The Necessary Precautionary and Preventive Systems of the Chemical Facility - Assignment Example

The best theme in most of the Hollywood films today dwell interestingly on terrorist attacks or taking as hostage, chemical plants, with the impact going towards bombings and killings of whoever gets in the way of the perpetrators. Mission Impossible I which starred Tom Cruise and most of the movies of Steven Seagal shared the same gist, that of protecting deadly chemicals from getting into the wrong hands. Luckily, there had been no reports around the world that such action-packed hostage-taking of some chemical facilities had ever been made known, because, indeed, with all the high-tech security measures being undertaken by magnificently high-financed chemical plants or laboratories, no one or no group would even attempt to get inside and forcefully steal chemicals vital to national security. Some films might have inadvertently suggested to criminal elements how to penetrate chemical plants, but thankfully, ideas were also alluded to with regards to potential security threats and vulnerabilities to crime such as terrorism, and at the same time, the effective security and protection measures that should be importantly undertaken. Hence, unquestionably, the National Institute of Justice, in collaboration with the Department of Justice components, the Office of Homeland Security, the Department of Energy, the Environmental Protection Agency, the Department of Transportation, numerous organizations, and private citizens, had been conscientious enough as to suggest the development of the Vulnerability Assessment Methodology. The prototype Vulnerability Assessment Model (VAM) developed is a systematic, risk-based approach in which risk is a function of the severity of consequences of an undesired event, the likelihood of adversary attack, and the likelihood of adversary success in causing the undesired event (Ashcroft, et al, 2002). On September, 2009, the Department of Environment Protection was lauded by the community of Clifton, New Jersey, for having cleaned up the facility left by Abrachem Group, who were involved in repackaging chemicals but did not level up with the pre-requisites necessary when operating a chemical facility in the United States. Lives of the people of New Jersey were in jeopardy, when Abrachem Group had leaking drums, that contained toxic chemicals, such as naphthalene, sodamide, peroxide, and nitric acid. The company abandoned 1,600 unlabeled, mislabeled and mishandled rusted drums filled with chemicals, some posing a threat to the environment and to the people of Clifton (2009). It is perceived that the proximity of the operations of Abrachem relatively placed the community of Clifton in a risky situation, although the security risk posed a lesser consequence and the number of lives exposed to the risk may not be estimated with accuracy. There was no threat of terroristic activity, however it is presumed that numerous short-cuts were committed, that resulted to the carelessness of the management of Abrachem, which had presented a high potential risk of toxic releases hazardous to the health of the people around the vicinity of the chemical facility. In this case, the vulnerability of the Abrachem facility in exposing the environment to unsafe toxic chemicals, was largely attributed to the negligence of its own management, because they did not comply several activities that may have ensured the safety of their operations. Significantly, Abrachem made their facility highly vulnerable to theft and destruction, having left the chemicals unattended and unlabeled at that, plus the absence of any security systems. According to news reports, at one time, Abrachem had been fined $20,000.00 for accidental toxic releases, and again in February, 2009, there were many complaints with regards to more toxic releases, and the company refused the entry of authorities, that a court order had to be processed. Abrachem did not even bother to disclose all the chemicals in their possession, because the identity of the chemicals could guide the proper authorities in determining what course of action to take to minimize toxic risks. This is the point also, wherein a scorecard could have been used with the objective of prioritizing cases. Scorecard tracks whether the types of information are publicly available for the 650 toxic chemicals or compounds included in the U.S. Toxics Release Inventory (2005). All of these are clear indications, that the twelve basic steps to adhere to the VAM have not been complied with, at all. They could have salvaged some form of a cooperative image, if only they were able to characterize the facility, derive severity levels of risks, assessing and prioritizing threats, preparing and surveying of the site, and having analyzed the risks and systems’ effectiveness. The most serious form of negligence that they had to resort to was to cut down on their financials, because if there was no cut-backs on expenditures, the security and the preventive measures could have been assured. In the sad case of Abrachem, when it comes to physical protection system (PPS), the likelihood of adversary success (LAS) will have to be defined as “ineffective or no protection measures; catastrophic event is expected.” (Citation) It may have been good news for the community of Clifton, New Jersey, that Abrachem moved away to another site, however there is a presupposition that they will continue the same kind of business operation under another group name. In this instance, the U.S. government should step in before allowing this group to continue operating as a chemical facility, because this time their records can be used as a gauge to ascertain results from past security surveys and audits, the reliability of their building blueprints and plans for future structures, and the extent of their operational procedures. In another event, a chemical plant, T2 Lab, located in the industrial area of north Jacksonville experienced explosions on December, 2007. Some of those who heard the blast from where they live, which is about fifteen minutes away from the facility, described the noise as gunshot type