5/27/2003:  US ANNOUNCES FUNDING FOR FOSSIL FUEL REPLACEMENT REACTORS
As a follow-up to the addendum signed in March 2003 (see the 3/12/2003 entry, below), on 27 May 2003 the US Department of Energy (DOE) declared that it will provide $466 million to refurbish one coal-burning power plant and build an additional new power plant in Russia, in exchange for the shutdown of three Russian plutonium-production reactors.  Washington Group International will manage the refurbishment of the old coal-fired plant at the Seversk site, which is expected to be finished by 2008.  Raytheon Technical Services will oversee the construction of a new plant at Zheleznogorsk, anticipated to be completed by 2011. (For more information, see the DOE press release, at http://www.energy.gov/HQPress/releases03/maypr/pr03113.htm.)
[H. Josef Hebert, "U.S. to Build Power Plants in Russia," Associated Press, 27 May 2003.] {Entered 6/04/2003 CB}

3/12/2003: US AND RUSSIA SIGN ADDENDUM TO REACTOR SHUTDOWN AGREEMENT
On 12 March 2003, Russian Minister of Atomic Energy Aleksandr Rumyantsev and US Energy Secretary Spenser Abraham signed an addendum agreement to the 1997 US-Russian Intergovernmental Agreement Concerning Cooperation Regarding Plutonium Production Reactors. The signing ceremony took place in Vienna during the International Conference on Security of Radioactive Sources cosponsored by the IAEA, the United States, and Russia.[1] Under the new agreement, the ADE-4 and ADE-5 reactors in Seversk and the ADE-2 reactor in Zheleznogorsk will stop producing plutonium by 31 December 2005 and 31 December 2006, respectively.[2] The reactors will continue to operate as heat and power sources until the existing fossil fuel plant in Seversk is refurbished and a new plant is constructed in Zheleznogorsk.[3] The United States pledged to provide about $500 million for the replacement plants. According to DOE estimates, the two reactors in Seversk will shut down in 2008 and the reactor in Zheleznogorsk in 2011.[4] Aleksandr Rumyantsev announced that an estimated 10t of plutonium resulting from the remaining operation of the reactors will be counted towards the 34t Russia pledged to eliminate under the US-Russia Plutonium Disposition Agreement.[1]
Sources:
[1] “Finansovoye uchastiye SShA v ostanovke rossiyskikh reaktorov-narabotchikov plutoniya sostavit sotni millionov dollarov,” Nuclear.ru Web Site, http://www.nuclear.ru/, 14 March 2003.
[2] “Podpisano soglasheniye ob ostanovke trekh rossiyskikh reaktorov, proizvodyashchikh plutoniy,” RosBiznesKonsalting, 12 March 2003; in Integrum Techno, http://www.integrum.com/.
[3] "U.S. and Russia Agree to Plan to Shutdown Three Remaining Russian Plutonium Production Reactors," DOE Press Release, http://www.energy.gov/, 12 March 2003.
[4] Platts Nuclear News Flashes, http://www.platts.com/, 12 March 2003. {Entered 4/25/2003 DA}

12/10/2001: US CONGRESS MAY HAVE REACHED AGREEMENT ON FUNDING SHUTDOWN OF RUSSIAN REACTORS
A US House of Representatives-Senate conference committee appears to have reached a compromise to end the internal Congressional debate on FY2002 funding for the shutdown of the plutonium production reactors at Seversk and Zheleznogorsk and their replacement with fossil fuel plants. The House version of the FY2002 defense authorization bill stipulates a permanent ban on DOD funding for that purpose, while the Senate bill contains no such provision. According to unofficial sources, the compromise proposes returning to the 2001 restriction formula and requires DOD to submit a report to Congress on possible funding alternatives. At the same time, the Bush administration does not have a formal position on the problem and awaits the results of the National Security Council's review of US nonproliferation programs in Russia. According to a DOE official, the administration is considering the option of transferring the Russian reactor shutdown program from DOD to DOE.
[Daniel Horner, "Conferees may have reached agreement on funds to shut Russian Pu reactors," NuclearFuel online edition, http://www.mhenergy.com, Vol. 26, No. 25, 10 December 2001.] {Entered 2/15/2002 DA}

