative use. Enereig For estimating purposes,the plant is assumedto be de-energized,with the exception of those facilities associated with long term dormancy. Replacementpower costs are used for the cost of energy consumption TLG Seruices, Inc,

Three MiIe Island Unit 2 Docurnent F07-1676-001,Reu. 0 D ecommi ssionin g Cost An aly sis Section 3, Page 20 of 27 during decommissioningfor tooling, lighting, ventilation, and essential services. Insurance Costs for continuing coverage(nuclear liability and property insurance) during dormancy and decommissioning are included and based upon current PDMS premiums and anticipated shared costswith the adjacent Unit 1. Reductions in premiums, throughout the decommissioning process,are based upon the guidance and the limits for coveragedefined in the NRC's proposed rulemaking "Financial Protection Requirements for Permanently Shutdown Nuclear Power Reactors."tsllThe NRC's financial protection requirements are based on various reactor configurations. Taxes Property taxes are not included. 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 stagesofthe project. 3.7 COST ESTIMATE

SUMMARY

A scheduleof expendituresfor each scenariois provided in Tables 3.1 through 3.3. Decommissioningcosts are reported in the year of projectedexpenditure; however, the values are provided in thousands of 2013 dollars. Costs are not inflated, escalated, or discounted over the period of expenditure. The annual expenditures are based upon the detailed activity costs reported in Appendices C through E, along with the schedulediscussedin Section4. TLG Services,Inc.

Three Mile Island, Unit 2 Docutnent F07-1676-001,Reu. 0 D ecomrn i ssion ing Cost An aly si s Section 3, Page 21 of 27 TABLE 3.1 DECON ALTERNATIVE SCHEDULE OF TOTAL ANNUAL EXPENDITURES (thousands,2013dollars) Equipment & Year Labor Materials E ne BuriaI 20L3 2,486 0 224 0 326 3,036 20t4 2.486 0 224 0 326 3,036 20L5 2.486 0 224 0 326 3.036 20L6 2.493 0 224 0 327 3.044 2017 2,486 0 224 0 326 3.036 2018 2.486 0 224 0 326 3.036 2019 2.486 0 224 0 326 3.036 2020 2.493 0 224 0 327 3.044 2021 2.486 0 224 0 326 3.036 2022 2.486 0 224 0 326 3.036 2023 2.486 0 224 0 326 3.036 2024 2.493 0 224 0 327 3.044 2025 2,486 0 224 0 326 3,036 2026 2.486 0 224 0 326 3.036 2027 2,486 0 224 0 326 3,036 2028 2.493 0 224 0 327 3.444 2029 2,486 0 224 0 326 3.036 2030 2.486 0 224 0 326 3.036 2031 2.486 0 224 0 326 3.036 2032 2.493 0 224 0 327 3.044 2033 2.486 0 224 0 326 3.036 2034 2.486 0 224 0 326 3,036 2035 2.486 0 224 0 326 3.036 2036 2.493 0 224 0 327 3.044 2037 2,486 0 224 0 326 3,036 2038 2,486 0 224 0 326 3.036 2039 2.486 0 224 0 326 3.036 TLG Services,Inc.

Three Mile Island. Unit 2 Docutnent F07-1676-001,Reu. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 3, Page 22 of 27 TABLE 3.1 (continued) DECON ALTERNATIVE SCHEDULE OF TOTAL ANNUAL DPENDITURES (thousands, 2013dollars) Equipment & Yea Labor Materials a E Burial 2040 42,184 1.311 854 22 9.056 53.427 204L 57,835 6.878 1.r22 r4.512 7,989 88.337 2042 50.240 1 5 .1 4 9 L.122 33.610 10.808 110.929 2043 50.240 1 5 .1 49 L.L22 33.610 10.808 110.929 2044 50,377 15.191 t.L25 33,702 10.838 111.233 2045 50.240 1 5 .1 4 9 r,t22 33.610 10,808 110.929 2046 47.661 12.938 t.024 27.5L7 8.718 97,858 2047 4 2 .7 7 L 8.743 838 15,960 4.752 73.063 2048 42.888 8.767 840 16.004 4,765 73.263 2049 4 2 .7 7 7 8.743 838 15.960 4,752 73.063 2050 42,77r 8 .7 4 3 838 15.960 4.752 73,063 2051 4L.768 8 ,3 9 1 810 15,131 4.570 70.671 2052 24.33L 4,863 255 814 1,091 31.35 4 2053 18,079 7.945 t04 1.820 47L 28.4r8 Total 67I,323 137.959 18.061 258.232 102.989 1.188,564 TLG Seruices,Inc.

Three Mile leland. Unit 2 Document F07-1676-001'Reu, 0 D ecotnmiseionin g Cost An a ly si e Section 3, Page 23 of 27 TABLE 3.2 DELAYED DE CON ALTERNATIVE SCHEDULE OF TOTAL ANNUAL DGENDITURES (thousands, 2013dollars) Equipment & Year Labor Materials Burial 2013 2.486 0 224 0 326 3.036 20r4 2,486 0 224 0 326 3.036 2015 2.486 0 224 0 326 3.036 2016 2.493 0 224 0 327 3.044 20L7 2.486 0 224 0 326 3,036 2018 2.486 0 224 0 326 3.036 2019 2.486 0 224 0 326 3,036 2020 2,493 0 224 0 327 3.044 202L 2.486 0 224 0 326 3.036 2022 2.486 0 224 0 326 3.036 2023 2.486 0 224 0 326 3,036 2024 2.493 0 224 0 327 3.044 2025 2,486 0 224 0 326 3.036 2026 2,486 0 224 0 326 3,036 2027 2.486 0 224 0 326 3.036 2028 2.493 0 224 0 327 3.044 2029 2,486 0 224 0 326 3.036 2030 2,486 0 224 0 326 3,036 2031 2.486 0 224 0 326 3.036 2032 2,493 0 224 0 327 3.044 2033 2.486 0 224 0 326 3.036 2034 1,150 240 236 4 482 2.r12 2035 588 341 242 6 547 L.7 24 2036 590 342 242 6 548 r.728 2037 588 341 242 6 547 1,724 2038 588 341 242 6 547 L.7 24 2039 588 341 242 6 547 r.724 TLG Services,Ine.

Three Mile Island. Unit 2 Docurnent F07-1676-001,Reu. 0 D econmi ssionin g Cost An aly si s Section 3, Page 24 of 27 TABLE 3.2 (continued) DELAYED DECON ALTERNATIVE SCHEDULE OF TOTAL ANNUAL DPENDITURES (thousands, 2013dollars) Equipment & Year ,abor Materials t 2040 590 342 242 6 548 r.728 2041 588 341 242 6 547 L,724 2042 588 341 242 6 547 1..724 2443 588 34L 242 6 547 t.724 2044 590 342 242 6 548 r.728 2045 2 t.4 2 0 885 Dbb 15 4.901 27.776 2046 59.4r2 3.573 T.T22 5.6L7 9.680 79.404 2047 51.713 1 3 .861 I.t22 30,900 9,785 107.381 2048 50.377 15.181 L.L25 33,687 ro.824 111.194 2049 50.239 1 5 .140 1.t22 33.595 10,795 110.890 2050 50.239 1 5 .140 I,T22 33.595 10,795 110.890 205L 50,239 1 5 .140 L.L22 33.595 10.795 110,890 2052 40.986 8 .757 840 15.988 4.75r 71.322 2053 40.874 8.733 838 t5.945 4.738 7r.r28 2054 40.874 8.733 838 r5.945 4.738 7L,L28 2055 40.874 8 .733 838 t5,945 4.738 7t,L28 2056 40.986 8 .757 840 15.988 4.75L 7L.322 2057 28.r32 3,949 456 4.649 2.275 39,461 2058 24.464 1 1 .029 156 2,509 700 38.859 2059 1.008 469 6 L07 28 1.619 Total 65t.L22 L4L.727 19,459 258.t43 107,103 L.L77.554 TLG Seruices,Inc.

Three Mile Island. Unit 2 Doeurnent F07-1676-001,Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Anolyeia Section 3, Page 25 of 27 TABLE 3.3 SAFSTORALTERNATIVE SCHEDULE OF TOTAL ANNUAL EXPENDITURES (thousands,2013dollars) Equipment & Year Labor Materials E 2013 2,486 0 224 0 326 3.036 20r4 2.486 0 224 0 326 3.036 2015 2.486 0 224 0 326 3.036 20t6 2.493 0 224 0 327 3.044 2017 2,486 0 224 0 326 3.036 2018 2,486 0 224 0 326 3,036 20L9 2.486 0 224 0 326 3.036 2020 2.493 0 224 0 327 3.O44 202t 2,486 0 224 0 326 3.036 2022 2.486 0 224 0 326 3.036 2023 2.486 0 224 0 326 3.036 2024 2,493 0 224 0 327 3.044 2025 2.486 0 224 0 326 3.036 2026 2.486 0 224 0 326 3.036 2027 2.486 0 224 0 326 3.036 2028 2,493 0 224 0 327 3,044 2029 2.486 0 224 0 326 3.036 2030 2,486 0 224 0 326 3.036 203I 2.486 0 224 0 326 3.036 2032 2,493 0 224 0 327 3,044 2033 2.486 0 224 0 326 3.036 2034 L .T 4 7 239 236 4 48r 2.t07 2035 584 339 242 6 546 L.716 2036 585 340 242 6 548 1.72t 2037 584 339 242 6 546 1.716 2038 584 339 242 6 546 L,7L6 2039 584 339 242 6 546 1.716 2040 585 340 242 6 548 t.7 21 204t 584 339 242 6 546 I.7T6 2042 584 339 242 6 546 L.7L6 2043 584 339 242 6 546 1.716 2044 585 340 242 6 548 r.72L TLG Seruices,hr.c.

Three Mile Island Unit 2 Docurnent F0 7-1676-001, Reu, 0 D ecornrni ssionin g Cost An aly si s Section 3, Page 26 of 27 TABLE 3.3 (continued) SAFSTOR ALTERNATIVE SCHEDULE OF TOTAL ANNUAL EXPENDITURES (thousands,2013 dollars) Equipment & Year Labor Materials Burial 2045 584 339 242 6 546 1.716 2046 584 339 242 6 546 t.7 L6 2047 584 339 242 6 546 r.716 2048 585 340 242 6 548 t.721 2049 584 339 242 6 546 1,716 2050 584 339 242 6 546 r.716 205r 584 339 242 6 546 L.716 2052 585 340 242 6 548 I.72I 2053 584 339 242 6 546 1.716 2054 584 339 242 6 546 1.716 2055 584 339 242 6 546 1.716 2056 585 340 242 6 548 L.727 2057 584 339 242 6 546 1.716 2058 584 339 242 6 546 1.716 2059 584 339 242 6 546 1.716 2060 585 340 242 6 548 L.72L 2061 584 339 242 6 546 t.716 2062 584 339 242 6 546 t.7L6 2063 584 339 242 6 546 T,7L6 2064 585 340 242 6 548 t.72L 2065 584 339 242 6 546 L.7t6 2066 584 339 242 6 546 t,7L6 2067 584 339 242 6 546 1.716 2068 585 340 242 6 548 1.721 2069 584 339 242 6 546 1, 7t6 2070 584 339 242 6 546 1,716 207r 584 339 242 6 546 1.716 2072 585 340 242 6 548 L.72r 2073 584 339 242 6 546 1.716 2074 584 339 242 6 546 L.7t6 2075 584 339 242 6 546 L.716 2076 585 340 242 6 548 L.721 TLG Serttices, Inc,

Three Mile Island Unit 2 Document F0 7-16 76-001, Reu. 0 D ecommi ssioning Cost An aly sis Section 3, Page 27 of 27 TABLE 3.3 (continued) SAFSTORALTERNATIVE SCHEDULE OF TOTAL ANNUAL DGENDITURES (thousands,2013dollars) Equipment & Year Labor Ma terials 2077 584 339 242 6 546 1.716 2078 584 339 242 6 546 t.7L 6 2079 584 339 242 6 546 1.716 2080 585 340 242 6 548 L.72L 2081 5.872 477 321 8 1,651 8.330 2082 5 9 .1 6 2 2 ,301 L.L22 L.449 11,987 76.02r 2083 54.3L2 1 1 .604 1.T22 26,L47 7.999 101.1 78 2084 50.377 15,L77 t.125 33,673 10.818 1 11 . 1 7 1 2085 50.239 1 5 .136 L.L22 33.581 10.789 110.867 2086 50,239 15.136 L.L22 33.581 10.789 110.867 2087 50.239 15,136 t.t22 33,581 10.789 110.867 2088 43,42L 10.455 916 20.657 6,353 81.802 2089 40.801 8.729 838 15.920 4.729 7L,017 2090 40.801 8.729 838 15.920 4.729 7t.0r7 2091 40,901 8.729 838 15.920 4.729 7T,OL? 2092 40.913 8,753 840 15.963 4.742 7L,2LT 2093 32.864 5 .738 599 8,866 3.193 5I.259 2094 24.035 8.524 196 1.821 857 35.434 2095 7.527 3.503 46 803 207 12.086 Total l 671.870i L53,9771 28,227 258.L57l 126,834 1.239,065 TLG Services,Inc.

Three Mile Island Unit Z Docurnent F07-1676-007, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 4, Page I of 6

4. SCHEDULE ESTIMATE The schedulesfor the decommissioningscenariosconsideredin this study follow the sequencepresentedin the AIFAIESP-036 study, with minor changesto reflect recent experienceand site-specificconstraints.

A scheduleor sequenceof activities is presentedin Figure 4.1 through 4.3 for the three decommissioningscenarios.The key activities listed in the scheduledo not reflect a one-to-onecorrespondencewith those activities in the cost tables, but reflect dividing some activities for clarity and combining others for convenience.The schedulewas preparedusing the "Microsoft Project 2010' computer seft"'r4rc.[321 4.I SCHEDULE ESTIMATE ASSUMPTIONS The schedulereflects the results of a precedencenetwork developedfor the site decommissioning activities, i.e., a PERT @rogram Evaluation and Review Technique)SoftwarePackage.The work activity durations used in the precedence network reflect the actual man-hour estimates from the cost tables, adjusted by stretching certain activities over their slack range and shifting the start and end dates of others. The following assumptionswere made in the developmentof the decommissioningschedule: The DECON alternative begins decommissioningof TMI'2 in 2040. The existing PDMS yearly costsof $3.1 million are continueduntil that date. The existing PDMS yearly costs ceaseupon the shutdown of the adjacent Unit 1 on April 19, 2034 for the Delayed DECON and SAFSTOR scenarios; normal SAFSTOR dormancy costs will commenceat that date until decommissioningbegins. The Delayed DECON alternative defers decommissioningof TMI-2 until TMI-1's spent fuel has been removedfrom the site. This scenarioassumes that the decontamination and dismantling activities at TMI-2 are synchronized with the adjacent unit such that the licenses for both units are terminated concurrently. The SAFSTOR alternative places TMI-2 into long-term storage along with TMI-I. TMI-2 remains in storage until such time that decommissioning activities can be coordinated with Unit 1. As with the second scenario, termination of the licensesis concurrent. AII work (except vessel and internals removal and some of the decontamination of NSSS components in the refueling canal) is per' TLG Serttices, Inc.

