2000: THE YEAR IN REVIEW

Chornobyl nuclear plant: closed down at last

While Ukraine never said explicitly that it would not fulfill its promise to close the Chornobyl nuclear facility if it did not receive the financing needed to mitigate the aftereffects of the nuclear accident, it had played the Chornobyl card well in the last few years. However, in 2000 it came time to finish the deal and complete its end of the bargain.

Once a proud product of Soviet engineering, Chornobyl had come to symbolize the dangers of nuclear power and the fragile nature of technology since the fourth reactor at the nuclear complex exploded at about 1 a.m. on April 26, 1986, hurling tons of nuclear materials and radioactive smoke and dust, first into the atmosphere and then over a wide range of Ukraine, Belarus and northern Europe. While only 31 died in the initial hours that followed the explosion caused by an experiment gone awry, it has affected the health and lives of hundreds of thousands more since then.

The agreement to permanently close the Chornobyl plant came in 1995, when Ukraine and the Group of Seven most industrialized nations signed a memorandum in Ottawa in which Kyiv stated that the complex would go offline forever by the end of 2000.

In return, Kyiv had demanded and received from the G-7 and the international community financial guarantees to cover the costs of permanently decommissioning the three nuclear reactors that were still working, funds to reconstruct the shelter over the destroyed fourth reactor block, and financing to help offset the social costs involved in the afteraffects of the tragedy as well as the actual closing.

In 1998 the United Nations held a fund-raiser, co-chaired by U.S. Vice-President Albert Gore and Ukrainian President Leonid Kuchma, which raised some $300 million of the $758 million projected cost of reconstructing the disintegrating concrete sarcophagus that was hastily constructed in the immediate weeks after the technological catastrophe.

G-7 countries also agreed to build a thermal energy generating plant to run the Chornobyl complex after it was shut down as well as a nuclear fuel reprocessing plant. They said they would cover a portion of the costs of retraining Chornobyl workers and the residents of Slavutych, the city that houses them and their families.

But what Ukraine hadn't received as the millennium year approached was financial support to complete two nuclear reactors in Khmelnytskyi and Rivne to offset the electricity generation that would be lost once the last running reactor at Chornobyl went offline.

There was some concern in the West about whether Ukraine would fulfill its promise in 2000, even as Kyiv continued to clamor for the money. The West already had promised Ukraine that the loan would be forthcoming in the form of a line of credit from the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD), but Ukraine remained unconvinced.

It turned out that the concerns on both sides were unfounded. Even as Kyiv continued to apply pressure on the EBRD to approve the loan, which the financial organization kept withholding as it waited for Ukraine to reform its energy sector and show that the two nuclear reactors would be economically sustainable, it realized that it had to keep its promise in order to maintain relations with the West.

Sensing the timing was right - U.S. Secretary of State Madeleine K. Albright was scheduled in Kyiv in a matter of weeks - the Cabinet of Ministers announced on March 29 that it would close Chornobyl by the end of the year in line with Ukraine's promise to the G-7.

The Ukrainian government announced the formation of an ad hoc committee on closing the facility, which in conjunction with the Ministry of Fuel and Energy was ordered to prepare a plan for the de-commissioning within three months. Another plan for the relocation of employees and their families and on the future of the city of Slavutych needed to be ready within six months.

But the key point of the resolution was the statement that everything hinged on talks with leaders of the G-7 and the European Union to assure Ukraine that it would receive adequate financing to help offset the costs of the project.

"One of the main provisions of the resolution says that the Ukrainian delegation should begin work on reaching clear agreements on the volumes and terms of such funding," said Vice Prime Minister of Energy Yulia Tymoshenko. The specifics, as Ms. Tymoshenko delineated them, included agreement on the construction of alternate facilities and the settlement of social problems that would follow the closing.

During a visit to Kyiv on March 23, however, Charles Frank, first vice-president of the EBRD, told the Ukrainian government not to put too much hope on a decision to support the Khmelnytskyi and Rivne reactors, because the EBRD did not consider them of primary importance to the closure of Chornobyl.

He said a bigger problem for the financing that Ukraine was requesting was to get Ukraine's energy sector working on a cash-payment basis so that the energy facilities, whether hydroelectric or nuclear, could show they were not loss-makers.

Mr. Frank also explained that the two uncompleted nuclear reactors "are far below present safety standards and would not be allowed to run in any European country."

On April 12 British Foreign Secretary Robin Cook announced during a one-day stay in Kyiv that Great Britain would grant Ukraine an additional $16.8 million for the completion of the sarcophagus over reactor No. 4 and to give additional support to complete the Khmelnytskyi and Rivne reactors.

Two days later, it was Secretary of State Albright's turn to travel to Kyiv to discuss the Chornobyl closing, among other matters, and to insist that Kyiv needed to set a date. While President Kuchma insisted that the government committee first needed to lay the groundwork and that Ukraine still needed financing from the West, Ms. Albright said that by setting a specific date Ukraine would psychologically set up a situation that would force the West to act.