8/27/2001: RUSSIA PROPOSES AMENDING THE 1997 AGREEMENT AND CONTINUING PLUTONIUM PRODUCTION UNTIL 2006
On 27 August 2001, the Russian government approved a draft protocol amending the 1997 US-Russian Intergovernmental Agreement Concerning Cooperation Regarding Plutonium Production Reactors. The amendments would extend the production of plutonium in the two plutonium production reactors in Seversk (ADE-4 and ADE-5) until 31 December 2005 and the plutonium production reactor in Zheleznogorsk (ADE-2) until 31 December 2006.[1,3] [The 1997 Agreement gives the year 2000 as the target date for stopping plutonium production at these three reactors through the conversion of their reactor cores.] Proposed amendments also include an option to construct fossil fuel power plants to replace the plutonium production reactors, which supply vital power and heat to the two closed cities and neighboring communities.[1,2] This option was discussed by the United States and Russia during 2000, when it became evident that modification of the three plutonium reactors for civilian use is technically and financially problematic. [See the discussion of this issue in the entries below.] Construction of fossil fuel power plants, according to the new amendments, will be included along with the reactor core conversion options specified in the 1997 Agreement. Under the draft protocol, gradual funding for either converting the reactors or replacing them with fossil-fueled facilities will be provided by the United States.[1,3] Russia will provide the United States with data necessary for monitoring the plutonium production reactors, including information on the reactors' shut-down. According to Agentstvo voyennykh novostey, Russia will also allow US officials to visit these reactors.[3] Vremya novostey reports that the exact figures for annual plutonium production by the three reactors are unknown as they are considered a state secret. However, the newspaper claims that its sources in the Ministry of Atomic Energy say that all three reactors are working at their minimum plutonium production capacity and producing "several kilograms of weapons-grade plutonium per year each." The same sources comment that this amount is "dribs and drabs" given the overall stockpile of weapons-grade plutonium in Russia. Even disposition of 34t of weapons-grade plutonium under the US-Russia Agreement "would not undermine Russia's defense capacity."[2] The Russian government charges the Ministry of Atomic Energy with negotiating the draft protocol amending the 1997 Agreement with the United States Department of Defense.[3]
Sources:
[1] "Pravitelstvo RF odobrilo izmeneniya v soglasheniye s SShA o plutoniyevykh reaktorakh," Interfax Daily News Bulletin, 27 August 2001.
[2] Yekaterina Kats, "Bednost - vrag konversii," Vremya novostey, 28 August 2001; in Minatom Daily Digest, http://www.minatom.ru. 
[3] "Russian Govt Okeys [sic] Changes to Treaty on Plutonium-Producing Reactors," Agentstvo voyennykh novostey, 27 August 2001; in "Russia: Govt Agrees Changes to Treaty on Plutonium-Producing Reactors," FBIS Document CEP20010827000093. {Entered 8/28/2001 ES}
 
3/5/2001: BUSH CALLS ON RUMSFELD TO REPORT ON ALTERNATIVES TO PU REACTORS AT ZHELEZNOGORSK AND SEVERSK
A White House memo dated 5 March 2001 from US President George W. Bush called on Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld to study alternatives to the plutonium production reactors located in Zheleznogorsk and Seversk.  The Rumsfeld report will be presented to the US Congress and must include an assessment of the costs of building fossil fuel plants to replace the current reactors and an identification of funding sources if the fossil fuel alternative is chosen.  US law prohibits the use of 2001 Cooperative Threat Reduction (CTR) funds for the construction of fossil fuel power plants for the communities now currently relying on the reactors for heat and electricity.
[Keith J. Costa, "Bush Gives Rumsfeld Helm on Russian Energy Alternatives Study," Inside The Pentagon, 8 March 2001, p. 11.]  {Entered 4/11/2001, GD}
 
2/19/2001: FOSSIL-FUEL POWER PLANT SET TO BE ALTERNATIVE TO PLUTONIUM PRODUCTION REACTOR AT ZHELEZNOGORSK
For more information, please see the 2/19/2001 entry in Russia: GKhK and Zheleznogorsk (Krasnoyarsk-26) General Developments. 
["U.S., Russia Agree on Fossil Fuel Plant at Zheleznogorsk," Nuclear Weapons & Materials Monitor, Vol. 5, No. 4, 19 February 2001.] {Entered 2/19/01 GD}
 
