Report: U.S. nuclear plants remain vulnerable to terrorists

[bananas]

Source: CNN

None of the 107 nuclear facilities in the United States are protected against a high-force terrorist attack, and some are still vulnerable to the theft of bomb-grade nuclear fuel, or sabotage intended to cause a nuclear meltdown, a new report says.

The Nuclear Proliferation Prevention Project (NPPP) at the LBJ School of Public Affairs at the University of Texas released the report Thursday. It wants to shine a light on the security gaps that still exist more than 10 years after the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001.

"It would be a tragedy if the United States had to look back after such an attack on a nuclear reactor and say that we could have and should have done more to prevent the catastrophe," said Prof. Alan J. Kuperman, co-author of the report.

The study was done at the request of the Defense Department after the Pentagon commissioned an academic study of the security vulnerabilities of the nation's 104 commercial nuclear power reactors and three civilian research reactors.

<snip>

Read more: http://www.cnn.com/2013/08/15/us/nuclear-plants-security/?hpt=hp_t1

[bananas]

1. Study: All 107 U.S. nuclear reactors vulnerable to terrorists

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-201_162-57598723/study-all-107-u.s-nuclear-reactors-vulnerable-to-terrorists/

Study: All 107 U.S. nuclear reactors vulnerable to terrorists

By BRIAN MONTOPOLI / CBS NEWS/ August 15, 2013, 2:46 PM

Every commercial nuclear reactor in the United States is insufficiently protected against "credible" terrorist threats, according to a new report (PDF) from the Nuclear Proliferation Prevention Project at the University of Texas at Austin.

The report found that facilities were vulnerable to the theft of bomb-grade nuclear materials and sabotage attacks designed to cause a meltdown.

While all 107 commercial nuclear power reactors were thought to be vulnerable, the report spotlighted 11 that were most at risk. That included eight reactors that were deemed unprotected from attacks from the sea: 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.

Three civilian reactors fueled with bomb-grade uranium were also deemed particularly vulnerable. They are housed at the University of Missouri in Columbia, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in Cambridge, and the National Institute of Standards and Technology - which is within 25 miles of the White House. Unlike military facilities that hold bomb-grade uranium, the report found, these facilities are not sufficiently defended against a credible terrorist threat.

As a release announcing the report notes, the Sept. 11 hijackers considered flying a passenger get into a New York City-area nuclear reactor.

<snip>

[bananas]

2. U.S. nuclear power plants vulnerable to 9/11-style attacks: report

http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/08/15/us-usa-nuclear-vulnerabilities-idUSBRE97E18I20130815

U.S. nuclear power plants vulnerable to 9/11-style attacks: report

By Timothy Gardner
WASHINGTON | Thu Aug 15, 2013 7:07pm EDT

(Reuters) - U.S. nuclear power plants are not adequately protected from threats, including the theft of bomb-grade material that could be used to make weapons and attacks intended to cause a reactor meltdown, a University of Texas report said on Thursday.

Not one of the country's 104 commercial nuclear reactors or three research reactors is protected against an attack involving multiple players such as the ones carried out by 19 airplane hijackers on 9/11, said the report by the Nuclear Proliferation Prevention Project, or NPPP, at the University of Texas, Austin.

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) only requires power plants to protect against attacks carried out by five or six people, according to the report, entitled Protecting U.S. Nuclear Facilities from Terrorist Attack. In addition, the NRC does not require plants to protect themselves against attacks from high-powered sniper rifles and rocket-propelled grenades.

The three research reactors, including one in Gaithersburg, Maryland, 24 miles from the White House, are powered by highly enriched uranium that if stolen could be used to make nuclear weapons, the report said.

Power utilities have argued they have done all they can to ensure security at plants without dramatically raising power bills, adding that it is the responsibility of the U.S. government to defend against attacks, said Alan Kuperman, the NPPP coordinator and a co-author of the report. "The problem is that's not occurring," he said.

<snip>

[iandhr]

3. In other news...

the earth is round.

[ConcernedCanuk]

9. LOL!

.
.
.



CC

[MarkLaw]

4. Diluting regulations so that failing facilities are able to pass is a more direct threat.

I'm more worried about release of radioactive material because of wear and tear than I am of terrorist with the ability to penetrate the facility.

[tofuandbeer]

5. The San Onofre California plant...

This never looked secure to me, as I drove down toward San Diego—it's right off the freeway and on the beach head.
I'm hoping they have the best radar available for ocean vessels.

[bemildred]

6. My God! I think probably near the whole damn country is poorly protected from a high-force attack.

And twelve years after 9/11 too, it's like nothing has been done. The incompetence, the neglect this shows! It's criminal.

[Aliceoh]

7. Need more security measures

I heard that Alqaeda is going to attack U.S. someday. If nuclear plant is attacked, the damaged will be beyond our imagination.
So, we need more security measures against them.

[Celefin]

8. This might say something about the classified real threat level assessment

...which might be inconsistent with the publicly announced threat level regarding another high force terrorist attack.
Seems strange that these super-high-value targets remain largely unprotected. But then of course expensive multi layer anti-terrorist security at these installations wouldn't have any impact on public perception as they are off limits to the public anyway.

Call me a cynic.

[malthaussen]

10. Or anyway, 80 year old nuns. n/t