ASHINGTON, Sept. 11 — Security
guards at 24 nuclear reactors at 13 sites, interviewed by a
nonprofit watchdog group, said they feared being outnumbered
and outgunned by terrorists in an attack. They also said that
rules on when they might use deadly force were ambiguous and
could allow terrorists to succeed.
In the survey, by the Project on Government Oversight, many
also complained that they had been forced to work so many
hours since security was tightened after the attacks on the
World Trade Center and the Pentagon that they found it
difficult to function.
One guard, speaking on condition that his name and his
place of work not be identified, said in a telephone
interview: "You got people carrying rifles, guns, and they're
tired. Supervisors are coming around to see if we're awake,
instead of resolving the problem."
The guard said a fellow guard at his plant had recently
fallen asleep behind the wheel on her drive home and crashed
her car. Guards have been working 12 hours a day, five to six
days a week for the last year, he said.
Asked about the survey, Richard A. Meserve, the chairman of
the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, said that there were no
limits on the number of hours a guard could be ordered to work
but that "they have to be capable to perform their function."
Since the terrorist attacks, Mr. Meserve said, the number of
guards at reactors nationwide had gone to about 6,000 from
about 5,000.
Most are contract employees; some work directly for the
reactor operators. "These are not rent-a-cops," Mr. Meserve
said. "They are people who have serious weapons and
training."
But the report found that at some plants, the guards were
paid less than the custodians and that turnover at the plants
was high. By some accounts, turnover has increased lately as
experienced guards have found better security jobs at
airports.
Training is also quite limited, some guards say.
Mr. Meserve said he had not read the report, but he agreed
that Congress should set national standards governing the
authority of nuclear reactor guards to use deadly force.
In the survey, and in telephone interviews, guards said
that in the states where they worked they were allowed to use
their guns if intruders threatened their safety. But they said
that if someone jumped a fence with a backpack or other item
that could arguably contain a bomb or other weapon, but did
not clearly threaten the guard, they could not fire their
guns.
Mr. Meserve, speaking at a three-day seminar called the
Nuclear Renaissance, organized by Infocast, a commercial
conference organizer, said today that the commission had
decided that security drills would be held at each nuclear
plant every three years, rather than every eight years, as was
done before Sept. 11.
In the past, those drills included force-on-force
exercises, with testers playing the role of terrorists, using
simulated weapons that resemble laser-tag toys. Those were
suspended after the attacks but will resume late this year or
early next year, he said.
Mr. Meserve also said that his agency was considering
establishing "cradle to grave" licensing of radioactive
materials that could be used by terrorists in "dirty bombs,"
and reforming the system by which the import and export of
such materials is licensed.
Mr. Meserve, in his speech and in remarks afterward,
emphasized that nuclear plants, because of their design, were
inherently tough targets, and that even before the terrorist
attacks, they had significant security protections.
He also said that the number of guards interviewed by the
organization — "more than 20," according to the report — was
too small for drawing conclusions.
Nonetheless, the guards, at various plants, repeated common
themes. One was a lack of training. At a Tennessee Valley Authority plant, one guard
said his training consisted of firing about 40 rounds of
ammunition, which took about three hours, to requalify to
carry a gun. "Any training after that, that's up to you," he
said in a telephone interview.
Guards questioned other areas of security. Some said new
lighting around the plants illuminated them but not potential
infiltrators. Others said they felt vulnerable in new guard
towers.
The T.V.A. guard, who would not allow his name to be used,
also complained about the ambiguity of the rules on deadly
force. If there is no clear threat to the guard, he said, "you
may hesitate."
Mr. Meserve, the regulatory commission chairman, said his
agency had repeatedly asked Congress over the years to set a
national standard for use of deadly force by power plant
guards, but to no avail.