[Infowarrior] - DHS Tornado Alley Lab idiocy questioned

[Richard Forno]

Infectious Diseases Study Site Questioned
Tornado Alley May Not Be Safe, GAO Says
By Carol D. Leonnig
Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, July 27, 2009

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/07/26/AR2009072602857_pf.html

The Department of Homeland Security relied on a rushed, flawed study  
to justify its decision to locate a $700 million research facility for  
highly infectious pathogens in a tornado-prone section of Kansas,  
according to a government report.
The department's analysis was not "scientifically defensible" in  
concluding that it could safely handle dangerous animal diseases in  
Kansas -- or any other location on the U.S. mainland, according to a  
Government Accountability Office draft report obtained by The  
Washington Post. The GAO said DHS greatly underestimated the chance of  
accidental release and major contamination from such research, which  
has been conducted only on a remote island off the United States.

DHS staff members tried quietly last week to fend off a public airing  
of the facility's risks, agency correspondence shows. Department  
officials met privately with staff members of a congressional  
oversight subcommittee to try to convince them that the GAO report was  
unfair, and to urge them to forgo or postpone a hearing. But the House  
Energy and Commerce Committee's oversight and investigations  
subcommittee, chaired by Rep. Bart Stupak (D-Mich.), decided  
otherwise. It plans to hold a hearing Thursday on the risk analysis,  
according to two sources briefed on the plans.

The criticism of DHS's site selection comes as the proposed research  
lab, the National Bio and Agro-Defense Facility (NBAF), was expected  
to win construction funding in the congressional appropriations process.

"Drawing conclusions about relocating research with highly infectious  
exotic animal pathogens from questionable methodology could result in  
regrettable consequences," the GAO warned in its draft report. DHS's  
review was too "limited" and "inadequate" to decide that any mainland  
labs were safe, the report found. GAO officials declined to comment on  
the findings.

The new developments started another round of accusations that  
politics steered DHS's decision in January to build the proposed lab  
in Manhattan, Kan. Critics of the choice argue that a Kansas  
contingent of Republican Sens. Sam Brownback and Pat Roberts and then- 
Gov. Kathleen Sebelius, a Democrat, aggressively lobbied DHS to pick  
their state. Records show that a DHS undersecretary and his site  
selection committee met frequently with the senators, one of whom is a  
member of an appropriations subcommittee that helps set DHS funding.

A Texas consortium that hoped to lure the DHS facility to San Antonio  
argues that the agency has wasted millions of dollars trying to  
justify its choice, and said the GAO's findings show that the  
selection method was "preposterous."

"They call it 'Tornado Alley' for a reason," said Michael Guiffre, an  
attorney for the consortium. "This really boils down to politics at  
its very worst and public officials who are more concerned about  
erecting some gleaming new research building than thinking about  
what's best for the general public."

DHS officials and Kansas leaders say the selection system, which began  
in late 2006, was always fair and open. Brownback has noted that  
George W. Bush was president in mid-January when his home state of  
Texas lost the competition.

"The process involved a transparent six-year process, run by career  
civil servants and punctuated with multiple public meetings near each  
finalist location," DHS spokesman Matthew Chandler said.

The DHS lab would replace and expand upon the mission of a federal  
research facility on a remote island on the northern tip of Long  
Island, N.Y. Critics of moving the operation to the mainland argue  
that a release could lead to widespread contamination that could kill  
livestock, devastate a farm economy and endanger humans. Along with  
the highly contagious foot-and-mouth disease, NBAF researchers plan to  
study African swine fever, Japanese encephalitis, Rift Valley fever  
and other viruses.

GAO's draft report said the agency's assessment of the risk of  
accidental release of toxins on mainland locations, including Kansas,  
was based on "unrepresentative accident scenarios," "outdated  
modeling" and "inadequate" information about the sites. The agency's  
analysis of the economic impact of domestic cattle being infected by  
foot-and-mouth disease played down the financial losses by not  
considering the worst-case scenario.

The agency noted that the United Kingdom's outbreak of foot-and-mouth  
disease in 2001, which resulted from an accidental release at a  
biological research laboratory south of London. Six million sheep,  
cattle and pigs were slaughtered to stop the contamination, and the  
country's agriculture market, comparatively a fraction of the U.S.  
market, lost $4.9 billion.

DHS had cited a foot-and-mouth disease facility in Winnipeg, Manitoba,  
as evidence that doing this research on the mainland is safe. But GAO  
said that is illogical: The NBAF would have a less sophisticated  
method for containing releases than the Winnipeg lab, it said, but  
would handle as many as 10 times the number of animals.

Selecting a spot for the lab has been rife with political battling and  
vigorous lobbying from five states that were finalists. Though the  
general public repeatedly voiced concern about the safety of such  
research, elected leaders were seeking the $3.5 billion jolt that the  
facility was expected to bring to its host's economy.

Critics of the selection of Kansas note that DHS Undersecretary Jay  
Cohen and others met often with the state's senators. Brownback said  
this month that he had helped add $36 million to a Senate bill to  
build the Kansas facility, and that he would work for the same in the  
House.

"We fought hard for this funding, and I'm glad my colleagues in the  
Senate realized the significant role this facility will play in  
researching emerging diseases that could endanger our food supply," he  
said on his Web site.

In recent days, DHS science officials involved in choosing the  
Manhattan site, adjoining Kansas State University, told Secretary  
Janet Napolitano's top staff members that GAO exceeded its authority  
in reviewing the agency's risk assessment, according to internal  
correspondence shared with The Post.

Chandler confirmed that agency staff members told the Energy and  
Commerce subcommittee staff members in their meeting last Monday that  
DHS would prefer not to have a hearing now. DHS officials were not  
trying to avoid discussing the issue during the appropriations  
process, Chandler said, but wanted to avoid wasting the agency's and  
committee's time until they saw the final GAO report.

"This has nothing to do with politics," Chandler said. "This is about  
logical reasoning . . . and was in the interest of everyone's time."