|
 ederal
agencies are reconsidering "public right-to-know" policies
out of concern that uncontrolled access to sensitive information
could facilitate future terrorist attacks. The Department of Transportation,
for example, closed off Internet access to the National Pipeline
Mapping System. The Centers for Disease Control took down its report
on America's vulnerability to chemical terrorism. Defense-related
sites are taking similar measures. Federal officials concluded that
leaving such information on the World Wide Web would make it too
easy for potential terrorists to identify attractive targets. Even
the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is taking part by deactivating
web access to databases that describe potential disasters at industrial
sites and facility safety measures. "People have a right to
know what kinds of risks there are, but unfortunately terrorists
are people too," an EPA spokesman told the press.
The EPA's actions
are particularly controversial. As noted in
an earlier piece on NRO, section 112r of the Clean Air Act requires
industrial facilities to prepare risk-management plans that detail
potential chemical accidents and "worst-case" scenarios
for what could happen to neighboring communities. By law, this information
is to be available to the public. As interpreted by the EPA, this
meant the risk-management plans should be posted on the Internet
for all the world to see and access anonymously. Congress thought
otherwise, and passed legislation limiting — though not eliminating
— public access to such sensitive data. Information of the
greatest potential value to would-be terrorists is only accessible
in public reading rooms around the country. With encouragement from
environmental activists, however, the EPA still posted substantial
data online — until recently that is.
The EPA opted
to pull its risk-management-plan database from the web out of concern
for public safety. Some environmental groups, however, do not feel
the same way. At the time of this writing, summaries of facility
risk-management plans are still available in an online searchable
database on RTKnet.
A potential terrorist can search the database for industrial facilities
near population centers where disabling safety measures and causing
an accident could have maximum impact. Armed with this information,
the terrorist could then get greater detail from a public reading
room. RTKnet also hosts a website for the Working Group on Community
Right-to-Know which lists the "Top 50 U.S. manufacturing Facilities
in Worst-case Disaster Potential" and several maps detailing
vulnerability zones for selected
chemical facilities.
The sponsors
of RTKnet, OMB Watch, and the Center for Public Data Access (CPDA),
have given no indication that they plan to take the information
offline. Instead, OMB Watch decries the federal actions as a threat
to "the spirit of civil society." A CPDA representative
attacked this author for "fear-mongering" and "finger-pointing"
for raising these concerns in an earlier column. According to OMB
Watch, such information must remain available because of the "public's
right-to-know." Concerns about terrorism should be addressed
by beefing up site security and reducing chemical use. Greenpeace
goes further, charging that the only way to reduce the terrorist
threat at industrial facilities is to phase-out the use of industrial
chemicals such as chlorine. Fortunately, not all environmental groups
have adopted such extreme positions. U.S. PIRG has temporarily removed
a report on fertilizer use listing facilities storing potentially
harmful substances.
Ensuring that
local communities have access to information about local threats
does not require searchable online databases of industrial facilities
nationwide, their vulnerabilities, and worst-case disaster potential.
Protecting communities simply requires local disclosure and cooperation
between industrial facilities and local officials. As noted in Congressional
hearing last week, local police, fire, and emergency officials are
the first to respond when disaster strikes. These are the people
who most need information about local threats, not D.C.-based environmental
activist groups or would-be terrorists. Local officials are also
in the best position to work with industrial facilities to identify
risks and find ways to protect the public from industrial accidents.
Disclosure to local community organizations can also be helpful
to encourage civic involvement. None of this, however, requires
posting sensitive data about industrial facilities on the web.
Federal mandates
requiring nationwide disclosure of sensitive industrial information
does little if anything to advance public safety. Even less can
be said for displaying such data on government websites. Private
groups have the right to post such material on their own sites,
but that doesn't make it wise. Our enemies will not attack us with
tanks and fighter planes. Rather, as on September 11, they will
identify our vulnerabilities and turn the fruits of modern industrial
civilization against us. The federal government should take stern
and reasonable steps to stop such attacks, and not unduly aid the
next wave of attackers. A free and prosperous society is necessarily
a somewhat vulnerable one, but we should not support federal agencies
or environmental activist groups exposing our Achilles's heels.
|
