The Derived Concentration Guideline Level (DCGL) is required to release the facility from the nuclear safety act at the stage of site restoration of the decommissioning nuclear power plant. In order to evaluate DCGL, there are various requirements, and among them, the selection of input parameters based on the application scenario is the main task. Especially, it is important to select input parameters that reflect site characteristics, and at this time, a single deterministic value or a probabilistic distribution can be applied. If it is inappropriate to apply a particular single value, it may be reasonable to apply various distributions, and the RESRAD code provides for evaluation using probabilistic methods. Therefore, this study aims to analyze the difference between the application of the deterministic method and the application of the probabilistic method to the area and thickness of the contaminated zone among the site characteristics data. This study analyzed the thickness and area of the contaminated zone, and in the case of thickness, the deterministic method was applied by changing the thickness at regular intervals from the minimum depth considered by MARSSIM to the thickness of the unsaturated zone identified in previous research data. In addition, a probabilistic analysis was performed by applying a distribution to the thickness of contaminated zone. Second, for the area of the contaminated zone, the dose was evaluated for each area in consideration of the areas to be considered when deriving Area Factor (AF), and the resulting change in DCGL was observed. As a result, the DCGL tends to decrease as the thickness increases, and it seems to be saturated when the thickness exceeds a certain thickness. Therefore, It was confirmed that the level of saturated values is similar to that of entering a probabilistic distribution, and in the case of a parameter that is reasonable to enter as a distribution rather than as a single value, it is sufficiently conservative to perform a probabilistic evaluation. In the case of area change, the DCGL evaluation result showed that the DCGL increased as the scale decreased. The magnitude of the change varies depending on the characteristics of each radionuclide, and in the case of radionuclides where external exposure gamma rays have a major exposure effect, the change is relatively small. It can be seen that the change in DCGL according to the area has the same tendency as the AF applicable to the survey unit for small survey units applied in the final status survey.

The decommissioning of domestic Nuclear Power Plants (NPPs) in Korea is expected to begin with the Kori-1, which was permanently shutdown in 2017. In addition, Wolsong-1 has been also permanently shutdown, and another type will be the decommissioning project following Kori-1. KHNP is promoting operation and decommissioning projects as the owner of NPPs, and the Central Research Institute (CRI) has been developing a Final Decommissioning Plan (FDP) for the decommissioning license document. The FDP consists of 11 major chapters in the order of overview of the project, characteristic evaluation, safety assessment, radiation protection, decontamination & dismantlement activities, waste management, etc. The contents described in each chapter are individual chapters, but there are also parts that consider the connection with other chapters. The CRI, which develops the FDP for the first decommissioning project in Korea, has spent a lot of time and effort considering this and has been proceeding through trial and error until the present stage. Therefore, this study aims to explain the current status of FDP, a license document for domestic decommissioning projects, and the link between major input data in major chapters. It can be said that System, Structure, and Components (SSCs) subject to dismantling are considered as the scope of FDP. Chapters that perform estimations on these dismantling targets may include safety assessments, exposure dose assessments for workers and residents, and waste inventory assessments. Therefore, an important part of performing the estimation works is to consider the entire scope of decommissioning activities, and as a way, it can start from data based on the inventory data. After generating the inventory data, the waste treatment classification for the inventory is designated by reflecting the results of the characterization. In addition, for cost estimation, the cost of decommissioning project is predicted by inputting some data (i.e., UCF) such as work process, number of workers, and time required for each item with data reflected in quantity and characterization. After that, based on these inventory, characterization, and UCF data, accident scenarios and industrial safety evaluation are performed for the safety assessment. The worker exposure dose is estimated by considering the dose rate of the workspace with these data. In the case of the amount of waste, the final amount of waste is estimated by considering the factors of reduction and decontamination. In summary, the main estimation contents of FDP are evaluated by adding elements required for the purpose of each chapter from data combined with inventory, characterization, and UCF, so the contents of these chapters are based on the logic of considering the entire scope of decommissioning in common.

