Late in May Parliament of Finland approved the government decision to construct the fifth unit of nuclear power plant in Finland. It is expected that Russian design on the basis of reactor VVER-1000 will be presented as well for unit construction tender. Such world known companies as "General Electric" (USA) and European concern "Framatome ANP" may become competitors of Russia. In his exclusive interview to Nuclear.Ru Director General of JSC "Atomstroyexport" Victor Kozlov told about the present position of Russia in the international market of nuclear power projects construction as well as concerning perspectives for the future:

Nuclear.Ru: Naturally, the first question: what are Russia's chances to win the tender for construction of the fifth NPP unit in Finland and who is going to compete us there?

V. Kozlov: Our possible competitor is French-German concern "Framatome ANP", and besides Swedish, English and American companies, which have already united their efforts putting forward a mutual design – all in all there will be 3 or 4 competitors. Certainly, we are going to participate in the tender and casting aside certain political motives, I think we have good chances to be first. But unfortunately policy always interferes…

Nuclear.Ru: How many units are being constructed with Russia participation abroad nowadays?

V. Kozlov:Construction of two units at Tianwan NPP in China is in its active stage. Contract was signed four years ago and commissioning of the first unit is planned in 2004. Process of construction is in a very good shape; Chinese part intently supervises quality of equipment manufacturing. In Saint-Petersburg 60 Chinese experts perform acceptance of equipment at our factories every day. By the way in March Finnish delegation visited Tianwan NPP in order to learn more about fulfillment of design, which had been elaborated earlier for conditions of Finland. Due to the fact that the decision to construct NPP was delayed there we offered it to China. Finns liked the construction very much. Tianwan NPP design is more advanced from the point of level of compliance with modern safety requirements in comparison with designs of the French, Swedes and Americans. China sent the design to IAEA expertise and international experts favorably reviewed it. Many technical decisions are implemented at Tianwan NPP, which have not any analogues entire the world. For instance, “catcher” for hypothetical accident of corium.

Furthermore, we finish construction of unit at NPP "Bushehr" in Iran, which was stopped by German concern "Siemens" 30 years ago. There are no such precedents in the world to complete construction of the unit started by somebody else and, what is more, after quite a long period of time. As a consequence there is a delay with commissioning as per contract terms. But these are objective difficulties as it is easier to construct a new unit than to finish an old one. However the first unit of "Bushehr" NPP is in good condition and we conduct talks about its commissioning and operation arrangements. Today, having come to a conclusion that unit will be commissioned on time, Iran actively trains its personnel including training in Russia. Some more units may to be constructed in Iran. We forwarded to Iranian side our fusibility study of accomplishing the second unit of "Bushehr" NPP, which was also left off by Germans. Besides this construction of two more units is possible on other sites, but these matters are under consideration yet.

At the end of last year and early in 2002 we signed a number of contracts for construction of Indian NPP "Kudankulam". As distinct from Iran and China we do not have General Contract in India, but only the ones for service rendering and equipment supply. It is determined by the fact that India has own strong specialists in the area of nuclear power. 14 units are in operation there today though of small capacities, but nevertheless the level of specialists is very high. That is why they can be equitable participants of unit construction. Indian side is ready to sign a contract minimum for 2 more units and ideally – for 4-6 units. Governments of India and Russia are also considering this question, and actually being a general contractor, JSC "Atomstroyexport" puts into practice the contracts, which were already signed.

Nuclear.Ru: Some time ago information was published concerning the fact that Russia does not meet the schedule of Tianwan NPP construction and the reason for that was "potential loosing" of nuclear industry factories which occurred during the period when there was no NPP construction in Russia…

V. Kozlov: After Chernobyl accident all nuclear plant constructions were frozen, new orders did not come, factories specialized in manufacturing of reactor equipment stood idle, experts left – it was a tragedy for Russian nuclear industry. Few believed then that Russia could rise on the feet again in the field of nuclear power, let along to supply nuclear power projects abroad. Enterprises had large budget debts, they had to replace out of date equipment, to renew their personnel. Really in some cases manufacturers delayed supplies for 1-2 months but together with our partners we reacted flexibly, as final commissioning of unit depends on the way installation and commissioning activities are implemented. So, broadly speaking, today we meet the schedule of Tianwan NPP construction. I should admit that we analyze our shortcomings very closely and it is correct , as shortcomings should be eliminated. There is an interesting fact: The French constructed the first two units in China. They delayed the first unit commissioning for 2 years. They also faced some problems, and after their solution The French got order for constructions of other 2 units. While constructing such large and complicated projects construction schedule can be a matter of correction. Nuclear power plant is not a local electrical train, but even trains are late sometimes. I don’t mean that such a situation should become accepted practice, but contemporary requirements to unit construction are so strict that if it is necessary to stop work in order to learn the influence of any may be the most unimportant problem on further progress of work – it is carried out.

Nuclear.Ru: China is striving to enlarge its share in NPP construction. In this respect is it possible to speak about any perspectives of units construction by Russia at the said Tianwan NPP?

V. Kozlov: Chinese part declares that if unit commissioning is a success they are ready to give Russia another order for minimum 4 more units at the same site. China has got huge and permanently growing demands in energy supply. It is clear that new units are necessary, but exact dates of beginning of construction and commissioning depend on Chinese government, as well as on what will be included into the next five-year plan of economic development.

Nuclear.Ru: In your point of view, where does the wave of information in March this year concerning the failure to implement their obligation by Iranian side during "Bushehr" NPP construction come from?