Three Mile Island Unit 2 Document F07-1676-001'Reu. 0 D ecommi ssionin g Cost An oly eis Section 4, Pa,ge2 of 6 formed during an 8-hour workday, 5 days per week, with no There are elevenpaid holidays per year. Steam generator removal activities are performed with limited parallel work on the A and B steam generators. Reactor and internals removal activities are performed by using separate crews for different activities working on different shifts, with a correspondingbackshift charge for the secondshift. Multiple crews work parallel activities to the maximum extent possible, consistent with optimum efficiency, adequate accessfor cutting, removal and laydown space, and with the stringent safety measures necessaly during demolition of heavy componentsand structures. Reactorbuilding basementdecontaminationusing remote equipment will occur prior to the start of reactor coolant system componentremoval. 4.2 PROJECT SCHEDULE The period-dependentcostspresentedin the detailed cost tables are basedupon the durations developedin the schedulefor decommissioningTMI'2. Durations are establishedbetweenseveralmilestonesin eachproject 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' dependentcosts. Project timelines are provided in Figures 4.2 through 4.4. TLG Seruices,Inc.

Three Mile Island Unit 2 Document F07-1676-001,Reu. 0 D ecommissioning Cost Analysis Section 4, Page 3 of 6 FIGURE 4.1 DECON ACTIVITY SCHEDULE lask Name ,oa 'ral,rsl'l,rl'se '& '3s l '44 '49 'g IAtr Urxit ? DECOI{ Bhoduh P*iod t&c- PDMBDolmenoy

                                         -st.;'i;
                                                                        !F I           !-   I
                                                                                                -     t         i ,,

P;isil;;;td"i E@ w @ w W ffi i,......: Poiod fu - n""*tir-t f.'"ii S ; i' ' , Hea*fir"ate {Jnit I M,ri,,, i*;;it-d;;;d;;6 i,i,,

                                                "ariscoN p*t#*.i"# A" D-l*3",tbEcoN                                                                           K i, Parisil,ta lTnit ? - Large cmponrnt renrsval                                                            f F}:IAB, Coutrnol,guttn* Blai. O&D                                                                     si
      *acsag*.:rrixateRc.retorBldg Leqt.r latcl*                                                            wi oecoata;;;ilr pr"*'              dtdc u;p"t t*                                                         :li:

Rcroo!"ePB,, RCP's g nCg pirn"ti (Irep*"tt"ii ,,d O. tr-i""t NSSS C"-p*""-i; ; ; ;@ . A Stean Geoefrtor Bamo:ral '!it Remar-e icsulaiion li Ere.*tnork pl*tfu::c li' I*trll t-*p **rppott* g C/H lif*i"g ----- t"g" ri C"r & raruor-r h;;a ,li "pe"i"l""""i *

---- Cut & rrmow ffC;ba {

L;ii,'g src-Gb-# ;;'"f";"."""i'# $, n:Tot e u"epo." elatu & rb*"d" $ Cle*n:*c*ndnrg:i{e, *ut & rer**ll;e*bell wall

                                                                                                               ,il ::

Re:nor'elot*er ch*n:rel L**d **nbl" ,il B Etea:n a.*rt"r i"*oirl ,,,,F Reactcr l'eesel Rssovil i'iF 9re,ry1*1]qy- &r Reler*r'*.es*el yye+'al iE.

           &te.cisr $ressurr l'agssl rlgeyal                                                                   i,w :

Feriod 4b Unit Z . sit Deao;ta-i"itl"* ., iF F ti;n'"t &'6."*; BHsDeb

                                                                                                        ' ,:::i
                                                                                                            ,i wm Fuel llaadli:rg     Auxiliars      Elde B&D                                                                   f f iM Liaercr T"tei""dm
- -O".uit" S"rtrt Ph&id---                                                                       @

sorr.tg & r.elea* of plant conmodities wW,,, D-Rd; & Bi*t.,ld ;*'";;i wiI ,

   '-"Aeactec El.dg . Lines ruror,:                                                                                 KI
      *;;i*-Bt{c         & B"**;'iffi;iis"*                                                                              @,

Llnilergmun& giping & soil reurediatien @. Priod {e L'nit t . Pldnt Uoe""e t t*laa*o i,,'- I'ilrs! iisams $rr',e3* ii cs

       \]fi,C Ttai&ca{i*rrr arrd retiew Fart 5O Soeqse tffiilrrted
                                                     ---                                                                  i,t, i;'i"d 5tdnit's]sil            n sto'iti*                                                                               rll Rexsre rr m ainin g b"rtdid;---                                                                                     iw 9,:*-:m3*PxF-y*4rod Landec,ap*

TLG Seruices,Inc.

Three Mile Island. Unit 2 Document F07-1676-001,Reu. 0 D ecornm.issionin g Cost An aly sis Section 4, Page 4 of 6 FIGURE 4.2 DE COMMISSIONING TIMELINE DECON (not to scale) Decommissioning AcoualsBegin Period0a Period5 PDMSMmitorirg Site Restcation TLG Services, Ine.

Three Mile Island Unit 2 Document F07-1676-001,Reu. 0 D ecommi ssionin g Cost An aly sis Section 4, Page 5 of 6 FIGURE 4.3 DECOMMISSIONINGTIMELINE DELAYED DECON (not to scale) Period1 Period 3 Period4 Period5 SAFSTOR Period2 De@mmissioning Decommissionlng Site Dormancy Preparations OpeEtions Restoratlon TMI-2 Decommlsslonlnt TMI.2 Accruals Bedn Re6ctlv!tlon Period2 TMF2 DelayedDECON Dormancy A Apr-2034 TLG Seruices, Inc.

Three Mile Island. Unit 2 Document F07-1676-001,Rev, 0 D ecornm i ssion ing Cost An aly sis Section 4, Page 6 of 6 FIGURE 4.4 DECOMMISSIONING TIMELINE SAFSTOR (not to scale) TMFl Shutdom Period3 Period4 Period 5 Period2 Dcommissioning Decommissioning Site Dormancy Preparations Operations Restoration TMI.2 Decommissionlnt TMI.2 Aeruals Begin Ractlvatlon Period2 TMI.2 custodial sAFsToR Dormancl TLG Seruices, Ine,

Three Mile Island. Unit 2 Docutnent F07-1676-001,Reu. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Seetion 5, Page I of 7

5. RADIOACTIVE \ryASTES 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 excessof applicable legal limits. Under the Atomic Energy Act,t33l16" NRC is responsiblefor protecting the public from sourcesof ionizing radiation. Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations delineates the production, utilization, and disposal of radioactive materials and processes. In particular, $71 defines radioactive material as it pertains to packaging and transportation and 561 specifiesits disposition.

Most of the materials being transported for controlledburial are categorizedas Low Specific Activity (LSA) or Surface Contaminated Object (SCO) materials containing Type A quantities, as defined in 49 CFR 5173-178. Shipping containers are required to be Industrial Packages (IP-l, IP-2 or IP-3, as defined in subpart 173.411). For this study, commercially available steel containers are presumed to be used for the disposal of piping, small components, and concrete. Larger componentscan serve as their own containers,with proper closure of all openings, accessways, and penetrations. Figure 5.1 summarizes the categories of radioactive waste streams and their disposition.Figure 5.2 identifies of the intended disposalsite and processingcenter. The volumes of radioactive waste generated during the various decommissioning activities at the site is shown on a line-item basis in AppendicesC, D, and E and summarized in Tables 5.1 through 5.3. The quantified waste volume summaries shown in these tables are consistent with $61 classifications.The volumes are calculated based on the exterior dimensionsfor containerizedmaterial and on the displacedvolume of componentsserving as their own waste containers. The reactor vessel,internals, other reactor coolant system components,and certain structural materials are categorized.as large quantity shipments and, accordingly, will be shipped in reusable, shielded truck casks with disposableliners or LSA boxesshippedwithin shieldedvans. In calculating disposalcosts,the burial feesare applied against the liner volume, as well as the special handling requirements of the payload. Most of the waste generatedby the decommissioningprocessappearsto be Class C or less, based.upon the available information regarding the amount of fission products and transuranics present in the buildings, and the quantities of building materials assumedshipped as radioactivewaste. This basis should be reexaminedif TLG Seruices,Inc.

Three Mile laland. Unit 2 Doeument F07-1676-001,Reu, 0 D ecommissioning Cost Ana.lysis Section 5, Page 2 of 7 additional characterization information becomesavailable in the future regarding the quantities of fission products and transuranics in more localized surveys. No process system containing/handling radioactive substances at the time of decommissioningis presumedto meet material releasecriteria by decay alone, i.e., systems radioactive in 2013 will still be radioactive over the time period during which the decommissioningis accomplished,due to the presence of long-lived radionuclides.While the doserates decreasewith time, radionuclidessuch as 137Cs will still control the disposition requirements. The waste material generatedin the decontaminationand dismantling of TMI'2 is primarily generated during Period 4 of the defined alternatives. Disposal fees are calculated using current disposal agreements,with surcharges added for the highly activated components, for example, generated in the segmentation of the reactor vessel. The cost to dispose of the majority of the material generated.from the d.econtaminationand dismantling activities is based upon FirstEnergy's disposal agreement with EnetgySolutions for its facility in Clive, Utah. EnergySolutions is not able to accept the higher activity waste (Class B and C) generated in the decontaminationof the reactor vessel and segmentation of the components closest to the core. As such, for this analysis, disposal costs for the Class B and C waste were based upon the preliminary and indicative information on the cost for such from WCS. TLG Seruices,Inc,

Three Mile Island, Unit 2 Document F0 7-I 6 76-007, Reu. 0 D ecommissioning Cost Analyeis Section 5, Page 3 of 7 FIGURE 6.1 TMI.2 WASTE STREAMS

SUMMARY

             ;     ti"*"g---

i

  \    tow-iild RadiDactivtwaste
    'r--*"...::-T.:

Resin N5S5 Dcontamlnatlon

                                               , (OassB/!i,, ,

TLG Servicea, Inc.

Three Mile Island. Unit 2 Doeument F07-1676-001,Rev. 0 D ecommi ssion ing Cost An a,lyei s Seetion 5, Page 4 of 7 FIGURE 5.2 DE COMMISSIONING WASTE DESTINATIONS RADIOLOGICAL TLG Services,Inc.

Three Mile Island. Unit 2 Docurnent F07-1676-001,Rev. 0 D ecorntnission in g Cost An aly sis Section 5, Page 5 of 7 TABLE 5.1 DECON ALTERNATIVE DECOMMISSIOMNG WASTE

SUMMARY

Waste Volume Weight Waste CostBasis Class It1 (cubicfeet) (nounds) Geolosic Repository Spent Fuel GTCC 2.856 564.685 Equivalent 357 20,5r4 Primary waste stream wcs C 2,734 237,772 WCS B 26,9L8 1.928,673 Secondarywaste stream EnerEvSolutions A r77.759 13.891,318 Tertiarv waste stream Concrete EnerEySolutions A 613,465 66,003,571 SoiI EnerEvSolutions A 48.992 3.723,4L4 DAW EnerwSolutions A 17,010 34 0.195 Survev & Release 61,736 3.704,L37 ProcessedWaste (Off- Recycling Site) Vendors 67,958 2.843,938 Totalt2l 1.019.785 93,258,2L7 tU Waste is classified according to the requirements as delineated in Title 10 CFR,Part 61.55 Columnsmay not add due to rounding TLG Seruiees,Inc.

Three Mile Island Unit 2 Document F07-1676'001,Reu. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 5, Page 6 of 7 TABLE 5.2 DELAYED DECON ALTERNATIVE DECOMMISSIONINGWASTE

SUMMARY

WasteVolume Weight Waste CostBasis Ql2sg ttl (cqbistp.pt)_"" (oounds) GeolosicRepositorv Spent Fuel GTCC 2.856 564.685 Equivalent 357 24,5t4 Primarv waste stream WCS c 2.734 237.772 WCS B 26,918 1,928,673 Secondarywaste stream EnersySolutions A L77.438 13.872.058 Tertiarv waste stream Concrete EnersvSolutions A 613.465 66,003,572 Soil EnercySolutions A 48.992 3.723.4L4 DAW EnersySolutions A 18.060 361.194 Survev & Release 61,736 3.704,L37 ProcessedWaste (Off- Recycling Site) Vendors 67.958 2.843.938 fefsltzl L,020,5L4 93,259,957 t1l Waste is classifred according to the requirements as delineated in Title 10 CFR,Part 61.55 I2l Columnsmay not add due to rounding TLG Seruices,Inc.

Three Mile Island. Unit 2 Docurnent F07-1676-001,Reu, 0 D ecommi ssionin g Cost An aly eis Section 5, Page 7 of 7 TABLE 6.3 SAFSTORALTERNATIVE DECOMMISSIONINGWASTE

SUMMARY

WasteVolume Weight Waste Cost Basis Qlssg ttl (cubic feet) (pounds) GeoloeicRepositorv Spent Fuel GTCC 2,856 564,685 Equivalent 357 20.5L4 Primarv waste stream wcs C 2,734 237,772 WCS B 26.918 1.928.673 Secondarywaste stream EnergySolutions A 176.490 13.80 5.128 Tertiarv waste stream Concrete EnerEvSolutions A 613.465 66,003,568 Soil EnergySolutions A 48,992 3.723.474 DAW EnercvSolutions A 2L,4L5 428.298 Survev & Release 61,736 3,7A4,137 ProcessedWaste (Off- Recycling Site) Vendors 68,950 2.895.277 Totalt2l 1"023,913 93.311.466 IU Waste is classified according to the requirements as delineated in Title 10 CFR,Part 61.55 Columnsmay not add due to rounding. TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile Island Unit 2 Document F0 7-1676-00I, Reu. 0 D ecomm.i ssioning Cost An aly si e Section 6, Page 7 of 5

6. RESULTS The analysis to estimate the costs to decommissionTMI-2 relied upon the site' specific,technical information developedin 1995-96and last updated in 2008.While not an engineering study, the estimates provide FirstEnergy with sufficient information to assessits financial obligations, as they pertain to the eventual decommissioningof the nuclear station.

The estimates described in this report are based on numerous fundamental assumptions, including regulatory requirements, project contingencies,radioactive waste disposal options, and site remediation requirements. The decommissioning scenariosassume that the remainder of the spent fuel (less than 1%), which is dispersedthroughout the reactor coolant and support systems,is packaged,shipped and buried as radioactivewaste. Someof the waste that is generatedis assumedto be GTCC. This waste is assumedto be transferred to the DOE at the time that it is processedand collectedduring the decommissioning.No costs have been included for the temporary storageof GTCC material. The cost projected to decommissionTMI-2, i.e., by the DECON alternative, is estimated to be g1.19 billion. The majority of this cost (approximately 97%) is associatedwith the physical decontamination and dismantling of the nuclear unit so that the lieense can be terminated. The remaining 3% is for the demolition of the designated structures and limited restoration of the site. The costs for the other decommissionalternatives, DelayedDECON and SAFSTOR,are estimated at $1.18 billion and $1.24billion, respectively. The primary cost contributors, identified in Tables 6.1 through 6.3, are either labor' related or associatedwith the managementand dispositionof the radioactivewaste. Program management is the largest single contributor to the overall cost. The magnitude of the expenseis a function of both the size of the organization required to manage the d.ecommissioning,as well as the duration of the program. It is assumed, for purposes of this analysis, that FirstEnergy will oversee the decommissioningprogram, using a DOC to managethe decommissioninglabor force and the associatedsubcontractors.The size and compositionof the management organization varies with the decommissioningphase and associatedsite activities. However, once the license is terminated, the staff is substantially reduced for the conventional demolition and restoration of the site. The cost for waste d.isposalincludes only those costsassociatedwith the controlled disposition of the radioactive waste generated from decontamination and d"ismantling activities, includ.ing plant equipment and components, structural material, filters, resins and dry-active waste. As describedin Section5, disposalof TLG Seruices,Inc.