10/2000: AGREEMENT-IN-PRINCIPLE REACHED ON REPLACEMENT OF SEVERSK REACTOR; ZHELEZNOGORSK REACTOR ISSUE REMAINS UNDECIDED
In October 2000, representatives of the US Department of Defense Cooperative Threat Reduction (CTR) Program and the Russian Ministry of Atomic Energy (Minatom) signed an agreement-in-principle in which the United States would support the refurbishment of an existing coal-fired plant in order to provide an alternative power source to the plutonium production reactors at the Siberian Chemical Combine (SKhK) currently providing heat and electricity to the city of Seversk. The agreement was the result of recommendations by a US-Russian working group focused on finding ways to replace the generating capacity of the plutonium production reactors at SKhK and the Zheleznogorsk Mining and Chemical Combine (GKhK).  In order for the agreement to be legally binding, it must be reviewed and approved by the US Congress and must be inserted as an amendment to the original Plutonium Production Reactor Agreement and the Core Conversion Implementing Agreement. One impediment to reaching a formal agreement exists in the language of the FY 2001 Defense Authorization Act that does not allow funds to be used for construction of fossil-fuel plants as an alternative to the plutonium reactors. However, Colonel Jim Reid, Program Policy Director of the CTR office, explained in the Post-Soviet Nuclear & Defense Monitor that remaining FY 1999 and 2000 funds could be used and that the plant would be "refurbished," not "constructed," thereby following the provisions of the FY 2001 law. Reid further commented that a replacement power source for the GKhK plutonium production reactor remained undecided and that Russia is expected to finish an analysis of the options by the end of 2000. 
["U.S., Russia Agree To Coal-Fired Plant Option For Seversk Pu Reactor," Post-Soviet Nuclear & Defense Monitor, 13 November 2000, pp. 14-15.] {Entered 12/12/2000 GD}
 
5/2000: US HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES PROPOSE LIMITS ON CONVERSION OPTIONS FOR RUSSIAN PLUTONIUM REACTORS
The US House of Representatives recommended in its Defense Authorization Bill and a related House committee report that funds earmarked for the US Cooperative Threat Reduction Program should not be used for the construction of fossil fuel plants to replace plutonium production reactors in Russia. The report stated that efforts to halt plutonium production in Russia should "be funded through other means, external to the Department of Defense." 
["House Proposes to Limit Conversion Options for Russian Pu Reactors," Nuclear Weapons & Materials Monitor, Vol. 4, No. 2, 26 May 2000, p. 5.] {Entered 11/15/2000 GD}
 
4/13/2000: MINATOM CONSIDERS REACTOR CONVERSION OPTIONS AT SEVERSK AND ZHELEZNOGORSK
The Russia Federation Ministry of Atomic Energy (Minatom) released the initial results of a technical assessment of conversion options for the plutonium production reactors at Seversk (Siberian Chemical Combine) and Zheleznogorsk (Mining and Chemical Combine). The assessment focused on converting the reactors to low-enriched uranium (LEU) cores.  Minatom believes that LEU cores would increase operational safety as well as chances for approval by the Russian nuclear regulatory agency, Gosatomnadzor (GAN).  In addition, Minatom said it plans to undertake a study focusing on fossil-fuel alternatives to produce electricity and heat currently generated by the plutonium production reactors.  A final decision on the conversion of the reactors is expected in early summer 2000.
["New LEU Design for Conversion of Russian Reactors Shows Promise," Nuclear Weapons & Materials Monitor," Vol. 4, No. 10, 3 May 2000, pp.18-19.] {Entered 11/15/2000 GD}
 
3/2000: RUSSIA PROPOSES OPERATING PRODUCTION REACTORS ANOTHER 20 YEARS
During US-Russian discussions in late March 2000, Minatom representatives presented a new proposal for conversion of the plutonium production reactors at the Mining and Chemical Combine and the Siberian Chemical Combine. Under the new Russian proposal, the reactors would be converted over five years to operate on LEU fuel different from that envisioned in earlier conversion proposals, and would remain in operation for an additional 15 years after conversion.  To reduce safety risks, the reactors would reduce their operating power by 20 percent in order to generate less heat and consequently reduce expansion of the reactor's graphite moderator blocks.  No comment was immediately forthcoming from Gosatomnadzor, although GAN director Yuriy Vishnevskiy said earlier that continuing to operate the Seversk production reactors would pose obvious safety risks. Tomsk environmental activist Konstantin Kozlov suggested that Minatom dropped its February 2000 proposal to replace the reactors with fossil fuel power plants because the fossil fuel option would not create any jobs in the nuclear sector.  An unnamed US official said that US officials would receive a final review of the new proposal at a meeting in Moscow on 12-13 April 2000.
[Thomas Nilsen, "Russian position on Pu-production reactors shifted again," Bellona Web Site, http://www.bellona.org/imaker?id=16455&sub=1, 11 April 2000.]{Entered 4/12/00 FW}
 
