ML17097A559

Callaway, Unit 1 - Enclosure 3 to ULNRC-06349 - Document A22-1690-001, Rev. 0, Decommissioning Cost Analysis for the Callaway Energy Center, Cover Page - Section 1, Page 8 of 8

ML17097A559
Person / Time
Site:	Callaway
Issue date:	03/16/2015
From:	Cloutier W A TLG Services
To:	Ameren Missouri, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Shared Package
ML17097A555	List: ML17097A556 ML17097A557 ML17097A558 ML17097A559 ML17097A560 ML17097A561 ML17097A562 ML17097A563 ML17097A564 ML17097A565 ML17097A566 ML17097A567 ML17097A568 ULNRC-06349, Callaway, Unit 1 - Document A22-1690-001, Rev. 0, Decommissioning Cost Analysis for the Callaway Energy Center, Section 3, Page 14 of 30 - Section 5, Page 2 of 6 ULNRC-06349, Callaway, Unit 1 - Enclosure 1 to ULNRC-06349 - NRC Decommissioning Funding Status Report - 2017 ULNRC-06349, Callaway, Unit 1 - Enclosure 2 to ULNRC-06349 - Minimum Decommissioning Cost - Per 10 CFR 50.75 Formula Process ULNRC-06349, Callaway, Unit 1 - Enclosure 3 - Document A22-1690-001, Rev. 0, Decommissioning Cost Analysis for the Callaway Energy Center, Decommissioning Alternatives, Section 2, Pages 1 of 12 - Section 3 Page 13 of 30 ULNRC-06349, Callaway, Unit 1 - Enclosure 3 to ULNRC-06349 - Document A22-1690-001, Rev. 0, Decommissioning Cost Analysis for the Callaway Energy Center, Appendix C, Page 4 of 10 - Appendix E, Page 7 of 10 ULNRC-06349, Callaway, Unit 1 - Enclosure 3 to ULNRC-06349 - Document A22-1690-001, Rev. 0, Decommissioning Cost Analysis for the Callaway Energy Center, Appendix E, Page 8 of 10 - Appendix G, Page 11 of 14 ULNRC-06349, Callaway, Unit 1 - Enclosure 3 to ULNRC-06349 - Document A22-1690-001, Rev. 0, Decommissioning Cost Analysis for the Callaway Energy Center, Appendix G, Page 12 of 14 - Appendix H, Page 20 of 20 ULNRC-06349, Callaway, Unit 1 - Enclosure 3 to ULNRC-06349 - Document A22-1690-001, Rev. 0, Decommissioning Cost Analysis for the Callaway Energy Center, Cover Page - Section 1, Page 8 of 8 ULNRC-06349, Callaway, Unit 1 - Enclosure 3 to ULNRC-06349 - Document A22-1690-001, Rev. 0, Decommissioning Cost Analysis for the Callaway Energy Center, Section 5, Page 3 of 6 - Appendix C, Page 3 of 10 ULNRC-06349, Callaway, Unit 1 - Enclosure 4 to ULNRC-06349 - Statement of Net Assets Available for Benefits ULNRC-06349, Callaway, Unit 1 - Enclosure 6 to ULNRC-06349 - Non-Unanimous Stipulation and Agreement ULNRC-06349, Callaway, Unit 1 - Status of Decommissioning Funding ULNRC-06349, Enclosure 7 - Order Approving Stipulation and Agreement ULNRC-06349, joy-nv Callaway, Unit 1 - Enclosure 5 to ULNRC-06349 - Application for Approval of Decommissioning Cost Estimate for Callaway Energy Center and Funding Level of Nuclear Decommissioning Trust Fund
References
ULNRC-06349 A22-1690-001, Rev. 0
Download: ML17097A559 (25)

Text

ULNRC-06349 DocumentA22-1690-OO1, Rev.0Enclosure3

• PagefoflZ3 DECOMMISSIONING COSTANALYSISfortheCALLAWAYENERGYCENTERpreparedforAmerenMissouripreparedbyTLGServices, Inc.Bridgewater, Connecticut March2015 ULNRC-06349 Enclosure 3Page2of173CallawayEnergyCenterDocumentA224690-OO1, Rev0Decommissioning CostAnalysisPageiiofxviiAPPROVALS ProjectManagerLim-dt9iiiia.rois WilliamA.Cloutier, Jr.DateyProjectEngineer'/%/4/5TimothyA.ArnoldDpteTechnical ManagerTLGServices, Inc.

ULNRC-06349 Enclosure 3Page3of773CaflawayEnergyCenterDocumentA22-1690-OO1, Rev.0Decommissioning CostAnalysisPageiiiofxviiTABLEOFCONTENTSSECTIONPAGEEXECUTIVE SUMMARYvli-xvliINTRODUCTION 1-i1.1Objectives ofStudy1-11.2SiteDescription 1-11.3Regulatory Guidance1-21.3.1High-Level Rathoactive WasteManagement 1-41.3.2Low-Level Radioactive WasteDisposal1-51.3.3Radiological CriteriaforLicenseTermination 1-72.DECOMT$$IOMNG ALTERNATIVES 2-12.1DECON2-22.1.1Period1-Preparations 2-22.1.2Period2-Decommissioning Operations 2-42.1.3Period3-SiteRestoration 2-72.2SAFSTOR2-82.2.1Period1-Preparations 2-92.2.2Period2-Dormancy2-102.2.3Periods3and4-DelayedDecommissioning 2-112.2.4Period5-SiteRestoration 2-123.COSTESTIMATE3-13.1BasisofEstimate3-13.2Methodology 3-13.3Financial Components oftheCostModel3-33.3.1Contingency 3-33.3.2Financial Risk3-53.4Site-Specific Considerations 3-63.4.1SpentFuelManagement 3-63.4.2ReactorVesselandInternalComponents 3-73.4.3PrimarySystemComponents 3-83.4.4RetiredComponents 3-103.4.5MainTurbineandCondenser 3-103.4.6Transportation Methods3-103.4.7Low-Level Radioactive WasteDisposal3-113.4.8SiteConditions Following Decommissioning 3-12TLGServices, Inc.

ULNRC-06349 Enclosure 3Page4of173CaflawayEnergyCenter.DocumentA22-1690-OO1, Rev.0Decommissioning CostAnalysisPageivofxviiTABLEOFCONTENTS(continued)

SECTIONPAGE3.5Assumptions 3-133.5.1Estimating Basis3-133.5.2LaborCosts3-133.5.3DesignConditions 3-143.5.4General3-153.6CostEstimateSummary3-174.SCHEDULEESTIMATE4-14.1ScheduleEstimateAssumptions 4-14.2ProjectSchedule4-25.RADIOACTIVE WASTES5-16.RESULTS6-17.REFERENCES 7-1TABLESDECONCostSummary,Decommissioning CostElementsxviSAFSTORCostSummary,Decommissioning CostElementsxvii3.1DECONAlternative, TotalAnnualExpenditures 3-193.laDECONAlternative, LicenseTermination Expenditures 3-203.lbDECONAlternative, SpentFuelManagement Expenditures 3-213.lcDECONAlternative, SiteRestoration Expenditures 3-223.2SAFSTORAlternative, TotalAnnualExpenditures 3-233.2aSAF$TORAlternative, LicenseTermination Expenditures 3-263.2b$AFSTORAlternative, SpentFuelManagement Expenditures 3-293.2c$AFSTORAlternative, SiteRestoration Expenditures 3-305.1DECONAlternative, Decommissioning WasteSummary5-55.2SAF$TORAlternative, Decommissioning WasteSummary5-66.1DECONAlternative, Decommissioning CostElements6-46.2SAFSTORAlternative, Decommissioning CostElements6-5TLGServices, Inc.

