RE: Terrorist attacks on nuclear facilities

[keith.millington@TFT.CSIRO.AU]

Dear Nick,



All the information I have posted here is already in the public domain. 

After yesterday's nauseating events,  many people, particularly informed

members of the public (and including reactor staff and their families) who

live near operating nukes will have similar concerns about this possibility.



Ignoring this issue won't make it go away - the only way to reduce the

probability of its occurrence is for governments to invest very significant

resources in improving their intelligence operations, to recruit inside

knowledge and infiltrate terrorist organisations. This certainly won't come

cheap - and needs public awareness of the potential issues and their support

/ leverage to make it happen. The alternative is for a lobby groups within

the US govt to waste vast resources on a white elephant like the missile

defence system, totally useless against real world scenarios like

yesterdays. 



cheers, Keith



(my opinions solely, not my employers)



-----Original Message-----

From: Tsurikov, Nick [mailto:nick.tsurikov@iluka.com]

Sent: Thursday, 13 September 2001 12:14 PM

To: radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu

Cc: 'keith.millington@TFT.CSIRO.AU'

Subject: RE: Terrorist attacks on nuclear facilities





Dear friends,



I hate to be a voice of reason, but I would seriously appreciate if things

like that (especially the details) are NOT discussed on the OPEN list. 



Kind regards

Nick Tsurikov

Eneabba, Western Australia

http://www.eneabba.net/ <http://www.eneabba.net/>  





		-----Original Message-----

		From:	keith.millington@TFT.CSIRO.AU

[mailto:keith.millington@TFT.CSIRO.AU]

		Sent:	Thursday, 13 September 2001 07:50

		To:	radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu

		Subject:	RE: Terrorist attacks on nuclear facilities



		It's reassuring to hear that the design criteria for US

nuclear plants

		considers the impact of a fully-fuelled commercial jet.

However in the UK

		(apart from the PWRs at Sizewell ) nuclear power plants are

		graphite-moderated, primary CO2-cooled Magnox and AGRs with

far larger cores

		(and hence, I think, larger containment vessels)  than PWRs.

Intuitively, I

		would expect larger containment vessels to be weaker, and

therefore more

		vulnerable, but I'm not an engineer and would be interested

in more expert

		advice. 



		In particular several of the Magnox stations still operating

were built in

		the 1950s / early 1960s. I'm not sure  how the Magnox or AGR

facilities

		would stand up against a fully-fuelled 767. If the

containment is breached,

		there is of course the possibility of a graphite fire (cf

Windscale stored

		energy release incident in 1957, Chernobyl 1986), with very

serious

		consequences.  



		Maybe somebody working at the UK Nuclear Installations

Inspectorate, or the

		UK companies now operating these reactors (I was there in

the good old CEGB

		days) could provide more knowledgeable and up-to-date

comments. 



		It's a great pity that, following yesterday's events, these

low-probability

		concerns have now become a reality.



		Keith Millington

		 



		-----Original Message-----

		From: Dukelow, James S Jr [mailto:jim.dukelow@pnl.gov]

		Sent: Thursday, 13 September 2001 3:29 AM

		To: 'Jack Earley'; keith.millington@TFT.CSIRO.AU;

		radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu

		Subject: RE: Terrorist attacks on nuclear facilities







		The ability of containment to survive the impact of a

fully-fueled large jet

		liner has been one of the nuclear plant design criteria for

many years.  I

		suspect there are no operating nuclear plants in the U.S.

and most other

		countries that are not designed to survive such an impact

and safely shut

		down.



		Best regards.



		Jim Dukelow

		Pacific Northwest National Laboratory

		Richland, WA

		jim.dukelow@pnl.gov



		These comments are mine and have not been reviewed and/or

approved by my

		management or by the U.S. Department of Energy.



		-----Original Message-----

		From: Jack Earley [mailto:jearley@enercon.com]

		Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2001 4:59 AM

		To: keith.millington@TFT.CSIRO.AU;

radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu

		Subject: Re: Terrorist attacks on nuclear facilities





		As I recall, since TMI is near the Harrisburg International

Airport, its

		containment was designed to withstand the impact of a 737 at

600 mph. I

		suppose any future plants should now take that design

feature into account.



		Jack Earley

		Radiological Engineer



		Enercon Services, Inc.

		6525 N. Meridian, Suite 503

		OKC, OK  73116

		phone: 405-722-7693

		fax:       405-722-7694

		jearley@enercon.com



	

************************************************************************

		You are currently subscribed to the Radsafe mailing list. To

unsubscribe,

		send an e-mail to Majordomo@list.vanderbilt.edu  Put the

text "unsubscribe

		radsafe" (no quote marks) in the body of the e-mail, with no

subject line.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

************************************************************************

You are currently subscribed to the Radsafe mailing list. To unsubscribe,

send an e-mail to Majordomo@list.vanderbilt.edu  Put the text "unsubscribe

radsafe" (no quote marks) in the body of the e-mail, with no subject line.