Negligence to Blame in All 73 Incidents of Missing Radioactive Materials in 2013: Report

A New York Police Department officer searches a van following a radiological "dirty bomb" threat in August 2007 in New York City. A new expert report found negligence to be a factor in every documented incident last year in which radioactive materials either went lost or were stolen.
National Journal
Rachel Oswald
March 21, 2014, 11:09 a.m.

Neg­li­gence was in­volved in all 73 in­cid­ents last year in which ra­dio­act­ive sub­stances re­por­ted went miss­ing, con­cludes a new ex­pert re­port on nuc­le­ar traf­fick­ing.

The re­port find­ing by the James Mar­tin Cen­ter for Non­pro­lif­er­a­tion Stud­ies could sug­gest there is much work yet to be done in in­ter­na­tion­al ef­forts to im­prove se­cur­ity around ra­di­olo­gic­al sub­stances that might be seized by ter­ror­ists and used to con­struct a so-called “dirty bomb.” This type of device could com­bine ra­di­olo­gic­al ma­ter­i­als and ex­plos­ives to con­tam­in­ate pop­u­lated areas.

The study, pub­lished on Wed­nes­day, ex­amined in­cid­ents in which both atom­ic and non-nuc­le­ar ra­dio­act­ive ma­ter­i­als went un­ac­coun­ted for. Of the 153 doc­u­mented in­cid­ents last year, 92 per­cent in­volved non-nuc­le­ar ra­dio­act­ive sub­stances util­ized in the med­ic­al and in­dus­tri­al fields, ac­cord­ing to a sum­mary of the re­port’s find­ings. 

“Few in­cid­ents in­volved the most dan­ger­ous ma­ter­i­als, and none were re­por­ted to have in­volved ma­ter­i­al that was nuc­le­ar weapons-us­able in form or quant­ity,” the sum­mary states.

To re­duce the pro­spects of fu­ture in­cid­ents stem­ming from neg­li­gence, the re­port re­com­mends “im­proved train­ing in nuc­le­ar ma­ter­i­als se­cur­ity and en­hanced end-user ac­count­ab­il­ity.”

Lead­ers from 53 na­tions are gath­er­ing in The Hag­ue, Neth­er­lands, on Monday and Tues­day to re­view the cur­rent status of glob­al ef­forts to bet­ter lock down vul­ner­able ra­dio­act­ive and nuc­le­ar ma­ter­i­als. Some ex­perts have cri­ti­cized the bi­en­ni­al Nuc­le­ar Se­cur­ity Sum­mit pro­cess — which began with Pres­id­ent Obama host­ing the first such gath­er­ing in 2010 — for fo­cus­ing too much on atom­ic sub­stances at the ex­pense ra­di­olo­gic­al sources.

While a nuc­le­ar ter­ror­ism at­tack could res­ult in a much great­er loss of life than a ra­di­olo­gic­al strike, most ana­lysts agree it would be easi­er for ex­trem­ists to ac­quire the in­gredi­ents they need to build a ra­di­olo­gic­al dirty bomb than get a hold of a nuc­le­ar weapon.

The Cen­ter for Non­pro­lif­er­a­tion Stud­ies ana­lys­is re­lied on a data­base it built that col­lec­ted in­form­a­tion drawn from for­eign reg­u­lat­ory agen­cies, spe­cial­ized In­ter­net search en­gines and in­ter­na­tion­al news re­ports. It is sep­ar­ate from a data­base kept by the United Na­tions’ In­ter­na­tion­al Atom­ic En­ergy Agency, which also tracks in­cid­ents of lost or stolen plutoni­um, urani­um and oth­er ra­di­olo­gic­al sources.

The U.N. nuc­le­ar watch­dog doc­u­mented roughly 140 in­cid­ents last year of lost or un­au­thor­ized util­iz­a­tion of atom­ic and ra­dio­act­ive sub­stances, Re­u­ters re­por­ted on Fri­day. It is not clear if the IAEA data­base and the CNS data­base were us­ing dif­fer­ent meth­od­o­logy for col­lect­ing or as­sess­ing in­form­a­tion.

