|
PETROLEUM DIRECTORY: CH2M Hill tackles anti-terrorism Alaska’s role in homeland security Susan Braund Petroleum Directory Contributing Writer
The sounds of a building alarm can trigger different responses, depending on the cultural perspective of threat. Because they have always lived in a threatened society, when people in Israel hear alarms, they rush to a protected space in the building’s core, while Westerners run outside, away from the perceived threat.
Since the events of 9-11, however, Americans’ normal responses to and awareness of threats have been forever altered: We are alert to threats of terrorism from within and without our borders. In March 2003 the U.S. government created the Department of Homeland Security “with one single overriding responsibility: to make America more secure. Along with the sweeping transformation within the FBI, the establishment of the Department of Defense’s U.S. Northern Command and the creation of the multi-agency Terrorist Threat Integration Center and Terrorist Screening Center, America is better prepared to prevent, disrupt and respond to terrorist attacks than ever before,” states the Homeland Security website.
The changing nature of security threats demands continual upgrades to critical infrastructure and protection mechanisms. Kim Bradley, CH2M Hill vice president, global business development manager, Anti-Terrorism, Threat Reduction and Security Services was in Anchorage in April to brief Alaska Support Industry Alliance members and CH2M employees about the company’s anti-terrorism security services and Alaska’s role in Homeland Security. The company has 30-plus years of experience in engineering solutions for security challenges in the Middle East, such as the West Bank and Kuwait and does $100 million of security projects each year, including security for water/wastewater and chemical plants, airports, port and harbors, national monuments, nuclear and government facilities and oil and gas. Bradley cites cost, continuing operations during upgrades, nurturing versus lockdown and acceptance as the main challenges for preventive security measures. Alaska’s vulnerable borders Alaska has the largest exposed borders of any state, including the Canadian border and surrounding waters. The extensive maritime border makes it difficult to protect, according to Bradley.
“Port security is vital, but we’re starting from scratch. There’s a mix of private and public usage of ports and harbors. It’s movement versus restricted movement, when movement equals dollars for general commerce, the cruise ship industry and ferries. The Navy can secure its ports, but in a public/private situation, it’s tougher.”
The good news is that Alaskans are already good at one crucial element of security readiness: interoperability, or relationship. Essential to mitigating the effects of any disasters, interoperability refers to the communications and response coordination capabilities of initial responders to an emergency event. Proficient interoperability requires training and exercise of compatible equipment to achieve results, according to CH2M Hill Vice President and Senior Program Manager Doug Sethness. “Any actions taken by public, private, and military organizations and agencies to create interoperability are crucial to our personal safety and security.”
“Alaska has a history of defending the homeland in World War II and the Cold War,” says Bradley. “You have disaster experience and already know how to work together. You have the best experience defending against threats, natural or manmade.”
“Protecting oneself to survive danger is a more normal part of the Alaska culture than is prevalent in other areas of the Lower 48 states,” says Sethness. “I think the challenge will be dealing with the accessibility and availability of critical facilities. Isolation of sites provides some deterrent to attack but doesn’t reduce these factors …I think they are still a major issue. For example, it is difficult to protect a vessel leaving the Port of Valdez from a small boat attack even though you have to go a long way to get there.” Security regulations and legislation Legislation and regulations to protect pockets of vulnerability are gradually evolving: In 2002, Congress enacted the Maritime Security Act and the Bioterrorist Act. Pending legislation includes the Chemical Security Act (2005) and Wastewater Act (2004). Once legislation is in place, regulations can follow.
On Dec. 31, 2003, the Coast Guard became the regulating authority to monitor port and harbor security plans. If port owners are not in compliance by July 1, 2004, the Coast Guard can levy fines up to $10,000.
“The U.S. Coast Guard has publicized a no-tolerance message for facilities not meeting the federally mandated security requirements,” says Sethness. “I believe they mean it, and I would caution facility owners and operators to become very familiar with the regulations and compliance activities within their facilities.” Industry concerns Every industry is vulnerable, but the degree of vulnerability varies from industry to industry according to Sethness. “I think the oil/gas/petroleum/petrochemical industry could be a major terrorist target for many reasons, not the least of which are the focus on industry in the last Osama Bin Laden tape and the perceived tie between the invasion of Iraq and the oil industry. There have been requests for increased vigilance based on information received concerning Gulf Coast refining facilities. The biggest challenge is changing our way of thinking, our culture, to deal with the terrorist threat.”
|
