Andrea Perea Shima Zabetian Maddison Neman Case 1
CHERNOBYL CONFINEMENT SHELTER The Chernobyl Power Plant was constructed in 1983 in modern day Oblast, Ukraine. In 1986, a
reactor at the Chernobyl nuclear power plant in Ukraine exploded in what was history's worst nuclear disaster. The destroyed reactor was open to the elements through the gaping hole in the roof, was an unprecedented environmental risk emitting radiation. Within months, Soviet crews contained the radioactive wreckage by constructing a temporary shelter, a 21-story-tall "sarcophagus" around the structure. This temporary structure was not secured properly to the existing reactor, which led to seismic risk, settling, and water intrusion. Ukraine received independence in 1991 from the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR). This allowed the developing nation to increase the chance to work with other countries and obtain financial and professional resources. A top priority for the nation and globe was to secure the environmental disaster with a permanent structure. The project was to exemplify political unification, economic relationship formation, engineering advancements and environmental safety values. A Bechtel-led team designed what is known as the New Safe Confinement (NSC) structure, the heart of a broader, longerterm Shelter Implementation Plan. The international cooperation provided expertise for solving the problems and a big chance for companies to grow on a global scale. The new safe continent steel-structure with 110 meters height, 163 meters span, and 165 meters length was manufactured off-site, moved to the site, and finally assembled on-site. David Haslewood, a prominent designer on the project suggested the arch be built off site and slid over the "sarcophagus." The arch shaped structure proved to be easier to move than a cube in modeling. A pan-European study (the TACIS programme) selected the sliding arch concept as the best solution for their further investigations and recommendations. The offsite construction intended to minimize radiation for construction workers while fitting snugly over the damaged reactor, excluding the chimney. It is to this day, the largest movable steel structure ever constructed. Ukraine is politically complex, once again in 2014, the country was in turmoil with the Russian Federation over the annexation of Crimea, the Ukrainian peninsula. The peninsula is comprised with key merchant ports, transporting goods across the Black Sea. During this time, the project was completing it is third ascent of the western arches. (ERBD 2020)
1
Andrea Perea Shima Zabetian Maddison Neman Case 1
The relationships built on the backs of this project helped to secure Ukraine as an ally to many
governments and forge economic stability for the region with backing by major democratic nations. The engineering advancements were cutting edge and vital to secure the radioactive material of the site. The complexity of the project from location to politics and economy coupled with engineering makes this project unlike any other in the world. The project team was headed by the Ukraine government. Bechtel, a United States based company led a consortium which included Battelle Memorial Institute and Ectricite de France for the project management. Bechtel has been involved early on in the project providing conceptual engineering, cost estimating, scheduling and project management services including preparing design and procurement packages. In the autumn of 1992, Design Group Partnership (DGP) of Manchester was invited to assist the Atomic Energy Authority (AEA) for the UK's submission for the international competition organized by the Ukrainian government. DGP was awarded lead designer, winning the competition. Of the 394 entries, only their submission proposed a sliding arch approach. There was no top design choice, but the French submission came as second best with the United Kingdom and German proposals following in third. The design build contractor was The French consortium Novarka with partners Vinci Construction Grands Projets and Bougues Travaux Publics. The lead contractor was Novarka with 50/50 partners. Given the complexity of the team and more than 40 nations involvement, there are likely many other contributors to the success of the project with plans to employ approximately a thousand people at peak of construction. The project began in March 2014 and was officially completed in July 2019, after suffering lengthy delays. Preconstruction activities including contract buyouts began right away and were fully completed in January 2010. Stabilization of the existing reactor and temporary structure began in January 2009 and was completed in January 2010. Novarka was able to begin construction upon completion of the stabilization. The infrastructure including site preparations and access were completed in April 2011. Steel erection began a year later and would be completed in three modules. The module sections are built at grade then raised to complete the entire module. As the module is completed, they are slid over the existing temporary structure. The arch modules were fused and the west wall of the permanent structure in April 2015. The arch "slipping" or moving into place began in April 2016 and was completed in November 2016.
