Department of Homeland Security Continues to Face Problems With Anti-Terrorism Measures For the Chemical Industry

The chemical industry currently employs 22, 500  in Kanawha and Putnam Counties alone and has a total economic impact of over $5 billion dollars.  Regional planners, according to Vision 2030, seek to add more small to mid level chemical related firms in the region.  Clearly the industry is in the Charleston area to stay.

But so is terrorism.  According to the Heritage Foundation, of the 51 known attempts by Islamic based terrorists, three have involved chemical facilities, or an attempt to seize hazardous materials. 

This week, Congress will examine the Department of Homeland Security's Chemical Facility Anti-Terrorism Standards (CFATS) program.  CFATS stems from post 9/11 concerns about the security of chemical facilities, but took nearly six years to enact.  It did address somewhat the serious problem of prevention and, if the worst happened, containment of an attack on a chemical plant.

Critics argue that the standards in place are costly, confusing, and fail to take into account local conditions.  A federal "one size fits all" solution has created too many problems, mainly because the government refuses to give businesses the information that they would need to comply with the standards.

The foundation of CFATS is a system that rates plants based upon their potential risk.  The Heritage Foundation reported in August that not only will the DHS not tell a firm why its facility is placed in a certain tier, they also discovered that the rating process was flawed.

Additionally, every firm must provide a safety plan to the DHS.  In five years, just a single plan has been approved.  The Department has failed to hire and train inspectors equal to the task, therefore, it cannot intelligently evaluate these plans.

Department witnesses on a congressional hearing on September 11th (scheduled by coincidence) fired back at critics, stating that 2,700 facilities have eliminated, reduced, or modified stockpiles of dangerous materials.  Representative John Shimkus, Republican Chair of the Subcommittee on Environment and the Economy, recognized the value of the CFATS statute. But he also said "I do not support waste, fraud, and abuse -- and it seemed we had a bipartisan consensus on this point at the last CFATS hearing . . .For all the support Congress has given over the years, CFATS should have more to show than repelling ropes, hazmat suits, and delayed implementation."

CFATS is one of the priority issues Congress wants to solve prior to the election.  It is up for renewal on October 4.  Few would oppose its renewal, but many are advocating for revising implementation.

Some push for a stronger role for the EPA.  Greenpeace submitted a petition with over 60,000 signatures requesting that the agency be empowered to act.  Blogger John Deans wrote "the Obama Administration has consistently testified in favor of strong policies on chemical disaster prevention. Now it’s time for them to stand up to Big Chem’s lobbyists and implement the authority they have to prevent chemical disasters as Congress intended."  Greenpeace believes that the federal government is best suited to protect local communities from the effects of terror attacks.

Others propose a wider ranging solution, believing that if one federal agency has not done the job, then two agencies with legal authority would only be worse.  Heritage Foundation researcher Jessica Zuckerman notes that

 The security of the high-risk chemical facilities is a collaborative endeavor. Facilities that possess chemicals capable of causing catastrophic disasters might benefit from a degree of federal oversight, while private-sector facilities themselves have a vested interest in providing security for their facilities. State and local governments also have a vested interest, as any disaster or catastrophe would occur directly in their jurisdiction. The three must work together to enhance U.S. chemical security.

The collaborative approach promotes partnership between the federal government and the parties with the most vested interest, local government and the chemical industry itself.

In any event, only a few weeks remain until either an improved law is passed, or CFATS disappears.