WASHINGTON, Oct. 3 (UPI) -- Members of the House Energy and Commerce Committee wrangled Wednesday over the best approach to improving security at the nation's 103 nuclear power plants.
The committee approved a basic set of changes to the Atomic Energy Act, as well as a few amendments. Those provisions will move to the House floor for consideration as part of a larger anti-terrorism legislation package.
The first change will allow nuclear plant employees to carry weapons while at the plant, as well as make arrests while they are armed. The arrest powers would be restricted to laws, leading to fines, prison sentences or both, that deal with locations under the control of the nation's various nuclear power agencies.
The second change would prohibit visitors to a nuclear facility from carrying weapons on the property. The third deals with sabotage, expanding the areas covered by existing laws to include fuel processing, transport and storage areas, as well as nuclear waste facilities. One of the approved amendments would increase the penalty for such acts to a fine of $1 million and up to life in prison.
The committee also passed an amendment from Rep. Heather Wilson, R-N.M., which would require the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to reassess the threats facing U.S. nuclear plants. The NRC would have to provide an initial report on the study within three months of the bill becoming law, and a final report within nine months.
Other provisions met with intense debate, however. Rep. Ed Markey, D-Mass, said the basic proposals are good, but do not go far enough.
"The commission has consistently dragged its feet in upgrading the so-called design basis threat that establishes what licensees are being asked to defend against," Markey said. "It continues to consider replacing (its security testing) program with one that would be designed and executed by the nuclear utility industry."
Markey offered several amendments, starting with a proposal to specifically authorize the president to deploy National Guard or active-duty forces to protect nuclear plants, as well as the authority to establish restricted airspace around the plants.
This met with opposition from Rep. Joe Barton, R-Texas, who said the proposal duplicates existing presidential powers and would delay passage of the overall bill, since other committees could claim the right to review Markey's proposed change.
Markey later withdrew the amendment, with the understanding Rep. Billy Tauzin, R-La., the committee chairman, would discuss the change with the other committees, paving the way for the amendment's later inclusion on the House floor.
Markey also submitted a proposal to increase the safeguards surrounding the transportation of nuclear materials. The amendment would require detailed manifests of nuclear cargo carried, as well as background checks for drivers and the use of direct routes to the material's destination.
This also was withdrawn, based on Wilson's concerns the amendment's language might hamper Defense Department shipments of nuclear material.
Markey was successful in going one step beyond Wilson's proposal to reassess threats to nuclear plants. The committee passed an amendment to require the NRC, in coordination with the FBI, Office of Homeland Security and other federal agencies, to update its rules regarding facility security within a year of passage.
The amendment lists several specific threats to consider, including water- and air-based attacks, and requires review of the new rules at least once every two years. The rules created also would require armed guards for spent fuel containers.
Several committee members noted the NRC already has said it will review threats and act accordingly. Discussion on this amendment devolved into whether or not the NRC can be trusted to carry through on that statement.
Rep. John Dingell, D-Mich., said the "sleepyheads" at the commission might benefit from a "wakeup call" forcing them to create new rules. Other members worried specifying threats to consider could prevent the NRC from using its expertise to uncover new hazards.
The weight of the discussion, punctuated by Markey's assertion that failing to act could doom any future plant construction, as well as hurting existing plants' bond ratings, led to the amendment's passage on a voice vote.