NRC: Stopping Aircraft Threat To Nuke Plants Impractical

'Active Protection' From Airborne Attack Military Responsibility
aeronews
Based in part on public comments obtained in November 2005, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission on Monday said protecting a nuclear power plant from a 9/11-style attack using an airliner is impractical given the scope of its responsibility.

The announcement came as the agency published the executive summary for a defense plan 15 months in the making. Specific details of the plan are considered secret by the US government, but in its statement the NRC said, "The active protection against airborne threats is addressed by other federal organizations, including the military."

Instead of devising ways to protect plants from attack -- such as the so-called "beamhenge" approach which would surround a vulnerable structure with a lattice-like barrier made from large, steel beams -- the NRC says plant operators should focus on limiting the public's exposure to radioactive material in the event of an attack using protection measures and evacuation plans already in place.

"This rule is an important piece, but only one piece, of a broader effort to enhance nuclear power plant security," said NRC Chairman Dale Klein. "Overall we are taking a multi-faceted approach to security enhancements in this post 9/11 threat environment, and looking at how best to secure existing nuclear power plants and how to incorporate security enhancements into design features of new reactors that may be built in coming years."

Predictably, the NRC is already under fire from critics of the plan, some of whom are saying the agency didn't fully account for the real-world threats of a terrorist attack.

Michele Boyd of Public Citizen's Energy Program, a nuclear industry watchdog group, told Business Week, "Rather than requiring measures to prevent a plane crash from damaging vulnerable parts of a nuclear plant ... the government is relying on post-crash measures and evacuation plans."

Those in favor of more active measures, such as US Senator Barbara Boxer of California, suggest the NRC should put plans in place to "defend against large, attacking forces and commercial aircraft."

The NRC argues it must plan for a "reasonable" response from the civilian security forces in place around most civilian nuclear facilities. As such, its security plan assumes a relatively small, lightly-armed attacking force. But critics say the plan doesn't even account for terrorist use of easily obtained, powerful weapons such as rocket-propelled grenades.

The NRC concluded its statement with, "The NRC remains an active partner with other federal and state/local authorities in constant surveillance of the threat environment and will adjust regulatory actions or requirements if necessary."