Text of APCO Worldwide statement concerning its work for Russian nuclear industry

The Hill published a story on Tuesday about the Clinton Global Initiative’s undercounting of support from APCO Worldwide.

The complete statement from APCO Worldwide Executive Chairwoman and Founder Margery Kraus to The Hill about its work for Tenex, a subsidiary of Russian nuclear firm Rosatom:

“APCO Worldwide’s activities involving client work on behalf of Tenex and The Clinton Global Initiative were totally separate and unconnected in any way. All activities on these two unconnected activities were appropriate, publicly documented from the outset and consistent with regulations and the law. Any assertion otherwise is false, unfounded and a lie.

“APCO was retained by Tenex and completed contractual work that was properly disclosed at the time to the U.S. Department of Justice in filings.

“APCO’s relationship with CGI was a corporate membership in the organization and in-kind support assisting CGI and its members with media relations. APCO had no relationship with the Clinton Foundation, or with former President Bill Clinton or Hillary Clinton. The relationship with CGI was publicly well documented.

“APCO began supporting CGI in the 2007-2008 period. CGI held annual meetings in New York City that attracted many of the most creative, high-profile players in corporate philanthropy, an area of focus at APCO for more than 30 years. APCO agreed to support the meeting because of our experience and because of the visibility it offered for a communications firm that had long-standing interest in this space.  

“Our first discussion with Tenex occurred in 2010. APCO, having maintained an office in Moscow since 1988, with a long pedigree in global energy issues, sought the opportunity to pitch Tenex in the context of a rapidly changing nuclear market. The so-called nuclear renaissance was driving a bullish assessment of the sector. In the U.S., Tenex had already been supplying one half of the LEU used in American plants. Tenex was the single largest supplier of U.S. energy through the “megatons for megawatts” agreement of the 1990s. The pending expiration of that agreement and the scale of the market opportunity in the U.S. (exemplified by the Obama Administration’s decision to extend loan guarantees) meant that Tenex would need to compete in a new market on standard commercial terms. This meant a few things:

• A Civil Nuclear Cooperation Agreement would be needed. These bilateral agreements govern any business relations with countries on nuclear energy;
• Modifications to an agreement with the U.S. Commerce Department and a settlement from 1992 on LEU dumping would be needed to authorize Tenex to compete across the sector;
• Tenex would need to seek visibility in the market and partnerships beyond selling LEU as a commodity, including its additional technologies.

“Our work on behalf of Tenex, including a description of the scope of work, fees, schedules and reporting requirements, is easily found in FARA filings that APCO made at the time. Both APCO’s original engagement and a one year extension remain in the online FARA database maintained by the U.S. Department of Justice.

“Our work with CGI – an entirely separate matter with separate teams – is featured in our UN Global Compact Reports.”