ULNRC-06349 Enclosure 3Page5of173CallawayEnergyCenterDocumentA22-1690-OO1, Rev.0Decommissioning CostAnalysisPagevofxviiTABLEOFCONTENTS(continued)

SECTIONPAGEG-1DECONAlternative, TotalAnnualExpenditures G-2G-laDECONAlternative, LicenseTermination Expenditures G-3G-lbDECONAlternative, SpentFuelManagement Expenditures G-4G-lcDECONAlternative, SiteRestoration Expenditures G-5H-i$AFSTORAlternative, TotalAnnualExpenditures H-2H-la$AFSTORAlternative, LicenseTermination Expenditures 11-5H-lbSAFSTORAlternative, SpentFuelManagement Expenditures 11-8H-ic$AFSTORAlternative, SiteRestoration Expenditures H-9FIGURES4.1ActivitySchedule4-34.2Decommissioning

Timeline, DECON4-44.3.Decommissioning

Timeline, SAFSTOR4-55.1Radioactive WasteDisposition 5-35.2Decommissioning WasteDestinations, Radiological 5-4APPENDICESA.UnitCostFactorDevelopment A-iB.UnitCostFactorListingB-iC.DECONAlternative Decommissioning CostEstimate, 40-YearOperating LifewithLow-Level Radioactive WasteProcessing C-2D.SAF$TORAlternative Decommissioning CostEstimate, 40-YearOperating LifewithLow-Level Radioactive WasteProcessing D-2E.DECONAlternative Decommissioning CostEstimate, 40-YearOperating LifewithDirectDisposalofLow-Level Radioactive WasteE-2F.SAFSTORAlternative Decommissioning CostEstimate, 40-YearOperating LifewithDirectDisposalofLow-Level Radioactive WasteF-2G.DECONAlternative Decommissioning CostEstimate, 60-YearOperating LifewithLow-Level Radioactive WasteProcessing G-6H.$AF$TORAlternative Decommissioning CostEstimate, 60-YearOperating LifewithLow-Level Radioactive WasteProcessing 11-10TLGServices, Inc.

ULNRC-06349 Enclosure 3Page6of173CallawayEnergyCenter.DocumentA22-1690-OO1, Rev.0Decommissioning CostAnalysisPageviofxviiREVISIONLOGNo.DateItemRevisedReasonforRevision003-16-2015 OriginalIssueTLGServices, Inc.

ULNRC-06349 Enclosure 3Pagezof173CallawayEnergyCenterDocumentA22-1690-OO1, Rev.0Decommissioning CostAnalysisPageviiofxviiEXECUTIVE SUMMARYThisreportpresentsestimates ofthecosttodecommission theCallawayEnergyCenter(Callaway) fortheselecteddecommissioning alternatives andscenarios following thescheduled cessation ofplantoperations.

Theestimates aredesignedtoprovideAmerenMissouriwithsufficient information toassessitsfinancial obligations, astheypertaintotheeventualdecommissioning ofthenuclearunit.Theanalysisreliesuponsite-specific, technical information fromanevaluation preparedin2011,[']updatedtoreflectcurrentassumptions pertaining tothedisposition ofthenuclearunitandrelevantindustryexperience inundertaking suchprojects.

Theanalysisisnotacomprehensive engineering evaluation, butestimates preparedinadvanceofthedetailedplanningrequiredtoexecutethedecommissioning ofthenuclearunit.Itmayalsonotreflecttheactualplantodecommission Callaway; theplanmaydifferfromtheassumptions madeinthisanalysisbasedonfactsthatexistatthetimeofdecommissioning.

Thecoststodecommission Callawayforthebasescenarios (currentlicenseexpiration date)arepresented attheendofthissection.Costsarereportedin2014dollarsandincludemoniesanticipated tobespentforradiological remediation andoperating licensetermination, spentfuelmanagement, andsiterestoration activities.

Acompletediscussion oftheassumptions relieduponinthisanalysisisprovidedinSection3,alongwithschedules ofannualexpenditures forthebasescenarios.

Asequenceofsignificant projectactivities isprovidedinSection4withatimelineforeachscenario.

Detailedcostreportsusedtogeneratethesummarytablescontained withinthisdocumentareprovidedintheappendices alongwiththecostsfortheadditional scenarios.

Consistent withthe2011analysis, thecurrentcostestimates assumethattheshutdownofthenuclearunitisascheduled andpre-planned event(e.g.,thereisnodelayintransitioning theplantandworkforce fromoperations orinobtaining regulatory relieffromoperating requirements, etc.).Theestimates includethecontinued operation ofthefuelhandlingbuildingasaninterimwetfuelstoragefacilityforapproximately fiveandone-halfyearsafteroperations cease.Duringthistimeperiod,itisassumedthatthespentfuelresidinginthepoolwillbetransferred toanindependent spentfuelstorageinstallation (ISFSI)locatedonthesite.TheISFSIwillremainoperational untiltheDepartment ofEnergy(DOE)isableto1"Decommissioning CostAnalysisfortheCallawayEnergyCenter,"DocumentNo.A22-1644-OO1, Rev.0,TLGServices, Inc.,August2011TLGServices, Inc.

ULNRC-06349 Enclosure 3Page8of173CaflawayEnergyCenter.DocumentA22-1690-OO1, Rev.0Decommissioning CostAnalysisPageviiiofxviicompletethetransferofthefueltoafederalfacility(e.g.,amonitored retrievable storagefacility).

Alternatives andRçgilations Theultimateobjective ofthedecommissioning processistoreducetheinventory ofcontaminated andactivated materialsothatthelicensecanbeterminated.

TheNuclearRegulatory Commission (NRCorCommission) providedinitialdecommissioning requirements initsruleadoptedonJune27,1988.[21Inthisrule,theNRCsetforthfinancial criteriafordecommissioning licensednuclearpowerfacilities.

Theregulations addressed planningneeds,timing,fundingmethods,andenvironmental reviewrequirements fordecommissioning.

