biowarfare labs unsafe

[Guest guest]

Some call for a timeout as US releases biolab security report

Intruders could break in at Texas, Georgia facilities

By Larry Margasak Associated Press / October 17, 2008

WASHINGTON - A new government report is heightening fears about the

safety of US biodefense laboratories that study some of the world's

deadliest germs. The latest worry: Intruders could easily break into

two of the labs because of lax security.

Now some lawmakers and members of a new citizens coalition are asking

whether it is time for a timeout in the expansion of the Bush

administration's biowarfare defense program.

The Bush administration decided after the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist

attacks that the nation needed to develop cures, drug treatments,

vaccines, and diagnostic tests to combat germs that could be used,

either in an attack or accidentally.

And, while US officials say there are no known incidents where

outsiders attacked anyone with germs from a US lab, the FBI concluded

last summer that Bruce Ivins, a microbiologist at an Army lab in Fort

Detrick, Md. was responsible for anthrax attacks in 2001. Ivins

committed suicide earlier this year.

Two House lawmakers and members of a new citizens coalition - people

" living in the shadow " of these labs - say the defensive biowarfare

program has expanded too quickly. Security measures have not kept up,

they said.

The latest government study, obtained by The Associated Press and

released publicly yesterday, found that intruders could easily break

into two laboratories handling organisms that could cause incurable

illnesses.

The Associated Press identified the vulnerable lab locations as

Atlanta and San . The Government Accountability Office, which

produced the report, did not identify the labs except to say they are

classified as Biosafety Level 4 facilities - requiring the highest

level of security. But the report included enough to determine their

locations.

In Texas, the Southwest Foundation for Biomedical Research has an

outside window that looks directly into the room where the deadly

germs are handled. The lab, which is privately run, also lacks

sufficient security cameras, intrusion detection alarms or visible

armed guards at its public entrances, the report said. Officials there

said they will tighten security.

" We already have an initiative under way to look at perimeter

security, " said Trevett, president of the lab in San .

" We're waiting for additional input but we're not waiting long. The

GAO would like us to do some fairly significant things. They would

like us to do it sooner rather than later. "

The other lab described as having insufficient security is operated by

Georgia State University in Atlanta. That lab lacked complete security

barriers and any integrated security system, including any live

monitoring by security cameras. During their review, investigators

said they watched an unidentified pedestrian enter the building

through an unguarded loading dock.

" Georgia State clearly wants its BSL-4 to be as safe as possible, "

said De Hines, assistant vice president for university relations.

" We are already taking steps that will enhance the lab's safety and

security standards. " Hines did not confirm the school's research lab

was the one mentioned in the congressional report.

The report, coupled with several investigative findings over the past

year, revealed security and safety problems covering every aspect of

the facilities: poor perimeter security, a growing number of accidents

inside the labs, and the FBI's conclusion last summer that a civilian

Army scientist at Ft. Detrick, Md. was behind deadly anthrax attacks

in 2001.

In Boston, Boston University's new National Emerging Infectious

Diseases Laboratories complex, on Albany Street, has been

controversial. It contains Level 3 and Level 4 labs.

Beth Willis, a member of a citizens group from Frederick, Md. near

Fort Detrick, said, " We understand we're not going to make the labs go

away, but we have a lot of concerns about safety.

" Biomedical research is very important. We're not saying it all should

stop. We are saying the size and scale of the ramp-up with pathogens,

considered by the government to be biowarfare pathogens, is a

dangerous thing, " Willis said. " It's an opportunity to say 'time out'

and address this. "

Michigan Representative Dingell, a Democrat and chairman of the

House Energy and Commerce Committee, this week repeated his call for

suspension of all further design and construction of biodefense

laboratories until security problems are fixed.

In a letter to President Bush in August, Dingell and fellow Democratic

Rep. Bart Stupak, also of Michigan, urged the suspension of all

further design and construction of laboratories in the program - until

security problems are fixed.

" We found that many of the labs are probably unnecessary or redundant.

Shockingly, the Government Accountability Office reported that no one

in the government even knows the total number of BSL (Biosafety Level)

3 and 4 labs currently in existence.

" Ironically, their proliferation has only exacerbated the potential

risk of a terrorist incident or accidental release, not enhanced our

nation's security. "

BSL-3 and BSL-4 laboratories are those handling the most dangerous

germs and toxins and requiring the most stringent security. The BSL-4

labs handle organisms that cause diseases without a cure. They include

ebola, marburg, junin and lassa viruse

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2008/10/17/some_call_for_a\

_timeout_as_us_releases_biolab_security_report/