Decommissioning is new challenge for nuclear plant chief

VILNIUS - Viktor Sevaldin, general director at Lithuania's Ignalina Nuclear Power Plant, could be likened to a captain who has to sink a ship that he himself built and sailed for many years.

Sevaldin is both saddened and excited by the challenge of shutting down the Soviet-era plant within the EU-imposed time frame.

"I built this power station, then operated it and managed it. As long as the Lithuanian authorities have confidence in me, I am ready to work here right up to the day I go on a pension," Sevaldin told The Baltic Times. "Each of the years I have spent at Ignalina has been distinct. It is exciting both to construct and to close a nuclear power plant, though closing appears sad to do," he said.

Sevaldin began his nuclear energy career long before coming to Ignalina. After graduating from the Energy Engineering Institute in Ivanovo, Russia in 1971 as a specialist in thermal power, he spent 11 years at the Leningrad nuclear power plant. He was involved in building, commissioning and staff training for all four of that plant's reactors.

In May, 1982 he was one of a group of experts sent to Lithuania to build a more modern nuclear plant.

"I came to Lithuania drawn by the promise of interesting work, and I stayed here because I really liked the nature and the people," Sevaldin noted.

He helped to design Ignalina's reactor control and protection system, install the first reactor, position the fuel channels and load nuclear fuel.

He was involved in commissioning Unit 1 in 1983 and Unit 2 in 1987, and held the posts of chief engineer and deputy for operations until Lithuania regained independence from the Soviet Union and assumed control at Ignalina.

"In November 1991 the new Lithuanian government offered me the post of general director. I said then, and have always said, that Ignalina will operate just exactly as long as it is needed by Lithuania," said Sevaldin.

"It's clear now that RBMK-type reactors have no future," he noted, referring to the fact that Ignalina is similar in design to the Soviet plant that exploded at Chernobyl, Ukraine in April 1986, causing the worst nuclear pollution ever seen in Europe.

Still, he added, a decade of projects to improve safety has eliminated nearly all of Ignalina's drawbacks, except for the lack of a full containment dome over the reactor.

"If it had this full containment, the plant could operate for many, many years."

Under pressure from the European Union, the Lithuanian government has committed to close Ignalina's first reactor by 2005 and is expected soon to agree to shut down the second one by 2009. The EU considers the Soviet-built facility irreparably unsafe.

Sevaldin said he was disappointed by the political decision to decommission Ignalina based on what he considers ungrounded fears and misperception in the countries of the EU. But he has accepted the project as a new, professional challenge and is intent on doing it as well as possible.

"My top priority is to manage this process well and avoid any chaos," he said. "Ignalina staff have to demonstrate to the public that they are able not only to construct and safely operate the plant, but also to skillfully and efficiently close it, safely storing the radioactive waste and other hazardous materials without damage to the environment."

Big rush

In Sevaldin's view, the EU seems to be rushing Ignalina's closure. This could raise new safety risks by straining resources, lowering staff morale and tempting key specialists to leave early.

"The most expensive project is the construction of intermediate storage facilities for spent nuclear fuel, but the most urgent task for today is building new heating systems for both the plant and the town," he said.

The boilers absolutely have to be ready before Unit 1 shuts down in late 2004, he insisted. Otherwise, if the lone second reactor has to be stopped for any reason during winter, the plant and the town would freeze and that would threaten nuclear safety.

Sevaldin also believes Unit 2 should not be closed before 2012, since to do the job well, decommissioning crews need to focus on unit one until that time. Rushing to close the second one in 2009 would mean dividing attention and resources between the two highly sensitive tasks.

Meanwhile, the Ignalina's director knows a major managerial effort will be needed to keep falling morale from influencing staff performance. "The political decision to decommission the reactors and the lack of good social guarantees for staff who will lose their jobs has a negative effect on the culture of safety," he said.

"Nonetheless, there is some legislation in the works relating to social guarantees, and there are some proposed social programs to create new jobs in the region. In any case, we will do our best not just to maintain the culture of safety, but to continue improving it."

A key task will be to prevent a premature exodus of key specialists, which would cripple Ignalina and could even force it to cease operations ahead of schedule. Sevaldin said he has been working hard to make sure that does not happen.

"We will be negotiating attractive individual contracts with the most needed specialists, to guarantee them work, good pay and benefits so they will want to stay with us," he said.

But the greatest challenge of all will no doubt be financing the costly closure projects, Sevaldin said. The funds that have been pledged by the EU and donor countries, and Lithuania's own small decommissioning fund, will have to be managed well.

Sevaldin would like to think atomic energy still has a future in Lithuania. His eyes lit up speaking of prospects to build a modern reactor in Visaginas, putting existing nuclear workers and know-how to good use, and providing for Lithuania's power needs.

"Unfortunately, Lithuania can't handle the cost of such a project. It could only happen with EU support, or if foreign investors with export plans were allowed in," he noted with chagrin.

Lithuanian officials have differing views on such an undertaking, he added.

In any case, it seems Sevaldin and other nuclear power experts in Lithuania will have their hands full for well over a decade just managing the closure of Ignalina.