Therulealsodefinedthreedecommissioning alternatives asbeingacceptable totheNRC:DECON,$AF$TOR,andENTOMB.DECONisdefinedas"thealternative inwhichtheequipment, structures, andportionsofafacilityandsitecontaining radioactive contaminants areremovedordecontaminated toalevelthatpermitsthepropertytobereleasedforunrestricted useshortlyaftercessation ofoperations."[3]

$AF$TORisdefinedas"thealternative inwhichthenuclearfacilityisplacedandmaintained inacondition thatallowsthenuclearfacilitytobesafelystoredandsubsequently decontaminated (deferred decontamination) tolevelsthatpermitreleaseforunrestricted use."[41Decommissioning istobecompleted within60years,althoughlongertimeperiodswifibeconsidered whennecessary toprotectpublichealthandsafety.ENTOMBisdefinedas"thealternative inwhichradioactive contaminants areencasedinastructurally long-lived

material, suchasconcrete; theentombedstructure isappropriately maintained andcontinued survefflance iscarriedoutuntiltheradioactive materialdecaystoalevelpermitting unrestricted releaseoftheproperty."[5J Aswiththe$AF$TORalternative, decommissioning iscurrently requiredto2U.S.CodeofFederal Regulations, Title10,Parts30,40,50,51,70and72'GeneralRequirements forDecommissioning NuclearFacilities,"

NuclearRegulatory Commission, FederalRegisterVolume53,Number123(j24018etseq.),June27,19883Thid.PageFR24022,Column34Thid.5jjj.PageFR24023,Column2TLGServices, Inc.

ULNRC-06349 Enclosure 3Page9of173CaflawayEnergyCenterDocumentA224690-OO1, Rev.0Decommissioning CostAnalysis.Pageixofxviibecompleted within60years,althoughlongertimeperiodswifialsobeconsidered whennecessary toprotectpublichealthandsafety.The60-yearrestriction haslimitedthepracticality fortheENTOMBalternative atcommercial reactorsthatgeneratesignificant amountsoflong-lived radioactive materiaLIn1997,theCommission directeditsstafftore-evaluate thisalternative andidentifythetechnical requirements andregulatory actionsthatwouldbenecessary forentombment tobecomeaviableoption.Theresulting evaluation providedseveralrecommendations; however,rulemaking hasbeendeferredpendingthecompletion ofadditional researchstudies,forexample,onengineered barriers.

In1996,theNRCpublished revisions tothegeneralrequirements fordecommissioning nuclearpowerplantstoclarifyambiguities andcodifyprocedures andterminology asameansofenhancing efficiency anduniformity inthedecommissioning process.[6]

Theamendments allowforgreaterpublicparticipation andbetterdefinethetransition processfromoperations todecommissioning.

Regulatory Guide1.184,[]issuedinJuly2000,furtherdescribed themethodsandprocedures acceptable totheNRCstaffforimplementing therequirements ofthe1996revisedrulerelatingtotheinitialactivities andmajorphasesofthedecommissioning process.Thecostsandschedules presented inthisanalysisfollowthegeneralguidanceandprocesses described intheamendedregulations.

Theformatandcontentoftheestimates isalsoconsistent withtherecommendations ofRegulatory GuideL202,[81issuedinFebruary2005.Decommissioning Scenarios Multipledecommissioning scenarios wereevaluated fortheCallawaynuclearunit.Thescenarios selectedarerepresentative ofalternatives currently available totheowner.TheDECONandSAFSTORalternatives wereevaluated forbotha40-yearand60-yearoperating licensesincetheapplication forlicenserenewalisstillinreview.Twodisposaloptionswerealsoevaluated:

recycling anddirectdisposal.

Recycling ispresented asthebaseoptionandconsiders theoff-siteprocessing ofplant6U.S.CodeofFederal Regulations, Title10,Parts2,50,and51,"Decommissioning ofNuclear PowerReactors,'

NuclearRegulatory Commission, FederalRegisterVolume61,(p39278etseq.),July29,19967"Decommissioning ofNuclearPowerReactors,"

Regulatory Guide1.184,NuclearRegulatory Commission, July20008"Standard FormatandContentofDecommissioning CostEstimates ofDecommissioning CostEstimates forNuclearPowerReactors,"

Regulatory Guide1.202,U.S.NuclearRegulatory Commission, February2005TLGServices, Inc.

ULNRC-06349 Enclosure 3Page10of173CaflawayEnergyCenter.DocumentA22-1690-OO1, Rev.0Decommissioning CostAnalysisPagexofxviiequipment andcommodities withlowlevelsofradiological contamination andlormaterialsuspected tobecontaminated forvolumereduction priortothsposai.

Thedirectthsposaioptionassumesthatallcontaminated andsuspectmaterialispackagedatthesitefordisposalataregulated disposalfacility.

Thescenarios aresummarized asfollows.PlantLow-Level Alternative Operating Radioactive WasteCostSummaries and/orLife(years)OptionsDetailedEstimates DECON40Recycling Sections3,6,AppendixCDirectDisposalAppendixE$AFSTOR40Recycling Sections3,6,AppendixD.DirectDisposal AppendixFDECON60Recycling AppendixGSAFSTOR60Recycling AppendixHMethodolov Themethodology usedtodeveloptheestimates described withinthisdocumentfollowsthebasicapproachoriginally presented inthecostestimating guidelines[9J developed bytheAtomicIndustrial Forum(nowNuclearEnergyInstitute).

Thisreference describes aunitfactormethodfordetermining decommissioning activitycosts.Theunitfactorsusedinthisanalysisincorporate site-specific costsandthelatestavailable information onworkerproductivity indecommissioning.

Anactivitydurationcriticalpathisusedtodetermine thetotaldecommissioning programschedule.

Thescheduleisrelieduponincalculating thecarryingcosts,whichincludeprogrammanagement, administration, fieldengineering, equipment rental,andsupportservices, suchasqualitycontrolandsecurity.

Contingency Consistent withcostestimating

practice, contingencies areappliedtothedecontamination anddismantling costsdeveloped as"specific provision forunforeseeable elementsofcostwithinthedefinedprojectscope,particularly important wherepreviousexperience relatingestimates andactualcostshasshownthatunforeseeable eventswhichwifiincreasecostsarelikelytooccur."['°]

Thecost9T.S.LaGuardia etaL,"Guidelines forProducing Commercial NuclearPowerPlantDecommissioning CostEstimates,'

MFINESP-036, May198610ProjectandCostEngineers'

Handbook, SecondEdition,AmericanAssociation ofCostEngineers, MarcelDekker,Inc.,NewYork,NewYork,p.239TLGServices, Inc.

ULNRC-06349 Enclosure 3Pagello1173CaflawayEnergyCenter.DocumentA224690-OO1, Rev.0Decommissioning CostAnalysisPagexiofxviielementsintheestimates arebasedonidealconditions; therefore, thetypesofunforeseeable eventsthatarealmostcertaintooccurindecommissioning, basedonindustryexperience, areaddressed throughapercentage contingency appliedonaline-item basis.Thiscontingency factorisanearlyuniversal elementinalllarge-scale construction anddemolition projects.

