"The NRC says jet can wreck nuke plant"?

[muckerheide <muckerheide@attbi.com>]

Has anyone looked at potential destruction of containment from outside,

non-penetrating, force?  And what does NRC actually say here?



Regards, Jim

============



Jet could wreck TMI, NRC admits



Designers didn't anticipate size, speed of today's planes



Thursday, March 28, 2002

By Brett Lieberman 

Of Our Washington Bureau



WASHINGTON -- Government regulators have acknowledged for the first time

that neither Three Mile Island nor any of the nation's other 102 operating

nuclear reactors could withstand the impact of an airliner the size of those

that crashed into the World Trade Center and the Pentagon.



Industry representatives and federal government officials downplayed the

threat in days after the Sept. 11 attacks, insisting that nuclear

containment buildings are "robust" and capable of withstanding explosions

and natural disasters.



In newly released documents, however, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission

concedes that even an accidental airplane crash was not factored into the

designs of 96 percent of U.S. nuclear plants. At those plants where the

threat was considered, design changes were aimed at smaller airplanes

traveling at slower speeds.



"When the plants were designed, large aircrafts that are presently used were

not in use," NRC spokeswoman Sue Gagner said.



The agency also acknowledged that critical systems that provide cooling,

electricity and storage of spent fuel are mostly in nonhardened buildings

that could not withstand an aircraft or missile attack.



The revelations were included in a report made available by U.S. Rep. Edward

J. Markey, D-Mass., based on responses to his queries from NRC Chairman

Richard A. Meserve. Markey, a frequent critic of the NRC, said the agency's

acknowledgment shows additional steps must be taken to improve nuclear plant

safety. 



The "NRC has admitted that even an aircraft impact at the auxiliary

electrical or cooling facilities could trigger a core meltdown at a nuclear

reactor, and yet the NRC refuses to upgrade security, refuses to install

anti-aircraft weaponry, refuses to ensure that security at decommissioned

reactors is maintained, and refuses to ensure that foreign nationals

employed at the reactors undergo security background checks," he said.



Yesterday, the agency maintained that reactors remain difficult targets

although it has not evaluated the effects of a plane crash.



"Even though they were not designed to withstand aircraft crashes, they are

extremely rugged structures," Gagner said.



While many nuclear plants, including those in Pennsylvania, have had

additional protection from National Guard troops and state police since

Sept. 11, the NRC has rejected the idea of deploying anti-aircraft weapons.



When most plants were built in the 1960s and 1970s, the NRC and plant owners

never contemplated that a large airliner would intentionally be crashed into

a nuclear plant. Consideration of an airplane crash was limited to

accidents. 



Fifty-five of the nation's 60 nuclear plants lie within 15 miles of public

airports. Most are small airports, carrying fewer than 100,000 departing

passengers a year, according to NRC and FAA data.



Nine operating plants, including TMI, are near airports that serve more than

100,000 passengers. Other airports near nuclear plants include international

airports in Charlotte, N.C., and near Pittsburgh.



Three Mile Island in Londonderry Twp., three miles from Harrisburg

International Airport, is the only nuclear power plant "constructed with

special design features to protect vital areas from crash impact and fire

effects," the new documents state.



However, those features -- reinforcement of outer walls, thickening of

concrete sections, special fire protection and ventilation -- would likely

be inadequate, according to the NRC.



TMI -- which was hit by the nation's worst nuclear accident 23 years ago

today, on March 28, 1979 -- was designed to withstand the impact of 200,000

pounds at 230 mph. A Boeing 757 or 767 such as those used in the New York

and Washington attacks on Sept. 11 weighs 272,500 to 450,000 pounds. The

planes used in those attacks traveled at speeds of 350 mph to 537 mph when

they struck. 



TMI was not built to withstand the impact of a larger airplane because "the

probability of an on-site crash was sufficiently low," the NRC stated.



Two other plants -- the Limerick nuclear plant near Pottstown and Seabrook

plant in Portsmouth, N.H., -- incorporated more modest features to help them

withstand the impact of an airplane weighing up to 12,500 pounds.



"With respect to the remaining sites, the probability of an aircraft impact

was either estimated or judged by inspection to be sufficiently low such

that the event need not be considered in the design basis," NRC documents

state. 



David Lochbaum, nuclear safety engineer for the Union of Concerned

Scientists, said it would be difficult to retrofit existing plants, but new

safety features should be incorporated in the next generation of plants.



"The plants are what they are," said Lochbaum. "It's too late to go back and

install 6 more feet of concrete."



Brett Lieberman may be reached at (202)383-7833 or

blieberman@patriot-news.com.



Copyright 2002 Penn Live. All Rights Reserved.



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

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 can view the Radsafe archives at http://www.vanderbilt.edu/radsafe/