A Chernobyl reminder just off our shores

Phoenix Gazette, 24 February 1996

Here is a prediction:

On the 10th anniversary of the world’s worst nuclear accident
— the April 26, 1986, Chernobyl nuclear power station meltdown
in Ukraine — the world will be treated to vows of “never
again,” and pledges of strict safety standards being applied
to nuclear plants all over the globe.

The death toll from Chernobyl has been estimated to be as
high as 125,000– a disproportionate share of those casualties
said to be among children, pregnant women and rescue workers. The
death rate in northern Ukraine rose 16 percent with a concomitant
escalation in thyroid and organ cancers.

With such catastrophic results, an anniversary of vows of
“never again” and uttered pledges of heightened safety
at nuclear plants are appropriate, understandable, and, yes,
predictable.

But at a time when the world’s sensibilities will once again
be set tingling with the memories of Chernobyl, why is the United
States tolerating the construction of another Chernobyl-like
plant just off her coast near Cienfuegos, Cuba?

Silence from White House

In fact, it is there at the Juragua nuclear complex where the
Russians are helping the Cubans complete two nuclear reactors —
while the Clinton administration watches.

No American has been more outspoken about the potential
dangers in Cuba than Roger W. Robinson Jr., who served as senior
director for International Economic Affairs at the National
Security Council during the Reagan administration.

Since leaving government service, Mr. Robinson has been a
strong, unwavering voice for action, especially in his position
as a member of the board of advisers of the Center for Security
Policy in Washington.

In testimony given before the House International Relations
Committee’s subcommittee on the Western Hemisphere last summer,
Mr. Robinson articulated his concerns:

• Sixty percent of the Russian-supplied materials used in
  these reactors are defective, according to knowledgeable
  Cuban defectors from the project.
• Integral reactor systems — including the reactor vessel
  itself, six steam generators, five primary coolant pumps,
  12 isolation valves and more — were stored outside for
  up to 18 months, exposed to highly corrosive tropical sea
  air and weather.
• The support structures of key reactor components contain
  numerous structural defects.
• The containment dome of the first reactor is designed to
  withstand pressures of only 7 pounds per square inch,
  compared with 50 psi in American-style reactors, leaving
  the Juragua dome exponentially weaker than an American
  reactor even in the event that the dome functions
  perfectly as designed, an unlikely prospect in the
  current situation.
• As many as 15 percent of the 5,000 previously approved
  welds in the reactor’s auxiliary plumbing, containment
  dome and spent-fuel cooling systems were X-rayed and
  found to be defective due to air pockets, poor soldiering
  and heat damage.

Mr. Robinson notes that despite these dangers, Russian
support for the project remains high, especially from Viktor
Mikhailov, head of the Ministry of Atomic Energy (MinAtom) and a
holdover from the old Soviet era.

Apparently Mr. Mikhailov is attempting to craft an
international consortium to complete the $2 billion facility with
the help of European suppliers such as Germany’s Siemens;
Electrictie de France and Ansaldo SpA of Italy.

Equally concerned about Cienfuegos is Sen. Jon Kyl, who
served as co-chairman of the Cienfuegos Task Force in the House
and subsequently urged that U.S. aid to Russia be reduced by
whatever amount Moscow invested in the Cuban nuclear facility.

With completion and fueling of the facility possible in the
1997-98 time frame, it is obvious that the Juragua reactors pose
a clear and present danger to the United States. Over 50 million
Americans might be exposed to a radioactive plume in the event of
a Juragua accident.

But where are the environmentalists? Where is Greenpeace and
Worldwatch? Silent.

Where are the anti-nuclear activists such as retired Rear
Adm. Eugene Carroll and Jack Mendelsohn of the Arms Control
Association? They are positively sanguine about what is going on
in Cuba.

‘Red herring’

“The cry of another Chernobyl is a red herring by people
who don’t want the plant completed,” says Adm. Carroll.

Where is the Clinton administration?

The president gives his blessing to an April meeting on
nuclear safety — hosted by Moscow, with not so much as a public
whisper about Cuba’s nuclear facility.

Where are the Republican presidential candidates, all of whom
articulate a concern for the future of America? Not a word about
Cuba’s nuclear facility.

But come the 10th anniversary of the world’s worst nuclear
accident, we will hear vows of dedication to safe nuclear
technology. Thanks to singular voices such as Roger W. Robinson
Jr., a few Americans will take those vows seriously.