ods that make up the nation’s chemical infrastructure.2 These include DHS’s Risk Analysis and Management for Critical Assets Protection (RAMCAP) exercise. RAMCAP describes an overall methodology and common framework for risk management that can be used to identify and prioritize critical infrastructure across all sectors. RAMCAP allows for comparable analysis and results within and between sectors. For the nation’s chemical infrastructure, DHS is using RAMCAP to analyze specific chemical sites. The Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPAs) Risk Management Plan (RMP) data represent a compilation of site-specific data submitted by the chemical industry in compliance with the Clean Air Act.3

2  

Of the many efforts under way or recently completed on chemical infrastructure protection, some most relevant to the present study include the following: (a) American Chemistry Council. 2002. Protecting a Nation: Homeland Defense and the Business of Chemistry. Arlington, VA; (b) O’Hanlon, M., P.R. Orszag, I.H. Daadler, I.M. Destler, D. Gunter, R.E. Litan, and J. Steinberg. 2002. Protecting the American Homeland: A Preliminary Analysis. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press; (c) Tucker, J.B. 2002. “Chemical Terrorism: Assessing Threats and Responses.” High Impact Terrorism: Proceedings of a Russian-American Workshop. Washington, DC: National Academy Press. 117; (d) Kleindorfer, P.R., J.C. Belke, M.R. Elliott, K. Lee, R.A. Lowe, and H.I. Feldman. 2003. “Accident epidemiology and the U.S. chemical industry: Accident history and worst-case data from RMP*Info” Risk Analysis. 23(5):865-881; (e) U.S. Department of Justice. 2000. Assessment of the Increased Risk of Terrorist or Other Criminal Activity Associated with Posting Off-Site Consequence Analysis Information on the Internet. Washington, DC: p. 13; (f) Congressional Research Service. 2003. Chemical Plant Security. RL31520. Washington, DC; (g) U.S. Department of Homeland Security. 2003. The National Strategy for the Physical Protection of Critical Infrastructures and Key Assets. Washington, DC; (h) U.S. Department of Homeland Security. 2005. The Interim National Infrastructure Protection Plan. Washington, DC; (i) U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Office for Domestic Preparedness. 2003. Vulnerability Assessment Methodologies Report: Phase I Final Report. Washington, DC; (j) American Petroleum Institute and the National Petrochemical and Refiners Association. 2004. Security Vulnerability Assessment Methodology for the Petroleum and Petrochemical Industries. Washington, DC; (k) National Institute of Justice. 2002. A Method to Assess the Vulnerability of U.S. Chemical Facilities. Washington, DC; (l) Center for Chemical Process Safety of the American Institute of Chemical Engineers. 2002. Guidelines for Analyzing and Managing the Security Vulnerabilities of Fixed Chemical Sites. New York, NY; (m) U.S. Department of Homeland Security. 2004. Capabilities Based Planning Overview. Available at http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/odp/docs/Capabilities_Based_Planning_Overview.pdf.

3  

Because of lack of access to detailed information, the committee reviewed neither the accuracy nor the appropriateness of RMP data nor the merits of the RAMCAP methodology.



The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement