|
|||||
|
|||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||
 |
 |
    |
|
|
|||
 |
|
||
|
|||
|
|
|
|
||||||||
|
Threat Assessment: U.S. Nuclear Plants Near Airports May Be at Risk of Airplane Attack Thousands of small airports are close to U.S. nuclear power plants, raising concerns that terrorists might attempt to attack a nuclear plant using a hijacked aircraft, USA Today reported today (see GSN, May 13). While security at major U.S. airports has been increased since the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, there is little to no security at most of the 18,000 “general aviation” airports that handle smaller aircraft, according to USA Today. “What would prevent some terrorist or criminal from taking a Learjet from a small airport?” said security consultant Jalal Haidar, senior vice president of Aerospace Services International. “They have no security measures. They’re a loophole in the overall aviation security system,” Haidar said. According to USA Today, more than 6,200 airports and heliports are within 60 miles of nuclear plants. Every U.S. nuclear plant is located within less than 20 miles of at least one public airport. Nuclear power plant operators have said, however, that most planes based at airports near nuclear plants are to small to cause the release large amounts of radiation (see GSN, Dec. 30, 2002). The concrete around a plant’s nuclear reactor would shield it from damage, and a crash attack on other sections of a plant would not result in a massive radiation release, they said. There is increased concern that a plant’s spent fuel pool might be more vulnerable to an attack using a hijacked aircraft because their roofs are often made of corrugated metal or concrete that is less thick than that of a reactor shell, according to USA Today (see GSN, Jan. 31). “It’s more difficult than a World Trade Center target but not beyond the capabilities of any commercial airline pilot,” airline pilot Marc Feigenblatt said, noting that an airplane attack on a spent fuel pool is possible. “It’s also not beyond the capabilities of a Sept. 11 terrorist with some degree of training in a commercial aircraft,” he said. Nuclear plant operators have said that commissioned studies indicate that while an airplane crash would damage a spent fuel pool, it would not result in a radiation release. After the Sept. 11 attacks, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission began a study as to the possible effects of an aircraft crashing into a nuclear power plant. The study remains uncompleted, though it has “the highest priority,” said NRC security chief Alan Madison, adding that science “does take time” (Gary Stoller, USA Today, June 11). The fear that terrorists might attempt to crash an aircraft into a nuclear site did not originate with the Sept. 11 attacks, according to USA Today. In 1972, three hijackers took control of a passenger flight during a stop in Birmingham, Ala., and threatened to crash the plane into a U.S. nuclear weapons plant in Oak Ridge, Tenn. The plane got as close as 8,000 feet above the site before the hijackers’ demands were met, USA Today reported. The hijackers were later arrested and imprisoned in Cuba after flying the plane to Havana. They were returned to Alabama in 1980, where they were sentenced to 20 to 25 years in prison each. Then have since been released (Gary Stoller, USA Today II, June 11).
| ||||||||||
Back to top