Itshouldbenotedthatcontingency, asusedinthisanalysis, doesnotaccountforpriceescalation andinflation inthecostofdecommissioning overtheremaining operating lifeofthestation.Contingency fundsareexpectedtobefullyexpendedthroughout theprogram.Assuch,inclusion ofcontingency isnecessary toprovideassurance thatsufficient fundingwillbeavailable toaccomplish theintendedtasks.Low-Level Radioactive WasteDisposalThecontaminated andactivated materialgenerated inthedecontamination anddismantling ofacommercial nuclearreactorisclassified aslow-level (radioactive) waste,althoughnotallofthematerialissuitablefor"shallow-land" disposal.

Withthepassageofthe"Low-Level Radioactive WastePolicyAct"in1980,["landitsAmendments of1985,[121 thestatesbecameultimately responsible forthedisposition oflow-level radioactive wastegenerated withintheirownborders.Withtheexception ofTexas,nonewcompactfacilities havebeensuccessfully sited,licensed, andconstructed.

TheTexasCompactdisposalfacilityisnowoperational andwasteisbeingacceptedfromgenerators withintheCompactbytheoperator, WasteControlSpecialists (WCS).Thefacilityisalsoabletoacceptlimitedquantities ofnon-Compactwaste.Disposition ofthevariouswastestreamsproducedbythedecommissioning processconsidered alloptionsandservicescurrently available toAmerenMissouri.

Themajorityofthelow-level radioactive wastedesignated forcontrolled disposal(ClassA['31)canbesenttoEnergy$olutions' facilityinClive,Utah.Therefore, disposalcostsforClassAwastewerebaseduponAmerenMissouri's Utilities ServiceAllianceagreement withEnergy$olutions.

Thisfacilityisnotlicensedtoreceivethehigheractivityportion(ClassesBandC)ofthedecommissioning wastestream.TheWCSfacilityisabletoreceivetheClassBandCwaste.Assuch,forthisanalysis, ClassBandCwastewasassumedtobeshippedtotheWCSfacilityfordisposal.

DisposalcostswerebaseduponAmerenMissouri's currentagreement withWCS.11"Low-Level Radioactive WastePolicyActof1980,"PublicLaw96-573,198012"Low-Level Radioactive WastePolicyAmendments Actof1985,"PublicLaw99-240,198613Wasteisclassified inaccordance withU.S.CodeofFederal Regulations, Title10,Part61.55TLGServices, Inc.

ULNRC-06349 Enclosure 3Pagel2ofl73

.CallawayEnergyCenter.DocumentA22-1690-OO1, Rev.0Decommissioning CostAnalysisPagexiiofxviiThedismantling ofthecomponents residingclosesttothereactorcoregenerates radioactive wastethatmaybeconsidered unsuitable forshallow-land thsposal(i.e.,low-level radioactive wastewithconcentrations ofrathonucides thatexceedthelimitsestablished bytheNRCforClassCradioactive waste(GTCC)).TheLow-Level Radioactive WastePolicyAmendments Actof1985assignedthefederalgovernment theresponsibility forthedisposalofthismaterial.

TheActalsostatedthatthebeneficiaries oftheactivities resulting inthegeneration ofsuchradioactive wastebearallreasonable costsofdisposing ofsuchwaste.However,todate,thefederalgovernment hasnotidentified acostfordisposing ofGTCCorascheduleforacceptance.

Forpurposesofthisanalysisonly,theGTCCradioactive wasteisassumedtobepackagedanddisposedofinasimilarmannerashigh-level wasteandatacostequivalent tothatenvisioned forthespentfuel.TheGTCCispackagedinthesamecanisters usedforspentfuelandeitherstoredonsiteorshippeddirectlytoaDOEfacilityasitisgenerated (depending uponthetimingofthedecommissioning andwhetherthespentfuelhasbeenremovedfromthesitepriortothestartofdecommissioning).

Asignificant portionofthewastematerialgenerated duringdecommissioning mayonlybepotentially contaminated byradioactive materials.

Thismaterialcanbeanalyzedonsiteorshippedoffsitetolicensedfacilities forfurtheranalysis, forprocessing andlorforconditioning/recovery.

Reduction inthevolumeoflow-level rathoactive wasterequiring disposalinalicensedlow-level radioactive wastedisposalfacilitycanbeaccomplished throughavarietyofmethods,including analysesandsurveysordecontamination toeliminate theportionofwastethatdoesnotrequiredisposalasradioactive waste,compaction, incineration ormetalmelt.Theestimates forthebasecasescenarios reflectthesavingsfromwasterecovery/volume reduction.

High-Level Radioactive WasteManagement Congresspassedthe"NuclearWastePolicyAct"['41(NWPA)in1982,assigning thefederalgovernment's long-standing responsibility fordisposalofthespentnuclearfuelcreatedbythecommercial nucleargenerating plantstotheDOE.TheDOEwastobeginaccepting spentfuelbyJanuary31,1998;however,todatenoprogressintheremovalofspentfuelfromcommercial generating siteshasbeenmade.Today,thecountryisatanimpasseonhigh-level wastedisposal, evenwiththeLicenseApplication forageologicrepository submitted bytheDOEtotheNRCin14"NuclearWastePolicyActof1982andAmendments,"

DOE'sOfficeofCivilianRadioactive Management, 1982TLGServices, Inc.

ULNRC-06349 Enclosure 3Pagef3of173CaUawayEnergyCenterDocumentA22-1690-OO1, Rev.0Decommissioning CostAnalysisPagexiiiofxvii2008.Asaresult,generators haveimitiated legalactionagainsttheDOEinanattempttoobtaincompensation forDOE'sbreachofcontract.

InJune2011,AmerenMissouriandtheDOEreachedanagreement onasettlement.

ThetermsincludepaymenttoAmerenMissouriforspentfuelstorageandrelatedcoststhrough2010,andthereafter, annualpaymentofsuchcostsaftertheyareincurred.

Atshutdown, thespentfuelpooiisexpectedtocontainfreshlydischarged assemblies (fromthemostrecentrefueling cycles)aswellasthefinalreactorcore.Overthefollowing fiveandone-halfyearstheassemblies arepackagedintomultipurpose canisters fortransfertotheISF$I.Itisassumedthatthisperiodprovidesthenecessary coolingforthefinalcoretomeetthedrystoragesystem'srequirements fordecayheat.TheNRCrequiresthatlicensees establish aprogramtomanageandprovidefundingforthemanagement ofallirradiated fuelatthereactorsiteuntiltitleofthefuelistransferred totheSecretary ofEnergy,pursuantto10CFRPart5O.54(bb).['1 Thepost-shutdown costsincurredtosatisfythisrequirement includetheisolation andcontinued operation ofthespentfuelpooiandtheISF$Iduringthefiveandone-halfyearsfollowing thecessation ofplantoperations.

Costsareincludedwithinthedecommissioning estimates foroffloading thepool.Thesecostsincludetheacquisition ofthedrystoragesystemmodules(multipurpose canisters andshieldedoverpacks.

