DCL-11-039, Submittal of Decommissioning Funding Report
| ML110950345 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Diablo Canyon  |
| Issue date: | 03/31/2011 |
| From: | Conway J Pacific Gas & Electric Co |
| To: | Document Control Desk, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| DCL-11-039 | |
| Download: ML110950345 (193) | |
Text
0 Pacific Gas and Electric Company John T. Conway 77 Beale Street Senior Vice President-Energy Supply &
Mail Code B32 Chief Nuclear Officer San Francisco, CA 94105 415.973.3336 Internal: 223.3336 Fax: 415.973.2313 March 31, 2011 10 CFR 50.75 Alternate Address Diablo Canyon Power Plant R O. Box 56 PG&E Letter DCL-1 1-039 Avila Beach, CA 93424 805.545.3333 Fax: 805.545.4884 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission ATTN: Document Control Desk Washington, DC 20555-0001 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:
PG&E is submitting the decommissioning fund report for Diablo Canyon Power Plant (DCPP) Units 1 and 2, pursuant to the requirements of 10 CFR 50.75(f).
Diablo Canyon Units 1 and 2 At the end of calendar year 2010, the market value of the DCPP Units 1 (3411 MWt) and 2 (3411 MWt) decommissioning trust fund Market value was $807.5 million and
$1,083.1 million respectively. Based on the site-specific decommissioning cost estimate prepared by TLG Services, Inc., and adjusted per the Nuclear Decommissioning Cost Triennial Proceeding (NDCTP) Decision 10-07-047 from the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC), PG&E is confident that the DCPP Units 1 and 2 decommissioning trust fund balance in 2024 and 2025 will meet the minimum NRC decommissioning amount of $580.3 million (2011 dollars) for each unit that was calculated pursuant to the requirements specified in 10 CFR 50.75(c).
Supporting Cost Estimates Based on site-specific cost estimates prepared by TLG Services, Inc. and the NDCTP Decision 10-07-047, PG&E has estimated that the decommissioning costs are approximately $583.9 million for DCPP Unit 1 and $546 million for Unit 2 in 2011 dollars. These costs do not include site restoration of the facilities ($258.6 million) nor spent fuel management costs after shutdown of the Units ($637.4 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 (Strategic Teaming and Resource Sharing)
Alliance Callaway
- Comanche Peak
- Diablo Canyon
- Palo Verde-San Onofre
- South Texas Project
- Wolf Creek
Document Control Desk PG&E Letter DCL-1 1-039 March 31, 2011 Page 2 Supportingq Enclosures Supporting documentation for this report is included as Enclosures 1 through 4. provides decommissioning funding status information in a format suggested by NEI and the NRC. provides information on the escalation of the required decommissioning funding amounts from 1986 dollars to 2011 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 14, the information includes escalation factors for energy, labor, and waste burial costs. provides the TLG Services, Inc. decommissioning cost estimate report prepared in March 2009 for PG&E's DCPP Units 1 and 2. The TLG Services, Inc.
cost estimate has then been adjusted to reflect the costs in 2011 dollars per CPUC Decision 10-07-047. The report provides cost estimates for decommissioning of both nuclear and non-nuclear facilities, including the independent spent fuel storage installation (ISFSI). contains the TLG Services, Inc. decommissioning cost estimate report prepared in March 2009 for PG&E's DCPP Units 1 & 2. The report provides cost estimates for the decommissioning of the nuclear, non-nuclear facilities, and spent fuel management including operation of the ISFSI.
There are no Regulatory commitments in this letter. Should you have any questions in regard to this document please feel free to call Mr. Bob Kapus at (707) 444-0810.
Sincerely, Jn.
onway Senior Vice President - Energ ly and Chief Nuclear Officer Enclosures cc/enc:
Elmo E. Collins, NRC Region IV James T. Polickoski, NRC Project Manager Alan B. Wang, NRC Project Manager INPO Diablo Distribution A
member of the STARS (Strategic Teaming and Resource Sharing)
Alliance Callaway -
Comanche Peak
- Diablo Canyon
° Palo Verde-San Onofre
- South Texas Project
- Wolf Creek PG&E Letter DCL-1 1-039 NRC Decommissioning Funding Status Report Diablo Canyon Power Plant - Units 1 (3411 MWt) and 2 (3411 MWt)
PG&E Letter DCL-11-039 Page 1 of 3 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.
- 1. The minimum decommissioning fund estimate, pursuant to 10 CFR 50.75(b) and (c)1
$ in Millions Value in January 2011 dollars Unit 1 $580.3 Unit 2 $580.3
- 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 2010 dollars)
Unit 1 $ 807.5 Unit 2 $1,083.1
- 3. A schedule of the annual amounts remaining to be collected; for items in 10 CFR 50.75(b) and (c). (Alternatively, the annual amounts remaining to be collected can include items beyond those required in 10 CFR 50.75(b) and (c) if the cover letter transmitting the report provides a total cost estimate and indicates what portion of that estimate is for items that are not included in 10 CFR 50.75(b) and (c)). (See item 6 of this enclosure describing the collection of additional funds)
Unit 1 amount remaining
$14.2
($4.7 million for 3 years beginning 2010)
Unit 2 amount remaining
$13.2
($4.4 million for 3 years beginning 2010)
, 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 Department of Energy are not included in the cost formulas.
PG&E Letter DCL-1 1-039 Page 2 of 3
- 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 2020 for Unit 1 and Unit 2), and rates of other factors used in funding projections; Escalation in decommissioning costs Rate of Return on Qualified Trust Unit 1 2010 Rate of Return on Qualified Trust Unit 1 2011 Rate of Return on Qualified Trust Unit 1 2012 Rate of Return on Qualified Trust Unit 1 2013 Rate of Return on Qualified Trust Unit 1 2014 Rate of Return on Qualified Trust Unit 1 2015 Rate of Return on Qualified Trust Unit 1 2016 Rate of Return on Qualified Trust Unit 1 2017 Rate of Return on Qualified Trust Unit 1 2018 Rate of Return on Qualified Trust Unit 1 2019 Rate of Return on Qualified Trust Unit 1 2020 Rate of Return on Qualified Trust Unit 1 2021 Rate of Return on Qualified Trust Unit 1 2022 Rate of Return on Qualified Trust Unit 1 2023 Rate of Return on Qualified Trust Unit 1 2024 Rate of Return on Qualified Trust Unit 1 (Post 2025)
Rate of Return on Qualified Trust Unit 2 2010 Rate of Return on Qualified Trust Unit 2 2011 Rate of Return on Qualified Trust Unit 2 2012 Rate of Return on Qualified Trust Unit 2 2013 Rate of Return on Qualified Trust Unit 2 2014 Rate of Return on Qualified Trust Unit 2 2015 Rate of Return on Qualified Trust Unit 2 2016 Rate of Return on Qualified Trust Unit 2 2017 Rate of Return on Qualified Trust Unit 2 2018 Rate of Return on Qualified Trust Unit 2 2019 Rate of Return on Qualified Trust Unit 2 2020 Rate of Return on Qualified Trust Unit 2 2021 Rate of Return on Qualified Trust Unit 2 2022 Rate of Return on Qualified Trust Unit 2 2023 Rate of Return on Qualified Trust Unit 2 2024 Rate of Return on Qualified Trust Unit 2 (Post 2025) 5.01 percent 4.96 percent 4.92 percent 4.88 percent 4.85 percent 4.82 percent 4.80 percent 4.78 percent 4.77 percent 4.75 percent 4.37 percent 4.01 percent 3.67 percent 3.35 percent 3.05 percent 2.95 percent 5.01 percent 4.96 percent 4.91 percent 4.88 percent 4.85 percent 4.82 percent 4.80 percent 4.78 percent 4.77 percent 4.75 percent 4.37 percent 4.01 percent 3.67 percent 3.35 percent 3.05 percent 2.95 percent
- 5. Any contracts upon which the licensee is relying pursuant to 10 CFR 50.75(e)(1)(v).
NONE PG&E Letter DCL-1 1-039 Page 3 of 3
- 6. Any modifications to a licensee's current method providing financial assurance occurring since the last submitted report.
NONE
- 7. Any material changes to trust agreements.
NONE
- 8. California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC)
Submittal in 2011 dollars in millions:
Total Unit 1 (Decommission 2024)
$ 857.5 Scope Excluded from NRC calculations 97.9 Spent Fuel Management
$ 175.7 Total NRC Decommissioning Costs
$ 583.9 Total Unit 2 (Decommission 2025)
$1,168.9 Scope Excluded from NRC calculations
$ 160.7 Spent Fuel Management
$ 461.7 Total NRC Decommissioning Costs
$ 546.5 PG&E Letter DCL-1 1-039 2011 Decommissioning Estimate U1 (1 page) 2011 Decommissioning Estimate U2 (1 page)
Composite Escalation (1 page)
Development of B Component (1 page)
Development of E Component (7 pages)
Development of L Component (7 pages)
PG&E Letter DCL-1 1-039 2011 Decommissioning Estimate U1 Nuclear Regulatory Commission Estimate of Decommission Costs for PWR DCPP Unit 1 in 2011 DCPP PWR (millions)
Jan 1986 Estimate
$105 Escalated to 1999
$118.2 (Table 2.1 in NUREG 1307, Revision 10, has no value for 1999 Burial)
Escalated to 2000 (No Submittal Required)
Escalated to 2001
$333.8 ($396.7 in 2001 Submittal)
Escalated to 2002 (No Submittal Required)
Escalated to 2003
$347.5 ($404.8 in 2003 Submittal)
Escalated to 2004 (No Submittal Required)
Escalated to 2005
$404.2 ($427.2 in 2005 Submittal)
Escalated to 2006 (No Submittal Required)
Escalated to 2007
$495.8 ($494.8 in 2007 Submittal)
Escalated to 2008 (No Submittal Required)
Escalated to 2009
$541.4 Escalated to 2010
$560.7 (No Submittal Required)
Escalated to 2011
$580.3 Jan 1986 based on 10 CFR 50.75 (c) Table of minimum amounts BWR based on minimum 1, 200 MWt = ($104 + (.009xMWt)) million per unit Jan 1986 based on 10 CFR 50.75 (c) Table of minimum amounts 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=1200MWt $75+0.0088P)
PG&E Letter DCL-1 1-039 2011 Decommissioning Estimate U2 Nuclear Regulatory Commission Estimate of Decommission Costs for PWR DCPP Unit 2 in 2011 DCPP PWR (millions)
Jan 1986 Estimate
$105 Escalated to 1999
$118.2 (Table 2.1 in NUREG 1307, Revision 10, has no value for 1999 Burial)
Escalated to 2000 (No Submittal Required)
Escalated to 2001
$333.8 ($396.7 in 2001 Submittal)
Escalated to 2002 (No Submittal Required)
Escalated to 2003
$347.5 ($404.8 in 2003 Submittal)
Escalated to 2004 (No Submittal Required)
Escalated to 2005
$404.2 ($427.2 in 2005 Submittal)
Escalated to 2006 (No Submittal Required)
Escalated to 2007
$495.8 ($494.8 in 2007 Submittal)
Escalated to 2008 (No Submittal Required)
Escalated to 2009
$541.4 Escalated to 2010
$560.7 (No Submittal Required)
Escalated to 2011
$580.3 Jan 1986 based on 10 CFR 50.75 (c) Table of minimum amounts BWR based on minimum 1, 200 MWt - ($104 + (.009xMWt)) million per unit Jan 1986 based on 10 CFR 50.75 (c) Table of minimum amounts 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=1200MWt $75+0.0088P)
PG&E Letter DCL-1 1-039 Development of B Component Development of Burial Escalation Developed from NUREG-1307 Revision 14 Table 2.1 "VALUES OF B SUB-X AS A FUNCTION OF LLW BURIAL SITE, WASTE VENDOR, AND YEAR" (Summary for non-Atlantic Compact)
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 Burial Costs (South Carolina) 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 1.678 2.007 2.494 11.408 11.873 12.824 12.771 15.852 15.886 18.129 18.732 19.034 21.937 22.477 23.030 23.597 25.231 26.332 27.292 28.358 PWR Restated to 1986 = 100 1.0000 1.1961 1.4863 6.7986 7.0757 7.6424 7.6108 9.4470 9.4672 0.0000 10.8039 0.0000 11.1633 11.3430 13.0733 13.3951 13.7247 14.0626 15.0364 15.6922 16.2646 16.8999 Table 2.1 Note ('c) From 7/1/95 through 6/30/2000 access was allowed for all states except North Carolina.
Effective 7/1/2000 rates are based on whether a waste generator is or is not a member of the Atlantic Compact.
2001 has no information in NUREG-1 307 Revision 12. 2001 is an estimate that is calculated by applying the average percent change between 2000 and 2002 and adding to the 2000 base.
2003 has no information in NUREG-1307 Revision 12. 2003 is an estimate that is calculated by applying the average percent change between 2002 and 2004 and adding to the 2002 base.
2005 has no information in NUREG-1 307 Revision 12. 2005 is an estimate that is calculated by applying the average percent change between 2004 and 2006 and adding to the 2004 base.
2007 has no information in NUREG-1 307 Revision 12. 2007 is an estimate that is calculated by applying the average percent change between 2004 and 2006 and adding to the 2006 base.
2009 has no information in NUREG-1307 Revision 13. 2009 is an estimate that is calculated by applying the average percent change between 2006 and 2008 and adding to the 2008 base.
2011 has no information in NUREG-1 307 Revision 14. 2011 is an estimate that is calculated by applying the average percent change between 2008 and 2010 and adding to the 2008 base.
Development of E Component PG&E Letter DCL-1 1-039 Page 1 of 7 Calculation of Energy Escalation Factor-Reference NUREG-1 307, Revision 14, Sectopm 3.2 Using Regional Indices SERIES ID: WPU0573 Light Fuel Oils (as of 03/02/11) and WPU0543 Industrial Electric Power (as of 03/02/11)
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 PPI for Fuels &
Related Products (1982 c 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 PPI for Light Fuel Oils (1982=100)
(F) = Light Fuel Oils REBASED TO 1986 = 100 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.
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 1.0000 1.0070 1.0018 0.9956 0.9991 1.0096 1.0175 1.0184 1.0184 0.9895 0.9869 0.9834 0.9658 0.9615 0.9650 0.9623 0.9790 0.9974 1.0175 1.0131 1.0114 0.9720 0.9562 0.9597 0.9527 0.9545 0.9545 0.9553 0.9536 1.0263 1.0350 1.0359 1.0377 1.0000 0.9562 0.9676 0.9807 0.9807 0.9834 0.9842 0.9947 1.0490 1.0701 1.0718 1.0727 1.0000 0.7610 0.6256 0.6073 0.5732 0.5451 0.4439 0.4890 0.5646 0.5256 0.5305 0.5561 0.6268 0.6476 0.6061 0.6341 0.6500 0.6720 0.6866 0.7244 0.6927 0.7232 0.7463 0.7085 0.6683 0.6280 0.6061 0.6500 0.6622 0.6171 0.5720.
0.5707 0.5598 0.5159 0.5756 0.6171 0.6695 0.6585 0.6988 0.7500 0.7012 0.6500 0.6427 0.6524 0.7232 Energy Escalation Factor (E) for PWR (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
Development of E Component PG&E Letter DCL-1 1-039 Page 2 of 7 Calculation of Energy Escalation Factor-Reference NUREG-1 307, Revision 14, Sectopm 3.2 Using Regional Indices SERIES ID: WPU0573 Light Fuel Oils (as of 03/02/11) and WPU0543 Industrial Electric Power (as of 03/02/11)
Oct-89 Nov-89 Dec-89 Jan-90 Feb-90 Mar-90 Apr-90 May-90 Jun-90 Jul-90 Aug-90 Sep-90 Oct-90 Nov-90 Dec-90 Jan-91 Feb-91 Mar-91 Apr-91 May-91 Jun-91 Jul-91 Aug-91 Sep-91 Oct-91 Nov-91 Dec-91 Jan-92 Feb-92 Mar-92 Apr-92 May-92 Jun-92 Jul-92 Aug-92 Sep-92 Oct-92 Nov-92 Dec-92 Jan-93 Feb-93 Mar-93 Apr-93 May-93 Jun-93 Jul-93 Aug-93 PPI for Fuels &
Related Products (1982 = 100)
(P) =Industrial Energy Power 117.2 113.5 114.2 114.9 115.0 115.4 115.1 117.0 123.9 124.4 124.6 125.0 121.2 120.2 118.9 124.2 124.3 124.3 124.7 128.2 132.6 134.5 133.8 133.8 128.3 123.1 125.1 125.9 125.3 125.8 124.8 128.5 134.8 135.6 135.1 135.9 131.2 125.5 126.7 127.1 126.4 126.7 126.8 127.5 136.9 137.1 137.2 PPI for Light Fuel Oils (1982=100)
(F)
Light Fuel Oils 64.0 64.4 68.1 85.3 59.4 60.4 61.0 58.4 53.0 51.6 72.3 87.3 104.8 98.9 89.3 82.9 74.3 61.6 60.0 59.6 57.6 58.1 62.1 65.4 67.6 71.0 62.2 54.4 57.3 56.0 59.0 62.1 65.4 64.6 63.3 65.6 68.2 64,2 59.4 59.0 60.4 63.2 62.4 62,6 60,8 57.0 54.4 REBASED TO 1986 = 100 PPI for Fuels &
PPI for Light Related Products Fuel Oils (1986 = 100)
(1986=100)
(P) =Industrial Energy Power (F) = Light Fuel Oils 1.0263 0.7805 0.9939 0.7854 1.0000 0.8305 1.0061 1.0402 1.0070 0.7244 1.0105 0.7366 1.0079 0.7439 1.0245 0.7122 1.0849 0.6463 1.0893 0.6293 1.0911 0.8817 1.0946 1.0646 1.0613 1.2780 1.0525 1.2061 1.0412 1.0890 1.0876 1.0110 1.0884 0.9061 1.0884 0.7512 1.0919 0.7317 1.1226 0.7268 1.1611 0.7024 1.1778 0.7085 1.1716 0.7573 1.1716 0.7976 1.1235 0.8244 1.0779 0.8659 1.0954 0.7585 1.1025 0.6634 1.0972 0.6988 1.1016 0.6829 1.0928 0.7195 1.1252 0.7573 1.1804 0.7976 1.1874 0.7878 1.1830 0.7720 1.1900 0.8000 1.1489 0.8317 1.0989 0.7829 1.1095 0.7244 1.1130 0.7195 1.1068 0.7366 1.1095 0.7707 1.1103 0.7610 1.1165 0.7634 1.1988 0.7415 1.2005 0.6951 1.2014 0.6634 Energy Escalation Factor (E) for PWR (Diablo Canyon) 0.9230 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
Development of E Component PG&E Letter DCL-1 1-039 Page 3 of 7 Calculation of Energy Escalation Factor-Reference NUREG-1307, Revision 14, Sectopm 3.2 Using Regional Indices SERIES ID: WPU0573 Light Fuel Oils (as of 03/02/11) and WPU0543 Industrial Electric Power (as of 03/02/11)
Sep-93 Oct-93 Nov-93 Dec-93 Jan-94 Feb-94 Mar-94 Apr-94 May-94 Jun-94 Jul-94 Aug-94 Sep-94 Oct-94 Nov-94 Dec-94 Jan-95 Feb-95 Mar-95 Apr-95 May-95 Jun-95 Jul-95 Aug-95 Sep-95 Oct-95 Nov-95 Dec-95 Jan-96 Feb-96 Mar-96 Apr-96 May-96 Jun-96 Jul-96 Aug-96 Sep-96 Oct-96 Nov-96 Dec-96 Jan-97 Feb-97 Mar-97 Apr-97 May-97 Jun-97 Jul-97 PPI for Fuels &
Related Products (1982 = 100)
(P) =Industrial Energy Power 137.6 131.9 126.3 126.0 126.2 125.9 125.8 125.4 126.0 133.5 134.5 134.5 134.9 129.1 127.0 127.4 127.6 128.0 128.3 126.4 130.2 135.3 136.6 136.5 133.7 131.4 127.6 127.7 127.9 127.1 127.8 129.1 135.0 137.5 136.0 136.2 136.2 131.2 127.1 127.7 128.3 128.1 128.2 127.3 129.7 135.1 135.9 PPI for Light Fuel Oils (1 982=1 00)
(F) = Light Fuel Oils 59.3 65.4 61.6 51.4 51.5 57.5 56.2 54.7 54.7 54.1 56.3 57.5 57.7 57.7 58.8 54.7 54.7 53.3 54.3 57.1 59.1 55.8 53.5 55.6 58.2 57.8 59.5 60.6 62.6 59.7 63.5 74.7 72.0 62.8 64.3 66.5 73.4 79.7 76.5 76.1 73.7 72.3 65.2 65.3 64.2 60.8 57.8 REBASED TO 1986 =100 PPI for Fuels &
PPI for Light Related Products Fuel Oils (1986 = 100)
(1986=100)
(P) =Industrial Energy Power (F) = Light Fuel Oils 1.2049 0.7232 1.1550 0.7976 1.1060 0.7512 1.1033 0.6268 1.1051 0.6280 1.1025 0.7012 1.1016 0.6854 1.0981 0.6671 1.1033 0.6671 1.1690 0.6598 1.1778 0.6866 1.1778 0.7012 1.1813 0.7037 1.1305 0.7037 1.1121 0.7171 1.1156 0.6671 1.1173 0.6671 1.1208 0.6500 1.1235 0.6622 1.1068 0.6963 1.1401 0.7207 1.1848 0.6805 1.1961 0.6524 1.1953 0.6780 1.1708 0.7098 1.1506 0.7049 1.1173 0.7256 1.1182 0.7390 1.1200 0.7634 1.1130 0.7280 1.1191 0.7744 1.1305 0.9110 1.1821 0.8780 1.2040 0.7659 1.1909 0.7841 1.1926 0.8110 1.1926 0.8951 1.1489 0.9720 1.1130 0.9329 1.1182 0.9280 1.1235 0.8988 1.1217 0.8817 1.1226 0.7951 1.1147 0.7963 1.1357 0.7829 1.1830 0.7415 1.1900 0.7049 Energy Escalation Factor (E) for PWR (Diablo Canyon) 1.0026 1.0049 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
Development of E Component PG&E Letter DCL-1 1-039 Page 4 of 7 Calculation of Energy Escalation Factor - Reference NUREG-1307, Revision 14, Sectopm 3.2 Using Regional Indices SERIES ID: WPU0573 Light Fuel Oils (as of 03/02/11) and WPU0543 Industrial Electric Power (as of 03/02/11)
Aug-97 Sep-97 Oct-97 Nov-97 Dec-97 Jan-98 Feb-98 Mar-98 Apr-98 May-98 Jun-98 Jul-98 Aug-98 Sep-98 Oct-98 Nov-98 Dec-98 Jan-99 Feb-99 Mar-99 Apr-99 May-99 Jun-99 Jul-99 Aug-99 Sep-99 Oct-99 Nov-99 Dec-99 Jan-00 Feb-00 Mar-00 Apr-00 May-00 Jun-00 Jul-00 Aug-00 Sep-00 Oct-00 Nov-00 Dec-00 Jan-01 Feb-01 Mar-01 Apr-01 May-01 Jun-01 PPI for Fuels &
Related Products (1982 = 100)
(P) =Industrial Energy Power 134.7 136.0 130.1 127.9 128.3 127.4 127.2 126.7 126.4 129.2 133.8 134.8 135.2 135.2 130.4 127.6 126.6 126.1 125.5 125.5 125.2 127.4 131.0 133.9 133.9 134.1 129.5 127.5 126.5 126.8 126.7 126.7 126.8 128.6 133.6 136.2 137.4 137.8 134.1 130.9 132.7 136.4 136.4 136.5 135.1 136.2 148.4 PPI for Light Fuel Oils (1982=100)
(F) = Light Fuel Oils 61.5 60.4 64.8 65.8 59.4 54.1 52.0 48.3.
50.2 50.0 46.3 45.0 44.0 48.3 47.4 46.2 38.8 40.9 38.2 42.8 52.5 52.6 52.4 58.7 63 67.6 65.5 71.3 72.9 75.3 87.9 89.7 83.1 82.9 86.2 88.7 91.6 110.1 108.6 108.4 100.6 96.1 91.6 83.1 86.2 94.2 90.2 REBASED TO 1986= 100 PPI for Fuels &
PPI for Light Related Products Fuel Oils (1986 = 100)
(1986=100)
(P) =Industrial Energy Power (F) = Light Fuel Oils 1.1795 0.7500 1.1909 0.7366 1.1392 0.7902 1.1200 0.8024 1.1235 0.7244 1.1156 0.6598 1.1138 0.6341 1.1095 0.5890 1.1068 0.6122 1.1313 0.6098 1.1716 0.5646 1.1804 0.5488 1.1839 0.5366 1.1839 0.5890 1.1419 0.5780 1.1173 0.5634 1.1086 0.4732 1.1042 0.4988 1.0989 0.4659 1.0989 0.5220 1.0963 0.6402 1.1156 0.6415 1.1471 0.6390 1.1725 0.7159 1.1725 0.7683 1.1743 0.8244 1.1340 0.7988 1.1165 0.8695 1.1077 0.8890 1.1103 0.9183 1.1095 1.0720 1.1095 1.0939 1.1103 1.0134 1.1261 1.0110 1.1699 1.0512 1.1926 1.0817 1.2032 1.1171 1.2067 1.3427 1.1743 1.3244 1.1462 1.3220 1.1620 1.2268 1.1944 1.1720 1.1944 1.1171 1.1953 1.0134 1.1830 1.0512 1.1926 1.1488 1.2995 1.1000 Energy Escalation Factor (E) for PWR (Diablo Canyon) 0.9991 1.0001 0.9927 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
Development of E Component PG&E Letter DCL-1 1-039 Page 5 of 7 Calculation of Energy Escalation Factor-Reference NUREG-1307, Revision 14, Sectopm 3.2 Using Regional Indices SERIES ID: WPU0573 Light Fuel Oils (as of 03/02/11) and WPU0543 Industrial Electric Power (as of 03/02/11)
Jul-01 Aug-01 Sep-01 Oct-01 Nov-01 Dec-01 Jan-02 Feb-02 Mar-02 Apr-02 May-02 Jun-02 Jul-02 Aug-02 Sep-02 Oct-02 Nov-02 Dec-02 Jan-03 Feb-03 Mar-03 Apr-03 May-03 Jun-03 Jul-03 Aug-03 Sep-03 Oct-03 Nov-03 Dec-03 Jan-04 Feb-04 Mar-04 Apr-04 May-04 Jun-04 Jul-04 Aug-04 Sep-04 Oct-04 Nov-04 Dec-04 Jan-05 Feb-05 Mar-05 Apr-05 May-05 PPI for Fuels &
Related Products (1982 = 100)
(P) =Industrial Energy Power 149.5 148.9 148.2 143.8 137.3 136.9 136.3 135.4 135.7 135.4 137.9 143.6 144.9 145.0 145.8 140.0 139.5 139.6 140.3 140.6 143.3 144.3 145.1 148.3 151.6 151.3 152.0 147.4 142.7 142.9 143.1 143.1 143.1 143.1 144.2 152.4 152.2 154.0 154.0 145.8 144.9 146.2 148.9 148.0 148.1 148.7 151.1 PPI for Light Fuel Oils (1 982=1 00)
(F) = Light Fuel Oils 81.3 83.2 93 76.8 70.5 56.6 58.3 59.6 69.1 76.4 75 71.4 75.5 77.9 89.5 95.1 82.8 84.6 95.7 120.4 128.9 98.3 85.5 87.2 90.1 94.1 88.2 97.8 93.0 95.8 106.8 100.8 107.8 115.2 116 111.5 119.3 131.1 136.8 161.7 153.6 133.8 138.5 146 169.4 170.9 165.3 REBASED TO 1986 = 100 PPI for Fuels &
PPI for Light Related Products Fuel Oils (1986 = 100)
(1986=100)
(P) =Industrial Energy Power (F) = Light Fuel Oils 1.3091 0.9915 1.3039 1.0146 1.2977 1.1341 1.2592 0.9366 1.2023 0.8598 1.1988 0.6902 1.1935 0.7110 1.1856 0.7268 1.1883 0.8427 1.1856 0.9317 1.2075 0.9146 1.2574 0.8707 1.2688 0.9207 1.2697 0.9500 1.2767 1.0915 1.2259 1.1598 1.2215 1.0098 1.2224 1.0317 1.2285 1.1671 1.2312 1.4683 1.2548 1.5720 1.2636 1.1988 1.2706 1.0427 1.2986 1.0634 1.3275 1.0988 1.3249 1.1476 1.3310 1.0756 1.2907 1.1927 1.2496 1.1341 1.2513 1.1683 1.2531 1.3024 1.2531 1.2293 1.2531 1.3146 1.2531 1.4049 1.2627 1.4146 1.3345 1.3598 1.3327 1.4549 1.3485 1.5988 1.3485 1.6683 1.2767 1.9720 1.2688 1.8732 1.2802 1.6317 1.3039 1.6890 1.2960 1.7805 1.2968 2.0659 1.3021 2.0841 1.3231 2.0159 Energy Escalation Factor (E) for PWR (Diablo Canyon) 1.1757 1.1824 1.2290 1.1237 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 1.2738 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
Development of E Component PG&E Letter DCL-1 1-039 Page 6 of 7 Calculation of Energy Escalation Factor - Reference NUREG-1 307, Revision 14, Sectopm 3.2 Using Regional Indices SERIES ID: WPU0573 Light Fuel Oils (as of 03/02/11) and WPU0543 Industrial Electric Power (as of 03/02/11)
Jun-05 Jul-05 Aug-05 Sep-05 Oct-05 Nov-05 Dec-05 Jan-06 Feb-06 Mar-06 Apr-06 May-06 Jun-06 Jul-06 Aug-06 Sep-06 Oct-06 Nov-06 Dec-06 Jan-07 Feb-07 Mar-07 Apr-07 May-07 Jun-07 Jul-07 Aug-07 Sep-07 Oct-07 Nov-07 Dec-07 Jan-08 Feb-08 Mar-08 Apr-08 May-08 Jun-08 Jul-08 Aug-08 Sep-08 Oct-08 Nov-08 Dec-08 Jan-09 Feb-09 Mar-09 Apr-09 PPI for Fuels &
Related Products (1982 = 100)
(P) =Industrial Energy Power 159.7 162.1 162.5 162.8 159.5 161.1 161.4 167.0 168.6 167.4 169.6 170.8 181.2 181.9 180.2 181.0 171.2 167.2 167.8 171.9 175.7 172.1 173.1 179.2 186.7 187.0 187.6 188.4 182.7 180.3 180.0 181.9 180.0 183.1 185.2 189.5 191.9 196.1 197.1 195.9 193.0 187.7 188.3 190.3 190.3 187.6 186.9 PPI for Light Fuel Oils (1982=100)
(F) = Light Fuel Oils 180.6 186.2 194.5 209.9 252.0 199.1 193.6 191.8 190.0 199.2 221.9 231.4 238.1 231.6 241.4 203.1 198.1 198.2 200.4 180.0 191.5 215.1 231.8 225.3 222.4 237.8 225.5 238.9 243.3 288.2 266.7 273.8 280.2 339.6 352.5 384.9 410.5 423.8 343.9.
335.1 279.0 218.2 163.0 159.8 145.6 136.8 159.9 REBASED TO 1986 = 100 PPI for Fuels &
PPI for Light Related Products Fuel Oils (1986 = 100)
(1986=100)
(P) =Industrial Energy Power (F) = Light Fuel Oils 1.3984 2.2024 1.4194 2.2707 1.4229 2.3720 1.4256 2.5598 1.3967 3.0732 1.4107 2.4280 1.4133 2.3610 1.4623 2.3390 1.4764 2.3171 1.4658 2.4293 1.4851 2.7061 1.4956 2.8220 1.5867 2.9037 1.5928 2.8244 1.5779 2.9439 1.5849 2.4768 1.4991 2.4159 1.4641 2.4171 1.4694 2.4439 1.5053 2.1951 1.5385 2.3354 1.5070 2.6232 1.5158 2.8268 1.5692 2.7476 1.6349 2.7122 1.6375 2.9000 1.6427 2.7500 1.6497 2.9134 1.5998 2.9671 1.5788 3.5146 1.5762 3.2524 1.5928 3.3390 1.5762 3.4171 1.6033 4.1415 1.6217 4.2988 1.6594 4.6939 1.6804 5.0061 1.7172 5.1683 1.7259 4.1939 1.7154 4.0866 1.6900 3.4024 1.6436 2.6610 1.6489 1.9878 1.6664 1.9488 1.6664 1.7756 1.6427 1.6683 1.6366 1.9500 Energy Escalation Factor (E) for PWR (Diablo Canyon) 1.7361 1.7770 1.8215 1.9019 2.1008 1.8380 1,8113 1.8306 1.8295 1.8705 1.9979 2.0527 2.1398 2.1101 2.1516 1.9595 1.8842 1.8643 1.8787 1.7950 1.8732 1.9758 2.0664 2.0641 2.0873 2.1677 2.1078 2.1805 2.1741 2.3919 2.2802 2.3262 2.3494 2.6693 2.7461 2.9339 3.0772 3.1666 2.7625 2.7113 2.4092 2.0709 1.7912 1.7850 1.7123 1.6535 1.7682
Development of E Component PG&E Letter DCL-11-039 Page 7 of 7 Calculation of Energy Escalation Factor-Reference NUREG-1307, Revision 14, Sectopm 3.2 Using Regional Indices SERIES ID: WPU0573 Light Fuel Oils (as of 03/02/11) and WPU0543 Industrial Electric Power (as of 03/02/11)
May-09 Jun-09 Jul-09 Aug-09 Sep-09 Oct-09 Nov-09 Dec-09 Jan-10 Feb-10 Mar-10 Apr-10 May-10 Jun-10 Jul-10 Aug-10 Sep-10 Oct-10 Nov-10 PPI for Fuels &
Related Products (1982 = 100)
(P) =Industrial Energy Power 190.5 193.3 196.2 194.7 194.9 189.9 186.0 186.0 186.3 186.1 189.0 188.8 192.0 197.8 199.8 200.8 200.0 194.7 192.9 PPI for Light Fuel Oils (1982=100)
(F) = Light Fuel Oils 158.6 183.7 165.2 196.1 186.6 193.3 207.8 197.5 220.7 200.2 217.0 231.5 226.0 212.4 209.3 221.4 220.0 236.0 245.5 REBASED TO 1986 = 100 PPI for Fuels &
PPI for Light Related Products Fuel Oils (1986 = 100)
(1986=100)
(P) =Industrial Energy Power (F) = Light Fuel Oils 1.6681 1.9341 1.6926 2.2402 1.7180 2.0146 1.7049 2.3915 1.7067 2.2756 1.6629 2.3573 1.6287 2.5341 1.6287 2.4085 1.6313 2.6915 1.6296 2.4415 1.6550 2.6463 1.6532 2.8232 1.6813 2.7561 1.7320 2.5902 1.7496 2.5524 1.7583 2.7000 1.7513 2.6829 1.7049 2.8780 1.6891 2.9939 Energy Escalation Factor (E) for PWR (Diablo Canyon) 1.7799 1.9226 1.8426 1.9933 1.9456 1.9545 2.0090 1.9562 2.0766 1.9706 2.0714 2.1446 2.1327 2.0925 2.0868 2.1538 2.1426 2.1976 2.2371 PG&E Letter DCL-1 1-039 Page 1 of 7 Development of L Component Calculation of Labor Escalation Factor - Reference NUREG-1 307, Revision 14, Section 3.1 Using Regional Indices SERIES ID: CIU20100000002401 (as of 03/02/11)
January 1986 adjusted to reflect NUREG 1307 Revision 14 Scaling Factor for West Labor (Page 7).
Note 1: The Base Labor factor was reindexed in December 2005, at which time the index was reset to 100.
Employment Cost Indust West Region Labor Private Industry Escalation (1989 = 100)
Factor Jan-86 89.8 1.00000 Feb-86 Mar-86 Apr-86 90.8 1.01114 May-86 Jun-86 Jul-86 91.2 1.01559 Aug-86 Sep-86 Oct-86 91.6 1.02004 Nov-86 Dec-86 Jan-87 92.5 1.03007 Feb-87 Mar-87 Apr-87 92.6 1.03118 May-87 Jun-87 Jul-87 93.7 1.04343 Aug-87 Sep-87 Oct-87 94.1 1.04788 Nov-87 Dec-87 Jan-88 95.4 1.06236 Feb-88 Mar-88 Apr-88 96.3 1.07238 May-88 Jun-88 Jul-88 97 1.08018 Aug-88 Sep-88 Oct-88 97.7 1.08797 Nov-88 Dec-88 Jan-89 98.8 1.10022 Feb-89 Mar-89 Apr-89 100 1.11359 May-89 Jun-89 Jul-89 101 1.12472 Aug-89 Sep-89 PG&E Letter DCL-1 1-039 Page 2 of 7 Development of L Component Calculation of Labor Escalation Factor-Reference NUREG-1 307, Revision 14, Section 3.1 Using Regional Indices SERIES ID: CIU20100000002401 (as of 03/02/11)
January 1986 adjusted to reflect NUREG 1307 Revision 14 Scaling Factor for West Labor (Page 7).
Note 1: The Base Labor factor was reindexed in December 2005, at which time the index was reset to 100.
Employment Cost Indust West Region Labor Private Industry Escalation (1989 = 100)
Factor Oct-89 101.8 1.13363 Nov-89 Dec-89 Jan-90 103.3 1.15033 Feb-90 Mar-90 Apr-90 104.5 1.16370 May-90 Jun-90 Jul-90 105.6 1.17595 Aug-90 Sep-90 Oct-90 106.3 1.18374 Nov-90 Dec-90 Jan-91 107.5 1.19710 Feb-91 Mar-91 Apr-91 108.9 1.21269 May-91 Jun-91 Jul-91 110 1.22494 Aug-91 Sep-91 Oct-91 110.9 1.23497 Nov-91 Dec-91 Jan-92 111.9 1.24610 Feb-92 Mar-92 Apr-92 112.9 1.25724 May-92 Jun-92 Jul-92 114.1 1.27060 Aug-92 Sep-92 Oct-92 114.9 1.27951 Nov-92 Dec-92 Jan-93 116.2 1.29399 Feb-93 Mar-93 Apr-93 116.4 1.29621 May-93 Jun-93 PG&E Letter DCL-1 1-039 Page 3 of 7 Development of L Component Calculation of Labor Escalation Factor - Reference NUREG-1 307, Revision 14, Section 3.1 Using Regional Indices SERIES ID: CIU20100000002401 (as of 03/02/11)
January 1986 adjusted to reflect NUREG 1307 Revision 14 Scaling Factor for West Labor (Page 7).
Note 1: The Base Labor factor was reindexed in December 2005, at which time the index was reset to 100.
Employment Cost Indust West Region Labor Private Industry Escalation (1989 = 100)
Factor Jul-93 117.8 1.31180 Aug-93 Sep-93 Oct-93 118.1 1.31514 Nov-93 Dec-93 Jan-94 119.4 1.32962 Feb-94 Mar-94 Apr-94 120.5 1.34187 May-94 Jun-94 Jul-94 121.3 1.35078 Aug-94 Sep-94 Oct-94 121.7 1.35523 Nov-94 Dec-94 Jan-95 122.6 1.36526 Feb-95 Mar-95 Apr-95 123.4 1.37416 May-95 Jun-95 Jul-95 123.9 1.37973 Aug-95 Sep-95 Oct-95 125 1.39198 Nov-95 Dec-95 Jan-96 125.9 1.40200 Feb-96 Mar-96 Apr-96 127.3 1.41759 May-96 Jun-96 Jul-96 128.3 1.42873 Aug-96 Sep-96 Oct-96 128.9 1.43541 Nov-96 Dec-96 Jan-97 130.3 1.45100 Feb-97 Mar-97 PG&E Letter DCL-1 1-039 Page 4 of 7 Development of L Component Calculation of Labor Escalation Factor-Reference NUREG-1 307, Revision 14, Section 3.1 Using Regional Indices SERIES ID: CIU20100000002401 (as of 03/02/11)
January 1986 adjusted to reflect NUREG 1307 Revision 14 Scaling Factor for West Labor (Page 7).
Note 1: The Base Labor factor was reindexed in December 2005, at which time'the index was reset to 100.
Employment Cost Indust West Region Labor Private Industry Escalation (1989 = 100)
Factor Apr-97 131.4 1.46325 May-97 Jun-97 Jul-97 132.5 1.47550 Aug-97 Sep-97 Oct-97 133.4 1.48552 Nov-97 Dec-97 Jan-98 135.2 1.50557 Feb-98 Mar-98 Apr-98 136.6 1.52116 May-98 Jun-98 Jul-98 138.5 1.54232 Aug-98 Sep-98 Oct-98 140 1.55902 Nov-98 Dec-98 Jan-99 140.3 1.56236 Feb-99 Mar-99 Apr-99 142.1 1.58241 May-99 Jun-99 Jul-99 143.3 1.59577 Aug-99 Sep-99 Oct-99 144.7 1.61136 Nov-99 Dec-99 Jan-00 147 1.63697 Feb-00 Mar-00 Apr-00 148.8 1.65702 May-00 Jun-00 Jul-00 150.8 1.67929 Aug-00 Sep-00 Oct-00 151.8 1.69042 Nov-00 Dec-00 PG&E Letter DCL-1 1-039 Page 5 of 7 Development of L Component Calculation of Labor Escalation Factor-Reference NUREG-1 307, Revision 14, Section 3.1 Using Regional Indices SERIES ID: CIU20100000002401 (as of 03/02/11)
January 1986 adjusted to reflect NUREG 1307 Revision 14 Scaling Factor for West Labor (Page 7).
Note 1: The Base Labor factor was reindexed in December 2005, at which time the index was reset to 100.
Employment Cost Indust West Region Labor Private Industry Escalation (1989 = 100)
Factor Jan-01 84.1 0.93653 Feb-01 Mar-01 Apr-01 85 0.94655 May-01 Jun-01 Jul-01 85.9 0.95657 Aug-01 Sep-01 Oct-01 86.9 0.96771 Nov-01 Dec-01 Jan-02 87.4 0.97327 Feb-02 Feb-02 Mar-02 Apr-02 88.5 0.98552 May-02 Jun-02 Jul-02 89.1 0.99220 Aug-02 Sep-02 Oct-02 89.8 1.00000 Nov-02 Dec-02 Jan-03 90.9 1.01225 Feb-03 Mar-03 Apr-03 92 1.02450 May-03 Jun-03 Jul-03 93.2 1.03786 Aug-03 Sep-03 Oct-03 93.8 1.04454 Nov-03 Dec-03 Jan-04 95.3 1.06125 Feb-04 Mar-04 Apr-04 96.2 1.07127 May-04 Jun-04 Jul-04 96.9 1.07906 Aug-04 PG&E Letter DCL-1 1-039 Page 6 of 7 Development of L Component Calculation of Labor Escalation Factor-Reference NUREG-1 307, Revision 14, Section 3.1 Using Regional Indices SERIES ID: CIU20100000002401 (as of 03/02/11)
January 1986 adjusted to reflect NUREG 1307 Revision 14 Scaling Factor for West Labor (Page 7).
Note 1: The Base Labor factor was reindexed in December 2005, at which time the index was reset to 100.
Employment Cost Indust West Region Labor Private Industry Escalation (1989 = 100)
Factor Sep-04 Oct-04 97.4 1.08463 Nov-04 Dec-04 Jan-05 98.4 1.09577 Feb-05 Mar-05 Apr-05 99.3 1.10579 May-05 Jun-05 Jul-05 99.7 1.11024 Aug-05 Sep-05 Oct-05 (Note 1) 100 2.06000 Nov-05 Dec-05 Jan-06 100.6 2.07236 Feb-06 Mar-06 Apr-06 101.8 2.09708 May-06 Jun-06 Jul-06 102.5 2.11150 Aug-06 Sep-06 Oct-06 103 2.12180 Nov-06 Dec-06 Jan-07 104.2 2.14652 Feb-07 Mar-07 Apr-07 104.9 2.16094 May-07 Jun-07 Jul-07 105.7 2.17742 Aug-07 Sep-07 Oct-07 106.5 2.19390 Nov-07 Dec-07 Jan-08 107.8 2.22068 Feb-08 Mar-08 Apr-08 108.4 2.23304 May-08 PG&E Letter DCL-1 1-039 Page 7 of 7 Development of L Component Calculation of Labor Escalation Factor - Reference NUREG-1 307, Revision 14, Section 3.1 Using Regional Indices SERIES ID: CIU20100000002401 (as of 03/02/11)
January 1986 adjusted to reflect NUREG 1307 Revision 14 Scaling Factor for West Labor (Page 7).
Note 1: The Base Labor factor was reindexed in December 2005, at which time the index was reset to 100.
Employment Cost Indust West Region Labor Private Industry Escalation (1989 = 100)
Factor Jun-08 Jul-08 Aug-08 Sep-08 Oct-08 Nov-08 Dec-08 Jan-09 Feb-09 Mar-09 Apr-09 May-09 Jun-09 Jul-09 Aug-09 Sep-09 Oct-09 Nov-09 Dec-09 Jan-10 Feb-10 Mar-10 Apr-10 May-10 Jun-10 Jul-1 0 Aug-10 Sep-10 Oct-10 Nov-10 Dec-10 Jan-i 1 109.3 109.4 109.9 110.0 110.3 110.6 111.4 111.7 112.3 112.5 112.7 2.25158 2.25364 2.26394 2.26600 2.27218 2.27836 2.29484 2.30102 2.31338 2.31750 2.32162 Jan-11 is an estimate based on difference between July 2010 and October 2010 and adding to the October 2010 base.
PG&E Letter DCL-1 1-039 Table C-1 and Table C-2 Diablo Canyon Power Plant Unit 1 Decon Decommissioning Cost Estimate Table C-1 and Table C-2 Diablo Canyon Power Plant Unit 2 Decon Decommissioning Cost Estimate
PG&E Letter DCL-1 1-039 Decommissioning Cost Analysis for the Diablo Canyon Power Plant (TLG Services, Inc.)
Document P01-1604-003, Rev. 0 DECOMMISSIONING COST ANALYSIS for the DIABLO CANYON POWER PLANT prepared for Pacific Gas and Electric Company prepared by TLG Services, Inc.
Bridgewater, Connecticut March 2009
Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document P01-1604-003, Rev. 0 Page ii of xvii APPROVALS Project Manager Project Engineer Technical Manager Quality Assurance Manager Geoffr G riffith Date J
n A. Carlson Date
- w.
s/,
9 rancis W. Sey e
ate sepý J.,Idler Date TLG Services, Inc.
Diablo Canyon Power Plant Document P01-1604-003, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Page iii of xvii TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION PAGE EXECU TIVE SUM M ARY..................................................................................
vii-xvii
- 1.
INTRODU CTION.....................................................................................................
1-1 1.1 Objectives of Study...........................................................................................
1-1 1.2 Site Description.................................................................................................
1-1 1.3 Regulatory Guidance.......................................................................................
1-2 1.3.1 Nuclear W aste Policy Act......................................................................
1-4 1.3.2 Low -Level Radioactive W aste Acts......................................................
1-5 1.3.3 Radiological Criteria for License Term ination....................................
1-7
- 2.
DECOM M ISSION IN G ALTERNATIVES..............................................................
2-1 2.1 DECON..............................................................................................................
2-2 2.1.1 Period 1 - Preparations.........................................................................
2-2 2.1.2 Period 2 - Decom m issioning Operations..............................................
2-4 2.1.3 Period 3 --Site Restoration....................................................................
2-7 2.1.4 ISFSI Operations and Decom m issioning............................................
2-8 2.2 SAFSTOR..........................................................................................................
2-9 2.2.1 Period 1 - Preparations.......................................................................
2-10 2.2.2 Period 2 - Dorm ancy............................................................................
2-11 2.2.3 Periods 3 and 4 - Delayed Decom m issioning.....................................
2-12 2.2.4 Period 5 - Site Restoration..................................................................
2-13
- 3.
COST ESTIM A TE.....................................................................................................
3-1 3.1 Basis of Estim ate..............................................................................................
3-1 3.2 M ethodology......................................................................................................
3-1 3.3 Impact of Decommissioning Multiple Reactor Units.....................................
3-3 3.4 Financial Com ponents of the Cost M odel.......................................................
3-4 3.4.1 Contingency...........................................................................................
3-4 3.4.2 Financial Risk........................................................................................
3-6 3.5 Site-Specific Considerations.............................................................................
3-7 3.5.1 Spent Fuel M anagem ent.......................................................................
3-8 3.5.2 Reactor Vessel and Internal Com ponents.........................................
3-10 3.5.3 Prim ary System Com ponents.............................................................
3-11 3.5.4 Retired Com ponents............................................................................
3-13 3.5.5 M ain Turbine and Condenser.............................................................
3-13 3.5.6 Transportation M ethods.....................................................................
3-13 3.5.7 Low -Level Radioactive W aste Disposal.............................................
3-14 3.5.8 Site Conditions Following Decom m issioning....................................
3-15 TLG Services, Inc.
Diablo Canyon Power Plant Document P01-1604-003, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Page iv of xvii TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued)
SECTION PAGE 3.6 A ssum ptions....................................................................................................
3-16 3.6.1 E stim ating B asis.................................................................................
3-16 3.6.2 L abor C osts..........................................................................................
3-16 3.6.3 D esign Conditions................................................................................
3-17 3.6.4 G eneral.................................................................................................
3-17 3.7 Cost Estim ate Sum m ary...............................................................................
3-20
- 4.
SCH ED U LE ESTIM ATE........................................................................................
4-1 4.1 Schedule Estim ate Assum ptions.....................................................................
4-1 4.2 P roject Schedule................................................................................................
4-2
- 5.
RAD IOA CTIVE W A STES........................................................................................
5-1 6.
R E S U L T S.................................................................................................................
6-1
- 7.
R E F E R E N C E S..........................................................................................................
7-1 TABLES DECON Cost Summary, Decommissioning Cost Elements...........................
xvi SAFSTOR Cost Summary, Decommissioning Cost Elements...................... xvii 3.1a Unit 1, DECON Alternative, Schedule of Total Annual Expenditures....... 3-22 3.lb Unit 2, DECON Alternative, Schedule of Total Annual Expenditures....... 3-23 3.2a Unit 1, SAFSTOR Alternative, Schedule of Total Annual Expenditures.... 3-24 3.2b Unit 2, SAFSTOR Alternative, Schedule of Total Annual Expenditures.... 3-26 5.1 Unit 1 DECON Alternative, Decommissioning Waste Summary.................. 5-3 5.2 Unit 2 DECON Alternative, Decommissioning Waste Summary.................. 5-4 5.3 Unit 1 SAFSTOR Alternative, Decommissioning Waste Summary.............. 5-5 5.4 Unit 2 SAFSTOR Alternative, Decommissioning Waste Summary.............. 5-6 6.1 Unit 1 DECON Alternative, Decommissioning Cost Elements..................... 6-4 6.2 Unit 2 DECON Alternative, Decommissioning Cost Elements..................... 6-5 6.3 Unit 1 SAFSTOR Alternative, Decommissioning Cost Elements.................. 6-6 6.4 Unit 2 SAFSTOR Alternative, Decommissioning Cost Elements.................. 6-7 TLG Services, Inc.
Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document P01-1604-003, Rev. 0 Page v of xvii TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued)
SECTION PAGE FIGURES 4.1 4.2 4.3 Activity Schedule..............................................................................................
4-3 Decom m issioning Tim eline, DECON..............................................................
4-7 Decom m issioning Tim eline, SAFSTOR..........................................................
4-8 APPENDICES A.
B.
C.
D.
Unit Cost Factor Development.........................................................................
A-1 Unit Cost Factor Listing.................................................................................
B-1 Detailed Cost Analysis, DECON.....................................................................
C-1 Detailed Cost Analysis, SAFSTOR..................................................................
D-1 TLG Services, Inc.
Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document P01-1604-003, Rev. 0 Page vi of xvii REVISION LOG No.
CR No.
Date
.Item Revised Reason for Revision, 0
03-27-09 Original Issue TLG Services, Inc.
Diablo Canyon Power Plant Document P01-1604-003, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Page vii of xvii EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY
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 analysis relies upon site-specific, technical information from an evaluation prepared in 2005,[1] updated to reflect current assumptions pertaining to the disposition of the nuclear plant and relevant industry experience in undertaking such projects. The current estimates are designed to provide Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E), with sufficient information to assess the plant owners' financial obligations, as they pertain to the eventual decommissioning of the nuclear plant.
The primary goal of the decommissioning is the removal and disposal of the contaminated systems and structures so that the plant's operating licenses can be terminated. The analysis recognizes that spent fuel will be stored at the site in the plant's storage pools and in an independent spent fuel storage installation (ISFSI) until such time that it can be transferred to the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) federal repository. Consequently, the estimates also include those costs to manage and subsequently decommission these interim storage facilities.
The currently projected cost to decommission the station, assuming the DECON alternative, is estimated at $1,828.3 million, as reported in 2008 dollars. An estimate for the SAFSTOR alternative is also provided.
The estimates 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 estimates incorporate a
minimum cooling period of approximately 12 years for the spent fuel that resides in the storage pools when operations cease.[21 In both scenarios that were analyzed, any residual fuel remaining in the pools after the 12-year period is relocated to the ISFSI to await transfer to a DOE facility.
The estimates also include the dismantling of site structures and non-essential facilities and the limited restoration of the site.
1 "Decommissioning Cost Analysis for the Diablo Canyon Power Plant," Document No. P01-1513-004, Rev. 0, TLG Services, Inc., June 2005 2
The current Part 72 ISFSI license does not allow dry cask storage of spent fuel with burnups above 45,000 MWD/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 will require longer decay times (12 years) before storing the spent fuel in the casks.
TLG Services, Inc.
Diablo Canyon Power Plant Document P01-1604-003, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Page viii of xvii Alternatives and Regulations The ultimate objective of the decommissioning process is to reduce the inventory of contaminated and activated material so that the license can be terminated. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC or Commission) provided initial decommissioning requirements in its rule adopted on June 27, 1988J 3] In this rule, the NRC set forth financial criteria for decommissioning licensed nuclear power facilities.
The regulations addressed planning
- needs, timing, funding
- methods, and environmental review requirements for decommissioning. The rule also defined three decommissioning alternatives as being acceptable to the NRC: DECON, SAFSTOR, and ENTOMB.
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."[4]
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."[51 Decommissioning is to be completed within 60 years, although longer time periods will be considered when necessary to protect public health and safety.
ENTOMB is defined as "the alternative in which radioactive contaminants are encased in a structurally long-lived material, such as concrete; the entombed structure is appropriately maintained and continued surveillance is carried out until the radioactive material decays to a level permitting unrestricted release of the property."[6] As with the SAFSTOR alternative, decommissioning is currently required to be completed within 60 years.
The 60-year restriction has limited the practicality for the ENTOMB alternative at commercial reactors that generate significant amounts of long-lived radioactive material. In 1997, the Commission directed its staff 3
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 4
Ibid. Page FR24022, Column 3 5
Ibid.
6 Ibid. Page FR24023, Column 2 TLG Services, Inc.
Diablo Canyon Power Plant Document P01 -1604-003, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Page ix of xvii to re-evaluate this alternative and identify the technical requirements and regulatory actions that would be necessary for entombment to become a viable option. The resulting evaluation provided several recommendations, however, rulemaking has been deferred pending the completion of additional research studies, for example, on engineered barriers.
In
- 1996, the NRC published revisions to the general requirements for decommissioning nuclear power plants to clarify ambiguities and codify procedures and terminology as a means of enhancing efficiency and uniformity in the decommissioning process.[71 The amendments allow for greater public participation and better define the transition process from operations to decommissioning.
Regulatory Guide 1.184, issued in July 2000, further described the methods and procedures acceptable to the NRC staff for implementing the requirements of the 1996 revised rule relating to the initial activities and major phases of the decommissioning process. The costs and schedules presented in this analysis follow the general guidance and processes described in the amended regulations. The format and content of the estimates is also consistent with the recommendations of Regulatory Guide 1.202, issued in February 2005.[81 Decommissioning Scenarios Two decommissioning scenarios are evaluated for the two nuclear units. The scenarios selected are representative of alternatives available to the owner and are defgred as follows:
DECON: The operating licenses for Units 1 and 2 currently expire in November 2024 and August 2025, respectively. The first scenario assumes that decommissioning activities at the two units 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 to facilitate decontamination and dismantling activities within the fuel handling building. 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 2051.
SAFSTOR: The units are placed into safe-storage in the second scenario. Spent fuel remaining in the spent fuel storage pools after a minimum cooling period of 12 years is transferred to the ISFSI for interim storage. The length of 7
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 8
"Standard Format and Content of Decommissioning Cost Estimates for Nuclear Power Reactors,"
Regulatory Guide 1.202, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, February 2005 TLG Services, Inc.
Diablo Canyon Power Plant Document P01-1604-003, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Page x of xvii SAFSTOR dormancy is established to schedule the beginning of Unit 1 decommissioning activities with the final spent fuel shipment from the ISFSI.
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.
Methodology The methodology used to develop the estimates described within this document follows the basic approach originally presented in the cost estimating guidelines[9I developed by the Atomic Industrial Forum (now Nuclear Energy Institute). This reference describes a unit factor method for determining decommissioning activity costs. The unit factors used in this analysis incorporates site-specific costs and the latest available information on worker productivity in decommissioning.
The estimates also reflect lessons learned from 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 engineering for the Pathfinder, Shoreham, Rancho Seco, Trojan, Yankee Rowe, Big Rock Point, Maine Yankee, Humboldt Bay-3, Connecticut Yankee and San Onofre-1 nuclear units have provided additional insight into the process, the regulatory aspects, and technical challenges of decommissioning commercial nuclear units.
An activity duration critical path is used to determine the total decommissioning program schedule. The schedule is relied upon in calculating the carrying costs, which include program management, administration, field engineering, equipment rental, and support services, such as quality control and security.
Contingency Consistent with cost estimating practice, contingencies are applied to the decontamination and dismantling costs developed as "specific provision for unforeseeable elements of cost within the defined project scope, particularly important where previous experience relating estimates and actual costs has shown that unforeseeable events which will increase costs are likely to occur."[10] The cost elements in the estimates are based on ideal conditions; therefore, the types of unforeseeable events that are almost certain to occur in decommissioning, based on industry experience, are addressed through a percentage contingency applied on a 9
T.S. LaGuardia et al., "Guidelines for Producing Commercial Nuclear Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Estimates," AIF[NESP-036, May 1986 10 Project and Cost Engineers' Handbook, Second Edition, American Association of Cost Engineers, Marcel Dekker, Inc., New York, New York, p. 239.
TLG Services, Inc.
Diablo Canyon Power Plant Document P01-1604-003, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Page xi of xvii 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 [I'] 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 funds are expected to be fully expended throughout the program. As such, inclusion of contingency is necessary to provide assurance that sufficient funding will be available to accomplish the intended tasks.
Low-Level Radioactive Waste Disposal The contaminated and activated material generated in the decontamination and dismantling of a commercial nuclear reactor is classified as low-level (radioactive) waste, although not all of the material is suitable for "shallow-land" disposal. [12] With the passage of the "Low-Level Radioactive Waste Policy Act" in 1980, [131 and its Amendments of 1985, [14] the states became ultimately responsible for the disposition of low-level radioactive waste (LLRW) generated within their own borders.
Until recently, there were two facilities available to PG&E for the disposal of low-level radioactive waste generated by Diablo Canyon. As of July 1, 2008, however, the facility in Barnwell, South Carolina was closed to generators outside the Atlantic Compact (comprised of the states of Connecticut, New Jersey and South Carolina). This leaves the facility in Clive, Utah, operated by EnergySolutions, as the only available destination for low-level radioactive waste requiring controlled disposal.
For the purpose of this analysis, the EnergySolutions' facility is used as the disposal site for the majority of the radioactive waste (Class A). There are no currently operating disposal facilities available to PG&E that have a license to dispose of the more highly radioactive waste (Classes B and C), for example, generated in the dismantling of the reactor vessel. As such, waste disposal costs and waste transportation distances must be estimated. The disposal cost and transportation distance for low-level radioactive waste is based on a study sponsored by PG&E and Southern California Edison Company, "Establishing an Appropriate Disposal Rate for 11 "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).
12 U.S. Code of Federal Regulations, Title 10, Part 61, "Licensing Requirements for Land Disposal of Radioactive Waste" 13 "Low-Level Radioactive Waste Policy Act of 1980," Public Law 96-573, 1980.
14 "Low-Level Radioactive Waste Policy Amendments Act of 1985," Public Law 99-240, 1986.
TLG Services, Inc.
Diablo Canyon Power Plant Document P01-1604-003, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Page xii of xvii Low Level Radioactive Waste During Decommissioning."[15I The study was done to reflect the California Public Utilities Commission's desire for these owners to conservatively estimate their nuclear decommissioning LLRW disposal rates.
The dismantling of the components residing closest to the reactor core generates radioactive waste considered unsuitable for shallow-land disposal (i.e., low-level radioactive waste with concentrations of radionuclides that exceed the limits established by the NRC for Class C radioactive waste (GTCC)). The Low-Level Radioactive Waste Policy Amendments Act of 1985 assigned the federal government the responsibility for the disposal of this material. The Act also stated that the beneficiaries of the activities resulting in the generation of such radioactive waste bear all reasonable costs of disposing of such waste. However, to date, the federal government has not identified a cost for disposing of GTCC or a schedule for acceptance. 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 the same type of canister used for spent fuel. The GTCC material is either stored with the spent fuel at the ISFSI 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).
A significant portion of the waste material generated during decommissioning may only be potentially contaminated by radioactive materials. This waste can be analyzed on site or shipped off site to licensed facilities for further analysis, for processing and/or for conditioning/recovery. Reduction in the volume of low-level radioactive waste requiring disposal in a licensed low-level radioactive waste disposal facility can be accomplished through a variety of methods, including analyses and surveys or decontamination to eliminate the portion of waste that does not require disposal as radioactive waste, compaction, incineration or metal melt. The estimates for Diablo Canyon reflect the savings from waste recovery/volume reduction.
High-Level Radioactive Waste Management Congress passed the "Nuclear Waste Policy Act"[16] (NWPA) in 1982, assigning the federal government's long-standing responsibility for disposal of the spent nuclear fuel created by the commercial nuclear generating plants to the DOE. The NWPA provided that DOE would enter into contracts with utilities in which DOE would promise to take the utilities' spent fuel and high-level radioactive waste and utilities would pay 15 "Establishing an Appropriate Disposal Rate for Low Level Radioactive Waste During Decommissioning", Robert A Snyder NEWEX, Revision 0, July 2008 (provided by PG&E).
16 "Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982 and Amendments," DOE's Office of Civilian Radioactive Management, 1982 TLG Services, Inc.
Diablo Canyon Power Plant Document P01-1604-003, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Page xiii of xvii the cost of the disposition services for that material. The NWPA, along with the individual contracts with the utilities, specified that the DOE was to begin accepting spent fuel by January 31, 1998.
Since the original legislation, the DOE has announced several delays in the program schedule. By January 1998, the DOE had failed to accept any spent fuel or high level waste, as required by the NWPA and utility contracts. Delays continue and, as a result, generators have initiated legal action against the DOE in an attempt to obtain compensation for DOE's breach of contract.
Operation of DOE's yet-to-be constructed repository is contingent upon the review and approval of the facility's license application by the NRC and the successful resolution of pending litigation. The DOE submitted its license application to the NRC on June 3, 2008, seeking authorization to construct the repository at Yucca Mountain, Nevada.
Assuming a timely review and adequate funding, the DOE expects that receipt of fuel could begin as early as 2020. [171 It is generally necessary that spent fuel be cooled and stored for a minimum period at the generating site prior to transfer. As such, the NRC requires that licensees establish a program to manage and provide funding for the management of all irradiated fuel at the reactor site until title of the fuel is transferred to the Secretary of Energy, pursuant to 10 CFR Part 50.54(bb).[18] This funding requirement is fulfilled through inclusion of certain cost elements in the decommissioning estimates, for example, associated with the isolation and continued operation of the spent fuel pools and the ISFSI.
The DOE's generator allocation/receipt schedules are based upon the oldest fuel receiving the highest priority. For purposes of this analysis, acceptance of commercial spent fuel by the DOE is expected to begin in 2020. The first assemblies removed from the Diablo Canyon site are assumed to be in 2028. With an estimated, maximum rate of transfer of 3,000 metric tons of uranium (MTU)/year, completion of the removal of fuel from the site is projected to be in the year 2051.
Consequently, costs are included within the estimates for the long-term caretaking of the spent fuel at the Diablo Canyon site until the year 2051.
An ISFSI, which is independently licensed and operated, will remain operational after the cessation of plant operations. For the DECON and SAFSTOR scenarios, the facility is expanded to accommodate the inventory of spent fuel residing in the plant's storage pools at the conclusion of the required cooling period. Once emptied, 17 DOE-RW-0604, "Project Decision Schedule", U.s. DOE Offfice of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management, January 2009".
18 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.
Diablo Canyon Power Plant Document P01-1604-003, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Page xiv of xvii the spent fuel pool facilities can be either decontaminated and dismantled or prepared for long-term storage.
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 will substantially damage power block structures, potentially weakening the footings and structural supports. Prompt dismantling of site structures (once the facilities are decontaminated) is clearly the most appropriate and cost-effective option. It is unreasonable to anticipate that these structures would be repaired and preserved after the radiological contamination is removed. The cost to dismantle site structures with a work force already mobilized on site is more efficient than if the process is deferred. Site facilities quickly degrade without maintenance, adding additional expense and creating potential hazards to the public and the demolition work force. Consequently, this study assumes that site structures are removed to a nominal depth of three feet below the local grade level wherever possible. The site is then to be graded and stabilized.
Summary The costs to decommission Diablo Canyon assumes the removal of all contaminated and activated plant components and structural materials such that the owner may then have unrestricted use of the site with no further requirements for an operating license. Low-level radioactive waste, other than GTCC waste, is sent to a commercial processor for treatment/conditioning or to a controlled disposal facility.
Decommissioning is accomplished within the 60-year period required by current NRC regulations. 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 facilities are also decommissioned.
Both the DECON and SAFSTOR scenarios are described in Section 2. The assumptions are presented in Section 3, along with schedules of annual expenditures.
The major cost contributors are identified in Section 6, with detailed activity costs, waste volumes, and associated manpower requirements delineated in Appendices C and D. The major cost components are also identified in the cost summary provided at the end of this section.
The cost elements in the estimates are assigned to one of three subcategories: NRC License Termination, Spent Fuel Management, and Site Restoration. The subcategory "NRC License Termination" is used to accumulate costs that are consistent with "decommissioning" as defined by the NRC in its financial assurance regulations (i.e.,
TLG Services, Inc.
Diablo Canyon Power Plant Document P01-1604-003, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Page xv of xvii 10 CFR Part 50.75). The cost reported for this subcategory is generally sufficient to terminate the unit's operating license, recognizing that there may be some additional cost impact from spent fuel management.
The "Spent Fuel Management" subcategory contains costs associated with the containerization and transfer of spent fuel from the wet storage pools to a DOE transport cask, as well as the transfer of the fuel in storage at the ISFSI to the DOE.
Costs are included for the operation of the storage pools and the management of the ISFSI until such time that the transfer is complete.
"Site Restoration" is used to capture costs associated with the dismantling and demolition of buildings and facilities demonstrated to be free from contamination. This includes structures never exposed to radioactive materials, as well as those facilities that have been decontaminated to appropriate levels. Structures are removed to a depth of three feet and backfilled to conform to local grade.
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., ARO determinations). In reality, there can be considerable interaction between the activities in the three subcategories. For example, an owner may decide to remove non-contaminated structures early in the project to improve access to highly contaminated facilities or plant components. In these instances, the non-contaminated removal costs could be reassigned from Site Restoration to an NRC License Termination support activity.
However, in general, the allocations represent a reasonable accounting of those costs that can be expected to be incurred for the specific subcomponents of the total estimated program cost, if executed as described.
As noted within this document, the estimates were developed and costs are presented in 2008 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.
Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document P01-1604-003, Rev. 0 Page xvi of xvii DECON COST
SUMMARY
DECOMMISSIONING COST ELEMENTS (thousands of 2008 dollars)
Cost Element Unit 1 Unit 2 Total Decontamination 18,180 21,089 39,269 Removal 116,996 213,110 330,106 Packaging 18,508 18,570 37,078 Transportation 15,738 15,183 30,920 Waste Disposal 81,180 84,060 165,240 Off-site Waste Processing 48,280 43,016 91,296 Program Management [1' 255,057 450,584 705,641 Spent Fuel Pool Isolation 11,358 7,593 18,951 Spent Fuel Management 145,290 144,151 289,441 Insurance and Regulatory Fees 20,535 18,420
'38,955 Energy 11,230 11,137 22,366 Characterization and Licensing Surveys 19,165 20,718 39,883 Property Taxes 3,177 3,090 6,266 Mfiscellaneous Equipment 6,454 6,478 12,932 Total [21 771,148 1,057,198 1,828,346 Cost Element License Termination 538,104 709,740 1,247,844 Spent Fuel Management 189,088 192,789 381,877 Site Restoration 43,956 154,668 198,624 Total [3]
771,148 1,057,198 1,828,346
[1] Includes engineering and security costs
[21 Columns may not add due to rounding TLG Services, Inc.
Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document P01-1604-003, Rev. 0 Page xvii of xvii SAFSTOR COST
SUMMARY
DECOMMISSIONING COST ELEMENTS (thousands of 2008 dollars)
Cost Element Unit 1 Unit 2 Total Decontamination 15,031 21,150 36,180 Removal 116,384 213,969 330,353 Packaging 14,704 15,027 29,731 Transportation 14,078 13,709 27,787 Waste Disposal 62,782 65,153 127,935 Off-site Waste Processing 50,229 44,863 95,091 Program Management [1]
250,533 550,768 801,301 Spent Fuel Pool Isolation 11,398 7,627 19,026 Spent Fuel Management 145,031 144,707 289,738 Insurance and Regulatory Fees 27,205 25,122 52,327 Energy 15,758 16,017 31,776 Characterization and Licensing Surveys 20,915 22,518 43,433 Property Taxes 4,126 4,043 8,169 lViscellaneous Equipment 11,738 11,980 23,719 Total [2]
759,912 1,156,654 1,916,567 Cost Element License Termination 510,831 555,813 1,066,644 Spent Fuel Management 203,537 448,831 652,368 Site Restoration 45,545 152,010 197,555 Total [2]
759,912 1,156,654 1,916,567
[1] Includes engineering and security costs
[21 Columns may not add due to rounding TLG Services, Inc.
Diablo Canyon Power Plant Document P01-1604-003, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 1, Page 1 of 8
- 1. INTRODUCTION This report presents estimates of the costs to decommission the Diablo Canyon Power Plant, (Diablo Canyon) following a scheduled cessation of plant operations. The analysis relies upon site-specific, technical information from an earlier evaluation prepared in 2005,[11* updated to reflect current assumptions pertaining to the disposition of the nuclear plant and relevant industry experience in undertaking such projects. The current estimates are designed to provide Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) with sufficient information to assess the plant owners' financial obligations, as they pertain to the eventual decommissioning of the nuclear station. It is not a detailed engineering document, but a financial analysis prepared in advance of the detailed engineering that will be required to carry out the decommissioning.
1.1 OBJECTIVES OF STUDY The objectives of this study are to prepare comprehensive estimates of the costs to decommission Diablo Canyon, 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 were taken as 40 years after receiving full power-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.
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 1 and 2 each have a current license rating of 3411 MWt, with corresponding estimated ultimate 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 References provided in Section 7 of the document TLG Services, Inc.
Diablo Canyon Power Plant Document P01-1604-003, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 1, Page 2 of 8 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.
1.3 REGULATORY GUIDANCE The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC or Commission) provided initial decommissioning requirements in its rule "General Requirements for Decommissioning Nuclear Facilities," issued in June 1988.[21 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 TLG Services, Inc.
Diablo Canyon Power Plant Document P01-1604-003, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 1, Page 3 of 8 Availability of Funds for Decommissioning Nuclear Reactors,"[3] which provided additional guidance to the licensees of nuclear facilities on the financial methods acceptable to the NRC staff for complying with the requirements of the rule. The regulatory guide addressed the funding requirements and provided guidance on the content and form of the financial assurance mechanisms indicated in the rule.
The rule defined three decommissioning alternatives as being acceptable to the NRC: DECON, SAFSTOR, and ENTOMB. The DECON alternative assumes that any contaminated or activated portion of the plant's systems, structures and facilities are removed or decontaminated to levels that permit the site to be released for unrestricted use shortly after the cessation of plant operations.
The rule also placed limits on the time allowed to complete the decommissioning process. For SAFSTOR, the process is restricted in overall duration to 60 years, unless it can be shown that a longer duration is necessary to protect public health and safety. The guidelines for ENTOMB are similar, providing the NRC with both sufficient leverage and flexibility to ensure that these deferred options are only used in situations where it is reasonable and consistent with the definition of decommissioning. At the conclusion of a 60-year dormancy period (or longer for ENTOMB if the NRC approves such a case), the site would still require significant remediation to meet the unrestricted release limits for license termination.
The ENTOMB alternative has not been viewed as a viable option for power reactors due to the significant time required to isolate the long-lived radionuclides for decay to permissible levels. However, with rulemaking permitting the controlled release of a site,[41 the NRC has re-evaluated this alternative. The resulting feasibility study, based upon an' assessment by Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, concluded that the method did have conditional merit for some, if not most reactors. However, the staff also found that additional rulemaking would be needed before this option could be treated as a generic alternative. The NRC had considered rulemaking to alter the 60-year time for completing decommissioning and to clarify the use of engineered barriers for reactor entombments.[51
- However, the NRC's staff has recommended that rulemaking be deferred, based upon several factors, e.g., no licensee has committed to pursuing the entombment option, 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 plants.[6]
When the decommissioning TLG Services, Inc.
Diablo Canyon Power Plant Document P01-1604-003, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 1, Page 4 of 8 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 will entitle the licensee to a fee reduction and eliminate the obligation to follow certain requirements needed only during operation of the reactor. Within two years of submitting notice of permanent cessation of operations, the licensee is required to submit a Post-Shutdown Decommissioning Activities Report (PSDAR) to the NRC. The PSDAR describes the planned decommissioning activities, the associated sequence and
- schedule, and an estimate of expected costs.
Prior to completing decommissioning, the licensee is required to submit an application to the NRC to terminate the license, which will include a license termination plan (LTP).
1.3.1 Nuclear Waste Policy Act Congress passed the "Nuclear Waste Policy Act"[7] (NWPA) in 1982, assigning the federal government's long-standing responsibility for disposal of the spent nuclear fuel created by the commercial nuclear generating plants' to the DOE. The NWPA provided that DOE would enter into contracts with utilities in which DOE would promise to take the utilities' spent fuel and high-level radioactive waste and utilities would pay the cost of the disposition services for that material. The NWPA, along with the individual contracts with the utilities, specified that the DOE was to begin accepting spent fuel by January 31, 1998.
Since the original legislation, the DOE has announced several delays in the program schedule. By January 1998, the DOE had failed to accept any spent fuel or high level waste, as required by the NWPA and utility contracts. Delays continue and, as a result, generators have initiated legal action against the DOE in an attempt to obtain compensation for DOE's breach of contract.
TLG Services, Inc.
Diablo Canyon Power Plant Document P01-1604-003, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 1, Page 5 of 8 Operation of DOE's yet-to-be constructed repository is contingent upon the review and approval of the facility's license application by the NRC and the successful resolution of pending litigation. The DOE submitted its license application to the NRC on June 3, 2008, seeking authorization to construct the repository at Yucca Mountain, Nevada. Assuming a.
timely review and adequate funding, the DOE expects that receipt of fuel could begin as early as 2020. [s8 It is generally necessary that spent fuel be actively cooled and stored for a minimum period at the generating site prior to transfer. As such, the NRC requires that licensees establish a program to manage and provide funding for the management of all irradiated fuel at the reactor site until title of the fuel is transferred to the Secretary of Energy, pursuant to 10 CFR Part 50.54(bb). [91 This funding requirement is fulfilled through inclusion of certain cost elements in the decommissioning estimate, for example, associated with the isolation and continued operation of the spent fuel pools and ISFSI.
DOE's contracts with utilities order the acceptance of spent fuel from utilities based upon the oldest fuel receiving the highest priority. For purposes of this analysis, acceptance of commercial spent fuel by the DOE is expected to begin in 2020 (in accordance with DOE's latest published schedule). The first assemblies removed from the Diablo Canyon site are assumed to be in 2028. With an estimated maximum rate of transfer of 3,000 metric tons of uranium (MTU)/year from the commercial generators, completion of the removal of fuel from the Diablo Canyon site is projected to be in the year 2051. Consequently, costs are included within the estimates for the long-term caretaking of thespent fuel at the Diablo Canyon site until the year 2051.
An ISFSI, which is independently licensed and operated, will remain operational after the cessation of plant operations. For the DECON and SAFSTOR scenarios, the facility is expanded 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.
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, [10] although not all of the TLG Services, Inc.
Diablo Canyon Power Plant Document P01-1604-003, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 1, Page 6 of 8 material is suitable for "shallow-land" disposal. With the passage of the "Low-Level Radioactive Waste Policy Act" in 1980,
[11]
and its Amendments of 1985, [121 the states became ultimately responsible for the disposition of low-level radioactive waste generated within their own borders.
Until recently, there were two facilities available to PG&E for the disposal of low-level radioactive waste generated by Diablo Canyon. As of July 1, 2008, however, the facility in Barnwell, South Carolina was closed to generators outside the Atlantic Compact (comprised of the states of Connecticut, New Jersey and South Carolina). This leaves the facility in Clive, Utah, operated by EnergySolutions, as the only available destination for low-level radioactive waste requiring controlled disposal.
For the purpose of this analysis, the EnergySolutions' facility is used as the disposal site for the majority of the radioactive waste (Class A).
There are no currently operating disposal facilities available to PG&E that have a license to dispose of the more highly radioactive waste (Classes B and C), for example, generated in the dismantling of the reactor vessel. As such, waste disposal costs must be estimated. The disposal cost for low-level radioactive waste is based on a study sponsored by PG&E and Southern California Edison Company, "Establishing an Appropriate Disposal Rate for Low Level Radioactive Waste During Decommissioning."[ 131 The study was done to reflect the California Public Utilities Commission's desire for these owners to conservatively estimate their nuclear decommissioning LLRW disposal rates.
The dismantling of the components residing closest to the reactor core generates radioactive waste considered unsuitable for shallow-land disposal (i.e., low-level radioactive waste with concentrations of radionuclides that exceed the limits established by the NRC for Class C radioactive waste (GTCC)). The Low-Level Radioactive Waste Policy Amendments Act of 1985 assigned the federal government the responsibility for the disposal of this material. The Act also stated that the beneficiaries of the activities resulting in the generation of such radioactive waste bear all reasonable costs of disposing of such waste.
However, to date, the federal government has not identified a cost for disposing of GTCC or a schedule for acceptance. 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.
TLG Services, Inc.
Diablo Canyon Power Plant Document P01-1604-003, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 1, Page 7 of 8 For purposes of this study, GTCC is packaged in the same type of canister used for spent fuel. The GTCC material is either stored with the spent fuel 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).
A significant portion of the waste material generated during decommissioning may only be potentially contaminated by radioactive materials. This waste can be analyzed on site or shipped off site to licensed facilities for further analysis, for processing and/or for conditioning/recovery. Reduction in the volume of low-level radioactive waste requiring disposal in a licensed low-level radioactive waste disposal facility can be accomplished through a variety of methods, including analyses and surveys or decontamination to eliminate the portion of waste that does not require disposal as radioactive waste, compaction, incineration or metal melt. The estimates for Diablo Canyon reflect the savings from waste recovery/volume reduction.
1.3.3 Radiological Criteria for License Termination In 1997, the NRC published Subpart E, "Radiological Criteria for License Termination," [14] 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). [15]
An additional and separate limit of 4 millirem per year, as defined in 40 CFR § 141.16, is applied to drinking water. [16]
TLG Services, Inc.
Diablo Canyon Power Plant Document P01-1604-003, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 1, Page 8 of 8 On October 9, 2002, the NRC signed an agreement with the EPA on the radiological decommissioning and decontamination of NRC-licensed sites. The Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) [17] provides that EPA will defer exercise of authority under CERCLA for the majority of facilities decommissioned under NRC authority. The MOU also includes provisions for NRC and EPA consultation for certain sites when, at the time of license termination, (1) groundwater contamination exceeds EPA-permitted levels; (2) NRC contemplates restricted release of the site; and/or (3) residual radioactive soil concentrations exceed levels defined in the MOU.
The MOU does not impose any new requirements on NRC licensees and should reduce the involvement of the EPA with NRC licensees who are decommissioning. Most sites are expected to meet the NRC criteria for unrestricted use, and the NRC believes that only a few sites will have groundwater or soil contamination in excess of the levels specified in the MOU that trigger consultation with the EPA. However, if there are other hazardous materials on the site, the EPA may be involved in the cleanup. As such, the possibility of dual regulation remains for certain licensees. The present study does not include any costs for this occurrence.
TLG Services, Inc.
Diablo Canyon Power Plant Document P01-1604-003, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 2, Page 1 of 13
- 2. DECOMMISSIONING ALTERNATIVES Detailed cost estimates were developed to decommission the Diablo Canyon nuclear plant for the following approved decommissioning alternatives: DECON and SAFSTOR. Although the alternatives differ with respect to technique, process, cost, and schedule, they attain the same result: the ultimate release of the site for unrestricted use.
Two decommissioning scenarios were evaluated for the two nuclear units. The scenarios selected are representative of alternatives available to the owner and are defined as follows:
DECON: Units 1 and 2 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 12 years is transferred to the ISFSI for interim storage. This scenario assumes that decommissioning activities at the two units 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 building. 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 2051.
SAFSTOR: 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 12 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 2051.
The following sections describe the basic activities associated with each alternative.
Although detailed procedures for each activity identified are not provided, and the actual sequence of work may vary, the activity descriptions provide a basis not only for estimating but also for the expected scope of work, i.e., engineering and planning at the time of decommissioning.
The conceptual approach that the NRC has described in its regulations divides decommissioning into three phases. The initial phase commences with the effective date of permanent cessation of operations and involves the transition of both plant and licensee from reactor operations (i.e., power production) to facility de-activation and closure. During the first phase, notification is to be provided to the NRC TLG Services, Inc.
Diablo Canyon Power Plant Document P01-1604-003, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 2, Page 2 of 13 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.
Engineering and Planning The PSDAR, required within two years of the notice to cease operations, provides a description of the licensee's planned decommissioning activities, a timetable, and the associated financial requirements of the intended decommissioning program. Upon receipt of the PSDAR, the NRC will make the document available to the public for comment in a local hearing to be held in the vicinity of the reactor site. Ninety days TLG Services, Inc.
Diablo Canyon Power Plant Document P01-1604-003, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 2, Page 3 of 13 following submittal and NRC receipt of the PSDAR, the licensee may begin to perform major decommissioning activities under a modified 10 CFR §50.59 procedure, i.e., without specific NRC approval. Major activities are defined as any activity that results in permanent removal of major radioactive components, permanently modifies the structure of the containment, or results in dismantling components (for shipment) containing GTCC, as defined by 10 CFR §61. Major components are further defined as comprising the reactor vessel and internals, large bore reactor coolant system piping, and other large components that are radioactive. The NRC includes the following additional criteria for use of the §50.59 process in decommissioning. The proposed activity must not:
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 also considered.
Typically, a licensee will not be allowed to proceed if the consequences of a particular decommissioning activity are greater than that bounded by previously evaluated environmental assessments or impact statements.
In this instance, the licensee would have to submit a license amendment for the specific activity and update the environmental report.
The decommissioning program outlined in the PSDAR will be designed to accomplish the required tasks within the ALARA guidelines (as defined in 10 CFR §20) for protection of personnel from exposure to radiation hazards. It will also address the continued protection of the health and safety of the public and the environment during the dismantling activity. Consequently, with the development of the PSDAR, activity specifications, cost-benefit and safety analyses, work packages and procedures, would be assembled to support the proposed decontamination and dismantling activities.
TLG Services, Inc.
Diablo Canyon Power Plant Document P01 -1604-003, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 2, Page 4 of 13 Site Preparations Following final plant shutdown, and in preparation for actual decommissioning activities, the following activities are initiated:
0 Characterization of the site and surrounding environs. This includes radiation surveys of work areas, major components (including the reactor vessel and its internals), internal piping, and primary shield cores.
0 Isolation of the spent fuel storage pools and fuel handling systems, such that decommissioning operations can commence on the balance of the plant. The pools will remain operational for approximately twelve years following the cessation of operations before the inventory resident at shutdown can be transferred to the DOE.
o Specification of transport and disposal requirements for activated materials and/or hazardous materials, including shielding and waste stabilization.
0 Development of procedures for occupational exposure control, control and release of liquid and gaseous effluent, processing of radwaste (including dry-active waste, resins, filter media, metallic and non-metallic components generated in decommissioning), site security and emergency programs, and industrial safety.
2.1.2 Period 2 - Decommissioning Operations This period includes the wet spent fuel storage and physical decommissioning activities associated with the removal and disposal of contaminated and activated components and structures, including the successful termination of the 10 CFR §50 operating license. Significant decommissioning activities in this phase include:
o Operations, maintenance, and security associated with storing of spent fuel in the spent fuel storage pools.
o Transferring spent fuel from the storage pools to the ISFSI.
o Construction of temporary facilities and/or modification of existing facilities to support dismantling activities. This may include a
centralized processing area to facilitate equipment removal and component preparations for off-site disposal.
Reconfiguration and modification of site structures and facilities as needed to support decommissioning operations. This may include the TLG Services, Inc.
Diablo Canyon Power Plant Document P01-1604-003, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 2, Page 5 of 13 upgrading of roads (on-and off-site) to facilitate hauling and transport. Modifications may be required to the containment structure to facilitate access of large/heavy equipment. Modifications may also be required to the refueling area of the building to support the segmentation of the reactor vessel internals and component extraction.
Design and fabrication of temporary and permanent shielding to support removal and transportation activities, construction of contamination control envelopes, and the procurement of specialty tooling.
Procurement (lease or purchase) of shipping canisters, cask liners, and industrial packages for the disposition of low-level radioactive waste.
o Decontamination of components and piping systems as required to control (minimize) worker exposure.
o Removal of piping and components no longer essential to support decommissioning operations.
o Removal of control rod drive housings and the head service structure from the 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.
Disassembly and segmentation of the remaining reactor internals, including the core shroud and lower core support assembly. Some material is expected to exceed Class C disposal requirements. As such, the segments will be packaged in modified fuel storage canisters for geologic disposal.
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.
Diablo Canyon Power Plant Document P01-1604-003, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis 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.
Removal of the steam generators and pressurizer for material recovery and controlled disposal. The generators will be moved to an on-site processing center, the steam domes removed and the internal components segregated for recycling. The lower shell and tube bundle will be packaged for direct disposal. These components can serve as their own burial containers provided that all penetrations are properly sealed and the internal contaminants are stabilized, e.g.,
with grout. Steel shielding will be added, as necessary, to those external areas of the package to meet transportation limits and regulations. The pressurizer is disposed of intact.
At least two years prior to the anticipated date of license termination, an LTP is required. Submitted as a supplement to the Final Safety Analysis Report (FSAR) or its equivalent, the plan must include: a site characterization, description of the remaining dismantling activities, plans for site remediation, procedures for the final radiation survey, designation of the end use of the site, an updated cost estimate to complete the decommissioning, and any associated environmental concerns. The NRC will notice the receipt of the plan, make the plan available for public comment, and schedule a local hearing. LTP approval will be subject to any conditions and limitations as deemed appropriate by the Commission. The licensee may then commence with the final remediation of site facilities and services, including:
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 any activated/ contaminated concrete.
o Surveys of the decontaminated areas of the containment structure.
o Remediation and removal of the contaminated equipment and material from the auxiliary building and any other contaminated facility. Radiation and contamination controls will be utilized until residual levels indicate that the structures and equipment can be released for unrestricted access and conventional demolition. This activity may necessitate the dismantling and disposition of most of TLG Services, Inc.
Diablo Canyon Power Plant Document P01-1604-003, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 2, Page 7 of 13 the systems and components (both clean and contaminated) located within these buildings.
This activity facilitates surface decontamination and subsequent verification surveys required prior to obtaining release for demolition.
Routing of material removed in the decontamination and dismantling to a central processing area. Material certified to be free of contamination is released for unrestricted disposition, e.g., as scrap, recycle, or general disposal. Contaminated material is characterized and segregated for additional off-site processing (disassembly, chemical cleaning, volume reduction, and waste treatment), and/or packaged for controlled disposal at a low-level radioactive waste disposal facility.
Incorporated into the LTP is the Final Survey Plan. This plan identifies the radiological surveys to be performed once the decontamination activities are completed and is developed using the guidance provided in the "Multi-Agency Radiation Survey and Site Investigation Manual (MARSSIM)."[181 This document incorporates the statistical approaches to survey design and data interpretation used by the EPA. It also identifies state-of-the-art, commercially available instrumentation and procedures for conducting radiological surveys. Use of this guidance ensures that the surveys are conducted in a manner that provides a high degree of confidence that applicable NRC criteria are satisfied. Once the survey is complete, the results are provided to the NRC in a format that can be verified. The NRC then reviews and evaluates the information, performs an independent confirmation of radiological site conditions, and makes a determination on final termination of the license.
The NRC will terminate 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.
2.1.3 Period 3 - Site Restoration Following completion of decommissioning operations, site restoration activities will begin. Efficient removal of the contaminated materials and verification that residual radionuclide concentrations are below the NRC limits will result in substantial damage to many of the structures.
Although performed in a controlled, safe manner, blasting, coring, drilling, scarification (surface removal), and the other decontamination activities will substantially degrade power block structures including the reactor and auxiliary buildings. Under certain circumstances, TLG Services, Inc.
Diablo Canyon Power Plant Document P01-1604-003, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 2, Page 8 of 13 verifying that subsurface radionuclide concentrations meet NRC site release requirements will require removal of grade slabs and lower floors, potentially weakening footings and structural supports. This removal activity will be necessary for those facilities and plant areas where historical records, when available, indicate the potential for radionuclides having been present in the soil, where system failures have been recorded, or where it is required to confirm that subsurface process and drain lines were not breached over the operating life of the station.
Prompt dismantling of site structures is clearly the most appropriate and cost-effective option. It is unreasonable to anticipate that these structures would be repaired and preserved after the radiological contamination is removed. The cost to dismantle site structures with a work force already mobilized on site is more efficient than if the process were deferred. Site facilities quickly degrade without maintenance, adding additional expense and creating potential hazards to the public as well as to future workers. Abandonment creates a breeding ground for vermin infestation as well as other biological hazards.
This cost study presumes that non-essential structures and site facilities are dismantled as a continuation of the decommissioning activity.
Foundations and exterior walls are removed to a nominal depth of three feet below grade. The three-foot depth allows for the placement of gravel for drainage, as well as topsoil, so that vegetation can be established for erosion control. Site areas affected by the dismantling activities are restored and the plant area graded as required to prevent ponding and inhibit the refloating of subsurface materials.
Non-contaminated concrete rubble produced by demolition activities is processed to remove reinforcing steel and miscellaneous embedments.
The processed material is then used on site to backfill foundation voids.
Excess non-contaminated materials are trucked to an off-site area for disposal as construction debris.
2.1.4 ISFSI Operations and Decommissioning The ISFSI will continue to operate under a separate and independent license (10 CFR §72) following the termination of the §50 operating licenses. Assuming the DOE starts accepting fuel from the industry in 2020, transfer of spent fuel from Diablo Canyon is anticipated to begin in 2028, and continue through the year 2051.
TLG Services, Inc.
Diablo Canyon Power Plant Document P01-1604-003, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 2, Page 9 of 13 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 multi-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 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. 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 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 pools or site surveillance and security are drained, de-energized, and secured. Minimal cleaning/removal of loose contamination and/or fixation and sealing of remaining contamination is performed. Access to contaminated areas is secured to provide controlled access for inspection and maintenance.
The engineering and planning requirements 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.
TLG Services, Inc.
Diablo Canyon Power Plant Document P01-1604-003, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 2, Page 10 of 13 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:
Isolating 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 of the spent fuel from the storage pools to the DOE, 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.
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.
Cleaning of the loose surface contamination from building access pathways.
Performing an interim radiation survey of plant, posting warning signs where appropriate.
o Erecting physical barriers and/or securing all access to radioactive or contaminated
- areas, except as required for inspection and maintenance.
TLG Services, Inc.
Diablo Canyon Power Plant Document P01-1604-003, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 2, Page 11 of 13 0 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 and/or detected and controlled. Appropriate emergency procedures are established and initiated for potential releases that exceed prescribed limits. The environmental surveillance program constitutes an abbreviated version of the program in effect during normal plant operations.
Security during the dormancy period is conducted primarily to prevent unauthorized entry and to protect the public from the consequences of its own actions. The security fence, sensors, alarms, and other surveillance equipment provide security. Fire and radiation alarms are also monitored and maintained.
Consistent with the DECON scenario, the spent fuel storage pools are emptied within approximately 12 years of the cessation of operations.
The transfer of the spent fuel to the DOE continues throughout the dormancy period until completed in 2051. Once emptied, the ISFSI is secured for storage and decommissioned along with the power block structures in Period 4.
After an optional period of storage (such that license termination is accomplished within 60 years of final shutdown), it is required that the licensee submit an application to terminate the license, along with an LTP (described in Section 2.1.2), thereby initiating the third phase.
TLG Services, Inc.
Diablo Canyon Power Plant Document P01-1604-003, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 2, Page 12 of 13 2.2.3 Periods 3 and 4 - Delayed Decommissioning Prior to the commencement of decommissioning operations, preparations are undertaken to reactivate site services and prepare for decommissioning. Preparations include engineering and planning, a detailed site characterization, and the assembly of a decommissioning management organization. Final planning for activities and the writing of activity specifications and detailed procedures are also initiated at this time.
Much of the work in developing a termination plan is relevant to the development of the detailed engineering plans and procedures. The activities associated with this phase and the follow-on decontamination and dismantling processes are detailed in Sections 2.1.1 and 2.1.2. The primary difference between the sequences anticipated for the DECON and this deferred scenario is the absence, in the latter, of any constraint on the availability of the fuel storage facilities for decommissioning.
Variations in the length of the dormancy period are expected to have little effect upon the quantities of radioactive wastes generated from system and structure removal operations.
Given the levels of radioactivity and spectrum of radionuclides expected from forty years of plant operation, no plant process system identified as being contaminated upon final shutdown will become releasable due to the decay period alone, i.e., there is no significant reduction in the waste generated from the decommissioning activities. However, due to the lower activity levels, a greater percentage of the waste volume can be designated for off-site processing and recovery.
