Executive Order 13650 Public Listening Session,

Date: February 27, 2014

Location: North Jersey Tra nsportation Planning Authority , One Newark Center, Newark, NJ 07102

Introduction and Opening Remarks

Kate Finnerty , Facilitator introduced the proceedings and remarked:

• Welcomed everyone to the final planned listening session in a series that has been held across the country and by webinar.

• Thanked the participants for being patient with r escheduling of the sessions due to weather.

• Informed participants that they may submit written comments by mailing NPPD/ISCD/Mailstop 0610, Department of Homeland Security, 245 Murray Lane, SW, Arlington, VA 20598

- 0610. Comments will also be accepted by em ail at: EO.Chemical@hq.dhs.gov or through the Federal eRulemaking Portal at http://www.regulations.gov

.
• Announcements:

o Please put phones on vibrate.

o This session is being recorded for note taking purposes only.

• Purpose: Provide stakeholders an overview of the Executive Order 13650: Improving Chemical Facility Safety and Security (EO) progress to date and provide an opportunity for the public to provide comments, feed back, and suggestions.

Summary and Progress to Date

Mathy Stanislaus, Assistant Administrator, Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response, Environmental Protection Agency ( EPA ) and EO Tri

- C hair

• These listening sessions have been a critical part of the EO and the panel takes the comments provided during the session very seriously.

• I b elieve the se listening sessions will provide the foundation for the recommendation s that will make it to the President’s desk.

• I would like to give a brief overview of the E xecutive Order and the progress we have made to date.

• We have organized into a set of sub working groups. The first working group has been focused on implementing Sections 3 and 4 of the EO, improving coordination. This group is d eveloping a plan for how s takeholders work together . It a lso addre sses how to share explosives material storage data as well as Chemical Facility Anti

- Terrorism Standards (CFATS) data administered by Department of Homeland Security ( DHS )

.
• We have been working on a Pilot Program in EPA Region II with the R egional R esponse T eam and us ing the infrastructure created by Emergency Planning and Community Right

- to

- Know Act ( EPCRA )

. The Pilot Program is defining high risk and inspection coordination amongst agencies
, to include inspections s cheduling and cross training. It is i dentify ing how to share information and how to improve access and content to chemical inventories

. EO 13650 Public Listening Session Page 1 February 27, 2014 Newark, NJ• Another sub

- working group has been focused on implementing Section 5 of the EO, information collection and sharing. This group has been t asked with examining how we collect and disseminate chemical information

. To date, the members have exchanged data to evaluate chemical facility compliance with existing regulations. Additionally, the working group has defined information collection and sharing needs such as a common terminology to develop common tool s and protocols to collect and share chemical information with F ederal, state, local, and tribal entities.

• Another sub

- working group has been focused on Section 6 of the EO, po licy standards and modernization. This working group has been r eviewing standards and regulations on how to handle storage and handling of Ammonium Nitrate (AN) , r eviewing the Appendix A CFATS list
, e nhancing the EPA’s R isk M anagement P lan Program (RMP), a nd e nhancing the Occupations Safety and Health Administration’s ( OSHA ) P rocess S afety M anagement (PSM) standards

.
• Based on feedback the group received, a preliminary list of options was developed and issued to the public for feedback. This is available
at https://www.osha.gov/chemicalexecutiveorder/section6.html

.
• Purpose is to provide preliminary options to move along stakeholder discussion to develop practical options to inform the plan to improve the policy governing chemical safety and security.

• The last sub

- working group has been focused on Section 7 of the EO, stakeholder outreach and best practices. The working group has been focused on identifying the challenges to creating and maintaining chemical safety and security and how determining how to implement best practices

. The sub

- working group developed and executed the se listening sessions

.
• In addition to providing comments here today, we encourage you to submit written comments. You may do so by sending an email to eo.chemical@hq.dhs.gov

.
• It is critically important for the Federal Government to reflect on the comments, best practices and standards, and other information you provide to better provide regulations, data, and service to the chemical stakeholder community.

Bob Kulick, Regional Administrator for OSHA Region II

• On behalf of Assistant Secretary Dr. David Michaels, and OSHA, welcome.

• OSHA’s focus is updating the 1992 PSM standard, which was developed to promote worker safety in the chemical industry. Since 1992, we have issued several citations and penalties addressing the PSM standard and related deficiencies

. In 2007, we initiated the Petroleum Refinery PSM national emph asis program

. In 2009, we built on that inspection program and implemented a PSM c hemical fatalities national emphasis program.

• The work with this EO will be another milestone to prevent chemical catastrophic incidents.

Amy Graydon, Branch Chief, DHS /Offi ce of Infrastructure Protection

• DHS has a unique security centric a spect in implementing the EO through both voluntary and regulatory programs:

o DHS’ regulatory programs include the Chemical Facility Anti

- Terrorism Standards (CFATS) and the Maritime Trans portation Security Act (MTSA). CFATS is a program that identifies and regulates chemical at the highest risk of terrorist attack. Since 2007, upon CFATS authorization, progress has been made. Since inception, more than 3000 facilities EO 13650 Public Listening Session Page 2 February 27, 2014 Newark, NJthat have been identi fied as high risk have modified their process and holdings to become unregulated.

o DHS also ha s voluntary programs focusing on public/private partnerships to ensure that dangerous chemicals are safeguarded. DHS serves as a sector

- specific agency for the chemical sector. In this roll, DHS works across Federal, State, local, and tribal governments and industry to develop training and best practices.

• In NJ, there are 111 currently regulated facilities, 153 in New York.



### • Chemical Safety and Security is a share d mission, and a shared area, and we are pleased to have everyone participating in the listening session.

Paul Hlubi k, New Jersey State Executive Director, U.S. Department of Agriculture ( USDA )

• Ammonium Nitrate (AN) safety and security is important to USDA do to it being one of the most extensively used plant foods in the country.

• It is essential that this chemical be properly regulated yet available as needed.

Lisa Plevin, Chief of Staff for EPA Region II

• On behal f of the R egion II office, we take chemical safety and security seriously

.
• The p ilot program addresses the number of facilities in the region and focuses on how to build on the existing network of local responders

.
• Highlights of Pilot Program :

o Changing the makeup of Reg ional Response Team to include Federal, State, and L ocal chemical security regulatory agencies as permanent members.

o Examining more effective use of EPCRA.

o EPA and New Je rsey Department of Environmental Protection (NJDEP) are collaborating

on a joint inspection program

. o Defining the lis t of high risk security criteria to increase data sharing

.
Eric Mosier, EPA , EO Sub

- Working Group 3 member

• The Region II Pilot is tri

- chaired (DHS, OSHA, EPA under the R egional R esponse T eam (RRT) . The focus o f the pilot is prevention, but also looking at preparedness and response.

• Subcommittees:

o First Responders: m e et with fire service folks, and hazmat teams in NY and NJ to fin d best practices and challenges. They are discussing training, additional exercises and getting more info into their han ds, specifically EPCRA T ier II information.

o Working Group examining the question: What is the best way to get them this info: during planning, or during response , or both?

o State Emergency Planning Commissions ( SERC ) and Local Emergency Planning Committees ( LEPCs ) : b roker the policies and procedures of the effective organizations and distribute them to those organizations that need assistance.

o Working Group looking at the question: What are the best practices to o rganize and execute SERCs and LEPCs?

