Oyster Creek Spent Millions On Post-9/11 Upgrades

Since Sept. 11, 2001, Exelon Nuclear has put more than $400 million toward physical security upgrades to its 10 power plants, including Oyster Creek Generating Station in Forked River, spokesperson April Schilpp said.

“Each plant was required to make substantial physical modifications, including additional barriers, more security observation posts and fortified and improved checkpoints,” said Neil Sheehan, spokesperson for the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC).

Exelon used that money to change the physical look of the plant by adding structures and different defenses to strengthen Oyster Creek’s already heavy security, Schilpp said.

Oyster Creek has installed outer vehicle barriers, bullet-resistant enclosures, vehicle checkpoints, new alarms to fences, additional surveillance and detection systems and concentric barriers in the plant, Schilpp said.

Within the last 10 years, gaining access even as an employee has become a vigorous process, she said. It requires an extensive background check and a continual observation program.

Employees are monitored by co-workers daily who look to observe anything out of the ordinary, she said.

Oyster Creek workers also are required to go through metal and explosive detectors and hand geometry recognition is used in addition to their badges, Schilpp said.

Vehicles entering plants are subject to more detailed searchers and at greater stand-off distances, Sheehan said.

“All of it has been enhanced since 9/11. It has gotten more strict to enter,” Schilpp said.

There are more sensitive checks the further employees go into the plant, she said.

Paramilitary Force

Each nuclear plant has a Design Basis Threat that they are responsible for at any given time, Sheehan said. A Design Basis Threat is a minimum threat level that plant security must be capable of handling. After 9/11, the bar was raised.

Plants also undergo force-on-force security exercises, he said. Mock intruders test the defenses of each plant on a graded basis every several years.

“This is the greatest exercise. Security forces are tested to make sure they can defend the plant against a hostile intruder,” Schilpp said.

The exercise is graded pass/fail by the NRC. Oyster Creek has participated in two force-on-force exercises since 9/11 and has successfully passed, she said.

“I can’t stress enough that the nuclear facilities are by far the best protected industrial facilities in this country. We have essentially a paramilitary force,” Schilpp said.

The security department of Oyster Creek are highly trained professionals, she said. Most have background in the military or law enforcement.

Security forces have to meet greater training requirements. They are also now heavily armed after 2003 legislation permitted private security forces at nuclear facilities in New Jersey to carry semi-automatic weapons and ammunition.

"That’s something that’s unique among security officers. They’re not usually required to live up to that much safety and reliability,” she said.

Security personnel have increased over the years, Schilpp said, although she could not provide exact numbers for precautionary reasons.

“As a company, we have always been confident of our ability to protect the plant and defend the plant and ultimately protect the health and safety of the public,” Schilpp said.

'Adequately Protected Against Cyber Attacks'

In 2001, shortly after 9/11, the NRC issued an advisory to power plants regarding the need to enhance cyber security. It also issued a guidance document to nuclear power plants on cyber security self-assessment methods in 2004.

Nuclear power plants were required under a cyber-security rule implemented by the NRC in 2009 to identify critical digital assets, establish a defensive architecture to protect these assets and apply security controls to these assets.

Oyster Creek’s cyber-security plan was approved in August.

Each plant is required to provide the NRC with a description of its defensive model and protective strategy, security controls, process for addressing each security control, commitment to maintain the cyber-security program, and documentation that supports NRC inspection activities, Sheehan said. 

After reviewing Oyster Creek’s cyber-security plan, the NRC concluded that the power plant complies with the standards and requirements of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 and the Commission’s rules and regulations.

Can Oyster Creek Sustain a 9/11-like Attack?

A study that was released by the Electric Power Research Institute in December 2002 found that an aircraft crash would not breach structures housing reactor fuel, Schilpp said.

It was determined that despite concrete crushing and bent steel, nuclear plant containment structures, used fuel storage pools, fuel storage containers, and used fuel transportation containers would withstand impact forces.

“The results of this study validate the industry’s confidence that nuclear power plants are robust and protect the fuel from impacts of a large commercial aircraft,” said Joe F. Colvin, NEI’s president and chief executive officer. “Clearly an impact of this magnitude would do great damage to a plant’s ability to generate electricity. But the findings show, far more importantly, that public health and safety would be protected.”

The analysis used computer-modeling techniques with several criteria that increase the severity of a crash scenario.

In one scenario, the study used a large aircraft traveling low to the ground at 350 mph, similar to that of the plane that struck the Pentagon on 9/11.

Since nuclear power plants are considerably smaller than the World Trade Center towers and the Pentagon, it is physically impossible for the engines and fuselage of a plane to transfer the full force impact to the containment building, the study says.

“The fact remains. The country has taken steps to reduce the possibility of this from happening,” Schilpp said. “Everyone worries about things now that they never thought about 10 years ago. The nuclear industry as a whole has new regulations to follow.”

