A RESPONSE TO LEGISLATIVE PROPOSALS TO IMPROVE SECURITY AT U.S. NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS

Since the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, concerns have been voiced that one of the nation’s 103 commercial nuclear power plants might be the next terrorist target. The U.S. House of Representatives passed legislation that could drastically revise Nuclear Regulatory Commission security requirements for nuclear facilities. A proposed Senate bill would federalize nuclear plant security forces. Additionally, there have been calls for installing anti-aircraft weapons at nuclear plants and creating permanent “no fly” zones around them. Further legislation proposing to improve the security of U.S. nuclear power plants is likely to follow. Some legislative proposals, such as the one to reassess the design basis threat against which nuclear plant security forces must defend, have merit as prudent responses to the threat to the nation posed by terrorism. Others, however, such as the call to federalize plant security forces, are ill-considered reactions that may be ineffective or that may have unintended consequences for the nuclear industry or the national defense against terrorism. This paper will describe and analyze current legislative proposals related to nuclear power plant security. It will identify the elements of the various proposals that are meritorious and those that are not. It will conclude with recommendations to the industry as to which proposals the industry should oppose and it will provide analysis the industry could use to persuade elected representatives to oppose those proposals.