2
Andrea Perea Shima Zabetian Maddison Neman Case 1
By the end of 2017, various sub systems were in operation including the radiation monitoring,
back up power supply, fire protection, communication, mechanical, electrical and plumbing. The project declared successful trial operations in April 2019 with official completion in July 2019. The project funding was led by the Ukrainian government in conjunction with European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD). (Reiserer 2011) The Chernobyl Shelter Fund (CSF) was created in 1997 to assist the Ukraine with the destroyed reactor and environmental concerns with radiation. The CSF was distributed internationally to gain capital. Initial project cost estimations were anticipated to be a total of 1.54 billion euros (1.77 billion USD) with approximately 1.01 billion (1.17 billion USD) allocated for the New Safe Confinement (NSC). The remaining costs included Reactor 4 dismantling, decontamination and destruction; site improvements; and support facilities construction. (EBRD 2020) Following the CSF creation, global efforts led by a G7 summit in Denver, Colorado, USA along with the European Union (EU) and Ukraine began. G7 is comprised of seven industrialized democracies which meet annual to discuss economics, security and energy issues. (Council on Foreign Relations 2019) There were over 40 countries and dozens of organizations which contributed more than 1.6 billion (1.89 billion USD) to the Chernobyl Confinement Shelter. The US has played key roles in eastern Europe since congress passed the FREEDOM Support Act in 1992, following the collapse of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR). The act aims to support emerging Eurasian democracies and open markets. Russia appears to be largely left out of conversations including press about the project's funding. According to World Nuclear News, Russia has made two contributions of which the second amounts to 10 million euros (11.83 million USD). (World Nuclear News 2015) Notably, Russia's membership to the G7 was suspended in 2014 due to the Crimea peninsula annexation which is Ukrainian land. By that time the project was erecting and connecting the third ascent of the western arches. According to ERBD, the US and EU were primary funding contributors to the first phase which was comprised of conceptual strategies, site stabilization and access and support facilities. As the project efforts began and contributions in the bank, there was an immense amount of interest being earned to help close the funding gap to 85 billion euros (100 billion USD) remaining to be allocated for. (ReliefWeb 2015) The project was completed at a cost of approximately 2.1 billion euros (2.48 billion USD). In total the US contributed more than 370 million USD by 2015 and the EBRD contributed 480 million euros (568 million USD). (ERBD 2020) 3
Andrea Perea Shima Zabetian Maddison Neman Case 1
According to the US Government Accountability Office (GAO) in July 2007 they reported the
project was approximately seven years behind schedule in the construction of the NSC. The public document states the previous couple years were due to failure of awarding construction contracts. The Ukraine government began an international design competition in 1992. According to the GAO, the project had consumed 380 million USD solely on administrative costs and contracts as of as of September 2006. (US GAO 2007) It was not until September 2007 that Vinci Construction Grands Projets and Bouygues Travaux Publics secured the award to design and build the NSF in partnership with Novarka. Reportedly, the contract was for 432 million euros (511 million USD). In that same year, Bechtel was awarded a contract for final design and construction. (Bechtel Wikipedia 2020) According to the publication, Nuclear Street, the company was awarded the contract by the Cabinet of Ministries of Ukraine in 2004. Although, limited information regarding contract details including the plethora of design build and engineering elements. It is apparent the project was an international feat comprised of countless partnerships. Most notably on the design and construction team headed by Bechtel, Vinci Construction Grands Projets, Bouygues Travaux Publics and Novarka. (EBRD 2020) The fall of the USSR left Ukraine to balance new relationships with the Chernobyl Confinement Shelter leading the way. The delay in awarding contracts resulted from extensive Ukraine and EBRD negotiations, according to the GAO. The Ukraine had regulations in place for nuclear facilities which likely had not been adjusted after the reactor disaster. The international project teams were expected to work within the formwork, with each entity learn to compromise with one another. Without compromise, the contracts could not have been executed. Politically and economically the country was beginning the process of re-building. As the worst nuclear accident in history, the case was under serious imposed risks that brought about the need for international expertise and collaboration. Design challenges such as shape, specifications and material choices had many scientists and researchers collaborating from conception to technical detailing. Given the radioactivity, designers had to protect the shelter from adverse weather and seismic activity. The NCS is designed to withstand temperatures ranging between -43°C and +45°C, a class three (one million year) tornado, and a six Medvedev-Sponheuer-Karnik (MSK-64)-scale earthquake.
4
Andrea Perea Shima Zabetian Maddison Neman Case 1
Construction challenges revolved around having workers in a highly radioactive site while
performing their jobs. The project suffered significant delays due to radiation exposure shutting down work crews, a factor not fully accounted for. The actual sliding the 36,000 tones structure was achieved by 224 hydraulic jacks, which moved the arch at 600mm with each stroke which took five days to move into place. Given the immense amount of challenges, it 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. This international cooperation provided expertise for solving the problems and a big chance for companies to grow on a global scale. The Chernobyl Confinement Shelter is an engineering masterpiece crafted globally by an incredibly talented team.
5
Andrea Perea Shima Zabetian Maddison Neman Case 1
BIBLIOGRAPHY
“Bechtel.” Wikipedia. Wikimedia Foundation, August 25, 2020. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bechtel. “Chernobyl New Safe Confinement.” Wikipedia. Wikimedia Foundation, October 7, 2020. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chernobyl_New_Safe_Confinement. “Chernobyl Shelter Fund Gets $200 Million Funding Boost.” World Nuclear News, April 30, 2015. worldnuclear-news.org/Articles/Chernobyl-Shelter-Fund-gets-$200-million-funding-b. “Chernobyl Shelter Fund.” European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD). Accessed October 10, 2020. https://www.ebrd.com/what-we-do/sectors/nuclear-safety/chernobylshelter-fund.html. “The Chernobyl Shelter Implementation Plan.” European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD). Accessed October 10, 2020. https://www.ebrd.com/what-we-do/sectors/nuclearsafety/chernobyl-shelter-implementation.html. "Chernobyl to be covered in steel". BBC News. September 18, 2007. Retrieved May 20, 2010. “The G7 and the Future of Multilateralism.” Council on Foreign Relations. Council on Foreign Relations, August 20, 2019. https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/g7-and-future-multilateralism. “GAO-07-923 Nuclear Safety: Construction of the Protective ...” US Government Accountability Office, July 2007. https://www.gao.gov/assets/270/264129.pdf. “The New Safe Confinement encloses the reactor and related debris for at least a century” Betchtel. , 2020. https://www.bechtel.com/projects/chernobyl-shelter-and-confinement/.
6
Andrea Perea Shima Zabetian Maddison Neman Case 1
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Reiserer, Axel. “NOVARKA and Chernobyl Project Management Unit Confirm Cost and Time Schedule for Chernobyl New Safe Confinement.” NOVARKA and Chernobyl Project Management Unit confirm cost and time schedule for Chernobyl New Safe Confinement [EBRD - News and events], April 8, 2011. https://web.archive.org/web/20110918032131/http://www.ebrd.com/pages/news/press/2011 /110408e.shtml. “See Chernobyl's Safe Confinement Shelter.” Bechtel Corporate. Accessed October 10, 2020. https://www.bechtel.com/projects/chernobyl-shelter-and-confinement/. "Ukraine postpones Chernobyl reactor safety cover". Xinhua News Agency. Retrieved November 20, 2017. “U.S. Commits $40 Million for Chernobyl Shelter Fund - Ukraine.” ReliefWeb, April 30, 2015. http://reliefweb.int/report/ukraine/us-commits-40-million-chernobyl-shelter-fund. "Vinci and Bouygues sign contract to build Containment Shelter for the Chernobyl Sarcophagus" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on October 2, 2011. Retrieved April 19, 2011.
7