2/13/2000: RUSSIA PROPOSES ABANDONING PRODUCTION REACTOR CONVERSION
Officials of the Russian Ministry of Atomic Energy informed a visiting US delegation in early February 2000 that the Russian government wants to abandon the US-Russian project to convert the plutonium production reactors at the Mining and Chemical Combine in Zheleznogorsk and the Siberian Chemical Combine in Seversk.  Russia proposes instead to shut down the reactors and build conventional power plants to provide the electric power now generated by the production reactors, including hydroelectric facilities near Zheleznogorsk, at an estimated cost of $230 million, most of which would be paid by the United States. US nuclear experts, including Princeton physicist Frank von Hippel, have criticized the original reactor conversion plan on nonproliferation grounds, fearing that converting the reactors to run on HEU rather than natural uranium would stimulate commerce within Russia in HEU fuel elements which would be vulnerable to theft or diversion during production and transport. Russian nuclear officials have also criticized conversion of the production reactors on safety grounds. Gosatomnadzor Deputy Director Aleksandr Dmitriyev has warned that the conversion process could further destabilize the production reactors. The production reactors are technical precursors to the power reactors at Chornobyl and share many of their design defects. Additionally, radiation has caused cracking in the reactor cores, which must now be held together with straps. US officials were skeptical of the new Russian cost estimates for the replacement power plants, which were significantly lower than previous estimates.  A senior Defense Department official noted that Congress has authorized only $115 million for the conversion project, of which $22 million has been spent. Officials also related that the projected date for a halt to plutonium production in Russia has been postponed to 2004 at the earliest, whether or not the new Russian proposal is adopted.
[Michael Dobbs, "Russian Reactor Project Troubled," Washington Post, 13 February 2000, p. A1.]{entered 2/14/00 FW}
 
6/99: RUSSIA WILL NOT HALT PLUTONIUM PRODUCTION BY YEAR 2000
Russia will continue production of plutonium beyond the year 2000 despite its 1994 agreement with the United States, under which Russia pledged to end plutonium production at three remaining production reactors by the year 2000. According to Russia, these three reactors, two of which are located in Seversk and one in Zheleznogorsk, are the major sources of heat and electricity for neighboring cities. According to Bellona, it is likely that plutonium production will continue at least until 2002 or 2003, resulting in another 3-4.5MT of weapons-grade plutonium being added to Russian stocks. The reprocessing of spent fuel from these reactors leads to production of some 1.5MT of weapons-grade plutonium every year. Converting the reactor cores could reduce plutonium output 10 to 100 times, and the plutonium from the converted reactors would not be weapons-grade. However, the Russian Federal Inspectorate for Nuclear and Radiation Safety (Gosatomnadzor) opposes the reactor core conversion program because these reactors have already "twice exceeded their service lifetime" and operating them is extremely risky.
[Thomas Nilsen, "Russian Pu-Stocks to Increase," Bellona web site,  http://www.bellona.no/e/russia/990603.htm.] {Entered 6/23/99 VT}
 
4/7/97: JAPAN PROVIDES RUSSIA WITH CONTAINERS FOR WEAPONS-GRADE PLUTONIUM STORAGE
Tens of thousands of weapons-grade plutonium storage containers are to be delivered to Russia from Japan, Russian Minister of Atomic Energy Viktor Mikhailov announced on 7 April 1997.  The containers will be delivered to Mayak in Ozersk (Chelyabinsk-65), the Siberian Chemical Combine in Seversk (Tomsk-7), the Mining and Chemical Combine in Zheleznogorsk (Krasnoyarsk-26), and other facilities where nuclear weapons dismantlement takes place. Each container costs approximately $2,000 to $5,000.  Mikhailov also announced that Japan is planning to help Russia build a long-term weapons-grade plutonium storage facility at Mayak, with a capacity of 40,000 containers.
[Vladimir Solntsev, ITAR-TASS, 7 April 1997; in "Tokyo To Deliver Nuclear Waste Containers to Russia," FBIS-TAC-97-097.] {Entered 8/12/97 EV}
 