The delay in decommissioning also yields lower working area radiation levels. As such, the estimate for this delayed scenario incorporates reduced ALARA controls for the SAFSTOR's lower occupational exposure potential.
Although the initial radiation levels due to 60Co will decrease during the dormancy period, the internal components of the reactor vessel will still exhibit sufficiently high radiation dose rates to require remote sectioning under water due to the presence of long-lived radionuclides such as 94Nb, 59Ni, and 63Ni. Therefore, the dismantling procedures described for the DECON alternative would still be employed during this scenario. Portions of the biological shield will still be radioactive due to the presence of activated trace elements with long half-lives (152Eu and 154Eu). Decontamination will require controlled removal and TLG Services, Inc.
Diablo Canyon Power Plant Document P01-1604-003, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 2, Page 13 of 13 disposal. It is assumed that radioactive corrosion products on inner surfaces of piping and components will not have decayed to levels that will permit unrestricted use or allow conventional removal. These systems and components will be surveyed as they are removed and disposed of in accordance with the existing radioactive release criteria.
2.2.4 Period 5 - Site Restoration Following completion of decommissioning operations, site-restoration activities can begin.
Dismantling, as a
continuation of the decommissioning process, is clearly the most appropriate and cost-effective option, as described in Section 2.1.3. The basis for the dismantling cost in this scenario is consistent with that described for DECON, presuming the removal of structures and site facilities to a-nominal depth of three feet below grade and the limited restoration of the site.
TLG Services, Inc.
Diablo Canyon Power Plant Document P01-1604-003, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 3, Page 1 of 27
- 3. COST ESTIMATE The cost estimates prepared for decommissioning Diablo Canyon consider the unique features of the site, including the NSSS, power generation systems, support services, site buildings, and ancillary facilities. The basis of the estimates, including the sources of information relied upon, the estimating methodology employed, site-specific considerations, and other pertinent assumptions, is described in this section.
3.1 BASIS OF ESTIMATE The estimates were developed using the site-specific, technical information from the 2005 analysis. This information was reviewed for the current analysis and updated as deemed appropriate. The site-specific considerations and assumptions used in the previous evaluation were also revisited. Modifications were incorporated where new information was available or experience from ongoing decommissioning programs provided viable alternatives or improved processes.
3.2 METHODOLOGY The methodology used to develop the estimates follows the basic approach originally presented in the AIF/NESP-036 study report, "Guidelines for Producing Commercial Nuclear Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Estimates,"[191 and the DOE "Decommissioning Handbook."[20]
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. [21]
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.
TLG Services, Inc.
Diablo Canyon Power Plant Document P01.1604-003, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 3, Page 2 of 27 This analysis reflects lessons learned from TLG's involvement in the Shippingport Station Decommissioning Project, completed in 1989, as well as the decommissioning of the Cintichem reactor, hot cells, and associated facilities, completed in 1997. In addition, the planning and engineering for the Pathfinder, Shoreham, Rancho Seco, Trojan, Yankee Rowe, Big Rock Point, Maine Yankee, Humboldt Bay-3, Oyster Creek, Connecticut Yankee, and San Onofre-1 nuclear units have provided additional insight into the process, the regulatory
- aspects, and the technical challenges of decommissioning commercial nuclear units.
Work Difficulty Factors TLG has historically applied work difficulty adjustment factors (WDFs) to account for the inefficiencies in working in a power plant environment. WDFs are assigned to each unique set of unit factors, commensurate with the inefficiencies associated with working in confined, hazardous environments.
The ranges used for the WDFs are as follows:
o Access Factor 10% to 20%
o Respiratory Protection Factor 10% to 50%
o Radiation/ALARA Factor 10% to 37%
o Protective Clothing Factor 10% to 30%
o Work Break Factor 8.33%
The factors and their associated range of values were developed in conjunction with the AIF/NESP-036 study. The application of the factors is discussed in more detail in that publication.
Scheduling Program Durations The unit factors, adjusted by the WDFs as described above, are applied against the inventory of materials to be removed in the radiologically controlled areas.
The resulting man-hours, or crew-hours, are used in the development of the decommissioning program
- schedule, using resource loading and event sequencing considerations. The scheduling of conventional removal and dismantling activities is based upon productivity information available from the "Building Construction Cost Data" publication.
An activity duration critical path is used to determine the total decommissioning program schedule. The schedule is relied upon in calculating the carrying costs, which include program management, administration, field TLG Services, Inc.
Diablo Canyon Power Plant Document P01-1604-003, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 3, Page 3 of 27 engineering, equipment rental, and support services such as quality control and security. This systematic approach for assembling decommissioning estimates ensures a high degree of confidence in the reliability of the resulting costs.
3.3 IMPACT OF DECOMMISSIONING MULTIPLE REACTOR UNITS In estimating the near simultaneous decommissioning of two co-located reactor units there can be opportunities to achieve economies of scale, by sharing costs between units, and coordinating the sequence of work activities. There will also be schedule constraints, particularly where there are requirements for specialty equipment and staff, or practical limitations on when final status surveys can take place. 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.
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 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 unit (- 43%).
o Segmenting the reactor vessel and internals will require the use of special equipment. The decommissioning project will be scheduled such that Unit 2's reactor internals and vessel are segmented immediately after the activities at Unit 1 have been completed.
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 TLG Services, Inc.
Diablo Canyon Power Plant Document P01-1604-003, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 3, Page 4 of 27 decontamination of the spent fuel pool areas is coordinated so as to synchronize the final status survey for the station.
The final demolition of buildings at Units 1 and 2 are considered to take place concurrently. This is considered a reasonable assumption since access to the buildings is considered good at the station.
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 emergency response fees, regulatory agency fees, corporate overhead, 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 and site restoration.
Inherent in any cost estimate that does not rely on historical data is the inability to specify the precise source of costs imposed by factors such as tool breakage, accidents, illnesses, weather delays, and labor stoppages. In the DECCER cost model, contingency fulfills this role. Contingency is added to each line item to account for costs that are difficult or impossible to develop analytically. Such costs are historically inevitable over the duration of a job of this magnitude; therefore, this cost analysis includes funds to cover these types of expenses.
3.4.1 Contingency The activity-and period-dependent costs are combined to develop the total decommissioning cost. A contingency is then applied on a line-item basis, using one or more of the contingency types listed in the AIF/NESP-036 study. "Contingencies" are defined in the American Association of Cost Engineers "Project and Cost Engineers' Handbook"[221 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, TLG Services, Inc.
Diablo Canyon Power Plant Document P01-1604-003, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 3, Page 5 of 27 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 contingency based on a preliminary technical position[231 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 the major activity-related problems (decontamination, segmentation, equipment handling, packaging, transport, and waste disposal) that necessitate a
contingency.
Individual activity contingencies ranged from 10% to 75%, depending on the degree of difficulty judged to be appropriate from TLG's actual decommissioning experience. The contingency values used in this study are as follows:
o Decontamination 50%
o Contaminated Component Removal 25%
o Contaminated Component Packaging 10%
o Contaminated Component Transport 15%
o Low-Level Radioactive Waste Disposal 25%
o Reactor Segmentation 75%
o NSSS Component Removal 25%
o Reactor Waste Packaging 25%
6 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%
" Supplies 25%
o Engineering 15%
o Energy 15%
o Characterization and Termination Surveys 30%
o Construction 15%
TLG Services, Inc.
Diablo Canyon Power Plant Document P01-1604-003, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 3, Page 6 of 27 o Taxes and Fees 10%
o Insurance 10%
o Staffing 15%
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 17.9%.
The value for the SAFSTOR alternative is approximately 17.5%.
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.
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:
" Transition activities and costs: ancillary expenses associated with eliminating 50% to 80% of the site labor force shortly after the cessation of plant operations, added cost for worker separation packages throughout the decommissioning program, national or company-mandated retraining, and retention incentives for key personnel.
" Delays in approval of the decommissioning plan due to intervention, public participation in local community meetings, legal challenges, and national and local hearings.
TLG Services, Inc.
Diablo Canyon Power Plant Document P01-1604-003, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 3, Page 7 of 27 o 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.
0 Policy decisions altering national commitments (e.g., in the ability to accommodate certain waste forms for disposition), or in the timetable for such, for example, the start and rate of acceptance of spent fuel by the DOE.
0 Pricing changes for basic inputs such as labor, energy, materials, and disposal. Items subject to widespread price competition (such as materials) may not show significant variation; however, others such as waste disposal could exhibit large pricing uncertainties, particularly in markets where limited access to services is available.
It has been TLG's experience that the results of a risk analysis, when compared with the base case estimate for decommissioning, indicate that the chances of the base decommissioning estimate's being too high is a low probability, and the chances that the estimate is too low is a higher probability. This is mostly due to the pricing uncertainty for low-level radioactive waste burial, and to a lesser extent due to schedule increases from changes in plant conditions and to pricing variations in the cost of labor (both craft and staff). This cost study, however, does not add any additional costs to the estimate for financial risk, since there is insufficient historical data from which to project future liabilities. Consequently, the areas of uncertainty or risk are revisited periodically and addressed through repeated revisions or updates of the base estimates.
3.5 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.
TLG Services, Inc.
Diablo Canyon Power Plant Document P01-1604-003, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 3, Page 8 of 27 3.5.1 Spent Fuel Management The cost to dispose of spent fuel generated from plant operations is not reflected within the estimates to decommission the Diablo Canyon site.
Ultimate disposition of the spent fuel is within the province of the DOE's Waste Management System, as defined by the NWPA.
As such, the disposal cost is financed by a 1 milllkWhr surcharge paid into the DOE's waste fund during operations. However, the NRC requires licensees to establish a program to manage and provide funding for the management of all irradiated fuel at the reactors until title of the fuel is transferred to the Secretary of Energy. This funding requirement is fulfilled through inclusion of certain high-level waste cost elements within the estimate, as described below.
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 commercial spent fuel by the DOE is expected to begin in 2020. The first assemblies removed from the Diablo Canyon site are assumed to be in 2028. With an estimated, maximum rate of transfer of 3,000 metric tons of uranium (MTU)/year, [24] completion of the removal of fuel from the site is projected to be in the year 2051. Consequently, costs are included within the estimates for the long-term caretaking of the spent fuel at the Diablo Canyon site until the year 2051.
The estimates incorporate a minimum cooling period of approximately 12 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 45,000 MWD/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 will require longer decay times (12 years) before storing the spent fuel in the casks.
In both scenarios that were analyzed, any residual fuel remaining in the pool after the 12-year period is relocated to the ISFSI to await transfer to a DOE facility.
Operation and maintenance costs for the storage facilities are included within the estimates and address the cost for staffing the facilities, as well as security, insurance, and licensing fees.
The estimates include the costs to purchase, load, and transfer the fuel storage canisters. Costs are also provided for the final disposition of the facilities once the transfer is complete.
TLG Services, Inc.
Diablo Canyon Power Plant Document P01-1604-003, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 3, Page 9 of 27 Canister Design A multi-purpose storage canister (HOLTEC HI-STORM 100 system),
with a 32-fuel assemblies capacity, is assumed for future cask acquisitions. A unit cost of approximately $1,000,000 is used for pricing the internal multi-purpose canister (MPC) and concrete overpack. The DOE is assumed to provide the MPC for fuel transferred directly from the pools to the DOE at no cost to the owner.
Canister Loading and Transfer An average cost of approximately $220,000 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. An average cost of approximately $200,000 per canister is used to estimate the cost to transfer the fuel 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 approximately
$1,500,000 and
$430,000 are used for operation and maintenance of the spent fuel pools and the ISFSI, respectively.
ISFSI Decommissioning Design Considerations A HI-STORM multi-purpose (storage and transport) dry shielded storage canister with a vertical, reinforced concrete storage overpack is used as a basis for the cost analyses. Approximately 50% of the overpacks are assumed to have some level of neutron-induced activation as a result of the long-term storage of the fuel, i.e., to levels exceeding free-release limits.
Approximately 10% of the concrete and steel is assumed to be removed from the overpacks for controlled disposal. The cost to dispose of this material, as well as the demolition of the ISFSI facility, is included in the estimates.
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 established by the NRC for Class C radioactive waste (GTCC)).
TLG Services, Inc.
Diablo Canyon Power Plant Document P01-1604-003, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 3, Page 10 of 27 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. 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 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 the same type of canister used to store spent fuel. 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 has been removed from the site prior to the start of decommissioning and the ISFSI deactivated.
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.
Intact disposal of reactor vessel shells has been successfully demonstrated at several of the sites currently being decommissioned.
Access to navigable waterways has allowed these large packages to be transported to the Barnwell disposal site with minimal overland travel.
Intact disposal of the reactor vessel and internal components can TLG Services, Inc.
Diablo Canyon Power Plant Document P01-1604-003, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 3, Page 11 of 27 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:
0 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 0 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 the reactor vessel will require segmentation, as a bounding condition. With lower levels of activation, the vessel shell can be packaged more efficiently than the curie-limited internal components.
This will allow the use of more conventional waste packages rather than shielded casks for transport (although some shielded casks are still required).
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 estimates TLG Services, Inc.
Diablo Canyon Power Plant Document P01-1604-003, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 3, Page 12 of 27 as a- "process liquid waste" charge.
In the SAFSTOR scenario, radionuclide decay is expected to provide the same benefit and, therefore, a chemical decontamination is not included.
The following discussion deals with the removal and disposition of the steam generators, but the techniques involved are also applicable to other large components, such as heat exchangers, component coolers, and the pressurizer. The steam generators' size and weight, as well as their location within the reactor building, will ultimately determine the removal strategy.
A trolley crane is set up for the removal of the generators. It can also be used to move portions of the steam generator cubicle walls and floor slabs from the reactor building to a location where they can be decontaminated and transported to the material handling area.
Interferences within the work area, such as grating, piping, and other components are removed to create sufficient laydown space for processing these large components.
The generators are rigged for removal, disconnected from the surrounding piping and supports, and maneuvered into the open area where they are lowered onto a dolly. Each generator is rotated into the horizontal position for extraction from the containment and placed onto a multi-wheeled vehicle for transport to an on-site processing and storage area.
The generators are disassembled on-site with the steam domes and lightly contaminated subassemblies designated for off-site recycling. The more highly contaminated lower shell and tube bundle are packaged for direct disposal. The interior volume is filled with low-density cellular concrete for stabilization of the internal contamination.
Disposal costs are based upon the displaced volume of the units. Each component is then loaded onto a rail car for transport to the disposal facility.
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.
Diablo Canyon Power Plant Document P01-1604-003, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 3, Page 13 of 27 3.5.4 Retired Components Both Diablo Canyon units are expected to replace their original sets of steam generators prior to final shutdown; these retired sets will be stored on site within a concrete protective structure. The cost for transportation and disposal of these retired sets of steam generators has been included in this analysis.
3.5.5 Main Turbine and Condenser The main turbine is dismantled using conventional maintenance procedures. The turbine rotors and shafts are removed to a laydown area. The lower turbine casings are removed from their anchors by controlled demolition. The main condensers are also disassembled and moved to a laydown area. Material is then prepared for transportation to an off-site recycling facility where it is surveyed and designated for either decontamination or volume" reduction, conventional disposal, or controlled disposal. Components are packaged and readied for transport in accordance with the intended disposition.
3.5.6 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.[251 The contaminated material will be packaged in Industrial Packages (IP-1, IP-2, or IP-3, as defined in subpart 173.411) for transport unless demonstrated to qualify as their own shipping containers. The reactor vessel and internal components are expected to be transported in accordance with Part 71, as Type B. It is conceivable that the reactor, due to its limited specific activity, could qualify as LSA II or III. However, the high radiation levels on the outer surface would require that additional shielding be incorporated within the packaging so as to attenuate the dose to levels acceptable for transport.
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 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.
TLG Services, Inc.
Diablo Canyon Power Plant Document P01-1604-003, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 3, Page 14 of 27 The transport of large intact components (e.g., large heat exchangers and other oversized components) will be by a combination of truck, rail, and/or multi-wheeled transporter.
Transportation costs for Class A low-level radioactive waste are based upon the mileage to the EnergySolutions facility in Clive, Utah.
Transportation costs for Class B and C waste are based upon the mileage to Andrews County, Texas. Transportation costs for off-site waste processing are based upon the mileage to Memphis, Tennessee.
Truck transport costs are estimated using published tariffs from Tri-State Motor Transit. [26]
3.5.7 Low-Level Radioactive Waste Disposal To the greatest extent practical, metallic material generated in the decontamination and dismantling processes is processed to reduce the total cost of controlled disposal. Material meeting the regulatory and/or site release criterion, is released as scrap, requiring no further cost consideration. Conditioning (preparing the material to meet the waste acceptance criteria of the disposal site) and recovery of the waste stream is performed off site at a licensed processing center. Any material leaving the site is subject to a survey and release charge, at a minimum.
Based on TLG's experience, rates were assumed for off-site processing as well as survey and release.
The mass of radioactive waste generated during the various decommissioning activities at the site is shown on a line-item basis in the detailed Appendices C and D, and summarized in Section 5. The quantified waste summaries shown in these tables are consistent with 10 CFR Part 61 classifications. Commercially available steel containers are presumed to be used for the disposal of piping, small components, and concrete. Larger components can serve as their own containers, with proper closure of all openings, access ways, and penetrations. The volumes -are calculated based on the exterior package dimensions for containerized material or a specific calculation for components serving as their own waste containers.
The more highly activated reactor components will be shipped in reusable, shielded truck casks with disposable liners. In calculating disposal costs, the burial fees are applied against the liner volume, as well as the special handling requirements of the payload. Packaging efficiencies are lower for the highly activated materials (greater than TLG Services, Inc.
Diablo Canyon Power Plant Document P01-1604-003, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 3, Page 15 of 27 Type A quantity waste), where high concentrations of gamma-emitting radionuclides limit the capacity of the shipping canisters.
For the purpose of this analysis, the EnergySolutions' facility is used as the disposal site for the majority of the radioactive waste (Class A). This waste was disposed of at a rate of $62 per cubic foot for "Bulk" waste, and a rate of $252 per cubic foot for "General" waste. These rates include State of Utah taxes and Southwest Compact fees. There are no currently operating disposal facilities available to PG&E that have a license to dispose of the more highly radioactive waste (Classes B and C), for example, generated in the dismantling of the reactor vessel. As such, waste disposal costs were estimated. The cost for disposal for Class B and C waste was $2,916 per cubic foot. This rate includes Southwest Compact fees. These disposal costs for low-level radioactive waste are based on a study sponsored by PG&E and Southern California Edison Company, "Establishing an Appropriate Disposal Rate for Low Level Radioactive Waste During Decommissioning."[131 The study was done to reflect the California Public Utilities Commission's desire for these owners to conservatively estimate their nuclear decommissioning LLRW disposal rates.
3.5.8 Site Conditions Following Decommissioning The NRC will terminate (or amend) 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. Local building codes and state environmental regulations will dictate the next step in the decommissioning process, as well as the owner's own future plans for the site.
All structures will be removed except for the switchyard. The switchyard is required for grid operations. Structures to be removed include but are not 'limited to the reactor buildings, auxiliary building, turbine buildings, intake and discharge structures, and steam generator storage facility.
The structures that are expected to require decontamination or radiological remediation are the reactor buildings, auxiliary building, and radwaste storage building.
TLG Services, Inc.
Diablo Canyon Power Plant Document P01-1604-003, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 3, Page 16 of 27 The estimates presented herein include the dismantling of the major structures to a nominal depth of three feet below grade, backfilling and the collapsing of below grade voids, and general terra-forming such that the site upon which the power block and supplemental structures are located is transformed into a "grassy plain."
The estimate does not assume the remediation of any significant volume of contaminated soil. This assumption may be affected by continued plant operations and/or future regulatory
- actions, such as the development of site-specific release criteria.
3.6 ASSUMPTIONS The following are the major assumptions made in the development of the estimates for decommissioning the site.
3.6.1 Estimating Basis The study follows the principles of ALARA through the use of work duration adjustment factors. These factors address the impact of activities such as radiological protection instruction, mock-up training, and the use of respiratory protection and protective clothing. The factors lengthen a task's duration, increasing costs and lengthening the overall schedule. ALARA planning is considered in the costs for engineering and planning, and in the development of activity specifications and detailed procedures. Changes to worker exposure limits may impact the decommissioning cost and project schedule.
3.6.2 Labor Costs The craft labor required to decontaminate and dismantle the nuclear plant is acquired through standard site contracting practices. The current cost of labor at the site is used as an estimating basis.
The owner will provide radiological health and safety, quality assurance and overall site administration during the decommissioning and derholition phases.
Contract personnel will provide engineering services, e.g., for preparing 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.
TLG Services, Inc.
Diablo Canyon Power Plant Document P01-1604-003, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 3, Page 17 of 27 Security, while reduced from operating levels, is maintained throughout the decommissioning for access control, material control, and to safeguard the spent fuel.
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 long-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-3474.[271 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 CR-0130[28] and CR-0672,[291 and benchmarked to the long-lived values from CR-3474.
The control elements are disposed of along with the spent fuel, i.e., there is no additional cost provided for their disposal.
Activation of the containment building structure is confined to the biological shield. More extensive activation (at very low levels) of the interior structures within containment has been detected at several reactors and the owners have elected to dispose of the affected material at a controlled facility rather than reuse the material as fill on site or send it to a landfill. The ultimate disposition of the material removed from the containment building will depend upon the site release criteria selected, as well as the designated end use for the site.
3.6.4 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:
TLG Services, Inc.
Diablo Canyon Power Plant Document P01-1604-003, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 3, Page 18 of 27 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.
Process operating waste inventories, i.e., the estimates do not address the disposition of any legacy wastes; the disposal of operating wastes during this initial period is not considered a decommissioning expense.
Secondary Side Systems Selected secondary side systems are assumed to be contaminated, and will require radiological controls during dismantling, and off-site waste processing. Systems assumed to be affected include:
o Auxiliary Steam o Condensate o Extraction Steam and Heater Drip o Lube Oil Distribution and Purification o Turbine Steam Supply o Turbine and Generator o Main Condensers o Main Turbine/Generator Contaminated Surfaces Contaminated concrete surfaces in the reactor buildings, fuel handling areas, containment penetration areas, radwaste storage building and auxiliary building will require decontamination by scabbling (removal of concrete surfaces to a depth of one-half inch), or a drill and spall technique (removal of concrete surfaces to a depth of two inches).
Electrical Switchyard The existing electrical switchyard will remain after decommissioning in support of the utility's electrical transmission and distribution system.
Scrap and Salvage The existing plant equipment is considered obsolete and suitable for scrap as deadweight quantities only. PG&E will make economically TLG Services, Inc.
Diablo Canyon Power Plant Document P01-1604-003, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 3, Page 19 of 27 reasonable efforts to salvage equipment following final plant shutdown.
However, dismantling techniques assumed by TLG for equipment in this analysis are not consistent with removal techniques required for salvage (resale) of equipment. Experience has indicated that some buyers wanted equipment stripped down to very specific requirements before they would consider purchase. This required expensive rework after the equipment had been removed from its installed location. Since placing a salvage value on this machinery and equipment would be speculative, and the value would be small in comparison to the overall decommissioning expenses, this analysis does not attempt to quantify the value that an owner may realize based upon those efforts.
It is assumed, for purposes of this analysis, that any value received from the sale of scrap generated in the dismantling process would be more than offset by the on-site processing costs. The dismantling techniques assumed in the decommissioning estimates do not include the additional cost for size reduction and preparation to meet "furnace ready" conditions. For example, the recovery of copper from electrical cabling may require the removal and disposition of any contaminated insulation, an added expense. With a volatile market, the potential profit margin in scrap recovery is highly speculative, regardless of the ability to free release this material. This assumption is an implicit recognition of scrap value in the disposal of clean metallic waste at no additional cost to the project.
Furniture, tools, mobile equipment such as forklifts, trucks, bulldozers, and other property is removed at no cost or credit to the decommissioning project. Disposition may include relocation to other facilities. Spare parts are also made available for alternative use.
Energy For estimating purposes, the plant is assumed to be de-energized, with the exception of those facilities associated with spent fuel storage.
Replacement power costs are used to calculate the cost of energy consumed during decommissioning for tooling, lighting, ventilation, and essential services.
Insurance Costs for continuing coverage (nuclear liability and property insurance) following cessation of plant operations and during decommissioning are included and based upon current operating premiums. Reductions in TLG Services, Inc.
Diablo Canyon Power Plant Document P01-1604-003, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 3, Page 20 of 27 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."[301 The NRC's financial protection requirements are based on various reactor (and spent fuel) configurations.
Taxes Property taxes 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 are provided in Tables 3.1 and 3.2. The tables delineate the cost contributors by year of expenditures as well as cost contributor (e.g., labor, materials, and waste disposal).
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 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 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 management 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 TLG Services, Inc.
Diablo Canyon Power Plant Document P01-1604-003, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 3, Page 21 of 27 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.
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 2008 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.
TLG Services, Inc.
Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document P01-1604-003, Rev. 0 Section 3, Page 22 of 27 TABLE 3.1a DECON ALTERNATIVE SCHEDULE OF TOTAL ANNUAL EXPENDITURES, UNIT 1 (thousands, 2008 dollars)
PG&E Year Labor Equipment &
Materials Contractor Labor Burial Other Total 2024 5,240 426 2,808 8
3,301 11,783 2025 31,907 4,829 19,265 3,169 21,306 80,477 2026 25,455 19,743 33,361 38,606 20,127 137,292 2027 21,656 20,478 34,008 45,390 15,945 137,476 2028 15,898 9,071 24,740 12,725 10,316 72,750 2029 13,422 7,763 20,678 10,605 10,308 62,776 2030 1,057 1,239 373 8
10,408 13,086 2031 1,057 1,239 373 8
10,408 13,086 2032 1,060 1,243 374 8
10,437 13,122 2033 1,057 1,239 373 8
10,408 13,086 2034 1,057 1,239 373 8
10,408 13,086 2035 1,057 1,239 373 8
10,408 13,086 2036 1,060 1,243 374 8
10,437 13,122 2037 2,560 2,521 4,083 2,289 9,623 21,077 2038 5,485 3,510 22,055 3,466 4,296 38,813 2039 1,101 8,431 9,927 1
2,422 21,882 2040 1,012 8,664 9,559 0
2,393 21,627 2041 603 663 2,866 0
2,235 6,366 2042 569 0
2,312 0
2,222 5,103 2043 569 0
2,312 0
2,222 5,103 2044 570 0
2,319 0
2,228 5,117 2045 569 0
2,312 0
2,222 5,103 2046 569 0
2,312 0
2,222 5,103 2047 569 0
2,312 0
2,222 5,103 2048 570 0
2,319 0
2,228 5,117 2049 569 0
2,312 0
2,222 5,103 2050 569 0
2,312 0
2,222 5,103 2051 569 349 2,315 4
13,014 16,251 2052 220 1,457 1,466 516 1,287 4,945 1137,653 1
96,587 1 210,569 1 116,839 1
209,499 1 771,148 TLG Services, Inc.
Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document P01-1604-003, Rev. 0 Section 3, Page 23 of 27 TABLE 3.1b DECON ALTERNATIVE SCHEDULE OF TOTAL ANNUAL EXPENDITURES, UNIT 2 (thousands, 2008 dollars)
PG&E Year Labor Equipment &
Materials Contractor Labor Burial Other Total 2025 9,011 1,157 7,959 17 6,861 25,005 2026 25,695 7,762 26,170 6,668 19,904 86,198 2027 23,205 21,815 43,514 44,172 16,257 148,963 2028 22,538 19,284 43,905 37,978 14,646 138,350 2029 21,813 10,551 39,706 11,900 12,513 96,482 2030 16,451 7,340 29,024 7,731 11,705 72,250 2031 6,522 1,396 9,246 12 10,208 27,383 2032 6,540 1,400 9,271 12 10,236 27,458 2033 6,522 1,396 9,246 12 10,208 27,383 2034 6,522 1,396 9,246 12 10,208 27,383 2035 6,522 1,396 9,246 12 10,208 27,383 2036 6,540 1,400 9,271 12 10,236 27,458 2037 8,254 2,774 12,749 2,132 9,398 35,307 2038 10,960 4,123 35,182 3,229 4,018 57,511 2039 4,739 32,960 36,726 1
2,424 76,850 2040 4,618 34,005 36,793 0
2,402 77,819 2041 880 2,602 4,956 0
2,240 10,677 2042 571 0
2,319 0
2,227 5,116 2043 571 0
2,319 0
2,227 5,116 2044 572 0
2,325 0
2,233 5,130 2045 571 0
2,319 0
2,227 5,116 2046 571 0
2,319 0
2,227 5,116 2047 571 0
2,319
.0 2,227 5,116 2048 572 0
2,325 0
2,233 5,130 2049 571 0
2,319 0
2,227 5,116 2050 571 0
2,319 0
2,227 5,116 2051 570 349 2,322 4
13,050 16,296 2052 220 1,461 1,472 518 1,290 4,962 1193,262 154,566 396,886 114,419 198,066 1 1,057,198 TLG Services, Inc.
Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document P01 -1 604-003, Rev. 0 Section 3, Page 24 of 27 TABLE 3.2a SAFSTOR ALTERNATIVE SCHEDULE OF TOTAL ANNUAL EXPENDITURES, UNIT 1 (thousands, 2008 dollars)
PG&E Labor Equipment &
Materials Contractor Labor Year Burial Other Total 2024 5,259 352 1,131 8
1,443 8,192 2025 30,958 4,209 8,474 326 9,132 53,099
.2026 9,269 3,677 3,298 671 24,008 40,923 2027 1,114 1,348 351 31 10,012 12,857 2028 1,118 1,351 352 31 10,039 12,892 2029 1,114 1,348 351 31 10,012 12,857 2030 1,114 1,348 351 31 10,012 12,857 2031 1,114 1,348 351 31 10,012 12,857 2032 1,118 i,351 352 31 10,039 12,892 2033 1,114 1,348 351 31 10,012 12,857 2034 1,114 1,348 351 31 10,012 12,857 2035 1,114 1,348 351 31 10,012 12,857 2036 1,118 1,351 352 31 10,039 12,892 2037 589 295 2
31 2,644 3,561 2038 588 293 1
31 2,624 3,536 2039 588 293 1
31 2,624 3,536 2040 589 293 1
31 2,631 3,545 2041 588 293 1
31 2,624 3,536 2042 588 293 1
31 2,624 3,536 2043 1
588 293 1
31 2,624 1 3,536 2044 589 293 1
31 2,631 3,545 2045 588 293 1
31 2,624 3,536 2046 588 293 1
31 2,624 3,536 2047 588 1
293 1
31 2,624 3,536 2048 589 293 1
31 2,631 3,545 2049 588 293 1
31 2,624 3,536 2050 588 293 1
31 2,624 3,536 2051 1,377 353 869 32 2,616 5,246 2052 19,859 1,950 21,842 44 2,726 46,420 2053 19,369 14,251 35,855 28,584 14,007 112,066 2054 118,116 1
19,367 33,742 46,649 16,313 1
134,188 2055 13,128 8,946, 24,128 12,817 5,269 64,289 2056 10,885 7,302 19,633 10,431 4,349 52,600 TLG Services, Inc.
Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document P01-1604-003, Rev. 0 Section 3, Page 25 of 27 TABLE 3.2a (continued)
SAFSTOR ALTERNATIVE SCHEDULE OF TOTAL ANNUAL EXPENDITURES, UNIT 1 (thousands, 2008 dollars)
PG&E Year Labor Equipment &
Contractor Materials Labor Burial Other Total 2057 2058 2059 2060 1,474 2,900 1,013 677 335 4,447 8,889 5.942 3,053 17,762 9,674 6.467 12 22 0
0 481 1,033 290 194 5,353 26,164 19,866 13,280 1153,673 1
97,609 1
189,456 1 100,344 1
218,830 1
759,912 TLG Services, Inc.
Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document P01-1604-003,,Rev. 0 Section 3, Page 26 of 27 TABLE 3.2b SAFSTOR ALTERNATIVE SCHEDULE OF TOTAL ANNUAL EXPENDITURES, UNIT 2 (thousands, 2008 dollars)
PG&E Labor Equipment &
Materials Contractor Labor Year Burial Other Total 2025 11,261 1,014 5,491 18 4,215 21,999 2026 32,110 7,428 20,954 728 15,858 77,079 2027 10,473 2,042 10,517 336 15,904 39,272 2028 6,569 1,323 9,229 35 9,739 26,895 2029 6,552 1,319 9,204 35 9,712 26,821 2030 6,552 1,319 9,204 35 9,712 26,821 2031 6,552 1,319 9,204 35 9,712 26,821 2032 6,569 1,323 9,229 35 9,739 26,895 2033 6,552 1,319 9,204 35 9,712 26,821 2034 6,552 1,319 9,204 35 9,712 26,821 2035 6,552 1,319 9,204 35 9,712 26,821 2036 6,569 1,323 9,229 35 9,739 26,895 2037 5,824 1,134 8,370 34 8,408 23,770 2038 2,591 308 4,662 32 2,606 10,199 2039 2,591 308 4,662 32 2,606 10,199 2040 2,598 309 4,674 32 2,613 10,227 2041 2,591 308 4,662 32 2,606 10,199 2042 2,591 308 4,662 32 2,606 10,199 2043 2,591 308 4,662 32 2,606 10,199 2044 2,598 309 4,674 32 2,613 10,227 2045 2,591 308 4,662 32 2,606 10,199 2046 2,591 308 4,662 32 2,606 10,199 2047 2,591 308 4,662 32 2,606 10,199 2048 2,598 309 4,674 32 2,613 10,227 2049 2,591 308 4,662 32 2,606 10,199 2050 2,591 308 4,662 32 2,606 10,199 2051 2,508 307 4,470 32 2,536 9,854 2052 2,516 489 1,382 33 1,101 5,520 2053 14,922 2,305 11,448 41 2,785 31,502 2054 18,130 16,601 31,370 33,107 13,418 112,627 2055 19,728 19,645 37,211 41,953 14,797 133,334 2056 18,988 10,267 33,375 10,869 4,704 78,203 2057 17,524 9,174 33,462 9,390 4,226 73,775 TLG Services, Inc.
Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document P01-1604-003, Rev. 0 Section 3, Page 27 of 27 TABLE 3.2b (continued)
SAFSTOR ALTERNATIVE SCHEDULE OF TOTAL ANNUAL EXPENDITURES, UNIT 2 (thousands, 2008 dollars)
PG&E Year Labor Equipment &
Contractor Materials Labor Burial Other Total 2058 6,494 2059 3,370 2060 2,253 14,496 34,206 34,316 33,548 22,940 22,427 24 0
0 872 296 198 56,092 71,530 47,817 1258,817 1
158,049 1 431,782 1
97,302 1
210,703 1 1,156,654 TLG Services, Inc.
Diablo Canyon Power Plant Document P01-1604-003, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 4, Page 1 of 8
- 4. SCHEDULE ESTIMATE The schedules for the decommissioning scenarios considered in this study follow the sequences presented in the AIF/NESP-036 study, with minor changes to reflect recent experience and site-specific constraints. In addition, the scheduling has been revised to reflect the spent fuel management plan described in Section 3.5.1.
A schedule or sequence of activities for the DECON alternative from shutdown 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 twelve years. The key activities listed in the schedule do not reflect a one-to-one correspondence with those activities in the cost tables, but reflect dividing some activities for clarity and combining others for convenience. The schedule was prepared using the "Microsoft Project Professional 2003" computer software. [31]
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. There are eleven paid holidays per year.
o 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.
Diablo Canyon Power Plant Document P01-1604-003, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 4, Page 2 of 8 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 pool areas 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 twelve 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.
Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document P01-1604-003, Rev. 0 Section 4, Page 3 of 8 FIGURE 4.1 ACTIVITY SCHEDULE i
LL LA L
0 Y" 11011111211311 I Diablo Canyon Unit 1 & 2 schedule Shutdown Unit 1 - November 2, 2024 Period la Unit 1 - Shutdown through transition Certificate of permanent cessation of operations submitted Fuel storage pool operations Dry fuel storage operations Reconfigure plant Prepare activity specifications Perform site characterization PSDAR submitted Written certificate of permanent removal of fuel submitted Site specific decommissioning cost estimate submitted DOC staff mobilized Period lb Unit 1 -Decommissioning preparations Fuel storage pool operations Recanfigure plant (continued)
Dry fuel storage operations Prepare detailed work procedures Decon NSSS Isolate spent fuel pool Period 2a Unit 1 - Large component removal Fuel storage pool operations Dry fuel storage operations Preparation for reactor vessel removal Reactor vessel & internals Remaining large NSSS components disposition Non-essential systems Main turbine/generator Main condenser License termination plan submitted Period 2b Unit 1 - Decontamination (wet fuel)
Fuel storage pool operations Dry fuel storage operations I -
i 40 Eli ni TLG Services, Inc.
Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document P01-1604-003, Rev. 0 Section 4, Page 4 of 8 FIGURE 4.1 (continued)
ACTIVITY SCHEDULE Task Nam VI IV9 Iy5 IVAIA I!'VAIV'7IVRIVQyinyivi9VqV1y4 5.5. 44.St Task NaTne Remove systems not supporting wet fuel storage Decon buildings not supporting wet fuel storage License termination plan approved Fuel storage pool available for decommissioning Period 2c Unit 1 Wet and Dry Fuel Storage Unit 1 Fuel Stored Wet Unit 1 Fuel Stored Dry Unit 2 Operations Shutdown Unit 2 - August 26, 2025 Period la Unit 2 - Shutdown through transition Certificate of permanent cessation of operations submitted Fuel storage pool operations Dry fuel storage operations Reconfigure plant Prepare activity specifications Perform site characterization PSDAR submitted Written certificate of permanent removal of fuel submitted Site specific decommissioning cost estimate submitted DOC staff mobilized Period lb Unit 2 - Decommissioning preparations Fuel storage pool operations Reconfigure plant (continued)
Dry fuel storage operations Prepare detailed work procedures Decon NSSS Isolate spent fuel pool Period 2a Unit 2 - Large component removal Fuel storage pool operations Dry fuel storage operations Preparation for reactor vessel removal Reactor vessel & internals Remaining large NSSS components disposition P31 E"11 Lt~Lt~
I *~
- L4 -
.*~
.1 I
I I
TLG Services, Inc.
Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document P01-1604-003, Rev. 0 Section 4, Page 5 of 8 FIGURE 4.1 (continued)
ACTIVITY SCHEDULE I.......
ý AW&
i Non-eesenthal systems Main turLbinelgnerator Main condenser License termination plan submitted Period 2b Unit 2 - Deconteraination (wet fuel)
Fuel storage pool operations Dry fuel storage operatiors Remove systerra nmt supporting wet fuel storage Decon buildngs not supporting wet fuel storage License termination plan approved Fuel storage pool available for decormmissioning Period 2c Unit 2 Wet Fuel Storage Unit 2 Wet Fuel Storage Period 2d Unit 1 & 2 - Decontamination following wet fuel storage Dry fuel storage operations Remove remaining sy*atrns Deoon wet fuel storage aea Period 2e Unit 1 & 2 - Plant license termination Dry fuel s torage operations Final Site Suovey TPRC review & approval Part 50 license terminated Period 3b Unit I & 2 - Site restoration Dry fuel storage operations Building dem.litions, bockfill and lsndsceping Period So - Unit I & 2 Fuel Storage Operations/Shipping All Spent Fuel Off Site (actual Daecomer "lO1)
Period 3d - Unit 1 & 2 GTCC shipping End GTCC shipment (aloual end of 2061)
Period 39 - ISFSI Decontamination End Decontamination (actual end of April M052)
Period 3f - ISFSI Site Restoration End Restoration (actual end of June "052)
TLG Services, Inc.
Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document P01-1604-003, Rev. 0 Section 4, Page 6 of 8 FIGURE 4.1 (continued)
ACTIVITY SCHEDULE LEGEND Legend:
- 1.
Red text and/or shaded scheduling bars indicate critical path activities
- 2.
Shaded scheduling bars associated with major decommissioning periods, e.g., Period la, indicate overall duration of that period
- 3.
Blue text and/or diamond symbols indicate major milestones
- 4.
Due to limitations within Microsoft PROJECT, dates beyond 2049 can not be printed. Those activities that continue past 2049 have the end date noted in the Task Name.
TLG Services, Inc.
Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document P01-1604-003, Rev. 0 Section 4, Page 7 of 8 FIGURE 4.2 DECOMMISSIONING TIMELINE DECON (not to scale)
Unit 1 (Shutdown November 2, 2024)
Pool and ISFSI Operations ISFSI Operations Period 1 Period 2 Period 3 Transition and Site Decommissioning 11 / 2024 05 / 2026 01/2039 01/2041 12/2051 06/2052 Storage Pools Empty Unit 1 - 01 / 2037 Unit 2 - 10 / 2037 Unit 2 (Shutdown August 26, 2025)
Period 1 Transition Period 2 Period 3 Decommissioning ISFSI Operations 08/2025 02/2027 01/2039 01/2041 12/2051 06/2052 TLG Services, Inc.
Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document P01-1604-003, Rev. 0 Section 4, Page 8 of 8 FIGURE 4.3 DECOMMISSIONING TIMELINE SAFSTOR (not to scale)
Unit 1 (Shutdown November 2, 2024)
Period 1 Transition Period 2 Period 3 Period 4 Period 5 Dormancy Decommissioning 11 / 2024 05 / 2026 12/2051 06/2053 08/2058 09/2060 Unit 1 Pool Empty 01 / 2037 Dry Spent Fuel Storage ISFSI Empty 12/ 2051 Unit 2 (Shutdown August 26, 2025)
Period 1 Transition and Period 2 Period 3 Period 4 Period 5 Delayed Dormancy Decommissioning 08/2025 02/2027 11/2052 05/2054 08/2058 09/2060 Unit 2 Pool Empty 10 / 2037 TLG Services, Inc.
Diablo Canyon Power Plant Document P01-1604-003, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 5, Page 1 of 6
- 5. RADIOACTIVE WASTES The objectives of the decommissioning process are the removal of all radioactive material from the site that would restrict its future use and the termination of the NRC license. This currently requires the remediation of all radioactive material at the site in excess of applicable legal limits. Under the Atomic Energy Act,[321 the NRC is responsible for protecting the public from sources of ionizing radiation. Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations delineates the production, utilization, and disposal of radioactive materials and processes. In particular, Part 71 defines radioactive material as it pertains to transportation and Part 61 specifies its disposition.
Most of the materials being transported for controlled burial are categorized as Low Specific Activity (LSA) or Surface Contaminated Object (SCO) materials containing Type A quantities, as defined in 49 CFR Parts 173-178. Shipping containers are required to be Industrial Packages (IP-1, IP-2 or IP-3, as defined in 10 CFR
§ 173.411). For this study, commercially available steel containers are presumed to be used for °the disposal of piping, small components, and concrete. Larger components can serve as their own containers, with proper closure of all openings, access ways, and penetrations.
The volumes of radioactive waste generated during the various decommissioning activities at the site are shown on a line-item basis in Appendices C and D, and summarized in Tables 5.1 and 5.2. The quantified waste volume summaries shown in these tables are consistent with Part 61 classifications. The volumes are calculated based on the exterior dimensions for containerized material and on the displaced volume of components serving as their own waste containers.
The reactor vessel and internals are categorized as large quantity shipments and, accordingly, will be shipped in reusable, shielded truck casks with disposable liners.
In calculating disposal costs, the burial fees are applied against the liner volume, as well as the special handling requirements of the payload. Packaging efficiencies are lower for the highly activated materials (greater than Type A quantity waste),
where high concentrations of gamma-emitting radionuclides limit the capacity of the shipping canisters.
No process system containing/handling radioactive substances at shutdown is presumed to meet material release criteria by decay alone (i.e., systems radioactive at shutdown will still be radioactive over the time period during which the decommissioning is accomplished, due to the presence of long-lived radionuclides).
While the dose rates decrease with time, radionuclides such as 137Cs will still control the disposition requirements.
TLG Services, Inc.
Diablo Canyon Power Plant Document P01-1604-003, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 5, Page 2 of 6 The waste material produced in the decontamination and dismantling of the nuclear plants is primarily generated during Period 2 of DECON and Period 4 of SAFSTOR. Material that is considered potentially contaminated when removed from the radiological controlled area is sent to processing facilities in Tennessee for conditioning and disposal. Heavily contaminated components and activated materials are routed for controlled disposal. The disposal volumes reported in the tables reflect the savings resulting from reprocessing and recycling.
For the purpose of this analysis, the EnergySolutions' facility is used as the disposal site for the majority of the radioactive waste (Class A). This waste was disposed of at a rate of $62 per cubic foot for "Bulk" waste, and a rate of $252 per cubic foot for "General" waste. These rates include State of Utah taxes and Southwest Compact fees. There are no currently operating disposal facilities available to PG&E that have a license to dispose of the more highly radioactive waste (Classes B and C), for example, generated in the dismantling of the reactor vessel. As such, waste disposal costs and waste transportation distances were estimated. For purposes of estimating the Class B and C waste transportation cost it was assumed that this waste was shipped to Andrews County, Texas. The cost for disposal for Class B and C waste was $2,916 per cubic foot. This rate includes Southwest Compact fees.
These disposal costs for low-level radioactive waste are based on a study sponsored by PG&E and Southern California Edison Company. The study was done to reflect the California Public Utilities Commission's desire for these owners to conservatively estimate their nuclear decommissioning LLRW disposal rates.
TLG Services, Inc.
Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document P01-1604-003, Rev. 0 Section 5, Page 3 of 6 TABLE 5.1 UNIT 1 DECON ALTERNATIVE DECOMMISSIONING WASTE
SUMMARY
Waste Volume Mass Waste Cost Basis Class [1]
(cubic feet)
(pounds)
Low-Level Radioactive EnergySolutions A
137,783 12,029,047 Waste (near-surface disposal)
Estimate [2]
B 5,627 684,759 Estimate [2]
C 574 69,650 Greater than Class C Spent Fuel (geologic repository)
Equivalent GTCC 433 85,510 Total [31 144,417 12,868,966 Processed/Conditioned Recycling (off-site recycling center)
Vendors A
402,284 15,636,010 Scrap Metal 95,983,842
[11 Waste is classified according to the requirements as delineated in Title 10 CFR, Part 61.55
[2]
Costs for disposal of Class B and C waste was based on the following study: "Establishing an Appropriate Disposal Rate for Low Level Radioactive Waste During Decommissioning",
Robert A Snyder NEWEX, Revision 0, July 2008
[3]
Columns may not add due to rounding.
TLG Services, Inc.
Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document P01-1604-003, Rev. 0 Section 5, Page 4 of 6 TABLE 5.2 UNIT 2 DECON ALTERNATIVE DECOMMISSIONING WASTE
SUMMARY
Waste Volume Mass Waste Cost Basis Class [1]
(cubic feet)
(pounds)
Low-Level Radioactive Waste (near-surface EnergySolutions A
146,080 12,657,732 disposal)
Estimate [21 B
5,645 686,747 Estimate [21 C
574 69,650 Greater than Class C Spent Fuel (geologic repository)
Equivalent GTCC 433 85,510 Total [31 152,732 13,499,639 Processed/Conditioned Recycling (off-site recycling center)
Vendors A
358,841 13,879,480 Scrap Metal 153,210,831
[1]
Waste is classified according to the requirements as delineated in Title 10 CFR, Part 61.55
[21 Costs for disposal of Class B and C waste was based on the following study: "Establishing an Appropriate Disposal Rate for Low Level Radioactive Waste During Decommissioning",
Robert A Snyder NEWEX, Revision 0, July 2008
[31 Columns may not add due to rounding.
