• The Heritage Network
    • Resize:
    • A
    • A
    • A
  • Donate
  • Federal Regulation Strangles Chemical Security

    On Thursday, the House Appropriations Committee will meet to discuss the much-debated Chemical Facility Anti Terrorism Standards (CFATS) program, which requires that the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) establish security standards for facilities that produce, handle, or store potentially dangerous chemicals.

    Enacted in the aftermath of 9/11, the program was to provide chemical facilities with the flexibility to decide how best to meet government security standards. In reality, however, it has resulted in overly complicated and burdensome regulation that has hampered the private sector without providing significant improvements to national security.

    CFATS has been plagued with problems since its inception. More than five years since its creation, the program has yet to complete a final inspection of any regulated facility. In fact, DHS has not even developed the procedures to do so and has also admitted to extensive problems with program personnel.

    Then there is the issue of overregulation. While CFATS was intended to provide flexibility to facility owners in meeting security standards, in reality the program has represented an attempt by the federal government to dictate chemical facility processes and standards.

    And there are those in Congress who only want to make the matter worse by adding an Inherently Safer Technology (IST) mandate, which would require that companies consider replacing their chemicals with alternative, “safer” chemicals. Yet safer may be a relative term. In fact, industry leaders indicate that, in many cases, the combination of replacement chemicals may be more dangerous than those originally being used.

    Moreover, the CFATS legislation largely fails to leverage the existing security infrastructure that many facilities have in place. Given that chemical facility owners already have the significant incentive to secure their resources and protect their facilities, this legislation can only impose rigid and burdensome restrictions on the private sector.

    Instead of imposing misguided regulations like CFATS, the government should engage in performance-based, market-conscious solutions for chemical security. It should capitalize on the existing interest the private sector has in securing its facilities by supporting industry efforts to enhance security.

    DHS should also enact measures to encourage transparency and cooperation. It is, after all, in the interests of both the government and the private sector to have an effective system of chemical security. But that system cannot be something thrown together as a knee-jerk reaction to the perceived chemical security threat. It should be based off of the realities of the chemical security industry and the free market system. In doing so, it can and should have both good intentions and good results.

    Maura Cremin is currently a member of the Young Leaders Program at The Heritage Foundation. For more information on interning at Heritage, please visit http://www.heritage.org/about/departments/ylp.cfm.

    Posted in Security [slideshow_deploy]

    One Response to Federal Regulation Strangles Chemical Security

    1. KJinAZ says:

      These are the same idiots who want to spend BILLIONS of dollars to convert or war ships to use Bio diesel at $28/gal. This is another example of just because you can do something, doesn't mean you should. Yes the Bio diesel is a LITTLE cleaner, but at almost 10 times the cost. This government wasted millions testing this already and is on a path to implement this. ARE YOU KIDDING, what idiots approved this? Do these people in Washington even understand that this is bad math? Do they not understand we are in a budget crisis? The entire green energy business is a scam! This is being pushed out by the EPA, which is PROOF that they have to much power, and NO COMMON SENSE!

      It is not the job of our government to tell business what is best for them. This regulation WILL raise the price of everything you buy that uses any chemicals in their process. DO YOU want to pay 20 to 50f more for many of your product, just so Homeland Security can be involved? If this does not make it clear that government is out of touch, zi don't know what does.

      Send Obama and all of his Czars, as well as all of the RINO republicans packing in 2012.

    Comments are subject to approval and moderation. We remind everyone that The Heritage Foundation promotes a civil society where ideas and debate flourish. Please be respectful of each other and the subjects of any criticism. While we may not always agree on policy, we should all agree that being appropriately informed is everyone's intention visiting this site. Profanity, lewdness, personal attacks, and other forms of incivility will not be tolerated. Please keep your thoughts brief and avoid ALL CAPS. While we respect your first amendment rights, we are obligated to our readers to maintain these standards. Thanks for joining the conversation.

    Big Government Is NOT the Answer

    Your tax dollars are being spent on programs that we really don't need.

    I Agree I Disagree ×

    Get Heritage In Your Inbox — FREE!

    Heritage Foundation e-mails keep you updated on the ongoing policy battles in Washington and around the country.