She explained that plans for an international donors' conference scheduled for Berlin in the summer and other efforts to support the construction of a sarcophagus over the crippled fourth reactor, as well as aid to Ukraine in developing compensatory energy sources, would be made simpler and more pressing.

On June 5, while U.S. President Clinton was in Kyiv on a short visit, President Kuchma made the announcement at a joint press conference in the Mariinsky Palace. Mr. Clinton responded: "I am very proud and moved to be here today - this is World Environment Day - for this historic announcement by President Kuchma that the final reactor at the Chornobyl nuclear power plant will be shut down and the entire plant closed forever on December 15."

The U.S. president promised $78 million towards construction of the new sarcophagus and an additional $52 million in new programs to aid Ukraine, much of it in energy-related initiatives.

As the various international leaders visiting Ukraine continued to pledge additional money, Ukraine's list of financial requirements was becoming clearer. Ukraine had determined that it would need some $500 million for decommissioning the Chornobyl facility; $400 million for safety-related ecological programs, as well as funds for the retraining and relocation of Chornobyl workers. Also, it would require $758 million to reconstruct the sarcophagus. Finally, it would require $100 million for fossil fuel energy supplies until compensatory nuclear energy sources could be developed, as well as the long-delayed loan to complete the Khmelnytskyi and Rivne nuclear reactors. The EBRD estimated that all told, expenses would run in excess of $2 billion.

The donors' conference in Berlin, held on July 5, proved to be a solid success. Ukraine received 355 million euros (about $300 million) towards financing for reconstruction of the sarcophagus, which along with the money promised during the U.N. pledge conference, gave Ukraine about $715 million - 90 percent of the money required.

Delegates from 37 countries took part, including the United States, which had already pledged $78 million during Mr. Clinton's visit to Kyiv, the European Commission, which promised 100 million euros (some $80 million); Germany, $25.6 million; Japan, $22.5 million; the United Kingdom, $18.4 million (promised during Foreign Secretary Cook's visit); and Canada $13 million.

"It looks like the problem with the shelter is finally resolved," Prime Minister Yuschenko said in Berlin.

While financing for the sarcophagus was secured, other questions remained as the closing date fast-approached, including securing the EBRD loan to complete the Khmelnytskyi and Rivne reactors and financing to purchase carbon fuels to tie Ukraine over until the two power plants were completed.

Verkhovna Rada Chairman Ivan Pliusch decided to publicly push for more funds on November 3, when he told recently appointed U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Carlos Pascual that he would work to block the closure of Chornobyl if the West did not begin to fulfill promises on compensatory energy sources.

Mr. Pascual pointed out to Mr. Pliusch that just two weeks prior the EBRD had promised Ukraine a $100 million loan for supplemental carbon fuel purchases, which the U.S. ambassador reminded the Ukrainian lawmaker still needed the Ukrainian Parliament's approval before a money transfer could take place.

On November 16 European Commission President Romano Prodi met in Kyiv with President Kuchma and said that Ukraine could count on another $21.6 million from the EC.

Two days before Mr. Prodi's visit some 1,500 Chornobyl victims gathered before the Verkhovna Rada to demand that the government increase their social benefits. They were reacting to the proposed 2001 national budget, which foresaw substantial cuts for subsidies across the board, including compensation for the estimated 2.2 million people classified as Chornobyl victims eligible for government payments of one sort or another.

The Chornobyl plant workers and their families, who would lose their jobs and be forced to relocate after December 15 became the undeclared Chornobyl victims in 2000, and their plight became public as the closing date neared.

Chornobyl officials estimated that $634 million would be needed between now and 2008 for social costs associated with relocating and retraining the remaining workers and for bringing economic diversity to the city of Slavutych, a town that was built after the disaster for the sole purpose of housing the workers.

The majority of the workers, some of who have known each other since before April 1986, would suffer dislocation of family and friends as they were retrained and then moved to other parts of Ukraine. The current level of unemployment in Slavutych would rise from its current 8.1 percent to 24 percent in 2002 before falling off to 13 percent by 2008. While more than 1,100 non-essential workers would leave almost immediately, another 6,000 experts would go by the end of 2001.

Plant managers and labor leaders agreed at a press conference on November 16 at the Chornobyl complex that the work force of 9,199, considered among the most skilled in Ukraine, would feel the full fury of a political decision that was made without their practical input. Angry workers, some of whom didn't see a need to go and others who simply didn't want to go, vented their anger and frustration during the meeting with journalists, which was called originally to explain the logistics behind the closure but nearly turned into a town meeting.

