TOPICS
TOPICS
Report cites increased risk of terrorist attack using chemicals
Security experts say the risk of a terrorist attack involving chemical weapons remains relatively small but is increasing, while many chemical facilities in the United States still lack adequate safeguards almost four years after 9/11, according to a recent congressional report.
The Environmental Protection Agency reported in June that about 600 U.S. chemical facilities have vulnerability zones where more than 100,000 people could be affected in the event of a "worst-case" attack, according to a Congressional Research Service report. And about 2,200 other facilities potentially threaten between 10,000 and 100,000 residents. CRS concluded, however, that EPA methodology used for calculating the affected population may understate the potential worst-case consequences of a terrorist attack.
"Because few terrorist attacks have been attempted against chemical facilities in the United States, the risk of death and injury in the near future is estimated to be low, relative to the likelihood of accidents at such facilities or attacks on other targets using conventional weapons," states the report, which was obtained and published by the American Federation of Scientists' Project on Government Secrecy. "For any individual facility, the risk is very small, but risks may be increasing with potentially severe consequences for human health and the environment. Available evidence indicates that many chemical facilities may lack adequate safeguards."
The report outlined options for lawmakers to consider, such as stricter regulations for chemical plant operators or requiring the Homeland Security Department to do more.
"Policymakers face three key issues: how to balance the risks and benefits of public disclosure; how to weigh the relative importance of diverse risks; and whom to hold responsible for achieving results," the report states.
The American Chemistry Council, which represents large chemical manufacturers, reported in July that its members have spent more than $2 billion to improve security at about 2,000 facilities.
The CRS report says the risk of terrorists using chemicals or attacking a chemical facility has been historically low. But the risk appears to be increasing, the report adds.
"Security experts now believe that lack of personal expertise no longer limits chemical weapon use, because there is a tendency for terrorists with similar extreme views to affiliate loosely with others with complementary skills and abilities," the report states. "Moreover, the rising level of education worldwide means that more people have the requisite training in chemical engineering, and the Internet has simplified communications, training and cooperation within geographically dispersed terrorist groups."
COMMENTS
- The North American continent is going to collide with Asia destroying the island of Japan as well as many other islands. It is a true statement, but important information is left out, such as how many millions of years will pass before it happens. An asteroid will collide with the earth destroying all life. It will happen eventually, maybe in a hundred thousand years. But, it will happen. I can say all kinds of things in a manner that makes them seem urgent when they are pretty insignificant and these government security reports seem to do just that. So, the risk of chemical attacks increases over time because people get smarter. But, does it really make that much difference? Won't countries also work to settle their differences as populations become more educated? Won't technologies for providing security get better over time? Won't radical groups learn to use political forums to get more done rather then terrorism? Maybe, there will be an increased risk of chemical attacks. But, there may be a decrease in terrorism over all especially if the United States stops funding terrorist by cutting it's reliance on foreign oil. Leave it to the government agencies to try and intimidate people with a speculative report that is taken out of context. A lot of people are beginning to realize that you can't trust everything the government says. But, that doesn't stop politicians from milking the fears of the general public in order to fund security projects that we don't really need. To me, the report lacks credibility and too much money is being spent on nothing while our social programs, like schools, go wanting. How safe will we be as an under educated society with a lot a lot unemployable people? Robert M. Posted August 17, 2005 3:41 PM
PROMO RIGHT: GBC
Advancing the business of government through analysis, insight and the sharing of best practices.
SPONSORED RESEARCH
Achieving a Greener Federal Government IBM
Federal Cybersecurity: Securing the Nation's Information IBM
American Recovery and Reinvestment Act: New Requirements for Tracking and Reporting Federal Workforce Data Kronos
Managing the Stimulus: A Candid Survey of Federal Program Managers Accenture and Microsoft
Improving Collaboration and Productivity in 21st Century Government: The Role of Communication for Government Executives Cisco