Three Mile Island Unit 2 Docurnent F07-1676-001'Reu, 0 D ecommissioning Cost Analysis Section 6, Page 2 of 5 the lower level material, including concrete and structural steel, is at the EnergySolutions facility. The more highly radioactive waste is sent to Waste Control Specialistsin Texas.Highly contaminatedcomponents,requiring additional isolation from the environment, are packagedfor geologicdisposal. Removal costs reflect the labor-intensive nature of the decommissioningprocess,as weII as the managementcontrols required to ensure a safe and suecessfulprogram. 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 decommissioningoperations, non-radiological demolition can be an integrated activity and a logical expansion of the work being performed in the process of terminating the license. The reported cost for transport includes the tariffs and surchargesassociatedwith moving large component. ,rrd/o" overweight shielded casks overland, as well as the general expense,e.g., Iabor and fuel, of transporting material to the destinations identified in this report. License termination survey costs are associated with the labor intensive and complex activity of verifuing 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 componentsand materials not removed in the decommissioningprocesswill also require confirmation and will add to the expense of surveying the facilities alone. Due to the complete removal of the reactor, auxiliary and fuel buildings, the final termination survey effort is reduced. The remaining costs include allocations for heavy equipment and temporary services,as well as for other expensessuch as regulatory fees and the premiums for nuclear insurance. TLG Seruices, Inc,

Three Mile Island. Unit 2 Docutnent F07-1676-001,Reu, 0 D ecomm issionin g Cost An a ly sie Section 6, Page 3 of 5 TABLE 6.1 DECON ALTERNATIVE DECOMMISSIONING COST ELEMENTS (thousandsof 2013 dollars) Cost Element Total Percentage Decontamination 35,403 3.0 Removal 189,064 15.9 Packaeine 28.008 2.4 Transportation 26,427 2.2 Waste Disposal 276,LLz 23.2 Off-site Waste Processins 11.053 0.9 ProEram Management [11 484.509 40.8 Securitv 55,590 4.7 Insurance and Reeulatory Fees L5,766 1.3 EnerEv 18.061 1.5 Characterization and Licensing Surveys 10.844 0.9 Property Taxes 0 0.0 MiscellaneousEquipment 23,851 2.O Site O&M 4,968 0.4 PDMS MonitorinE 8.908 0.8 Total tzl 1",188,564 100.0 CostElement Total Percentage LicenseTermination 1,1-491099 96.7 Site Restoration 39.467 3.3 Total tzl 1.188,564 100.0 l1l Includes engineering costs I2l Columns may not add due to rounding TLG Services, Inc,

Three Mile Island Unit 2 Document F07-1676-001,Reu. 0 Decommiesioning Cost Analysis Section 6, Page 4 of 5 TABLE 6.2 DELAYED DECON ALTERNATIVE DECOMMISSIONINGCOSTELEMENTS (thousandsof 2013dollars) CostElement Total ttl Percentage Decontamination 35,321 3.0 Removal 190.858 t6.2 Packaeine 28,007 2.4 Transnortation 26.310 2.2 Waste Disposal 276.022 23.4 Off-site Waste Processins 11.053 0.9 Prosram Managemsnl tzl 472.755 40.2 Securitv 46,850 4.0 Insurance and RegulatorvFees 21,899 1.9 Enersv 19"459 L.7 Characterization and Licensins Survevs 10.844 0.9 Pronertv Taxes 0 0.0 MiscellaneousEquipment 26.259 2.2 Site O&M 4,968 0.4 PDMS Monitorine 6.949 0.6 Total t31 L,L77,554 100.0 CostElement Total Percentase License Termination 1,139,536 96.8 Site Restoration 38.018 3.2 Total t31 L.I17,554 100.0 trl Includesdormancycostsfollowing TM-l shutdown in 2034 I2l Includesengineeringcosts 131 Columnsmay not add due to rounding TLG Services, Inc.

Three Mile Island. Unit 2 Docum.ent F0 7-16 76-001, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Sectian 6, Page 5 of 5 TABLE 6.3 SAFSTOR ALTERNATIVE DECOMMISSIOMNG COST ELEMENTS (thousandsof 2013 dollars) Cost Element Total [tl Percentage Decontamination 35.286 2.9 Removal 196,595 15.9 Packaeine ?8pQq, 2.3 Transportation 26.298 2.1 Waste Disposal 275.884 22.3 Off-site Waste Processins 11.206 0.9 Program ManaEement t2l 482.930 39.0 Securitv 56,699 4.6 Insurance and Regulatory Fees 4L.497 3.4 Energy 28.227 2.3 Characterization and Licensine Survevs 10.844 0.9 Propertv Taxes 0 0.0 Miscellaneous Equipment 33.617 2.7 Site O&M 4,968 0.4 PDMS Monitorine 6.949 0.6 Total t31 1.239.065 100.0 Cost Element Total Percentage LicenseTermination r.20t.o47 96.9 Site Restoration 38.018 3.1 fef2l tsl 1.239.065 100.0 lll Includesdormancycostsfollowing TMI-I shutdown in 2034

12) Includesengineeringcosts t31 Columnsmay not add due to rounding TLG Seruicea,Inc.

Three Mile Island. Unit 2 Document F07-1676-001'Reu. 0 D ecommissioning Coet Analysis Section TPage 1of3

7. REFERENCES

1. "DecommissioningCost Estimate for the Three Mile Island, Unit 2," Document No. G01-1196-003, TLG Services,Inc., February 1996 "DecommissioningCost Estimate for Three Mile Island Unit 2," Document No.

F07-1601-002, TLG Services,Inc., January 2009

3. U.S. Codeof Federal Regulations,Title 10, Parts 30, 40, 50, 51, 70 and,72, "General Requirements for Decommissioning Nuclear Facilities," Nuclear Regulatory Commission,Federal RegisterVolume 53, Number 123 (p 24018 et seq.),June 27, 1988

4. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission,Regulatory Guide 1.159, "Assuring the Availability of Funds for DecommissioningNuclear Reactors,"October2003

5. U.S. Code of Federal Regulations,Title 10, Part 20, Subpart E, "Radiological Criteria for LicenseTermination." Federal Register,Volume 62, Number L39 (p 39058et seq.),July 21, 1997 U.S. Code of Federal Regulations, Title 10, Parts 20 and 50, "Entombment Options for Power Reactors,"AdvancedNotice of ProposedRulemaking, Federal RegisterVolume 66, Number 200,October 16,200L

7. U.S. Code of Federal Regulations, Title 10, Parts 2, 50 and 51, "Decommissioning of Nuclear Power Reactors," Nuclear Regulatory Commission,FederalRegisterVolume6L G,39278et seq.),JuIy 29, 1996

8. "Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982 and Amendments," IJ.S. Department of Energy's Offrceof Civilian RadioactiveManagement, 1982

9. BIue Ribbon Commission on America's Nuclear Future's Charter, http://cvbercemetery.unt.edn/archive/brc/201206?0215336/http://brc.eov/indgx.p hP?q=Pae./.h.*,.t

10. "Blue Ribbon Commissionon America'sNuclear Future, Report to the Secretary of Energy," http://www.brc.eov/sites/defaulUfiIes/documents /brc finalreport ian2012.pdf,January 2012

11. Stratery for the Management and Disposal of Used Nuclear Fuel and High-Level RadioactiveWaste,"U.S. DOE, January 11,2013 TLG Seruices, Inc.

Three Mile Island, Unit 2 DacurnentFA7-rc76-007,Rev,0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 7 Page2 of 3

7. REFERENCES (continued)

12. 'AcceptancePriority Ranking & Annual Capacity ll.eport," DOE/RW-0567,July 2004

13. "Low-LevelRadioactiveWaste Policy Act," Public Law 96-573,1980 t4. "Low-Level RadioactiveWaste Policy AmendmentsAct of 1985,"Public Law 99-240,January/15, 1986

15. Waste is classified in accordancewith U.S. Code of Federal Regulations,Title 10,Part 61.55

16. "Establishment of Cleanup Levels for CERCI"A Sites with Radioactive Contamination " EPA Memorandum OSWERNo. 9200.4-18,August 22, 1997

17. U.S. Code of Federal Regulations, Title 40, Part 141.1"6, "Maximum contaminant levels for beta particle and photon radioactivrty from man-made radionuclidesin community water systems."

18. "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, October9, 2002

19. Three Mile Island Unit 2 Post Defueling Monitored Storage Safety Analysis Report, 1995Update, Chapter 4 (Fuel), GPU Nuclear Corporation 1995

20. "Multi-Agency Radiation Survey and Site Investigation Manual (MARSSIIVD,"

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

21. T.S. LaGuardia et al., "Guidelines for Producing Commercial Nuclear Power Plant DecommissioningCostEstimates,"AIFATESP-036,May 1986

,, W.J. Manion and T.S. LaGuardia, "DecommissioningHandbook," U.S. Departmentof Energy,DOE/EV/10128-1, November1980 TLG Services, Inc.

Three MiIe Island. Unit 2 Doeument F0 7-16 76-00I' Reu. 0 D ecornmi ssionin g Cost An aly si s Section 7 Page 3 of 3

7. REFERENCES (continued)

23. "Building Construction Cost Data 2013," Robert Snow Means Company, Inc.,

Kingston, Massachusetts

24. Project and Cost Engineers' Handbook, Second Edition, p. 239, American Associationof Cost Engineers,Marcel Dekker, Inc., New York, New York, 1984

25. "Strategy for Management and Disposal of Greater-Than-ClassC Inw-Level RadioactiveWaste," Federal Register Volume 60, Numbet 48 k, 13424et seq.),

March 1995

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

27. Tri-State Motor Transit Company, published tariffs, Interstate Commerce Commission(ICC),DocketNo. MC-109397and Supplements,2000

28. J.C. Evans et al., "Long-Lived Activation Products in Reactor Materials" NUREG/CR-3474,Pacific Northwest Laboratory for the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.August 1984

29. R.I. Smith, G.J. Konzek, W.E. Kennedy, Jr., "Technology,Safety and Costs of Decommissioning a Reference Pressurized Water Reactor Power Station,"

NIIREG/CR-0l3O and addenda,Pacific Northwest Laboratory for the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. June 1978

30. H.D. Oak, et al., "Technology,Safety and Costsof Decommissioninga Reference Boiling Water Reactor Power Station," NIIREG/CR-A672and addenda,Pacific Northwest Laboratory for the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. June 1980

31. "Financial Protection Requirementsfor Permanently Shutdown Nuclear Power Reactors,"10 CFR Parts 50 and 140,Federal Register Notice, Vol. 62, No. 210, October30, 1997

32. "Microsoft Project 2010,"Microsoft Corporation,Redmond,WA, 2010

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

TLG Seruices, Inc.

Three MiIe Island Unit 2 Document F07-1676-001,Reu, 0 D ecommi ssioning Cost An aly si s Append.ix A, Page I of 4 APPENDD( A UNIT COST FACTOR DEVELOPMENT TLG Seruices,Inc.

Three Mile Island. Unit 2 Docum.ent F07-1676-001,Rev, 0 Decornmissioning Cost Analysis Append,ix 4 Page 2 of 4 APPENDD(A UMT COSTFACTORDEVELOPMENT Example: Unit Factorfor Removalof Contaminated Heat Exchanger< 3,000lbs.

1. SCOPE Heat exchangersweighing < 3,000 lbs. will be removedrn one plece usrng a crane or small hoist. They will be disconnectedfoom the inlet and outlet piping. The heat exchangerwill be sent to the waste processingarea.

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

a Removeinsulation 60 (b) b Mount pipe cutters 60 60 c Install contamination controls 2A (b) d Disconnectinlet and outlet lines 60 60 e Cap openings 20 (d) f Rig for removal 30 30 o b Unbolt from mounts 30 30 h Removecontamination controls 15 15 i Remove,wrap, sendto waste processingarea 60 60 Totals (Activity/Critical) 355 255 Duration adjustment(s):

 + Respiratoryprotection adjustment (25o/oof.cntical duration)                                 64
 + RadiatiodAl\IL\      adjustment (25%of ctitical duration)                                   64 Adjusted work duration                                                                        383

Protectiveclothing adjustment (30%of adjustedduration) 115 Productive work duration 498

 + Work break adjustment (8.33% of productive duration)                                        42 Total work duration (minutes)                                                                 544
                             ** Total duration = 9.000 hr {'R

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

Three Mile Isla,nd Unit 2 Document F07-1676-001,Reu. 0 Decotnmissioning Cost Analysis Append.ix 4 Poge 3 of 4 APPENDXA (continued)

3. LABOR REQUIRED Duration Rate Cost Crew Number (hours) ($ihr) ($)

Laborers 3.00 9.000 33.92 $915.84 Craftsmen 2.00 9.000 59.98 r,079.64 Foreman 1.00 9.000 6r.79 556.11 GeneralForeman 0.25 9.000 65.28 r46.88 Fire Watch 0.05 9.000 33.92 L5.26 Health PhysicsTechnician 1.00 9.000 48.84 439.56 Total Labor Cost $3,153.29

4. EQUIPMENT & CONSUMABLES COSTS Equipment Costs Consumables/lVlaterialsCosts

' universal sorbent 50 @$o'49 sq ft {tl                                      $24.50
- Tarpaulins (oil resistant/fire retardant) 50 @$0.22lsqft {zt               $11.00
-Gastorch consumables1@ $13.49/hrx t hr {3}                                  $13.49 Subtotal cost of equipment and materials                                      $48.ee Overhead& profi"ton equipment and materials @ L6.00o/o                         $7.84 Total costs,equipment & material                                              $56.83 TOTAL COST:

Removal of contaminated heat exchanger <3000 pounds: $3,210.12 Total labor cost: $3,153.29 Total equipment/materialcosts: $56.83 Total craft labor man-hoursrequired per unit: 65.700 TLG Sentices,Inc.

Three Mile Island. Unit 2 Document F07-1676-001,Rev. 0 Decommiesioning Cost Analysis Appendix 4 Page 4 of 4 D. NOTES AND REFERENCES r Work difficulty factors were developed in conjunction with the Atomic Industrial Forum's (now NEI) program to standardize nuclear decommissioningcost estimates and are delineated in Volume 1, Chapter 5 of the "Guidelines for Producing Commercial Nuclear Power Plant DecommissioningCostEstimates,"AIFAIESP-036,May 1986.

Referencesfor equipment & consumablescosts:

1. www.mcmas.ter.com online catalog,McMaster Carr Spill Control (71e3T88)

2. R.S.Means (2013)Division 01 56, Section13.60-0600, page22

3. R.S.Means (2013)Division 01 54 33, Section40'6360,page688 Material and consumablecostswere adjusted using the regional indices for Harrisburg, Pennsylvania.