Between the coordination of the federal government, law enforcement, the NRC and other organizations, an incident like 9/11 to a nuclear power plant would require a lot more precision, Schilpp said.

“It’s rare for something like that to happen. There would be physical damage and lives lost but its such an unlikely event that would happen. It’s not something you can assume would happen with any sort of accuracy,” Schilpp said.

Post 9/11: Tanks, Troops and Machine Guns

Following the events of 9/11 the National Guard and state police had a heavy presence in Lacey. From tanks to troops with machine guns, they were all stationed at Oyster Creek Generation Station.

“It gave residents a much better feeling as far as safety goes,” Mayor Gary Quinn said.

After 9/11 there was a need for the National Guard because the nuclear industry did not have the safety features that it does today, Quinn said. They provided a sense of protection.

Troops stood guard at the power plant from October 2001 to December 2008.

The guardsman were replaced with a video surveillance system to supplement private security operations, according to the Asbury Park Press's (APP) "State ends Guard Role in Security at Reactor." Images would be transmitted to the State Police Regional Operations and Intelligence Center in Ewing.

But even with the additional surveillance and removal of outside forces, the plant is in constant contact with the state police, Schilpp said. Any suspicious activity is carefully shared, she said.

During the years following 9/11, Exelon ceased a contract with Wackenhut, a private security firm. There had been several security lapses, including a 2003 incident in which a News 12 New Jersey television crew drove onto plant grounds without being stopped, APP reported.

Oyster Creek now has its own in-house force, Schilpp said.

Without the department of defense on guard, the NRC requires more coordination between federal agencies regarding nuclear plant security, Sheehan said. The NRC and North American Aerospace Defense Command now share information on potential aviation threats to plants, he said.

The NRC has also created an Office on Nuclear Security and Incident Response, which focuses resources and expertise on plant security, he added.

Representatives from the National Guard and State Police were unable to comment.

Still Vulnerable

Despite the millions spent in upgrades, advocates against the plant are still concerned.

“We have always been extremely concerned about the vulnerability of the plant in a post 9/11 world. We always have been very worried about an airplane type attack,” said Janet Tauro, Chair of the Board of Directors for the New Jersey Environmental Federation and a member of Grandmothers, Mothers, and More (GRAMMES).

Both groups have been pushing for a no fly zone over the plant as well as the construction of a concrete structure over the spent fuel pool. Exelon should also bring the fuel pool down to low density, she said.

“We have asked for better protection of the fuel pool…They say it costs too much money. These are safety things that are logical requests that we asked for that have been ignored,” she said. “They could have done things that they haven’t done. Public safety doesn’t come as number one with them. Money comes as number one.”

“We don’t feel that New Jersey should have to live with the risk of Oyster Creek. It’s not right. Especially when there are alternate ways to generate electricity that are far safer,” Tauro said.

Tauro does not find Oyster Creek’s security upgrades comforting, she said.

Years ago, there was a member of Al-Qaeda arrested in Yemen, she said. That individual had been employed for eight years in various nuclear plants including those in New Jersey.

“So when they talk about security, why was that person allowed to work at New Jersey plants for eight years? It’s things like that that are horrifically unsettling. They need to be on the highest of alerts of all times. It strikes a lot of fear in you,” Tauro said.

Dennis Zannoni, a Chief Nuclear Engineer and former Department of Environmental Protection's chief resident inspector for Oyster Creek, has written articles about Oyster Creek’s upgrades since 9/11.

“All of those upgrades were made to protect from an attack from the ground location. Nothing was done to prevent an attack from the air,” he said. “I don’t think [terrorists] are very stupid. If they’re going to attack a plant, it wouldn’t be from the ground.”

The spent fuel pool is located more than 100 feet above the ground, he said.

“Nothing has been done to protect the most vulnerable thing at the plant. They pretty much just ignored it. They said nothing’s going to happen. From a security standpoint, the fuel pool remains the most vulnerable thing at the plant,” Zannoni said.

Three other plants in New Jersey have a concrete structure surround the spent fuel but with Oyster Creek closing in 10 years, Exelon is not going to spend the money, he said. The spent fuel will remain on site for a long time even after the plant shuts down.

“It is what it is,” he said. “What’s the point of shutting the plant down if the biggest vulnerability still remains?”

Oyster Creek is the oldest operating nuclear plant in the country and provides enough around-the-clock electricity for 600,000 New Jersey homes. The plant is set to close in 2019, 10 years before its federal operating license expires.

See the attached PDFs for a copy of the NRC’s report “Protecting Our Nation” and the EPRI’s study “Deterring Terrorism: Aircraft Crash Impact Analyses Demonstrate Nuclear Power Plant’s Structural Strength.”