ISFSIoperations, oncethefuelhasbeenoff-loaded fromthepoolanduntilsuchtimethatthetransferoffueltotheDOEcanbecompleted, areexpectedtobefullyreimbursable andtherefore notaddressed inthisstudy.Theeventualdecommissioning oftheISF$Iisalsonotincluded.

Relocation ofthespentfuelfromthepooitotheISFSIwifiallowAmerenMissouritoproceedwithdecommissioning (orsafe-storage preparations) intheshortesttimepossible.

SiteRestoration Immediate dismantling ofsitestructures (oncethefacilities aredecontaminated) isclearlythemostappropriate andcost-effective option.Itisunreasonable toanticipate thatthesestructures wouldberepairedandpreserved aftertheradiological contamination isremoved.Thecosttodismantle sitestructures withaworkforcealreadymobilized onsiteismoreefficient thaniftheprocessisdeferred.

15US*CodeofFederal Regulations, Title10,Part50,"Domestic Licensing ofProduction andUtilization Facilities,"

Subpart54(bb),"Conditions ofLicenses" TLGServices, Inc.

ULNRC-06349 Endosure3PageJ4ofl73 CallawayEnergyCenterDocumentA22-1690-OO1, Rev.0Decommissioning CostAnalysisPagexivofxviiSitefacilities quicklydegradewithoutmaintenance, addingadditional expenseandcreatingpotential hazardstothepublicandthedemolition workforce.Consequently, thisstudyassumesthatsitestructures areremovedtoanominaldepthofthreefeetbelowthelocalgradelevelwhereverpossible.

Thesiteisthentobegradedandstabilized.

SummaryThecoststodecommission Callawayassumetheremovalofallcontaminated andactivated plantcomponents andstructural materials suchthattheownermaythenhaveunrestricted useofthesitewithnofurtherrequirements foranoperating license.Low-level radioactive waste,otherthanGTCCwaste,issenttoacommercial processor fortreatment/conditioning ortoacontrolled disposalfacility.

Decommissioning isaccomplished withinthe60-yearperiodrequiredbycurrentNRCregulations.

Regardless ofthetimingofthedecommissioning activities, theestimates assumetheeventualremovalofallthecontaminated andactivated plantcomponents andstructural materials, suchthatthefacilityoperatormaythenhaveunrestricted useofthesitewithnofurtherrequirement foranoperating license.Thedecommissioning scenarios aredescribed inSection2.Theassumptions arepresented inSection3,alongwithschedules ofannualexpenditures forthebasescenario.

Themajorcostcontributors areidentified inSection6,withdetailedactivitycosts,wastevolumes,andassociated manpowerrequirements delineated intheappendices tothisreport.Themajorcostcomponents arealsoidentified inthecostsummaryprovidedattheendofthissection.Thecostelementsintheestimates areassignedtooneofthreesubcategories:

NRCLicenseTermination, SpentFuelManagement, andSiteRestoration.

Thesubcategory "NRCLicenseTermination" isusedtoaccumulate coststhatareconsistent with"decommissioning" asdefinedbytheNRCinitsfinancial assurance regulations (i.e.,10CFRPart50.75).Thecostreportedforthissubcategory isgenerally sufficient toterminate theunit'soperating license,recognizing thattheremaybesomeadthtional costimpactfromspentfuelmanagement.

The"SpentFuelManagement" subcategory containscostsassociated withthetransferofthespentfueltotheISF$Iaswellastheoperation ofthespentfuelpooiuntilsuchtimethatthetransferiscomplete.

"SiteRestoration" isusedtocapturecostsassociated withthedismantling anddemolition ofbuildings andfacilities demonstrated tobefreefromcontamination.

Thisincludesstructures neverexposedtoradioactive materials, aswellathosefacilities TLGServices, Inc.

ULNRC-06349 Enclosure 3Page15of173CallawayEnergyCenterDocumentA22-1690-OO1, Rev.0Decommissioning CostAnalysisPagexvofxviithathavebeendecontaminated toappropriate levels.Structures areremovedtoadepthofthreefeetandbackfilled toconformtolocalgrade.Itshouldbenotedthatthecostsassignedtothesesubcategories areallocations.

Delegation ofcostelementsisforthepurposesofcomparison (e.g.,withNRCfinancial guidelines) ortopermitspecificfinancial treatment (e.g.,AssetRetirement Obligation determinations).

Inreality,therecanbeconsiderable interaction betweentheactivities inthethreesubcategories.

Forexample,anownermaydecidetoremovenon-contaminated structures earlyintheprojecttoimproveaccesstohighlycontaminated facilities orplantcomponents.

Intheseinstances, thenon-contaminated removalcostscouldbereassigned fromSiteRestoration toanNRCLicenseTermination supportactivity.

However,ingeneral,theallocations represent areasonable accounting ofthosecoststhatcanbeexpectedtobeincurredforthespecificsubcomponents ofthetotalestimated programcost,ifexecutedasdescribed.

Asnotedwithinthisdocument, theestimates weredeveloped andcostsarepresented in2014dollars.Assuch,theestimates donotreflecttheescalation ofcosts(duetoinflationary andmarketforces)overtheremaining operating lifeofthereactororduringthedecommissioning period.Forthepurposesofthisanalysis, thecostspresented inthefollowing tablesreflectplantdecommissioning attheexpiration ofitscurrentlicense(2024)andtheuseofoff-sitelow-level radioactive wasteprocessing tominimizethevolumedesignated forcontrolled disposal.

Costsfortheotheridentified scenarios (including thosefora60-yearoperating life)arepresented intheappendices (EthroughH).TLGServices, Inc.

ULNRC-06349 Enclosure 3Page16of173CaUawayEnergyCenterDecommissioning CostAnalysisDocumentA22-1690-OO1, Rev.0PagexviofxviiDECONCOSTSUMMARY40-YEARPLANTOPERATING LIFELOW-LEVEL RADIOACTIVE WASTEOFF-SITEPROCESSING DECOMMISSIONING COSTELEMENTS(thousands of2014dollars)-----"Decontamination 18,461Removal173,424....Transportation 15,934__----Security69,772273991p--"------p1t'_1ent-DirectCosts[2129,564-1392--..Charact9_çSurvs____

2424PropertyTaxes 2,595pqp_n------Total[3]836582CostElementLicenseTermination SpentFuelManagement SiteRestoration

[1]Includesengineering costs[2]Directcostsoniy.Excludesprogrammanagement costs(staffing) butincludescostsforspentfuelloading!spentfuelpoolO&MandEmergency Planningfees[31ColumnsmaynotaddduetoroundingCostTotal[3I836,582692,62229,564114,396TLGServices, Inc.

