Executive Order 13650 Public Listening Session, 

Date: February 27, 2014

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

Introduction and Opening Remarks

Kate Finnerty, Facilitatorintroduced 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 rescheduling 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 email 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, feedback, 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-Chair

• These listening sessions have been a critical part of the EO and the panel takes the comments 

provided during the session very seriously.

• I believe these listening sessionswill provide the foundation for the recommendationsthat will 

make it to the President’s desk.

• I would like to give a brief overview of the Executive 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 developing a 

plan for how stakeholders work together. It also addresses 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 Regional Response Team 

and using the infrastructure created by Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act 

(EPCRA). The Pilot Program is defininghigh risk and inspection coordination amongst agencies, 

to include inspections scheduling and cross training. It is identifyinghow 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 tasked 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 tools and protocols to collect and share chemical information with Federal, state, local, 

and tribal entities.

• Another sub-working group has been focused on Section 6 of the EO, policy standards and 

modernization. This working group has been reviewing standards and regulations on how to 

handle storage and handling of Ammonium Nitrate(AN), reviewing the Appendix A CFATS list, 

enhancing the EPA’s Risk Management Plan Program(RMP), and enhancing the Occupations 

Safety and Health Administration’s (OSHA) Process Safety Management(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 challengesto creating 

and maintaining chemical safety and security and how determining how to implement best 

practices. The sub-working group developed and executed these 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 emphasis program. In 2009, we built on that inspection program and 

implemented a PSM chemical fatalities national emphasis program.

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

Amy Graydon, Branch Chief, DHS/Office of Infrastructure Protection

• DHS has a unique security centric aspect 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 Transportation 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, NJ
that have been identified as high risk have modified their process and holdings to 

become unregulated.

o DHS also has 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 shared mission, and a shared area, and we are pleased to have 

everyone participating in the listening session.

Paul Hlubik, 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 behalf of the Region II office, we take chemical safety and security seriously.

• The pilot program addresses the number of facilitiesin the region and focuses on how to build

on the existing network of local responders.

• Highlights of Pilot Program:

o Changing the makeup of Regional Response Team to include Federal, State, and Local 

chemical security regulatory agencies as permanent members.

o Examining more effective use of EPCRA.

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

on a joint inspection program.

o Defining the list 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 underthe Regional Response Team(RRT). The 

focus of the pilot is prevention, but also looking at preparedness and response.

• Subcommittees:

o First Responders: meet with fire service folks, and hazmat teams in NY and NJ to find 

best practices and challenges. They are discussing training, additional exercises and 

getting more info into their hands, specifically EPCRA Tier 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): broker 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 organize 

and execute SERCs and LEPCs?

EO 13650 Public Listening Session Page 3

February 27, 2014

Newark, NJ
o Working Group is leveraging joint work that has already occurred in the region between 

DHS, OSHA, and EPA. The intent is to collaborate and improve how joint work will be 

done and information will be shared.

o What information needsto 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 continue.

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 others.

• 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 Dyno Nobel,remarked:

• Dyno Nobel is the largest explosives manufacturing company in the US and the largest producer 

of Ammonium Nitrate (AN) in the United States.

• We are a member of the Institute of Makers of Explosives (IME). IME companies have developed 

a number of recommendations 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 1910-109i for the safe manufacturing 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, and will not increase the margin of safety if regulated.

• Current OSHA rules are sufficient; EPA Risk Management Plan (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, NJ
good 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. ANand 

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 

perspective, what is their view on operationalizing a best practice to approaching fire response 

to AN fires?

o Mr. Shank responded: If the fire is part of the facility where AN islocated, 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. Shank responded: he thinks there is good knowledge to be shared. 

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

• The CCPS has published 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 ISTand have also published on 

subjectsrelated to engineering design.

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

was 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.

• Looking at the formal definition: “IST, also known as inherently 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 to 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 resultsfrom 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, NJ
o PSM, RMP, Thresholds, process hazard analysis, incident investigation and 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 experience, what 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.

• Follow-up from Mr. Stanislaus: I agree that it is a layered approach that comes across from 

many elements of process engineering design. Is that how you read the New Jersey experience?

o Mr. Bergerresponded: agrees and thinks that many people do notfully understand 

what work is IST related.

• Question from Mr. Stanislaus: Is risk 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 responded: thinksthe 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 Relayed an editorial in the NY Times detailing 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 of 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, NJ
o 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 threat 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 cannot be stolen, that certainly is 

a good example of IST providing more security.However, in terms of substituting a 

chemical that may have national security interest, security as a whole may be affected 

more. IST islimited in the degree in can help security while impacting safety in some 

cases.

Jeff Titel, Director, NJ Sierra Club, remarked:

• I am here today because a state like New Jersey has a long history of chemical plant accidents.

The Hercules Chemical facility has adisaster every five years and other facilities have had

explosions and leaks over the past fifty years.

• Many facilities are regulated underthe 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 will benefit as well due 

to less contamination and accidents.

• Do not have to go far to see disaster remnants.

o The Occidental Petroleumplant remnants and the old Diamond Alkali Plant are less than a 

mile from here, and are responsible for the dioxins added to the river creating a SuperFund 

site.

o Across the bay, Kuehne Chemical is using chlorine 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 investing in the 

environment and our communities.

o NJ TCPA 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 workers 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 response 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 these plants currently, and lack of awarenessis 

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, NJ
o Mr. Titel responded: There have been positives, but there needs to be additional 

movement going forward. Many NJ facilities are older and not attracting investment to 

follow through on improving plant design standards. 

Elvin Montero, DirectorChemistry Council of New Jersey (CCNJ), commented:

• CCNJ recently partnered with government and labor organizationsto 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 revealed their Toxic Release Inventory (TRI) emissions information 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 Community Advisory Panels(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 thatthe working group use existing regulationsto 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 concern in NJ and nationally, that executing TCPA through EPA RMP will 

provide little applicable benefitfor reducing risk beyond what is already required through 

existing regulations and could be potentially detrimental.

o Currently, TCPA has 12,000 facilities covered including 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 operators to meet safety standards. Explicit safer alternative 

mandates are not needed.

• CCNJ agreeswith the American Chemistry Council (ACC)that TCPA should not be nationalized.

o The NJ Department of Environmental Protection (NJ DEP)report published in January

2010 made no recommendations for IST mandates based on the experience of their

program evaluation.

• Review of IST assessments completed by facilities confirmed thatinherently safer approaches 

will always be considered as a matter of course. Each facility needs to work with community and 

local stakeholders to meet their responsibilities, regulatory obligations, and requirements.

• Question from Mr. Stanislaus: Do you have thoughts on how to get outlier facilities to 

participate in their programs and products?

o Mr. