Technical Paper http://dx.doi.org/10.7733/jnfcwt.2015.13.3.

187

Chemical Decontamination Design for NPP Decommissioning

and Considerations on its Methodology
원전해체를 위한 화학제염 설계 및 그 방법론에 대한 고려사항

Geun Young Park and Chang-Lak Kim*

KEPCO International Nuclear Graduate School, 658-91 Haemaji-ro, Seosaeng-myeon, Ulju-gun, Ulsan, Republic of Korea

박근영, 김창락*
한국전력국제원자력대학원대학교, 울산광역시 울주군 서생면 해맞이로 658-91

(Received February 16, 2015 / Revised April 2, 2015 / Approved May 11, 2015)

Decontamination is one of the crucial technologies that are applied during the decommissioning process of nuclear facilities
to secure the safety of workers and to minimize the quantity of radioactive waste. Decontamination removes radionuclides
on the surface of contaminated metal. Compared with decontamination for operational nuclear facilities, decontamination
for nuclear power plants that are being decommissioned needs to remove the more and thicker surface using more aggres-
sive agents or specially developed equipment. This paper analyzed the factors to be considered before planning the decon-
tamination, representative decontamination technologies, and their application procedure,etc .

Keywords: Decontamination, Design, Methodology, Decommissioning, Criteria

*Corresponding Author.
Chang-Lak Kim, KEPCO International Nuclear Graduate School, E-mail: clkim@kings.ac.kr, Tel: +82-52-712-7333

ORCID
Geun Young Park http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6587-6471 Chang-Lak Kim http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6931-9541

This is an Open-Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/
by-nc/3.0) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited

JNFCWT Vol.13 No.3 pp.187-199, September 2015 ISSN2287-5182(Online) ISSN1738-1894(Print) 187

Geun Young Park et al. : Chemical Decontamination Design for NPP Decommissioning and Considerations on its Methodology
원전해체시장이 본격적으로 도래함에 따라 그에 따른 기술연구가 부각되고 있다. 그러한 기술 중 방사선 제염은 직접적인
원전해체 과정 중 가장 초반에 행해지는 작업으로 현장 근로자의 안전확보 및 폐기물 양 감소를 위해 수행되는 중요한 작업
이다. 제염을 통해 폐기물 표면에 존재하는 방사선 물질을 제거하게 되는데 해체에 적용되는 제염기술은 보다 강한 매개체
를 사용하거나 개선된 설비를 활용하여 표면층 제거 정도가 일반적인 제염보다 훨씬 크다. 따라서 제염 계획 수립시 다양
한 관점에서 분석 방법이 필요하다. 본 연구에서는 제염기술 선정을 위해 고려해야 할 요인을 설명하였으며, 대표적인 제염
기술 사례 분석을 통해 실제 기술 수행을 위해 원전 설비 내 제염 아이템 선정 및 제염 장비 활용을 위해 검토해야 할 사항
을 제시하였다.
중심단어: 제염, 설계, 방법론, 해체, 제염기준
1. Introduction
The decontamination should be essentially considered
before starting decommissioning of nuclear facilities due
to the risk of radiation exposure to the decommissioning
workers. But decontamination may not be the best way de-
pending on the case. The benefits of the decontamination
should be evaluated with various aspects. In this paper, cri-
teria and main consideration to plan the decontamination
are suggested.
Decontamination is defined as the removal of contami-
nation from surfaces of facilities or equipment by washing,
heating, chemical or electrochemical action, mechanical
cleaning, or other techniques. The objectives of decontami-
nation are:
● to reduce the risk of radiation exposure;
● to restore equipment and materials;
● to reduce the volume of radioactive waste requiring
storage and disposal;
● to restore the site and facility;
● to remove loose radioactive contaminants and fix the
remaining contamination in place in a protective stor-
age or permanent disposal work activities;
● to reduce the magnitude of the residual radioactive
source in a protective storage mode for public health
and safety reasons; and
● to reduce the protective storage period or to minimize
188
long-term monitoring and surveillance requirements.
However, as a result of decontamination, secondary
waste would be generated. The higher DF is demanded, the
more waste is generated. Waste generation is directly re-
lated to cost and benefit of working efficiency. On the other
hand, leaving adherent contamination within pipes and
components in a dispersed form on the internal metal sur-
faces can be a good method to reduce both in occupational
exposure and cost by simply removing the contaminated
system and its components and only performing packaging
activities.
A decontamination project may also require a facility
capable of treating secondary waste from decontamination.
The concentrated waste, representing a more significant ra-
diation source, must be solidified and shipped for disposal
in licensed disposal facilities. The optimal waste reduc-
tion configuration must be defined after an economic as-
sessment of treatment versus transportation/disposal costs.
Each of these additional activities may increase:
● occupational exposure rates;
● the potential for a release; and
● the uptake of radioactive material.
These could result in higher doses than those received
from removing, packaging and shipping the contaminated
system without extensive decontamination. Resolution of
JNFCWT Vol.13 No.3 pp.187-199, September 2015
 Geun Young Park et al. : Chemical Decontamination Design for NPP Decommissioning and Considerations on its Methodology

