Weaknesses Found in Safety Assessment of Planned Biodefense Lab

Source:  http://www.globalsecuritynewswire.org/gsn/nw_20100305_6437.php



Title:   Weaknesses Found in Safety Assessment of Planned Biodefense Lab

By:    Global Newswire Staff
Date:    Friday, March 5, 2010

The U.S. Army should fine-tune its procedures for determining safety risks in its projects following slip-ups in plans for the new site of the U.S. Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases at Fort Detrick, Md., a National Academy of Sciences committee said in a report issued Thursday (see GSN, Sept. 23, 2009).



Despite shortcomings the report's authors found in the planned $680 million facility's environmental impact statement, they stopped short of recommending that planners rework the blueprint, which could have delayed progress on the 800-acre site. The laboratory -- slated to begin operating in 2014 -- would still incorporate safety features not available at the current USAMRIID location, which still meets or surpasses existing safety standards, according to the report.

The Army provided insufficient evidence to back its conclusion that a release of the Ebola and Q-fever agents from the new facility would pose no threat to residences and commercial sites in Fredrick, a community numbering roughly 59,000 people, according to an NAS statement.

The service did not adequately assess personal risk of contamination or disease contraction, nor did it address exposure risks for workers within the new laboratory, according to the report. The military's assessment also failed to evaluate other potential sites for the new facility, although U.S. lawmakers mandated that it be located at Fort Detrick, the panel said.

In addition, the Army did not explore possible security threats posed by laboratory personnel, the committee stated. A U.S. Justice Department investigation pinned blame for the 2001 anthrax mailings on Bruce Ivins, a former USAMRIID microbiologist who killed himself in 2008 (see GSN, Feb. 26).

The panel's decision to allow work on the facility to move forward was "unconscionable," said Robert Kozak, an activist with the Fort Detrick Watchdog Group.

The organization might file suit in a bid to force the Army to rework its environmental report on the facility, Kozak added. "We'd have to find the money to do it, but that is the next step," he said.

"We need to have the risks addressed and mitigated very transparently," said Beth Willis, a member of the group Frederick Citizens for Biolab Safety.

Maj. Gen. James Gilman, the site's commander, asserted that Fort Detrick is committed to safety. However, the NAS panel correctly observed that the laboratory complex must better communicate its "relentless focus" on safety to the neighboring area, he said in a press release (David Dishneau, Associated Press/San Francisco Examiner, March 4).

---

The article is reproduced in accordance with Section 107 of title 17 of the Copyright Law of the United States relating to fair-use and is for the purposes of criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research.