TLG Services, Inc.
Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document P01-1604-003, Rev. 0 Section 5, Page 5 of 6 TABLE 5.3 UNIT 1 SAFSTOR ALTERNATIVE DECOMMISSIONING WASTE
SUMMARY
Waste Volume Mass Waste Cost Basis Class [1]
(cubic feet)
(pounds)
Low-Level Radioactive EnergySolutions A
130,665 10,701,162 Waste (near-surface disposal)
Estimate [2]
B 2,754 353,167 Estimate [2]
C 584 68,960 Greater than Class C Spent Fuel (geologic repository)
Equivalent GTCC 433 85,510 Total [3]
134,437 11,208,799 Processed/Conditioned Recycling (off-site recycling center)
Vendors A
416,013 16,212,920 Scrap Metal 96,120,000
[1]
Waste is classified according to the requirements as delineated in Title 10 CFR, Part 61.55
[21 Costs for disposal of Class B and C waste was based on the following study: "Establishing an Appropriate Disposal Rate for Low Level Radioactive Waste During Decommissioning",
Robert A Snyder NEWEX, Revision 0, July 2008
[31 Columns may not add due to rounding.
TLG Services, Inc.
Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document P01-1604-003, Rev. 0 Section 5, Page 6 of 6 TABLE 5.4 UNIT 2 SAFSTOR ALTERNATIVE DECOMMISSIONING WASTE
SUMMARY
Waste Volume Mass Waste Cost Basis Class [1M (cubic feet)
(pounds)
Low-Lev'el Radioactive EnergySolutions A
137,862 11,224,803 Waste (near-surface E
disposal)
Estimate [21 B
2,754 353,167 Estimate [2]
C 584 68,960 Greater than Class C Spent Fuel (geologic repository)
Equivalent GTCC 433 85,510 Total [3]
141,634 11,732,440 Processed/Conditioned Recycling (off-site recycling center)
Vendors A
371,549 14,414,930 Scrap Metal 153,348,000
[1]
Waste is classified according to the requirements as delineated in Title 10 CFR, Part 61.55
[2]
Costs for disposal of Class B and C waste was based on the following study: "Establishing an Appropriate Disposal Rate for Low Level Radioactive Waste During Decommissioning",
Robert A Snyder NEWEX, Revision 0, July 2008
[31 Columns may not add due to rouiiding.
TLG Services, Inc.
Diablo Canyon Power Plant Document P01-1604-003, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 6, Page 1 of 7
- 6. RESULTS The analysis to estimate the costs to decommission Diablo Canyon relied upon the site-specific, technical information developed for a previous analysis prepared in 2005. 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 twelve 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 $1,828.3 million. The majority of this cost (approximately 68.2%) is associated with the physical decontamination and dismantling of the nuclear plant so that the operating license can be terminated. Another 20.9% is associated with the management, interim storage, and eventual transfer of the spent fuel. The remaining 10.9% is for the demolition of the designated structures and limited restoration of the site.
The cost projected for deferred decommissioning (SAFSTOR) is estimated to be
$1,916.6 million. The majority of this cost (approximately 55.7%) 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 34.0% is associated with the management, interim storage, and eventual transfer of the spent fuel. The remaining 10.3% is for the demolition of the designated structures and limited restoration of the site.
The primary cost contributors, identified in Tables 6.1 thru 6.4, are either labor-related or associated with the management and disposition of the radioactive waste.
Program management is the largest single contributor to the overall cost. The magnitude of the expense is a function of both the size of the organization required to manage the decommissioning, as well as the duration of the program. The size and composition of the management organization varies with the decommissioning phase 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 the long-term care of the spent fuel (for the DECON alternative).
TLG Services, Inc.
Diablo Canyon Power Plant Document P01-1604-003, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 6, Page 2 of 7 As described in this report, the spent fuel pools will remain operational for a minimum of twelve years following the cessation of operations. The pools will be isolated and an independent spent fuel island, created.
This will allow decommissioning operations to proceed in and around the pool areas. Over the twelve-year period, the spent fuel will be packaged into multi-purpose canisters for transfer to the ISFSI. Spent fuel will also be in storage at the ISFSI (from operations). This inventory will be transferred to the DOE after the pools are emptied.
The cost for waste disposal includes only those costs associated with the controlled disposition of the low-level radioactive waste generated from decontamination and dismantling activities, including plant equipment and components, structural material, filters, resins and dry-active waste. As described in Section 5, disposition of the majority of the low-level radioactive material requiring controlled disposal is at the EnergySolutions' facility. Highly activated components, requiring additional isolation from the environment (GTCC), are packaged for geologic disposal. The cost of geologic disposal is based upon a cost equivalent for spent fuel.
A significant portion of the metallic waste is designated for additional processing and treatment at an off-site facility. Processing reduces the volume of material requiring controlled disposal through such techniques and processes as survey and sorting, decontamination, and volume reduction. The material that cannot be unconditionally released is packaged for controlled disposal at one of the currently operating facilities. The cost identified in the summary tables for processing is all-inclusive, incorporating the ultimate disposition of the material.
Decontamination and removal costs reflect the labor-intensive nature of the decommissioning process, as well as the management controls required to ensure a safe and successful program. Non-radiological demolition is a natural extension of the decommissioning process. The methods employed in decontamination and dismantling are generally destructive and indiscriminate in inflicting collateral damage. With a work force mobilized to support decommissioning operations, non-radiological demolition can be an integrated activity and a logical expansion of the work being performed in the process of terminating the operating license. Prompt demolition reduces future liabilities and can be more cost effective than deferral, due to the deterioration of the facilities (and therefore the working conditions) with time.
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 TLG Services, Inc.
Diablo Canyon Power Plant Document P01-1604-003, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 6, Page 3 of 7 identified in this report. For purposes of this analysis, material is primarily moved overland by truck.
Decontamination is used to reduce the plant's radiation fields and minimize worker exposure. Slightly contaminated material or material located within a contaminated area is sent to an off-site processing center, i.e., this analysis does not assume that contaminated plant components and equipment can be decontaminated for uncontrolled release in-situ. Centralized processing centers have proven to be a more economical means of handling the large volumes of material produced in the dismantling of a nuclear plant.
License termination survey costs are associated with the labor intensive and complex activity of verifying that contamination has been removed from the site to the levels specified by the regulating agency. This process involves a systematic survey of all remaining plant surface areas and surrounding environs, sampling, isotopic analysis, and documentation of the findings. The status of any plant components and materials not removed in the decommissioning process will also require confirmation and will add to the expense of surveying the facilities alone.
The remaining costs include allocations for heavy equipment and temporary services, as well as for other expenses such as regulatory fees and the premiums for nuclear insurance.
While site, operating costs are greatly reduced following the final cessation of plant operations, certain administrative functions do need to be maintained either at a basic functional or regulatory level.
TLG Services, Inc.
Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document P01-1604-003, Rev. 0 Section 6, Page 4 of 7 TABLE 6.1 UNIT 1 DECON ALTERNATIVE DECOMMISSIONING COST ELEMENTS (thousands of 2008 dollars)
Cost Element Total Percentage Decontamination 18,180 2.4 Removal 116,996 15.2 Packaging 18,508 2.4 Transportation 15,738 2.0 Waste Disposal 81,180 10.5 Off-site Waste Processing 48,280 6.3 Program Management [1]
255,057 33.1 Spent Fuel Pool Isolation 11,358 1.5 Spent Fuel Management 145,290 18.8 Insurance and Regulatory Fees 20,535 2.7 Energy 11,230 1.5 Characterization and Licensing Surveys 19,165 2.5 Property Taxes 3,177 0.4 Miscellaneous Equipment 6,454 0.8 Total [21 771,148 100.0 Cost Element Total Percentage License Termination 538,104 69.8 Spent Fuel Management 189,088 24.5 Site Restoration 43,956 5.7 Total [21]
771,148 100.0
[1] Includes engineering and security costs
[21 Columns may not add due to rounding TLG Services, Inc.
Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document P01-1604-003, Rev. 0 Section 6, Page 5 of 7 TABLE 6.2 UNIT 2 DECON ALTERNATIVE DECOMMISSIONING COST ELEMENTS (thousands of 2008 dollars)
Cost Element Total Percentage Decontamination 21,089 2.0 Removal 213,110 20.2 Packaging 18,570 1.8 Transportation 15,183 1.4 Waste Disposal 84,060 8.0 Off-site Waste Processing 43,016 4.1 Program Management [1]
450,584 42.6 Spent Fuel Pool Isolation 7,593 0.7 Spent Fuel Management 144,151 13.6 Insurance and Regulatory Fees 18,420 1.7 Energy 11,137 1.1 Characterization and Licensing Surveys 20,718 2.0 Property Taxes 3,090 0.3 Miscellaneous Equipment 6,478 0.6 Total [21 1,057,198 100.0 Cost Element Total Percentage License Termination 709,740 67.1 Spent Fuel Management 192,789 18.2 Site Restoration 154,668 14.6 Total [21 1,057,198 100.0
[M] Includes engineering and security costs 121 Columns may not add due to rounding TLG Services, Inc.
Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document P01-1604-003, Rev. 0 Section 6, Page 6 of 7 TABLE 6.3 UNIT 1 SAFSTOR ALTERNATIVE DECOMMISSIONING COST ELEMENTS (thousands of 2008 dollars)
Cost Element Total Percentage Decontamination 15,031 2.0 Removal 116,384 15.3 Packaging 14,704 1.9 Transportation 14,078 1.9 Waste Disposal 62,782 8.3 Off-site Waste Processing 50,229 6.6 Program Management [1]
250,533 33.0 Spent Fuel Pool Isolation 11,398 1.5 Spent Fuel Management 145,031 19.1 Insurance and Regulatory Fees 27,205 3.6 Energy 15,758 2.1 Characterization and Licensing Surveys 20,915 2.8 Property Taxes 4,126 0.5 Miscellaneous Equipment 11,738 1.5 Total [21 759,912 100.0 Cost Element Total Percentage License Termination 510,831 67.2 Spent Fuel Management 203,537 26.8 Site Restoration 45,545 6.0 Total [2]
759,912 100.0
[1] Includes engineering and security costs
[21 Columns may not add due to rounding TLG Services, Inc.
Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document P01-1604-003, Rev. 0 Section 6, Page 7 of 7 TABLE 6.4 UNIT 2 SAFSTOR ALTERNATIVE DECOMMISSIONING COST ELEMENTS (thousands of 2008 dollars)
Cost Element Total Percentage Decontamination 21,150 1.8 Removal 213,969 18.5 Packaging 15,027 1.3 Transportation 13,709 1.2 Waste Disposal 65,153 5.6 Off-site Waste Processing 44,863 3.9 Program Management [1]
550,768 47.6 Spent Fuel Pool Isolation 7,627 0.7 Spent Fuel Management 144,707 12.5 Insurance and Regulatory Fees 25,122 2.2 Energy 16,017 1.4 Characterization and Licensing Surveys 22,518 1.9 Property Taxes 4,043 0.3 Miscellaneous Equipment 11,980 1.0 Total [21 1,156,654 100.0 Cost Element Total Percentage NRC License Termination 555,813 48.1 Spent Fuel Management 448,831 38.8 Site Restoration 152,010 13.1 Total [21 1,156,654 100.0
[1] Includes engineering and security costs
[21 Columns may not add due to rounding TLG Services, Inc.
Diablo Canyon Power Plant Document P01-1604-003, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 7, Page 1 of 3
- 7. REFERENCES
- 1.
"Decommissioning Cost Analysis for the Diablo Canyon Power Plant,"
Document No. P01-1513-004, Rev. 1, TLG Services, Inc., August 2005
- 2.
U.S. Code of Federal Regulations, Title 10, Parts 30, 40, 50, 51, 70 and 72, "General Requirements for Decommissioning Nuclear Facilities," Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Federal Register Volume 53, Number 123 (p 24018 et seq.), June 27, 1988
- 3.
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Regulatory Guide 1.159, "Assuring the Availability of Funds for Decommissioning Nuclear Reactors," October 2003
- 4.
U.S. Code of Federal Regulations, Title 10, Part 20, Subpart E, "Radiological Criteria for License Termination"
- 5.
U.S. Code of Federal Regulations, Title 10, Parts 20 and 50, "Entombment Options for Power Reactors," Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, Federal Register Volume 66, Number 200, October 16, 2001
- 6.
U.S.
Code of Federal Regulations, Title 10, Parts 2,
50 and 51, "Decommissioning of Nuclear Power Reactors,"
Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Federal Register Volume 61 (p 39278 et seq.), July 29, 1996
- 7.
"Nuclear Waste Policy Act, of 1982 and Amendments," U.S. Department of Energy's Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management, 1982
- 8.
DOE/RW-0604, "Project Decision Schedule," U.S. Department of Energy's Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management, January 2009
- 9.
U.S. Code of Federal Regulations, Title 10, Part 50, "Domestic Licensing of Production and Utilization Facilities," Subpart 54 (bb), "Conditions of Licenses"
- 10.
U.S. Code of Federal Regulations, Title 10, Part 61.55, "Waste classification"
- 11.
"Low Level Radioactive Waste Policy Act," Public Law 96-573, 1980
- 12.
"Low-Level Radioactive Waste Policy Amendments Act of 1985," Public Law 99-240, 1986 TLG Services, Inc.
Diablo Canyon Power Plant Document P01-1604-003, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 7, Page 2 of 3
- 7. REFERENCES (continued)
- 13.
"Establishing an Appropriate Disposal Rate for Low Level Radioactive Waste During Decommissioning", Robert A Snyder NEWEX, Revision 0, July 2008
- 14.
U.S. Code of Federal Regulations, Title 10, Part 20, Subpart E, "Radiological Criteria for License Termination," Federal Register, Volume 62, Number 139 (p 39058 et seq.), July 21, 1997
- 15.
"Establishment of Cleanup Levels for CERCLA Sites with Radioactive Contamination," EPA Memorandum OSWER No. 9200.4-18, August 22, 1997.
- 16.
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"
- 17.
"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
- 18.
"Multi-Agency Radiation Survey and Site Investigation Manual (MARSSIM),"
NUREG-1575, Rev. 1, EPA 402-R-97-016, Rev. 1, August 2000
- 19.
T.S. LaGuardia et al., "Guidelines for Producing Commercial Nuclear Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Estimates," AIF/NESP-036, May 1986
- 20.
W.J. Manion and T.S. LaGuardia, "Decommissioning Handbook," U.S.
Department of Energy, DOE/EV/10128-1, November 1980
- 21.
"Building Construction Cost Data 2008," Robert Snow Means Company, Inc.,
Kingston, Massachusetts
- 22.
Project and Cost Engineers' Handbook, Second Edition, p. 239, American Association of Cost Engineers, Marcel Dekker, Inc., New York, New York, 1984 TLG Services, Inc.
Diablo Canyon Power Plant Document P01-1604-003, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Section 7, Page 3 of 3
- 7. REFERENCES (continued)
- 23.
"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)
- 24.
DOE/RW-0351, "Civilian Radioactive Waste Management System Waste Acceptance System Requirements Document", Revision 5, May 31, 2007
- 25.
U.S. Department of Transportation, Title 49 of the Code of Federal Regulations, "Transportation," Parts 173 through 178, 2007
- 26.
Tri-State Motor Transit Company, published tariffs, Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC), Docket No. MC-427719 Rules Tariff, March 2004, Radioactive Materials Tariff, January 2008
- 27.
J.C. Evans et al., "Long-Lived Activation Products in Reactor Materials" NUREG/CR-3474, Pacific Northwest Laboratory for the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. August 1984
- 28.
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
- 29.
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
- 30.
"Financial Protection Requirements for Permanently Shutdown Nuclear Power Reactors," 10 CFR Parts 50 and 140, Federal Register Notice, Vol. 62, No. 210, October 30, 1997
- 31.
"Microsoft Project Professional 2003," Microsoft Corporation, Redmond, WA.
- 32.
"Atomic Energy Act of 1954," (68 Stat. 919)
TLG Services, Inc.
Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document P01-1604-003, Rev. 0 Appendix A, Page 1 of 4 APPENDIX A UNIT COST FACTOR DEVELOPMENT TLG Services, Inc.
Diablo Canyon Power Plant Document P01-1604-003, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis 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 processing area.
- 2.
CALCULATIONS Activity Critical Act Activity Duration Duration ID Description (minutes)
(minutes)*
a Remove insulation 60 (b) b Mount pipe cutters 60 60 c
Install contamination controls 20 (b) d Disconnect inlet and outlet lines 60 60 e
Cap openings 20 (d) f Rig for removal 30 30 g
Unbolt from mounts 30 30 h
Remove contamination controls 15 15 i
Remove, wrap, send to waste processing area 60 60 Totals (Activity/Critical) 355 255 Duration adjustment(s):
+ Respiratory protection adjustment (50% of critical duration) 128
+ Radiation/ALARA adjustment (37% of critical duration) 95 Adjusted work duration 478
+ Protective clothing adjustment (30% of adjusted duration) 143 Productive work duration 621
+ Work break adjustment (8.33 % of productive duration) 52 Total work duration (minutes) 673
- Total duration = 11.217 hr *
- alpha designators indicate activities that can be performed in parallel TLG Services, Inc.
Diablo Canyon Power Plant Document P01-1604-003, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Appendix A, Page 3 of 4 APPENDIX A (continued)
- 3.
LABOR REQUIRED Duration Rate Crew Number (hours)
($/hr)
Cost Laborers 3.00 11.217
$48.88
$1,644.86 Craftsmen 2.00 11.217
$59.39
$1,332.36 Foreman 1.00 11.217
$62.93
$705.89 General Foreman 0.25 11.217
$65.78
$184.46 Fire Watch 0.05 11.217
$48.88
$27.41 Health Physics Technician 1.00 11.217
$53.75
$602.91 Total Labor Cost
$4,497.89
- 4.
EQUIPMENT & CONSUMABLES COSTS Equipment Costs none Consumables/Materials Costs
-Blotting paper 50 @ $0.58 sq ft (1}
$29.00
-Plastic sheets/bags 50 @ $0.18/sq ft {2}
$9.00
-Gas torch consumables 1 @ $10.52/hr x 1 hr (3}
$10.52 Subtotal cost of equipment and materials
$48.52 Overhead & profit on equipment and materials @ 17.25 %
$8.37 Total costs, equipment & material
$56.89 TOTAL COST:
Removal of contaminated heat exchanger <3000 pounds:
$4,554.78 Total labor cost:
$4,497.89 Total equipment/material costs:
$56.89 Total craft labor man-hours required per unit:
81.88 TLG Services, Inc.
Diablo Canyon Power Plant Document P01-1604-003, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Appendix A, Page 4 of 4
- 5.
NOTES AND REFERENCES o Work difficulty factors were developed in conjunction with the Atomic Industrial Forum's (now NEI) program to standardize nuclear decommissioning cost estimates and are delineated in Volume 1, Chapter 5 of the "Guidelines for Producing Commercial Nuclear Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Estimates," AIF/NESP-036, May 1986.
o References for equipment & consumables costs:
- 1. McMaster-Carr, Item 7193T88, Spill Control
- 2. R.S. Means (2008) Division 01 56, Section 13.60-0200, page 20
- 3. R.S. Means (2008) Division 01 54 33, Section 40-6360, Reference-10 o Material and consumable costs were adjusted using the regional indices for San Luis Obispo, California.
TLG Services, Inc.
Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document P01-1604-003, Rev. 0 Appendix B, Page 1 of 7 APPENDIX B UNIT COST FACTOR LISTING (DECON: Power Block Structures Only)
TLG Services, Inc.
Diablo Canyon Power Plant Document P01-1604-003, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Appendix B, Page 2 of 7 APPENDIX B UNIT COST FACTOR LISTING (Power Block Structures Only)
Unit Cost Factor Cost/Unit($)
Removal of clean instrument and sampling tubing, $/linear foot 0.53 Removal of clean pipe 0.25 to 2 inches diameter, $/linear foot 5.65 Removal of clean pipe >2 to 4 inches diameter, $/linear foot 7.99 Removal of clean pipe >4 to 8 inches diameter, $/linear foot 15.37 Removal of clean pipe >8 to 14 inches diameter, $/linear foot 29.88 Removal of clean pipe >14 to 20 inches diameter, $/linear foot 38.77 Removal of clean pipe >20 to 36 inches diameter, $/linear foot 57.06 Removal of clean pipe >36 inches diameter, $/linear foot 67.83 Removal of clean valve >2 to 4 inches 102.44 Removal of clean valve >4 to 8 inches 153.66 Removal of clean valve >8 to 14 inches 298.82 Removal of clean valve >14 to 20 inches 387.72 Removal of clean valve >20 to 36 inches 570.65 Removal of clean valve >36 inches 678.35 Removal of clean pipe hanger for small bore piping 33.90 Removal of clean pipe hanger for large bore piping 124.18 Removal of clean pump, <300 pound 257.65 Removal of clean pump, 300-1000 pound 711.04 Removal of clean pump, 1000-10,000 pound 2,828.75 Removal of clean pump, >10,000 pound 5,465.31 Removal of clean pump motor, 300-1000 pound 299.03 Removal of clean pump motor, 1000-10,000 pound 1,177.97 Removal of clean pump motor, >10,000 pound 2,650.42 Removal of clean heat exchanger <3000 pound 1,516.92 Removal of clean heat exchanger >3000 pound 3,810.98 Removal of clean feedwater heater/deaerator 10,757.59 Removal of clean moisture separator/reheater 22,135.40 Removal of clean tank, <300 gallons 331.59 Removal of clean tank, 300-3000 gallon 1,048.60 Removal of clean tank, >3000 gallons, $/square foot surface area 8.70 TLG Services, Inc.
Diablo Canyon Power Plant Document P01-1604-003, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Appendix B, Page 3 of 7 APPENDIX B UNIT COST FACTOR LISTING (Power Block Structures Only)
Unit Cost Factor CostlUnit($)
Removal of clean electrical equipment, <300 pound 141.13 Removal of clean electrical equipment, 300-1000 pound 486.82 Removal of clean electrical equipment, 1000-10,000 pound 973.67 Removal of clean electrical equipment, >10,000 pound 2,308.13 Removal of clean electrical transformer < 30 tons 1,602.97 Removal of clean electrical transformer > 30 tons 4,616.28 Removal of clean standby diesel generator, <100 kW 1,637.30 Removal of clean standby diesel generator, 100 kW to 1 MW 3,654.56 Removal of clean standby diesel generator, >1 MW 7,565.66 Removal of clean electrical cable tray, $/linear foot 13.16 Removal of clean electrical conduit, $/linear foot 5.74 Removal of clean mechanical equipment, <300 pound 141.13 Removal of clean mechanical equipment, 300-1000 pound 486.82 Removal of clean mechanical equipment, 1000-10,000 pound 973.67 Removal of clean mechanical equipment, >10,000 pound 2,308.13 Removal of clean HVAC equipment, <300 pound 141.13 Removal of clean HVAC equipment, 300-1000 pound 486.82 Removal of clean HVAC equipment, 1000-10,000 pound 973.67 Removal of clean HVAC equipment, >10,000 pound 2,308.13 Removal of clean HVAC ductwork, $/pound 0.56 Removal of contaminated instrument and sampling tubing, $/linear foot 1.64 Removal of contaminated pipe 0.25 to 2 inches diameter, $/linear foot 22.13 Removal of contaminated pipe >2 to 4 inches diameter, $/linear foot 38.42 Removal of contaminated pipe >4 to 8 inches diameter, $/linear foot 60.30 Removal of contaminated pipe >8 to 14 inches diameter, $/linear foot 119.72 Removal of contaminated pipe >14 to 20 inches diameter, $/linear foot 144.08 Removal of contaminated pipe >20 to 36 inches diameter, $/linear foot 200.04 Removal of contaminated pipe >36 inches diameter, $/linear foot 236.75 Removal of contaminated valve >2 to 4 inches 466.22 Removal of contaminated valve >4 to 8 inches 558.77 TLG Services, Inc.
Diablo Canyon Power Plant Document P01-1604-003, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Appendix B, Page 4 of 7 APPENDIX B UNIT COST FACTOR LISTING (Power Block Structures Only)
Unit Cost Factor Cost/Unit($)
Removal of contaminated valve >8 to 14 inches 1,152.68 Removal of contaminated valve >14 to 20 inches 1,466.63 Removal of contaminated valve >20 to 36 inches 1,955.83 Removal of contaminated valve >36 inches 2,322.96 Removal-of contaminated pipe hanger for small bore piping 114.31 Removal of contaminated pipe hanger for large bore piping 379.89 Removal of contaminated pump, <300 pound 994.26 Removal of contaminated pump, 300-1000 pound 2,289.60 Removal of contaminated pump, 1000-10,000 pound 7,519.81 Removal of contaminated pump, >10,000 pound 18,316.19 Removal of contaminated pump motor, 300-1000 pound 967.26 Removal of contaminated pump motor, 1000-10,000 pound 3,053.97 Removal of contaminated pump motor, >10,000 pound 6,856.50 Removal of contaminated heat exchanger <3000 pound 4,554.78 Removal of contaminated heat exchanger >3000 pound 13,175.19 Removal of contaminated tank, <300 gallons 1,651.42 Removal of contaminated tank, >300 gallons, $/square foot 32.24 Removal of contaminated electrical equipment, <300 pound 773.83 Removal of contaminated electrical equipment, 300-1000 pound 1,860.19 Removal of contaminated electrical equipment, 1000-10,000 pound 3,581.23 Removal of contaminated electrical equipment, >10,000 pound 6,982.38 Removal of contaminated electrical cable tray, $/linear foot 37.36 Removal of contaminated electrical conduit, $/linear foot 17.17 Removal of contaminated mechanical equipment, <300 pound 861.55 Removal of contaminated mechanical equipment, 300-1000 pound 2,056.73 Removal of contaminated mechanical equipment, 1000-10,000 pound 3,953.19 Removal of contaminated mechanical equipment, >10,000 pound 6,982.38 Removal of contaminated HVAC equipment, <300 pound 861.55 Removal of contaminated HVAC equipment, 300-1000 pound 2,056.73 Removal of contaminated HVAC equipment, 1000-10,000 pound 3,953.19 TLG Services, Inc.
Diablo Canyon Power Plant Document P01-1604-003, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Appendix B, Page 5 of 7 APPENDIX B UNIT COST FACTOR LISTING (Power Block Structures Only)
Unit Cost Factor Cost/Unit($)
Removal of contaminated HVAC equipment, >10,000 pound 6,982.38 Removal of contaminated HVAC ductwork, $/pound 2.29 Removal/plasma arc cut of contaminated thin metal components, $/linear in.
4.11 Additional decontamination of surface by washing, $/square foot 8.60 Additional decontamination of surfaces by hydrolasing, $/square foot 36.12 Decontamination rig hook up and flush, $/ 250 foot length 7,312.90 Chemical flush of components/systems, $/gallon 16.76 Removal of clean standard reinforced concrete, $/cubic yard 145.04 Removal of grade slab concrete, $/cubic yard 193.82 Removal of clean concrete floors, $/cubic yard 379.84 Removal of sections of clean concrete floors, $/cubic yard 1,123.28 Removal of clean heavily rein concrete w/#9 rebar, $/cubic yard 254.39 Removal'of contaminated heavily rein concrete w/#9 rebar, $/cubic yard 2,251.67 Removal of clean heavily rein concrete w/#18 rebar, $/cubic yard 321.60 Removal of contaminated heavily rein concrete w/#18 rebar, $/cubic yard 2,980.61 Removal heavily rein concrete w #18 rebar & steel embedments, $/cubic yard 491.72 Removal of below-grade suspended floors, $/cubic yard 379.84 Removal of clean monolithic concrete structures, $/cubic yard 958.59 Removal of contaminated monolithic concrete structures, $/cubic yard 2,250.19 Removal of clean foundation concrete, $/cubic yard 752.34 Removal of contaminated foundation concrete, $/cubic yard 2,096.28 Explosive demolition of bulk concrete, $/cubic yard 32.43 Removal of clean hollow masonry block wall, $/cubic yard 108.56 Removal of contaminated hollow masonry block wall, $/cubic yard 357.95 Removal of clean solid masonry block wall, $/cubic yard 108.56 Removal of contaminated solid masonry block wall, $/cubic yard 357.95 Backfill of below-grade voids, $/cubic yard 28.42 Removal of subterranean tunnels/voids, $/linear foot 122.09 Placement of concrete for below-grade voids, $/cubic yard 154.57 Excavation of clean material, $/cubic yard 3.06 TLG Services, Inc.
Diablo Canyon Power Plant Document P01-1604-003, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysis Appendix B, Page 6 of 7 APPENDIX B UNIT COST FACTOR LISTING (Power Block Structures Only)
Unit Cost Factor Cost/Unit($)
Excavation of contaminated material, $/cubic yard 42.67 Removal of clean concrete rubble (tipping fee included), $/cubic yard 24.58 Removal of contaminated concrete rubble, $/cubic yard 26.80 Removal of building by volume, $/cubic foot 0.32 Removal of clean building metal siding, $/square foot 1.27 Removal of contaminated building metal siding, $/square foot 4.40 Removal of standard asphalt roofing, $/square foot 2.47 Removal of transite panels, $/square foot 2.33 Scarifying contaminated concrete surfaces (drill & spall), $/square foot 15.00 Scabbling contaminated concrete floors, $/square foot 8.77 Scabbling contaminated concrete walls, $/square foot 22.75 Scabbling contaminated ceilings, $/square foot 77.64 Scabbling structural steel, $/square foot 7.26 Removal of clean overhead crane/monorail < 10 ton capacity 673.87 Removal of contaminated overhead crane/monorail < 10 ton capacity 1,906.00 Removal of clean overhead crane/monorail >10-50 ton capacity 1,617.31 Removal of contaminated overhead crane/monorail >10-50 ton capacity 4,573.64 Removal of polar crane > 50 ton capacity 6,744.05 Removal of gantry crane > 50 ton capacity 28,851.72 Removal of structural steel, $/pound 0.23 Removal of clean steel floor grating, $/square foot 4.69 Removal of contaminated steel floor grating, $/square foot 13.68 Removal of clean free standing steel liner, S/square foot 13.05 Removal of contaminated free standing steel liner, $/square foot 37.73 Removal of clean concrete-anchored steel liner, $/square foot 6.52 Removal of contaminated concrete-anchored steel liner, $/square foot 43.96 Placement of scaffoldingin clean areas, $/square foot 17.73 Placement of scaffolding in contaminated areas, $/square foot 29.17 Landscaping with topsoil, $/acre 26,058.01 Cost of CPC B-88 LSA box & preparation for use 1,931.00 TLG Services, Inc.
Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document P01-1604-003, Rev. 0 Appendix B, Page 7 of 7 APPENDIX B UNIT COST FACTOR LISTING (Power Block Structures Only)
Unit Cost Factor CostfUnit($)
Cost of CPC B-25 LSA box & preparation 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 of LSA drum & preparation for use Cost of cask liner for CNSI 8 120A cask (resins)
Decontamination of surfaces with vacuuming, $/square foot 1,702.11 1,666.89 10,158.75 161.97 8,060.01 0.75 TLG Services, Inc.
Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document P01-1604-003, Rev. 0 Appendix C, Page 1 of 24 APPENDIX C DETAILED COST ANALYSIS DECON TLG Services, Inc.
Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document P01-1604-003, Rev. 0 Appendix C, Page 2 of 24 Table C-1 Diablo Canyon Unit 1 DECON Decommissioning Cost Estimate (Thousands of 2008 Dollars)
Off-Sits LLRW NRC Spent Fuel Site Processed Burial Volumes Burial I Utility and Activity Decon Removal Packaging Transport Processing Disposal Other Total Total Lic. Term.
Management Restoration Volume Class A Class B Class C GTCC Processed Craft Conetactor Index Activity Description Cost Cost Costs Costs Costs Costs Costs Contnlen e
Costs Costs Costs Costs Cu. Feet Cu. Felt Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Wt., Lbs.
Manhours Manhours PERIOD la - Shutduows through Transition Period la Direct Decommissioning Activities la.1.1 Prepare preliminary decommissioning cost la1.2 Notification of Cessation of Operations la.1.3 Remove fuel & source matedal 1 a.1.4 Notification of Permanent Defueling la.1.5 Deactivate plant systems & process waste la.1.6 Prepare and submit PSDAR l1.1.7 Review plant dwgs & specs.
la.1.8 Perform detailed rad survey la.1.9 Estimate by-product inventory la.1.10 End prod uct description tult.
Detailed by-product inventory la.1.12 Define major work sequence la.1.13 Perform SER and EA la.1.14 Perform Site-Specific Cost Study la.1.15 Prepare/submit License Termination Plan la.1.16 Receive NRC approval ofiterminabon plan Activity Specifications la.1.17.1 Plant & temporary facilties la 1.17.2 Plant systems la.1.17.3 NSSS Decontamination Flush la.1.f17.4 Reactor internals la.1.17.5 Reactor vessel la.1.17.6 Biological shield la.1.17.7 Steam generatom la.1.17.8 Reinforced concrete la.1.t7.9 Main Turbine la.1.17.10 Main Condensers la.1.17.11 Plant structures & buildings la.1.17.12 Waste management 1a.1.17.1 3 Facility & site closeout la.1.17 Total Planning & Site Preparations la.1.18 Prepare dismantling sequence la.1.19 Plant prep. & temp. svces la.1.2i0 Design outer clean-up system la.1.21 Rigging/Cont. Cod Envlpsltoolingletc.
la.1.22 Procure casks/Iinem & containers la.1 Subtotal Period ta Activity Costs Period la Additional Costs I:.2.1 Spent Fuel Pool Isolation 1 a,2 Subtotal Period la Additional Costs Period la Collateral Costs ta a3.1 Spent Fuel Capital and Transfer Ia.3 Subtotal Period la Collateral Costs Period la Period-Dependent Costs l..4.1 Insurance ta.4.2 Property taxes 156 32 188 188 a
We 240 551 120 120 156 899 372 599 491 590 5o0 60 851 779 60 374 1 92 48 48 374 55 1 1I08 4,535 298 2,700 168 2,100 147 13.642 a
50 289 289 114 666 666 25 145 145 25 145 145 32 188 188 186 1,086 1,086 77 449 449 124 724 724 102 593 593 a
122 712 641 104 603 543 12 72 72 176 1.028 1.028 162 941 941 12 72 72 78 452 452 40 232 116 10 5
10 58 78 452 226 114 666 666 22 130 65 940 5,475 4,821 60 347 347 560 3,260 3,260 35 203 203 435 2,535 2.535 31 178 178 2,828 16.470 15.816 1,300 2,000 4,600
-1,000 1.000 1,300 7,500 3,100 5,000 4,096 4,920 4,167 500 7,100 6,500 5o0 3.120 1.600 400 400 3.120 4,600 900 37,827 71 60 116 58 58 226 65 654 654 2.400 1,400 1.230 73,753 9,407 1,950 11.358 11,358 9,407 1,950 11,358 11f358 836 173 1,009 836 173 1.009 1,009 1,009 1,195 165 1,360 1.360 101 14 115 115 TLG Services, Inc.
Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis Docunent P01-1604-003, Rev. 0 Appendix C, Page 3 of 24 Table C-1 Diablo Canyon Unit 1 DECON Decommissioning Cost Estimate (Thousands of 2008 Dollars)
Off-Site LLRW NRC Spent Fuel Site Processed Burial Volumes Burial I Utility and Activity Decon Removal Packaging Transport Processing Disposal Other Total Total Lic. Term.
Management Restoration Volume Class A Class B Class C GTCC Processed Craft Contractor Index ActivityDescriptlon Cost Cost Costs Costs Cests Costs Costs Continsency Costs Costs Costs Costs Cu. Feet Cu. Fest Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Wt. Lbs.
Manhours Manhours Period la Period-Dependent Costs (continued) 1a.4.3 Health physics supplies la.4.4 Heavy equipment rental la.4.5 Disposal of DAW generated l1.4.6 Plant energy budget la.4.7 NRC ISFSI Fees la.4.8 NRC Fees la.4.9 Emergency Planning Fees la.4.10 Spent Fuel Pool O&M la.4.11 ISFSI - Operating Costs 1a.4.12 Spent Fuel StoragelCapital Equipment la.4.13 ISFSI - Fixed Costs 1o.4.14 Security Staff Cost 1a.4.15 Utility Staff Cost 1s.4 Subtotal Period to Period-Dependent Costs la.0 TOTAL PERIOD ta COST PERIOD Ib - Decommissioning Preparations Period lb Direct Decommissioning Activities Detailed Work Procedures lb.1.1.1 Plant systems lb.1.1.2 NSSS Decontamination Flush 1b.1.1.3 Reactor internals 1b.1.1.4 Remaining buildings 1b.1.1.5 CRD cooling assembly 1b.1.1.6 CRD housings & IC tubes lb.1.1.7 Incore instrumentation tb.1.1.8 Reactor vessel lb.1.1.9 Facility ctosnoot lb.1.1.10 Missile shields lb.1.1.11 Biological shield lb.1.1.12 Stea" generators lb.1.1.13 Reinforced concrete lb.1.1.14 Main Turbine lb.1.1.15 Main Condensers lb.1.1.16 Auxiliary buildiog lb.1.1.17 Reactor building lb.1.1 Total lb.1.2 Decon primary lop lb.1 Subtotal Period l b Activity Costs Period 1 b Additional Costs lb.2.1
' Site Characterization l.b2,2 Hazardous Waste Management lb.2.3 Mixed Waste Management lb.2 Subtotal Period 1 b Additional Costs Period 1 b Collateral Costs 1b.3.1 Decoc equipment 1 b.3.2 DOC staff relocation expenses lb.3.3 Process liquid waste lb.3.4 Small toot allowance 486 490 976 11 11 4
38 1,330 159 706 1,258 735 118 1,594 239 775 26,403 38 34,612 168 654 654 102 591 591 16 69 69 276 1.605 1,605 159 98 803 803 174 1,432 152 887 24 142 330 1.925 50 289 161 936 936 5,473 31,876 31,876 7,202 42,843 38,009 159 1.432 887 142 1,925 289 4,834 5,842 654 610 610 610 12,190 22 12.264 423.400 12,190 22 435.664 12,190 22 509,417 976 11 4
38 58,497 12,153 71.680 65,183 567 120 300 162 120 120 120 435 144 54 144 551 120 187 187 327 327 3,986 118 685 617 25 145 145 62 362 362 34 195 49 25 145 145 25 145 145 25 145 145 90 525 525 30 174 87 11 65 65 30 174 174 114 666 666 25 145 72 39 226 39 226 68 395 356 68 395 356 826 4,812 3,907 1,122 2,745 2,745 69 147 87 72 226 226 40 40 905 905 4.733 1,000 2,500 1,350 1,000 1.80D 1.801D 3,830 1,200 450 1,200 4,600 1,000 1.560 1,560 2,730 2,730 33.243 1.067 1.067 33.243 25,000 9.412 25,000 9,412 1,623 1,623 3,986 1,948 7,557 6,652 4,549 1,886 6,435 6,435 590 122 713 713 912 189 1,101 1,101 6,051 2,197 8,248 8,248 935 64 188 194 1,129 1.129 1,395 289 1,684 1,684 2,648 10.674 10,674 0
3 3
400 2,403 290,742 547 786 6,988 TLG Services, Inc.
Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis Doeument P01-1604-003, Roe. 0 Appendix C, Page 4 of 24 Table C-1 Diablo Canyon Unit I DECON Decommissioning Cost Estimate (Thousands of 2008 Dollars)
Oft-its LLRW NRC Spest Foal Site Processed Burial Volumes BurialI Utility and Activity Decon Removal Packaging Transport Processing Disposal Other Total Total Lic. Term.
Management Restoration Volume Class A Class B Class C GTCC Proesseed Craft Contractor index Activity Descripton Cost Cost Costs Costs Costs Costs Costs Contingency Costs Costs Costs Costs Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Foot Cu. Feet Wt, Lbs.
Manhours Manhours Period lb Collateral Costs (orrtinued) lb.3.5 Pipe cutting equipment 1b.3.6 Decon ng l b.3.7 Spent Fuel Capital and Transfer 1b.3 Subtotal Period 1 b Collateral Costs Period lb Pedod-)ependent Costs lb.4.1 Decon supplies 11.4.2 Insurance lb.4.3 Property taxes 11b.4.4 Health physics supplies 11b.4.5 -
Heavy equipment rental 1tb.4.6 Disposal of DAW generated 1b.4.7 Plant energy budget lb.4.8 NRC ISFSI Fees 11.4.9 NRC Fees lb.4AI0 Emergency Planning Fees lb.4.11 Spent Fuel Pool O&M lb.4.12 ISFSI - Operating Costs I b.4.13 Spent Fuel Storage/Capoal Equipment 15.4.14 ISFSI - Fixed Costs 1b.4.15 Security Staff Cost lb.4.16 DOC Staff Cost l1.4.17 Utility Staff Cost lb.4 Subtotal Period 1 b Period-Dependent Costs 1b.0 TOTAL PERIOD t b COST PERIOD 1 TOTALS PERIOD 2a - Large Component Removal Period 2a Direct Decommissioning Activities Nuclear Steam Supply System Removal 2a.1.1.1 Reactor Coolant Piping 2a.1.1.2 Pressurizer Quench Tank 2a.1.1.3 Reactor Coolant Pumps & Motors 2a.1.1.4 Pressurizer 2a.1.1.5 Steam Generators 2a.1.1.6 Retired Steam Generator Units 2a.1.1.7 CRDMsllCls/Senice Structure Removal 2a.1.1,8 Reactor Vessel Internals 2a.1.1.9 Reactor Vessel 2a.1.1 Totals Removal of Major Equipment 2a.1.2 Matn Turbine/Generator 2a.1.3 Main Condensers Cascading Costs from Clean Building Demolition 2a.1.4.1 fReactor 2a.l.4.2 Containment Penetration Area 2a.1.4.3 Fuel Handling 2a.1d4 Totals 1,000 1,400 Z,399 1,002 188 496 786 6.998 1,891 28 272 243 28 515 592 50 7
2 22 1,319 95 350 369 364 70 1.578 142 385 5,260 13,172 7
2 22 23.745 207 1.207 1.207 290 1.690 1,690 103 599 3.731 16,966 16,388 10 38 38 82 674 674 7
57 57 94 366 366 50 293 293 9
40 40 273 1,592 1,592 95 48 398 398 51 420 76 440 14 84 327 1,906 29 172 80 464 464 1,090 6,350 6,350 2.730 15,902 15.902 4.972 29.292 26,176 599 599 95 420 440 84 1,906 172 3,116 3.714 905 9,557 1,559 400 2,403 290,742 547 354 7,084 13 6,082 63,091 210.994 354 7,084 13 280.167 4,051 1,517 195 4,051 2,493 206 305 287 40 32 29 6
120 101 44 38 59 454 394 3,846 2,686 1,895 162 92 224 144 2.231 5,070 100 4,159 1,598 1,295 t0.804 12,018 534 192 1,529 181 1,208 66 175 1.449 789 793 40 6
121 295 1.924 1,890 37 914 651 5,878 7.010 35,672 12.849 62.083 57.464 7,048 94.170 25,002 133,763 122,647 766 588 2,027 2,027 108 72 254 254 1,358 618 2,360 2,360 620 385 1,852 1,852 2,974 5.939 5.040 22.803 22.803 2,974 5,768 3.263 15.790 15,790 255 270 1,040 1,040 4,579 234 7,692 20,864 20,864 8,548 234 11,113 26,404 26,404 5,948 27,941 469 29,041 93,394 93.394 755 2.403 1,364 2.403 297.826 26.626 322.822 310,016 26,648 832.239 2.141 258,908 10.138 329 36,557 1.073 5.388 871,200 4,152 2.460 269,821 2,282 37.344 23.568 3.353.901 23.234 1,750 37,344 22.887 3,128,906 10.800 1,125 3,881 86,025 4.285 1,753 845 574 359,588 28,500 1,272 6,416 2,379 964,382 28,500 1,272 74,688 68,822 3,224 574 9,329,287 112,963 5,419 139 881 605 131 831 570 631 2,981 2,981 950 4.193 4.193 250 1,458 1,458 14 79 79 36 212 212 300 1,749 1,749 7,712 2,301 7,274 2,170 551,290 9,450 520.010 27.028 13,127 704 1,746 15,578 TLG Services, Inc.
Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document P01-1604-003, Rev. 0 Appendix C, Page 5 of24 Table C-i Diablo Canyon Unit 1 DECON Decommissionin~g Cost Estimate (Thousands of22888 Dollars)
IActioity Off-Sits LLRW NRC Spent Fuel Site Processed Burial Volumes Burial I Utility and Decon Remoeat Packaging Transport Processing Disposal Other Total Total Lic. Term.
Management Restoration Volume Class A Class B Class C GTCC Processed Craft Conbtactor I Cost Cost Costs Costs Casts Costs Costs Continaency Costs Costs Casts Costs Cu. Feet Cu. Feel Cu. Feet Cu. Faet Cu. Feet WtL Lbs.