EO 13650 Public Listening Session Page 3 February 27, 2014 Newark, NJo Working Group is leveraging joint work that has already occurred in the region between DHS, OSHA, and EPA. The intent is to c ollaborate and improve how joint work will be done and information will be shared.

o What information needs to be shared cross agency instead of everything ?

o This information will be published in May of this year.

• To sustain activities, a permanent committee will be established for the pilot group on the RRT so work can cont inue.

Lisa Long, Director of Engineering Safety, OSHA

• Provided an overview of activities relating to Section 6 of the Executive Order, specifically the options proposed in the area of Policy Regulation and Standards Modernization located
at: https://www .osha.gov/chemicalexecutiveorder/Section_6ai_Options_List.html

.

Kate Finnerty asked presenters to come forward to provide comments and reviewed the ground

- rules for the public listening session. The goal is to give everyone an opportunity to speak and to be respectful of everyone’s time:

• Purpose is to hear a diverse set of opinions from a broad spectrum of people.

• Working Group is not looking for consensus on any topics.

• Comments should be related to the Executive Order.

• Please respect the opinion of othe rs.

• State name, organization and/or stakeholder group when presenting.

• Five minutes are provided to each person when speaking.

Registered Speakers :
Larry Shank, Senior Manager at Dyn o N obel
, remarked:

• Dyn o N obel is the largest explosives manufacturing company in the US and the largest pr oducer of Ammonium Nitrate (AN) in the United States.

• We are a m ember of the Institute of Makers of Explosives ( IME )

. IME companies have developed a number of recom mendations to the working group, including:

o Support updating 29 CFR 1910

- 109i to remove obsolete references and eliminating the option to store AN in combustible structures as well as update the firefighting recommendations to not engage the fire and move people away when an AN fire

occurs.

o Update 29 CFR 19 10

- 109i for the safe manufactur ing of explosives and of blasting agents. They think the standards should be updated, but that OSHA standard for PSM does not cover blasting agents, and that any regulation of blasting agents under this rule is unnecessary , a nd will not increase the margin of safety if regulated.

• Current OSHA rules are sufficient; EPA R isk M anagement P lan (RMP) should not be expanded to cover AN . RMP is a consequence based program and does not include OSHA’s perspective and EO 13650 Public Listening Session Page 4 February 27, 2014 Newark, NJgood housekeeping standards. RMP was never considered appropriate to cover these blasting type substances.

o Initially, EPA considered including 1.1 explosives , but they delisted them in 1998. AN and blasting agents are considered lower tier explosives.

o It would be prudent to extend safety practices that have already been developed and communicate that with the proper facilities as opposed to establishing new regulation under the RMP

.

• Question from Mr. Stanislaus : On the issue of fighting fires on AN. From a local responder
pe rspective, what is their view on operationalizing a best practice to approa ching fire response to AN fires?

o Mr. Shank responded: If the fire is part of the facility where AN is located, it should not be fought. In many locales, the local fire departments are invited to facilities for planning visits and both groups work hand in hand.

• Follow

- up from Mr. Stanislaus : Is there good knowledge being conveyed to local responders ?

o Mr. S hank responded: he thinks there is good knowledge to be shared.

Scott Berger, Center for Chemical Process Safety ( CCPS )
, commented:

• The CCPS has p ublished 60 books on the subject of process safety

.

• The topic of Inherently Safer Technology ( IST ) has been discussed in CCPS since the 1970s

o We have published two editions of a book dedicated to IST and have also published on subjects related to engineering design

.

• Our unique expertise led to DHS asking CCPS to write a formal definition of IST in 2010. There

w as some confusion of what IST meant at the time. Many chemical engineers do not know they are doing it because it is inherently established in chemical facility and process design. I have been using it since the 1970s before it was even defined as IST.

• Loo king at the formal definition: “ IST, also known as inher ently safer design, permanently eliminates or reduces hazards to avoid or reduce the consequence of incidence.”

o IST is one way to mitigate hazards. There are many others.

• IST is a philosophy applied t o the design and operation of the lifecycle

.
o It is not a specific technology that can be substituted for another.

o Each case is based on design and is unique, and can lead to different results from design case to design case.

• There is no clear boundary between IST and other strategies

.
o NJ Toxic Catastrophe Prevention Act ( TCPA ) program showed that IST can go beyond simple replacement of substance or reaction and should be interwoven to the entire design process and chemical lifecycle.

o Elements can be applied throughout the lifecycle

o IST is an integral part of designing a safe process

.
o ISTs are relative.

• There are numerous examples where IST already applies in existing regulations

. EO 13650 Public Listening Session Page 5 February 27, 2014 Newark, NJo PSM, RMP, Thresholds, process hazard analysis, incident investigation an d validation, termination of worst case scenarios, and improvement planning

.
o There are many opportunities already where IST is being applied and should be highlighted

.

• Any regulatory action related to IST that goes beyond existing provision , should undergo a detailed review before being implemented. Such a detailed review is impractical at this point in time.

• CCPS strongly supports the use IST as part of the overall engineering process.

• Question from Mr. Stanislaus : in terms of the New Jersey experien ce, wh at is your view of their implementation of IST?

o Mr. Berger responded: What NJ is looking for is evidence that IST has been considered in the design and operation of the plant

. On one hand, substitution may be viewed. On another hand, design may be viewed. They can also look at how operations documents
are written

. Safer ways of fighting fires is also an example of applying inherently safer
processes. It essentially becomes a paper exercise of connecting the dots of many different safer initiatives.

• Follo w

- up from Mr. Stanislaus : I agree that it is a layered approach th at comes across from many elements of process engineering design. Is that how you read the New Jersey experience?

o Mr. Berger responded: agrees and thinks that many people do not fully understand what work is IST related

.

• Question from Mr. Stanislaus : Is r isk shifting in the same basket, what is your view on that as it relates to IST?

o Mr. Berger responded: Risk shifting creates value judgments and becomes a policy decision because the danger is just placed somewhere else and it is not necessarily IST all of the time.

• Question from Mr. Stanislaus: Is the establishment of redundant and backup power part of IST implementation or is it a broader process engineering scope?

o Mr. Berger re sponded: thinks the establishment of redundant and backup power is a pretty broad effort and is not specifically an IST implementation . Many things we are hearing are not necessarily IST and do not need to be labeled in that way.

o R elay ed an editorial in th e NY Times detail ing some construction materials at the Chevron refinery are safer than others as an implementation of IST when really, the use of such materials is just good engineering practices.

• Question from Ms. Graydon : Is IST taking credit for some o f the standards that are already being done?

o Mr. Berger responded: Depends. If an engineer is highlighting work that is IST, but he or she didn’t know at that time, that is the case.

• Question from Larry Stanton , EPA : Can he discuss the dynamic between IST and how it affects security?

EO 13650 Public Listening Session Page 6 February 27, 2014 Newark, NJo Mr. Berger responded: I learned a lot of this from Larry Stanton through discussions about differentiating incidents based on accidents or intentional acts. There are other aspects of security that need to be managed such as t hreat and material including the degradation of infrastructure for example. Those other dimensions of security may not be impacted by IST. If you do not have a material that ca nnot be stolen, that certainly is a good example of IST providing more securit y. However, in terms of substituting a chemical that may have national security interest, security as a whole may be affected

more. IST is limited in the degree in can help sec urity while impacting safety in some

cases.
Jeff Titel, Director, NJ Sierra Club , remarked:

• I am h ere today because a state like New Jersey has a long hist ory of chemical plant accidents. The Hercules Chemical facility has a disaster every five years and other facilities hav e had explosions and leaks over the past fifty years.

