ML17102B069

From kanterella
Revision as of 15:08, 4 May 2018 by StriderTol (talk | contribs) (Created page by program invented by StriderTol)
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Decommissioning Funding Report for Diablo Canyon Power Plant, Units 1 and 2
ML17102B069
Person / Time
Site: Diablo Canyon  Pacific Gas & Electric icon.png
Issue date: 03/31/2017
From: Halpin E D
Pacific Gas & Electric Co
To:
Document Control Desk, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
DCL-17-022
Download: ML17102B069 (206)
v • d • e


Text

Pacific Gas and Electric Company'"' March 31, 2017 PG&E Letter DCL-17-022 Edward D. Halpin Senior Vice President Generation and Chief Nuclear Officer P.O. Box 56 Avila Beach, CA 93424 605.545.4100 E-Mail: EIHB@pge.com U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission ATIN: Document Control Desk

  • Washington, DC 20555-0001 10 CFR 50.75(f) Docket No. 50-275, OL-DPR-80 Docket No. 50-323, OL-DPR-82 Diablo Canyon Units 1 and 2 Decommissioning Funding Report for Diablo Canyon Power Plant, Units 1 and 2

Dear Commissioners and Staff:

Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) is submitting the decommissioning funding report for Diablo Canyon Power Plant (DCPP), Units 1 and 2, pursuant to the requirements of 10 CFR 50.75(f). Diablo Canyon Power Plant, Units 1 and 2 At the end of calendar year 2016, the market values of the DCPP Units 1 (3411 MWt) and 2 (3411 MWt) decommissioning trust fund were $1,201.6 million and $1,571.0 million, respectively. PG&E currently has more funds in the DCPP, Units 1 and 2, decommissioning trust fund than required to meet the minimum NRC decommissioning amount of $620.2 million (2017 dollars) for each unit that was calculated pursuant to the requirements of 10 CFR 50.75(c). PG&E continues to fund the trust through collections for additional costs beyond those required in 10 CFR

  • 50.75(c). Supporting Cost Estimates TLG Services, Inc. prepared a site-specific decommissioning cost estimate that PG&E submitted to the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) in the 2015 Nuclear Decommissioning Cost Triennial Proceeding (NDCTP) on March 1, 2016. Based on site-specific cost estimates prepared by TLG Services, Inc., PG&E estimates that the decommissioning costs are about $1,297.0 million for DCPP Unit 1 and $1,276.4 million for Unit 2 in 2017 dollars. These costs do not include site restoration of the facilities ($671.2 million) or spent fuel management costs after shutdown of Units 1 and 2 ($837.5 million). To assure that sufficient funds will be available for decommissioning, PG&E has established separate external sinking trust fund accounts for DCPP, Units 1 and 2. A member of the STARS Alliance Callaway
  • Diablo Canyon
  • Palo Verde
  • Wolf Creek Document Control Desk March 31, 2017 Page2 Supporting Enclosures PG&E Letter DCL-17-022 Enclosures 1-6 provide supporting documentation for this report. Enclosure 1 provides decommissioning funding status information* in a format suggested by the Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) and the NRC. Enclosure 2 provides information on the escalation of the required decommissioning funding amounts from 1986 dollars to 2017 dollars. As required by 10 CFR 50.75(c)(2), and using NUREG-1577, "Standard Review Plan on Power Reactor Licensee Financial Qualifications and Decommissioning Funding Assurance, Revision 1, and NUREG-1307, "Report on Waste Burial Charges," Revision 16, the information includes escalation factors for energy, labor, and waste burial costs. NUREG-1307, Revision 16, assumes for plants that have no disposal site available within their designated low-level waste (LLW) compact, that the cost for disposal of Class A LLW is the same as that for the Clive, Utah disposal faqility and for Class B and C LLW is the same as that for the Andrews County, Texas disposal facility including accounting for out-of-compact fees. The State of Texas limits the total non-compact waste disposed at the compact waste facility (CWF) in Andrews County, Texas for out-of-compact generators to 30 percent of licensed capacity. DCPP does not have a disposal site available within its designated Southwestern LLW Compact. NUREG-1307, Revision 16, states that, given these considerations, licensees may want to set aside additional decommissioning trust funds to avoid significant future shortfalls in funding and potential enforcement actions. Based on the limited number of CWFs currently available and the potential for limited to no availability at the Texas CWF for DCPP LLW disposal when PG&E begins LLW disposal associated with decommissioning, PG&E has used the formula, coefficients, and adjustment factors from NUREG-1307 Revision 16 in our cost analyses, with the exception of the burial/disposition factor. As allowed per NUREG-1307, Revision 16, PG&E used a burial/disposition adjustment factor higher than the burial/disposition adjustment factor provided iri NUREG-1307, Revision 16, for plants that have no disposal site available within their designated LLW Compact. To avoid significant future shortfalls in funding and potential enforcement actions, PG&E used the burial/disposition adjustment factor for compact-affiliated disposal for the South Carolina site. The specific decommissioning cost estimate results in a total cost estimate of no less than the amount estimated by using the parameters presented in NUREG-1307, Revision 16, while accounting for the potential future shortfall in disposal capacity at the CWF in Andrews County, Texas. Enclosure 3 is the 2015 DCPP Appendix C1, Table C.,1 for Unit 1 and 2015 DCPP Appendix C2, Table C-2 for Unit 2 from the TLG Services, Inc. decommissioning cost estimate report prepared in March 2016 for DCPP Units 1 and 2. PG&E then adjusted the TLG Services, Inc. cost estimate to reflect the costs in 2017 dollars per the NDCTP submitted on March 1, 2016, to the CPUC by applying the escalation factors included in the submittal. The report provides cost estimates for decommissioning of both nuclear A member of the STARS Alliance Callaway
  • Diablo Canyon
  • Palo Verde
  • Wolf Creek Document Control Desk March 31, 2017 Page3 PG&E Letter DCL-17-022 and non-nuclear facilities, including the Diablo Canyon Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation (ISFSI). Enclosure 4 is a cash flow for the total decommissioning of DCPP that identifies the monies for NRC scope (removal of radiological contamination), site restoration (including nonradiological work), and the spent fuel management based on the TLG Services, Inc. 2015 Cost Estimate by unit. Enclosure 5 contains the TLG Services, Inc. decommissioning cost estimate report prepared in March 2016 for DCPP Unit 1 and Unit 2. The report provides cost estimates for the decommissioning of the nuclear, non-nuclear facilities, and spent fuel management, including operation and decommissioning of the ISFSI in 2014 dollars. Enclosure 6 contains the variance of the 2016 forecast, as submitted in Enclosure 3 of PG&E Letter DCL-15-044, "Decommissioning Funding Report for Diablo Canyon Power Plant, Units 1 and 2," dated March 31, 2015, to the actual expenditures for 2016. PG&E makes no new or revised regulatory commitments (as defined by NEI 99-04) in this letter. Should you have any questions, please contact Mrs. Brooke Winterton at (805) 549-0368. Sincerely, Edward D. Halpin Senior Vice President, Generation and Chief Nuclear Officer cc: Diablo Distribution cc/encl: Kriss M. Kennedy, NRC Region IV Administrator Balwant K. Singal, NRR Senior Project Manager INPO A member of the STARS Alliance Callaway
  • Diablo Canyon
  • Palo Verde
  • Wolf Creek

> Enclosure 1 PG&E Letter DCL-17-022 NRC Decommissioning Funding Status Report Diablo Canyon Power Plant-Units 1 (3411 MWt) and 2 (3411 MWt) PG&E Letter DCL-17-022 Page 1of4 I NRC Decommissioning Funding Status Report !

  • Diablo Canyon Power Plant -Units 1 (3411 MWt) & 2 (3411 MWt) As provided in 10 CFR 50.75(f)(1), each power reactor licensee is required to report to the NRC on a calendar year basis, beginning on March 31, 1999, and every
  • 2 years thereafter, on the status of its decommissioning funding for each reactor or share of reactor it owns.
  • Note that Items 3, 4, and 8 are data included in PG&E's Nuclear Decommissioning Cost Triennial Proceeding (NDCTP) filed with the California Public Utilities . Commission (CPUC) on March 1, 2016. PG&E does not anticipate a decision on this filing until mid-2017.
  • 1. The minimum decommissioning fund estimate, pursuant to 10 CFR 50. 75 (b) and(tj1 * $ in Millions _Yalue in January 2017 dollars Unit 1 $ 620.2 Unit 2 $ 620.2 2. The amount accumulated at the end of the calendar year preceding the date of the report for items included in 10 CFR 50.75 (b) and (c). (Alternatively, the total amount accumulated at the end of the calendar year preceding .the date of the report can be reported here if the cover letter transmitting the report provides the total estimate and indicates what portion of \that estimate is for items not included
  • in 10 CFR 50.75 (b) and (c)). Market Value (December 2016 dollars) $ in Millions Unit 1 $1,201.6 Unit 2 $1,571.0 1 *The NRC formulas in section 10 CFR 50.75(c) include only those decommissioning costs incurred by licensees to remove a facility or site safely from service and reduce residual radioactivity to levels that permit: (1) release of the property for unrestricted use and termination of the license; or (2) release of the property under restricted conditions and termination of the license. The cost of dismantling or demolishing nonradiological systems and structures is not included in the NRC decommissioning cost estimates. The costs of managing and storing spent fuel on site until transfer to DOE are not included in the cost formulas.
  • PG&E Letter DCL-17-022 Page 2 of 4 3. A schedule of the annual amounts remaining to be collected include items beyond those required in 10 CFR 50.75 (b) and (c). (The cover letter transmitting the report provides a total cost estimate and indicates the portions of that estimate for items that are not included in 10 CFR 50.75 (b) and (c)) $ in Millions Amount Remaining $953:7 Unit 1 Annual Collection 2017-2024 Unit 2 Annual Collection 2017-2025 $62.225 $53.200 4. The assumptions used regarding escalation in decommissioning cost, rates of earnings on decommissioning funds (anticipates that the portfolio of each trust will be gradually converted to a more conservative all income portfolio beginning in 2024 for Unit 1 and Unit 2), and rates of other factors used in funding projections; Rate of Return on Qualified Trust Unit 1 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035 2036 2037 2038 2039 -2040 2041 2042 2043 4.49 percent 4.48 percent 4.45 percent 4.42 percent 4.38 percent 4.34 percent 4.29 percent 4.24 percent 4.18 percent 4.08 percent 3.99 percent 3.90 percent 3.82 percent 3.74 percent 3.67 percent 3.60 percent 3.54 percent 3.48 percent 3.42 percent 3.36 percent 3.31 percent 3.26 percent 3.22 percent 3.17 percent 3.13 percent 3.09 percent 3.05 percent 2044 2045 2046 2047 2048 2049 2050 2051 2052-2059 Rate of Return on Qualified Trust Unit 2 2017 -2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035 2036 2037 2038 2039 2040 2041 2042 2043 2044 2045 2046 2047 2048 2049 2050 Enclosure 1 PG&E Letter DCL-17-022 Page 3\of 4 3.01 percent ' 2.98 percent 2.95 percent 2.91 percent 2.88 percent 2.85 percent 2.83 percent 2.80 percent 77 percent 4.51 percent 4.48 percent 4.45 percent 4.41 percent 4.37 percent 4.32 percent 4.27 percent 4.22 percent 4.17 percent 4.10 percent 4.00 percent 3.92 percent 3.83 percent 3. 75 percent 3.68 percent 3.61 percent 3.55 percent 3.48 percent 3.43 percent 3.37 percent 3.32 percent 3.27 percent 3.22 percent 3.18 percent 3.13 percent 3.09 percent 3. 05 percent 3.02 percent 2.98 percent 2.95 percent 2.92 percent 2.88 percent 2.85 percent 2.83 percent 2051 2052-2059 . Enclosure 1 PG&E Letter DCL-17-022 Page 4of4 2.80 percent 2.77 percent 5. Any contracts upon which the licensee is relying pursuant to 1 O CFR 50.75(e)(1)(v). NONE 6. Any modifications to a licensee's current method providing financial assyrance occurring since the last submitted report. NONE .1. Any material changes to trust agreements. 'NONE 8. CPUC Submittal in 2017 Dollars in Millions Total Unit 1 (Decommission 2024) $ 1,817.5 Scope Excluded from NRC calculations $ 105.1 Spent Fuel Management $ 415.4 Total NRC Decommissioning Costs $ 1.,297.0 Total Unit 2 .(Decommission 2025) $ 2,264.6 Scope Excluded from NRC calculations $ 566.1 Spent Fuel Management $ 422.1 Total NRC Decommissioning Costs $ 1,276.4 2017 Decommissioning Estimate Unit 1 (1 page) 2017 Decommissioning-Estimate Unit 2 (1 page) Composite Escalation (1 page) \ Development of E Component (8 pages) Development of L Component (10 pages) Development of B Component , (1 page) Enclosure 2
  • PG&E Letter DCL-17-022 2017 Decommissioning Estimate Unit 1 Nuclear Regulatory Commission Enclosure 2 PG&E Letter DCL-17-022 Estimate of Decommission Costs for Pressurized Water Reactor (PWR) Diablo Canyon Power Plant (DCPP) Unit 1 in 2015 January 1986 Estimate Escalated to 1999 Escalated to 2000 Escalated to 2001 Escalated to 2002 Escalated to 2003 Escalated to 2004 Escalated to 2005 Escalated to 2006 Escalated to 2007 Escalated to 2008 Escalated to 2009 Escalated to 2010 Escalated to 2011 Escalated to 2012 Escalated to 2013 Escalated to 2014 Escalated to 2015 Escalated' to 2016 Escalated to 2017 DCPP PWR {millions) $105 $118.2 {Table 2.1 in NUREG 1307 Revision 10 has no value for 1999 Burial) {No Submittal Required) $333.8 ($396.7 in 2001 Submittal) (No Submittal Required) $347.5 ($404.8 in 2003 Submittal) {No Submittal Required) $403.5 ($427.2 in 2005 Submittal) {No Submittal Required) $494.2 ($494.8 in 2007 Submittal) (No Submittal Required) $539.7 ($679.5 in 2009 Submittal) {No Submittal Required) $588.1 ($546.15 in 2011 Submittal) {No Submittal Required) $620.2 ($643.0 in 2013 Submittal) (No Submittal Required) $623.4 ($646.2 in 2015 Submittal) {No Submittal Required) $620.2 Based on 10 CFR 50.75 {c), "Table of Minimum Amounts" {January 1986 dollars). PWR Greater than or equal to 3400 MWt = $105 million per unit between 1200 MWt and 3400 MWt {for PWR less than 1200 MWt, use P=1200 MWt $75+0.0088P) Page 1 of 1 2017 Decommissioning Estimate Unit 2 Enclosure 2 PG&E Letter DCL-17-022 Nuclear Regulatory Commission Estimate of Decommission Costs for Pressurized Water Reactor (PWR) Diablo Canyon Power Plant (DCPP) Unit 2 in 2017 January 1986 Estimate Escalated to 1999 Escalated to 2000 Escalated to 2001 Escalated to 2002 Escalated to 2003 Escalated to 2004 Escalated to 2005 Escalated to 2006 Escalated to 2007 Escalated to 2008 Escalated to 2009 Escalated to 2010 Escalated to 2011 Escalated to 2012 Escalated to 2013 Escalated to 2014 Escalated to 2015 Escalated to 2016 Escalated to 2017 DCPP PWR (millions) $105 $118.2 (Table 2.1 in NU REG 1307 Revision 1 O has no value for 1999 Burial) (No Submittal Required) $333.8 ($396.7 iri 2001 Submittal) (No Submittal Required) $347.5 ($404.8 in 2003 Submittal) (No Submittal Required) $403.5 ($427.2 in 2005 Submittal) (No Submittal Required) $494.2 ($494.8 in 2007 Submittal) (No Submittal Required) $539.7 ($720.9 in 2009 Submittal) (No Submittal Required) $588.1 ($546.5 in 2011 Submittal) (No Submittal Required) $620.2 ($643.0 in 2013 Submittal) (No Submittal Required) $623.4 (646.2 in 2015 Submittal) (No Submittal Required) $620.2 Based on 10.CFR 50.75 (c), "Table of Minimum Amounts" (January 1986 dollars). PWR Greater than or equal to 3400 MWt = $105 million per unit between 1200 MWt and 3400 MWt (for PWR less than 1200 MWt, use P=1200 MWt $75+0.0088P) Page 1of1 / l Composite Escalation Enclosure 2 PG&E Letter DCL-17-022 Calculating Overall Escalation Rate PWR Jan-86 Jan-99 Jan..QO Jan..01 Jan-02 Jan..03 Jan-04 Jan-05 Jan..06 Jan..07 Jan-OB Jan..09 Jan-10 Jan-11 Jan-12 Jan-13 Jan-14 Jan-15 Jan-16 Jan-17 Weight (1) L (Labor) 1.0000 1.5624 1.6370 0.9365 0.9733 1.0122 1.0445 1.0846 2.0600 2.1218 2.1939 2.2536 2.2784 2.3175 2.3711 2.4061 2.4638 2.5235 2.5812 2.6492 0.65 E (Energy) 1.0000 0.8499 1.0297 1.1850 0.9909 1.2027 1.2164 1.4656 1.8306 1.7950 2.3262 1.7850 2.0766 2.3145 2.6030 2.5667 2.6162 2.2076 1.7624 1.8705 0.13 B(Burial) 1.0000 0.0000 10.8039 10.9840 11.1633 11.3433 13.0733 13.3951 13.7247 14.0626 15.0364 15.6505 16.2646 17.2446 18.2247 18.2247 18.2247 18.2247 18.2247 17.9148 0.22 (1) From NUREG 1307, Revision 16, Report on Waste Burial Charges, Section 3.1, Page a, where A, 8, and Care the fractions of the total 1986 dollar costs that are attributable to labor (0.64), energy (0.14), and burial (0.22), respectively, and sum to 1.0. PWR Combined Escalation Rate for. Jan-86 Jan-99 Jan..QO Jan..01 Jan..02. Jan..03 Jan..04 Jan..05 Jan..06 Jan..07 Jan..08 Jan..09 Jan-10 Jan-11 Jan-12 Jan-13 Jan-14 JanC15 Jan-16 Jan-17 1.0000 1.1260 3.5748 3.1793 3.2174 3.3098 3.7132 3.8425 4.5964 4.7063 5.0364 5.1400 5.3291 5.6011 5.8890 5.9071 5.9510 5.9367 5.9163 5.9064 Page 1of1 J Development of E Component Calculation of Energy Escalation Factor-Reference NUREG-1307, Revision 16, Section 3.3 Using Regional Indices Series ID: WPU0573 Light Fuel Oils (as of 02/21/2017) and WPU0543 Industrial Electric Power (as of 02/21/2017) REBASED TO 1986 = 100 Jan-86 Feb-86 Mar-86 Apr-86 May-86 Jun-86 Jul-86 Aug-86 Sep-86 Oct-86 Nov-86 Dec-86 Jan-87 Feb-87 Mar-87 Apr-87 May-87 Jun-87 Jul-87 Aug-87 Sep-87 Oct-87 Nov-87 Dec-87 Jan-88 Feb-88 Mar-88 Apr-88 May-88 Jun-88 Jul-88 Aug-88 Sep-88 Oct-88 Nov-88 Dec-88 Jan-89 Feb-89 Mar-89 Apr-89 May-89 Jun-89 Jul-89 Aug-89 Sep-89 Oct-89 PPI for Fuels & Related Products (1982 = 100) (P) = Industrial Energy Power 114.2 115.0 114.4 113.7 114.1 115.3 116.2 116.3 116.3 113.0 112.7 112.3 110.3 109.8 110.2 109.9 111.8 113.9 116.2 115.7 115.5 111.0 109.2 109.6 108.8 109.0 109.0 109.1 108.9 117.2 118.2 118.3 118.5 114.2 109.2 110.5 112.0 112.0 112.3 112.4 113.6 119.8 122.2 122.4 122.5 117.2 PPI for Light Fuel Oils (1982 = 100) (F) = Light Fuel Oils 82.0 62.4 51.3 49.8 47.0 44.7 36.4 40.1 46.3 43.1 43.5 45.6 51.4 53.1 49.7 52.0 53.3 55.1 56.3 59.4 56.8 59.3 61.2 58.1 54.8 51.5 49.7 53.3 54.3 50.6 46.9 46.8 45.9 42.3 47.2 50.6 54.9 54.0 57.3 61.5 57.5 53.3 52.7 53.5 59.3 64.0 PPI for Fuels & PPI for Light Related Products Fuel Oils (1986 = 100) (1986 = 100) (P) = Industrial Energy Power (F) = Light Fuel Oils PWR wt = 0.58 PWR wt = 0.42 1.0000 1.0000 1.0070 0.7610 1.0018 0.6256 0.9956 0.6073 0.9991 0.5732 1.0096 0.5451 1.0175 0.4439 1.0184 0.4890 1.0184 0.5646 0.9895 0.5256 0.9869 0.5305 0.9834 0.5561 0.9658 0.6268 0.9615 0.6476 0.9650 0.6061 0.9623 0.6341 0.9790 0.6500 0.9974 0.6720 1.0175 0.6866 1.0131 0.7244 1.0114 0.6927 0.9720 0.7232 0.9562 0.7463 0.9597 0.7085 0.9527 0.6683 0.9545 0.6280 0.9545 0.6061 0.9553 0.6500 0.9536 0.6622 1.0263 0.6171 1.0350 0.5720 1.0359 0.5707 1.0377 0.5598 1.0000 0.5159 0.9562 0.5756 0.9676 0.6171 0.9807 0.6695 0.9807 0.6585 0.9834 0.6988 0.9842 0.7500 0.9947 0.7012 1.0490 0.6500 1.0701 0.6427 1.0718 0.6524 1.0727 0.7232 1.0263 0.7805 Page 1 of 8 Energy Escalation Factor (E) forPWR (Diablo Canyon) 1.0000 0.9037 0.8438 0.8325 0.8202 0.8145 0.7766 0.7961 0.8278 0.7947 0.7952 0.8039 0.8235 0.8296 0.8142 0.8245 0.8408 0.8607 0.8785 0.8919 0.8775 0.8675 0.8681 0.8542 0.8333 0.8174 0.8082 0.8271 0.8312 0.8544 0.8405 0.8405 0.8369 0.7967 0.7964 0.8204 0.8500 0.8454 0.8638 0.8859 0.8715 0.8814 0.8906 0.8957 0.9259 0.9230 Enclosure 2 PG&E Letter DCL-17-022 Development of E Component Calculation of Energy Escalation Factor-Reference NUREG-1307, Revision 16, Section 3.3 Using Regional Indices Series ID: WPU0573 Light Fuel Oils (as of 02/21/2017) and WPU0543 Industrial Electric Power (as of 02/21/2017) REBASED TO 1986 = 100 PPI for Fuels & PPI for Light PPI for Fuels & PPI for Light Related Products Fuel Oils Related Products Fuel Oils (1982 = 100) (1982=100) (1986 = 100) (1986 = 100) (P) = Industrial Energy Power (F) = Light Fuel Oils (P) = Industrial Energy Power (F) = Light Fuel Oils Nov-89 113.5 64.4 0.9939 0.7854 Dec-89 114.2 68.1 1.0000 0.8305 Jan-90 114.9 85.3 1.0061 1.0402 Feb-90 115.0 59.4 1.0070 0.7244 Mar-90 115.4 60.4 1.0105 0.7366 Apr-90 115.1 61.0 1.0079 0.7439 May-90 117.0 58.4 1.0245 0.7122 Jun-90 123.9 53.0 1.0849 0.6463 Jul-90 124.4 51.6 1.0893 0.6293 Aug-90 124.6 72.3 1.0911 0.8817 Sep-90 125.0 87.3 1.0946 1.0646 Oct-90 121.2 104.8 1.0613 1.2780 Nov-90 120.2 98.9 1.0525 1.2061 Dec-90 118.9 89.3 1.0412 1.0890 Jan-91 124.2 82.9 1.0876 1.0110 Feb-91 124.3 74.3 1.0884 0.9061 Mar-91 124.3 61.6 1.0884 0.7512 Apr-91 124.7 60.0 1.0919 0.7317 May-91 128.2 59.6 1.1226 0.7268 Jun-91 132.6 57.6 1.1611 0.7024 Jul-91 134.5 58.1 1.1778 0.7085 Aug-91 133.8 62.1 1.1716 0.7573 Sep-91 133.8 65.4 1.1716 0.7976 Oct-91 128.3 67.6 1.1235 0.8244 Nov-91 123.1 71.0 1.0779 0.8659 Dec-91 125.1 62.2 1.0954 0.7585 Jan-92 125.9 54.4 1.1025 0.6634 Feb-92 125.3 57.3 1.0972 0.6988 Mar-92 125.8 56.0 1.1016 0.6829 Apr-92 124.8 59.0 1.0928 0.7195 May-92 128.5 62.1 1.1252 0.7573 Jun-92 134.8 65.4 1.1804 0.7976 Jul-92 135.6 64".6 1.1874 0.7878 Aug-92 135.1 63.3 1.1830 0.7720 Sep-92 135.9 65.6 1.1900 0.8000 Oct-92 131.2 68.2 1.1489 0.8317 Nov-92 125.5 64.2 1.0989 0.7829 Dec-92 126.7 59.4 1.1095 0.7244 Jan-93 127.1 59.0 1.1130 0.7195 Feb-93 126.4 60.4 1.1068 0.7366 Mar-93 126.7 63.2 1.1095 0.7707 Apr-93 126.8 62.4 1.1103 0.7610 May-93 127.5 62.6 1.1165 0.7634 Jun-93 136.9 60.8 1.1988 0.7415 Jul-93 137.1 57.0 1.2005 0.6951 Aug-93 137.2 54.4 1.2014 0.6634 Sep-93 137.6 59.3 1.2049 0.7232 Oct-93 131.9 65.4 1.1550 0.7976 Page 2 of 8 Energy Escalation Factor (E) for PWR (Diablo Canyon) 0.9063 0.9288 1.0205 0.8883 0.8955 0.8970 0.8933 0.9007 0.8961 1.0031 1.0820 1.1523 1.1170 1.0613 1.0554 1.0119 0.9468 0.9406 0.9564 0.9685 0.9807 0.9976 1.0145 0.9979 0.9889 0.9539 0.9181 0.9299 . 0.9257 0.9360 0.9707 1.0196 1.0196 1.0104 1.0262 1.0157 0.9662 0.9477 0.9477 0.9513 0.9672 0.9636 0.9682 1.0067 0.9883 0.9754 1.0026 1.0049 Enclosure 2 PG&E Letter DCL-17-022 Development of E Component Calculation of Energy Escalation Factor-Reference NUREG-1307, Revision 16, Section 3.3 Using Regional Indices Series ID: WPU0573 Light Fuel Oils (as of 02/21/2017) and WPU0543 Industrial Electric Power (as of 02/21/2017) REBASED TO 1986 = 100 PPI for Fuels & PPI for Light PPI for Fuels & PPI for Light Related Products Fuel Oils Related Products Fuel Oils (1982 = 100) (1982=100) (1986 = 100) (1986 = 100) (P) = Industrial Energy Power (F) = Light Fuel Oils (P) = Industrial Energy Power (F) = Light Fuel Oils Nov-93 126.3 61.6 1.1060 0.7512 Dec-93 126.0 51.4 1.1033 0.6268 Jan-94 126.2 51.5 1.1051 0.6280 Feb-94 125.9 57.5 1.1025 0.7012 Mar-94 125.8 56.2 1.1016 0.6854 Apr-94 125.4 54.7 1.0981 0.6671 May-94 126.0 54.7 1.1033 0.6671 Jun-94 133.5 54.1 1.1690 0.6598 Jul-94 134.5 56.3 1.1778 0.6866 Aug-94 134.5 57.5 1.1778 0.7012 Sep-94 134.9 57.7 1.1813 0.7037 Oct-94 129.1 57.7 1.1305 0.7037 Nov-94 127.0 58.8 1.1121 0.7171 Dec-94 127.4 54.7 1.1156 0.6671 Jan-95 127.6 54.7 1.1173 0.6671 Feb-95 128.0 53.3 1.1208 0.6500 Mar-95 128.3 54.3 1.1235 0.6622 Apr-95 126.4 57.1 1.1068 0.6963 May-95 130.2 59.1 1.1401 0.7207 Jun-95 135.3 55.8 1.1848 0.6805 Jul-95 136.6 53.5 1.1961 0.6524 Aug-95 136.5 55.6 1.1953 0.6780 Sep-95 133.7 58.2 1.1708 0.7098 Oct-95 131.4 .57.8 1.1506 0.7049 Nov-95 127.6 59.5 1.1173 0.7256 Dec-95 127.7 60.6 1.1182 0.7390 Jan-96 127.9 62.6 1.1200 0.7634 Feb-96 127.1 59.7 1.1130 0.7280 Mar-96 127.8 63.5 1.1191 0.7744 Apr-96 129.1 74.7 1.1305 0.9110 May-96 135.0 72.0 1.1821 0.8780 Jun-96 137.5 62.8 1.2040 0.7659 Jul-96 136.0 64.3 1.1909 0.7841 Aug-96 136.2 66.5 1.1926 0.8110 Sep-96 136.2 73.4 1.1926 0.8951 Oct-96 131.2 79.7 1.1489 0.9720 Nov-96 127.1 76.5 1.1130 0.9329 Dec-96 127.7 76.1 1.1182 0.9280 Jan-97 128.3 73.7 1.1235 0.8988 Feb-97 128.1 72.3 1.1217 0.8817 Mar-97 128.2 65.2 1.1226 0.7951 Apr-97 127.3 65.3 1.1147 0.7963 May-97 129.7 64.2 1.1357 0.7829 Jun-97 135.1 60.8 1.1830 0.7415 Jul-97 135.9 57.8 1.1900 0.7049 Aug-97 134.7 61.5 1.1795 0.7500 Sep-97 136.0 60.4 1.1909 0.7366 Oct-97 130.1 64.8 1.1392 0.7902 Page 3 of 8 Energy Escalation Factor (E) for PWR (Diablo Canyon) 0.9570 0.9032 0.9047 0.9339 0.9268 0.9171 0.9201 0.9551 0.9715 0.9776 0.9807 0.9512 0.9462 0.9272 0.9282 0.9231 0.9297 0.9344 0.9640 0.9730 0.9678 0.9780 0.9771 0.9634 0.9528 0.9590 0.9702 0.9513 0.9743 1.0383 1.0544 1.0200 1.0201 1.0323 1.0677 1.0746 1.0373 1.0383 1.0291 1.0209 0.9851 0.9810 0.9876 0.9976 0.9863 0.9991 1.0001 0.9927 Enclosure 2 PG&E Letter DCL-17-022 Development of E Component Calculation of Energy Escalation Factor-Reference NUREG-1307, Revision 16, Section 3.3 Using Regional Indices Series ID: WPU0573 Light Fuel Oils (as of 02/21/2017) and WPU0543 Industrial Electric Power (as of 02/21/2017) REBASED TO 1986 = 100 PPI for Fuels & PPI for Light PPI for Fuels & PPI for Light Related Products Fuel Oils Related Products Fuel Oils (1982 = 100) (1982 = 100) (1986=100) (1986=100) (P) = Industrial Energy Power (F) = Light Fuel Oils (P) = Industrial Energy Power (F) = Light Fuel Oils Nov-97 127.9 . 65.8 1.1200 0.8024 Dec-97 128.3 59.4 1.1235 0.7244 Jan-98 127.4 54.1 1.1156 0.6598 Feb-98. 127.2 52.0 1.1138 0.6341 Mar-98 126.7 48.3 1.1095 0.5890 AP,r-98 126.4 50.2 1.1068 0.6122 May-98 129.2 50.0 1.1313 0.6098 Jun-98 133.8 46.3 1.1716 0.5646 Jul-98 134.8 45.0 1.1804 0.5488 Aug-98 135.2 44.0 1.1839 0.5366 Sep-98 135.2 48.3 1.1839 0.5890 Oct-98 130.4 47.4 1.1419 0.5780 Nov-98 127.6 46.2 1.1173 0.5634 Dec-98 126.6 38.8 1.1086 0.4732 Jan-99 126.1 40.9 1.1042 0.4988 Feb-99 125.5 38.2 1.0989 0.4659 Mar-99 125.5 42.8 1.0989 0.5220 Apr-99 125.2 52.5 1.0963 0.6402 May-99 127.4 52.6 1.1156 0.6415 Jun-99 131.0 52.4 1.1471 0.6390 Jul-99 133.9 58.7 1.1725 0.7159 Aug-99 133.9 63 1.1725 0:7683 Sep-99 134.1 67.6 1.1743 0.8244 Oct-99 129.5 65.5 1.1340 0.7988 Nov-99 127.5 71.3 1.1165 0.8695 Dec-99 126.5 72.9 1.1077 0.8890 Jan-OD 126.8* 75.3 1.1103 0.9183 Feb-DO 126.7 87.9 1.1095 1.0720 Mar-DO 126.7 89.7 1.1095 1.0939 Apr-DO 126.8 83.1 1.1103 1.0134 May-DO 128.6 82.9 1.1261 1.0110 Jun-DO 133.6 86.2 1.1699 1.0512 Jul-DO 136.2 88.7 1.1926 1.0817 Aug-DO 137.4 91.6 1.2032 1.1171 Sep-DO 137.8 110.1 1.2067 1.3427 Oct-DO 134.1 108.6 1.1743 1.3244 Nov-DO 130.9 108.4 1.1462 1.3220 Dec-DO 132.7 100.6 1.1620 1.2268 Jan-01 136.4 96.1 1.1944 1.1720 Feb-01 136.4 91.6 1.1944 1.1171 Mar-01 136.5 83.1 1.1953 1.0134 Apr-01 135.1 86.2 1.1830 1.0512 May-01 136.2 94.2 1.1926 1.1488 Jun-01 148.4 90.2 1.2995 1.1000 Jul-01 .149.5 81.3 1.3091 0.9915 Aug-01 148.9 83.2 1.3039 1.0146 Sep-01 148.2 93 1.2977 1.1341 Oct-01 143.8 76.8 1.2592 0.9366 Page 4 of 8 Energy Escalation Factor (E) forPWR (Diablo Canyon) 0.9866 0.9559 0.9241 0.9124 0.8909 0.8991 0.9123 0.9167 0.9151 0.9120 0.9340 0.9051 0.8847 0.8417 0.8499 0.8330 0.8566 0.9048 0.9165 0.9337 0.9807 1.0027 1.0273 0.9932 1.0127 1.0159 1.0297 1.0937 1.1029 1.0696 1.0777 1.1200 1.1461 1.1670 1.2638 1.2373 1.2200 1.1892 1.1850 1.1619 1.1189 1.1277 1.1742 1.2157 1.1757 1.1824 1.2290 1.1237 Enclosure 2 PG&E Letter DCL-17-022 Development of E Component Calculation of Energy Escalation Factor-Reference NUREG-1307, Revision 16, Section 3.3 Using Regional Indices Series ID: WPU0573 Light Fuel Oils (as of 02/21/2017) and WPU0543 Industrial Electric Power (as of 02/21/2017) REBASED TO 1986 = 100 PPI for Fuels & PPI for Light PPI for Fuels & PPI for Light Related Products Fuel Oils Related Products Fuel Oils (1982 = 100) (1982 = 100) (1986=100) (1986 = 100} (P) = Industrial Energy Power (F) = Light Fuel Oils (P) = Industrial Energy Power (F) = Light Fuel Oils Nov-01 137.3 70.5 1.2023 0.8598 Dec-01 136.9 56.6 1.1988 0.6902 Jan-02 136.3 58.3 1.1935 0.7110 Feb-02 135.4 59.6 1.1856 0.7268 Mar-02 135.7 69.1 1.1883 0.8427 Apr-02 135.4 76.4 1.1856 0.9317 May-02 137.9 75 1.2075 0.9146 Jun-02 143.6 71.4 1.2574 0.8707 Jul-02 144.9 75.5 1.2688 0.9207 Aug-02 145.0 77.9 1.2697 0.9500 Sep-02 145.8 89.5 1.2767 1.0915 Oct-02 140.0 95.1 1.2259 1.1598 Nov-02 139.5 82.8 1.2215 1.0098 Dec-02 139.6 84.6 1.2224 1.0317 Jan-03 140.3 95.7 1.2285 1.1671 Feb-03 140.6 120.4 1.2312 1.4683 Mar-03 143.3 128.9 1.2548 1.5720 Apr-03 144.3 98.3 1.2636 1.1988 May-03 145.1 85.5 1.2706 1.0427 Jun-03 148.3 87.2 1.2986 1.0634 Jul-03 151.6 90.1 1.3275 1.0988 Aug-03 151.3 94.1 1.3249 1.1476 Sep-03 152.0 88.2 1.3310 1.0756 Oct-03 147.4 97.8 1.2907 1.1927 Nov-03 142.7 93.0 1.2496 1.1341 Dec-03 142.9 95.8 1.2513 . 1.1683 Jan-04 143.1 106.8 1.2531 1.3024 Feb-04 143.1 100.8 1.2531 1.2293 Mar-04 143.1 107.8 1.2531 1.3146 Apr-04 143.1 115.2 1.2531 1.4049 May-04 144.2 116 1.2627 1.4146 Jun-04 152.4 111.5 1.3345 1.3598 Jul-04 152.2 119.3 1.3327 1.4549 Aug-04 154.0 131.1 1.3485 1.5988 Sep-04 154.0 136.8 1.3485 1.6683 Oct-04 145.8 161.7 1.2767 1.9720 Nov-04 144.9 153.6 1.2688 1.8732 Dec-04 146.2 133.8 1.2802 1.6317 Jan-05 148.9 138.5 1.3039 1.6890 Feb-05 148.0 146 1.2960 1.7805 Mar-05 148.1 169.4 1.2968 2.0659 Apr-05 148.7 170.9 1.3021 2.0841 May-05 151.1 165.3 1.3231 2.0159 Jun-05 159.7 180.6 1.3984 2.2024 Jul-05 162.1 186.2 1.4194 2.2707 Aug-05 162.5 194.5 1.4229 2.3720 Sep-05. 162.8 209.9 1.4256 2.5598 Oct-05 159.5 252.0 1.3967 3.0732 Page 5 of 8 Energy Escalation Factor (E) forPWR (Diablo Canyon) 1.0584 0.9852 0.9909 0.9929 1.0431 1.0790 1.0845 1.0950 1.1226 1.1354 1.1989 1.1981 1.1326 1.1423 1.2027 1.3308 1.3880 1.2364 1.1749 1.1998 1.2314 1.2504 1.2237 1.2495 1.2011 1.2164 1.27.38 1.2431 1.2789 1.3168 1.3265 1.3451 1.3840 1.4536 1.4828 1.5687 1.5227 1.4278 1.4656 1.4995 1.6198 1.6306 1.6141 1.7361 1.7770 1.8215 1.9019 2.1008 Enclosure 2 PG&E Letter DCL-17-022 Development of E Component Enclosure 2 PG&E Letter DCL-17-022 Development of E Component Calculation of Energy Escalation Factor -Reference NUREG-1307, Revision 16, Section 3.3 Using Regional Indices Series ID: WPU0573 Light Fuel Oils (as of 02/21/2017) and WPU0543 Industrial Electric Power (as of 02/21/2017) REBASED TO 1986 = 100 PPI for Fuels & PPI for Light PPI for Fuels & PPI for Light Related Products Fuel Oils Related Products Fuel Oils (1982.= 100) (1982 = 100) (1966=100) (1966 = 100) (P) = Industrial Energy Power (F) = Light Fuel Oils (P) = Industrial Energy Power (F) = Light Fuel Oils Nov-09 166.0 207.6 1.6287 2.5341 Dec-09 186.0 197.5 1.6287 2.4085 Jan-10 186.3 220.7 1.6313 2.6915 Feb-10 186.1 200.2 1.6296 2.4415 Mar-10 169.0 217.0 1.6550 2.6463 Apr-10 188.6 231.5 1.6532 2.6232 May-10 192.0 226.0 1.6813 2.7561 Jun-1 o 197.6 212.4 1.7320 2.5902 Jul-10 199.8 209.3 1.7496 2.5524 Aug-10 200.8 221.4 1.7563 2.7000 Sep-10 200.0 220.0 1.7513 2.6829 Oct-10 194.6 235.6 1.7040 2.8756 Nov-1 o 190.9 245.3 1.6716 2.9915 Dec-10 191.4 250.0 1.6760 3.0488 Jan-11 193.1 260.4 1.6909 3.1756 Feb-11 194.4 276.8 1.7023 3.4000 Mar-11 195.0 307.5 1.7075 3.7500 Apr-11 194.1 325.1 1.6996 3.9646 May-11 196.9 315.1 1.7242 3.8427 Jun-11 205.7 316.9 1.8012 3.8646 Jul-11 215.3 311.5 1.8653 3.7986 Aug-11 216.6 296.9 1.8967 3.6207 Sep-11 215.6 306.5 1.8897 3.7376 Oct-11 206.6 299.6 1.8091 3.6537 Nov-11 204.0 322.7 1.7663 3.9354 Dec-11 204.4 301.0 1.7698 3.6707 Jan-12 201.1 308.6 1.7609 3.7659 Feb-12 200.3 316.5 1.7539 3.8598 Mar-12 199.8 330.8 1.7496 4.0341 Apr-12 198.1 327.1 1.7347 3.9890 May-12 201.5 315.6 1.7644 3.6488 Jun-12 207.7 284.6 1.6187 3.4707 Jul-12 221.5 267.9 1.9396 3.5110 Aug-12 222.1 313.4 1.9448 3.8220 Sep-12 222.8 330.4 1.9510 4.0293 Oct-12 214.1 334.1 1.8748 4.0744 Nov-12 212.3 311.6 1.8590 3.8000 Dec-12 213.8 303.3 1.8722 3.6986 Jan-13 199.2 303.6 1.7443 3.7024 Feb-13 199.4 327.7 1.7461 3.9963 Mar-13 199.0 308.7 1.7426 3.7646 Apr-13 198.6 303.9 1.7408 3.7061 May-13 203.5 296.4 1.7820 3.6146 Jun-13 211.9 294.9 1.8555 3.5963 Jul-13 211.4 300.4 1.8511 3.6634 Aug-13 210.4 307.4 1.8424 3.7488 Sep-13 210.3 315.3 1.8415 3.8451 Oct-13 201.2 306.6 1.7618 3.7415 Page 7 of 8 Energy Escalation Factor (E) for PWR "(Diablo Canyon) 2.0090 1.9562 2.0766 1.9706 2.0714 2.1446 2.1327 2.0925 2.0868 2.1538 2.1426 2.1961 2.2260 2.2526 2.3145 2.4153 2.5654 2.6509 2.6139 2.6679 2.6890 2.6208 2.6659 2.5838 2.6889 2.5798 2.6030 2.6384 2.7091 2.6615 2.6399 2.5126 2.5996 2.7332 2.6239 2.7966 2.6742 2.6393 2.5667 2.6912 2.5916 2.5662 2.5517 2.5867 2.6123 2.6431 2.6830 2.5933 Enclosure 2 PG&E Letter DCL-17-022 Development of E Component Calculation of Energy Escalation Factor-Reference NUREG-1307, Revision 16, Section 3.3 Using Regional Indices Series ID: WPU0573 Light Fuel Oils (as of 02/21/2017) and WPU0543 Industrial Electric Power (as of 02/21/2017) REBASED TO 1986 = 100 PPI for Fuels & PPI for Light PPI for Fuels & PP! for Light Related Products Fuel Oils Related Products Fuel Oils (1982 = 100) (1982 = 100) (1986 = 100) (1986 = 100) (P) = Industrial Energy Power (F) = Light Fuel Oils (P) = Industrial Energy Power (F) = Light Fuel Oils Nov-13 199.0 295.3 1.7426 3.6012 Dec-13 200.5 302.9 1.7557 3.6939 Jan-14 215.1 297.5 1.8835 3.6280 Feb-14 214.4 309.1 1.8774 3.7695 Mar-14 214.8 306.5 1.8809 3.7378 Apr-14 210.8 306.7 1.8459 3.7402 May-14 215.2 304.4 1.8844 3.7122 Jun-14 224.0 296.5 1.9615 3.6159
  • Jul-14 227.5 295.3 1.9921 3.6012 Aug-14 227.7 293.9 1.9939 3.5841 Sep-14 225.1 291.0 1.9711 3.5488 Oct-14 217.0 271.4 1.9002 3.3098 Nov-14 210.7 260.9 1.8450 3.1817 Dec-14 213.9 218.9 1.8730 2.6695 Jan-15 222.4 173.6 1.9475 2.1171 Feb-15 221.1 184.3 1.9361 2.2476 Mar-15 218.2 185.7 1.9107 2.2646 Apr-15 213.3. 178.2 1.8678 2.1732 May-15 217.0 196.6 1.9002 2.3976 Jun-15 237.2 193.4 2.0771 2.3585 Jul-15 237.3 187.0 2.0779 2.2805 Aug-15 236.8 180.4 2.0736 2.2000 Sep-15 234.2 163.1 2.0508 1.9890 Oct-15 218.2 165.3 1.9107 2.0159 Nov-15 213.4 159.7 1.8687 1.9476 Dec-15 214.8 131.1 1.8809 1.5988 Jan-16 205.3 114.4 1.7977 1.3951 Feb-16 204.3 107.7 1.7890 1.3134 \ Mar-16 204.5 113.8 1.7907 1.3878 Apr-16 202.4 116.8 1.7723 1.4244 May-16 206.3 137.8 1.8065 1.6805 Jun-16 220.4 149.4 1.9299 1.8220 Jul-16 226.2 152.2 1.9807 .. 1.8561 Aug-16 227.3 143.5 1.9904 1.7500 Sep-16 228.1 155.5 1.9974 1.8963 Oct-16 216.2 152.8 1.8932 1.8634 Nov-16 210.7 151.6 1.8450 1.8488 Dec-16 215.0 152.0 1.8827 1.8537 Oct 16 through Dec 16 are Preliminary Values from PPI Indices Based on Base Year 2000 being the indice values Dec 1999, Jan 2017 base will be Dec 2016 Page 8 of 8 Energy Escalation Factor (E) for PWR (Diablo Canyon) 2.5232 2.5697 2.6162 2.6721 2.6608 2.6415 2.6521 2.6563 2.6679 2.6618 2.6337 2.4922 2.4064 2.2076 2.0187 2.0669 2.0593 1.9960 2.1091 2.1953 2.1630 2.1267 2.0248 1.9549 1.9018 1.7624 1.6286 1.5892 1.6215 1.6262 1.7536 1.8846 1.9284 1.8894 1.9549 1.8807 1.8466 1.8705 Enclosure 2 PG&E Letter DCL-17-022 Development of L Component Enclosure 2 PG&E Letter DCL-17-022 . Calculation of Labor Escalation Factor -Reference NUREG-1307, Revision 16, Section 3.2 Using Regional Indices Series ID: CIU20100000002401 (as of 02/21/2017) January 1986 adjusted to reflect NU REG 1307, Revision 16, Scaling Factor for West Labor (Page 11) Note 1: The Base Labor factor was re-indexed in December 2005, at which time the index was reset to 100. Employment Cost lndust West Region Labor Private Industry Escalation (1989=100) Factor Dec-85 89.8 1.00000 Jan-86 Feb-86 Mar-86 90.8 1.01114 Apr-86 May-86 Jun-86 91.2 1.01559 Jul-86 Aug-86 Sep-86 91.6 1.02004 Oct-86 Nov-86 Dec-86 92.5 1.03007 Jan-87 Feb-87 Mar-87 92.6 1.03118 Apr-87 May-87 Jun-87 93.7 1.04343 Jul-87 Aug-87 Sep-87 94.1 1.04788 Oct-87 Nov-87 Dec-87 95.4 1.06236 Jan-88 Feb-88 Mar-88 96.3 1.07238 Apr-88 May-88 Jun-88 97 ' 1.08018
  • Jul-88 Aug-88 Sep-88 97.7 1.08797 Oct-88 Nov-88 Dec-88 98.8 1.10022 Jan-89 Feb-89 Mar-89 100 1.11359 Apr-89 Page1of10 Development of L Component . Enclosure 2 PG&E Letter DCL-17-022 *Calculation of Labor Escalation Factor-Reference NUREG-1307, Revision 16, Section 3.2 Using Regional Indices Series ID: CIU20100000002401 (as of 02/21/2017) January 1986 adjusted to reflect NU REG 1307, Revision 16, Scaling Factor for West Labor (Page 11) Note 1: The Base Labor factor was re-indexed in December 2005, at which time the index was reset to 100. Employment Cost lndust West Region Labor Private Industry Escalation (1989=100) Factor Dec-85 89.8 1.00000 May-89 Jun-89 101 1.12472 Jul-89 Aug-89 Sep-89 101.8 1.13363 Oct-89 Nov-89 Dec-89 103.3 1.15033 Jan-90 Feb-90 Mar-90 104.5 1.16370 Apr-90 May-90 Jun-90 105.6 1.17595 Jul-90 Aug-90 Sep-90 106.3 1.18374 Oct-90 Nov-90 Dec-90 107.5 1.19710 Jan-91 Feb-91 Mar-91 108.9 1.21269 Apr-91 May-91 Jun-91 110 1.22494 Jul-91 Aug-91 Sep-91 110.9 1.23497 Oct-91 Nov-91 Dec-91 111.9 1.24610 Jan-92 Feb-92 Mar-92 112.9 1.25724 Apr-92 May-92 Jun-92 114.1 1.27060 Jul-92 Aug-92 Page 2of10 Development of L Component Enclosure 2 PG&E Letter DCL-17-022 Calculation of Labor Escalation Factor -Reference NUREG-1307, Revision 16, Section 3.2 Using Regional Indices Series ID: CIU20100000002401 (as of 02/21/2017) January 1986 adjusted to reflect NU REG 1307, Revision 16, Scaling Factor for West Labor (Page 11) Note 1: The Base Labor factor was re-indexed in December 2005, at which time the index was reset to 100. Employment Cost lndust West Region Labor Private Industry Escalation (1989=100) Factor Dec-85 89.8 1.00000 Sep-92 114.9 1.27951 Oct-92 Nov-92 Dec-92 116.2 1.29399 Jan-93 Feb-93 Mar-93 116.4 1.29621 Apr-93 May-93 Jun-93 117.8 1.31180 Jul-93 Aug-93 Sep-93 118.1 1.31514 Oct-93 Nov-93 ' Dec-93
  • 119.4 1.32962 Jan-94 Feb-94 Mar-94 120.5 1.34187 Apr-94 May-94 Jun-94 121.3 1.35078 Jul-94 Aug-94 Sep-94 121.7 1.35523 Oct-94 Nov-94 Dec-94 122.6 1.36526 Jan-95 Feb-95 Mar-95 123.4 1.37416 Apr-95 May-95 Jun-95 123.9 1.37973 Jul-95 Aug-95 Sep-95 125 1.39198 Oct-95 Nov-95 Dec-95 125.9 1.40200 Page 3of10 Development of L Component Enclosure 2 PG&E Letter DCL-17-022 Calculation of Labor Escalation Factor -Reference NUREG-1307, Revision 16, Section 3.2 Using Regional Indices Series ID: CIU20100000002401 (as of 02/21/2017) January 1986 adjusted to reflect NUREG 1307, Revision 16, Scaling Factor for West Labor (Page 11) Note 1: The Base Labor factor was re-indexed in December 2005, at which time the index was reset to 100. Employment Cost lndust West Region Labor Private Industry Escalation (1989=100) Factor Dec-85 89.8 1.00000 Jan-96 Feb-96 Mar-96 127.3 1.41759 Apr-96 May-96 Jun-96 128.3 1.42873 Jul-96 Aug-96 Sep-96 128.9 1.43541 Oct-96 Nov-96 Dec-96 130.3 1.45100 Jan-97 Feb-97 Mar-97 131.4 1.46325 Apr-97 May-97 Jun-97 132.5 1.47550 Jul-97 Aug-97 Sep-97 133.4 1.48552 Oct-97 Nov-97 Dec-97 135.2 1.50557 Jan-98 Feb-98 Mar-98 136.6 1.52116 Apr-98 May-98 Jun-98 138.5 1.54232 Jul-98 Aug-98 Sep-98 140 1.55902 Oct-98 Nov-98 Dec-98 140.3 1.56236 Jan-99 Feb-99 Mar-99 142.1 1.58241 Apr-99 Page 4of10 Development of L Component Enclosure 2 PG&E Letter DCL-17-022 Calculation of Labor Escalation Factor-Reference NUREG-1307, Revision 16, Section 3.2 Using Regional Indices Series ID: CIU20100000002401 (as of 02/21/2017) January 1986 adjusted to reflect NU REG 1307, Revision 16, Scaling Factor for West Labor (Page 11) Note 1: The Base Labor factor was re-indexed in December 2005, at which time the index was reset to 100. Employment Cost lndust West Region Labor Private Industry Escalation (1989=100) Factor Dec-85 89.8 1.00000 May-99 Jun-99 143.3 1.59577 Jul-99 Aug-99 . Sep-99 144.7 1.61136 Oct-99 Nov-99 Dec-99 147 1.63697 Jan-00 Feb-00 Mar-00 148.8 1.65702 Apr-00 May-00 Jun-00 150.8 1.67929 Jul-00 Aug-00 Sep-00 151.8 1.69042 Oct-00 Nov-00 Dec-00 84.1 0.93653 Jan-01 Feb-01 Mar-01 85 0.94655 Apr-01 May-01 Jun-01 85.9 0.95657 Jul-01 Aug-01 Sep-01 86.9 0.96771 Oct-01 Nov-01 Dec-01 87.4 0.97327 Jan-02 Feb-02 Mar-02 88.5 0.98552 Apr-02 May-02 Jun-02 89.1 0.99220 Jul-02 Aug-02 Page 5of10 Development of L Component Enclosure 2 PG&E Letter DCL-17-022 Calculation of Labor Escalation Factor-Reference NUREG-1307, Revision 16, Section 3.2 -Using Regional Indices Series ID: CIU20100000002401 (as of02/21/2017) January 1986 adjusted to reflect NU REG 1307, Revision 16, Scaling Factor for West Labor (Page 11) Note 1: The Base Labor factor was re-indexed in December 2005, at which time the index was reset to 100. Employment Cost lndust West Region Labor Private Industry Escalation (1989=100) Factor Dec-85 89.8 1.00000 Sep-02 89.8 1.00000 Oct-02 Nov-02 Dec-02 90.9 1.01225 Jan-03 Feb-03 Mar-03 90.9 1.01225 Apr-03 May-03 Jun-03 92 1.02450 Jul-03 Aug-03 I ,, Sep-03 93.2 1.03786 \ Oct-03 Nov-03 -Dec-03 93.8 1.04454 Jan-04 Feb-04 Mar-04 95.3 1.06125 Apr-04 May-04 Jun-04 \.. 96.2 1.07127 Jul-04 Aug-04 Sep-04 96.9 1.07906 Oct-04 Nov-04 Dec-04 97.4 1.08463 Jan-05 Feb-05 Mar-05 98.4 1.09577 Apr-05 May-05 Jun-05 99.3 1.10579 Jul-05 Aug-05 Sep-05 99.7 1.11024 Oct-05 Nov-05 Dec-05 Note 1 100 2.06000 Page 6of10 Development of L Component Enclosure 2 PG&E Letter DCL-17-022 Calculation of Labor Escalation Factor -Reference NUREG-1307, Revision 16, Section 3.2 Using Regional Indices Series ID: CIU2010000000240l (as of02/21/2017) January 1986 adjusted to reflect NU REG 1307, Revision 16, Scaling Factor for West Labor (Page 11) Note 1: The Base Labor factor was re-indexed in December 2005, at which time the index was reset to 100. Employment Cost lndust West Region Labor Private Industry Escalation (1989=100) Factor Dec-85 89.8 1.00000 Jan-06 Feb-06 Mar-06 100.6 2.07236 Apr-06 May-06 Jun-06 101.8 2.09708 Jul-06 Aug-06 Sep-06 102.5 2.11150 Oct-06 Nov-06 Dec-06 103 2.12180 Jan-07 Feb-07 Mar-07 104.2 2.14652 Apr-07 May-07 Jun-07 104.9 2.16094 Jul-07
  • Aug-07 Sep-07 105.7 2.17742 Oct-07 Nov-07 Dec-07 106.5 2.19390 Jan-08 Feb-08 Mar-08 107.8 2.22068 Apr-08 May-08 Jun-08 108.4 2.23304 Jul-08 Aug-08 Sep-08 109.3 2.25158 Oct-08 Nov-08 Dec-08 109.4 2.25364 Jan-09 Feb-09 Mar-09 109.9 2.26394 Apr-09 Page 7of10
  • Development of L Component Enclosure 2 PG&E Letter DCL-17-022 Calculation of Labor Escalation Factor -Reference NUREG-1307, Revision 16, Section 3.2 Using Regional Indices Series ID: CIU20100000002401 (as of 02/21/2017) January 1986 adjusted to reflect NU REG 1307; Revision 16, Scaling Factor for West Labor (Page 11) Note 1: The Base Labor factor was re-indexed in December 2005, at which time the index was reset to 100. Employment Cost lndust West Region Labor Private Industry Escalation (1989=100) Factor Dec-85 89.8 1.00000 May-09 Jun-09 110 2.26600 Jul-09 Aug-09 Sep-09 110.3 2.27218 Oct-09 Nov-09 Dec-09 110.6 2.27836 Jan-10 Feb-10 Mar-10. 111.3 2.29278 Apr-10 May-10 Jun-10 111.7 2.30102 Jul-10 Aug-10 Sep-10 112.3 2.31338 Oct-10 Nov-10 Dec-10 112.5 2.31750 Jan-11 Feb-11 Mar-11 113.5 2.33810 Apr-11 May-11 Jun-11 114.3 2.35458 Jul-11 Aug-11 Sep-11 114.6 2.36076 Oct-11 Nov-11 Dec-11 115.1 2.37106 Jan-12 Feb-12 Mar-12 115.7 2.38342 Apr-12 May-12 Jun-12 116.3 2.39578 Jul-12 Aug-12 Page 8of10 Development of L Component Enclosure 2 -PG&E Letter DCL-17-022 Calculation of Labor Escalation Factor -Reference NUREG-1307, Revision 16, Section 3.2 Using Regional Indices Series ID: CIU20100000002401 (as of 02/21/2017) January 1986 adjusted to reflect NU REG 1307, Revision 16, Scaling Factor for West Labor (Page 11) Note 1: The Base Labor factor was re-indexed in December 2005, at which time the index was reset to 100. Employment Cost lndust West Region Labor Private Industry Escalation (1989=100) Factor Dec-85 89.8 1.00000 Sep-12 116.8 2.40608 Oct-12 Nov-12 Dec-12 116.8 2.40608 Jan-13 Feb-13 Mar-13 117.6 2.42256 Apr-13 May-13 Jun-13 118.5 2.44110 Jul-13 Aug-13 Sep-13 119.2 2.45552 ! Oct-13 Nov-13 Dec-13 119.6 2.46376 Jan-14 Feb-14 Mar-14 120.1 2.47406 Apr-14 May-14 Jun-14 120.9 2.49054 Jul-14 Aug-14 Sep-14 121.9 2.51114 Oct-14 Nov-14 Dec-14 122.5 2.52350 Jan-15 Feb-15 Mar-15 123.1 2.53586 Apr-15 May-15 Jun-15 123.8 2.55028 Jul-15 Aug-15 Sep-15 124.6 2.56676 Oct-15 Nov-15 Dec-15 125.3 2.58118 Page 9of10 _J Development of L Component Enclosure 2 PG&E Letter DCL-17-022 Calculation of Labor Escalation Factor -Reference NUREG-1307, Revision 16, Section 3.2 Using"Regional Indices Series ID: CIU20100000002401 (as of 02/21/2017) January 1986 adjusted to reflect NU REG 1307, Revision 16, Scaling Factor for West Labor (Page 11) Note 1: The Base Labor factor was re-indexed in December 2005, at which time the index was reset to 100. Employment Cost lndust West Region Labor Private Industry Escalation (1989=100) Factor Dec-85 89.8 1.00000 Jan-16 Feb-16 Mar-16 126.2 2.59972 Apr-16 May-16 Jun-16 127.2 2.62032 Jul-16 Aug-16 Sep-16 127.9 2.63474 Oct-16 Nov-16 Dec-16 128.6 2.64916 Page 10of10 Development of Burial Escalation Developed from NUREG-1307, Revision 16 Development of B Component *Enclosure 2 PG&E Letter DCL-17-022 Table 2.1 "VALUES OF B SUB-X AS A FUNCTION OF LLW BURIAL SITE AND YEAR" (Summary for non-Atlantic Compact) 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Revised to Bx Values for Generic LLW Disposal Site (Assumed to be same as that provided for the Atlantic Compact for lack of a better alternative at this time. PWR PWR Burial Costs Restated to (South Carolina) 1986 = 100 1.678 1.0000 2.007 1.1961 2.494 1.4863 11.408 6.7986 11.873 7.0757 12.824 7'.6424 12.771 7.6108 15.852 9.4470 15.886 9.4672 0.0000 18.129 10.8039 0.0000 18.732 11.1633 19.034 11.3433 21.937 13.0733 22.477 13.3951 23.030 13.7247 23.597 14.0626 25.231 15.0364 26.262 15.6505 27.292 16.2646 28.937 17.2446 30.581 18.2247 30.581 18.2247 30.581 18.2247 30.581 18.2247 30.581 18.2247 30.061 17.9148 Table 2.1 Note (e): Bx values for the generic site are assumed to be the same as that provided for the Atlantic Compact for lack of a better alternative at this time. Note (f): Effective with NUREG-1307, Revision 8 (Reference3) an alternative disposal option was introduced in which the bulk of the LLW is assumed to be dispositioned by waste vendors and/or disposed of at a non-compact disposal facility. Note (g): Effective with NUREG1307, Revision 15, the nomenclature for the two disposal options, referred to as "Direct Disposal" and "Direct Disposal with Vendors" in previous revisions of NUREG-1307, is changed to "Compact-Affiliated Disposal. Facility Only" and "Combination of Comapct-Affiliated and Non-Compact Disposal Facilities" to better describe the options. Note (h): 2013 has no information in NUREG-1307 Revision 15. 2013 is an estimate that is calculated by applying the percent change between 2010 and 2012 and adding to the 2012 base. Note (i): 2015 The NRC has issued Regulatory Issue Summary 2014-12, "Decommissioning Fund Status Report Calculations Update to Low-Level Waste Burial Charge Information," to inform licensees that they may use low-level waste burial charge data contained in Revision 15 of NUREG-1307, Report on Waste Burial Charges: Changes in Decommissioning Waste Disposal Costs at Low-Level Waste Burial Facilities, dated January 2013, when preparing their periodic decommissioning fund status report .. Note 0): Effective with NUREG-1307, Revision 15, the nomenclature for the two disposal options, referred to as "Direct Disposal" and "Direct Disposal with Vendors" in previous revisions of NUREG-1307, was changed to "Compact-Affiliated Disposal Facility Only" and "Combination of Compact-Affiliated and Non-Compact Disposal Facilities" to better describe these options. Note (k): As allowed per NUREG-1307, Revision 16, PG&E used a burial/disposition adjustment factor higher than the burial/disposition adjustment factor provided in NUREG-1307, Revision 16, for plants that have no disposal site available within their designated LLW Compact. To avoid significant future shortfalls in funding and potential enforcement actions, PG&E used the burial/disposition adjustment factor for compact-affiliated disposal for the South Carolina Site." Page 1 of 1 Appendix C-1 Diablo Canyon Power Plant Unit 1 Decon Decommissioning Cost Estimate (9 pages) Appendix C-2 Diablo Canyon Power Plant Unit 2 Decon Decommissioning Cost Estimate (9 pages) Enclosure 3 PG&E Letter DCL-17-022 \