The effects of an individual effective dose from radioactive contamination that will remain during site reuse after the decommissioning of nuclear facilities is generally assessed using the RESRAD code. The calculated results should meet the site reuse criteria presented by regulators, 0.25 mSv/yr in the United States and 0.1 mSv/yr in Korea. After completion of decommissioning, the dose is not subject to measurement, resulting in Derived Concentration Guideline Level (DCGL) remaining at the site that is practically consistent with the dose criteria. In order to assess dose using the RESRAD code, various requirements will need to be considered and determined, where the selection of input parameters is one of the important factors in the dose assessment. In addition, appropriate selection of site-specific parameters is important to reflect the site characteristics of each decommissioned Nuclear Power Plant (NPP). Therefore, this study intends to analyze the impact of site-specific parameters by referring to the cases of overseas decommissioned NPPs. In order to evaluate doses using RESRAD code, a site reuse scenario must first be selected. In general, in the case of unrestricted reuse, the resident farmer scenario can be applied, so the resident farmer scenario was also selected in this study. In addition, once a resident farmer scenario is selected, input parameters are selected according to the scenario, and the input parameter inputs a single value or distribution according to the deterministic or probabilistic evaluation method. Therefore, since this study is to evaluate the effect on site-specific parameters, a single value was applied as a deterministic evaluation method. For the 10 site-specific parameters considered in overseas cases, the difference was set twice using the F9 function key in the RESRAD code and the results were analyzed. In this study, we used prior research data targeting domestic nuclear facility for sensitivity analysis. Related parameters include the category of contamination layer, soil, water transport, ingestion, and occupancy. The parameters that appeared as the greatest influence among the 10 parameters were different in radionuclide on the contaminated zone. We showed the changes according to the difference in input parameters was presented using the graph provided by the RESRAD code. As a result, in the evaluation for Co-60 in this study, no significant change was observed. However, in case of H-3, several parameters values were changed, indicating that the effect on dose will be different depending on the site characteristics of the nuclear facilities.

The Derived Concentration Guideline Level (DCGL) using RESRAD code is generally obtained for the reuse of the site and remaining buildings of the decommissioning of nuclear facilities. At this time, the evaluation first considers wide DCGL assuming homogenous contamination for the entire target site. The DCGL derived through this will be compared with the actual contamination measured at the Final Status Survey (FSS) stage to determine whether the site is compliance with criteria. Guidelines for Survey units are presented in MARSSIM and suggested in Class 1 through 3. Therefore, DCGL for the survey unit of a certain smaller area is established by applying a correction factor from wide DCGL, which is define as an Area Factor (AF). Therefore, this study reviewed the AF applied in overseas cases, reviewed the necessary factors for derivation, and compared them by applying factors to the preliminary experimental target area for domestic nuclear installations. The AF is the ratio of the dose from the base-case contaminated area to the dose from a smaller contaminated area with the same radioactive concentration. To this end, an unrestricted resident farmer scenario was applied as the site reuse scenario, which deals with all exposure pathways considered in the RESRAD. The potential exposure pathways considered in resident farmer scenarios are largely divided into external and internal exposures, which are based on NUREG/CR-5512. In addition, in order to calculate the AF, a change in the contaminated area occurs, and accordingly, a variable that varies according to the area, i.e., length parallel to aquifer flow (LCZPAQ), the contaminated fraction of plant food ingested (FPLANT), the contaminated fraction of meat and milk (FMEAT and FMILK), is accompanied. As the contamination area decreases, these variables decrease, and the criteria for reduction were reflected through overseas cases. In this study, three nuclides (C-14, Co-60, and Cs-137) were assumed as representative nuclides, and the area of the contaminated site was selected as 50,000 m2 and reduced at a certain rate. As a result, each nuclide showed different characteristics, but in general, AF increases as the area decreases. Compared to the area of this study, AF values were calculated to be smaller than those of overseas cases, but it was confirmed that the area of the values showed similar patterns. In addition, in the case of C-14, the slope of AF increased rapidly as the area decreased, while Co-60 and Cs-137 showed similar slopes.