explosion that shook their home, and from afar, thick plume of smoke was seen. From the plant itself, the employees who were not injured heard hissing noise and sound wave before the blast happened. Apparently, it was not an act of terrorism, but more of technical malfunctions. T2 Lab produces ecotane, a gasoline additive that reduces tailpipe emissions (CNN 2007). The incident resulted to the death of four people and injured fourteen others who were brought to the nearby hospitals. Luckily, it was ruled that there was no toxicity in the air. Such an event could have been avoided, if only the management of T2 Lab engaged as their guide the VAM. It is precisely in their kind of an industrial chemical facility that they should have employed the twelve steps to assess the vulnerability of their facility to undesired events. Facility Characterization Matrix is an important tool that should not be foregone. The facility characterization matrix organizes the security factors for each processing activity and provides a framework for determining and prioritizing the critical activities (Ashcroft, 2002). Since the plant produces ecotane, there is a possibility that when released in the air, there is a great tendency that this will be inhaled by the surrounding community. It is vital that the safeness of the chemical must be assessed when it comes to its toxicity or at what point in volume would it be hazardous to health. When information about toxicity and exposure is available for a specific chemical, it can then be combined to provide a scientific evaluation of potential health risks. This process, called risk assessment, becomes the basis for legal and social judgments about the safety or acceptability of chemical releases (2005). The more positive system that the event in T2 Lab had shown was their readiness to respond in such an incident. They were quick to have the premises evacuated, their communication system was in place, information for the interested parties were released on time. However, it is essential that they employ preventive measures, because such an event should not be repeated. It is understandable that in this type of complex undertaking, there will be innumerable steps to be complied in order that a chemical facility will be in top shape, security- and safety-wise. Having experienced serious repercussions, T2 Lab cannot afford to do away with the various activities suggested under VAM, that may prove to be effective in risk management. It would do well for any chemical facility to determine the severity of an undesired event and the likelihood of an attack from either terrorists or insiders. The best way is to make use of the Severity Priority Ranking Matrix, which can be helpful in assessing how much and in what aspect threats can be more likely to occur. It is inevitable that a chemical facility will encounter systems failure, therefore it should be their objective that when component failure happens, operational downtime must be contained to a minimum, that contingency plans must be in place to possibly restore operation systems back to normal at an acceptable period. When an undesired event had already happened, it is the best time to review and analyze the system’s effectiveness, to prevent recurrence of accidents, malfunctions or intrusion of adversarial elements. In the case of T2 Lab, the inadequacy of their security and protection measures resulted to the death of four people and injuries were experienced by fourteen people. Basically, getting involved in the business of chemical facility, entails substantial security and safety measures. The list is endless, because, as it goes along, newer and more complex data would come out, thus, the need to modify and improve is imperative, therefore, more preventive measures will most likely be missed out. To simplify the systems or the preparations, it can certainly help if management would know the answers to the questions: “What is the desired event?” “Will the loss of a facility have a significant impact on the Nation?” “Does the facility have a total onsite inventory of threshold quantities (TQs) or greater of a chemical covered under Federal regulation 40 CFR 68.130?” (Ashcroft, et al, 2002). Being concerned with the environment and the people nearby is also one simple solution that can dramatically reduce the hazards of exposures to chemical releases. Choosing the location to be far from the madding crowd could certainly eliminate the threats of major toxic gas clouds that can come from a chemical facility. Along the way, the U. S. government had introduced regulatory incentives and other opportunities that had encouraged chemical facility management to be more responsible in preserving the health security and toxic-free environment of their own employees and the people around their chemical facility. Understandably, the owners of the chemical facility will undoubtedly have to spend exorbitant amounts to bring about the necessary precautionary and preventive systems in place, because, they can likewise expect exorbitant returns in their investments. Those who expect to gain more but spend less, are the ones who are making their facility vulnerable to systems and components failure, and accidents due to lower quality of operations, that may cost them millions of dollars after all. To be able to run a legitimate chemical facility with all the modern hi-tech systems, is a goal that can only function successfully if safety and security are the priorities. They may not be subjects of terroristic acts, but most likely, a more covert action or a lesser major inside perpetrators can be expected. Who knows, Jack Bauer of the TV series “24” may rescue them in time. Works cited: Ashcroft, J., Daniels, D., Hart, S. (2002). A Method to assess the vulnerability of US Chemical Facilities, US Department of Justice Programs, 3 – 13. CNN, 2007. Four dead in chemical plant explosion, officials say. Retrieved from: http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/12/19/florida.explosion/index.html 2005. Green Media Toolshed. 2009. Clifton Journal Editorial. Retrieved from: http://www.northjersey.com/news/environment/59694767.html Read More