Most vocal was Oleksii Bondar, an electrician who complained that he saw no tangible evidence of the foreign aid promised the workers, except for the presence of foreign psychologists who were working with the employees to help them deal with stress associated with the changes. In their presence he saw only irony. "They take away my last bit of soup and then advise me from which tree to hang myself," said a distressed Mr. Bondar.

Oleksii Lych, head of the Chornobyl trade union, said no good social or economic reason exists for taking the Chornobyl nuclear energy plant offline. In his opinion the decision was strictly political and neither the West nor the Ukrainian government had considered the implications - especially for the workers. He said that even as Ukraine continued extensive negotiations with the West over receiving additional financing and proceeds with technical preparations for the shutdown, the workers' needs were yet to be properly addressed.

"All the officials are saying the work is proceeding and that everything will be ready, but come December 15 they will not be ready to assure the well-being of the personnel of Chornobyl," said Mr. Lych.

Oleksander Bohomaz, retired former plant engineer, asked: "Everybody says the world will sleep easier after December 15, but how will we sleep with our $18 monthly pensions?"

Plant managers, too, said they believed there was no reason to close the Chornobyl nuclear complex at the moment. Many were convinced the Chornobyl nuclear complex remained one of the best energy-generating plants in the world, regardless of its tragic history, and that with improvements made over the last years it also had become one of the safest. They saw no reason, they said, why the plant could not operate effectively until its originally scheduled retirement in 2010.

Oleh Holoskokov, assistant director of the Chornobyl complex, said the No. 3 reactor block, the only one of the four Chornobyl reactors still functioning, was running as efficiently as ever. In 2000 the plant had been running at 82.4 percent of capacity. Only in 1995, when it ran at 83.4 percent, was it higher.

"It is an effectively running nuclear station, which works in the same way as all other Ukrainian reactors and receives no special privileges," said Mr. Holoskokov. "We are closing a perfectly good nuclear reactor."

With the date of the closing only 10 days away, the EBRD still had not made a decision on the one issue that Ukraine had tried to hammer home throughout the year: it still needed financing to finish the reactors at Khmelnytskyi and Rivne.

With lawmakers from dozens of European parliamentary bodies arrived in Kyiv on December 5 for Verkhovna Rada hearings on the Chornobyl closure, President Kuchma invited them for a brief meeting to remind them that the EBRD had not yet approved the loan for the two plants.

"At times it is difficult for us to understand the logic by which the pace of fulfillment of the obligations is purposely and obviously slowed down," Mr. Kuchma told more than 40 European diplomats. He called the closing of Chornobyl "the business of all mankind."

EBRD Vice-President Joachim Jahncke, one of the first speakers during the hearing, allowed Ukraine and the world a sigh of relief when he announced that he had recommended the EBRD board of directors approve the loan request, which was all but a guarantee that Ukraine would finally get the loan in the amount of $215 million.

Mr. Jahncke also addressed a concern that had surfaced within the country that Europe would forget about Ukraine once Chornobyl was finally mothballed. "Once Chornobyl is closed, Ukraine will not be left alone. We will be with Ukraine for many years to come," he said.

With the official approval of the EBRD loan on December 7 by its board of directors, the last formal barrier to the closing of the ill-fated reactor complex was removed.

On December 14 President Kuchma traveled to Chornobyl one last time, leading a delegation of international diplomats, including the prime ministers of Russia and Belarus. At the site he visited the control room of the third reactor, which would go offline the following day, spoke with plant workers and visited the city of Slavutych. He also met with plant managers and city administrators.

The president promised to take personal charge and assume full responsibility for the fate of the Chornobyl workers and their families after the plant was closed.

"Nobody will be left jobless or uncared for," Mr. Kuchma emphasized.

Then on December 15, while hundreds of representatives of the international diplomatic community watched at the Ukraina Palace concert hall, President Kuchma gave the command to shut down the third reactor once and for all.

"In accordance with a decision made by Ukraine and from agreements made with the world community, I direct that the No. 3 reactor at Chornobyl be shut down," Mr. Kuchma said at 1:16 Kyiv time, in ordering Vitalii Tolstonohov, the general director of the Chornobyl nuclear plant, to begin the shut down operation.

Mr. Kuchma and his guests then viewed the control room of reactor No. 3 via a live feed on a large monitor at the concert hall, while an engineer at Chornobyl threw the switch that halted the huge, atomically fueled, electricity-generating turbine.

In remarks afterward, the Ukrainian president cited statistics that tell the story of what the Chornobyl catastrophe has done to Ukraine and its development: nearly 3.5 billion affected either directly by the disaster or its consequences; nearly 10 percent of the territory of Ukraine irradiated; 160,000 people moved from 170 abandoned localities; total economic losses, directly or indirectly related to the disaster, approaching $130 billion; in some years 12 percent of the national budget was dedicated to Chornobyl-related expenses.

Copyright © The Ukrainian Weekly, January 7, 2001, No. 1, Vol. LXIX

| Home Page |