TLG Seruices,Inc.

Three Mile Island. Unit 2 Docutnent F07-1670-001,Reu.0 D ecotnmi ssioning Cost An a.lysi s Appendix B, Page I of 7 APPENDD( B UNIT COST FACTOR LISTING (SAFSTOR: Power Block Structures Only) TLG Seruices, Inc.

Three Mile Island. Unit 2 Docurnent F07-1670-001,Rev. 0 Decotnm.iesioning Cost Anolyeia Append.ix B, Page 2 of 7 APPENDD( B UNIT COST FACTOR LISTING (Power Block Structures Only) Unit Cost Factor Cost/Unit($) Removal of clean instrument and sampling tubing, $/linear foot 0.65 Removal of clean pipe 0.25 to 2 inches diameter, $Ainear foot 5.73 Removal of clean pipe >2 to 4 inches diameter, $llinear foot 8.28 Removal of clean pipe >4 to 8 inches diameter, $/linear foot 18.2r Removal of clean pipe >8 to 14 inches diameter, $Ainear foot 32.80 Removal of clean pipe >14 to 20 inches diameter, $/linear foot 42.69 Removal of clean pipe >20 to 36 inches diameter, $/linear foot 62.52 Removal of clean pipe >36 inches diameter, $llinear foot 74.66 Removal of clean valve >2to 4 inches L22.0r Removal of clean valve >4to 8 inches t82.L4 Removal of clean valve >8 to 14 inches 328.42 Removal of clean valve >l4to 20 inches 426.90 Removal of clean valve >20 to 36 inches 625.24 Removal of clean valve >36 inches 746.63 Removal of clean pipe hanger for small bore piping 41.06 Removal of clean pipe hanger for large bore piping 128.91 Removal of clean pump, <300 pound 307.22 Removal of clean pump, 300-1000pound 837.90 Removal of clean pump, 1000-10,000pound 2,992.23 Removal of clean pump, >10,000 pound 5,785.54 Removal of clean pump motor, 300-1000 pound 358.40 Removal of clean pump motor, 1000-10,000pound r,246.71 Removal of clean pump motor, >10,000 pound 2,802.79 Removal of clean heat exchanger <3000 pound 1,685.84 Removal of clean heat exchanger >3000 pound 4,237.90 Removal of clean feedwater heater/deaerator 11,387.33 Removal of clean moisture separator/reheater 22,925.30 Removal of clean tank, <300 gallons 395.46 Removal of clean tank, 300-3000 gallon r,240.33 Removal of clean tank, >3000 gallons, $/square foot surface area 10.06 TLG SeruiceqInc.

Three Mile Island, Unit 2 Rev. 0 Document F07-1676-001, D ecornm,i ssionin g Cost Analy si s Append,ixB, Page 3 of 7 APPENDD( B UNIT COSTFACTORLISTING (Power Block Structures Only) Unit Cost Factor Cost/Unit($) Removalof clean electrical equipment,<300 pound 172.57 Removalof clean electrical equipment, 300-1000pound 578.96 Removalof clean electrical equipment, 1000-10,000pound L,L48.82 Removalof clean electrical equipment,>10,000pound 2,659.64 Removalof clean electrical transformer < 30 tons 1,878.11 Removalof clean electrical transformer > 30 tons 5,319.28 Removalof clean standby dieselgenerator,<100 kW 1,888.50 Removalof clean standby dieselgenerator,100kW to 1MW 4,212.30 Removalof clean standby dieselgenerator,>1 IVIW 9,7L8.57 Removalof clean electrical cabletray, $/linear foot IO.DD Removalof clean electrical conduit, $Ainearfoot 6.65 Removalof clean mechanicalequipment,<300 pound L72.57 Removalof clean mechanicalequipment, 300-1000pound 578.96 Removalof clean mechanicalequipment, 1000-10,000pound t,148.82 Removalof clean mechanicalequipment,>10,000pound 2,659.64 Removalof clean HVAC equipment,<300 pound 201.26 Removalof clean HVAC equipment, 300-1000pound 680.14 Removalof cleanIIVAC equipment,1000-10,000 pound 1,360.00 Removalof clean IIVAC equipment,>10,000pound 2,659.64 Removalof clean IIVAC ductwork, $/pound 0.69 Removalof contaminatedinstrument and sampling tubing, $/linear foot 1.10 Removalof contaminatedpipe 0.25to 2 inches diameter, $llinear foot L5.52 Removalof contaminatedpipe >2 to 4 inches diameter, $/linear foot 26.I4 Removalof contaminatedpipe >4 to 8 inches diameter, $Ainearfoot 43.62 Removalof contaminatedpipe >8 to L4 inches diameter, $llinear foot 83.77 Removalof contaminatedpipe >14 to 20 inchesdiameter, $Ainearfoot loa.79 Removalof contaminatedpipe >20 to 36 inchesdiameter, $llinear foot 138.62 Removalof contaminatedpipe >36 inches diameter, $/linear foot 164.58 Removalof contaminatedvalve >2to 4 inches 329.26 Removalof contaminatedvalve >4to 8 inches 398.41 TLG Seruices,Inc.

Three Mile Island. Unit 2 Docutnent F07-1676-001,Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Append.ix B, Page 4 of 7 APPENDD( B UMT COST FACTOR LISTING (Power Block Structures Only) Unit Cost Factor Cost/Unit($) Removalof contaminatedvalve >8 to 14 inches 796.48 Removalof contaminatedvalve >14 to 20 inches L,0L2.72 Removalof contaminatedvalve >20 to 36 inches 1,345.01 Removalof contaminatedvalve >36 inches 1,604.65 Removalof contaminatedpipe hanger for small bore piping r06.09 Removalof contaminatedpipe hanger for large bore piping 326.47 Removalof contaminatedpump, <300 pound 696.25 Removalof contaminatedpump, 300-1000pound 1,655.34 Removalof contaminatedpump, 1000-10,000 pound 5,414.54 Removalof contaminatedpuop, >10,000pound 13,160.39 Removalof contaminatedpump motor, 300-1000pound 7rL.77 Removalof contaminatedpump motor, 1000-10,000pound 2,L99.r7 Removalof contaminatedpump motor, >10,000pound 4,965.06 Removalof contaminatedheat exchanger<3000pound 3,2L0.12 Removalof contaminatedheat exchanger>3000pound 9,308.12 Removalof contaminatedtank, <300 gallons L,L62.67 Removalof contaminatedtank, >300 gallons,$/squarefoot 23.76 Removalof contaminatedelectrical equipment,<300 pound 545.67 Removalof contaminatedelectrical equipment, 300-1000pound 1,339.76 Removalof contaminatedelectrical equipment, 1000-10,000pound 2,573.65 Removalof contaminatedelectrical equipment,>10,000pound 5,2r0.82 Removalof contaminatedelectrical cabletray, $/linear foot 26.68 Removalof contaminatedelectrical conduit, $/Iinear foot L2.65 Removalof contaminatedmechanicalequipment,<300 pound 614.05 Removalof contaminatedmechanicalequipment, 300-1000pound 1,5t4.27 Removalof contaminatedmechanicalequipment, 1000-10,000pound 2,9L3.58 Removalof contaminatedmechanicalequipment,>10,000pound 5,2L0.82 Removalof contaminatedIIVAC equipment,<300 pound 614.05 Removalof contaminatedIIVAC equipment,300-1000pound L,5L4.27 Removalof contaminatedIIVAC equipment, 1000-10,000pound 2,913.58 TLG Sentiees, Inc.

Three Mile Island Unit 2 Document F07-1676-001'Reu.0 D ecomrnissioning Coat Analysie Append.ixB,Page 5of 7 APPENDD( B UNIT COST FACTOR LISTING (Power Block Structures Only) Unit Cost Factor Cost/Unit($) Removalof contaminatedIIVAC equipment,>10,000pound 5,zLO.82 Removalof contaminatedIIVAC ductwork, $/pound t.57 RemovaVplasmaarc cut of contaminatedthin metal components,$/linear in. 3.03 Additional decontaminationof surfaceby washing, $/squarefoot 5.90 Additional decontaminationof surfacesby hydrolasing, $/squarefoot 29.59 Decontaminationrig hook up and flush, $/ 250 foot length 5,166.38 Chemicalflush of components/systems, $/gallon 15.07 Removalof clean standard reinforcedconcrete,$/cubicyard r6L.72 Removalof grade slab concrete,$/cubicyard 204.76 Removalof clean concretefloors, $/cubicyard 384.77 Removalof sectionsof clean concretefloors, $/cubicyard L,r72.57 Removalof clean heavily rein concretewI#9 rebar, $/cubicyard 246.65 Removalof contaminatedheavily rein concretewf#9 rebar, $/cubicyard 1,631.53 Removalof clean heavily rein concretewfi#18rebar, $/cubicyard 3L2.r7 Removalof contaminatedheavily rein concretewI#18 rebar, $/cubicyard 2,15L.28 Removalheavily rein concretewi#18 rebar & steel embedments,$/cubicyard 472.38 Removalof below-gradesuspendedfloors, $/cubicyard 384.77 Removalof clean monolithic concretestructures, $/cubic yard 970.85 Removalof contaminatedmonolithic concretestructures, $/cubicyard r,625.26 Removalof clean foundation concrete,$/cubic yard 773.t2 Removalof contaminatedfoundation concrete,$/cubicyard L,5L2.45 Explosivedemolition of bulk concrete,$/cubicyard 34.4r Removalof clean hollow masonryblock wall, $/cubicyard L27.29 Removalof contaminatedhollow mason-ryblock wall, $/cubicyard 225.66 Removalof clean solid masonryblock wall, $/cubicyard L27.29 Removalof contaminatedsolid masoruyblock wall, $/cubicyard 225.66 BackfiIl of below-gradevoids, $/cubicyard 29.40 Removalof subterraneantunnels/voids,$/linear foot 140.98 Placementof concretefor below-gradevoids, $/cubicyard 106.48 Excavationof clean material, $/cubicyard 3.72 TLG Seruices, Inc.

Three Mile Island. Unit 2 Document F0 7-16 76-001, Reu. 0 Decomm.issioning Cost Ana,lysis AppendixB, Page 6 of 7 APPENDD( B UNIT COST FACTOR LISTING (Power Block Structures Only) Unit Cost Factor Cost/Unit($) Excavation of contaminated material, $/cubic yard 32.49 Removal of clean concrete rubble (tipping fee included), $/cubic yard 23.55 Removal of contaminated concrete rubble, $/cubic yard 22.75 Removal of building by volume, $/cubic foot 0.34 Removal of clean building metal siding, $/square foot r.67 Removal of contaminatedbuilding metal siding, $/square foot 2.95 Removal of standard asphalt roofing, $/square foot 2.60 Removal of transite panels, $/square foot 2.56 Scariffing contaminated concrete surfaces (drill & spall), $/square foot 9.36 Scabbling contaminated concrete floors, $/square foot 5.46 Scabbling contaminated concrete walls, $/square foot t4.71 Scabbling contaminated ceilings, $/square foot 50.37 Scabbling structural steel, $/square foot 4.69 Removal of clean overhead crane/monorail < 10 ton capacity 850.33 Removal of contaminated overhead crane/monorail < 10 ton capacity t,454.77 Removal of clean overhead crane/monorail >10-50 ton capacity 2,042.99 Removal of contaminated overhead crane/monorail >10'50 ton capacity 3,473.58 Removal of polar crane > 50 ton capacity 7,581.02 Removal of gantry crane > 50 ton capacity 30,668.72 Removal of structural steel, $/pound 0.24 Removal of clean steel floor grating, $/square foot 6.t7 Removal of contaminated steel floor grating, $/square foot 10.94 Removal of clean free standing steel liner, $/square foot 1,5.27 Removal of contaminated free standing steel liner, $/square foot 27.59 Removal of clean concrete-anchored steel liner, $/square foot ,.oo Removal of contaminated concrete-anchored steel liner, $/square foot 32.10 Placement of scaffolding in clean areas, $/square foot 13.55 Placement of scaffolding in contaminated areas, $/square foot 18.24 Landscaping with topsoil, $/acre 2r,3L2.72 Cost of CPC B-88 LSA box & preparation for use L,727.27 TLG Seruiees,Inc.

Three Mile Isla.nd Unit 2 Document F07-1676-001'Reu. 0 D ecornmissioning Cost Analysis Append,ixB,Page 7of 7 APPENDD( B UNIT COSTFACTORLISTING (Power Block Structures Only) Unit Cost Factor Cost/Unit($) Cost of CPC B-25 LSA box & preparation for use L,584.45 Cost of CPC B-12V 12 gaugeLSA box & preparation for use 1,301.09 Costof CPC8-144 LSA box & preparationfor use 8,595.11 Costof LSA drum & preparation for use 192.13 Cost of cask liner for CNSI 8 120Acask (resins) 7,110.93 Cost of cask liner for CNSI 8 120.Acask (frlters) 6,993.18 Decontaminationof surfaceswith vacuuming, $/squarefoot 0.96 TLG Seruiees,Inc.

Three Mile Island. Unit 2 Docurnent F07-1676-001,Reu. 0 Decomnt issioning Cost Analysis Append,ix C, Page l of 8 APPENDX C DETAILED COSTANALYSIS DECON TLG Sercices, Inc.

d; 33 $ 65 6F6iE+ B f i R F E q R C E qE g. 6E' .i i $$ -_d ddaddd E5 FRE6 FBEgp,: 3;s;3 8B ad8:x RB gF5s.;_9- S e e E F -B x r i d j d J F j d j d E]

          .5                              E3.33:8sS.               psqgess66g$E; j    d d j d          iidi         i     d s oFl^
      ;E!

55?

      -    MA E85    P      8S ?3Frt;                S g F E e i E d @ a $ e g .B $ i g e F "E a g E g

_- : c 6

{ iH

   !H';E

. 3l

i!

        .i Ea               6Ba    g N{   NacN-q--            E g g F , s g $ 3 3 4 8E   3g 5PR*F BF.C,R.S N N 3 sfii z

q g r5 sI IE F$ {? s e {" 1 A , e i 8," i .t i t F,ii r - i EEE ;

               , E* telilsl,gg.tii                                  l                g,       a*EEiitE;sEs li 56

{$ {.s E{ r:5s a

l-f:ffB*

                       !-N6' EiEiilgiiEgif e

t-Ne!6@F6o: ei$jig3ilgi

:qo-oosoo9ll i.i--i--.a'1-.-.

giiiciE;EEE

                                                                                            ':99:99       ?iNo!      e d

I d

'F

-5 H iEE issEsi ! H isc*ssss.tss 5 ssseses;sgss F ; ; ; ; ; ; 5 i i $ B iE E I 63 ts fA

dq !s. . E 3 S S! E g B. 63- -9 $i d rgr i -cd dgi

g g cg q E E 6g:lH 6

\: i$ d d d

                                                                                                   ;ts3 P5HS333 6  $ p ; i . . 5 ; s Q F 3P3. 3 3 ;

3 3 g
q gs 5 . s F s g i p F q S $ . d "

                                ;i     {ddd e

5 p F .F. S s s s F . c F i $ E B g t q F e q q q

                                                                                                                      * : .$ F

S i S F q S F - 9 .

J-_ idd6 6 N 9 olc^ qiE 56E N,O 58S3 tX'X6R;;88$3 s8E 5B'3d .e.i3.*3e3REgF.