this question depends on specific facts, such as the expo-
sure rate of the gamma-emitting contamination, the con-
tamination level, and the effectiveness of the containing
component and piping in reducing radiation fields in the
work area.
Decontamination is performed to reduce the risk of
radiation exposure to the public and workers. In con-
trast with normal decontamination that is performed dur-
ing operation, the decontamination process for decom-
missioning of NPP(Nuclear Power Plant) requires high
DF(Decontamination Factor) to keep the acceptance level
of the waste disposed. Table 1 shows the typical contami-
nation status according to the surface depth and DF when
the layers are removed.
Typical film thicknesses on PWR(Pressurized Water
Reactor) stainless steel surfaces are 2-3 μm while those on
Inconel surfaces are closer to 1-2 μm. This is partly due to
the lower general corrosion rate of Inconel and partly due
to the higher velocities over the Inconel surfaces, which
tend to limit deposition. Hydrodynamic conditions at the
surface are not conducive to particles settling and adhering
to the surface. The majority of these films are grown-on
oxide. Deposited oxide accounts for <25% of the film. The
densities of these films are in the range 3.0-5.0 g/cm³ with
4.0 being a typical average. This is about 75% of the theo-
retical density of 5.2 g/cm³[1].
Another method that is commonly used to express film
thickness is the specific weight, i.e., mg/cm². In many cases,
this is a more practical unit of measure since it is obtained
directly by scraping or descaling a known area of pipe or
fuel. It does not depend upon knowledge of the film thick-
ness and density, both of which require sophisticated labo-
ratory techniques to measure. The specific weight is simply
the product of the thickness and density, with the appropri-
ate corrections for units. For the stainless steel film referred
to above, the specific weight is:
For the Inconel film, the specific weight is 0.8 mg/
cm²[2].
2. Decontamination Evaluation
2.1 Evaluation Criteria

Table 1. Contaminated Layers Status and DF required [1] Various aspects of criteria about the decontamination
Layers Depth Materials DF should be considered before implementing the practical de-
contamination technique[3].
Outer layer 1 - 5 μm Fe2O3, Iron rich 1~5
● Radiological Safety
Intermediate layer FeCr2O4, Cr2O3,
2 - 10 μm 5 ~ 50 The radiological safety aspects of a particular cleaning
(CRUD) Chromium rich
Base alloy 5 - 30 μm Fe, Cr, Ni 50 ~ 10,000 technique can greatly influence its region for use.
● Waste Generation
Table 2. Typical Deposit Parameters for general NPPs [2] Total volume of the waste produced during a decontam-
Deposit Deposit Density Specific Weight ination operation must be reduced and properly packaged
Reactor Type
Thickness(μm) (g/cm³) (mg/cm²) for storage, transport and disposal. The radioactive waste
PWR -Pipe 3 4 1.2 that is removed from the contaminated surfaces can be ex-
-SG 2 4 0.8
panded in volume by the decontamination agent during the
BWR -Pipe 10 3.5 3.5
-HX 50 3.5 17.5 decontamination process. Any increase in the total volume
CANDU -Pipe 75 4 30 of resultant radioactive waste increases the cost of disposal.
-SG 25 4 10 The total amount of secondary generated high radioactive

JNFCWT Vol.13 No.3 pp.187-199, September 2015 189

Geun Young Park et al. : Chemical Decontamination Design for NPP Decommissioning and Considerations on its Methodology
waste resulting from decontamination is very important and
has a high weighting factor in determining a suitable de-
contamination method.
● Need for Disassembly
Some of the components to be decontaminated would
have to be disassembled to some degree to provide access
to the interior surfaces. Both the degree of disassembly
required and the relative difficulty of disassembly would
impact the applicability of a particular decontamination
technique. The need for disassembly, along with waste
generation, has very high weighting factor in considering
a proper technique.
● Accessibility
Since the radioactive material will generally be on the
inside of the reactor coolant system, the area to be decon-
taminated must be accessible. Depending upon the tech-
nique considered one or more openings may be required to
decontaminate the system at hand.
● Size of Item
For off-system decontamination, an item that is too large to
fit off-system decontamination equipment, e.g. a tank, must
be sectioned. The size of the component becomes then an
important factor to be considered.
● Capital Cost
The initial cost of the decontamination equipment and
supporting systems, in addition to the expected lifetime of
that equipment, can be important factors in the selection of
an appropriate decontamination method. The capital cost
would include the total cost of all the necessary equipment,
amortized over the expected useful lifetime.
● Operating Cost
This criterion includes labor cost plus the cost of con-
sumable supplies. A labor intensive decontamination tech-
nique, and/or one which requires a large amount of expen-
sive material would be unfavorable. It should be noted that
the operating cost for decontamination can be quite differ-
ent from the cost of ordinary industrial cleaning. The costs
associated with personnel shielding and waste disposal
need to be added considerably to the cost that would result
190
from an application of the same technique to a nonnuclear
cleaning project.
● Requalification
The feasibility of reusing a component/system after de-
contamination can be affected by a number of different fac-
tors. One is the cost of decontamination and requalification
compared with the cost of replacement. Another factor is
the effect of access or sectioning operations that require
excessive repair work and requalification tests. Some de-
contamination techniques result in the removal of a signifi-
cant amount of metal from the surface being cleaned. Such
removal might affect the reusability of the item. The sur-
face quality after cleaning is also important, since a rough
surface is much more subject to rapid recontamination. All
of these factors can affect requalification.
● Corrosiveness
This refers to the tendency to corrode a surface as a re-
sult of the reaction between the decontamination agent and
the item being cleaned, both during the decontamination
and as a residual effect later on.
● Industrial Safety
This criterion relates to the inherent safety character-
istics of the decontamination technique. In deciding on a
proper decontamination technique, the level of safety pre-
cautions and their effects on the costs need to be considered.
2.2 Factors Influencing Cost
A major consideration in deciding whether or not to
decontaminate RCS(Reactor Coolant System) or its sub-
system is the economical value the exercise. Not only eco-
nomical cost but also benefit incurred from applying de-
contamination should be considered. So, parameters that
can be a standard to evaluate benefit/cost are summarized
in this section.
2.2.1 Benefit Parameters
● Exposure Avoided
The exposure that would be incurred without the
JNFCWT Vol.13 No.3 pp.187-199, September 2015
 Geun Young Park et al. : Chemical Decontamination Design for NPP Decommissioning and Considerations on its Methodology

decontamination can be estimated by multiplying the radia- ● In-house Costs

tion exposure taken for each task by DF. Subtracting from This parameter means costs in supporting the decontam-
this estimated value the value of the actually incurred radia- ination activities such as staff training and monitoring. It
tion exposure gives the exposure avoided.[4] also include the cost of any supplies provided by the utility.
● Reduced Critical Path Time ● Critical Path Time
The time for inspection, maintenance and repair is re- Labor charge and rental fee for equipments is propor-
duced by applying decontamination. The radiation expo- tional to the working time. The expense can be saved as
sure risk is lowered as much as the working time reduced. much as time saved.
● Residual Benefits ● Exposure Incurred
This benefit parameter is not related with decontami- Although a majority of radioactivity is reduced by de-
nation for a decommissioning project. In operational NPP, contamination, small radiation exposure can not be avoid-
there is a problem about recontamination which is affected ed. A proper economical compensation should be paid ac-
by deposit containing radioactivity. The recontamination cording to the potential risk and the degree of damage.
tends to result from deposit rather than fuels.
● Intangible Benefits
There are real benefits to a decontamination which are 3. Decontamination Planning
difficult or impossible to evaluate. The risk level and secu-
rity level can be lowered by reducing the risk of radiation 3.1 Introduction of Decontamination Technol-
exposure. Due to the lowered risk level, normal workers ogies
and general tools can be put in the workplace where spe-
cial workers or special tools should have been put before As shown in Table 3, there are various types of de-
decontamination. contamination depending on objectives and contaminated
items. But only chemical decontamination for RCS and
2.2.2 Cost Parameters
● Vendors Charges Table 3. Decontamination for Decommissioning [5]
This item is the total charge by the decontamination chemical Method
Pipe Line System
vendor for performing decontamination. It includes trans- Mechanical Method
portation of equipment, installation and removal, supply Decontamination before Dismantling
Hydro Jet
- Reduction of Occupational Exposure
of chemicals and ion exchange resins, performance of de-
Pool, Tank Blast
contamination and related documentation. Waste manage-
Strippable Coating
ment should be handled separately even if the same vendor
Electropolishing
handled it[4].
Chemical Immersion
● Waste Management and Disposal Costs Decontamination after Dismantling
This cost parameter is the most important parameter - Recycle of Contaminated Metal Pipes, Components Blast
- Reduction of Radioactive Waste
determining economical efficiency. This item covers waste Ultrasonic Wave

treatment cost for disposal (drying or solidification of spent Gel Method

resin as well as any other volume reduction methods ap- Decontamination of Building Mechanical
- Unconditional Release of Building Concrete Surface
plied), waste packaging cost (liners or high integrity con- -Reduction of Radioactive Concrete Thermal Stress
tainers), transportation cost to repository, and disposal cost. Waste

JNFCWT Vol.13 No.3 pp.187-199, September 2015 191

Geun Young Park et al. : Chemical Decontamination Design for NPP Decommissioning and Considerations on its Methodology
Table 4. Summary of EPRI DFD
Title
(i) Oxidation(2~4hours)
Process (ii) Reduction(12hours)
(iii) Transition(2~4hours)
Using Fluoroboric Acid(0.08%) as the base solvent
Feature Reagent dilute and chemical costs low
Suitable for cleanup on IX(Ion Exchange) resin
1) Big Rock Point : 70 MWe BWR, 37 yrs operation
- decon' volume(area) : 32,000 gallons (10,764 ft²)
- period : 1st(9 days for 6 cycles), 2nd(3 days for one cycle)
- 410 curies of gamma nuclides removed (DF 27)
Experience 2) Maine Yankee : 825 MWe PWR
- Bypassing large components (SG, Reactor)
- period : 1st(8 days for 11 cycles), 2nd(8 days for 13 cycles)
- liquid waste generated : 625 ft³
- 103 curies of gamma nuclides removed (DF 31.5)
its auxiliary system would be handled in this paper, since
chemical decontamination is already proven by experienc-
es and has economical and beneficial advantages compared
with other techniques.
Chemical decontamination uses concentrated or dilute
chemical reagents in contact with the contaminated item,
to dissolve the contamination layer covering base metal. In
most cases, required decontamination level would be ob-
tained by repeating the process as long as necessary. In mild
chemical decontamination process which has low DF, the
process should be non-destructive to the base metal and is
generally used for operating facilities. But aggressive chemi-
cal decontamination requires high DF since it should remove
even some of base metal to mitigate radiation exposure.
In case of decontamination for decommissioning of
NPPs, DF should be high to reduce the radioactivity of
waste below the acceptance level of disposal. While a DF
of 10 is generally used for operating plants, a DF of 100
or more is suitable for decommissioning projects. In this
section, techniques of high DF are described[6] and some
factors influencing management are proposed.
Among chemical decontamination techniques, there
are two proven aggressive decontamination techniques:
DFD(Decontamination For Decommissioning) applied to
192
EPRI DFD
Adding ~200 ppm KMnO4
Adding an excess of oxalic acid
Returning to the base solvent
Maine Yankee NPP and CORD D UV(Chemical Oxidation
Reduction Decontamination_ Decommissioning_Ultra Vi-
olet) to Connecticut Yankee NPP.
Tables 4 and 5 show examples of the decontamination
technology which are suitable for permanent shut-down of
NPP. DFD developed by EPRI(Electric Power Research
Institute) is the more aggressive process than operation-
al-type such as LOMI(Low Oxidation-state Metal Iron),
CAN-DEREM(Canadian Decontamination and Remedia-
tion process) and CITROX(Citric Oxide acid process) with
>1,000 DF [6].
Recently, the EPRI DFDX process that is more efficient
and economic technology was developed from DFD. This
technology includes processing of radioactive solution us-
ing electrochemical ion exchange to produce a minimal
metallic waste.
Siemens developed CORD for decontamination of
operational facilities. According to the need of high DF,
CORD D UV was developed from the CORD for perma-
nent shut-down NPP[6].
3.2 Components Volume
For fluid systems evaluations, it is necessary to identify
JNFCWT Vol.13 No.3 pp.187-199, September 2015
 Geun Young Park et al. : Chemical Decontamination Design for NPP Decommissioning and Considerations on its Methodology
Table 5. Summary of CORD D UV
Title
(i) Oxidation
(ii) Reduction
Process
(iii) Decontamination
(iv) Decomposition
No need to cleanup or drain system between steps
Feature
Shorter time & Less waste
Connecticut Yankee (Haddem Neck) : 619 MWe PWR
- Bypassing large components (SG, Reactor)
Experience - Existing equipments in NPP were used
- Period : 28 days for two cycles (actually 9 days)
- Liquid waste generated : 465 ft³
Table 6. Comparison of EPRI DFD and CORD D UV[6]
EPRI DFD
Advantage
- Reagent dilute and chemical costs low
- Suitable for cleanup on IX resin
- No reagent clean-up between steps
- Fluoroboric acid continuously recycled
- Process chemistry progressively dissolves base metal
- Suitable for use in fuel-out full system decontamination of a
permanently shut-down plant
- Metal can be cleaned to free release limits
Disadvantage
- The increasing risk from using strong acid as base solvent
- More waste compared with CORD D UV
and quantify the volumes of those systems. Volume can be
used as a quantity standard of reagent that is consumed to
decontaminate. RCS, RHRS(Residual Heal Removal Sys-
