The homeland is still unsecured, and now the nation's attorneys general are asking the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to do something about it. Seven AGs joined with public interest group Nuclear Information and Resource Service to petition the NRC for a rulemaking to increase defenses at the nation's unsecured nuclear power facilities. "The interest of terrorists in attacking nuclear power plants is a matter of record," the attorneys general stated in the letter. "At minimum, the upgraded design basis threat should require defenses against attacks by air, water, or land and by groups at least as large as that involved in the 9/11 attacks. The NRC should upgrade the threat to reflect the realities of 2005." Specifically, the petitioners want nuclear power stations to erect obstructions to prevent catastrophic damage from an aircraft attack similar to those on 9/11. "It is deeply disturbing that, more than three years after 9/11, nuclear reactors, the nation's most dangerous sites, still have no protection against air attack and must only protect against attackers in far smaller numbers than seen on 9/11," said Daniel Hirsch, President of [the Committee to Bridge the Gap].... "It seems a no-brainer that reactors should be protected by 'Beamhenge' shields of I-beams and steel cabling, so that incoming planes crash into the shield not the reactor or spent fuel pool. Similarly, it isn't rocket science that one should protect reactors against at least as many attackers as we saw on 9/11...." "Even acknowledging NRC efforts on security upgrades to date, they don't measure up to the clear and present danger," said Paul Gunter, Director of the Reactor Watchdog Project for NIRS in Washington, DC. "It is indefensible for NRC to set its regulatory bar below the level of ferocity already demonstrated on September 11th."