Re: [DOEWatch] Oil and Gas Energy infrastructure a terrorist target-FBI Warning

[SAFarberMSPH@CS.COM]

Radsafers:

I received a reply  [copied below] from a New England area anti-nuclear activist, Ray Shadis of Maine, who has posted at times to Radsafe to the post I made to DOEWatch about sabotage warnings by the FBI regarding natural gas and oil industries. 


Mr. Shadis, as noted below,  makes much of some content he states was included in NCRP Draft Report SC 46-14 " Radiation Protection Issues Related to Terrorist Activities That Result in a Dispersal of Radioactive Material, " September 2000. I believe reference was made to this draft document in earlier discussions on Radsafe. However, not having either the draft or final reports at hand [or a copy of the earlier posts on this subject], I am not able to respond specifically to Mr. Shadis' claims about dispersal of radioactivity from 100 kg of 5 year old fuel by 1000 lbs of TNT [equivalent] and what was assumed in the calculation. I would assume that this calculation makes the initial assumption that the fuel was not in a cask, but I'm not sure. 


Does someone have the details of what was assumed in coming up with the dose estimate claimed in the post by Mr. Shadis as having been in the Draft NCRP Report SC 46-14??


If this information has been posted earlier to Radsafe, perhaps someone could email me a copy. It would seem informative to critique Mr. Shadis' claims if there are serious flaws in fact or emphasis both in reply to DOEWatch [which I could post until I get thrown off their "discussion" group.], or to the distribution for his post below.


Thanks for any help in clarifying these rather extreme  claims of nuclear plant vulnerability


Stewart Farber, MSPH

Public Health Sciences

email: SAFarberMSPH@cs.com


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

Forwarded Message: 

Subj:   Re: [DOEWatch] Oil and Gas Energy infrastructure a terrorist target-FBI Warning  

Date:   11/26/01 4:10:08 PM Pacific Standard Time   

    


From:    shadis@ime.net (Raymond Shadis)

Reply-to:    shadis@ime.net (Raymond Shadis)

To:    nrc_concerns@yahoogroups.com (NRC CONCERNS), doewatch@yahoogroups.com (DOEWATCH), radiumproj@cs.com


Dear Mr. Farber,

     Please reconcile your notion of limited offsite consequences for

radiological sabotage with the offsite dose estimates and dose distributions

in appendix A of  the NCRP Draft Report SC 46-14 " Radiation Protection

Issues Related to Terrorist Activities That Result in a Dispersal of

Radioactive Material, " September 2000.


Graphs in that document show some extraordinary doses ( 600 REM) at about

110 kilometers 24 hours Post-Blast for 100 kg of 5 year old fuel distributed

by 1000 lbs of TNT ( equivalent). As near as I can tell the estimates were

modeled by Tom Dahlstrom of Bechtel in Nevada. The graphs and accompanying

tables were thrown out in the final report NCRP 138,October 24, 2001,  as

was the title.


138 avoids quantification of radioactive material dispersal and dose and is

accordingly retitled, "Management of Terrorist Events Involving Radioactive

Material."


Some interesting, though strained, language remains in NCRP 138 on page 16,

" Spent nuclear fuel elements could also be targeted, but they contain much

less radioactive material than an operating reactor plant because of the

rapid decay fission products.

Concerning the affected area, health hazards would be similar to that which

occurred at Chernobyl, but on a significantly smaller scale...Areas at risk

from high-level radioactive waste dispersed by a large explosive device can

be many miles from the source. With a smaller amount of source material and

explosive, the area of concern is more in the range of several city blocks

or a few miles from the target area."


Coincidently, I had lunch today with a CNO from a large nuclear utility who

stated quite emphatically that he did not disagree with the consequence

figures in the SC 46-14 Draft.  Could you please put a rosy hue on all this

so that I don't engage in too much hand-wringing?


Thanks for all your diligent work in protecting the public health from

radiation hazards, minimal though they may be.


    Raymond Shadis

    Friends of the Coast

                                              Staff

Advisor

                                      New

England Coalition


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

From: <radiumproj@cs.com>

To: <Magnu96196@aol.com>; <doewatch@yahoogroups.com>;

<Downwinders@onelist.com>; <MATTWALD@nytimes.com>

Sent: Monday, November 26, 2001 2:48 PM

Subject: [DOEWatch] Oil and Gas Energy infrastructure a terrorist target-FBI

Warning



DOEWatch:


As noted in the AP wire story copied  below, the FBI has issued a strong

warning that terrorists linked to Osama bin Laden may target oil and natural

gas facilities in the US if he is captured or killed. Despite the hysterical

demands by various antinuclear groups  and individuals who post regularly to

DOEWatch since Sept. 11 that antiaircraft batteries and hundreds of National

Guardsman should be stationed at every nuclear power plant in the US, the

reality is nuclear power plants make rather poor targets for terrorists if

the goal is offsite consequences to health and safety.


Had the terrorist of Sept. 11 crashed one of the hijacked planes into a

nuclear plant vs. the World Trade Center it is most probable that thousands

of lives would have been saved.


Nuclear power plants with  three to four foot thick reinforced concrete

containment domes around vital plant systems, are the most resistant

structures to sabotage capable of causing serious damage of anything America

has ever built. Anti-nuclear hysteria whipped up in what is little more than

an attempt at propaganda by activist groups and individuals  does no one any

good [except those who only goal is to drive up nuclear energy costs at any

cost].


The unscientific and dogmatic hand-wringing  that many anti-nukes have

generated against nuclear power plants since Sept. 11, has only distracted

our nation from sensible planning against sabotage in non-nuclear energy

industries, and truly vulnerable targets where simple attacks could cause

massive loss of life and interruption of energy supply.


Stewart Farber, MS Public Health

Radium Experiment Assessment Project [REAP]

email: radiumproj@cs.com

=====

Energy Industry on Alert for Attack

By H. JOSEF HEBERT WASHINGTON (AP) - The oil and gas industry is on

especially high alert after a Federal Bureau of Investigation warning that

Osama bin Laden may have ordered retaliatory strikes against North American

natural gas facilities in event of his capture or death, industry sources

said Monday.................

...........................