V. Kozlov: During the whole period of our cooperation with Iran we are in the focus of permanent informational, psychological and political pressure. We are periodically accused of the fact that during our construction of NPP we supply Iranians with those technologies which can be used for manufacturing of nuclear weapon, though any expert can claim it is a mere provocation and profanation. Nevertheless, Iran apprehends some provocations, subversive activities, equipment damage during shipment by sea. We have plenty of foes. If we are "thrown off" Iran others will come to our place. May be even the United States, 30 years ago Iran was planning to construct 12 NPP units: 4 – with Germans, 4 – with the French and 4 – with Americans. Today we tackle the task, which could hardly be handled by anybody in the world: to accomplish the project using available equipment and structures. And we’ll manage this, but our competitors do not like it.

Nuclear.Ru: If technically such an accomplishment is possible could Russia finish commissioning of the third unit at Brazilian NPP "Angra" and were any talks conducted on this matter?

V. Kozlov: This variant may have been discussed somewhere, but no any serious meetings with participation of experts were held so far. By example of Iran we know that a detailed study of available infrastructure should be performed before contract signing. In theory it is possible to accomplish construction of anything. Though taking into consideration Iranian experience I can say it is possible in practice as well. On the one hand, it is more expensive for the customer as a careful study of a project triggers additional expenses. On the other, constructed buildings and structures can be used, for instance part of equipment, piping and pumps. We have the following agreement with Iran: if expenses for study and evaluation of equipment status are, let’s say, twice as less than the cost of new equipment, we use the units available. If more than this, we purchase new ones.

Nuclear.Ru: Payment within the frame contract with Iran is paid off in cash, but there are few contracts of such a type in the world. As a rule, units are constructed at the expense of Supplier’s credit. It is very profitable to construct NPP abroad, but is contemporary Russia able to grand such credits of millions worth?

V. Kozlov: International market for nuclear power equipment exists. And there are a lot of those, who want to enter it. Today our five units abroad are like a bone in the throat of our competitors, nobody has that many. Naturally they try to intercept these orders. According to modern international practice credits are granted under the following conditions: 15 % in cash, 85 % - credit. Payment of a credit by different installments is carried out during 10-15 years after unit commissioning. Some years ago credits were granted with 6-7 % annual rate. We signed contract with both China and India with 4% annual rate. It seems less, but today loans in the world are granted with 2-2.5 % annual rate. If the country is able or not – this is a question to the country. What is a nuclear power plant? It is mechanical engineering, instrument-making industry. If Russia does not want to lock itself in raw materials export, then equipment export for NPP is a bright example of abilities of Russian industry nowadays. The viewpoint of Ministry of Finance appears to be in contradiction with Russia’s interests in the area of export support of machinery and equipment. Ministry of Finance is like a chief accountant, who never has got money for anything, it saves cash and lives by today’s interests. On the other hand if we want to develop export Ministry of Finance is not in charge of that – export should be developed on the basis of state strategy. If there is a strategy, funds will be found.

Nuclear.Ru: India considered a possibility to modernize their own 500 MW heavy water reactors, enhancing to 750 MW and installing them at NPP "Kudankulam". Can Russia persuade India to continue construction of new units with VVER-1000 reactors?

V.Kozlov: India is eager to cooperate with us, but it is under strong pressure from the part of the USA. In general it is rather a complicated problem and it is connected first of all with the fact that up to now India has not signed Non-proliferation Agreement. But today the French began active work in India. I am sure they will solve the problem of unblocking India in that field, as they are interested in penetration into Indian market. They will convince their government of the fact that Indian contracts will provide activities for their own industry and create new working places. This question will be solved on the political level. We are not very active in this respect as we have not culture of lobbing our interests in the international scene.

Nuclear.Ru: In connection with politics. A number of countries in Eastern Europe, which claim to be EC members, are under pressure to close NPPs of Soviet construction period, which are in operation now. Are you afraid that such "shut down en masses" can undermine Russia’s position in competitive struggle?

V. Kozlov: There won't be any mass closing since countries –owners won’t allow this, they are actively fighting with that. In Bulgaria 50% of power supply of country are produced at 6 units NPP “Kozloduy”, Bulgaria is energy exporter and they want it to import electric power. EC persist in the first 4 units closing. Units No. 1 and 2 were constructed about 30 years ago and speaking fairly they should be decommissioned soon. But Bulgarians try to prove that their lifetime can be prolonged beyond design operating life with our assistance. The 3-rd unit of Novovoronezhskaya NPP with VVER-440 can be an example of successful modernization and prolongation of operating life. They can hardly be allowed to keep in operation units 1 and 2 of NPP "Kozloduy", but I am positive that they will bend around backward to keep their units 3 and 4 in operation. There won’t be any damage to Russia image. By the way, now our units in Bulgaria are in better condition in comparison with the units commissioned in the UK at the same period.

Nuclear.Ru: Now we suggest exporting units VVER –1000. If Russia starts construction of units VVER-1500 can they also become "an export variant"?

V. Kozlov: There is no doubt. But international practice is the following: first one should construct a unit at his own country, commission it, show its successful operation during 4 or 5 years and after that suggest it for export. In other words unit with VVER-1500 can be supplied abroad in 10 years. VVER-1000 is quite competitive by far. What is more, for certain countries capacity of 1500 MV is too high and power nets cannot support it. So VVER-1000 is optimal choice for them. A new generation of VVER-1000 provides enhanced safety level, example of which we construct at Tianwan NPP in China.


                         Material is presented from site Nuclear.Ru.