tem), CVCS(Chemical Volume and Control System), and
DPS(Decontamination Processing System) would be in-
cluded in decontamination items[7].
● RCS volume
If some jumpers like a nozzle dam are utilized to bypass
large components, the volume is considerably reduced. Just,
pipelines, pressurizer, and RCP(Reactor Cooling/Coolant
Pump) need to be considered and analyzed except a reactor
and steam generators. According to a plan, whole RCP can
be involved in decontamination project or just a part of it
can be used. Steam generator can also be considered in the
JNFCWT Vol.13 No.3 pp.187-199, September 2015
CORD D UV
Adding 50~300 ppm permanganic acid(HMnO4)
Adding 550 ppm oxalic acid
Adding 1,500 ppm oxalic acid
Removal of oxalic acid (UV)
CORD D UV
Advantage
- Faster and more efficient than general decontamination
- Less waste since lower concentration, no K+, and no additives such as
NaOH or HNO3
- Can be used in all types of water-cooled reactors
- Metal can be cleaned to free release limits, if required
- UV light reduces system redox potential and causes base metal
corrosion resulting in much higher DFs
Disadvantage
- Lower performance compared with DFD
- Difficult to change path of fluids
same way. The volume of whole or a part of tubes can be
used, or it can be omitted by the plan.
● CVCS volume
CVCS would be contaminated by radionuclides during
operation period. But, depending on the decontamination
plan or policy, the volume is different. There are many op-
tions like whether pumps or pre-filters are included or not.
If pumps are included in the decontamination project, some
sealing tool are required to prevent leakage. And, in case of
pre-filters, the inner media should be removed to prevent
potential pressure drop.
● RHRS volume
RHRS connected directly with RCS is operated to re-
move decay heat during operation. So, crud accumulation
193
Geun Young Park et al. : Chemical Decontamination Design for NPP Decommissioning and Considerations on its Methodology
occurring radiation risk are generated on the inner surface
of components.
● Processing system volume
During decontamination process, additional decontam-
ination equipments should be assembled with RCS. So, its
volume also has to be included in the total volume. There
are various equipments depending on the applied technolo-
gy. But, generally, piping and demineralizers take up much
portion in the volume of DPS(Decontamination Process
System).
3.3 Assembly of DPS
Depending on the technology and plan, connection lo-
cation of DPS is different. But many cases showed that the
area around RHRS is a suitable location to assemble DPS.
As shown in Fig. 1, 4 options on RHRS were considered for
decontamination of operational NPP [7].
There are several differences between decontamination
for decommissioning and decontamination for operational
facility. Therefore effect of the location of DPS in case of
decontamination for decommissioning also needs to be
studied. For example, the components and their structure
after a discharge of DPS have an effect on the pressure
drop and the temperature change. Furthermore there are
high risk of leakage compared with decontaminating op-
Fig. 1. DPS to RHRS Tie-in Options in an Evaluation of Indian Point 2 [7].
194
erational facilities since strong acid reagent would be used
for the decommissioning project. So, many bypass tools or
sealing tools would be required to prevent accidents. Es-
pecially, pumps need to be considered carefully because of
gap between rotating parts and fixed parts.
But the area around RHRS is not always a right answer.
As shown in Fig. 3 and 4 in case of Maine Yankee NPP, the
jumpers used for bypassing tubes of steam generators were
used for connection with DPS. In accordance with the ap-
plication and cycles, the assembly location of another inlet
pipe were changed (App 1: CVCS inlet, App 2: drain/fill
line on the Hot/Cold legs). Then, as shown in Fig. 5 in case
of Connecticut Yankee NPP, an inlet pipe of DPS was con-
nected with a pressurizer and the discharge line was con-
nected with discharge line of RHRS.
4. Decontamination Methodology
4.1 Decontamination Process
If preparation of technologies and related procedures
were finished, these would be applied to the practical field-
work. Fig. 2 shows the general task flow of the decontami-
nation. Combination of the chemical performance and the
number of cycles result in DF eventually. In other words,
JNFCWT Vol.13 No.3 pp.187-199, September 2015
 Geun Young Park et al. : Chemical Decontamination Design for NPP Decommissioning and Considerations on its Methodology