Diablo Canyon Power Plant Enclosure 3 Decommissioning Cost Analysis PG&E Letter DCL-17-022 Apendix C1, Page 1 of 9 Table C-1 Table C-1 Diablo Canyon Unit 1 Diablo Canyon Unit 1 DECON Decommissioning Cost Estimate DECON Decommissioning Cost Estimate (Thousands of 2014 Dollars) (Thousands of 2017 Dollars) Off-Site LLRW Activity Decon Removal Packaging Transport Processing Other Total Total Contractor PG&E Contractor PG&E Index Activity Description Cost Cost Costs Costs Costs Costs Costs Contingency Costs Labor Eqp&Mat Labor Disposal Other Labor Eqp&Mat Labor Disposal Other PERIOD 1a -Shutdown through Transition Period 1 a Direct Decommissioning Activities 1a.1.1 Prepare preliminary decommissioning cost 245 245 245 263 1a.1.2 Notification of Cessation of Operations a 1a.1.3 Remove fuel & source material n/a 1a.1.4 Notification of Permanent Defueling a 1a.1.5 Deactivate plant systems & process waste a 1a.1.6 Prepare and submit PSDAR 377 377 377 405 1a.1.7 Review plant dwgs & specs. 866 866 866 932 1a.1.8 Perform detailed rad survey a 1a.1.9 Estimate by-product inventory 188 188 188 203 1a.1.10 End product description 188 188 188 203 1a.1.11 Detailed by-product inventory 245 245 245 263 1a.1.12 Define major work sequence 1,412 1,412 1,412 1,520 1a.1.13 Perform SER and EA 584 584 584 628 1a.1.14 Perform Site-Specific Cost Study 942 942 942 1,013 1a.1.15 Prepare/submit License Termination Plan 771 771 771 830 1a.1.16 Receive NRG approval of termination plan a Activity Specifications 1a.1.17.1 Plant & temporary facilities 927 927 927 997 1a.1.17.2 Plant systems 785 785 785 845 1a.1.17.3 NSSS Decontamination Flush 94 94 94 101 1a.1.17.4 Reactor internals 1,337 1,337 1,337 1,439 1a.1.17.5 Reactor vessel 1,224 1,224 1,224 1,317 1a.1.17.6 Biological shield 94 94 94 101 1a.1.17.7 Steam generators 588 588 588 632 1a.1.17.8 Reinforced concrete 301 301 301 324 1a.1.17.9 Main Turbine 75 75 75 81 1 a.1.17.10 Main Condensers 75 75 75 81 1a.1.17.11 Plant structures & buildings 588 588 588 632 1a.1.17.12 Waste management 866 866 866 932 1a.1.17.13 Facility&sitecloseout 169 169 169 182 1a.1.17 Total 7,124 7,124 Planning & Site Preparations 1a.1.18 Prepare dismantling sequence 452 452 452 486 1a.1.19 Plant prep. & temp. svces 3,644 3,644 3,280 364 o 3,530 380 o 1a.1.20 Design water clean-up system 264 264 264 284 1a.1.21 Rigging/Cont. Cntrl Envlps/tooling/etc. 2,794 2,794 2,514 279 2,706 292 1a.1.22 Procure casks/liners & containers 232 232 232 249 1a.1 Subtotal Period 1 a Activity Costs . 20,328 20,328 Period 1 a Additional Costs 1a.2.1 Spent Fuel Pool Isolation 26,314 26,314 19,735 6,578 21,240 6,865 1a.2.2 Disposal of Contaminated Tools & Equipment 250 125 3,849 4,225 23 227 3,849 125 25 237 4,456 131 1a.2 Subtotal Period 1 a Additional Costs 250 125 3,849 26,314 30,538 Period 1 a Collateral Costs 1a.3.1 Environmental Permits and Fees 1,153 1,153 1,153 1,207 1a.3.2 GTCC Storage Permitting (PG&E Labor) 3,996 3,996 3,996 4,351 1a.3.3 GTCC Storage Permitting (Contractor) 619 619 619 667 1a.3 Subtotal Period 1 a Collateral Costs 5,769 5,769 "Period 1 a Period-Dependent Costs 1a.4.1 Insurance 1,294 1,294 1,294 1,355 1a.4.2 Property taxes 203 203 203 212 1a.4.3 Health physics supplies 714 714 714 745 1 a.4.4 Heavy equipment rental 689 689 689 719 1a.4.5 Disposal of DAW g!'!nerated 16 5 22 43 14 22 5 .2 15 26 5 1a.4.6 Plant energy budget 3,324 3,324 3,324 3,480 1a.4.7 NRG Fees 1,350 1,350 1,350 1,413 1a.4.8 Emergency Planning Fees 1,145 1,145 1,145 1,198 1a.4.9 Spent Fuel Pool O&M 963 963 963 1,008 1a.4.10 ISFSI Operating Costs 664 664 664 695 1a.4.11 Severance Related Costs 50,701 50,701 50,701 55,204 1a.4.12 Security Staff Cost 27,673 27,673 27,673 30,131 1a.4.13 Utility Staff Cost 45,392 45,392 45,392 49,423 1a.4 Subtotal Period 1 a Period-Dependent Costs 1,402 16 5 22 132,709 134,153 1a.O TOTAL PERIOD 1a COST 1,402 266 130 3,871 185,118 190,788 TLG Services, Inc. I J Diablo Canyon Power Plant Enclosure 3 Decommissioning Cost Analysis PG&E Letter DCL-17-022 Apendix C1, Page 2 of 9 Table C-1 Table C-1 Diablo Canyon Unit 1 Diablo Canyon Unit 1 DECON Decommissioning Cost Estimate DECON Decommissioning Cost Estimate (Thousands of 2014 Dollars) (Thousands of 2017 Dollars) Off-Site LLRW Activity Decon Removal Packaging Transport Processing Disposal Other Total Total Contractor PG&E Contractor PG&E Index Activity Description Cost Cost Costs Costs Costs Costs Costs Contingency Costs Labor Eqp&Mat Labor Disposal Other Labor Eqp&Mat Labor Disposal Other PERIOD 1 b -Decommissioning Preparations Period 1 b Decommissioning Activities Detailed Work Procedures 1b.1.1.1 Plant systems 891 891 891 959 1b.1.1.2 NSSS Decontamination Flush 188 188 188 203 1b.1.1.3 Reactor internals 471 471 471 507 1b.1.1.4 Remaining buildings 254 254 254 274 1b.1.1.5 CRD cooling assembly 188 188 188 203 1b.1.1.6 CRD housings & ICI tubes 188 188 188 203 1b.1.1.7 lncore instrumentation 188 188 188 203 1b.1.1.8 Reactor vessel 684 684 684 736 1b.1.1.9 Facility closeout 226 226 226 243 1b.1.1.10 Missile shields 85 85 85 91 1b.1.1.11 Biological shield 226 226 226 243 1b.1.1.12 Steam generators 866 866 866 932 1b.1.1.13 Reinforced concrete 188 188 188 203 1b.1.1.14 Main Turbine 294 294 294 316 1b.1.1.15 Main Condensers 294 294 294 316 1b.1.1.16 Auxiliary building 514 514 514 553 1b.1.1.17 Re.actor building 514 514 514 553 1b.1.1 Total 6,261 6,261 1b.1.2 Decon primary loop 1,367 1,367 250 1,118 269 1,166 1b.1 Subtotal Period 1 b Activity Costs 1,367 6,261 7,628 Period 1 b Additional Costs 1b.2.1 Site Characterization 7,481 7,481 4,645 2,837 0 4,999 2,960 0 1b.2.2 Hazardous Waste Management 264 264 264 276 1b.2.3 Mixed Waste Management 349 349 349 365 1b.2 Subtotal Period 1 b Additional Costs 8,093 8,093 Period 1 b Collateral Costs 1b.3.1 Decon equipment* 1,144 1,144 1,144 1,194 1b.3.2 DOC staff relocation expenses 1,780 1,780 1,780 1,916 1b.3.3 Process decommissioning water waste 79 37 66 205 386 4 112 205 66 4 117 237 69 1b.3.4 Process decommissioning chemical flush waste 4 108 305 7,852 8,269 12 100 7,852 305 13 104 9,090 319 1b.3.5 Small tool allowance 3 3 3 3 1b.3.6 Pipe cutting equipment 1,336 1,336 1,336 1,394 1b.3.7 Decon rig 1,943 1,943 1,943 2,028 1b.3.8 Environmental Permits and Fees 572 572 572 599 1b.3.9 GTCC Storage Permitting (PG&E Labor) 269 269 269 293 1b.3.10 GTCC Storage Permitting (Contractor) 623 623 623 671 1b.3 Subtotal Period 1 b Collateral Costs 3,170 1,339 145 370 8,057 3,244 16,326 Period 1 b Period-Dependent Costs 1b.4.1 Decon supplies 39 39 39 40 1b.4.2 Insurance 642 642 642 672 1b.4.3 Property taxes 101 101 101 105 1b.4.4 Health physics supplies 396 396 396 414 1b.4.5 Heavy equipment rental 341 341 341 356 1b.4.6 Disposal of DAW generated 9 3 13 25 8 13 3 9 15 3 1b.4.7 Plant energy budget 3,297 3,297 3,297 3,451 1b.4.8 NRG Fees 391 391 391 410 1 b.4.9 Emergency Planning Fees 568 568 568 594 1b.4.10 Spent Fuel Pool O&M 477 477 477 500 1b.4.11 ISFSI Operating Costs 329 329 329 345 1b.4.12 Severance Related Costs 2,981 2,981 2,981 3,246 1b.4.13 Security Staff Cost 12,839 12,839 12,839 13,979 1b.4.14 DOC Staff Cost 8,558 8,558 8,558 9,210 1b.4.15 Utility Staff Cost 22,638 22,638 22,638 24,649 1 b.4 Subtotal Period 1 b Period-Dependent Costs 39 738 9 3 13 52,821 53,622 1b.O TOTAL PERIOD 1b COST 4,576 2,077 -154 373 8,070 70,419 85,670 PERIOD 1 TOTALS 4,576 3,479 420 503 11,942 255,537 276,458 PERIOD 2a -Large Component Removal Period 2a Direct Decommissioning Activities Nuclear Steam Supply System Removal 2a.1.1.1 Reactor Coolant Piping 670 491 55 46 1,604 2,865 1,122 93 1,604 46 1,208 97 1,856 48 2a.1.1.2 Pressurizer Quench Tank 71 50 8 7 225 362 121 9 225 7 130 9 261 7 TLG Services, Inc. ----------

Diabla: Canyon Power Plant Enclosure 3 Decommissioning Cost Analysis PG&E Letter DCL-17-022 Apendix C1 ,"Page 3 of 9 Table C-1 Table C-1 Diablo Canyon Unit 1 Diablo Canyon Unit 1 DECON Decommissioning Cost Estimate DECON Decommissioning Cost Estimate (Thousands of 2014 Dollars) (Thousands of 2017 Dollars) Off-Site LLRW Activity Decon Removal Packaging Transport Processing Disposal Other Total Total Contractor PG&E Contractor PG&E Index Activity Description Cost Cost Costs Costs Costs Costs Costs Contingency Costs Labor Eqp&Mat Labor Disposal Other Labor Eqp&Mat Labor Disposal Other 2a.1.1.3 Reactor Coolant Pumps & Motors 263 178 182 258 1,943 2,823 491 131 1,943 258 529 137 2,249 270 2a.1.1.4 Pressurizer ' 91 100 605 159 1,010 1,966 247 550 1,010 159 265 574 1,169 167 2a.1.1.5 Steam Generators 863 4,521 3,702 2,471 17,238 28,795 3,136 5,951 17,238 2,471 3,375 6,211 19,955 2,586 2a.1.1.6 Retired Steam Generator Units 2,627 2,407 17,238 22,272 1,085 1,542 17,238 2,407 1,168 1,609 19,955 2,520 2a.1.1.7 CRDMs/ICls/Service Structure Removal 355 516 281 43 897 2,092 870 282 897 43 937 295 1,038 45 2a.1.1.8 Reactor Vessel Internals 369 15,437 13,707 2,721 50,684 434 83,352 8,260 21,687 50,684 2,721 8,889 22,633 58,674 2,848 2a.1.1.9 Reactor Vessel 276 11,685 3,847 1,165 5,952 434 23,358 8,166 8,076 5,952 1,165 8,789 8,428 6,890 1,219 2a.1.1 Totals 2,958 32,979 25,015. 9,276 96,789 867 167,885 Removal of Major Equipment 2a.1.2 Main Turbine/Generator 257 257 255 2 275 2 2a.1.3 Main Condensers 846 846 815 31 877 32 Cascading Costs from Clean Building Demolition 2a.1.4.1 *Reactor 1,533 1,533 991 542 , 1,067 566 2a.1.4.2 Containment Penetration Area 95 95 59 35 64 37 2a.1.4.3 Fuel Handling 249 249 147 102 158 107 2a.1.4 Totals 1,877 1,877 Disposal of Plant ,Systems 2a.1.5.1 Auxiliary Steam 187 187 181 6 195 6 2a.1.5.2 Auxiliary Steam (RCA) 377 47 19 690 1,133 332 92 690 19 357 96 798 20 2a.1.5.3 Condensate System 860 860 835 25 899 27 2a. 1.5.4 Condensate System (Insulated) 356 356 349 7 376 8 2a.1.5.5 Containment Spray 343 138 57 2,044 2,583 327 154 2,044 57 352 161 2,366 60 2a.1.5.6 Extraction Steam & Heater Drip 332 332 322 10 347 11 2a.1.5.7 Feedwater System 58 58 57 1 61 1 2a.1.5.8 Feedwater System (Insulated) 213 213 207 6 223 6 2a.1.5.9 Feedwater System (RCA Insulated) 174 39 16 570 798 161 51 570 16 174 53 660 17 2a.1.5.10 Feedwater System (RCA) 8 2 1 30 41 8 3 30 1 8 3 35 1 2a.1.5.11 Lube Oil Distribution & Purification 146 146 141 5 151 6 2a.1.5.12 Nitrogen & Hydrogen 25 25 24 1 26 1 2a.1.5.13 Nitrogen & Hydrogen (Insulated) 1 1 1 0 1 0 2a.1.5.14 Nitrogen & Hydrogen (RCA Insulated) 8 0 0 6 14 7 1 6 0 8 1 7 0 2a.1.5.15 Nitrogen & Hydrogen (RCA) 151 7 3 110 271 133 26 110 3 143 27 127 3 2a.1.5.16 Oily Water Separator & TB Sump 51 12 5 180 247 44 19 180 5 47 20 208 5 2a.1.5.17 Saltwater System 241 241 239 2 257 2 2a.1.5.18 Turbine Steam Supply 960 960 935 25 1,006 26 2a.1.5.19 Turbine Steam Supply (RCA) 1,183 291 121 4,293 5,888 1,096 378 4,293 121 1,179 394 4,970 126 2a.1.5.20 Turbine and Generator 102 102 100 2 107 2 2a.1.5.21 Turbine and Generator {Insulated) 34 34 32 1 35 1 2a.1.5 Totals 5,811 536 223 7,922 14,491 2a.1.6 Scaffolding in support of decommissioning 3,063 17 5 34 3,119 1,473 1,607 34 5 1,585 1,677 40 5 2a.1 Subtotal Period 2a Activity Costs 2,958 44,833 25,568 9,504 104,746 867 188,476 Period 2a Additional Costs 2a.2.1 Remedial Action Surveys 8,400 8,400 8,400 8,794 2a.2.2 Retired Reactor Head 301 98 2,057 2,456 164 137 2,057 98 176 143 2,381 103 2a.2.3 PG&E RPV Staff Support Team 7,407 7,407 5,239 2,168 5,639 2,360 2a.2.4 DOC RPV Staff Support Team 7,136 7,136 7,136 7,681 2a.2 Subtotal Period 2a Additional Costs 301 98 2,057 22,943 25,399 Period 2a Collateral Costs 2a.3.1 Process decommissioning water waste 118 57 102 319 597 6 170 319 102 7 177 369 107 2a.3.2 Process decommissioning chemical flush waste 2a.3.3 Small tool allowance 362 362 362 378 2a.3.4 Environmental Permits and Fees 3,940 3,940 3,940 4,124 2a.3.5 GTCC Storage Permitting (PG&E Labor) 2,800 2,800 2,800 3,048 2a.3.6 GTCC Storage Permitting (Contractor) 3,133 3,133 3,133 3,372 2a.3 Subtotal Period 2a Collateral Costs 118 362 57 102 319 9,872 10,831 Period 2a Period-Dependent Costs 2a.4.1 Decon supplies 267 267 267 278 2a.4.2 Insurance 1,988 1,988 1,988 2,082 2a.4.3 Property taxes 693 693 693 726 2a.4.4 Health physics supplies 4,792 4,792 4,792 5,001 2a.4.5 Heavy equipment rental 9,041 9,041 9,041 9,435 2a.4.6 Disposal of DAW generated 143 43 204 390 13 130 204 43 14 136 236 45 2a.4.7 Plant energy budget 10,789 10,789 10,789 11,294 2a.4.8 NRC Fees 2,445 2,445 2,445 2,560 2a.4.9 Emergency Planning Fees 2,792 2,792 2,792 2,923 2a.4.10 Spent Fuel Pool O&M 3,288 3,288 3,288 3,443 2a.4.11 ISFSI Operating Costs 2,269 2,269 2,269 2,375 TLG SeNices, Inc.

Diablo Canyon Power Plant Enclosure 3 Decommissioning Cost Analysis PG&E Letter DCL-17-022 Apendix C1, Page 4 of 9 Table C-1 Table C-1 Diablo Canyon Unit 1 Diablo Canyon Unit 1 DECON Decommissioning Cost Estimate DECON Decommissioning Cost Estimate (Thousands of 2014 Dollars) (Thousands of 2017 Dollars) Off-Site LLRW Activity Decon Removal Packaging Transport Processing Disposal Other Total Total Contractor PG&E Contractor PG&E Index Activity Description Cost Cost Costs Costs Costs Costs Costs Contingency Costs Labor Eqp&Mat Labor Disposal Other Labor Eqp&Mat Labor Disposal Other 2a.4.12 Severance Related Costs 11,089 11,089 11,089 12,074 2a.4.13 Spent Fuel Storage Canisters/Overpacks 2,263 2,263 2,263 2,369 2a.4.14 Security Staff Cost 80,898 80,898 80,898 88,082 2a.4.15 DOC Staff Cost 94,381 94,381 94,381 101,576 2a.4.16 Utility Staff Cost 140,745 140,745 140,745 153,244 2a.4 Subtotal Period 2a Period-Dependent Costs. 267 13,833 143 43 204 353,641 368,131 2a.O TOTAL PERIOD 2a COST 3,343 59,029 26,070 9,747 107,325 387,324 592,838 PERIOD 2b -Site Decontamination Period 2b Direct Decommissioning Activities Disposal of Plant Systems 2b.1.1.1 Capital Additions 85-2002 (clean) 230 230 225 6 242 6 2b.1.1.2 Capital Additions 85-2002 (contaminated) 665 43 19 671 1,398 621 88 671 19 669 91 776 20 2b.1.1.3 Chemical & Volume Control 1,576 1,708 169 74 2,617 6,143 2,857 595 2,617 74 3,075 621 3,029 77 2b.1.1.4 Chemical & Volume Control (Insulated) 579 637 30 13 464 1,723 1,093 154 464 13 1,176 160 537 14 2b.1.1.5 Component Cooling Water 248 248 241 7 259 7 2b.1.1.6 Component Cooling Water (RCA) 844 170 71 2,514 3,599 763 252 2,514 71 821 263 2,910 74 2b.1.1.7 Compressed Air 220 220 214 6 230 6 2b.1.1.8 Compressed Air (Insulated) 8 8 8 0 8 0 2b.1.1.9 Compressed Air (RCA Insulated) 40 2 1 30 73 35 6 30 1 38 7 35 1 2b.1.1.10 Compressed Air (RCA) 731 39 16 572 1,358 649 121 572 16 698 126 662 17 2b.1.1.11 Diesel Engine-Generator 227 227 222 6 238 6 2b.1.1.12 Diesel Engine-Generator (Insulated) 14 14 14 1 15 1 2b.1.1.13 Electrical (Clean) 2,705 2,705 2,638 67 2,839 70 2b.1.1.14 Electrical (Contaminated) 863 99 43 1,526 2,531 813 150 1,526 43 875 156 1,766 45 2b.1.1.15 Electrical (Decontaminated) 4,228 4,228 4,178 50 4,496 52 2b.1.1.16 Fire Protection 538 141 61 2,182 2,922 506 174 2,182 61 544 181 2,526 64 2b.1.1.17 Gaseous Radwaste 121 6 3 98 228 104 23 98 3 112 24 114 3 2b.1.1.18 HVAC (Clean Insulated) 35 35 35 0 38 0 2b.1.1.19 HVAC (Clean) 463 463 461 2 496 2 2b.1.1.20 HVAC (Contaminated Insulated) 435 56 25 873 1,389 374 117 873 25 403 123 1,011 26 2b.1.1.21 HVAC (Contaminated) 1,934 282 123 4,364 6,703 1,691 525 4,364 123 1,820 548 5,051 128 2b.1.1.22 Liquid Radwaste 1,046 1,088 94 41 1,456 3,725 1,961 267 1,456 41 2,110 279 1,685 43 2b.1.1.23 Liquid Radwaste (Insulated) 123 118 6 3 91 340 216 31 91 3 232 32 105 3 2b.1.1.24 Make-up Water 457 457 442 15 476 16 2b.1.1.25 Make-up Water (Insulated) 41 41 40 2 43 2 2b.1.1.26 Make-up Water (RCA Insulated) 60 5 2 79 148 53 13 79 2 57 13 92 2 2b.1.1.27 Make-up Water (RCA) 322 30 13 450 815 279 73 450 13 301 76 521 13 2b.1.1.28 Miscellaneous Reactor Coolant 37 191 10 4 151 393 204 34 151 4 220 35 175 4 2b.1.1.29 Nuclear Steam Supply Sampling 256 11 5 164 436 251 15 164 5 271 16 190 5 2b.1.1.30 Nuclear Steam Supply Sampling (Insulated 78 1 1 21 100 76 3 21 1 82 3 24 1 2b.1.1.31 Residual Heat Removal 579 467 141 61 2,176 3,424 579 607 2,176 61 623 634 2,519 64 2b.1.1.32 Safety Injection 179 18 8 285 491 171 26 285 8 184 27 330 8 2b.1.1.33 Safety Injection (Insulated) 9 1 0 11 21 8 2 11 0 9 2 13 0 2b.1.1.34 Safety Injection (RCA Insulated) 57 7 3 102 169 50 14 102 3 54 14 118 3 2b.1.1.35 Safetilnjection (RCA) 478 62 26 919 1,485 418 122 919 26 450 127 1,064 27 2b.1.1.36 Service Cooling Water 149 149 144 5 155 5 2b.1.1.37 Service Cooling Water (RCA) 41 5 2 75 123 36 10 75 2 39 10 87 2 2b.1.1 Totals 3,941 20,885 1,430 615 21,891 48,763 2b.1.2 Scaffolding in support of decommissioning 3,829 . 21 6 43 3,899 1,841 2,009 43 6 1,981 2,097 50 7 Decontamination of Site Buildings 2b.1.3.1 *Reactor 1,687 3,581 1,294 6,445 34,468 47,475 4,393 2,169 34,468 6,445 4,727 2,263 39,901 6,748 2b.1.3.2 Capital Additions 85-2004 58 40 8 3 115 224 92 14 115 3 99 15 133 3 2b.1.3.3 Containment Penetration Area 575 306 28 32 445 1,386 787 122 445 32 847 127 516 34 2b.1.3 Totals 2,319 3,927 1,330 6,481 35,029 49,085 2b.1 Subtotal Period 2b Activity Costs 6,260 28,641 2,781 7,103 56,963 101,748 Period 2b Additional Costs 2b.2.1 Remedial Action Surveys 1,441 1,441 1,441 1,509 2b.2 Subtotal Period 2b Additional Costs 1,441 1,441 Period 2b Collateral Costs 2b.3.1 Process decommissioning water waste 229 112 199 621 1,160 12 329 621 . 199 13 343 718 208 2b.3.2 Process decommissioning chemical flush waste 6 177 501 1,824 2,509 19 164 1,824 501 21 171 2,112 525 2b.3.3 Small tool allowance 486 486 486 507 2b.3.4 Environmental Pe_rmits and Fees 676 676 676 708 2b.3 Subtotal Period 2b Collateral Costs 235 486 289 700 2,445 676 4,831 Period 2b Period-Dependent Costs TLG Services, Inc. ------------------------

Diablo Canyon Power Plant Enclosure 3 Decommissioning Cost Analysis PG&E Letter DCL-17-022 Apendix C1, Page 5 of 9 Table C-1 Table C-1 Diablo Canyon Unit 1 Diablo Canyon Unit 1 DECON Decommissioning Cost Estimate DECON Decommissioning Cost Estimate (Thousands of 2014 Dollars) (Thousands of 2017 Dollars) Off-Site LLRW Activity Decon Removal Packaging Transport Processing Disposal Other Total Total Contractor PG&E Contractor PG&E Index Activity Description Cost Cost Costs Costs Costs Costs Costs Contingency Costs Labor Eqp&Mat Labor Disposal Other Labor Eqp&Mat Labor Disposal Other 2b.4.1 Decon supplies 953 953 953 995 2b.4.2 Insurance 341 341 341 357 2b.4.3 Property taxes 119 119 119 125 2b.4.4 Health P,hysics supplies 2,605 2,605 2,605 2,719 2b.4.5 Heavy equipment rental 1,536 1,536 1,536 1,603 2b.4.6 Disposal of DAW generated 80 24 113 217 7 73 113 24 8 76 131 25 2b.4.7 Plant energy budget 1,462 1,462 1,462 1,530 2b.4.8 NRC Fees 420 420 420 439 2b.4.9 Emergency Planning Fees 479 479 479 502 2b.4.10 Spent Fuel Pool O&M 564 564 564 591 2b.4.11 Liquid Radwaste Processing Equipment/Services 134 134 134 140 2b.4.12 ISFSI Operating Costs 389 389 389 408 2b.4.13 Severance Related Costs 10,905 10,905 10,905 11,873 2b.4.14 Spent Fuel Storage Canisters/Overpacks 774 774 774 810 2b.4.15 Security Staff Cost 13,478 13,478 13,478 14,674 2b.4.16 DOC Staff Cost 8,392 8,392 8,392 9,032 2b.4.17 Utility Staff Cost 13,058 13,058 13,058 14,218 2b.4 Subtotal Period 2b Period-Dependent Costs 953 4,141 80 24 113 50,514 55,825 2b.O TOTAL PERIOD 2b COST 7,448 33,267 3,150 7,827 59,521 52,632 163,846 PERIOD 2c -Spent fuel delay prior to SFP decon Period 2c Direct Decommissioning Activities 2c.1 Subtotal Period 2c Activity Costs Period 2c Additional Costs No additional costs in this period 2c.2 Subtotal Period 2c Additional Costs Period 2c Collateral Costs 2c.3.1 Spent Fuel Transfer-Pool to ISFSI 49,231 49,231 12,308 36,923 (0) 13,246 38,534 (0) 2c.3.2 Environmental Permits and Fees 5,197 5,197 5,197 5,441 2c.3 Subtotal Period 2c Collateral Costs 54,428 54,428 Period 2c Period-Dependent Costs 2c.4.1 Insurance 2,623 2,623 2,623 2,746 2c.4.2 Property taxes 914 914 914 957 2c.4.3 Health physics supplies 1,166 1,166 1,166 1,217 2c.4.4 Disposal of DAW generated 45 13 63 121 4 40 63 13 4 42 73 14 2c.4.5 Plant energy budget 11,236 11,236 11,236 11,763 2c.4.6 NRC Fees 2,812 2,812 2,812 2,944 2c.4.7 Emergency Planning Fees 3,684 3,684 3,684 3,856 2c.4.8 Liquid Radwaste Processing Equipment/Services 1,027 1,027 1,027 1,076 2C.4.9 ISFSI Operating Costs 2,993 2,993 2,993 3,134 2c.4.10 Spent Fuel Storage Canisters/Overpacks 57,473 57,473 57,473 60,168 2c.4.11 Security Staff Cost 103,273 103,273 103,273 112,444 2c.4.12 Utility Staff Cost 16,468 16,468 16,468 17,931 2c.4 Subtotal Period 2c Period-Dependent Costs 1,166 45 13 63 202,504 203,791 2c.O TOTAL PERIOD 2c COST 1,166 45 13 63 256,932 258,219 PERIOD 2d -Decontamination Following Wet Fuel Storage Period 2d Direct Decommissioning Activities 2d.1.1 Remove spent fuel racks 1,032 80 186 41 1,447 2,786 1,050 248 1,447 41 1,130 259 1,675 43 Disposal of Plant Systems 2d.1.2.1 Electrical (Contaminated) -FHB 251 15 7 233 505 234 32 233 7 252 34 269 7 2d.1.2.2 Electrical (Decontaminated) -FHB 1,561 144 60 2,130 3,895 1,413 292 2,130 60 1,521 305 2,466 63 2d.1.2.3 Fire Protection (RCA) 340 31 13 465 849 296 76 465 13 318 79 538 14 2d.1.2.4 HVAC (Contaminated) -FHB 460 64 28 997 1,550 400 124 997 28 431 130 1,154 29 2d.1.2.5 Spent Fuel Pit Cooling 130 53 23 817 1,022 126 56 817 23 136 59 946 24 2d.1.2.6 Spent Fuel Pit Cooling -FHB 181 57 25 876 1,138 173 64 876 25 186 67 1,014 26 2d.1.2 Totals 2,922 365 155 5,517 8,959 Decontamination of Site Buildings 2d.1.3.1 Fuel Handling 1,450 1,220 68 47 633 3,418 2,543 195 633 47 2,737 204 733 49 2d.1.3 Totals 1,450 1,220 68 47 633 3,418 2d.1.4 Scaffolding in support of decommissioning 766 4 9 780 368 402 9 396 419 10 2d.1 Subtotal Period 2d Activity Costs 2,482 4,988 623 244 7,606 15,943 Period 2d Additional Costs TLG Services, Inc.

Diablo Canyon Power Plant Enclosure 3 Decommissioning Cost Analysis PG&E Letter DCL-17-022 Apendix C1, Page 6 of 9 Table C-1 Table C-1 Diablo Canyon Unit 1 Diablo Canyon Unit 1 DECON Decommissioning Cost Estimate DECON Decommissioning Cost Estimate (Thousands of 2014 Dollars) (Thousands of 2017 Dollars) Off-Site LLRW Activity Decon Removal Packaging Transport Processing Disposal Other Total Total Contractor PG&E Contractor PG&E Index Activity Description Cost Cost Costs Costs Costs Costs Costs Contingency Costs Labor Eqp&Mat Labor Disposal Other Labor Eqp&Mat Labor Disposal Other 2d.2.1 License Termination Survey Planning 1,208 1,208 1,012 196 0 1,089 205 0 2d.2.2 Remedial Action Surveys 1,132 1,132 1,132 1,185 2d.2 Subtotal Period 2d Additional Costs 2,340 2,340 Period 2d Collateral Costs 2d.3.1 Process decommissioning water waste 77 40 72 225 414 4 113 225 72 5 118 260 75 2d.3.2 Process decommissioning chemical flush waste 2d.3.3 Small tool allowance 100 100 100 104 2d.3.4 Decommissioning Equipment Disposition 171 63 350 585 16 156 350 63 . 17 163 406 66 2d.3.5 Environmental Permits and Fees 531 531 531 556 2d.3 Subtotal Period 2d Collateral Costs 77 100 212 135 575 531 1,629 Period 2d Period-Dependent Costs 2d.4.1 Decon supplies 287 287 287 300 2d.4.2 Insurance 268 268 268 280 2d.4.3 Property taxes .93 93 93 98 2d.4.4 Health physics supplies 714 714 714 745 2d.4.5 Heavy equipment rental 1,206 1,206 1,206 1,258 2d.4.6 Disposal of DAW generated 34 10 48 92 3 31 48 10 3 32 56 11 2d.4.7 Plant energy budget 612 612 612 641 2d.4.8 NRG Fees 280 280 280 293 2d.4.9 Emergency Planning Fees 188 188 188 197 2d.4.10 Spent Fuel Transfer* ISFSI to DOE 480 480 480 503 2d.4.11 Liquid Radwaste Processing Equipment/Services 210 210 210 220 2d.4.12 ISFSI Operating Costs 306 306 306 320 2d.4.13 Severance Related Costs 8,329 8,329 8,329 9,068 2d.4.14 Security Staff Cost 1,657 1,657 1,657 1,804 2d.4.15 DOC Staff Cost 4,420 4,420 4.420 4,757 2d.4.16 Utility Staff Cost 6,170 6,170 6,170 6,718 2d.4 Subtotal Period 2d Period-Dependent Costs 287

  • 1,920 34 10 48 23,013 25,312 2d.0 TOTAL PERIOD 2d COST 2,846 7,007 869 389 8,229 25,884 45,225 PERIOD 2e
  • Delay before License Termination Period 2e Direct Decommissioning Activities /No direct activities in this period 2e.1 Subtotal Period 2e Activity Costs Period 2e Additional Costs No additional costs in this period 2e.2 Subtotal Period 2e Additional Costs Period 2e. Collateral Costs 2e.3.1 Environmental Permits and Fees 948 948 948 992 2e.3 Subtotal Period 2e Collateral Costs 948 948 Period 2e Period-Dependent Costs 2e.4.1 Insurance 427 427 427 447 2e.4.2 Property taxes 167 167 167 175 2e.4.3 Health physics supplies 105 105 105 110 2e.4.4 Disposal of DAW generated 2 3 6 0 2 3 0 2 3 2e.4.5 Plant energy budget 2e.4.6 NRG Fees *, 238 238 238 250 2e.4.7 Emergency Planning Fees 336 336 336 352 2e.4.8 Spent Fuel Transfer* ISFSI to DOE 1,333 1,333 1,333 1,396 2e.4.9 ISFSI Operating Costs 546 546 546 571 2e.4.10 Security Staff Cost 3,462 3,462 3,462 3,770 2e.4.11 Utility Staff Cost 1,289 1,289 1,289 1,403 2e.4 Subtotal Period 2e Period-Dependent Costs 105 2 3 7,798 7,909 2e.O TOTAL PERIOD 2e COST 105 2 3 8,746 8,857 PERIOD 2f. License Termination Period ?f Direct Decommissioning Activities 2f.1.1 ORISE confirmatory survey 262 262 209 52 (0) 225 55 (0) 2f.1.2 Terminate license a 2f.1 Subtotal Period 2f Activity Costs 262 262 Period 2f Additional Costs 2f.2.1 License Termination Survey 13,951 13,951 13,755 196 0 14,803 205 0 2f.2 Subtotal Period 2f Additional Costs 13,951 13,951 Period 2f Collateral Costs .-----TLG Services, Inc.

Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis Activity Index Activity Description 2f.3.1 2f.3.2 2f.3 DOC staff relocation expenses Environmental Permits and Fees Subtotal Period 2f Collateral Costs Period 2f Period-Dependent Costs 2f.4.1 Insurance 2f.4.2 Property taxes 2f.4.3 Health physics supplies 2f.4.4 Disposal of DAW generated 2f.4.5 Plant energy budget 2f.4.6 NRG Fees 2f.4.7 Emergency Planning Fees 2f.4 .. 8 Spent Fuel Transfer -ISFSI to DOE 2f.4.9 ISFSI Operating Costs 2f.4.10 Security Staff Cost 2f.4.11 DOC Staff Cost 2f.4.12 Utility Staff Cost 2f.4 Subtotal Period 2f Period-Dependent Costs 2f.0 TOTAL PERIOD 2fCOST PERIOD 2 TOTALS PERIOD 3b -Site Restoration Period 3b Direct Decommissioning Activities Demolition of Remaining Site Buildings 3b.1.1.1 *Reactor 3b.1.1.2 Capital Additions 85-2004 3b.1.1.3 Containment Penetration Area 3b.1.1.4 Miscellaneous 3b.1.1.5 Turbine 3b.1.1.6 Turbine Pedestal 3b.1.1.7 Fuel Handling 3b.1.1 Totals Site Closeout Activities 3b.1.2 Grade & landscape site 3b.1.3 Final report to NRG 3b.1 Subtotal Period 3b Activity Costs Period 3b Additional Costs 3b.2.1 Concrete Crushing 3b.2.2 Cofferdam Construction and Teardown 3b.2.3 Soil I Sediment Control Plant Area 3b.2.4 Miscellaneous Construction Debris (out of state disposal) 3b.2.5 Scrap Metal Transportation (out of state) 3b.2.6 FSS Manager 3b.2 Subtotal Period 3b Additional Costs Period 3b Collateral Costs 3b.3.1 Small tool allowance 3b.3 Subtotal Period 3b Collateral Costs Period 3b Period-Dependent Costs 3b.4.1 Insurance 3b.4.2 Property taxes 3b.4.3 Heavy equipment rental 3b.4.4 Plant energy budget 3b.4.5 NRG ISFSI* Fees 3b.4.6 Emergency Planning Fees 3b.4.7 Spent Fuel Transfer-ISFSI to DOE 3b.4.8 ISFSI Operating Costs 3b.4.9 Security Staff Cost 3b.4.10 DOC Staff Cost 3b.4.11 Utility Staff Cost 3b.4 Subtotal Period 3b Period-Dependent Costs 3b.O TOTAL PERIOD 3b COST PERIOD 3c -Fuel Storage Operations/Shipping Period 3c Direct Decommissioning Activities TLG Services, Inc. Table C-1 Diablo Canyon Unit 1 DECON Decommissioning Cost Estimate (Thousands of 2014 Dollars) De con Cost 13,637 Removal Cost 929 929 929 101,505 8,731 388 887 37 4,734 1,705 2,403 18,886 2,839 21,725 555 581 1,620 2,755 253 253 9,218 9,218 33,951 Packaging Costs 9 9 9 30,144 Transport Costs 3 3 3 17,980 Off-Site Processing Costs LLRW Disposal Costs 12 12 12 175,153 Other Costs 1,780 869 2,649 391 153 501 521 308 1,219 500 3,521 6,162 6,977 20,253 37,114 768,631 294 294 3 7,131 6,044 756 13,933 643 502 823 359 1,012 4,018 1,645 11,566 18,387 9,955 48,911 63,138 Total Total Contractor PG&E Contingency Costs Labor Eqp&Mat Labor Disposal 1,780 1,780 869 2,649 391 153 929 929 24 8 12 501 521 308 1,219 500 3,521 3,521 6,162 6,162 6,977 6,977 21,206 38,067 1,107,050 8,731 5,660 3,071 388 270 118 887 554 333 37 22 15 4,734 3,276 1,458 1,705 953 752 2,403 1,416 988 18,886 2,839 383 2,456 294 294 22,019 557 168 387 581 260 321 1,620 776 844 7,131 6,044 756 756 16,688 253 253 253 643 502 9,218 9,218 823 359 1,012 4,018 1,645 11,566 11,566 18,387 18,387 9,955 9,955 58,129 97,088 Other 869 391 153 3 501 521 308 1,219 500 3 7,131 6,044 643 502 823 359 1,012 4,018 1,645 Table C-1 Diablo Canyon Unit 1 Enclosure 3 PG&E Letter DCL-17-022 Apendix C1, Page 7 of 9 DECON Decommissioning Cost Estimate (Thousands of 2017 Dollars) Contractor Labor 1,916 6,632 6,091 291 596 24 3,525 1,026 1,524 412 316 180 280 835 814 19,789 Eqp&Mat 970 8 3,205 124 348 16 1,522 785 1,031 2,563 404 335 881 264 9,620 PG&E Labor 3,834 7,596 12,593 10,839 Disposal 14 Other 910 410 160 3 524 545 322 1,276 524 3 7,465 6,327 673 526 862 376 1,060 4,207 1,722 Diablo Canyon Power Plant Enclosure 3 Decommissioning Cost Analysis PG&E Letter DCL-17-022 Apendix C1, Page_B of 9 Table C-1 Table C-1 Diablo Canyon Unit 1 Diablo Canyon Unit 1 DECON Decommissioning Cost Estimate DECON Decommissioning Cost Estimate (Thousands of 2014 Dollars) (Thousands of 2017 Dollars) Off-Site LLRW Activity Decon Removal Packaging Transport Processing Disposal Other Total Total Contractor PG&E Contractor PG&E Index Activity Description Cost Cost Costs Costs Costs Costs Costs Contingency Costs Labor Eqp&Mat Labor Disposal Other Labor Eqp&Mat Labor Disposal Other No direct activities in this period 3c.1 Subtotal Period 3c Activity Costs Period 3c Additional Costs No additional costs in this period 3c.2 Subtotal Period 3c Additional Costs Period 3c Collateral Costs 3c.3 Subtotal Period 3c Collateral Costs Period 3c Period-Dependent Costs 3c.4.1 Insurance 5,876 5,876 5,876 6,152 3c.4.2 Property taxes 4,589 4,589 4,589 4,805 3c.4.3 Plant energy budget 3c.4.4 NRC ISFSI Fees 4,697 4,697 4,697 4,917 3c.4.5 Emergency Planning Fees 9,246 9,246 9,246 9,679 3c.4.6 Spent Fuel Transfer -ISFSI to DOE 37,101 37,101 37,101 38,841 3c.4.7 ISFSI Operating Costs 15,026 15,026 15,026 15,731 3c.4.8 Security Staff Cost 80,154 80,154 80,154 87,272 3c.4.9 Utility Staff Cost 18,436 18,436 18,436 20,074 3c.4 Subtotal Period 3c Period-Dependent Costs 175,126 175,126 3c.O TOTAL PERIOD 3c COST 175,126 175, 126 PERIOD 3d -GTCC shipping Period 3d Direct Decommissioning Activities Nuclear Steam Supply System Removal 3d.1.1.1 Vessel & Internals GTCC Disposal 2,861 11,570 14,431 2,861 11,570 2,986 12,112 3d.1.1 Totals 2,861 11,570 14,431 3d.1 Subtotal Period 3d Activity Costs 2,861 11,570 14,431 Period 3d Additional Costs No additional costs in this period 3d.2 Subtotal Period 3d Additional Costs Period 3d Collateral Costs 3d.3 Subtotal Period 3d Collateral Costs Period 3d Period-Dependent Costs 3d.4.1 Insurance 12 12 12 13 3d.4.2 Property taxes 9 9 9 10 3d.4.3 Plant energy budget 3d.4.4 ISFSI Operating Costs 31 31 31 32 3d.4.5 Security Staff Cost 165 165 165 180 3d.4.6 Utility Staff Cost 38 38 38 41 3d.4 Subtotal Period 3d Period-Dependent Costs 255 255 3d.O TOTAL PERIOD 3d COST 2,861 11,570 255 14,686 PERIOD 3e -ISFSI Decontamination Period 3e Direct Decommissioning Activities No direct activities in this period 3e.1 Subtotal Period 3eActivity Costs Period 3e Additional Costs 3e.2.1 License Termination ISFSI 165 10 18 666 1,490 2,349 44 131 666 1,509 47 136 771 1,579 3e.2 Subtotal Period 3e Additional Costs 165 10 18 666 1,490 2,349 Period 3e Collateral Costs 3e.3 Subtotal Period 3e Collateral Costs Period 3e Period-Dependent Costs 3e.4.1 Insurance 107 107 107 112 3e.4.2 Property taxes 80 80 80 84 3e.4.3 Plant energy budget 3e.4.4 Security Staff Cost 191 191 191 208 3e.4.5 Utility Staff Cost 250 250 250 272 3e.4 Subtotal Period 3e Period-Dependent Costs 628 628 3e.O TOTAL PERIOD 3e COST 165 10 18 666 2,118 2,976 PERIOD 3f -ISFSI Site Restoration TLG Services, Inc.

Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis Activity Index Activity Description Period 3f Direct Decommissioning Activities No direct activities in this period 3f.1 Subtotal Period 3f Activity Costs Period 3f Additional Costs 3f.2.1 Demolition and Site Restoration ISFSI 3f.2.2 Soil I Sediment Control ISFSI Area 3f.2 Subtotal Period 3f Additional Costs Period 3f Collateral Costs 3f.3.1 Smail tool allowance 3f.3 Subtotal Period 3f Collateral Costs Period 3f Period-Dependent Costs 3f.4.1 Insurance 3f.4.2 Properiy taxes 3f.4.3 Heavy equipment rental 3f.4.4 Plant energy budget 3f.4.5 Security Staff Cost 3f.4.6 Utility Staff Cost 3f.4 Subtotal Period 3f Period-Dependent Costs 3f.O TOTAL PERIOD 3f COST PERIOD 3 TOTALS TOTAL COST TO DECOMMISSION TLG Services, Inc. Table C-1 Diablo Canyon Unit 1 DECON Decommissioning Cost Esti_mate (Thousands of 2014 Dollars) Off-Site Dec on Removal Packaging Transport Processing Cost Cost Costs Costs Costs ------1,994 ----25 ----2,019 ----30 ----30 --------------69 -------------------69 ----2,118 ----36,234 2,871 18 -18,214 141,218 33,435 18,502 -LLRW Disposal Costs ---------

12,236 199,331 Other Total Total Contractor Costs Contingency Costs Labor Eqp&Mat ---------------3,339 -5,333 1,583 411 --25 12 13 3,339 -5,359 --------30 -30 , -----------34 ---69 -69 28 -33 -93 --93 --188 -256 ----3,527 -5,645 ----244,163 -295,522 ----1,268,331 -1,679,030 324,340 156,089 PG&E Labor Disposal Other --------------------3,339 -----------------------------34 -----28 33 --93 --------------------713,655 187,761 297,185 Table C-1 Diablo Canyon Unit 1 Enclosure 3 PG&E Letter DCL-17-022 Apendix C1, Page 9 of 9 DECON Decommissioning Cost Estimate (Thousands of 2017 Dollars) Contractor Labor 1,704 13 349,067 Eqp&Mat 429 14 31 72 162,899 PG&E Labor 36 101 777,032 Disposal 217,356 Other 3,496 35 29 311,119 L Diablo Canyon Power Plant -Unit 1 Decommissioning Cash Flow Estimated in 2017 Dollars (1 page) Diablo Canyon Power Plant -Unit 2 Decommissioning Cash Flow Estimated in 2017 Dollars (1 page) Enclosure 4 PG&E Letter DCL-17-022 Year 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025. 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035 2036 2037 2038 2039 2040 2041 2042 2043 2044 2045 2046 2047 2048 2049 2050 2051 2052 2053 2054 2055 2056 2057 2058 2059 2060 2061 2062 TOTAL NOTES: 1) 2) NRCScope (Radiological) $250,623 $9,489,525 $11,071,864 $8,287,484 $8,169,522 $17,828,330 $12,718,892 $7,047,544 $7,947,139 $149,791,131 $183,575,330 $184,491, 740 $184,997,197 $210,817,604 $108,971!,938 $20,294,496 $20,350,097 $20,294,496 $34,191,926 $37,147,569 $39,894, 774 $456,142 $456,142 $157,463 $0 $0 $0 $0

$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $15,098,364 $3,208,945 $1,297,013,277. Diablo Canyon Power Plant -Unit 1 Decommissioning Cash Flow (Note 1) Estimated in 2017 Dollars Non-NRC Scope Spent Fuel (Non-Radiological) Management Total $250,623 $69,010 $9,558,535 $30,990 $11,102,855 $8,287,484 $8,169,522 $17,828,330 $12, 718,892 $7,047,544 $150,557 $476,916 $8,574,612 $1,185,391 $2,901,241 $153,877, 763 $1,840,504 $3,135,747 $188,551,580 $1,486,006 $3,252,038 $189,229, 784 $1,490,077 $3,260,948 $189,748,222 $5,326,510 $3,427,366 $219,571,480 $5,489,406 $28,617,184 $143,085,527 $0 $40,854,564 $61,149,060 $0 $40,966,494 $61,316,591 $0 $40,854,564 $61,149,060 $0 $34,502,881 $68,694,807 $0 $2,641,874 $39,789,443 $4,354,982 $3,532,902 $47,782,658 $33,116,011 $8,197,161 $41,769,314 $33,116,011 $8,197,161 $41,769,314 $11,431,828 $8,255,387 $19,844,678 $0 $8,308,785 $8,308,785 $0 $8,286,083 $8,286,083 $0 $8,286,083 $8,286,083 $0 $8,286,083 $8,286,083 $0 $8,308,785 $8,308,785 $0 $8,286,083 $8,286,083 $0 $8,286,083 $8,286,083 $0 $8,286,083 $8,286,083 $0 $8,308,785 $8,308,785 $0 $8,286,083 $8,286,083 $0 $8,286,083 $8,286,083 $0 $8,286,083 $8,286,083 $0 $8,308,785 $8,308,785 $0 $8,286,083 $8,286,083 $0 $8,286,083 $8,286,083 $0 $8,286,083 $8,286,083 $0 $8,308,785 $8,308,785 $0 $8,286,083 $8,286,083 $0 $8,286,083 $8,286,083 $0 $8,286,083 $8,286,083 $0 $8,308,785 $8,308,785 $0 $8,176,076 $23,274,440 $5,959,990 $0 $9,168,935 $105,047,275 $415,394,454 $1,817,455,006 Enclosure 4 PG&E Letter DCL-17-022 Cummulative Decommissioning Estimate $250,623 $9,809,158 $20,912,012 $29,199,496 $37,369,018 $55,197,348 $67,916,240 $7 4,963, 784 $83,538,396 $237,416,159 $425,967,740 $615,197,524 $804,945,746 $1,024,517,226 $1,167,602, 753 $1,228, 751,813 $1,290,068,404 $1,351,217,464 $1,419,912,271 $1,459, 701, 714 $1,507,484,372 $1,549,253,687 $1,591,023,001 $1,610,867,679 $1,619,176,464 $1,627,462,546 $1,635, 748,629 $1,644,034,712

$1,652,343,497 $1,660,629,580 $1,668,915,663 $1,677,201,746 $1,685,510,530 $1,693, 796,613 $1, 702,082,696 $1,710,368,779 $1,718,677,564 $1,726,963,647 $1,735,249,730 $1,743,535,813 $1, 751,844,597 $1,760,130,680 $1, 768,416, 763 $1,776,702,846 $1,785,011,630 $1,808,286,070 $1,817,455,006 Trust Account Funding $1,iOl,582,914 Market Value Cash Flow is based on construction of Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation (ISFSI) and assumes Department of Energy (DOE) Used Fuel Repository opens in 2028. Trust Account Value of $1,201.6 million Market Value as of 12/31/16. Page 1of1 _J PG&E Letter DCL-17-022 Diablo Canyon Power Plant.:. Unit 2 Decommissioning Cash Flow (Note 1) Estimated in 2017 Dollars Cummulative NRCScope Non-NRC Scope Spent Fuel Decommissioning Trust Account Year (Radiological) (Non-Radiological) Management Total Estimate Funding I 2016 $241,031 $241,031 $241,031 2017 $9,524,814 $69,010 $9,593,823 $9,834,854 2018 $11,080,044 $30,990 $11,111,034 $20,945,888 2019 $8,287,484 $8,287,484 $29,233,37! 2020 $8,169,522 $8,169,522 $37,402,893 2021 $17,828,330 $17,828,330 $55,231,223 2022 $12, 718,892 $12, 718,892 $67,950,115 2023 $7,047,544 $7,047,544 $74,997,659 2024 $7,125,147 $7,125,147 $82,122,806 2025 $34,639,417 $137,736 $1,019,160 $35, 796,313 $117,919,119 2026 $114,860, 760 $639,314 $2,906,199 $118,406,272 $236,325,392 2027 $179,013,274 $1,464,672 $3,496,283 $183,974,229 $420,299,621 2028 $185,192,365 $1,531,514 $3,606,375 $190,330,254 $610,629,875 2029 $184,686,375 $1,527,330 $3,596,521 $189,810,226 $800,440,101 2030 $220,404,389 $8,259,371 $2,795,270 $231,459,030 $1,031,899,131 2031 .$57,583,521 $1,566,465 $36,590,997 $95, 740,983 $1,127,640,114 2032 $26,271,695 $0 $42,875,009 $69,146,703 .$1,196,786,817 2033 $26,199,914 $0 $42, 757,864 $68,957,778 $1,265, 744,595 2034 $26,199,914 $0 $42,757,864 $68,957,778 $1,334, 702,373 2035 $59,342,012 $0 $28,754,357 $88,096,369 $1,422, 798, 742 2036 $60,709,855 $30,739,547 $3,584,129 $95,033,531 $1,517,832,273 $1,570,994, 710 Market Value 2037 $383,855 $219,998, 721 $8,215,581 $228,598,157 $1, 746,430,431 2038 . $383,855 $219,998,721 $8,215,581 $228,598,157 $1,975 ,028,588 2039 $129,354 $74,136,555 $8,272,569 $82,538,478 $2,057,567,066 2040 $0 $0 $8,32t,278 $8,324,278 $2,065,891,344 2041 $0 $0 $8,301,534 $8,301,534 $2,074,192,878 2042 $0 $0 $8,301,534 $8,301,534 $2,082,494,411 2043 $0 $0 $8,301,534 $8,301,534 $2,090, 795,945 2044 $0 $0 $8,324,278 $8,324,278 $2,099,120,223 2045 $0 $0 $8,301,534 $8,301,534 $2,107,421,756 2046 $0 $0 $8,301,534 $8,301,534 $2,115,723,290 2047 $0 $0 $8,301,534 $8,301,534 $2,124,024,824 2048 $0 $0 $8,324,278 $8,324,278 $2,132,349,101 2049 $0 $0 $8,301,534 $8,301,534 $2,140,650,635 2050 $0 $0 $8,301,534 $8,301,534 $2,148,952,168 2051 $0 $0 $8,301,534 $8,301,534 $2,157,253,702 2052 $0 $0 $8,324,278 $8,324,278 $2,165,577,980 2053 $0 $0 $8,301,534 $8,301,534 $2,173,879,513 2054 $0 $0 $8,301,534 $8,301,534 $2,182,181,047 2055 $0 $0 $8,301,534 $8,301,534 $2, 190,482,581 2056 $0 $0 $8,324,278 $8,324,278 $2,198,806,858 2057 $0 $0 $8,301,534 $8,301,534 $2,207,108,392 2058 $0 $0 $8,301,534 $8,301,534 $2,215,409,926 2059 $0 $0 $8,301,534 $8,301,534 $2,223, 711,459 2060 $0 $0 $8,324,278 $8,324,278 $2,232,035, 737 2061 $15,130,548 $0 $8,191,330 $23,321,878 $2,255,357,615 2062 $3,218,242 $5,971,551 $0 $9,189,794 $2,264,54 7,409 TOTAL $1,276,372,152 $566,071,499 $422,103, 757 $2,264,547,409 NOTES: 1) Cash Flow is based on construction of ISFSI and assumes DOE Used Fuel Repository opens in 2028. 2) Trust Account Value of $1,571.0 million Market Value as of 12/31/16. Page 1of1 l Pacific Gas and Electric Company Chapter 2 Attachment A Enclosure 5 PG&E Letter DCL-17-022 2016 TLG Diablo Canyon Units 1 & 2 Decommissioning Cost Study ( (

PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY CHAPTER 2 ATTACHMENT A 2016 TLG DIABLO CANYON UNITS 1 & 2 DECOMMISSIONING COST STUDY Document POl-1719-001, Rev. 0 DECOMMISSIONING COST ANALYSIS for the DIABLO CANYON POWER PLANT ----------.---*--* -* --*--------------1 I " I I .I prepared for Pacific Gas and Electric Company prepared by TLG Services, Inc. Bridgewater, Connecticut February 2016 2-AtchA-1 Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis Project Manager Project Engineer Technical Manager TLG Services, Inc. APPROVALS Document POl-1719-001, Rev. 0 Page ii <?.f xxi f!ftft£ Date 2-AtchA-2 Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis SECTION TABLE OF CONTENTS Document POl-1719-001, Rev. 0 Page iii of xxi PAGE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ................................................................................... vii-xxi 1. INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................... 1-1 1.1 Objectives of Study ........................................................................................... 1-1 1.2 Site Description ................................................................................................. 1-1 1.3 Regulatory Guidance ........................................................................................ 1-3 1.3.1 Nuclear Waste Policy Act ..................................................................... 1-5 1.3.2 Low-Level Radioactive Waste Acts ...................................................... 1-8 1.3.3 Radiological Criteria for License Termination ................................... 1-9 1.3.4 California Governor Moratorium on Disposing of Decommissioned Materials ................................................................. 1-10 2. DECOMlY.ITSSIONING ALTERNATIVES .............................................................. 2-1 2.1 DE CON .............................................................................................................. 2-2 2.1.1 Period 1 -Preparations ......................................................................... 2-2 2.1.2 Period 2 -Decommissioning Operations ............................................. 2-4 2.1.3 Period 3 -Site Restoration .................................................................... 2-8 2.1.4 ISFSI Operations and Decommissioning ............................................ 2-9 2.2 SAFSTOR .......................................................................................................... 2-9 2.2.1 Period 1 -Preparations ....................................................................... 2-10 2.2.2 Period 2 -Dormancy ............................................................... ............ 2-11 2.2.3 Periods 3 and 4 -Delayed Decommissioning .................................... 2-12 2.2.4 Period 5 -Site Restoration .................................................................. 2-13 3. COST ESTIMATES .................................................................................................. 3-1 3.1 Basis of Estimates ............................................................................................ 3-1 3.2 Methodology ...................................................................................................... 3-2 3.3 Impact of Decommissioning Multiple Reactor Units ..................................... 3-4 3.4 Financial Components of the Cost Model.. ..................................................... 3-5 3.4.1 Contingency ........................................................................................... 3-5 3.4.2 Financial Risk ........................................................................................ 3-7 3.5 Site-Specific Considerations ............................................................................ 3-8 3.5.1 Spent Fuel Management ...................................................................... 3-8 3.5.2 Reactor Vessel and Internal Components ......................................... 3-11 3.5.3 Primary System Components ............................................................. 3-13 3.5.4 Main Turbine and Condenser ............................................................ 3-14 3.5.5 Retired Components ............................................................................. 3-14 3.5.6 Transportation Methods ..................................................................... 3-14 TLG Services, Inc. 2-AtchA-3 Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis SECTION TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued) Document POl-1719-001, Rev. 0 Page iv of xxi PAGE 3.5.7 Low-Level Radioactive Waste Disposal.. ........................................... 3-15 3.5.8 Site Restoration Following License Termination ............................. 3-16 3.6 Assumptions .................................................................................................... 3-17 3.6.1 Estimating Basis ................................................................................. 3-17 3.6.2 Labor Costs .......................................................................................... 3-17 3.6.3 Design Conditions ............................................................................... 3-18 3.6.4 General ...................................................................................... * ........... 3-19 3. 7 Cost Estimate Summary ........................................................................ : ...... 3-23 4. SCHEDULE ESTIMATE ........................................................................................ 4-1 4.1 Schedule Estimate Assumptions ..................................................................... 4-1 4.2 Project Schedule ................................................................................................ 4-2 5. RADIOACTIVE WASTES ........................................................................................ 5-1 6. RESULTS ........................... : ..................................................................................... 6-1 7. REFERENCES .......................................................................................................... 7-1 TABLES DE CON Cost Summary Decommissioning Cost Elements*********************:******* xx SAFSTOR Cost Summary Decommissioning Cost Elements ........................ xxi 3.1 DECON :Alternative, Schedule of Total Annual Expenditures, Unit 1 ....... 3-25 3.2 DE CON Alternative, Schedule of Total Annual Expenditures, Unit 2 ....... 3-27 3.3 SAFSTOR Alternative, Schedule of Total Annual Expenditures, Unit 1. ... 3-29 3.4 SAFSTOR Alternative, Schedule of Total Annual Expenditures, Unit 2 .... 3-31 5.1 DECON Alternative, Decommissioning Waste Summary, Unit 1. ................. 5-4 5.2 DECON Alternative, Decommissioning-Waste Summary, Unit 2 ................. 5-5 5.3 SAFSTOR Alternative, Decommissioning Waste Summary, Unit 1 ............. 5-6 5.4 SAFSTOR Alternative, Decommissioning Waste Summary, Unit 2 ............. 5-7 6.1 DECON Alternative Decommissioning Cost Elements, Unit 1 ..................... 6-4 6.2 DECON Alternative Decommissioning Cost Elements, Unit 2 ..................... 6-5 6.3 SAFSTOR Alternative Decommissioning Cost Elements, Unit 1. ................. 6-6 6.4 SAFSTOR Alternative Decommis,s_ioning Cost Elements, Unit 2 .................. 6-7 TLG Services, Inc. 2-AtchA-4 Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis SECTION TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued) FIGURES

  • Document POl-1719-001, Rev. 0 Page v ofxxi PAGE 1.1 Diablo Canyon Power Plant General Plan .................................................... 1-11 1.2 Diablo Canyon Power Plant Aerial View ...................................................... 1-12 1.3 Diablo Canyon Power Plant Reactor Building Section ........... : ..................... 1-13 4.1 Activity Schedule -DE CON ............................................................................. 4-3 4.2 DECON Alternative Decommissioning Timeline ........................................... 4-5 4.3 SAFSTOR Alternative Decommissioning Timeline ........................................ 4-6 APPENDICES A. Unit Cost Factor Development ............................................................................. A-1 B. Unit Cost Factor Listing ...................................................................................... B-1 C. Detailed Cost Analysis, DECON ........................................................................... C-1 D. Detailed Cost Analysis, SAFSTOR ...................................................................... D-1 E.
  • ISFSI License Termination Estimate .................................................................. E-1 TLG Services, Inc. 2-AtchA-5 l Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis REVISION LOG No. Date Item Revised 0 02/24/2016 n/a TLG Services, Inc. 2-AtchA-6 Document POl-1719-001, Rev. 0 Page vi of xxi Reason for Revision Original Issue I '\ I I Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Document POl-1719-001, Rev. 0 Page vii of xxi This report presents estimates of the cost to decommission the Diablo Canyon Power Plant (Diablo Canyon) for the selected decommissioning scenarios following the scheduled cessation of plant operations. The estimates are designed to provide the Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) with the information to assess its current decommissioning liability, as it relates to Diablo Canyon. The analysis relies upon site-specific, technical information from an evaluation prepared in 2012,[IJ updated to reflect current assumptions pertaining to the disposition of the nuclear plant and relevant industry experience in undertaking such projects. The costs are based on several key assumptions in areas of regulation, component characterization, high-level radioactive waste management, low-level radioactive waste disposal, performance uncertainties* (contingency) and site restoration requirements. The plant inventory, the basis for the decontamination and dismantling requirements and cost, and the decommissioning waste streams, were reviewed for this analysis. Significant "physical" changes were limited to some additional security modifications made to the station in the past three year interval. The estimate was also revised to reflect the following significant changes from the previous evaluation: o Consistent with PG&E's interpretation of the California governor's executive order on the moratorium on dispot?ing of decommissioned materials in the State of California[2l, costs to account for transporting and disposing of decommissioned materials to an out-of-state disposal facility have been added. o PG&E's experience segmenting the Humboldt Bay Unit 3 reactor and industry experience segmenting the Zion Nuclear Station reactor vessels have been incorporated into the estimate. o Permitting costs associated with constructing a Greater-Than-Class-C storage pad, as well as other expected permitting expenses and environmental fees have been incorporated into the estimate. o Maintaining security staff levels near operating staff levels while spent fuel is stored in the spent fuel pools was re-affirmed. The cost associated with maintaining these staff levels has been incorporated into the estimate. "Decommissioning Cost Analysis for the Diablo Canyon Power Plant," Document PO 1-1648-001, Rev. 0, TLG Services, Inc., December 2012. 2 California governor Executive Order D-62-02. Decommissioned materials are materials that meet US NRC release criteria, but have low residual levels of radioactivity. TLG Services, Inc. 2-AtchA-7 Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document POl-1719-001, Rev. 0 Page viii of xxi o Cost impact of a delay in DOE's start of spent fuel pickup from commercial generators from 2024 to 2028. o Complying with expected re-licensing requirements after the ISFSI license is renewed. The analysis is not a detailed engineering evaluation, but an estimate prepared in . advance of the detailed engineering required to carry out the decommissioning of the nuclear units. It may also not reflect the actual plan to decommission Diablo Canyon; the plan may differ from the assumptions made in this analysis based on facts that exist at the time of decommissioning. The costs to decommission Diablo Canyon for the scenarios evaluated are tabulated at the end of this section. Costs are reported in 2014 dollars and include monies anticipated to be spent for radiological remediation and operating license termination, spent fuel management, and site restoration activities. A complete discussion of the assumptions relied upon in this analysis is provided in Section 3, along with schedules of annual expenditures for each scenario. A sequence of significant project activities is provided in Section 4 with a timeline for each scenario. Detailed cost reports used to generate the summary tables contained within this document are provided in Appendices C through E. Consistent with the 2012 analysis, the current cost estimates assume that the shutdown of the nuclear units are scheduled and pre-planned events (e.g., there is no delay in transitioning the plant and workforce from operations or in obtaining regulatory relief from operating requirements, etc.). The estimates include the continued operation of the Fuel Handling Buildings as interim wet fuel storage facilities for approximately ten years after operations cease. [3J During this time period, it is assumed that the spent fuel residing in the pools will be transferred to an independent spent fuel storage installation (ISFSI) located on the site. The ISFSI will remain operational until the DOE is able to complete the transfer of the fuel to a federal facility (e.g., a monitored retrievable storage facility)J4J DOE has breached its obligations to remove fuel from reactor sites, and has also failed to provide the plant owner with information about how it will ultimately perform. In 3 The current Part 72 ISFSI license does not allow dry cask storage of spent fuel with burnups above 62 GWD/metric ton. It is assumed that PG&E can amend the Part 72 license to store the higher burn up fuel, but that as a condition of the amendment it will require longer decay times (10 years) before storing the spent fuel in the casks. 4 Projected expenditures for spent fuel management identified in the cost analyses do not consider the outcome of the litigation with the DOE with regard to the delays incurred by PG&E in the timely removal of spent fuel from the site. TLG Services, Inc. 2-AtchA-8 Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document POl-1719-001, Rev. 0 Page ix of xxi the absence of information about how DOE will perform, and for purposes of this analysis only, it is assumed that DOE will accept already-canistered fuel. (It is
  • recognized that the canisters may not be licensed or licensable for transportation when DOE performs.) If this assumption is incorrect, it is assumed that DOE will have liability for costs incurred to transfer the fuel to DOE-supplied containers. Alternatives and Regulations The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) provided general decommissioning requirements in a rule adopted on June 27, 1988. [5J In this rule, the NRC set forth technical and financial criteria for decommissioning licensed nuclear facilities. The regulations addressed planning needs, timing, funding methods, and environmental review requirements for decommissioning. The rule also defined three decommissioning alternatives as being acceptable to the NRC: DECON, SAFSTOR, and ENTOMB. DECON is defined as "the alternative in which the equipment, structures, and portions of a facility and site containing radioactive contaminants are removed or decontaminated to a level that permits the property to be released for unrestricted use shortly after cessation of operations."[6] SAFSTOR is defined as "the alternative in which the nuclear facility is placed and maintained in a condition that allows the nuclear facility to be safely stored and subsequently decontaminated (deferred decontamination) to levels that permit release for unrestricted use."[7J Decommissioning is required to be completed within 60 years, although longer time periods will be considered when necessary to protect public health and safety. ENTOMB is defined as "the alternative in which radioactive contaminants are encased in a structurally long-lived material, such as concrete; the entombed structure is appropriately maintained and continued surveillance is carried out until the radioactive material decays to a level permitting unrestricted release of the property."[SJ As with the SAFSTOR alternative, decommissioning is currently required to be 5 U.S. Code of Federal Regulations, Title 10, Parts 30, 40, 50, 51, 70 and 72 "General Requirements for Decommissioning Nuclear Facilities," Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Federal Register Volume 53, Number 123 (p 24018 et seq.), June 27, 1988 6 Ibid. Page FR24022, Column 3 7 Ibid. B Ibid. Page FR24023, Column 2 TLG Services, Inc. 2-AtchA-9 Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document POl-1719-001, Rev. 0 Pagexofxxi completed within 60 years, although longer time periods will also be considered when necessary to protect public health and safety. The 60-year restriction has limited the practicality for the ENTOMB alternative at commercial reactors that generate significant amounts of long-lived radioactive material. In 1997, the Commission directed its staff to re-evaluate this alternative and identify the technical requirements and regulatory actions that would be necessary for entombment to become a viable option. The resulting evaluation provided several recommendations, however, rulemaking has been deferred pending the completion of additional research studies (e.g., on engineered barriers). In 1996, the NRC published revisions to the general requirements for decommissioning nuclear power plants to clarify ambiguities and codify procedures and terminology as a means of enhancing efficiency and uniformity in the decommissioning processJ9J The amendments allowed for greater public participation and better define the transition process from operations to decommissioning. Regulatory Guide 1.184, issued in July 2000, further described the methods and procedures acceptable to the NRC staff for implementing the requirements of the 1996 revised rule that relate to initial activities and major phases of the decommissioning process. The costs and schedules presented in this analysis follow the general guidance and process described in the amended regulations. The format and content of the estimate is also consistent with the recommendations of Regulatory Guide 1.202, issued in February 2005JIOJ In 2011, the NRC published amended regulations to improve decommissioning planning and thereby reduce the likelihood that any current operating facility will become a legacy site.llll The amended regulations require licensees to conduct their operations to minimize the introduction of residual radioactivity into the site, which includes the site's subsurface soil and groundwater. Licensees also may be required to perform site surveys to determine whether residual radioactivity is present in subsurface areas and to keep records of these surveys with records important for decommissioning. The amended regulations require licensees to report additional details in their decommissioning cost estimate as well as requiring additional financial 9 U.S. Code of Federal Regulations, Title 10, Parts 2, 50, and 51, "Decommissioning of Nuclear Power Reactors," Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Federal Register Volume 61, (p 39278 et seq.), July 29, 1996 10 "Standard Format and Content of Decommissioning Cost Estimates of Decommissioning Cost Estimates for Nuclear Power Reactors," Regulatory Guide 1.202, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, February 2005 11 U.S. Code of Federal Regulations, Title 10, Parts 20, 30, 40, 50, 70, and 72, "Decommissioning Planning," Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Federal Register Volume 76, (p 35512 et seq.), June 17, 2011 TLG Services, Inc. 2-AtchA-10 Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document POl-1719-001, Rev. 0 Page xi of xxi reporting and assurances. These additional details are included m this analysis, including the ISFSI decommissioning estimate (Appendix E). Decommissioning Scenarios Two basic decommissioning scenarios are evaluated for the two nuclear units. The scenarios selected are representative of alternatives available to the owner and are defined as follows: DECON: Units 1and2 are currently expected to cease operations in November 2024 and August 2025, respectively. Spent fuel remaining in the spent fuel storage pools after a minim.um. cooling period of 10 years is transferred to the ISFSI for interim. storage. This scenario assumes that decommissioning activities at the two units begin soon after unit shutdown and are sequenced and integrated so as to minimize the total duration of the physical dismantling processes. Any residual spent fuel is transferred to the ISFSI so as to facilitate decontamination and dismantling activities within the fuel handing buildings. Decommissioning of the station and subsequent demolition of the structures is completed by 2039. Spent fuel storage operations continue at the site until the transfer of the fuel to the DOE is complete, assumed to be in the year 2061. The ISFSI is then decommissioned and dismantled. SAFSTOR: Units 1 and 2 are currently expected to cease operations in November 2024 and August 2025, respectively. The units are placed into storage in this scenario. The start of field decommissioning is deferred to the end of the fuel storage period. Spent fuel remaining in the spent fuel storage pools after a minim.um. cooling period of 10 years is transferred to the ISFSI for interim. storage. As with the DECON scenario, decommissioning activities at the two units are sequenced and integrated so as to minimize the total duration of the physical dismantling processes. Spent fuel storage operations continue at the site until the transfer of the fuel to the DOE is complete, assumed to be in the year 2061. Methodology The methodology used to develop the estimates follows the basic approach originally presented in the cost estimating guidelines [121 developed by the Atomic Industrial Forum. (now Nuclear Energy Institute). This reference describes a unit cost factor method for estimating decommissioning activity costs. The unit cost factors used in this 12 T.S. LaGuardia et al., "Guidelines for Producing Commercial Nuclear Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Estimates," AIF/NESP-036, May 1986 TLG Services, Inc. 2-AtchA-11

/ Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document POl-1719-001, Rev. 0 Page xii of xxi analysis incorporate site-specific costs and the latest available information about worker productivity in decommissioning. An activity duration critical path is used to determine the total decommissioning program schedule. This is required for calculating the carrying costs, which include program management, administration, field engineering, equipment rental, quality assurance, and security. This systematic approach for assembling decommissioning estimates ensures a high degree of confidence in the reliability of the resulting costs. The estimates also reflect lessons learned from previously completed decommissioning projects, including TLG's involvement in the Shippingport Station decommissioning, completed in 1989, and the decommissioning of the Cintichem reactor, hot cells and associated facilities, completed in 1997. In addition, the planning and experience associated with the Pathfinder, Shoreham, Rancho Seco, Trojan, Yankee Rowe, Big Rock Point, Maine Yankee, Humboldt Bay-3, Connecticut Yankee, San Onofre, Vermont Yankee, and Zion nuclear units have provided additional insight into the process, the regulatory aspects, and technical challenges of decommissioning commercial nuclear units. Contingency Consistent with cost estimating practice, contingencies are applied to the decontamination .and dismantling costs developed as "specific provision for unforeseeable elements of cost within the defined project scope, particularly important where previous experience relating estimates and actual costs has shown that unforeseeable events which will increase costs are likely to occur."l13l The cost elements in the estimates are based on ideal conditions; therefore, the types of unforeseeable events that are almost certain to occur in decommissioning, based on industry experience, are addressed through a percentage contingency applied on a line-item basis. This contingency factor is a nearly universal element in all large-scale construction and demolition projects. It should be noted that contingency, as used in this analysis, is based on a preliminary technical position [14] to reflect the California Public Utilities Commission's desire* for owners to conservatively establish an appropriate contingency factor for inclusion in the decommissioning revenue requirements. 13 Project and Cost Engineers' Handbook, Second Edition, American Association of Cost Engineers, Marcel Dekker, Inc., New York, New York, p. 239. 14 "Technical Position Paper for Establishing an Appropriate Contingency Factor for Inclusion in the Decominissioning Revenue Requirements", Study Number: DECON-POS-H002, Revision A, Status: Preliminary (provided by PG&E). TLG Services, Inc. 2-AtchA-12 Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document POl-1719-001, Rev. 0 Page xiii of xxi Contingency funds are expected to be fully expended throughout the program. As such, inclusion of contingency is necessary to provide assurance that sufficient funding will be available to accomplish the intended tasks. Low-Level Radioactive Waste Disposal The contaminated and activated material generated in the decontamination and dismantling of a commercial nuclear reactor is generally classified as low-level radioactive waste, although not all of the material is suitable for "shallow-land" disposal. With the passage of the "Low-Level Radioactive Waste Disposal Act" in 198Q,l15J and its Amendments of 1985,[16] the states became ultimately responsible for the disposition oflow-level radioactive waste generated within their own borders. With the exception of Texas, no new compact facilities have been successfully sited, licensed, and constructed. The Texas Compact disposal facility is now operational and waste is being accepted from generators within the Compact by the operator, Waste Control Specialists (WCS). The facility is also able to accept limited quantities of Compact waste. Disposition of the various waste streams produced by the decommissioning process considered all options and services currently available to PG&E. The majority of the low-level radioactive waste designated for direct disposal (Class Al17J) can be sent to Energy Solutions' facility in Clive, Utah. Therefore, disposal costs for Class A waste were based upon PG&E's current-contract rates with EnergySolutions. This facility is not licensed to receive the higher activity portion (Classes B and C) of the decommissioning waste stream. The WCS facility is able to receive the Class B and C waste. As such, for this analysis, Class B and C waste was assumed to be shipped to the WCS facility and disposal costs for the waste using this facility were based upon PG&E current-contract rates. The dismantling of the components residing closest to the reactor core generates radioactive waste that may be considered unsuitable for shallow-land disposal (i.e., level radioactive waste with concentrations of radionuclides that exceed the limits established by the NRC for Class. C radioactive waste (Greater Than Class C, or GTCC)). The Low-Level Radioactive Waste Policy Amendments Act of 1985 assigned the federal government the responsibility for the disposal of this material. The Act also stated that the beneficiaries of the activities resulting in the generation of such radioactive waste bear all reasonable costs of disposing of such waste. However, to date, 15 "Low-Level Radioactive Waste Policy Act of 1980," Public Law 96-573, 1980 16 Low-Level Radioactive Waste Policy Amendments Act of 1985," Public Law 99-240, 1986 11 Waste is classified in accordance with U.S. Code of Federal Regulations, Title 10, Part 61.55 TLG Services, Inc. 2-AtchA-13 Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document POl-1719-001, Rev. 0 Page xiv of xxi the federal government has not identified a cost for disposing of GTCC or a schedule for acceptance. For purposes of this analysis only, the GTCC radioactive waste is assumed to be packaged and disposed of in a similar manner as high-level waste and at a cost equivalent to that envisioned for the spent fuel. The GTCC is packaged in the same canisters used for spent fuel and either stored on site or shipped directly to a DOE facility as it is generated (depending upon the timing of the decommissioning and whether the spent fuel has been removed from the site prior to the start of decommissioning). High-Level Radioactive Waste Management Congress passed the "Nuclear Waste Policy Act"[ISJ (NWPA) in 1982, assigning the federal government's long-standing responsibility for disposal of the spent nuclear fuel created by the commercial nuclear generating plants to the DOE. It was to begin accepting spent fuel by January 31, 1998; however, to date no progress in the removal of spent fuel from commercial generating sites has been made. Today, the country is at an impasse on high-level waste disposal, even with the License Application for a geologic repository 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 recommendations for a new plan."[19] 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's charter includes a requirement that it consider "[o]ptions for safe storage of used nuclear fuel while final disposition pathways are selected and deployed."l20J On January 26, 2012, the Blue Ribbon Commission issued its "Report to the Secretary of Energy containing a number of recommendations on nuclear waste disposal. Two of the recommendations that may impact decommissioning planning are: 18 "Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982 and Amendments," DO E's Office of Civilian Radioactive l\1anagement, 1982 19 Charter of the Blue Ribbon Commission on America's Nuclear Future, "Objectives and Scope of Activities," http://www.brc.gov/index.php?q=vage/charter TLG Services, Inc. 2-AtchA-14 Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document POl-1719-001, Rev. 0 Page xv of xxi o "[T]he United States [should] establish a program that leads to the timely development of one or more consolidated storage facilities"[211 o "[T]he United States should undertake an integrated nuclear waste management program that leads to the timely development of one or more permanent deep geological facilities for the safe disposal of spent fuel and high-level nuclear waste."[22] 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 recommendations made by the Blue Ribbon Commission and as "a framework for moving toward a sustainable program to deploy an integrated system capable of transporting, storing, and disposing of used nuclear fuel..."[23] "With the appropriate authorizations from Congress, the Administration currently plans to implement a program over the next 10 years that: o Sites, designs and licenses, constructs and begins operations of a pilot interim storage facility by 2021 with an initial focus on accepting used nuclear fuel from shut-down reactor 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 and allows for acceptance of enough used nuclear fuel to reduce expected government liabilities; and o Makes demonstrable progress on the siting and characterization of repository sites to facilitate the availability of a geologic repository by 2048."[24] The NRC's review of DOE's license application to construct a geologic repository at Yucca Mountain was suspended in 2011 when the Administration significantly reduced the budget for completing that work. However, the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit issued a writ of mandamus (in August 2013)[25] 21 "Blue Ribbon Commission on America's Nuclear Future, Report to the Secretary of Energy," http://www.brc.gov/sites/default/files/documents/brc finalreport jan2012.pdf, p. 32, January 2012 22 Ibid., p.27 23 "Strategy for the Management and Disposal of Used Nuclear Fuel and High-Level Radioactive Waste," U.S. DOE, January 11, 2013 24 Ibid., p.2 25 U.S. Court of Appeals for the District Of Columbia Circuit, In Re: Aiken County, et al, Aug. 2013,http://www.cadc.uscourts.gov/internet/opinions.nsf/BAEOCF34F762EBD985257BC6004DE B18/$file/ll-1271-1451347.pdf TLG Services, Inc. 2-AtchA-15 Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document POl-1719-001, Rev. 0 Page xvi of xxi ordering NRC to comply with federal law and resume its review of DOE's Yucca Mountain repository license application to the extent allowed by previously appropriated funding for the review. That review is now complete with the publication of the five-volume safety evaluation report. A supplement to DOE's environmental impact statement and an adjudicatory hearing on the contentions filed by interested parties must be completed before a licensing decision can be made. A federal appeals court has ruled that DOE's obligation to take possession of spent nuclear fuel is unconditional and cannot be excused either by the absence of a repository or by a claim of unavoidable delay. 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 discharged from the reactor.[261 PG&E's current spent fuel management plan for the Diablo Canyon spent fuel is based in general upon: 1) a 2028 start date for DOE initiating transfer of commercial spent fuel to a federal facility (not necessarily a final repository), and 2) expectations for spent fuel receipt by the DOE for the Diablo Canyon fuel. The DOE's generator allocation/receipt schedules are based upon the oldest fuel receiving the highest priority. Assuming a maximum rate of transfer of 3,000 metric tons of uranium (MTU)/year, the spent fuel is completely removed from the site by the end of 2061 for a 2025 station shutdown. Different DOE acceptance schedules may result in different completion dates. The NRC requires that licensees establish a program to manage and provide funding for the caretaking of all irradiated fuel at the reactor site until title of the fuel is transferred to the DOE. [27] Interim storage of the fuel, until the DOE has completed the transfer, will be in the fuel handling building's storage pool as well as at an on-site 26 In 2008, the DOE issued a report to Congress in which it concluded that it did not have authority, under present law, to accept spent nuclear fuel for interim storage from decommissioned commercial nuclear power reactor sites. However, the Blue Ribbon Commission, in its final report, noted that: "[A]ccepting spent fuel according to the OFF [Oldest Fuel First] priority ranking instead of giving priority to shutdown reactor sites could greatly reduce the cost savings that could be achieved through consolidated storage if priority could be given to accepting spent fuel from shutdown reactor sites before accepting fuel from still-operating plants . . . . . The magnitude of the cost savings that could be achieved by giving priority to shutdown sites appears to be large enough (i.e., in the billions of dollars) to warrant DOE exercising its right under the Standard Contract to move this fuel first." For planning purposes only, this estimate does not assume that Diablo Canyon, as a permanently shutdown plant, will receive priority; the fuel removal schedule assumed in this estimate is based upon DOE acceptance of fuel according to the "Oldest Fuel First",priority ranking. 27 U.S. Code of Federal Regulations, Title 10, Part 50 -Domestic Licensing of Production and Utilization Facilities, Subpart 54 (bb), "Conditions of Licenses" TLG Services, Inc. 2-AtchA-16 Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document POl-1719-001, Rev. 0 Page xvii of xxi ISFSI. For purposes of tl?is analysis, it is assumed that DOE will accept canistered fuel. An ISFSI, which is independently licens*ed and operated, will remain operational after the cessation of plant operations. For the DECON and SAFSTOR scenarios, the facility is projected to have the capacity to accommodate the inventory of spent fuel residing in the plant's storage pools at the conclusion of the required cooling period. Once emptied, the spent fuel pool facilities can be either decontaminated and dismantled or prepared for long-term storage. For cost estimating purposes, the spent fuel scenario developed for Diablo Canyon assumed that the DOE would initiate spent fuel receipt in the year 2028. DOE's generator allocation/receipt schedules are based upon the oldest fuel receiving the highest priority. The information available on the projected rate of transfer and the backlogged national queue indicates that Diablo Canyon fuel would not be eligible for pickup until 2035. Supplemental dry cask spent nuclear fuel storage in the form **of an ISFSI is assumed to be expanded following cessation of plant operations to accommodate the assemblies in the plant's wet storage pools. By relocating the fuel to the ISFSI, the wet storage pools may be secured and decommissioning of the nuclear units may proceed. Costs are included within the estimates to expand the ISFSI to accommodate the residual spent fuel inventories after pool operations cease and for the long-term caretaking of spent fuel at the site through the year 2061. The PG&E position is that the DOE has a contractual obligation to accept Diablo Canyon's fuel earlier than the projections set out above consistent with its contract commitments. No assumption made in this study should be interpreted to be with this claim. However, including the cost of storing spent fuel in this study is appropriate to ensure the availability of sufficient decommissioning funds at the end of the station's life if the DOE has not met its obligation. Site Restoration The efficient removal 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 can substantially damage power block structures, potentially weakening the footings and structural supports. It is unreasonable to antiCipate that these structures would be repaired and preserved after the radiological contamination is removed. The cost to dismantle site structures with a work force already mobilized is more efficient and less costly than if the process is deferred. Consequently, this study assumes that site structures included within this analysis are removed to a nominal depth of three feet below the local grade level wherever possible. The site is then graded and stabilized. The debris and scrap metal TLG Services, Inc. . 2-AtchA-17 Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document POl-1719-001, Rev. 0 Page xviii of xxi produced during site restoration activities is designated as "decommissioned material" and transported to an out-of-state facility. Summary The estimates to decommission Diablo Canyon assume the removal of all contaminated and activated plant components and structural materials such that the owner may then have unrestricted use of the site with no further requirements for an operating license. Low-level radioactive waste, other than GTCC waste, is sent to a licensed radioactive waste disposal facility. Decommissioned materials are sent to an out-of-state disposal facility. Decommissioning is accomplished within the 60-year period required by current NRC regulations. In the interim, the spent fuel remains in storage at the site until such time that the transfer to a DOE facility is complete. Once emptied, the storage facility can also be decommissioned. Both the DECON and SAFSTOR scenarios are described in Section 2. The bases of the estimates and assumptions are presented in Section 3, along with schedules of annual expenditures. The major cost contributors are identified in Section 6, with detailed activity costs, waste volumes, and associated manpower requirements delineated in Appendices C and D. The major cost components for all scenarios are also identified in the cost summary provided at the end of this section. The cost elements in the estimates for all the decommissioning alternatives are assigned to one of three subcategories: NRC License Termination (radiological remediation), Spent Fuel Management, and Site Restoration. The subcategory "NRC License Termination" is used to accumulate costs that are consistent with "decommissioning" as defined by the NRC in its financial assurance regulations (i.e., 10 CFR §50. 75). The cost reported for this subcategory is generally sufficient to terminate the unit's operating license, recognizing that there may be some additional cost impact from spent fuel management. The "Spent Fuel Management" subcategory contains costs associated with the containerization and transfer of spent fuel from the wet storage pool to a DOE transport cask or to the ISFSI for interim storage, as well as the transfer of the spent fuel in storage at the ISFSI to the DOE. Costs are included for the operation of the storage pool and the management of the ISFSI until such time that the transfer is complete. It does not include any spent fuel management expenses incurred prior to the cessation of plant operations, nor does it include any costs related to the final disposal of the spent fuel. TLG Services, Inc. 2-AtchA-18 Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document POl-1719-001, Rev. 0 Page xix of xxi "Site Restoration" is used to capture costs associated with the dismantling and demolition of buildings and facilities demonstrated to be free from contamination. This includes structures never exposed to radioactive materials, as well as those facilities that have been decontaminated to appropriate levels. Structures are removed to a depth of three feet and backfilled to conform to local grade. It should be noted that the costs assigned to these subcategories are allocations. Delegation of cost elements is for the purposes of comparison (e.g., with NRC financial guidelines) or to permit specific financial treatment (e.g., Asset Retirement Obligation determinations). In reality, there can be considerable interaction between the activities in the three subcategories. For example, an owner may decide to remove contaminated structures early in the project to improve access to highly contaminated facilities or plant components. In these instances, the non-contaminated removal costs could be reassigned from Site Restoration to an NRC License Termination support activity. However, in general, the allocations represent a reasonable accounting of those costs that can be expected to be incurred for the specific subcomponents of the total estimated program cost, if executed as described. As noted within this document, the estimates were developed and costs are presented in 2014 dollars. As such, the estimates do not reflect the escalation of costs (due to inflationary and market forces) over the remaining operating life of the plant or during the decommissioning period. TLG Services, Inc. 2-AtchA-19 Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document POl-1719-001, Rev. 0 Page xx of xxi DECON COST SUMMARY DECOMMISSIONING COST ELEMENTS (thousands of 2014 dollars) Cost Element Unit 1 Unit2 Decontamination 18,214 21,549 Removal 141,218 319,210 Packaging 33,435 32,500 Transportation 31,679 294,378 Waste Disposal 199,331 178,340 Program Management [IJ 473,419 491,299 >---" Security 338,910 348,555 Spent Fuel Pool Isolation 26,314 17,577 Spent Fuel Management [2J 213,527 193,784 Insurance and Regulatory Fees 36,956 32,862 Energy 32,071 31,910 Characterization and Licensing Surveys 33,875 37,509 Property Taxes 7,658 7,503 Severance 84,005 84,169 Miscellaneous Equipment 8,421 9,026 Total [3J 1,679,030 2,100,172 Cost Element License Termination 1,190,754 1,172,913 Spent Fuel Management 389,775 395,217 Site Restoration 98,501 532,042 Total [3J 1,679,030 2,100,172 [ll Includes engineering costs r21 Excludes program management costs (staffing) but includes costs for spent fuel loading/transfer/spent fuel pool O&M and EP fees [3J Columns may not add due to rounding TLG Services, Inc. 2-AtchA-20 Total 39,763 460,428 65,934 326,057 377,671 964,718 687,465 43,890 407,311 69,817 63,981 71,384 15,161 168,174 17,447 3,779,202 2,363,667 784,992 630,543 3,779,202 Diablo Canyon Power Plant . Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document POl-1719-001, Rev. 0 Page xxi of xxi SAFSTOR COST SUMMARY DECOMMISSIONING COST ELEMENTS (thousands of 2014 dollars) Cost Element Unit 1 Unit2 Decontamination 14,403 21,401 Removal 143,288 319,891 Packaging 23,554 22,581 Transportation 29,063 292,279 Waste Disposal 182,273 160,224 Program Management [lJ 604,377 439,612 Security 377,878 386,029 Spent Fuel Pool Isolation 26,459 17,615 Spent Fuel Management [21 214,610 194,121 Insurance and Regulatory Fees 53,180 50,493 Energy 37,842 37,721 Characterization and Licensing Surveys 34,831 42,625 Property Taxes 9,548 9,373 Severance 84,470 84,353 Miscellaneous Equipment 15,685 16,419 Total 31 1,851,460 2,094,736 Cost Element License Termination 1,128,923 1,048,860 Spent Fuel Management 623,759 512,851 Site Restoration 98,778 533,025 Total [31 1,851,460 2,094,736 [11 Includes engineering costs [21 Excludes program management costs (staffing) but includes costs for spent fuel loading/transfer/spent fuel pool O&M and EP fees [3] Columns may not add due to rounding TLG Services, Inc. 2-AtchA-21 Total 35,804 463,179 46,135 321,341 342,497 1,043,988 763,907 44,074 408,730 103,673 75,562 77,455 18,921 168,823 32,104 3,946,195 2,177,783 1,136,610 631,802 3,946,195 r;---Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis 1. INTRODUCTION Document POl-1719-001, Rev. 0 Section 1, Page 1of13 This report presents estimates of the cost to decommission the Diablo Canyon Power Plant (Diablo Canyon) for the selected decommissioning scenarios following the scheduled cessation of plant operations. The estimates are designed to provide Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) with the information to assess its current decommissioning liability, as it relates to Diablo Canyon. The analysis relies upon site-specific, technical information from an earlier evaluation prepared in 2012[1]* updated to reflect current assumptions pertaining to the disposition of the nuclear plant and relevant industry experience in undertaking such projects. The costs are based on several key assumptions in areas of regulation, component characterization, high-level radioactive waste management, low-level radioactive waste disposal, performance uncertainties (contingency) and site restoration requirements. The analysis is not a detailed engineering evaluation, but estimates prepared in advance of the detailed engineering required to carry out the decommissioning of the nuclear units. It may also not reflect the actual plan to decommission Diablo Canyon; the plan may differ from the assumptions made in this analysis based on facts that exist at the time of decommissioning. 1.1 OBJECTIVES OF STUDY The objectives of this study are to prepare comprehensive estimates of the costs to decommission Diablo Canyon based on the DECON and SAFSTOR scenarios, to provide a sequence or schedule for the associated activities, and to develop waste stream projections from the decontamination and dismantling activities. For the purposes of this study, the shutdown dates are based on the expiration of the current operating licenses, or 2 November 2024 for Unit 1, and 26 August 2025 for Unit 2. 1.2 SITE DESCRIPTION Diablo Canyon is located on the central California coast in San Luis Obispo County, approximately 12 miles west southwest of the City of San Luis Obispo. The plant, comprised of two nuclear units, is located on a 750-acre site adjacent to the Pacific Ocean, roughly equidistant from San Francisco and Los Angeles. References provided in Section 7 of the document TLG Services, Inc. 2-AtchA-22 Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document POl-1719-001, Rev. 0 Section 1, Page 2 of 13 The Nuclear Steam Supply System (NSSS) consists of a pressurized water reactor and a four-loop Reactor Coolant System. The systems were supplied by the Westinghouse Electric Corporation. Units 1and2 each have a license rating of 3411 MWt, with corresponding net electrical outputs 1131 and 1156 megawatts (electric), respectively, with the reactors at rated power. The Reactor Coolant System is comprised of the reactor vessel and four heat transfer loops, each containing a vertical U-tube type steam generator, and a single-stage centrifugal reactor coolant pump. In addition, the system includes an electrically heated pressurizer, a pressurizer relief tank, and interconnected piping. The system is housed within a "containment structure," a seismic Category I reinforced-concrete dry structure. It consists of an upright cylinder topped with a hemispherical dome, supported on a reinforced concrete foundation mat, which is keyed into the bedrock. A welded steel liner plate anchored to the inside face of the containment serves as a leak-tight membrane. The liner on top of the foundation mat is protected by a two-foot thick concrete fill mat, which supports the containment internals and forms the floor of the containment. The lower portion of the containment cylindrical wall has additional embedded wide flange steel beams between elevations 88 ft. 2 in. and 108 ft. 2 in. (mean sea level). Heat produced in the reactor is converted to electrical energy by the Steam and Power Conversion Systems. A turbine-generator system converts the thermal energy of steam produced in the steam generators into mechanical shaft power and then into electrical energy. The plant's turbine-generators are each tandem compound, four element units. They consist of one high-pressure double-flow and three low-pressure double-flow elements driving a direct-coupled generator at 1800 rpm. The turbines are operated in a closed feedwater cycle that condenses the steam; the heated feedwater is returned to the steam generators. Heat rejected in the main condensers is removed by the Circulating Water System (CWS). The circulating water system provides the heat sink required for removal of waste heat in the power plant's thermal cycle. The system has the principal function of removing heat by absorbing this energy in the main condenser. Condenser circulating water is water from the Pacific Ocean. Each unit is served by two circulating water pumps at the intake structure. From this structure seawater is pumped through two circulating water conduits to the condenser inlet water boxes. The water is returned to the ocean at Diablo Cove through an outfall at the water's edge. TLG Services, Inc. 2-AtchA-23 Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis 1.3 REGULATORY GUIDANCE Document POl-1719-001, Rev. 0 Section 1, Page 3 of 13 The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC or Commission) provided iriitial decommissioning requirements in its rule "General Requirements for Decommissioning Nuclear Facilities," issued in June 1988J2l This rule set forth financial criteria for decommissioning licensed nuclear power facilities. The regulation addressed decommissioning planning needs, timing, funding methods, and environmental review requirements. The intent of the rule was to ensure that decommissioning would be accomplished in a safe and timely manner and that adequate funds would be available for this purpose. Subsequent to the rule, the NRC issued Regulatory Guide 1.159, "Assuring the Availability of Funds for Decommissioning Nuclear Reactors,l3J which provided additional guidance to the licensees of nuclear facilities on the financial methods acceptable to the NRC staff for complying with the requirements of the rule. The regulatory guide addressed the funding requirements and provided guidance on the content and form of the financial assurance mechanisms indicated in the rule. The rule defined three decommissioning alternatives as being acceptable to the NRC: DECON, SAFSTOR, and ENTOMB. The DECON alternative assumes that any contaminated or activated portion of the plant's systems, structures and facilities are removed or decontaminated to levels that permit the site to be released for unrestricted use shortly after the cessation of plant operations, while the SAFSTOR and EN.TOMB alternatives defer the process. The rule also placed limits on the time allowed to complete the decommissioning process. For all alternatives, the process is restricted in overall duration to 60 years, unless it can be shown that a longer duration is necessary to protect public health and safety. At the conclusion of a 60-year dormancy period (or longer if the NRC approves such a case), the site would still require significant remediation to meet the unrestricted release limits for license termination. The ENTOMB alternative has not been viewed as a viable option for power reactors due to the significant time required to isolate the long-lived radionuclides for decay to permissible levels. However, with rulemaking permitting the controlled release of a site,l4l the NRC did re-evaluated the alternative. The resulting feasibility study, based upon an assessment by Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, concluded that the method did have conditional merit for some, if not most reactors. The staff also found that additional rulemaking would be needed before this option could be treated as a generic alternative. TLG Services, Inc. 2-AtchA-24 Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document POl-1719-001, Rev. 0 Section 1, Page 4 of 13 The NRC had considered rulemaking to alter the 60-year time for completing decommissioning and to clarify the use of engineered barriers for reactor entombments.l5l However, the NRC's staff has subsequently recommended that rulemaking be deferred, based upon several factors (e.g., no licensee has committed to pursuing the entombment option, the unresolved issues associated with the disposition of greater-than-Class C material (GTCC), and the NRC's current priorities), at least until after the additional research studies are complete. The Commission concurred with the staffs recommendation. In 1996, the NRC published revisions to the general requirements for decommissioning nuclear power plantsJ6J When the decommissioning regulations were adopted in 1988, it was assumed that the majority of licensees would decommission at the end of the facility's operating licensed life. Since that time, several licensees permanently and prematurely ceased operations. Exemptions from certain operating requirements were required once the reactor was defueled to facilitate the decommissioning. Each case was handled individually, without clearly defined generic requirements. The NRC amended the decommissioning regulations in 1996 to clarify ambiguities and codify procedures and terminology as a means of enhancing efficiency and uniformity in the decommissioning process. The amendments allow for greater public participation and better define* the transition process from operations to decommissioning. Under the revised regulations, licensees will submit written certification to the NRC within 30 days after the decision to cease operations. Certification will also be required once the fuel is permanently removed from the reactor vessel. Submittal of these notices, along with related changes to Technical Specifications, entitle the licensee to a fee reduction and eliminate the obligation to follow certain requirements needed only during operation of the reactor. Within two years of submitting notice of permanent cessation of operations, the licensee is required to submit a Post-Shutdown Decommissioning Activities Report (PSDAR) to the NRC. The PSDAR describes the planned decommissioning activities, the . associated sequence and schedule, and an estimate of expected costs. Prior to completing decommissioning, the licensee is required to submit an application to the NRC to terminate the license, which will include a license termination plan (LTP). In 2011, the NRC published amended regulations to improve decommissioning planning and thereby reduce the likelihood that any current operating facility will become a legacy site.l7l The amended regulations require licensees to

  • conduct their operations to minimize the introduction of residual radioactivity into the site, which includes. the site's subsurface soil and groundwater. Licensees also may be required to perform site surveys to determine whether TLG Services, Inc. 2-AtchA-25 Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document POl-1719-001, Rev. 0 Section 1, Page 5 of 13 residual radioactivity is present in subsurface areas and to keep of these surveys with records important for decommissioning. The amended regulations require licensees to report additional details in their decommissioning cost estimate as well as requiring additional financial reporting and assurances. The additional details, including a decommissioning estimate for the Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation (ISFSI), are included in this study. 1.3.1 Nuclear Waste Policy Act Congress passed the "Nuclear Waste Policy Act"[SJ (NWPA) in 1982, assigning the federal government's long-standing responsibility for disposal of the spent nuclear fuel created by the commercial nuclear generating plants to the DOE. It was to begin accepting spent fuel by January 31, 1998; however, to date no progress in the removal of spent fuel from commercial generating sites has been made. Today, the country is at an impasse on high-level waste disposal, even with the License Application for a geologic repository 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 recommendations for a new plan." 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's charter includes a requirement that it consider "[o]ptions for safe storage of used nuclear fuel while final disposition pathways are selected and deployed."[91 On January 26, 2012, the Blue Ribbon Commission issued its "Report to the Secretary of Energy containing a number of recommendations on nuclear waste disposal. Two of the recommendations that may impact decommissioning planning are: o "[T]he United States [should] establish a program that leads to the timely development of one or more consolidated storage facilities" o "[T]he United States should undertake an integrated nuclear waste management program that leads to the timely development of one or more permanent deep geological facilities for the safe disposal of spent fuel and high-level nuclear waste."[IOJ TLG Services, Inc. 2-AtchA-26 Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document POl-1719-001, Rev. 0 Section 1, Page 6 of 13 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 recommendations made by the Blue Ribbon Commission and as "a framework for moving toward a sustainable program to deploy an integrated system capable of transporting, storing, and disposing of used nuclear fuel..." [11] "With the appropriate authorizations from Congress, the Administration currently plans to implement a program over the next 10 years that: o Sites, designs and licenses, constructs and begins operations of a pilot interim storage facility by 2021 with an initial focus on accepting used nuclear fuel from shut-down reactor 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 and allows for acceptance of enough used nuclear fuel to reduce expected government liabilities; and o Makes demonstrable progress on the siting and characterization of repository sites to facilitate the availability of a geologic repository by 2048." The NRC's review of DOE's license application to construct a geologic repository at Yucca Mountain was suspended in 2011 when the Administration significantly reduced the budget for completing that work. However, the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit issued a writ of mandamus (in August 2013)[121 ordering NRC to comply with federal law and resume its review of DOE's Yucca Mountain repository license application to the extent allowed by previously appropriated funding for the review. That review is now complete with the publication of the five-volume safety evaluation report. A supplement to DOE's environmental impact statement and an adjudicatory hearing on the contentions filed by interested parties must be completed before a licensing decision can be made. Completion of the decommissioning process is dependent upon the DO E's ability to remove spent fuel from the site in a timely manner. DOE's repository program assumes that spent fuel allocations will be accepted for disposal from the nation's commercial nuclear plants, with limited exceptions, in the order (the "queue") in which it was discharged from the reactorJ13J PG&E's current spent fuel management plan for the Diablo Canyon spent fuel is based in general upon: 1) a 2028 start date for DOE TLG Services, Inc. 2-AtchA-27 Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document POl-1719-001, Rev. 0 Section 1, Page 7 of 13 initiating transfer of commercial spent fuel to a federal facility (not necessarily a final repository), and 2) expectations for spent fuel receipt by the DOE for the Diablo Canyon fuel. The DOE's generator allocation/receipt schedules are based upon the oldest fuel receiving the
  • highest priority. The information available on the projected rate of transfer and the backlogged national queue indicates that the oldest Diablo Canyon fuel would not be eligible for pickup until 2035. Assuming a maximum rate of transfer of 3,000 metric tons of uranium (MTU)/year, the spent fuel is completely removed from the site by year end 2061 for a 2025 station shutdown. The NRC requires that licensees establish a program to manage and provide funding for the caretaking of all irradiated fuel at the reactor site until title of the fuel is transferred to the DOEJ14l Interim storage of the fuel, until the DOE has completed the transfer, will be in the fuel handling buildings' storage pool as well as at an on-site ISFSI. The ISFSI will remain operational until the DOE is able to complete the transfer of the fuel to a federal facility (e.g., a monitored retrievable storage facility). DOE has breached its obligations to remove fuel from reactor sites, and has also failed to provide the plant owner with information about how it will ultimately perform. In the absence of information about how DOE will perform, and for purposes of this analysis only, it is assumed that DOE will accept already-canistered fuel. (It is recognized that the canisters may not be licensed or licensable for transportation when DOE performs.) If this assumption is incorrect, it is assumed that DOE will have liability for costs incurred to transfer the fuel to DOE-supplied containers. The ISFSI is* assumed to be expanded following cessation of plant operations to accommodate the assemblies in the plant's wet storage pools. By relocating the fuel to the ISFSI, the wet storage pools may be secured and decommissioning of the nuclear units may proceed. Costs are included within the estimates to expand the ISFSI to accommodate the residual spent fuel inventories after pool operations cease and for the long-term caretaking of spent fuel at the site through the year 2061. The PG&E position is that the DOE has a contractual obligation to accept Diablo Canyon's fuel earlier than the projections set out above consistent with its contract commitments. No assumption made in this study should be interpreted to be inconsistent with this claim. However, including the cost of storing spent fuel in this study is appropriate to ensure the availability of sufficient decommissioning funds at the end of the station's life if the DOE has not met its obligation. The cost for the interim storage TLG Services, Inc. 2-AtchA-28 Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document POl-1719-001, Rev. 0 Section 1, Page 8 of 13 of spent fuel has been calculated and is separately presented as "Spent Fuel Management" expenditures in this report. 1.3.2 Low-Level Radioactive Waste Acts The contaminated and activated material generated in the decontamination and dismantling of a commercial nuclear reactor is classified as low-level (radioactive) waste, although not all of the material is suitable for "shallow-land disposal. With the passage of the "Low-Level Radioactive Waste Policy Act" in 1980,l15l and its Amendments of 1985,[16] the states became ultimately responsible for the disposition of low-level radioactive waste generated within their own borders. With the exception of Texas, no new compact facilities have been successfully sited, licensed, and constructed. The Texas Compact disposal facility is now operational and waste is being accepted from generators within the Compact by the operator, Waste Control Specialists (WCS). The facility is also able to accept limited quantities of non-Compact waste. Disposition of the various waste streams produced by the decommissioning process considered all options and services currently available to PG&E. The majority of the low-level radioactive waste designated for direct disposal (Class Al17l) can be sent to EnergySolutions' facility in Clive, Utah. Therefore, disposal costs for Class A waste were based upon PG&E's current Diablo Canyon contract-based costs associated with the EnergySolutions facility. This facility is not licensed to receive the higher activity portion (Classes B and C) of the decommissioning waste stream. The WCS facility is able to receive the Class Band C waste. As such, for this analysis, Class B and C waste was assumed to be shipped to the WCS facility. Disposal costs for this waste were also based upon PG&E's current contract-based costs associated with the WCS facility. The dismantling of the components residing closest to the reactor core generates radioactive waste that may be considered unsuitable for shallow-land disposal (i.e., low-level radioactive waste with concentrations of radionuclides that exceed the limits established by the NRC for Class C radioactive waste (GTCC)). The Low-Level Radioactive Waste Policy Amendments Act of 1985 assigned the federal government the responsibility for the disposal of this material. The Act also stated that the beneficiaries of the activities resulting in the generation of such radioactive waste bear all reasonable costs of disposing of such waste. TLG Services, Inc. 2-AtchA-29 Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document POl-1719-001, Rev. 0 Section 1, Page 9 of 13 However, to date, the federal government has not identified a cost for disposing of GTCC or a schedule for acceptance. For purposes of this analysis only, the GTCC radioactive waste is assumed to be packaged and disposed of in a similar manner as high-level waste and at a cost equivalent to that envisioned for the spent fuel. The GTCC is packaged in the same canisters used for spent fuel and either stored on site or shipped directly to a DOE facility as it is generated (depending upon the timing of the decommissioning and whether the spent fuel has been removed from the site prior to the start of decommissioning). 1.3.3 Radiological Criteria for License Termination In 1997, the NRC published Subpart E, "Radiological Criteria for License Termination," [IS] amending 10 CFR Part 20. This subpart provides radiological criteria for releasing a facility for unrestricted use. The regulation states that the site can be released for unrestricted use if radioactivity levels are such that the average member of a critical group would not receive a Total Effective Dose Equivalent (TEDE) in excess of 25 millirem per year, and provided that residual radioactivity has been reduced to levels that are As Low As Reasonably Achievable (ALARA). The decommissioning estimates assume that the Diablo Canyon site will be remediated to a residual level consistent with the NRC-prescribed level. It should be noted that the NRC and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) differ on the amount of residual radioactivity considered acceptable in site remediation. The EPA has two limits that apply to radioactive materials. An EPA limit of 15 millirem per year is derived from criteria established by the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA or Superfund)J19J An additional and separate limit of 4 millirem per year, as defined in 40 CFR §141.16, is applied to drinking water. [20] On October 9, 2002, the NRC signed an agreement with the EPA on the radiological decommissioning and decontamination of NRC-licensed sites. The Memorandum of Understanding (M0U)[21J provides that EPA will defer exercise of authority under CERCLA for the majority of facilities decommissioned under NRC authority. The MOU also includes provisions for NRC and EPA consultation for certain sites when, at the time of license termination, {l) groundwater contamination exceeds permitted levels; (2) NRC contemplates restricted release of the site; TLG Services, Inc. 2-AtchA-30 Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document POl-1719-001, Rev. 0 Section 1, Page 10 of 13 and/or (3) residual radioactive soil concentrations exceed levels defined in the MOU. The MOU does not impose any new requirements on NRC licensees and should reduce the involvement of the EPA with NRC licensees who are decommissioning. Most sites are expected to meet the NRC criteria for unrestricted use, and the NRC believes that only a few sites will have groundwater or soil contamination in excess of the levels specified in the MOU that trigger consultation with the EPA. However, if there are other hazardous materials on the site, the EPA may be involved in the cleanup. As such, the possibility of dual regulation remains for certain licensees. The present study does not include any costs for this occurrence. 1.3.4 California Governor Moratorium on Disposing of Decommissioned Materials The Governor of the State of California, Executive Order D-62-02, orders a moratorium " ... on the disposal of decommissioned materials into Class III landfills and unclassified waste management units, as described in title 27, sections 20260 and 20230, of the California Code of Regulations". The order defines "decommissioned materials," as materials with low residual levels of radioactivity (below Federal Nuclear Regulatory Commission release levels) that, upon decommissioning of a licensed site, may presently be released with no restrictions upon their use. The order concludes that without regulations these decommissioned materials :tnay not be released with no restrictions upon their use. As such, in the absence of California regulations on decommissioned materials, it is PG&E's position that the decommissioning plan for decommissioned materials
  • should be based on transport and disposal to an out-of-state licensed facility. TLG Services, Inc. 2-AtchA-31 Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document POl-1719-001, Rev. 0 Section 1, Page 11of13 ' BO ARY TLG Services, Inc. FIGURE 1.1 DIABLO CANYON POWER PLANT GENERAL PLAN .l'le*C't' ..st!ISSIQil UN£ !CMO IDM.ILU PACIFIC figure -location indicated with arrow OCEAN 2-AtchA-32 SI TE BOUli 0 BOO 1200 1600 SCALE IN fEET Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis FIGURE 1.2 Document POl-1719-001, Rev. 0 Section 1, Page 12 of 13 DIABLO CANYON POWER PLANT AERIAL VIEW (Imagery date August 2013, from Google Earth) TLG Services, Inc. 2-AtchA-33 l_ Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis FIGURE 1.3 Document POl-1719-001, Rev. 0 Section 1, Page 13 of 13 DIABLO CANYON POWER PLANT REACTOR BUILDING SECTION TLG Services, Inc. 2-AtchA-34 Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document POl-1719-001, Rev. 0 Section 2, Page 1of13 2. DECOMMISSIONING ALTERNATIVES Detailed cost estimates were developed to decommission Diablo Canyon based upon the approved DECON and SAFSTOR decommissioning alternatives. 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. This study does not address the cost to dispose of the spent fuel residing at the site; such costs are funded through a surcharge on electrical generation. However, the study does estimate the costs incurred with the interim on-site storage of the fuel pending shipment by the DOE to an off-site disposal facility. The scenarios selected are representative of alternatives available to the owner and are defined as follows: DECON: Units 1and2 are currently expected to cease operations in November 2024 and August 2025, respectively. Spent fuel remaining in the spent fuel storage pools after a minimum cooling period of 10 years is transferred to the ISFSI for interim storage. This scenario assumes that decommissioning activities at the two units begin soon after unit shutdown and are sequenced and integrated so as to minimize the total duration of the physical dismantling processes. Any residual spent fuel is transferred to the ISFSI so as to facilitate decontamination and dismantling activities within the fuel handing buildings. Decommissioning of the station and subsequent demolition of the structures is completed by 2039. Spent fuel storage operations continue at the site until the transfer of the fuel to the DOE is complete, assumed to be in the year 2061. The ISFSI is then decommissioned and dismantled. SAFSTOR: Units 1 and 2 are currently expected to cease operations in November 2024 and August 2025, respectively. The units are placed into safe-storage in this scenario. The start of field decommissioning is deferred to the end of the fuel storage period. Spent fuel remaining in the spent fuel storage pools after a minimum cooling period of 10 years is transferred to the ISFSI for interim storage. As with the DE CON scenario, decommissioning activities at the two units are sequenced and integrated so as to minimize the total duration of the physical dismantling processes. Spent fuel storage operations continue at the site until the transfer of the fuel to the DOE is complete, assumed to be in the year 2061. ;' The following sections describe the basic activities associated with each base case alternative (DECON and SAFSTOR). Although detailed procedures for each activity identified are not provided, and the actual sequence of work may vary, the activity descriptions provide a basis not only for estimating but also for the expected scope of work, i.e., engineering and planning at the time of decommissioning. TLG Services, Inc. 2-AtchA-35 Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document POl-1719-001, Rev. 0 Section 2, Page 2 of 13 The conceptual approach that the NRC has described in its regulations divides decommissioning into three phases. The initial phase commences with the effective date of permanent cess*ation of operations and involves the transition of both plant and licensee from reactor operations (i.e., power production) to facility de-activation and closure. During the first phase, notification is to be provided to the NRC certifying the permanent cessation of operations and the removal of fuel from the reactor vessel. The licensee is then prohibited from reactor operation. The second phase encompasses activities during the storage period or during major decommissioning activities, or a combination of the two. The third phase pertains to the activities involved in license termination. The decommissioning estimates developed for Diablo Canyon are also divided into phases or periods; however, demarcation of the phases is based upon major milestones within the project or significant changes in the projected expenditures. 2.1 DECON The DECON alternative, as defined by the NRC, is "the alternative in which the equipment, structures, and portions of a facility and site containing radioactive contaminants are removed or decontaminated to a level that permits the property to be released for unrestricted use shortly after cessation of operations." This study does not address the cost to dispose of the spent fuel residing at the site; such costs are funded through a surcharge on electrical generation; However, the study does estimate the costs incurred with the interim on-site storage of the fuel pending shipment by the DOE to an off-site disposal facility. 2.1.1 Period 1 -Preparations In anticipation of the cessation of plant operations, detailed preparations are undertaken to provide a smooth transition from plant operations to site decommissioning. Through implementation of a staffing transition plan, the organization required to manage the intended decommissioning activities is assembled from available plant staff and outside resources. Preparations include the planning for permanent defueling of the reactor, revision of technical specifications applicable to the operating conditions and requirements, a characterization of the facility and major components, and the development of the PSDAR. TLG Services, Inc. 2-AtchA-36 Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis Engineering and Planning Document POl-1719-001, Rev. 0 Section 2, Page 3 of 13 The PSDAR, required prior to or within two years of permanent cessation of operations, provides a description of the licensee's planned decommissioning activities, a timetable, and the associated financial requirements of the intended decommissioning program. Upon receipt of the PSDAR, the NRC will make the document available to the public for comment in a local hearing to be held in the vicinity of the reactor site. Ninety days following submittal and NRC receipt of the PSDAR, the licensee may begin to perform major decommissioning activities under modified 10 CFR §50.59 procedure, i.e., without specific NRC approval. Major activities are defined as any activity that results in permanent removal of major radioactive components, permanently modifies the structure of the containment, or results in dismantling components (for shipment) containing GTCC, as defined by 10 CFR §61. Major components are further defined as comprising the reactor vessel and internals, large bore reactor coolant system piping, and other large components that are radioactive. The NRC includes the following additional criteria for use of the §50.59 process in decommissioning. The proposed activity must not: o foreclose release of the site for possible unrestricted use, o significantly increase decommissioning costs, o cause any significant environmental impact, or o violate the terms of the licensee's existing license Existing operational technical specifications are reviewed and modified to reflect plant conditions and the safety concerns associated with permanent cessation of operations. The environmental impact associated with the planned decommissioning activities is Typically, a licensee will not be allowed to proceed if the consequences of a particular decommissioning activity are greater than that bounded by previously evaluated environmental assessments or impact statements. In this instance, the licensee would have to submit a license amendment for the specific activity and update the environmental report. The decommissioning program outlined in the PSDAR will be designed to accomplish the required tasks within the ALARA guidelines (as defined in 10 CFR §20) for protection of personnel from exposure to radiation hazards. It will also address the continued protection of the health and safety of the public and the environment during the dismantling activity. Consequently, with the development of the PSDAR, activity specifications, cost-benefit and safety analyses, work packages, and TLG Services, Inc. 2-AtchA-37 Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document POl-1719-001, Rev. 0 Section 2, Page 4 of 13 procedures, would be assembled to support the proposed decontamination and dismantling activities. Site Preparations Following final plant shutdown, and in preparation for actual decommissioning activities, the following activities are initiated: o Characterization of the site and surrounding environs. This includes radiation surveys of work areas, major components (including the reactor vessel and internals), internal piping, and biological shield cores. o Isolation of the spent fuel storage pool and fuel handling systems. This allows decommissioning operations to be performed in plant areas to the greatest extent, with minimum impact to the project schedule. The fuel will be transferred from the spent fuel pools once it decays to the point that it. meets the heat load criteria of the spent fuel casks. It is therefore assumed that the fuel pools will remain operational for a minimum of ten years following the cessation of plant operations. o Specification of transport and disposal requirements for activated materials and/or hazardous materials, including shielding and waste stabilization. o Development of procedures for occupational exposure control, control and release of liquid and gaseous effluent, processing of radwaste (including dry-active waste, resins, filter media, metallic and metallic components generated in decommissioning), site security and emergency programs, arid industrial safety. 2.1.2 Period 2 -Decommissioning Operations This period includes the physical decommissioning activities associated with the removal and disposal of contaminated and activated components and structures, including the successful release of the site from the 10 CFR §50 operating license, exclusive of the ISFSI. Significant decommissioning activities in this phase include: o Construction of temporary facilities and/or modification of existing facilities to support dismantling activities. For example, this will include a centralized processing area to facilitate equipment removal and component preparations for off-site disposal. TLG Services, Inc. 2-AtchA-38 Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document POl-1719-001, Rev. 0 Section 2, Page 5 of 13 o Reconfiguration and modification of site structures and facilities as needed to support decommissioning operations. This will include the upgrading of roads (on-and off-site) to facilitate hauling and transport. Modifications will be required to the containment structure to facilitate access of large/heavy equipment. Modifications will also be required to the refueling area of the reactor building to support the segmentation of the reactor vessel internals and component extraction. o Transfer of the spent fuel from the storage pool to the ISFSI pad for interim storage. o 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. o Procurement (lease or purchase) of shipping canisters, cask liners, and industrial packages. o Decontamination of components and piping systems as required to control (minimize) worker exposure. o Removal of piping and components no longer to support decommissioning operations. o Removal of control rod drive housings and the head service structure from reactor vessel head. Segmentation of the vessel closure head. o Removal and segmentation of the upper internals assemblies. Segmentation will maximize the loading of the shielded transport casks, i.e., by weight and activity. The operations are conducted under water using remotely operated tooling and contamination .controls. o Disassembly and segmentation of the remaining reactor internals, including the core former and lower core support assembly. Some material is expected to exceed Class C disposal requirements. As such, the segments will be packaged in modified fuel storage canisters for geologic disposal. o Segmentation of the reactor vessel. A shielded platform is installed for segmentation as cutting operations are performed in-air using remotely operated equipment within a contamination control envelope. The water level is maintained just below the cut to minimize the working area dose rates. Segments are transferred in-air to containers that are stored under water, for example, in an isolated area of the refueling canal. o Removal of the activated portions of the concrete biological shield and accessible contaminated concrete surfaces. If dictated by the steam TLG Services, Inc. 2-AtchA-39 Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document POl-1719-001, Rev. 0 Section 2, Page 6 of 13 generator and pressurizer removal scenarios, those portions of the associated cubicles necessary for access and component extraction are removed. o Removal of the steam generators and pressurizer for controlled disposal. The generators will be moved to an on-site processing center, the steam domes removed and segmented for transportation and disposal. The lower shell and tube bundle will be packaged as a piece container for direct disposal. These components can serve as their own disposal containers provided that all penetrations are properly sealed and steel shielding added, as necessary, to those external areas of the package to meet transportation limits and regulations. o Expansion of the ISFSI .and transfer of the spent fuel from the storage pools to the DOE and ISFSI pad for interim storage. Spent fuel storage operations continue throughout the active decommissioning period. Fuel transfer to the DOE is expected to begin in 2035 and to be completed by the end of the year 2061. At least two years prior to the anticipated date of license termination, an LTP is required. Submitted as a supplement to the Final Safety Analysis Report (FSAR) or its equivalent, the plan must include: a site characterization, description of the remaining dismantling activities, plans for site remediation, procedures for the final radiation survey, designation of the end use of the site, an updated cost estimate to complete the decommissioning, and any associated environmental concerns. The NRC will notice the receipt of the plan, make the plan available for public comment, and schedule a local hearing. LTP approval will be subject to any conditions and limitations as deemed appropriate by the Commission. The licensee may then commence with the final remediation of site facilities and services, including: o Removal of remaining plant systems and associated components as they become nonessential to the decommissioning program or worker health and safety (e.g., waste collection and treatment systems, electrical power and ventilation systems). o Removal of the steel liners from refueling canal, disposing of the activated and contaminated sections as radioactive waste. Removal of activated/ contaminated concrete (all concrete inside the containment liner). o Surveys of the decontaminated areas of the containment structure. TLG Services, Inc. 2-AtchA-40 Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document POl-1719-001, Rev. 0 Section 2, Page 7 of 13 o Remediation and removal of the contaminated equipment and material from the auxiliary building, fuel handling buildings, and any other contaminated facility. Radiation and contamination controls will be utilized until residual levels indicate that the structures and equipment can be released for unrestricted access and conventional demolition. This activity may necessitate the dismantling and disposition of most of the systems and components (both clean and contaminated) located within these buildings. This activity facilitates surface decontamination and subsequent verification surveys required prior to obtaining release for demolition. o Routing of material removed in the decontamination and dismantling to a central processing area. Contaminated material is characterized and segregated for packaging and disposal at a low-level radioactive waste disposal facility. Material that meets the US NRC release criteria, but may contain residual radioactivity is classified as decommissioned material and will be transported, and disposed of at an out-of-state waste disposal facility. Incorporated into the LTP is the Final Survey Plan. This plan identifies the radiological surveys to be performed once the decontamination activities are completed and is developed using the guidance provided in the "Multi-Agency Radiation Survey and Site Investigation Manual (MARSSIM)."[22] This document incorporates the statistical approaches to survey design and data interpretation used by the EPA. It also identifies commercially available instrumentation and procedures for conducting radiological surveys. Use of this guidance ensures that the surveys are conducted in a manner that provides a high degree of confidence that applicable NRC criteria are satisfied. Once the survey is complete, the results are provided to the NRC in a format that can be verified. The NRC then reviews and evaluates the information, performs an independent confirmation of radiological site conditions, and makes a determination on the requested change to the operating licenses (that would release the property, exclusive of the ISFSI, for unrestricted use). The NRC terminates the operating licenses if it determines that site remediation has been performed in accordance with the LTP, and that the terminal radiation survey and associated documentation demonstrate that the facility is suitable for release. TLG Services, Inc. 2-AtchA-41 Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis 2.1.3 Period 3 -Site Restoration Document POl-1719-001, Rev. 0 Section 2, Page 8 of 13 Following completion of decommissioning operations, site restoration activities can begin. Efficient removal of the contaminated materials and verification that residual radionuclide concentrations are below the NRC limits will result in substantial damage to many of t11;e structures. Although performed in a controlled, safe manner, blasting, coring, drilling, scarification (surface removal), and the other decontamination activities will substantially degrade power block structures including the . reactor and auxiliary buildings. Under certain circumstances, verifying that subsurface radionuclide concentrations meet NRC site release requirements will require removal of grade slabs and lower floors, potentially weakening footings and structural supports. This removal activity will be necessary for those facilities and plant areas where historical records indicate the potential for radionuclides having been present in the soil, where system failures have been recorded, or where it is required to confirm that subsurface process and drain lines were not breached over the operating life of the station. It is not currently anticipated that these structures would be repaired and preserved after the radiological contamination is removed. The cost to dismantle site structures with a work force already mobilized on site is more efficient than if the process is deferred. This cost study presumes that non-essential structures and site facilities are dismantled as a continuation of the decommissioning activity. Foundations and exterior walls are removed to a nominal depth of three feet below grade. The three-foot depth allows for the placement of gravel for drainage, as well as topsoil, so that vegetation can be established for erosion control. Non-contaminated concrete rubble produced by demolition activities is processed on-site to remove reinforcing steel and miscellaneous embedments. The processed rubble is then transported and disposed of at an out-of-state waste disposal facility. The removed rebar, plus non-contaminated steel, copper, and other metals are transported to an out-of-state scrap dealer. Below grade voids are backfilled with clean imported fill to provide a reasonably uniform site contour (i.e., no large localized on site depressions). Site areas affected by the dismantling activities are restored and the plant area graded as required to prevent ponding and inhibit the refloating of subsurface materials. TLG Services, Inc. 2-AtchA-42 Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis 2.1.4 ISFSI Operations and Decommissioning Document POl-1719-001, Rev. 0 Section 2, Page 9 of 13 For purposes only of this estimate, transfer of spent fuel to a DOE repository or interim facility is assumed to be exclusively from the ISFSI once the fuel pools have been emptied and the fuel handling buildings released for decommissioning. If this assumption is incorrect, it is assumed that DOE will have liability for costs incurred to transfer the fuel to DOE-supplied containers and to dispose of existing containers. The ISFSI will continue to operate under a separate and independent license (10 CFR §72) following the termination of the §50 operating licenses. Completion of the decommissioning process is dependent upon the DOE's ability to remove spent fuel from the site in a manner timely enough to complete license termination activi_ties within 60 years of unit shut down. This analysis assumes that the last of the spent fuel will be removed from the site within approximately 36 years of the station shutdown or year 2061. At the conclusion of the spent fuel transfer process, the ISFSI will be decommissioned. The Commission will terminate the §72 license when it determines that the remediation of the ISFSI has been performed in accordance with an ISFSI license termination plan and that the final radiation survey and associated documentation demonstrate that the facility is suitable for release. Once the requirements are satisfied, the NRC can terminate the license for the ISFSI. The ISFSI is based upon the currently licensed facility that uses purpose canisters and concrete overpacks for pad storage. For purposes of this cost analysis, it is assumed that once the inner canisters containing the spent fuel assemblies have been removed, any required decontamination performed on the storage overpack (some minor neutron activation is assumed), and the license for the facility terminated, the concrete overpacks can be dismantled using conventional techniques for the demolition of reinforced concrete. Demolished concrete (decommissioned material) is packaged and transported to an out-of-state waste disposal facility. The concrete storage pad is then removed and the area regraded. 2.2 SAFSTOR The NRC defines SAFSTOR as "the alternative in which the nuclear facility is placed and maintained in a condition that allows the nuclear facility to be safely stored and subsequently decontaminated (deferred decontamination) to levels TLG Services, Inc. 2-AtchA-43 Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document POl-1719-001, Rev. 0 Section 2, Page 10 of 13 that permit release for unrestricted use." The facility is left intact (during the dormancy period), with structures maintained in a sound condition. Systems that are not required to support the spent fuel pool or site surveillance and security are drained, de-energized, and secured. Minimal cleaning/removal of loose contamination and/or fixation and sealing of remaining contamination are performed. Access to contaminated areas is secured to provide controlled access for inspection and maintenance. The engineering and planning requirements for physical dismantling activities are similar to those for the DECON alternative. Site preparations for physical dismantling are also similar to those for the DECON alternative, with the exception of certain activities, such as spent fuel pool operations and maintenance, and chemical decontamination of primary systems. Decommissioning operations are assumed to begin once the transfer of the spent fuel to the DOE is completed (in year 2062). 2.2.1 Period 1 -Preparations Preparations for long-term storage include the planning for permanent defueling of the reactor, revision of technical specifications appropriate to the operating conditions and requirements, a characterization of the facility and major components, and the development of the PSDAR. The process of placing the plant in safe-storage includes, but is not limited to, the following activities: o Isolation of the spent fuel storage services and fuel handling systems so that safe-storage operations may commence on the balance of the plant. This activity may be carried out by plant personnel in accordance with existing operating technical specifications. Activities are scheduled around the fuel handling systems to the greatest extent possible. o Transferring the spent fuel from the storage pools to the ISFSI for interim storage, following the minimum required cooling period in the spent fuel pools. o Draining and de-energizing of the non-contaminated systems not required to support continued site operations or maintenance. o Disposing of contaminated filter elements and resin beds not required for processing wastes from layup activities for future operations. TLG Services, Inc. 2-AtchA-44 Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document POl-1719-001, Rev. 0 Section 2, Page 11of13 o Draining of the reactor vessel, .with the internals left in place and the vessel head secured. o Draining and de-energizing non-essential, contaminated systems with decontamination as required for future maintenance and inspection. o Preparing lighting and alarm systems whose continued use is required; de-energizing portions of fire protection, electric power, and HVAC systems whose continued use is not required. o Cleaning of the loose surface contamination from building access pathways. o Performing an interim radiation survey of plant, posting warmng signs where appropriate. o Erecting physical barriers and/or securing all access to radioactive or contaminated areas, except as required for inspection and maintenance. o Installing security and surveillance monitoring equipment and relocating security fence around secured structures, as required. 2.2.2 Period 2 -Dormancy The second phase identified by the NRC in its rule addresses licensed activities during a storage period and is applicable to the dormancy phases of the deferred decommissioning alternatives. Dormancy activities include a 24-hour security force, preventive and corrective maintenance on security systems, area lighting, general building maintenance, heating and ventilation of buildings, routine radiological inspections of contaminated structures, maintenance of structural integrity, and a site environmental and radiation monitoring program. Resident maintenance personnel perform equipment maintenance, inspection activities, routine services to maintain safe conditions, adequate lighting, heating, and ventilation, and periodic preventive maintenance on essential site services. An environmental surveillance program is carried out during the dormancy period to ensure that releases of radioactive material to the environment are prevented or detected and controlled. Appropriate emergency procedures are established and initiated for potential releases that exceed prescribed limits. The environmental surveillance program constitutes an abbreviated version of the program in effect during normal plant operations. TLG Services, Inc. 2-AtchA-45 Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document POl-1719-001, Rev. 0 Section 2, Page 12 of 13 Security during the dormancy period _is conducted primarily to prevent unauthorized entry and to protect the public from the consequences of its own actions. The security fence, sensors, alarms, and other surveillance equipment provide security. Fire and radiation alarms are also monitored and maintained. Consistent with the DECON scenario, the spent fuel storage pools are emptied within approximately 10 years of the cessation of operations. The transfer of the spent fuel to the DOE takes place during the dormancy period until completed in 2061. Once emptied, the ISFSI is decommissioned along with the power block structures in Period 4. 2.2.3 Periods 3 and 4 -Delayed Decommissioning Prior to the commencement of decommissioning operations, preparations are undertaken to reactivate site services and prepare for decommissioning. Preparations include engineering and planning, a detailed site characterization, and the assembly of a decommissioning management organization. Final planning for activities and the writing of activity specifications and detailed procedures are also initiated at this time. Much of the work in developing a termination plan is relevant to the development of the detailed engineering plans and procedures. The activities associated with this phase and the follow-on decontamination and dismantling processes are detailed in Sections 2.1.1 and 2.1.2. The primary difference between the sequences anticipated for the DE CON and this deferred scenario is the absence, in the latter, of any constraint on the availability of the fuel storage facilities for decommissioning. Variations in the length of the dormancy period are expected to have little effect upon the quantities of radioactive wastes generated from system and structure removal operations. Given the levels of radioactivity and spectrum of radionuclides expected from forty years of plant operation, no plant process system identified as being contaminated upon final shutdown will become releasable due to the decay period alone, i.e., there is no significant reduction in the waste generated from the decommissioning activities. The delay in decommissioning also yields lower working area radiation levels. As such, the estimate for this delayed scenario incorporates reduced ALARA controls for the SAFSTOR's lower occupational exposure potential. TLG Services, Inc. 2-AtchA-46 Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document POl-1719-001, Rev. 0 Section 2, Page 13 of 13 Although the initial radiation levels due to 60Co will decrease during the dormancy period, the internal components of the reactor vessel will still exhibit sufficiently high radiation dose rates to require remote sectioning under water due to the presence of long-lived radionuclides such as 94Nb, 59Ni, and 63Ni. Therefore, the dismantling procedures described for the DE CON alternative would still be employed during this scenario. Portions of the biological shield will still be radioactive due to the presence of activated trace elements with longer half-lives (152Eu and 154Eu). Decontamination will require controlled removal and disposal. It is assumed that radioactive corrosion products on inner surfaces of piping and components will not have decayed to levels that will permit unrestricted use or allow conventional removal. These systems and components will be surveyed as they are removed and disposed of in accordance with the existing radioactive release criteria. 2.2.4 Period 5 -Site Restoration Following completion of decommissioning operations, site-restoration activities begin. Dismantling, as a continuation of the decommissioning process is a cost-effective option, as described in Section 2.1.3. The basis for the dismantling cost is consistent with that described for DECON, presuming the removal of structures and site facilities to a nominal depth of three feet below grade and the limited restoration of the site. TLG Services, Inc. 2-AtchA-47 Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis ' 3. COST ESTIMATES Document POl-1719-001, Rev. 0 Section 3, Page 1 of 32 The cost estimates prepared for decommissioning Diablo Canyon consider the unique features of the site, including the nuclear steam supply system, electric power generating systems, structures, and supporting facilities. The basis of the estimates, including the sources of information relied upon, the estimating methodology employed, site-specific considerations, and other pertinent assumptions, is described in this section. 3.1 BASIS OF ESTIMATES The estimates were developed using site-specific, technical information extracted from the 2012 and previous estimates. This information was reviewed for the current analysis and updated as deemed appropriate. The site-specific considerations and assumptions used in the previous evaluation were also revisited. Modifications were incorporated where new information was available or experience from ongoing decommissioning programs provided viable alternatives or improved processes. The following are the significant changes associated with the plant configuration or radiological status that have been incorporated into the current estimate. o Removing and disposing of materials associated with recently installed security measures, particularly physical barriers, were incorporated into the estimate. The following are the significant changes associated with other aspects of the current estimate. o Consistent with PG&E's interpretation of the California governor's executive order on the moratorium on disposing of decommissioned materials in the State of California[23l, costs to account for transporting and disposing of decommissioned materials to an out-of-state disposal facility have been added. o PG&E's experience segmenting the Humboldt Bay Unit 3 reactor and industry experience segmenting the Zion Nuclear Station reactor vessels have been incorporated into the estimate. o Permitting costs associated with constructing a Greater-Than-Class-C storage pad, as well as other expected permitting expenses and environmental fees have been incorporated into the estimate. TLG Services, Inc. 2-AtchA-48 Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document POl-1719-001, Rev. 0 Section 3, Page 2 of 32 0 Maintaining security staff levels near operating staff levels while spent fuel is stored in the spent fuel pools was re-affirmed. The cost associated with maintaining these staff levels has been incorporated into the estimate.
  • Cost impact of a delay in DOE's start of spent fuel pickup from commercial generators from 2024 to 2028.
  • Complying with expected re-licensing requirements after the ISFSI license is renewed. 3.2 METHODOLOGY The methodology used to develop the estimates follows the basic approach originally presented in the AIF/NESP-036 study report, "Guidelines for Producing Commercial Nuclear Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Estimates,"[24] and the DOE "Decommissioning Handbook."[25] These documents present a unit factor method for. estimating decommissioning activity costs, which simplifies the estimating calculations. Unit factors for concrete removal ($/cubic yard), steel removal ($/ton), and cutting costs ($/inch) are developed using local labor rates. The activity-dependent costs are estimated with the item quantities (cubic yards and tons), developed from plant drawings and inventory documents. Removal rates and material costs for the conventional disposition of components and structures rely upon information available in the industry publication, "Building Construction Cost Data," published by R.S. Means. [261 The unit factor method provides a demonstrable basis for establishing reliable cost estimates. The detail provided in the unit factors, including activity duration, labor costs (by craft), and equipment and consumable costs, ensures that essential elements have not been omitted. Appendix A presents the detailed development of a typical unit factor. Appendix B provides the values contained within one set of factors developed for this analysis .. This analysis reflects lessons learned from TLG's involvement in the Shippingport Station Decommissioning Project, completed in 1989, as well as the decommissioning of the Cintichem reactor, hot cells, and associated facilities,
  • completed in 1997. In addition, the planning and experience associated with the Pathfinder, Shoreham, Rancho Seco, Trojan, Yankee Rowe, Big Rock Point, Maine Yankee, Humboldt Bay-3, Connecticut Yankee, San Onofre, Vermont Yankee, and Zion nuclear units have provided additional insight into the process, the regulatory aspects, and technical challenges of decommissioning commercial nuclear units. TLG Services, Inc. 2-AtchA-49 Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis Work Difficulty Factors Document POl-1719-001, Rev. 0 Section 3, Page 3 of 32 TLG has historically applied work difficulty adjustment factors (WDFs) to account for the inefficiencies in working in a power plant environment. WDFs are assigned to each unique set of unit factors, commensurate with the inefficiencies associated with working in confined, hazardous environments. The ranges used for the WDFs are as follows: o Access Factor o Respiratory Protection Factor (l) Radiation/ALARA Factor o Protective Clothing Factor o Work Break Factor 10% to 20% 10% to 50% 10% to 37% 10% to 30% 8.33% The factors and their associated range of values were developed in conjunction with the AIF/NESP-036 study. The application of the factors is discussed in m?re detail in that publication. Scheduling Program Durations The unit factors, adjusted by the WDFs as described above, are applied against the inventory of materials to be removed in the radiological controlled areas. The resulting labor-hours, or crew-hours, are used in the development of the decommissioning program schedule, using resource loading and event sequencing considerations. The scheduling of conventional removal and . dismantling activities is based upon productivity information available from the "Building Construction Cost Data" publication. In the DECON alternative, dismantling of the fuel handing systems and decontamination of the spent fuel pool is also dependent upon the timetable for the transfer of the spent fuel assemblies from the pool to the ISFSI. An activity duration critical path is used to determine the total decommissioning program schedule. The schedule is relied upon in calculating the carrying costs, which include program management, administration, field engineering, equipment rental, and support services such as quality control and security. This systematic approach for assembling decommissioning estimates ensures a high degree of confidence in the reliability of the resulting costs. TLG Services, Inc. 2-AtchA-50 Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document POl-1719-001, Rev. 0 Section 3, Page 4 of 32 3.3 IMPACT OF DECOMMISSIONING MULTIPLE REACTOR UNITS In estimating the near simultaneous decommissioning of two co-located reactor unit's there can be opportunities to achieve economies of scale, by sharing costs between units, and coordinating the sequence of work activities. There will also be schedule constraints, particularly where there are requirements for specialty equipment and staff, or practical limitations on when final status surveys can take place. For purposes of the estimate, Units 1 and 2 are assumed to be essentially identical. Common facilities have been assigned to Unit 2. A summary of the principal impacts are listed below. (I} The sequence of work generally follows the principal that the work is done at Unit 1 first, followed by similar work at Unit 2. This permits the experience gained at Unit 1 to be applied by the workforce at the second unit. It should be noted however, that the estimate generally does not consider productivity improvements at the second unit, since there is little documented experience with decommissioning two units simultaneously. The work associated with developing activity specifications and procedures can be considered essentially identical between the two units, therefore the second unit costs are assumed to be a fraction of the first 43%). o Segmenting the reactor vessel and internals will require the use of special equipment. Thermal cutting equipment and equipment spare parts will be shared between the two reactors. The decommissioning project will be scheduled such that Unit 2's reactor internals and vessel are segmented in sequence with the activities at Unit 1. o Some program management and support costs, particularly costs associated with the more senior positions, can be avoided with two reactors undergoing decommissioning simultaneously. As a result, the estimate is based on a "lead unit that includes these senior positions, and a "second" unit that excludes these positions. The designation as lead is based on the unit undertaking the most complex tasks (for instance vessel segmentation) or performing tasks for the first time. o The final radiological survey schedule is also affected by a two-unit decommissioning schedule. It would be considered impractical to try to complete the final status survey of Unit 1, while Unit 2 still has ongoing radiological remediation work and waste handling in process. As such, the transfer of the spent fuel from the storage pools and subsequent decontamination of the spent fuel pool areas is coordinated so as to synchronize the final status survey for the station. c The final demolition of buildings at Units 1and2 are considered to take place concurrently. TLG Services, Inc. 2-AtchA-51 Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document POl-1719-001, Rev. 0 Section 3, Page 5 of o Unit 1, as the first unit to enter decommissioning, incurs the majority of site characterization costs. o Shared systems and common structures are generally assigned to Unit 2. o Station costs such as ISFSI operating costs, emergency response fees, regulatory agency fees, and insurance are generally allocated on an equal basis between the two units. 3.4 FINANCIAL COMPONENTS OF THE COST MODEL TLG's proprietary decommissioning cost model, DECCER, produces a number of distinct cost elements. These direct expenditures, however, do not comprise the total cost to accomplish the project goal, i.e., license termination, spent fuel management and site restoration. 3.4.1 Contingency The activity-and period-dependent costs are combined to develop the total dycommissioning cost. A contingency is then applied on a line-item basis, using one or more of the contingency types listed in the AIF/NESP-036 study. "Contingencies" are defined in the American Association of Cost Engineers "Project and Cost_ Engineers' Handbook"[27J as "specific provision for unforeseeable elements of cost within the defined project scope; particularly important where previous experience relating estimates and actual costs has shown that unforeseeable events which will increase costs are likely to occur." The cost elements in this analysis are based upon ideal conditions and maximum efficiency; therefore, consistent with industry practice, contingency is included. In the AIF/NESP-036 study, the types of unforeseeable events that are likely to occur in decommissioning are discussed and guidelines are provided for percentage contingency in each category. It should be noted that contingency, as used in this analysis, includes a contingency target based on a preliminary technical position [281 to reflect the California Public Utilities Commission's desire for owners to conservatively establish an appropriate contingency factor for inclusion in the decommissioning revenue requirements. Contingency Based on AIF Guidelines As stated in the AIF study contingency funds are an integral part of the total cost to complete the decommissioning process. Exclusion of this component puts at risk a successful completion of the intended tasks and, potentially, subsequent related activities. For this study, TLG examined TLG Services, Inc. 2-AtchA-52 Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document POl-1719-001, Rev. 0 Section 3, Page 6 of 32 the maJor activity-related problems (decontamination, segmentation, equipment handling, packaging, transport, and waste disposal) that necessitate a contingency. Individual activity contingencies i*anged from 10% to 50%, depending on the degree of difficulty judged to be appropriate from TLG's actual decommissioning experience. The contingency values used in this study are as follows: o Decontamination 50% o Contaminated Component Removal 25% o Contaminated Component Packaging 10% e Contaminated Component Transport 15% o Low-Level Radioactive Waste Disposal 25% o Reactor Segmentation* 35% o NSSS Component Removal 25% o Reactor Waste Packaging 25% o Reactor Waste Transport 25% o Reactor Vessel Component Disposal 50% o GTCC Disposal 15% o Non-Radioactive Component Removal 15% o Heavy Equipment and Tooling 15% o Supplies 25% e Engineering 15% e Energy 15% a Characterization and Termination Surveys 30% o Construction 15% o Taxes and NRC Fees 10% o Insurance 10% '-o Staffing 15% o Breakwater Removal 25% o ISFSI Decommissioning (license termination) 25% o Spent Fuel Storage (Dry) Systems 15% o Spent Fuel Transfer Costs 15% o GTCC Pad Permitting 15% o Environmental Permits and Fees 15% o Decommissioned Materials (Transport and Disposal) 15%
  • Reactor Segmentation Contingency has been reduced from AIF Guidelines level (75%) to 35% since substantial industry experience (and corresponding increased cost) has been incorporated into the current estimate. TLG Services, Inc. 2-AtchA-53 Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document POl-J.719-001, Rev. 0 Section 3, Page 7 of 32 The contingency values are applied to the appropriate components of the estimates on a line item basis. The composite contingency value (excluding additional contingency described in the Preliminary Technical Position) for the DECON alternative is approximately 17.4%. The value for the SAFSTOR alternative is approximately 17.0%. Appendix E, the ISFSI decommissioning calculation, uses a flat 25% contingency added at the end of the calculation. Contingency Based on Preliminary Technical Position In addition to the contingency based on the AIF guidelines, additional contingency was added to reflect the California Public Utilities Commission desire for owners to conservatively establish an appropriate contingency factor for inclusion in the decommissioning revenue requirements. Based on the previously referenced technical position, additional contingency was added to reflect an overall project contingency of 25% (both scenarios). This contingency was incorporated on a line item basis, with each line item receiving a pro-rated share of the increase. The nominal increase in contingency to achieve an overall contingency rate of 25% is 40%. 3.4.2 Financial Risk In addition to the routine uncertainties addressed by contingency, another cost element that is sometimes necessary to consider when bounding decommissioning costs relates to uncertainty, or risk. Examples can include changes in work scope, pricing, job performance, and other variations that could conceivably, but not necessarily, occur. Consideration is sometimes necessary to generate a level of confidence in the estimate, within a range of probabilities. TLG considers these types of costs under the broad term "financial risk." Included within the category of financial risk are: o Transition activities and costs: ancillary expenses associated with eliminating 50% to 80% of the site labor force shortly after the cessation of plant operations, added cost for worker separation packages throughout the decommissioning program, national or company-mandated retraining, and retention incentives for key personnel. Q Delays in approval of the decommissioning plan due to intervention, public participation in local community meetings, legal challenges, and national and local hearings. TLG Services, Inc. 2-AtchA-54 Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis DocumentPOl-1719-001, Rev. 0 Section 3, Page 8 of 32 a Changes in the project work scope from the baseline estimate, involving the discovery of unexpected levels of contaminants, contamination in places not previously expected, contaminated soil previously undiscovered (either radioactive or hazardous material contamination), variations in plant inventory or configuration not indicated by the as-built drawings. o Regulatory changes, for example, affecting worker health and safety, site release criteria, waste transportation, and disposal. I I
  • Policy decisions altering national commitments in the ability to I accommodate certain waste forms for disposition, or in the timetable for such, or the start and rate of acceptance of spent fuel by the DOE.
  • Pricing changes for basic inputs such as labor, energy, materials, and waste disposal. This cost study does not add any additional costs to the estimate for financial risk, since there is'insufficient historical data from which to project future liabilities. Consequently, the areas of uncertainty or risk are revisited periodically and addressed through repeated revisions or updates of the base estimates. 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. 3.5.1 Spent Fuel Management The cost to dispose the spent fuel generated from plant operations is not reflected within the estimates to decommission Diablo Canyon site. Ultimate disposition of the spent fuel is within the province of the DOE's Waste Management System, as defined by the Nuclear Waste Policy Act. As such, the disposal cost is financed by a surcharge paid into the DOE's waste fund during operations. On November 19, 2013, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit ordered the Secretary of the Department of Energy to suspend collecting annual fees for nuclear waste disposal from nuclear power plant operators until the DOE has cond.ucted a legally adequate fee assessment. Prior to this suspension, the disposal cost was financed by a 1 mill/kWhr surcharge paid*into the DOE's waste fund during operations. TLG Services, Inc. 2-AtchA-55 Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document POl-1719-001, Rev. 0 Section 3, Page 9 of 32 The total inventory of assemblies that will require handling during decommissioning is based upon the following assumptions. The DOE's generator allocation/receipt schedules are based upon the oldest fuel receiving the highest priority. For purposes of this analysis, acceptance of Diablo Canyon spent fuel by the DOE is expected to be complete by 2061 to permit license termination within approximately 36 years of station shut down. The first assemblies removed from the Diablo Canyon site are projected to be in year 2035. The estimates incorporate a minimum cooling period of approximately 10 years for the spent fuel that resides in the storage pools when operations cease. The current Part. 72 ISFSI license does not allow dry cask storage of spent fuel with burnups above 62 GWD/metric ton. It is assumed that PG&E can amend the Part 72 license to store the higher burnup fuel, but that as a condition of the amendment it rwill require longer decay times (10 years) before storing the spent fuel in the casks. In both scenarios, any residual fuel remaining in the pool after the 10-year period is relocated to the ISFSI to await transfer to a DOE facility. Operation and maintenance costs for the spent fuel pool and the ISFSI are included within the estimates and address the cost for staffing the facility, as well as security, insurance, and licensing fees. The estimates include the costs to purchase, load, and transfer the multi-purpose spent fuel storage canisters (MPCs) from the pool to the ISFSI. Costs are also provided for transfer of the MPCs to the DOE from the ISFSI (although it is acknowledged that this may not occur and that the fuel in the MPCs may have to be repackaged at DOE expense). Canister Design A multi-purpose storage canister (HOLTEC HI-STORM lOOSA system), with a 32-fuel assemblies capacity, is assumed for future canister and overpack acquisitions. The overpack in use at Diablo Canyon is uniquely configured with additional support steel for seismic considerations. A unit cost of $1,230,000 is used for pricing the internal multi-purpose canister (MPC) and concrete overpack. Canister Loading and Transfer An average cost of $1,053,600 per canister is used for the labor and consumables to load/transport the spent fuel from the pools to the ISFSI pad, based upon Diablo Canyon operating experience. The same cost, $1.053 million per canister, is used to estimate the cost to transfer the fuel TLG Services, Inc. 2-AtchA-56

Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document POl-1719-001, Rev. 0 Section 3, Page 10 of 32 from the spent fuel pools to the DOE. For estimating purposes, 50% of the pool to DOE cost is used to estimate the cost to transfer the fuel from the ISFSI to the DOE. Operations and Maintenance Annual costs (excluding labor) of $1.58 million and $1.09 million are used for operation and maintenance of the spent fuel pools and the ISFSI, respectively. The ISFSI cost reflects additional costs associated with inspection and aging mitigation likely to be required as a result ,of the ISFSI license renewal. ISFSI and GTCC Pad and Decommissioning

  • At the . time of decommissioning it is expected that there will be 138 emptied concrete I steel HI-STORM 100 SA overpacks, and 8 similar GTCC emptied concrete I steel overpacks located on the ISFSI and GTCC pads, respectively. The nominal weight of each overpack is 135 tons, comprised of 45 tons of steel and 90 tons of concrete. From a perspective of complying with the US NRC release criteria, the estimate is based on seven overpacks per unit (quantity necessary to manage the final core offload) having some level of steel liner neutron-induced activation as a result of the long-term storage of the fuel, i.e., to levels exceeding release limits. The steel liners in these activated overpacks are assumed to be removed and disposed of as radioactive material. The remaining material, including the concrete pads and embedments up to a depth of three feet below grade are designated as decommissioned material. The cost to demolish this material, as well as package and transport it to an out-of-state waste disposal is included in the estimates. In accordance with the specific requirements of 10 CFR §72.30 for the ISFSI work scope, the cost estimate for decommissioning the ISFSI reflects: 1) the cost of an independent contractor performing the decommissioning activities; 2) an adequate contingency factor; and 3) the cost of meeting the criteria for unrestricted use. The decommissioning cost for the ISFSI is identified as a separate line item in the Unit 1and2 cost tables in Appendices C and D, and as stand-alone table in Appendix E. GTCC The dismantling of the reactor internals generates radioactive waste considered unsuitable for shallow land disposal (i.e., low-level radioactive waste with concentrations of radionuclides that exceed the limits TLG Services, Inc. 2-AtchA-57 Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document POl-1719-001, Rev. 0 Section 3, Page 11 of 32 established by the NRC for Class C radioactive waste (GTCC)). The Level Radioactive Waste Policy Amendments Act of 1985 assigned the federal government the responsibility for the disposal of this material. The Act also stated that the beneficiaries of the activities resulting in the generation of such radioactive waste bear all reasonable costs of disposing of such waste. Although there are strong arguments that GTCC waste is covered by the spent fuel contact with DOE and the fees being paid pursuant to that contract, DOE has taken the position that GTCC waste is not covered by that contract or its fees and that utilities, including PG&E, will have to pay an additional fee for the disposal of their GTCC waste. However, to date, the federal government has not identified a cost I for disposing of GTCC or a schedule for acceptance. As such, the GTCC radioactive waste has been packaged and disposed of as high-level waste, at a cost equivalent to that envisioned for the spent fuel. For purposes of this study, GTCC is packaged in a canister similar to those used to store spent fuel. The cost of the canister is estimated to be approximately 50% of the spent fuel canister due to design differences. Disposal costs are based upon a cost equivalent to that envisioned for the spent fuel. It is not anticipated that the DOE would accept this waste prior to completing the transfer of spent fuel. Therefore, until such time the DOE is ready to accept GTCC waste, it is reasonable to assume that this material would remain in storage with the spent fuel in the ISFSI at the Diablo Canyon site (for the DECON alternative). In the SAFSTOR scenario, the GTCC material is shipped directly to a DOE facility as it is generated since the fuel will have been removed from the site prior to the start of decommissioning and the ISFSI deactivated. The cost to dispose of GTCC material is based on the equivalent cost to dispose of spent fuel (weight basis). The details for estimating this value is provided in Section 5 of this analysis. 3.5.2 Reactor Vessel and Internal Components The reactor pressure vessel and internal components are segmented for disposal in shielded, reusable transportation casks. Segmentation is performed in the refueling canal, where a turntable and remote cutter are installed. The vessel is segmented in place, using a mast-mounted cutter supported off the lower head and directed from a shielded work platform installed overhead in the reactor cavity. Transportation cask specifications and transportation regulations dictate the segmentation and packaging methodology. TLG Services, Inc. 2-AtchA-58 Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document POl-1719-001, Rev. 0 Section 3, Page 12 of 32 Intact disposal of reactor vessel shells has been successfully demonstrated at several of the sites that have been decommissioned. Access to navigable waterways has allowed these large packages to be transported to the Barnwell disposal site with minimal overland travel. Intact disposal of the reactor vessel and internal components as a single package can provide savings in cost and worker exposure by eliminating the complex segmentation requirements, isolation of the GTCC material, and transport/storage of the resulting waste packages. Portland General Electric (PGE) was able to dispose of the Trojan reactor as an intact package (including the internals). However, its location on the Columbia River simplified the transportation analysis since: ' o the reactor package could be secured to the transport vehicle for the entire journey, i.e., the package was not lifted during transport, o there were no man-made or natural terrain features between the plant site and the disposal location that could produce a large drop, and o transport speeds were very low, limited by the overland transport vehicle and the river barge. As a member of the Northwest Compact, PGE had a site available for disposal of the package -the US Ecology facility in Washington State. The characteristics of this arid site proved favorable in demonstrating compliance with land disposal regulations. It is not known whether this option will be available when the Diablo Canyon plant ceases operation. Future viability of this option will depend upon the ultimate location of the disposal site, as well as the disposal site licensee's ability to accept highly radioactive packages and effectively isolate them from the environment. Consequently, the study assumes that the reactor vessel will require segmentation, as a bounding condition. 3.5.3 Primary System Components In the DECON scenario, the reactor coolant system components are assumed to be decontaminated using chemical agents prior to the start of dismantling operations. This type of decontamination can be expected to have a significant ALARA impact, since in this scenario the removal work is done within the first few years of shutdown. A decontamination factor (average reduction) of 10 is assumed for the process. Disposal of the decontamination solution effluent is included within the estimate as a TLG Semices, Inc. 2-AtchA-59 Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document.POl-1719-001, Rev. 0 Section 3, Page 13 of 32 "process liquid waste" charge. In the SAFSTOR scenarios, radionuclide decay is expected to provide the same benefit and, therefore, a chemical decontamination is not included. The following discussion deals with the removal and disposition of the steam generators, but the techniques involved are also applicable to other large components, such as heat exchangers, component coolers, and the pressurizer. The steam generators' size and weight, as well as their location within the reactor building, will ultimately determine the removal strategy. A trolley crane is set up for the removal of the generators. It can also be used to move portions of the steam generator cubicle walls and floor slabs from the reactor building to a location where they can be decontaminated and transported to the material handling area. Interferences within the work area, such as grating, piping, and other components are removed to create sufficient laydown space for processing these large components. The generators are rigged for removal, disconnected from the surrounding piping and supports, and maneuvered into the open area where they are lowered onto a dolly. Each generator is rotated into the horizontal position for extraction from the containment and placed onto a multi-wheeled vehicle for.transport to an on-site processing and storage area. The generators are disassembled on-site with the outer shell and lightly contaminated subassemblies designated for segmentation and direct disposal. The more highly contaminated tube sheet and tube bundle contained within the steam generator lower shell are packaged as a piece container for direct disposal. Disposal costs are based upon the displaced volume and weight of the units. Reactor coolant piping is cut from the reactor vessel once the water level in the vessel (used for personnel shielding during dismantling and cutting operations in and around the vessel) is dropped below the nozzle zone. The piping is boxed and transported by shielded van. The reactor coolant pumps and motors are lifted out intact, packaged, and transported for processing and/or disposal. TLG Services, Inc. 2-AtchA-60 Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis 3.5.4 Main Turbine and Condenser Document POl-1719-001, Rev. 0 Section 3, Page 14 of 32 The main turbine is dismantled using conventional maintenance procedures. The turbine rotors and shafts are removed to a laydown area. The lower turbine casings are removed from their anchors by controlled demolition. The main condensers are also disassembled and moved to a laydown area. Material is then surveyed and prepared for transportation to an off-site scrap facility. 3.5.5 Retired Components Both Diablo Canyon units have replaced their original sets of steam generators and reactor closure heads; these retired components are stored on site within a concrete protective structure. The cost for transportation and disposal of these items has been included in this analysis. 3.5.6 Transportation Methods Contaminated piping, components, and structural material other than the highly activated reactor vessel and internal components will qualify as LSA-I, II or III or Surface Contaminated Object, SCO-I or II, as described in Title 49. [29] The contaminated material will be packaged in Industrial Packages (IP-1, IP-2, or IP-3, as defined in subpart 173.411) for transport unless demonstrated to qualify as their own shipping containers. The reactor vessel and internal components are expected to be transported in accordance with 10 CFR Part 71, in Type B containers. It is conceivable that the reactor, due to its limited specific activity, could qualify as LSA II or III. However, the high radiation levels on the outer surface would require that additional shielding be incorporated within the packaging so as to attenuate the dose to levels acceptable for transport. Any fuel cladding failure that occurred during the lifetime of the plant is assumed to have released fission products at sufficiently low levels that the buildup of quantities of long-lived isotopes (e.g., l37Cs, 90Sr, or transuranics) has been prevented from reaching levels exceeding those that permit the major reactor components to be shipped under current transportation regulations and disposal requirements. Transport of the highly activated metal, produced in the segmentation of the reactor vessel and internal components, will be by shielded truck cask. Cask shipments may exceed 95,000 pounds, including vessel segment(s), supplementary shielding, cask tie-downs, and tractor-trailer. The maximum level of activity per shipment assumed permissible was based TLG Services, Inc. 2-AtchA-61 L __ Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document POl-1719-001, Rev. 0 Section 3, Page 15 of 32 upon the license limits of the available shielded transport casks. The segmentation scheme for the vessel and internal segments is designed to meet these limits. The transport oflarge intact components (e.g., large heat exchangers and other oversized components) will be by a combination of truck, rail, and/or multi-wheeled transporter. Transportation costs for Class A radioactive material requiring controlled disposal are based upon the mileage to the EnergySolutions facility in Clive, Utah. Transportation costs for the higher activity Class B and C radioactive material are based upon the mileage to the WCS facility in Andrews County, Texas. The transportation cost for the GTCC material is assumed to be contained within the disposal cost. Truck transport costs were developed from published tariffs from Tri-State Motor Transit. [30J 3.5.7 Low-Level Radioactive Waste Disposal The mass of radioactive waste generated during the various decommissioning activities at the site is shown on a line-item basis in the detailed Appendices C and D, and summarized in Section 5. The quantified waste summaries shown in these tables are consistent with 10 CFR Part 61 classifications. Commercially available steel containers are presumed to be used for the disposal of piping, small components, and concrete. Larger components can serve as their own containers, with proper closure of all openings, access ways, and penetrations. The volumes are calculated based on the exterior package dimensions for containerized material or a specific calculation for components serving as their own waste containers. The more highly activated reactor components will be shipped in reusable, shielded truck casks with disposable liners. In calculating disposal costs, the disposal fees are applied against the liner yolume, as well as the special handling requirements of the payload. Packaging efficiencies are lower for the highly activated materials (greater than Class A waste), where high concentrations of gamma-emitting radionuclides limit the capacity of the shipping canisters. Class A Waste For the purpose of this analysis, the Energy Solutions' facility is used as the disposal site for the majority of the radioactive waste (Class A). The disposal costs for Class A low-level radioactive waste are based on current Diablo Canyon contracted rates between PG&E and EnergySolutions in TLG Services, Inc. 2-AtchA-62 Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document POl-1719-001, Rev. 0 Section 3, Page 16 of 32 year 2014 dollars. A complete explanation of the basis for Class A waste disposal is provided in Section 5 of this analysis. Class B and C Waste For purposes of this analysis, the Waste Control Specialists (WCS) Andrews County, TX facility is used as the disposal site for the higher radioactivity waste (Class B and C). The disposal costs for Class B and C
  • low-level radioactive waste are based on current Diablo Canyon contracted rates between PG&E and WCS in year 2014 dollars. A complete explanation of the basis for class B and C waste disposal is provided in Section 5 of this an.alysis. 3.5.8 Site Restoration Following License Termination The NRC will amend or terminate the site license if it determines that site remediation has been performed in accordance with the license termination plan, and that the terminal radiation survey and associated documentation demonstrate that the facility is suitable for release. The NRC's involvement in the decommissioning process will end at this point. Building codes and environmental regulations will dictate the next step in the decommissioning process, as well as owner's own future plans for the site. Only existing site structures are considered in the cost. It is assumed that the electrical switchyard.s remain after Diablo Canyon is decommissioned. Structures are removed to a nominal depth of three feet below grade. The voids are backfilled with clean fill and capped with soil. The site is then re-graded to conform to the adjacent landscape. Vegetation is established to inhibit erosion. These "non-radiological costs" are included in the total cost of decommissioning. Concrete rubble and scrap metal (considered decommissioned material) generated from demolition activities is processed and transported via a combination of local truck and long-distance railway transport to an site out-of-state waste facility or out-of-state scrap dealer. Concrete rubble also incurs a disposal charge. Clean fill is brought on site to backfill below grade voids as needed. The excavations will be regraded such that the power block area will have a final contour consistent with adjacent surroundings. The estimates do not assume the remediation of any significant volume of contaminated soil. TLG Services, Inc. 2-AtchA-63 L __ Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis 3.6 ASSUMPTIONS Document POl-1719-001, Rev. 0 Section 3, Page 17 of 32 The following are the major assumptions made m the development of the estimates for decommissioning the site. 3.6.1 Estimating Basis Decommissioning costs are reported in the year ofprojected expenditure; however, the values are provided in 2014 dollars. Costs are not inflated, escalated, or discounted over the periods of performance. The estimates were developed using site-specific and technical information extracted from the 2012 estimates. This information was reviewed for the current analysis and updated as deemed appropriate. The site-specific considerations and assumptions used in the previous evaluation were also revisited. Modifications were incorporated where new information was available or experience from ongoing decommissioning programs provided viable alternatives or improved processes. The study follows the principles of ALARA through the use of work duration adjustment factors. These factors address the impact of activities such as radiological protection instruction, mock-up training, and the use of respiratory protection and protective clothing. The factors lengthen a task's duration, increasing costs and lengthening the overall schedule. ALARA planning is considered in the costs for engineering and planning, and in the development of activity specifications and detailed procedures. Changes to worker exposure limits may impact the decommissioning cost and project schedule. *3.6.2 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. Costs for site administration, operations, construction, and maintenance personnel are based upon average salary information provided by PG&E. PG&E will hire a Decommissioning Operations Contractor (DOC) to manage the decommissioning. The owner will provide site security, radiological health and safety, quality assurance and overall site administration during the decommissioning and demolition phases. Contract personnel will provide engineering services (e.g., for preparing TLG Services, Inc. 2-AtchA-64 Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document POl-1719-001, Rev. 0 Section 3, Page 18 of 32 the activity specifications, work procedures, activation, and structural analyses) under the direction of PG&E. Personnel costs are based upon average salary information provided by PG&E. Overhead costs are included for site and corporate support, reduced commensurate with the staffing of the project. Security is maintained close to operational levels while fuel is stored in the spent fuel pool. Security is reduced substantially once all spent fuel has been relocated to the ISFSI. Staffing levels are assigned for each unit by sub-period and functional area. This estimate was updated to reflect PG&E's experience at Humboldt Bay Unit 3 and industry experience at Zion. This experience has resulted in an increase in the Utility and DOC staff needed to support the reactor and large component decommissioning activities (Sub-Period 2a in the estimate). Economies of a multi-unit decommissioning are recognized by establishing a primary and a secondary staff level. The unit assigned the primary staff will include common supervisory positions and positions that may be shared across both units. The types of positions and staffing levels are adjusted based upon the type of activity occurring in each period. 3.6.3 Design Conditions Any fuel cladding failure that occurred during the lifetime of the plant is assumed to have released fission products at sufficiently low levels that the buildup of quantities of fong-lived isotopes (e.g., 137Cs, 90Sr, or transuranics) has been prevented from reaching levels exceeding those that permit the major NSSS components to be shipped under current transportation regulations and disposal requirements. The curie contents of the vessel and internals at final shutdown are derived from those listed in NUREG/CR-3474J31J Actual estimates are derived from the curie/gram values contained therein and adjusted for the different mass of the Diablo Canyon components, projected operating life, and different periods of decay. Additional short-lived isotopes were derived from NUREG/CR-0130l32J and NUREG/CR-0672,l33J and benchmarked to the long-lived values from NUREG/CR-3474. TLG Services, Inc. 2-AtchA-65 Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis DocumentPOl-1719-001, Rev. 0 Section 3, Page 19 of 32 It is anticipated that there may be control element assemblies (CEAs) in the spent fuel pool at the cessation of operations, including those CEAs from the final core. This analysis assumes that the CEAs can be disposed of along with the spent fuel at no additional cost. Neutron activation of the containment building structure is assumed to be confined to the biological shield. 3.6.4 General Transition Activities Existing warehouses are cleared of non-essential material and remain for use by PG&E and its subcontractors. The plant's operating staff performs the following activities at no additional cost or credit to the project during the transition period: o Drain and collect fuel oils, lubricating oils, and transformer oils for recycle and/or sale. o Drain and collect acids, caustics, and other chemical stores for recycle and/or sale. o Process operating waste inventories. Disposal of operating wastes (e.g., filtration media, resins) during this initial period is not considered a decommissioning expense; however, the estimates do include the disposition of a small volume of material currently being stored in the spent fuel pool (as described in Section 5). Decommissioned Materials Consistent with PG&E's interpretation of the California governor's executive on the moratorium on disposing of decommissioned materials in the State of California (Executive Order D-62-02), costs to account for transporting and disposing of decommissioned materials to an out-of-state disposal facility have been included in this estimate. Decommissioned materials, as used in the context of this analysis are defined as materials that meet the US NRC release criteria but contain low residual levels of radioactivity that currently may not be placed into California Class III landfills or unclassified waste management units. Demolished concrete and scrap steel are categorized as decommissioned materials in this analysis. TLG Services, Inc. 2-AtchA-66 Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document POl-1719-001, Rev. 0 Section 3, Page 20 of 32 Cost for disposing of decommissioned materials include local handling and packaging costs, cost for truck transport via public highway to a railhead in San Luis Obispo, and rail transport to an out-of-state location (Utah for concrete, Nevada for scrap steel). This cost is included in the Appendices C and D cost tables line items labeled: o Backfill Structures & Concrete Removal (out of state disposal) o Breakwater Demolition and Removal (out of state disposal) o Disposition of Mobile Barriers (out of state disposal) o Miscellaneous Construction Debris (out of state disposal) o Scrap Metal Transportation (out of state); and o Demolition and Site Restoration ISFSI GTCC Pad The existing ISFSI pad is expected to be at capacity at the time of station shutdown with all spent fuel offloaded to the ISFSI. Due to the physical layout of the ISFSI pad it is impractical to expand the pad to support the addition of GTCC storage casks. In order to store GTCC material generated during decommissioning, costs for permitting and constructing a GTCC Storage Pad have been included. The cost for design, permitting and reviews is estimated at $18.8 million. The cost for construction is estimated at $5 million. Environmental Permits and Fees The estimate reflects PG&E's determination that there will be substantive Environmental Permits and Fees required and costs incurred between the time of station shutdown and Part 50 licenses termination. The annual amount budgeted between shutdown and license termination is $1.9 million I year (DECON scenario). A similar amount was included in the SAFSTOR scenario. The projected .costs are consistent with costs identified in the SONGS 2 and 3 Site-Specific Decommissioning Estimate [34J submitted to the NRC in 2014. Scrap and Salvage The existing plant equipment is considered obsolete and suitable for scrap as deadweight quantities only. PG&E will make economically reasonable efforts to salvage equipment following final plant shutdown. However, dismantling techniques assumed by TLG for equipment in this analysis TLG Services, Inc. 2-AtchA-67 Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document POl-1719-001, Rev. 0 Section 3, Page 21of32 are not consistent with removal techniques required for salvage (resale) of equipment. Experience has indicated that some buyers wanted equipment stripped down to very specific requirements before they would consider purchase. This required expensive rework after the equipment had been removed from its installed location. Since placing a salvage value on this machinery and equipment would be speculative, and the value would be small in comparison to the overall decommissioning expenses, this analysis does not attempt to quantify the value that an owner may realize based upon those efforts. It is assumed, for purposes of this analysis, that metallic scrap generated in the dismantling process would be considered decommissioned material that requires out-of-state transport. The dismantling techniques assumed in the decommissioning estimates do not include the additional cost for size reduction and preparation to meet "furnace ready conditions. For example, the recovery of copper from electrical cabling may require the removal and disposition of any contaminated
  • insulation, an added expense. With a volatile market, the potential profit margin in scrap recovery is highly speculative, regardless of the ability to free release this material. This assumption is an implicit recognition of scrap value in the disposal of clean metallic waste at no additional cost to the project. Furniture, tools, mobile. equipment such as forklifts, trucks, bulldozers, and other property is removed at no cost or credit to the decommissioning project. Disposition may include relocation to other facilities. Spare parts are also made available for alternative use. Energy For estimating purposes, the plant is assumed to be substantially energized, with the exception of those facilities necessary to support dismantling activities and spent fuel storage. Replacement power costs
  • are used to calculate the cost of energy consumed during decommissioning for tooling, lighting, ventilation, and essential services. The purchase price of electricity is based on the average PG&E's 2014 price for utility bundled retail sales to industrial customers. The average price in 2014 was 14.22 cents I kWh. Emergency Planning FEMA fees associated with emergency planning are assumed to continue for approximately 18 months following the cessation of operations. At this time, the fees are discontinued, based upon the anticipated condition of TLG Services, Inc. 2-AtchA-68 _J Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document POl-1719-001, Rev. 0 Section 3, Page 22 of 32 the spent fuel. Annual state fees are* assumed to be reduced by 50% at time of shutdown and remain at those levels until spent fuel has been transferred to dry storage. After spent fuel is in dry storage state fees are estimated to be reduced to 25% of operating levels until spent fuel has been removed from the station. Insurance Costs for continuing coverage (nuclear liability and property insurance) following cessation of plant operations and during decommissioning are included and based upon current operating premiums. Reductions in premiums, throughout the decommissioning process, are based upon the guidance and the limits for coverage defined in the NRC's proposed rulemaking "Financial Protection Requirements for Permanently Shutdown Nuclear Power Reactors."[35] The NRC's financial protection requirements are based on various reactor (and spent fuel) configurations. Reactor Pressure Vessel (RPV) and Internals Segmentation This estimate was updated to reflect PG&E's experience with i*eactor and internals segmentation at Humboldt Bay Unit 3 and industry experience at Zion. This experience has resulted in an increase in the time to segment and package the reactor and internals (Sub-Period 2a in the estimate), an increase in the Utility and DOC staff needed during this sub-period (included in Utility and DOC Staff cost elements), an increase in the level of PG&E and DOC staff necessary to directly support the work (identified as "PG&E RPV Staff Support Team" and "DOC RPV Staff Support Team"), and an increase in the estimated amount of equipment and spares necessary to perform the segmentation (included in the cost table line items labeled "reactor vessel" and "reactor vessel internals". A reduction in reactor vessel segmentation (Removal) contingency from 75% to 35% was incorporated to reflect the addition of this industry experience, and cost of the equipment and spares necessary to perform the segmentation. The estimate was also revised to reflect difference in mass between the Unit 1 and Unit 2* reactor internals. Unit 1 has a somewhat massive thermal shield along the core elevation, whereas Unit 2 has a less massive series of neutron pad assemblies along the core elevation. The thermal shield has a greater mass (76,500 pounds) than the neutron pad assemblies (23,000 pounds). TLG Services, Inc. 2-AtchA-69 Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis Taxes Document POl-1719-001, Rev. 0 Section 3, Page 23 of 32 Property taxes (land) are included for all decommissioning periods. Site Modifications The perimeter fence and in-plant security barriers will be moved, as appropriate, to conform to the Site Security Plan in force during the various stages of the project. 3.7 COST ESTIMATE SUMMARY Schedules of expenditures for the DE CON and SAFSTOR scenarios are provided in Tables 3.1 through 3.4. The tables delineate the cost contributors by year of expenditures as well as cost contributor (e.g., labor, materials, and waste disposal). ,Additional tables in Appendices C and D provide detailed costs elements. The cost elements are also assigned to one of three subcategories: "License Termination, "Spent Fuel Management, and "Site Restoration." The subcategory "License Termination is used to accumulate costs that are consistent with "decommissioning" as defined by the NRC in its financial assurance regulations (i.e., 10 CFR §50. 75). The cost reported for this subcategory is generally sufficient to terminate the plant's operating license, recognizing that spent fuel management represents an additional cost liability that will interact with the license termination effort. The "Spent Fuel Management" subcategory contains costs associated with the containerization and transfer of spent fuel from the pools to the DOE and the transfer of casks from the ISFSI to the DOE. Costs are also included for the operations of the pools and manageme:r:it of the ISFSI until such time that the transfer of all fuel from this facility to an off-site location (e.g., geologic repository) is complete. "Site Restoration" is used to capture costs associated with the dismantling and demolition of buildings and facilities demonstrated to be free from contamination. This includes structures never exposed to radioactive materials, as well as those facilities that have been decontaminated to appropriate levels. Structures are removed to a depth of three feet and backfilled to conform to local grade. TLG Services, Inc. 2-AtchA-70 Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document POl-1719-001, Rev. 0 Section 3, Page 24 of 32 As discussed in Section 3.4.1, it is not anticipated that the DOE will accept the GTCC waste prior to completing the transfer of spent fuel. Therefore, the cost of GTCC disposal is shown in the final year of ISFSI operation (for the DECON alternative). While designated for disposal at the geologic repository along with the spent fuel, GTCC waste is still classified as low-level radioactive waste and, as such, included as a "License Termination" expense. Decommissioning costs are reported in 2014 dollars. Costs are not inflated, escalated, or discounted over the period of expenditure (or projected lifetime of the plant). The schedules are based upon the detailed activity costs reported in Appendices C and D, along with the timeline presented in Section 4. The ISFSI decommissioning cost estimate is provided in a table format m Appendix E. This appendix is provided to support required US NRC filings. TLG Services, Inc. 2-AtchA-71 Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis DocumentPOl-1719-001, Rev. 0 Section 3, Page 25 of 32 Year 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035 2036 2037 2038 2039 2040 2041 2042 2043 2044 2045 2046 2047 2048 2049 2050 2051 2052 2053 TABLE 3.1 DECON ALTERNATIVE SCHEDULE OF TOTAL ANNUAL EXPENDITURES, UNIT 1 (thousands, 2014 dollars) PG&E Labor 21,002 119,598 72,400 69,575 69,766 68,119 38,931 26,569 26,641 26,569 27,971 14,456 12,322 8,689 8,689 5,853 4,370 4,358 4,358 4,358 4,370 4,358 4,358 4,358 4,370 4,358 4,358 4,358 4,370 4,358 Equipment & Contractor Materials Labor 1,457 6,586 10,517 40,814 17,296 42,746 16,495 41,811 16,541 41,925 18,396 47,764 13,597 23,432 8,460 2,732 8,484 2,739 8,460 2,732 8,603 6,589 2,851 7,752 2,274 23,668 8,162 13,394 8,162 13,394 2,818 4,624 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 LLRW Disposal Other Total 636 1,681 31,362 5,910 10,985 187,824 26,395 14,434 173,271 31,414 14,230 173,525 31,500 14,269 174,000 49,277 16,960 200,516 33,664 21,319 130,943 14 19,520 57,295 14 19,573 57,452 14 19,520 57,295 2,951 17,914 64,028 5,293 6,308 36,660 13 6,215 44,491 0 8,956 39,201 0 8,956 39,201 0 5,307 18,601 0 3,392 7,762 0 3,383 7,740 0 3,383 7,740 0 3,383 7,740 0 3,392 7,762 0 3,383 7,740 0 3,383 7,740 0 3,383 7,740 0 3,392 7,762 0 3,383 7,740 0 3,383 7,740 0 3,383 7,740 0 3,392 7,762 0 3,383 7,740 TLG Services, Inc. 2-AtchA-72 Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document POl-1719-001, Rev. 0 Section 3, Page 26 of 32 TABLE 3.1 (continued) DECON ALTERNATIVE SCHEDULE OF TOTAL ANNUAL EXPENDITURES, UNIT 1 (thousands, 2014 dollars) PG&E Equipment & Contractor LLRW Year Labor Materials Labor Disposal Other Total 2054 4,358 0 0 0 3,383 7,740 2055 4,358 0 0 0 3,383 7,740 2056 4,370 0 0 0 3,392 7,762 2057 4,358 0 0 0 3,383 7,740 2058 4,358 0 0 0 3,383 7,740 2059 4,358 0 0 0 3,383 7,740 2060 4,370 0 0 0 3,392 7,762 2061 4,358 2,861 0 0 14,848 22,066 2062 567 653 1,639 666 5,096 8,621 Total I 713,655 156,089 324,340 187,761 297,185 1,679,030 TLG Services, Inc. 2-AtchA-73 Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document POl-1719-001, Rev. 0 Section 3, Page 27 of 32 Year 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035 2036 2037 2038 2039 2040 2041 2042 2043 2044 2045 2046 2047 2048 2049 .2050 2051 2052 2053 2054 TABLE 3.2 DECON ALTERNATIVE SCHEDULE OF TOTAL ANNUAL EXPENDITURES, UNIT 2 (thousands, 2014 dollars) PG&E Labor 42,905 101,899 68,437 69,374 69,184 66,579 42,012 37,800 . 37,696 37,696 41,465 17,044 8,710 8,710 5,830 4,378 4,366 4,366 4,366 4,378 4,366 4,366 4,366 4,378 4,366 4,366 4,366 4,378 4,366 4,366 Equipment & Contractor Materials Labor 2,330 9,426 9,790 27,036 17,998 40,977 18,453 43,415 18,403 43,296 19,330 53,125 8,972 10,491 7,066 2,254 7,046 2,248 7,046 2,248 7,980 11,924 13,124 49,794 75,661 119,926 75,661 119,926 25,497 40,413 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 LLRW Disposal Other Total 1,361 3,452 59,475 8,243 11,518 158,485 27,142 14,477 169,030 29,060 14,493 174,794 28,981 14,453 174,317 54,562 17,630 211,226 9,522 17,501 . 88,497 16 17,359 64,493 15 17,311 64,317 15 17,311 64,317 5,451 14,784 81,604 1,713 6,884 88,558 0 10,588 214,884 0 10,588 214,884 0 5,815 77,555 0 3,398 7,776 0 3,389 7,755 0 3,389 7,755 0 3,389 7,755 0 3,398 7,776 0 3,389 7,755 0 3,389 7,755 0 3,389 7,755 0 3,398 7,776 0 3,389 7,755 0 3,389 7,755 0 3,389 7,755 0 3,398 7,776 0 3,389 7,755 0 3,389 7,755 TLG Services, Inc. 2-AtchA-74 owerPlant Diablo Canyon P, Decommission in g Cost Analysis Document POl-1719-001, Rev. 0 Section 3, Page 28 of 32 TABLE 3.2 (continued) DECON ALTERNATIVE *SCH EDULE OF TOTAL ANNUAL EXPENDITURES, UNIT 2 (thousands, 2014 dollars) PG& E Equipment & Contractor LLRW Year Lab or Materials Labor Disposal Other Total 2055 4, 366 0 0 0 3,389 7,755 2056 4, 378 0 0 0 3,398 7,776 2057 4, 366 0 0 0 3,389 7,755 2058 4, 366 0 0 0 3,389 7,755 2059 4, 366 0 0 0 3,389 7,755 2060 4, 378 0 0 0 3,398 7,776 2061 4, 366 2,869 0 0 14,876 22,111 2062 568 655 1,643 668 5,108 8,641 I Total I 752,0 34 317,881 578,140 166,748 285,369 2,100,172 TLG Services, In c. 2-'AtchA-75 I Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis TABLE 3.3 SAFSTOR ALTERNATIVE Document POl-1719-001, Rev. 0 Section 3, Page 29 of 32 SCHEDULE OF TOTAL ANNUAL EXPENDITURES; UNIT 1 (thousands, 2014 dollars) Equipment & Contractor LLRW Year PG&E Labor Materials Labor Disposal Other Total 2024 20,458 1,388 4,497 642 1,689 28,673 2025 116,037 9,383 24,985 3,733 10,712 164,851 2026 67,890 5,852 3,519 1,141 12,146 90,548 2027 36,157 4,856 1,455 9 12,556 55,033 2028 36,256 4,870 1,459 9 12,591 55,184 2029 36,157 4,856 1,455 9 12,556 55,033 2030 36,157 4,856 1,455 9 12,556 55,033 2031 36,157 4,856 1,455 9 12,556 55,033 2032 36,256 4,870 1,459 9 12,591 55,184 2033 36,157 4,856 1,455 9 12,556 55,033 2034 31,592 4,113 1,216 8 11,164 48,092 2035 8,386 332 0 4 4,088 12,811 2036 8,409 333 0 4 4,099 12,846 2037 8,386 332 0 4 4,088 12,811 2038 8,386 332 0 4 4,088 12,811 2039 8,386 332 0 4 I 4,088 12,811 2040 8,409 333 0 4 4,099 12,846 2041 8,386 332 0 4 4,088 12,811 2042 8,386 332 0 4 4,088 12,811 2043 8,386 332 0 4 4,088 12,811 2044 8,409 333 0 4 4,099 12,846 2045 8,386 332 0 4 4,088 12,811 2046 8,386 332 0 4 4,088 12,811 2047 8,386 332 0 4 4,088 12,811 2048 8,409 333 0 4 4,099 12,846 2049 8,386 332 0 4 4,088 12,811 2050 8,386 332 0 4 4,088 12,811 2051 8,386 332 0 4 4,088 12,811 2052 8,409 333 0 4 4,099 12,846 2053 8,386 332 0 4 4,088 12,811 TLG Services, Inc. 2-AtchA-76 Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document POl-1719-001, Rev. 0 Section 3, Page 30 of 32 TABLE 3.3 (continued) SAFSTOR ALTERNATIVE SCHEDULE OF TOTAL ANNUAL EXPENDITURES, UNIT 1 (thousands, 2014 dollars) Year 2054 2055 2056 2057 2058 2059 2060 2061 2062 2063 2064 2065 2066 2067 2068 2069 2070 2071 PG&E Labor 8,386 8,386 8,409 8,386 8,386 8,386 8,409 8,386 29,475 33,803 38,260 38,155 24,111 10,329 6,659 5,508 4,289 . 2,961 Total I 909,418 I TLG Services, Inc. Equipment & Contractor Materials Labor 332 0 332 0 333 0 332 0 332 0 332 0 333 0 332 0 4,842 24,283 12,283 34,589 18,198 37,588 18,148 37,485 15,212 39,236 6,429 17,651 916 15,819 6,913 17,271 8,361 13,999 5,772 9,665 160,812 292,002 2-AtchA-77 LLRW Disposal Other Total 4 4,088 12,811 4 . 4,088 12,811 4 4,099 12,846 4 4,088 12,811 4 4,088 12,811 4 4,088 12,811 4 4,099 12,846 4 4,088 12,811 19 4,487 63,106 17,982 9,584 108,242 36,140 14,667 144,853 36,041 14,627 144,458 50,426 14,844 143,830 24,321 6,893 65,623 11 1,076 24,481 3 6,031 35,726 0 7,243 33,893 0 5,001 23,400 170,639 318,588 1,851,460

/ Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document POl-1719-001, Rev. 0 Section 3, Page 31 of 32 TABLE 3.4 SAFSTOR ALTERNATIVE SCHEDULE OF TOTAL ANNUAL EXPENDITURES, UNIT 2 (thousands, 2014 dollars). Equipment & Contractor LLRW Year PG&E Labor Materials Labor Disposal Other Total 2025 41,550 2,169 5,902 1,365 3,459 54,446 2026 106,578 9,402 17,134 3,681 11,884 148,680 2027 45,846 4,247 1,823 531 8,035 60,482 2028 29,765 4,038 1,198 7 5,512 40,520 2029 29,683 4,027 1,194 7 5,497 40,410 2030 29,683 4,027 1,194 7 5,497 40,410 2031 29,683 4,027 1,194 7 5,497 40,410 2032 29,765 4,038 1,198 7 5,512 40,520 2033 29,683 4,027 1,194 7 5,497 40,410 2034 29,683 4,027 1,194 7 5,497 40,410 2035 21,225 2,727 777 6 5,626 30,361 2036 5,579 320 4 4 5,881 11,787 2037 5,564 319 4 4 5,865 11,755 2038 5,564 319 4 4 5,865 11,755 2039 5,564 319 4 4 5,865 11,755 2040 5,579 320 4 4 5,881 11,787 2041 5,564 319 4 4 5,865 11,755 2042 5,564 319 4 4 5,865 11,755 2043 5,564 319 4 4 5,865 11,755 2044 5,579 320 4 4 5,881 11,787 2045 5,564 319 4 4 5,865 11,755 2046 5,564 319 4 4 5,865 11,755 2047 5,564 319 4 4 5,865 11,755 2048 5,579 320 4 4 5,881 11,787 2049 5,564 319 4 4 5,865 11,755 2050 5,564 319 4 4 5,865 11,755 2051 5,564 319 4 4 5,865 11,755 2052 5,579 320 4 4 5,881 11,787 2053 5,564 319 4 4 5,865 11,755 2054 5,564 319 4 4 5,865 11,755 TLG Services, Inc. 2-AtchA-78 Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document POl-1719-001, Rev. 0 Section 3, Page 32 of 32 TABLE 3.4 (continued) SAFSTOR ALTERNATIVE SCHEDULE OF TOTAL ANNUAL EXPENDITURES, UNIT 2 (thousands, 2014 dollars) Year 2055 2056 2057 2058 2059 2060 2061 2062 2063 2064 2065 2066 2067 2068 2069 2070 2071 PG&E Labor 5,564 5,579 5,564 5,564 5,564 5,579 5,564 2,006 22,352 31,504 40,483 40,040 28,047 18,373 5,501 4,283 2,957 Total I 763,457 TLG Services, Inc. Equipment & Contractor Materials Labor 319 4 320 4 319 4 319 4 319 4 320 4 319 4 319 4 4,799 16,381 13,382 29,759 20,301 39,540 20,085 39,650 14,248 42,615 7,665 41,126 60,188 103,406 76,008 120,736 52,477 83,358 324,526 550,674 2-AtchA-79 LLRW Disposal Other Total 4 5,865 11,755 4 5,881 11,787 4 5,865 11,755 4 5,865 11,755 4 5,865 11,755 4 5,881 11,787 4 5,865 11,755 4 1,323 3,655 18 4,428 47,978 16,245 9,724 100,614 , 32,382 14,885 147,591 32,725 14,823 147,324 42,032 13,152 140,094 19,470 6,810 93,444 3 7,246 176,344 0 8,853 209,880 0 6,112 144,904 148,606 307,474 2,094,736 Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis 4. SCHEDULE ESTIMATE Document POl-1719-001, Rev. 0 Section 4, Page 1 of 6 The schedules for the decommissioning scenarios considered in this study follow the sequences presented in the AIF/NESP-036 study, with minor changes to reflect recent experience and site-specific constraints. In addition, the scheduling has been revised to reflect the spent fuel management plan described in Section 3.5.1. A schedule or sequence of activities for the DECON alternative from shutdown to ISFSI site restoration is presented in Figure 4.1. The scheduling sequence is based on the fuel being removed from the spent fuel pools within ten years. The key activities listed in the schedule do not reflect a one-to-one correspondence with those activities in the cost tables, but reflect dividing some activities for clarity combining others for convenience. The schedule was prepared using the "Microsoft Project Professional" computer softwareJ36J 4.1 SCHEDULE ESTIMATE ASSUMPTIONS The schedule reflects the results of a precedence network developed for the site decommissioning activities, i.e., a PERT (Program Evaluation and Review Technique) Software Package. The work activity durations used in the precedence network reflect the actual man-hour estimates from the cost table, adjusted by stretching certain activities over their slack range and shifting the start and end dates of others. The following assumptions were made in the development of the decommissioning schedule: o The spent fuel pools are isolated until such time that all spent fuel has been discharged from the spent fuel pools to the DOE. Decontamination and dismantling of the storage pools is initiated once the transfer of spent fuel is complete (DECON option). o All work (except vessel and internals removal) is performed during an 8-hour workday, 5 days per week, with no overtime. e Reactor and internals removal activities are performed by using separate crews for different activities working on different shifts, with a corresponding backshift charge for the second shift. o Multiple crews work parallel activities to the maximum extent possible, consistent with optimum efficiency, adequate access for cutting, removal and laydown space, and with the stringent safety measures necessary during demolition of heavy components and structures. TLG Services, Inc. 2-AtchA-80 Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document POl-1719-001, Rev. 0 Section 4, Page 2 of 6 o For plant systems removal, the systems with the longest removal durations in areas on the critical path are considered to determine the duration of the activity. 4.2 PROJECT SCHEDULE The period-dependent costs presented in the detailed cost tables are based upon the durations developed in the schedules for decommissioning. Durations are established between several milestones in each project period; these durations are used to establish a critical path for the entire project. In turn, the critical path duration for each period is used as the basis for determining the period-dependent costs. A second critical path is shown for the spent fuel storage period, which determines the release of the fuel handling area of the auxiliary building for final decontamination. *Project timelines are for the DECON and SAFSTOR scenarios are provided in Figures 4.2 and 4.3 with milestone dates based on the 2024 and 2025 shutdown dates for Units 1 and 2, respectively. The fuel pools are emptied approximately ten years after shutdown, while ISFSI operations continue until the DOE can complete the transfer of assemblies to its geologic repository. Deferred decommissioning in the SAFSTOR scenarios is assumed to commence so that the physical dismantling takes place immediately after all spent fuel has been removed from the site. TLG Services, Inc. 2-AtchA-81 Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document POl-1719-001, Rev. 0 Section 4, Page 3 of 6 FIGURE 4.1 ACTIVITY SCHEDULE -DECON _;_; Diablo Canyon t:lli1 I Shutdo ... Oat* l Ptriod b Shutdon Throufh Traiuition Cemfitiie of permanut ttmnon of opmtJnO! !Uhmitted -!...i Fuel storage pool opennons 5 Dty fuel nongeopennons 6 Recoaligun plant J] Prepare amrity *pttlfiranons I Ptrform *it* chmcterizarion -PSD:IR 1ubmitted 10 Written ttrti6cate of permanent re moral of fuel submitted Ir Site 1pecifit de<O:nmmiozung ro.t emmm !ubmitted 11 DOC !tafh3obihud ll Period lb PreparalioM ...,.,...., Fuel stonge pool 0pt11tions ll Recoaligure plant (continued) If' l>ty fut! !tO!lg! OptllODlll lfi Prepare dttailed nrk pro<tdum U Decon:'i" --u-i L<ol&te iptnt fuel pool ""F' Period 21 Larfe Compontnt Rtmoval Fuel !to11,ge pool openrions Dry fuelstonge opentions ll Prepmtion for rea<ror msel re moral 'Ti Rea<ror m!El & internals lS Rel!llllllng l&rge :'iSSS components dispo!lnon 7'* __.D :'ioo'f'-'Enrial !)'!!Elll! Main tutbin genentor T Main conden.<er T !.irelL" t*rminatim> p1an !Ulimined ...,.,...., 2b Decontllllinatlon ( .. et fuel) ...!., Fuel !tonge pool opennons Dry fuel !tonge ope11tiom n R*more S)"!l!Jll! not suppornng .-!I fut! !tO!lg! Decon buildings DOI suppomng nt fu*l !IO!lfe Liotnse ttrmination plan 1ppt01*ed ..:_,Period pent Fuel Delay Prior to Spent Fuel Pool Decon ll F u*l uorage pool openrions "'i'1 Dry fu*l stonge openrions 2d Decontamination follo.-inf wtt fuel Dty fut! Stonge opentions Re mow remaining sy!leJZll Decon .-er fut! >tong* uu Ptriod 2e Delay before wse termination II 0.lay b.fore littn.<e ttl'll!lllltion 754 lo Canyon t: llit 2 Shutdo.-n Date :luguit 26, ___. Ptriod la Shuidon Throufh T raasltlon ll Cenifirate of permanent tt<..!lhon of opelllwns !ubmmed Fuel11oragepooloperarions l! Dty fuel sto11,ge ope11rions ll R.coaligurt plant Si"" PNpare actirity specifications Iii Ptrform !ite chm<r*rizanon 551 PSDAR *mitt.d T Cenifittte of permuen1 ttmoral of fuel subnut fd SJ' ite *pe<ifit de<Olllml!!iontoJ '°"' tsttm11e *ubnnned T OOC!tlf!mobiliz.d TLG Services, Inc.

  • 11 * ----* * *
  • n * * * * *
  • I
  • r-i * ---2-AtchA-82 * * *
  • I
  • fl *
  • n
  • Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document POl-1719-001, Rev. 0 Section 4, Page 4 of 6 FIGURE 4.1 (continued) ACTIVITY SCHEDULE -DECON lb DtcO!lllllissioninf PreparatiollS Fuel !iorage pool op!rttioll! 6l Re<<>nfigure plant (continutd) T Drr fuel !lortgHpmtioM g-i Pttpare dttailed mrk De<<>nXs.§ -;;-; lsol.tte spent fuel pool 16 Period 2a l.arfe Component Removal Fuel storage pool opentiolll Dry fuel !lortge opentions .!_, Pttpuanon for rmtor rt!..<tl rttnOl*al .!-, Reactor 1-.!..<tl S:: interoals 71 Remaining l.trgt XSSS romponents di..<po!tbon Xon .. s..<tntial 3J'lfm> ll lliin nuWie/genmtor 111 lliinrondell$tr w!ISf tennillatiGn pl.tn submmed 2b Det0ntamlnation ( .. et fuel) 71 Fuel !lOrtge pool opentioll! Drr fuel stortge operttioll! Rem01-. system> oot supponing .-et fuel stortge -!-1 De<<>n buildings not supponin1 wet fuel !lortge Llten..<t tenmnation pl.tn appm-.d Period !c pent Fuel De by Prior to pent Fuel Poo!Det0n F utl storage pool openrio111 Dry fut! Stonge openboll! 2d Unit! Det0ntamlnation FollowinfWtl Fuel Drr fuel ltorage opentioll! 11 RemOl"f ttml!lllllg sr*tem> .!.i Dtrouet srorageam ..!_,Period tlUntt 1and2 License Termination Dry fuel l!Ortge opertlioll! flllllSiteSllrl"e; XRC min* S:: appm"ll 9l Pan 00 litense terminated 3b Unit l and ! Site Restoration !I Dry fuel !lortgt operttioll! :!j Bwlding demolition!, baoifill and ludmping 91 l.tnd..<<1 . TLG Services, Inc. 2-AtchA-83 n * * * * *
  • I -I --* liil
  • ri *
  • I Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document POl-1719-001, Rev. 0 Section 4, Page 5 of 6 Unit 1 FIGURE 4.2 DECON ALTERNATIVE DECOMMISSIONING TIMELINE (not to scale) (Shutdown November 2, 2024) ' ' Pool and ISFSI Operations ISFSI Operations Period 2 Period 3 Site Period 1 Transition and Preparations Decommissioning Restoration ISFSI Operations ISFSI D&D 11/2024 Unit 2 P2a I P2bl 09/2029 05/2030 05/ 2026 11/2036 Storage Pools Empty Unit 1 -11 / 2034 Unit 2 -08 / 2035 (Shutdown August 26, 2025) Period 2 Site 05 / 2039 12 I 2061 07 I 2062 Period 3 Period 1 Transition and Preparations Decommissioning Restoration ISFSI Operations ISFSI D&D P2a I P2b I 03/2030 02/2031 08 I 2025 02/ 2027 11I2036 05 / 2039 12 I 2061 07 I 2062 P2a represents the* sub-period during which the reactor, reactor internals, and other large NSSS components are removed. P2b represents the sub-period during which the remaining radioactive materials are removed (excluding wet spent fuel storage facilities). TLG Services, Inc. 2-AtchA-84 Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost AnalY,sis Document POl-1719-001, Rev. 0 Section 4, Page 6 of 6 Unit 1 FIGURE 4.3 SAFSTOR ALTERNATIVE DECOMMISSIONING TIMELINE (not to scale) (Shutdown November 2, 2024) Period 2 Period 3 Period 4 Delayed Period 5 Site Period 1 Transition and Preparations Dormancy Preparations Decommissioning Restoration 11I2024 05/ 2026 .. 01I2062 Unit 1 Pool Empty 11 I 2034 07 I 2063 Dry Spent Fuel Storage Unit 2 (Shutdown August 26, 2025) Period 1 Period 2 Transition and ISFSIEmpty 12 I 2061 Period 3 Delayed 03 I 2069 09 I 2071 Period 4 Period 5 Site Preparations Dormancy Preparations Decommissioning Restoration 08/ 2025 02 I 2027 TLG Services, Inc. 01I2063 Unit 2 Pool Empty 08 I 2035 2-AtchA-85 07 I 2064 03 I 2069 09 I 2071 Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document POl-1719-001, Rev. 0 Section 5, Page 1 of 7 5. RADIOACTIVEWASTES The objectives of the decommissioning process are the removal of all radioactive material from the site that would restrict its future use and the termination of the NRC license. This currently requires the remediation of all radioactive material at the site in excess of applicable legal limits. Under the Atomic Energy Act, [37] the NRC is responsible for protecting the public from sources of ionizing radiation. Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations delineates the production, utilization, and disposal of radioactive materials and processes. In particular, Part 71 defines radioactive material as it pertains to transportation and Part 61 specifies its disposition. Most of the materials being transported for controlled Disposal are categorized as Low Specific Activity (LSA) or Surface Contaminated Object (SCO) materials \ containing Type A quantities, as defined in 49 CFR Parts 173-178. Shipping containers are required to be Industrial Packages (IP-1, IP-2 or IP-3, as defined in 10 CFR §173.411). For this study, commercially available steel containers are presumed to be used for the disposal of piping, small components, and limited quantities of concrete. Larger components can serve as their own containers, with proper closure of all openings, access ways, and penetrations. Material that is expected to meet requirements for transport in bulk, such as the majority of contaminated concrete, is disposed of without its' packaging. The waste material produced in the decontamination and dismantling of the nuclear plants is primarily generated during Period 2 of DE CON and Period 4 of SAFSTOR. The. volumes of radioactive waste generated during the various decommissioning activities at the site are shown on a line-item basis in Appendices C and D, and summarized in Tables 5.1 through 5.4. The quantified waste volume summaries shown in these tables are consistent with Part 61 classifications. The volumes are calculated based on the exterior dimensions for containerized material and on the displaced volume of components serving as their own waste containers. The reactor vessel and internals are categorized as large quantity shipments and, accordingly, will be shipped in reusable, shielded truck casks with disposable liners. In calculating disposal costs, the disposal fees are applied against the liner volume, as well as the special handling requirements of the payload. Packaging efficiencies can be lower for the highly activated materials (greater than Type A quantity waste), where high concentrations of gamma-emitting radionuclides limit the capacity of the shipping canisters. No process system containing/handling radioactive substances at shutdown is presumed to meet material release criteria by decay alone (i.e., systems radioactive at shutdown will still be radioactive over the time period during which the TLG Services, Inc. 2-AtchA-86 Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document POl-1719-001, Rev. 0 Section 5, Page 2 of 7 decommissioning is accomplished, due to the presence of long-lived radionuclides). While the dose rates decrease with time, radionuclides such as 137Cs will still control the disposition requirements. Disposal costs are based on the following: Class A Waste For the purpose of this analysis, the EnergySolutions' facility is used as the disposal site for radioactive waste (Class A). The disposal costs for Class A low-level radioactive waste are based on current Diablo Canyon contracted rates between PG&E and EnergySolutions in year 2014 dollars. The resulting 2014 rates, using this approach, results in disposal costs of: o $304 per cubic foot for' Large Component waste (components disposed of essentially intact) o $277 per cubic for Containerized waste (components that are segmented and placed into steel shipping containers) o * $62 per cubic foot for "Bulk" waste (high density was such as contaminated concrete) 0 $39 per cubic foot for medium density "Bulk waste o $27 per cubic foot for low density waste (paper and plastics) o $62,188 per cask ($518 per cubic foot for a 120 cubic foot cask) for higher activity Class A waste requiring cask shipments (some resins and filters and some segments of the reactor and internals). Class B and C Waste For purposes of this analysis, the WCS Andrews County, TX facility is used as the disposal site for the higher activity radioactive waste (Class B and C). The disposal costs for Class B and C low-level radioactive waste are based on current Diablo Canyon contracted rates between PG&E and WCS in year 2014 dollars. The resulting 2014 rates, using this approach, results in a disposal costs of: o Class B non-irradiated hardware waste (including High Activity Fee) -The Class B non-irradiated hardware base rate is $2,885 per cubic foot. The high activity fee reflects a surcharge for waste with higher curie contents); after application of this surcharge the rate is $6,520 per cubic foot. o Class B irradiated hardware waste -$10,500 per cubic foot (the curie content of this waste is not considered large enough to warrant High Activity or Carbon-14 fees). TLG Services, Inc. 2-AtchA-87 Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document POl-1719-001, Rev. 0 Section 5, Page 3 of 7 o Class C irradiated hardware waste -$10,500 per cubic foot (base rate). The high activity and Carbon-14 fees are a substantial contributor to cost increases above the base rate. The average rate for irradiated hardware with high activity and Carbon-14 fees included ranges from a low average of $19,335 per cubic foot (Unit 2 -SAFSTOR) to a high average of $23,561 per cubic foot (Unit 1 -DECON scenario). The average changes depending on the mass of the reactor internals (there are differences between Units 1and2), and the amount of radioactive decay c (SAFSTOR scenario is based on a greater amount of radioactive decay). GTCC Waste The volume and cost to dispose of GTCC material is developed using the following method: o A projection of the amount of electricity delivered from the station through the end of currently licensed life is calculated. Using a rate of 1 mill per kWhr (DOE standard contract rate) this is converted to a total spent fuel disposal cost for the station. * <> An estimate of the total weight of spent fuel generated through the end of currently licensed life is calculated . ., An average disposal cost for the spent fuel (per pound) is calculated by dividing the total spent fuel disposal cost the total spent fuel mass. This calculation results in the cost per pound used for disposal ($111 per pound). o This average disposal cost is applied against the total mass of GTCC material to estimate the GTCC disposal cost. o The reported disposal volume is calculated by assuming that GTCC waste is placed in a canister equivalent in size to a spent fuel canister (nominal 360 cubic feet, each) and loading these canisters with up to 23, 100 pounds of waste. The reported disposal mass is the mass of the GTCC material plus the mass of the spent fuel canister. TLG Services, Inc. 2-AtchA-88 Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis TABLE 5.1 Document POl-1719-001, Rev. 0 Section 5, Page 4 of 7 DECON ALTERNATIVE DECOMMISSIONING WASTE SUMMARY, UNIT 1 Waste Volume Weight Waste Cost Basis Class 111 (cubic feet) (pounds) . Low-Level Radioactive Energy Solutions Waste (near-surface Large Component A 101,249 8,511,621 disposal) Energy Solutions Containerized A 150,150 8,670,091 Energy Solutions Bulk A 322,760 32,275,569 Energy Solutions Medium Density A 8,960 397,906 Energy Solutions DAW A 13,117 262,341 Energy Solutions Class A Cask A 6,953 630,618 WCS (other than irradiated hardware) B 887 94,531 WCS (irradiated hardware) B 963 109,091 WCS (irradiated hardware) c 785 112,154 Greater than Class C Spent Fuel _(geologic repository) Equivalent GTCC* 1,649 330,307 Total 121 607,474 51,394,230 [l] Waste is classified according to the requirements as delineated in Title 10 CFR, Part 61.55 [2] Columns may not add due to rounding.
  • GTCC unpackaged mass is 85,510 lbs. TLG Services, Inc. 2-AtchA-89 Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis TABLE 5.2 Document POl-1719-001, Rev. 0 Section 5, Page 5 of 7 DECON ALTERNATIVE DECOMMISSIONING WASTE SUMMARY, UNIT 2 Waste Volume Weight Waste Cost Basis Class [lJ (cubic feet) (pounds) L6w-Level Radioactive Energy Solutions Waste (near-surface Large Component A 101,249 8,492,999 disposal) Energy Solutions Containerized A 139,621 8,017,074 Energy Solutions Bulk A 329,078 32,907,367 Energy Solutions Medium Density A 11,761 517,442 Energy Solutions DAW A 14,857 297,133 Energy Solutions CiassA Cask A 7,031 635,327 WCS (other than irradiated hardware) B 887 94,531 WCS (irradiated hardware) B 963 109,091 WCS (irradiated hardware) c 393 52,080 Greater than Class C Spent Fuel (geologic repository) Equivalent GTCC* 1,649 330,307 Total [2l 607,490 51,453,351 [1) Waste is classified according to the requirements as delineated in Title 10 CFR, Part 61.55 [2) Columns may not add due to rounding.
  • GTCC unpackaged mass is 85,510 lbs. TLG Services, Inc. 2-AtchA-90 Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis TABLE 5.3 Document P01-1719-001, Rev. 0 Section 5, Page 6 of 7 SAFSTOR ALTERNATIVE DECOMMISSIONING WASTE SUMMARY, UNIT 1 Waste Volume Weight Waste Cost Basis Class [11 (cubic feet) (pounds) Low-Level Radioactive Energy Solutions Waste (near-surface Large Component A 106,396 8,987,727 disposal) Energy Solutions Containerized A 148,691 8,514,573 Energy Solutions Bulk A 322,095 32,209,011 Energy Solutions Medium Density A 8,960 397,906 Energy Solutions DAW A 15,511 310,219 Energy Solutions Class A Cask A 3,142 214,949 WCS (other than irradiated hardware) B --WCS (irradiated hardware) B 501 44,300 WCS (irradiated hardware) c 798 111,490 Greater than Class C Spent Fuel (geologic repository) Equivalent GTCC 1,649 330,307 Total [21 607,742 51,120,484 [l] Waste is classified according to the requirements as delineated in Title 10 CFR, Part 61.55 [2] Columns may not add due to rounding.
  • GTCC unpackaged mass is 85,510 lbs. TLG Services, Inc. 2-AtchA-91 Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis TABLE 5.4 Document POl-1719-001, Rev. 0 Section 5, Page 7 of 7 SAFSTOR ALTERNATIVE DECOMMISSIONING WASTE SUMMARY, UNIT 2 Waste Volume Weight Waste Cost Basis Class [IJ (cubic feet) (pounds) Low-Level Radioactive Energy Solutions Waste (near-surface Large Component A 106,396 8,987,727 disposal) Energy Solutions Containerized A 138,340 7,880,533 Energy Solutions Bulk A 326,832 32,682,782 Energy Solutions Medium Density A 11,761 517,442 Energy Solutions \ DAW 'A 15,913 318,268 Energy Solutions Class A Cask A 3,244 221,109 WCS (other than irradiated hardware) B --WCS (irradiated hardware) B 501 44,300 WCS (irradiated hardware) c 406 51,416 Greater than Class C Spent Fuel (geologic repository) Equivalent GTCC* 1;649 330,307 Total [21 605,044 51,033,885 [l] Waste is classified according to the requirements as delineated in Title 10 CFR, Part 61.55 [2] Columns may not add due to rounding.
  • GTCC unpackaged mass is 85,510 lbs. TLG Services, Inc. 2-AtchA-92 Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis 6. RESULTS Document POl-1719-001, Rev. 0 Section 6, Page 1 of 7 The analysis to estimate the costs to decommission Diablo Canyon relied upon the site-specific, technical information extracted from the 2012 and previous estimates. This information was reviewed for the current analysis and updated as deemed appropriate. The site-specific considerations and assumptions used in the previous evaluation were also revisited. Modifications were incorpqrated where new information was available or experience from ongoing decommissioning programs provided viable alternatives or improved processes. While not an engineering study, the estimates provide PG&E with sufficient information to assess their financial obligations, as they pertain to the eventual decommissioning of the nuclear station. The estimates described in this report are based on numerous fundamental assumptions, including regulatory requirements, project contingencies, low-level radioactive waste disposal practices, high-level radioactive waste management options, and site restoration requirements. The decommissioning scenarios assume continued operation of the station's spent fuel pools for a minimum of ten years following the cessation of operations for continued cooling of the assemblies. The cost projected to promptly decommission (DECON) Diablo Canyon is estimated to be $3, 779.2 million. The majority of this cost (approximately 62.5%) is associated with the physical decontamination and dismantling of the nuclear plant so that the operating license can be terminated. Another 20.8% is associated with the management, interim storage, and eventual transfer of the spent fuel. The remaining 16.7% is for the demolition of the designated structures and limited restoration of the site. The cost projected for deferred decommissioning (SAFSTOR). is estimated to be $3,946.2 million. The majority of this cost (approximately 55.2%) is associated with placing the plant in storage, ongoing caretaking of the plant during dormancy, and the eventual physical decontamination and dismantling of the nuclear plant so that the operating license can 'be terminated. Another 28.8% is associated with the management, interim storage, and eventual transfer of the spent fuel. .The remaining 16.0% is for the demolition of the designated structures and limited restoration of the site. The primary cost contributors, identified in Tables 6.1 through 6.4, are either related or associated with the management and disposition of the radioactive waste. Program management is the largest single contributor to the overall cost. The magnitude of the expense is a function of both the size of the organization required to manage the decommissioning, as well as the duration of the program. The size and composition of the management organization varies with the decommissioning-phase TLG Services, Inc. . 2-AtchA-93 Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document POl-1719-001, Rev. 0 Section 6, Page 2 of 7 and associated site activities. However, once the operating licenses are terminated, the staff is substantially reduced for the conventional demolition and restoration of the site, and th'e long-term care of the spent fuel (for the DE CON alternative). As described in this report, the spent fuel pools will remain operational for a minimum of ten years following the cessation of operations. The pools will be isolated and independent spent fuel islands created. This will allow decommissioning operations to proceed in and around the pool areas. Over the ten-year period, the spent fuel will be packaged into multi-purpose canisters for transfer to the ISFSI. Spent fuel stored in the ISFSI is assumed to be transferred to the DOE in order to support license termination within 60 years of shut down. The cost for waste disposal includes those costs associated with the controlled disposition of the low-level radioactive waste generated from decontamination and dismantling activities, including plant equipment and components, structural material, filters, resins and dry-active waste. As described in Section 5, disposition of the majority of the low-level radioactive material requiring controlled disposal is at the Energy Solutions' facility. Highly activated. components, requiring additional isolation from the environment (GTCC), are packaged for geologic disposal. The cost of geologic disposal is based upon a cost equivalent for spent fuel. Decontamination and removal* costs reflect the labor-intensive nature of the decommissioning process, as well as the management controls requj.red to ensure a safe and successful program. Non-radiological demolition is a natural extension of the decommissioning process. With a work force mobilized to support decommissioning operations, non-radiological demolition can be an integrated activity and a logical expansion of the work being performed in the process of terminating the operating license. Prompt demolition reduces future liabilities and can be more cost effective than deferral, due to the deterioration of the facilities (and therefore the working conditions) with time. The reported cost for transport includes the tariffs and surcharges associated with moving large components and/or overweight shielded casks overland, as well as the general expense, e.g., labor and fuel, of transporting material to the destinations identified in this report. For purposes of this analysis, low-level radioactive waste is primarily moved via public highway by truck. Bulk shipments of decommissioned materials are moved by a combination of truck and railway. Decontamination is used to reduce the plant's radiation fields and minimize worker exposure. License termination survey costs are associated with the labor intensive and complex activity of verifying that contamination has been removed from the site to the levels TLG Services, Inc. 2-AtchA-94 Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document POl-1719-001, Rev. 0 Section 6, Page 3 of 7 specified by the NRC. 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 ofany plant components and materials not removed in the decommissioning process will also require confirmation and will add to the expense of surveying the facilities alone. The remaining costs include allocations for heavy equipment and temporary services, as well as for other expenses such as regulatory fees and the premiums for nuclear insurance. While site operating costs are greatly reduced following the final cessation of plant operations, certain administrative functions do need to be maintained either at a basic functional or regulatory level. TLG Services, Inc. 2-AtchA-95 Diablo Canyon Ppwer Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis TABLE 6.1 Document POl-1719-001, Rev. 0 Section 6, Page 4 of 7 DECON ALTERNATIVE DECOMMISSIONING COST ELEMENTS, UNIT 1 (thousands of 2014 dollars) Cost Element Total Percentage Decontamination 18,214 1.1 Removal . 141,218 8.4 Packaging 33,435 2.0 Transportation 31,679 1.9 Waste Disposal 199;331 11.9 Program Management [IJ 473,419 28.2 Security 338,910 20.2 Spent Fuel Pool Isolation 26,314 1.6 Spent Fuel Management [2l 213,527 12.7 Insurance and Regulatory Fees 36,956 2.2 Energy 32,071 1.9 Characterization and Licensing Surveys 33,875 2.0 Property Taxes 7,658 0.5 Severance 84,005 5.0 Miscellaneous Equipment 8,421 0.5 Total [3l 1,679,030 100.0 Cost Element Total Percentage License Termination 1,190,754 70.9 Spent Fuel Management 389,775 23.2 Site Restoration 98,501 5.9 Total [3J 1,679,030 100.0 r11 Includes engineering costs f2l Excludes program management costs (staffing) but includes costs for spent fuel loading/transfer costs/spent fuel pool O&M and EP fees [31 Columns may n,ot add due to rounding
  • TLG Services, Inc. 2-AtchA-96 Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis TABLE 6.2 Document POl-1719-001, Rev. 0 Section 6, Page 5 of 7 DECON ALTERNATIVE DECOMMISSIONING COST ELEMENTS, UNIT 2 (thousands of 2014 dollars) Cost Element Total Percentage Decontamination 21,549 1.0 Removal 319,210 15.2 Packaging 32,500 1.5 Transportation 294,378 14.0 Waste Disposal 178,340 8.5 Program Management [IJ 491,299 23.4 Security 348,555 16.6 Spent Fuel Pool Isolation 17,577 0.8 Spent Fuel Management [2J 193, 784 9.2 Insurance and Regulatory Fees 32,862 1.6 Energy 31,910 1.5 Characterization and Licensing Surveys 37,509 1.8 Property Taxes 7,503 0.4 Severance 84,169 4.0 Miscellaneous Equipment 9,026 0.4 Total [3J 2,100,172 100.0 Cost Element Total Percentage License Termination 1,172,913 55.8 Spent Fuel Management 395,217 18.8 Site Restoration 532,042 25.3 Total l3J 2,100,172 100.0 111 Includes engineering costs 121 Excludes program management costs (staffing) but includes costs for spent fuel loading/transfer costs/spent fuel pool O&M and EP fees [3J Columns may not add due to rounding TLG Services, Inc. 2-AtchA-97 Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis TABLE 6.3 Document POl-1719-001, Rev. 0 Section 6, Page 6 of 7 SAFSTOR ALTERNATIVE DECOMMISSIONING COST ELEMENTS, UNIT 1 (thousands of 2014 dollars) Cost Element Total Percentage Decontamination 14,403 0.8 Removal 143,288 7.7 Packaging 23,554 1.3 Transportation 29,063 1.6 Waste Disposal 182,273 9.8 Program Management [IJ 604,377 32.6 Security 377,878 20.4 Spent Fuel Pool Isolation 26,459 1.4 Spent Fuel Management [2] 214,610 11.6 Insurance and Regulatory Fees 53,180 2.9 Energy 37,842 2.0 Characterization and Licensing Surveys 34,831 1.9 Property Taxes 9,548 0.5 Severance 84,470 4.6 MiscellaneouS" Equipment 15,685 0.8 Total [3l 1,851,460
  • 100.0 Cost Element Total Percentage License Termination 1,128,923 ( 61.0 Spent Fuel Management 623,759 33.7 Site Restoration 98,778 5.3 Total [3] 1,851,460 100.0 [1J Includes engineering costs [2J Excludes program management costs (staffing) but includes costs for spent fuel loading/transfer costs/spent fuel pool O&M and EP fees [3] Columns may not add due to rounding TLG Services, Inc. 2-AtchA-98 Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis TABLE 6.4 Document POl-1719-001, Rev. 0 Section 6, Page 7 of 7 SAFSTOR ALTERNATIVE DECOMMISSIONING COST ELEMENTS, UNIT 2 (thousands of 2014 dollars) Cost Element Total Percentage Decontamination 21,401 1.0 Removal 319,891 15.3 Packaging 22,581 1.1 Transportation 292,279 14.0 Waste Disposal 160,224 7.6 Program Management [IJ 439,612 21.0 Security 386,029 18.4 Spent Fuel Pool Isolation 17,615 0.8 Spent Fuel Management [2J 194,121 9.3 Insurance and Regulatory Fees 50,493 2.4 Energy 37, 721 1.8 Characterization and Licensing Surveys 42,625 2.0 Property Taxes 9,373 0.4 Severance 84,353 4.0 Miscellaneous Equipment 16,419 0.8 Total [3J 2,094,736 100.0 Cost Element Total Percentage License Termination 1,048,860 50.1 Spent Fuel Management 512,851 24.5 Site Restoration 533,025 25.4 *Total [3J 2,094,736 100.0 [ll Includes engineering costs [21 Excludes program management costs (staffing) but includes costs for spent fuel loading/transfer costs/spent fuel pool O&M and EP fees [3J Columns may not add due to rounding TLG Services, Inc. 2-AtchA-99 Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis 7. REFERENCES Document POl-1719-001, Rev. 0 Section 7, Page 1 of 4 1. "Decommissioning Cost Analysis for the Diablo Canyon Power Plant," Document POl-1648-001, TLG Services, Inc., December 2012. 2. U.S. Code of Federal Regulations, Title 10, Parts 30, 40, 50, 51, 70 and 72, "General Requirements for Decommissioning Nuclear Facilities," Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 53 Fed. Reg. 24018, June 27, 1988. 3. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Regulatory Guide 1.159, "Assuring the Availability of Funds for Decommissioning Nuclear Reactors," Rev. 2, October 2011. 4. U.S. Code of Federal Regulations, Title 10, Part 20, Subpart E, "Radiological Criteria for License Termination." 5. Code of Federal Regulations, Title 10, Parts 20 and 50, "Entombment Options for Power Reactors," Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 66 Fed. Reg. 52551, October 16, 2001. 6. U.S. Code of Federal Regulations, Title 10, Parts 2, 50 and 51, "Decommissioning of Nuclear Power Reactors," Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 61 Fed. Reg. 39278, July 29, 1996. 7. U.S. Code of Federal Regulations, Title 10, Parts 20, 30, 40, 50, 70, and 72, "Decommissioning Planning," Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Federal Register Volume 76, (p 35512 et seq.), June 17, 2011. 8. "Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982," 42 U.S. Code 10101, et seq. 9. Charter of the Blue Ribbon Commission on America's Nuclear Future, "Objectives and Scope of Activities" http://www.brc.gov/index.php?q=page/charter 10. "Blue Ribbon Commission on America's Nuclear Future, Report to the Secretary of Energy," http://www.brc.gov/sites/default/files/documents/brc finalreport jan2012.pdf, p. 27, 32, January 2012. 11. "Strategy for the Management and Disposal of Used Nuclear Fuel and Level Radioactive Waste," U.S. DOE, January 11, 2013. 12. U.S. Court of Appeals for the District Of Columbia Circuit, In Re: Aiken County, et al, Aug. 2013, http://www.cadc.uscourts.gov/internet/opinions.nsf/BAEOCF34F762EBD9852 57BC6004DEB18/$file/11-1271-1451347.pdf TLG Services, Inc. 2-AtchA-100 Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis 7. REFERENCES (continued) Document POl-1719-001, Rev. 0 Section 7, Page 2 of 4 13. In 2008, the DOE issued a report to Congress in which it concluded that it did not have authority, under present law, to accept spent nuclear fuel for interim storage from decommissioned commercial nuclear power reactor sites. However, the Blue Ribbon Commission, in its final report, noted that: "[A]ccepting spent fuel according to the OFF [Oldest Fuel First] priority ranking instead of giving priority to shutdown reactor sites could greatly reduce the cost savings that could be achieved through consolidated storage if priority could be given to accepting spent fuel from shutdown reactor sites before accepting fuel from still-operating plants ..... The magnitude of the cost savings that could be achieved by giving priority to shutdown sites appears to be large enough (i.e., in the billions of dollars) to warrant DOE exercising its right under the Standard Contract to move this fuel first." For planning purposes only, this estimate does not assume that Vogtle, as a permanently shutdown plant, will receive priority; the fuel removal schedule assumed in this estimate is based upon DOE acceptance of fuel according to the "Oldest Fuel First" priority ranking. The plant owner will seek the most expeditious means of removing fuel from the site when DOE commences performance. 14. U.S. Code of Federal Regulations, Title 10, Part 50, "Domestic Licensing of Production and Utilization Facilities," Subpart 54 (bb), "Conditions of Licenses." 15. "Low Level Radioactive Waste Policy Act," Public Law 96-573, 1980. 16. "Low-Level Radioactive Waste Policy Amendments Act of 1985," Public Law 99-240,
  • 1986. 17. U.S. Code of Federal Regulations, Title 10, Part 61.55 "Waste Classification." 18. U.S. Code of Federal Regulations, Title 10, Part 20, Subpart E, "Final Rule, Radiological Criteria for License Termination," 62 Fed. Reg. 39058, July 21, 1997. 19. "Establishment of Cleanup Levels for CERCLA Sites with Radioactive Contamination," EPA Memorandum OSWER No. 9200.4-18, August 22, 1997. 20. U.S. Code of Federal Regulations, Title 40, Part 141.16, "Maximum contaminant levels for beta particle and photon radioactivity from man-made radionuclides in community water systems." TLG Services, Inc. 2-AtchA-1 01 I I Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document POl-1719-001, Rev. 0 Section 7, Page 3 of 4 7. REFERENCES (continued) 21. "Memorandum of Understanding Between the Environmental Protection Agency and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission: Consultation and Finality on Decommissioning and Decontamination of Contaminated Sites," OSWER 9295.8-06a, October 9, 2002. 22. "Multi-Agency Radiation Survey and Site Investigation Manual (MARSSIM)," NUREG/CR-1575, Rev. 1, EPA 402-R-97-016, Rev. 1, August 2000. 23. Governor State of California, Executive Order D-62-02, Moratorium on the Disposal of Decommissioned Materials. 24. T.S. LaGuardia,et al., "Guidelines for Producing Commercial Nuclear Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Estimates," AIF/NESP-036, May 1986. 25. W.J. Manion and T.S. LaGuardia, "Decommissioning Handbook," U.S. 26. 27. 28. '* 29. 30. 31. 32. Department of Energy, DOE/EV/10128-1, November 1980. "Building Construction Cost Data 2014," Robert Snow Means Company, Inc., Kingston, Massachusetts. Project and Cost Engineers' Handbook, Second Edition, p. 239, American Association of Cost Engineers, Marcel Dekker, Inc., New York, New York, 1984. "Technical Position Paper for Establishing an Appropriate Contingency Factor for Inclusion in the Decommissioning Revenue Requirements", Study Number: DECON-POS-H002, Revision A, Status: Preliminary (provided by PG&E). U.S. Department of Transportation, Title 49 of the Code of Federal Regulations, "Transportation," Parts 173 through 178. Tri-State Motor Transit Company, published tariffs, Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC), Docket No. MC-427719 Rules Tariff, March 2004, Radioactive Materials Tariff, August 2011. :J.C. Evans et al., "Long-Lived Activation Products in Reactor Materials" NUREG/CR-34 7 4, Pacific Northwest Laboratory for the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, August 1984 . . R.I. Smith, G.J. Konzek, W.E. Kennedy, Jr., "Technology, Safety and Costs of Decommissioning a Reference Pressurized Water Reactor Power Station," NUREG/CR-0130 and addenda, Pacific.Northwest Laboratory for the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, June 1978. TLG Services, Inc. 2-AtchA-102 ) \

Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis 7. REFERENCES (continued) Document POl-1719-001, Rev. 0 Section 7, Page 4 of 4 33. H.D. Oak, et al., "Technology, Safety and Costs of Decommissioning a Reference Boiling Water Reactor Power Station," NUREG/CR-0672 and addenda, Pacific Northwest Laboratory for the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, June 1980. 34. San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station, Units 2 and 3, Site Specific Decommissioning Cost Estimate, submitted to U.S. Nuclear Regulatory . Commission on September 23, 2014 (NRC ADAMS -ML14269A034). 35. "Financial Protection Requirements for Permanently Shutdown Nuclear Power Reactors," 10 CFR Parts 50 and 140, Proposed Rule, 62 Fed. Reg. 58690, October 30, 1997. 36. "Microsoft Project Professional 2013," Microsoft Corporation, Redmond, WA. 37. "Atomic Energy Act of 1954," (68 Stat. 919). TLG Services, Inc. 2-AtchA-103 Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis APPENDIX A Document POl-1719-001, Rev. 0 Appendix A, Page 1 of 4 UNIT COST FACTOR DEVELOPMENT TLG Services, Inc. 2-AtchA-104 \ .. __J Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document POl-1719-001, Rev. 0 Appendix A, Page 2 of 4 APPENDIX A UNIT COST FACTOR DEVELOPMENT Example: Unit Factor for Removal of Contaminated Heat Exchanger< 3,000 lbs. 1.. SCOPE Heat exchangers weighing< 3,000 lbs. will be removed in one piece using a crane or small hoist. They will be disconnected from the inlet and outlet piping. The heat exchanger will be sent to the waste processmg area. 2. CALCULATIONS Act Activity ID Description Activity Duration (minutes) a Remove insulation b Moµnt pipe cutters c Install contamination controls d Disconnect inlet and outlet lines e Cap openings f Rig for removal g Unbolt from mounts h Remove contamination controls 1 Remove, wrap, send to waste processing area Totals (Activity/Critical) Duration adjustment(s): + Respiratory protection (50% of critical duration) + Radiation/ALARA adjustment (37.1% of critical duration) Adjusted work duration + Protective clothing adjustment (30% of adjusted duration) Productive work duration + Work break adjustment (8.33 % of productive duration) Total work duration (minutes) ***Total duration::::: 11.217 hr*** 60 60 20 60 20 30 30 15 60 355

  • alpha designators indicate activities that can be performed in parallel TLG Services, Inc. 2-AtchA-105 Critical Duration (minutes)* (b) 60 (b) 60 (d) 30 30 15 _fil! 255 128 95 478 143 621 673 Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis 3.
  • LABOR REQUIRED Crew Laborers Craftsmen Foreman General Foreman Fire Watch Health Physics Technician Total Labor Cost APPENDIX A (continued) Number 3.00 2.00 1.00 0.25 0.05 1.00 Duration (hours) 11.217 11.217 11.217 11.217 11.217 11.217 4. EQUIPMENT & CONSUMABLES COSTS Equipment Costs Consumables/Materials Costs -Universal Sorbent 50@ $0.63 sq. ft. *{1} Document POl-1719-001, Rev. 0 Appendix A,, Page 3 of 4 Rate ($/hr) $58.50 *$73.82 $77.97 $82.70 $58.50 $80.71 Cost $1,968.58 $1,656.08 $874.59 $231.91 $32.81 1$905.32 $5,669.29 none -Tarpaulins (7.5 mils, oil resistant, fire retardant) 50@ $0.28/sq. ft. {2} $31.50 $14.00 $19.89 -Gas torch consumables 1@ $19.89/hr. x 1 hr. {3} Subtotal cost of equipment and materials Overhead & profit on equipment and materials @ 17 .25 % Total costs, equipment & material TOTAL COST: Removal of contaminated heat exchanger <3000 pounds: Total labor cost: Total equipment/material costs: Total craft labor man-hours required per unit: TLG Services, Inc. 2-AtchA-106 $65.39 $11.28 $76.67 $5,745.96 $5,669.29 $76.67 81.88 Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis 5. NOTES AND REFERENCES Document POl-1719-001, Rev. 0 Appendix A, Page 4 of 4 o Work difficulty factors were developed in conjunction with the Atomic Industrial Forum's (now NEI) program to . standardize nuclear decommissioning cost estimates and are delineated in Volume 1, Chapter 5 of the "Guidelines for Producing Commercial Nuclear Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Estimates," AIF/NESP-036, May 1986. o References for equipment & consumables costs: 1. www.mcmaster.com online catalog, McMaster Carr Spill Control (7193T88) 2. R.S. Means (2011) Division 01 56, Section 13.60-0600, page 20 3. R.S. Means (2011) Division 015433, Section 40-6360, page 664 o Material and consumable costs were adjusted using the regional indices for San Luis Obispo, California. TLG Services, Inc. 2-AtchA-107 Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis APPENDIXB Document POl-1719-001, Rev. 0 Appendix B, Page 1 of 7 UNIT COST FACTOR LISTING (DECON: Power Block Structures Only) TLG Services, Inc. 2-AtchA-108 Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document POl-1719-001, Rev. 0 Appendix B, Page 2 of 7 Unit Cost Factor APPENDIXB UNIT COST FACTOR LISTING (Power Block Structures Only) Removal of clean instrument and sampling tubing, $/linear foot Removal of clean pipe 0.25 to 2 inches diameter, $/linear foot Removal of clean pipe >2 to 4 inches diameter, $/linear foot Removal of clean pipe >4 to 8 inches diameter, $/linear foot Removal of clean pipe >8 to 14 inches diameter, $/linear foot Removal of clean pipe > 14 to 20 inches diameter, $/linear foot Removal of clean pipe >20 to 36 inches diameter, $/linear foot Removal of clean pipe >36 inches diameter, $/linear foot Removal of clean valve >2 to 4 inches Removal of clean valve >4 to 8 inches Removal of clean valve >8 to 14 inches Removal of clean valve > 14 to 20 inches Removal of clean valve >20 to 36 inches Removal of clean valve >36 inches Removal of clean pipe hanger for small bore piping Removal of clean pipe hanger for large bore piping Removal of clean pump, <300 pound Removal of clean pump, 300-1000 pound Removal of clean pump, 1000-10,000 pound Removal of clean pump, > 10,000 pound Removal of clean pump motor; 300-1000 pound Removal of clean pump motor, 1000-10,000 pound Removal of clean pump motor, >10,000 pound Removal of clean heat exchanger <3000 pound Removal of clean heat exchanger >3000 pound Removal of clean feedwater heater/deaerator Removal of clean moisture separator/reheater Removal of clean tank, <300 gallons Removal of clean tank, 300-3000 gallon Removal of clean tank, >3000 gallons, $/square foot surface area TLG Services, Inc. 2-AtchA-1 09 Cost/Unit($) 0.64 6.83 9.71 18.80 36.38 47.32 69.62 82.71 125.09 187.99 363.81 473.25 696.24 827.12 43.11 153.78 317.69 876.55 3,467.44 6,708.09 366.40 1,440.67 3,241.51 1,863.57 4,694.16 13,221.06 27,164.50 408.58 1,287.26 10.76 Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document POl-1719-001, Rev. 0 Appendix B, Page 3 of 7 APPENDIXB UNIT COST FACTOR LISTING (Power Block Structures Only) Unit Cost Factor Removal of clean electrical equipment, <300 pound Removal of clean electrical equipment, 300-1000 pound Removal of clean electrical equipment, 1000-10,000 pound Removal of clean electrical equipment, > 10,000 pound Removal of clean electrical transformer < 30 tons Removal of clean electrical transformer > 30 tons Removal of clean standby diesel generator, <100 kW Removal of clean standby diesel generator, 100 kW to 1 MW Removal of clean standby diesel generator, > 1 MW Removal of clean electriGal cable tray, $/linear foot Removal of clean electrical conduit, $/linear foot Removal of clean mechanical equipment, <300 pound Removal of clean mechanical equipment, 300-1000 pound Removal of clean mechanical equipment, 1000-10,000 pound Removal of clean mechanical equipment, > 10,000 I Removal of clean HV AC equipment, <300 pound Removal of clean HV AC equipment, 300-1000 pound Removal of clean HVAC equipment, 1000-10,000 pound Removal of clean HV AC equipment, > 10,000 pound Removal of clean HV AC ductwork, $/pound Removal of contaminated instrument and sampling tubing, $/linear foot Removal of contaminated pipe 0.25 to 2 inches diameter, $/linear foot Removal of contaminated pipe >2 to 4 inches diameter, $,/linear foot Removal of contaminated pipe >4 to 8 inches diameter, $/linear foot Removal of contaminated pipe >8 to 14 inches diameter, $/linear foot Removal of contaminated pipe > 14 to 20 inches diameter, $/linear foot Removal of contaminated pipe >20 to 36 inches diameter, $/linear foot Removal of contaminated pipe >36 inches diameter, $/linear foot Removal of contaminated valve >2 to 4 inches Removal of contaminated valve >4 to 8 inche's TLG Services, Inc. 2-AtchA-110 Cost/Unit($) 172.18 596.53 1,193.05 2,833.62 1,967.92 5,667.24 2,010.05 4,486.57 9,288.11 16.19 7.07 172.18 596.53 1,193.05 2,833.62 208.20 716.77 1,428.53 2,833.62 0.67 2.12 27.60 48.06 76.99 151.04 182.02 252.93 299.41 596.47 713.66 Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document POl-1719-001, Rev. 0 Appendix B, Page 4 of 7 Unit Cost Factor APPENDIXB UNIT COST FACTOR LISTING (Power Block Structures Only) Removal of contaminated valve >8 to 14 inches Removal of contaminated valve > 14 to 20 inches Removal of contaminated valve >20 to 36 inches Removal of contaminated valve >36 inches Removal of contaminated pipe hanger for small bore piping Removal of contaminated pipe hanger for large bore piping Removal of contaminated pump, <300 pound Removal of contaminated pump, 300-1000 pound Removal of contaminated pump, 1000-10,000 pound Removal of contaminated pump, > 10,000 pound Removal of contaminated pump motor, 300-1000 pound Removal of contaminated pump motor, 1000-10,000 pound Removal of contaminated pump motor, > 10,000 pound Removal of contaminated heat exchanger <3000 pound Removal of contaminated heat exchanger >3000 pound Removal of contaminated tank, <300 gallons Removal of contaminated tank, >300 gallons, $/square foot Removal of contammated electrical equipment, <300 pound Removal of contaminated electrical equipment, 300-1000 pound Removal of contaminated electrical equipment, 1000-10,000 pound Removal of contaminated electrical equipment, > 10,000 pound Removal of contaminated electrical cable tray, $/linear foot Removal of contaminated electrical conduit, $/linear foot Removal of contaminated mechanical equipment, <300 pound Removal of contaminated mechanical' equipment, 300-1000 pound Removal of contaminated mechanical equipment, 1000-10,000 pound Removal of contaminated mechanical equipment, > 10,000 pound Removal of contaminated HV AC equipment, <300 pound Removal of contaminated HV AC equipment, 300-1000 pound Removal of contaminated HV AC equipment, 1000-10, 000 pound TLG Services, Inc. 2-AtchA-111 Cost/Unit($) 1,457.10 1,855.89 2,475.96 2,940.80 196.57 627.04 1,271.73 2,912.20 9,419.98 22,949.80 1,224.80 3,820.36 8,577.08 5,745.96 16,620.69 2,109.59 41.10 992.28 2,374.42 4,571.64 8,896.21 47.99 22.33 1,104.56 2,624.64 5,045.24 8,896.21 1,104.56 2,624.64 5,045.24 Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document POl-1719-001, Rev. 0 Appendix B, Page 5 of 7 APPENDIXB UNIT COST FACTOR LISTING (Power Block Structures Only) Unit Cost Factor Cost/Unit($) Removal of contaminated HVAC equipment, > 10,000 pound Removal of contaminated HVAC ductwork, $/pound Removal/plasma arc cut of contaminated thin metal components, $/linear in. Additional decontamination of surface by washing, $/square foot Additional decontamination of surfaces by hydrolasing, $/square foot Decontamination rig hook up and flush, $/ 250 foot length Chemical flush of components/systems, $/gallon Removal of clean standard reinforced concrete, $/cubic yard Removal of grade slab concrete, $/cubic yard Removal of clean concrete floors, $/cubic yard Removal of sections of clean concrete floors, $/cubic yard Removal of clean heavily rein concrete w/#9 rebar, $/cubic yard Reniova:l of contaminated.heavily rein concrete w/#9 rebar, $/cubic yard Removal of clean heavily rein concrete w/#18 rebar, $/cubic yard Removal of contaminated heavily rein concrete w/#18 rebar, $/cubic yard Removal heavily rein concrete w/#18 rebar & steel embedments, $/cubic yard Removal of below-grade suspended floors, $/cubic yard Removal of clean monolithic concrete structures, $/cubic yard Removal of contaminated monolithic concrete structures, $/cubic yard Removal of clean foundation concrete, $/cubic yard Removal of contaminated foundation concrete, $/cubic yard Explosive demolition of bulk concrete, $/cubic yard Removal of clean hollow masonry block wall, $/cubic yard Removal of contaminated hollow masonry block wall, $/cubic yard Removal of clean solid masonry block wall, $/cubic yard
  • I Removal of contaminated solid masonry block wall, $/cubic yard Backfill of below-grade voids, $/cubic yard Removal of subterranean tunnels/voids, $/linear foot Placement of concrete for below-grade voids, $/cubic yard Excavation of clean material, $/cubic yard TLG Services, Inc. 2-AtchA-112 8,896.21 2.88 5.18 10.82 46.25 9,363.44 20.36 176.00 236.02 458.27 1,369.56 294.72 2,746.44 372.62 3,635.61 567.86 458.27 1,148.84 2,741.24 902.94 2,553.97 39.04 127.04 450.03 127.04 450.03 36.27 146.14 139.00 3.78 Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document POl-1719-001, Rev. 0 Appendix B, Page 6 of 7 Unit Cost Factor APPENDIXB UNIT COST FACTOR LISTING (Power Block Structures Only) Excavation of contaminated material, $/cubic yard Removal of clean concrete rubble (tipping fee included), $/cubic yard Removal of contaminated concrete rubble, $/cubic yard Removal of building by volume, $/cubic foot Removal of clean building metal siding, $/square foot Removal of contaminated building metal siding, $/square foot Removal of standard asphalt roofing, $/square foot Removal of transite panels, $/square foot Scarifying contaminated concrete surfaces (drill & spall), $/square foot Scabbling contaminated concrete floors, $/square foot Scabbling contaminated concrete walls, $/square foot Scabbling contaminated ceilings, $/square foot Scabbling structural steel, $/square foot Removal of clean overhead crane/monorail< 10 ton capacity Removal of contaminated overhead crane/monorail< 10 ton capacity Removal of clean overhead crane/monorail> 10-50 ton capacity Removal of contaminated overhead crane/monorail> 10-50 ton capacity Removal of polar crane > 50 ton capacity Removal of gantry crane > 50 ton capacity Removal of structural steel, $/pound Removal of clean steel floor grating, $/square foot Removal of contaminated steel floor grating, $/square foot Removal of clean free standing steel liner, $/square foot Removal of contaminated free standing steel liner, $/square foot Removal of clean concrete-anchored steel liner, $/square foot Removal of contaminated concrete-anchored steel liner, $/square foot Placement of scaffolding in clean areas, $/square foot Placement of scaffolding in contaminated areas, $/square foot Landscaping with topsoil, $/acre Cost of CPC B-88 LSA box & preparation for use TLG Services, Inc. 2-AtchA-113 Cost/Unit($) 52.86 28.80 33.74 0.38 1.69 6.08 2.99 2.70 16.23 10.18 27.24 93.82 8.28 830.25 2,454.05 1,992.60 5,888.73 8,320.63 35,420.29 0.26 5.97 17.93 16.14 48.13 8.07 56.11 17.60 31.95 26,800.29 2,212.44 Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document POl-1719-001, Rev. 0 Appendix B, Page 7 of 7 Unit Cost Factor APPENDIXB UNIT COST FACTOR LISTING (Power Block Structures Only) Cost of CPC B-25 LSA box & preparatfon for use Cost of CPC B-12V 12 gauge LSA box & preparation for use Cost of CPC B-144 LSA box & preparation for use Cost ofLSA drum & preparation for use Cost of cask liner for CNSI 8 120A cask (resins) Cost of cask liner for CNSI 8 120A cask (filters) Decontamination of surfaces with vacuuming, $/square foot TLG Services, Inc. 2-AtchA-114 Cost/Unit($) 2,025.85 1,655.88 11,184.40 230.65 13,296.62 9,629.75 1.02 Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis APPENDIXC Document POl-1719-001, Rev. 0 Appendix C, Page 1 of 21 DETAILED COST ANALYSIS DE CON Tables C-1 Diablo Canyon Power Plant, Unit 1 ................................................................... 2 C-2 Diablo Canyon Power Plant, Unit 2 ................................................................. 12 TLG Services, Inc. 2-AtchA-115 l\J :T 1> O> Diablo Canyon Power Pla11t Deconuninfoninz Co*t AnalJ"*i* Activity Jude.. Actlvlt ' OHC:rl tlon PERIOD h-Shutdown throuib Tr1u11ltlon Period la Direcc DecommiM.iooing Acch*itie* la.I.I Prepare preliminary deoommi&l!ioning coel la.1.2 Notification or Ceesalion orOperatiODI la.US kf:move (uc( & IOUl'Ce material ln.1.4 Noc mention or Pennaoent Ocfuelinp: la.1.5 De3eli\*nte plant. systems & JlroeefM Ja.l.6 Prepare and submit PSDAR lu.1.7 Re\*iew plant. dwgs & 11pecs. lo.1.8 Perbn1 detailed rad surwiy la.1.0 E:11timm.c by-product inn!ulory ltd.10 Eud product description In.I.II Dclailcdby-µroductim*e11tory ln.1.12 Define nlajorwurkscqueoce la.1.13 Perform SER mu\ EA In.I.I<! Perfonn Site.Specific Col!l Study ln.1.15 Prepnre/submit License TenniMtkln Plan la.l.IG Receh*e NRC approvnl c.r t.enrun11tion plan Activity Specifications la.1.17.1 Pl11nl &tem1>0rnryfacilities ln.1.17.2 Planl"]'Mem11 111.1.17.3 NSSB Decontamination Flu1h 111.1.17.4 React:c.r internals la.1.17.i.i Reacic.r\'Cll8e) ln.l.17.6 Biological i.-bil!ld la.1.17.7 Steam generaton la.1.17.8 Reinkin:ed COO('rele ln.1.17.\f la. 1.17.10 Conden!9C'rs la.1.17.11Plant1tructuro1&building' la.1.17.12Wa1temaoag(>meot la. I. 17.13 l'ao.."ilit.y & si1e clueooul 111.1.17 Tof1.1l Pltrnning & Site PrepRrations In.I.IS Prep:tre dismnntHng l!CQUence Jn.l.IO Plant. prep. & temp. B\'OOl'I la.l.20 De11ign wet.er dean-up sy1Wm la.1.21 Rigg:ingf{))nf.. Cntrl Emlp1/tooling/e1c. lu.1.22 Procure ensksllinen & contniners la.I Subtohtl Period lo Adivit.y Cotti.I Period la Addilio11nl Cost.& IR.2.1 SµenL Fuel P1X.1l leolntio11 la.2.2 Disp!'.1881 of Contaminated Toole & Ja.2 Subtotal Period la Additional C<.81.!! Period la CoUaleral Coel8 la.3.1 J-:uvironment.nl Perm ii.. and Fee1 la.3.2 GTCC Swagc Pennittilll'. (PG&E L.abor1 1a3.3 GTOC Slol'age Permitting (Contractor) la.3 Sub!ulnl Period la Coll11ternl C-osts TLG &1*vicn, Inc. Off-Site Remov11l P11ck11.inc TrRDsport Pro<'eulnc C..t c. .. Costs Co1t1 c. ... 211) 103 219 103 Table C-1 Diablo Canyon Unit 1 DECON Decommissioning Cost Estimate (Thousands of2014 Dollars) LLRW NRC Disposal Other Total Tot11l Uc.Tenn. eo. .. Cotls Conlin enc Coit! eo. .. 202 43 2*16 240 . n/o . 3!0 67 377 377 713 163 8(16 '"" " IM "" 188 1'8 156 "" 188 1'8 202 13 215 245 1,163 200 1.412 1.412 481 103 58* 584 775 IGG £M2 042 630 136 771 771 763 164 027 83< .... 139 ,.. 708 78 17 9,1 .. 1,101 236 1,337 1,337 1,008 216 1,224 1,224 78 17 94 94 *18' 104 ... ... 248 63 ilOI 151 62 13 " 62 13 " 484 104 ... 294 713 163 1166 866 140 30 169 86 5,860 1,209 7,124 6,273 372 80 462 452 3,000 644 3,6*14 3,644 217 *17 264 "' 2,300 *If.I-I 2.794 2.794 191 *II 232 232 IG.730 3,602 20.328 J9,.f77 21,00-4 *.GOO 26.314 26,314 2,835 1,068 4,225 4,225 2,835 21,664 5,718 '°*""" 36,538 9*9 " 1,1[)3 1,153 3.200 700 3,996 3,996 5!0 100 019 619 4,i40 1,019 5,769 5,769 Spent Fuel Site Processed Burhi.l Volumes M11n111ement Restor11tlon Volume ChutA CIHsB CIHsC Costs c. ... Cu. Feel Cu.Feet Cu. Feet C\1. Feet 03 78 161 " " 21J.I " 861 861 l(*,245 10.2'5 GTCC Cu. Ff!f!t Document PDl-1719-001, Rev. 0 Appendix C, Pa/le :!of 21 Burial/ UtUity11ad ProcHsed Curt Conh*11ctor Wt., Lbs. M1111houn M*nhoun I.JOO 2.000 4,600 l,OfA.1 1,000 1,300 7.600 3.100 oOOO 4.000 4,920 4,167 500 7,100 11,500 500 3,12U 1,600 400 400 3,120 4,600 000 37,827 2,400 1,400 t280 n.15a G24.945 317 C12UU5 317 N :T :p--.J Diablo Ctm,Yort Power Plant Decommiuionin1 Co*t Anal>**ia Activity In des Actlvtt Descrl tlon Period la Period-Df'pendent. Goel:& la.4.1 lneurance Ja.4.2 PropN1yta:o;-e8 la.4.3 Het1lth1>byskf!eupplies lt1.4.4 Heavy equipment 1tnlal la . .Ui of DAW generated ln..&.G Plant. energy budget la .. 1.7 NRC la..&.8 Emergem .. 'Y Pleoning Fees la.4.9 Spent Fuel Pool O&M la.UO ISFSI Operating Coe!h la.4.11 $e\*eranoo Related Cost.& la.4.12 StalTCoal la.4.13 Utilit}' SUilT Co&t la.4 Subtotal Period I a Period-Dependent Col:ltl!! la.O TOTAL PERIOD la COST PERIOD lb -Deeommi11ionlnr PrepuaUons Period lb Direct Dea.mmis11iouing Aclinlie.'1 Detaifod Work Procedure* lb.I.LI Plant l!!YSlt"WS lb.1.1.2 NSSS Deconl.aminalioo Flueh lb.1.1.3 Reactorinlernalit lb.l.1.4 Re:mainingbuildinge Jb.1.1.6 CRD cooling alll!t'mbly lb.1.1.6 CRD housings & ICI tube11 lb.1.1.7 l.11curein111rumenl.a1ion lb.1.1.8 Reactorvef!61!.I lb.l.1.9 FacilityclO@IOOut lb.J.1.10 t.lill.'lile11hields lb.I.I.II Biologic11\sb)eld lb.J.J.12 Steam gcneraton lb.1.1.13 ReinforeeJ concrete lh.1.1.M t.lainTurbine ib.1.1.IO Uain Condenaen Jb.1.1.16 Auxilii.ry building Jb.i.1.17 Reactor building lb.LI Total lb.1.2 Decon primal')' loop lb.I Subtotal Period lb Ad.ivity Cost.ii Period lb .i\dditional Coete lb.2.1 SiteCharncteriwtion lb.2.2 Hazardous Waste M.anagemenl lh.2.3 Mi!Led Waste ;\lanagement lb.2 Sublolal Period lb Additional Cc.Pts Period lb U.llateral Coe1 .. lb.3.1 Deoon equipn1enl lb.3.2 DOC etaffrelocation expenses lh.3.3 Proce11e decommissioning water W[l9te Jh.3.4 Prooeu deeon1miseioning chemical flush waste lb.3.5 Smalt tnol 1dlowarn:e lb.3.6 Pipe cul ting equipment. lb.3.7 Decon rig lb.3.8 Envinmmeotal Permit..s and Foos Jb.3.9 GTCC Storoge Permilling Labor) Jb.3.JO GTCC Stor11ge Pennitting (Contractor) lb.3 Subtotal Pf'riod lb Collateral C-Ollls TLG &,.vicn, lnc. Off-Site Deeon Removal Packaging Tl"an.'lport ProceHlnr eo .. Coot Co.'11.'J Co1ts Co.'Jt9 G26 607 I.I 1,003 " 1,093 233 107 797 797 942 <6 32 &I 2 94 251 J,100 1,6"0 2,690 1,103 127 306 Table C-1 Diablo Canyon Unit 1 DECON Decommissioning Cost Estimate (Thousands of 2014 Dollars) LLRW NBC 01.'Jposlll Other Toh.I Total Lie.Term. Costs Co.'Jh Co11th1 enc Costs eo. .. 1,132 162 1,294 1,294 177 25 203 203 , .. 714 714 122 689 """ 16 43 13 2,737 087 3,324 3,324 1,181 , . .,, 1,300 1,300 1,001 143 1,1.J5 792 170 003 547 117 6"4 41,741 8,960 50,701 50,701 22.783 4.800 27,673 27.673 37.370 8.022 45,392 45,392 JG 100,462 23,565 134,153 131.382 2,851 lii2,610 33,895 190,788 187,100 734 168 891 802 150 33 188 188 388 83 471 471 209 45 254 64 15G 33 188 188 105 33 188 188 156 33 188 188 003 121 .... 084 186 40 226 113 70 15 85 "" 186 40 226 226 713 153 86G 8G6 15G 33 188 94 2,12 52 294 242 52 2\H 423 91 514 '"" 423 91 514 463 6,154 1.100 6.261 5.083 570 1,367 1,367 5.154 1,677 7,628 6,4i>l 5,234 2.247 7,481 7,.J81 217 47 264 264 287 62 349 349 5,738 2.356 8.003 8.003 202 1,144 l,U4 l,*165 315 1,780 1,780 151 103 386 386 5,i83 2,138 8,269 8,200 1 3 ""' 1,336 1,336 3*13 1,943 1,948 471 IOI 672 572 221 47 269 269 513 110 623 623 5,984 2,670 3,597 16,326 16,326 Spent Fuel Site ProceHed BuriRI VolumH M11narement Restoration Volume Cla.'l.'IA ClusB c1.,,c Costs eo ... Cu.Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet GIO 1.1.15 963 """ 2,771 610 2.771 851 10.855 89 191 113 94 294 '°' 51 51 1,177 1.177 291 887 291 887 GTCC Cu. Feet Document POl-17l!J..OOI, Rev. 0 Appendix C, Pa1e 3 of 21 Buri*I/ Utility and Proce.'l.'led Craft Contractor Wt. Lbs. M*nhoun Manhoun 12,190 20 302,008 423,400 12.100 20 726,308 G37,130 337 800.061 4,733 1,000 2,500 1,300 1,000 1,000 1,000 3,630 1,200 400 1,200 4,000 1,000 1,560 1,5GO 2,730 2,730 33.243 1,067 1.067 33,243 2G,OOO 9.412 25.000 0,412 17,471 57 9-1,631 166 112,002 223 N :l> 0 ::::r '.!: CX> Oioblo Con,10n Power Plant Dec:onm1Wionin1 Cost Anuly*i* Activity ludu: Actlvlt Descrl >tlon Perkxt lb J>eriod.()ppeodeot Coeu1 lb.4.1 Decun 1upplies lb.4.2 ln*W"*ntt lb.<1.3 l'ropertyt11u1 lb.<1.4 Hellitb pbyak:. auppliM tb.4.6 Hel'IY}' equipment renlal ib.4.G Di1poul oC DA\\' generated lb . .&.7 Plant energr bu*t ib.4.8 NRCF'eet 1b.rn Emergency Ph111ning Fl-ea lh.4.10 Spent Fuel Pool O&J.1 lb.<1.11 tsrnr Operali11g Costs lb.ol.12 Sernranc:t: Related Coat1 lb.4.13 Security StefTGi.t lb.4 1-4 DOCSt.afTCoiit lb.4.16 Utilit}' Sc.afl'Coat lb.I Sublolal Period lb Period-Dependent Co.ta lb.O TOTAL PERIOD lb COST PERIOD 1 TOTALS PERIOD Z. -lAr*e Componeut Runoval Period 2a Dired. Decommissioning Aclh'itit>8 Nuelel'lr Siemn Supply Sy1tem Remwal 2a.1.l.I Re8ctor Ux>lnnl Pip1nr 2a.l.l.2 Prt-Muriu-r Quench Tank 211.1.1.3 Reftctor Cuol11n1 PwniJ8 & Moton 211.l.l.4 Pre..,uriu-r 2*.1.1.6 Sream GelK"ratOl'f 2a.l.l.6 JU.1 ired Steam Gern.*rator Unit.a 2a.J.l.7 CROl\bnCJ.&:rvk-e Strur:t.ure Rt>mul'al 211.l.l.8 Reactor Ve1eel l.nterna\!1 21'1.1.l.9 RellCtorVelll!I 2a.l.1 "°"'" Hemovnl of Major 1<:quipn1enl 28.l.2 Turbi.11e/Generalor 28.l.3 l.lttb1Conden!lf!l'1I Cnscadinr 0... from Clean Building Demolilion 211.IA.I '"'-* 2*.1.4.2 ConlllinmenL Penetration Area 2a.l.4.3 J<'uel Hudlin& 2a.14 Toe.11 Dit1KJU1I of Sy11tem1 2a.l.6.I Au%ilia11*St.eam 2al.6.2 AuxiliaJ1' Sieam 2a 1.63 Cooden11o11ta &'y1tem 2a 1.6*1 Condenaate Sr1tem (l111ulated) 2a.l.6.6 Containment Spray 2a.l.6.6 Exiroctkm Sleam & Healer Drip 2a.l.6.7 Feedwa1er S)'!lem 2a.l.6.8 J<'eedwaler Sy11tcm (ln1ulated) 2a..l.6.9 Fet'dwater SrMem (RCA ln!lulfltP<i} :?a.l.6.10 Fttdwaler Syttem (RCA) 2a.l.6.11 Lube Oil Di1lribution & Punfkalion 2a.l.6.12 N11ropn & Hydruren 21'1.1.6.13 & 11,,vdroeen (ln8ulated) 2a.l.5.l-4 Nilrotien & (RCA ln1ulatetl) 2a.l.5.Hi Nii f\llf\'11 & Hydrofl'.en (RCA) 211.1.6.16 Oily Wii!er &>11amt<>r & TO Swnp 2tl.l.6.17 Saltwnler System 2a.t.6.18 Turbint* St.cam Supply 2a.l.6.19 Turbint* Steam Supply (RCA) nG Servicn, Inc. Orf.Site Decon RenK1v*I P11cit.rinr TraDJpor1 Procenlnr c. .. Coo< Cotti Coou Com 29 292 281 29 073 3,416 1,876 136 307 3,416 2,768 367 ... ""' 361 .. .. .. 37 8 163 131 169 213 63 ,. 630 131 503 3,330 3,239 2.034 2,298 1,982 207 380 2'0 .. 216 10,286 10,005 2,0(H IGI 1,186 2,83'1 808 1,no1 22,386 19,-400 7,JOO 212 600 1.262 78 206 1,645 16' m " 18 708 293 262 121 " 2i4 .. li6 128 34 13 8 2 120 20 Ill
  • 38 to 198 790 871 26<1 .. Table C-1 Diablo Ca_uyon Unit 1 DECON Decommissioning Cost Estimate (ThouHnds of 2014 Dollars) U.RW NHC Spent Fuel ObponJ Other Total Tot*l Uc.Term. M*n*fement c.. .. Co91s Contlu enc c. ... Costs Costs 10 ,. 39 '61 80 ... 642 88 13 IOI IOI 104 """ 300 00 311 311 10 ' " " 2,714 ... 3,2fJ7 a,201 3'2 *10 391 301 197 71 ""' 668 393 84 477 477 271 "" 329 329 2.4!S4 627 2.081 2,081 10.670 2.269 12,839 12.839 7,040 1.612 8.568 ..... 18,638 4,001 22,688 22,638 10 43,674 9,-427 G3,622 62,2*18 1.374 0,9.U 67,137 17,065 86670 83.118 1,374 &795 200,747 00,900 2iG,468 270,28-4 4,146 1,181 *** 2,866 2,866 166 104 362 302 1,-431 737 2,823 2,823 744 ... l,"6() 1,1166 12,696 6,993 28,796 28,796 12,696 6,298 22,272 22,272 661 683 2,002 2,002 29,646 367 30,860 83,362 88,362 """' 367 7,894 28,868 28,3&6 62.087 714 63,719 IG7,886 167,686 ... 267 110 Sitt 271 1.633 1,633 17 96 .. u 2'9 2-t9 3ll2 1,677 J,Sn 33 187 608 21)() 1,133 1,133 162 800 6.1 3'6 1,608 6W 2,683 2,683 09 332 to "" 38 213 '"' 204 7ll8 71J8 22 II 41 41 26 l*W 26 I 4 . .. 14 81 70 271 271 132 63 2"7 247 43 2*11 170 000 3,162 1,001 0,388 '*'"" Site Proces.ed Burial Volume!! Huloratlon Volume Ch1HA ClusB CIHsC OTCC c.. .. Cu. Feel Cu. Feet Cu. Feel Cu.Feet Cu. Feet ... ... 1,177 ... 887 2,0'l8 11,CiOO 887 2,2i6 321! 4,701 2,4*13 41,712 41,031 3,881 t,878 003 786 0,420 107,071 003 780 267 *** 187 1,836 800 ... 6,4.41 332 .. 213 1,617 811 146 " 16 2112 478 2 .. 1 000 11,428 Document POl-1119-001, Rev. 0 Appendix C, Pa1e 4 of 21 Burl*I/ Utlllty*nd Proceu1ed CrRft Contr*ctor Wt. Lbs. M*nho\ln M*nhoun 7,0fN " 142,21-t 63,091 210.004 7,00< " 416.300 119,0&l 26,301 468,966 700,221 26,638 1,259,016 200,153 I0,138 30,667 1,073 77-4,000 '*""' 100 306,214 2,366 ... 3.360,761 23,233 1,750 3,126,629 I0,800 1,126 146,494 7,9'76 404,'113 33,167 1,469 003,382 33, 167 1,4li9 9,300,002 126,487 6,830 3,033 0.8i6 11,896 70< 1.7-46 1 ... 346 2.3IO 111.86!.! 3,714 10,671 4,aGi 331,619 3,631 4,162 708 2,666 92,470 1,793 4,867 86 1,817 316 17 037 77 17,803 l,*163 20,138 4;7 2,fr.!G 11,966 GOG, GOO 12,203 Dioblo Con,on Power Planl Decommia.ionin1 Co*I Analy.I* Activity lndu: Actlvlt Dtterl Ion Di*puewl o( Plant System* (l'Onl inlW!dj 2*. 1.6.20 Turbinr 11nd °"Dl'.ralor 2a.1.6.21 Turbine *11d Geoeralor (lwulat.ed) 211.l.6 Total* 2-.1.G ScatrolcUne in 1uppon. oC decomm1A1toninJ Subtctal. Pe:riod 211 kf.i,*lty Coeu Period 2a Add1tio1uil Co.ta 2o.2. I Ren1edi1tl AcHon Sun*ey1 2a.2.2 Retired He11ctor Head 211.2.3 PG&J.; RPV St..t1fTSuJJport TellD'I 2a.2..I DOC RJlV Staff Support. Team 211 2 Subtot.al Period 211 AdtlitKinal Coet1 Period 2a C<;Ualeral Co.U 211.3. I Proceu decommiNioning wnter wul.e 2a.3.2 Proceu deoommiNionin1 chemical flu1h waN.e 2a.3.3 Small tool 11J1llowance 2a.3..t Emirorunental Permh.a and F't:fl 211.3.11 GTCC St.<<¥ Permitting (PG&E Labor) 2a.3.6 GTCC Storage Permitting (ContrM:tor) 2a.3 Subtotal Pf'riod 211 Collateral Cash Perkid 2a Period-Dependenl <Oat" 211.4.1 Decon 1mppliH 211.4.2 lntlU'lllJ(!e 211.4.3 Property l*XH 211.4.4 Heall h phyeiCll flupplieto 2111.4.ll Heavy equipmenL renl*I 2a.4.G Dil!poaal of DAW renerated 2a.4. 7 Plan! 1H1ergr bud,el 2a.4.8 NRC Fee1 2a.ol.9 Emel'gt1ncy P1anoing Feet1 2aA.10 Spent. Pw1 O&M 2a.4. l I ISFSI Opcr111.inlf Cofit1 h..6.12 Se\'erance ltel11led Co81.1 2a .. I. 13 Spent CanietenK.>\'f:rpticlr:11 2*. l.14 Security Staff Cost 211..t. 16 DOC Slaff Coel 2o . .J. JG Utility So1rr C'olL 2aA Sublofol Period 2a Period-Dependent Coeh 211.0 TOTAL Pt:RIOD 2a COST PERIOD 2b-Site Decontamination Period 2b Direct. DeconmiHk.ning Actirit.ie. Di111)0MI of Plant Sy1t.etn.1 21.. I. I I Capital AddiUorui 85-2002 (clean) 2b 1.1.2 Capital Add1Uo1ui 80-2002 {rontaminated) 2b.l. l.3 Chemk:al & Volume Cootrof 2b.l. l.4 Chmik:fll & Volume Control (tnsuJated) 2b.l.l.5 CooiponentCoolingWater 2b. I. I.6 Canponent Coolin& W11ter (RCA) 2b.J.l.7 CcmprenedAfr 2b. 1.1.8 Ccmpreued Air (lntulated) 2b. I. 1.9 ConprelM'ld Air (RCA ln11ulaled) 2b.l.J.IO Com11reslledAir(RCA} 2b.l.l.ll Die9el Engioo-Generator 2b.I. 1.12 Oie9el E11Jine-Geoora1or llntulaled) 2b.1.l.13 tClt>anJ 2b. I. L 14 Ele<:1rieal (Conlaminated) 2b. I. I. IO Eklctriad (Deoon1.a111illllled) 2b.l.l.IB Fire Prolection 2b.l.l.17 Go&eou11 Radw11ete TLG ServicH, Inc. Decon eo .. l,i2.a 69 196 196 1,900 918 338 Removal Tuasport Cost Costs Costs 84 28 "'"" 2,26G 31,679 3,630 7,443 10.973 tl,960 100 400 1,268 ... 204 622 181 6 29 ... 167 12 2,227 636 3,481 300 .. 16 19,930 263 263 126 126 20.378 38 ... 26 149 2 .. .. 123 G 183 """' 61 81 84 .. 7,688 16 61 11 .. 1 13 Off...Slte Proceuln1 Costs Table C-1 Diablo Canyon Un.it 1 DECON Decommissioning Cost Estimate (Thousand* o( 2014 Dollars) LLRW Disposal CottJ 0,1131> 26 G8,4--li 1.615 1,516 "'" 235 150 150 70.347 '"' 1,927 342 1,852 22 421 1,124 1,007 72 Other Co!tt 71< 5,877 6,006 5.876 17,860 3.213 2,306 2.(i79 8,128 1,739 006 8,882 2,1"9 2,443 2,707 1,8C8 9,100 l,BGa 66,601 7i,702 116,873 291.664 318.246 Total Conlin encv 18 G ... ...... 2.623 . ., 1,300 6,()00 109 ., 600 ... ... 1,067 70 249 87 1,263 1,008 ,. 1,007 ... """ 681 401 1,0GO 400 M,2<J6 16.670 24 872 66.097 131.239 ... 361 1,831 ... " ... .. 19 301 40 3 .,. 640 747 "' .... Total Cosu 102 34 14,491 3,119 188,476 8,400 2,400 7,407 7,136 211,309 "'" 362 U'1l 2,800 3,133 10,831 267 1,988 693 """ 9,041 -10,789 2,445 2,71!2 '""" 2,209 11,08!) 2,263 80,898 94,361 140,745 368,131 OO'l,838 " 1,398 6,143 l,i23 248 ..... 220
  • 73 1,358 227 14 2,70{; 2,631 4,228 2,922 228 NRC Lie. Term. Coso 10,976 3,119 183,868 8AOO 2,400 7,407 7,136 211,300 3:16 3,940 zeoo 3,133 10,7116 267 1,088 .... 4,i1f2 fl,041 ""' 10,780 2,.14(i 11,089 80,698 0-1.361 140.746 367,449 677.601 1,3"" 6,143 1,723 3,000 73 1,358 2,631 2,922 228 Spent Fuel Mllnafement Cotti 2,792 3,288 2,269 2,2(;3 10,613 J0.613 102 34 3,616 4,61!! 3G .. .. 4.72*1 22\l
  • l*l 2,705 4,228 Cu. Feel Cu. Feel Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feel 21,087 .. , 6,()72 6(172 *53 403 ..... 140.616 1.78£i ..... 1,236 6,692 .. 1,622 4,061 *.006 2G2 786 786 Document POl-111'-00I, Rev. 0 AppendU C, Pa1e 5 of 21 Burial I Proce11ed Wt. Lbs. 29,323 I0,681,000 822,<142 27.170 27.170 111,698 111.Ml8 II \.42300 108,806 424,620 76,243 407,837 4,883 112.770 3l'J3,970 16,{15J 1,244 422 67,001 16,818 237,569 71.016 2,008 73,114 .. .. 182 182 310,943 2,830 B,756 21,664 10,766 3,078 8,014 2,744 98 393 i,199 2,760 178 32,770 S,666 49,641 Ci,400 1,IGG Utility .ud ContrACtor Manhour.11 '" 69,808 01,691 llil.637 OCI0,241 712.671 1,308,922 2.030.736 3.,089,102

"' 0 Diablo Cony<m Power Plant DecommiHionin1 Coat AnalJ'lli11 Activity lnde.x Actlvit\* Descd lion Di8JJUflal oC Pl1:1ni Sys1em1 (cunl ioued) 2b. l.l.18 llVAC (Cle11n lnsul11t.ed) 2b.l.l.19 1-IVAC(Clean) 2b.J. l.20 H\IAC (Conlaminated J119ulm.ed) 2b.l.l.21 H\IAC(Ux!Utmin11ted) 2b. I. l.22 Liquid Ju.dwaste 2b. I. l.23 Liquid Ju.dwHte (]nsulated) 2b.l.l.24 2b. I. l.25 M11ke-up W11ter (lt1Mulaled) 2b. l. l.26 Mtike-up Wat.er (RCA ln1ul11tfld) 2b. I. i.27 Muke-u1l W1:tt.er (RCA) 2b. l. l.28 Miacellnnrou1 Re11ctor Oiolant 2b. I. l.29 Nuclear Sleam Supply Sampling 2b. I. l.30 Nuclear Sleam Supply Sampling (lnsuluted 2b. I. l.31 Reaidual Heat Remui*al 2b.1.l.32 Snrety Injection 2b.1. l.33 Snrets Injection (]naulat.ed) 2b. l.1.J.t Safot>* lnjecuon (RCA lneulated) 2b. I. l.35 Sarety I11jec::t.10n (RCA) 2b. I. l.3G Sel"\'ice Coolini Waler 2L.1.1.37 Sel"\*ioe Cooling Watt:r (RCA) 2b.l.l Tot1:tls 2b. l.2 Scaffolding in l!Upport of derommiuioning Derontmniualion ofSil:e Buildings 2b.l.3.I *RellClor 2b. l.3.2 Capit11I Additiolllll 80-2004 2b. l.3.3 Cootuinnwnt Pent'tra1ion Area 2b.l.J Toi els 2b.I Sublotal PerkKI 2b Activit.y Co&.-11 Period 2b Addiuomd f'...o&UI 2b.2. I Remt.>dial Action Surn*ya 2b.2 Sublot11\ PerkN:l 2b AJdilfonal CoM.,, Period 2b Cost* 2b.J. I Prncen t1ecommiuioning water w11ete 2b.3.2 Prown decommissioning chemical Ou1h waste 2b.3.3 Sn11dl tool allowance 2b.3 . .J En\*ironment11I Pennil.fl and Feeti 2b.3 SubloCal Pertod 2b CoUai.eral Chit.fl Period 2b Period.Dependent Coals 2b.4. I Demo supplieii 2b..l.2 Insurance 2bA.3 Proriertyt..ue9 2b . .J.4 liealtb phy*it.,. supplies 2b.4.5 Me1wy equipment rental 2L.4.6 Di.s1io.nl of DAW generated 2L.4.7 PlanLcrit:rip*l.ud1ie1 2b.4.8 NRCt'oo1 2b.4.9 Plmining Fees 2b.4. IO Spent Fuel Pool O&M 2bA. I l Liquid ltatlw1t1le Processing Equipment&l"\*ief!ll 2b.4.12 JSF'SI Operoling "2b.4.13 SenirRnce Rrlated Coeh 2b.4. I-& Spent Fuel Storage C...nislers.Ovt"rpacks 2b.4. l5 Security S111fTf'..<111t 2b.4.16 DOCS1111TCo.t 2b.4.17 2b.4 Sublolal PerkK.I 2L Period-Dependent Cu.ill! 2b.O TOTAL 2b OOST TLG &1-vicn, Inc. Table C-1 Diablo Canyon Un.it 1 DECON Decommissioning Cost Estimate (Thousands of2014 Dollars) Off-Site LLRW Oe<10n Remov*I Pftck*rinf Tr1Wsport Procenlnf DlspoJAI Cost Coat Costs Costs Co1ts Cost.s 610 72 22 338 2,297 983 34 336 1,362 3,649 133 137 702 702 29 361 621 1,425 801 87 3i6 34 *16 237 J.11 188 67 ,., 132 * " 362 123 30 16,166 2,820 2,637 30 225 2,8\.12 21,877 400 1,919 l,2Gl'i 3,183 26,460 49 247 " 6 5 27 123 lG I * .. 1,251 18 1,132 26 2,-433 98 '" 253 70 70 2,765 20 IOI " 2 2 10 ' 4 0 60 7 0 21 007 5,JOO 3 2'1 6,3J6 5.M8 164 413 20 643 3,214 1,072 67 59 332 Ill 121 15 1,603 210

  • 75 677 '5 16,123 32 25,386 85 32S 26,799 "' 1,3-1-1 1.801 83 83 43,838 Othel" Cosh 1,009 1,009 M7 667 200 104 1.203 367 "° ... 110 321 8,U78 637 11.096 6,llOO 10,761 41,657 43,223 To till Contlu enc 6 82 306 J,7JG 1,126 107 81 7 " 210 108 113 26 966 126 ' *13 380 26 32 12,420 1,024 12,030 67 17 12,544 26,987 "' '33 """ 694 86 119 l,IU7 251 " " 686 271 "' 2'8 53 60 100 " 69 l,fl27 137 2,382 1,483 2,308 10,110 37,637 Tot11.I Costs 36 .. , 1,389 6,703 3,726 '"' *II J.18 BIG 303 '36 100 3.424 491 21 169 1.485 149 123 48,763 3,899 47,4i5 224. 1,386 49,086 101,7*18 1,4*11 1,4*11 1,160 2,500 *186 676 4,831 91>3 341 119 2.005 1.636 217 l,4G2 ° 479 " 134 389 10,906 774 13,478 8,392 13,008 56,825 163,846 NHC Spenl Fuel Lk. Term. M11.nftfe1nent Cosu Costs 1,389 G,703 '"' 1*18 816 303 436 100 3,424 491 21 100 1,485 1!!3 30,737 3,8!1£1 47,475 224 1,386 49,086 92,722 1,441 1,4"1 1,100 2,500 486 676 4,831 053 341 119 2.606 1,536 217 1.402 420 134 10,000 13,478 8,3'12 13,058 63,61& 152,613 479 664 389 2,207 2,207 She Processed Burhd Volume!I Res1or11.tlon Volume Clnu A Cla.u B Class C OTCC Costs Cu. Peel Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feel Cu. Feet 467 41 149 9,026 9,026 9,026 2,324 11,615 3,874 241 212 1,100 402 436 116 6,793 750 30 272 2,-147 200 68,270 816 349,938 320 2,IZIJ 362,387 411,472 882 1,.100 2,341 3.10'.! S,!02 416,fHG Document POl-1119-001, Rev. 0 Appendix C, PaJle G of 21 Burial I Processed Wt., Lbs. 141,631 707,889 2$,137 l.J,718 12,800 73,076 24,489 26,671 3,362 363.070 46.248 1,841 IG,571 149.139 12,159 3,551,368 36,653 33.233,450 18,671 li2,793 33.424,910 37.012,930 52,000 156,622 208.421 62.046 62,0-16 37.283,400 Cr11£t MilltlhOUl"!I 476 6,0IG 4, 102 18,472 11:1,782 2,100 6,611 521 50*1 3.139 2,158 2,700 824 ti.036 1.852 "' 068 4,656 1,856 251,648 21,023 43,339 847 7,362 61,637 324,108 12,187 12,187 172 273 IOI IOI 336,842 U1lllty1111d Co111r11ctor &hnhoun 1&2,246 60,034 122,&17 341,177 341,17i

"' ;!: (") ::T !: "' Diablo Conyo" Power Plorat Dl!commiuionin1 Cod Anolyel* Actl\llt)' 1.nde..x Aetl\111\' Desel'i tlon PERIOD :?.c-Spent fuel delay pl'ior 10 SFP decon Period 2c Direc:t IA-cotnntiMkmini Activities Period 2cCollateral Coll* 2e.3.I Spent Puel TraoaJl.'r

  • Pool to ISFSI 2e.3.2 Environment.ad Pemlitl and Feet 2c.3 Subtotal Pertod 2e Colh1tcral COtllt Period 2c Period-Dependenl. Coet.e 2c.4.I ln*urHnlll!! 2c.4.2 Proi>ertytoxe1 2c.4.3 Heallhpby1ic11upplie1 2c.4.4 Oispogal o( DAW generaled 2c.4.5 Plant energr budget 2c.4.6 l\.'RCJo*ces 2c.U Enle.J'geney Planning Fee1 '.lc.4.8 Llqu1d Radwa11.e Proce11.ing Equipmenl.1Sernee1 2c.4.9 ISF'SI Operaliog Costa 2e.4.10 Spent Skirnge Cani1lera.Overpackl 2c.4.IJ Security Starr C:O.t 2c.4.12 UtilityStaffCciet 2<.4 SubtOfal Period 2c Periotl*Dependeot Coet& 2".0 TOTAL 2c OOST PERIOD 2d-Decont*mln11tlon FollowlnrWet F1..1el Stonre Period 2d Direct DerommiHioning Ad1vitic9 2d.l.l Remove epe.nt foci racU of Plant Sy&temt 2d.l.2.I Elec:triall (C'..ootrunirmted)
  • FHB 2d.l.2.2 Electrie111J (Dttontarninaled)
  • FHB 2d.i.2.3 Fire Protect.ion (RCA) 2d.l.2 . .f. HVAC (Cont.aminatt'\I)
  • FHil 2d.J.2.6 Spent Pucl Pit Cooling 2d.l.2.6 Spent f.'ucl Pit CooJing
  • 2d.l.2 Tot11la Derontamin11tion of Site Buildings 2d.l.8.J Fuel ll1:1ndling 2d.l.3 Totals 2d.l. 2d.3.2 Proceu dl'commiHioning chemical flush WHle 2d.3.3 Sm111l 1ooJ 11.llowance 2d.3.4 Decoinmi9"'ioning Equ.ipment Di.'\lposition 2d.3.5 Envimnm.-ntal PcrmiLt and 2d.3 Subtotal Period 2d CuUa1eraJ Cosu Period 2d Period*Depemlent 2d.4.I Deoon 1upplies 2d.4.2 IHurl'lnl'f! 2d.4.3 Propt'rtytaxe1 2d.4.4 He"lthpby1k1!1u11vlie' 2d.4.5 n'nLal 2d.4.6 Diapo1ttl or DAW 1wnert1ted TLG &1'Vica, lr*c. Off-Site Decon Ren10"*l P11.ekarinr Tr11.nsport ProeeHhlf eo .. eo .. Costs eo ... Cosu 809 39 II ... 39 II 809 39 II 602 "' 163 33 186 13 1,149 126 49 200 28 II 339 06 23 9C .JG 19 133 00 20 2,152 319 128 845 800 60 .. 845 890 60 38 664 1.-147 3.674 5'5 201 " 35 59 82 100 52 45 82 186 112 212 C.26 003 30 Table C-1 Diablo Cauyon Uuit l DECON Decommissioning Cost Estimate (Thousands oC2014 Dollars) LLRW NRC Dbpo511.J Other To till Total Lie. Terin. Coso Costs Conlin ene Costs Costs 40,631 8,700 *19,231 U79 918 5,197 5,107 4-1,800 9,618 64,428 5,197 2,29i'i 328 2.623 2.623 800 114 914 014 307 1,166 1,100 47 25 121 121 9,200 1,986 11,236 11,236 *400 36! 2,812 2,812 3,222 " 3,684 846 182 1,027 1,027 2,464 629 2.993 47,317 10,IG7 U7.'73 Sl>,022 18,250 103,273 61,636 13,668 2,910 16,4G8 8,234 47 167,234 36,601 203,791 79,770 47 212,044 45,220 258,21U 84,007 1,066 863 2,786 2,786 171 130 006 006 1,069 1,001 3,895 3,896 342 218 849 849 73* 31)7 1,6&0 1,660 602 200 1,022 1,022 646 "-"' 1,138 1,138 4,063 2,297 8,969 8,950 400 1.110 3.418 3.418 400 1,llO 3,418 3,HS 2()5 780 780 5,602 4,<175 15,943 15,943 845 363 1.208 1,2()8 792 3*10 1,132 1,132 1.637 703 2.3.\0 2,J.10 165 109 414 41'1 18 100 100 208 125 " 085 437 94 531 031 423 437 "° 1,IL<>9 1,629 76 287 287 234 " 268 268 82 12 ., "' 188 714 71< 213 1,200 1,200 .. 19 92 92 Spent. Fuel Site Proce!t!ted Burh1.l Volume!t M1m111ement Restoration Volume CJ11.ssA ClassB ClassC Co sis eo ... Cu.Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet 49,231 .f.9,231 1.732 3.684 2,003 67,473 51,636 8,234 12.f.,021 1,732 173,251 J,732 3,862 819 6,670 1,287 2,664 2,174 2,332 1-1,686 3,326 3,320 163 22,025 319 6,667 6,986 1,321 OTCC Cu.Feet Document POl-1119-001, Rev. 0 Appl!ndi:c C, Pug#! 1of21 Burial/ Utility and Processed Cl'11.ft Contractor Wt. Lbs. Manhoun Manhoun 8-1,637 ,.,. 1,170,300 160,400 34,637 5G 1,320,700 34,637 w 1,320,700 234,773 966 37,721 2,492 345,663 15,063 76,37J 161,763 4,376 132,611 1,401 142,IOJ 1,923 806,024 28,562 2*1-8,).12 23.647 248.142 23.047 7,331 4.20& 1.385.200 67,278 G.240 9,567 9,007 6,240 19,142 62 300,000 .. 319,142 100 ZC,412 43