Manhours Manhours I
Inlay A*ti*i* n*FinNNn ndox t v ascription Disposal of Plant Systems 2a.1.5.1 Auxiliary Steam 2a.1.5.2 Auxiliary Steam (RCA) 2a.1.5.3 Condensate System 2a.1.5.4 Condensate System (Insulated) 2a.1.5,5 Containment Spray 2a.1.8.6 Extraction Steam S Heater Drip 2a.1.5.7 Feedwater System 2a.1.5.8 Feedwater System (Insulated) 2a.1.5.9 Feedwater System (RCA Insulated) 2a.1.5.10 Feedw.tor System (RCA) 2a.1.5.11 Lube Oil Distrbutiun & Putiguation 2a.1.S.12 Nitrogon& Hydrogen 2a.1.5.13 Nitrogen & Hydrogen (Insulated) 2a.1.5.14 Nitrogen & Hydrogen (RCA Insulated) 2a.1.5.15 Nitrogen & Hydrogen (RCA) 2a.15.16 Oily Water Separator & TB Sump 2a.1.5.17 Saitwuoter Systom 2a.1.5.18 Turbine Stoam Supply 2a.1.5.19 Turbine Stoam Supply (RCA) 2a.1.5.20 Turotne and Gennratot 2a.1.5.21 Turbine and Geneoraor (Insulated) 2a.1.5 Totals 2a.1.6 Scaffolding in support of decommissioning 2a.1 Subtotal Period 2a Activity Costs Period 2a Additional Costs 2a-2.1 Retired Reactor Head 2a.2 Subtotal Period 2a Additional Costs Period 2a Collateral Costs 2a.3.1 Process liquid waste 2a'.32 Small tool allowance 2a.3.3 Spent Fuel Capital and Transfer 2a.3 Subtotal Period 2a Collateral Costs Period 2a Peoiod-Dependent Costs 2a.4.1 Decon supplies 2a.4.2 Insurance 2a.4.3 Property taxes 2a.4.4 Hearth physics supplres 2a.4.5 Heavy equipment rentat 2a.4.6 Disposal of DAW generated 2a.4.7 Plant energy budget 2a.4.8 NRC ISFSI Fees 2a.4.9 NRC Fees 2a.4.10 Emergency Planning Fees 2a.4.11 Spent Fuel Pool O&M 2a.4.12 ISFSI - Operating Costs 2a.4.13 Spent Fuol StoragetCapital Equipment 2a.4.14 ISFSI - Fixed Costs 2a.4.15 Security Staff Cost 2a.4.16 DOC Staff Cost 2a.4.17 Utility Staff Cost 2a.4 Subtotal Period 2a Period-Dependent Costs 245 213 1,131 401 194 450 65 271 98 5
188 17 1
5 87 30 162 1, 227 671 116 49 5,622 6
3 68 21 10 16 5
11 3
3i 0
1 80 22 4
1 256 56 29 592 182 87 143 48 101 24 1
25 50 8
700 182 37 8
2,228 458 240 4,856 1.497 713 1,176 395 825 199 10 205 2
38 63 5,742 1,497 300 63 18,278 67 10 2,311 12 1,295 22,249 12.658 8,384 26,006 29,126 469 102 151 55 503 15 102 151 55 503 15 192 958 958 130 616 616 1.530 8,176 8,176 489 2,590 2,590 234 1.237 1,237 431 2,216 2,216 115 628 628 287 1,495 1,495 81 405 405 4
21 21 113 533 533 3
28 0
1 2
9 9
39 169 169 25 126 126 33 195 1,770 9,519 9,519 583 2,954 2,954 110 567 567 32 152 152 6.204 32.587 32,371 819 3,227 3,227 37.945 138.131 137,915 528 1,355 1.355 528 1,355 1,355 184 718 718 62 361 325 329 1.915 575 2.994 1,043 31 122 122 97 796 796 22 182 164 708 2.756 2.756 774 4,509 4.509 131 584 584 415 2,419 2.419 302 144 1,188 1,188 123 1,015 242 1,407 46 270 1,249 7.276 94 549 239 1,390 1,390 4,272 24,879 24.879 6.040 35,177 35,177 14,629 84,823 73,986 4.445 2.330 47,076 14.512 6.908 11,399 3,829 7,995 1.926 101 1.986 20 1
20 371 607 195 55.669 14.508 2,909 607 216 177.198 586 37 216 267.458 73.330 3.224 574 17.626.350 278.128 5.419 180,494 4,001
-4.627 3,528 1,911,765 18.771 589.348 6,833 280.525 3,329 462,924 7,441 155,509 1,130 324,669 4,542 78,223 1,693 4.117 81 80,661 3.052 315 17 793 75 15.060 1,433 24,649 464 2,926 2,260,765 20,590 589,194 11,474 118.127 1.947 24,645 777 7,196,094 94,419 29,669 18,689 2.002 211,020 2,100 2.002 211,020 2,100 84 84 106 49 299 106 299 49 196 196 91 2,049 3.735 91 5,784 97 97 36 36 183 1,586 183 1,586 699 160 320 2.004 302 1,044 892 1,165 224 6,026 454 1,151 20,607 29.137 320 63.867 725 36 1,915 1,915 36 725 43,508 141 43,508 141 302 1,015 1,407 270 7,276 549 10.819 18 16 5,158 5,158 103,157 188 18,197 251.451 460,189 103.157 188 729,838 TLG Services, Inc.
Diablo Canyon Power Plant Document P01-1604-003, Rev. 0 Decommissioning Cost Analysios j Appendix C, Page 6 of 24 Table C-1 Diablo Canyon Unit 1 DECON Decommissioning Cost Estimate (Thousands of 2008 Dollars)
Off-Site LLRW NRC Spent Fuel sito Processed Burial Volumes Burial/
Utility and Activity Decon Removal Packaging Transport Processing Disposal Other Total Total Lic. Term.
Management Restoration Volume Class A Class B Class C GTCC Processed Craft Contractor Index Activlty Description Cost Cost Costs Costs Costs Costs Costs Contingency Costs Costs Costs Costs Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet WE, Lbs.
Manhoutr Manhours 2o.0 TOTAL PERIOD 2a COST PERIOD 21 - Site Decontamination Period 2b Direct Decommissioning Activities Disposal of Plant Systems 2b.1.1.1 Capital Additions 85-2002 (clean) 2b.1.1.2 Capital Additions 85-2002 (contaminated) 2b.1.1.3 Chemical & Volume Control 2b.1.1.4 Chemical & Voiume Control (Insulated) 2b.1.1.5 Component Cooling Water 2b.1.1.6 Component Cooling Water (RCA) 2b.1.1.7 Compressed Air 2b.1.1.8 Compressed Air (Insulated) 21.1.1.9 Compressed Air (RCA Insulated) 2b.1.1.10 Compressed Air (RCA) 2b.1.1.11 Diesel Engine-Generator 2b.1.1.12 Diesel Engine-Generator (Insulated) 2b.1.1.13 Electrical (Clean) 2b.1.1.14 Electrical (Contaminated) 2b.1.1.15 Electrical (Decontaminated) 2b.1.1.16 Fire Protection 2b.1.1.17 Gaseous Radsaste 2b.1.1.18 HVAC (Clean Insulated) 21,1.1.19 HVAC (Clean) 2b.1.1.20 HVAC (Contaminated Insulated) 2b.1.1.21 HVAC (Contaminated) 2b.1.1.22 Liquid Rad-aste 2b'1.1.23 Liquid Radvaste (Insulated) 2b.1.1.24 Make-upWater 2b.1.1.25 Make-up Water (Insulated) 2b.1.1.26 Mak-p Water (RCA Insulated) 2b.1.1.27 Make-opWoter (RCA) 2b.1.1.28 Miscellaneous Reactor Coolant 2b.1.1.29 Nuclear Steam Supply Sampling 20.1.1.30 Nuclear Steam Supply Sampling (Insuloted 2b.1.1.31 Residual Heat Removal 2b.1.1.32 Safety Injection 2b.1.1.33 Sa fety Injection (Insulated) 2b.1.1.34 Safety Injection (RCA Insulated) 2b.1.1.35 Safety Injection (RCA) 2b.1.1.36 Service Cooling Water 2b.1.1.37 Service Cooling Water (RCA) 2b.1.1 Totals 20.1.2 Scaffolding in suppod of decommissioning Decontamination of Site Buildings 2b.1.3.1
- Reactor 21.1.3.2 Capital Additions 85-2004 2b.1.3.3 Containment Penetration Area 2b.1.3 Totals 2b.1 Subtotal Period 2b Activity Costs 1.492 28,433 12,955 8.671 26,006 30.131 65.937 155 353 725 948 265 341 166 478 148 5
22 413 152 10 1,809 491 3,025 311 66 24 304 254 1,128 478 598 56 63 306 28 34 180 17 98 146 44 275 258 101 5
32 270 100 23 1.817 12,889 3
3 28 62 87 19 13 13 107 0
1 3
24 9
63 73 612 11 93 4
3 6
36 34 178 48 44 4
2 0
3 2
19 4
5 4
6 1
1 56 68 4
11 0
0 2
4 17 33 O
3 82 1,445 234 475 573 40 161 876 10 199 505 35 5.022 761 14 28 281 30 1.381 183 172 440 5
36 28 157 29 31 31 35 1
8 309 589 76 31 3
2 23 17 205 151 26 10,864 2,349 53.676 227,302 214,298 32 187 177 795 795 1.152 4,023 4.023 370 1,218 1,210 34 201 371 1.844 1.844 31 178 1
6 10 45 45 190 830 830 32 184 2
12 375 2,184 301 1,404 1,404 2.223 10,955 10,955 286 1,460 1.460 36 151 151 5
29 63 367 165 772 772 781 3,684 3,684 741 2,521 2,521 75 241 241 63 369 6
34 18 84 84 99 458 458 64 250 250 71 292 292 19 73 73 569 2,124 2,124 64 287 287 3
13 13 23 100 100 197 874 874 21 121 14 67 67 8,681 38.426 34,556 1,024 4,034 4.034 3,146 11,265 11.265 36 133 133 421 1.450 1.450 3,603 12,848 12.848 13.308 55,308 51,438 12,734 271 267.458 81,215 3,224 187 2,266 4,609 2,316 383 615 201 S
8,495 178 6
S 102 1.932 184 12 2,184 4.898 132 48,689 7,373 131 105 29 367 2,728 114 13,391 695 1.667 1,886 46 135 369 34 269 1,522 203 124 299 133 10 31 2.999 2,242 736 121 25 7
221 64 1.989 576 121 253 3,871 105,317 9.297 733 46 574 17,984,030 280,557 735,341 2.830 92,043 6.160 380,777 26,732 70,078 10,196 3,078 344,999 8.025 2.744 98 4,130 380 78,476 6,959 2.760 178 32,770 210,603 8,543 1,977,300 51.247 299,432 5,298 14,631 1,089 S -
475 5,804 120,927 4,027 605,518 -
18,115 216,389 18.104 13,869 1,993 5,614 521 10,909 564 61,817 2.969 21,970 1.932 23,955 2.684 3,177 816 320,783 5,703 40.322 1,773 1,628 82 14,653 537 131,878 4.462 1,856 10,286 384 5,070,550 247,503 37,087 23,361 2,889 15 11 84 12 1,524 1,737 381 27 23 1
266 198 29 1.817 1,947 410 349 4
33 386 426 3.703 40 3
120 394 586 4.099 4,128 20,482 386 14 1,164 1,509 5,670 22,005 3,871 111,728 31,348 2,076,526 53,197 16,586 839 180,273 7,367 2,273,384 61,403 7,381,021 332,267 3,634 17,724, 807 1,842 11,533 6,460 TLG Services, Inc.
Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document P01-1604-003, Rev. 0 Appendix C, Page 7 of 24 Table C-1 Diablo Canyon Unit 1 DECON Decommissioning Cost Estimate (Thousands of 2008 Dollars)
Off-Site LLRW NRC Spent Fuel Site Processed Burial Volumes Burial I Utility and Actieity Decon Removal Packaging Transport Processing Disposal Other Total Total tic. Term.
Management Restoration Volume Class A Class B Class C GTCC Processed Craft Contractor Index Activito Desription Cost Cost Costs Costs Costs Costs Costs Contin enc Costs Costs Costs Costs Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Co. Feet Cu. Feet Wt, Lbs.
Manhours Manhours Period 2b Collateral Costs 2b.3.1 Process liquid -iste 2b.3.2 Small tool allowance 2b.3.3 Spent Fuel Capital and Transfer 2b.3 Subtotal Period 2b Collateral Costs 210 189 366 210 366 189 779 779 Period 2b Period-Dependent Costs 2b.4.1 Deoon supplies 792 2b.4.2 Insurance 2b.4.3 Property taxes 2b.4.4 Health physics supplies 2.360 2b.4.5 Heavy equipment rental 4,490 2b.4.6 Disposal of DAW generated 2b.4.7 Plant energy budget 2b.4.8 NRC ISFSI Fees 2b.4.9 NRC Fees 2b.4.10 Emergency Planning Fees 2b.4.11 Spent Fuel Transfer - Pool or ISFSI to DOE 2b.4.12 Spent Fuel Pool O&M 2b.4.13 Liquid Rad'cste Processing Equipment/Serices 2b.4.14 ISFSI - Operating Costs 2b.4.15 Spent Fuel Storage/Capitat Equipment 2b.4.16 ISFS - Fixed Costs 2b.4.17 Security Staff Cost 2b.4.18 DOC Staff Cost 2b04.19 Utility Staff Cost 2b.4 Subtotal Period 2b Period-Dependent Costs 792 6.850 89 89 33 33 1,011 898 1,011 -
898 846 194 294 1.915 366 1.264 715 918 1.411 369 271 5,128 550 1,394 17.1a4 25.221 294 57,747 682 2,873 2,873 76 441 441 186 1,084 944 4.399 3.314 274 1,066 1,066 117 963 963 27 220 220 815 3,176 3.176 931 5,420 5,420 121 536 536 397 2.312 2,312 366 175 1,439 1,439 99 814 190 1,108 293 1,704 76 445 445 56 327 1.063 6.191 114 664 289 1.683 1.683 3.562 20.747 20,747 5,228 30,450 30,450 13.827 79.632 68,458 28,079 139,339 123,210 1,084 1,084 2.821 2,821 240,731 550 240.731 550 366 814 1,108 1,704 327 6,191 664 11,174 4,735 94,697 172 22,031 216.309 402.574 4,735 94,697 172 640,914 2b.0 TOTAL PERIOD 20 COST PERIOD 2c - Wet Fuel Storage Period 2c Direct Decommissioning Activities Period 2c Collateral Costs 2c.3.1 Spent Fuel Caputal and Transfer 2c.3 Subtotal Period 2c Collateral Costs Period 2c Period-Dependent Costs 2c.4.1 Insurance 2..4.2 Property taxes 2c.4.3 Health physics supplies 2c.4.4 Disposal of DAW generated 2c.4.5 Plant energy budget 2c,4.6 NRC ISFSI Fees 2c,4.7 NRC Fees 2c,4.8 Emergency Planning Fees 2c.4.9 Spent Fuel Transfer - Pool or ISFSI to DOE 2c.4.10 Spent Fuel Pool O&M 2c.4.11 ISFSI - Operating Costs 2c.4.12 Spent Fuel StorageJCapial Equipment 2c.4.13 ISFS - Fixed Costs 2c.4.14 Utility Staff Cost 2c.4 Subtotal Period 2c Period-Dependent Costs 2c.0 TOTAL PERIOD 2c COST 4,636 24,940 1,086 2,654 11,533 7,765 58.645 12,258 3,871 111,728 38,904 11.920 11.920 7,716,449 332,989 640.914 9,873 2,047 11.920 9,873 2,047 11.920 701 701 3.474 805 15 6
49 2,016 1,522 1,457 2,974 4.050 5.868 1,125 44.027 2,288 15 6
49 6,990 15 6
49 76,596 480 3,954 3,954 111 917 917 242 943 943 20 90 80 418 2,434 2,434 1,522 201 1,659 1.659 411 3,386 839 4,889 1.216 7,084 233 1,359 9,127 53,154 474 2,762 1.449 8,439 8,439 15,223 92,590 18,435 1.522 3,386 4,889 7,084 1,359 53,154 2,762 74.155 86.075 797 15,949 29 118.932 797 15,949 29 118.932 701 15 6
49 86,469 17,270 104,510 18.435 797 15,949 29 118.932 TLG Serviees, Inc.
Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis Docurnent P01-1604-003, Rev. 0 Appendix C, Page 8 of 24 Table C-i Diablo Canyon Unit I DECON Decommissioning Cost Estimate (Thousands of 2008 Dollairs)
IActivity Off-ita LLRW NRC Spent Fuel Sit.
Processed Burial Volumes Burial IUtility and Decon Removal Packaging Transport Processing Disposal Other Total Total Lic. Term.
Management Restoration Volume Class A Class B Class C GFCC Processed Craft Contractor Cost Cost Costs Costs Costs Costs Costs Continnencv Costs Costs Costs Costs Cu. FPet Co. Feet Cuo Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Wt, Lbs.
Manhoourn Manhours I I
In*I A*IVIW UQSCrl D*on ndox ct i Description PERIOD 2d - Decontamination Followdng Wet Fuel Storage Period 2d Direct Decommissioning Activities 2d.1.1 Remove spent fuel racks Disposal of Plant Systems 2d.1.2.1 Electrical (Contaminated) - FHB 2d.1.2.2 Electrical (Decontaminated) - FHB 2d.1.2.3 Fire Protection (RCA) 2d.1.24 HVAC (Contaminated)- FHB 2d.1.2.5 Spent Fuel Pit Cooling 2d.1.2.6 Spent Fuel Pit Cooling - FHB 2d.1.2 Totals Decontamination of Site Buildings 2d.1.3.1 Fuel Handling 2d.1.3 Totals 2d.1.4 Scaffolding in support of decommissioning 2d.1 Subtotal Period 2d Activity Costs Period 2d Additional Costs 2d.2.1 License Termination Surmey Planning 2d.2 Subtotal Period 2d Additional Costs Period 2d Collateral Costs 2d.3.1 Process liquid waste 2d.3.2 Small tool allowance 2d.3.3 Decommissioning Equipment Disposition 2d.3 Subtotal Period 2d Collateral Costs Period 2d Period-Dependent Costs 2d.4.1 Decon supplies 2d.4.2 insurance 2d.4.3 Property taces 2d.4.4 HeaSt physics sopplies 2d.4.5 Heavy equipmrent rental 2d.4.6 Disposal of DAW generated 2d.4.7 Plant energy budget 2d.4.8 NRC ISFSI Fees 2d.4.9 NRC Fees 2d.4.10 Emergency Planning Fees 2d.4.11 Spent Fuel Transfer - Pool or ISFSI to DOE 2d.4.12 Liquid Radwaste Processing Equipment/Semices 2d.4.13 ISFS - Operating Costs 2d4.4 14 SFS - Fined Costs 2d.4.15 Security Staff Cost 2d.4.16 DOC Staff Cost 2d.4.17 LUility Staff Cost 2d.4 Subtotal Period 2d Period-Dependent Costs 2d.0 TOTAL PERIOD 2d COST 477 47 136 142 880 191 268 70 97 1,649 11 2
8 22 24 68 665 723 39 665 723 39 578 3
1,142 2.996 246 116 53 72 121 116 72 174 210 443 1,076 S
26 210 1,519 26 1.469 4,587 446 34 10 90 20 41 26 27 214 48 48 2
298 215 107 322 10 10 630 77 5.
742 162 320 36 117 221 125 237 1,543 499 206 610 206 510 17 2
1,765 1.668 656 598 1,948 1,948 69 305 305 478 2.202 2.202 104 478 478 181 854 854 133 588 580 150 660 660 1,116 5,088 5,088 944 3,134 3.134 944 3,134 3,134 205 907 807 2,862 10.977 10,977 746 20 7,198 1,570 3,102 138 1,130 841 1,209 903 14,955 1,902 1,996 1,965 1,996 1,965 147 9
17,097 6,372 2,496 221.587 962
' 32,098 2,475 292.312 14,847 63,760 3.139 138.203 4,294 120,463 1,270 129,199 1,737 776,035 27,761 253,465 23.531 253.465 23,531 7,417 4.672 1.258.505 56,927 669 277 946 946 669 277 946 946 6,240 6,240 200 686 99 686 299 177 46 87 245 88 303 171 207 177 65 132 182 2,769 3,526 87 8,089 2,451 2,054 8,757 201 785 785 15 87 87 215 1.229 1.229 432 2,101 2,101 73 283 283 24 201 201 6
53 53 153 597 597 223 1,299 1,299 36 159 159 51 296 296 86 42 345 345 24 195 43 250 37 213 213 13 78 27 159 38 220 220 574 3,343 3,343 731 4,257 4,257 2,095 12,036 11,265 5,666 26,060 25,290 88 195 250 78 159 770 770 794 6.000 378 6,000 1,172 1,400 1,400 23,097 8.944 47,648 155 303,548 88 351,197 243 28,006 51 28,006 51 1,637,707 57.221 2,880 35.040 58,080 96,000 102.240 TLG Servies, foe.
Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommuisioning Cost Analysis Documnent P01-1604-003, Rev. 0 Appendix C, Page 9 of 24 Table C-I Diablo Canyon Unit I DECON Decommissioning Cost Estimate (Thousands of 2008 Dollars)
IActivity P Off-Site LLRW NRC Spent Fuel Site Processed Burial Volumes Burial)
Utility and Devon Removal Packaging Transport Processing Disposal Other Total Total Lic. Term.
Management Restoration Volume Class A Class B Class C GTCC Processed Craft Contractor Cost Cost Costs Costs Costs Costs Costs Continoency Costs Costs Costs Costs Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet WE, Lbs.
Manhours ManhoursI Bm IN.hi A*IVI* I )O* f I*NOn ndox ctivi Descri on PERIOD 2e -License Termination Period 2e Direct Decommissioning Activities 2e.1.1 ORISE confirmatory survey 2e.1.2 Terminate license 2e.1 Subtotal Period 2e Activity Costs Period 2e Additional Costs 2e.2.1 License Termination Survey 2e.2 Subtotal Period 2e Additional Costs Period 2e Collateral Costs 2e.3.1 DOC staff relocation expenses 2e.3 Subtotal Period 2e Collateral Costs Period 2e Period-Dependent Costs 2e.4.1 Insurance 2e.4,2 Property taxes 2e.4.3 Health physics supplies 2e.4.4 Disposal of DAW generated 2e'4.5 Plant energy budget 2e.4.6 NRC ISFSI Fees 2e.4.7 NRC Fees 2e.4.8 Emergency Planning Fees 2e.4.9 Spent Fuel Transfer - Pool or ISFSI to DOE 2e.4.10 SFS1 -Operaling Costs 2e.4.11 SF51 -Fixed Costs 2e.4.12 Security Staff Cost 2e.4.13 DOC Staff Cost 2e.4.14 Utility Staff Cost 2e.4 Subtotal Period 2e Period-Oependent Costs 2e.0 TOTAL PERIOD 2e COST 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 31.1.1.4 Miscellaneos 3b.1.1.5 Turbine 31.1.1.6 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 NRC 3b.1 Subtotal Period 30 Activity Costs 153 63 218 218 153 83 216 216 8,178 8.178 1,395 1.395 919 6
919 6
919 6
7,597 59,580 14,508 11,9, 6,873 273 615 26 3,274 1,212 1,689 13.961 290 76 2
20 200 144 532 281 339 106 216 298 2,847 2,525 2
20 7,852 2
20 17.578 53 39,990 40.020 237.386 3,390 11.568 11.568 3.390 11,568 11,568 289 1,684 1,684 289 1.684 1,684 40 330 330 11 86 86 318 1,236 1,236 8
36 36 42 242 242 144 73 605 605 39 319 70 409 22 128 45 261 62 360 360 590 3,437 3,437 523 3,048 3,048 1.842 10.642 9,381 5,585 24.110 22.849 110,277 521,321 404,082 319 144 319 409 128 261 1,261 319 1.261 319 113,090 4.141 402,284 130,180 3,224 574 6,371 12 4,714 36.143 39.286
-6,371 12 80,143 6,371 142,841 83.263 27.360,510 813,637 1.680,690 74,901 3,572 6,563 249 38,602 11,300 16,750 151,936 142.829 3,120 142,829 3,120 1,425 8,298 57 330 127 742 5
31 679 3,952 251 1,463 350 2,039 2.894 16.856 8,298 330 742 31 3,952 1.463 2.039 16,856 2-272 16.234 471 2,743 187 39 226 226 187 3,404 19,825 226 2,743 19,599 4,587 S -
1,560 156,523 1,560 TLG Services, Inc.
Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document P01-1604-003, Rev. 0 Appendix C, Page 10 of24 Table C-1 Diablo Canyon Unit 1 DECON Decommissioning Cost Estimate (Thousands of 2008 Dollars)
Off-Site LLRW NRC Spent Fuel Site Processed Burial Volumes Burial I Utility and Activity Decon Removul Packaging Transport Processing Disposal Other Total Total Lic. Term.
Management Restoration Volume Class A Class B Class C GTCC Processed Craft Contractor Index AcEvita Description Cost Cost Costs Costs Costs Costs Costs Continsency Costs Costs Costs Costs Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Wt, Lbs.
Manhours Manhours Period 3b Additional Costs 3b.2.1 Concrete Crushing 3b.2.2 Cofferdam Construction and Teardown 3b.2 Subtotal Period 35 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 NRC ISFSI Fees 3b.4.6 Emergency Planning Fees 3b.4.7
-Spent Fuel Transfer - Pool or ISFSI to DOE 3b.4.8 ISFSI - Operating Costs 3b.4.9 ISFSI - Fixed Costs 3b.4.10 Security Staff Cost 3b.4.11 DOC Staff Cost 3b.4.12 Utility Staff Cost 3b.4 Subtotal Period 3b Period-Dependent Costs 3b.0 TOTAL PERIOD 3b COST PERIOD 3c - Fuel Storage OperationslShipping Period 3o Direct Decommissioning Activities Period 3c Collateral Costs 3X.3 Subtotal Period 3c Collateral Costs Perod 3c Period-Dependent Costs 3`.4.1 Insurance 3c.4.2 Property taxes 3c.4.3 Plant energy budget 3c.4.4 NRC ISFSI Fees 3c.4.5 Emergency Planning Fees 3c.4.6 Spent Fuel Transfer - Pool or ISFSI to DOE 3c.4.7 ISFSI - Operating Costs 3..4.8 ISFSI - Fixed Costs 3c.4.9 Security Staff Cost 3c.4.10 Utility Staff Cost 3X.4 Subtotal Period 3c Period-Dependent Costs 3c.0 TOTAL PERIOD 3. COST PERIOD 3d - GTCC shipping Period 3d Direct Decommissioning Activities Nuclear Steam Supply System Removal 3d.1.1.1 Vessel & Internals GTCC Disposal 3d.1.1 Totals 3d.1 Subtotal Period 3d Activity Costs 464 438 901 96 560 91 529 187 1,089 39 225 39 225 560 529 1,089 225 225 2,063 4,004 6,067 187 187 6,420 6,420 23.741 787 207 273 391 763 921 289 587 338 6,581 1,713 12.849 109 896 896 29 235 235 1.331 7,750 7.750 56 329 329 391 391 105 869 869 191 1,112 1,112 60 349 349 122 709 709 70 408 408 1,364 7.945 7.945 355 2,068 0
1,158 910 3.792 23.061 0
5.718 17.342 5.343 81,211 27,783 114.337 162.590 115,897 13,036 7.422 44.199 226 5,718 38.255 4,184 578 4,762 1,098 152 1,250 2,075 2.075 4,055 560 4.615 4.865 1,009 5,874 1,534 318 1,852 3,119 647 3,766 20,852 4,323 25,174 5,130 1,064 6.194 46.913 8.650 55,562 46.913 8.650 55.562 4,762 1,250 2.075 4,615 5.874 1,852 3,766 25,174 6,194 55,562 55.562 306,566 76,755 383,321 383,321 300 8,952 300 8,952 300 8,952 1.897 11.150 11.150 1.897 11.150 11.150 1.897 11.150 11.150 433 85,510 433 85,510 433 85,510 TLG Services, Inc.
Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document P01-1604-003, Rev. 0 Appendix C, Page 11 of 24 Table C-I Diablo Canyon Unit I DECON Decommissioning Cost Estimate (Thousands of 2008 Dollars)
Off-Site LLRW NRC Spent Fuel site Processed Burial Volumes Burial I Utility and Decon Removal Packaging Transport Processing Disposal Other Total Total Lic. Term.
Management Restoration Volume Class A Class B Class C GTCC Processed Craft Contractor Cost Cost Costs Costs Costs Costs Costs Continaency Costs Costs Costs Costs Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Wt. Lbs.
Manhours Manhours SActivity tIdex Activity Description Period 3d Collateral Costs 3d.3 Subtotal Period 3d Collateral Costs Period 3d Period-Dependent Costs 3d.4.1 Insuranoe 3d.4.2 Properly taxes 3d.4.3 Plant energy budget 3d.4.4 NRC ISFSI Fees 3d.4.5 Emergency Planning Fees 3d.4.6 ISFSI - Operating Costs 3d.4.7 SF51 - Fixed Costs 3d.4.8 Security Staff Cost 3d.4.9 Utility Staff Cost 3d.4 Subtotal Period 3d Period-Dependent Costs 3d.0 TOTAL PERIOD 3d COST PERIOD 3e - ISFSI Decontamination Period 3e Direct Decommissioning Activities Period 3e Additional Costs 3e.2.1 ISFSI License Termination 3e.2 Subtotal Period 3e Additional Costs Period 3e Colateral Costs 3e.3.1 Small tool alvnance 3e.3 Subtotal Period 3e Collateral Costs Period 3e Period-Deperdent Costs 3e.4.1 Insurance 3e.4.2 Property taxes 3e.4.3 Heavy equipment rental 3e.4.4 Plant energy budget 3e.4.5 Securty Staff Cost 3e.4.6 Utility Staff Cost 3e.4 Subtotal Period 3e Period-Dependent Costs 3e.0 TOTAL PERIOD 3e COST PERIOD 31 - ISFSI Site Restoration Period 3f Direct Decommissioning Activities Period 3f Additional Costs 31.21 ISFSI Demolition and Site Restoration 3f.2 Subtotal Period 3f Additional Costs Period 31 Collateral Costs 3f.3.1 SmaI tool alluwowce 3fi3 Subtotal Period 3f Collateral Costs Period 3f Period-Dependent Costs 3f4.1 Insurance 3f14.2 Property taxes 31.4.3 Heavy equipment rental 31.4.4 Plant energy budget 300 15 4
7 14 5
11 73 148 8.952 148 1,059 4
100 387 789 1.059 4
100 387 789 14 14 2
17 1
4 7
2 16 1
7 2
13 15 89 4
22 27 175 1,924 11.325 11.150 678 3,016 678 3,016 3
17 3
17 18 145 5
38 64 373 36 207 27 156 t49 919 829 3,953 121 707 121 707 1
5 1
5 17 4
7 16 7
13 89 22 175 175 433 85.510 3,016 6,239 3,016 6,239 748.943 15,356 1,280 748.943 15,356 1,280 1,080 270 1,350 1,350 17 17 309 309 1,383 4
100 127 33 172 129 461 387 1,250 145 38 373 207 156 919 3.953 6,239 2,510 1,901 4,411 748,943 15.356 5,691 3,446 50 3,446 80 562 24 562 24 707 707 4
4 19 125 103 17 2
19 21 125 TLG Services, Inc.
Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document P01-1904-003, Rev. 0 Appendix C, Page 12 of 24 Table C-1 Diablo Canyon Unit 1 DECON Decommissioning Cost Estimate (Thousands of 2008 Dollars)
Off-Site LLRW NRC Spent Fuel Site Processed Burial Volumes Burial I Utility and Activity Decon Removal Packaging Transport Processing Disposal Other Total Total Lic. Term.
Management Restoration Volume ClassA Class B Class C GTCC Processed Craft Contractor Index Activit Description Cost Cost Costs Costs Costs Costs Costs Contisgency Costs Costs Costs Costs Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Wt, Lbs.
Manhours Mambo-rs Period 3f Period-Dependent Costs (continued) 3f.4.5 Security Staff Cost 3f.4.6 Utility Staff Cost 3f.4 Subtotal Period 3f Penod-Dependent Costs 3f.0 TOTAL PERIOD 3f COST PERIOD 3 TOTALS TOTAL COST TO DECOMMISSION 103 669 25,793 304 11,648 87.866 15,019 86 18 104 54 11 65 158 53 314 181 175 1,025
-104
-65 314 1,025 1,265 784 2,050 3,446 2,130 433 834,453 181,392 508,389 1O0 9,339 61.529 12,856 39.990 56,407 393.084 19,000 116t064 11,375 154.278 771,148 538,104 66,434 38.255 6,239 189,088 43.956 402,284 137,783 5,627 574 433 28,504,980 1,021.677 3,021.318 7OTALCOST TO DECOMMISSION WITH 25.01% CONTINGENCY:
$771,148 thousands of 2008 dollars TOTAL NRC UCENSE TERMINATION COST IS69.78% OR:
$538,104 thousands of 2008 dollars PENT FUEL MANAGEMENT COST IS24.52% OR:
$189,088 thousands of 2008 dollars ON-NUCLEAR DEMOLITION COST IS 5.7% OR:
$43,956 thousands of 2008 dollars TOTAL LOW-LEVEL RADIOACTIVE WASTE VOLUME BURIED (EXCLUDING GTCC):
143,984 Cubic Feet TOTAL GREATER THAN CLASS C RADWASTE VOLUME GENERATED:
433 Cubic Feet TOTAL SCRAP METAL REMOVED:
47,992 Tons TOTAL CRAFT LABOR REQUIREMENTS:
1,021,677 Man-hours End Notes:
n/a - indicates that this activity not charged as decommissioning expense.
a -indicates that this activoy performed by decommissioning staff.
0 -indicates that this value is less than 0.5 but is non-zero.
a cell containing "-" indicates a zero value TLG Serices, Inc.
Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis Docunent P01.1604-003, Rev. 0 Appendix C, Page 18 of24 Table C-2 Diablo Canyon Unit 2 DECON Decommissioning Cost Estimate (Thousands of 2008 Dollars)
Off-Sits LLRW NRC Spent Fuel Site Processed Burial Volures Burtal/
Utility asd Astiofy Decon Removal Packaging Transport Prsoessing Disposas Other Total Total Lic. Tesm.
Management Restoration Volume Class A Class B Class C GTCC Processed Craft Contractor Index Actlvi Description Cost Cost Costs Cost Costs Costs Costs Contlonfsenc Costs Costs Costs Costs Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Fast Wt., Lbs.
Manhours Manhours PERIOD Ia - Shutdown through Transition Period ia Direct Decommissioning Actilities ta.t.l Prepare preliminary decommissioning cost
- 1 a.2 Notification of Cessation of Operations l a. 1.3 Remove fuel & source material 1a.1.4 Notification of Permanent Defueting I..1.5 Deactivate plant systems & process waste 1a.1.6 Prepare and submit PSDAR l:.1.7 Review plant dwgs & specs.
l'.1,8 Perform detailed red survey Ia.1.9 Estimate by-product inventory I:.1.10 End product description ll..11 Detailed by-product inventory ls.1.12 Define major work sequence la.1.t3 Perform SER and EA l1a1.14 Perform Site-Specific Cost Study I ail15 Prepare/submit License Termination Plan la.1016 Receive NRC approval of termination plan Activity Specifcations la.1.17.1 Plont & temporary facilities ta.I.17.2 Plant systems la.1.17.3 NSSS Decontamination Flush ta,1.17.4 Reactor internals ta.1.17.5 Reactor essel ta.t.17.6 Biological shield ta.n.17.7 Steam generators ta.1.17.8 Reinforced concrete 1:1.1t7.9 Msin Turbine ta.t.17.10 Main Condensers ta.1.17.17 Plant structres & buildings ta.t.17.12 Wasto management ta.1.17.13 Pacil]y & site closeout lait7 Total Planning & Srie Preparations lo1f1 Prepare dismantling sequence Sa.t.t1 Plant prep. & temp. svces Ia.1.20 Design water cleas-op system ta.l.2t RiggingiCont Cntrd Envlpsdoolingletc.
ln.t.22 Procure casksliners & containers la.1 Subtotal Period I a Activity Costs Period ta Additional Costs no.2.1 Spent Fuel Pool Isolation ta.2 Subtotal Period ta Additional Costs Period ta Collateral Costs la.3.1 Spent Fuel Capial and Transfer la.3 Subtotal Period ta Collateral Costs Period ta Perod-Dependent Costs la.4.t Insurance ts.4.2 Property toxes ta.4.3 Health physics supplies ta.4.4 Heavy equipment rental 67 14 81 Nia 81 556 103 22 124 124 236 50 2
286 51 51 67 384 159 256 210 252 26 364 333 26 160 82 21 236 1,939 11 62 62 11 62 62 14 81 81 81 466 466 33 192 192 54 310 310 44 254 254 a
53 305 275 45 259 233 5
31 31 77 441 441 70 403 403 5
31 31 34 194 194 17 99 50 4
25 4
25 34 194 97 50 286 286 10 56 28 409 2,348 2,067 26 149 149 569 3,269 3,269 ts 87 87 443 2,543 2,543 13 76 76 1,808 10.389 10.109 31 2
-50 25 25 97 28 280 855 1.967 428 428 556 3.207 1.326 2,138 1,751 2,104 1,782 214 3.038 2.779 214 1.334 684 171 171 1.334 1'967 385 16,175 1.026 599 526 31.537 123 2,70 72 2,100 63 8,581 280 6,272 1.322 7.593 7,593 6,272 1.322 7,593 7.593 1.649 348 1.997 1,997 1,649 348 1,997 1,997 457 490 1,195 lo 168 1,363 1,363 14 115 115 161 618 618 103 593 593 TLG Services, Inc.
Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cast Analysis Document P01-1604-003, Re.. 0 Appendix C, Page 14 of24 Table C-2 Diablo Canyon Unit 2 DECON Decommissioning Cost Estimate (Thousands of 2008 Dollars)
I Off-Site LLRW NRC Spent Fuel Site Processed Burial Volumes Burial I Utility and Activity Decon Removal Packaging Transport Processing Disposal Other Total Total Lic. Term.
Management Restoration Volume Class A Class B Class C OTCC Prooessed Craft Contractor ilndex Actlvity Description Cost Cost Costs
-Costs Costs Costs Costs Contntenc Costs Costs Costs Costs Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feel Co. Feet Cu. Feet Wt., Lbs.
Manhourm Manhours Period ta Petiod-Dependent Costs (continued)
- a.4.5 Disposal o DAW generated 1 a.4.6 Ploor energy budget ta:4.7 NRC ISFSI Fees l.4.8 NRC Fees la,4.9 Emergency Planning Fees la.4.10 Spent Fuel Pool O&M 1..4.11 ISFSI - Operating Costs la.4.12 Spent Fuel Starage/Capital Equipment l1.4.13 ISFSI - Flxed Costs la.4.14 Security Staff Cost t:.4.15 Utlfuy Staff Cost 1l.4 Subtotal Period la Peood-Dependent Costs la.0 TOTAL PERIOD ta COST PERIOD lb -Decommissioning Preparations Period lb Direct Decommissioning Activities Detailed Work Procedures 1b.1.1.1 Plant systems 1b.1.1.2 NSSS Decontamination Flush lb.1.1.3 Reactor internals 1b.1.1.4 Remaining buildings 1b.1.1.5 CRD cooling assembly lb1..1.6 CRD housings & ICI tubes lb.1.1.7 Incore instrumentation tb.1.1.t Reactor vessel lb.1.1.9 Facility closeout fl.t.1.t0 Missile shields tb.1.1.t Biological shield lb.t.1.12 Steam generators lb.1.1.13 Reinforoed concreto lb.1.1.14 Main Turbine
- b..1.15 Main Coodensers lb.1.1,16 Auxiliary building 1b. 1..17 Reactor building th,1.1 Total 1b.1.2 Decn primary loop 947 11 947 11 35 1,330 191 471 1,258 735 141 4,385 286 10,231 21,222 35 41,545 15 64 64 280 1,610 1,610 191 66 537 537 177 1,434 155 890 30 171 924 5.309 60 347 2,156 12.358 12,388 4,473 25,695 25,695 8.782 51.324 42,982 191 1,434 890 171 5,309 347 8,341 565 11,299 21 157,471 346,229 565 11,299 21 503,700 35 58,047 12,259 71,303 60,684 10,338 280 565 11.299 21 535,237 243 51 128 69 51 51 51 186 62 23 62 236 51 80 80 140 140 1.704 51 294 264 11 62 62 27 155 155 15 84 21 11 60 62 11 62 62 11 62 62 39 225 225 13 74 37 5
28 28 13 74 74 55 286 286 I1 62 31 17 97 17 97 29 169 153 29 169 153 359 2,063 1.675 29 63 37 31 97 97 17" 17 388 2,024 428 1,069 577 428 428 428 1,552 513 192 513 1,967 428 667 667 1,167 1.167 14,215 1,067 1,067 14,215 10,690 4.024 10,690 4,024 550 550 1,635 1.148 2,783 2.783 1,704 1.508 4,847 4,459 lb.t Subtotal Period to Activity Costs 1.835 388 Period 1 b Additional Costs 1b.2.1 Site Characterization Ib.2.2 Haza rdous Waste Management Ib.2.3 Mood Waste Management lb.2 Subtotal Period 11 Addional Costs Period 1 b Collateral Costs lb.3.1 Dacon equipment 1b.3.2 DOC staff relocation expenses lb.3.3 Procoss liquid wsste 10.3.4 Small tool atlowasce 1b.3.5 Pipe cutting equipment 1,.3.6 Decoc "g I b.3.7 Spent Fuel Capital and Transfer 1b.3 Subtotal Period lb Collateral Costs 935 64 190 2
1,000 1,400 2,399 1,002 190 1,945 820 2,765 2,765 590 124 715 715 912 192 1,104 1,104 3,447 1,136 4,583 4,583 1,395 791 7.041 S
504 791 7,041 1,899 197 1,132 1,132 294 1,689 1,689 2,711 10,796 10,796 0
3 3
211 1,211 1,211 295 1,695 1.695 106 610 3,815 17,137 16,526 610 610 401 2,421 401 2,421 292,773 292.773 TLG Services, Inc.
Diabto Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document P01-1604-003, Rev. 0 Appendix C, Page 15 of 24 Table C-2 Diablo Canyon Unit 2 DECON Decommissioning Cost Estimate (Thousands of 2008 Dollairs)
Ac,*tivity o ff-Sit LLRW NRC Spent Fuel bit.
Prcesse Burial Volumes Uurialii Decon Removal Packaging Transport Processing Disposal Other Total Total Lic. Term.
Management Restoration Volume Close A Class B Class C OTCC Prosesser Craft Contrectar Cost Cost Costs Costso sts Co ststs Costs Contisgoscy Costs Costs Costs Costs Cu. Feet Cu. Foot Cu. Feet Cu. Fait Cu. Feet Wt., Lbs.
Manhoura Manhourse I
1-IludyI dn ex I
Period lb Period-Dependect Costs Ib.4.1 Decon supplies lb.4.2 Insurance Ib.4.3 Property taxes lb.4.4 Health physics supplies lb.4.5 H-eavy equipment rectal lb.4.6 Disposal of DAW generated lb.4.7 Plant energy budget lb.4.R NRC ISFSI Fees lb.4.9 NRC Fees lb4.10 Emergency Planning Fees 1 b.4.11 Spent Fuel Pool O&M lb.4.12 ISFSI - Operating Costs 1 b.4.13 Spent Fuel Storage/Capoal Equipment lb.4.14 SFS1 -Foxed Costs lb.4.15 Security Staff Cost lb.4.16 DOC Staff Cost lb.4.17 Utildy Staff Cost 1b.4 Subtotal Period 1 b Perod-Dependent Costs lb.0 TOTAL PERIOD lb COST PERIOD I TOTALS PERIOD 2a - Large Component Removal Period 2a Direct Decommissioning Activities Nuclear Steam Supply System Removal 2o.1.1.1 Reactor Coolant Piping 2a.1.1.2 Pressurer Quench Tank 2a.l.1.3 Reactor Coolant Pumps & Motors 2a.l.1.4 Pressurizer 2a.1.1.5 Steam enerators 2a.l.1.6 Retired Steam Generator Units 2a.1.1.7 CRDMsolCIs/Seovce Structure Removal 2a.1.1.8 Reactor Vessel Intemals 2a.1.1.9 Reactor Vessel 2s.1.1 Totals Removal of Major Equipment 2a.1.2 Main Turbine/Generator 2as.t3 Main Condensers Cascading Costs from Clean Building Demolit0n 2s.1.4.1
- teoctor 2o.1.4,2 Auxiliary 2a.1.4.3 Containment Penetration Area 2a1 :14.4 Raduwaste Storage 2a.1.4.5 Fuel Handling 2a.1.4 Totals Disposal of Plant Systems 2a.1.5.1 Auciliary Steam 2a.1.5.2 Auxiliary Steam (RCA) 2a.1.5.3 Building Services (Non-Pourer Block) 2a.t.5.4 Condensate System 2a.1.5,5 Condensate System (insulated) 29 10 39 39 602 85 687 687 51 7
58 58 255 90 345 345 247 52 299 299 0-6 2
2 8
37 37 1,341 283 1,623 1,623 96 96 237 33 271 271 375 53 427 370 78 448 71 15 86 1,919 404 2,324 144 30 175 5,158 1,087 6,245 6.245 3,863 814 4,677 4,677 10,698 2.255 12.953 12.953 29 502 6
2 20 24.926 5,304 30,790 27,234 96 427 448 86 2.324 175 3,556 4,167 388 327 327 726 2,421 6.541 12 79,383 47,314 174,537 6.541 12 301,234 299.314 12,319 319,473 310.613 12.339 854,710 4,063 1,505 196 4,063 2,452 206 305 287 40 32 29 6
120 101 44 38 59 454 394 3.846 2,606 1,895 162 92 224 134 2.198 5,018 100 4.126 1,562 1,285 10.739 11,930 532 191 1.529 181 1,208 652 66 82 175 2,183 794 798 40 6
121 295 1,924 1,890 37 870 651 5,835 7,061 31,976 11.763 57.356 52,802 7,096 90,023 24.022 128,660 113,486 766 598 2,036 2.036 108 73 255 255 1,358 628 2,371 2.371 620 391 1,859 1,859 2,974 5,939 5,124 22,887 22,887 2,974 5,768 3.317 15,844 15,844 255 275 1,044 1,044 4,516 229 7,700 20,667 20.667 8,548 229 11,250 26,467 26,467 5,948 27.878 459 29.356 93,430 93.430 2,141 258,908 10,138 329 36,557 1,073 5,388 871,200 4,152 2,460 209,821 2,282 37,344 23,568 3.353,901 23,234 1,750 37,344 22,887 3,128,906 10,800 1,125 3,881 86,025 4,285 S1,502 845 574 352,188 27.833 1,245 6,416 2,379 964,382 27.833 1,245 74,688 68.572 3,224 574 9,321.887 111,630 5,366 14.505 669 0
1,293 2,421 138 879 603 131 831 570 640 2,983 2,983 966 4,208 4,208 255 1.462 1,462 137 790 790 14 80 80 17 99 99 37 212 212 460 2,643 2,643 7,691 2,294 7.274 2.170 549,788 9,425 520.010 27.028 13.127 7,054 704.
918 1.746 23,550 128 109 6
1.031 388 6
2 62 21 31 14 546 181 252 118 4,477 1.481 105 519 519 67 310 310
-1 7
1,429 7,545 7,545 490 2,561 2,561 2,440 1,146 7
43,400 14,362 99,082 2,123 46,536 1,820 106 1,762,487 17,105 583,235 6,634 TLG Services, Inc.
Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decoatissiooionag Cost Analysis Documont P01-1604-003, Rev. 0 Appendix C, Page 16 of 24 Table C-2 Diablo Canyon Unit 2 DECON Decommissioning Cost Estimate (Thousands of 2008 Dollars)
IAotN.
Off-,Site LLRW NRC; Spent Fuel Site Processe BurlaJ Volumnes Bun.l i Utllty n Oecon Removal Packaging Transport Processing Disposal Other Total Total Lic. Teom.
Management Restoration Volume Claos A Class B Class C GTCC Processed Craft Contrator I Cost Cost Coats Conts Costs Coots Costa Coetinoanco Costs Costs Costs Costs Cu. Feet Cua Fst Cu. Fet Cu Fet Cu Feet Wt.. bs.
