Vulnerability of North Anna Nuclear Generating Station in Virginia - Essay Example

Vulnerability of North Anna Nuclear Generating Station in Mineral, Virginia The susceptibility of nuclear plants to terrorism is of great concern as far as nuclear security and safety is concerned. Thus, civilian nuclear research reactors, nuclear power plants, particular naval fuel plants, fuel fabrication plants as well as uranium enrichment facilities are susceptible to terrorist attacks which may result in extensive radioactive contamination. In addition, the terrorist threat is of numerous general kinds; ranging from commando-like attacks from the ground, cyber attacks to external threats like aircraft crash into nuclear plant. The US 9/11 Commission claimed that nuclear plants were possible targets initially contemplated for the 9/11 attacks. Thus, if terrorists could adequately destroy safety systems so as to lead to a core meltdown and adequately damage spent fuel pools, an attack such as that would lead to rampant radioactive contamination. Consequently if use of nuclear power is to considerably expand, then it means nuclear plants must be extremely made secure against attacks that may lead to release of substantial quantities of radioactive contamination into their surrounding communities (Kuperman, 2013). Nuclear plants usually become the preferred targets of attack during armed conflict and over the past 30 years, have been frequently targeted during military strikes, campaigns, invasions and occupations. Various activities of civil disobedience from the 80s by Plowshares (a peace group) have demonstrated how nuclear plants can be broken into, with the group’s activities demonstrating unusual security breaches at nuclear plants within the US. The National Nuclear Security Administration has recognized the significance of the Plowshares 2012 action. This has led to non-proliferation policy specialists to question the utilization of private contractors in provision of securities at plants that manufacture as well as store the country’s most hazardous military material. This report seeks to assess the vulnerability of the North Anna Nuclear Generating Station in Mineral, Virginia and identify the various threats it faces, calculated risk and existing countermeasures (Allison, 2005). Threats identified Cyber virus Believed to have been formed by Israel and the US, Stuxnet was discovered in June 2010 and is a computer worm whose purpose was attacking the nuclear facilities in Iran. It put off safety apparatus, resulting in centrifuges spinning out of control. Originally, Stuxnet spread through Microsoft Windows, targeting Siemens Industrial control systems. Although this is not the first instance industrial systems have been targeted by hackers, Stuxnet happens to be the first discovered invented malware capable of spying and subverting industrial systems in addition to being the first to incorporate a programmable logic controller(PLC) root kit (Kuperman, 2013). Such cyber worms as Stuxnet can be used to wreck havoc in nuclear facilities leading to untold of damage and destruction to not only the economy but also US citizens. For instance, Stuxnet has been used before to target 5 organizations in Iran, with the likely target broadly alleged to be uranium enrichment facilities in Iran. In addition, Symantec in August 2010 noted that sixty percent of the computers infected globally were in Iran. Further claims by Siemens stated that Stuxnet had not damaged any of its customers’ infrastructures .However the Iran nuclear program that makes use of embargoed Siemens apparatus secretly procured had been infected by Stuxnet. This vulnerability can be used by terrorists to damage North Anna Nuclear Generating Station in Mineral, Virginia (Kuperman, 2013). Calculated risk Probability of the attack taking place=8/10 with criticality of the attack being 3/10. Total risk=24/100 which is approximately 24%. Counter measures One of the best counter measure strategies against cyber attack is isolation from the internet. Thus all computers networks within the facility should not have any direct access to the Internet or indirect access since they should not be connected to the internal networks of the facility. In addition, implementation of enhanced virus protection as well as biometric access facilitates enhanced as well as implemented tight controls over the utilization of portable equipment and media. Thus, where such devices as compact disks, laptops and thumb drives are utilized in interfacing with equipment in the facility, controls are implemented so as to reduce cyber attack. Such controls comprise of authorization of portable assets in the execution of a particular role, reducing the movement from less secured assets to the ones that are more secured in addition to virus scanning (Kuperman, 2013). Consequently, this will ensure that nuclear facilities are protected well from such attacks as those of Stuxnet which was transmitted via the use portable media. Finally there should be heightened defenses against possible insider threat. Thus, there ought to be enhanced training as well as insider mitigation programs that are aimed at enhancing cyber security in such facilities. Sniper attack Snipers are highly trained shooters who can take their opponents with unmatched precision. These highly trained shooters can within a very short period of time completely dismantle the security facility in place and do whatever they want. Sniper attacks have been recorded world over .Thus form instance on April 2013, San Jose-California; snipers opened fire and shot at a