although the performance of reagent is not good, desired There are many options for designing of a decontami-
DF can be accomplished by repeating decontamination nation process. The first task is determining whether large
process. However, in that case, secondary waste generation components is included in decontamination list. As men-
as well as decontamination time would increase. Eventu- tioned earlier, trying to reduce radioactivity to clearance
ally, it is a matter of efficiency and cost. level is inefficient since the volume of secondary waste
Two decontamination experiences from USA are ana- would be increased. Especially, decontaminating entire
lyzed to consider the Korean NPPs decontamination in the reactor vessel components is not a proper decision since
future. Major parameters of the technologies are showed a reactor consist of many components which have high
in Table 7. radioactivity. And, including steam generator tubes in the
decontamination list may not have much advantage since
4.1.1 Large Components only outer about 10 rows contribute the external radiation
exposure. The main objective of decontamination before
Install & Test Receipt of Vendor dismantling is making a safe place to protect the workers
Nozzle Dam Equipment
who would be working in the primary side. To reduce radio-
Setup & Test active waste, additional decontamination after dismantling
Equipments
would be needed like electrochemical polishing, ultrasonic
Prepare & Heatup
Plant Systems
wave, chemical immersion method and so on.

Perform Repeat process to

Decontamination get proper results 4.1.2 Flow Path of Chemicals
Measurement If large components are excluded from decontaminated
Concentration
items, nozzle dams have to be installed to connect hot legs
Flushing & Dismantle devices
Final cleanup & Nozzle Dam and cold legs in RPV(Reactor Pressure Vessel) at first. And,
Fig. 2. Process Flow of Decontamination.

Table 7. Major Parameters of Decontamination Process[6]

Main Yankee NPP Connecticut Yankee NPP
Parameter
EPRI DFD Siemens CORD
No. of cycles 11/13 2
Total processing time
480 610
(Days)
Net processing time
202 / 193 238
(Days)
Final clean 4 weeks 5 weeks

Solvent flow 300 / 650 gpm 1,800 gpm

Average contact DF 31.5 15.9

Metal removed 677 lbs 182 lbs

Base metal penetration 12 / 14 μm 0.3 μm

Total IX resin waste 625 ft³ 465 ft³ Fig. 3. Flow Path of Application 1 in Maine Yankee NPP [8].

JNFCWT Vol.13 No.3 pp.187-199, September 2015 195

Geun Young Park et al. : Chemical Decontamination Design for NPP Decommissioning and Considerations on its Methodology
jumper type equipments can be assembled under steam
generator to bypass tubes, or a portion of tubes can be used
as passages flowing reagent. Fig. 3 and 4 show the flow
path of Maine Yankee NPP. Jumpers were assembled under
steam generator. The fluid was entered through the pipe-
line interconnected with the loop #3 jumper and discharged
from other pipeline of loop #2 jumper. During application
1, RCS and CVCS were decontaminated as shown in Fig. 3.
vendor-supplied equipments. This equipments consist of a
Fig. 4. Flow Path of Application 2A in Maine Yankee NPP [8].
Fig. 5. Flow Path of RCS Full Loop in Connecticut Yankee NPP [9].
196
During application 2, RCS and RHRS were decontami-
nated as shown in Fig. 4. One of inlet lines is changed from
CVCS line to drain/fill line of loop #1 between hot-leg and
cold-leg.
In decontamination of Connecticut Yankee NPP, large
components were not included in the decontamination list
in comparison with the Maine Yankee case. A portion of
tubes(about 20%) was used to bypass rest of tubes in steam
generators. As shown in Fig. 5, there is no additional by-
pass equipments on/under steam generators.
Decontamination equpments would be set up with RCS
systems. Existing equipments in NPP can be used with the
circulating pump, heater, filter, chemical injection system,
restoration system(ion exchange system in EPRI DFD and
UV burning system in CORD D UV) and the connecting
tools like pipes and hoses.
Unlike the Maine Yankee NPP case that existing equip-
ments in the NPP were not utilized for decontamination, a
combination of existing plant equipment as well as tem-
porary equipment external to the station was used for de-
contamination of Connecticut Yankee NPP. An RHR pump,
the pressurizer heaters, and the plant demineralizers in the
plant were used to support decontamination operations. It
may mean a single system should be applied to utilize ex-
isting equipments since changing pipelines by application
is difficult. As shown in Fig. 5, an inlet pipeline is connect-
ed with a pressurzier and a discharge line is connected with
the RHRS discharge line to utilize components involved in
each system.
Tables 8 and 9 show the decontamination schedule of
Maine Yankee NPP and Connecticut Yankee NPP[6]. Com-
pared with the Maine Yankee case, more time was spent for
decontamination of Connecticut Yankee NPP due to treat-
ing failed fuel. Particles of fuels were remained bottom
the reactor and crevices on the surface of components. So,
those had a negative impact like delaying working time on
the process. If there is no delay factor, pure decontamination
time is assumed approximately from two weeks to 20 days.
JNFCWT Vol.13 No.3 pp.187-199, September 2015
 Geun Young Park et al. : Chemical Decontamination Design for NPP Decommissioning and Considerations on its Methodology