"-' ::r :p "-' "-' Diablo Canyon Power Plant Deconm1ilf9ionin,R Co*t Arwly*i* Activity Index Actlvlt Desert 1tlo11 Pt:riod 2d Period-Dependent Co81.11 {oootinued) 2d.4.7 Pltinl energy budget 2d.<l.8 NRCfo'eee 2d.<1.!t t:mcrlfl!ncy Plrmning Feea 2d.4.IO Spent fo'uel Transfer

  • ISFSI lo DOE 2d.4.ll Liquid R.tidw111le ProcesAing EquipmentJSen*k:e1 2d.4.12 ISFSI Opcrnting Co8r.. 2d.4.13 Se\*er11noe Rel&t.ed Cot!lfl 2d.4.l-1 Security Staff Cost 2d.4.16 DOCStuITCo&t 2d.4.16 UtilityStHITCOllt 2d.4 Subtoeol Period 2d Period.De11endent Cotil 1 2d.O TOTAL PERIOD 2d OOST PERIOD 3e -Delay before License Termination Period 2e Direct. l)ea,utmisaionmg Act.iviUea Period 2e Collnteral Co8t1 2e.3.I Ell\irorunental Permit.II and Ftoet 2e.3 Subtotal Period 2e C>lla1eral f'AJ11t1 Period 2e Period-Dependent Coats 2e.4.1 ln1urnn('(' 2f".4.2 1'1'(>µ1*rtytaxe1 2e.4.3 Heulth phy11icii 1u11plieti 2e.4.4 Di1Po@al or DAW 2e.4.6 Planr energy budget 2e.4.6 NRCl-'001 2e.4.7 Emt>rgt:ncy Pl11uning Footi 2e.4.8 Spent Tram1rer
  • ISF'SI to OOE 2e.4.9 ISlSI Operating Coet-8 2e.4.JO Security StaITCc.t 2e.4.ll Utilily Slt11TCoet 2e.4 Subl-Ot.al Period 2f' Period-Dependent Co.it-8 2e.O P*;muo 2e OOST PERIOD 2C-Llce11H Termlnation Period 2r Direct 2f.Ll ORISEoonfinnot.ory 1un*ey 2f.l.2 Terrninolelioenae 2f.I Subtotal Period 2f Acth"ity COits Peri(.(I 2f Additional Co!ll* 2(2.J Licem1e Tem1im1tioo Survey 21'.2 Subtotal Period 2f Additional Cost.II Period 2fC>llat.eral Co.ii. 2f.3.I DOC tin ff rdocatk..u el'.pell!Ml!! 2f.3.2 Endromncul.al Permit.11 ond Fees 2f.3 Sublotal Period 2fCollateral C09t9 Table C-1 Diablo Canyon Unit 1 DECON Decommissioning Cost Estimate (Thousands 0(2014 Dollars) Off-Site LLRW Decon Remov11I P11ck*ci1t1' TrAnsport Procenlnl' Dlsposlll Co11t Co!lt Co1t!I Co1tJ Co1u Co!lls 212 1.618 30 3/i 1,703 6.274 760 321 6.061 78 78 78 Otbel:' Co!lfJ "" 240 IGO 306 17' 262 6,867 1,364 3,639 6,07D 18,989 21.063 780 780 37< 146 209 294 1,006 ... 2,860 1,001 G,480 7,260 IS.1 183 9,761 &,761 1..166 715 2,181 Tot.U Contl11 enc 108 35 24 .. 37 " 1,472 293 781 1,000 4,620 I0,0-t3 167 lGi 63 " 28 I 30 '2 236 96 612 228 1,847 1,514 79 79 4,190 4.190 315 154 ... Totll1 Co!ll!I .., 280 188 ° 210 300 8,329 1,667 4.420 6.170 26,312 46,:.126 9-18 948 '27 I07 106 6 238 336 l,333 048 3,402 1,289 7,009 8,857 " . 262 13,961 13.951 1,780 8GO 2,(H9 NHC Spent Fuel Site Lie. Tel'ut. M11n11f'ement Ret10l'Atlo11 Coiit.1 Co!lll Co!ll!I Cl2 280 188 ""' 210 306 8,329 1,667 4,420 6.170 2*1,338 "" "4.261 974 918 ... 427 167 100 6 238 330 1,333 646 3,.in2 1,289 6,C94 2,215 G,012 2,216 262 262 13,9.51 13.951 1,7/JO 8GO 2,649 Proce!l!led Bul'ifll Volumes Volume CIHs A Clan 8 CJ.,, C OTCC Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet 1,321 30.332 82 82 Document POJ-1719-001, Rev. 0 Appendix C, Pa,Re 8 of 21 Burial I Proeened Wt., Lbs. 26,412 1.700.822 1,838 1,638 1,C39 Craft Ma11houn 67,00D Utllltyand Contr11ctor 11.tanhouu 16,800 35,040 611,080 I00,92U 116,160 36,103 12,000 48,103 -18,!03 126,393 3.120 126.393 3.120

"' ::T f: "' "' Diablo Can,on Power Planl Decommi-.lonin6 Co.I Anub .. i* Activity lndu Actlvitv Dfferl tlon Period 2f Period-Of.pendent (Joe(.e 2(4.l lnaura!IC\" 2f.4.2 2r.4.3 Health pby11n 1upplies 2[4.4 Oiapoaal ol DAW gene.rated 2r.4.6 Pl.nt energy budget 2r.u NRC Pee1 2(4.7 Planniag 2tU Spent. Fuel Transrer -ISFSI to OOE 2(.4.9 ISPSI Opm*ting Collt.1 2(.4.10 Security StaffC.-...t 2r.4.11 DOCSUJffCoet 2(.4.12 Utility Starr Colt 2f.4 Sublotal Period 2f Period-Dependent Colu 2'0 TOTAL PERIOD 2r OOST PERIOD j TOTALS PERIOD 3b -Site Rutor*don Period 3b Direct. n.ia.run1uionrng i\d.i,*itiel Demolition ofRemainirll'. Site Buildinp 3b.l.l.I *Rewtor 3b.l.l.2 C11t1it.-I Additiona 86-2004 3b.t.J.3 Coutainmtnt. Penelrall()ll An-11 ab.J.1.4 AU-lbmeou1 3b.l.l.15 Turbine 3b.l.l.6 Turbine Pedellal 8b.J.l.7 Fuel llandlirll'. 3b.l.I To:Olt Site Cloeeout ActMtft 3b.l.2 Grade & lamhcapP lite 3b.l.3 Pinal report lo NRC 3b.I Subl.Ol.31 Period 3b Ai.1.ivit.y Colt.a Period 3b ;\ddilion&I Cotil! 3b.2.1 CoMret.eCru11bi11g Ub.2.2 ColTerditm Con1truct.ion &nd TeMdown 3b.2.3 Soil I Sediment Control Plant Area 3b.2.4 1\likellaneou1 Conatruction Deb.U (outof11.ate di1poeal) 3b.2.6 Scrttp Mel.al Tramportttlion (ou' of.1tate) 3b.2.6 FSS Mnn11ger 3b.2 Subtot.al Period 3b Additional Coltt Pf.riod 3b Collateral C<lltJo 3b.3.I Small tool aJlow3noe 3b.3 Subto4*al Period 3b Colkller31 eo.u Period 3b Period.Dependent Coatt 3b4.I lne.uranoe 3b.4.2 Pf"Oliel1ytaxes 3b.4.3 He11Y)* equipment. rental 3b.4.4 Plttn1 eners:>* budget 3b.U NRCISFSI FeH 3b.4.6 Emef'll'Dc:y Planning Fees 3b.4.i Spent Tran1fer

  • ISl-'$1 to OOE Sb.U ISFSI Operatiag C.0.11 3b.4.9 Secunty s1,.rr Coet 3b.4.IO IX>C S1arreo.t 3b.4.ll Utilily 3b.4 Sublotal Period 3b Penod*Ot>pendcnt Coete 3b.O TOTAL PERIOD 3b OOST TLG &rvicn, lnc. OIT-Site Remov*I Pacbslns Tr1tnsport ProceHlns "" "" Co1h eo ... eo ... .... .... .. , 8.181 75,300 23.942 14.406 7,188 320 730 31 3,8U7 1,404 15,&19 2,337 17,88G ... 1 478 1.33-1 Z2G8 ""' 208 7,689 7,589 27,961 Table C-1 Diablo Canyon Un.it 1 DECON Decommissioning Cost Estimate (Thousands 0£2014 Dollars) LLRW NKC Dlspos.U Other Total Total lJe. Term. Manasement c.. .. CoslJ Conlin enc Costs Cot ts Com .., ** ... 391 13' 19 ... JM 245 929 929 * " " m 99 J;()J J;()J ... .. ... ... 200 .. ... "" 1,004 ... 1,219 1.219 "' .. J;()() 600 2,800 622 3.621 3,621 6,073 1,(189 6,162 6,162 5.7<< 1.233 6,977 6,977 16.746 3.758 21,200 19.178 2.027 28,869 8.496 38,067 aG,089 2,(1'.!7 120.303 G30,704 234,118 1.107 060 902.013 191,287 l,&13 8,731 ** 388 ,., 887 7 37 837 4,734 301 1,706 "" 2,403 3,388 18,886 W2 2,839 242 " "" ,,,. "' 3,891 22,019 294 .. M7 103 ... ... 1,620 6,870 1,260 7,131 4.976 1.068 6,0-14 622 '" 706 706 11,471 :1,949 16,688 706 *15 , .. .. 2113 r& 81 GJ3 643 "'° .. 002 602 1,629 9,218 678 ... 823 ... ** ... 35!1 ... 127 1,012 l,012 710 4,018 4,018 ..... 201 1,646 1,645 9,622 2,044 11,006 '°' 8,790 16,137 18,387 8,100 1,769 &,966 0 1,001 40,397 10,143 68,129 '°' 18,961 62,110 17,0'.l8 117,088 1,000 18,961 Site ProceHed Burl1tl VolumC9 BHtor1tllon Volume ClaHA ClauB Clll3sC OTCC Com Cu.Feet Cu. F<<t Cu. Feet Cu.Feet Cu. Feet .... 337 .. , 13,760 689,912 003 785 8,731 """ 887 37 4,73..f J,700 ..... 18,886 2,JJJ9 21,726 .. 7 ... 1.620 7.131 6,044 15.932 ... ... 9,218 823 2,776 18,387 7,06-1 39,168 77,0'i8 Document POJ.J719-00J, Rev. 0 Appendi.Y C, Pu6e 9of 21 Burial/ UtUltyand Procuted Cl"llft Contr,.ctor Wt. Lbs. lhuboun lhn.houn 6,73-4 JI 37,321 46,760 60,107 6,734 IH,179 6.734 1213,404 147,299 60.199.630 841,286 6,002,1>41 67,914 3,672 G,r& 2'9 38,803 11,300 16,700 144,961 4,687 '*'""' 149,538 '*""" 1,071 4.004 I0,271 6,1>18 16,247 6,1>18 122,582 136,Sill 87,llH 346,671 166,784 863,371)

"' :::,-'.!" "' ,t> Diablo Ctrnyon Power Pla11t Der:ommiHionina Coat Analy*i* Activity lndu: Activlt\* Descrl lion PERIOD k -Fuel Storaj'e Operations/Shlpplnl' Period Sc Din!ci DeeommiMiooing Activities Period 3c Col.J11teral Cue1a &.3 Sublot.al Period 3c Collateritl Cueta Pericxl 3c Period-Dependent Coet.11 3cA.J loHrance 3c..l.2 Proi>crt.y la11e11 3c.4.3 Plimtcoorgyhmlgel 3c.4.4 NRC l.SFSI Fee* & .. 1.6 Emergency Planning fees 3c..&.6 Spent 'l'nmeJer

  • ISFSI to DOE Sc..t.7 ISfSI Opewtinr Coets Sc..t.8 Security Sta!l'Coet 3cA.9 Utility St.alfCoet &A Sublc.lal Period 3c:: PeriOO.Dependenl Costa &.O TOTAL PERIOD 3c:: COST PERIOD ad -OTCC shlppinf Pt"riod 3d Oireci Deroinmin1oning Aet.iviliee Nuclenr Ste1tm Su11ply Sysll'nl IL.>mcn*nl 3d.l.l.1 Vetll!l'I & lnt.eroals GTCC Di!!PoSlll 3d.l.I To1.al1 3d.I Sublullll Penud 3d Act1\*ity C',<;aet* 3d.3 Sulitolal Pf'riod 3d Uilluteral C-Oeh Period 3d Pt>riod-De!J('ndt-nt Cueu 3d . .f..1 lnAurance 3d.4.2 Properlyla.1::e11 3dA.3 Plant t"nergy hut.Igel 3d.4.4 ISFSI OperatingC-Olils 3dA.5 Security St8ff Co!it 3d.4.6 UtilitySlllffeo.t. 3d.4 Subtotal Period :"sd Period-Dependent Coe11 3d.O TOTAL PERIOD 3d 0061' PERIOD le* ISFSl Dccontamluatlon Period 3e Direct Decommi1111iooing Actfrilies Period 3e Additional Coet.1 3e.2.I Liain!IC Ten11innl100 ISlo"SI 3e.2 Subtotril Period 3e Additional Coell Period 3e Collat.ernl Co&tP .... Subtot.nl Period 3e Colb1tcrnl ""°"'* Period 3e Periotl*Dependent Costs 3e.4.J JeA.2 Proper1yl&Jte& 3e.4.3 Plan1.f'oerw*butlge1 36.4.4 Security StaffCoel 3'>.4.6 U111i1yStalTCc.et 3e.4 Sublolnl Period 3e Peri<xl-Dependent Call11 3'".0 TOTAL PERIOD 3e COS'l' TLG Inc. Off-Site Oeco11 Removal P1u*karJ11r Tr11n9port Proceulnr Cool Cool Costs Co*" Coou 2,107 2,107 2,I07 2.107 121 13 121 13 121 13 Table C-1 Diablo Canyon Unit 1 DECON Decommissioning Cost Estimate (Thousands o{ 2014 Dollars) LLRW NRC Obpoul Othec Total Total Uc. Term. Cosls Costs Contin enc* Cost.11 "°'" 6.1*11 736 6,876 .,a,010 675 .,1,689 *1.109 688 .f.,697 8.088 1,167 9,246 30.M6 6,656 37.IOI 12,371 2,655 15,026 66.&89 l.f.,166 80,IM 16,178 3,268 18,.f.30 146,436 29.690 175.12U l.f.6,4315 29,690 176,126 9,626 2,799 l.f.,431 1 .. ,431 9,626 2,799 14,431 14,431 9,626 2,7ll9 14,431 14,431 Ii 12 8 9 26 31 1'16 2\) 166 31 7 ,. 211 " 255 9.626 211 2.843 l.f.,G86 14,431 <00 1,096 619 U49 2.349 <OO 1,098 619 2,349 2,3*19 79 28 107 107 "' 21 80 80 l<I 60 191 191 UM 66 260 260 *162 166 628 028 '"' 1.r.oo 784 2,if76 2,076 Spe11t.Fuel Site Procened M11n11rement RHtoratlon Volume ClaHA Costs Com Cu.Feet Cu. Feet 5,876 4,589 .f.,697 9,24(1 37.IOI 16.026 80.104 18.436 176.126 175,12(1 12 31 165 38 200 206 J,777 1,777 1,777 llurhd Volume' ClanB CJusC OTCC Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet 1,6<19 1,6<19 1,649 1.6*19 Document P01-1119-001, Rev. 0 Appendix C, Poae JO of 21 Burl*I/ Utllityand Processed Curt Co11tr11ctor Wt., Lbs. Manhoun 82lUIOO 169.497 £185.297 !Rl5,297 3'0,307 330,307 330,307 1,700 328 2.028 330.307 2,028 106.170 7.000 388 108,170 7,00G 388 1,001 1,001 3,803 108,170 7,006 4,llfl Diablo Canyon PowerPloul Dt!commluionin1 Co*t AnulJ .. i* Activity lndu Actlvltv Descri tlon PERIOD ar -ISFSI Site Restoration Period SfDin!ci Decomnti..aiuninf Activitie* Pt!riod sr Addi1iunal Cost* 3f.2.I Ot>molition &nd Site Refilortllion ISFSI 3f.2.2 Soil/SedimeotCootrollSPSI 3(2 Subcotal Perkxl 3f Addilional C-oe11 Period 3CCollot.era1 CoiJu Jf.3.1 Snrnlltool allowonce 3f.3 Subt.o1al P&riocl ar C.Ollat.er1J.l Ch!t.1 Period 3( Period-DependcnL Coats 3f.4.l lo*uranoe 314.:.t 3!4.3 Heavy equip1nent. rent:r.1 31'.4.4 Plant er.erg)* Ludget 3f.4.6 SecurilJ' St.afTCott 3f.4.6 Utilit;S1arrn.at 3f.4 Subwul Period 3( Period-Dependent n.t* ato TOTALPERIOD3f00ST PER.IOD 3 TOTALS TOTAL COST TO DECOlDUSSJON TAL COST TO OECOMAOSSIO WITH U.06"l> AL NRC LICENSE TERMJNATION OOST IS 70.11'i OR: C..t ll,H7 Removal Coot 1,642 21 l,663 ,. " " 57 1,744 29,816 107,890 TALLOW-LEVEL RADIOACTIVE WASTE VOLUME DURJED (EXCLUDING OTCC): AL GREATER THAN Cl.ASS C RADWASTE VOLUAtE OENERATID: AL SCRAP M.ETAL REMOVED: AL CRAFT LABOR R.E UJREMENI'S: E11dNole1: nla
  • indic&te. that Lbhl ad:Mty nc;t charted as deeommit&ioning expeo!ll!. 11. indicates thtit this 9Cl.iv1ty performed by dttommiuiooing 11.aO'. 0 *indicates thot this nalue 11 leu than 0.5 but i1 non-uro. a cell contain.inc*.* indic.ule. a uro ,*alue TLG &rvice*, Inc. Table C-1 Diablo Canyon Unit 1 DECON Decommissioning Cost Estimate (fhousanda of 2014 Dollars) P11ckafi111 Transport Costs Costs Off-Site ProceHlnf Cosl.s LLRW Oiapo!!lal eo. .. Other eo,,, 2,7.1{1 23 27 76 156 2.906 2,116 13 10,016 202,221 16,<114 14.8'13 1.19.114 1,041,671 Sl,871.030 OUltln or 201.f dollars tl.,190,764 thousandJ or 2014 dollars 1389.776 thouuods or 201.f doll.rs 198,GOI thousa11d1 of 2014 dollus 606,824 C11blc Feet 1.649 Cubic Feet. 49.707 Tons I 06I 7!5 M*n-hours Tot Ill Contln enc 912 I 0'7 *I " *
  • 10 " llOO 61,341 aaa .. u1 Total c. ... M33 20 6,369 :JO :JO " 69 28 33 "" , .. 6,646 296,622 1.671,010 NKC Uc.Tenn. Costs 18,467 1,190,76.f Spent Fuel Man111ement Costs 194,342 189,77G Site Bestor111tlon c. ... '*""" 20 6,369 30 30 ,, 69 :18 33 !J3 200 6,646 82,723 N.601 Document POJ-l1l!J..OOJ, Rev. 0 Appendix C, Pa1e II of 21 Proces1ed Volume CIHs A Cius 8 ClaH C GTCC Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Burld/ Procened Wt., Lbs. 1,777 1.649 "38,477 &63,189 , .... 1.6.fl 61.,194.ZIO 20,.143 ..... 23,011 23,011 195,800 l,06a,72G UtUityand Contr11ctor Ma11houn 80 340 "' 1,133 1,213 1,346,109 7,667,666

"' :::,-::=-"' CJ) Diablo Canycm Power Plarit Decommiuionin1 Cost Analy*i* Actl\*lty Index Activity De9cri don PERIOD lit-Shutdown throush Transition Period la Direct Dewmrni111"oning Actil*h:ie!ll In.I.I Preptire preliminary deoommilll!!ioning fXl8l 111.1.2 Notification o£Cessatioo orf)peratiooa 1a.1.a Retno\*e rue] & aource material la.1..t Notification or Permanent DeJut:ling ln.1.5 Deactintte plant system* & Pl'OC'lN ""IA! la.1.6 Prepare 1to<l 1iubmit PSDAR la.1.7 Ril*icw plant dwgs & SJ!eCll. la.1.8 Perfom1 detailed rml aun*cy ln.1.9 EBtirufll£hy-product.inl'e11lory la.LIO End pro.Jud deKription la.I.II Delailed by-produci.inrenlory ln.1.12 Define major work 8Cquenc,-e Ja.1.13 Pcrrom1 um! E..t,. la.1.14 Perfom1 Site-Spe(;Hic Cost Study la.1.15 Preparehrnhtnit License Tcnninalion Plan la.1.16 Receh*c NRC approval oflenninaLlon plan Activity Specifications Ja.1.17.1 Plaol &.t.pmporal'}* racih1it-, la.1.17.2 PlanliiyMem11 la.1.17.3 NSSS Drcontrunination Flu"h la.1.17.4 11e8ClorinterMI., 111.1.17.6 Reactorves!'lf'I lr1.l.17.6 Biological11hiekl la.1.17.7 Sleamgeneralor9 la.1.17.8 Reinforced ooncrele Ja.1.17.9 M11i11Turbine ln.1.17.10 Mitin Cc.ndenserf!. la.1.17.11 Plant. "truc1uret1 & buildings la.1.17.12 Wa!!olemanagen1en1 la.1.17.13 Facility&!!oitedoeoeou1 Ja.1.17 Tol81 Planning & Site Prcparat.iollll Ja.1.18 Prepnre di11mantling sequence lit.LIO Plnnl.prep. &temp. 8\'CC6 111.1.20 De1ign waler elean-up eyalem 111.1.21 Riggingl\Jont. Cnlrl Eo\*lpaft.oolingletc. la.1.22 Procureetu1ka/lincra&oont.ninere 111.I Sublolnl Period la Activity Coeh Period la Additional Coalll ln.2.1 Spent Jo'uel Pool holntion la.2.2 Dispoe:tl or Contaminated Toob & l-:qui1)menl la.2 Subl.olal Period la AddiLlonal Cc.At-& Perk>d laCollateralCoeta la.31 Em*irouinent.-il Permil9 and F'ee1 la.3.2 GTCX::: Storage PenniUing (PG&E Labor) la.3.3 GTOO Storage Permitting (ContrACtor) la.3 Subtotal Period la Collateral f'..oet1 Period la Period-Drpendent. Cosl.s la.4.1 lnsuranef' lo.*1.2 ProiK'rtytaxe1 la.4.3 Health phy11ic111up11lie1 la.4.'I 1-!cavyequipmenl.l't!ntal la.4.5 Dispo11al or DA\\' geoernted litA.0 Plnnl energy budget la.4.7 NllCF'ee!!I la.4.8 Emergency Planning Ft'('! ]H,4.9 Spent lud Pool O&M ln.4.10 ISFSJ 011eralfog <'-<A!!l.s TLG Servi.cH, Inc. Removal PacU.-lns Tntn5Por1 eo.t Coot "°'"' "°'" 219 10.1 219 103 495 667 13 Table C-2 Diablo Canyon Unit 2 DECON Decommissioning Cost Estimate (Thousands of 2014 Dollars) Off.Site LLRW NRC Proceulns Dbpo,al Other Tot11.I Total Lie. Term. eo,t, eo,,, Co1t1 Conlin enc Co9tl c. ... 8G 19 106 106 . nl* . 133 2!l 162 162 :m 66 372 372 66 " 81 81 66 14 81 81 "" 10 105 105 498 108 606 606 '°" *1* 200 2[)0 .,., 72 <O* 40-1 272 59 331 331 326 71 397 358 277 00 337 303 33 7 *10 40 4il 102 673 673 431 .. "' 626 33 7 40 .. 207 " 262 202 166 23 121! 65 27

  • 32 27
  • 32 207 ... 2G2 126 306 66 372 37:! GO " " 36 2.510 5'15 3,0M 2,6'.)0 160 36 104 19.1 3.000 651 3,651 :i,661 03 20 118 113 2.300 *100 2.700 2.700 82 18 09 99 10.19.t 2,212 12.407 12,042 14.442 3,13-4 17577 17.577 2.836 1,079 t 236 *1,236 2.836 IU-42 4.214 21.813 21.813 949 ""' 1.156 1,165 3,389 7M 1,124 4,12.t 1,571 341 1.912 1,912 5,90'J 1,282 1.192 7,192 1.132 16< 1,200 1.200 177 20 '""' 203 170 674 674 12a 61'0 600 15 * ** 40 2.737 ... 3,331 3,331 834 121 054 ""' 1,001 146 1.146 792 172 .... G47 119 666 Spent Fue:I Site Proce9sed Burial Volumes )flllla1ement Re9lor11.tio11 Volume ClauA ClassB c1.,,c Costs Costs Cu. Feel Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feel .., " 65 32 32 126 "" 365 306 I0.245 I0,245 666 1,1*16 00< ... GTCC Cu. Feet Documen* POl-1119-001, Rev. 0 Appendix C, Po.re l!of 21 Burial/ Utility llJld ProceHed c .. n Contractor Wt., Lb,. J\.la.nhoun Man hours 6'6 866 1,009 *128 428 566 3.2IO 1,327 2,140 1,753 2,100 1,783 214 3.039 2,i82 "' 1,336 ... 171 171 1,335 1,"69 385 16,100 1.027 690 526 31.&36 GH946 317 62-1.045 317 11,200 18

"' -::1" 1> "' ..... Diablo Canyon Power Pion I Deconunlnlonin1 Co.t Anoly*i* Activity lnde.x Actlvlt De1icrl lion P11:riod la Period*lkpc.nden1.Cos11 (lvntinued) la.4.11 Se,-eranre Related Cail* la.4.12 &c::urityS.11trCo.1 la.4.13 Utilit)' su.rr Coat Subtotal Period la Period-Oepc.nde.nt Cott* la.O TCYrAL PEJUOD la C{JST PERIOD lb-DeeomntlHlonln1 Preparation* Pr.Mod lb Direct OecommiHioning Aci.il'itie* Deutiled Work Procedure* lb.I.I.I Pl11Dtty1lem* lb.1.1.2 NSSS Drecontomination J'luah lb.l.1.3 Reactof'inlernol1 lb.I.IA Remain.ing huilding1 Jb.1.1.6 CROcooling11188embly lb.1.1.G CRO houetnp & ICI tube.I lb.I 1.7 lnt:l'.ftl iutnnnenlaCJon lb 118 Reactwvcael Jb.1.1.9 Facilily c&o.eout lb.I.I.JO Miuiklahield* lb.I.I.II BiokJcictolebtelJ Jb.1.1.12 Stt-am gener"ton lb.1.1.13 HeinrottedOOl\Crf'le lb.1.1.14 Main Turbine lb.l.J.16 MainCondienl!lf'n lb.I.I.IS Auxiluuy buildiov lb.1.1.17 Reector bu1kho1 lb.I.I Total lb.1.2 °"-vn primary lwp lb.I Sublotal Period lb Actm1y Colt* Period lb Addil.ionol lb.2.1 SiteCh1m1cteriwlioo lb.2.2 llo2ardoua Wflllte Man11gtoment lh.2.3 rtlixed\\'09tcl.lonogement lb.2 Subtotal Period lb Addition11I OltlU Period lb Collateral Coel* lb.3.1 Oeoon equipme11t ib.3.2 DOC 1tafl' cxpenaet lb.3.3 Proa!'l1decomminiooiog11*ater wa11t.c lb.3..4 ProoeH deeommlMioningehemical Ruth wlllle lb.35 Small loo! t\lklw1nce Jb.3.8 Pipe cuUina cquipmenl lb.3.7 °""""rig lb3.8 Enviroomeol.a.1 Permit* and Fee1 lb.39 GTCC Storawe Pemutling (PG&E Labor) lb3 JO GTCC Stor* Pennittinv (Contractor) lb3 Subtotal Period lb Collaleral Coate Perk>d lb Perk>d-Ot!pendeo1 C09t* lb.4.1 Deron tuppliel lb.U ln11uranct lb.4.3 Proper1ytatt11 tb.4.4 Health phy1k9 1upplie9 lb.4.6 llellJV)' equipment rentl'll lb.4.6 0ial)Otl81orDAWgeqera1ed lb.4.7 Pliml t'DellO' budger lb.4.8 NRCF11Jet lb.Ht Emergency Planning ree, lb.4.10 Spent Pool Pool O&M TLG ,5e,.vicu, Inc. RemovaJ Cn.t Cnot 1,002 l,002 i97 7£17 ... .. 2 1,100 1,000 2,&90 1.I03 29 2611 281 Table C-2 Diablo Canyon Unit 2 DECON Decommissioning Cost Estimate (Thousands o( 2014 Dollars) OCI-Slte ILRW Paclultfnl Tr11nspor1 ProceHIDI DlspoHI Other Tot11I Total en. .. Co!il!I Co!ltl Co!ltS Cnou Co11tln enc Costt 46,9*i3 9,970 66,913 21.316 4,620 26,941 29,883 ..... 3G.3C8 " lo 104.362 22,731 128,186 232 107 2,850 134,908 30,439 100697 "' ll8 38' 00 " 81 100 "' 202 00 19 100 00 " 81 00 14 81 .. .. 81 "' 62 293 80 17 97 30 6 "' 80 17 97 ""' 00 372 00 14 " Ill* 22 126 10*1 22 126 181 31! 220 181 "' 220 2.206 "" 2,086 677 1.374 2,200 1,00< ..... 2,238 971 3,200 217 .., " 287 C2 3.19 2.742 1,081 3,823 201 1,1*17 IA66 318 1.784 " 61 151 llM 888 94 ,., 6.783 2161 8 292 I ""' 1.330 347 1.917 471 102 "' '°' 16.1 867 613 133 7'6 127 000 6,934 3,25-1 3.763 17,0iG 10 ,. 561 81 642 88 13 IOI ., " 61 .. , 6 23 2,714 ""' 3,300 231 33 "" 497 72 068 393 .. 478 NRC Spent Fuel Site Procet!Jt'!d Llc. Term. *tan*Jemenl Restor11tiou Volume ClaHA ""'" Cost!J ""'" Cu. Feet Cu. Feet 66,913 26,941 30,308 126,409 2,776 ""' IGG,"6G 2,776 ... 10,810 ... 38 " "" 27 82 81 81 81 293 48 48 "' 97 372 ** ** 126 120 llJ8 " llJ8 " 2,180 ... 1,374 3,66< ... 3,209 264 3*IO 3.823 1,147 1,781 388 291 8.29'.l 3 1.339 1.9.(7 "' 867 740 17,076 291 39 642 IOI '"" 342 " 322 '*""" "" 008 478 Burial Volumes ClassB ClauC GTCC Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet 887 887 Document POl-1719-001, Rev. 0 Appendix C, Pa1e 13 of 21 Burial/ Utlllty and Procened Cr.Ct Coutr11ctor Wt. Lbs. Manhoun Manhouu 286,';86 34G,279 11,200 18 C33,014 636,244 336 CG4,680 2.026 .,. 1,070 678 ,,. .,. 428 1.564 614 193 ... 1,009 '28 008 ... 1,168 1.168 14,228 1,007 1,007 14,228 10,COO 4,025 10,600 4,025 17.471 57 94.531 166 112,00'.l 223 6,439 II Diablo Canyon Power Plout Decommi1J1Jionin1 Co.a Anal.r*i* Activity lndex Actlvlt Descri tlon Period lb Period*Dependent Co!l1*11ronlinued) lb.4.11 lb.4.12 Security SlalfCoet Jb.4.13 rx:x:: StalfCoet Jb.4.Jo& UtilityStalTCost. lb.-' Subl.Ol.al Period lb Period.Dependent Coets lb.O TOTAl.Pl<;R.IOD lb COST PERIOD 1 TOTALS PERIOD 211.. Lar&e Component Removal Period 2a Direct DecomruiuioninK Ac!frities Nucleur Steam Supply Systen1 Reru0\"81 2a.l.l.I Reacto1Cool8nl Pipin11 2a.1.l.2 PreuurizerQueocbTruik 2a.l.l.3 lkactorCoolant.flumps&.Mot.or8 2a.l.l.4 Preuurizer 2a.l.l.6 SteamGeneralofl!I 2a.l.1.6 Ju.tired Steam Gent>rator Units 2n. I. l.7 CRDf\11nCls/Service Structure Ren101*al 2n.l.l.8 Re.actor\"euel lnternal8 2i:t.1.J.11 Uettetor\*e11tel 2a.1.I Tolrilll Removal or Major Equipment 2a. l.2 Main Turbioe!Cenerator 2a.l.3 ?\lain C.C,ndeMt'n Ca!!a!d.iog Croo.1 Clean Building Deruoli1Mx1 2a.1.4.I *RelllClor 2a.l.4.2 Auxiliary 211.1.4.3 Cuntainment Penr*lration Area 2a.l.4.4 Radwaslt> Storage 211.1.4.5 Fuel Hondling 2a.l.-1 To1.al8 Dit1po11alofPlanlSy11t.emt1 2a.l.5.I AuxiliarySteam 2a. l.6.2 Auxiliary S1.P.an1 (RCA) 2a.J.6.3 Building Service* (Non.Power Block) 2a.l.5.4 Condeo&lllle. System 2a. l.5.5 Condenlllte S)*11tem On1ulated) 2a. l.6.6 Cont.aino1ent Spray 2a.l.5.7 E:rtrncdon Steam & Heat.er Drip 2a.l.5.8 Feedwalt'r 2a. l.6.9 Feedwater System (lo111laled) 2a. l.6.10 fo'eedwat.e.r System (RCA lnsulat.ed) 2a. l.6. I l Feedwat.er Syst.e1n (RCA) 2a. l.5.12 NS8S Sr:.mpling 2a. l.5.13 NSSS Sr:.m11llng (lnsulr:.1.ed) 2n. l.5.14 Nilrogcn & Hydn)£en 2a.l.6.16 Ni1.rogen&.llydrogen(lmulatt'd) 2a.l.6.16 Nitrogen&. Hydnl(en (RCA Insulated) 2a.l.6.17 Nitrogen & Hydrogen (RCA) 2n. l.6.18 Oily Water Separ11tor & TB Sump 2a.1.5.19 S11ltwaler System 2a. l.6.20 Turbioe Steftm Supply 2a. l.5.2 I Turbine SI.earn Supply (RCAJ 2n.l.5.22 Turbine find Generntor 2a.l.5.23 Turbine and Generator (lm*ufotcd) 2a.J.6 Totale 2n. l.6 Scaffolding in auppurt. of dec-ommiHiuninir 2a.l Subt.otal P1*riod 211 Actfrity Costs TLG &,.vice., Inc. Decon C:O.t 20 3,416 300 " 163 53 503 207 186 161 1,694 l,Gff4 Removal P*ckal'inf Transport Cost Cosu Co5ls 661 1,663 2,716 001 37 131 70 3,330 ""' 10,112 7,612 22,033 212 696 1,262 762 " 97 206 2,405 70 1.13 7 6*15 286 238 240 70 108 121

  • 166 ... 20 I
  • IOO 30 188 794 ... 85 20 4,357 4,424 34,127 134 366 .. 7 1&9 .... 3,239 2,298 246 f.1,706 2,639 18,790 20 117 33 266 458 19,281 " 1 38 6 213 114 2,03.t 1,982 35 1,609 8fAI 6,788 .. 13 10< 1rn G,977 Table C-2 Diablo Canyon Unit 2 DECON Decommissioning Cost Estimate (Thousands 0!2014 Dollars) 00'..Slte LLRW Procenlnf DispoHI Coils CostJ 6,9-18 8,703 1.181 100 1,431 760 12,696 12.696 661 18,920 3,469 61,00!J 260 1.453 ... 22 87 72 .. 3,3!0 6,710 56 07,734 Other Cosu 271 I0.5i0 """' 14.819 36,100 43,aas 33' 334 668 Total Couth1 enc 59 2,29< 1,083 3,216 7,G99 13,696 4-1.037 856 )()6 745 425 7,0iO 6,364 660 23,009 7,818 46,011 46 IOI 274 160 17 21 46 622 11 l>l 2 140 62 638 52 " 37 202 IO 93 21 4 0 3 .. ... " 172 1,080 18 3,300 1,627 61,726 Total Cost* 330 12,8G4 6,075 18.036 43,431 68,388 237,986 2.874 363 2.831 l,W! 28,872 22.330 2,008 63.834 22.800 147J163 267 8<8 1,536 928 90 118 2/iO 2.927 !JG 11(;7 9 785 3'8 2492 292 .. 200 786 " 354 70 24 I 13 200 171 221! 966 6,149 103 "' 14.074 6,148 172,206 NRC S1>ent Fuel Lie. Tertn. Management Cost* Coils 12,86<1 6,076 18,036 12,056 00,607 232.963 2.874 363 2,831 1,869 28.872 22,330 2,098 63,834 22,890 147,953 1.036 1128 90 118 260 2,9"27 11(;7 2.49"l 786 " 36' 70 13 200 171 6,149 10,900 6,148 IG7,928 1,377 1,877 .1,153 Site Re,tor*tiou Costs " 870 257 848 06 9 785 "' 292 .. 205 229 900 103 30 3,17*1 4,279 .. Cu. Feet C11. Feel Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet 322 lH3 11.-'23 2.276 329 -1,701 2,443 41.712 41,0.11 3,881 1,878 9,420 107.671 003 5,261 1,502 70 316 30 l*I 2GO 317 11,9EH 20,636 1,444 129.700 887 887 393 003 393 393 Documenr POJ.J119-001, Rev. 0 Appendix C, Pa1e U of 21 Burl*I I Proce,,ed Wt. lb,. G.43& 118.HI 71'.l-'.686 200.153 36.657 774.900 286,592 3,360,761 3,125.629 146,4!M 34-1.339 003,382 0,287.&"'6 65.012 320.048 f.11.654 4,81!":1 19.173 1,85:.! 834 16.841 19.303 729,177 1.267,612 64.977 IO.GI0,400 Craft Ma11hour1 II 11,000 12.32.5 I0.138 1,073 """' 2,J(;G 23.233 I0,800 7,976 30,833 30,833 121,820 3,033 !:1,875 11,89C. 'i,064 704 918 1,746 22,317 1,170 1,008 100 9.716 4.253 3420 3.625 1.038 2,M7 1,G95 81 2,400 711 300 16 73 1,391 400 2,1m 12,007 12,4<12 1,260 378 133.726 25G.634 Utlll1y*nd Contractor M*nhouu 142,214 4G,643 171,G91 300.4.19 378,7(11 1.0-13,282 100 938 1,760 1,125 1,365 1,3% 6,644 G,644

"' :::T :!: "' <O Diab lo Can,yon Power Plartt Df!!conuniffionin1 Co*t Anal)'9i* Activity lnde.x Actlvltv De.11crl lion Pertod 2* Additiorui.I ec.a. 2-.2.1 Remedial Act loo Sun*eys 2 *. 2.2 Rel ittd Reactor Head 2 *. 2.3 PG&:E RPV Scaff Support Team 211-2.4 IX)C RPV St*ff Support TelllD 2*.2 Subtotal Period 2a Additional Cost.a Period 2* Collater11l Co.LA 211.3.1 Prooe11 dewmmi&aioning "Iller waste 211.3.2 Prooeu dooommiMioning che111k:ol n118h wa1t.e 2a.S.S Smoll lool 11Uowr1oce 211.3.-1 Enl'ironmenu.I Pen:nill 1md Feet 2a.3.6 GTCX:: Penuilling (PG&E Labor) 2a.3.G GTCX:: Storage Pem1itliug (Contrttetor) 2a.3 Subl.olal Period 2a Collnter11I Co!lll Period 2a Period-Dependt:nt Cu!:ll lla..&.I Decon tuppliu 2L-l.2 IHuranoe 2it.43 Prqien.ytaxee 2*-4.4 Health physkt *Upplie1 2a.4.6 HeftV)' eqWplll('nt reuliil 2a.4.6 OispoMlorDAW iienerated 2it.4.7 Planlt'net10*budgt>f 2a.4.8 NRCFeH 2uA.ll Emergency Planning Fees 2aA.10 S11t"nt lo'uel Pool O&M 2 ..... 11 ISFSI Operat iug Coel* 2a.4.12 $e\-erHce RelatOO Ulel* 2*.4.13 Spent. Fuel Stor11p C.ni11*ent/Qverpf11Cb 211.ol.14 Securi1y S1atreh!1 2 ..... 1u 2* .... HI UtiUly StatrClist 2a.4 Sublolal Period 2* Period-Depende-nt Cc.sis 2a.O TOTAL PERIOD 2a CXIST PERIOD 2b. Site Oeeo111a1ni11atio11 Period 2b Diroct Acth-itie1 Di11poe.11I of Pinnt Sy1tcnu 2b.l.1.I Capit.fll Additions (l,""let10) 2b.l.l.2 Capiull Addilionl 86-2002 (oontam.ineted) 2b.l.l.3 Chemiad 5' Volume Control 2b.l.l.4 Chemical It Volume Control (Jngulated) 2b.l.l.6 Qmpooent Cc.dintf Wat.er 2b.l.l.6 Component Cc.ding Water (RCA) 2b.l.l.7 Ct.-npreued Aif 2b.l.l.8 Compno:ued An (ltllulated) 2L.I.1.9 Can11reued An (RCA ln1ulatedJ 2b.I LIO Cunpreued Air (RCA) 2bl.l.ll Dte11el Engine-Generrilor 2b.J.l.l.2 DM:tel (lmrnfatt'd) 2b.l.l.13 Electrical(Clean) 2b.l.l.14 EMlctric81 (Contaminated) 2b.l.1.15 E\ocuical (RC * .\J 2b.l.l.16 2b.l.l.17 G119t'OUs Radw*ste 2b.1.J.J8 HVAC (CleAn Jruu.lated) 2b.l.l.19 H\'AC{Clerin) 2b.l.l.20 HVAC{Cootamina1ed lHulnted) 2b.l.l.21 HVAC (Umtamin*led) 2b.Ll.22 Liquid RadwHte 2b.1.l.23 Liquid UadwHte <ln!!ulated) 2b.l.l.24 Lube Oil Dillribul iou & Purificat.K.o 2b.l.l.25 1\111ke-up\Vatt'r 2b.l.J.26 Writer (l111ulated) TLG Inc. Remov*I C..* C..* 72 321 72 321 177 3,400 6,715 177 10,116 1,943 44,662 467 ... 8'9 1090 807 "" 1116 600 123 * ,. ""' 143 3 3,257 362 1,963 374 136 " *38 241 1,073 380 459 81 .. 132 2M " Table C-2 Diablo Canyon Unit 2 DECON Decommissioning Cost Estimate (fhouHnds o{ 2014 Dollars) Off.Site u.RW P*ckA1b11 Tr.n1port Proceuioa Dbpoul Other Tollll Tot*I C..u Costl Coil* Co111 Costs Contln eoc Costs *,302 7.003 2G3 81 1,615 003 2,462 G,008 1,323 7,422 5,875 1,275 7,100 ""' 81 1,516 17,276 5,603 U.C37 ., ... 24' IG7 62' 70 300 2.926 ... 3,001 1722 "' 2,006 IAl8 308 1.726 " 88 "' G.067 1,"53 8597 .. "' l.C.00 227 1,700 .. , 79 .,._ 1,230 '"'"" 1,457 8172 132 37 157 .. <10 8.013 1,730 !l,762 1,3"3 19' 1,637 2,2().1 319 2,523 2.442 ... :?,973 1,686 306 2,001 6,008 1,301 7,297 ..... "' 30<8 c.8.331 12,659 ,...,, 70,100 16,213 86,313 107.381 23,303 130,686 182 37 167 2S2,112 69,307 332,037 19,728 7,182 59,CSI 286,122 118,090 637,278 101 """ .. 22 ... 443 1,710 127 62 1,653 1.636 ..... " 10 317 ... 1690 ,13 "' 149 .. .. ... '"' M83 27 149 8 2 ,. '° 76 30 II ... 30* l,3!l8 31 17' I

  • 707 3,003 41 17 MO 336 1,2"6 ,,. 2,3811 122 .. I .... 737 2,866 .. 0 183 118 ... * ** .. ... 34 14 ... , .. 089 173 71 2,250 1,242 4.808 ., 23 742 "' 2,MG 3 33 *1 168 29 ""' .. 311 ' 30 NRC Spent Fuel Site Proce.Hed Lie. Term. llan*gement Rmitoratlo11 Volur.ne Cl*uA C..u Colli.!J c.. .. Cu. Feet Cu.Feet 7,003 2,462 6,072 7,422 7,160 2.&,C37 5.072 62< .172 361 311 3.001 2.006 1,726 8.368 "" 472 "' 1,700 ""' 63 """' 8,172 410 ..... 9,702 J.637 2,li23 2,973 2,051 7,297 3,043 70,llS!I 86,313 130.68li 321.386 I0,689 G3 *,llGI> C.22,30<J 10.689 4,880 141,148 008 1.7JO .... ..... 5.976 , ... 1,1,6 '" .... 6,009 ... 8 ,. .. 1,'911 1.019 "'
  • 3,003 ..... 1,962 2,389 2,860 5,726 ... 600 .. "" ""' 1,60!> 4.8118 8.132 2,380 2.G83 168 120 160 811 30 Burl*I Volumes Clu!IB Clu!IC GTCC Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet 963 303 Document P0/./1/J..001, Rev. 0 Appendix C, Pu1e IS of 21 Burl*I/ Utility *nd Proceued Craft Coolractor Wt. Lbs. !lihnho11" Manhoun 6',008 322 442 2,098 '° 611,803 91,69-4 322,4-12 00,166 161,637 28.292 D2 28,W'J 92 117.005 191 800,Sl)i 642,867 1,206,367 117.006 191 2,648,672 11,078,2l:IO 322,983 2,800,762 7,040 168.006 6,600 36 ... 137 24 672 69.872 9920 2,1164 408.30.& 8,:.118 1,881 .. <00 98,G62 7,238 2.069 *18 <17,918 118,983 4,001 27,956 348,902 6,1 .. 9 40,200 1,833 002 7,019 li7.832 3,075 496.632 JS,888 163,638 11,312 7.330 1,002 1,004 3,794 87C

"' :i> ff ::::r '.!: "' 0 Diablo Can)'On Power Pfarit Decommi .. ioning Co** Analy*i* Actklty lndu Actlvltv De,eri tlon Di,posal of Pinnt Sy111em1 ll'Ontinued) 2b .. l.l.27 W111er (RCA lne.ul8.ted) 2b.l.l.28 M11ke-up Wntcr fRCA) 2b .. J .. l .. ?9 Mechenic*I De.pllJ'lment Equipment 2b.l.l.30 Mi1eellaneom1 Renctor Coolant. 2b.J.1.31 Nuclear $le8m Supply Sampling ::!b.l.l.32 Nuclear Slctun SllJ>p}y SwnpliDg Hnsuloted ::!b.1.1.33 Rc.:iiduallle11t Remo\'"111 211..l.l.34 Safety lnjed.ion 2b.l.l.36 Snfoty lnjcction(lnsuluted) 2h.1.1.36 Safely luject.ion (HCA lnsuh1ted) 2b.J..l.37 Safely lu,icrtion <RC .. .\) 2b.l.l.38 Sel'\*lce Cooling Water 2h.J.l.39 SeM*ice Cooling Wnter (RCA) 2h.l.l.40 Sewer Sy1le1n 2b.l.I Totat1 2b.l.2 Scrurolding in 1up1>0r1. ol dccu:runiasioninj!: Dec:ontamination tJ(6ile lluildinge 2b.l.3.I *React.or 2b.l.3.2 Auxiliary 2b.l.3.3 Cnpit11I Addition* 86-2004 2b.l.3.4 Containment Peneirati!Jn An-;i 2b.i.3.li H1.1dw8SteSt(lr1.1ge 2b.l.3 Tot111!1 2b.I Sub1(Jfal Prriod 2b Activity Costs Period 2b Add1t1onal Cu!ott ::!b.2.l Remedi11l .Actiou SuM*ey1 2b.2 Subtotal Period 2b Addition11I C-OM..t Period 2b Collater11I Coet11 2h.3.J Prooeu 1le<uumiuioning l\'f:ller 2h.3.2 Proc-!111 deoommiuioningcht"mical fl1111h "2b.3.3 SmalJloolHllowance 2b.3.4 Environmenlal Pennit.s and Fcea ::!b.3 SubtoWI Peri01l 2b Collnternl Coet.& Period 2b Period.Dependent Costa 2b.4.J Deoon 11up1>lie1 2b.4.2 lnsurunt-e 2b.4.3 Prq:iertytaxet: 2h.4.4 He11lth phy1iai 11upplie11 2h.4.5 He11vy equipment rcnlal ::!b.4.6 Disix--1 or DAW geoernU!d 2b.O Pl8nt energy budget 2bA.8 NRCFee1 2b.4.9 Emergency Plt111ning J.'eet 2h.4.IO Speul J.'ucl Pool O&M 2b.4.ll Liquid Radwn1te Proocstiug Equi\>ment.J6en*ioo11 2b.4.12 ISPSI Oper;iting Cost* 2b.4.13 Sc\*ernnce Related Coitt1 2b.4.14 Security St11ITCost 2b.4.15 DOC Sta.IT Cost 2b.4.IEI Utili1ySl11ITC<.Jt 2b.4 Sublotnl Period 2b Period*Dept>ndent C<.61!-2b.O TOTAL PERJOO 2b CUST TLG &rvien, lne. Re1novAI Tr11n,port C..t eo .. Co*" Cost! 33 . IG6 23 I 22 146 22 I I 0 I 0 326 313 122 60 128 16 6 I 30 6 323 .. " , .. 37 ** 1.914 14.335 1.078 436 6,6'0 12 083 2,G37 1,132 1.369 773 02 02 4:!4 176 10 19 336 226 25 27 66 * " 3,120 3,870 1,231 5,453 0,033 23,741 2,360 5,000 1'3 104 176 3 136 362 ""' 1-11.:i 436 2-11 537 1.389 2,312 2.003 92 26 1,389 .j,315 92 20 6,668 28,493 2.683 8,'63 Table C-2 Diablo Canyon Unit 2 DECON Decommissioning Cost Estimate (Thousands of 2014 Dollars) rf-Sill'l LLRW N"RC Proeeninr Dbpo,11.I Other Tot11I Tol*I Lie.Term .. Cost' Costs Costs Conlin enc Cost! "°'" 62 31 121 121 292 171 061 061 0 2 112 Ill *103 .J03 16 " 63 53 7 6 " 23 1,1>84 l)Q(I 8,3-13 8,343 200 126 ., .. , .. 8 6 21) 21) 76 42 164 16*1 671 372 l.4'12 l,442 31 176 74 42 162 162 II 00 13.873 I0.789 42.-124 33,066 70 2.034 7,686 7,686 25,386 12,162 47,607 "7,007 691 1,641 UIS 4,618 Ill '23 1.171 1,171 328 462 l.891 1,391 36 46 166 166 26,500 14,623 54.853 M,803 40,493 ::!7,448 104.003 00,147 6"3 2,2tH 2,WI l."'8 693 2.291 2.21JI 488 333 1,243 1,243 1,180 627 2,200 2,200 96 631 631 692 191 1.073 1,078 l,GGS " 1,J.16 6,066 6,066 602 1,81l2 1,892 *173 68 6'I 641 166 " 18!1 189 836 3.148 3,148 '36 2438 2,438 110 59 287 267 1.006 414 2.320 2.320 *106 59 463 463 004 96 700 736 160 8913 174 38 212 21::! 508 110 618 9.100 1,988 11,148 11.148 17.677 3,814 21,391 21,391 rn.633 3,371 18,9CM 18.004 23,400 6,099 28,596 28,596 110 70,797 17,073 03,81.).'} Ul,529 42,271 73,277 46,368 200,113 196,022 Spent Fuel Site Processed Burl*I Volume' M11.n*(eme11t Re,tor11.lio11 Volume Cl*HA c1.,,u c1.,, c GTCC Costs Costs Cu.Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet 186 1,0UG 406 60 ,. 6,726 767 "" 27(1 2,*127 176 260 GO 8,816 50,136 1,805 349.938 G,804 1,:JOO 2,IW 000 JG0,784 8,81G 412,720 942 1,281 2,223 4.006 760 ... 618 2,274 4,006 2,274 8,816 419.0*IS Documenl POl-1119--001, Rev. 0 Appe,.dix C, Pajfe llio/ 21 Buri*I/ Ut.Hlty *nd Proceued Craft ContrRctor Wt. Lb.s .. Ma11ho11r1 M1rnhoun 11,366 "' 64.346 2,210 19 24.761 2,226 280 1.528 120 3-18,913 6,41>8 46.109 1.792 1.826 76 16..133 617 147.800 4,277 2,18ti 16.400 606 7*1G 3.060.638 222.884 81.221 <<.703 33,233.4C.O 43.340 582.052 28,093 117.118 8,113 7,362 M,154 ll(J7 34,100.500 87,76*1 37,297.420 366,351 lff,300 19,306 G6,1)20 184 100.538 240 103.058 *12:! 81.806 '" 241,174 l*IJ,.jll 262,48.'l 81.800 13*1 640,069 37,572.380 370,214 G<t6.Cl69

"' ::r 1> w Diablo Canyon Power Plat1I Decommiulonin1 Cost Analpl* Activity lndu Actlvlt Descri Ion PERIOD 2e-Spent fuel delay prior to SFP deoon Periotl2c0il'fd Dflc:onuniuionin1 Actintte& Period 2c Collateral Colt* 2c.3.I Spent Fuel Tranarer

  • Pool LO ISFSI 2c.3.2 Environ1nent*I Permiu and Fees 2c.3 Sublotfll Perkill 2c Collateral C.:.U Period 2c Period-Dependent Co.I.a 2c.4.I ln9urance 2e..t.2 Proiier1.y1axe1 2e.4.3 Health pby8ic81upplit'I 2c..S.4 Di*posal of DAW generated 2c.'l.6 Plant energy budget k4.6 NRC Feet 2c.4.7 Emervency Plannin1 Feee 2c.<l.8 Spent Tran1fer. ISFSI to IX)lo; 2c.4.9 Liquid Radwa\WI J>roceM.ing f,qWpmenlJSen*ice1 2c.l.10 ISFSI Operalin1 Co.ti 2c.4.l I Spent Fuel Storage C.ni.tersKNerp.::b 2c..4.12 Security StafTCoat 2c..4.13 Utility St11ffCoet 2<.4 Subtotal Period 2c Pt'dod*Depentkont Coei.. 2<.0 TOTAL PERIOD 2c OOS'r PERIOD !d-Decontamloation Follo"*lnrWet Fuel PerKlll 2d Dtcommiuioning Activitiet 2d.l.I Remwe spent fuel racb Di8JKl8lll cA Plaot Sy1ter:n1 2d.l.2.I Electrical {Conlnminl!ltMI}
  • FHB 2d.l.2..2 Eledricllll (RCAJ-Fl-m 2d.l.l.3 Fire Prot.ictklo (RCA) 2d.J.2.4 HVAC(Contnmin11h'tl). FHB 2d.l.:U Spent Fuel Pit Cooling 2d.l.2.G Spent Fuel Pit Cooling. nm 2d.1.2 Totals Decontruninnr.Mln or Site Bu.ildinge 2d.l.3.I fo'uel Handling 2d.l.3 Total1 2d.l.4 Scaffnldinr in 1upport. oC decommi11ioning 2d.I Subtot.al Period 2d Adiril1* eo.t1 Period 2d Additionnl Co.ti 2d.2.I LicenMl TermiMLkMt Survey Planniug 2d.2.2 Remedi:.I At.-tion Sun-..y1 2d.2 Subkll&I Perkid 2d Additiounl C.0.11 Period 2d CoU&teral Coeui 2d.3.I Process dea.m.miNioning "'ttter waM.e 2d.3.2 Procet111 UtoraxiuniHkming ('hemica( nu.b W88le 2d.3.3 Smalllooll!lllowaoce 2d.3.4 Decommiuioning Equipment Dli!poeition 2d...3.6 En\*irontnf'nt.a.1 and Feee 2d.3 Subtotal Pt"riotl 2d Colllllerttl Coel* Period 2d Period*De!'l(:.ndent CM!la 2d.4.I Decon euppliet 2tl.U Insurance 2d.4.3 Prq)Cny taxe1 2d.4.4 lleahhphyeic*aupplit>e 2d.4.Ci 1-lettvy equipment ren1.ttl TLG &1-vicn, Inc. Removal Padustnr Transpai:1 C..* Co** eo. .. Costs 078 '3 12 078 '3 12 978 43 12 602 .. Ul3 83 Ill 3 681 ,. 29 266 "' " 2'0 37 " 00 47 19 133 "" 21 1,627 '"" IOI 8'6 8119 00 38 *** 899 60 .. 1106 1,4-17 ... 176 .. 36 00 78 100 " ** 78 185 Ill 212 628 ,.,,, Table C...2 Diablo Canyon Unit 2 DECON Decommission.ing Cost Estimate (Tbousa11d* 0(2014 Dollar*) Orf-Sile LLRW Procenlnl' Obpasal Other Tot11I Total Cosls Cosu Costs Co11tin CUC Costs 33.221 7,210 -U71 027 6,198 37.-IO"l 8,100 46,628 2.200 331 2.622 71l6 "' 014 ... 1.381 61 27 133 9.233 2,004 11237 1.080 2-1<4 l,004 3.217 ... 3.682 867 188 1.006 84-1 183 1,cm 2,400 .... 2.004 38,783 8,417 47,200 98,076 21,284 119369 41.267 8,966 60,22.2 " 199,626 43,102 243.711 " 237.017 61,239 289,339 1,006 873 2,700 IOI 78 " 918 096 2,297 4G9 274 1,002 <tiG 267 1,004 GOO 266 1,007 656 297 1,166 3,227 1,778 6,88G 466 1,122 3.430 ... 1,122 3.430 ,. " 11537 4.773 """ 14.640 8'6 367 1.212 792 , .. 1.136 l,B37 711 2.348 166 116 .,. 17 .. 258 126 087 '37 .. ..,., 423 '37 ... 1.627 77 288 " ... 268 82 12 93 191 710 216 1.206 KRC Spent Fuel Sile Procened Llc. Ter1n. lilana1ement Volunie ClaHA eo. .. Costs eo. .. Cu. Feet Cu. Feet 40,-131 6,198 6,1{18 40,431 2,622 lll*I l,331 133 1.002 11,237 1.93-1 3,682 l.06G 1,0'l7 ..... ....... 69,680 26,111 25,111 103,""' 139,722 1,902 100,187 180,163 1,002 """' 3,802 361 366 2,297 3,317 J.()62 l,GOC 1,034 1,719 1.o:n 2,200 1,166 2,367 6,886 ll.003 3,430 3.325 3.*l30 3.326 1.1537 361 14.B40 10,20"J 1,212 1,13Ci 2,348 ,,. 318 ... 087 a.ea1 ""' 1,627 ..... ,.. 268 93 719 Burial Volumes ClanB Cius C GTCC Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu.Feet Oocurnenl PaJ.J1JJ..OOJ, RflV. D Appendix C, Pa*e 11 of !l Burial/ Utility *nd Procened Craft Conti::11ctor Wt. Lbs. Mau hours Manhoun 38.042 62 J,:W0,724 *150,377 38,042 62 1.800,101 38.042 62 1.800,101 234.773 ... 2222& 1,498 201.180 8,927 3,643 104,767 3,086 13-to79 1,4IO l*l*l,266 1,&21 710,8.t!) '°*""" 248.142 23,547 248.142 23,647 16.24-4 8.941 l.2!0007 63..837 6,240 0,007 il.667 GJ!IO 19,100 62 300.000 .. 31D,IOO ""

I\) :i> 0 :::T !: w I\) Diablo CPnyon Power Plant DecommiHionin1 Co*t Analy*i* Activity lnde.x AcUvlt De!lcri tlon Pt:riod 2d Period-Dependeni. Q.ieu (l'Uolinued) 2d.4.6 D1111)()Nlll or DAW geoer11ted 2d..f.7 Plant energy budge.I 2d..f.8 NRC 2d.4.9 Planning Fee11 2d.4.10 Spent Fuel Tran1fer -to DOE :.!d.4.11 l,i(1md Radwasle Procening EquipmenL/Sen*ices 2d.4.12 ISFSI Opera I ing Cost* 2d.4.13 $e\*er1H-.ce Relt1led Co!lh 2d.4.J.I Security SteffCo6t 2d . .f.15 DOC Stt11T Co81 2d.4.16 SlaffCo!ll 2d.4 Subtolnl Period 2d Period-Dependent Coet.1 2d.O TOTAL PERIOD 2d L"OST PERIOD 2r-Uce111e Termln*tion Period 2f Direct Decomin1saioni..n1 2r.1.1 ORISE oonfirmatory 1un*ey 2(1.2 Temunalelicen11e 2r.1 Sublol!d Period 2f Acth*itr Cuit1 Period 2f Addiliomal Cosl1 2£.2.1 License Trm1i1111tio11 Survey 2r.2 Subtolf1l l'l!riod 2f Additional ('All!h Period 2f Ulllat.eral O>elll 2r.3.1 lX>Cslt1ffrelc.cationeXpeOJ1oes 2r.3.2 Environmental Perm.it.1111nd Fee!il 2f.3 Sublofal Peril.xi 2fColl11ler11I CoEo.ll! Ptrkid 2£ Perkod-Oependent Costs 2[4.1 ID.!luram:e 2(4.2 ProiK'rtyt11xe1 2t.f.3 Heidt h phy1ic1 1upplie1 2(4A DiJJl)Qlt1l of DAW gentrztt.ed 2(.4.5 Pl1mle!K!rl(\'hudgoct 2[4.6 NRCFces 2f.4.7 Emergency Planning Ftte 2(.4.8 Spent Fuel Tr1rn1for

  • ISFSI to 2(A.9 ISFSI Ope1ntmg Cc.t.s 2U.IO Security 61.t1C!'C.O.t 2(.4.11 OOC StafTCost 2(4.12 Utility Stall'C'091. 2[4 Subtoenl Perk>d 2rPeriod-Dependent Cosl8 2r.o TOTAL PERIOD 2roosT PERIOD 2 TOTALS PERIOD 3b -Site Re1tonllon Period 3b Dired Dcoommiseiooing Ac1i\*iti1?' Demolition of Hemaininit Sit.e Building& 3b.l.l.1 *Reactor 3b.l.1.2 AdminiJ1Jtr111ioo 3b.l.l.3 Auxilinry Sb.l.1.4 Capil.al Additio111 86-2004 3b.l.l.5 Chemk:al Storfllftl Jb.1.1.6 Chlorinnti(Jfl. Jb.l.1.7 Circulflli11g Water Tunnele 3b.l.l.8 Cold Mt1Chine Shop 3b.l.l.9 (A)mmunkntion 3b.l.l.IO Oo11ck!nMte Sup11ort Sb.1.1.11 Containment l'PDClrni.ion Area 3b.l.l.12 TLG &,.vice*, Inc. Removlll Co.t Co** 212 1,620 1.703 IU88 004 904 004 I0,214 80,124 7,188 1,100 ..... 4,627 ' 10 1,214 42'i ' 926 736 fl.)7 Table C-2 Diablo Canyon Unit 2 DECON Decommissioning Cost Estimate (Thousands 0£2014 Dollars) Ort.Site LLRW Pacbj'lni Tr11nsport ProceHinf Dl!po111l Other Tot11l Total COlltll Collt9 Co9t9 Coll II ColltS Co11th1 enc Co!ll 4() 11 ... 26 120 004 109 613 168 " 193 16" " 188 GJ.I 13a i.f8 173 37 210 252 00 300 8.061 1,7.10 0.810 1.771 .... 2,156 0.266 1,141) 6.412 8..190 1,842 10.332 *IO II 48 25781 6,066 33.666 701! ""' 5.244 27.856 11.296 52.293 183 1* 262 183 79 202 16.JIJ'j 6,697 21.7fl6 16.IW 6,597 21,700 1,466 318 1,784 716 166 870 2.181 473 2,654 S<2 50 392 13' 19 16.1 32'7 1,281 " .112 89 li02 302 14 3*16 269 "" """ 1.004 218 1.222 412 89 " 2.8911 629 3.528 6.073 1,101 6.174 5.74-1 1,247 6.900 16.592 3857 21371 34.154 11.006 46.083 23,171 13.968 I07,22G 658,425 237,087 1.131,100 1,560 8,748 200 1,400 1,516 8.002 1,004 5,631 I 6 2 12 264 1,478 "' 020 I G 201 1,127 158 886 216 1,214 !<RC Spent Fuel Site Procened Uc.TertlL MllDafement Rator11.tlon Volume ClaHA eo ... Co1t9 Co1t1 Cu.Feet Cu.Feet l2U 1,781 613 193 188 1.18 210 300 0.810 2.100 6.412 10,332 82,.127 1.242 1.781 fil.060 U42 27.068 262 262 21,7ll6 21,700 1,784 870 2.664 39'l 16.1 1.281 24 337 002 346 ""' 1,222 " 3,528 6,17-1 6,000 19,339 2,031 337 44,002 2,031 337 921,620 100,21ID 13,197 500,398 8,H8 1,400 8,002 6,631 6 12 1,478 020
  • 1,127 889 1,21*1 Burl*I Volumes Cl11"B ClusC GTCC Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet 003 393 Document POJ-1119-001, Rev. 0 Appendix C, Pa1e /So/21 Buri*! I Utlllty*nd Proce11ed Craft Contnctor Wt. Lbs. Ma11ho11r1 Man hours 36,629 "' 22,800 48.000 9J.G80 35.629 58 162.480 UiG4.746 63613 10.S,720 200,4G8 3,120 200,-468 3,120 6,734 II 37.321 46,700 G0.107 6.734 II 144.179 G.73-1 200.470 147,299 li0,200.180 962.351 s.001.9.m 87,914 10,368 64,"71 47,403 49 "" 12,194 3,780 " 9,300 G,(;G!j 8,321 N :t> 0 ::::T !: w w Dioblo Canyon PowerPlonl Decommi.*ioning Co*t Anol.r*i* Activity Jn du Acdvlt Oon Demolilkon of RemainiDlt' Site Buildi.np (a:.aliouedJ 3b.1.l.13 Fabric".atioo Shop 8b.l.l.1'4 Fire Pwnp Hou.e Sb.1.1.16 Hn.ardou1 WAIU! Storage i-'acilit)" 3b.l.l.IG lotabStrucu.ire 3b.l.l.17 Alaintenftnce Shop 3b.l.l.18 ,_liteelleneous Structure1 3b.l.1.19 Nl'O Permintent Warehouse 3b.1.1.20 Poud1 ab.1.1.21 Portuble J.'ire Pun111 & Fuel Cart. 3b.l.l.22 Pretrentment 3b.J.l.23 ROOwoste Stonge 3b.J.l.2* Radwa1te Storttge Facility (Additiom1l) 3b.l.l.20 Rotor Warehou11e Jb.l.l.26 Security 3b.l.l.Z7 Security Buildiup (addilicmal) 3b.l.l.28 Sec:urity Mod1f'icnUons (2010 kl 2010) 3b.l.l.29 SimuJatur 3b.I 1.30 Ste11m Generator Storage Facihly 3b.l l.31 Teif.pbone Te.rminaJ 3b 1.132 Turbine 3b.l.l.33 Turb11w Pedelt11I 3b.l.J.J.4 Vehicle ,_l11inle.n11nce 3b.l.1.36 WHte. Water Holdmf & Tre111.meot Facility Jb.1.1.36 Fuel Handling Sb.I.I Totols SiteC!oetoou1..o\di1*itit-t Sb.1.2 Grade & landlcape 1ite 3b.l.3 Finalreport.ruNRC 3b.1 Subtotal Prriod Sb Additiorutl aw. 3b.2.I Backfill Structures & Concrete Remv.*al foul of state. di&p<11af) 3b.2.2 Breakwarrr Oemolil ion and Remonl (out of &late. di11poMI) Sb.2.3 Coflertlam Con11 ruc1 ion and Teardown 3b.2.4 ConcrNe Crushing Jb.2.6 Ois11088lorCalbe1t.o1Sidiog :Jb.2.(1 Oi.eJ)l)dit.ion or Mobile Bnrrierw (out oC st11te tli&JlOllll) 3b.2.7 Soil I Sediment Qmtrol Plant Area 3h.2.8 t.li-llanoou* Construction Debrie (outo(elate 1U1po1111l) 3b.2.9 Scrnp Met11I Ttaruiportotion (our. ol ttate) 3b.2.IO FSS }.lanager 3b.2 Subt.ota! Period 3b Additional Coelf; Period 3b CoUate.rtil Coelf; 3b.3.I Small tool aJlowance 3b.3 Subtotal Period 3b Collateral Co.ti Period 3b Co&l9 3b.4 I lnaurance 3b.U Propertyta:te1 3b4.3 HeAV)" equipmttnt rental 3b.4.'4 Plant l"Perg:r budget 3b.4.6 NRCISFSI Feet 3b.4.6 EmerK'l!ncy Planning Feet 3b.O Spent Pue.I Tranefor -ISJ.'SI to DOE 3b.'4.8 ISJ.'SI 0,ieral ing Colt.9 SbA.9 Security Stall'Coet. 3b.4.10 IX)C Sta IT Coet 3b.4.ll UtililyStalTCoet 3b.4 Subtotal Period Sb Period-Dependent. Coet1 3b.O TOTAL PERIOD 3b OOST TLG Ser-vice.a, lru:. Decon Removal Pacbrlnr Transport Coo* Coot eo.u Cotti 129 6 .. 6,G.>6 "'" G8 1,468 2 I II 1,892 63 002 367 " &36 '4-14 OG8 3 6,008 1,'40'4 37 " 1,979 47,015 2.337 .. 9,362 24,700 73,G67 .,. 1,"73 1'8 1,3.3*1 101,810 1.100 1,100 7,089 7,689 IG9,Ull Table C-2 Diablo Canyon Unit 2 DECON Decommissioning Cost Estimate (Thouunds of2014 Dollars) Oft-Site LLRW RC Processinr DlspoHI Other Tot*I Total Uc. Ter1n. Costs Co11t1 Co1t1 Coutln enc Co111 c. ... 28 167 "' 1,227 G.882 116 IBO 16 83 310 1,787 a 2 " *Ill 2.302 II ** 196 1.008 80 m L2 70 :JOO 1.138 ll6 6'1 210 1,178 I 3 1,282 7,100 306 1,700 *16 30 429 2.'108 10,200 67,!?18 WI 2.8 .. 4 llM 22 "" "" llM 10,733 60,188 126 '44,417 1.(,999 8'4,117 IG8,Cl3 B3,233 306,003 104 682 321 1,801 421 01 -172 ""' 770 "" 1,623 5.870 1,274 7.14'4 7.837 1,701 9.1138 6'2 136 767 767 228.261 82,286 412.368 767 .., 1412 "' 1.412 603 81 .... .. 0 ** l\03 1.847 9.236 678 147 826 "' .. 300 ... 128 1,01'4 3,308 718 """' 1.36< 2!l< 1,648 9.629 2,068 ll,008 15,137 3,286 18,t23 8,100 1,779 9,97'4 (0) .w,.100 10,266 68,2<19 0 268.769 103,627 632.207 883 Spent Fuel Site ProcesHd llanaaement RHloratlou Volume Cl11111A Cost*s eo. .. Cu.Feet C11.Feet "' 62 C,882 '80 .. 1,787 3 ' 13 2,002 *.. 1,008 .., 70 1,188 6'1 1,178 3 i,190 1,i09 46 30 2,408 67,218 2,8 .. 4 00,002 8'4,117 300,003 082 1,801 612 779 1,623 7,1*1<1 ..... 411,600 1,.(12 I.Hi 6" 600 9,23G 826 300 1,01'4 "°"' 1,648 8,81'4 2,783 18,423 1,996 7,97\1 ISt,OCM 3\t,246 l!i,00'4 &12.320 Burl*I Volumes ClanB ClanC GTCC Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Document POJ-JTJ!J..001, Rev. 0 Appendix C, Page 19of :!I Burl*I/ Utility and Proc:eHed Craf1 Conlr.ctor Wt. Lbs. Ma.nhours Mo1houn 1,223 .. 400 4G,3G4 3,U4 C73 14,003 " 14 108 17,864 662 li.938 3944 722 9,627 '4,191 8,888 28 67,74'4 11,300 " 238 16,760 439,079 (,687 008 443,600 6G8 31,H8 29'4,'408 4,004 ..... 1,4-15 10,271 6,148 347,936 6.148 122,686 136,891 87,197 346,77*1 791,6()1 3!>2,fiOO

,,., :; '.(> w .,. Diablo Canyon Power Plant DecommiMioning Co*t Analy11i11 Activity lndex Actlvlt De1cri tlon PERIOD k *Fuel Stor.fe Oper11.tlonSISblppln* Period 3c Dirvct Acth*itie9 p.,riod 3c Coll11ter11I C<.91-11 3c.3 Sublotal Period 3c CoUaterul Cosl1 Period 3c Period.l)ependentCo.u ac .. u Insurance 3c..l.2 Propertytaxea 3c..l.3 PIMteoorgybudgP.l 3c.4A NRC ISFSI 3c.4.6 Emergency Planning Fee. 3c.4.6 Spent Fuel 1'tan11Cr. ISF"SI w DOE 3c.4.7 ISF'SI Opera1in1 Coats 3c.4.8 Security StalJ Cusl 3d.9 UtihtySi.alTCc.et 3c..I Subtotal Period 3c Period.Dependent Co.t.11 3c.O TOTAL PERIOD 3c OOST PERIOD 3d *OTCC 9hlpplnr Period 3d Dif1'CI. Dt>commiHioning Aclivitiea Nuclenr Steam Supply Hemond 3d.1.1.1 Vt'fl!K'I & Intl'rnal.!i GTOO ad.I.I 3d.I Sublolal Period 3d Acfo*ity Costs Period 3d Col.lrtt.cral U.. Sd.3 SubtoMI Period 3d Collmrnl Q:,,,t.e Period 3d Period-Depemknt Coet-ll Sd.4.J Insurance 3d.4.2 PropP.nyt11xe1 3d.4.3 Plant ell(*rg)' budget 3d.4.4 ISFSI Qr.ernting Co!lh &l.4.5 SecuriLy StalJCOlll 3dA.6 Utility SlatTCoet Sd.4 Sublola\ Period 3d Period.l)epem:kml Gusts 3d.O TOTAL PERIOD 3d Q)S'J' PERIOD 3e. ISFSl Decontamln11tlon Period 3e Direct Detunm1uiioning Activities Period 3e Additional Costt 3e.2.J License Tennimition ISFSI 3e.2 Subtol.t1I Period 3e Addit10nal !Aels Period 3e Collateral Coli1:s 3e.3 SublOl.a.I Period 3ci Colh1111ral Coat a Period 3e Period*Depeodeot Co81s 3e.4.I 3e.4.2 Proilt'nytaxes 3e.4.3 Plsnr. energy budget 3e.4.4 Security Staff Co.it 3e.4.6 U1ility StafTCo81 .... SubtOl.aJ Period 31' Period*Dependent Co8l.ll 3o.O TOT AL PERIOD ae COS"r TLG &rvicn, Inc. Re111oval Packac"ln* C:O.t Co*t eo. .. 2,!07 2,107 2,I07 2.!07 121 121 121 Table C-2 Diablo Canyon Unit 2 DECON Decommissioning Cost Estimate (Thousands 0!2014 Dollau) Orr.Site ll.RW Tr1m1port Processinr Dbpo111l Other Total Tot1tl Cost! Cost! Co!ll!I Co1tt Contln enc Costt 5.143 7.14 5.887 *1.016 581 *1.507 4.111 095 4.705 8001 l.171 0.262 30"6 6.631 37.186 12.376 2.686 16001 00.013 H.326 803"9 15.184 3.295 18.470 145.488 30.028 176,616 145,488 J0.028 176,616 9.626 2,829 14,462 9,520 2,829 14,462 9.520 2,829 14,"62 11 12 ' " 6 31 136 29 100 31 38 211 "' 256 9.620 211 2.87.f 14.718 13 490 1.098 026 2,300 13 400 1.006 62tl 2,3W 7D 28 107 60 21 80 '" 61 11!2 184 66 200 *102 167 '"' 13 4"'1 1."60 798 2,980 !<RC S11ent Fuel Site Proces-d Llc. Term. Ptl1Wageme11t RHtor11tlon Volume Cl1111A Colt* Cost! Custs Cu.Feet Cu. Feet 5,887 4,507 .f.700 0.262 37,186 16,061 80.339 18,470 176.616 176.616 14,462 14,462 14,462 "

  • 31 166 38 200 14,462 256 2,300 1,777 '*""' 1,777 107 80 192 "" .,. 2.98Ci 1,777 Burial Volumes Cl*ssB Clnt C GTCC Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet 1,649 1.649 1.649 1.640 Document POJ.J119-00I, Rev. 0 Appendix C, Page 20of 21 Burial! Utility and Processed Craft Contractor Wt. Lb!I. Man hours M11nhours 826,100 159,665 086.665 985,GOS 3.10,307 330,307 330.307 1,700 328 2,028 330.307 2.028 108.170 7.000 388 108,170 7.000 3ll8 1.001 1,901 3,803 108,liO 7.006 4,191 Diablo Can)'OH Pomer Plant Decon11nidionin1 Co*t AnaiJ'*i* Ac1ivl1y Actlvhv Descrl tton PERIOD 1£-ISFSI Site RutoraLk>n Period 3r0irecl Decomm111ion..in1Act1vitit-t 3r Addi1 ional eo.1 .. 3f.2. I DemohtlOCI. Md Site RHtor&Lion ISFSI 3r.2.2 A.reaSoil/SedunentControl ISFSI 3f.2 Subt.olal Period af * .a.rlditklnal Co.ti Period 3fCoUateral CoWi 3f.3.I Snrnll lool allowm1ce 3f.3 Subtotul Period 3fCollat.eml Clotilll Pcrkxl 3f PeriOO-Oependent Co.lll 3L4.I lnauraDai Prot:ie.ri)' trui:ea 3f.4.3 Heav)* equipmut rulal 3f.4.4 Plant ener1y budtet 3f.U.i Seairity Stal!'Coet 3f.4.6 Utilil)" Staff CoM. 3L4 Suhtc.lal Perk.cl 3f Period-Orpendent eo.t.. 3(.0 TOTAL pf;RIOD 3fOOST PERIOD 3 TOTALS TOTAL COST TO DECOllMlSSION "° 13,610 Table C-2 Diablo Canyon Unit 2 DE CON Decommission_ing Cost Estimate (Thousand& of2014 Dollars) Off-Site ILRW Removal PacU..lnl' THnsport ProceHIDI' DbpoHI Other Costs Cost CosLt Costt Costt Costs 1,&42 21 1,663 ,. ,. 67 67 1,744 161,776 2,llU 244,916 H.8.51 2,749 2,740 23 27 76 '"' 2.906 13 10,016 418,934 14,186 128.0U 1,156,806 u.100,111 lhounndt or 2014 dollars Sl.17J,llH thoun.nd1 or 201-1 dollars '3116.117 thou*ands or 2014 dollars $H2,G42 thouunds or 2014 dollars 963 * "67
  • 12
  • 6 J7 ... 1,007 138,228 420,!51 Total "°'" 6344 u ..... .. 30 3' 00 "' 33 93 257 ..... 73Ul81 2,100,171 AL LOW-LEVEL RADIOACTIVE WASTE VOLUME BURIED (EXCLUDING OTCC): 606,840 Cubic Feet AL GREATER THAN CLASS C RADWAb'TE VOUJA-1E GENERATED: UIREMENTS: EndNotea: nfa
  • ind9calff lh..,t 1hi1 actMty not. dial'j'l'!d M decomnnukming eJq>t_n.r. 11. indK:attt that thi* .et.i\*1ty pefformed by deconuniNionlnr s111fT. 0 -lndicatu that thi* l'alue it leel than 0.6 bul i* non-ttro. a ceU containin1 '"*'" lnchcatH a zero vallH'l TLG &ruicn, Inc. 1,649 Cubic Feet 78,197 Tout l,iK 293 Man-bouu NRC Spent Fuel Llc. Term. Manal'ement Costs Costs 18.330 194,7i6 1,171,1111 195.!17 Site Restoration "°'" 6,SU ,. 6,369 30 "' 3' 00 28 33 93 "' ..... ti17,97G 5H.o.u Document POI-1719-001, Rev. 0 Appendix C, Paze 21of21 -..,.c""1 .. p::::!:d Cu, Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Wt. Lb1. Crllft MAnhoun 1,777 1,860 ... 20,-1-13 2,668 23,011 23,011 1,649 438.477 821,Gli l,6411 61,463.140 1,796.291 Utllil1 and Contr"ctor M*nhoun JJO 3'9 ,.. 1.133 1,213 1,346.678 7,llH.900 Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis APPENDIXD Document POl-1719-001, Rev. 0 Appendix D, Page 1of21 DETAILED COST ANALYSIS SAFSTOR Tables D-1 Diablo Canyon Power Plant, Unit 1 ................................................................... 2 D-2 Diablo Canyon Power Plant, Unit 2 ................................................................. 12 TLG Services, Inc. 2-AtchA-136

""' :::J" :i=-w ..... Diublo Canyon Power Plant Deconuni.aalonin1 Coat Analyai* Activity Actlvlt De!llerl tlon PEBJOD la -Shutdown tbroulh Tranddon Ill Direct Ol!c:ommi98ioning Activitaet 1111.l.I SAFSTOR 11ilf' ebarl!lcieriulion turvey 111.l.2 P,..,pa.re preliminary decornmiMioning ro.t. l*.1.3 Nolificalion orCeu&tioo oCOperation* la.1.-1 Remm*e fuel & llOUrct mat.er-ill.I la.1.6 Nolifiet1lion of Pem1anent Defueling la.1.6 Deact.h*ole pluut 1ys1.em11 & prooeu .,,,,.,le hi.1.7 PrepKre and submit PSDAR 111.l.8 Revie11* ))lunt dwgs & 81>CC8. hi.1.9 Perlhm1 delailed rad sun*ey la.LIO Estimate b,-.product. in\'entory ls.I.II Endproductdc11eription la.1.12 Detailed by.product invenl.ory la.1.13 Define major work 1e<1ueoce la.1.14 Perl'orm SER r.nxl EA la.1.16 Perbtn S1i.e.SpeclfieColt Study Act1nty Spedflcatk>o. l*.1.16.1 Pttpar"I' plaol 1md fiw:il1lie1 l'or SAFSTOR l*.1.16.2 Pl1.1ot1yllem1 la.1.16.3 Plflol1tructures11ndbuildinp la.1.16.4 WMlf' man11gement la.1.16.6 111eili1y and site donnan<")' 111.l.16 T""'I Detailed Work Prooedures 111.1.17.I ptantll)..tem* lt.1.17..2 Fadlity cloioooul &: dorm11D<-')' 111.1.17 Total la.1.18 Procure ncuum drying -'YSlem la.1.19 Drain/de-cnergiR noi1<0ot. l)'ttems 111.1.20 Drain &t dr)* NSSS \11.1.21 Dr11in/de-eoerit:iuronl.11minatedsysl.em1 111.1.22 Decoo/11eeure cont.amineled l)'tlemt la.I Period la Activity C081.5 Period la Arlditional Co.u la.2.1 Spent Fuel Pool 180latlon la.2.2 0i8P(l5lll o( Contaminated Toolt &: Equipment. 111.2 Subtotal Period ht Additional Coeu Period laCollateralC.,.u ls.3.1 En,*ironmenlal PenniU and Fee1 IL3 Subtotal Period la Collateml Cc..sl..t Period la Period-Dependenl. Cc.ta Ja.4.1 hu1ura!le'! la.4.2 Pr<ipertylaxu la .... 3 llealthphy1tc.1u11plie1 la.4.4 Hein')' equipment. reotnl lll..1.6 Ditposal o( DAW generated 11'1 .... 6 Plt1nt energy la.4.7 NKCF-la.4.8 Pbtonin1 io'ee. 111 .... 9 Spe.n1 f'uel Pool O&:M la.4.10 ISJo"SI ()peraliogCuit.s 11'1.4.ll Severatxe Hell'lted Co.ts 111 .... 12 Securily Su.ff Coet 111.4.13 UtilitJ'Stft!l'Coet 111..I Subtotnl Perk.d la Period*Dcpendent Cuiit1 la.O TOTAL PERIOD la COST TLG &1"Vicn, Inc. Orf.Site Removal Paeli:a1ln1 Transport Proeesalnl eo .. Coo< Cool> eo. .. C..u 219 103 219 103 ,,. '67 " 1.093 " 1,093 233 I07 Table D-1 Diablo Cauyon Unit 1 SAFSTOR Decommissioning Cost Estimate (Thousands 0£2014 Dollars) RW NKC Disposal Oum Total Tot111l Lie.Term. Co11h Cosu Co11tln rue Co*l* eo ... 600 ""' 8G& ... 202 .. "" 2-IC . of* 310 GO 379 379 202 *I& 246 2*16 16& 3-1 189 189 16& 31 189 189 23" " " 166 ,. 189 189 '81 100 1587 1587 "' 172 9'7 9<7 76,'J 100 9"2 932 .... 143 789 789 *84 107 " "" 310 69 3;9 379 310 89 379 379 2,613 "" 3,00H 3,00it 183 " ,,. "' 186 " 227 227 370 82 41>1 "I 16 19 .. 6,185 1,197 7,002 7,G62 21.664 4.700 26.460 26,*Mt 2.836 I.IOI 4.2M UM 2.836 21.66-1 6,897 00,717 30,717 9*9 '10 1,100 l,160 949 210 l,160 1.160 1,132 107 l,"'9 1,200 177 26 201 201 191 720 720 126 892 692 16 * ** ** 2,737 006 3,342 3,342 1,181 174 1,366 1,36' 1,001 148 1,140 ?92 17& 008 ... , 121 868 41,7"1 9,240 W,982 60,982 22,783 6,043 27,826 27,826 37,370 8,273 45,043 *15,6*3 18 109,462 2*1,302 13*1,891 132,100 2,861 138,239 31,007 174,429 171,646 Spent Fuel Site Processed Burial Man11.,.eme11t Re1toratlon Volume ClauA ClauB CIH!llC GTCC "°"" Co1111 Cu. Feet Cu.Feet Cu.Fu:t Cu. Feet Cu. Ffft I0,2*6 10,246 810 1,1*9 968 668 2,785 610 2,786 10,81>6 Document PDl-1119-001, Rev. 0 Appendix D, Pa1e ! of Burial Utility and ProeeHfld Craft Contractor Wt.,U,.. Manhoun M11nhoun 1.300 2.000 1.300 1.000 1000 I 600 1.000 &,000 *.112<l .a,1a; 3.120 2.000 2,000 16,!..'07 .. .. 1,200 100 36,800 62*.U46 317 62*.916 317 12,100 20 302,006 423.400 12,lfJO '° 720.308 637,13ti 337 762,198

"' ::T 1> w °' Oiablo Canyon. Power Plrrnl DecommiHionin1 Co*t Anal.)'9i* Activity Index Actlvitv Descrl lion PERIOD lb-SAFSTOR Limited DEOON Activities Period lb Dtrect DK-ommiMiooing Activiliel Il<<onlrunirutlioo or Site Buildings lb.I.I.I *Reactor lb.1.1.2 Cont.a.inmenl Pcnelration Area Jh.1.1.3 F'uel H11ndling lb.I.I Total1 lb.I Suhl.olal Period lb Co..ta Period lb Additional lb.2.1 lftt1,0rdou1 W1t11te Monagt"ment lb.2.2 Mixed\\'tu1teMauagement lb.4! Subtotal Period lb AtkJitional Cott* Per.00 Jb Collateral Cc.au lb.3.1 Deu,.nequipment lb.3.2 P!'OOeMdecc.mm.iuioningw&terwa11le lb.3.3 Pn.ooeN deoooJ.miNIOlling tbem1ca\ nuth Wtl&le lb.3.4 SmaU tool allowance lb.3.6 Em*ironmenlal Penni11 and Fres lb.3 Subtotal Period lb Collatt"ral Gotts Pt>riod lb Period-Dt>penden! COllt1 lb.4.1 lb.4.2 luur11111(:'e lb..&.3 Property l8xee lb.4.4 llt>nlth phy!!lic:e 1upplte. lb.4.6 lle11vy equipment. rental lb.4.6 DiepcJ1NlofDAWgent"rated lb.4.7 Plant energy bu.I lb.4.8 NRCf(-lbA.9 Ernergti-ncy Plannini;i ft'tt9 lb.4.10 Spent t'ut'I Pool O&:M lb.'1.11 !Sft'SJ Opert1lingCo.il8 lb.4.12 Se\*erHoce Reh1ted Coste lh..1.13 Securily St.&ITCoet lb .. 1.1.1 UtilityStaftCoi!t lb..J Subtotal Period lb Period*De11endent C'Olltl lb.O TCffAL PERIOD lb COb'T PERIOD le -Preparations (or SAFSTOR Dormancy Period le Direct Dcrommi1ttonmg * .\dh:it;e1 le.I.I Prepare 1upport. equipment 1£.r 1toragre lc.1.2 ln11all conlainmeot 11re11ure equal. line* le.1.3 Interim 1un*ey prior to dormancy le.1.4 Securf! building aooeMee: lc.1.5 Prepare & sul.llnit interim 11llKl'1 le.I Subtotal Period le .o\t.1h*i1y Costs Period Ir: Collatt>ral Co8ta le.3.1 !>l'()Cffll der:omrni11toning wnter wa111e le.S.2 P'roceM derommiukming chemical flush le.3.3 Small tool ttUowimce \c.3.4 Em*ironmental Penn.ill and Fee11 lc.3 Subh:.tal Pf'riod le Collateral D>>t1 TLG &1vicn, Inc. Ofr..Slte Rr:moval P*clr:*slns Tran.9Por1 Proce11lns c. .. Co" c. ... Costs ""'" 1,015 28.J 731 2.030 2,(00 ... 168 Ill 185 ,. 1,100 Ill 185 8-17 , .. 143 .,, I06 3,977 < 2'1 74,210 241

"' :::r "' <D Diablo Canyon Power Planl DecommWionin1 Co*t Anuly*i* Activity lnde:m: Actlvlt Oe!lcri tion Period le Period-Dependeo1. Coeu1 k.'4.1 lneurance le.'4.2 Prcperty taxes le.'4.3 Heallhpby1ica1upplie8 lc.'4.4 Hea\')' equipmenl rent.al lc.'4.0 DilPOlal o( DAW p;ener11ted lc.4.6 P\llnt energy budget lc.4.7 NRCFeeai lc.4.8 En1ergency Planning Feee lc.4.9 Fuel Pool O&M lc.'4.10 ISPSI Operuting Coe1.11 lc.4.11 Se\*erance ltelotedCo.ih lc.'4.12 Securi1y SUifl'Coet le.'4.13 UtilitrStafl'Coe:t le.4 Suhlotal Period le Period-Dependent Coet1 lcO TOTAL PERIOD lcOOST PERIOD 1 TOT AlS PERIOD 2a. SAF&1'0R Dormancy with Wet Spent Fuel Storare Period 2a Direct. Decu11mi111ioning Activities 211.1.l Quarterly lnel)t'ction 211.1.2 Semi-annul'll em*ironnwnw.l 1urvey 2n.l.3 Prepttre re110rt1 211.l.4 1li1.umi1mu1 roorrephlC'l'.Dll'llt 2a.l.5 Maintenance eupplie1 211.I SubWl.11! Period 211 .Ad1vity Co!lt* Period 2a Additional Ccet1 2a.2.l Sevt>raoee IWLated Cul!t* 2a.2 Subtotal Perlc..d 2ll Additional Cost* Period 2a C>llateral Coeta 2a.3.1 Spent Fuel Ttan11fur *Pool to ISFSI 2a.3.2 Em*1ronmental Permite and Feee 2a.3 Subl-0lal Period2aCollalerelCoel11 Period 2a Period-Dependent C'o8t.a 2a . .t.I lnauranit"e 2n..l.2 Property lllJ:ee 21'1.4.3 Healtbpby1ica1upplie9 2a.4.4 Diepolllll of DAW 28.4.5 Pl.811t energy budi;cl 2a.4.6 NRCFee. 21A.7 Emergenc)' Planning fee1 2a.4.8 Spent Fuel Pool O&."d 2a.4.9 ISl<'SI Operating Coat.a 2aA.IO Spent Fuel Slorage Canialen.Ornrpacb 2a.4.ll Security Slaff Coat 2a.4.12 Utilitr Starr Uoet 2a.4 Period 2a Period-Depeudenl. Cof;U 21t.O TOT AL PEHIOO 2a OOST PERIOD l!b* SAFSTOR Domumey with Dl"y Spent Fuel Storare Period 2b Direct Decommi&11ioning /\divitie!I 2b.l.I Quarterly Jnepec:tion 2b.l.2 Semi-annual en\*irc.nmentnl 11urvey 2b.l.3 Preparereporl1 2h.l.4 Biluminoue roof replacement 2b.l.6 Maintenaoceeuppliel! 2b.I Subtotal Pericd 2b Act U.SI* PeriuJ 2h Uilla1cr11:I <'A1St1 2b.3 Subt-OC11I Period 2b <'..ollmcral Coeta TLG &,.vices, Inc. Off-Site Remov11I Pack11JlnJ Transport ProceHlnJ Co" eo .. eo ... eo,,, eo ... 188 136 327 196 886 "o 231 4,173 2,418 493 526 1.849 46 13 1,849 46 13 1,849 ,. 13 Table D-1 Diablo Canyon Unit 1 SAFSTOR Decommissioning Cost Estimate (Thousands of2014 Dollars) LLRW NRC Disposal Other Total Tot Ill Lie. Term. Costs Costs Contln enc Cost1 Costs 276 " 317 317 " * '° 00 70 268 268 31 IG9 IG9 10 10 6"7 "" .,. .,. 168 " 193 198 24-1 3G 260 193 .. '"" 133 "' 163 16,227 3.692 19.810 19.8Ht G.197 1.151 6.348 6.348 9.112 2,017 ll,129 11,129 32,262 7,190 39,787 39,J(lfl 6'45 33,317 8.161 43,575 42,800 4.026 189.203 *IG,4'45 247,283 243,117 1,182 436 1,618 1,618 1,182 436 1,618 1.618 I0,86*1 2,<06 13,268 13,268 10,864 2,405 13,268 13,268 40,531 8,972 49.003 8,079 1,788 9,867 9,867 48,009 I0,761 59,370 9,867 4,333 63ll *l,972 .ol,277 Ui!O 223 1.733 1,733 .. ., 2.632 2.632 00 30 14' 14' ..... I.OJI 5,689 2,8H 2,462 363 2.826 2,826 6,08-l 696 6.982 6,743 1,*t93 8,236 4,653 1,930 5,683 49.817 11,028 60,8"4 162,000 36,081 199.071 9,832 17,280 95,340 16,821 '5 321,310 70,779 394,002 41,008 55 381,965 84,380 468,309 66,762 3,776 1,393 0,169 0,169 3,776 1,393 5,169 ii,\G{J Spent Fuel Site ProceHed Burial Voluane.9 Mana&"ernent Re1tou1llon Volume Clas:. A Cla.HB Cl11uC Co.to Co111 Cu.Feet Cu.Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet 1<9 260 236 163 679 149 679 1,386 4,166 13,660 49,503 .t9,C.03 695 2,045 2.8-U S,982 8,236 5,663 60,844 189,239 78,519 363,0'14 2,0*16 402,647 2,046 OTCC Cu. Feet Document POl-1119-001, Rev. 0 Appendi.xD, Page 4 of 21 Burh1I/ Utilltya11d Processed curt Contractor Wt .* Lbs. Manhour1 Manho11rs um 69.92D 100.240 2,972 173 169 77.188 12..193 173.752 782,436 39.926 1,114,956 40.000 67 2,231,700 861,931 40,900 67 3,083.637 40,900 67 3,083,637

"-' :l> n ::::r 1> .!>. 0 Dioblo Cunyon Power Plant Deconuninioninz Co*t Analy*i* Actlvil.y lndex Actlvlt Descl'i tlo11 Period 2b Prri00-Depend1.*nt Co.1.e 2b.4.J ln1ur111ice 2b.4.2 Property IRire. 2b.4.3 1-len.llh phyeice supplies 2b.M Oiapogal of DAW 2b.4.6 Plant energy budget 2b.4.6 NRCFeet 2b..l.7 J.:mergencyPlenningFeee 2b . .t8 Spent Fuel Transfer. ISFSI to DOE 2b .. UI 181-'SI Operi:ttingCoiiLA 2b.4.10 Security StnITCoet 2h.4.JI Utility StaITCoe1 2b.4 Sublotal Period 2b Period.Dependenl Costs 2b.O TOTAL PERIOD 2b OOST PERIOD 2 TOTALS PERIOD 3a-Reactlv*te Slee Followlnr SAFSTOR Donnancy Period 3a Direct Derorwni11ioning Activities :Jtt.1.1 Prepare pn>limmary derommisaioning roet 3a.1.2 llevklw11le11tdwg1&spee11. 3a.l.3 Perform detailt*d r11d 1une1* JR.!.4 End product dc11Cri11tion 3a.l.6 Detailed by*1lrodt1ci inventory 3a.l.6 Define major work 3a.l.7 Perl"orm SER and EA 3a.l.8 Perform Si1e-Speci[ic Coet Study 38.1.9 Preparehubmil License Tem1inatiou Plan 3a.LIO Receive NRC eppnn*a\ of terminal ion pion Acth*itySpecificntion11 3a.1.11.l Re-itetivale planl & lemporary facilitiea 38.1.11.2 Ph.ml 1y&1ent1 311.1.11.3 Reoct.of"inlern11l1 3A.l.ll.4 ReActor\*essel 3a.1.ll.5 Biol0l(ict1l 1hield 311.J.Jl.6 SwnmgenerBWNI aa.1.11.7 Reinforced concrete 38.1.11.8 Main Turbine 38.1.11.9 Main Condcneers 311.1.11.10 Plunl11ructure1& building& 38.1.11.11 Wu1temllllagemeut 3a.1.ll.12 Facility&.sitecloeeout 3a.l.ll Total Planning & Site Prep:m*tion* 3a.l.12 Pre11arediamantlingsequence 3a.l.13 Plantr1re1).&temp.11Vce11 3a.l.H De11ign water clean-up 8}"11.f:'m 3a.l.15 Ritiging.IC<.mt. Cntrl Ell\*lpBftooliug/elc. 3a.J.IO Procure ca1kalliner1 & container* 3".I Subtotal Period 3a Act.ivily f'...os!s Period 3R Addil icmal Come 38.2.1 S1t.r Characteriz111kon 3a.2 Subtotal Prriod 3a Addi I ionel Coet!! Period Sa CollateraJ Co.11 3".3 Sublotal Pl'ri!Jd 3e Collateral Period 3a P\'riOO*Dl!'pendt>nt Coel.ll 3a.4.I lnsur1mce 3a.4.2 Properl)' t10.:e1 38.4.3 llenlth phy1ics11upplies 3RA.4 Hea\'Y equi111uenl rent.al 3a.4.6 Dispoeal of DAW TLG Sel'"vice1, Inc. orr-site Deeon Removal P11.ckaJ1nr Transport Proeeulnr c. .. c. .. Co9ts c. ... C..u 2,772 68 19 2.772 68 19 2.772 68 19 *1.622 114 32 '"' 067 12 Table D-1 Diablo Canyon Unit 1 SAFSTOR Decommissioning Cost Estimate (Thousands of 2014 Dollars) LLRW NRC Disposal Other Tot*I Tot11.I Lie.Term. Costs Costs Contln euc Costt Costs 12,363 1,823 1"',176 13,664 4,824 712 5,63G 0,63G 1,023 3,795 3,796 *1 44 211 211 7,439 1,647 9,006 9,0llG """ 1,107 8,609 9,718 1,-13.f 11,163 36,3-19 8,CM7 H.300 14,8G3 3,2<.JO 18,161 103.874 22,095 12'\868 31,407 82.779 18.325 101.104 M.733 81 279,702 60.446 3-13.088 126.0-11 81 283,478 61,830 3-18,267 131,210 130 000,443 146,220 816.666 196,972 202 46 246 2*16 713 l58 871 871 . 166 3*1 1** 189 202 " 240 24(1 1,103 207 1,<120 1,4.20 481 106 587 587 776 172 947 947 630 141 ii6 776 1,143 203 1,3<.)6 1,2r..G 646 143 789 710 1,101 244 1,340 1,346 1,00ll 223 1,231 1,231 78 17 ., .. 481 107 691 691 2*18' "" 303 161 ., l*I "' 62 " 76 484 107 6111 296 713 158 871 871 l*lO 31 170 86 6,167 1,366 7,533 6,631 372 82 464 "' 3,000 004 3,004 3,004 217 48 20& 26& 2,300 509 2,809 2,800 191 42 233 233 16,573 3,669 20,241 19,339 5,234 2,317 7,661 7,661 U,234 2,317 7,561 7,661 438 66 ro3 003 177 26 20*1 2<"1 100 627 627 126 692 otn 14 8 3G 3C Spentluel Slt.e Proees,ed Burill1Volume9 ManR(ement RHtoratlon Volume ClauA ClusB Cl11uC c.. .. Co1t1 Cu. Feet Cu.Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet "' 3.00* 11,163 .f-1,396 18,16*1 95,*162 -17.371 217,047 3,004 217.047 3.004 619,59-1 6,0.f9 "" 79 161 ,. 76 296 86 902 902 614 GTCC Cu. Feet Document P01*1119-00I, Rev. 0 Appendix D, Page 5 of 21 Hurl1"1/ Utility and Proeesnd Craft Contractor Wt .* lbs. Man hours M1mho11n G0,088 .. 1,3.15.786 007.IM ll0,088 "" 2.2.J2.93f.I ll0.088 .. 2.242.039 100.987 166 6.326.676 1.:JOO 4,600 l.tlOO 1.300 7,600 3.100 6,000 4.096 7.370 4,167 7,100 C,500 500 3,120 1.600 100 ... 3.120 1.600 000 39777 2.*100 1,M.(I 1.230 72,700 25.000 it,412 25,000 9,412 10,287 17

"' :J" t> .,,. Diab lo Cun)'On Power Pla,.t DeconuniMloning Co*t Anuly*i* Activity In dell Actlvlt Desert lion Period 3" Pt>notl-Dependeot Collt.& toon1 inlM!dJ 3" . .f.6 Plant energy a. .... 7 NRCFee. 311.4.8 Securil)' SoiffCoM 3'1.4.9 Utility Starr Coet .... Subtot.al Period 3a Period-Of:pendenl eo.t.a "'" TO'T'AL PERIOD &i COST PERIOD Sb* Decomnliulonlnc Prepnatlon1 J>r:.riod 3b Direct DecornmiMk>ning Activitie1

  • Detailed Work l)roredure1 3b.l.l.I Pla11Ll)*tteru1 3b.l.U! Reactor internal* 3b.1.J.3 Remaining buiWing1 3b.l.l.-I Jb.1.u; CRD bou.1np & !Cl tube* 3b.l.l.6 lnoore il\91.rumenlalion 3b.l.l.7 Reactor\'ettel 3b.l.l.8 Facility cbloout 3b.l.l.9 Miniie1hieltl1 Jb.1.1.10 3b.l.l.11 S1eam Jb.1.1.12 Reinrorced ooncrelc Jb.1.1.18 M11in 'l'urbine 3b.J.1.14 Main CondcnMn Jb.1.1.Ui Auuli*u*y building 3b.l.l.16 Re111."lorbuildin1 Sb.I.I Toh! ab.I Subtcic.I Period 3b A.ct.ivily Co&l1 Period 3b CoUateral Cc.el* 3b.3.I Dtlcon equipment 3b.3.2 3b.:t3 Pipe culling equipment 3b.3 Suhl:otal Period 3b Collater11I Cotti Period 3b Period-Dependent Coet.11 3b.4.I Deroo llll\Jlhet 3b.4.2 ln11ur111)Ce 3b.4.3 Propert)' l*xe& ab.4.4 Health pbyliai 1upplieil 3b.4.6 Hein")' equipment rent.Al 3b.4.6 Disp<11al ol W gene:raled 3b..i.7 Plti.nl enrf'ID' budfet 3b.U NRCFcet 3b.HI Securit}* Sl.tltrCoet 3b.4.JO DOC Starr Co.t Jb.4.11 Utilitr S1arr eo.1 3b . .f Subtot.ol Period 3b Period-Depemlent Uollll 3b.O TaTAL l'EltlOD 3b COST PERIOD a TOTALS Ofl-Slte Removal Packastnc Transport Proceulnc Cool Co" Com eo. ... eo." 1,(lU 12 1,(126 12 ... 1,100 942 1,100 29 '"' , .. 29 537 971 1,637 971 2,662 ,. Table D-1 Diablo Canyon Unit 1 SAFSTOR Decomm..issioning Cost Estimate (ThouHnda oC2014 Dollars) LLRW NRC Obposal Oum Tot*I Total Uc.Term. Costs Cost1 Contln enc Cot ts Com 2,737 006 3,a.2 3,342 378 w "" '34 .... "'" 1,166 1,IM 23,187 28,l'U9 28,919 " "*""" 0,307 36,313 36,313 J.J *19,669 12,383 63,100 G2,20-1 73' 162 800 807 388 .. "' 473 209 .. 266 ** 166 34 , .. , .. 1156 34 189 189 , .. 34 189 180 003 126 687 687 186 " 227 114 70 16 .. .. ,.., " 227 227 713 168 871 871 '" 3'1 189 06 242 " 295 242 64 2"6 423 .,, 617 ... 423 ** 617 ... ..... 1,107 6,106 4,tr22 ..... 1,107 6,106 4,922 ... 1,161 1,161 1,406 ... 1,790 1,700 , .. 1,34*1 1,344 1.406 77C -1,28.1 4,28-1 11 ,. 39 ... 38 293 293 .. 13 102 " "' 3'6 316 .. .., 3-17 * " " 1,372 ,.,. 1,676 1,676 100 28 218 218 "' 106 579 679 G,661 1,460 8,001 8,001 11,0:16 2,673 14,199 14,100 20,600 4,682 25,821 26,821 27,0'll 6,1566 36,211 36,027 22 76,600 18,948 99,318 97,230 S)M'nt}"uel Sile Processed Burial Volume;, ltbn11Sement Rertou1llon Volume Clan A ClanB ClassC "°'" Cotti Cu. Feet Cu.Fut Cu. Feet Cu. Feet 614 002 611 00 l!l2 '" ., 296 , .. " 62 l,lM l,IM 2!'2 292 1,184 ""' 2,006 1100 OTCC Cu. Feet Document POl-1119-001, Rn'. 0 Appendix D, Page 60/ :!l Burial/ Utility and Processed Cr art Contractor Wt.,Lb1. Manhoun '&hnhoun 13,00G 268,62D I0,287 17 271,(,64 10,287 2&,017 363,779 4733 2600 1.300 1.000 1.000 1,000 3,630 1,200 *150 1.200 *.1100 1.000 1,000 1,600 2,730 82243 32.2"3 5.834 10 6.636 68,600 1:19,669 5,834 10 19-1,764 5,834 10 227,007 16,121 25.026 i>80,786 N :::,-:/" .,,.. N Diablo Canyon Power Plant DecommiHionin11 Co.a Analy*i* Activity lndu Actlvltv Descrh>tlon PERIOD .. a* Llirre Component Removal Period 411 Dtrect OecorumiNioninr Adi-fit in Nudt*ar Steam Supplf Syal.em Reruovl!ll 4a. J. J. I Reactor Coolant Pip1n1 48.1.1.2 PreNurizerquenchT8nlt 4a.J.l.3 ReactorCoolantP11mJ)6&Moc.on 48.l.l..I Pre1111urizer 4a.l.l.fi Sleani Gt:1'6rttlo1"11 4a. l.l.6 ffclired Stewn Ce11er1t1..0r Uni!.$ 411..1.1.7 CHOi\ll1flGl1&n*ioo Structure Reruovol 411.l.l.8 ReltCtcrVuael lnlf!rn1dJ 4a.l.1.9 Ve..el &: lnlernol* (.,TCC Di*poaal 4a.1.1.IO ReactorVeuel 41.l.l Total1 JU.11KN:d ofM1'JQf' E11uipment 4a. l.2 M11m TurbineiUeneralor 4a.l.3 Main CondenJoen CMeatling Coe11 from Ckit1n Building 0.1.4.1 *Reactor 4a. l.4.2 ConUiirunenl Penctrt1tioo Arett 4o. l.4.3 Handling 4t1.l.4 Tc1tt1l1 Dlllposal of Plflnt Sy11em1 4a.l.6.I Aux:ililu)'Sl!!tlm 4a. l.6.2 S1e1un tRCA' 4a. l.6.3 CondcnNJl.e Sy1tem 48. l.6.4 Conden&al.e 6y11em (lmula1ed) 4t1. l.6.6 Contammenl Spray 48. l.6.6 E:x1rACt10n Steam&. llet1lt>r Drip 4t1.l.6.7 Feedwt1ter6y11em 4t1. I .6.8 Fe.odwl!lter Syalt'ru (ln1ulateJ) 4o. l.6.9 F'u-t>dwr1ter Sy1lem (RCA Jnsulnted) 4a. l.6. IO Syatem <RCA) 4t1. I .6. I I Lube Oil Di*trihution & PurirlClltion 4a.l.6.12 NitrD(ren&l-IJdrutten 4&.1.6.13 4a.l.6.14 Nltl"OIJt"n & 1-lydroven (RCA Insulated) 4t1.l.6.l6 Nitrogen&l-lrdl'OC'!n(RCA) 48.1.6.16 OilyWat.crSeparator&TBSump 48.1.6.17 Salt.,,ot1l.er6y*teru 4a.l.6.18 Turbine S1.e111n Supply 4a. l.0.19 Turbine Steam Supply {RCA) 4a.l.6.io Turbine and OenemWr 4.a.1.6.2 I Turbine and Generator ti n1ulaled) 4a.l.6 Tnt.411 4a. l .6 Scaffoldtnll in llUllJl(lrl or deooinmiuic.ning 4a.I Subtotal Period 4a Activily Co.11 Period *IA Additional Q:,i,i,, 4a.2.J Remedi11I Action Survey1 *la.2.2 Retired Reac\Ot"llelld *lit.2.S PG&E RPV SlllfTSupport Teo.m 4a.2.4 IX>C RPV Stt1!fSupport Team 4a.2 Subu.ol P1mod 4t1 Addilional Colu Period 4a Colh1leral Cult1 4A.3.J Jll'OCl'lll dceommillllioning 111*ater wa1h1 4a.3.2 Pl'\.ll'f'N decomm1nlvning cbl'mical nu11h wm1te *la.3.3 SmAll tool olkiw1HIOI! *IA.3 Sulitotal Period *ht Cullnlernl Co81.11 TLG &rvicn, l"c. Table D-1 Dinblo Canyon Unit 1 SAFSTOR Decommissioning Cost Estimate (Thousands of2014 Dollars) OU.Site -LLRW Decon Removal Pacta.inr Tran.sport Proceulnr Disposal Cost Coit Co.tu Cosu Cotts Co1ts 83 "" II 107 ... 104 393 393 :m 38 llG 70 3.330 ,.. 0*118 U.918 20.545 212 ... 1,262 78 206 1.546 1** 278 708 293 262 "' .. 170 128 G 120 20 Ill ,. lllll 700 871 84 28 4,l\8G 2,100 29.784 230 230 .. 7 87 370 2.260 :uoo 2'6 7.188 1.646 14,003 " 1.21 34 2 10 2lil *l<l9 " 14,676 263 263 27 4 lllll 110 1982 1:os2 26 l.I05 210 6,736 16 *17 la I 99 183 6,923 81 81 " " 1,181 II>; l,.f31 760* 12,696 12.696 061 24,672 9.625 2,901 66,677 l508 1,506 420 22 I 81 132 3.162 *.836 " 72,437 l,616 1,616 42 " Other "°'" 243 l!-13 ..., ..., 4,703 '*""' 4,113 13,086 Total Contlna:enc ... .. <7 "' 279 17 .. 342 34 """ 167 .. 677 61 II 39 210 II 27 6 *I 72 66 41 176 1,0-48 19
  • 3,527 82*1 64,000 2,082 616 946 9!0 4,663 26 63 78 Tot.al "°'" 2,21JG JOI 2,520 1,702 27,120 22,382 1.763 68.040 11.631 18,371 157.025 268 .. I 1,642 .. 261 1,888 188 1,142 866 368 2,003 ... 68 214 800 " 1'7 26 I 14 273 "" "' ... 6,936 103 ** 14.601 3,007 177,689 6,780 2,474 6,214 6,0'.l3 19,41:17 *7 291 ""' NRC ___ Lie. Teml. l!Ian1trement Cosu Cosu 3(11 2,520 1,702 27,120 22,:}82 1.763 68,0IO 11,631 18,371 167.026 1,642 .. "' 1,888 1,1 .. 2 2,603 llOO *" 14 273 262 6,936 11,000 173,0 .. 6 6,786 2,474 6,214 6,023 111,497 "' :!62 ... Sliii*-*----Pniceued___ -uu-ri1tTVolu1ne5 Rettonllon Volume Cius A Clu1 B Clt1u C GTCC Co*I* Cu. Feel Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet 208 851 188 ... ,.. 3:l< 68 214 147 26 242 ... 100 .. 3.636 2,270 '"' 4,701 2.4-13 *11.712 -11.031 3.881 2,632 9.631 J06,4:VJ 1,836 II 1,617 80 " 202 .,. II 4t8 21.067 ... 001 798 1,649 601 708 1.649 Document POJ./119-001, Rev. 0 App1:11dixD, Pa1e 1of!J Burlt1I/ ProcH!ted Craft Wt .* u,,. Manhoun 200,163 36,667 714,000 267.066 3.3li0,761 3,126,(;29 146,49.f 402.868 330.307 063.812 9,667,685 111862 331,619 02,470 *1,867 037 17,803 29,138 691'609 1.285,206 29,323 6,Gl*I ... 2,796 l,NH 20.008 ICl.800 5.232 21633 21.63;1 90.114 3,033 0,87& 11,696 704 I.HO 14.3*16 2.310 3,il .. I0.671 4.367 3.631 4.IG2 706 2,066 1,703 llG 1.817 316 17 77 1..163 !501 2028 11.906 12.:.!03 1.244 *12"J 67.026 16.049 UliifiY4'-1iti Contractor Ma.nhouni 80 700 1.126 1.126 003 ... ... , 4,644 130,176 " 71)(! 1,649 10,972, 110 200.340 6.067 29 29 6,072 6,072 82 82 322,442 322,442 4,8fl5 4,895 66,8.'.16 2.000 &8,033 16 16 .. 41.862 6 ... 186 106088

,._, :::T J> "' Diablo Con10n Power Plant Decomminloning Co*t Anal.)'Si* Activity lodes. Actlvlt Deserl tlon Period 4111 PE'r.00.Depe-ndt>nLCoet. <ta..4.1 Deooo 1upphe1 4a.4.2 lnauraDl'f! 4e.4.3 Property tau. 4A.4.4 Health pby1icl 1upplie1 .. ,.,..&,6 HU\")' equipment rentel ... ..&.6 Dil{>OUI of DAW generated 4a..6.7 PlanLenergybudget 4a..t.8 NRCFee9 411,l.IJ Liquid fUtdw111le Equipment./Servk:leS 4tt..l.IO Securi1ySt11rrCost. 41! .... JI DOC Staff Chit 4a .... 12 Utility SlaffCost "8.*I Subl.otal Period 411 Period-Dependent Coal.I 4a.O TOTAL PERIOD -la OO&'T PERIOD .. b. Site Decont .. mln*tlon Period 4b Direct Deo:immi111ionlng Actirilies *lb.I.I Rell"IO\*e 1penl fuel racke 0111pc.MI of PIAnt Sy9lem1 4b.l.2.I Capital Addition* st;..200'.l (deftn) 4b.l.2.2 Capital Addil k>n1 86-2002 (ronlaminaled) 4b.l.2.3 Chemical & \"olunw Control 4b.1.2.4 & Volume Control (ln!!-ulatedJ .. b.1.2.6 Cornpont'nl Cooling Wtt1er .. b.J.2.6 Component Cooling W11ter (RCA) 4b.1..2.7 funpreaaed Air 4b.l.2.8 Canpre-1 Air On1ule1ed) 4b.l.2.9 Compl'\'Mt'd Air (RCA lruuhtted) 4b.l.2.IO Compreeeed Air {RCA) .. b.J.2.11 EnJioe-GenerDl:or .. b.1.2.12 Dtelel Engine-Gent>ralor On1ulated) *lb.1.2.13 Elect.rical (Clean) *lb.1.2.14 Elect.ric11l (Contaminated) 4b.l.2.15 Electrical (Contaminotcd)

