tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9122514974659083342.post955234652176278314..comments2024-02-02T22:30:20.736-05:00Comments on Chemical Facility Security News: Senate Appropriations Committee Addresses CFATSPJCoylehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03390039682578324978noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9122514974659083342.post-30471727093255176692012-05-26T05:45:51.481-04:002012-05-26T05:45:51.481-04:00Your comment - "While ISCD, GreenPeace and th...Your comment - "While ISCD, GreenPeace and the American Chemistry Council all site (sic) these figures as proof that improvements are being made, all of them are ignoring the fact that DHS has done nothing to confirm these reported changes, nor has a study been done to determine how the changes were made." - is inaccurate. Inspector teams were sent in a significant number of cases to inspect and verify whether the facility had reduced or removed their chemical holdings according to their formal request to be retiered. These teams documented what they found and these analyses were used by DHS HQ in making the final decision on whether to retier the subject facility. While it is true that some facilities reduced the concentration, somtimes to a minor degree and other times significantly - the fact is, DHS established a threshold of concentration that was deemed significant, not one that below which posed zero risk. CFATS was designed to regulate high risk sites, not all sites that pose a risk. Therefore a threshold had to be established and followed.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com