It is required to get the proper value of the fluid velocity. means that velocity is in inverse proportion to the number
According to the velocity, the status of dead space isolating of cycles. So, the optimum value should be studied.
the fluid is different. And, the velocity effects on the num- The location of equipments monitoring radioactivity
ber of decontamination cycles since low flow areas appear should also be considered in details since MnO2 is accumu-
to have lower DF. Adequate motive force should be avail- lated the bottom of the components and the dead pipeline.
able to ensure good flow to all locations. But, if it is too fast, MnO2 is a well-known getter for Co-60. So, the location
the decontamination time would be reduced but the risk of of detectors is one of important factors for radiation safety.
leakage is higher and the number of cycles is increased. It
4.2 Decontamination Waste
Table 8. Decontamination Schedule of Maine Yankee NPP[6]
Step Project
Description of process Start End Duration Duration
Waste are produced from ion exchange equipments
(Days) (Days) that are used to remove metals from deposit dissolution
Receipt of equipment 1/26/98 2/2/98 8 8 and base metal corrosion. Cation resin is used to remove
Setup & Test tools 1/27/98 2/10/98 15 16 contaminants involved in water during the overall decon-
tamination process. And, anion resin removes the chemical
Install Nozzle Dams 2/3/98 2/7/98 4 16
to clean water after the decontamination and to reduce the
1st Prepare systems 2/10/98 2/14/98 4 20
concentration of boron before the decontamination.
Perform 1st App. 2/14/98 2/23/98 8.5 28.5 Cation resin may be recharged to avoid generating
2nd Prepare systems 2/23/98 2/26/98 3.5 32 GTCC(Greater than class C) waste due to its TRU(Transuranic)
Perform 2nd App. 2/27/98 3/6/98 7.5 39.5 loading even if the resin is spent less than half. It is important
to keep the decontamination waste as LLW class that can be
Final Clean-up 3/6/98 4/3/98 27.5 67
accepted in near surface disposal facility.

Table 9. Decontamination Schedule of Connecticut Yankee NPP[6]

Step Project
Description of process Start End Duration Duration 5. C
 urrent State of Decontamination Tech-
(Days) (Days) nology in Korea
Install Nozzle Dam 5/29/98 6/25/98 27 27

Receipt of equipment 6/17/98 6/30/98 13 32 KAERI(Korea Atomic Energy Research Institute) had
Setup & Test tools 6/19/98 7/6/98 17 36 developed oxidation-reduction decontamination technolo-
gies, such as Regenerative LOMI Process, for maintenance
1st Prepare systems 7/7/98 7/25/98 18 57
during the operation of nuclear facilities. These technolo-
Perform 1st Cycle 7/26/98 8/8/98 13 71
gies had been applied successfully to the decontamination
2nd Prepare systems 8/8/98 8/10/98 2 73 of spent fuel shipping casks and RCP valves. Also elec-
Perform 2nd Cycle 8/10/98 8/21/98 11 84 trochemical and chemical decontamination processes using
Final Clean-up 8/21/98 9/28/98 38 122 highly concentrated chemical solutions were proven to be
effective for decontamination of radioactive metal scraps
Dismantle Equipment 8/24/98 9/3/98 10
for recycling[10].
Equipment off site 9/22/98 9/23/98 2
Recently, KAERI has also developed several decon-
Nozzle Dam removed 10/20/98 10/23/98 3 tamination technologies such as PFC (perfluorocarbon)