  • PI-IB 4b.l.2.16 Electrical {Decontaminaled) 4b.l.2.17 Electricnl {Deoont.an1inttt.ed)
  • f'HB 4b.l.2.18 Fire Protootkm 4b.1.2.l9 Fire Prot.ection (RC.A.) 4b.l.2.20 Gn1P.Ou1 Rad11*&1Jlc 4b.l.2.21 IWAC (Oean ln1ulated) 4b.l.2.22 HVACCClee.n) 4b.l.2.23 !IV AC (Coalamin11ted IDAulated) 4b.l.2.24 llVAC (Contaminated) 4b.l.2.26 HVAC (Contaminated)* FIJB 4b.J.2.26 Uquid R.3dwaate 4b.l.2.27 Uquid Radv.*aate (huul:Ked) 4b.l.2.28 Make..upW&te.r .. b.1.2.29 Make.up Water Ontulated) 4b.l.2.30 Make-up \Voter (RCA lnaulated) 4b.l.2.31 M11ke-upWl!ter(R(".,A) 4b.l.2.32 M111ttllaneou1 Reactor Coolant 4b.l.2.33 Nudear Steam Sup1Jlv Sampling 4b.l.2.34 Nuclear Steam Supply Sampling On1ula1ed 4b.1.2.36 Re&idual Heat Removal 4b.l.2.36 SaretylzUectiort 4b.l.2.37 Sarety lnjeclioo Onaulllted) 4b.l.2.38 Sa&!)' lnjeelion (RCA lntulttted) 4b.l.2.39 Sarety IDjection (RCA) 4b.l.2..&0 Servk.'f' Cooling Willer <tb.1.2.41 Servke Cooling W111er (RCA) 4b.l.2.42 Spent Fuel Pil Cooling *lb.1.2.43 Spent f'uel Pit Cc.oling *!<'JIB 4b.l.2 Tutttls TLG Sen.iicn, Inc. f..Site o ... n Remov*I P*ek*stns Transport Pr-oces1in1 eo .. eo .. eo ... c.. .. C..u 157 2.800 6,967 96 27 157 8.766 06 27 ... 38.789 14,943 6,0-IG ... "' 103 33 190 *136 38 16 1.136 148 61 "" 26 II '°" 6Z2 149 .. 181 6 .. 2 I 638 3< 13 18'i 12 2,227 673 "' 36 W1 '" 6 3,481 1.MO 126 40 *"" 123 "' 2llO 28 II "
  • 2 29 881 288 49 20 J.280 247 IOI ""' .. " 726 ., 34 79 ' 376 " 4G * ' 237 27 IO 126 0 3 168 4 61 I 0 300 123 liO 110 16 7 6 I 0 42 6 ' 352 .. 21 123 30 4 ' .. <6 19 120 00 20 17,613 1,570 634 Table D-1 Diablo Canyon Unit 1 SAFSTOR Decommissioning Cost Estimate (Thousands o{ 2014 Dollars) LLRW NKC Sput Fuel Disposal Other Tot*I Total Uc.Term. lhn*s:ement eo ... Cosu Contln cue Cosu eo ... "°'" .. 216 216 1,392 206 ..... 1,698 ... " 667 001 1,037 3,84fj M-1'3 1,319 7,276 7,276 113 62 "" 297 i,1(18 1,57 .. 8,682 8,682 1,600 '" 1,804 1,804 1,026 227 1,263 1263 ..... 673 3,159 3,159 66,486 12.604 68,000 08.000 81,682 18,000 09.641 09.641 113 152.316 36,933 197,408 197,362 7 .. ,IU8 Hl6,887 91.063 394.983 300.26 .. 1,066 ... 2,714 '..1,714 " 23' 494 362 1,336 1,336 1,927 1,166 '*""' 4,430 '"" :roo 1,005 1,005 ** ... 1,802 ... , 8,628 3,628 40 221 I ' " 19 " 78 "' 362 ..... ..... .. 2'9 3 14 493 2.720 1,124 6<7 2,"'6 2,466 171 128 481 45.1 770 4,251 1,569 1,032 3,026 3,026 1,607 773 2,001 2,001 342 226 866 866 72 "' 220 °
  • 36 ,, ... 6<3 366 1,360 1,366 3,214 1.717 6,666 6 .... 731 "" l,516 1,515 1,072 G83 '*""" 2600 67 .. 208 208 83 460 ' 42 69 "' 149 149 332 216 822 822 Ill 00 336 339 121 109 412 412 .. " "" ** 1,008 '"' 2,820 2,820 %10 '" 476 476 ' ' 21 21 76 " 170 170 677 "" 1,497 l,4f17 27 100 65 33 12*1 124 002 , .. 1,017 1,017 *** 21'4 1,129 1,129 20,187 13,222 63,226 44,lliO She Pr-oce.ned Burial Volumes Rettor*tlon Volume CbssA ClassB CIH!!C Cotti Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet l5C -t,218 "' 4,218 4.729 130,647 501 ,, .... 3,862 232 1,786 6,00l> 1,236 !?49 6,692 "' ' "" 1,622 229 14 2,720 4,061 6IO 4,2fil 6,670 6,800 1,237 ,., 36 466 2.324 11.616 2,65-1 3,871 '..I.fl 400 ., "' 1,100 402 "' .. 5,793 769 80 "' 2.,447 100 '""' 2,174 2,332 O,O'i6 72,065 GTCC Cu. Feet l.G40 Document PDl-111j.001, Rev. 0 Appendix D, Pa6e 8of :!I llurhd/ Ulllity*nd f'roeeHcd Craft Contr*ctor Wl ** Lbt. M*nhoun M1tnhoi1n ... '"' 3G.G4J 523.123 1)28.l<tO 84.36G '"' 1.486900 11,383,810 269.427 1.008.001 234,?;3 000 2.830 108,808 5.963 424,520 16.520 75,243 6,600 3,078 407,837 8,614 2,744 "" ..... 393 92,770 7.199 2,760 178 32,770 247,4!".19 i.74G 37,721 2,200 49,541 3-16,563 15,003 36a,9'i0 6.6JG 75.373 3.808 10.963 1.0.fO .,. 6.016 l.U,631 a656 707.889 JG.046 161.763 a796 236,137 9.848 14,718 1,0-12 5,614 621 12,800 694 73,0'iG 3.139 24,489 1,787 26,671 2,436 ,, .. 363,070 4,438 46,248 ..... UMJ 80 16,671 ... 149,13ft 4.666 J,81ie 12,169 400 132,511 1,208 142,103 1,724 4,44G,392 244,496 N :,-:p .,,.. .,,.. Diablo Con.}'On Power Plant DecommiMllonin1 Coil Analyai* Activity lndex Actlvitv Desert lion 4b.t.3 &:*f'Jolding in 1upport. Q( dt>a.ommieeiorUng l>eroo.t.uninab.1a of Srte Buildinp <lb.1.4.1 ... """ .ib.1.4.2 C.pilal 80-2004 4b.l.4.3 Containment Penetration An!a .fb.l . .J.4 Fuel Handling .fb.1...i Tolal1 4b.1 Sublolnl Period -lbActivityCot!te Period 4b Additiounl Costs 4b.2.l LioentM Tenninalion Survey Plannin11 4b.2.2 Remcdi11I Act.ion Swvey1 4b.2.3 Llce.1111e Terminulion ISFSI 4bJ! Sul,tLoLaJ Period *lb Addi I iuna\ Coett PerKKl*ibCollateralO...t. 4b.3.I Proce.. deo::mrruMtoning wute 4b.3.2 Prooe. decomminming chemical Outh w**te 4b.3.3 Small tool allowanct' 4b.3.nlal 4b.4.6 Dispoeal of DAW vnerated 4b .... 7 Plaotene:rgybudget 4b.4.8 NRC J.'ees 4b .. t.9 Liquid Riid11*u1e Procetsmg Equlpmen1/Sern:ie1 4b."4.IO Securily Sl.-ffeo..t *lb.4.11 IX>C 61arr QJlr. *lb.4.12 Utilitr St.-IT Co8l 4b.4 Suhl-Olal Ptiriod *lb Period-Dependent CoAIJI 4b.O TOTAL PERIOD .tb CO&'T PERIOD <le -Del1y Uc:ense Ten11in*tkm Period 4e Dtrect Decommi11klo.ing Ac:tivitiet! Penod 4e Coll1t1.eral Cott.a 4<.3 Subtruil Period 4eCollauraJCo.ts Perwid -le Penod-Dependenl Cr.st.t 4eA.I ln1ur3ntti 4e.4.2 Propertr 4e.-l.3 Health pby1ia 1upphe1 4e.4.4 Di1po111ol o( DAW generated 4e.4.5 Pluoten<'rgJ'budget 4e.4.6 NRCfen .ite.4.i St'curitySlflffCo!c. 4e.4..8 UtihtyS1a1TC.OSt .... Subtotal 4e Period-Dependent .... TOT AL PERIOD 4e COST TLG &rvice*, Inc. OU-Site Rir:mov111I Pacltatlnl' Transport Process Int eo .. Co" "°'" "°'" "°'" 3,299 22 l,Olli ""' 1,132 6,300 .. 2G 7 a ""' 170 " ,, 75.'l "" 60 " 2,007 3,689 1,221 6,364 2.64 I 24.660 2.976 6,038 121 " 121 IJ 15 " 37 431 100 " 16 431 172 ** 003 2,376 2,612 86 " ooa -1,981:1 .. 2*1 MOO 30,201 3,2*11 6,1(16 .. .. .. Table D-1 Diablo Canyon Unit l SAFSTOR Decommissioning Cost Estimate (Thousands o( 2014 Dollars) LLRW NHC Dl!posal 0th .. Total Total Llc.Tir:rm. Costs "°'" Conlin enc "°'" "°'" 38 1,236 4,001 4,001 26,38C 12,-471 ...... '8,068 BO .. 216 216 310 106 1,229 1,229 '43 1,0IO 3,04-1 3,0.U 2'.i,22-1 13,901 62,647 62,6-17 -17,6H 29,207 113,087 104.0Jl 8*6 37.1 1,220 1.220 2.063 9'J2 a,ooti a,006 400 l,GGO 800 3,001 3,001 400 ..... 2.106 7,226 7,226 103 GO 236 236 .. 626 626 258 129 <i6!l <i6!l 361 280 1,35.'l 1,35.'l 333 1,230 1,230 Ol7 91 708 700 216 32 "' 247 877 3,263 :l,263 678 3,100 3,100 103 .. 269 , .. 2,486 660 3,036 731 108 839 839 ... 101 ... ... 1,146 '"' 1,300 1,39!1 12,208 2,702 14,9IO 14,9!0 18,633 4,103 22,m!G 22,63G 103 36,:.iatl Q,784 62,277 62,277 ..i8,"61) *Kl,877 11,131 173.942 1(14,866 181 27 206 206 36 132 132 7 , .. 36 297 297 ... 213 1,178 1,178 1,316 291 1,007 1,607 Z,719 607 3,428 3,-428 2,719 607 3,428 3,428 Spent Fuel Sile Processed Burial Volumes lt1.an111ernent Renoratlon Volume Clan A Cl*ssB Chu1sC OTCC "°'" Co*** Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feel Cu. Feet Cu. Ftt.t 977 349,938 320 1,638 M6,0..i7 9.(176 132,831 1.777 I 777 200 6,667 6,666 3,6>0 3,830 Q,076 110,306 102 102 IU2 Document POl-1119-001, Rn*. 0 D, Pait: 9of 21 llurl111l/ Utilily and Proceued c,o11 Contractor Wt., Lbs. M1nho1'rs M1nho11r.1 '3.98* 23.924 33,233,460 44,003 18,Sil 762 113,Gf.IO G,140 2IO,C84 20,266 38,606,400 72,00CJ 38.331.640 3-11.HI G.2<10 2Gl71 108.170 7.006 *1191 108,170 32.1n I0431 11,971 39 300,000 .. 311,971 127 76,600 126 15,786 118.700 212.100 76,WJ l:lfi :J"6,C64 :iS,828.aoo 373,8/:l 367.086 2,032 13.286 14,880 2,032 28,166 2,032 28,166 N :::r 1> .j>. "' Diablo Con,10n Power Pla11t Deconuniuioninz Co*t Anul.f9i* Activity Ind es: Activity Descri tlon PERIOD 4f -Ucen5e Termln11tlon Pt>riod 4fDirect DecommWioniOf Acth-ilie1 4(.1.l ORJSE confirmftlory 1ul'\o*ey .f.f.1.2 Terminalelicenae 4f.l Subt.ot.ftl Period 4f Actfrity L"oett Period 4f Additional Golt. 4[2.1 Licenll6 Terminalion Survey "' Subtotol Period .If Addilional Coate Period <lf C'.0Uoter1d Coet.1 4£.3.l DOC staff relocation expen11e1 41.3 Subl.olal Period 4f Collateral Coet.e Period 4f Period-DepeDdenl Colt. 414.I ln1uranoe 4[4.2 Prq>ert}'taut 4(.4.3 llenlthphytk:81upplie1 4f.4.4 Di!ipOl,BI or DAW generated 4(.4.5 Plauttmert0* budget 4[4.6 NRCFee1 4'.4.7 Security Cott 4f.4.8 DOC Staff Colt 4£.4.9 Utility S11:t1T Coe1 4C.4 Subtotal Pti-riod 4( Period-Dt>pendenl. *1£.0 TOTAL PERIOD 4CO)ST PERIOD 4 TOTAlS PERIOD :lb-Site Rntoration Period 5b Oirecl Dc-comn1iMioning Adivilie! Demolition or Remaining Si1.i Building11 Db.I.I.I *Rencl-Or 6b.l.l.2 C11pitnl Addifon11 85-2004 6b.l.l.3 Peoolr1ttk>n Area Ob.I.IA Mi11eellaneous 6b.l.l.6 Turbine 6b.l.l.6 Turbine Pede9l11l Uh.Ll.7 Fuel Handling Ob.I.I TotaJ. Site Ckieeout Activitiet 6b.l.2 Grade &: landit'npe 1ite 6b.l.3 Final report t.o NRC 5b.1 Subl.ol.al Perkxl 6b Activit1* Colla Period 5b Additionnl Coats ob.2.1 CoDCrele Cruthinj!: 5b.2.2 Cofferdam Construct)on and TeardO\l*n 50.2.3 Soil I Sedin1ent Control Pion I Areli 5b.2.4 DemoliUon 11nd Site Rt-t!l-Oration ISFSI 6b.2.6 Mi&eellanoous Conetruction Debri1 (out or 11tele d1spoeal) 5b.2.6 S<-ra11 Mela! Trantporlation (out of 11.0lf') Gb.2.7 FSSManager .. Subtotal Period 5b Additkmal Coe1-1 Period 5b Colluteral Colt11 Ob.3.1 SmnJJ tool allot1*ance Ub.3 Subtotal Period 5b Collateral Costs TLG Se1-vicu, Inc. Off-Site Decon Remov11I PAckflrlnr Tnnsµort Proeeaslnr Co" Co" Cosu Co!lts Com 683 G83 683 4,110 69,700 18,UJ6 12,213 7,188 320 7:l0 31 3.897 1 . ..04 1.979 15.649 2.337 17.886 "' *178 1,366 1.642 S,931 232 232 Table D-1 Diablo Canyon Uuit 1 SAFSTOR Decommissioning Cost Estimate (Thousands o( 2014 Dollars) LLRW NKC Spent Fuel Dbponl Other Total Tot.al Lie.Tenn. 1thnft(ement Co!it5 Co!lts Contln euc Costs eo ... CoU!I 183 81 204 2G4 183 81 264 26*1 9,761 .J,321 14,082 14,082 9,761 *1,321 14,082 J.1,082 1.466 324 1.700 1.700 1.466 324 1,700 1,71JO 134 20 163 163 262 936 935 G 24 24 412 .. 601 604 ... 67 623 623 713 168 876 870 6,073 1,123 6,196 6,196 0,462 1,207 0,069 6,6{;9 12,240 2,923 16,864 16,864 23,6.f.8 7,000 32,000 32,000 122,589 233,132 144,341 604,362 000,M8 1,691 8,179 71 "'" 162 892 7 37 """ 4,760 311 1.715 *138 2.417 3.442 18.991 "' 2.864 242 .. ""' 295 "' *l,013 22,140 296 102 660 100 684 300 1,656 2,749 009 4,999 0,870 1,300 7,170 4,976 1,101 6,077 622 138 780 760 14,220 3,656 :!1,806 700 61 284 ol ,., Site Processed Burial Volumes Restontlou Volume ClauA Cla5sB CIAuC GTCC Costs Cu.Feet Cu.Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu.Feet 336 336 3U 13,806 680,289 601 roll 1,649 8.779 391 802 37 ol.760 1.716 2Al7 18.001 2.864 218<15 600 ... 1,656 4,91'9 7,170 6,077 21.0"6 , .. 28* Document POl-1119-001, Rev. 0 Appendix D, Pa1e lOof 21 Hurllll/ Utlllty11nd f>rocesHd Cr11ft Contractor Wt., Lbs. Manhoun M11nbo11n l21J.300 3.120 126.393 3.120 6,698 11 9,821 46.760 GIJ,00< 6,6<J8 11 113,636 8,1198 126,404 ll0,666 00,220,940 769,707 2,009067 67,914 3,672 6.563 249 38.GOO 11.300 16.760 14.f..951 Hi87 1.500 149.638 1.560 1,971 4,f>CH 12.839 20,443 .. 6,148 39,267 5,228 Diablo Canyon Power Plr:mt Deconw1i .. ionin1 Co.t Analy*i* Activity Judea Activity De9crl Perkld 6b "'°nod*Dependt-nt Coe$s 6b.4.I ln*uunire 6b.4.2 Propert1* 1iu:e. 6b.4.3 He&\'Y equipment ft"Dt.1111 6b.4.4 Plantener'llJ'budgel Ob.*1.6 Stic:urilySt.llffCOltt 6b.a DOC Stsrr Coet 6bA.7 Utilil.yStaffCost Ion 6bA Su!Jlol.111 Period 6b Penod.l.)f:peudent Collt.1 lib.O TO'l'AL PERIOD Oh cmrr PERIOD 6 TOTALS TOTAL COST TO DEOOMMISSION n-. Rll".mov111I Coot Coot 7,'"9 7.580 21l6.18 29.638 9.2.69 109.109 '.AL LOW-LEVEL RADIOACTIVE WASTE VOLUlt.E BURIED (EXCLUDING GTCC); OT AL ORF.ATER THAN CLASS C RADWASTE VOLUME GENERATE[); End Nole1. oftt
  • mdh:ate1 lha1. lhit RL1.hdty nol.charged H 11£.cunmlJ1111Qn111g upente. l:l
  • indicD1e11 lhat th.ii nc1ivily 11erfurmed by dl'\."'Otllmifl8iuning 0
  • indic11lcJ1 that thi1 value i1 le!.8 thnn 0.6 but h1 IWll*'l.t'ru. 11oollC1JOtaininJ***intlict1te111:7.t'toYaluc TLG &,.vicn, lnc. P*cbslns eo.o 18.819 Table D-1 Diablo Canyon Unit 1 SAFSTOR Decommissioning Cost Estimate (Thousand* 0(2014 Dollars) on.sue LLRW NHC Tr*n,Vort Proceulns DbpoHI Othe. To1*l Tot Ill Uc.Term. C..u C..u Cost' Cost' Conlin enc c.. .. eo,o .... .. ... l,C80 9,"'9 678 150 828 2.3&3 619 15.137 3,361 , ..... 6,366 1,I07 7,762 2*1,068 7,171 30.713 11,89<1 83,0 .. 2 l,OW 39.41*1 l*l.800 83.942 1.000 11.776 128.771 UOU82: 170,844 l,861,480 1,118,92.3 Sl.831.<180 Sl,118,923 thouHod1 of 20U dollsn '821,749 lhouund* nf !014 dollan SH.778 thouHud10( !014 dollan 608,09 .. Cubic feet 1,8.&9 Cubic Feet 49,707 Toni 1.011.818 Man-houn Spent Fuel Sile Procesaed Buri111l Volume!! ltlana1"emenl Restoration Volume Cius A ClaHB Cltt.nC c.. .. Co*ls Cu. Feet Cu.Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet '°' 9200 828 2.8GI 18.488 7.7(12 00.713 82.887 82.887 8H.7H 98.778 804,79-t *** 798 GTCC Cu. Feet 1,649 Document POl-J7lg..001, Rev. 0 Appendix D, Pa,1e 11 of !I Burl111l/ Utllity111nd Proce!ind Craft Cont'l'"ttctor Wt .. Lb,. M*nhours Manboun 32,28G 13'.}891 67,164 200.331 188.796 2<13.120 188700 243.120 61,120, .. 80 1.013.818 9,S86,40.4 N :::,-1" .,,. ..... Diablo Can.10n Power Pforit Decommiuionin1 Co*t Analy.i* Activity Ta du AcUvil De9crl tlon PERIOD 1'1
  • Shu1down thl'O\l(h Tr111n1illon Period I* Direct Decomm1Mioning Acl1nl1e1 l*.1.1 SAFS'T(JR 1ite charad.l!'riution 1un-ey 1 *. 1.2 Prepare prdiminaJ')* dttocn.miuion.ing coet. la.1.3 Notification of Ceuation ol'OiM!rndons la.IA Remove ruel & souroe m11terial 111.l.6 Nolificadon of Permanenl [)dueling lD.1.6 lk:lld i\'ltl.e 11l11nt 1y11em1 & prooeN Wt1sl.e lo.1.7 Prepnre and 1ub1nil PSDAR ltt.1.8 plnnt ;lwp & spec1. la.1.0 Perfonu detailed rad aurve)' la.I.lo Estinlflle by-productio\*entorr la.I.II End product dellt!ription Ja.1.12 Oet.niledhJ.i*J>rnduct.in\*enlor)* la.1.13 Deline major work .eque1K'e la.1.1'4 Perfi:.rm SER and EA la.1.15 Per'""1u Site-Specific Co.t Stulb* Act.ivitySpecifications l*.J.16.1 Prepnre pllUll and l°acllitifti for SAFSTOR 111.l.16.2 PIAol1yttem1 la.l.16.3 Plant atructutt* and building* la.1.16.4 W1111emanagemcnl ln.1.16.6 Jo'acilily und ai1e OOnnaocy la.J.16 Tot*al la.L.17.1 Pillot 1yll.f'm1 la.1.17.2 F'.Olit7 elo.i!eout & donnancy la.1.17 Tot.i la.1.18 Procure v1tCUum drying l)'tllem la.I.lit Drllin/de-eneryize non<0nt.. 1ystem1 la.1.20 Drain&dry NSSS la.1.21 Drain/Ue-f.nergiie contaminated 1y1t('m1 la.1.22 Decon/!le('Un!I oonl.aminttled 1y1tem.t In.I Sublou.I PeriOl'l la Activity C08u Period la Addition11I Colt.II 111.2.1 Spent Pool h1olation la.2.2 Dil)>09al ofContan11nated Tools & Jo;qulpment la.2 Subt.otal Period la Additional Co.ts Period le Collateral Calta 111.3.1 Enrironmental Permiu 11od Fen la.3 Subt.olM Period la Collttleral Co.ta Period la Period-Depeadenl Co.ta la.4.1 lnauranoe l11*U Pn'.lfll',lrtylaxeti la.4.3 He11lth phyak:s 1upplie* 111.4.4 He11vy equipment reul*I lll.4.5 Dispw11I or DAW geoera1ed la.4.6 Plant eoergy budgt>t la.4.7 NRCFf!ff la.4.8 Emergency Planning Feea la.4.9 S1wnl J.'uel Pool O&M la.4.10 ISFSI Operal ing C.:.1a la.4.11 Sel-erance Related C.0.11 la.4.12 Security StaffCo.:.lf!t lll.4.13 Utility Staff Coll Ja.4 Subt(l(a\ Pl!riod la Period-Dependent Cc:.8t11 la.O TOTAL PERIOD la OOST TLG Servicn, Inc. Removal Packll&'lnr Tr*n9port C:O.t Co*t C:O.u Coou 219 103 219 103 ... " 13 1,002 13 1,062 232 I07 Table D-2 Diablo Canyon Unit 2 SAFSTOR Decommissioning Cost Estimate (Thousands of 2014 Dollars) CI-Sile Ll.RW NRC Procenlnr Dbpoul Other Tol111I Total Llc. Tenn. Co9t.I eo,., Co1u Coutl11 enc Co1t1 C:O.u GOO "" 803 """ 86 19 106 106 . olo . 133 ,. 162 162 .. 19 106 100 . "' 16 81 81 06 16 81 81 JOO 22 I" "' "' " 81 81 200 .. 251 251 332 73 ... .... 326 72 ""' """ 277 61 !137 337 207 .. 203 2i>3 133 29 162 162 133 29 162 162 1,075 , .. 1,312 l,312 "' 17 96 .. 80 17 117 ., I08 " 193 193 . 2,082 7"7 3,7tl8 ll,768 J.1.4-4.2 3,173 17.616 17,616 2.835 1,093 uro 4,2ro 2,836 14..142 *1.266 21.866 21.866 949 209 .... 1,168 949 209 1.168 1.168 100 1,298 1,2911 177 "' 203 203 181 GiG 676 "' 691 601 16 8 40 "' 2.737 001 3.338 3.838 .... 122 IY ... 966 1,001 147 1,148 702 "' 907 .. , 120 007 415,943 10,093 66,036 '6,036 21,316 4,680 26,006 26,&98 29,883 6,060 36,448 88.448 " I0-&,362 23,010 128,40U 126,68*1 2,860 122.736 28,271 IM,2W 11>2,476 Spent Fuel Site Proceued Burl*I Volumes J.lan*iiement Restoration Volume Cl*nA CltH' B Cl*uC GTCC Co!tl!J eo. .. Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feel Cu. Feet Cu. Feet 10.246 10,246 060 1,148 007 667 2.781 ... 2,781 10.810 Document P01*111!1-00I, Rev. 0 D, Po1e /lo/ 11 Buri*I f Utility *nd ProceHed Craft CoatrllCtor Wt. Lb1. Man hours Mu\hour1 666 806 006 '28 '28 642 "" 1.327 2.uo 2,100 1,783 1,330 ... 856 6,036 006 .,. 1,020 43 16,361 62-1.946 317 624.046 317 11,200 18 286,786 346,229 11,299 18 633,014 oaG.2<14 330 648,376 N :i> n ::;,-CX> Diablo Conyon Power Plant DecommiHionin6 Co*t Analy*i* Actlvil)' lnde.x Act I vi De1crl lion PERIOD lb-SAFSTOR UmJted DECON Activities Period lb Dtrecc DeoommlANoning Decootaminllllion of Bu..ildinp lb.I.I.I *Reactor lb.1.1.2 Auii.li*ry lb.1.1.3 C11pit11\ Addition* 86-200-t lb.1.1..1 Containment Penetration Arel! lh.1.1.6 Fuel llPndling lb.I.I Total* lb.I 6ub1o11.1l Period I b Al..'livity Co.11 Perie.cl lb Additiou.&1 C<'8U lb.2.1 Haurdctus Wute Meoegemeot Jb.2.2 Mixed Wq(.e MllDllp!meul lb.2 Subtot1l Penod lb Additton11l Co.ta Period lb c.ollateral Cost* lb3.I Decou equipment lb.3.2 Proce11 decomminiooing '11*ater wallte lb.3.3 Prooen deeommiMk>nin1 ehemical nu1h lb.3.4 Smull 1ool 1dlowance lb.3.6 Env1ronmenl1'1 Perm ii* and Feet1 lb.3 Sublohol Period lb Collateml Co.11 Period lb Ptriod*Dt'pendeot Cosl.& JbA.I Deron 1uppliel lb.4.2 ln111reooe lb.-t.3 Prqier1ytsxes lb.-tA Heelth pby111C11 suppl.ie9 lb.-t.6 He11vy equipment rental lb.U D11pueal ur DAW lf\"DerateJ lb.4.7 Pl11.n1 ene.rio*budae1 lbA.8 NRCFt>t>I lb.4.9 Emergency l'lt1nmng t't"es S1)tlnL Fuel Pool O&M Jb . ..i.11 ISJ-'SI Operating Cost& lb.*1.12 Security 8111.ITCO&t lh.U3 Utilitl* Starr Co!!it Subtotal Period lb Period-Dependent Costs lb.O TOTAL PERIOD lb OOST PER.IOD Jc-Prep1ratlons for SAFSTOR Oorm.a.ucy PeriOO k Direct. Oeoommiaiooing Ad.ivitie. le.I.I Prepare 1upport equipment for l!Wl°ll:IJ'! lc.1.2 TostnU containment preuure equal.1111'!'.11 lc.J.3 Interim 1urvfl)* p11br to donnuncy lc.1.4 Secure building acce1ees lc.1.6 Prep11re & 1ubmit interim f'elKJrl le.I Subtotal Period le Act1vi11* Coel* Period lcColleteral C.0.111 lc.3.1 Procest decommiuk.ning: walt>r Wll!!te lc.3.2 ProceH deoonuninkming chemical flu11h w111te lc.3.3 Smell lool alk.wullN! lc.3A Envim1me11t11I Permit.I! 11nd Fees lc.3 Sublolnl Pe.rkld k Collateral C'..os11 Period le PerkMJ.J)cpendent Cost!I lc.4.1 Insurance lc.4.2 Proper1ytnxet lc.4.3 Hcalthphy1ic911upplie1 TLG Services, Inc. Removal Pack.afinf Tr11n1port "° "° eo.u Cosh 1,015 1,160 372 ,.. 731 3,6"3 3,663 .., 172 121 202 .. 1,114 .. 121 202 1,-468 ... 143 16 1,468 601 16 6,136 661 100 '"' 601 " 663 196 137 23() 1"6 137 ... 181 Table D-2 Diablo Canyon Unit 2 SAFSTOR Decommissioning Cost Estimate (Tbouaanda 0(2014 Dollara) Off-Slee LLRW N"RC Proctulnf Dbposal Other Total Tola) Uc. Term. Co11t Co111 Coit* CollUn enc Cost* c. ... '" 1,700 1,769 8'2 100'1 1,00'1 273 6.u'i 6<6 ""' .192 492 636 1.266 1.266 2,601 (i,164 6,ID*I 2,601 6.16-4 6,16-t 217 .. ... 2G6 287 "" 360 350 '°' 111 616 G16 207 1,140 1,149 ... 396 IA6"4 1,"54 13 13 73 239 ., 21!2 292 ... 2311 ... 2,008 2,008 638 2.t.00 2,006 286 42 327 327 ... " " 131 *1"" ""' 31 17' 17* 19 10 ** ** GOO 152 . ., 841 117 17 136 1 .. 262 37 289 200 " "' 1'18 "" ""' 6.373 1,180 6,663 6,00.'.I 7.6a2 1,656 0.187 D.187 19 11.632 3,873 20,613 19.812 683 16.376 7,263 30.260 29,1>49 110 .., Gl2 11 "" 63 733 1.066 1,065 . 3() *17 " 772 452 l.17i 1.777 641 ... 1.662 1,602 I 6 231 61 282 282 641 231 WO 1,ll*K> l,H<tO 276 *IO 316 316 .. 6 .. .. GG 247 2-47 Spenl }"uel Sile Proce,,ed Burial Volumes )bnafement Re1toradon Volume Clas1A Cb"B ClauC GTCC Co1u Cosu Cu. Feet Cu.Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet 1,088 1,088 696 286 2.M 168 701 696 701 1.783 1,237 1,237 Document POl-1119.001, Rev. 0 Appendix D, PaKe 13 of !!I Burial/ Ullllty *nd Procened Cr.Ut Coot1r111ctor Wt. Lb1. Manho11r1 Mu1hour1 13,166 16,861 6,100 8,917 0,816 47,8&8 47.BliB 66,200 212 66.200 212 13,892 23 72,28G 87,260 13.89'.l 23 150.66-t 70.181 '8.003 159,564 3,000 700 8,6-t7 266 12,247 266 74,216 241 74,216 241 Oiablo Canyon Power Plant DecommWloninR Co*t Anal:y*i* Activity lndu Activity De1cri tlon Period le F't:riod*Dependr-ut Co.ti (continued) lc.4.4 Heavy equipment rental lc.*.5 D*poeal of DAW gt'aerated 11'.4.<: Pbmt ener113* bu dpt lc.4.7 NRCFee1 lc.4.8 Jo:me.rgeney Planning Fee1 lc.4.9 Spent Fuel Pool 0&..>..1 lc.4.10 ISFSI ()peraling Co.ts lc.4.11 Senmmcellt!l11tl!dCo8t. lc.4.12 Spent Puel Stor11ge CtnilllcrsKh*erp11Cka lc.4.13 Security S111rr Co.t lc.4.14 \llilityStt1ffC.O.t lc.4 Subt.otril Period Jc Pcriod-Dcpendenl C'oet. lcO TOTAL PERJOD le COST PERIOD 1 TOTAIS PERIOD 2a-SAFSTOR Dormancy with Wet Spent Fuel Stor*re Period 2a Direct Decommiu1onin1 Adi\*1tiu 2*.1.1 Quarterlylnapectaon 211. 1.2 Semi-rmnu11I environmental 1uney 211.l.3 Prtoparereports 2a. I .4 Biluminou* roof rep!M:emenl 2n.l.5 211.l Sub1o411I Period 211 Activity Co9t1 Period 2a Additional Coats 2a.2.1 Se\'t!rHcfl Relatf.'d Cu.111 211.2 Sublot.al PerMxl 2* Additk>nal er..t.. Period 2a Coll*teral Coe1*s 2a.3. I Spent Jo'uel 'hana!er
  • Pool to ISFSI 211.3.2 Envirownent.111 Pennits and Fen 2a.3 Subt-otal Pt>riod 2a Coll11teral Costs Period 2a Period-Dependent Coet1 2n..l.I lntur&nCfj 2a .... 2 Properly t.axe1 211.4.3 Hea!Lh physic* 1upplies 211.4.-1 Oi1po1alofDAW1f!nuated 2a.4.6 Plani energy budget 2*.4.6 NRC Fees 2*.4.7 Emergency Plan.nine Fee1 b.4.8 Spent Fuel ISF'SI to DOE 2a.4.9 Spent Fuel Pool O&:..\I 2a..l.10 ISFSI ()peratinr Coll.I 2a.4. ll Stturity SMffC:O.t 2aA.12 U1ilit)-*Stalf'C<.l 2a.4 Subtotal Period 2a Period-Dependent Co.I.I 2'0 TOTAL PERIOD 2a <DST PERIOD 2b-SAFSTOR Do1TI1ancy with Dry Spent Fuel Stor11re Period 2b Direct Deoommi111ionin1 2b.l.I Quarler\)'ln&peetion 2b.1.2 Semi-an11u11l envirotlJJtt'nt11l 2b. J.3 Prepare ttporU 2b. l.4 B1tumioou1 ru.l replncement 2b.l.6 2b. I Sublt11nl Period 2b .Activity Coetll PeriOO 2b Collateral Coii1*1 2b.3 Subtotnl Period 2b Collalernl Chit a TLG &,.vicn, Inc. o ..... Coot 195 6,331 Removal P*<'kArlnr TraMport Cn1l Cost* Colt.9 138 319 877 140 231 ... 1,622 30 II 1.622 II l,622 .. II Table D-2 Diablo Canyon Unit 2 SAFSTOR Decommissioning Cost Estimate (Thouunda of 2014 Dollars) NRC Spent Fuel Off.-Site PrO<'enlnr (;Q1h Other Co1t1 Total Conlin enc Total Co*t* Lie. Term. lbn*r*ment 645 .t.078 t6 46 007 '" "' 100 " u;,703 2.000 IU97 7,287 323'8 33.361 17J..172 ,.. 1,182 1.2!1 7,514 7.514 33,221 8,079 41.800 -U33 J,!!10 4.608 2 282 6.08-1 .. , 6.7'3 *.063 173.983 26,600 230,693 280,728 122 3.963 3.780 30 2 1'7 17 3G " 29 a*oo li-19 1,142 1,601 7,158 8,llO <13.634 433 "' 1,661 1,651 7,298 1,776 9,073 ... 221 *** " 1,023 331 891 191 I '81 1,022 38,221 5,624 60.:159 61,.124 27 1,3-41 l,"'8 100 10 *** 130 280 236 103 I0.163 3,0IO 0,339 8.887 30.843 """° 220.006 . '" 1,610 1,00.1 ff 164 Y,164 40,520 9,853 60,373 4,0U7 1,731 2.216 121 5.681 2.693 6976 1068 .... 6.675 212.206 31,2%3 282,670 343.870 . 149 ..... 6.153 Co1t9 16& 10 814 100 19.llia 6.3.'ID 8,887 36,115 39,832 221,800 ... 1,615 1,003 lt.164 lt,164 9,853 9,853 *1,273 1,731 2.216 121 2,8*0 2.003 9.002 1,406 30,843 51,623 ... 6,004 5,103 200 " 163 3,Cl-19 3.727 3,727 7,210 ..0,520 <I0,520 694 2.8-40 6,976 1,068 8,225 5,675 202,6*2 23,817 201,827 292.347 Site Rntor*tlou ""'" .. Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet 138 138 1,375 13.007 1,717 1.717 1,717 Document POl*lTJJ-001, Rev. 0 Appe11Jix 0, Pa6* U of :!l Buri*! I Procened Wt. Lbs. 2.765 2.700 76.971 79'l.300 3t340 3-1,34(1 3.1,340 Craft Manhoura 12,493 60,921 58 "' .. Utility and Conlr*ctor Man hours 00.929 84,423 154.361 154,601 962,631 2,391,265 ""'"" 2.675,242 2.676,242

"' :i> 0 ::::T (J'J 0 Diablo Canyon Power Pla"t Deconm1i**ionh11 Co*t Analy*i* Activity lndu Actlvltv Deller! lion Period 2b Period*Dependt-111. °'919 2b.4.I lm1urnnce 2b.4.2 Pl'QJlf'r1Y taxet 2b.4.3 Hefllth 11bytict 1upplit>1 2b.4.4 Diripoeal of DAW itenerated 2b.-U Plant energy budget 2b.-1.6 NRC J.'ee1 2bA.7 Emergt?ncy Pllmning Feee 21.1.-1.8 Spent Fuel w DOE 2b.Uf ISFSI OperntingCost.1 2b.4.10 Spent Fuel 2b..S.ll Socurity St.o(f'Coiit 2b.4.12 Ulilit.yStaffCo&t. 2b.4 Subtotal Period 2b Period-Dependent Coett 2b.O TOTAL 2b COST PERIOD 2c-SAFSTOR Dormancy witbou1 Spent Fuel Storare Period 2c Direct Dcooinmis.ionmit Activities 2c.l.I Quarterly lmlJM!Clit.on 2c.l.2 Semi*nnnufll l'nvironmenl.al eun-ey 2e.l.3 2c.JA Bitumiuout roof re11lacemelll 2c.l.fi llh11nteminoe11u1111lice 2c.1 Subtnh*I Periotl 2c Activity Coroh Ptriotl2eCollateralC.OS111 2c.3 Subtotal Pe.nod 2c Collaternl Costt Pf:riod 2e Period-0.-.pendenl Co9t11 2c.4.l lnturence 2c.4.2 Proper1ytaxea 2c.4.3 Healthphyaic1aup11liee 2c .... 4 DiriJlOllRI of DAW jft':nerated 2c.4.6 Plant. energy 2c.4.G NRCJ.'1"1*a 2c.-1.7 Security St11ITC0!!t 2c.".8 Utility Staff Goet "'" Subtotal Period 2e Period-Dependent Cotilll "'-0 TOTAL PERIOD 2c COST PERIOD 2 TOTALS PERIOD 3a -Reactlv*le Site FoUowlnJ SAFSTOR Dorm*ncy Period Sa Dired. Deanmi.Miooinit Actil-itiet 3a.l.I Prepare prelimuu1t)* deoommiuioning et11t 3a.l.2 Re,,e..,*plantdwg1 &!lpe.Cll. 3a.l.3 Perforin detailed rad 1urver 3a.l.4 Eudpro.Juctdeacriptio1:1 3a.l.6 Delailedby-11roductin1*eutory 3a.l.6 Define n1ajor work acqueoce 3a.l.7 Pt>rfi>rm SER and EA 31t.l.8 PerM-m Site.Specific Coat Study 3a.l.9 Preparelllubmit Llfl'nee Tenninalion Plan 3a.l.JO Rtteive NRC *11proval of termination plan Act.iYity Specifieatio1111 3a.l.Jl.1 Re-ectiv.Meplant&lempor11.ryfacilitie* 311.l.ll.2 Pinnt 1yMe1n1 311.l.ll.3 Reactorintern11.I! 311..1.11.4 ReactorveNel 38.1.ll.6 BiolQti:icnlshield 3o.l.11.6 S1eamgeneralors 311..1.11.7 Reinfon:edcoucrelt> 3a.J.Jl.8 fll11i11Turbine TLQ ServicH, foe. Table D-2 Diablo Canyon Unit 2 SAFSTOR Decommissioning Cost Estimate (Thousands of 2014 Dollar!J) Off-Site LLRW NRC S11ent Fuel Decon Removal Trftn!porl Pwc:esslnJ DbpoJRI Other eo,u Tot"I Conlin enc Lie. Term. Man*1ement {;o,t Co!rl CoJts Cott5 Co515 Co51S Costs CoJts ll,fl83 l,7Sli 13.738 13,2'42 400 4.G79 686 0,'6G 6,361> 2,42& 888 3,313 3,313 " JG 68 37 178 178 i,2JG 1,686 8,80'.l 8,802 G,74 .. """ 7.732 7,7J2 9,-127 1,381 I0,808 10,808 35.-182 7.795 43.277 -13,277 11.-118 3,lt>S 17,586 17,586 38.783 8,620 47,304 47,304 l(Jl.474 22,292 123.700 29,{14:.! 93.824 18817 4.13 .. 22.061 22,961 2.425 67 16 G8 2 .. 53.227 30481{1 91,52-1 213,294 2.425 57 JG 68 262.811 5-1,695 309,072 OO,G78 213,294 6 J 6 6 J39 51 JOO JOO l*M 62 J96 I06 438 .. '°' 602 177 26 203 203 92 "' 126 126 J 7 7 "' GG 334 33< 240 "' 282 282 931 205 \,lali 1,136 71-1 157 870 870 ., 2.780 683 3..100 3,.160 92 2.923 630 MM 3,066 4,139 98 28 117 G36.482 116,664 667.497 151.866 005.6 .. 1 8G J9 J06 J06 306 67 372 372 . 06 15 8J 81 86 19 J06 JOO *196 JI)!) 607 007 206 46 20J 261 332 73 406 406 272 60 332 332 489 J07 697 637 277 OJ 337 304 47J JO< 676 676 -1:11 90 626 626 33 7 40 40 207 " 263 263 JGG " J3G 65 27 G 32 Site Restoration Cost' 00 34 60 3' Proce!lled Burial VolumH \'olume Ch1H A Clu5 B Class C GTCC Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet 2.1133 2.533 OG 96 96 4.346 Document POJ-1119-001, Rev. 0 Appe11dix D, Pa1e 15 of 21 Burial/ Processed Wt. Lbs. 60,GOO 60.00J 50.00G J.921 1,021 1.921 SG.927 Cr Aft Prhuhoun 83 ., 83 J'2 Utility and Contr11ctor M11nhoun 1,::IOS.:.!&O 220,000 1626.260 1.626,250 W,rot.i 1:1,a.1a 21,379 21.379 4.222.870 66G J,llGll 428 060 3,210 1,327 2,MO 1,753 3,154 1,783 3,031l 2,782 "' 1,33(; ... 171 N l> <> :T 1> Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommioionin1 Co.t AnalJ11i* Activity lndu Actlvlt Al.1i*1ty SpeeirJCaliun* (eont1nued) 3a.l.ll.9 Alam Condenser1 Sa.1.11.10 Planl 8lructures &. bu1lding1 Sa.I.II.II WMlt-management 311.J.Jl.12 Fac1lily&aitecloeeout 3a.l.ll r ... 1 Plannins & Site Preparation* 3a.l.12 Prepare di1m11ntlinr .equence 311.1.13 Plantprep.&.temp.1wc:ea 3a.\.14 ))efiign water denn-up De1crl tlon 3a.1.IU Risghig..COnt. Cntrl En\'Jp.tlooling/etc. 3a.l.18 Procurect11skallioer1&00111.8iner1 3a.1 Subtotal Period 3a Ad.ivity Co.I.I Period Sn Additionnl Costs Sa.2.1 Site CbAracterization 3a.2 Subtotal Period 3a Additk.nal Cc.eta Period 3a Q.lla1eral C.ll "' Subtotal Perk.cl 8.a Collateral Co.ti Period 38 Period-Dependent Co.11 3a.<1.I ln*urance 3111.<1.2 Prope11 y t axee 3.n.4.3 He1dth phy1ia supplies Sa ....... l-leev)' equi)Jlrn'Dl ren1al a. .... 5 Di*poeal or DAW generlMed 3a.4.6 Planl.eMrm*budlo!f 3a.<l.7 NRCJ.'en 38.4.8 Securit7 StaffC...t 3.11.U UtilityStatru..t .... Subtotal Period Sa Periud-Dependent Cost1 3ft.0 TOTAL 31 O)S'f PERJOD lb-Decomrulnlontnr Prepantlon1 Period 3b Direct Decom1ni11ioning Acti\'itie1 Detailed Work Prucedurea Sb.I.I.I Plnnt1y1tenu 8b.l.l.2 Relld.or internal* 3b.l.l.3 Remaining buildiop 3b.l.IA CRD roolior .-01bly 3b.l.l.5 CRD bou.inp & ICJ tubes Sb.l.1.6 lnciore in9trwut.ntation 3b.l.l.7 ab.1.1.8 Facility doteout 3b.l.l.9 AU*ilfl*h6eld1 3b.1.l.IO Biolotrieal1h6eld 3b.1.l.H Steam generatc.n Sb.J.1.12 Re1nfoMed conerete 3b.l.l.IS Main Turbin!' 3b.l.l.14 Main Cbndena,r,r1 3b.t.l.16 Auxiliary bu1ldmg 3b.l.l.16 Reactor building Sb.I.I Total ab.I Subtolal Period Sb Activity Cmts Period Sb Collatt"ral U.l* 3b.3.I Decon equipmenl 3b.3.2 DOC '111fTrelocAtion expeneee. 3b.3.8 Pipe culling equipment 3b.3 Sublola\ Period 3b Coll11ternl Cc.i.11 TLG Su'Vicn, ln-c. Removal Pactu..inr Tran9port C..* eo .. C..u Co90 " " II 1.002 II 1.002 II "" 1,100 942 1,100 Table D-2 Diablo Cauyon Uuit 2 SAFSTOR Decom.missioning Cost Estimate (Thousands o( 2014 Dollars) IT.Site LLRW NRC ProceHlnl 01,posal Other Total Total Uc. Term. Co1t5 Costs Co1t1 Coutln enc Co9tl C..u 27

  • 32 ""' .. 263 126 " G7 372 372 .. 13 73 "' 2,G.tO ..., 3,220 2,834 166 " , .. '°' 3.000 ... MOO 3.600 "" "' 113 113 2.800 '°" 2.806 2.806 82 18 100 100 I0.126 2.224 12.3*19 11,963 6.234 2.300 7.6/W 7.53-1 6.2S4 2,300 '*""' 7,534 .,. .. "" "" 177 26 203 "" '"' "" " '" 001 001 13 7 34 3*1 2.7S7 001 3.338 3,338 332 "' 381 ""' 946 ""' 1,164 1.164 li.880 3,818 21,Hl8 21.198 13 22,010 6,06i 28,006 28.000 13 37,369 9,680 <17,978 47,002 "' 69 ,., "' 166 36 "" 202 00 20 100 27 .. 16 81 81 .. 16 81 81 .. " 81 81 "' 113 ,., " 80 17 97 ** 30 1 "' "' 80 17 97 91 ,.. 6'I 372 372 .. , . 81 *O '°' 23 126 10* 23 '"' 181 "' 221 100 181 "' 221 109 2,J.40 <liO :!,610 2,10,1 2,1.t() <70 2,610 2,104 207 1,149 1,149 l.4GG '22 1,787 1,787 242 1,342 1,342 1,466 i71 4,278 *l,278 Spent Fuel Site Procened Management Rntor1ltlon Volume Cla1.tA Clu9 B Clau C GTCC Cosb eo. .. Cu.Feet Ct1. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet 32 126 ,. 366 386 .. , .. , """ .. , 38 8> 19 *IO 126 126 22 22 """ GOO Document POJ-J1J9-00J, Rev. 0 D, Pa1e 16 of !J Burl*I/ Procened Craft Wt., Lbs. M*nhours 25,000 25,000 9,813 16 9,Gl3 16 \J,613 26,016 U111ityand Contuctor Man hours 171 1,336 1,969 ,.. 17,0'l4 1,027 ... 628 31.117 &,412 9.412 13,036 200,229 213,264 263,793 2.026 1.070 678 ,,. '28 ,,. 1,66*1 "' 103 ,,. 1.009 <128 ... ... 1,Hl8 1,168 13,800 01 "' Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommiltsioninll Co*f A11al.r*is Activity lndu: Actlvlt Descd tlon Period 3b Period-Dependenl Cost1 3b.4.l l>l'lron 1uppUe. 3b.4.2 ln!-uranct> 3b.4.3 PJ"Ol)('ny taxe1 3b.4.4 Het1ltb11hysic11upplies 3b.4.5 Het1vy 1M1uipment rent.fl( 3b.4.6 Disposal orO,\W genera1ed 3b.-1.7 PIHntener(O' budget 3b.*l.8 NRC Fees 3b.4.9 Security Staff Co.t 3h.4.IO DOCStalTCotit 3b.4. JI Utility Slt1fTCo8t 3b.4 Subtotal Period Sb PcrioJ-Dependent Coats 3b.O TOTAL 3h COST PERIOD 3 TOTAlS PERIOD .fa* LarJ"e Component Removal Period 4a Direct Decommitie1c..nin1t Acth"ilie1 Nuclet1r Ste11m Supply SJ*Bll'm Remornl 4a.l.l.l React.orC'-00lanl Piping 4a.l.l.2 PIV!suri-wrQuenchTa11k 4a.l.l.3 Heactor<Alolanl Pum1)S&Motort. .fa.1.1.ol PreNurller 4a.l. l.5 Steam Gcuerator1 *ta.t.1.6 Re1iredS1eamGl'ne.ratorUnit1 4a.l.L7 CRDM9'JCl1t/ServiceS1ructure Rel'DO\'al 4n.l.1.8 RE'&etor\"eMel loternt1I* *l.'1.1.1.9 V-.1 & loterrud1 GTCX: Dispw.nl 4a. I. I. IO He3Ct.Cor \*euel 4a.l.J Totnl* Removal or M.Jor Equi1)1nent 4a.l.2 Tutbine1Uenerator .ia.L.3 Cal!Cading Cot.ti from Clean Building Demoliti<ln 4a.1.4.1 *Rettetor la.1.-1.2 Auxlliary *lo.l.4.3 Cot1tninruc.nt Pe.nc.lrotioo Area *la.l.4.4 RadwaeleSWrage 4a.1.4.5 Fuel Ha11tUing .. a.I... Tot.al* Di9Jl(>llal of Plant Sy*tem1 .Sa.1.5.J AuxiliaryStet1.m fa.1.5.2 Auxiliary Steam (RCA) *la.J.5.3 ComlenanteSyslem 4a. l .5.4 Coudens::ile Srsltm (lmrnloted) 4a. l.5.5 Containrue.nt Spray *la.1.5.6 E:xt.roct.icm Slt!tun & Het1!.e.r Drip 4a.l.5.7 F'l'Cdw11l.erSyste1n *111.1.5.8 Feedwt1t.er Sytlem (ln1ulatf'd) 4a. 1.6.9 Peedwatc.r S)"Sl-t>m {RCA Insulated) 4a.1.6. IO Foodwale.r Syll.Cm (RCA) 4a.J . .5.ll NSSSSampling 4a. l.5.12 NSSS San1plin1 (ln11ulated} 4a. Ui.13 Nilrog.!n & Hydroti:en 4a. l.5. l4 Nitrowin & Hydrogen (ln1ul11t.ed) 4a.l.5.15 Nitrugen & Hydl'(Jg'l<n (RCA lnnlflled) 4a.1.5.16 Nitrogen & Hydrogen (RCA> 4o. l.6. !7 Oily W111er &>11arntor & TB Sump 4o.J.6.18 Salt waler 4o. l.5.19 Turbine Ste11m Supply *la. l.G.20 Turbin(" St.enm Supply lRCA) TLG &,.vice., Inc. Table D-2 Diablo Canyon Unit 2 SA.FSTOR Decommissioning Cost Estimate (ThouHnds 0£2014 Dollars) Off.Sile l.LRW NRC Spent }"uel Decon Removal Pack**lnf Transport Proceuinf Disposal Other Co!U Tott1l Coutit1 ene Total Costs Uc. Term.. a.111.naaement Co!it Cost Cosu Costs Costs Costs 29 971 971 83 9 00 II !07 " 77 236 284 610 I GIO 327 33 116 70 3,330 335 1:1,244 6,744 20,197 212 coo 1,262 762 78 97 200 2.405 79 143 646 286 238 240 70 108 121 8 147 '3 20 I 9 106 31 188 794 ... 17 48 7 87 370 2,260 2,260 246 6,709 l,452 13,609 20 117 33 2 266 27 U)ti 110 1,982 1,982 26 701 210 6,241 46 13 104 20 1.181 160 1,431 700 12,696 12,600 601 13,f.lfJ4 9,620 2,001 "6,000 200 1,453 416 22 87 8 72 .. 3,310 206 89 1.372 167 474 4.54(1 8.714 16611 19.216 66.586 220 220 440 II 37 13 86 . ., 4 301 24 104 097 l,{'14 3,GM .t.796 14.376 626 81 649 387 6,711 6,413 438 17,836 2,093 6,238 40,471 46 '"' 27i 167 17 21 46 628 17 148 142 63 646 "' 16 37 204 II 87 ,.
  • 0 3 66 4& 41 174 1,699 39 293 IO'J 321 347 19 1,673 IOI 678 6,637 I0.628 19.72iJ 26617 74.694 2,292 301 2,516 l,091l 27.074 22.a.1 1.749 48,871 11.618 17,76G 136,22.j 258 849 1,5.W 930 .. 118 260 2033 llG ... 787 340 2.*199 293 86 200 787 41 331 72 " I 13 251 173 229 008 6,168 Co9lJ 39 293 IO'J 321 347 19 1,673 191 678 6.5J7 10,628 19,720 26,111 73.703 2,292 301 2,51l'i 1,600 :fi,074 22,a.1 1,7 .. 9 48,871 11,618 17,766 136,224 1.6.fO 980 95 118 260 2.933 787 41 331 72 13 261 173 G,168 Site Rettoutlon Cost! 802 258 8'9 96 787 340 293 86 2Q6 " 229 ... Processed Burial Volumes Volume Cla11 A ClaH B Class C GTCC Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Fe.et Cu. Feet Cu. Fed 2,276 aw 4,701 2,4.f3 41,712 41.0:H 3,881 2,532 9,631 108,"36 003 G,201 1,602 w 316 "" " 280 317 II.BG-I 001 1.649 001 406 1.649 Docume11I PD1*1119-001, Rev. 0 Appelldix D, PuJle 11 of 21 Burial/ Processed Wt. Lb!. 5.316 6.316 5.315 l-&.927 260,163 30.557 774,900 267.000 3,300,761 3,125,629 145,4lM 342.784 330,307 963,812 9,097,611 55.012 320.048 91.664 4.819 19,173 1.802 834 15,841 19.300 729.17'i Crt1ft Manhoun 2.5.024 6,614 600 2,706 1,501 "'"""' 10,800 5,232 lif,200 19,200 85,44' 3,033 !),875 11,896 7,0S4 701 618 1.746 22317 1,179 1,008 9,710 4,253 3.420 3,625 1,038 2,5-17 1,695 81 2,158 642 300 16 73 1,3fH 417 2,770 12,007 12,.f42 Utlll1yand Contr11ctor Manhouu 6,636 12.874 100,389 149.799 103.500 417,392 80 700 1,126 1,126 000 <.880 --1 Diablo Con;J'On Power Plant Decommia.ioning Co*t Anal.y*i* Activity lndu Actlvhv De.scri don DilJIOIJlll c;f Plan! Sy11em1 (l'(llll inued) .. a.1.6.21 TurbineaodGenerator "a.1.6.22 Turbine ud Geoer111oc (luulaced) 4a.l.6 Total* 4a. l.6 6caffoldmg ifi 1Uppor1. o( decomcruHioning 4a.I Sublolal Period .ja tJogu Period 4a Additional Co6ts 4tt.2.I Remedial Action Sun*ey1 411.2.2 Hetlredlk11ctAJrl-lcacl 4a.2.3 PG&Jo: HPV Slaff Support 't'e&m 4a.2.4 DOC RPV Staff Support Team 4a.2 Suhwc,oJ Period 4a AddiUonul <hill Period 43 CoUateral Colt* *la.3.1 Prooe99 deoon11niMioning wAter ll'Mle -la.3.2 Prooeu tlecumniNiorung chemical Oush wa1t.e 4a.3.3 Smalltool11i&owaDCfl *la 3 Subtotal Period 4a Collateral Costa Pt:rKid .ja Period*Dependcnl C.0.11 4111.4. I Decon supphee *la.4.2 ln!luronoe .fa.4.3 Propf'rtY lllXH 4a.4.4 He.Ith pby11icl l!IUJ'lllk-1 4a.4.6 lleflV)' equipmeul nm I.al 4a.4.6 411.4.7 Plant eoerg)' budget 4a.4.8 NRC fee1 4a.4.U Liquid RadwMte Procet111ng Equipment&n*K:e1 4a.<f.10 SeocurilyStnffU..t .ja.4.11 [)(X:S1affCc>>t 4n.4.12 Utility St .. trCost 4a.4 Sub<<>tnl Pl'riod 4a PerioJ-IA-pendenl Coel.8 b.O TOTAL PEIUOD 4a OOST PERIOD 4b-Site Oecontand11*Uon Period 4b Direct Deoommi11kming lu:twilie. *lb.I.I Re.n10\'e1pe.ntfoelrocb DilJlOlll] ol Plaut Syllem* 4b. l.2. I Bu1kUng Se."icn (Non.Power mock) lb.1.2.2 Cnpital Addition* 86-2002 (Ocen) *lb.1.2.3 Cnpital Additioo1 86-200'1 (ctllltaminated) -lb.1.2.1 Chem6cnl&VolumeControl .. b. J.2.6 Chemic8.I &. Volume Conlrol (lmufoted) 4b.l.2.G C'.crupc.neuc.Cooliu.a:Wat.er 4b. l.2. 7 C.C.npooent Cooling \Vat er (RCA) 4b 1.2.8 CuopreHed Air 4b.l.2.9 Com11reued Air Ooeulttted} 4b. I .2. IO Comprefled Air (RCA lnsulaled) 4b.1.2.11 Q.mpre..ed Air (RCA) <fb.J.2.1.2 DM!tlel Engine-Geoe.r111tor .jb.1..2.13 Oieeel En&]DC'-f'..enerfllor 4b.1.2.J4 E1ec:trical(Ck-1U1) 4b.1.2.lii Elenrical (Contamin11ted) 4b. l.2.16 Eledrical (Contaminated)-FHB .ib.J.2.17 Eledriall(RCA) 4b.l.2.18 ElectriCl'll(Rr'..A)-FHB 4b.l.2.19 FireProt*'dion 4b. l.2.20 fire Protect.ion *lb.I.2.21 Cneeou9 Rl'ldwasle 4b.J.2.22 H\IAC(Ckao lnsulnted) *lb.1.2.23 IWAC (lJl.,an) TLG Se1-vicn, Inc. Coot "' 142 014 Removal PactA&"ir11 Trflnspor1 Co.st Co.su Costs 80 26 4,328 4,260 2S8 268 2,731 6,372 8,103 40,4*19 .. 7 437 ... 397 108 000 123 G 29 636 I 6,429 81 81 " 16 28 28 5,M*I 33 22 62 10 1 14 17 3 20 00 "
  • Table D-2 Diablo Canyon Unit 2 SAFSTOR Decommissioning Cost Estimate (Thousands 0(2014 Dollar.s) NRC Spent Fuel O'..Site Proceuln1 Coses LLRW Ol.1po1t1l Coses Other eo ... Totfll Contln enc Total Cost* Lie. Term. &11maa:e.menl 6,710 66 61,766 1.610 urn; 43 121 121 63,.J.13 1,000 009 1,663 317 1,854 " 448 540 101 918 1,684 4S9 183 "" 4 269 *1113 12.623 1,266 438 6,410 1.033 .,. 2,336 C.1.881 'i8,257 J.j2.63li 166,500 19 ' 3,401 1,683 4<'>,183 1,1164 611 038 904 *1316 67 81 62 18' .. 1,000 1,180 .. 1,400 161 :!03 613 11,397 li,192 33,410 83,001 2 100 429 ... 2"7 43 933 27 1 20 ... 31 715 327 76 "' 602 749 278 116
  • 96 103 30 14,076 6,931 160,272 6.106 2,470 6,200 6,(116 18797 .. 316 "' 194 1.439 002 3,731 6,662 318 7819 1,184 1,129 2,800 63,278 \16,449 184,441 363,023 2.707 * ... 1,6-lO 3,812 1,016 241 3,004 150 8 76 1,403 "' 4 3,972 1,262 287 2,394 2.80 .. 2,881) 1,066 4 ... 00 634 Co9u Costs J0,00-l 6,931 IM,092 6,106 2.470 5.200 5.016 18797 .. 283 381 19' l,439 461 3,731 G,G62 316 78U:I J,184 1.129 2,860 63,278 96,449 184,391 2,707 1,640 3.812 1,016 3,69-1 76 1.403 1,262 287 2,30-t 2.889 1,066 ... Site R"tor .. eion C..** 100 30 3,172 4,279 31 31 4,001
  • 669 2*11 160 8 17' 4 3,072 2,3fl4 60 6"*1 Docume11I POJ-J1JJ..OOJ, Rev. 0 Appendix D, Page lB of :!l P==d .. Burl*I/ Processed we. Lbs. Cu. Fe.et Cu. Feet Cu. Fe.et Cu. Feet Cu. Feet 20,C36 1.-14-1 100,616 l'i.072 5,072 82 82 4, .. 96 (.10,166 3,M2 2,625 6,976 1,146 ..... 80 1,619 1,902 366 3,317 6,726 1,600 GOO 001 601 1,2L7.612 Gl,977 1,610 10,020,100 322.-142 322.442 89.916 89,916 1.G*lfJ 11,337,300 23-t7i3 163906 361137 00,872 6,193 90,002 118,983 22.229 202, 180 348,002 103.349 .0.203 Cr.Ct 1,200 378 63,323 33,007 217,092 51,21H 2,098 53 362 16 10 147 147 270,007 ... 107 7,0-IO 5,777 13,445 6,26.t 2,981 8,218 1,881 .. 400 7,238 2,049 48 47,918 4,1189 1,340 27,!IM 8,1127 6,2fl4 3,643 1,644 662 7,019 Utllltyand Contnctor M*nhours 4,860 40 41.862 64.186 106.088 32,143 478,286 879,429 1,389,867 US00,825 Diablo Cunyon Power Plaut DecommiHioninJl Co*f Anuly*i* Activity 1.nde.x AcUvitv Dellcri lion Dillpo11al or Plant Sya1em1 (rontinued) 4b.l.2.2<1 HVAC(Coulaminaled lmiuhned) 4b.l.2.2G IWAC(Contamin11ted) ' 4b.l.2.2S HVAC(Contaminnted). FHB 4b. l.2.27 Liquid RM.lwaat.e -lb.1.2.28 Liquid RadwHte (ln1ulated) -lb.1.2.29 Lube Oil Di1tr1but.km &. Purificalion 4b. J.2.30 Water lb.1.2.31 Make.up W1tter(ln11uh1ted) -tb. 1.2.32 Make.up W11ler (IWA I usu luted) 4b. l.2.33 \Voter (RCA) 4b. J.2.34 Mecharucal De11artn1ent E<1uipment 4b. l.2.35 Mi&eellnoooua Reactor Cool1:1nt 4b. l.2.36 Nucleur Sleam Supply Sampling 4b. l.2.37 Nuclear Slum Supply Sampling (lnaulated *lb.1.2.38 Residual Hent Remoo.*al -tb.1.2.39 Safot3* Luject.ion 4b.l.2.-IO S:ifot)' IQjection(lnaul:iled) 4b. l.2.41 SaJ'ety Injection (RCA ln1ul:ited) 4b. l.2.42 Sal"ety (RCA) 4b. l.2.43 Sen*ice Cocilin1 W11ltlr 4b. l.2.44 Sen*iCt' Cooling Wnter (RCA) 4b. l.2.45 Se"*cr Syr.t.elfl Ex11an1ion *lb.1.2.46 Spenl Fuel Pit Co0Hn1 4b.i.2.47 Spenlfuel PilCooling.fllB 4b.l.2 Tut1d1 4L.1.3 ScalJolding in aupport or decomm.iSt1io1.1ing Deronlamii1ation or Site Buildinp 4b.l.4.1 *Reactor 4b.l.4.2 AuJ:.iliary 4b. l.-l.3 Capital Addit)l.)m 85-2004 4b. J.4.4 f'...ootainmt>nt Penclrativn Area 4b. l..t.6 Radwn!lle Sloragt* 4b.l.4.G FuelHandling 4b.l.4 Totnla 4b.1 Sublol ul Period 4b Activity 0:.91.1 Period 4b 1Wdition&I Coet.a 4b.2. I Liccnte Ten11im1tion Survey Planning <lb.2.2 Remedial .<\ctkin Sun"ey11 ,lb.2.3 LiceD..!le Tt>rmin11tion ISFSI 4b.2 Sublotal Period 4b Additional Co@.11 Period 4b Coll:iteral Cosl.8 4b.3.I ProceH dcoon1mi1111ioning l\'ater Wll!lle 4b.3.2 Proresa decoolmiuioning chemical aullh waat.e 4b.3.3 Small tool allowance 4b.3.4 Deoouuniuioning Equipment DiaIJ(J@ilion 4b.3 Sublolnl Pt*riOO 4b Collt1teral Co!lt.ii Period 4b PerkJd.DependentClHC.a 4h.4.I Dea:m auppliu 4b.4.2 lnaurance 4b.4.3 Property tax.e* 4b.4.4 Health ph)'1k:I 1upplie<< 4b.4.0 Heavy equipment rental -lb.4.6 Dilpoe..*dorDAWgener:iUld 4b . .f.7 Planl eoe.rgy budget 4b . .f.8 NRC Feea 4b.4.9 Liquid lliidw1t5te Equipment.1SeniN'1 4b.4.IO Security Sw.fTCoet 4b.4.11 lX>CStafTCoel 4b.4.12 Utilil>' SlllfTCoet *lb.<I Sublotal Period 4b Period*De11endenc Co!ica 4b.O TOTAL PERIOD 4b ms*r TLG &rvice*, lnc. Decon Removal Pack111i111 Transporl Co!it Co!lt Co!lts Costs 1,016 1,210 386 ""' 6 7ii3 3,008 4,213 " I.MO 1,ii*IO G,768 217 004 216 "' *IO 132 205 " 33 166 I 130 20 8 281 116
  • 39 323 144 37 *19 87 120 15,320 6,376 2,748 561 123 170 *16 746 -6,393 26,156 121 121 .. , 461 2,733 3,232 G,OOG 32,703 173 37 57 3
  • 23 122 16 I 6 G4 47 00 1,331 1,132 .. 9 24 3 .. 1,284 2,827 100 173 103 103 3,111 14 71 10 23 I I 0 00 19 21 " 6,300 73 14 22 13 13 39 " "' 29 29 6.171 Table D-2 Diablo Canyon Unit 2 SAFSTOR Decommissioning Cost Estimate (Thousands o( 2014 Dollars) ff.Site I.LBW NRC S11ent Fuel Site ProceHinr Dlspo1al Other Costa Tot11I Coi1U11 enc Total Costs Lie. Term. Maoageme11t Restoration Cosu Cosu "' 2,260 476 7'2 33 G2 " 112 16 7 1.684 209 8 75 671 74 """ ... 17,100 84 26.386 817 .. 310 27 443 26,877 46,127 *100 400 110 , .. 368 123 123 46,108 846 2.678 I.GOO 4.ft83 763 200 3.07& 628 GOJ 1,413 22,899 33,048 62,66Ci 67.638 200 1,218 262 437 28 29 06 32 173 0 91 IJ 6 712 122
  • 43 377 32 42 II 206 "" 11,125 2,375 12,376 1,341 367 402 33 1,003 16,622 29,863 371 1,13..J 803 2,307 IOI 128 2"3 -112 39 1.001 710 67 676 92 124 310 6,001 7,260 10,984 -18,4*17 ... 4,676 1,004 1,675 106 161 311 30 "'"' 2 3*1G GI 22 27-18 400 19 166 1,4<17 176 163 00 1,027 J,J.11 41'.i.422 8.11!11 47,003 3,860 .... 1,22& 121 3.03G 1>7,200 114,226 1,217 3,710 2,000 7.922 1162 ... 1.401 2.I04 .,. ... 3733 39*12 " 3.702 710 686 1,724 27,930 40,308 86,401 209.900 Co!its Costs Costs ... 4,676 1,004 1,f.i71'.i IOG 122 663 346 GI 22 2,748 469 19 !BG l,H7 163 1,027 1,141 36,578 8,119'1 41,&63 3,860 ... 1,226 121 3,03G 67,200 101'.i,381 1.217 3,710 2,996 7.922 2&1 1162 ... 1,401 2,10*1 876 305 3.733 3942 323 3.71>2 719 686 1.72*1 27,930 40.306 86.<IOI 201.106 IGl 311 ao 17G GO 8,844 8.84-1 ProceHed Burial Volumes Volume Cl11H A Cl11H 8 Cius C GTCC Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet 1,606 8,132 1,719 2.('83 120 166 1,066 406 69 25 5,726 767 3(1 270 2,427 ,.. 2,200 2,367 61,799 2,100 34{1,ll38 6,613 1,0<17 1,838 476 2,951 361,863 429.681 1,777 1,777 211 G,007 6,878 *l.G!\3 *l,6fJ3 442.928 Document P01-1119-001, Rev. 0 Appendix D, PaJle 19of 21 Burial/ Prouued Wt. Lbs. 97,832 495,632 10-4.707 163,638 7,330 11.355 &4.346 24.761 3.666 1.628 348.913 -IG.100 1.826 UJ.433 147,899 16,409 134,0i!l 144,205 3,700,486 97,466 33,233.400 462.994 91,174 143,667 42.164 2JO,G84 184, 120 38,282.840 108.170 108,170 12,676 J00.000 312.675 91.856 91.856 38,700.040 Craft Ma.nhouu 2,660 6,697 """ 1,004 3,794 876 441 2,210 19 1,847 252 108 4.045 l,GOI ll8 Gl7 4,277 2,186 W6 7'16 1,266 1,721 214,8&3 H,004 23,319 6,7&. &,139 002 20.261) 101,986 367,447 31,161 7,000 38,167 41 .. 120 160 160 *106.883 Utility and Contrftctor M1uihoun 6,240 4,191 10,431 19,636 209.423 368,834 61J7,79:J 608.224 Dioblo Can,on PowerPla111 Df!:con1111inionin1t Co*l An.aly.i* Activity lndu. Actlvltv De.!icri don PERIOD 4C-UcenHI Termination Perklt.I 4f Direct Deoomm1Mioning * .\ct1vitie9 4(.1.1 ORISE ronfirma1ory 1urny 4tl.2 Tenn.inatelioenee . 1r.1 Subl.olal Pukid 4f Actinty Co.ta Period 4r Additional Co.a 1r.2.1 Liom11e Tem1in*Uon Survey 4f.2 Subl.otal Period 4r Addition11I Coet1 Period4rC.OllntcralColill .. r.s.1 DOC1taffre.loclltionexpen11e1 *1[3 Subwta1 Period 4fCollaleral Coeta Perioll 4C Period-Dependent O:iet.1 d.4.1 !DJJu.raoori .U.4.2 Property taxe1 4r.4.3 Health ph)*1ict 1upplte. <tf..fi.4 Dis)>09al c.CDAW generated *IC.4.6 Plant ene:l"VJ' bud&-et .. r. ... 6 NRCJ.'t'etl 4f.4.7 Security Starreo.t *lr.4.8 DOC S1.a0' Coat 4r.4.9 Ulili1yStttffCo.t 4(... Sub1o1nl Period df't>riod-Dependent Co9t1 4(.0 TOTAL PERIOD 4fOJST PERJOD 4 TOTALS PERIOD 6b-Sile Restorallon Period 6b Dired DecoomuMioniD( Ad.ilitle!I Demolition or Remaining Sile BuilJinp C.h.1.1.J *Rell\.1.or 6b. I. l.2 Atlminiuralion 6h.l.l.3 Auxilit1ry 6b.l. l.4 Capilal Addilion1 8&.20().1 Gb.1.1.6 Cbemictll StQr11ge 6b. LI .6 Chlorination 6b.l.1.7 Cin:-ulatingWalerTun.nele 6b.1. l.8 Cold Machine Shop 6b,J.J.9 Communication 6b. I. l. IO Condenut& Poli*hingfTechnic::a.l Support 6b. I 1.11 Penetrntilin Atta 6b.J.1.12 Dilc:harveStructutt 6b.1. l.13 f3brk:ation Shop &ld 1.14 Pin Pump lfoWMe 6b. I. l.16 llnardou1 W*11.e St.omt1e Facilitr 6b 1.1.16 Intake 8truet.ure 6b I. I 17 M1ti11Len11nce SIM;p 6b. l.1.18 llli1rellaneou1 S1ruc1urn 6b.l.l.19 NPO PennHent W*ttbou.e 6b.l.l.20 Pond* 6b.l.l.21 Portr.blePirePump&fo'uelCart 6b.J.1.22 Prelre11t.111ent 6b.l.l.23 IUidwt111tPStorav 6b. I. l.24 Radwaale Storage Pacillly (Additional) 6b, 1.1.26 Rotor Warehouee 6b. l. l.20 Security 611.1.1.27 Security Buildinp (Addi1iooal) C.li.1.1.28 Sttu.rity Modifii::ntiom (2010 lo 2015) fib.1.1.29 Gb.1.1.00 Steam f' .... merator Slorage fo'acility 61,,.1.1.31 Te)epboneTerminal fib.J.l.32 Turbill{' TLG &rvicn, foe. Removal PackA1h11 Tran9pol'l C..t Co** C..u "°'" 002 902 90Z 6,282 74,065 17,492 11,700 7,188 1,160 6,{186 4,627 ' IO l,2t.t m ' 926 730 997 129 ' " ..... ... .. 1,'68 2 I " 1,892 63 902 007 67 93' ... ... a 6,908 Table D-2 Diablo Canyon Unit 2 SAFSTOR Decommissioning Cost Estimate (Thousands o( 2014 Dollars) OIT-Slte u.RW NRC Procenlol Dltpo!al Other Total Total Uc. Term. Coso Co!t9 Co11tt Conlin enc Co9t!I "°'" 183 80 2G3 203 . 183 80 26J 263 15.100 G,678 21.877 21,877 lt'>.100 6,078 21.877 21.877 I *166 322 1.787 1,787 IA66 "' 1.787 1,787 ... 20 153 103 330 1,233 1,233 ' ,. 21 .., 91 603 603 302 .. 3'7 "" 713 167 800 869 6,073 l,IJ.t 6,187 6,187 6,4C.2 1,198 6,6"' ..... 12,087 2,95£1 16,006 16,006 28,93'4 10,030 39,894 39.89-t 100,661 262,171 142,477 613.766 000,501 \,679 8,767 263 1..ioa 1,630 8,1521 1,016 6,6'13 I 6 2 " 1.481 .. . .. I 6 200 ""' 100 891 '19 U116 ,. 1'7 7 " 1,242 6,89'7 87 *181 16 83 32.'.l 1,791 0 3 0 * * " 416 " ** I ... 1,100 81 448 13 70 200 1,141 .. . .. 213 1,181 I 1,298 7,200 Spent Fuel Site Burial Volumes llaoa1ement Restor .. t loo Volume CJ.s,A Cl*" B c1.,, c "°' "°'" Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet 33ll ... 336 13,206 ..... ,. 601 400 8,7G7 1,40;J 8,621 6,6.13 6 " 1,481 '" 6 1129 891 1.716 167 7 " 6,897 '81 83 l,791 3 2 13 2,307 o* 1,100 448 70 1,141 6'12 1,181 *I i,200 GTCC Cu, Feet J.64& Documenl POl-1119-001, Rni. 0 Appendix D, Pa1tf!: :!O of :!I Burial/ Utility and Proceued Craft Contractor WI. Lbs. Manhoun Manhoun 200,468 8,120 200,468 3,12(J ..... " 9,821 "6,1W 50,004 6,608 " 113,036 6,6YEI 200,479 116,606 60,139,630 876,969 2.226,706 67,914 10,368 64,.71 47,403 16 .. 12,194 3,78S .. 9300 ..... 8.321 1,223 "" '"' 46,364 3.444 673 14,093 " " 108 li.864 002 9,938 3,li44 722 9,627 4,HH 8,888 ,. 57,744

"' ::::r 1" 01 m Diablo Canyon Power Plant DecommiHioninlf Co*I Anulyai* Activity lndu Actlvlt ne,cri tlon Demol.ilioo orRemRioing Site Buildine11 (eootiouedJ 6b.l.l.3;1 Turbine Pedeetal 6b.l.l.34 Vehicle M1tin1enaoce Ob.Ll.35 W1Ute Water !folding & Treatment Facility 5b.l.J.3G Fuel Handling Sb.I.I Totale Site Cl0800Ut Acti..-itiell 5b.l.2 Grade & h:rnd11e1:1µe 1il.e C.b.1.3 FinHlre1>0rttoNRC 5b.I Sublotul Period 5b Acl.i\'ity Period 5b Addil.ionsl Colt.a 5b.2.1 Backfill Structures & Concrete RemO\'ol (out or etete die1)0lal) Ob,2.2 Brenkwster Demolition and RenKl'l'l'li {out of elnte di11po1111I) 5b,2.3 CofTenlarn Construction and Teardown 5b.2.4 Concrete Cru1hing 5b.2.0 0111po11al ofGalLe!llol Siding 6b.2l> 011po11itio11 c.f'-IOOUe Barrier* (out of et.ate d11poeal) C.h.2.7 Soll /Sediment Control Plant Area f.h.2.8 Demohtk>n and Site Re1tomtibn ISFSI 5b.2.9 '-li9Cll'Jlaneuu11 Comtruction Debri1 (out ofetate tli1po68]) 5b.2.IO ScraJJ Mt!t.11l 'l'r11n11port11tion (out of1111ue1 5b.2.ll FSSM11nagf'r 5b.2 Sllblotal Pl'riod 6b Addilional Coet-11 Period 5b CollalNlll 5b.3.I Smell 1001 11llow&nC'I' 6b.3 Sublotal Period 6b C.ollateral Co:!!t.!! Period 6b Period-Dependent Coete 5b.4.I ln1ur11DCe 6bA.2 C.b.4.3 HtlttY)"equipmentrenlel 6b.4.4 enerlQ' budge! 6b.4.5 Security St.11fl'Cooet 6b.4.(l OOCSll'llTCo!!L 5b.U Utility S1.a1T Colt 6b .. 1 Subtot,ul Period 5h Period.De1>endcntCoete lib.O TOTAL PERIOD Ob OOST PERIOD 6 TOTALS TOT AL COST TO DECOMMISSION l'OT COST TO DECOM!.USSIONWITH 2.6.03** CONTINGENCY: AL NBC LICENSE TERMINATION COST IS 60.0N OR: PENT FUEL MANAGEMENT COST IS 14.48" OR: ON.NUCLEAR DEMOLl'flON COST IS 26.46% OR: Deeo11 Removllll "° eo .. 1,404 37 24 1,079 .. 7.015 2,337 M.l,3fi2 24,700 73.6157 .,. l,473 168 1.:lU 1,642 !03,<173 1,18<1 1,184 7,c.89 7,680 161,598 161,508 13,684 244,911 AL LOW.J..EVEL RADIOACTIVE WASTE VOLUHE BURlED (EXCLUDING OTCC): AL GREATER TitAN CJ.ASS C RADWA5I'E VOLUUE GENERATED: End Notee: n/a

  • indicate" I h11t 1hi" activity not charged n& dccommiHioning expense. a* indiC(ltefJ that. thie Pct.h*ily pt>rfornMid by decommiMiioning 11t&IT. 0 -indkates th11t. thi11 \'nlue it leu than 0.6 but is non*zeru. itct>lloonloining"-" indirntee11wrovalue TLG &1-vicu, Inc. Packlllalna "°'" 18,114 Table D-2 Diablo Canyon Unit 2 SAFSTOR Decommissioning Cost Estimate (Thouaands 0(2014 Dollars) Off.Site llRW NRC Tr11n,port Pll,)CH!llD* Dl!!po!111I Other Tot11I Total Lie. Term. Co!ih Co!ih Co!ll9 Co11t1 Contin enc Co!tll Co!lt!I """ 1,718 .. 00 '35 2,413 I0,328 57,3-t4 513 2.800 10< "' 126 126 104 I0,860 00.320 126 4<1.417 15.184 84 301 168.613 6-t,011 306281 I05 6113 320 1.806 "' 93 '" 472 141 780 298 l.G.S2 2,749 604 i,995 5.870 1,290 7.160 7,837 1,722 9,G59 622 137 759 709 231.010 83,907 418,300 709 260 l,H4 200 1,44<1 4'0 6< 60< 1,007 9,256 678 ).19 827 2.343 010 2,8"8 15,137 3,326 18,*163 G,35() 1,396 7.761 2-1,1)53 7,117 a9,668 26G.06G 102,1-19 519.813 ... 200.006 102.149 519.813 886 12,306 113.776 1.272.766 419.290 2.094,738 1,048,MO U.094, 738 thou1and1 or 2014 dollan Sl,048,880 thouund' of 2014 doll*n UU,8U tbou1and*or 2014 doll*" '633,026 thou1and1 of 20U dollar. 803,394 Cubic F<<t 1,849 Cubie Feet 78,297 Ton' 1 777 688 Man.hours S11eotFuel Site Proce,,ed Burial Volume' !ol11n*ten1ent Restor*tlou Volume Cl11s,A ClosB Clu,c eo,ts ""'" Cu. Feet Cu.Feet Cu. Feet Cu. F<<t 1,713 " 30 2,413 57,84*1 ""'° 00,194 84,301 306,281 6113 1.805 '" 780 1,662 4.995 7,160 9,559 *117.631 1,444 1,444 '°' El,256 827 2,808 18,otG3 7,751 00,658 518.928 518,928 611.861 6U,Oali 602.488 001 466 GTCC Cu.Feet UWD Documenl P01*1119-00l, Rev. 0 Appendix D, Pu1e 21 of 21 Burial I Utlli1y111nd Proce,sed Cr11ft Cootr11ctor WI. Lbs. Ma.nhoun M1111houn 11,300 367 , .. 16,'i60 *13!J,079 4.587 6G8 443,G66 668 31.448 ,.. '°" U.l04 6.35!> l,HO 12.839 20,*M3 110 0,148 370,9*1G 1',228 3"l,28G 136,891 G7,154 236,MI 81<1.611 2*12,227 814,611 242.227 61.033.880 1,777,668 8.070,724 Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis APPENDIXE Document POl-1719-001, Rev. 0 Appendix E, Page 1 of 2 ISFSI LICENSE TERMINATION ESTIMATE TLG Services, Inc. 2-AtchA-157 N I .-(") ::::r I ...... <J"1 CXl Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis Activity Description Decommissioning Contractor Planninl" (characterization specs and procedures) Decontamination (activated disDosition) License Termination (radiolocical survevs) Subtotal Supporting Costs NRC and NRC Contractor Fees and Costs Insurance Prooertv Taxes Security PG&E StaIT Subtotal Total (w/o continl!ency) Total (w/25% continsrencv) Removal Costs 243 243 243 303 Table E Diablo Caynon Power Plant ISFSI Decommissioning Cost Estimate (thousands of 2014 dollars) Packaging Trallsport LLRW. Other Disposal Costs Costs Costs Costs 423 15 27 981 55 1 557 15 27 981 2 036 160 158 118 282 368 1084 15 27 981 3,!l9 18 34 1,226 3,899 Total Costs 423 1,320 1557 3 300 160 158 118 282 368 1084 4,384 5,480 The npplication of contingency is consistent with the evaluation criteria referenced by the NRC in NUREG-1757 ("Consolidated Decommissioning Guidance, Financial Assurance, Recordkeeping, and Timeliness," U.S. NRC's Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, NUREG-1757, Vol. 3, Rev. 1, February 2012). Note: The costs shown in this Appendix will differ from values in Appendices C and D costs tables due. These two appendices include n additional contingencyto achieve an overall project contingency of 25'!-o. TLG Services, Inc. Burial Volume Class A (cubic feet) 3,555 3,555 3,555 Document POl-1719-001, Rev. 0 Appendix E, Page 2 of 2 Person-Hours NRC/NRC Contractor Licensee Contractor Man hours 1264 852 11895 14 011 776 3 803 3,803 7 606 776 14,011 7,606 776 Variance of the 2016 Forecast Enclosure 6 PG&E Letter DCL-17-022 Estimated Costs: Enclosure 6 PG&E Letter DCL-17 -022 Page 1 of 1 Forecast of 2016 per PG&E Letter DCL-15-044, Enclosure 4, dated March 31, 2015, in 2015 dollars: Unit 1: NRC Scope (Radiological) Non-NRC Scope Spent Fuel Management Unit 2: NRC Scope (Radiological) Non-NRC Scope Spent Fuel Management Actual Costs: $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Actual 2016 Incurred Costs, provided in Enclosure 4 of this letter, reflects the actuals for 2016 in nominal dollars. Unit 1: NRC Scope (Radiological) Non-NRC Scope Spent Fuel Management Unit 2: NRC Scope (Radiological) Non-NRC Scope Spent Fuel Management Variance: (Unfavorable) Unit 1: NRC Scope (Radiological) Non-NRC Scope Spent Fuel Management Unit 1: NRC Scope (Radiological) Non-NRC Scope Spent Fuel Management $250,623 $0 $0 $241,031 $0 $0 -$250,623 $0 $0 -$241,031 $0 $0 Decommissioning costs were overspent in 2016 primarily due to PG&E's decision not to extend the operating license and began the planning process for decommissioning the two units. The costs for planning the decommissioning commenced in 2016.
Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML17102B069&oldid=629086"