• Many fa cilities are regulated under the Toxic Catastrophe Prevention Act ( TCPA ) in the state.

• Given what occurred in West Virginia recently with the chemical spill, the Sierra Club strongly believes that
, by making plants safer and more secure, the environment wi ll benefit as well due to less contamination and accidents.

• D o not have to go far to see disaster remnants

.
o The Occidental Petro leum plant remnants and the old Diamond Alkali Plant are less than a mile from here , and are responsible for the dioxins added t o the river creating a SuperFund
site.

o Acr o ss the bay, Kuehne C hemical is using c hlorine and catastrophe could occur with its proximity to the water and the community.

• IST is inherently safer for all of us. By investing and reducing toxic risk, we are inve sting in the
environment and our communities

.
o NJ TC P A Program is voluntary, and Sierra Club thinks reduction of risk and implementation of IST needs to be required and not voluntary. Sitting on a shelf does
not do anything

. Plant w orkers also need to be included in any discussions First responders need to be included in the discussion.

• Public education of community members is very important especially in the case of a release

.

• If there is a spill, then the community can handle it during the emergency resp onse and during the cleanup.

• The Federal Government needs to be involved in technical oversight. In NJ, over the past 4 years, inspections at facilities have dropped 60%. Penalties have been dropped by 60% as well

.

• People do not know what is occurring at t hese plants currently, and lack of awareness is increasing the risk.

• Question from Mr. Stanislaus : What do you think about the results of the TCPA Program ?

EO 13650 Public Listening Session Page 7 February 27, 2014 Newark, NJo Mr. Titel responded: There have been positives, but there needs to be additional movement going for ward

. Many NJ facilities are older and not attracting investment to follow through on improving plant design standards

.

E lvin Montero, Director Chem istry Council of New Jersey (CCNJ), commented:

• CCNJ r ecently partnered with government and labor orga niza tion s to design and implement safety and security training at chemical facilities. Many regulations have helped them in their
commitment to safety training and awareness and have led to a reduction in illness and worker accidents.

• EPA earlier this month re vealed their Toxic Release Inventory ( TRI ) emissions informa tion that demonstrated that New Jersey has had a 92% drop in emissions over the past 20 years.

• Members of CCNJ group engage local communities through C ommunity A dvisory P anels (CAPs)

.
o There are 10 CAPs in the state made up of many stakeholders across the chemical
sector.

o Regularly hold meetings to share information about the facilities and dispelling rumors and misconceptions amongst different parties.

• I recommend that the working group use existing regulations to further improve chemical safety and security in concert with facility owners.

• There has been recent attention to adopt New Jersey TCPA nationally , in particular the IST Assessment. There is c oncern in NJ and n ationally, that executing TCPA through EPA RMP will provide little applicable benefit for reducing risk beyond what is already requir ed through existing regulations and could be potentially detrimental.

o Currently, TCPA has 12,000 facilities covered includi ng bakeries, hair stylists, etc.

• Increased attention to safer alternatives will distract from other parts of the EO and lead to unnecessary and duplicative regulatory obligations that do not enhance safety or security.

• All of these programs require operato rs to meet safety standards. Explicit safer alternative mandates are not needed.

• CC N J agrees with the American C hemistry Council (ACC) that TCPA should not be nationalized.

o The NJ Department of Environmental Protection (NJ DEP) report published in Jan uary 2010 made no recommendations for IST mandates based on the experience of the ir program evaluation.

• Review of IST assessments completed by facilities confirmed that inherently safer approache s will always be c onsidered as a matter of course. Each facility n eeds to work with community and local stakeholder s to meet their responsibilities, regulatory obligations, and requirements.

• Question from Mr. Stanislaus : Do you have thoughts on how to get o utlier facilities to participate in their programs and products?

o Mr. Montero responded: CCNJ a gree s with ACC in how they work with their partners

. There is a commitment within the industry to w ork with suppliers and distributors to make sure cradle to grave products are properl y stored and properly delivered and managed by appropriate standards. The ResponsibleCare ® Security Code best practices EO 13650 Public Listening Session Page 8 February 27, 2014 Newark, NJare available online and can be shared with everyone

. When we all work together we are safer and more secure, and we all benefit

• Question from Mr. Stanislaus : can you explain the ACC code as it is implemented, specifically
, the IST component of the ResponsibleCare ® Program ? What additional analysis is required in the NJ program that is not required in the ACC ResponsibleCare ® Program ?

o Mr. Montero responded: I am not particularly sure what specific pa rt of ResponsibleCare ® Mr. Stanislaus is referencing because CCN J is affiliated wi th ACC and not directly related. There is a checklist and protocol that is normally done in the ACC
program , but NJ requires a process w hen going throug h the check list for what they consider IST. The NJ e xercise did show that many pieces we re implemented, and other pieces will be implemented at some point. IST does not necessarily create new
processes , but many of them we re perhaps already in the pipeline for consideration by facilities.

• Follow

- up from Mr. Stanislaus : the New Jersey DEP’s review of the program that walks through various kinds of changes

. They determined that 50% of chemical plants identify changes when doing the analysis prescribed by the NJ program. So, saying some of those were already in the pipeline and some were triggered by the assessment identifies that there is a mix of IST identification through the analysis?

o Mr. Montero responded: The way the program is designed, a facility can t ake credit for any IST component at any point in the facility’s life. This includes during plant design. In other cases, there were projects in the pipeline when looking at different processes. It is best to include IST is when the plant is designed and in itially built. In the New Jersey case, the concept of risk shifting is analyzed. For example, did some of that risk shifting result in a lower amount of a particular chemical being on site while increasing the amount of delivery to the facility? Those thi ngs are considered and looked at for the New Jersey for the IST assessment mandate.

• Follow

- up from Mr. Stanislaus : in terms of a broader process safety analysis and some of the results from the New Jersey program have created process safety changes and not just implementation of strict IST. Is that you take on it?

o Mr. Montero responded: Yes, and some of that would have come out of the programs that already exist, like the PSM and RMP programs.

• Follow

- up from Mr. Stanislaus : how do you operationalize near misses? Is t here is a range of how companies report near misses? What are your views of best practices on near misses and reporting them based on the New Jersey experience?

o Mr. Montero responded that he would check. Each individual company approaches it differently, but in NJ the trend is that something is noticed, it is recorded, and safety experts analyze it.

• Follow

- up from Mr. Stanislaus : NJ’s approach to reactivity is that they have listed specific chemicals and it is not hazards based? Does CCNJ have a view to NJ’s approach on reactivity chemicals and how they should be addressed?

EO 13650 Public Listening Session Page 9 February 27, 2014 Newark, NJo Mr. Montero responded: The comments will be included in written response.

• Question from Larry Stanton , EPA : Many of your member companies are a signatory to some to R esponsible C are ® . What kind of challenges do signatory companies have when propagating their concept of safety up and down the value chain (cradle to grave) ? How do we work with industry to get to those non

- affiliated companies that may be responsible for delivery of chemicals to and from facilities ?

o Mr. Montero responded: The challenge here is how are we trying to f ind the West, TX type company through this process

. Through the IST assessment, we are not going to get there. In regards to the R esponsible C are ® program, many companies will audit their suppliers before partnering with them. How easy it is to utilize thes e programs will have to be commented from the R esponsible C are ® folks that are implementing them

.

