The SAFETY ActSAFETY Act falls short

Published 6 June 2011

The SAFETY Act (the Support Anti-terrorism by Fostering Effective Technologies Act of 2002) was created in order to speed up the pace of homeland security-related technologies and solutions reaching the market; the act encourages private firms to develop technology to combat terrorism by providing liability protection in case a firm is sued; since applications by companies for Safety Act coverage began in 2004, not many more than 400 technologies have been approved under the act; critics say that number should be in the thousands; they say the act is a good idea — but few in the industry know about it

The SAFETY Act (the Support Anti-terrorism by Fostering Effective Technologies Act of 2002) was created in order to speed up the pace of homeland security-related technologies and solutions reaching the market. The act encourages private firms to develop technology to combat terrorism by providing liability protection in case a firm is sued.

Stephen Heifetz, former deputy assistant secretary for policy at DHS, told the Los Angeles Times that the act’s approach is the right one, because if a service or product fails during a terrorist attack, it can leave the developers of that technology open to costly litigation.

For example, somebody might come up with a widget to screen people entering a stadium,” Heifetz said. “But they might fear that if somebody gets in that stadium and assaults, injures or kills somebody, they’ll be sued, and feeling that, they might not develop it in the first place.”

A congressional hearing last month heard, though, that while the act’s approach is correct, its implementation has been anything but. Since applications by companies for Safety Act coverage began in 2004, not many more than 400 technologies have been approved under the act.

Marc Pearl, president of the Homeland Security & Defense Business Council, an organization that represents private companies that work in the domestic security field, told the Times that “While 400-plus services and products have received a designation or certification, that number should be in the thousands.” He added that there have been reports that applications are reviewed inconsistently and that it takes too long to get a certification renewed after it expires, which discourages companies from applying in the first place.

The Times notes that the number of new applications has fallen: there were 142 applications in the 2009 fiscal year but only 28 at the halfway point of the 2011 fiscal year. The 2011 number has since been updated and will continue to grow, but the number of applications is not expected to reach the 2009 level.

Heifetz said the program is fundamentally sound but just is not well-known outside the community of established government contractors. “Not all legislation is sensible, but this one was a very good idea,” Heifetz said. “I think the criticism here is less about substance and more about public relations.”