[ RadSafe ] Re: NRC says new nuclear plants should be plane-proof

Wed Apr 25 12:08:51 CDT 2007

It is part of the never ending problem of wanting to build something
better without giving to opposition the opportunity to claim that you
think what you already have is junk.  It requires mealy-mouth
statements.

What I would like the "terrorists could crash a plane into it" opponents
of power plants to address is why they are not equally concerned about
sports stadiums.  There are far more stadiums than nuclear power plants,
and none of them are remotely able to withstand a crashing commercial
jet aircraft.  Where is the outrage that stadiums ignore this risk?  Are
the people who attend sporting events not worthy of being protected by
the concern of Activists? (OK, I will spot them NASCAR, but how about
the others?)  

On a rather more serious note, I would bet that there are thousands,
perhaps tens of thousands, of potential targets that, if hit with a wide
body jet, would result in greater loss of life and/or economic and
ecologic damage than a nuclear power plant, and none of them are
anything like as able to prevent and contain damage.   

-----Original Message-----
From: radsafe-bounces at radlab.nl [mailto:radsafe-bounces at radlab.nl] On
Behalf Of Sandy Perle
Sent: Wednesday, April 25, 2007 9:38 AM
To: radsafe at radlab.nl; powernet at hps1.org
Subject: [ RadSafe ] Re: NRC says new nuclear plants should be
plane-proof 

Does anyone see the irony in the recent statement from the NRC Chairman?

In the first instance, he states that new rules are "meant to protect
new reactors against a deliberate hit by a jet like those that rammed
into the World Trade Center and Pentagon on September 11, 2001" and then
goes on to say that current plants are adequately protected, "It will
not apply to the nation's existing 104 civilian nuclear power plants,
which already have adequate protection."

This would imply to me that the newer designs are not inherently as safe
since new designs must consider the potential for aircraft strike. If
the current designs are adequate, I would expect that new designs would
be just as adequate, unless the NRC is considering degrading many of the
current requirements in place.

Comments anyone?

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. nuclear reactor builders will likely have to
weigh the potential for a commercial aircraft strike when they design
new plants, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission said on Tuesday. 

The NRC's proposed rules are meant to protect new reactors against a
deliberate hit by a jet like those that rammed into the World Trade
Center and Pentagon on September 11, 2001, the commission said.

The proposal would apply to companies that want to build new reactors
whose designs have not received NRC certification, a spokesman for the
NRC said. It will not apply to the nation's existing 104 civilian
nuclear power plants, which already have adequate protection, he said.

----------------------------------------------------------------
Sandy Perle
Senior Vice President, Technical Operations Global Dosimetry Solutions,
Inc. 
2652 McGaw Avenue
Irvine, CA 92614

Tel: (949) 296-2306 / (888) 437-1714 Extension 2306
Tel: (949) 419-1000 Extension 2306
Fax:(949) 296-1144

Global Dosimetry Website: http://www.dosimetry.com/ Personal Website:
http://sandy-travels.com/ 

_______________________________________________
You are currently subscribed to the RadSafe mailing list

Before posting a message to RadSafe be sure to have read and understood
the RadSafe rules. These can be found at:
http://radlab.nl/radsafe/radsaferules.html

For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other settings
visit: http://radlab.nl/radsafe/