Skip to main content

NEI Responds to NPPP Report on Security at U.S. Nuclear Power Plants

By
A few minutes ago, NEI issued a statement concerning the security of the nation's 100 operating nuclear reactors. The statement comes in response to the release yesterday of a report by the Nuclear Proliferation Prevention Project. Here's the nut graf:
A report by a graduate research assistant at the University of Texas’ Nuclear Proliferation Prevention Project, released Aug. 15, is an academic paper developed for discussion among academia of the appropriate security levels at nuclear energy facilities. It is not a full assessment of security, nor does the author of the report have access to the safeguarded information that she would need to make such as assessment.

Like many such evaluations that examine the potential theft of uranium fuel from commercial reactors, the NPPP report fails to explain how attackers would be able to dislodge highly irradiated uranium fuel—800 to 1,200-pound, 18-foot-tall fuel bundles—and maneuver them from reactors, storage pools or steel and concrete containers past layers of elaborate security.
See our website for more information on nuclear power plant security.
Labels:

Comments

jimwg said…
That report didn't have to be accurate to deliver its true intent of seeding doubt and fear to prompt shutting down and abolishing nuclear plants.

James Greenidge
Queens BY
August 16, 2013 at 10:51 PM
Anonymous said…
Anyone else notice the NPPP "staff" claimed the Japan quake drained the Fukushima spent fuel pools?

It's tough to avoid the conclusion they intentionally released that steaming pile of fetid dingo kidneys in the middle of the August news desert, complete with the "SO CLOSE to the White House" fearmongering. And the media dutifully gnawed on that dry bone. Sad.
August 17, 2013 at 6:16 AM
Atomikrabbit said…
The Fukushima #4 SFP canard, and not even accurately enumerating the number of operating power plants (100, plus the 3 research reactors they worry about), raised my suspicions about accuracy immediately.

But to NEI - most PWR fuel weighs 1000 lbs and is 12 feet long; BWR less. I know of no assemblies 18 feet long.
August 18, 2013 at 12:00 PM
Anonymous said…
Thank you for the statement in bold, "nor does the author of the report have access to the safeguarded information that she would need to make such as assessment."

Sadly, I must also agree with James Greenidge.

Steve
August 19, 2013 at 12:51 PM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Wednesday Update

By
From NEI’s Japan micro-site: NRC, Industry Concur on Many Post-Fukushima Actions Industry/Regulatory/Political Issues • There is a “great deal of alignment” between the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission and the industry on initial steps to take at America’s nuclear energy facilities in response to the nuclear accident in Japan, Charles Pardee, the chief operating officer of Exelon Generation Co., said at an agency briefing today. The briefing gave stakeholders an opportunity to discuss staff recommendations for near-term actions the agency may take at U.S. facilities. PowerPoint slides from the meeting are on the NRC website. • The International Atomic Energy Agency board has approved a plan that calls for inspectors to evaluate reactor safety at nuclear energy facilities every three years. Governments may opt out of having their country’s facilities inspected. Also approved were plans to maintain a rapid response team of experts ready to assist facility operators recoverin...
Post a Comment
Read more

Fluor Invests in NuScale

By
You know, it’s kind of sad that no one is willing to invest in nuclear energy anymore. Wait, what? NuScale Power celebrated the news of its company-saving $30 million investment from Fluor Corp. Thursday morning with a press conference in Washington, D.C. Fluor is a design, engineering and construction company involved with some 20 plants in the 70s and 80s, but it has not held interest in a nuclear energy company until now. Fluor, which has deep roots in the nuclear industry, is betting big on small-scale nuclear energy with its NuScale investment. "It's become a serious contender in the last decade or so," John Hopkins, [Fluor’s group president in charge of new ventures], said. And that brings us to NuScale, which had run into some dark days – maybe not as dark as, say, Solyndra, but dire enough : Earlier this year, the Securities Exchange Commission filed an action against NuScale's lead investor, The Michael Kenwood Group. The firm "misap...
1 comment
Read more

Activists' Claims Distort Facts about Advanced Reactor Design

By
Below is from our rapid response team . Yesterday, regional anti-nuclear organizations asked federal nuclear energy regulators to launch an investigation into what it claims are “newly identified flaws” in Westinghouse’s advanced reactor design, the AP1000. During a teleconference releasing a report on the subject, participants urged the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to suspend license reviews of proposed AP1000 reactors. In its news release, even the groups making these allegations provide conflicting information on its findings. In one instance, the groups cite “dozens of corrosion holes” at reactor vessels and in another says that eight holes have been documented. In all cases, there is another containment mechanism that would provide a barrier to radiation release. Below, we examine why these claims are unwarranted and why the AP1000 design certification process should continue as designated by the NRC. Myth: In the AP1000 reactor design, the gap between the shield bu...
23 comments
Read more