T*EPER jj

     -- :   E 6

Er" 1 .F; t F fi*.1{ E l 8ss , ,: l EqsHRFsPg B 8 . , . . q 3 q -i3t-s! . f r , 3 e

        ;EE          I           FNgSSg j                                                                              --

sHi d j d d 1 tlXtr z 3 8, c t s i Ei, $ Al.E

                   ! ,i;t i ai i "cai;                                -er              .s-5 ti! "iu,E                e ;i+            $,.,f i:;iiii*sBig!                EiEtgii3s:ffi33;iEii,*                           lE;     Egliig     $s:iisisffg

r$

s:

!o
!.s
*.1                { . . r = = = r = = :-: _g { ! = = = = = = = : : : = ; ; i$                    i !==*__E =

r * " ; i : ; : e : : e i t } 3 , i E5 l ; ; ; ; : : ; ; : j ; ; ; H E E ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; e a e e a e ei #a #a #eI a ; # ; s& a e
e e i l i i i i i l l g SA

t

                                                                   $ s s$ 3$ E B . q $ q g i 3 3 3gq*t cggiq$qgg$* $$

SE R ; 9- a9d j?d ; 9 , 9 8 ts9 8t E5 s d d d d d d d H 3 { F F S g B S$; t g a . q . o . 3 . 3 c 3 : . ; $ . $ $ : 8E. q9 c s . c F B i 9SnsErigeg iB d* e ' * ::{e : FxE;g 3 5is'BR+g E i_i6 I

                                .                  6.4 dd
                                '.      .8.,..8 sg.g,c.c.!8s@.'

ddi - _d dd I 836A 9E 9, d d d d d d d d E 5 g ! , r . * . H . $ { E 5 . 3 s . R s f ci i.g* e J = $ ; I* e 5 E E E S . ; = H s E3ERq R f r$gfgi i q a *

p i i : $ R ; I I otrl^

         ;EE 56!           $      FReS;38ts83                          i s n e s o R d e e . s- 3 r 3 8 $ g ! $

R 8 p
8 3 - g - $

j d d d d d i

      --  :   E a

i rJ l .i; :H e!*.9*

XE; o vt $8

          ,YZ e

z E E S 6 e F 6j 9 B F S E 3d.s,=.;.ss!,:N.F4333-.:.Qsg-38'g d d d d d d 93 588S.9-,s8qbg.,q,s. ie:@ts 3

                                                                                                                                  @ t r_id Eq

R 3 3 ' n o E d e s fE i tss!Fg3Rs3PR:*iFiR9:$

d t' d e - B< s _!=sig i",*,9 ;g*"e*iEt,*g :; F ; gtsce "E

i 5E T!

{.s i.t P9 ri{riir E Q { i:::::::::-

fr F 5 !;;;;;;;;;;

                                             ,i:E,i,i, iEtEe*,Eesaift{ieleit*e{

ili!r, fE i:,siEEEEiiiit i-- i:- i;rr;::;::3;.':::::::Bs***$f}*$.*q. , 5il l;; E"i;;i!;!!;!is;!!!i!!!!iis!;!!!!i;!

                                                                                                                                      $i r

g r

cs 3!."88 $$ 3 u:

l RF d 3 E ? R E B qE N { e a o o 9 HHp $53Hs ESF! 3AE98Sff"

                                                                                                                                           ? F  d - a E{                                        :                                                                                d   d     d                    s B g p S E s g .s$8                                                                                                                  EF3*

sd6dd{d

                 <_d 6

Eg33:e3$:fii:$$B

                  . . .-9.              .ts 8Eh                 8    E jd-'                d    d K
                  ..       a9
                           &.F d i d d d
                                        .EI       ;

d 3 6 S EEH{ssfisRgssEdE

                                                    ..83                                                         s F-E                                  F : E $ $E$         s : R s 3 P g e E 3 3 R B Q 3 . ! F$p $
                                                                         ' ' dF E ;d :6E

_ d j d d Jididjd d -Nflgis a e

                                                                 $i E .d F            E6 3d J :d R        E : E $RgE      g:E*3:Be*3333!83!.iE$                 d 5       ijdddrd                  ts                                     d                   li-f:S qF4^                                                                                                      fl E.E 5a!        s 3 3 8 3 8 8 8o -             o.o1           * ? : C 9 : E R R 6 E ;E 3                               g N F e = o g N 6 6 s e

e 1 - H r$R g a 6 o N N 6 -

NdJ9 T

    -- = e 6
    ;* FF
    !i1';E F:*.9{

X E; . . . F oS9 ; 3 8 .8. .i:d8$3$E i i j i d d d d UEE L YX FXF z $ssi'fr'sgR3eRR.$REg 6d{d d d s

                                           $       s..E                               I BE i d 35Q3e*g==:F6"Ee@fi5$                H c i j a

6 dt' E

l9 E" {E. i*; r

                                                    ";                                                g I                                - ee                   g iEt -Ei 8,,^{gs,E??tg"

3 E F!

x*,iiE :.J d;tE! :di

-El
!d
*.s

_{ql

E r8 SA rgEiigii?-:

             ! i N 6 r 6 @ F @

Inredq4qq* I ifti d a o ii,ri:ii*uisigi

                                                    ','"- {-'r'rc:::iill-l ; ' ; ; ! 9 : : ! ! ! a - '

sssr tsesr::s:ese:ei Eiiisiiisr53tiffi

                                                                                                                  ^ g;= i=llllllllii!itii===r =
                                                                                                                  ! E & i5*++

s f p t

{ c _r$

                                                                        !,                                            9dSB E j d d Ruf Pr F '

4 . ' . . . ' ' o

$ $9* *3-S F 8gd Fn I

c c B p $ c aF3 3 3 ; 5 3 E g p . p d d d d i i i d i d d d d d d ; d F E..gg

                                                                              -    d d E
                                                                                                                 .               n i:

S3 39* .S 3 I 3 5 P : l3 SB' 3 ' CC d d i d gdd -d! 6 E 8ts$'RS3$ 3 d e$83333838 d d d i d d d d { d 9 3E3 $E8eE!ilfr3Es$E

                                                                                        - J    i d      i i j d { N d d e

Q a g

_:;338S8S 8 3saABSEF 998 R q .r dE g{ E Efi$?s!$g 5 o a9a{6-o-tqo-

                                                                                        ;r                 +-_dis6o otsl^                                                              =
        ': ltr e  1 6:

F5 83 5a!

                                              +   ddi - _ddd s 9. F di R : g q Rd 53d dE $ g E
    -.   ;     E 6

s'i5

    !r';E F='=!
       !' .E1t 8 S                                 . s s . . tl q                                       ssFcEg$3 d+jd-_+dN 99
        ,iI z      f ; c B " s f ; ^ $g ! : ; 3 3 ! $ F . g E i      d   d d d 5 6 t - d          i I

d d d

                     ;e3oN5o3                 5   E3Ril3B t'                 d      d   {d            ddil a

E J: F d 1*F Eg, e E_!t "

.i

I

                                              ,i-EEE;**                 ii ii 5l                                    i                 i-$"8 ,l E ;ii gsp;r;; ! i-E                                  e FE, !,. g,*,n,uil{f                                          ga,id                                               ?i }i_!gg i Int                             E i 5 E H j : :E; i t ?          se rEA,   t ; s s 3,"E t:

s6 rSu {s ;,:[=i=', Iiilgri;gifg liffgi gg:iiiigsnssEgE lifEIg Erg!E; tr

*.1                E;ll;lll-                    { - * . =

r r - . . i = = = = i-= = = : : e : : : i : : : - - E ; - = - i = .

xs t8 E z z z a a e; a!a! ! ! i ! ! e $ A ; E ! ! i : A I ; ; ; ; 1 ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; H I s ; ; E q {!i *r *- H s!

6b

-a g.

r SE

\! :;:3E36TAL:;FSdF F.g :Fp$$$ i$ Ri *:'$"5E3::':F;!' ! ;i;silg sl a6

                                            ' ' F 3

p E s : : s 3 d 5 g t s ! g 3 gq 3 . d ; d - ; x3 .839 i i 6 r d

                                           ..;    d  +

e E:r9Se:58SR3S\e 3r3 983S9$ 8g

                          - _      ;dj d          t  6                                       i       d i d d oH^
        'e=JXl c I 5dE                                                  ;:986Ft:!2oe3:ts              N3+
        -&Q
     -. : q

E '.!; F t i;1 F='=ii EE3 oYi r x; FXF z

a R P

                                                                                                  ' 's       I s r ? E E r E 6 F s E R q sq Fg$ i  . 8 S F E i l Jr                                                     F*              !

E i g ! r : ,igEti s E r*, igEit.E{ii,E E iiu," ! lti-l iii*:"i *.i;.gEi_* - E ! .d !.9

! l ss 6i t::iisg;stfi t

iriIaiii:s:iii!ii,:, R R ::-^.-..-coe:ae:

                                                                                         ;tEE 3

iit}$gg

ig E ; : : : : s : : E ? , . F ; E E : : : : : : : : = = = i = = !i : 1 . E ; , i { i { r ,I i t i * * + { * + g i + * *

H E r A e
a a c a a
6
ia o : t 6 3 EA !l

q: $$ ssd \! E5 3Eg F59

                                                  ;;g
                                           ,.,r.      F   E 6;3 s,EP5g33R                   F   P I N        isdo       g   g   d
                                           .      l1t

{ad 1 a 5 dridgEgj qts] ^ i

           .tEE 56!        *.;N"ie3F                   5   5   g g 6                          idddg

E ii

        !H';E F:='=i
           >E8
           ,,En sse83t rdd!

g3c oxi z Er:. 3B { I 5g 9s

                                                              'Ab g               3si 3               tE!

dg i F e3: s 4- 7

                   .          E                18         ;   t; g E          E                -ao        I
                  .l           st      -       : r        x   :    '! E e          :        8    e;   i       I r5                 E eg3 H:C! Q                            8 E! : . E 56 isiiEe?Fit I!Eii#trs;P: F I:F         ! : ! '
                                                              ; E :?
                                                            .tEEa ds                                                           C;EiE t l ii                 ! - N 6 ! B o F o i a ' + ! i a ! ! !            e X

E l E

                                                            'i:,i;:
'! d' E Fd

Three Mile leland Unit 2 Document F07-1676-001,Reu. 0 D e comrnissio ning Cost An aly sis Append,ixD, Page I of I APPENDX D DETAILED COSTANALYSIS DELAYED DECON TLG Seruices, Inc.

d{

8. '"6^C9 c. q CRgggC E$RFRCR qd dridddd -_d!d Nd

[{

s$

6 E 6 x66 3" "3 : a d i ddddd H Ac e F S i $q 3 3 3

q R

                                    ..i;38      S     3E*3S93                        F g . E p

3 E$E. "4 3 !
q .

      ^3a
      .: b!

5.ti 393 ss 3gFS4d XgFEeSa

    ^: gE 6 6                            d , 4      4 6 < + 1 o='=d E'i:t F* 5+

EtsI .39: 3 s3s g d 33Ee d d d d d i:: s L i d R i s 3 E $ i 39 g $ 3

q $

I 9ii foF E,,,.3 B 3 FI 6

                                !t
                                ;3 c.fa
            !               = =                                                                  j r              i 6                                       .{i       fE; i F           i? n E  g iJ        f i5 is I ; ,!                             {         I gi - uii E           g 62

i q *"

Euriie! , it i ! I.r r 3 * ,u E q iHcg,9s $ii iH l;,i?l5ul l; !si;ia!ix!Er s ie;:ii'i*iiE;ff;f?i r! ?.*3i;"ssl e"iEgi{ii*Eig + 1 -c! si l.s t i lEif:ig3i jg;3ii; i I 3;iise?isig; i Hi is3islsFFi: ii T

.1 E: Ei irr!;;,r,, I !:::,:,3,!:rrr:::ru ufif;!;:;;:;;;;; ;: t ka

ib d6 ri 3tR88fr SSiR F sRERECCFC9EE qd ;{*iR S d i r' dj-iddg-* EI st 3S a

                   --&.-5                  .E                                                                           P:;F3388 c        FFsF FS$E; EE:dE          i d i i A . F  3 I $ i R F : FH r -        i d 6 4
                                                                                                             .$;3gFs,.F3Fg d i d d d                                                           F 6d{F$,: F*38*[ tS3$p                     N ' F r   - 1 o { 6 - c - {             ppF   . ,* q s s E s F F $ $ g ; "

d!'ddgrd-'d do?

       .E u:
       !P . :

EA

                   '.s$e3           65=gsE sdgdi                                                    8853..gx'3$R;a9ggg
     ^E.3E                     i d o?':d E;      E:

E's sgpts rt33Rs88R8tsE

       >EE         ftfi:Fe5 d      g S8B8F8 d d  g 88388 Ft-o H , . , , 9 * $ C p - 63C
                                                                          ;      d j d d    +

xH t tz2 FOE I o o! n;

                                      ,"Ei=!,* i                                        ? i; f               e,f,B;llEtg;*,:;E.                                 :eii           .,i,                   i 3{

5E l.s d at

                  ;*igi=

9-ceiil

                  .{ii::::

i;;;;;; iii;gii

!r:se II3i$s i-,.=

is$*fiii*igEsg i i-.-=sglrrii-ss;;;;; ii3;i! ii i;i;;i;I;;;;; EifEg53dsfu E i--"-..""e?:1qlE9

                                                                                             ^ 3 t t:ji::i'j]l::::::::-
                                                                                             ; F I E;;;;;;Iae*esaeaec EA

ai' s$ E{ FE AS R399R;SE;E r$ 6 3S .9 .9 .; .53 d F sBxsg F3;8 g3'$ d R Ji 933 E: 5 3 5 9S 9 R : . $ F R $ F e R E : ERe R S Eo $* 3f ; E d F F : C . a dj--e T r S:93!

                                               !:.$Fa$iaF:3i:                          sEgg!.*Eg::
       ^dt
           !                                                        -*-: 3 I
       = b:
       .!i         gE5                        @ e . ; 3 q 3 3 ; 8 R E E Fg            ER:EF3*8SE                        FgiF-9'F'R; E   O-
                                                                    ;'ddp-'91*91;
    ^   E A=

Ei E: fi* 5r EEE x 3g35e3R

                                                                  -'l -l   o 6 xH    t                                                            &6 tz 2 FOF c iE d   d E8'!s3g*p*$

d gd* p s3 E " $ 9E o d d

                                                                                       -   3 F si ! 3d . 3 di d 31F$g3g            ,S !   FE  qq  RC33'n"3xeF i ; d      d    d d i                                  E-             z                           s t ui                                     { i. Ii,*tA                                         i i-,, sj r{

fF ,!.s

.1 x5

                ;;i;       ::i;i*
                -" t-nn* {.^.-..*.""=oo is*gsii*'igigl jl q*qss c {i d*9*! 9*4a a ii !a! 1sa e
                                                      !r.

ae;jiiJ;;;;; iuIiaiii,gEifu, FEi Es, gisiiEE I 3 ; ! - r : ; i i : : 1 . E = = l = } . r l l l l l l l l i ; f; E i E;;s;!$;!;! S!s 3!l A!i;!!!;!il! i

!9                                                                                                                                                t HQ

it db 3338

i sd 3 sd p*: 9. sgESRgS S t9 - r i + . i i i r d j o d i d d d i d +dd; d as 3 . . ; 3 . 9 e t s 5 8. J . t s S e 3 t s S B R 8ee$Fes.e 3..3 .1"..,'.-e ts g

iP : Bpgig e sjt"!t;i-g r i d d d ? d ! d x

                                                                                                , ' d
                                                                        - _ d c        ER e3
                      - _ 6 t3*:E                       ;e;:3$;e i            d B I i   J 8S5393SE6
                                                                                                -_iddd;t'            d 8.39 R6    dd     dd-' dddid 3&?9R3?38*88ie                                                                                                 F9;3*ei9ES3 d ' 6 d                                           _.R_S;rd:F_!B                                                dd     6djdd6::F       3
     .1: ( u) 6:

I.:i 39.

