Planning for terrorist attacks has become an unfortunate necessity for any owner of a large facility since Sept. 11. Facility owners have spent a great deal of time and money trying to figure out how best to improve security without choking off business. Many owners have feared that no matter how they prepare for a terrorist event, nothing they do will prevent an attack and the possibility of incurring massive lawsuits by victims afterward.

Fortunately, there is a federal law that addresses those concerns and can help mitigate or eliminate liability claims relating to terrorist attacks. The Support Anti-Terrorism By Fostering Effective Technology Act of 2002 (the SAFETY Act) provides tort protections for sellers and customers of products or services that can be used to detect, defend against, or respond to acts of terrorism. These protections include the ability to dismiss almost immediately claims arising out of the use of products or services intended to help combat terrorist attacks.

The SAFETY Act was drafted in part to respond to concerns companies had that conducting business in the homeland security market segment would expose them to nearly limitless legal liability. Such fears are quite valid given a number of decisions in U.S. courts holding that entities providing security in a number of terrorist events (Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, 1993 World Trade Center bombing, 1996 Olympic Park bombing) could be or actually are liable for damages arising out of those events.

Under the SAFETY Act, the seller of an “anti-terror technology” (which is either a product or a service) may apply for liability protections from Department of Homeland Security (DHS). If the protections of the SAFETY Act are awarded, sellers and customers of anti-terror products and services are protected from liability arising out of terrorist attacks. More specifically, sellers of the technology have the right to be dismissed from liability claims if the plaintiff cannot prove the seller committed fraud or misconduct in the application process. Customers, meanwhile, are to be dismissed immediately from any such claims, as under the SAFETY Act only sellers may have liability claims brought against them.

Such protections are awarded only after a thorough review of the seller’s product or service has been conducted by DHS. Also SAFETY Act protections apply regardless of whether the customer is a government or private entity. These incentives are designed to help ensure the United States has as many tools in its arsenal as possible to deter, defend against, and defeat terrorist activities.

Essentially any product or service that has an anti-terror application is eligible for protections under the SAFETY Act, and examples include security guard services, explosive-sniffing canines, vulnerability assessment services, training services, and camera systems.

There are many ways amusement and attraction owners can utilize the SAFETY Act. For instance, an amusement park owner can look to purchase camera systems or guard services from SAFETY Act-certified companies so they (a) can take advantage of the seller’s SAFETY Act liability protections and (b) can enjoy the level of comfort associated with knowing they are utilizing items that have been thoroughly vetted by the DHS. Alternatively, amusement park owners can themselves apply for SAFETY Act protections for any security services they provide internally (guards, evacuation training, etc.).

Amusement park and attraction owners should think seriously about the ways SAFETY Act protections can benefit them. For a little investment up front, it can pay great dividends in the unfortunate event of a terrorist attack.

Brian E. Finch Esq. is the head of the Homeland Security Practice Group at the Washington, D.C.-based law firm Dickstein Shapiro. He has helped draft dozens of successful SAFETY Act applications for a wide variety of companies. E-mail Finch at finchb@dicksteinshapiro.com.