VERMONT YANKEE Transitioning into SAFSTOR September 2, 2015

1. VERMONT YANKEE • Transitioning into SAFSTOR • September 2, 2015 Paul Paradis Director Decommissioning

2. Briefing Outline • 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

3. Introduction • 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the Plant • Transition the Organization • Key driver in pre-planning is to reduce costs by eliminating requirements no longer applicable for decommissioning and reducing staffing.

4. Why was SAFSTOR selected? 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.

5. Why was SAFSTOR selected? - Funding • 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 • SpentFuel Management - $368 Million • Nuclear Decommissioning Trust (NDT) Fund is currently $664.5 Million (as of December 31, 2014)

6. VY PSDAR Timeline

7. Transitioning the Facility • 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

9. Transitioning the Facility - People Operation Dormancy Preparation SAFSTOR Defuel Post Defuel E-Plan Fuel in Dry Storage 2nd ISFSI Pad Needed • Site Operation • Operation Safety • ~630 Personnel Wet Fuel (Hot) Management ~320 Personnel Wet Fuel (Cool) Management ~150 Personnel Dry Fuel Management ~50 Personnel Organizations Decom Planning

10. Transitioning the Facility - People • 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

11. Transition the Organization - Process • 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.

12. Transition the Organization - Projects • 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

13. Transition the Organization – Socio-Economic Impact • 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

14. Current State - What It Looks Like • 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

15. Current State - What It Looks Like We Are Here

16. Lessons Learned / Takeaways • 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

17. Summary • Learning organization: • Gain understanding of decommissioning regulations • Extensive benchmarking • Check and adjust to regulatory and external influences • Developing 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 Paradis Director Decommissioning Entergy Vermont Yankee pparadi@entergy.com