                                                                        $39-E:.9 6 E            E d g  R F g 3 8* . 3 E r e J d d      d    d BA436F            RAE33 dR --g I

5 a n'i3 o;':d 3; !: i* 3+ . , . pd59 . F t F

ET {r_r; dddd

H I t2 2 toF F ( ) -

d d s g d . H E . 3e . , s d d a d { 6 o

                       ;g         8o        R3E3E E S                           n!!oE  I 0                                            -.+

6

                                         ...i.:...-3
                                                                              -                  EPEiF$6              t

. 4 . 4

                      *3Egen93gSeFE:$F;"8e!8                                           g         -!.8,$9
                                                                  - d J                                                              tsts                   6

E Ei

iie ESg

                                                 '?i                  a-                 E       5      dd' 4:5 q^ii                                 i S r F!
                                                                                                                          !;i t                    $      E      n sii 5!!:. E                                       g i

a J E rrl; re ,f e :

cilait! E I r s d

i i

                                                                                                                          .FE,i ri

.l! .9

                  ?iffiii:i;ifiiiiiii;ri l;;i;siiEEi!;gili;3rFis

N d r 6 6 F 6 o e -

i I liE!

                                                                                              .t;!iEEtE g iiElTn?$

ot Eq r i 5 f! 3 5 t ? r 4d,.3&.2d8 j

                                                                                                                  ;i z4 glffE s {;E,JEEIE!

fg:if3iis;g?rf Eir3: g rt *-"' *:q.:eececE4li i- i -l E:::995::::::::::'i::::: E 6 d d d i d d d 6 i i . i i d . d d o d d a d in"ioi.ice.{ ;::?? ;;;:;;;;:;;;;!; 3 E j; i T HA

ab d6 K

l B{

si F ( esgS :x?9e-1BF I ;*33BFgF S EX;.R;;3.F B$ +l: -'- d E 3 RR{ N8-A

                                                                                         $     8id =FR                $

i 593ts;Sg g $ : B i l R A . E E FE i g E 3 P i l C fFr i 3 g : E ; E E P . P aieEirEo e

e E 6 g qd $ . i $ -r Jg d gEd dS Fj i6 i! g l n i F . i i 3

3SE3$Rgj!33e3388 teS; g EE$.8;:3.$ q..$i j r 9 g f e E 8 $ s3 E .5-5 d j d d o @ g t) 3S3$333efrS r ' d j d d dddtsdddddd s=Rr353e833CBS39F.-8S 3 j d - - d d dig;FFs$ 8$83gEB8rS d d d i d d i d d i R,83_t

         *3a                                                                              6

u:

t !4 v E: - :" :3e833838S

       ^E.3E                                                                                   dd-_jdNd i

e=':d ET E:

5*

EE: ' 83 "N6'1'I;q F 8S 9tE FOF S s B I n F S i rb g R s e n F . $d 8 8F 9 id q gi " 8 g ' g g 3:s33iisE.F dddddiid I R J 3 ? ; oR; C r ...88 o a N o N ' + : o e I SBSRSEE-.4.

                                                                                          ! - P R E s S' -*. - e i88o.:.3 o-@-F      ' 5-1q
                                                                . { j n

i, r- c{! !T pd {.s

               *lgf,g,gfi3?iiiii*                                     i*,,u*uu,,

iS;elelel +l leiclel er*lei l !e ; tiii = e= SEe = iiliiigi3ii gfuii

: : : : : *= i r * * * * * = * *! r. r ; * ,

eeeeeee f+* J EA

{b q& j d q a l{ d d d d R693 d I E{ ii:H$fr6reE i$ I di_ ; dddjj 3 I 83 d d dd 3 o q

                                                                                                      ' F     3f3336383 P
                                                            & ts
                                                              &  56 q 9 33 e   ;gR5pE8F:               d d e                                                                 -            .-9 i ;    i d i   d { ; d t d 6 d                     dd                                 E g 5 C . 3: d3 3 3 $ S ; : : 3 S rj              +s-diddd s"p :.3 qg  Ee  -

s f r E f. -r: p

A .I F.;$3 EB*:s3B:93

       *6a
      .:  b:

r! .5i e; xx e , 3 " R e 3 g $ i g *. . F

   ^E'3E             d -_                  iFdd o?':d
   ;ii    !:

E* E*

       >3:        I A&8338F; d$'jddadi 9*

d d sg 9. ,9'3F33;B { ;

Yz 2 FoF E

o 5

                                                                                              @ e i at!

Ead* j'. IEi?i Et: fts tE," B-

                             ,{8,,;,g,ix*,                                                    &g eEt;E"EFi sr{s'i u 6;E*

d s!

!r {.s a5 EE fu*5sii*uifigi

             !;:;;;:;;;;iil; Eiift*    ;i* :;rE,;effi*u;ig;

t !,;=!s*!n*!;e;;;;;;s;*

ariEeiiiisg

                                                                                                     =EFf i;;;;;;:;:;
                                                                                                                          .3 P

5 H FA

it' d6 tBn ra s&8i: sd dd {:Rg s{ F. n F . d3 si n F iH$$

s $ dd+d A

3S 8g R p3:FC33 S A 9N9 F 3* e ,s,.8 i d i a 5 e3 3 PSiPSSS i33tES dj ; d d d d

       *3c
       .: u!

rP . !t :i ; 9R9FE35 88r

    ^E 3; e;       =N EJI 5:

E* t+

EF Ie ' 8 $BS3R

                                                                                              - c - q ? q Y/'

tz2 FOF o d d

                                                                                                                 *EB i -   d            i                  i d                         d s

Egq 8ra 83 "E $ E* : E 3.9: Ez r ! 5 ,C .i t Eiq* EE, { 58.; ? 6" a :> ,fa l ; s!

                  =*:$ i,i i,;i ,iI E,- EH E                                                                                tt,e.p lIi:sif              iiifuigft;igg                               EIE F I E :

{

                  *il'i,          :;:g

!ii

;s8                                                                                                                          =t;.
                                                                                                                              ! Er        a
                                                                                                                            .;irE          t

{.s =rs: i a f R r i ! I E p

B E - - : - - r - * . ! - d 6 { , o l r : - d o i ' . @ F a - J EE E a : i : : i l - : ! + c e q d N ; 6 6 f i a ; ' r + ? ! r c I F

s ?? Z E

e a a ei *
c Aiecce* iIE ii*i*ei;ii r H P

!A

Three Mile Isla,nd Unit 2 Docurnent F07-1676-001,Rev. 0 D ecotnrni ssionin g Cost An aly sis Append.ix E, Page I of 8 APPENDD( E DETAILED COSTANALYSIS SAFSTOR TLG Seruices, Inc.

ib i{ 9C9itq st9999??

B axSYEY 6iFi:6*ii q Pfd

=&

d R-F dddddd -_d{d dd REi E.! \: 5t J$i+ 9 E. . . . 3 6 d d a d i i i n --rddd

                                                                                      $a cp$;qiq gi3g*         9.3  ,

o 5 FS8 g p.sg;3$35 d i -' jddd

                                                                                      $ i ' c E t g g qg' s 3 1

g '

E?

r du*A

        '                                             E.HFg$p33                       sD e9F{Ed        tgFqs:3' 66                                      j i i i d 6l-                                              i tI :'i:

i3 ilg fi*'E

E!

c9! d d J d d d F ;5 idi 8 o

                                                        ,,.3$S:p3I 9!::3            3 3 R 3* $ 5

q 3 3 g . i . g u q $
tAi 9) a

i. a 6!

s3E g d

                                 ; ;.                                    'l:      fi  s            eA s E        ,        i   E     F        r                    i        il I'F"F            i :
                                                                                                  'E HE,f              i   tlg         : !

-a! Ed ,! .s

.t E5 E5 Ed li';i i,;isi :ii;ilisi f;! !sr!;;::,, fi!,::::,

iiE,slis,sc$

                                                   !=!::::::*;,

Euiiiiiii$r

                                                                             =Ff;!::::;;:::;

ai**,i, E;i::;i;i P t

rb ii gcgpE.g,q3 scs3.,;RqRqggFgEE q{ d: g r 6 dF r_d o @ . d;--_ LJi i_dj-rddgd REI \.3 E i e5ESg85 d d ts -'djd

                                                                                                 $p;F..$53QF.e,.339$

j t j j 3 g;3S3i9:i!R

                                                                       --i_   t'ddd EPHN    . s. a E E F ^ E R R $ F F g 6   d   d I E?

TOi 5g:3qi: 8;3;g i 3;osF$3S EE53..gx"xsR;.ggqq "I iE 6 J r- d' o;.:d

   ;"1 gt r: : E.                                                                                      *tsp8     aatsBRF88SR33 EEi                  cts8I8          88388             H . . . . $ R $ S R *3g o99                                                                i   d - d =     J 9I.E a

a u s,gi;{;i;,it .T E"i* . $ 1{ -4! t.s

.9 x!

            ;;isi,iii;iii 6,e=x 5

i igiigi s

r:: E:::::. I;ir:- I" E:i::t:!:qii,

ii,i;iii s A sisl-t A , q g S sd g g 3 s 4 . l e * , i s g g i ; d 4 3 3 ; t * ; s e ; e ;

ii;lg;;g3:;ff I n * ;_..-..*.o9:!tlie

                                                                                          - E ; !:::::::::::::::::-

H X E*esa**f*rs6*4 d

                                                                                                                                      .F rf

A

rb qd FFf i.ir E! tB $SggeEasEds 5t ii ti t 833 ga,s.s,3.39 sRf$8.5s g*'s.8i r$ BS e 9 s. s 3 *8.9.;.9,$$ 3: 5 3 5 93 9t i _'-_ I 6F9SS;8398 o'r8 a.F.E,n.*.8 o{9 d I 3:R5 5 6-E@ag 3..Jeg d ?i-_ I dd8 gg{f IE? F du x*

       '                                                    sd      B Fr ' Sgg $ 3 9 8 q 3          gsis-e-F6R; 385

_ E.E; 6:b ddn' e7.:N Eil g: r :* ' E ' l EE! e oRx ;:

                                             -'d    -_ e

x.i 5SEPe3*BX": 53 S : ;

d -_ tdd a a R"A!33h.$; d d _ o N 9

                           ..eq3                                    31FEg3g.$5                 33   88eq'i"3339
                                                                       .-o      I    9i s"..9*s.,d E

t

                    !;P-
                    **!                                                                                                 a a

il r$ ,{i-ti,s .A *6 gH ,gffE?c,E

{

st

i

{.s r5

                 ;aAi i-"
                 ;4de isl;i*

i-",.

tnaa!

fu,;i:ii*uigigi f"qe*.....e:r: it-arii'

                 & s r a    a a
                                  "*uu*"*I!Ji;;;;

Iir;tui*ili,

                                                             ! I { !=,r;:t:tt-
                                                          ; E E E i;;;;i!?!;!

iig

                                                                                         'E..3:   $r$$t!!;FEg?

EgsiEEiEssiE

                                                                                             ; H =i ; s : ; r ; ; r " . i :

5$i 3i x'ii;;;;;;i;t {j EA F

rb at SBSS qF Rd Se

t sr393g8 3

$ -'d i +.ij+r_ts--d i+ Dd d cj d ddd+ d 3 3 . A 9 , $ 4 8 3 8 . 3 . 9 $ C S SEE4g R 8 P F S S e f r . 8 d d r d d @ - d d F i a j d . ! j d rjdddd ad d 6

                  !F"-.:"ts:.-..I.

fr 33i 3 5 i d i d d

                                                                                            ...R.F..8 6 d .                                         j - ' d H

r d i i

                                                    -9 89                      ;

E $ . : R . R q $ : 9 . E . E e ; = { R3= R r 6 d J o r d A E $ 5 p : R 8 3 53 . 3 i

                                                                                          -Fd-if,iF             F-
                                                                                                                           $ 3 .F dd AS       tdpRq$$g
                                                                                                                                           !Jd-deiFaR e

5 ER?3R;?38:EtnsER*:39.& I 6 9d569$ts35 E *E. F E3 1$FXSSSB fi _- d d i R _ q 6:-:r-r .; dd d6rd*+s

      .:3E Io;                                                                                                                         *ur=r**ruu,                      g

e . s . B ; 5 F $ E 1 g

f r s g - 8 ;d . 83 3 ;Xg3RR g3E *R-3

   - -E . s ;

H A TE d :drdd d R 5

   *Eili i *> Ee!                                                                                      3.         F3E
                                                                                                                                           $t' jjdddd oQI 9X; idi                                                                                                                              .9.                      '5 d d i d            d  d                                                  a I

a E 3 !dsB'.5.3 id

                                                                                           -*     -:         ^ 3

8. i ' N

                                                                                                   !:g          I                                                  a d d d I

IF ; s E s-;;c i i;EE E g s si! {ci?:.e3? jri3?iri=E

f i i ; ar* tt* E i{ ' 3 iF c g!9. .cE fl ieti-S6 L9 j.l

t P9 s!

              ;lllii::lt;iiiiEiifu

N 6

6 o F o o o -

E,i d 6 6 d d 6 d d d 4 6 d d 6 o d d 6 q,i 9 Sddd6dddddda..diiida66i

                                                                                 ;i;;jsiriiiE 6

d s sifts 5 iE*;*sii'u{

                                                                                     - E ; I i : P R r 3 " I ; $ E n i, -, "r '"..o- *- ". e
                                                                                                                                           " i' !i ii ri in r {

e i J ! s e e s s $ E e s s e E s 3 * $ { s

s S c s e s "+ E E ;

EIEi g ;-

. i

{ F

iI

q [

Rl{ i.r i! R gd s g 6d s g s E S g : id3 ? a 3E$ g ;Ff f ; cd$8 :- E F$ E33.HR3S,* 5t 6 iF j ; E e S 8Bd gpxi

                                                                  $Fd               5.                              $

d E E S F g s H $ 3 $ : $ B R A .*a F $g E i g F $ 9 f iF: 3 3 : A

E E p . F .8; s e s s d - ' ta sp-;-go g,'n! ri 5 5 3 . t $ - E s . ! l S g E q $ gB o.

a r _ Bd* t L g ddd ddoid d 3 R *33 F 3 d j d -_rd d d 9:ES.rE-At. i ' d

_ d d E gdd ad g ; Fd R 9 $ e $ 3 c s 3 3dBd oE E I gdddaR

                                                                                                                         ! . 8 9 9$ i. 9 3 . e 9 3 5       $:Ri398983398839FF3; J d                                   d   ddd       d 3838933335 d d d S d d e d d d 3, $ g gg gg g r 3 q d';i
         !d:

P S : 33e9B3E3ER *.cE$ $9.FF:$S

      , -I . s ;

H; dd -'rddd K i5 o*.id 3ii n: F , f lE

EE5 ^B .S " : ' 8: 5 .8 E gri o9!

FE- ro66@a 6@os g s8a@8e*3 -; l- Fo $6 9d ,dnA36S' A

' N p - : e ondddi:d 1 lr a

a s 3 ; o*;.i s ...FF

                   ?-R!N-so:Bd                                "
                                                                  !E_g"*!-F
                                                              ;   dRSo'5c3.

r @ q

                                                                                                                           .B,S     . ' 'X-3-.

Eu

                                   ,                         F                            Eiu

ni 1{

- E !
! d
,! .s rl 5'!
&tr iiiggsliii:iiiEis                           ii,,uui,,,            i'iliiiiigEi
                 , ' : : l : - : x l r

i ; : : : : : i : : ". t ; : : ; q E : .,' i = .

3;;;;il;;;*+;;;;aa.;+ ifu3i I X ; ; ; ; + ;; C g ; $ ; a $ ; ;Il lgi l ; : ; ; ; ; ; ; : ; ff,uiiis

t

js . g F

EF q{ E E$i; r
d d R !.I a

\.n ss \! 8S :d iE Sd F A F 6 N rFd @E5 $ F EF q. 3F rs 5 3 tido.ij 3

                  ..,.&       a                                g'        ,     .g

d d d

                          'E                                                         E 3

98 E d r ! : 8 3 " d 3 g. E

                                                                                                                    - s:"85*

3: d d EE i.gcF5frpSE3

                                                             -             4 1 9
         .3                                   33 EF i,EflRqNFEF:

6 - E E ; . : : s 3 B . E g 3 s i . Eg; cq8 d d

       +Pt rd{       3':SPE                                    5,36Ressgig                       --:Rot:;:9tegg:B                 NSq EE RH H   U:

ur:'i E E;3t

.E EE:

oPl tii F 3' a q 6

                           .t  P                                                     a       qPsesE6FsBRgSFF I
                 *3                                                              3                           ;

rF { , i ; E 15 s.t .si

,:.9 J;

Ei i,ir"i

                               =iiiii l&*ci c: l*i*-+ e . X Q E iii:iii,:iii

H *!r* jg+ i!! ji*=ss;s*ttt irgi g,n I : : - E ; . ! ; . E : : l : : : : : E i " *" iH X uiiri3i,*ai R '!-*.*@@-66e:ll:

E E:::::::::i-iiil ri:i

                                                                                                                            -E
                                                                                                                            !ii:

H j S t a e ; c a

e f , r ;

5 g

d5 +i Bd d d i d Rd E.r s! 5d

                                                                           'q E8 6e3 R P3--F$:S

{ d d d o 5 ntt d Ed9 eg5

        .:Bl
        ,! o ui x                                                          EE9

_ 6:a o*.:d iii nt fl:.E.8

         >E:                                  R . . ! g E g 3 nF :

oPl d d d d d t c xi

          !x; I

rl a 3ES 53p

                                                                                     .!8X EE!

3 aEz _z 3 . 2E 5? ; 3 gt t

I . Ei: s iT;?

  .!               i"i;i .;r;.                                           3E E        :i;s n ; 3
                                                                                     ;9ii 6

l*iiggg iiii:;es;giE$ ire daaE o.5 E i:i 5,t i!c,' rsi *t;E

                                                                                     *f f   :

{.s ,o: Et!EE

*.8               E  i r i : s " I* : . ;{ *:f :f q:f ! ! f: : -
                  ;ff                                                   " E fi a E  iS;; i P9 H

Ftr

EnclosureB TMt-15-036 EscalationAnalysisfor ThreeMile lsland Unit 2 20 13 Sife-SpecrfrcDecommissioning Cost E stimate February2015 (15 pagesfollow)

Document F07-1676-003,Reu. 0 ESCALATION ANALY$S for THREE MILE ISLAND UNIT 2 2013 SITE-SPECIFI C DE COMMISSIONINGCOSTESTIMATE prepared for FirstEnergy Corporation prepared by TLG Services,Inc. Bridgewater, Connecticut February 2015

Three MiIe Island. Unit 2 Docurnent No. F07-1676-003,Rev.0 Escalation Analyeis Page ii of iii APPROVALS Project M*,nnger {#b Tschnicsl Manager TLG Seruices,Inc.

Three Mile Island, Unit 2 Docurnent No, F07-1676-003,Reu.0 Escalation Ana,Iysis Page iii of iii REVISION LOG TLG Sentices,Inc.

Three Mile Island. Unit 2 Document No. F07-1676-003, Reu.0 Escalation Analysis Page I of 12 DECOMMISSIOMNG COSTESCALATION STUDY Purpose This report presents escalatedcostsfor the estimates of the coststo decommission Three Mile Is1and Unit 2 (TMI-2) for the selected decommissioningscenarios.The estimates, escalated to the year of expenditure dollars, are designed to provide FirstEnergy Corporation @irstEnergy), with the information to assessits current decommissioningliability, as it relates to TMI-2. Basis This escalation analysis is based upon the recent decommissioning cost analysis performed for Three Mile Island Unit 2.r Explanatory information from this report is provided below. Three decommissioning scenarios were evaluated for Three Mile Island Unit 2 (TMI-2). The scenarios selected are representative of alternatives available to the owners and are defined as follows: DECON The adjacent TMI-I is promptly decommissionedupon the scheduled cessation of operations in 2034. TMI-2 transitions from a Post-Defueling Monitored Storage (PDMS) status to decommissioning in 2A40. The decommissioningprogram for TMI-2 commencesafter TMI-1 shutdown and is managed independently from the TMI-I decommissioning effort; license termination of Unit 2 occurs in 2053, approximately 60 years after TMI'2 flrst enteredPDMS.

2. Delayed DECON Decommissioningof TMI-2 commencesupon the removal of TMI-l's spent fuel from the site in 205f . The decommissioningprogram for TMI' 2 runs concurrently with the TMI-I decommissioningeffort and concludeswith the termination of both licenses.

3. SAFSTOR TMI-I is placed.into safe-storagewith decommissioningdeferred 60 years. TMI-2 remains in storage with decommissioningdeferred until it can be sequenced.with TMI-I. The decommissioning program for TML? mns concurrently with the TM-l decommissioningeffort and concludes with the termination of both licenses.

t "DecommissioningCost Analysis for ThreeMile Island lJnit2," DocumentF07'1676-001,Rev. 0, TLG Services,Inc., December2014. TLG Seruices, Inc.

Three Mile Island, Unit 2 Reu.0 Document No. F07-1676-003, Escalation Analysie Page 2 of 12 The site-specificcost estimate was prepared by TLG Services,Inc. (TLG) in year 2013 (i.e., nominal) dollars. Becausethe actual decommissioningwill not occur for many years and may continue for decades,the nominal-dollar estimates must be escalatedinto the year of expenditure. That is, we must determine the dollar value of each year's expenditure at the time it is expectedto be incurred. Those escalated dollars then provide the basis for fi.nancial planning and asset management. Because many of the decommissioning activities occur long in the future, small fluctuations in escalation on the cost side, and investment earnings on the trust balance side, have an exponential impact on the resources required over the long periods of time typically associatedwith decommissioningscenarios. In this analysis, TLG reviewed each applicable cost component separately to d"eterminethe rate by which each component was expected to escalate annually. Using an accepted aggregation methodolog:yTLG determined the overall average rate the decommissioningcostswere expectedto escalate annually for each unit and each scenario.The averagerates are provided in the results section. The following narrative describesthe methodology used to escalate the schedule of decommissioningexpenditures. BackEround TLG developed the cost to decommission TMI-2 in year 2013 dollars; the mathematics to transform those costs to the year in which they will actually be incurred is relatively straightforward,. The key to the analysis is selecting the appropriate forecasting indices for each of the major cost components. For that, TLG has relied.upon guidance from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) and the industry-wide recognizedexpertise of IHS Global Insight. The NRC divides its reference costs for decommissioning into categories of labor, energy, and Low Level Radioactive Waste (LLR!V) disposal. To provide guidance to operators and regulators and promote uniformity, the NRC periodically reissues NUREG-1307,"Report on Waste Burial Charges."NUREG-1307is helpful in that it id.entifi.esthe appropriate ind.ices that should be used to escalate the labor and energy cost components and provides historical changes in low level radioactive waste disposalcosts. TLG also allocates its costs for decommissioninginto categories,with the NRC's labor category further subdivided into "labor" and "equipment and materials," and an "other' category added for regulatory fees, property taxes and other unique or one-timeexpenditures. TLG Sercices,Inc.

Three Mile Island. Unit 2 Docurnent No. F07-1676-003, Reu.0 Escalation Analysis Page of 12 3 Consistent with standards defrned in the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) Accounting Standards Codification (ASC), Topic 4L0-20,121 TLG develops future cash flows by escalating four of the cost categories (abor, equipment and materials, energy and other) with indices provided by IHS Global Insight of Lexington, MA. IHS Global Insight is a privately held company which acquired Global Insight in 2008. The combined company includes well-known businesses such as Cambridge Energy ResearchAssociates(CERA), Jane's Information Group, and IHS Herold; it also includes the former companies known as DRI (Data Resources,Inc.) and WEFA (Mharton Econometric Forecasting Associates). Since Global Insight has no direct index for escalation of low level radioactive waste disposalcosts,the escalationrate for LLRW disposal has been establishedusing a broad-based inflation index (CPI, Services) combined with a comparative retrospective LLRW disposal cost escalation analysis. The timeframe of decommissioningtypically exceedsthat of the published indices; therefore for years beyond.the published index, the inflation factor is determined using a "moving-average"method, averagingthe most recent 25 years of indices to determine the future year index. This is a well-accepted methodology for determining longer-term projections and one that has been reviewed and deemed appropriateby IHS Global Insight as well. Assumntions and Methodolow The baseyear (2013)costswere extractedfrom the "DecommissioningCostAnalysis for Three Mile Island Unit 2," issued in December 20L4, specifi.callythe Total costs cashflows from Tables 3.1 through 3.3. The decommissioningcost analysis analyzed the DECON, Delayed DECON and SAFSTORscenarios. The primary objectivesof the TMI-2 decommissioningproject are to remove the facility from service, reduce residual radioactivity to levels permitting unrestricted release, restore the site, perform this work safely, and complete the work in a cost effective manner. The selection of a preferred decommissioning alternative is influenced by a number of factors. These factors include the cost of each decommissioningalternative, minimization of occupational rad.iation exposure, availability of low-Ievel waste disposal facilities, regglatory requirements, and public concerns. In addition, the existing agreement between FirstEnergy and the NRC requires decommissioning to be completed within 60 years of the beginning of the Post-Defueling Monitored Storage period, which began in 1993.The DECON scenarioin the cost estimate meetsthis requirement. 2 Accounting Standards Codification, Topic 4LO-20,Financial Accounting Standards Board, JuIy 2009.ASC 410-20-55-14states:"It is expectedthat uncertaintiesabout the amount and timing of future cash flows can be accommodatedby using the expected present value technique and therefore will not prevent the determination of a reasonableestimate of fair value." TLG Seruices,Inc.

Three MiIe Island. Unit 2 Document No. F07-1676-003, Reu.0 Escalation Analysis Page 4 of 12 Under the agreement with the owners of the adjacent Unit 1, TMI-Z wiII not begin d,ecommissioningprior to the final shutdown of Unit 1. The Delayed DECON and SAFSTOR methodology coordinates the Unit 1 and Unit 2 decommissioning operationsto a limited extent for cost sharing. The DECON methodologyassumes that TMI-2 decommissions independent of Unit 1 activities. Contaminated materials are removed, packaged, shipped and disposedof offsite. Clean materials are surveyed for radioactive contamination and released as scrap metal or construction debris. In accordancewith 10 CFR 50.S2(a)(9),a license termination plan will be developedand submitted for NRC approval at least two years prior to termination of the license. Following the license termination survey and termination of the NRC license, all remaining site structures are removed to three foot below grad.eelevation, and the subgrade voids backfilled with concrete rubble and structural frll. The site is frnally graded to conform to the surrounding area, and native vegetation placed for erosion control. Under the SAFSTOR methodolory, the facility is placed in a safe and stable condition and maintained in that state, allowing levels of radioactivity to decrease through rad.ioactivedecay, followed by decontamination and dismantlement. After the safe storage period.,the facility will be decontaminated and dismantled to levels that permit license termination, similar to the DECON methodology. Decommissioning costs were divided into the five escalation categories, for which future rate of inflation factors were established.The five categoriesare: Labor Wages,fringes and benefits for craft, salaries and benefits for professional workers, clerical, administrative, service, contract workers, as well as for certain trades Equipment & Material Heavy equipment, specialty tooling, packaging, small tools, construction materials, consumables, rental equipment and temporary construction facilities (trailers) Energy Electrical power purchases (as a large industrial customer) to support site operations LLRW Disposal Costs for the processing of low'Ievel radioactive waste as weII as for the controlled disposal of material that cannot be recovered(releasedfor unrestricted use) Other Site operating costs (not already accounted for), for example,taxes, fees,and costsfor specializedservicesand project support activities (may include unspecified contributions from labor, equipment and materials, and TLG Seruices,Inc.

Three Mile Island, Unit 2 Docurnent No. F07-1676-003,Rev,0 Escalation Analysis Page 5 of 12 transportation), and payments for one'time disposal services(e.g., Greater-than-Class-Cradioactive waste, or GTCC) The currently projected total costs (in thousands of 20L3 dollars) to decommission the nuclear station, with the two scenariosanalyzed, are as follows: DECON $1.188,564 DelayedDECON $L,177,554 SAFSTOR s1.239.065 The costs include the monies anticipated to be spent for operating license termination (radiological remediation) and site restoration activities. The costs are based on several key assumptions in areas of regulation' component characterization, high-level radioactive waste management, Iow'level radioactive waste disposal, performance uncertainties (contingency) and site remediation and restoration requirements. The following table reflects the percentageof each cost componentrelative to the total coststo decommissionTMI-2: DECON Delaved DECON SAFSTOR Escalation Costs o/oof Costs %of Costs %of Category (Thousands Total (Thousands Total (Thousands Total of 2013$) Cost of 2013$) Cost of 2013$) Cost Labor 67t.323 oo.D 65r.r22 OD.J 67L.870 54.2 Equipment & Material 137.959 11.6 r4r.727 L2.0 r53.977 12.4 Enerey 18.061 1.5 19.459 L.7 28,227 2.3 LLRW Disposal 258.232 2L.7 258.143 2L.9 258,r57 20.8 Other Items 102.989 8.7 107.103 9.1 126.834 IQ.2 Escalation The following escalation indices were established for each of the five cost categories. The escalationindices for Labor, Equipment and Material, Energy and Other were provided by IHS Global Insight Company via their Datalnsight-Web online service. The indices used show the last update as 13 October 2OL4.Global Insight does not provide historical or projected costs for disposal of radioactive waste. As such, a TlG-developed LLRW Disposal/Recycling index was used in this escalation TLG Seruices,Ine.