Manhors Manhos m Inaex Ac[IV* U*BCrlOTIOR Index
-nim, Period 2a Disposal of Plant Systems (continued) 2a.1.5,6 Containment Spray 2o.1.5.7 Extraction Steam & Heater Drip 2oal.5,8 Foedwater System 2a l.5.0 Feadwatet Systom (Insulated) 2a.1.5.10 Feedwater System (RCA Insulated) 2a.1.5.11 Feedwater System (RCA) 2a.t.5.12 NSSS Sampling 2a.1.5.13 NSSS Sampling (Insulated) 2a.1.5,14 Nitrogeno Hydrogen 2a.1.5.15 Nitrogen S Hydrogon (Insulated) 2a.1.5.16 Nitrogen 5 Hydrmgtn (RCA Insulated) 2o.1.5.17 Nitrogen & Hydrogen (RCA) 2a.1.5.18 Oly Water Separator & TB Sump 2a.1.5.19 Saltsater System 2a.1.5.20 Turbino Steam Supply 2a.1.5.21 Turbine Steam Supply (RCA) 2a.1.5.22 Turbine ano Generaton 2a.1.5.23 Turbioe mnl Generator (Insulated) 2a.1.5 Totals 2a.1.6 Scaffolding in support of decommissioning 2a.1 Subtotal Period 2a Activity Costs Period 2a Additonal Costs 2a.2.1 Renired Reactor Head 2a.2 Subtotal Period 2a Additional Costs Period 2a Collateral Costs 2a,3,1 Process liquid waste 2a.3.2 Small tool allowance 2a.3.3 Spent Fuel Capial and Transfer 2a.3 Subtotal Period 2a Collateral Costs Period 2a Pearod-Dependent Costs 2a.4.1 Decon supplies 2a.4.2 Insurance 2o.4.3 Property taces 2a.4.4 HeaSh physics supplies 2a.4.5 Heavy equipment rental 2a.4.5 Disposal Of DAW generated 2a.4.7 Plant energy budget 2a.4.8 NRC ISFSI Fees 2..4,9 NRC Fees 2a.4.10 Emergency Planning Fees 2a,4,11 Spent Puel Transfer-Pool or ISFSI to DOE 2a.4. 2 Spent Fuel Pool O&M 2a.4,13 ISFSI - Operatng Costs 2o.4,14 Spent Fuel Storage/Capital Equipment 2a.4.15 ISFSI - FiXed Costs 2o,4,16 Security Stfff Cost 2a.4.17 DOC Staff Cost 2a4.18 t Uility Staff Cost 2a,4 Subtotal Period 2a Peyod-Dependent Costs 2a.0 TOTAL PERIOD 2a COST 183 10 84 391 16 137 93 13 112 137 93 3
24 4
0 1
128 4
3 38 1
0 16 1
4 0
0 81 0
4 24 1
5 153 1,240 81 714 685 23 191 119 4
39 44 1
7 5,099 245 2,093 4,344 26 19 1.285 24,426 12,573 8,216 688 1.126 919 197 10 8
43 2
34 41 5,855 1,567 318 58 17,151 48 149 22 24,958 29,122 459 228 1,192 1,192 6,687 270,737 3.135 406 2,078 2,076 10,916 443,294 6.490 252 1,389 1,389 8,906 361,684 1,645 29 166 166 2,547 80 396 396 1,907 77,448 1.601 4
20 20 100 4,076 76 63 251 251 81 164 17,884 3.398 15 59 5
20 1,787 711 3
20 20 309 0
1 1
16 2
8 8
17 705 72 37 157 157 330 13,400 1,362 108 89 5
402 16,329 394 32 186 186 2.779 1,831 9,721 9.721 5-6.760 2,305,038 20,783 614 3,079 3,079 15,189 616,829 11.698 118 598 598 3,082 125,162 2.001 29 140 140 565 22,940 696 5,854 30,489 30.110 380 166.269 185 6,768,654 86.499 1,572 6,132 6,132 1,300 82 65.745 37,341 38,848 139,887 139.507 380 257,222 73.303 3,224 074 17.226,080 295,473 5,366 102 151 503 15 537 1,363 1,363
-102 151 55 503 15 537 1,363 1,383 2.002 2,002 107 49 318 107 318 49 80 2,113 3,658 104 198 198 39 39 8,508 184 189 727 727 87 385 346 1,160 244 1,404 184 1i1t0 500 2,516 1.074 38 1.404 1,404 38
-6 85 157 342 1.962 296 700 876 352 1,141 219 4,531 445 13,382 20,180 29,194 342 74,121 24,958 30,151 75,755 731 731 31 120 120 96 781 781 22 179 161 742 2,856 2,R56 771 4,428 4.428 143 628 628 414 2,376 2,376 206 290 98 708 798 123 1,000 1,000 74 427 427 241 1,382 1,382 46 265 265 955 5,481 5,486 94 539 539 2,820 18,202 16.202 4,253 24,433 24.433 6,153 35,347 35.347 17,076 97,542 88,131 9,394 56,961 241.309 230,074 10,798 18 5,524 18 5,524 436 257,222 81,561 3,224 574 211,020 2,100 84 211,020 2.100 84 43,889 143 43,889 143 110,482 201 204,930 246,240 458,460 110,482 201 909,630 17,591,480 297,917 915,080 89 5,771 104 1,481 30,617 12,877 TLG Serrices, Inc.
Diabso Canyon Power Plant Deeommissioning Cost Analysis Document P01-1604-003, Rev. 0 Appendix C, Page 17 sf24 Table C-2 Diablo Canyon Unit 2 DECON Decomnmissioning Cost Estimate (Thousands of 2008 Dollars)
Off-Site LLRW NRC Spent Fuel Site Processed Burial Volumes Burial I Utility sod Aotioity Decon Removal Packaging Transport Processing Disposal Other Totot Total Lic. Term.
Management Restoration Volume Class A Class B Class C GTCC Processed Craft Contractor Index Activity Description Cost Cost Cost tcosts Costs Costs Costs Contic eno Costs Costs Costs Costs Cu. Feet Ca. Feet Cu, Feet Cs. Feet Co. Feet Wt. Lbs.
Machoot Macboors PERIOD 21 -Site Decontamination Period 28 Direct Decommissioning Activities Disposal of Plant Systems 2b.1,1.1 Capital Additions 85-2002 (Clean) 2b.1.1.2 Capital Additions 85-2002 (contaminated) 2b..1.3 Chemical & Volume Control 2b. 1.1.4 Chemical & Volume Control (Insulated) 2b.1.1.5 Component Cooling Water 2b 1.11.6 Component Cooling Water (RCA) 2b.1.1.7 Compressed Air 2b.1.1.8 Compressed Airr Insulated) 2b. 1..9 Compressed Air (RCA Insulated) 2b.1.1.10 Compressed Air (RCA) 2b.1.1.11 Diesel Engine-Gonerator 2b.f.1.12 Diesel Erngine-Generator (Insulated) 2b.1.1.1 3 EefrecIal (Clean) 2b.1. 114 Electrcal (Contamnnated) 2b1.1.115 Electcal (RCA) 2b.1.1.1 6 Fire Protection 2b.1.1.17 Gaseous Radwaste 2b.1.1.18 HVAC (Clean lnsulated) 2b.1.1.19 HVAC (Clean) 2b.1.1.20 HVAC (Contaminated Insulated) 2b.1.1.21 HVAC (Contaminated) 2b.1.1.22 Liquid Radwoste 2b.1.1.23 Liquid Radwaste (Insulated) 2b.1.1.24 Lube Oil Distribution & Purification 2b.1.1.25 Meke-up Water 2b.1.1.26 Mabc-op Water (Insulated) 2.1.11.27 Make-up Wator (RCA Insulated) 2b.1.1.28 Make-up Water (RCA) 21.1.1.29 Mechanical Department Equipment 2b.1.1.30 Miscellaneous Reactor Coolant 2b.1.1.31 Nucear Steam Suppiy Sampiing 2b.1.1.32 N ucar Steam Supply Sampling (Insulated 2b.1.1.33 Residual Heat Removal 2b.1.1.34 Safety Injection 2b.1.1.3S Safety Injection )Insulated) 2b.1.1.36 Safety Injection (RCA Insulated) 2b.1.1.37 Safety injection (RCA) 2b.:.1.38 Se rice Cooling Water 2b.1.1.39 Service Cooling Water (RCA) 2b.1.1.40 Sewr System Expansion 2b.1.1 Totals 2b.1.2 Scaffolding in support of decommissioning Decontamination of Site Buildings 2b.1.3.1
'Reactor 2b.1.3.2 Auxiliary 2b.1.3,3 Capital Additions 85-2004 2b.1.3.4 Containment Penetration Area 2b.1.3.5 Ra/waste Storage 2b.1.3 Totals 2b.1 Subtotal Period 28 Activity Costs 382 380 670 815 241 315 161 462
-10 23 116 3
2.645 279 1.691 293 102 34 356 1 91 849 298 345 24 32 211 208 20 25 1 26 1
17 101 16 7
265 236 98 4
30 250 118 29 40 1,514 11.507 9
38 287 58 55 75 403 498 17 12 39 147 13 107 877 0
1 11 3
26 212 5
30 243 17 30 256 2,103 10 91 750 5
9 61 34 4
25 197 17 22 125 970 124 30 31 142 274 2
1 2
18 5
42 342 0
3 24 2
17 1 38 4
5 30 31 1
1 3
7 O
0 1
3 55 67 305 583 4
11 76 31 0
0 3
2 2
4 23 17 17 33 203 150 1
4 35 298 1,015 7,479 2,009 80 462 224 995 995 1,040 3,555 3.555 345 1,115 1.115 34 195 372 1,831 1.831 21 122 1
6 11 46 46 195 847 847 24 141 1
3 557 3,203 162 735 735 1,095 5,176 5176 282 1.426 1,426 63 273 273 7
41 75 431 120 554 554 576 2,665 2,665 467 1,588 1.588 35 115 115 156 755 755 44 251 4
24 15 67 67 77 361 361 0
1 67 256 256 9
36 36 4
15 15 560 2,071 2,071 64 284 284 3
12 12 22 97 97 193 845 845 25 142 18 87 87 8
49 7.055 30,878 25,806 1,966 7,665 7,665 462 2,779 224 3.909 2,029 375 561 195 8.505 122 6
108 2,000-5 141 3
3,203 2,355 63 20,389 7.268 587 132 41 431 1,912 64 9,399 474 1,380 1,251 23 67 3,315 251 2
237 1,340 288 124 25 26 S
11 11 2,957 2,219 734 121 24 7
2 218 63 1,971 571 142 342 49 5,072 72.506 8,010 1,624 102 7.035 132,341 6.462 326.881 23,723 64,973 9.341 2.984 345.395 7,753 1.881 99 4,393 387 83,461 6,991 2,089 48 4-7,918 101,246 4.850 828,008 28,569 295,145 4.992 35,376 1,724 S -
662 6,878 83,372 3,019 423,748 13.623 148,480 10,972 6,908 948 134,627 3,487 3.794 376 9.606 423 54,432 2,103 19 22,203 1,982 3,299 257 1,414 110 317,012 5,170 40.197 1,726 1,614 70 14.529 498 130,758 4,112 2,186 13.881 478 746 3,623,296 220,481 82,182 46,676 5,430 33 24 1,524 1.737 381 349 1,080 657 112 106 345 150 24 21 266 188 29 33 7
56 12 10 3,222 2,788 558 519 186 27 426 3,703 232 1,592 30 345 120 394 8
173 816 6,206 3,198 11.317 11,317 4,128 20.482 2,076,526 53,198 1,636 5.416 5.416 2,251 6,098 629,318 28,216 430 1,345 1,345 288 1.320 128,360 8,143 428 1,457 1A57 1,164 1.509 180.273 7,367 91 356 356 75 660 61.324 8a4 5,782 19,891 19.891 7,907 30,069 3,075,801 97,808 4,736 19,725 888 1,558 8.480 8,242 14,803 58,434 53.362 5.072 82,037 38.181 6,781,279 364,965 TLG Services, Inc.
Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis Docarnent P01-1604-003, Rev. 0 Appendix C, Page 18 sf24 Table C-2 Diablo Canyon Unit 2 DECON Decommissioning Cost Estimate (Thousands of 2008 Dollars)
Off-SOte LLRW NRC Spent Fuel Site Processed Burial Volumes Burial IUtiiy and Activity fecon Removal Packaging Transport Processing Disposal Other Total Total Lic. Term.
Management Restoration Volume Class A Class B Class C GTCC Processed Craft Contractor Index Activity Description Cost Cost Costs Costs Costs Costs Costs Contioencc Costs Costs Costs Costs Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet WI. Lbs.
Manhoors Manbours Period 2b Collateral Costs 2b.3.1 Process liquid woste 2b.3.2 Smai tool alloancce 2b.3.3 Spent Fuel Capital and Transfer 2b.3 Subtotal Period 2b Collaterat Costs 224 185 400 224 400 185 758 956 679 2,803 2.803 84 485 485 576 121 697 758 956 576 885 3.984 3,287 697 697 2,749 2,749 227,668 536 227,668 536 Period 2b Penod-Dependent Costs 2b.4.1 Decon supplies 1,457 2b.4.2 Insurance 21.4.3 Property taxes 2b.4.4 Hea0h physics supplies 2,600 20.4.5 Heavy equipmrnt rental 4,547 21.4.6 Disposal of DAW generated 101 2b.4.7 Plant energy budget 2b.4.8 NRC ISFSI Fees 2b.4.9 NRC Feec 2b.4.10 Emergency Planning Fees 2b.4.11 Spent Fue Transfer - Pool or ISFSI to DOE 2b.4.12 Spent Fuel Poi CO M 2b.4.13 Liquid Radooste Processing Equipment/Services 2b.4.14 ISFSI - Operating Costs 2b.4.15 Spent Fuel Storage/Capital Equipment 2b.4.16 ISFS1 - Fcxed Costs 2b.4.17 Security Staff Cost 2b.4.18 DOC Staff Cost 2b.4.19 Utilty Staff Cost 2b.4 Subtotal Period 2b Period-Dependent Costs 1,457 7,147 101 2b.0 TOTAL PERIOD 20 COST PERIOD 2c -Wet Fuel Storage Period 2c Direct Decommissioning Activities Period 2c Collateral Costs 2c.3.1 Spent Fuel Capital and Transfer 2c.3 Subtotal Period 2c Collateral Costs Period 2c Period-Depcndcent Costs 2c.4.1 Insurance 2c.4.2 Property taxes 2c.4.3 Health physics supplies 2c4.4 Disposal of DAW generated 2c.4.5 Plant energy budget 2c.4.6 NRC ISFSI Fees 2c.4.7 NRC Fees 2c.4.8 Emergency Planning Fees 2c.4.9 Spent Fuel Transfer - Pool or ISFSI to DOE 2c.4.10 Spent Fuel Pool O&M 2c.4.11 ISFSI - Operating Costs 2c.4.12 Spent Fuel Storage/Capital Equipment 2c4.13 ISFSI -Fixed Costs 2c.4.14 Securiy Staff Cost 2c,4.15 iltlry Staff Cost 2c.4 Subtotal Period 2c Perod-Dependent Costs 6,418 27,273 1.174 857 196 38 333 1,940 371 877 724 1,232 1,429 374 274 9,137 557 16.757 24.325 35,045 30 333 94,096 2,353 8,480 9,532 94,672 9,800 9,800 3,161 723 7
62 1,908 1,367 1,224 2.671 3.383 5,270 Sa 1011 38,301 2,000 52,323 38,639 7
62 152,115 512 1,969 1.969 120 978 978 28 224 224 913 3,513 3.513 958 5.500 5,506 139 610 610 409 2.349 2,349 371 371 123 1,000 1,000 102 026 826 260 1,492 1,492 301 1,730 1,730 79 452 452 58 332 332 1,926 11.063 11,063 117 675 675 3.532 20.289 20,289 5.127 29A452 29,452 7,386 42,431 42,431 22.088 125.269 108,771 16.489 37,776 187.678 165.421 17.186 5,355 5.365 5.072 82.037 46,294 107,294 195 256,614 296,171 549,743 107,294 195 1,102,529 7,116,241 365,696 1,102,529 2.065 11.865 2.065 11.865 11,865 11.865 809 19 809 is 444 3,005 3,605 102 825 825 204 1,093 1,093 26 113 113 402 2.310 2,310 1,367 1.307 172 1.395 1,395 375 3.047 3.047 713 4,096 4,096 1,111 6,380 6,380 213 1,224 1,224 8,089 46,470 46.470 433 2,488 2,408 11.027 63,350 63.350 8,143 46,782 46,782 31.534 184,545 119,474 65,072 33.599 196.411 119,474 76.937 090 19,915 36 796,620 590,920 996 19,915 36 1.387,540 996 19,915 36 1.387,540 2c.O TOTAL PERIOD 2c COST 809 19 7
62 161,915 TLG Services, Ine.
Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document P01.1604-003, Rev. 0 Appendix C, Page 19 of24 Table C-2 Diablo Canyon Unit 2 DECON Decommissioning Cost Estimate (Thousands of 2008 Dollars)
Oft-Ste LLRW NRC Spent Fuel site Processed Burial Volumes Burial iUtiliy and Activity Decon Removal Packaging Transport trooessing Disposal Other Total Total LIc. Term.
Management Restoration Volume Class A Class B Class C GTCC Processed Craft Contractor Index Activity Description Cast Cost Costs Costs Costs Costs Costs Contingency Casts Casts Costs Costs Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Wt., Lbs.
Manhours Manhours PERIOD 2d - Decontamination Following Wet Fuel Storage Period 2d Direct Decommissioning Activties 2d.1.1 Remove spent fuel racks Disposal of Plant Systems 2d.1.2.1 Electrical (Contaminated) - FHB 2d.1.2.2 Electrical (RCA)-FHB 2d.1.2.3 Fire Protection (RCA) 2d.1.2.4 HVAC (Contaminated) - FHB 2d.1.2.5 Spent Fuel Pit Cooling 2d.1.2.6 Spent Fuel Pit Cooling - FHB 2d.1,2 Totals Decontamination of Site Buildings 2d.1.3.1 Fuel Handling 2d.t.3 Totals 2d.1.4 Scaffolding in support of decommissioning 2d. 1 Subtotal Period 2d Activity Costs Period 2d Additional Costs 2d.2.1 License Termination Surey Planning 2d.2 Subtotal Period 2d Additional Costs Period 2d Collateral Costs 2d.3.1 Process liquid waste 2d.3.2 S all tool allowance 2d.3.3 Decommissioning Equipment Disposition 2d.3 Subtotal Period 2d Collateral Costs Period 2d Period-Dependent Costs 2d.4.1 Decon supplies 2d.4.2 Insurance 2d.4.3 Propery tax.s 2d.4.4 Heaoth physics supplies 2d.4.5 Heavy equipment rental 2d.4.6 Disposal of DAW generated 2d.4.7 Plant energy budget 2d.4.8 NRC ISFSI Fees 2d.4.9 NRC Fees 2d.4.10 Emergency Planning Fees 2d.4.11 Spent Fuel Transfer - Pool or ISFSI to DOE 2d.4.12 Liquid Radwaste Processing Equipment/Services 2d.4.13 ISFSI - Operabng Costs 2d.4.14 ISFSI - Fixed Costs 2d.4.15 Securdy Staff Cost 2d.4.1 DOC Staff Cost 2d.4.17 Utiny Staff Cost 2d44 Subtotal Period 2d Pedod-Dependent Costs 2d.0 TOTAL PERIOD 2d COST 477 47 136 34 86 521 203 190 72 98 1,169 665 723 665 723 1.086 1.142 3.024 1
6 3
4 22 24 60 39 39 7
242 6
53 27 27 26 28 166 48 48 5
253 656 45 3
434 222 212 17 119 222 129 238 1,162 480 206 510 206 510 37 5
1.404 1.652 608 1,958 1.958 42 183 183 287 1,301 1,301 124 579 579 124 573 573 137 597 597 154 671 671 868 3.905 3,905 959 3,150 3,150 959 3,150 3.150 393 1,533 1.533 2.828 10,546 10.546 2,496 440 12 4,211 2,153 2,055 65 1.156 844 1,246 907 11,260 1,828 1,996 1,965 1,996 1,965 325 20 13.581 6,310 221,587 962 18,915 1.488 171.029 8.801 67,426 3.365 89.234 3.027 121,824 1,291 131.056 1,753 619,483 19,725 253,465 23,531 253,465 23,531 16,436 9,335 1,110,972 53,554 6-9 282 951 951 669 282 951 951 116 53 121 16 i68 174 210 445 1,076 S
35 210 1,521 39 215 107 322 13 13 200 686 99 686 299 177 46 115 245 88 207 171 207 177 65 132 2,143 3,931 6,066 115 13.655 204 787 787 14 83 83 219 1,232 1,232 438 2,102 2,102 74 264 284 25 202 202 7
53 53 156 602 602 227 1,303 1.303 48 212 212 52 296 296 08 29 237 237 24 196 44 251 37 214 214 14 79 28 160 452 2,594 2,594 828 4,759 4.759 1,278 7,344 7,344 3.322 18.873 18.100 6.870 32,471 31.699 793 6,000 370 6,000 1,171 88 196 251 79 160 772 772 1,862 1,862 19,581 9,342 6.240 6.240 47.568 155 303.548 88,
351,117 243 37,235 68 31.920 48.000 91,680 37,235 68 171,600 1,499.323 53W65 177,840 1,468 4.614 451 588 2,090 2,066 14,324 TLG Serviera, Inc.
Diablo Canyon Poner Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis Doeoussent P01-I6,4-603, Rev. 0 Appendix C, Page 20 of 24 Table C-2 Diablo Canyon Unit 2 DECON Decommissioning Cost Estimate (Thousands of 2008 Dollars)
Off-SRt LLRW NRC Spent Fuel Site Processed Burial Volumes Burial I Utilit and Activity Decon Removal Packaging Transport Processing Disposal Other Total Total Lic. Tenm.
Management Restoration Volume Class A Class B Class C GTCC Processed Craft Contractor index Activity Description Cost Cost Costs Costs Costs Costs Costs Contingency Costs Costs Cost.
Costs Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Wt., Lbs.
Manhours Mnhours PERIOD 2e -License Termination Period 2e Direct Decommissioning Activities 2e.1.1 ORISE confirmatory survey 2:.1.2 Terminate license 2e.
Subtotal Period 2e Activity Costs Period 2e Additional Costs 2e.2.1 License Termnination Survey 2e.2 Subtotal Period 2e Additional Costs Period 2o Collateral Costs 20.3.1 DOC staff relocation expenses 2e.3 Subtotal Period 2e Collateral Costs Period 2e Period-Dependent Costs 2:.4.1 Insurance 2e.4.2 Property taxes 2".4.3 Health physics supplies 2:.4.4 Disposal of DAW generated 20.4.5 Plant energy budget 2a.4.6 NRC ISFSI Fees 2e.4.7 NRC Fees 20.4.8 Emergency Planning Fees 2a.4.9 Spent Fuel Transfer - Pool or ISFSI to DOE 20.4.10 ISF51 - Operating Costs 20.4.11 ISFSI - Fixed Costs 2e.4.12 Securty Staff Cost 2a.4.13 DOC Staff Cost 2..4.14 Utility Staff Cost 2e.4 Subtotal Period 2e Period-Dependent Costs 20.0 TOTAL PERIOD 2e COST PERIOD 2 TOTALS PERIOD 3b -Site Restoration Period 3b Direct Decommissioning Actiitoes Demolition of Remaining Site Buildings 3b.1.1.1
- Reactor 3b.1.1.2 Administration 3b.1.1.3 Auxiliary 3b.1.1.4 Capital Additions 85-2004 3b.1.1.5 Chemical Storage 3b.1.1.6 Chlodnation 31,..1.7 Circulating Water Tunnels 3b.1.1.8 Cold Machine Shop 31.1.1.9 Communication 3b.1.1.10 Condensate Polishing/Technical Support 3b.1.1.11 Containment Penetration Area 3b.1.1.12 Discharge Structure 3b.1.1.13 Fabrication Shop 31b.1.14 Fire Pump House 3b.1.1.15 H-aerdous Waste Storage Facility 3b.1.1.16 Intake Structure 3b.1.1.17 Maintenance Shop 153 64 217 217 153 64 217 217 11,808 4,977 16,785 16,785 11,808 4,977 16,785 16,785 209,457 3,120 209,457 3,120 1.242 1.242 1.242 7
2 1.395 294 1.689 1.689 1,395 294 t,689 1,689 290 41 330 330 76 11 87 87 436 1,679 1,679 22 9
40 40 200 42 243 243 144 144 355 50 405 405 281 39 320 339 71 410 106 22 129 216 45 261 3.433 723 4,156 4.156 4,840 1,020 5A960 5 5.860 5.631 1.167 6,817 6,817 22 15,910 3,698 20,681 19,617 22 29.265 9.033 39.572 38.308 144 320 410 129 261 1,264 1.264 355 355 7,097 13 51.071 57,357 80.929 7.097 13 189,357 2
355 7,097 209%470 192,477 9,367 64,556 14.528 11.458 35,529 41,833 375,931 144.239 697,441 584.976 106,957 5,508 358,841 138.548 3,224 574 26,234,050 926,984 3.775,465 6,873 960 5,977 3,915 4
8 1,008 357 4
763 615 854 107 5
35 4.868 330 1,449 8.322 8.322 202 1,163 1.163 1,260 7.237 7,237 825 4,740 4.740 1
5 5
2 10 10 213 1.221 1.221 75 433 433 1
5 5
161 923 923 130 745 745 180 1,034 1,034 23 130 130 1
5 5
7 42 42 1,026 5.893 5,893 69 399 399 74,901 10,358 64.471 47,403 46 99 12.071 3.785 44 9.300 6,565 8.317 1,223 55 430 46.364 3,444 TLG Sersciees, Inc.
/
Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Coot Analysis Document P01-1604-003, ReH. 0 Appendix C, Page 21 of 24 Table C-2 Diablo Canyon Unit 2 DECON Decommissioning Cost Estimate (Thousands of 2008 Dollars)
IActivity Ott-Sits LLRW NRC Spent Fuel site Processed Burial Volumes Burial I Utility and, Decon Removal Packaging Transport Processing Disposal Other Total Total Lic. Term.
Management Restoration Volume Class A Class B Class C GTCC Processed Craft Contractor Cost Cost Costs Costs Costs C Cost Costs Co.tinoeoco C Cost Cost.
Costs Costs Cu. Feet CU. Feet Cu. Feel Cu. Font Cu. Feet Wt. Lbs.
Manhours Manhours I In*
A*]V*
U*MDZIOn Index ri ion Period 3b Demolition of Remaining Site Buildings (continued) 3b.1.1.18 Misceltanous Structures 3b.1.1.19 NPO Permanent Warehouse 3b.1.1.20 Ponds 3b1.1.21 Portable Fire Pump & Fuel Cart 3b.1.1.22 Pretreatment 31,1.1.23 Radwaste Storage 3b.1.1.24 Radwaste Storage Facility (Additional) 3b.1.1.225 RotorWarehouse 3b.1.1.26 Security 3b.1.1.27 Securdy Buildings (additional) 3b.1.1.28 Simulator 3b.1.1.29 Steam Generator Storage Facility 3b.1.1.30 Telephono Terminal 3b.1.1.31 Turbine 3b.1.1.32 Turbine Pedestal 3b.1.1.33 Vehicle Maintenance 3b.1.1.34 Waste Water Holding & Treatment Facility 3b.1.1.35 Fuel Handling 3b.1.1 Totals Site Closeout Activities 3b.t.2 Remove Rubble 3b.1.3 Goads & landscape site 3b. 1.4 Final report to NRC 3b.1 Subtotal Period 3b Activity Costs Period 3b Additonal Costs 3b.2.1 Concrete Crushing 3b.2.2 Breakwmter Demoldion and Removal 3b.2.3 Cofferdam Construction and Teardoon 3b.2 Subtotal Period 3b Additional Costs Period 3b Collateral Costs 3b.3.1 S-no[ tool allowance 3b.3 Subtotal Period 3b Collateral Costs 57 1.221 2
1 9
1,595 42 742 303 46 370 821 2
4,940 1,212 30 20 39,784 1.470 2,272 43,526 8.467 33,893 438 42,798 12 69 69 257 1,478 1,478 0
2 2
0 1
1 2
11 11 336 1,931 1,931 9
51 51 156 898 898 64 366 366 10 56 56 78 448 448 173 994 994 1
3 3
1,041 5,981 5,981 255 1,467 1,457 6
37 37 4
24 24 356 2,045 2,045 8,384 48,168 48,168 310 1,779 1,779 479 2,751 2,751 80 17 97 97 80 9,190 52.795 97 52,699 673 14,093 24 14 108 17,854 662 9,938 3,944 722 4,191 8.888 28 57,743 11.300 367 238 16,7750 436,410 8.191 4.587 449,187 667 667 7
7 797 797 Period 3b Period-Oependent Costs 3b.4.1 Insurance 3b.4.2 Property taxes 3b.4.3 Heavy equipment rental 6,420 3b.4.4 Plant energy budget 3b.4.5 NRC ISFSI Fees 3b.4.6 Emergency Planning Fees 3b.4.7 Spent Fuel Transfer - Pool or ISFSI to DOE 3b.4.8 ISFSI - Operating Costs 3b.4.9 ISFSI - Fixed Costs 3b.4.10 Scuriy Staff Cost 3b.4.11 DOC Staff Cost 3b.4.12 Utlity Staff Cost 3b.4 Subtotal Period 3b Peitod-Dependent Costs 6.420 787 207 273 391 753 921 289 587 9.337 12,616 7,795 33.965 1.786 10.261 10,261 11.905 45,798 45,798 92 530 530 13,783 56,589 56,589 168 965 965 168 965 965 111 898 898 29 236 236 1,353
.7772 7,772 57 330 330 391 391 107 870 870 194 1.115 1.115 61 350 350 124 711 711 1,968 11,305 0
4,748 6.557 2,659 15.275 15.275 1,643 9,438 0
1,133 8.305 8.305 48,690 0
10,451 38,239 37.686 128,379 46,649 4.004 170,069 46,649 138,914 145.326 116,474 400,714 619,256 448.030 3b.0 TOTAL PERIOD 3b COST 93.541 34.045 31.447 159,040 97 10,451 148,492 TLG Services, Inc.
Dirablo Canyon Paouvr Plant Decommisssionin/sg Cost Anoalysis Documsent P01-1604-003, Rev. 0 Appendix C, Page 22 of 24 Table C-2 Diablo Canyon Unit 2 DECON Decommissioning Cost Estimate (Thousands of 2008 Dollars)
I Actl Off-site LLRW NRC Spent Fuel s11e Processed B~urial Volumes B~urial I Utility and Decon Removal Packaging Transport Processing Disposal Other Total Total Lic. Term.
Management Restoration Volume Class A Class B Class C GTCC Processed Craft Contractor Cn.f r"*
ne Cnst.
Cn~t.
Co.t.
Cost.
rCO~as Contln.oen..v Casts Canst Costs Casts Cu.Foot Cu. Feet Cu.Feet Cu. Fet Cu.Foot Wt.. Lbs.
Manhoues Manhours I
Inlay A*tiu*
N*ri*lnn Index Activity Ue ption Cost Cost costs costs Cast.
Cast.
Costs Contingency cost.
Coal.
cost.
Cast.
Cu Feet Cu Feet Cu Feet C. F-o Co Fset Wt Lbs, Manhouns Manh PERIOD 3c -Fuel Storage Operations/Shipping Period 3c Direct Decommissioning Activites Period 3c Collateral Costs 3c.3 Subtotal Period 3c Colateral Costs Period 3c Period-Dependent Costs 3c.4.1 Insurance 3c.4.2 Property taxes 3c.4.3 Plant energy budget 3c.4.4 NRC ISFSI Fees 3c.4.5 Emergency Planning Fees 3c04.6 Spent Fuel Transfer-Pool or ISFSI to DOE 3c.4.7 ISFS1 - Operatng Costs 3c.4.8 SFSI1 Fixed Costs 3c.4.9 Security Staff Cost 3c.4.10 Ufiby Staff Cost 3c.4 Subtotal Period 3c Perod-Depevdent Costs 3c.0 TOTAL PERIOD 3c COST PERIOD 3d - GTCC shipping Period 3d Direct Decommissioning Activities Nuclear Steam Supply System Removal 3d.1.1.1 Vessel & Internals GTCC Disposal 3d.1.1 Totals 3d.1 Subtotal Period 3d Activity Costs Period 3d Collateral Costs 3d.3 Subtotal Period 3d Collateral Costs Period 3d Period-Dependent Costs 3d.4.1 Insurance 3d.4.2 Property taxes 3d.4.3 Plant energy budget 3d.4.4 NRC ISFSI Fees 3d.4.5 EmergencyPlanning Fees 3d.4.6 ISFS1 - Operating Costs 3d.4.7 SFS - Fixed Costs 3d.4.8 Security Staff Cost 3d.4.g Utility Staff Cost 3d.4 Subtotal Period 3d Penod-Dependent Costs 3d.0 TOTAL PERIOD 3d COST PERIOD 3e -ISFS Decontamination Period 3e Direct Decommissioning Activites Period 3e Additional Costs 3e.2.1 ISFSI License Termination 3e.2 Subtotal Period 3e Additional Costs 4,184 588 4,772 1.098 154 1,252 2.075 2,075 4,055 570 4.625 4,865 1,025 5.891
-1534 323 1.8577 3.119 657 3,777 20.852 4.394 25,246 5,130 1.081 6,212 46.913 8.794 55,706 46,913 8,794 55,706 4.772 1,252 2,075 4.625 5,891 1.857 3,777 25.246 6,212 55.706 55,706 306.566 76.755 383.321 383.321 300 8,952 1.929 11.181 11.181 433 85,510 300 8,952 1,929 11.181 11.181 433 85.510 300 8.952 1.929 11,181 11.181 433 85,510 300 1,059 4
100 1.059 4
100 15 2
17 4
1 4
7 7
14 2
16 5
1 7
11 2
13 73 15 89 18 4
22 148 27 175 8,952 148 1.956 11,357 11.181 17 4
7 16 7
13 89 22 175 175 433 85.510 1.080 270 1,350 1.350 387 789 387 789 689 3,028 689 3,028 3,028 6,239 748,943 15,356 1,280 3,028 6,239 748,943 15.356 1,280 TLG Servcice., Ine.
Diablo Canyon Power Plant Deeonmissioniag Cost Analysis Documents P01.1604-003, Rev. 0 Appendix C, Page 23 of24 Table C-2 Diablo Canyon Unit 2 DECON Decommissioning Cost Estimate (Thousands of 2008 Dollars) ctivitivy Ot-ffSite LLRW NSC spent Fuel Site Processed burial Volumes BurialI Utility 0n0 Decon Removal Packaging Transport Processing Disposal Other Total Total Lie. Term.
Management Restoration Volume Class A Class B Class C GTCC Processed Craft Contractor Cast Cnt Cc.1nl nt nt ntn~~
-nt nt
~
nt
~ ~
- l ~
I l*tCJFp u ~
- JF~f Vtlh annm Mnnr II Inlay A*Iv*
n*t*rlnfl*n miss A
rl non Coal units coal.
Costs Costs cost.
-Im.
Cost.
osts Costs Cost.
Cu Fast Cu Feet Cu Fast Cu Feet Cu Feet Wt nhoure Mani Period 3e Collateral Costs 3e.3.1 Small tool abovwance 3e.3 Subtotal Period 3e Collateral Costs Period 3e Peiod-Dependent Costs 3e.4.1 Insurance 3e.4.2 Property taxes 3e.4.3 Heaoy equipment rental 3e.4.4 Plant energy budget.
3e.4.5 Security Staff Cost 3e.4.6 Urility Staff Colst 3e.4 Subtotal Period 3e Perio-Dependent Costs 3e.0 TOTAL PERIOD 3e COST PERIOD 3f - ISFSI Site Restoration Period 3I Direct Decommissioning Activities Period 3fAditdiional Costs 31.2.1 ISFSI Demolition and Site Restoration 3f.2 Subtotal Period 3f Additional Costs Period 3f Coulateral Costs 13f.1 Small tool otowacs 3f 3 Subtotal Period V Collateral Costs Period 3f Period-Dependent Costs 11.4.1 Insurance 3f.4.2 Properly taxes 1.4.3 Heavy equipment rental 114.4 Plant energy budget 314.5 Security Staff Cost 3f.4.6 Utility Staff Cost 114 Subtotal Period 3f Period-Dependent Costs 305 TOTAL PERIOD 3I COST PERIOD 3 TOTALS 14 14 3
17 3
1 7 17 17 309 309 1.383 100 127 33 172 129 461 387 1,250 18 145 145 5
38 38 65 375 375 36 208 208 27 156 15 151 922 922 843 3,967 3,967 6,239 2.510 1,901 4.411 748,943 15,356 5,691 3,446 80 3,446 80 562 562 24 123 709 24 123 709 709 709 4
4 1
5 1
5 50 50 17 2
19 19 103 22 125 125 86 18 105 105 1.265 54 11 66 66 784 103 158 54 314 314 2,050 669 181 178 1,028 1.029 3,446 2,130 95,592 304 107 9.339 82,537 43.217 231.097 11t278 71.327 148,492 6,239 433 834,453 638,058 840,522 TLG Serviees, In-.
Diablo C.oyoo P.-o Planot D-no~~eouioei-ig Coo/ Anoalysis Doeurneot P01.1604-003, Rev. 0 Appendix C, Page 24 of 24 Table C-2 Diablo Canyon Unit 2 DECON Decommissioning Cost Estimate (Thousands of 2008 Dollars)
Off-Sit.
LLRW NRC Spent Fool Silo Proonoend Burnal Volunnee Buriall Utilityan Activity Oecon Removal Packaging Transport Processing Disposal Other Total Total Lie. Term.
Management Restoration Volume Class A Class B Class C GTCC Processed Craft Contractor lndex Activits Description Cost Cost Cost.
Cost.
Cost.
Cost.
Costs Contingency Coost Cost.
Cost.
Cost.
Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Wt.. Lbs.
Manhouro Manhoaro TOTAL COST TO DECOMMISSION 13,430 162,600 15,038 12,363 35,529 58,267 548.492 211,479 1,057,198 709,740 192,789 154,668 358,841 1460080 5,645 574 433 27.379,120 1,577,382 5,470,697 TOTAL COST TO DECOMMISSION WITH 25.01% CONTINGENCY:
$1,057,198 thousands of 2008 dollars TOTAL NRC LICENSE TERMINATION COST IS 67.13% OR:
$709,740 thousands of 2008 dollars SPENT FUEL MANAGEMENT COST IS 18.24% OR:
$192,789 thousands of 2000 dollars 4ON-NUCLEAR DEMOLITION COST IS 14.63% OR:
$154,668 thousands of 2008 dollars TOTAL LOW-LEVEL RADIOACTIVE WASTE VOLUME BURIED (EXCLUDING GTCC):
152,299 Cubic Feet TOTAL GREATER THAN CLASS C RADWASTE VOLUME GENERATED 433 Cubic Feet TOTAL SCRAP METAL REMOVED:
76,605 Tons TOTAL CRAFT LABOR REQUIRIMENTS:
1.577,382 Man-hours End Notes.
na - indicates that this antivitY not charged as decommnssioning expense.
a - icdicates that this activity performed by decommissioning staff.
0- indicates that this halue is less than 0.5 but is non-aero.
a ce0l containing "- indicates a zero value TLG Se-rices, In-.
Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document P01-1604-003, Rev. 0 Appendix D, Page 1 of 26 APPENDIX D DETAILED COST ANALYSIS SAFSTOR TLG Services, Inc.
Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis Doouentn P01-1604-003, Re. 0 Appendix D, Page 2 of 24 Table D-1 Diablo Canyon Unit I SAFSTOR Decommissioning Cost Estimate (Thousands of 2008 Dollars)
Off-Site LLRW NRC Spent Fuel Site Processed Burial Volumes Burial!
Utility and Activity Decon Removal Packaging Transport Processing Disposal Other Total Total Lic. Term.
Management Restoratioo Volume Class A Class B Class C UTCC Processed Craft Contractor index Activity Description Cost Cost Costs Costs Costs Costs Costs Conttingetncy Costs Costs Costs Casts Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet WL, Lbs.
Manhonss Manhours PERIOD ta - Shutldown through Transition Period la Direct Decommissioning Activities
- a.1.1 SAFSTOR site characterization survey la.1.2 Prepare preliminary decommissioning cost la.1.3 Notification of Cessation of Operations Ia.1.4 Remove fuol & source material la.1.5 Notification of Permanent Defueling 1a.1.6 Deactivate plant systems & process uaste
- a.1.7 Prepare and submit PSDAR Ia,1.8 Review plant dugs & specs.
la.1.9 Perform detailed rad survey la.1.10 Estimate by-product inventory la.1.11 End product description la.1.12 Detailed by-product inventory 1a.1.13 Define major work sequence 1a.1.14 Perform SER and EA la.1.15 Perform Srie-Specttc Cost Study Activity Specifications 1a.1.16O1 Prepare plant and facilities for SAFSTOR ta.1.16.2 Plant systems l..1.16.3 Plant structures and buildings la.1.16.4 Waste management la.1.16.5 Facility and site dormancy la.1.16 Total Detailed Work Procedures la.1.17.1 Plant systems ta.1.17.2 Facility closeout & dormancy 1a.1.17 Total 1:.1.18 Procure vacuum drying system ls.1.
Drain/de-energize non-cont systems 1a.1.20 Drain & dry NSS la.1.21 Drainlde-energize contaminated system la.1.22 Decorusecure contaminated systems la.1 Subtotal Period la Activity Costs Period la Collateral Costs la.3.1 Spent Fuel Capital and Transfer la.3 Subtotal Period t a Collateral Costs Period la Perod-Dependent Costs la.d.1 Insurance la.4.2 Property taxes la.4.3 Health physics supplies 1 a.4.4 Heavy equipment rental la.4.5 Disposal cI DAW generated la.4.6 Plant energy budget la.4.7 NRC JSFSI Fees la.4.8 NRC Fees
- a.d.9 Emergency Planning Fees la.4.10 Spent Fuel Pool O&M ta.4.11 ISFSI - Operating Costs 414 175 589 589 156 33 189 189 a'a a
240 51 291 291 156 33 189 189 1.300 120 120 180 120 372 599 25 145 145 25 145 145 38 218 218 25 145 145 79 450 450 127 726 726 125 715 715 106 605 605 79 453 453 51 291 291 51 291 291 411 2,354 2.354 2,000 1,300 1,000 1,000 1,500 1,000 3,100 5.000
-90 500 374 240 240 1,943 4,920 4,167 3,120 2,000 2,000 16,207 142 30 172 172 144 30 174 174 286 60 346 346 12 3
15 15 4,717 1,086 5,802 5,802 836 177 1.012 836 177 1,012 1,183 1,200 2,383 100 35,890 1,012 1,012 486 490 4
11 1,195 101 4
38 1.330 159 706 1,258 735 141 169 1.363 1,363 14 115 115 171 658 658 104 593 593 16 69 69 281 1,611 1,611 159 100 805 805' 177 1,435 155 890 30 171 159 1,435 890 171 610 12,190 22 TLG Services, Io.
Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document P01-1604-003, Rev. 0 Appendix D, Page 3 of 24 Table D-I Diablo Canyon Unit 1 SAFSTOR Decommissioning Cost Estimate (Thousands of 2008 Dollars)
Off-Site LLRW NRC Spent Fuel Site Processed Burial Volumes Burial I Utility and Activity Decon Removal Packaging Transport Processing Disposal Other Total Total Lc. Term.
Management Restoration Volume Class A Class B Class C GTCC Processed Craft Contractor Index Activoty Description Cost Costo sts Ct Cost C
sts CoCtonsct Costs Costs Costs Costs Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Wt., Lbs.
Mancours Manhours Period la Period-Dependent Costs (continued)
I a.4.12 Spent Fuel Storage/Capial Equipment 1a.4.13 ISFSI - Fixed Costs la.4.14 Security Staff Cost la.4.15 Utity Staff Cost Ia.4 Subtotal Period la Period-Dependent Costs la.0 TOTAL PERIOD la COST PERIOD I b - SAFSTOR Limited DECON Activities Period lb Direct Decommissioning Activities Decontamination of Site Buildings 1b,1.1.1 'Reactor b.1.1.2 Containment Penetration Area I b. 1.1.3 Fuel Handling 1b.1.1 Totals 1b.1 Subtotal Period l b Activity Costs Period lb Collateral Costs lb.3.1 Decon equipment lb.3.2 Process liquid vste lb.3.3 Small toot ailowrance 1b.3.4 Spent Fuel Capital and Transfer 1b.3 Subtotat Period lb Coliateral Costs Period lb Penod-Dependent Costs 1b.4 1 Decon supplies 1b.4.2 Insurance 1 b.4.3 Property taxes 1 b.4.4 HeaDth physics supplies 1b.4.5 Heavy equipment rental 1 b.4.6 Disposal of DAWgenerated 1b.4.7 Plant energy budget 1b.4.8 NRC ISFSI Fees lb.4.9 NRC Fees 1b.4.10 Emergency Planning Fees lb.4.11 Spent Fuel Pool O&M lb.4.12 ISFSI - Operating Costs 1o.4.13 Spent Fuel Storage/Capital Equipment 1b.4.14 ISFSI - Fixed Costs 1b.4.15 Seourity Staff Cost lb.4.16 Utility Staff Cost lb.4 Subtotal Period lb Pefiovl-Dependent Costs 1b.0 TOTAL PERIOD lb COST PERIOD lc - Preparations for SAFSTOR Dormancy Period 1c Direct Decommissioning Activities lc.1.1 Prepare support equipment for storage lo.1.2 Install containment pressure equal. lines lc.1.3 Interim survey poior to dormancy lc.1.4 Secure building accesses 976 976 1.594 239 775 26,403 38 34,635 38 40.187 11 4
11 4
1,501 250 639 2.389 2.389 935 165 75 46 1.100 46 75 650 303 123 S -
10 850 426 10 4,339 473 86 304 304 4
4 307 286 252 286 252 301 25 34 335 48 178 187 185 36 648 72 195 5.349 34 7,561 321 7,813 337 1,932 51 290 164 939 939 5.587 31.990 31.990 7,357 43.021 38.145 8,620 49,836 43.947 1,059 2.559 2,251 176 426 374 451 1,089 956 1,685 4.074 3,583 1,685 4.074 3,583 198 1.133 1.133 292 1,122 1,122 10 56 56 53 305 553 2.617 2.311 300 1,149 1,149 42 344 344 4
29 29 107 410 410 26 150 150 14 63 63 71 406 406 48 25 203 203 26 214 39 224 8
43 137 785 15 87 41 237 237 1,132 6.481 6,481 1.988 10.874 9,472 4,226 17.564 15.366 308 51 131 491 491 1,932 290 4.877 5.889 610 610 305 305 48 214 224 43 785 87 1,402 1,707 12,264 423.400 12.190 22 435.664 12,190 22 471,554 26,109 4,381 10,962 41,452 41,452 1,122 67,311 219 1,122 67,311 219 556 11,126 20 3,091 87,269 556 11,126 20 90,360 1,678 78,437 41,691 90,360 491 431 42 91 522 522 9
50 50 733 310 1,043 1.043 a
3,000 700 12,834 TLG Services, Inc.
Diablo Canyon Power Plant Deecomruissioning Cost Arnatlysi Document P01-1604-003, Rev. 0 Appendix D, Page 4 of 24 Table D-1 Diablo Canyon Unit 1 SAFSTOR Decommissioning Cost Estimate (Thousands of 2008 Dollars)
Off-Site LLRW NRC Spent Fuel Site Pocessed Burial Volumes Burial Utility and Activity Decon Removal Packaging Transport Processing Disposal Other Total Total Lib. Term.
Management Restoration Volume Class A Class B Class C GTCC Processed Craft Contractor 1ndex Activity Description Cost Cost Costs Costs Costs Costs Costs Contingency Costs Costs Costs Costs Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Wt, Lbs.