The decommissioning of the Nuclear Power Plant (NPP) is a long-term project of more than 15 years and will be carried out as a project, which will require project management skills accordingly. The risk of decommissioning project is a combination of many factors such as the decommissioning plan, the matters licensed by the regulatory agency, the design and implementation of dismantling, the dismantling plan and organization, and stakeholders. There will be some difficulties in risk management because key assumptions about many factors and the contents of major risks should be well considered. Risk management typically performs a series of processes ranging from identification and analysis to evaluation. In order to analyze and evaluate risks here, identification of potential risks is the first step, and in order to reasonably select potential risks, various factors mentioned should be considered. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to identify possible risks that should be considered for the decommissioning project in various aspects. The risk of the decommissioning project can be defined using the hazard keyword, and the risk family presented in the IAEA safety series can also be referred. It would be better to approach the radiological or non-radiological risks that may occur in the dismantling work with the hazard keyword, and if the characteristics of the decommissioning project are reflected, it would be a good idea to approach it on a risk family basis. There are 10 top risks in the risk family, 25 risks at the level 2 and 61 risks at the level 3 are presented. It may be complex to consider these hazards and risks recommended as risk families at the same time, so using the results of safety evaluation as input data for risk identification can be a reasonable approach. Therefore, this study intended to derive the possible risks of the decommissioning project based on the risk family structure. At this point, the reflection of the safety assessment results was intended to be materialized by considering the hazards checklist. As a result, this study defined and example of 38 possible risks for the decommissioning project, considering the 10 top risk family and lower level risk categories. This result is not finalized, and it will be necessary to further strengthened through expert workshops or HAZOP in the future.

The decommissioning of Korea’s nuclear power facilities is expected to take place starting with the Kori Unit 1 followed by the Wolsong Unit 1. In Korea, since there is no experience of decommissioning, considerations of site selection for the waste treatment facilities and reasonable selection methods will be needed. Only when factors to be considered for construction are properly selected and their effects are properly analyzed, it will be possible to operate a treatment facility suitable for future decommissioning projects. Therefore, this study aims to derive factors to be considered for the site selection of treatment facilities and present a reasonable selection methodology through evaluation of these factors. In order to select a site for waste treatment facilities, three virtual locations were applied in this study: warehouse 1 to warehouse 3. Such a virtual warehouse could be regarded as a site for construction warehouses, material warehouses, annexed building sites, and parking lots in nuclear facilities. If the selection of preliminary sites was made in the draft, then it is necessary to select the influencing factors for these sites. The site of the treatment facility shall be suitable for the transfer of the waste from the place where the dismantling waste is generated to the treatment facility. In addition, in order for construction to take place, interference with existing facilities and safety should not be affected, and it should not be complicated or narrow during construction. Considering the foundation and accessibility, the construction of the facility should be economical, and the final dismantling of the facility should also be easy. In order to determine one final preferred plan with three hypothetical locations and five influencing factors, there will be complex aspects and it will be difficult to maintain consistency as the evaluation between each factor progresses. Therefore, we introduce the Analytic Hierarchical Process (AHP) methodology to perform pairwise comparison between factors to derive an optimal plan. One optimal plan was selected by evaluating the three virtual places and five factors of consideration presented in this study. Given the complexity and consistency of multiple influencing factors present and prioritizing them, AHP tools help users make decisions easier by providing simple and useful features. Above all, it will be most important to secure sufficient grounds for pairwise comparison between influencing factors and conduct an evaluation based on this.

