'Active Protection' From Airborne Attack Military
Responsibility
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."