ULNRC-06349 Enclosure 3Page17of173CallawayEnergyCenterDocumentA22-1690-OO1, Rev.0Decommissioning CostAnalysisPagexviiofxviiSAFSTORCOSTSUMMARY40-YEARPLANTOPERATING LIFELOW-LEVEL RADIOACTWE WASTEOFF-SITEPROCESSING DECOMMISSIOMNG COSTELEMENTS(thousands of2014dollars)CostElementCostDecontamination 16,533Removal174,946Packaging

---

=--------2369Transportation 13,139-----.,..----ProrarnManagement

['1394,922EY..'...:_2__9--:....--.ppIqI,----.SpentFuelManagement

[2J29,534_Lg41cc.....",CharacterizationandLicensingSurveys 24,327PropertyTaxe s18,943C'cE1211--.Total[31-1,091,753 CostElementCostLicenseTermination 887,947cpFii1Manaement[4]89,388SiteRestoration 114,417Total[3]-1,091,753

[1]Includesengineering costs[2]Directcostsoniy.Excludesprogrammanagement costs(staffing) butincludescostsforspentfuelloading/spent fuelpoolO&MandEmergency Planningfees[3]Columnsmaynotaddduetorounding[4]Includespercentage ofPeriod2a(dormancy) plantoperating costsuntilspentfuelpoolisemptied,inadditiontothedirectcosts.TLGServices, Inc.

ULNRC-06349 Enclosure 3Pagel8of173CaUawayEnergyCenter.DocumentA22-1690-OO1, Rev.0Decommissioning CostAnalysisSectioni, Page1of81.INTRODUCTION Thisreportpresentsestimates ofthecoststodecommission theCallawayEnergyCenter(Callaway) fortheselecteddecommissioning alternatives andscenarios following thescheduled cessation ofplantoperations.

Theestimates aredesignedtoprovideAmerenMissouriwithsufficient information toassessitsfinancial obligations, astheypertaintotheeventualdecommissioning ofthenuclearunit.Theanalysisreliesuponsite-specific, technical information fromanevaluation

)preparedin2011,[hlupdatedtoreflectcurrentassumptions pertaining tothe:::.disposition ofthenuclearunitandrelevantindustryexperience inundertaking such.;projects.

Theanalysisisnotacomprehensive engineering evaluation, butestimates

,**

*preparedinadvanceofthedetailedplanningrequiredtoexecutethedecommissioning ofthenuclearunit.Itmayalsonotreflecttheactualplantodecommission Callaway; theplanmaydifferfromtheassumptions mademtinsanalysisbasedonfactsthat9'existatthetimeofdecommissioning.

01.1OBJECTIVES OFSTUDYTheobjectives ofthisstudyweretopreparecomprehensive estimates ofthecoststodecommission

Callaway, toprovideasequenceorschedulefortheassociated activities, andtodevelopwastestreamprojections fromthedecontamination anddismantling activities.

Anoperating licensewasissuedforCallawayin1984fora40yearoperating period.ThecurrentlicenseexpiresatmidnightonOctober18,2024.OnDecember19,2011,AmerenMissourisubmitted arequestforrenewaloftheoperating licenseforanadditional periodof20years.Theapplication iscurrentunderreviewbytheNuclearRegulatory Commission (NRC).Forthepurposesofthisanalysis, thebasecasereflectsplantdecommissioning attheexpiration ofitscurrentlicense(2024)andtheuseofoff-sitelow-level radioactive wasteprocessing tominimizethevolumedesignated forcontrolled disposal.

1.2SITEDESCRIPTION ThenuclearunitislocatedinCallawayCounty,Missouri, approximately 80mileswestoftheSt.Louismetropolitan area.Thenearestpopulation centerisJefferson City,25mileswest-southwest oftheplantsite.Thestationisan1,171MWe(netdesignelectrical rating)pressurized waterreactorwithsupporting facilities.

TLGServices, Inc.

ULNRC-06349 Enclosure 3Pagel9of173CallawayEnergyCenterDocumentA22-1690-OO1, Rev0Decommissioning CostAnalysisSectioni, Page2of8Westinghouse ElectricCompanydesignedthenuclearsteamsupplysystem(N$S$).TheN$$Sconsistsofapressurized waterreactorwithfourindependent primarycoolantloops,eachofwhichcontainsareactorcoolantpumpandasteamgenerator.

Anelectrically heatedpressurizer andconnecting pipingcompletethesystem.TheN$S$isratedatathermalpowerlevelof3,579MWt(3,565MWtreactorcoreplus14MWtforreactorcoolantpumps),withacorresponding turbine-generator grossoutputof1284MWe.Thesystemishousedwithinacontainment structure, apre-stressed, post-tensioned concretestructure withcylindrical wall,ahemispherical dome,andaflatfoundation slab.Thewallanddomeformapre-stressed post-tensioned system.Theinsidesurfaceofthestructure iscoveredwithacarbonsteelliner,providing aleaktightmembrane.

Apowerconversion systemconvertsheatproducedinthereactortoelectrical energy.Thissystemconvertsthethermalenergyofthesteamintomechanical shaftpowerandthenintoelectrical energy.Theturbine-generator isatandem-compound, six-flow, fourelement,1800-rpmunit.Theunitconsistsofonehighpressureandthreelow-pressure turbineelementsdrivingadirectlycoupledgenerator.

Theturbineisoperatedinaclosedfeedwater cyclethatcondenses thesteam;thefeedwater isreturnedtothesteamgenerators.

Heatrejectedinthemaincondensers isremovedbythecirculating watersystem.Thecirculating watersystemsuppliescoolingwatertothemaincondenser, condensing thesteamexhausted fromtheturbine.Coolingforthecondenser circulating watersystemissuppliedbyalargenaturaldraftcoolingtower.MakeupwaterforthecoolingtowerisdrawnfromtheMissouriRiver.1.3REGULATORY GUIDANCETheNuclearRegulatory Commission (NRCorCommission) providedinitialdecommissioning requirements initsrule"GeneralRequirements forDecommissioning NuclearFacilities,"

issuedinJune1988.[2]Thisrulesetforthfinancial criteriafordecommissioning licensednuclearpowerfacilities.

Theregulation addressed decommissioning planningneeds,timing,fundingmethods,andenvironmental reviewrequirements.

Theintentoftherulewastoensurethatdecommissioning wouldbeaccomplished inasafeandtimelymannerandthatadequatefundswouldbeavailable forthispurpose.Subsequent totherule,theNRCissuedRegulatory Guide1.159,"Assuring theAvailability ofFundsforDecommissioning NuclearReactors,"[3]

whichprovidedadditional guidancetothelicensees ofnuclearfacilities onthefinancial methodsacceptable totheNRCstaffforcomplying withtherequirements oftherule.Theregulatory guideaddressed thefundingTLGServices, Inc.

