|
|||||
|
|||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||
 |
 |
    |
|
|
|||
 |
|
||
|
|||
|
|
|
|
||||||||
|
Experts Criticize U.S. Plan to Protect Nuclear Reactors
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission has rejected recommendations to require guard forces at nuclear reactors to be capable of defending against terrorists armed with such weapons as rocket-propelled grenades and armor piercing ammunition, the Associated Press reported yesterday (see GSN, Sept. 16, 2005). “Instead of sizing the [Design Basis Threat] on the actual threat, the NRC bases security standards on what the NRC, or perhaps the nuclear industry, believes a private guard force can be expected to handle,” said Peter Stockton, a former Energy Department security adviser now with the Project on Government Oversight. Industry and congressional sources familiar with the commission’s deliberations confirmed those decisions, according to AP. Preparation of the Design Basis Threat “takes into account not only what is the threat but what is reasonable for a private security force to protect against,” said Michael Weber, deputy director of the commission’s Nuclear Security and Incident Response Office. A declassified version of the plan indicates that guards must be prepared to defend against attacks from multiple directions including from water, though not from the air. It also assumes a potential suicide attack, AP reported. Sources said the plan anticipates an attack by about twice as many terrorists than had been assumed in plans prepared before Sept. 11, 2001. Such plans only had to anticipate four attackers, one of which was an inside accomplice. Attorneys general from seven states that contain 31 nuclear reactors said last year that the commission “should require defenses against attacks … by groups at least as large as that involved in the 9/11 attacks.” Nineteen men were involved in those strikes. Nuclear industry experts said most requirements in the plan have been implemented and that nuclear plants are much more secure than chemical plants and other potential terrorist targets. “We feel pretty good on balance that we have the right level or protection,” said Steven Floyd, vice president for regulatory affairs at the Nuclear Energy Institute, the industry lobbying group. “To be able to do what (some critics) are asking us to do we’d need our own army, navy and air force,” Floyd said. “We’ve never seen a [rocket-propelled grenade] used in this country,” he said (Josef Hebert, Associated Press/Yahoo!News, Feb. 22).
| ||||||||||
Back to top