• Follow

- up from Mr. Stanton : what challenges do these companies have when trying to propagate security and safety concepts? We see a lot of accidents from compa nies not affiliated with national trade associations , so success of these partnerships and safety auditing is limited. Is there something that can be done at the regulatory level to assist that?

o Mr. Montero responded: A lot of that role belongs to the state level and to the inspectors so that these companies are abiding by a ce rtain standard of operation. It works in New Jersey because this type of cooperation exists. Looking at best practices as a basis is a good way to promote that cooperation. I ndus try ha s a role in using stewardship programs, but there are regulations and rules in place that allow regulators to inspect these locations that are under the radar.

• Follow

- up from Mr. Stanislaus : My understanding of the ResponsibleCare ® Program is that it needs to be pushed down the supply chain? Can we figure out tools for LEPCs to assist with this? And how do we so lve the quandary of collective collaboration between stakeholders when some companies do not participate in the regulatory and trade group pro grams and LEPCs do not have the resources to implement safety and security at their level?

o Mr. Montero said : Y es, and that he will have responses to this quandary concept in the future

.

Paul Kauffman, Director of Advocacy, Green Faith , remarked:

• They ar e a f aith based environmental organization in Highland Park, NJ

.

• Stewardship of this planet and c onservation of life are religious and moral obligations.

o Green Faith has a m ajor concern for environmental justice communities and wants to protect those commu nities from those that are most vulnerable to chemical disasters and pollution levels.

• Two groups in danger:

o Workers in various industrial facilities deserve protection from harm

.
o To protect them, recommends m ore clearly define d and enforce d IST

.
o Many companies keep IST reports secret or lie about implementation of IST

. EO 13650 Public Listening Session Page 10 February 27, 2014 Newark, NJo Imperative that these reports are issued to the public and accurate

.
o Communities adjacent to the plants also deserve protection from harm.

 This includes minority populations

.

• There should be a s ingle definition for high hazard facility across the F ederal government

.

• Agencies should maintain a public ly accessible F ederal and state inspection database detailing high risk facilities

.
o More chemical should be on the chemical of interest l ist

.
o Database for F ederal
, state and l ocal partners that allows government agencies to share information about plants that sell and store toxic chemicals should exist.

 These groups in these zones should be part of these reviews.

• Chemical substitution and p rocess changes are the most effective way to promote chemical safety and security.

• Communities and workers have a right to know if management has made a realistic effort to make facilities safe and secure

.

• Communities have a right to express th eir concerns to government officials.

o System should be established to receive and respond to input from the public regarding chemical facility issues

.

• Implement IST r equirements

.

• Government must f ulfill regulatory roll zealously

.

• Experience h as proven that facility ow ners will cut corners at the expense of wo rkers and fence line communities for financial gain.

• We must find and use the safest chemicals process, and withhold the use of new chemicals until they have been proven safe.

• Responsibility rests with Federal agencies to establish these policies

.

• State agencies should implement mandatory IST review reports based on the push from Federal oversight

.

• Every religion speaks of the value of human life and by extension all life on this planet.

• I urge the agencies cond ucting the Listening Session to i mplement results of EO quickly and fully.

• Question from Mr. Stanislaus : what is your membership?

o Mr. Kauffman responded: They are not a member organization; they are a central organization that distributes information to individuals that need it. This includes 10 ,000

- 12,000 people across the country

• Follow

- up from Mr. Stanislaus : what is the recommend ation for community interaction?

o Mr. Kauffman responded: T hose people who are not politically savvy do not have an opportunity to speak up or have a voice. Consequently, they get dumped on in terms of pollution and in terms of the back burner. They need an opportunity and an outlet to speak up for themselves. I d o not have a specific recommendation at hand. But they need to be made aware and receive a method to do so.

• Follow

- up from Mr. Stanislaus: What about inspection data being available?

EO 13650 Public Listening Session Page 11 February 27, 2014 Newark, NJo Mr. Kauffman responded: These remarks were composed before he heard the introduction today, so he is happy to hear some of them are already being considered.

• Follow

- up from Mr. Stanislaus : You m ade a recommendation to expand the list of chemicals? Is this DHS related or should it be broader?

o Mr. Kauffman responded: This shoul d be broadened across all agencies.

• Question from Ms. Graydon : What information do you anticipate from workers and communities if a response /report system is established?

o Mr. Kauffman responded: Those people don’t have the opportunity to speak. They shoul d be encouraged to speak and their grievances should be addressed.

John Hall, public citizen, commented:

• Held many positions at DuPont facility , one of which was an officer in the union and member of the safety and health committee

.

• The union always demand ed that training be done on time.

• This session is important to workers because of chemical release issues and the fact they keep occurring

.

• My focus is on workers in these plants. Management needs to engage workers and receive what they know both in the pl ant and in the community to increase safety.

• Has great respect for workers because their knowledge of day to day process greatly outweighs those of management.

o Whistleblower rights and jobs must be protected because of the knowledge they hold is important to protecting facility safety.

o People need to be able to speak up without fear.

• We need to b etter protect workers and the communities where they live.

• Workers should be represented at every stage of the process in developing safety processes.

o Described an ex ample of employee involvement: C hlorine cars were stored at a facility fence line and the community voiced concern s. Management decided to put the cars the middle of the facility

– which increased the risk to employees. Workers should have been includ ed in that discussion

.

• Question from Mr. Stanislaus : Can you talk about your experiences of near misses that were treated at your plant?

o Mr. Hall responded: I am not an engineer, so my knowledge is limited. But many plants in NJ are old and workers are at risk. Root cause analysis and investigations were done, but only certain employees, who support management views, were selected to be a part of the
reviews.

• Question from Mr. Stanis laus: How have changes in management been done as it relates to process safety?

o Mr. Hall responded: I am not sure exactly what the regulation states, but new management needs t o be trained as guardian of their safety process es . Most new managers are fresh out of college, and their field knowledge is limited. EO 13650 Public Listening Session Page 12 February 27, 2014 Newark, NJ• Question from Mr. Stanislaus : How has the maintenance budget changed over time?

o Mr. Hall responded: I spent a lot of time in that department. When business gets slow, the
maintenance budget is the firs t to go. Today most maintenance is contracted out, and the experience is limited

. For example, just replacing pipelines and gaskets is very important. Using a wrong gasket can create a bigger problem when a release occurs. Using maintenance workers that cross industries is a bad idea because their knowledge about what gasket to use in the example could be incorrect.

• Question from Mr. Stanislaus : regarding training of employed workers, what differenc es d o you see from employees versus contractors ?

o Mr. Hall responded: They raised the question as a union constantly, but were never shown proof that con tractors had the same knowledge as embedded employees. Contract administrator would oversee the contractors, but contractors would often ask questions of the e mployees regardin g information they did not know.

Molly Greenberg, Ironbound Community Corporation , remarked:

• Advocate for environmental justice in Newark

.

• Newark is mostly middle and low income people of color and they are unjustly exposed to chemical r eleases

.

