CHERNOBYL CONFINEMENT SHELTER MADDISON NEMAN
ANDREA PEREA
SHIMA ZABETIAN
Historical Snapshot 1983 Power Plant Constructed 1986 Reactor- 4 Explosion 1991 Ukraine Independence 1986 21-Story “Sarcophagus� Structure Constructed by USSR
The temporary structure was not secured properly to the existing reactor which led to seismic risk, settling and water intrusion.
Global Significance Project exemplifies political unification ◦ Ukraine became an independent nation in 1991 ◦ Over 40 countries funded the project Engineering advancements ◦ Contains the radioactive site for the next 100 years ◦ Internal height 92.5m (303.5ft) ◦ Internal arch span 245m (803.8ft) ◦ Constructed at ground level, adjacent to reactor then moved by hydraulics, remotely into final position ◦ Largest movable steel structure ever built Environmental safety values ◦ Site highly radioactive for another 20,000 years ◦ Regional and global impact on health
Project Team Project Owner ◦ Government of Ukraine
Project Management ◦ Bechtel-led consortium including Battelle Memorial Institute and Electricité de France
Designer ◦ Design Group Partnership David Haslewood (UK)
Design-build Contractor ◦ Novarka with partners Vinci Construction Grands Projets and Bouygues Travaux Publics (FR)
Main Contractor ◦ Novarka with 50/50 partners
Design + Construction Contracts International Competition 1992 ◦ Ukraine (owner) held competition for designs
September 2006 ◦ Administration and contracts amounted to 380 million USD
Design Partnership 2007 ◦ Novarka (France) ◦ Vinci Construction Grands (France) ◦ Bouygues Travaux Publics (France) ◦ 432 million euros (511 million USD)
Bechtel ◦ Bechtel reports inception and awarded in 2007
Chernobyl Shelter Fund 2017 ◦ Ukraine (owner) ◦ European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD) ◦ Proposal documents distributed internationally for funding
G7 Commitments ◦ Industrialized democracies which meet annually to discuss economics, security and energy issues ◦ All of the countries contributed to the funding and support
Project Funding
US FREEDOM Support Act ◦ Founded by the US congress in 1992, following collapse of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) ◦ Aims to support emerging Eurasian democracies and open markets ◦ The act paved the way to fund the project and create a political and economic relationship with Ukraine
US + EU Involvement ◦ EBRD reports primary funding contributors for conceptual strategies, site stabilization, access and support facilities
Russian Federation Involvement ◦ Generally left out of publications and press ◦ First contribution unknown ◦ World Nuclear News publication reports second contribution of 10 million euros (11.83 million USD) was made ◦ G7 membership suspended in 2014, currently eight countries excluding Russia
Initial Estimates ◦ 1.54 billion euros (1.77 billion USD) Total ◦ 1.01 billion euros (1.17 billion USD) New Safe Confinement ◦ Remaining utilized for dismantling, decontamination and destruction; site improvements; and support facilities
Project Costs
Funding Gaps ◦ Everchanging project milestones created additional funding ◦ ERBD held funds closing the gap from 300 million euros to 85 million euros (100 million USD) through interest
US Total 370 million USD as of 2015 EBRD Total 480 million euros (568 million USD) as of 2020 2.1 BILLION EUROS (2.48 BILLION USD)
Challenges + Strategies Design ◦ Shape, specifications and material choices led by scientists and researchers ◦ Adverse weather and seismic risk vulnerability. Designed to withstand temperaturs ranging from -43°C and +45°C, a class three (one million year) tornado, and a six MedvedevSponheuer-Karnik (MSK-64)-scale earthquake.”
Construction ◦ Highly radioactive region with delays incurred due to exposure ◦ Support structures to house workers offsite ◦ Sliding 36,000 tones structure with 224 hydraulic jacks
Challenges + Strategies Creating Relationships ◦ Political ◦ Economical
Regional Turmoil ◦ Crimea annexation by Russian Federation in 2014 ◦ Port critical to transportation of goods
Delayed Contracts ◦ US Government Accountability Office (GAO) stated in 2007 the project was seven years behind schedule. ◦ GAO stated current Ukrainian nuclear regulations were a portion of the negotiations with design and construction contracts
Current Status 2005 Anticipated Completion 2019 Actual Completion 3,000 persons monitoring the site
Robots deployed throughout the structure performing maintenance
Building equipment continues to be installed as engineering advancements are made
Conclusion As the worst nuclear accident in history, the case was under serious imposed risks that brought about the need for international expertise and collaboration. On the other hand, this project was an excellent opportunity for international companies to work in a brand-new country with global coordination to demonstrate their vast capability of coping with one the most complicated and riskiest challenges in the construction market. Win-Win opportunity: This international cooperation provided expertise for solving the problems and a big chance for companies to grow on a global scale.
CHERNOBYL CONFINEMENT SHELTER MADDISON NEMAN ANDREA PEREA
SHIMA ZABETIAN