Nuclear Weapons 37 - U.S. Nuclear Plant Security Report 1 - The Report
There has always been a close connection between nuclear weapons and nuclear power. A great deal of the motivation for launching the commercial nuclear power industry was to provide more support for the nuclear weapons programs in the U.S. and the Soviet Union during the Cold War. As other nations developed their own nuclear weapons programs, a global movement arose to oppose the proliferation of nuclear weapons. Treaties were created to limit nuclear arsenals and to restrict the flow of nuclear weapons technologies and materials to countries which did not yet have their own nuclear weapons. As nuclear arsenals have been reduced in the major nuclear nations, other efforts have been aimed at insuring that facilities for fueling nuclear reactors are not used for refining weapons grade nuclear materials. There are stringent internationals sanctions against Iran right now over the fear that they are developing nuclear weapons under the guise of commercial power reactor development and fueling. Another fear is that terrorists might attack commercial nuclear reactors with the intent of causing a nuclear accident or stealing nuclear materials to be used for dirty bombs or refined into weapons grade materials.
The Nuclear Proliferation Preventing Project is a program at the University of Texas that “engages in research, debate, and public education to ensure that civilian applications of nuclear technology do not foster the spread of nuclear weapons to states or terrorist groups.” They receive funding from the Department of Defense. Recently they released a report on the vulnerability of U.S. commercial nuclear reactors to terrorist attacks. The report was released on August 15, 2013 and is titled Protecting U.S. Nuclear Facilities from Terrorist Attack: Re-assessing the Current “Design Basis Threat” Approach.
The report concluded that all one hundred and seven commercial reactors in the United States are vulnerable to terrorist attack. Eleven reactors that were especially vulnerable were highlighted. Eight reactors that were said to be unprotected from attack by sea were Diablo Canyon in California, St. Lucie in Florida, Brunswick in North Carolina, Surry in Virginia, Indian Point in New York, Millstone in Connecticut, Pilgrim in Massachusetts, and the South Texas Project. In addition, the three U.S. commercial reactors that are fuelled with nuclear weapons grade uranium were also said to be particularly vulnerable. These three reactors are located at the University of Missouri in Columbia, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and the National Institute of Standards in Washington, D.C.
The report made reference to the 911 attack of 2001. The authors charge that none of the commercial reactors in the U.S. are protected against an attack of the scale of 911. It is thought that the 911 hijackers considered flying a plane into the Indian Point Reactor near New York City but decided against it because they were certain that such an important target would be protected by anti-aircraft missiles. Fortunately for citizens on New York City and surrounding area, the hijackers were mistaken.
In general, U.S. commercial reactors are designed and staffed against smaller scale attacks known as “design basis threats”. Some are better protected that others which are considered to be less attractive to attack or less dangerous. However, those protecting the reactors don’t really know exactly how terrorist would evaluate potential targets and it is hard to know exactly what harm a particular reactor attack could cause. The report recommends that all U.S. commercial reactors be hardened against the maximum credible terrorist threat.