Manhours Manhours Period 1c Direct Decommissioning Activities (continued)
Ic.1.5 Prepare & submit interim report lc.1 Subtotal Period lc Activity Costs Period lc Additional Costs lc.2.1 Spent Fuel Pool Isolation lc.2.2 Hazardous Waste Management lc.2.3 Mined Waste Management lc.2 Subtotal Period Ic Additional Costs Period le Collateral Costs lc.3.1 Process liquid waste lc.3.2 Small tool allowance l c.3.3 Spent Fuel Capital and Transfer lc.3 Subtotal Period to Collateral Costs Period lc Period-Dependent Costs lc.4.1 Insurance 1 c.4.2 Property taxes lc.4.3 Health physics supplies l c.4.4 Heavy equipment rental lc.4.5 Disposal of DAW generated 1c.4.6 Plant energy budget lcA.7 NRC ISFSI Fees lc.4.8 NRC Fees lc.4.9 Emergency Planning Fees lc.4.10 Spent Fuel Pool O&M lc,4.11 ISFSI - Operating Costs 1c.4.12 Spent Fuel StoeagelCapitel Equipment lc.4.13 ISFSI - Fixed Costs lc.4.14 Security Staff Cost lc.4.15 Utildy Staff Cost lc.4 Subtotal Period lc Period-Dependent Costs lc.f0 TOTAL PERIOD lc COST PERIOD 1 TOTALS 70 15 85 85 803 425 1,700 1.700 583 16,534 583 472 9.407 590 912 10,909 383 361 244 383 361 244 208 5
208 5
187 119 95 95 291 25 3
1 9
324 46 172 181 179 34 93f 70 189 5.175 3
1 9
7,617 98 384 369 19,573 195 695 728 67,573 1.991 11.398 11.398 125 715 715 193 1.104 1.104 2,309 13,218 13.218 368 1.414 1.414 1
5 5
52 295 421 1.715 1,420 41 332 332 3
28 28 66 253 253 25 145 145 4
16 16 69 393 393 46 24 196 196 26 207 38 217 7
42 197 1,127 15 05 40 229 229 1,095 6.270 6.270 1.650 9,586 7,962 4,804 26,219 24.200 17,650 93.620 83,513 295 295 46 207 217 42 1,127 85 1,724 2,019 9.616 1.415 84.876 276 1.415 84.876 276 138 2,755 5
2.990 84,423 138 2,755 5
87,413 1.552 87,631 16,815 87,997 3,840 178,258 58,528 649,910 307 208 784 4,546 2,232 491 PERIOD 2a - SAFSTOR Dormancy with Wet Spent Fuel Storage Period 2a Direct Decommissioning Activities 2a,1.1 Quartedy Inspection 2a.1.2 Semi-annual environmental survey 2a. 1.3 Prepare repors 2a.1.4 Bituminous roof replacement 2a.1.5 Maintenance supplies 2a.1 Subtotal Period 2a Activity Costs Period 2a Collateral Costs 2a.3.1 Spent Fuel Capital and Transfer 2a.3 Subtotal Period 2a Collateral Costs Period 2a Period-Oependent Costs 2a.4,1 Insurance 2a.4.2 Property taxes 2a&4.3 Health physics supplies a
1,342 1,342 12,357 12,357 4,707 1,077 940 473 1,816 473 1,816 2,615 14,973 2,815 14,573 664 5.371 152 1,229 331 1,271 1.g16 1,816 14,973 14,973 5,371 1,229 1,271 TLG Services, Inc.
Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document P01-1604-003, Res. 0 Appendix D, Page 5 of 24 Table D-1 Diablo Canyon Unit I SAFSTOR Decommissioning Cost Estimate (Thousands of 2008 Dollars)
Off-Sitl LLRW NRC Spent Fuel site Processed Burial Volumes Burial I Utility and Activity Decon Removal Packaging Transport Processing Disposal Other Total Total
[ic. Term.
Management Restoration Volume Class A Class B Class C GTCC processed Craft Contractor Index Activity Description Cost Cost Costs Costs Costs Costs Costs Conlingency Costs Costs Costs Costs Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Fel Cs. Feet Cu. Feet WL, Lbs.
Manhoces Manhours Period 2a Peiod-Dependent Costs (continued) 2a.4.4 Disposal of DAW generated 2a.4.5 Plant energy budget 2a.4*6 NRC ISFSI Fees 2a4.7 NRC Fees 2a.4.8 Emergency Planning Fees 2a.4.9 Spent Fuel Transfer - Pool or ISFSI to DOE 2a.4.10 Spent Fuel Pool O&M 2a.4.11 ISFSI - Operating Costs 2a.412 Spent Fuel Storage/Capital Equipment 2a.4.13 ISFSI - Fixed Costs 2a.4.14 Utility Staff Cost 2a.4 Subtotal Period 2a Period-Dependent Costs 2a.0 TOTAL PERIOD 2a COST PERIOD 2b - SAFSTOR Dormancy with Dry Spent Fuel Storage Period 2b Dired Decommissioning Activities 2b.1.1 Ouorterly Inspection 2b.1.2 Semi-annual environmental survey 2b.1.3 Prepare reports 2b.1.4 Bituminous toot replacement 2b.1.5 Maintenance supplies 2b.1 Subtotl Period 2b Activity Costs Period 2b Period-Dependent Costs 2b.4.1 Insurance 21.4.2 Property taxes 2b.4.3 Health physics supplies 21b4.4 Disposal of DAW generated 2b.4.5 Plant energy budget 2b.4.6 NRC ISFSI Fees 2h.4.7 NRC Fees 2b.4.8 Emergency Planning Fees 2b.4.9 Spent Fuel Transfer - Pool or ISFSI to DOE 2b.4.10 ISFSI - Operating Costs 2b.4.11 SFSI - Fixed Costs 2b.4.12 Utility Staff Cost 2b.4 Subtotat Period 2b Pedod-Dependent Costs 2b.0 TOTAL PERIOD 21 COST PERIOD 2 TOTALS PERIOD 3a - Reactivate Site Following SAFSTOR Dormancy Period 3a Direct Decommissioning Activities 3a.1.1 Prepare preliminary decommissioning cost 3a.1.2 Reviem plant dogs & specs.
3a.1.3 Perform detailed tad survey 3a.1.4 End product description 3a.1.5 Detailed by-product inventory 3a.1.6 Define major work sequence 3a.1.7 Pertorm SER and EA 3a.1.8 Pertorm Site-Specific Cost Study 3a.1.9 Preparetsubmit License Termination Plan 75 28 248 104 455 2.840 601 3,441 2.035 2,035 2,152 304 2,456 4,278 604 4,882 4,601 974 5.575 7.846 1.660 9,507 1.505 318 1.823 55,181 11,678 66,859 3,060 647 3.707 9,823 2,079 11,902 940 75 28 248 99,105 20,116 120,513 940 75 28 248 112,805 23,205 137,301 455 3,441 2,035 2,456 4.882 5.575 9.507 1.823 66.859 3.707 11,902 120,513 137,301 3.994 79.890 146 167,057 3,994 79.890 146 167,057 3,994 79,890 146 167,057 1,881 1.881 663 2.544 663 2.544 2,544 2,544 1,276 104 1,276 104 1,276 104 2.216 179 39 39 39 67 5,750 811 6,562 1.509 213 1,722 450 1.726 343 144 630 1.990 421 2,411 2,852 2,852 3,015 425 3,441 5,573 786 6,360 6.699 1,418 8,116 2,108 446 2,555 4,287 907 5,194 7.259 1,536 8.795 343 41.043 7.558 50,364 343 42,924 8.222 52,909 591 155,730 31,427 190,210 6.562 1,722 1,726 630 2,411 2,852 3,441 6,360 8.116 2.555 5.194 8,795 50.364 52.909 190,210 5,534 110,682 202 124,846 5.534 110,682 202 124,846 5,534 110,682 202 124,846 9,529 190,572 347 291,903 156 551 120 156 899 372 599 491 33 189 189 117 668 668 25 145 145 33 189 189 190 1,089 1,089 79 450 450 127 726 726 104 595 595 1.300 4,600 1,000 1,300 7,5 0 e 3.100 5.000 4,096 TLG Services, Inc.
Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document P01-1604-003, Rev. 0 Appendix D, Page 6 of 24 Table D-1 Diablo Canyon Unit 1 SAFSTOR Decommissioning Cost Estimate (Thousands of 2008 Dollars)
Off-Site LLRW NRC Spent Fuel Site Processed Burial Volumes Burial I Utility and Activity Decon Removal Packaging Transport Processing Disposal Other Total Total Lic. Term.
Managemeet Restoration Volume Class A Class B Class C GTCC Pr.cessed Craft Contractor Index Activit Description Cost Cost Costs Costs Costs Costs Costs Castineensir Costsa Costs Costs Costs Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Wt., Lbs.
Manhours Manhours Period 3a Direct Decommissioning Activities (continued) 3a.1.10 Receive NRC approval of temination plan Activity Specifications 3a.1.11.1 Re-activate plant & temporary facilities 3a.1.11.2 Plant systems 3a.1.11.3 Reactor internals 3a.1.t1.4 Reactor vessel 3a.1.11.5 Biological shield 3a.1.11.6 Steam generators 3a.1.11.7 Reinforced concrete 3a.1.11.8 Main Turbine 3a.1.111.9 Main Condensers 3a.11.10 Plant structures & buildings 3a.,1.11.11 Waste management 3a.1.11.12 Facility & site closeout 3a.1.11 Total Planning & Site Preparations 3a.1.12 Prepare dismanuting sequence 3a.1.13 Plant prep. & temp. svces 3a.1.14 Design water clean-up system 3a.1.15 Rigging/Cont. Cntri Envlpn/tooling/etc.
- 3. 1.16 Procure casksliners & containers 3a.1 Subtotal Period 3a Activity Costs Period 3a Period-Dependent Costs 3a.4.1 Insurance 3a.4.2 Property taxes 3a,4.3 Heahlt physics supplies 3a.4.4 Heavy equipment rental 3a.4.5 Disposal oa DAW generated 3a.4.6 Plant energy budget 3a.4.7 NRC Fees 3a.4.8 Security Staff Cost 3:.d9 Utility Staff Cost 3a.4 Subtotal Period 3a Period-Dependent Costs 3a.0 TOTAL PERIOD 3a COST PERIOD 3h - Decommissioning Preparations Period 3b Direct Decommissioning Activities Detailed Work Procedures 3b.1.1.1 Plant systems 3b.1.t.2 Reactor intemals 3b.1.1.3 Remaining buildings 3b1.1.4 CRD cooling assembly 3b.1.1.5 CRD housings & CI tubes 3b.1.1.6 Incore instrumentahon 3b.1.1.7 Reactor vessel 3b.l.1.8 Facility closeout 3b.1.1.9 Missile shields 3b.1.1.10 Biological shield 3b.1,1.11 Steam generators 884 500 851 779 60 374 192 48 48 374 551 S
108 4,769 288 2,700 168 2,100 147 13,516 187 1,071 964 106 605 545 180 1.031 1.031 165 944 944 13 73 73 79 453 453 41 232 116 10 58 10 58 79 453 227 117 668 668 23 131 65 1,0W9 5.778 5.086 61 349 349 571 3,271 3.271 36 203 203 444 2,544 2,544 31 179 179 2.860 16,377 15,685 52 419 419 14 115 115 150 575 575 104 593 593 13 59 59 281 1,611 1,611 35 284 284 929 5,321 5,321 3,459 19,805 19,805 5,038 28.781 28,781 107 61 116 58 58 227 65 692 692 7,370 4,167 7,100 6.500 500 3,120 1,600 4W0 4O0 3.120 4.600 900 39,777 2,400 1,400 1.230 72.703 19 65,179 258,629 19 323,807 425 490 10 367 101 32 1,330 249 4,391 16,345 32 22,784 514 514 514 10,287 10,287 915 10 4
915 10 4
32 36.300 7,898 45.158 44.466 692 567 162 120 120 120 435 144 54 144 551 120 688 619 63 363 363 34 196 49 25 145 145 25 145 145 25 145 145 92 527 527 30 174 87 11 65 65 30 174 174 117 668 668 69 147 87 10.287 19 396,510 4.733 2,500 1,350 1,000 1,000 1,000 3630 1,200 450 1,200 4,600 TLG Services, Inc.
Diablo Canyon Power Plant Deeommissioonig Cost Analysis Documnent P01-1604-003, Rev. 0 Appendix D, Page 7 of 24 Table D-1 Diablo Canyon Unit 1 SAFSTOR Decommissioning Cost Estimate (Thousands of 2008 Dollars)
Aotivlty I' do.
Activity Description Period 3b Detailed Work Procedures (continued) 3b.1.1.12 Reinforced concrete 3b.1.1.13 Main Turbine 3b.1.1.14 Main Condensers 3b.1.t.1 5 Auxiliary building 3b.1.11t6 Reactor building 3b.1.1 Total 3b.1 Subtotal Period 3b Activiy Costs Period 3b Additional Costs 3b.2.1 Site Characterization 3b.2 Subtotal Period 3b Additional Costs Period 3b Collateral Costs 3b.3.1 Decon equipment.
3b.3.2 DOC staff relocation expenses 3b.3.3 Pipe cutting equipment 3b.3 Subtotal Period 3b Collateral Costs Period 3b Period-Dependent Costs 3b.4.1 Decon supplies 3b.4.2 Insurance 3b.4.3 Property taxes 3b.4.4 Health physics supplies 3b.4.5 Heavy equipment rental 3b.4.6 Disposal of DAW generated 3b.4.7 Plant energy budget 3b.4.8 NRC Fees 3b.4.9 Security Staff Cost 3b.4.10 DOC Staff Cost 3b*4.11 Ufility Staff Cost 3b.4 Subtotal Period 3b Period-Dependent Costs 3b.0 TOTAL PERIOD 3b COST PERIOD 3 TOTALS PERIOD 4a - Large Component Removal Period 4a Direct Decommissioning Activities Nuclear Steam Supply System Removal 4a.1.1.1 Reactor Coolant Piping 4a.1.1.2 Pressurizer Quench Tank 4a.1.3.3 Reactor Coolant Pumps & Motors 4a.1.f.4 Pressurizer 4a.1.f.5 Steam Generators 4a.1.1.6 Retired Steam Generator Units 4a.1.1.7 CRDMsoCIs/Service Structure Removal 4a.11.8 Reactor Vessel Internaos 4a.1,1.9 Vessel & Internals GTCC Disposal 4a.1.1.10 Reactor Vessel 4a.1.1 Totals Off-Site LLRW NRC Spent Fuel site Processed Burial volumes Barial I utility 000 I Decon Removal Packaging Transport Processing Disposal Other Total Total Lic. Term.
Management Restoratlon Volume Class A Class B Class C GTCC Processed Craft ContractoI Cast Cost Costs Costs Costs Costs Costs Contingency Costs Costs Costs Costs Co. Feet Co, Feet Co. Peer Ca. Feet Co. Feet Wt., Lbs.
Moehoors Mashours cost Cost Costs Costs cost.
Costs osts Costs Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Vitt, Lbs.
Manhours anh El 120 187 187 327 327 3.866 3.866 25 145 73 40 227 40 227 69 397 357 69 397 357 818 4.684 3.776 818 4,684 3,776 73 227 227 40 40 908 908 1,000 1,560 1,560 2,730 2,730 32,243 32,243 4,549 1,925 6,474 6,474 4,
d549 1,925 6,474 8,474 25,000 9,412 25,000 9,412 935 1,000 935 1,000 198 1,133 1,133 1.395 295 1,690 1,690 212 1,212 1,212 1,395 705 4,035 4,035 29 235 246 29 480 964 1,480 964 2,395 66 259 7
26 26 101 8
59 85 3,846 35 90 60 1,983 86 3,911 372 10,275 5
5 5
40 6
44 454 1,858 1,858 221 3,746 1,315 9,543 2
2 2
6 32 5
121 295 1,886 1.886 29 496 633 5,383 221 51 18 667 125 2,202 4.892 8,195 18 16,351 18 26,161 50 62,461 60 690 9
97 1,358 620 2,974 5,768 2,974 5,768 39 282 3,476 197 8,952 8,565 197 6,057 35,495 394 10 39 39 31 252 252 7
598 58 83 318 318 52 297 297 8
33 33 141 808 808 18 142 142 466 2,668 2,668 1,035 5,927 5,927 1,734 9,929 9,929 3,585 20,471 20,471 7,033 35,664 34,756 14,931 80,822 79,222 406 1.554 1,554 52 203 203 564 2,213 2.213 372 1.809 1.809 4.741 21.158 21.158 3,325 15.811 15,811 173 789 789 6,131 16.089 16,089 1,895 10,847 10,847 10.969 25,675 25,675 28,629 96,147 96,147 292 292 292 806 5.834 11 32,679 58,560 129,669 5,834 11 220,907 5.834 25,011 262,562 16.121 25,029 659,072 908 1.600 214 1,927 256,781 5,614 33 296 36,557 596 5,388 871,200 3.760 2,460 269,821 1,782 37,344 22,887 3.128,906 20.508 1,125 37,344 22,887 3.128,906 10.800 1,125 419 3,362 83,603 2.134 2,693 376 584 360,613 23,417 1.069 433 85.510 6,481 2,379 964,972 23,417 1,069 75,354 68,381 2,754 584 433 9.186.868 92.028 4,387 TLG Services, Inc.
Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document P01-1604-003, Rev. 0 Appendix D, Page 8 of 24 Table D-1 Diablo Canyon Unit I SAFSTOR Decommissioning Cost Estimate (Thousands of 2008 Dollars)
Oft-Site LLRW NRC Spent Fuel Site Processed Burial Volumes Burial I Utility and Activity Decon Removal Packaging Transport Processing Disposal Other Total Total Lie. Term.
Management Restoration Volume Class A Class B Class C GTCC Processed Craft Contractor Index Activity Description Cost Cost Costs Costs Costs Costs Costs Contlenency Costs Costs Costs Costs Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Wt., Lbs.
Manhours Manhours Removal of Major Equipment 4:.1.2 Main Turbine/Generator 4a.1.3 Main Condensers Cascading Costs from Clean Building Demolition 4a:1.4.1
- Reactor 4a..4.2 Containment Penetration Area 4a.1.4.3 Fuel Handling 4a.1.4 Totals Disposal of Plant Systems 4a.1.5.1 Auxiliary Steam 4a.1.5.2 Auxltiary Steam (RCA) 4a.1.5.3 Condensate System 4a.1.5.4 Condensate System (insulated) 4a.1.5.5 Containment Spray 4a.1.5.6 Extraction Steam & Heater Drip 4a.1.5.7 Feedwater System 4a.l.5.8 Feedwoter System (Insulated) 4a.1.5.9 Feedu'ater System (RCA Insulated) 4a.1.5.10 Feedwoter System (RCA) 4a.1.5.1l Lube Oil Distrbution & Purification 4a.1.5.12 Nitrogen & Hydrogen 4a.1.5.13 Nitrogen & Hydrogen (Insulated) 4a.1.5.14 Nitrogen & Hydrogen (RCA Insulatnd) 4a.1.i.15 Nitrogen & Hydrogen (RCA) 4a.1.5.16 Oily Water Separator & TB Sump 4a.1.5.17 Saltwater System 4a.1.5.18 Turbine Steam Suyply 4a.1i.5.19 Turbine Steam Supply (RCA) 4a.1.5.20 Turtine and Generator 4a,1.5.21 Turbine and Generator (Insulated) 4a.1.5 Totals 4a.1.6 Scaffolding in support of decommissioning 4a.1 Subtotal Period 4a Activity Costs Period 4a Additional Costs 4a.2.1 Retired Reactor Head 4a.2 Subtotal Period 4a Additional Costs Period 4a Collateral Costs 4a.3.1 Process liquid waste 4a.3.2 Small tool allovunce 4a.3 Subtotal Period 4a Collateral Costs Period 4a Perod-Dependent Costs 4a.4.1 Deawn supplies 4a.4.2 Insurance 4a.4.3 Property taxes 4a.4.4 Health phtysics supplies 4a.4.5 Heavy equipment rental 4a.4.6 Disposal of DAW generated 4a.4.7 Plant energy budget 4a.4.8" NRC Fees 4a.4.9 Liquid Radwaste Processing Equipment/Services 471 153 113 928 1,370 145 107 875 1.208 66 175 1.449 245 6
56 458 213 3
29 240 1.131 68 592 4.856 401 21 182 1,497 194 10 87 713 450 16 143 1,176 65 5
48 395 271 11 101 825 98 3
24 199 5
0 1
10 188 3
25 205 17 1
5 0
0 2
87 1
5 38 30 1
8 63 162 1,227 80 700 5.742 671 22 182 1,497 S
116 4
37 30 49 1
8 63 5,622 256 2,228 18,278 408 2,073 2,073 711 3,208 3.208 256 1,463 1,463 14 80 80 37 212 212 307 1,755 1,755 196 962 962 133 619 619 1,561 8,208 8,208 500 2,601 2,601 239 1,242 1,242 440 2,225 2,225 117 631 631 293 1,501 1.501 82 407 407 4
21 21 115 536 536 4
2i 0
1 2
9 9
40 170 170 25 126 126 34 196 1.807 9,556 9.556 595 2,966 2,966 113 569 569 32 152 152 6.333 32,717 32.500 810 3.143 3,143 8,118 7,657 13,127 704 1,746 15.578 365,301 8,335 344,574 24,147 4,445 180,494 4,001 2,330 94,627 3,528 47.076 1,911,765 18,771 14.512 589,348 6,833 6,908 280,525 3,329 11.399 462,924 7,441 3,829 155,509 1,130 7,995 324,669 4,542 1,926 78,223 1.693 101 4.117 81 1,986 80.661 3,052 20 315 1
17 20 793 75 371 15,060 1,433 607 24,649 464 196 2,926 55,669 2.260.765 20,590 14,508 589,194 11,474 2,909 118,127 1,947 607 24,645 777 217 177,198 7,196,094 94,419 2.236 12 9
67 10 586 39 29,687 17,211 372 21.423 10.109 7,839 26,205 35,504 394 37,198 139,044 138,927 217 268,913 68.420 2,754 584 433 17,122.520 251,718 4,387 84 84 102 151 102 151 55 503 15 55 503 10 56 27 110 103 263 56 263 27 110 103 539 1,366 1,366 539 1,366 1,366 103 399 399 56 318 286 158 717 685 28 108 108 87 700 700 20 160 144 637 2.441 2.441 693 3.970 3,970 114 499 499 372 2,130 2.130 129 1,045 1.045 113 648 648 2,002 211,020 2.190 2,002 211.020 2,100 405 24,289 79 405 24.289 79 32 32 80 1,805 3,277 613 140 83 31 272 1.758 916 535 16 4.386 87.730 160 TLG Services, Inc.
Diablo Canyon Power Plant Deommissiaioning Cost Analysis Document P01.1604-003, Rev. 0 Appendix D, Page 9 of 24 Table D-1 Diablo Canyon Unit I SAFSTOR Decommissioning Cost Estimate (Thousands of 2008 Dollars)
Off-Sits LLRW NRC Spent Fuel site Processed Burial Volumes Burial /
Utility and Activity Decon Removal Packaging Transport Processing Disposal Other Total Total Lic. Term,.
Management Restoration Volume Class A Class B Class C GTCC Processed Craft Contractor oIndex Activity Description Cost Cost Costs Costs Costs Costs Costs Contingass Costs Costs Costs Costs Cu. Fast Cu. Fast Cu. Fast Cu. Fast Cu. Feet Wt.. Lbs.
Manhours Manhours Period 4a Period-Dependent Costs (continued) 4:.4.10 SeoJrity Staff Cost 4a.4.1l DOC Staff Cost 4a.4.12 Utility Staff Cost 4a.4 Subtotal Period 4a Period-Dependent Costs 4a,0 TOTAL PERIOD 4a COST PERIOD 40 - Site Decontamination Period 4 Direct Decommissioning Activities 4b.1.1 Remove spent fuel racks Disposal of Plant Systems 4b.1.2.1 Capital Additions 85-2002 (clean) 4b.1.2.2 Capotal Additions 85-2002 (contaminated) 4b.1.2.3 Chemical & Volume Control
- 40. 1.2.4 Chemical & Volume Control (Insulated) 4b. 1.2.5 Component Cooling Water 4b. 1.2.6 Component Cooling Water (RCA) 4b.1.2.7 Compressed Air 4b.1.2.8 Compressed Air (Isolated) 4b,1.2.9 Compressed Air(RCA Insulated) 4b.1.2.10 Compressed Air (RCA) 4b.1.2.11 Diesel Engine-Generator 41.1.2.12 Diesel Engine-Generator (Insulated) 4b.1.2.13 Electrical (Clean) 40.1.2.14 Eletricl (Contaminated) 4b.1 2.15 Electricl (Contuminated) - FHB 41.1.2.16 Elertricu (Decontaminated) 4b.1.2.17 Electrucl (Deoontaminated( - FHB 41.1.2.18 Fire Protection 4b.1.2.19 Fire Protection (RCA) 4b,1.2'20 Gaseous Radwoste 4b.1.2.21 HVAC (Clean Insulated) 4b.1.2.22 HVAC (Clean) 4b.1.2.23 HVAC (Contaminated Insulated) 40.1.2.24 HVAC (Contaminated) 4b.1.2.25 HVAC (Contuminated) - FHB 4b.1.2.26 Liquid Radwoste 4b.1.2.27 Liquid Rodowaste (Insulated) 4b.1.2.28 Make-up Water 4b.1.2.29 Muake-up Water (Insulated) 4b.1.2.30 Make-up Water (RCA Insulated) 4b.1.2.31 Mske-up Water (RCA) 4b.1.2.32 Miscellaneous Reactor Coolant 4b.1.2.33 Nu'leur Steam Supply Sumpling 41b..2.34 Nuclear Steam Supply Sompling (Insulated 41.1.2.35 Residual Heat Removal 4b.1.2.36 Safety Injection 4b,1.2.37 Solely Injection (Insulated) 4b.1.2.38 Safety tnjnction (RCA Insulated) 41.1.2.39 Safety Injection (RCA) 4b.1.2.40 Service Cooling Water 41.1.2.41 Service Cooling Water (RCA) 4b.1.2.42 Spent Fuel Pit Cosling 4b.1.2.43 Spent Fuel Pit Cooling - FHB 80 5,082 4.367 16,057 21,827 83 31 272 46,214 508 26,869 10,370 8.034 26,205 36,382 46,623 432 47 136 34 659 155 310 851 308 166 478 148 22 413 152 10 1,809 442 128 3.025 880 311 191 60 24 304 229 1,018 242 538 56 306 28 34 180 87 131 40 231 90 4
32 270 100 23 63 86 3
28 234 46 97 646 351 16 15 65 129 13 107 876 0
1 10 3
24 199 7
65 532 1
10 81 73 612 5.022 11 90 742 11 93 761 2
20 162 0
4 34 4
37 304 21 185 1,521 5
42 348 38 49 268 316 4
3 8
31
.0 3
28 2
19 157 3
6 38 19 1
7 57 0
1 7
26 84 595 214 1
12 99 0
0 4
1 4
36 5
39 320 0
3 26 8
32 238 61 10 34 251 72 924 5,291 5,291 3,398 19,456 19.456 4,619 26,446 26.446 11,134 62.894 62.878 49,029 204.021 203,756 580 1,888 1,888 33 187 165 741 741 588 2.579 2.579 173 705 705 35 202 378 1.852 1.852 31 179 1
6 10 45 45 194 834 834 32 184 2
12 383 2.192 283 1.329 1.329 65 285 285 2,269 11.001 11,001 488 2,212 2.212 292 1.466 1.466 106 481 481 30 129 129 5
29 64 368 154 729 729 723 3,469 3,469 169 806 806 374 1.584 1,584 34 136 136 65 371 6
34 19 84 84 101 460 460 47 200 200 60 256 256 16 63 63 304 1,454 1,454 56 259 259 2
11 11 20 93 93 172 807 807 21 121 14 67 67 102 505 505 117 570 570 265 268.913 75,213 2.754 584 433 17,445,560 254.056 617,381 2.621 222,759 962 16 187 2,830 2,266 92.043 5,363 6,267 1,420 373,180 14,546 627 513 68,999 5,086 202 3,078 8,495 344,999 8,025 179 2.744 6
98 102 4,130 380 1.932 78,476 6,959 184 2,760 12 178 2,192 32,770 5,155 2089365 7.636 786 31,909 2.213 48,689 1.977.300 51.247 7.198 292,312 14,847 7,373 299,432 5,298 1,570 63.760 3.139 332 13.495 965 29 475 368 5,804 2.950 119,809 3,471 14,745 598,821 15,667 3,370 136,839 3,710 20599 1,347 212.279 9,155 78 124 13,753 928 371 5,614 34 521 269 10.909 564 1,522 61.817 2,969 371 77 21,534 1,558 556 22,561 2,485 70 2,836 735 5,773 853 306.888 4,053 963 39.122 1,570 38 1,558 72 345 14.018 533 3,107 126.161 4.433 121 1.856 253 10.286 384
-2,311 242 114,445 1.103 2,433 284 122,976 1,513 64,821 198,294 349,794 4,386 87,730 160 612,909 TLG Servieea, Ie.
Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document P01-1604-003, Rev. 0 Appendix D, Page 10 of 24 Table D-1 Diablo Canyon Unit 1 SAFSTOR Decommissioning Cost Estimate (Thousands of 2008 Dollars)
Ott-Site LLRW NRC Spent Fuel Site Processed Burial Volumes Burial i Utility and Activity Decon Removal Packaging Transport Processing Disposal Other Toiai Total Lic. Term.
Management Restoration Volume Class A Class B Class C GTCC Processed Craft Contractor Index Activrit Description Cost Cost Costs Costs Costs Costs Costs Coontlonenc Costs Costs Costs Costs Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Wt., Lbs.
Manhours Manhours Period 40 Disposal of Plant Systemo (continued) 4b.1.2 Totals 13.980 4b.1.3 Scaffolding in support of decommissioning 3,354 Decontamination of Site Buildings 4b.1.4.1
- Reactor 1,371 1,504 4b.1.4.2 Capital Additions 85-2004 24 20 4b.1.4.3 Containment Penetration Area 237 140 4b.1.4.4 Fuel Handling 593 597 4b.1.4 Totals 2,225 2,261 4b.1 Subtotal Period 4b Activity Costs 2,657 19.642 Period 4b Additional Costs 4b.2.1 ISFSI License Termination 1,059 4b.2.2 License Termination Surey Planning 4b.2 Subtotal Period 4b Additional Costs 1.059 Period 4b Collateral Costs 4b.3.1 Process liquid saste 127 4b.3.2 Small tool allowance 397 4b.3.3 Decommissioning Equipment Disposition 4b.3 Subtotal Period 40 Collateral Costs 127 397 Period 4b Period-Dependent Costs 4b.4.1 Decon supplies 948 4b.4.2 Insurance 4b.4.3 Property taxes 4b.4.4 Health physics supplies 2.445 4b.4.5 Heavy equipment rental 4.592 4b.4.6 Disposal of DAW generated 4b.4.7 Plant energy budget 4b.4.0 NRC Fees 40.4.9 Liquid Radwaste Processing Equipment/Services 4b.4.10 Security Staff Cost 4b.4.11 DOC Staff Cost 41.4.12 Utiiby Staff Cost 4b.4 Subtotal Period 4b Period-Dependent Costs 948 7,038 4b.0 TOTAL PERIOD 4b COST 3.731 28,136 PERIOD 4d -Delay before License Termination Period 4d Period-Dependent Costs 4d.4.1 Insurance 4d.4.2 Property taxes 4d.4.3 Health physics supplies 92 4d.4.4 Disposal of DAW generated 4d.4.5 Plant energy budget 4d.4.6 NRC Fees 4d.4.7 Utility Staff Cost 4d.4 Subtotal Period 4d Period-Dependent Costs 92 4d.0 TOTAL PERIOD 4d COST 92 316 1,728 13,672 1.193 18 13 101 15 345 1
23 31 401 871 341 426 1,365 4
40 3
28 120 299 42 206 388 415 792 2.055 2,190 14,564 3,922 8,203 39,094 35.209 1,215 4.714 4.714 2,190 7,541 7,541 34 126 126 357 1.204 1.204 823 2.680 2.680 3,404 11.552 11.552 13,402 57,248 53,363 3,885 132.547 4,661 880 58 5.786,013 239,260 44.530 25.817 4,128 17,997 1.944,651 46,746 386 14 16,586 744 1,164 1,197 148.244 6,147 1.996 1,566 212,259 20,239 7.674 20.775 2.321.740 73.876 3,885 141.101 28,315 8.375,042 339.915 3,022 6,237 748,923 15,272 1.280 6240 3,022 6,237 748,923 15,272 7,520 4
100 4
100 387 783 690 3,022 669 283 952 952 387 1.451 973 3.974 952 62 121 183 94 94 1,152 250 236 107 686 100 357 686 335 234 909 909 84 481 481 220 1.234 1.234 538 2,624 2,624 924 6,000 397 6,000 1,320 55.419 180 303.726 88 359.145 268 334 1.282 1.282 866 122 988 988 198 28 226 226 863 3.309 3.309 972 5.564 5.564 35 309 130 567 567 1,959 415 2.374 2.374 1,293 182 1,475 1,475 755 160 914 914 1.426 302 1.728 1.728 15,043 3,183 18.226 18,226 21.285 4,504 25,789 25,789 35 309 42.824 11,195 62.442 62.442 2,682 15.250 4,953 44,275 26,108 126,288 119,381 3,022 4.981 99,624 181
-22,534 192,566 344,160 4,981 99.624 181 559,260 3,885 147,101 40,854 9,582,733 355,637 566.780 106 7
192 9-34 7
1,232 7
1.232 15 121 121 33 125 125 3
12 12 27 220 220 198 1,131 1,131 275 1.609 1,609 275 1.609 1,609 1055 2,103 4
15.400 105 2,103 4
15,400 105 2,103 4
15,400 TLG Services, Ine.
Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document P01-1604.003, Rev. 0 Appendix D, Page I) of 24 Table D-1 Diablo Canyon Unit I SAFSTOR Decommissioning Cost Estimate (Thousands sf2008 Dollars) i Ac.Ivity Off-Site LLRW NRC Spent Fuel Site Processed Burial Volumes Burial I Utility and I Doecon Removal Packaging Transport Processing Disposal Other Total Total Lic. Term.
Management Restoration Volume Class A Class B Class C GTCC Processed Craft Contractor Cost Cost Costs Costs Costs Costs Costs Continoenco Costs Costs Costs Costs Cu. Foot Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Wt., Lbs. -
Manhours Mantrous I I
InQ*x
- C[]VI* I *A*rlntlOn notes MVWJVIW U-prion PERIOD 4e - License Termination Period 4e Direct Decommissioning Activities 4e,1.1 ORISE confirmatory survey 4e. 1.2 Terminate license 4e.1 Subtotal Period 4e Activity Costs Period 4e Addirtional Costs 4e.2.1 License Termination Survey 4e.2 Subtotal Period 4e Additional Costs Period 4e Collateral Costs 4e.3.1 DOC staff relocation expenses 4ae.3 Subtotal Period 4a Collateral Costs Period 4e Period-Dependent Costs 4e.4.1 Insurance 4e.4.2 Property taxes 4e.4.3 Health physics supplies 4e.4.4 Disposal of DAW generated 4e.4.5 Plant energy budget 4e.4.6 NRC Fees 4e.4.7 Security Staff Cost 4e.4.8 DOC Staff Cost 4A.4n9 Utility Staff Cost 4e.4 Subtotal Period 4e Period-Dependent Costs 4e.0 TOTAL PERIOD 4e COST PERIOD 4 TOTALS PERIOD 5b - Site Restoration Period 51 Direct Decommissioning Activities Demolition of Remaining Site Buildings 5b.1.1.1
- Reactor 5b. 1.1.2 Capital Additions 85-2004 5b.I.1.3 Containment Penetration Area 5b.1.1.4 Miscellaneous 5b.1t.,5 Turtine Sb.1.6.6 Turbine Pedestal 51b.1.1.7 Fuel Haodling Sb.1.1 Totals Site Closeout Activities 5b.1.2 Grade & landscape site 5b.1.3 Final report to NRC 5b.1 Subtotal Period 5b Activity Costs Period 5b Additional Costs 5b.2.1 Concrete Csushing 5b.2.2 ISFS1 Demolition and Site Restoration 5b.2.3 Cofferdam Construiction and Teardors 5b.2 Subtotal Period 5b Additional Costs 153 65 218 218 153 65 218 218 8.178 8.178 3,461 11,639 11.639 3.461 11,639 11.639 142,829 3,120 142,829 3.120 1.395 295 1.690 1,690 1.395 295 1.690 1.690 76 11 87 87 919 324 1,243 1.243 6
2 20 8
36 36 200 42 243 243 532 75 607 607 298 63 361 361 2--47 602 3.449 3.449 2,525 534 3,059 3.059 919 6
2 20 6,478 1,660 9,085 9,085 919 6
2 20 16.203 5,482 22,632 22.632 4.239 56,016 11,530 10,719 41,455 41,362 108,334 80,894 354,549 347,378 3.022 319 6.371 12 4,714 36,143 39,286 319 6.371 12 80,143 319 6,371 142,841 83,263 4l150 416,013 116.491 2,754 584 433 27.036.770 752.537 1.282.823 6,873 273 615 26 3,274 1,212 1,689 13.961 1,455 8,328 58 331 130 745 5
31 693 3,966 256 1,468 357 2,046 2,955 16,916 8,328 331 745 31 3,966 1,468 2,046 16,916 2.753 19,669 74,901 3,572 6,563 249 38,602 11,300 16-750 151,936 4,587 1,560 156,523 1.560 2,063 3,349 80 4,004 9.416 80 2,272 16.234 481 2,753 187 40 227 227 187 3,475 19,896 227 98 562 24 120 690 93 530 24 311 1,782 464 545 438 1,447 0
690 690 062 830 1,093 TLG Services, Ine.
Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis Documoent P01-1604-003, Rev. 0 Appendix D, Page 12 of 24 Table D-1 Diablo Canyon Unit 1 SAFSTOR Decommissioning Cost Estimate (Thousands of 2008 Dollars)
Oft-Site LLRW NRC Spent Fuel Site Processed Buoial Volumes Burial I Utility and Activity Decon Removal Packaging Transport Ptoessittg Disposal Other Total Total Lic. Term.
Management Restoration Volume Class A Class B Class C GTCC Processed Craft Contractor Index Activity Description Cost Cost Costs Costs Costs Costs Costs Contingency Costs Costs Costs Costs Cu. Feat Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Wt., Lbs.
Manhours Manhoturs Perod 5b Collateral Costs 5b.3.1 Small tool allowance 5b.3 Subtotal Period Sb Collateral Costs Period 5b Period-Depeodent Costs Sb.4.1 Insurance 5b.4.2 Property taxes 5b.4.3 Heavy equiprent rental 5b.4.4 Plant energy budget 5b.4.5 Security Staff Cost 5b.4.6 DOC Staff Cost 5b.4.7 Utilty Staff Cost 5b.4 Subtotal Period 51 Period-Dependent Costs 5b.0 TOTAL PERIOD 5b COST PERIOD 5 TOTALS TOTAL COST TO DECOMMISSION 190 190
-,420.
6,420 40 231 40 231 231 231 207 29 236 1.359 7.778 273 58 330 338 72 410 6,581 1.393 7.974 1,713 362 2.075 9,111 3,272 18.803 236 7,778 330 410 7,974 2,075 18.803 5,343 81,211 27.783 114,337 24,290 0
9,322 7,099 40,711 227 690 39,795 165.939 115.977 24,290 0
9,322 7,099 40.711 227 690 39,795 165,939 115,977 9,749 87,150 11,919 11,487 41,455 42,730 403,420 152.002 759,912 510,340 203,537 46,035 416,013 130.665 2,754 584 433 27,421,720 1,002,381 2,999,686 TOTAL COST TO DECOMMISSION WITH 25% CONTINGENCY:
$759,912 thousands of 2008 dollars TOTAL NRC UCENSE TERMINATION COST IS 67.16% OR:
$510,340 thousands of 2008 dollars SPENT FUEL MANAGEMENT COST IS 26.78% OR:
$203,537 thousands of 2008 dollars NON-NUCLEAR DEMOLITION COST IS 6.06% OR:
$46,035 thousands of 2008 dollars TOTAL LOW-LEVEL RADIOACTIVE WASTE VOLUME BURIED (EXCLUDING GTCC):
134,004 Cubic Feet TOTAL GREATER THAN CLASS C RADWASTE VOLUME GENERATED:
433 Cubic Feet TOTAL SCRAP METAL REMOVED:
48,060 Tons TOTAL CRAFT LABOR REQUIREMENTS:
1,002,381 Man-hours End Notes:
n/a - indicates that this activity not charged as decommissioning expense.
a - indicates that this activity performed by decommissioning staff.
0 - indicates that this value is less than 0.5 but is non-zero.
a cell containing" -" indicates a zero value TnG Services, Inc.
Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document P01-1604-003, Rev. 0 Appendix D, Page 13 sf24 Table D-2 Diablo Canyon Unit 2 SAFSTOR Decommissioning Cost Estimate (Thousands of 2008 Dollars)
IActioity Ofif-rte LLRW NRC Spent F uel sit.
Processed Burilal VOlUmes Burial I Utilityan Decon Removal Packaging Transport Processing Disposal Other Total Total Lic. Term.
Management Restoration Volume Class A Class B Close C GTCC Proesseld Craft Contra=torI Ca~
- st Cast Osts Casts Costs Cases Cases Cantinesneo Costs Coste Casts Costs Cu.PFeet Cu.Feet Co.Feet Co.Feet CuoFeat Wt..iLs.
Manhours ManhoarsI B Inlay A*l*
N*q*ri*inn notes AcbWtV Description Cost Cast Costs Cost.
at.
Costs Costs Cost.
Cu. Feet Cu Feet C.. Feet Cu. Feel Cu. Feet VVt. Lb..
M.nhour.
Vituth.ur.
PERIOD I a -Shutdown through Transition Period ta Direct Decornomissioning Activities l:a.1.1 SAFSTOR site characterization survey I.1.2 Prepare preliminary decommissioning cost la.1.3 Notification of Cessation of Operations 1 s.4 Rsmose fuel & source "aterial 1 a.1.5 Notification of Permanent Defueling la.1.6 Dettivte plant systems & process waste fa.1.7 Prepare and submit PSDAR la.1.8 Review plant dwgs & spe1s.
ta.f.9 Pet.onm detailed tad survey la.1.10 Estimate by-product inventory la.1.11 Entd product descripbion fa.1.t2 Detaiftd by-product inventory ta.1.13 Define major work sequence la1.1t4 Perform SER and EA alt 5 Perform Site-Specific Cost Study Activity Specifications la:1.16tI Prepare plant and factibes ftr SAFSTOR ta.1.16.2 Plant systems la.1.16.3 Plant structures and buildings la.1.16.4 Waste management f:.f.116.5 FPasity and site domnocy la.1.16 Total Detailed Work Procedures ial1.17.l Plant systems lo.1.17.2 Facility closeout & dormancy la.1.17 Total laZ1.18 Pmcure vacuum drying system 1ail1 Drain/de-energize non-cont, systems 1a.1.20 Drain & dry NSSS la.I.21 Drain/de-energize contaminated systems la.1.22 Deconsecure contaminated systems ta.1 Subtotal Period ta Activity Costs Period ta Collateral Costs 1:a.3.1 Spent Fuel Capital and Transfer ta.3 Subtotal Period la Cotateral Costs Period ia Peiod-Dependent Costs a1.4.1
.su.nnce la.4.2 Property taxes la.4.3 Health physics supplies la.4.4 Heavy equipment rental 1a.4.5 Disposal of DAW generated la.4.6 Plant energy budget ia.4.7 NRC ISFSI Fees la.4.8 NRC Fees l.4.9 Emergency Planning Fees la.4.1g Spent Fuel Pool O&M 1a.4.11 ISFSI - Operating Costs la.4.12 Spent Fuel StoragelCaptal Equipment la.4.13 ISFSI - Fixed Costs 414 179 593 593 67 14 81 61 a
nia 103 67 51 51 77 51 159 256 252 214 160 103 103 831 22 125 125 14 81 ait ft 62 62 11 62 62 17 94 94 11 62 62 34 193 193 55 312 312 55 307 307 46 260 260 35 195 195 22 125 125 22 125 125 180 1.010 1,010 556 855 556 428 428 641 428 1,326 2,138 2,104 1,782 1,334 855 855 6.930 61 13 74 74 62 13 75 75 122 26 149 149 5
1 6
6 a
2,254 577 2,830 2,830 506 513 1,019 43 15,347 1,649 1.649 357 2,006 367 2,006 2,006 2,006 486 490 11 101 4
38 1,330 191 471 1,258 735 141 4,385 286 172 1.367 1.367 15 115 1 15 175 661 661 106 596 596 16 70 70 2 87 1,617 1,617 191 191 68 539 539 181 1,439 1.439 159 894 894 30 171 171 948 5,333 5.333 62 348 348 610 12,190 22 TLG Services, Inc.
M.N.t Corsyos Paer.. PNow Daecommissieoning Cost Anlyei.
Document P01-1604-003, Rev. 0 Appendhix D, Page 14 of 24 Table D3-2 Diablo Canyon Unit 2 SAFSTOR Decommissioning Cost Estimate (Thousands of 2008 Dollars) jA nboo Off-Sit.
LLRW NRC Spent Fuel Site Processed Burial Volumes Burial I t-.
Decon Removal Packaging Transport Processing Disposal Other Total Total Lic. Tess.
Management Restoration Volume Class A Class B Class C GTCC Procnesed Craft Contractor Cost Cost Costs Costs Costs Cost.
Costs Contingency Costs Costs Costs Costs Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Wt., Lbsi M;ntourn Manhorn I'd ex Period la Period-Dependent Costs continued) la.4.14 Security Staff Cost 10,231 2,212 12,443 12,443 1a.4.15 Utility Staff Cost 26,403 5,707 32,110 32.110 10.4 Subtotal Period la Period-Dependent Costs 976 11 4
38 46.726 10,139 57,894 49.518 l1.0 TOTAL PERIOD la COST 976 11 4
38 50,629 11.072 62,730 52.348 PERIOD l b -SAFSTOR Limited DECON Activities Period lb Direct Decommissioning Activities Decontamination of Site Buildings lb.1.1.1
- Reactor 1,501 1.081 2.582 2,251 lb.1.1.2 Auxiliary 1,010 728 1,738 1.516 1b.1.1.3 Capital Addions 85-2004 296 213 509 444 1b01.1.4 Containment Penetration Area 226 163 388 339 1b.1.1.5 Fuel Handling 57 5 414 989 863 1b.1.1 Totals 3,608 2,599 6,207 5,411 8.376 10,382 610 610 157,471 423,400 12,190 22 580,871 12,190 22 596.218 26,111 17,740 5,109 3,917 9,816 62,693 62,693 331 223 65 500 127 796 796 3.608 2,599 6,207 5,411 1b.1 Subtotal Period I b Activity Costs Period 1b Collateral Costs 1b.3.1 Decon equipment 1b.3.2 Process liquid wste Sb.3,3 0m011 tool allouwance 1 b.3.4 Spent Fuel Capital and Transfer 1 b.3 Subtotal Perod 1 b Colateral Costs Period 1b Perod-sependent Costs 1b.4.1 Dec0- supplies 1b.4.2 Insurance Ib.4,3 Property taxes 1b.4.4 Halth physics supplies Ib.4.5 Heavy equipment rental 1 b4.6 Disposal of DAW generated 1 b.4.7 Plant energy budget 11,4.8 NRC ISFSI Fees lb.4.9 NRC Fees lb.4.10 Emergency Planning Fees 1b.4.11 Spent Funl Pool O&M lb.4.12 ISFSI - Operating Costs 1b.4.13 Spent Fuel Storage/Capital Equipment 1b.4.14 ISFSI - Fixed Costs 1b.4.15 Securty Staff Cost 1b.4.16 Utility Staff Cost 1b.4 Subtotal Period 11, Period-Dependent Costs lb.0 TOTAL PERIOD lb COST PERIOD Ic - Preparations for SAFSTOR Dormancy Period 1c Direct Deconarnssioning Activities 1c.1.1 Prepare support equipment for storage 1e.1.2 Install containment pressure equal, lines
- 1..1.3 Interim survey prior to dormancy 1,1.4 Secure buiding accesses lc,1.5 Prepare & submit interim report 935 202 1,137 1.137 180 82 331 312 325 1,230 1,230 69 8-15 4
84 252 54 307 1,115 69 82 331 312 252 597 2,758 2.452 307 307 1,223 73,380 238 1,223 73.380 238 1,467 406 123 16 6
1,467 529 16 6
6,189 599 99 337 301 25 54 335 48 110 187 185 36 962 72 2.579 6,655 54 11,504 366 11,756 529 1,996 1,996 43 345 345 4
29 29 146 552 552 27 150 150 23 100 100 72 408 408 48 48 17 136 136 27 214 214 40 225 225 8
43 43 208 1,170 1,170 16 88 8
557 3,136 3,136 1,439 8,093 8,093 3,156 16,733 14,945 1,788 6,352 25,698 22,807 2,095 796 874 874 2,097 17,477 32 39,691 106,720 17,477 32 146,411 90,856 62,963 146,411 431 42 733 30 93 524 524 9
51 51 317 1,050 1,050 6
36 36 3,000 700 12,834 249 TLG Services, Inc.
Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document P01-1604-003, Rev. 0 Appendix D, Page 15 of 24 Table D-2 Diablo Canyon Unit 2 SAFSTOR Decommissioning Cost Estimate (Thousands of 2008 Dollars)
IAdrd Off-SoRe LLRW NRC Spent Fuel Site Processed Burial Volumes Burial I Utlity and Decon Removal Packaging Transport Processing Disposal Other Total Total Lic. Term.
Management Restoration Volume Class A Class B Class C GTCC Proesosed Craft Contractor Cost Cost cost.
Costs Costs Costs Costs Contngnency Costs Costs Costs Cost.
Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Wt.. Lbs.
Maahours Msnhsura I
de on ion n
x Q==:ý r;
lc.1 Subtotal Period ic Activity Costs Period ic Adititonal Costs lc.2.1 Spent Fuel Pool Isolation Sc.2.2 Hazardous Waste Management lc.2.3 Mixed Waste Management 1c.2 Subtotal Period c Additional Costs Period lc Collateral Costs lc.3.1 Process liquid woste lc.3.2 Strall tool allowance Ic.3.3 Spent Fuel Capital and Transfer lc.3 Subtotal Period lc Collateral Costs Period is Period-Dependent Costs Ic.4.1 Insurance lc.4.2 Property taxes lC.4.3 Hoolth physics supplies 1 c.4.4 Heavy equipment rental lc.4.5 Disposal of OAW generated C
c4.6 Plant energy budget lc.4.7 NRC ISFSI Fees 1c.4.6 NRC Fees ic.4.9 Emergency Planning Fees Io l10 Spent Fuel Pool O&M 1lc4.11 ISFSI - Opersting Cost lc.4.12 Spent Fuel StorageiCapital Equipment lc.4.13 ISFSI - Fixed Costs l.4.14 Sscurity Staff Cost lc.4.15 Utility Staff Cost 1c.4 Subtotal Pedod 1 c Period-Dependent Costs 472 763 425 1,661 1,661 6,272 1.356 7,627 7,627 590 128 718 718 912 197 1,109 1.109 7,773 1,680 9,454 9.454 16,534 249 208 95 383 361 376 1,422 1.422 1
5 5
252 54 307 208 5
95 383 361 252 431 1,734 1,428 307 307 1.414 1.414 84,861 276 84.861 276 198 123 322 301 25 10 335 48 119 187 185 36 957 72 2,579 6,655 10 11,500 43 345 345 4
29 29 71 270 270 27 150 150 4
18 18 72 408 408 48 17 136 136 27 214 40 225 8
43 207 1,164 16 88 557 3,136 3,136 1,439 8,093 8,093 2.532 14,367 12.584 48 214 225 43 1,164 88 1.783 154 3.073 154 3.073 6
39,691 106,720 6
146,411 3
1 lc.0 TOTAL PERIOD IC COST 208 799 98 304 370 20,288 5,069 27.216 25,126 2,090 1,568 87,933 15.815 146,661 PERIOD I TOTALS 6,397 2,373 208 725 774 82,673 22,493 115.644 100,282 14,566 796 4,274 190,980 79,801 889,290 PERIOD 2a -SAFSTOR Dormancy with Wet Spent Fuel Storage Period 2a Direct Decomnmissioning Activities 2`.1.1 Quarterly Inspection 2a.1.2 Semkannual environmental survey 2o.1.3 Prepare reports 2o.1.4 Bituminous roof replacement 2o.1.5 Maintenance supplies 2a.1 Subtotal Period 2a Actiuy Costs Period 2a Collateral Costs 2o.3.1 Spent Fuel Capital and Transfer 21.3 Subtotal Period 2a Collateral Costs Period 2a Period-Dependent Costs 2a.4.1 lnsuranco 2o.4.2 Property taxes 2a.4.3 Health physics supplies 2o.4.4 Disposal of DAW generated 2a.4.5 Plant energy budget 2a.4.6 NRC ISFSI Fees 2a.4.7 NRC Fees 36 1,341 1.378 11,535 11,535 8
44 483 1,825 491 1,869 44 1,825 1,869 2,494 14,029 2,494 14,029' 14,029 14,029 1.254 83 31 4,703 1,076 273 2,838 2.034 1,907 678 5.381 5.381 155 1,231 1,231 434 1.637 1,637 117 504 504 613 3,452 3,452 2,034 2,034 275 2.182 2,182 4,453 88,054 160 TLG Services, Ine.
Dinablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis Doaeument P01-1604-003, Rev. 0 Appendix D, Page 16 of24 Table D-2 Diablo Canyon Unit 2 SAFSTOR Decommissioning Cost Estimate (Thousands of 2008 Dollars)
Off-Site LLRW NRC Spent Fuel Site Processed BurialVolumes Burial Utility and Astivity Decon Reaoval Packaging Transport Processing Disposal Other Total Total Lic. Term.
Management Restoration Volume Class A Class B Class C GTCC Pocessed Craft Contrastor Index Atiei Dascripno Cost Cost Costs Costs Costs Costs Costs Contingencs Costs Costs Costs Costs Cu. Foat Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Wt., Lbs.
Manhoure Manhoors Period 2a Period-Dependent Costs (continued) 2a.4.8 Emergency Planning Fees 2a.4.9 Spent Fuel Transfer -Pool or ISFSI to DOE 2a.4.10 Spent Fuel Pool O&M 2a.4. 1 ISFS6 - Operating Costs 2a.4.12 Spent Fuel StoragelCapital Equipment 2a.4.13 ISFSI - Fixed Costs 2a.4.14 Security Staff Cost 2a.4.15 Utility Staff Cost 2o.4 Subtotal Period 2a Period-Dependent Costs 2a.0 TOTAL PERIOD 2a COST PERIOD 21 - SAFSTOR Dormancy with Dry Spent Fuel Storage Period 2b Direct Decommissioning Activities 2b.1.1 Quarterly Inspection 2b.1.2 Seon-annual environmental survey 21.1.3 Prepare reports 2, 1.4 Bituminous not replacement
- 21. 1.5 Maintenance supplies 2b.1 Subtotal Period 2b Activity Costs Period 2b Period-Dependent Costs 2b.4.1 Insurance 2b.4.2 Property taxes 21.4.3 Heaoth physics supplies 2b.4.4 Disposal of DAW generated 2b.4.5 Plant energy budget 2b.4.6 NRC ISFSI Fees 2b.4.7 NRC Fees 2b.4.8 Emergency Planning Fees 2b.4.9 Spent Fuel Transter - Pool or ISFSI to DOE 2b.4.10 ISFSI - Operating Costs 2b.4.11 ISFS - Fiood Costs 2b.4.12 Security Staff Cost 2b.4.13 Utility Staff Cost 2b.4 Subtotal Period 2b Period-Dependent Costs 2b.0 TOTAL PERIOD 2b COST PERIOD 2c -SAFSTOR Dormancy without Spent Fuel Storage Period 2c Direct Decommissioning Activities 2c.1.1 Quarterly Inspection 2c.1.2 Semi-annual environmental survey 2c.1.3 Prepare reports 2c.1.4 Bituminous roof replacement 2c.1.5 Maintenance supplies 2c.1 Subtotal Period 2c Actvity Costs Period 2c Period-Dependent Costs 2c.4.1 lnsuornce 2c.4.2 Property taxes 2c.4.3 Health physics supplies 2,.4.4 Disposal at DAW generated 2c.4.5 Plant energy budget 2c.4.6 NRC Fees 2c.4.7 Utility Staff Cost 1,204 83 31 1,204 83 31 4,275 616 4,891 4,967 1,074 6,041 7,840 1,695 9,535
-,5-14 325 1,829 52,049 11.251 63,301 3,057 661 3.718 77,844 16,827 94.672 57,486 12.427 69,913 273 221.582 47,148 270.320 273 234.495 50.133 286,21t 48 10 5
1.779 641 2,420 1.827 651 2,478 4.891 6,041 9.535 1.829 63,301 3,718 94,672 69.913 270,320 286,218 1.185.193 879.157 4,403 88,054 160 2,064,350 4,403 88,054 160 2,064,350 SO 2,420 2,4708 5,438 784 6.221 1,427 206 1,633 1,339 482 1,821 102 38 337 144 622 1,882 407 2,288 2,697 2,697 2,529 364 2,893 5,270 760 6,030 6,333 1,369 7,702 1,994 431 2,425 4,054 876 4,930 54,202 11.717 65,918 30.143 6,516 36,659 1.339 102 38 337 115,968 24.056 141.839 1.339 102 30 337 117,795 24,707 144,318 6.221 1,633 1.821 622 2,288 2,697 2,893 6,030 7,702 2,425 4,930 65,918 36,659 141.839 144,318 5,438 108,754 198 796,886 472,229 5,438 108,754 198 1.269,114 5,438 108,754 198 1.269,114 3
114 117 1
4 4
41 156 156 42 159 159 48 382 382 13 105 105 28 106 106 9
38 30 26 147 147 22 178 178 95 537 537 78 6
334 92 2
21 121 155 441 336 6,728 12 7,589 TLG Serices, lee.
Diablo Canyon Power Plant Deeommissioning Cost Analysis Docuaenet P01.1604-003, Rev. 0 Appendix D, Page 17 of 24 Table D-2 Diablo Canyon Unit 2 SAFSTOR Decommissioning Cost Estimate (Thousands of 2008 Dollars)
Off-She LLRW NRC Spent Fuel Sit.
Prcessed Burial Volumes Burial I Utilit osd Activity Decon Removal Packaging Transport Processing Disposal Other Total Total Lie. Term.
Management Restoration Volumi ClGss A Class B Closs C GTCC Processed Craft Contractor Index Activity Desci ption Cost Cost Costs Costs CosCosot Costs Costs Contingency Costs Costs Costs Costs Cu. Faet CU. Feet Cu. Feet CU. Feet Cs. Feet Wt., Lbs.
Manhousr Manhours 2c.4 Subtotal Period 2c Penod-Dependent Costs 78 6
2 21 1,143 242 1.492 1,492 336 6,728 12 7,589 2c.0 TOTAL PERIOD 2c COST PERIOD 2 TOTALS PERIOD 3a - Reactivate Site Following SAFSTOR Dormancy Period 3a Direct Decommissioning Activities 3a.1.1 Prepare preliminary decommissioning cost 3s.1.2 Revie plant dwgs & specs.
3:11.3 Pertorm detailed rod survey 3a.1.4 End product description 3:.1.5 Detailed by-product inventory 3a.1.6 Defint major mork sequence 3a.1.7 Perform SER and EA 3A.1.8 Perform Site-Specific Cost Study 30.1.9 Peparp/submit License Termination Plan 3a.1.10 Receive NRC approval of termination plan Activity Specifications 3:.1.111.1 Re-activate plant & temporary facilities 3a.1.t 1.2 Plant systems 3e.1.11.3 Reactor intrinals 3a.1.11.4 Reactor ceseel 3:.1.11.5 Biclogiceal shield 3o.1.11.6 Steam generators 3a.1.11.7 Reinforced concrete 3o.1.11.8 Mein Turbine 3a.1.11.9 Mair Condensers 3a.1.11.10 Plant structures & buildings 3a.1.11.I1 Waste management 3a.1.1 1.12 Facifity & site closeout 3a.1.11 Total Planning & Site Preparations 3a.1.12 Prepare dismantling sequence 3a.1.13 Plant prep. & temp. svces
- 3. 1.14 Design mater clean-up system 3a.1.1S5 RigginglCont. Ccntr Envlpsltooling/etc.
3a.1.1s Procure casksrliners & containers 3a.1 Subtotal Period 3a Activity Costs Period 3a Period-Dependent Costs 3a.4.1 Insurance 3a.4.2 Property taxes 3a.4.3 Health physics supplies 3a.4.4 Heavy equipment rental 3:.4.5 Disposal of DAW generated 3a.4.R Plant energy budget 3a.4.7 NRC Fee, 3a.4.8 Secoitty Steff Cost 3a.4.9 Utility Staff Cost 3a.4 Subtotal Period 3a Period-Dependent Costs 3a..
TOTAL PERIOD 3. COST 78 6
2 21 1,261 284 1,652 1,652 336 10,177 2,620 191 71 631 353.550 75.124 432.188 1,652 430,536 67 14 81 81 236 51 287 287 6.728 12 7,589 203.536 371 3,341,053 556 1,967 428 556 3,207 1,326 2,138 1,751 51 67 384 S 159 256 210 378 214 364 333 126 160 82 21 21 160 236 48 S
2,039 11 62 62 14 81 51 83 468 468 34 193 193 55 312 312 45 255 255 82 459 414 46 46 260 234 26 78 443 443 72 405 405 6
31 31 35 195 195 18 100 50 50 4
25 25 4
25 25 35 195 97 97 51 287 287 10 56 28 28 441 2.480 2,183 297 3.151 1.782 3,036 2,779 214 1,334 684 171 171 1.334 1,967 385 17.009 1,028 599 526 31,088 123 27 150 150 2,700 584 3,284 3,284 72 16 87 87 2,100 454 2,554 2,554 63 14 77 77 8,527 1,843 10,370 10,073 297 403 490 3
367 101 30 1,330 214 396 12,270 30 14,678 53 420 420 15 115 115 145 548 548 106 598 598 13 5S 55 287 1,617 1.617 31 245 245 86 482 482 2,652 14,922 14,922 3,388 19,001 19,001 481 481 481 9,613 9.613 18 6,257 200,229 18 206,486 893 9
3 30 23,205 5,231 29,371 29,074 297 9,613 18 237,573 TLG Services, Inc.
Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document P01-1604-003, Rev. 0 Appendix D, Page 18 of24 Table D-2 Diablo Canyon Unit 2 SAFSTOR Decommissioning Cost Estimate (Thousands of 2008 Dollars)
Off-Site LLRW NRC Spent Fuel Site Processed Burial Volumnes Burial I Utility sd Actvity Decon Removal Packaging Transport Proesassig Disposal Other Total Total Lic. Tern.
Management Restoration Volume Class A Class B Class C GTCC Pracessed Craft Contractor Index Activity Description Cost Cast Costs Costs.
Costs Costs Costs Continency Costs Costs Cost Costs Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Wt., Lbs.
Manhouor Manhours PERIOD 3b -Decommissioning Preparations Period 3b Direct Decommissioning Activities Detailed Work Procedures 3b.1.1.1 Plant systems 3b.1.1.2 Reactor intemals 31.1.1.3 Remaining buildings 3b.1.1.4 CRD coling assembly 3b.1.1.5 CRD housings & ICI tubes 3b.1.l.S lncore instrumentation 3b.1.1.7 Reactor vessel 3b.1.1.9 Facility closeout 3b.1.1.9 Missile shields 3b.1.1.10 Biological shield 3b.1.1.11 Steam generatars 3b.1.1.12 Reifotedconreto 3b.1.1.13 Main Turbine 3b.1.1.14 Main Condensers 3b.1.1.15 Auxiliary building 3b.1.1.16 Reactor building 3b.1.1 Total 3b.1 Subtotal Period 3b Activity Costs Period 31 Additional Costs 3b.2.1 Site Characterization 3b.2 Subtotal Period 31 Additional Costs Period 3b Collateral Costs 3b.3.1 Decon equipment 3b.3.2 DOC staff relocation expenses 3b*3.3 Pipe cutting equipment 3b.3 Subtotal Period 3b Collateral Costs Period 3b Period-Dependent Costs 3b.4.1 Decon supplies 3b.4.2 Insurance 3b.4.3 Property taxes 3b.4.4 Health physics supplies 3b.4.5 Heavy equipment rental 3b.4.6 Disposal of DAW generated 3b.4.7 Plant energy budget 3b.4.8 NRC Fees 38.4.9 Securty Staff Cost 3b.4.10 DOC Staff Cost 3b.4.11 Utility Staff Cost 3b.4 Subtotal Period 3b Period-Dependent Costs 3b.0 TOTAL PERIOD 3b COST PERIOD 3 TOTALS 243 52 295 266 128 28 156 156 69 15 84 21 51 11 62 62 51 11 62 62 51 11 62 62 186 40 226 226 62 13 75 37 23 5
28 28 62 13 75 75 236 51 287 287 51 11 62 31 8-17 97 80 17 97 140 30 170 153 140 30 170 153 1.653 357 2,010 1,620 30 63 37 31 97 97 17 17 390 2,024 1.069 577 428 428 428 1,552 513 192 513 1.967 428 667 667 1,167 1,167 13,787 13.787 1,653 357 2,010 1.620 390 1,845 841 2,786 2,788 1.945 841 2.7886 2786 202 1,137 1.137 1,395 302 1,697 1,697 216 1,216 1.216 1,395 720 4.050 4,050 10.690 4,024 10.690 4,024 935 1,000 935 1.000 29 218 246 5
29 464 5
964 1,464 5
964 2,356 14 221 51 16 667 107 199 3,458 6.152 16 10,854 10 39 39 32 253 253 7
58 58 79 297 297 53 299 299 7
30 30 144 811 811 15 123 123 43 241 241 747 4.205 4,205 1.330 7,482 7.482 2,468 13,837 13,837 266 266 390 266 5.315 5,315 10 3.137 42,874 100.389 10 146.400 16 15,847 4,386 22,684 22,294 46 39,052 9,617 52,055 91,368 5,315 10,700 164,211 14,927 10,717 401.785 687 746 TLG Services, Ins.
Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decomamissiosing Cost Analysis Doueoant P01-1604-003, Rev. 0 Appendix D, Page 19 of24 Table D-2 Diablo Canyon Unit 2 SAI 7STOI1 Decommissioning Cost Estimate (Thousands of 2008 flollsers)
A Itoty 0ff-Sits LLRW NRC Speot Foet Sits Prouessed Bsrist Vuolumes Bonist 8 Utility and Decon Removal Packaging Transport Processiog Dispo.sa Other Total Total Lic. Term.
Management Restoration Volume Class A Class B Class C GTCC Processed Craft Contractor Cost Coot Costs Costs Costs Costs Costs Contigonoy Costs Costs Costs Coots Cu. Feel Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Wt., Lbs.
Manhours Manhoues I'll ex PERIOD 4a - Large Component Removal Period 4a Direct Decommissioning Activities Nuclear Steam Supply System Removal 4sa.1..1 Reactor Coolant Piping 4a.t.1.2 Pressurizer Quench Tank 4a.l.t.3 Reactor Coolant Pumps & Motors 4a.1.1.4 Pressunoer 4a.1.t.5 Steam Generators 4a.1.1.6 Retired Steam Generator Units 4a.1.1.7 CROMstlCIs/Sesrvce Structure Removal 4e.1.1.8 Reactor Vessel Internals 4a.1.1.9 Vossel & Intenals GTCC Disposal 4a.1.1.10 Reactor Vessel 4s.1.1 Totals Removal oa Major Equipment 4a.1.2 Main Turbine/Generator 4a.1.3 Main Condensers Cascading Costs from Clean Building Demolition 4:.1.4.1 Reactor 4a.1.4.2 Auxiliary 4a.1.4.3 Containment Penetration Area 4a.1.4.4 Radmaste Storage 4a.1.4.5 Fuel Handling 4a.1.4 Totals 66 259 40 32 60 690 415 1,562 1,562 7
26 6
5 9
97 53 204 204 26 101 44 121 1,358 576 2,225 2,225 8
59 454 295 620 380 1,817 1.817 85 3.846 1.858 1,884 2.974 5.768 4.1843 21,260 21.260 1.858 1.886 2.974 5,768 3.396 15.882 15,882 35 90 221 29 39 202 177 792 792 78 2.023 3.805 563 3,362 203 6.284 16.319 16,319 8.952 1I,35 10,887 10.887 86 3.952 1.361 633 8,565 203 11,266 26,065 26.065 390 10.357 9,648 5,449 6.057 35.381 406 29,326 97,015 97.015 470 153 113 925 416 2,077 2,077 1,370 145 107 875 727 3,223 3,223 214 1,927 33 296 5,388 2.460 37.344 22.887 37,344 22.887 419 3.362 2.241 376 6,481 2,379 75,354 67.929 2.754 8,096 7,657 584 584 256,781 5.614 36.557 596 871.200 3,760 269,821 1.782 3.128,906 20,508 3,128.906 10.800 83.603 2,134 351.463 24.250 433 85,510 964,972 24.250 433 9.177,718 93.695 364.306 8.312 344,574 24,147 1,125 1.125 1,102 1,102 4,454 1,208 652 66 82 175 2.183 Disposal of Plant Systems 4a.1.5.1 Auxiliary Steam 4a.1.5,2 Auxiliary Steam (RCA) 4a.1.5.3 Condensate System 4sa1.5.4 Condensate System (Insulated) 40.1.5.5 Containment Spray 4a.1.5.6 Extraction Steam & Heater Drip 40.1.5.7 Feedmoten System 4a.1.5.8 Fesdwator System (Insulated) 4a.1.5.9 Feedwater System (RCA Insulated) 4a.1.5.10 Feedwater System (RCA) 4..1.5.11 NSSS Sampling 4a.1.5.12 NSSS Sampling (Insulated) 4:.1.5.13 Nitrogen & Hydrogen 40.1.5.14 Nitrogen & Hydrogen (lnsulotod) 4a.1.5.15 Nitrogon & Hydrogen FRCA Insulated) 4a.1.5.16 Nitrogen & Hydrogen (RCA) 4a.1.5.17 Oily Woter Separator & TB Sump 4a.1.5.18 Saitmater System 40.1.5.19 Turbine Son:m Supply 4a.7.5.20 Turbine Steoa Supply (RCA) 4a.1:5.21 Turbine and Generator 4o.t.5.22 Turbine and Generator (Insulatsed) 4a.1.5 Totals 4.t1.6 Scaffolding in suppor of decommissioning 4a.1 Subtotal Petod 4a Activity Costs 390 128 3
31 252 109 2
14 118 1,031 62 546 4.477 388 21 181 1,481 183 10 84 688 391 16 137 1,126 93 13 112 919 137 93 3
24 197 4
0 1
70 15 4
4 5
34 34 1
0 5
16 1
4 0
0 2
81 -
0 4
34 24 1
5 41 153 1,240 81 714 5.855 685 23 191 1,567 119 4
39 318 44 1
7 58 5,075 245 2,093 17,158 40 4,178 26 19 149 22 261 1,469 1.469 141 793 793 14 80 80 18 99 80 38 213 213 472 2.655 2,655 108 522 522 68 312 312 1,466 7,582 7,582 502 2.573 2.573 234 1,198 1.198 416 2,086 2.086 258.
1,395 1,395 30 167 82 398 398 4
20 20 58 230 230 14 54 54 4
20 0
1 2
8 8
38 158 150 19 88 89 33 186 1.878 9,768 9,768 630 3,095 3,095 121 601 601 30 140 140 5,995 30,606 30.231 1,553 5,946 5.946 2,440 1,146 43,400 14,362 6,667 10,916
~
8,996 167 1,907 100 148 137 21 20 17
~
17 330 S
402 186 56,760 15,189 3,082 S -
565 375 166.336 158 1,300 86 375 258.742 68,173 2.754 99.082 2.123 46.536 1.820 1,762.487 17,105 583,235 6.634 270,737 3,135 443,294 6.490 361,684 1,645 2.547 77,448 1,601 4.076 76 17,622 2.155 1,798 643 309 16 705 72 13,400 1,362 16.329 394 2,779 2.305,038 20,783 616,829 11,698 125,162 2,001 22,940 696 6,768,403 86,082 65,704 34,066 584 433 16,720,780 269.852 73.127 7.054 704 918 1.748 23.550 23,632 10,217 7.781 25.164 35.442 406 38.489 141.521 1417147 4,454 TLG Services, Inc.
Diablo Canyon Power Plant Deeomaisoioning Cost Analysis Docusnent P01-1604-003, Rev. 0 Appendix D, Page 20 of24 Table D-2 Diablo Canyon Unit 2 SAI 1STOR Decommissioning Cost Estimate (Thousnseds of 2008 Doilsars)
Aotcety Off-Site LLRW NRC Spent Fuel site Processed Burial Volumes Burial I Utility and Decon Removal Packaging Transport Processing Disposal Other Total Total Lic. Teom.
Management Restorstion Volume Class A Class B Class C GTCC Processed Craft Contractor Cost Cost Costs Costs Costs Costs Costs Contingoocy Costs Costs Costs Costs Cu. Feat Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Wt., Lbs.
Moehours Manhourss I -1diAn ex Period 4a Additional Costs 4a.2.1 Retired Reactor Head 4a.2 Subtotal Period 4a Additional Costs Period 4a Collateral Costs 4s.3.1 Process liquid waste 4a.3.2 Smal tool allowance 4o.3 Subtotal Period 4a Collateral Costs Period 4a Period-Dependent Costs 4e.4.1 Dsonr supplies 4:.4.2 Irsurance 4a4.3 Property taxes 4a.4.4 Heath physics supplies 4a.4.5 Heavy equipment rental 4a.4.6 Disposal of DAW generated 4a.4.7 Plant energy budget 4a.4.8 NRC Fees 4a.4.9 Liquid Radwaste Processing EquipmentlServices 4a.4.10 Securty Staff Cost 4a.4.11 DOC Staff Cost 4a.4.12 Utility Staff Cost 4a.4 Subtotal Penod 4a Period-Dependent Costs 4a.0 TOTAL PERIOD 4a COST PERIOD 45 - Site Decontamination Period 4b Direct Decommissioning Activities 4b.1.1 Remove spent fuel rocks Disposal ot Plant Systems 4b.1.2.1 Building Services (Non-Power Block) 4b.1.2.2 CapIal Additions 85-2002 (Clean) 4b.1.2.3 CapitaI Addibons 86-2002 (contarrdnated) 4b.1.2.4 Chemical & Volume Control 4b.1.2.5 Chemioal & Volume Control (Insulated) 4b.1.2.6 Component Cooling Water 4b.1.2.7 Component Cooling Water (RCA) 4b.1.2.8 Compressed Air 4b.1.2.9 Compreossd Air (Insulated) 4b.1.2.10 Comnprssed Air (RCA Insulated) 4b.1.2.1 1 Compressod Air (RCA) 4b.1.2.12 Di:ssl Engine-Generator 4b.1.2.13 Diesel Engine-Generator (Insulated) 4b.1.2.14 Electrical (Clean) 4b.1.2.15 Electrical (Contarmnated) 4b.1.2.16 Electrical (Contaminated)- FHB 4b.1.2.17 Electrical (RCA) 4b.1.2.18 Electrical (RCA)-FHB 4b.1.2.19 Fire Protection 4b.1.2.20 Fire Protection (RCA) 4b.1.2.21 Gaseous Radwaste 4b.1.2.22 HVAC (Clean Insulated) 41.1.2.23 HVAC (Clean) 4b.1.2.24 HVAC (Contnminated Insulated) 4b.1.2.25 HVAC (ContamInated) 4b.1.2.26 HVAC (Contaminated) - FHB 4b.1.2.27 Liquid Radwoste 102 151 55 102 151 55 503 1i 55D 1,377 1,377 503 15 5S0 1,377 1.377 2.002 2.002 211,020 2.100 211.020 2.100 84 84 57 28 111 "
105 283 57 283 28 111 105 79 1,588 3,258 79 5,146 89 89 610 140 33 294 1,748 624 532 6.076 16,188 22,742 33 294 48,658 526 29,163 10.485 7,981 25,164 36,344 49,080 432 47 136 34 659 106 406 406 61 344 309 168 750 716 29 108 108 88 698 698 20 160 144 680 2,568 2.568 704 3,962 3.962 126 543 543 378 2,126 2.126 90 713 713 115 646 646 1,313 7,389 7.389 3,499 19.688 19.688 4,916 27,658 27,658 11.958 66,258 66,242 51.165 209,907 209,482 592 1,901 1,901 1
7 83 464 202 916 916 518 2.230 2.230 163 653 653 35 196 381 1,940 1,840 22 122 1
6 11 46 46 200 852 852 25 141 1
3 572 3.217 153 694 694 39 171 171 1,124 5,204 5,204 294 1,309 1,309 289 1,433 1,433 127 583 583 54 244 244 7
41 77 433 113 524 524 536 2,512 2,512 117 544 544 233 995 995 4
410 34 34 410
-16 4,747 16 4,747 425 258,742 75,332 2,754 24.593 80 24,593 80 94,947 173 0
80,179 199.114 360,714 94.947 173 650,007 584 433 17,051,340 272.204 654,545 2,621 222,759 962 6
382 338 731 283 161 462 100 5
23 411 116 3
2.645 251 77 1,691 521 293 203 92 34 356 172 766 171 310 5
40 331 40 83 547 312 15 14 62 117 13 107 877 0
1 11 3
26 212 4
31 256 1
6 48 30 256 2,103 6
53 434 10 91 750 3
27 222 1
11 86 3
26 210 15 130 1,065 3
27 225 22 36 218 175 7
464 3,206 5,298 1,263 604 464 196 8,505 122 6
2,055 141 3
3.217 2,478 463 20,389 4,211 7.268 2,153 837 41 433 2,038 10.324 2,182 2,117 787 107 7.035 130,192 5,628 320.521 12,471 63,950 4,681 2,984 345,395 7,753 1,881 S
99 4,393 387 83,461 6.991 2,089 48 47,918 100,651 4,336' 18,804 1.330 828,008 28,569 171,029 8.801 295,145 4,992 87,426 3.365 34.009 1,529 9662 6,878 82.759 2,603 419.267 11.785 88.616 2,617 145,111 6,344 TLG Servires, Ia.
Diablo Canyon Power Plant Denomnissioning Cost Analysis Document P01-1604-003, Rev. 0 Appendix D, Page 21 of24 Table D-2 Diablo Canyon Unit 2 SAFSTOR Decommissioning Cost Estimate (Thousands of 2008 Dollars)
Off-ite LLRW NRC Spent Fuel site Processed Burial Volumes Burial/
Utility end Activity Decon Removal Packaging Transport Processing Disposal Other Total Total Lie. Teem.
Management Restoration Volume Class A Class B Class C GTCC Processed Craft Contractor index Activitn Description Cost Cost Costs Costs Coets Costs Costs Coneesency Coets Coets Costs Costs Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Fmst Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Wt., Lbs.
Manhours Manhours Period 4b Disposal of Plant Systems (continued) 4b.1.2.28 Liquid Readwaste (Insulated) 4b.1.2.29 Lube Oil Distribution & Purification 4b.1.2.30 Make-up Water 40.1.2.31 Make-up warter (Insulated) 40.1.2.32 Mske-up Watrer (RCA Insulated) 4b.1.2.33 Make-up Water (RCA) 4b.1.2.34 Mechanical Department Equipment 4b.1.2.35 Miscellaneous Reactor Coolant 4b.1.2.36 N uclear Stee m Supply Sampling 4b.1.2.37 Nuclear Steam Supply Sampling (Insuiated 41.1.2.38 Residual Heat Removal 4b.1.2.39 Safety Injection 40.1.2.40 Safety njecfion (Insulated) 41.1.2.41 Safety Injecton (RCA Insulated) 4b.1.2.42 Safety Injection (RCA) 4b.1.2.43 Service Cooling Water 4b.1.2.44 Service Cooling Water (RCA) 4b.1.2.45 Sewer System Expansion 40.1.2.46 Spent Fuel Pd Cooling 4b.1.2.47 Spent Fuei Pit Coolag - FHB 4b.1.2 Totals 4b.1.3 Scaffolding in support of decommissioning Decontamination of Site Buildings 4b.1.4.1
- Reactor 4b.1.4.2 Aucitbary 4b.1.4.3 Capital Addfones 85-2004 41.1.4.4 Containment Penetration Area 40.1.4.5 Radwaste Storage 40.1.4.6 Fuel Handling 4b.1.4 Totals 4b.1 Subtotal Period 4b Activity Costs Period 40 Additional Costs 40.2.1 ISFSI License Termination 4b.2.2 License Termination Survey Planning 40.2 Subtotal Period 40 Additional Costs Period 40 Collateral Costs 4b.3.1 Process liquid waste 4b.3.2 Small tool elowance 4b.3.3 Decommissioning Equipment Disposition 4b.3 Subtotal Period 40 Collateral Costs Period 4b Period-Dependent Costs 40.4.1 Decor supplies 4b.4.2 Insurance 4b.4.3 Property taxes 40.4.4 Health physics supplies 4b.4.5 Heavy equipment rental 4b.4.6 Dispoes o1 DAW genarated 4b.4.7 Plant energy budget 4b.4.8 NRC Fees 4b.4.9 Liquid Radweste Processing Equipment/Services 4b.4.10 Security Staff Cost 40.4.11 DOC Staff Cost 29 211 208 20 25 126 89 14 6
211 88 4
30 250 118 29 40 64 87 12,253 6,267 2
1 5
42 0
3 2
17 3
6 O
1 O
0 25 83 1
12 0
0 1
4 5
39 1
4 9
33 10 35 237 1,244 39 29 4
15 342 24 138 39 19 8
3a 591 209 99 4
35 35 241 62 255 72 9.795 981 223 32 17 69 69 160 759 759 45 253 4
25 15 68 68 79 363 363 0
1
'49 205 205 7
30 30 3
13 13 300 1.419 1,419 56 256 256 2
10 10 19 90 90 168 779 779 25 143 19 88 88 9
49 106 514 514 122 581 581 6,584 31,094 25,992 2,329 8,919 8,919 40 61
-63 3,315 253 25 237 1,340 377 77 74 32 5.726 831 960 38 342 3,081 143 342 49 2.339 245 2,474 287 5,101 94,955 4,015 1,949 129 1,371 1,504 345 341 426 1,365 2.237 7,588 7,588 4,128 17,997 986 474 89 87 232 1.204 1,379 4.428 4,428 2.251 4.824 307 105 19 17 30 261 366 1,103 1,103 288 1,042 237 140 23 28 120 299 364 1,212 1,212 1,164 1.197 5
39 9
8 8
130 69 268 268 75 521 593 597 31 42 206 388 840 2,698 2,698 1,996 1,566 3,473 2,860 518 521 1,021 3.647 5,255 17,297 17:297 9,903 27,146 3,905 21,427 931 1,828 11,039 5.320 14,761 59,211 54,109 5,101 106.807 33,911 6,847 481 134,627 3,487 3.794 376 9,606 423 54,432 2,103 19 21,764 1,602 3,017 227 1.293 97 303.129 3,705 39.005 1.530 1,545 62 13,901 495 125,112 4,084 2,186 13,881 478 746 115,793 1,123 124,819 1.529 4.187,504 211.427 98,676 51,099 1,944,618 46,746 498.290 23,409 99,807 6,779 148.207 6,147 47,028 616 212,259 20,239 2.950,208 103,935 7.459,147 367,424 748,9?3 15,272 1,280 6240 748,923 15,272 7,520 58,549 190 303,726 88 362,275 278
- 09,214 1599 138.036 295,949 1,059 4
100 387 783 705 3,037 3.037 669 289 958 958 1,059 4
100 387 1,451 994 3,995 958 3.037 134 66 264 249 253 965 965 426 92 518 518 121 107 686 100 225 1,239 1.239 134 426 187 371 686 349 570 2,723 2,723 6,237 6,237 976 6,000 397 6,000 1,373 5,461 1.574 2,725 4,951 103 38 933 214 339 2,112 954 814 9.,300 24,151 567 2,141 2,141 135 1,068 1,068 31 244 244 982 3,706 3,706 1,070 6,021 6.021 145 625 625 457 2,569 2,569 138 1,092 1,092 176 990 990 2,010 11,310 11,310 5,221 29,371 29,371 TLG Serviaes, Ine.
Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document P01.1604-003, Rev. 0 Appendix D, Page 22 of 24 Table D-2 Diablo Canyon Unit 2 SAFSTOR Decommissioning Cost Estimate (Thousands of 2008 Dollars)
I Aetivity Indcex Activity Description Period 4b Peoiod-Dependent Costs (continued) 4b.4.12 Utility Staff Cost 4b.4 Subtotal Period 4b Period-Dependent Costs 4b.0 TOTAL PERIOD 4b COST PERIOD 4e - License Termination Period 4e Direct Decommissioning Activities 4e.1.1 ORISE confirmatory suroey 4e.1.2 Terminate license 40.1 Subtotal Period 4e Activity Costs Period 4e Additional Costs 4e.2.1 License Termination Survey 4e.2 Subtotal Perod 4e Additional Costs Period 4e Collateral Costs 4e.3.1 DOC staff relocation expenses 4a.3 Subtotal Period 4e Collateral Costs Period 4e Period-Dependent Costs 4e.4.1 Insurance 4e.4.2 Property taxes 4o.4.3 Health physics supplies 4e.4.4 Disposal of DAW generated 4e.4.5 Plant energy budget 4e.4.6 NRC Fees 4e.4.7 Security Staff Cost 4e.4.8 DOC Staff Cost 4e.4.9 Utility Staff Cost 4e.4 Subtotal Period 4e Period-Dependent Costs 4e.0 TOTAL PERIOD 4e COST PERIOD 4 TOTALS PERIOD 51b -Sitc Restoration Period 5b Direct Decommissioning Activities Demolition of Remaining Site Buildings 5b.1.1.1 oReactor 5b.1.1.2 Adninsistration 5b. 11.3 Auxiliary 5b..1.4 Capital Additions 85-2004 Sb.1.t.5 Chemical Storage 5b.1.1.6 Chlorination 5b..1.7 Circulating Water Tunnels 5b.1.1.t Cold Machine Shop 5b.t1,t9 Communication Sb.1..t10 Condensate PolishinglTechnical Support 5b.1.t.11 Containment Penetration Area 5b.1.1.12 Discharge Structure 5b.t.1.13 Fabricatiaon Shop 5b.1.1.14 Fire Pump Hoos.
5b.1.t.1 5
-aardous Waste Storage Facility Sb.t.t,1s Intake Structure 5b.1.1.17 Maintenance Shop Off-Site LLRW NRC SpentFuel Site Processed Burial Volumes Burial /
Utility an Decon Removal Packaging Transport Processing Disposal Other Total Total Lic. Teem.
Management Restoration Volumo Class A Class B Class C GTCC Processed Craft Contractor Cost Cost Costs Costs Costs Costs Costs Contlesenc s
Costs Casts costs Costs Cu. Pest Ca.Pe Ca.Peet C.Peas Cu. Feet Wt., Lbs.
Manhours Manhours 295 t8 413 4,0 51,2 32,975 7,128 40,103 40,103 1,574 7,676 103 38 339 71,452 18,058 99.239 99,239 5,613 30.587 1,224 2,338 11,725 6.394 72,904 34,383 165,167 157,029 5,461 3,037 5,101 112,807 46,982 521,223 105.214 199 955,207 8.679,558 383.173 962,727 153 66 219 219 153 66 219 219 11,808 5,105 16,913 16.913 11.808 5,105 16,913 16,913 209,457 3,120 209,457 3.120 1,395 302 1,697 1,697 1,395 302 1,697 1,697 76 11 87 67 1,240 447 1,687 1,687 7
2 22 9
40 40 200 43 244 244 355 51 406 406 1,306 262 1,589 1,589 4.840 1,046 5,187 5.887 5,213 1,127 6,340 6,340 1,240 7
2 22 11i991 3,017 16,279 16.279 1,240 7
2 22 25,347 8,490 35,107 35.107 6,139 60,990 11,716 10,321 36.889 42.759 147,330 94,038 410.181 401,618 351 7.025 13 18.857 57.357 74,643 351 7.025 13 150,857 351 7,025 209.470 153.977 3,037 5,526 371,549 122.665 2,754 584 433 25,737,920 864.847 1,771.249 6,873 960 5,977 3,915 4
8 1,00' 357 4
763 615 854 107 5
35 4,8a8 330 1.486 8,359 209 1,168 1,292 7.269 846 4,7t1 1
5 2
10 218 1,226 77 435 1
5 165 927 133 748 185 1,039 23 131 1
5 8
42 1,052 5,920 71 401 8,359 1,168 7,269 4,761 5
10 1,226 435 5
927 748 1,039 131 5
42 5.920 401 74,901 10,358 64.471 47,403 46 99 12.071 3.785 44 9.300
-,565 8.317 1,223 55 430 46,364 3.444 TLG Sereices, Inc.
Diablo Canyon Power Plant Decommissioning Cost Analysis Document P01.1604-003, Rev. 0 Appendix D, Page 23 sf24 Table D-2 Diablo Canyon Unit 2 SAFSTOR Decommissioning Cost Estimate (Thousands of 2008 Dollars)
Off-Site LLRW NRC Spent Fuel Site Processed Burial Volumes Burial IUtility and Actioity Decon Removal Packaging Transport Processing Disposal Other Total Total Lic. Term.
Management Restoration Volume Class A Class B Class C GTCC Processed Craft Contractor tndex Activity Description Cost Cost Costs Costs Costs Costs I Costs Cetinene Cents Costs Costs Costs Cu. Feet Cu. Fmst Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Wt., Lbs.
Manhours Manhouns Period 5b Deornition of Remaining Site Buildings (continued) 5b.1.1.18 Miscellaneous Structures 5b.1.1.19 NPO Permanent Warehouse 5b.1.1.20 Ponds 5b.1.1.21 Portable Fire Pump & Fuel Caol 5b.1.1.22 Pretreatment 5b.1.1.23 Radwssta Storage 5b.1.1.24 Radmaste Storage Facility (Additional) 5b.1.1.25 RotorWarehouse 5b.1.1.26 Security 5b.1.1.27 Security Buildings (Additional) 5b.1.1.29 Simulaton 5b.1.1.29 Steam Generator Storage Facility 5b.1.t.30 Telephone Terminal 5b.1.1.31 Turbine 5b.1.1.32 Turbine Pedestal 5b.1.1.33 Vehicle Maintenance 5b.t.1.34 Waste Water Holding & Treatment Facility 5b.1.1.35 Fuet Handling 5b.1.1 Totals Site Closeout Activities 5b.1.2 Remove Rubble 5b.t,3 Grade & landscape site 5b.t.4 Final report to NRC 5b.1 Subtotal Peltod 5b Activity Costs Period 5b Additional Costs 5b.2.1 Concrete Crushing 5b.2.2 ISFSI Demolition and Site Restoration 5b.2.3 Breakuater Demolition and Removal 5b.2.4 Cofferdam Constructon and Teardeon 5b.2 Subtotal Period 5D Additional Costs Period 5b Collateral Costs 5b.3.1 Smalo tool allowance 5b.3 Subtotal Penod lb Collateral Costs Period 5b Perinod-Dependent Costs 5h.4.1 Insurance 5b.4.2 Pnrperty taxes 5b.4.3 Heavy equipment rental 5b.4.4 Plant energy budget 5b.4.5 Secunty Staff Cost 5b.4.6 DOC Staff Cost 5b.4.7 Utility Staff Cost 5b.4 Subtotal Period 5b Period-Dependent Costs 5b.0 TOTAL PERIOD 5b COST PERIOD 5 TOTALS 57 1,221 2
1 9
1,595 42 742 303 46 370 821 2
4,940 1,212 30 20 1,689 39,784 12 69 264 1,484 0
2 0
1 2
11 345 1,940 9
52 160 902 65 368 10 56 8S 450 177 998 1
3 1,068 6,007 262 1,474 7
37 4
25 365 2,054 8,600 48,384 69 1,484 2
-1 11 1,940 52 902 368 56 450 998 3
6,007 1.474 37 25 2.054 48.384 1.787 2,763 52.934 10.307 692 46.104 532 692 56.944 673 14,093 24 14 108 17,854 662 9,938 3,944 722 4,191 8,888 28 57,743 11,300 367 238 16,750 436,410 1,470 2,272 43,526 8.467 545 33.893 438 43.344 318 1,787 491 2,763 80 17 97 97 80 9,426 53,032 97 7
1.832 10.307 24 123 692 12,211 46.104 i5 532 7
24 14.261 57.636 8,191 4.587 1667 449.187 667 37,68 3,349 80 128,379 46.649 4,004 173.418 46,729 801 801 173 974 974 173 974 974 6,420 6,420 94,090 94,090 207 273 3,553 12.616 5,679 22.327 30 236 1,388 7,807 59 331 768 4.321 2.727 15,343 1,228 6,906 6.199 34,945 236 7.807 331 4,321 15,343 6,906 34.945 51,291 145.326 83,349 279.966 622,605 327.362 622,605 327,362 22.430 30,059 146,587 97 692 145,797 22,430 30.059 146.987 97 692 145,797 TLG Services, Inc.
Diablo Canyon Po.-
Pl..t D-.oon-iooio-irg Cost Anoysfyio Doctuoent P01-1604-003, Rev. 0 Appendix D, Page 24 of 24 Table D-2 Diablo Canyon Unit 2 SAFSTOR Decommissioning Cost Estimate
.(Thousanasds of 2008 Dollars)
A hifty Off-Sito LLRW NRC Spent Fuel Site Processed Burial Volumes Burial I Utility ood Decon Removal Packaging Transport Processing Disposal Other Total Total Lic. Teom.
Managemnot Restoration Volumo Class A Class B Class C GTCC Processed Craft Contractor Cost Cost Costs Costs Costs Costs Costs Contingency Costs Costs Costs Costs Cu. Feet Cu. Feot Cu. Feet Cu. Feet Cu. Foot Wt.. Lbs.
Manhours Manhours led ex TOTAL COST TO DECOMMISSION 13,500 162,429 12,129 11,130 36.889 44.211 645,036 231,331 1,156,654 555,017 448,831 152,806 371,549 137,862 2,754 584 433 26,147,370 1,578,341 6.730,738 TOTAL COST TO DECOMMISSION WITH 2S% CONTINGENCY:
$1.156,654 thousands of 2008 dollars TOTAL NRC LICENSE TERMINATION COST IS 47.98% OR:
$555,017 thousands of 2008 dollars SPENT FUEL MANAGEMENT COST IS 38.8% OR:
$448,831 thousands of 2008 dollars NON-NUCLEAR DEMOLITION COST IS 13.21% OR:
$152.806 thousands of 2008 dollars TOTAL LOW-LEVEL RADIOACTIVE WASTE VOLUME BURIED (EXCLUDING GTCC):
141,201 Cubic Feet "OTAL GREATER THAN CLASS C RADWASTE VOLUME GENERATED:
433 Cubic Feet OTAL SCRAP METAL REMOVED:
76.674 Tons "OTAL CRAFT LABOR REQUIREMENTS:
1,578.341 Man-hours End Notes:
hai - indicates that this activity not charged as decommissioning expense.
a - indicates Seal this activity perfored by decommissioning staff.
0 - indicates that this value is loss than 0.5 but is non-zro.
a cell containing -" indicates a zero, value TLG Ser-ices, Ine.