• I n 1970s , an explosion at the Radium Chemical Plant killed four people and sent children to the hospital with respiratory distress.

o Newark fire chief asked why is a firm using such chemicals next to a school and residential

area ?

• In Oct ober 2012, Superstorm Sandy swept together numerous chemicals from many facilities. Many community members could not recognize the different hues in the storm water.

o Nothing has been done to address this since the storm

• Chronic exposure is an issue, and is not being better addressed

• Recommendations:

o All F ederal agencies should implement IST by replacing hazardous substances with safer

ones or adopting safer production

.
o EPA should use Clean Air Act G eneral D uty clause section 112 to force facilities to better design a nd operate facilities

.
o There should be a single definition for high risk facilities across the Federal Government.

o Agencies should maintain public accessible databases

.
o Establish a s ingle framework for inspection criteria. This should include cross trainin g of inspectors.

o Share information across agencies and make information publicly accessible.

o Federal agency taskforce should implement enhanced information collection that should include public access and public comment.

EO 13650 Public Listening Session Page 13 February 27, 2014 Newark, NJo Community groups with workers in hi gh industrial areas surrounding chemical facilities should be part of any assessment or reviews of facilities.

o There should be a review of emergency response capacity of local communities.

o Assessment of emergency response capacity to address what is going on there

.
o Emergency responders should have knowledge of high hazards at facilities located in their jurisdiction.

o Communicating and investigating spills should be done during and after accidents including flooding

.
o Have do demonstrate best practices, not j ust report them

.

• Move forward with the EO and commit to go beyond the EO and enforce IST adoption to not just mitigate but prevent chemical issues.

• Question from Mr. Stanislaus : Do you know what caused the chemical spills from Sandy?

o Ms. Greenberg responde d: The surge caused most of the spills. EPA was the only one that was able to do some inspections, but it took a while. Still do not know what chemicals were spilled

. Most residents did their own muck out and did not have proper gear to do so. Their
exp osure is unknown.

• Question from Mr. Stanislaus : d oes she have a sense of how much the community know about their adjacent facilities?

o Ms. Greenberg responded: The facility that leaked due to the storm is right next to the prison and an immigration detenti on center. Some schools are within a mile of a facility. Some smaller facilities are within a mile as well.

• Question from Larry Stanton: Could you expand on how assessments of LEPCs would be done?

o Ms. Greenberg responded: It needs to be a partnership b etween the local community and other resources. Risk m anagement would ne ed to be done. It is important to get local fire departments and hospitals involved.

• Follow

- up from Mr. Stanton : I s this what t he LEPCs should do? Should there be something different than the LEPC structure?

o Ms. Greenberg responded: R esidents and community members do not know what to do in regards to emergency response. When Sandy hit, residents cleaned out their home. They did not know chemicals were present in the water, or, if they did, they did not know to wear specific gear. Emerg ency personnel were no t present

. It is beneficial to do a n innovative strategy to define emergency response

.

• Follow

- up from Mr. Stanton: Is the LEPC the vehicle to get that work done ?

o Ms. Greenberg resp onded: I see the LEPC as a partner in the vehicle, but it cannot be the only source especially if resources have been removed from these groups.

Kate Finnerty made an announcement that there are currently no speakers currently registered for the night ses sion. If no one wants to speak upon the start of the 6 pm session, the listening session will adjourn.

John Pajak, representing workers and the International Brotherhood of Teamsters , commented: EO 13650 Public Listening Session Page 14 February 27, 2014 Newark, NJ• Talk ed briefly about whistleblowers and worker participation

.

• It is important that any program has a strong push for whistleblower protection.

o Without protection, it is unlikely many workers will ever come forward.

• Some Companies pursue w histle blowers aggressively

.

• It is a difficult process for many workers to unde rtake when reporting safety violations.

• As far as participation, he has lobbied hard to get this covered in the NJ TC P A.

o Prior to worker participation guidelines, inspectors would just walk a facility and never talk to workers.

o Since then, there is much mo re engagement of workers and this greatly helps the inspection regime.

• Worker participation is vital to get a true, clear picture of regulations being executed properly at a facility.

• Question from Mr. Stanislaus : Can you speak to how change of management has occurred with respect to maintenance of process safety requirements?

o Mr. Pajak responded: With p rocess safety requirements, like mechanical integrity, each manager has a different perspective and cost thresholds when maintaining these standards and re quirements. Many good managers have left, and there are some bad ones still around that they would not feel bad about leaving

. There is little way for them as workers to lobby for how management should handle safety requirements

.

• Question from Mr. Stanislaus : W hat are your experience s with near misses?

o Mr. Pajak responded: R eporting near misses is done through the SAP AG system at my facilities.

o Depending on lower supervision at the plant , how things are seen is how it is reported. Upper management usually focuses on the root cause depending on if the manager believes in it or not. I know there are some managers that truly believe in root cause identification ; however, others don’t care. Phillips 66 in particular has a robust near miss p rocess. In the case of a facility doing something wrong, they are less likely to report near misses properly. It tends to be that not know ing about near misses can cause a big hit in the future. Facilities should not lose the opportunity to fix a proble m exposed by a near miss

.

• Question from Mr. Kulick : Is it your experience that maintenance budgets are first to take a hit ?

o Mr. Pajak responded: Yes. Specifically in old facilities, maintenance budgets become critical and it gets dangerous quickly when a budget is cut like that.

Tricia Sheehan, Representative of Moms Clean Air Force , remarked:

• Org anization of 200,000 people fighting for clean air

.

• On Nov 30, 2012, a train spill occurred, and a shelter

- in

- place was ordered.

o I did so, and barred the doors , but health issues still occurred

. EO 13650 Public Listening Session Page 15 February 27, 2014 Newark, NJo I called the emergency response number to report symptoms of her family (including a 6 year old and 2 year old) and requested additional guidance, and levels of the chemical spill

.
o After giving my location
, which is about 3 miles away and downwind, I was told that I

was not in the evacuation zone, and that they probably had colds, and I should not worry about the spill.

o I k ept calling the response number, but kept getting the same response that I should not worry about the effects.

o I ev entually talked to the doctor, but the doctor did not have expertise for treatment of exposure to the spilled chemical

.
o Overall, a t least 100 people went to the hospital, and 700 evacuations occ urred due to the chemical spill.

o A First Responder , who is my cousin , was not given any breathing apparatus when cleaning up the site.

o Air monitoring devices were found to be faulty

.

• There is a lot to be learned:

o There should be a f ocus on preventing accidents, but there also must be a fo cus on better emergency preparedness.

o My experience is that the Gloucester response team was not prepared to respond to such an accident.

o I w ould like better focus placed on IST.

• Question from Mr. Stanislaus: W hen was it recognized that you were in the ev acuation zone and what was done after that?

o Ms. Sheehan responded: T here was never recognition that I was in the evacuation zone. The air tester said it was clean. Cleanup caused more releases. There is now a lawsuit and I learned through that lawsuit th at the testing equipment was faulty.

Jenni fer Kim, State Director, New Jersey Public Interest Research Group (NJPIRG) , remarked:

• Org anization that protect s consumers and promote s good government in New Jersey.

• T he strongest way to protect the public and to minimize risk is to require IST.

• As Ms. Sheehan’s story shows, facilities are important, but transportation is just as important. This needs to be more closely handled in addition to the work being done in the EO.

