Higher Education Community Submits Comments on Proposed Regulations
for High-Risk Chemical Facilities
May 10, 2007
College and university
laboratories would be subject to the same security regulations as
high-risk chemical facilities under a proposed rule released by the
Department of Homeland Security (DHS) on April 2.
The American Council on
Education (ACE) sent comments to
DHS yesterday on the proposed Chemical Facility Anti-Terrorism Standards
requesting that the agency temporarily exempt the higher education
sector until the rule can be revised to be more “relevant and
applicable” to colleges and universities. ACE developed the
comments in conjunction with the National Association of College and
University Business Officers (NACUBO) and submitted them on behalf of
six other higher education associations.
As part of effort to determine
the level of risk for terrorism posed by chemical facilities around the
country, DHS is proposing that facilities and institutions housing
even very small quantities of specified chemicals be required to
complete a screening assessment that would be used to identify security
vulnerabilities (the list of “Chemicals of Interest”
specified under the rule is online here.)
According to the rule,
facilities that might possess any of 342 substances must first complete
a so-called “Top-Screen analysis.” If any one of the 104
chemicals identified by DHS as
high-risk is present in even the smallest amount, the
Top-Screen must be fully completed. This would affect all college
laboratories and classrooms and would be a burdensome process, according
to ACE and NACUBO.
“In order to complete the
Top-Screen analysis, each college, university, community college and
other institution of higher education must inspect every building,
laboratory and classroom where any science course is taught, to
determine which one might contain just one of these substances,”
the associations wrote in their comments. “Even after this effort,
it is almost certain that not a single college or university will be
found to be a chemical facility that presents a high risk of terrorist
attack. We urge the DHS not to divert its resources from the important
task of ensuring that chemical facilities are protected, by converting a
program intended to regulate chemical facilities into a program to
regulate any facility where miniscule amounts of a single chemical might
exist.”
“We recognize the
importance of securing certain facilities that are vulnerable to
terrorist activity,” said Ada Meloy, director of legal and
regulatory affairs at ACE. “However, the requirement that
every college inventory chemicals present for science courses when they
pose no credible threat is a misdirection of resources and a distraction
from real anti-terrorism efforts. Universities are already subject to
EPA and OSHA regulations, and this added burden would not enhance safety
either on or off our campuses.”
For more information, see the
following:
| risk management department of homeland security laboratories legal regulatory |
|