What We're Following See More »
STAFF PICKS
These (Supposed) Iowa and NH Escorts Tell All
6 hours ago
NATIONAL JOURNAL AFTER DARK

Before we get to the specifics of this exposé about escorts working the Iowa and New Hampshire primary crowds, let’s get three things out of the way: 1.) It’s from Cosmopolitan; 2.) most of the women quoted use fake (if colorful) names; and 3.) again, it’s from Cosmopolitan. That said, here’s what we learned:

  • Business was booming: one escort who says she typically gets two inquiries a weekend got 15 requests in the pre-primary weekend.
  • Their primary season clientele is a bit older than normal—”40s through mid-60s, compared with mostly twentysomething regulars” and “they’ve clearly done this before.”
  • They seemed more nervous than other clients, because “the stakes are higher when you’re working for a possible future president” but “all practiced impeccable manners.”
  • One escort “typically enjoy[s] the company of Democrats more, just because I feel like our views line up a lot more.”
Source:
STATE VS. FEDERAL
Restoring Some Sanity to Encryption
6 hours ago
WHY WE CARE

No matter where you stand on mandating companies to include a backdoor in encryption technologies, it doesn’t make sense to allow that decision to be made on a state level. “The problem with state-level legislation of this nature is that it manages to be both wildly impractical and entirely unenforceable,” writes Brian Barrett at Wired. There is a solution to this problem. “California Congressman Ted Lieu has introduced the ‘Ensuring National Constitutional Rights for Your Private Telecommunications Act of 2016,’ which we’ll call ENCRYPT. It’s a short, straightforward bill with a simple aim: to preempt states from attempting to implement their own anti-encryption policies at a state level.”

Source:
STAFF PICKS
What the Current Crop of Candidates Could Learn from JFK
6 hours ago
WHY WE CARE

Much has been made of David Brooks’s recent New York Times column, in which confesses to missing already the civility and humanity of Barack Obama, compared to who might take his place. In NewYorker.com, Jeffrey Frank reminds us how critical such attributes are to foreign policy. “It’s hard to imagine Kennedy so casually referring to the leader of Russia as a gangster or a thug. For that matter, it’s hard to imagine any president comparing the Russian leader to Hitler [as] Hillary Clinton did at a private fund-raiser. … Kennedy, who always worried that miscalculation could lead to war, paid close attention to the language of diplomacy.”

Source:
STAFF PICKS
Hillary Is Running Against the Bill of 1992
6 hours ago
WHY WE CARE

The New Covenant. The Third Way. The Democratic Leadership Council style. Call it what you will, but whatever centrist triangulation Bill Clinton embraced in 1992, Hillary Clinton wants no part of it in 2016. Writing for Bloomberg, Sasha Issenberg and Margaret Talev explore how Hillary’s campaign has “diverged pointedly” from what made Bill so successful: “For Hillary to survive, Clintonism had to die.” Bill’s positions in 1992—from capital punishment to free trade—“represented a carefully calibrated diversion from the liberal orthodoxy of the previous decade.” But in New Hampshire, Hillary “worked to juggle nostalgia for past Clinton primary campaigns in the state with the fact that the Bill of 1992 or the Hillary of 2008 would likely be a marginal figure within today’s Democratic politics.”

Source:
STAFF PICKS
Trevor Noah Needs to Find His Voice. And Fast.
7 hours ago
WHY WE CARE

At first, “it was pleasant” to see Trevor Noah “smiling away and deeply dimpling in the Stewart seat, the seat that had lately grown gray hairs,” writes The Atlantic‘s James Parker in assessing the new host of the once-indispensable Daily Show. But where Jon Stewart was a heavyweight, Noah is “a very able lightweight, [who] needs time too. But he won’t get any. As a culture, we’re not about to nurture this talent, to give it room to grow. Our patience was exhausted long ago, by some other guy. We’re going to pass judgment and move on. There’s a reason Simon Cowell is so rich. Impress us today or get thee hence. So it comes to this: It’s now or never, Trevor.”

Source:
×