• Has a graphic that shows 68 schools are w ithin 1 mile of the high risk chemical facilities in New Jersey.

o This is a major problem that shows just how many people are at risk in case of an accident.

• Chemicals can affect children differently than adults.

• Our goal is to educate the public about the problems and risks as well as solutions.

o Most people know about the problem that high risk chemical facilities provide, and are happy to hear that solutions exist for immediate implementation

. EO 13650 Public Listening Session Page 16 February 27, 2014 Newark, NJo But, they get frustrated when some of them are not implemented.

• We have obtained petitions in New Jersey and Pennsylvania requesting EPA to use its authority under the Clean Air act to require chemical facilities to convert to safer alternatives and technology, and to strengthen safety standards for transporting dange rous toxics.

o 79,000 doors were knocked, and 34,000 people were interviewed in New Jersey alone.

o 6500 petitions from New Jersey have been delivered in the past.

o 3379 from New Jersey were updated at today’s hearing.

o 3000 petitions were submitted from Pennsy lvania.

• Couple of comments from some of the online petitions that were collected were noted:

o NJ needs to be a proactive leader not a reactive cleanup state.

o NJ cannot wait for an other accident. Good governance is all about preventing accidents.

o Strongly believe this is an importa nt issue that must be addressed.

o She s ubmitted petitions for the record. [which can be viewed
at: http:// www.regulations.gov/#!docketBrowser;rpp=100;so=DESC;sb=docId;po=0;dct= PS%252BSR;D=DHS

- 2013

- 0075 ].

• Question from Mr. Stanislaus : What does the petition call for?

o Ms. Kim responded: The petition is mostly a global call. There are comments that have
persona l notes. It is saying that many people live close to chemical facilities and are at risk to chemical issues. They u rge EPA under the Clean Air A ct to implement IST standards better.

C arol Gay, President NJ Industrial Union Council , commented:

• Far too many deaths occur due to reactive chemical accidents that could be avoided through safer technologies and/or stronger enforcement measures.

• Need IST measures
, and safer alternatives to protect workers and communities.

• NJ has 90 high hazard chemical facilities

.

• High flooding (like Super Storm Sandy storm) released chemicals into the community and water table consistently

.

• Climate change will inevitably cause more flooding and cause more issues including toxic spills.

• This w ill translate to higher health care costs down the road.

• Stricter enforcement measures are absolutely necessary

.

• She is here to not just see safer technologies used, but is also here to state that they are extremely concerned about retaliatory actions taken against workers when t hey speak up about dangers

.

• Described a number of recent incidents:

o West, TX

o Coal Slurry toxic waste from Patriot Coal being dumped in West Virginia

o Duke Energy Waste Pond Collapse occurred recently in North Carolina.

EO 13650 Public Listening Session Page 17 February 27, 2014 Newark, NJo In NJ, hundreds were sickened due to t he Vinyl Chloride release in the Conrail Train derailment

.

• Disregard for health and safety is immoral

.

• Some one must guarantee their safety if facilities are not going to do so.

• Workers are the first line of defense against these catastrophes. Engaging them will create better facility oversight when they have the protections they need.

• Whistleblowers deserve praise and not retaliation

.
o They play a vital public safety role. They protec t us, so we need to protect them with maximum protection

.

• Question from M r. Stanislaus : Describe your organization ?

o Ms. Gay responded: It is a State wide labor federation representing 125,000 workers in New Jersey . It is a Federation of organizations.

Debra Coyle

- McFadden, Work Environment Council , remarked:

• Focus on New Jersey TCPA succes ses and related recommendations they have to make it stronger for a national program.

• Prevention is the best way to protect workers and communities. There have been successes in IST Program implementation :

• In 2010, the DEP IS T Implementation summary r eported 123 cases of successfully IST implementation

.

• In Oct. 2013, the NJ Work Environment Council report stated that nearly 300 water and waste water treatment plants had switched from chlorine to other methods. It a lso identified vulnerabilities in the NJ program.

o Some facilities fail to consider solutions for considering safer chemicals and processes. There are 42 of these that did not consider this in their IST analyses.

o Of then 9 facilities that claim options were eco nomically unfeasible, seven failed to conduct the proper quantitative analysis.

o More than 1/3 of the facilities are using chlorine, h ydrofluoric acid, and anhydrous ammonia despite safer alternatives being available.

• EPA is a good group to force conduction of IST reviews.

• Rules requiring IST reviews have had some success, but there is more progress that can be made.

• Most notably, an effective approach must address all aspects of disasters from prevention to
response

.

• Recommendations for the W orking G roup wh en implementing a national standard:

o Prevent facility management from declaring IST reviews a secret.

o Those facilities that have made positive steps should be called out and praised for doing

so.

EO 13650 Public Listening Session Page 18 February 27, 2014 Newark, NJo IST reviews should be put online. Communities and workers ha ve a right to know that faci lities have made proper efforts to make facilities safer and more secure.

o Require facility management to b etter document their claims. They should be required to quantify economic benefits when sw itching to cleaner technologies such as reduced liability and insurance costs, and benefits to municipalities and adjacent communities.

Nicky Sheets, Director
, Center of Urban Environment, Thomas Edison State College , remarked:

• General Recommendation: Need to move from managing risk to preventing catastrophes. They echo similar recommendations discussed earlier in the meeting, that companies and facilities be required to follow more IST standards.

o This authority exists in the Cle an Air Act and/or the Executive Order guidance.

• Environmental Justice Concerns:

o Disasters have shown the environmental justice communities are especially vulnerable to the detrimental impacts of disasters.

o Fed eral Government should do an environmental just ice study. A better understanding of how plants affect these communities needs to exist.

• This should include chemicals used, how much used, and those at risk and how much at risk , and the characteristics of those plants

. It should be a systematic
review.

o O nce done, then disaster plans must be created that specifically address environmental justice issues includin g:

• Evacuation ;

• Rebuilding and return ;

• Health consequences ;

• Community input ;

• Prevention ; and

• It should also address the factors that make these comm unities more vulnerable including:

o Racial discrimination ;

o Limited resources ;

o Existing health disparities ; and

o Cumulative impacts

• When addressing the factors that make environmental justice communities more vulnerable, this will help such communities withs tand catastrophes and their detrimental impacts better.

• One major issue is excessive pollution and cumulative impacts.

o Cumulative impacts are multiple pollutants emitted by multiple facilities.

o In NJ, and other parts of the country, a higher level of cumul ative impacts affects environmental justice communities.

o This comes from a NJ DEP analysis.
EO 13650 Public Listening Session Page 19 February 27, 2014 Newark, NJo These cumulative impact levels are directly connected to race and income.

• Any pilot program that deals with chemical policy needs to deal with this, and the connection between race, income, and cumulative impacts.

• Question from Mr. Stanislaus about cumulative impacts (catastrophes and general releases): Are you distinguishing between the cumulative impacts from normative releases from the cumulative impacts fr om episodic, accidental releases ?

o Mr. Sheets responded: I am talking a bout both of them. Cum ulative impacts are related to releases that happen and how they contribute to pollution that already exists in the community in addition to catastrophe issues. I n catastrophes, it is the catastrophes themselves that are the main focus.

