An Overlooked Vulnerability?

American manufacturing facilities that produce and store toxic chemicals for various industrial uses are potential terrorist targets, according to Guardsmark Inc.’s The Lipman Report, which outlines suggested security policies for the facilities.

These facilities could be targeted using methods such as explosives, resulting in potentially devastating damage to the surrounding environment as dangerous compounds are released into the air and water supply. Yet no federal standards exist to mandate security protection for chemical plants on U.S. soil. Enhancing physical security at U.S. chemical plants is paramount to Homeland security, The Lipman Report says.

There are 15,000 chemical facilities that handle large quantities of toxic or flammable substances in the U.S. — many of them located near major metropolitan areas. According to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), 123 chemical facilities in the U.S. are located in the vicinity of one million or more residents.

Potential terrorist attacks aimed at chemical facilities can be classified into two broad categories: direct attacks on facilities or chemicals being stored or transported, and covert use of business contacts, facilities or information to gain access to materials. In either case, terrorists could be insiders or outsiders and may use traditional or non-traditional weapons to gain control of the facility or its assets.

Over the last ten years there has been a marked increase in the number of plots against chemical plants by terrorists worldwide. Most of these attempts were in war zones abroad, but at least two attempts to release chemicals from facilities occurred in the U.S. — one involved a large propane storage facility, the other a gas refinery.

Currently, no defined national strategy exists for protecting chemical plants, and no federal or state regulations cover security at these facilities. Individual chemical plants must focus on enhancing their security to deter and prevent sabotage and terrorism.

Legislators in Washington have been considering Congressional action to tighten security at chemical plants for more than a year. Senator Jon Corzine (D-N.J.) has introduced the Chemical Security Act, which would require the EPA to work with the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to identify high-priority chemical plants and develop regulations to require vulnerability assessments and to implement response plans. Another bill, the Chemical Facilities Security Act of 2003, sponsored by Senator James Inhofe (R-Okla.), would give the DHS alone the authority to draft regulations requiring chemical plant operators to conduct vulnerability assessments and to prepare site security plans.

While Congress considers the future of government regulation over the chemical industry, chemical plants from coast to coast remain vulnerable to attack.

The following are some of the recommended first steps to establishing an effective security program:

• Conduct a comprehensive risk assessment survey to determine potential areas of vulnerability and risk levels. The assessment should focus on all aspects of the security program to include an evaluation of physical barriers, protective lighting, security hardware and procedural controls in place at the facility. The assessment should also include an audit of the facility’s inventory control processes that govern important information about access to dangerous chemicals.

• Identify the location of all toxic substances at the facility and know the specific hazards related to the release of each substance.

• Conduct comprehensive pre-employment background checks for all personnel assigned to the facility, including temporary and permanent on-site contractors.

• Develop a comprehensive physical security program to reduce the opportunities for unauthorized entry and sabotage. Focus areas should include access control procedures and site surveillance. Procedures should be set in place to alert security personnel if any suspicious activity occurs, or if any amount of potentially toxic substances is unaccounted for.

• Provide continuous training for all security personnel assigned to the facility, paying particular attention to the prevention of trespassing and unauthorized entry.

• Develop an emergency plan, which clearly specifies the role of security personnel in the event of an accidental or intentional release of chemicals. The plan should assign tasks to specific individuals to handle any foreseeable crises that may occur. This plan should also convey clear instructions on how to lock down and evacuate the premises, as well as how to communicate with employees and their families.

• Establish a liaison with local fire department, law enforcement and hospital representatives to discuss operations at the facility and to determine response capability in the event of a chemical release.

• Develop an employee security awareness program and conduct initial and ongoing educational sessions.

This article is adapted from The Lipman Report, from Guardsmark Inc., Memphis, Tenn. For information, send an e-mail to [email protected].