High-risk Materials

New York City Police conducted an undercover operation to demonstrate the ease with which a terrorist could obtain chlorine gas. The police set-up a fake water-purification company and were able to obtain three 100-pound cylinders of chlorine. The purchase was done without any direct contact and no background checks. Despite the focus on manufacturers of high-risk materials by Homeland Security, the NYPD operation was able to obtain chlorine with very little effort. Chlorine, even in small dosages, effects human respiratory function and is lethal in large doses. Chlorine can’t be filtered by most masks and will deteriorate the latex seals of many chemical masks.

The New York case is an important reminder of how vulnerable small manufacturers and vendors of hazardous materials can be to a terrorist effort. Unfortunately this story occurred in New York which already receives a lion share of attention from the Department of Homeland Security. I firmly believe that the last place a terrorist will try to obtain materials for an attack in such high-profile areas as New York or Los Angeles. Small chemical manufacturers and vendors in less high-profile areas (such as cities like Kansas City or Des Moines) may not have the budget or the impetus to implement the necessary security oversight over the purchase of their products. A terrorist might also try to obtain smaller quantities from multiple vendors. The products could be gathered in one part of the country to be used in an attack in another part of the country. Of course if all else fails, a terrorist could simply steal the materials from a storage area. While this last option would alert authorities, depending on how quickly the material would be used may make it worth the risk. I recall a case in Kentucky back in 1999 where around several thousand pounds of ANFO was stolen from a demolition company. I don’t know if the material was ever recovered but imagine the logistics required to steal and move such a quantity!

Local first responders, healthcare workers, emergency planners and others involved in homeland security need to really look around their own backyard. Too often homeland security becomes an exercise in defeating some external organization from launching and attack on the United States. Communities that aren’t along the coasts are near major metropolitan areas just can’t relate to such scenarios. These communities, however, could be the ideal location for a terrorist to obtain the necessary materials to create a weapon. Chlorine is just one of many different chemicals that are produced in large quantities for commercial use yet are highly poisonous and could be used by a terrorist group to execute an attack. Very often the plants that produce these chemicals are located in remote areas of the country, area from major population areas. The location reduces the possibility of people being injured in the event of an industrial accident but it also makes it easier for terrorists to obtain the materials either through subterfuge or theft.

These remote communities often don’t have a response plan for dealing with a major disaster at such a facility. First responders and medical treatment facilities may be too small to be able to adequately deal with any type of large scale industrial accident. Sometimes very few in the community are even aware what high risk manufacturers may be located in their community. For example, few here in the Cincinnati area are probably aware of the Portsmouth Gaseous Diffusion Plant. The plant has 23.0 metric tons of highly enriched uranium, which is stored and processed as uranium hexafluoride (UF6), and other compounds including fluorides, and oxides. (Source: DOE). Most of the first responders I’ve spoken to here in the Cincinnati area have protocols to deal with transporting and treating patients with radiological exposure. Most of the hospitals here don’t have the ability to deal with mass casualties with radiation burns much less decontaminating medical personnel who have handled these patients.

The Portsmouth example is a dramatic example but is shows what may literally be right outside the door of a community. A terrorist operation that targets such a facility for either a fake business transaction, theft or outright attack is far more likely for most communities compared to another 9/11 type attack. The real challenge is to be able to protect these smaller facilities and manufacturers while not increasing their operating costs to the point that they are forced out of business. Too often the immediate conclusion is the terrorists are going to launch an attack when their ultimate goal may be much more subtle. Getting communities to spend large sums of money, restrict business practices, and eliminate other business practices altogether could have an even greater impact to our economy than exploding several cylinders of chlorine gas. Think about the impact security screenings at airports have had on our airline industry. Airlines have had to greatly reduce in-flight services to offset the increase in fuel costs making flights rather unpleasant experiences. Compound the poor in-flight experience with the aggravation of long security lines and the result is fewer people willing to fly commercial airlines. Wealthier passengers chose charter aircraft which results in more aircraft in the skies and increasing the incidence of delays. Less affluent passengers look to rental cars or trains as ways of avoiding the hassles of air travel. All of this jeopardizes many of the major carriers (Delta is looking at merging with another legacy carrier). I’m not saying all of this was caused by terrorist attacks but by having to insure in-flight safety we have inadvertently made airline travel even less attractive than normal.

If we over-react to the New York city case, we may also create economic adversity for our smaller businesses. These businesses may not be able to operate due to the increasing costs of doing the necessary security checks on their customers. Customers may resent the additional paperwork and delays in procuring services and products and may turn to vendors from outside the US. As always, security will come down to how much are we willing to pay?