• F ollow

- up from Mr. Stanislaus : W e heard in Baton Rouge and Houston about the lack of ability for community residents to participate in local planning activities. Can you speak to th at?

o Mr. Sheets responded: They are doing a lot of work on climate change and this shows a similar pattern. Le arned from Superstorm Sand y that non

- governmental organizations (NGO) participated in recovery, but they were left on their own. NGOs were not in corporated in emergency planning and rebuild planning. Government has to work in partnership with NGOs, c ommunity o rg anizations, and environmental justice

o rganizations that are part of the community to get their feedback

. A dded that in order to make that participation meaningful, they need more resources. They are under resourced and overwhelmed especially in the environmental justice world.

• Follow

- up from Mr. Stanislaus: What kind of resources?

o Mr. Sheets responded: That is euphemism, isn’t it? They mainly mean the ability to hire people to participate in a meaningful way (experts, legal, policy, technical, etc). They lack human capital. This could also be true from the resident point of view. Most people are volunteers. There is an effort to connec t the scientific community to the EJ community. They need resources to find this help and compensate them properly.

• Follow

- up from Mr. Stanislaus : In terms of the role of local organizations, the Sandy report to the President praised the local community or ganizations in getting the word out. Can you talk about that a bit?

o Mr. Sheets responded: E nvironmental justice communities dispute the report after Sandy that the local response was adequate. E nvironmental justice organizations and NGOs played a role in getting the word out, but they went far beyond that with Sandy. They provided food, got publ ic services up and played a major role in getting electricity

re

- established. They could have done more in the planning if they had been included. Juan Camil o

- Os orio said that environmental justice groups are frustrated that they are just considered to be a communication piece. They have a role to do more, and their role needs to be expanded.

Del Vitale , U nited S teel W orkers (USW), commented:

EO 13650 Public Listening Session Page 20 February 27, 2014 Newark, NJ• USW members are hig hly skilled and highly trained operators of these facilities and are hurt the most when accidents happen.

• Many events were forewarne d by near misses that were not properly addressed at the time.

• Worker involvement is very important. They know all of the eq uipment and all of the standard operating procedures, and are key in connecting stakeholders together to prevent a release.

• Worker participation should be part of all conversations about preventing disasters at facilities and informing emergency responders . They should also be included in all regulation development.

• There s hould be shift to safer chemicals and safer chemical processes

.

• NJ has been a leader through NJ TCPA IST rules. The working group should look to that as a model in determining best practi ces.

• IST assessments may take time, and regulations and policy should be updated in the meantime.

• OSHA PSM standard does not work as well as it should. They are encouraged by the OSHA Request for Information ( RFI )

. Urge s OSHA to initiate rulemaking to update the standard and it should inc lude more worker participation :

o S hould include general engineering practices ;

o Include workers on near miss investigation teams ;

o Include workers in emergency planning including local first responders ; and

o Cover more haz ardo us chemicals including reactive chemicals.

• In moving forward, it is important that F ederal and state agencies work together and with state and local partners to make sure recommendations do not fall through the cracks at the local level.

• Question form Mr. Stanislaus : C an you expand on address ing near misses?

o Mr. Tal responded: They have an Emergency Response Team program, and anytime there is a serious incident that did or could have resulted in worker casualty, there is a response team that investigat es and compiles data. Much of my statement was crafted by this group. Their department has a lot of additional data.

• Mr. Stanislaus asked if they would follow up with more information and some specific recommendations in reporting and address ing near mis ses.

o Mr. Tal responded: T his is a loaded question because there are many near misses that are not reported because accident reporting is not encouraged. People have the perception that they will be penalized and that there are reward programs that reward no accidents so any that do occur go unreported. Root cause is important, in addition to not blaming the worker immediately.

• Follow up from Mr. Kulick: C ould you expand on workers being established on investigation
teams ?

o Mr. Tal responded: W orkers know t he facility and do not have a vested interest in covering anything up. This includes OSHA and private investigations . It should be transparent.

EO 13650 Public Listening Session Page 21 February 27, 2014 Newark, NJLeeann Simpatanasakul, concerned citizen ; commented:

• Applaud the efforts of the group on risk management

.

• Need to put more focus on risk prevention including the removal of dangerous chemicals and chem ical processes.

• We need to be proactive.

• Emergency response community needs to listen to the medical community

• What does switching to less dangerous alternatives mean ?

o Fewer worker casualties ;

o Fewer family financial hardships as a result ;

o E nvironmental justice communities will have better environmental surroundings ; and

o Fewer firefighters and responders in dangerous situations

.

• Maintaining current programs maintains the status quo.

• 97 facilities in NJ still use hazardous chemicals. Five of them put 2 million of more people at risk.

• We need a change and a regulatory imperative to have facilities switch if possible.

• By IST, switching Chlorine gas to a disinfectant with UV light. Or, an oil refinery can replace hydrogen fluoride into a solid acid catalyst.

• This will not apply to all chemicals, but where a solid alternative exists, then it needs to be required.

• A grees tha t one size fits all does not work.

• The bottom line here is that the conversation within the group needs to be turned to what mandatory prevention measure should be.

• Question from Mr. Stanislaus : D o you distinguish between the size s of the fa cility in your recommendation? How should smaller facilities do an IST analysis?

o Ms. Sinpatanasakul responded: i t should be mandatory for everyone, but government assistance should exist for smaller facilities that cannot economically get themselves into compliance.

Ope n Comment Period

Howard Boyer , Thermal Fisher Scientific , commented:

• With the USW and is the Health and Safety Chairman for my local union.

• Most people are intimidated about standing up to the company and expressing themselves.

• I am able to handle this bet ter with USW backing.

• Understand that companies intimidated other people by calling them bad workers, and find backdoor ways to keep them quiet.

• More effective training is necessary for TCPA and PSM. I t lacks real meaningful integrity.

o I have been trained by many groups, and that training is much better than company based trainings.

o This is particular true with Process Safety Management.
EO 13650 Public Listening Session Page 22 February 27, 2014 Newark, NJ• In regards to n ear m isses:

o Many of them are swept under the rug. Union officials are the ones that typically bring up th e near misses and they head off problems.

o I do inspections in both of my plants, and find that the companies never find the same issues as the union representatives.

• Stronger whistleblower laws are essential, but I think there is a large backlog in process ing them.

• In regards to Homeland Security:

o When they do inspections, they should involve more participants from workers and employee representatives like DEP

- TCPA and OSHA does.

Capt. Bill Sheehan, Hackensack River Keeper , remarked:

• Member of the Interna tional Waterkeep er A lliance with 210 programs around the world.

• We a dvocate clean water for everyone

.

• Wants to reinforce the importance of chemical safety and chemical control to obtain goals of Clean Water Act.

• Passaic River and Hackensack River have water pollution issues.

• Waterkeeper Alliance has sue d polluters to clean up messes after they leave and dump pollution.

• When the state and Federal governments do not do the job, I do it for them to sue and use the court system.

• T hink my job should be obsol ete, and the job would be obsolete if the Federal government would be doing their job, but I know I have more work that I will be able to complete in my lifetime.

• Most of the pollution is chemical related. Kuehne Chemical is a major problem with two major spills into the river which resulted in fish death due to caustic soda raising the pH levels in the river. There are also chlorine issues.

• Think they are trying to correct that, but I am not sure because there is no transparency. Any attempt to connect wit h Kuehne Chemical is rebuffed.

• E nvironmental justice groups should be engaged more to distribute information as needed and provide guidance and resources where necessary.

