The type of radioactive waste that may occur in the process of nuclear power plant dismantling can be classified into solid, liquid, gas, and mixed waste. The amount of these wastes must be defined in the Final Decommissioning Plan for approval of the licensing. Also, in the case of Metal radioactive waste, it is necessary to calculate the generation amount in order to treat radioactive waste at a Radioactive Waste Treatment Facility (RWTF). Since a large quantity of metal radioactive waste is generated during the decommissioning of a nuclear power plant, the application of a metal melter for reduction is considered. The metal waste is heated to a temperature above the melting point and separated into liquid and gas forms. Nuclides existing on the surface of metal waste vaporize in a melting furnace to become dust or collect in sludge. Nonvolatile nuclides such as Co, Fe and Mn remain in ingot, but other nuclides can be captured and reduced with dust and sludge. And the types of melting furnaces to be applied can be broadly classified into Atmospheric Induction Melter (AIM) and Vacuum Induction Melter (VIM). Therefore, this review intends to compare the two types of metal furnaces to be included in RWTF.

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.