7/25/96: MINATOM: RUSSIA NEEDS TO PRODUCE PLUTONIUM TO PRESERVE TECHNOLOGY, JOBS
A conference on nuclear testing in Zelenograd organized by the Russian branch of Greenpeace revealed differences of opinion among the Russian, Kazakhstani and Kyrgyzstani participants regarding plutonium production. Commenting on the ongoing processing of plutonium at Krasnoyarsk-26 and Tomsk-7 facilities, Lev Fioktistov, a member of the Russian Academy of Sciences, stated that the facilities can supply electricity to the cities without having to produce plutonium. Minatom representative Kotlov stated that Russia must continue producing plutonium "in order to preserve technology and jobs." The issue of existing plutonium was also raised. The participants pointed out the absence of plutonium-fueled BN-800 reactors. The high cost of BN-800 reactors (estimated at $1 billion) is impeding their timely construction.
["Atomshikov raduyet antiyadernoye dvizheniye," SEGODNYA, 7/25/96, p. 9.] {ENTERED 9/18/96, KVY}
 
8/18/95: DOE SAYS RUSSIA HAS NOT CEASED PLUTONIUM PRODUCTION
In an interview with POST-SOVIET NUCLEAR & DEFENSE MONITOR, Terry Lash, Director of the US DOE's Nuclear Energy Office, stated that Russia has not halted production of weapons-grade plutonium. However, Russia says it is not supplying the material to the military.
["On Nuclear Safety, Power Initiatives In Russia, Ukraine...DOE's Dr. Terry Lash," POST-SOVIET NUCLEAR & DEFENSE MONITOR, 8/18/95, p. 4.]
 
12/94: RUSSIA NO LONGER PRODUCING WEAPONS PLUTONIUM
Russian delegates announced during the Gore-Chernomyrdin Commission meeting that Russia had stopped producing weapons-grade plutonium as of 10/1/94. According to the delegates, Russia is only producing plutonium oxide at the reactors. The US has not verified this announcement. According to Interfax, the reactors continue to produce heat and energy for the nearby towns; the non-weapon-grade plutonium removed from the reactors will be stored until it can be used as fuel in fast breeder reactors.
["U.S.-Russian Negotiations On Plutonium Production Reactors Stall," POST-SOVIET NUCLEAR & DEFENSE MONITOR, 1/31/95, p. 1; Interfax, 12/2/94; in "Reactors End Weapons-Grade Plutonium Production," FBIS-SOV-94-232, 12/2/94.]
 
10/94: ESTIMATED 70 TONS OF PLUTONIUM WILL BE EXTRACTED BY 2003
It is estimated that by the year 2003, 70 tons of weapons-grade plutonium will be removed from nuclear weapons due to dismantlement activities required under START I and START II.
[Brigitte Sauerwein, "Waste not, want not," International Defense Review, 10/94, pp. 81-82.]
 
3/16/94: RUSSIA TO HALT PLUTONIUM PRODUCTION
Russian Minister for Nuclear Energy Viktor Mikhaylov and US Energy Secretary Hazel O'Leary signed a protocol in Washington in which Russia agreed to end its production and separation of weapons-grade plutonium. Plutonium production will cease one year after Russia has alternative energy supplies.
["Russia Agreed To Phase Out Weapons-Grade Plutonium Production...," NUCLEAR NEWS, 4/94, p. 71.]
 
12/93: GORE AND CHERNOMYRDIN DISCUSS RUSSIAN PLUTONIUM PRODUCING REACTORS
US Vice President Gore and Russian Prime Minister Chernomyrdin discussed the issue of closing the remaining Russian plutonium producing reactors.
[Frank von Hippel, "Fissile-Material Security In The Post-Cold War World," draft of article for PHYSICS TODAY, 3/16/95, p. 6.]

Page last updated 17 December 2003
This file is no longer being updated.  For major recent developments, see the Nuclear Fuel Cycle Developments file.

Comments or questions? Contact Elena Sokova at MIIS CNS: esokovaATmiis.edu

This material is produced independently for NTI by the Center for Nonproliferation Studies at the Monterey Institute of International Studies and does not necessarily reflect the opinions of and has not been independently verified by NTI or its directors, officers, employees, agents. Copyright © 2002 by MIIS.

HOME  |  CONTACT US  |  SITE MAP