• Question from Mr. Stanislaus : Any particular recommendations on surge impacts and sto rm flood issues?

o Capt. Sheehan responded: P articipated in some planning exercises to increase resiliency in the area. Resiliency has in some cases supplanted sustainability as the new catch phrase. Facilities that were really harmed by that storm are bu ilt on old wetlands that were filled with G od knows what in the late 1800s and early 1900s

. The c hemical companies have been
on it ever since. T he land is polluted, is continually being polluted, and the Newark community continues to bear the brunt and ca rry an unfair burden

. Storms will always be a problem in dislodging these issues. He s hared a story about a plastic drum floating in the
river after Tropical Storm Floyd

. He knew better then to handle it himself and called the DEP Emergency Response people to recover the drum. He assisted the DEP in recovering the drum with his boat, and they hauled it in. DEP figured out , based on the drum markings, that EO 13650 Public Listening Session Page 23 February 27, 2014 Newark, NJit was a drum of Ammonium Nitrate that slipped off a facility and was floating in the river. Plastic drums have airspace in them that help them float. If someone else had come across that drum, consequences could have been different because the amount of AN was substantia l. Safety has to be improved , and much of that can be done by empowering employees to speak up when they see something wrong.

Afternoon Session Closing Comments

Mr. Stanislaus provided closing comments for the afternoon session:

• Thank ed everyone for part icipating.

• Please submit written comments to reinforce your spoken comments
to eo.chemical@hq.dhs.gov

.

• Please provide policy document comments by the end of March. Please supply comments as soon as possible if you can.

• Full EO report is due to the President by the end of May.

Kate Kinnerty noted the public listening session was taking a dinner break for one hour and will
reconvene at 6 PM.

Evening Session Registered Speakers

• There were no pre

- registered speaker s for the evening session.

Evening Session Open Comment Period

Lorna Barton, representing health professionals and the nursing union of University Hospital in Newark,
NJ , remarked:

• I am a nurse at University Hospital

.

• Requesting F ederal and state right

- to

- know laws be maintained and strengthened by requiring facilities to identify all chemicals used in the ir manufacturing process

.

• EPA should issues rules and/or guidelines to require safer chemicals.

• First responders must be made aware of chemicals being used so appropriate decontamination processes can be enacted

• Strongly worded directives, like the right to know law, need to be enforced

• One thing is clear, it is important to identify any chemicals so that any impact can be understood and patients treated properly.

• They have a decontamination unit in the hospital, but they need to know that a contamination has occurred and what the chemical is t o use it.

• A professional response for prevention will reduce a potential catastrophe.

• If a disaster occur s without knowing what chemicals are responsible , the serious situation can get compounded.
EO 13650 Public Listening Session Page 24 February 27, 2014 Newark, NJ• EPA should act to further protect people and require that safety data sh eets be transmitted immediately following an accident.

• EPA should enforce the use of safer chemicals and chemical processes.

• Question from Ms. Graydon : has the hospital been involved in the local emergency planning?

o Ms. Barton’s response: They are a level one trauma hospital, and they have received many people during emergencies. The ER is co nsidered a command center for disasters and disaster drills, so they are part of the emergency planning.

• Question from Mr. Kulick : D o they do decon tamination drills as well?

o Ms. Barton’s response: Y es, they do. This includes tagging and decon tamination sh owers

. They do the drills during normal daily operations.

• Question fr om Jeff Kohn , EPA ( siting in for Mr. Stanislaus ): Do you feel that you have enough knowledge about chemicals in the area? Could you use more training?

o Ms. Barton’s response: We receive the chemical safety sheets and file them properly. I do not necessarily need more information or training, but I am concerned that there is the ability for something to come into the ER that we may not expect.

• Question from Mr. Kohn: Your hospital is ver y prepared. Do you think this is the case everywhere?

o Ms. Barton responded: N ot all hospitals do the decontamination drill, and are not quite as prepared as my hospital. My hospital is considered a primary hospital partly because of the services they off er.

• Mr. Kohn encouraged her to submit a comment to the email address demonstrating the hospital’s best practice when handling emergencies dealing with chemical release.

There were no other speakers for the evening session at 8 PM the public listening sessi on concluded.

EO 13650 Public Listening Session Page 25 February 27, 2014 Newark, NJParticipant Analysis

Stakeholder Group 2/27 /2014 Newark, NJ

Chemical Producer 2 Ag Supply 0 Chemical Storage 0 State/Local Regulator 0 First Responder 0 Media 1 Owner/Operator 0 Industry Association 2 Labor Organization 6 Federal Representative 6 Environment/Community 11 Consensus Organization 0 Other: 0 Citizen 1 Education 0

Security 0 Vendor 0 State/Local 0 Tribal 0 Health/Research 1 

## TOTAL (Attended In

- Person) 

## 30

Conference Call 45



## Attended (In

Person & Conf Call) 75

EO 13650 Public Listening Session Page 26 February 27, 2014 Newark, NJ

## Executive Order 13650 Improving Chemical Facility Safety and Security **February 27**  **, 2014 Listening Session** Hosted by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and the Department of Labor ( DoL) Location: North Jersey Transportation Planning Authority (NJTPA), One Newark Center, Newark, NJ 071 02 

### Agenda 12:00 p.m.

– 1:00 p.m. Registration

1:00 p.m.

– 1:40 p.m. Welcome, Introductions, and Overview Kate Finnerty, Facilitator

Mathy Stanislaus, EPA, Executive Order 13650 Working Group Co

- Chair Assistant Administrator, Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response

Amy Graydon , Department of Homeland Security (DHS)
, Office of Infrastructure Protection Robert Kulick , Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) Paul Hlubik , Department of Agriculture (USDA) Maureen O’Rourke
, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF)

Overview of EPA Region 2, Lisa Plevin, EPA Chief of Staff

Overview Pilot Program Section 3 and 4, Eric Mosher, EPA

Overview Section 6a , Lisa Long, OSHA

1:40 p.m.
– 1:50 p.m. Listening Session Format Kate Finnerty, Facilitator

1:50 p.m.

– 5:00 p.m. Comments from Listening Session Participants

5:00 p.m.

– 6:00 p.m. BREAK
6:00 p.m.

– 6: 20 p.m. EO Overview Mathy Stanislaus, EPA, Executive Order 13650 Working Group Co

- Chair Assistant Administrator, Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response

Overview of EPA Region 2, Judith Enck, EPA Regional Administrator

6: 20 p.m.
– 6:2 5 p.m. Listening Session Format Kate Finnerty, Facilitator

6:2 5 p.m.
– 7:50 p.m. Comments from Listening Session Participants

7:50 p.m.

– 8:00 p.m. Closing Remarks Mathy Stanislaus, EPA, Executive Order 13650 Working Group Co

- Chair Assistant Administrator, Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response

8:00 p.m. Adjournment

Persons may also submit written comments to NPPD/ISCD/Mailstop 0610, Department of Homeland Security, 245 Murray Lane, SW, Ar lington, VA 20598

- 0610. Comments will also be accepted by email at: EO.Chemical@hq.d hs.gov or through the Federal eRulemaking Portal at http://www.regulations.gov

. For more information on EO 13650, please visit https://www.osha.gov/chemicalexecutiveorder/index.html and https://www.dhs.gov/topic/chemical

- security

.