National Bio- and Agro-Defense Facility

Much of the federal research on livestock diseases is currently conducted by DHS and USDA at the Plum Island Animal Disease Center in New York, a facility constructed shortly after World War II. The changing and more interdependent nature of U.S. agriculture, coupled with a major shift in the types of animal disease threats, has forced Plum Island to incrementally evolve, but it has simply reached the limits of its capacity.

After concluding that there is a need for a new state of the art animal disease research facility, two years ago DHS solicited proposals from across the country for potential sites. A competitive process that began with 29 initial proposals was narrowed down to five potential sites, including a site near Butner, North Carolina put forward by the North Carolina Consortium for the NBAF, a public-private partnership that includes academic researchers, government officials, agricultural groups and private sector stakeholders in our state.

I have said from the beginning that neither I nor anyone else should form a final opinion about the North Carolina site until the environmental studies were completed and the relevant questions answered. The draft environmental impact statement (DEIS) for the NBAF that DHS released in June answered many questions about how the facility would operate, but it did not answer all of them.

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has held three different public sessions in Granville County for the precise purpose of hearing concerns and answering questions from the public. I am continuing to work with DHS to ensure that stakeholder questions are answered and concerns are addressed. That said, community concerns and level of local support for the facility will be an important factor in any decision the Department makes on where to locate the NBAF. Most recently, the Raleigh City Council and the Durham Board of Commissioners voted to oppose the establishment of NBAF at the Butner site.

I approach the proposed NBAF not only as a local representative but also as the Chairman of the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Homeland Security. In that capacity, it is not my role to advocate for any particular site, but to make sure that critical animal disease research is done and that, wherever it is done, it is done safely. For one particularly critical question not fully answered by the DEIS – whether Foot and Mouth Disease research can safely be conducted on the mainland – I have taken steps to ensure that the NBAF facility will not be constructed at any of the five proposed sites until the Department conducts a risk analysis and that analysis is reviewed by the Government Accountability Office.

The entire project demands the strictest oversight and accountability to ensure the safest and most environmentally-friendly facility possible. Through my subcommittee post, I intend to exercise such oversight in order to achieve a safe and sustainable outcome for both our national security interests and the welfare of the communities where the facility is eventually sited.

Additional information about NBAF is available through the website of the Department of Homeland Security (http://www.dhs.gov/xres/labs/editorial_0762.shtm).