VERMONT YANKEETransitioning into SAFSTOR

S E P T E M B E R 2 , 2 0 1 5

Paul ParadisDirector Decommissioning

Briefing Outline

2

Introduction ---Announcement, Why was SAFSTOR selected?, VY PSDAR Timeline---

Transitioning the Facility---People, Process, Projects, Economic Impact---

Current State - What It Looks Like

Lessons Learned / Takeaways

Introduction

3

Announcement on August 27, 2013 to shutdown Vermont Yankee based on economic analyses.Human Resources, Communications and External Affairs

implemented pre-planned shutdown announcement plans.

A roadmap based on decommissioning project plans was developed.Transition the PlantTransition the Organization

Key driver in pre-planning is to reduce costs by eliminating requirements no longer applicable for decommissioning and reducing staffing.

Why was SAFSTOR selected?

4

The selection of a preferred decommissioning alternative was influenced by a number of factors at the time of plant shutdown.

Cost of each decommissioning alternative Minimization of occupational radiation exposure Availability of low-level waste disposal facilities Availability of a high-level waste (spent fuel) repository or a Department of Energy

(DOE) interim storage facility Regulatory requirements, and public concerns In addition, 10 CFR 50.82(a)(3) requires decommissioning to be completed within 60

years of permanent cessation of operations Under the SAFSTOR methodology, the facility is placed in a safe and stable condition and maintained in that state allowing levels of radioactivity to decrease through radioactive decay, followed by decontamination and dismantlement. After the safe storage period, the facility will be decontaminated and dismantled to levels that permit license termination. In accordance with 10 CFR 50.82(a)(9), a license termination plan will be developed and submitted for NRC approval at least two years prior to termination of the license.

Why was SAFSTOR selected? - Funding

5

Updated Cost Estimate to Decommission VYNPS is $1.242 Billion in 2014 dollars for SAFSTOR.

Termination of the NRC Operating License - $817 Million Site Restoration - $57 Million Spent Fuel Management - $368 Million Nuclear Decommissioning Trust (NDT) Fund is currently $664.5 Million (as of

December 31, 2014)

VY PSDAR Timeline

6

Transitioning the Facility

7

People – Planning for reduced staffing levels

Process – Developing appropriate regulatory and administrative changes

Projects – Preparing the plant for a period of dormancy

Socio-Economic Impact – Community relations

8

Transitioning the Facility - People

9

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 - 2020 2021+ Operation Dormancy Preparation SAFSTOR

Site Operation Operation

Safety

~630 Personnel

Decom Planning

Org

aniz

ation

s

Wet Fuel (Hot) Management

~320 Personnel

Wet Fuel (Cool) Management

~150 Personnel

Dry Fuel Management

~50 Personnel

Defuel Post Defuel E-Plan Fuel in Dry Storage

2nd ISFSI Pad Needed

Transitioning the Facility - People

10

Morale / Culture

Relocation of Personnel

Skill Sets for the Organization

Attrition Management and Absorption plans

Employee Communication – over communicate and be transparent

Staffing decommissioning planning organization – early separation from operation of the facility and right skill set

Transition the Organization - Process

11

Regulatory Submittals and Engineering Analysis PDEP Adiabatic Heat-up Analysis Other examples and overall numbers

Corporate Structuring Corporate alignment and site engagement are paramount to making

the transition successful.

Financial Structuring Cost tracking and cost reduction efforts

Work destruction Change management plans Processes, programs, procedures and activities are continuously

reviewed and revised, deleted or maintained during the appropriate SAFSTOR Timeline period.

Transition the Organization - Projects

12

Define SAFSTOR Plant Configuration Habitability Dry Fuel Storage Fuel Pool Cooling Security E-Plan

Plan and schedule system/building abandonment Hazard removal Utility cost reduction

Implement Projects & Modifications Security Improvements Consolidation of personnel Reduction in heating and cooling costs

ISFSI / Spent Fuel Management Spent Fuel Pool Optimization vs. Spent Fuel Pool Island Pad construction Vendor selection Long term facility configuration

Transition the Organization – Socio-Economic Impact

13

Communication Plans Public Outreach Impact on the Local Economy Understanding the audience and communicating on their

terms Vydecommissioning.com (web and mobile) SAFSTOR Matters TV

Current State - What It Looks Like

14

Staffing Reductions Attrition Retention Absorption Facility Status Regulatory status Building status – Cold and Dark preps Permit status – Ex: NPDES

Transition to Post-Defueling Emergency Plan Change Management Culture Changes

Current State - What It Looks Like

15

We Are Here

Lessons Learned / Takeaways

16

Culture – From Operations to Dormancy

Spent Fuel Management Planning – Early Decisions

Water Management

Focus on Work Destruction

Stake Holder Management

Use of Consultants and Contractors

Project Management Organization

Integration with site and corporate work efforts

Separate Decommissioning Planning from Operations

Summary

17

Learning organization:Gain understanding of decommissioning regulationsExtensive benchmarkingCheck and adjust to regulatory and external influencesDeveloping new processes and leveraging existing

Developed comprehensive decommissioning model for first large scale BWR to transition to SAFSTOR

Pre-planning allows for cost-effective transition from operations to SAFSTOR: eliminate requirements, simplify work processes, reduce staffing

Plan on track for SAFSTOR

18

Paul ParadisDirector DecommissioningEntergy Vermont Yankee

pparadi@entergy.com