Kori Unit 1 is about 600MW Pressurized Light Water Reactor as WH type. KHNP got an approval for construction and operation of Kori unit 1 on May 31, 1972 and started commercial operation from Apr. 29, 1987. And then, it was decided to permanently suspend it on Jun. 18, 2017 after 40 years of commercial operation. The Nuclear Safety Act stipulates that if a commercial nuclear power plant is permanently suspended, the utility must submit a Final Decommissioning Plan (FDP) within 5 years. So, KHNP, the utility, developed a FDP for Kori Unit 1 and submitted it to the government in May 2021. In South Korea, the FDP is to be prepared in accordance with the relevant notices and consists of 11 major chapters such as (1) Decommissioning Plan Overview, (2) Project management, (3) Status of Site and Environmental, (4) Decommissioning Strategies and Method, (5) Ease of Decom. Design characteristic, (6) Safety Analysis, (7) Radiation Protection, (8) Decontamination and Dismantling, (9) Radioactive Waste Management, (10) Environmental Impact Analysis, (11) Fire Protection and (12, 13) Etc., References and Glossary. KHNP has prepared a strategy and system consisting of three areas such as R&D, Engineering and licensing document development to prepare the final decommissioning plan for Kori Unit 1. The promotion system for the preparation of the FDP for Kori Unit 1 is composed of Engineering (HAS Characterization, Dismantling Safety Evaluation, Radiological Environmental Report, Radioactive Waste Treatment and Facility Construction), R&D(KHNP R&D Results such as Process/Work Package /Cost Estimation, Safety Analysis, Contamination and Exposure, Guide for Detailed Characteristic, Site Safety Analysis, RV & RVI Dismantling Process, etc.), Overseas case lessons learned(Taiwan unit 1 NPP FDP and Spain Zorita NPP FDP analysis) and Development of Licensing Document. KHNP completed the initial completion of the Final Decommissioning Plan for Kori Unit 1 in March 2020 and carried out collecting residents’ opinions through public hearings. And then, KHNP supplemented the results of the residents’ opinions and applied for license to the Nuclear Safety and Security Commission in May, 2021. Now, KHNP are responding to the FDP licensing review.

In nuclear decommissioning projects, past and present projects in the world, an important area to be managed is waste management. The management of waste should be done with various aspects of consideration in mind from the moment it occurs from the cutting and dismantling of Systems, Structures, and Components (SSCs). Therefore, this study aims to discuss the disposition considerations for the efficient management of low and very low level waste that is expected to be generated in large quantities and to examine its applicability to domestic nuclear facilities. As for waste management, radioactive wastes begin to be generated when SSCs are dismantled, so waste management should be carried out as a result of dismantling activities. In addition, the waste is stored in the final disposal container and transferred to the storage or disposable facilities. In order to store in the final disposal container or transfer container, it will have to be classified by radioactive level. From the perspective of waste classification, wastes below the low level can be divided into low levels, very low levels, and clearance in Korea. Therefore, as an important point of waste management, when SSCs are dismantled, the work process must be carried out until the final disposal in accordance with the disposition strategy based on the waste classification. As a disposition strategy, the process presented by the IAEA can be referred. The materials to be dismantled for the first time are largely divided into radioactive and suspected radioactive materials. After going through the dismantling process, three criteria are considered to satisfy the disposition option: unconditional release criterion, conditional criterion, and radioactive waste. The types of waste below the final low level are classified into two types as unconditional, two types as conditional, and low and very low levels. In this study, six disposition options are reviewed, including unconditioned reuse and disposal, conditional reuse and disposal, and disposal of VLLW and VLW. Options for radioactive waste may be subject to operational criteria and may need to be supplemented in terms of the acceptance criteria in the repository. In the case of the conditional option, the clearance criterion can be applied, but considering the decommissioning characteristics, it is an option that can be used for nuclear industry, and specific reuse scenarios should be supplemented through discussions with the regulatory agency. In addition, it seems that the unconditional option needs to establish a corresponding criterion.