Tuesday, May 13, 2008

Blog Comment 5-12-08

I ran into a comment about last week’s blog on security guards (see: "Security Guard Background Checks") on CrimCheck.com. The comment by Ryan Sherman was that: "It is the contract company’s responsibility to get their guards screened." Actually, that was the whole point of the original article and my blog; there is little or no regulation of unarmed guards in many jurisdictions. That and the fact that the chemical facility management will be responsible to DHS for those checks, not the guard companies.

This is the problem that DHS and chemical facility management are going to run into when they start to work the personal surety issues associated with securing high-risk chemical facilities from potential terrorist attack. The lack of federal regulations governing security guards will make it difficult to establish acceptable guidelines under CFATS for what must be done for these security guards.

In fact, the same problems exist, under current rules, for the background checks for facility personnel with unaccompanied access to sensitive areas of the facility. The CFATS regulations do not spell out what kind of background checks must be done. Neither do they spell out what findings on such a check will prohibit an employee or security guard from working at a high-risk chemical facility.

No comments:

/* Use this with templates/template-twocol.html */