Three MiIe leland. Unit 2 Docurnent No. F07-1676-003,Reu, 0 Escalation Analysis Page 6 of 12 analysis. This index is a combination of historical information through 20t4 fuom NRC publications for disposal site rates and projections using the Consumer Price Index, Servicesinformation provided by Global Insight as discussedpreviously. Forecast data for labor, equipment/ materials, energy, and general inflation were available through 2O39.In order to extrapolate beyond the available Global Insight data, TLG calculated a 25-year moving averageinflation factor to extend the Global Insight indices through 2095, the end point of the TMI-2 decommissioning scenarios. Index Selection The following table identifies the Global Insight forecast data sets used for the four cost categories (exclusive of LLRW disposal). Consistent with the NRC's guidance, TLG escalatesthe labor componentof its decommissioningcost estimates using an Employment Cost Index (ECI) and the energ:ycost componentwith a Producer Price Index (PPD. Use of the Consumer Price Index, Services (CUSASNS) for general services, site operating costs and one-time expenditures is consistent with the intent of the index (the measure of the averagechange in prices over time of goodsand services). Global Insight Forecast Database TLG Cost Category ECI Total Compensation@CIPCTNS) Labor Expenditures Infl ation Producer Price Index, Machinery & Equipment/Nlaterial Expenditures Eouipment (WPIP11) Inflation ProducerPrice Index, Fuels and Related Energy Expenditures Inflation Products and Power (WPIP05) ConsumerPrice Index. Services Other Items Expenditures Inflation (CUSASNS) TlG-Developed LLRW DisposalPrice Index LLRW Disposal / Recycling [Historical data basedupon Barnwell published tari{fs; forecastdata basedupon the Consumer Price Index, Services (CUSASNS)plus 1% additional to reflect above-inflationincreasesobservedat the Barnwell burial sitel TLG Seruices,Inc.

Three MiIe Island. Unit 2 Document No. F07-1676-003,Reu.0 Escalation Analyeis Page 7 of 12 Labor The decommissioningprocessis labor intensive, with labor representing more than half of the total cost. The estimates for TMI-2 include the cost of the craft labor performing field activities, the field supervision and support services, project management, administration, security, and costs for specialty contractors. The Employment Cost Index (ECI) is a measureof changesin labor costs.It is one of the principal economicindicators used by the Federal Reserve Bank. The index shows changes in wages and. salaries and benefit costs, as well as changes in total compensation.The ECIPCTNS index, provided by Global Insight, is a forecast of future changes in the cost of labor, defrned as compensation per employee hour worked. The self-employed, owners-managers, and unpaid family workers are excluded. from coverage. The ECI is designed as a fixed-weight index at the occupational level, thus eliminating the effects of employment shifts among occupations. Both components of compensation, wages/salaries, and benefits, are covered. In addition to TLG's judgment, IHS Global Insight has confi.rmedthat the selected ind.ex is appropriate to use in determining the rate at which the labor costs will escalateover time. Equipment and Material Equipment and material costs in the decommissioningestimates include small tools and consumables as well as the heavy construction equipment involved in the dismantling, d.emolition and movement of materials around the site. The Producer Price Indexes ePI) measuresmonthly averagechangesin selling prices receivedby d.omesticproducers for their output. Most of the information used in the PPI is obtained by sampling of industries in the mining and manufacturing sectors of the economy.The indexes reflect price trends for a constant set of goods and services representing the total output of an industry. TLG uses a broad-basedescalationindex, the Producer Price Index for Machinery and EquipmentWPIP1l). In addition to TLG's judgment, IHS Global Insight has confirmed that the selected index is appropriate to use in determining the rate at which the equipment and material costswill escalateover time. Energy Enerry costs in the decommissioningestimate include only direct energy purchases, primarily electric power and fuel oil for heating. TLG uses a broad'basedpower escalation index, ihe Producer Price Ind.ex for Fuels and Related Products and Power (WPP05). While the WPIPO5 index has some volatility (since it tracks in TLG Seruices,Inc.

Three Mile Island, Unit 2 Reu.0 Docutnent No. F07-1676-003, Escalation Analysis Poge 8 of 12 part the price of oil), the cost of energy in the decommissioningestimates is a small percentage and therefore has little effect on the overall escalation rate for decommissioningcost. In addition to TLG's judgment, IHS Global Insight has confirmed that the selected index is appropriate to use in determining the rate at which energT costs will escalateover time. Low Level Radioactive Waste Disposal The inflation index used for radioactive waste burial costs is the Global Insight Consumer Price Index, Services (CUSASNS), with an additional lo/oper year to account for differencesobserved(over the past 14 years) between low-level waste disposal rates reported in NRC NUREG-1307 documents and general services inllation rate (CUUR0000SAS)reported by the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Other "Othey costsin the decommissioningestimates include such items as licensing fees, taxes, specialservices(for example,a fee for the geologicdisposalof GTCC waste), as well as labor-intensive activities such as radiological surveys that include costs for off-site analytical services. Becausethe "Other" costs contain this variety of cost components,TLG uses a ConsumerPrice Index to project future expenditures.The CPI, Services index (CUSASNS) measures changes in the prices of goods and services.It is therefore more representative of the non-labor cost elements included in the decommissioningestimates. Accordingly, the use of the CPI for "Other' costs reflects more accurately the cost componentswith the "Other category than the use of the "Labor" escalation factor as a proxy. In addition to TLG's judgment, IHS Global Insight has confirmed that the selected index is appropriate to use in determining the rate at which the "other" costs will escalateover time. Results With the proper escalation indices identified, TLG escalated the cost per year for the five escalation categories using the Global Insight index corresponding to that year and escalation .uiegory. Tables 1 through 3 provide escalated schedulesof annual expendituresfor the DECON, DelayedDECON and SAFSTORscenariosfor TMI-2. The schedulesdetail each of the five escalation categoriesthrough to the end of each scenario's decommissioningperiod for Total Costs, as well as the cost categoriesof License Termination and Site Restoration. TLG Seruices,Ine,

Three MiIe Island. Unit 2 Document No. F07-1676-003,Reu,0 Escalation Analysis Page I of 12 No discounting of the escalateddollars was performed. Using the escalated cash flows for each unit, TLG determined the single-value yearly escalation rate which yielded the same sum of escalated dollars for each of the four tables. The rate, referred to as a composite averageannual escalation rate, is tabulated for the four decommissioningcost cash flows as follows: DECON 2.77% DelavedDECON 2.78% SAFSTOR 2.85% In a similar fashion, the composite average annual escalation rates for each of the five escalation categories can be developed. The following table details the compositeannual averagerates for the three decommissioningscenarios. Composite Average Annual Rate (%o) Escalation DECON Delayed SAFSTOR Categorv DECON Labor 2.7L3 2.707 2.687 Equipment/ & Material 1.146 1.153 1.176 Enersv 2.200 2.L93 2.r49 LLRW Disnosal 3.599 3.607 3.632 Other Items 2.628 2.631 2.644 Overall 2.774 2.784 2.853 Similarly, the composite average annual escalation rates for the three cost categories identifred in the decommissioning cost estimate can also be developed. The values for the three d.ecommissioningscenarios are provided in lhe following table. Composite AveraEe Annual Rate ( ) Escalation Delayed DECON SAFSTOR Category DECON License Termination 2.795 2.805 2.87r Site Restoration 2.331 2.324 2.381 Overall 2.774 2.784 2.853 TLG Seruices,Inc.

sql sr. dj' \ S9

                                                                                                                &-s.

sta ^B (o I gc \l fl oooooo0 sl{ EE o EE 9Er 6 I E;i ooooooooooo o sitt

                              -gg      5 t

iEE q g! f

                                          )oooooo                                             ooooooooooS 3Ei       i a;!

Egl ao6ooooooNooooo$ rI

;i!

Et t rt

                                          )ooooooooooooooo.$HRRfr EE' H! I      6
                                                                                         ;d                     Ei Eg ET tr i iHHEREFHHHFHHH$ERFHHHHHRfi                  FRXRHEHHFfi          RRHH I

r $f ;H $ 3 R . ; . E n F F B S $ e q & q s e$ H H $ $ PPNENNR=FSSS' t ooooooooooooooooo....E$gEpE[$.888.R.;

gssSsgE3bg3'"

RN $RFFnFFH sHs;$FsE ssssEsHH$.83:$.$iBFEEiH 3 Efi$P$SE$gBN

                                                                                          ;;:JJ;<t.iddddd nHpFF$g:*$BsHgsg$s?s$se$geFgggBEiD33*Fe z

o o HHEFHfi FHHHHHHFFHRFRHFHHFF$fi *H*THHFFHFFRF 9:N8SE3F38eR3r ddddddddddq?di I e* fi,E; eEHge$$$qg5Hs$$Bt $ - PEgR.

                                                                                   - fr
                                                                                - -F        sfr.Rs.

i B" eHeR R$j i$ E$EF E$dfi.E

oooooooooooooooooooooF[$F5EE*

                      ?                                                                      s$sP$3'33bBE' ii E

P I I RNRRiRRRxRSFS;il8$E$$$$rfr HEfr E.3:n$3S ggE$H g t ti e o F3 9E 5 ooooRssbsssqEgggH d ooo6oooooooo

          \U, 5       F
                      .!r

I'*?-i9'33L';*"

qP 3 d o1*

l I ll.

o E t el i_! i E E

                                            $$gRsig:*$gg$gBgH?Cg$3c$3e                    g*3!BE3Egg3$3 tn x9 Sal E

r ttErE! I

'B s s5 i 3 o 5E s i; E I C F E z

sE o FHFFEE gFHHHHHFHRFHHgHHFRRFFHXXHEHHERHRH 6 1r c P E.9 < I 5 Ei g s tP!B ( ) i 6 t 8 E!'EE d 5 3 ;$!E E'3tr N

sal R5 6j' \ SO s!! ^ lo z N o s r& U

l

t r* ooooooo6oooo6oooooooooooooooooooooRE E ? :-

E r" 3E I E:E I oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo D 5: s! i a i8E i q i{ Pl e ! I oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooeooooooooPo ri! 3EiI l4! cooooooooo oooo8p

                               !gt                                                                                                      E r3l      t

3{ I I

zad Fx* OE

                                                                                              .*..9xfi9fr..

6b6M F; u8

                               =u
                               =2 I

R E E r5 a iEEFFFFHHHHHHF$HRFHFHHFRHgFR$HHHfi HfifiRR$$HHHRFR z

o I E er sFE$figx s3$qg5H; sfi$gsE gI cs.EE.N"R R.E$"$N.E g$gg3.3.S

                                                                                  ;i;----r-NRRNn&9P9:**

g oooooooooo -ee*:eePslPsggREflFFgRpfiE$ g @

                                                                                                      - e -: .-!-. -d R F $ E E E R R N S F
                                  .E RFRRFR$RNHsHs:sBsF3s8Fss$ssq$:fl$$$H.nEgF t

ooooooooooooooooooooH$5$E$$q[9qfr.H.e.3*.g"Hd.F.s-.9m.$ 6 - 6 o N N o o o o o e s o t a I I nHsRs$s:**ss$ssssse$$seessF$3$$gFgFi3$$$ 2 o o q FHHFFfi EFHHHHFHH$RHHHHHHRHREE$HHHHFfi fiFRRH*RFgR z E d o

                                            $ J fH                             $$EpE:se3$FRfi i I g F g g g g $g$s$s f$r $ f i                            33*R          gE $s$:R
                  !                         ooooooooooooooooooooo              PP::ePseseggREgSpERp$[*

6

                                    ]                                                                 eseR&eggBggNs R N R & R R R S N R g H S FE        Sees   E B g$T$=gg.*iig.ggxgltu F $$s$$

F5 E E s* i og t q E d: i $5$Et Eg- $- t- $- r*;Fd$s 8.X.3 e P Pg j s i $ H.S.s e F.g$ i i d sS

*+

If ,

g;i =E flgRgR$g:** g3$gggsgg$g es!s!88$rs3$$$g$$EEf O;FJ H ol ri i $$35 t! ' B fi sFila l d 6E i r I o

i* i E. { 3s = i! d I z HHFFEfi FHHHHHHHHRHHHHHFRHfi gFHfi *HfiHfifrFHgHRHHRFR a 3iX E!el e! F E ' i s< it ;t E!E iP T at) o;

            ;'r;rTT
 $$I hJ Fi

s sb gl.----

dI El

\ l *l S l^:l !s 1,5 tEB

       !l il E l3?l tEt l^l ESI

l ag&8888t----

FE

                 ;iEiFFFFFEFIEFNIFEHfiEF!hCiiiIiTfiEFTIFfiflgiEFEEgF*PFF*gFFEfi6[$8fiAAgRiHAF*AERfifi
                   $E39*;i$3sg:!gE!*:93i$g:$$!t*;E:3gi              555:   e:;$;"15:    E;"t-{is:8i  cFF:'FFP:;gi;    $*:$;'$s$.Alii s::3ni:Fiistslii:rF;g:l:a3*Bgtstll I

ooc.cooorr.e!.!:reesnltsIRtFs&t6s38t5;e.?:?9e53s58.!8 g & E - i - gg; a g - i F - s - g s l i e :$ sE g a iF F ss : l r l8r ftsilfrii8titsF;;rFaEssEisl:s0is33!B;E8s$EtCsEArseAFF[3pFF:gSsSIilitseEsg$.gB$3:$953: iii l

                                 " " ' t s 9 1 3 c $ r i E t r l e F s : ! u ! s E I c t s S s s  ; E E t J t s s E sqEt d  : "F; :: 3r r9P5t,"1q1f r il, I

ii it.

                ;13 $x$ig:i$li$sB33gg    $.alt:::!Billi: ei8i!e!ie:sE            i; *gi$ia*    8${*3$i5;3$sg*}       3F*g$E$l           $*l$     El i6 iEEFFfiffFFEFFFF$Rfi*RgdPRARf,iiFiiIFAFFFfiI{PTFPftgTfig$*HR*$FFfiFEfiEFFEHgFP*PflgF$gdP
                                                  @*s::*ecrsste:rFg$PF:533$$$:

cccoo.!?::!r!rF:crraisNREarFaRe;s8atsi8s5e:sto"**"rnor9slFggtgH.fi!iiii; ii rt. EFflffiRFixtsEiisFsicsEsi!:!srscec!5:!eistlssEgt$tEpF!:plp:ssssrfIssgg$$.t3833i3$iF? xilE '""'isE:r{clists.Bs::*s$3!ssEgEsc;EEiEEilEsEEpiFpFg:&ts-i$;*!-gR!R I $iii

 !gEii'i,'i      I $R            ir g33
                          *lt: $gB
                     $g"rC:                 9-8:::!!!1t   9:i1!! ! 9!! iiis?gl:i$ii 3$$g8R$ig:g$n                9gig3$gf;$:$:t*

o I L

s;ii*ii

                 ;giEFFFPFFPIFXFgFgH*CIFgCIEiiiPIiiiFFfig*PEFEEF*ggi*[F*gE6HFEEEhFgi$*F{fiRfiRFF                                                         v)}}

TMI-15-036, Decommissioning Funding Status Report

Contents

Text

Enclosures:

References:

References:

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

Navigation menu

TMI-15-036, Decommissioning Funding Status Report

Text

Enclosures:

References:

References:

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

Navigation menu

Search