ULNRC-06349 Endosure3Page20of173CallawayEnergyCenter.DocumentA22-1690-OO1, Rev.0Decommissioning CostAnalysisSectioni, Page3of8requirements andprovidedguidanceonthecontentandformofthefinancial assurance mechanisms indicated intherule.Theruledefinedthreedecommissioning alternatives asbeingacceptable totheNRC:DECON,SAFSTOR,andENTOMB.TheDECONalternative assumesthatanycontaminated oractivated portionoftheplant'ssystems,structures andfacilities areremovedordecontaminated tolevelsthatpermitthesitetobereleasedforunrestricted useshortlyafterthecessation ofplantoperations.

Therulealsoplacedlimitsonthetimeallowedtocompletethedecommissioning process.ForSAF$TOR,theprocessisrestricted inoveralldurationto60years,unlessitcanbeshownthatalongerdurationisnecessary toprotectpublichealthandsafety.Theguidelines forENTOMBaresimilar,providing theNRCwithbothsufficient leverageandflexibility toensurethatthesedeferredoptionsareonlyusedinsituations whereitisreasonable andconsistent withthedefinition ofdecommissioning.

Attheconclusion ofa60-yeardormancyperiod(orlongerforENTOMBiftheNRCapprovessuchacase),thesitewouldstillrequiresignificant remethation tomeettheunrestricted releaselimitsforlicensetermination.

TheENTOMBalternative hasnotbeenviewedasaviableoptionforpowerreactorsduetothesignificant timerequiredtoisolatethelong-lived radionuclides fordecaytopermissible levels.However,withrulemaking permitting thecontrolled releaseofasite,[4]theNRChasre-evaluated thisalternative.

Theresulting feasibility study,baseduponanassessment byPacificNorthwest NationalLaboratory, concluded thatthemethoddidhaveconditional meritforsome,ifnotmostreactors.

However,thestaffalsofoundthatadditional rulemaking wouldbeneededbeforethisoptioncouldbetreatedasagenericalternative.

TheNRChadconsidered rulemaking toalterthe60-yeartimeforcompleting decommissioning andtoclarifytheuseofengineered barriersforreactorentombments

• [5]TheNRC'sstaffhasrecommended thatrulemaking bedeferred, baseduponseveralfactors,e.g.,nolicenseehascommitted topursuingtheentombment option,andtheNRC'scurrentpriorities, atleastuntilaftertheadditional researchstudiesarecomplete.

TheCommission concurred withthestaffsrecommendation.

In1996,theNRCpublished revisions tothegeneralrequirements fordecommissioning nuclearpowerplants.[61 Whenthedecommissioning regulations wereadoptedin1988,itwasassumedthatthemajorityoflicensees woulddecommission attheendofthefacility's operating licensedlife.Sincethattime,severallicensees permanently andprematurely ceasedoperations.

Exemptions fromcertainoperating requirements wererequiredTLGServices, Inc.

ULNRC-06349 Enclosure 3Page2lof173CallawayEnergyCenterDocumentA224690-OO1, Rev.0Decommissioning CostAnalysisSectioni, Page4of8oncethereactorwasdefueledtofacilitate thedecommissioning.

Eachcasewashandledindividually, withoutclearlydefinedgenericrequirements.

TheNRCamendedthedecommissioning regulations in1996toclarifyambiguities andcodifyprocedures andterminology asameansofenhancing efficiency anduniformity inthedecommissioning process.Theamendments allowforgreaterpublicparticipation andbetterdefinethetransition processfromoperations todecommissioning.

Undertherevisedregulations, licensees willsubmitwrittencertification totheNRCwithin30daysafterthedecisiontoceaseoperations.

Certification willalsoberequiredoncethefuelispermanently removedfromthereactorvessel.Submittal ofthesenoticeswillentitlethelicenseetoafeereduction andeliminate theobligation tofollowcertainrequirements neededonlyduringoperation ofthereactor.Withintwoyearsofsubmitting noticeofpermanent cessation ofoperations, thelicenseeisrequiredtosubmitaPost-Shutdown Decommissioning Activities Report(PSDAR)totheNRC.TheP$DARdescribes theplanneddecommissioning activities, theassociated sequenceandschedule, andanestimateofexpectedcosts.Priortocompleting decommissioning, thelicenseeisrequiredtosubmitanapplication totheNRCtoterminate thelicense,whichwillincludealicensetermination plan(LTP).1.3.1High-Level Radioactive WasteManagement Congresspassedthe"NuclearWastePolicyAct"[71(NWPA)in1982,assigning thefederalgovernment's long-standing responsibility fordisposalofthespentnuclearfuelcreatedbythecommercial nucleargenerating plantstotheU.S.Department ofEnergy(DOE).TheDOEwastobeginaccepting spentfuelbyJanuary31,1998;however,todatenoprogressintheremovalofspentfuelfromcommercial generating siteshasbeenmade.Today,thecountryisatanimpasseonhigh-level wastedisposal, evenwiththeLicenseApplication forageologicrepository submitted bytheDOEtotheNRCin2008.Asaresult,generators haveinitiated legalactionagainsttheDOEinanattempttoobtaincompensation forDOE'sbreachofcontract.

InJune2011,AmerenMissouriandtheDOEreachedanagreement onasettlement.

ThetermsincludepaymenttoAmerenMissouriforspentfuelstorageandrelatedcoststhrough2010,andthereafter, annualpaymentofsuchcostsaftertheyareincurred.

TLGServices, Inc.

ULNRC-06349 Enclosure 3Page22of173CaflawayEnergyCenterDocumentA22-1690-OO1, Rev.0Decommissioning CostAnalysis$ectionl, Page5of8Atshutdown, thespentfuelpooiisexpectedtocontainfreshlydischarged assemblies (fromthemostrecentrefueling cycles)aswellasthefinalreactorcore.Overthefollowing fiveandone-halfyearstheassemblies arepackagedintomultipurpose canisters fortransfertotheI$FSI.Itisassumedthatthisperiodprovidesthenecessary coolingforthefinalcoretomeetthedrystoragesystem'srequirements fordecayheat.TheNRCrequiresthatlicensees establish aprogramtomanageandprovidefundingforthemanagement ofallirradiated fuelatthereactorsiteuntiltitleofthefuelistransferred totheSecretary ofEnergy,pursuantto10CFRPart50.54(bb).[8]

Thepost-shutdown costsincurredtosatisfythisrequirement includetheisolation andcontinued operation ofthespentfuelpooiandtheI$FSIduringthefiveandone-halfyearsfollowing thecessation ofplantoperations.

Costsareincludedwithinthedecommissioning estimates foroffloading thepool.Thesecostsincludetheacquisition ofthedrystoragesystemmodales(multipurpose canisters andshieldedoverpacks.

ISF$Ioperations oncethefuelhasbeenoff-loaded fromthepooianduntilsuchtimethatthetransferoffueltotheDOEcanbecompleted, areexpectedtobefullyreimbursable andtherefore notaddressed inthisstudy.Theeventualdecommissioning oftheI$F$Iisalsonotincluded.

Relocation ofthespentfuelfromthepooltotheI$F$IwillallowAmerenMissouritoproceedwithdecommissioning (orsafe-storage preparations) intheshortesttimepossible.