JNFCWT Vol.13 No.3 pp.187-199, September 2015 197

Geun Young Park et al. : Chemical Decontamination Design for NPP Decommissioning and Considerations on its Methodology
decontamination technology and CO2 pellet blasting de-
contamination technology, which were proven to be effec-
tive for decontamination of loosely contaminated particu-
lates. Therefore, essential decontamination technologies
for decommissioning have been developed. However, the
system decontamination for decommissioning of NPPs has
not been fully developed yet in Korea.
6. Conclusions
There are two objectives of decontamination for de-
commissioning. The first one is to reduce risk of radiation
exposure of workers and the public. The decontamination
for this objective is applied before dismantling. The sec-
ond objective is reducing waste generation through reuse
or recycling. The decontamination of this case is applied
after dismantling. These two kinds of decontamination can
be diversely progressed according to the conditions of in-
dividual NPP.
Various full system decontamination technologies such
as LOMI, CANDEREM, CORD, and DFD have been
applied in nuclear facilities. It is possible to apply these
technologies to the NPP decommissioning project since
the desired DF can be obtained by repeating decontamina-
Fig. 6. Decontamination Technologies under study in Korea(KAERI) [10].
198
tion cycles. But the desired DF is not the only value that
should be considered. Secondary waste generation contain-
ing highly concentrated radioactivity needs to be controlled
because it causes additional disposal concern, manage-
ment costs, risk of secondary radiation exposure and so on.
Highly concentrated reagents are used in these technologies
since not only contaminated layer on the surface of compo-
nents but also some of the base metal should be removed to
get high DF. From the analysis of EPRI DFD and CORD D
UV decontamination technologies, key considerations for
decontamination planning are derived as follows:
1) RCS, CVCS, RHRS and their auxiliary pipelines are
to be included in the decontamination list.
2) Excluding large components is favorable because
the decontamination efficiency is low economically and
environmentally.
3) How to bypass the large components?
- Reactor: Using a nozzle dam that connected hot legs
and cold legs
- Steam generator: A type of jumper assembles to
manways under the steam generators, or a portion
of tubes can be used to bypass.
4) Whether existing equipments for the decontamina-
tion will be used?
- Using existing equipments is favorable to the single-
application-decontamination method.
5) The suitable location to connect DPS to the RCS
- If existing equipments are used, selecting connec-
tion place of DPS is constrained by the location of
existing equipments such as demineralizers, pumps
and heaters.
- If temporary equipments from vendors are used, the
inlet and discharge pipelines can be changed by the
application or the situation.
6) Sometimes particles containing high radioactivity
are stuck in crevices or are remained on the bottom of the
large components. These materials have an negative effect
on efficiency of the decontamination.
Most of chemical and electrochemical processes have
JNFCWT Vol.13 No.3 pp.187-199, September 2015
 Geun Young Park et al. : Chemical Decontamination Design for NPP Decommissioning and Considerations on its Methodology

been effective in decontaminating reactor components to
free release limits. However this work should be performed
in fixed-base center so that the material is free-released. In
many overseas cases, this is more cost effective than near
surface disposal of the contaminated components. After re-
moval of the bulk of radioactivity through a full system
decontamination at NPP site, the rest of radioactivity would
be removed in the fixed-base facility to free release lim-
its. Although the total decontamination is not feasible, the
components may be sent to less expensive disposal facility
for VLLW or LLW class waste.
Acknowledgement
This research was supported by the Nuclear Safety Re-
search Program funded by the Nuclear Safety and Security
Commission (No. 1305009).
Reactor Coolant Systems at Maine Yankee and Con-
necticut Yankee, TR-112092, Electric Power Research
Institute(EPRI) (1999).
[7] P. Miller. PWR Fuel-In Full Reactor Coolant System
Decontamination Qualification, TR-107986, Electric
Power Research Institute(EPRI) (1997).
[8] C. Wood. Maine Yankee Decommissioning Experience
Report, 1011734, Electric Power Research Institute
(EPRI) (2005).
[9] S. Bushart. Connecticut Yankee Decommissioning
Experience Report, Electric Power Research Institute
(EPRI) (2006).
[10] B. Seo. Decontamination & Dismantling Market and
its Development Situation, Korea Atomic Energy Re-
search Institute(KAERI) (2012).

References

[1] L. E. Boing. Decommissioning of Nuclear Facilities/

Decontamination Technologies, International Atomic
Energy Agency(IAEA) (2006).
[2] H. Ocken. Decontamination Handbook, TR-112352,
Electric Power Research Institute(EPRI) (1999).
[3] P. Kinnunen. ANTIOXI - Decontamination Techniques
for Activity Removal in Nuclear Environments, VTT
(2008).
[4] C. J. Wood. Full-system Decontamination of a BWR
Using the LOMI Process, Volume 4 : Full-System De-
contamination Experience and Cost-Benefit Analysis,
TR-100049, Electric Power Research Institute(EPRI)
(1991).
[5] Nuclear Energy Agency(NEA) Task Group, Decontam-
ination Techniques Used in Decommissioning Activi-
ties, NEA (1999).
[6] C. J. Wood. Evaluation of the Decontamination of the

JNFCWT Vol.13 No.3 pp.187-199, September 2015 199