nearby electrical substation for 19 minutes surgically knocking out 17 gigantic transformers that supplied power to Silicon Valley. Sixty seconds before the arrival of police, the snipers disappeared in the darkness (Kuperman, 2013). Experts are worried that such terrorist attacks could be replicated in other regions of the country and cause untold of loss and damage to the economy. If snipers decided to carry such an attack on a nuclear facility, then it would result in far worse destruction. Calculated risk=Criticality. Probability 0.6*0.4=0.24 or 24% Counter measures Some of the counter measures that can be employed in this scenario comprise of increased police presence and spot scopes. Bomb Bombing is the third threat facing nuclear plants. There are several serious consequences that would result if a suitably powerful bomb were to be used on a nuclear facility. This would result in explosion of a nuclear reactor leading to catastrophic effects. A nuclear explosion releases energy in four basic classes. First and foremost is blast which releases 40-50 percent of entire energy, secondly is the thermal radiation which releases 30-50 percent of the entire energy, thirdly is ionizing radiation which releases 5 percent of the entire energy and finally is residual radiation which releases 5-10 percent of the entire energy of the explosion. Thus, the physical damage mechanisms (thermal and blast radiation) of a nuclear weapon are similar to those of conventional bombs (Smith, 2014). Nevertheless, the energy released by a nuclear explosion is millions of times more great per gram with temperatures reaching tens of millions of degrees. The high radiation and temperatures cause gas to travel outwards radially in a thin, dense shell known as “hydrodynamic front” with the front acting like a piston that pushes past and compresses the neighboring medium, making a spherically enlarging shock wave. A nuclear explosion also produces gamma rays which generate high energy electrons via Compton scattering. The pulse so produced is strong enough to result in reasonably long metal objects to serve as antennas and produce high voltages because of the interactions in the electromagnetic pulse. Such voltages as these can damage unshielded electronics (Smith, 2014). Calculated risk=probability* criticality =0.3*0.8=0.24 or 24% One of the best known bomb countermeasures is use of dogs and development of a distinctive bomb awareness training program for managers, which can be adapted and utilized by employees, security officers as well as other government agencies. Such a curriculum also offers information on the overall guidelines that can be utilized in the development of a plan to minimize the bombing incidents risks. Employees can also be trained on how to handle bomb threats, facility evacuation procedures as well as how to conduct bomb searches (Smith, 2014). Biological weapons threat A biological weapon is one of the deadliest weapons ever produced. Whereas only few nations are suspected of having offensive biological weapons, several have the capacity to rapidly generate and make biological weapons if they so willed. After the anthrax letter attacks of 2001 in the US, the likelihood of bioterrorism has reinvigorated attempts to criminalize actions related with the abuse of biological materials. Thus a greater risk is posed when such agents capable of causing harm are used in a nuclear facility. It will lead to serious repercussions such causing sickness and even death to the personnel manning the facility (Smith, 2014). It’s also important to note that the Biological and Toxin Weapons Convention(BTWC) prohibiting the production, development, acquisition and stockpiling of biological weapons, does not have the verification provision to make sure its members are not clandestinely keeping biological weapons programs. This further poses a bigger challenge to the international community since it is hard to detect clandestine programs because of the dual-use nature of biotechnology as well as the uneven and frequently meager preparedness of several countries’ public health systems for a main disease outbreak (Kuperman, 2013). Calculated risk=probability*criticality 0.1*0.9=0.09 or 9%. Counter measures One of the most effective countermeasures is contamination of the equipment and vaccination against various known forms of biological weapons. In conclusion all US nuclear plants, private or public, that poses catastrophic dangers-whether from radiological sabotage, nuclear material theft or any other act of terrorism-must be capable of withstanding an utmost credible attack from terrorists. As concerns civilian plants, where it is inappropriate and unaffordable for private operators to set up definite protective measures, the federal government must offer additional backup so as to enhance the combined defenses to the needed degree (Kuperman, 2013). The vulnerabilities of US nuclear plants are known to American officials and fortunately there is sufficient time for preventive action to be taken. However, this must start now. In addition, it would be such a catastrophe if the US had to reflect after a successful attack one of her nuclear plants and say that she could have and must have done more to avert the tragedy. References Allison, G. (2005). Nuclear Terrorism: The Ultimate Preventable Catastrophe. New York: Henry Holt and Company. Kuperman, A. (2013). How U.S. nuclear reactors are vulnerable to terrorists. CNN , pp1-5. Smith, J. (2014). A LAW ENFORCEMENT AND SECURITY OFFICERS GUIDE TO RESPONDING TO BOMB THREATS . New York: Charles C Thomas Publisher. Read More