1.3.2Low-Level Radioactive WasteDisposalThecontaminated andactivated materialgenerated inthedecontamination anddismantling ofacommercial nuclearreactorisclassified aslow-level (radioactive) waste,althoughnotallofthematerialissuitablefor"shallow-land" thsposal.

Withthepassageofthe"Low-Level Radioactive WastePolicyAct"in198O,[1anditsAmendments of1985,t101 thestatesbecameultimately responsible forthedisposition oflow-level radioactive wastegenerated withintheirownborders.Withtheexception ofTexas,nonewcompactfacilities havebeensuccessfully sited,licensed, andconstructed.

TheTexasCompactdisposalfacilityisnowoperational andwasteisbeingacceptedfromgenerators TLGServices, Inc.

ULNRC-06349 Endosure3Page23of173CaltawayEnergyCenterDocumentA22-1690-OO1, Rev.0Decommissioning CostAnaiysisSectioni, Page6of8withintheCompactbytheoperator, WasteControlSpecialists (WC$).Thefacilityisalsoabletoacceptlimitedquantities ofnon-Compact waste.Disposition ofthevariouswastestreamsproducedbythedecommissioning processconsidered alloptionsandservicescurrently available toAmerenMissouri.

Themajorityofthelow-level radioactive wastedesignated forcontrolled disposal(ClassAWl)canbesenttoEnergySolutions' facilityinClive,Utah.Therefore, disposalcostsforClassAwastewerebaseduponAmerenMissouri's Utilities ServiceAllianceagreement withEnergy$olutions.

Thisfacilityisnotlicensedtoreceivethehigheractivityportion(ClassesBandC)ofthedecommissioning wastestream.TheWCSfacilityisabletoreceivetheClassBandCwaste.Assuch,forthisanalysis, ClassBandCwastewasassumedtobeshippedtotheWCSfacilityfordisposal.

DisposalcostswerebaseduponAmerenMissouri's currentagreement withWCS.Thedismantling ofthecomponents residingclosesttothereactorcoregenerates radioactive wastethatmaybeconsidered unsuitable forshallow-landdisposal(i.e.,low-level rathoactive wastewithconcentrations ofrathonucides thatexceedthelimitsestablished bytheNRCforClassCradioactive waste(GTCC)).TheLow-Level Radioactive WastePolicyAmendments Actof1985assignedthefederalgovernment theresponsibility forthedisposalofthismaterial.

TheActalsostatedthatthebeneficiaries oftheactivities resulting inthegeneration ofsuchradioactive wastebearallreasonable costsofdisposing ofsuchwaste.However,todate,thefederalgovernment hasnotidentified acostfordisposing ofGTCCorascheduleforacceptance.

Forpurposesofthisanalysisonly,theGTCCradioactive wasteisassumedtobepackagedanddisposedofinasimilarmannerashigh-level wasteandatacostequivalent tothatenvisioned forthespentfuel.TheGTCCispackagedinthesamecanisters usedforspentfuelandeitherstoredonsiteorshippeddirectlytoaDOEfacilityasitisgenerated (depending uponthetimingofthedecommissioning andwhetherthespentfuelhasbeenremovedfromthesitepriortothestartofdecommissioning).

Asignificant portionofthewastematerialgenerated duringdecommissioning mayonlybepotentially contaminated byradioactive materials.

Thismaterialcanbeanalyzedonsiteorshippedoffsitetolicensedfacilities forfurtheranalysis, forprocessing andiorforconditioning/recovery.

Reduction inthevolumeoflow-level radioactive wasterequiring disposalinalicensedlow-level radioactive wastedisposalTLGServices, Inc.

ULNRC-06349 Enclosure 3Page24of173CaflawayEnergyCenter.DocumentA22-1690-OO1, Rev.0Decommissioning CostAnalysisSectioni, Page7of8facilitycanbeaccomplished throughavarietyofmethods,including analysesandsurveysordecontamination toeliminate theportionofwastethatdoesnotrequiredisposalasradioactive waste,compaction, incineration ormetalmelt.Theestimates forthebasecasescenarios reflectthesavingsfromwasterecovery/volume reduction.

1.3.3Radiological CriteriaforLicenseTermination In1997,theNRCpublished SubpartE,"Radiological CriteriaforLicenseTermination,"['21 amending10CFRPart20.Thissubpartprovidesradiological criteriaforreleasing afacilityforunrestricted use.Theregulation statesthatthesitecanbereleasedforunrestricted useifradioactivity levelsaresuchthattheaveragememberofacriticalgroupwouldnotreceiveaTotalEffective DoseEquivalent (TEDE)inexcessof25milliremperyear,andprovidedthatresidualradioactivity hasbeenreducedtolevelsthatareAsLowAsReasonably Achievable (ALARA).Thedecommissioning estimates assumethattheCallawaysitewillberemediated toaresiduallevelconsistent withtheNRC-prescribed level.ItshouldbenotedthattheNRCandtheEnvironmental Protection Agency(EPA)differontheamountofresidualradioactivity considered acceptable insiteremediation.

TheEPAhastwolimitsthatapplytoradioactive materials.

AnEPAlimitof15miliremperyearisderivedfromcriteriaestablished bytheComprehensive Environmental

Response, Compensation, andLiability Act(CERCLAorSuperfund).['3]

Anadditional andseparatelimitof4miffiremperyear,asdefinedin40CFR§141.16,isappliedtodrinkingwater.['4J OnOctober9,2002,theNRCsignedanagreement withtheEPAontheradiological decommissioning anddecontamination ofNRC-licensed sites.TheMemorandum ofUnderstanding (MOU)['51 providesthatEPAwilldeferexerciseofauthority underCERCLAforthemajorityoffacilities decommissioned underNRCauthority.

TheMOUalsoincludesprovisions forNRCandEPAconsultation forcertainsiteswhen,atthetimeoflicensetermination, (1)groundwater contamination exceedsEPA-permitted levels;(2)NRCcontemplates restricted releaseofthesite;andior(3)residualradioactive soilconcentrations exceedlevelsdefinedintheMOU.TheMOUdoesnotimposeanynewrequirements onNRClicensees andshouldreducetheinvolvement oftheEPAwithNRClicensees whoaredecommissioning.

MostsitesareexpectedtomeettheNRCcriteriaforunrestricted use,andtheNRCbelievesthatonlyafewsiteswillhaveTLGServices, Inc.

ULNRC-06349 Enclosure 3Page25of173CallawayEnergyCenterDocumentA22-1690-OO1, Rev.0Decommissioning CostAnalysis$ectionl, Page8of8groundwater orsoilcontamination inexcessofthelevelsspecified intheMOUthattriggerconsultation withtheEPA.However,ifthereareotherhazardous materials onthesite,theEPAmaybeinvolvedinthecleanup.Assuch,thepossibility ofdualregulation remainsforcertainlicensees.

Thepresentstudydoesnotincludeanycostsforthisoccurrence.

TLGServices, Inc.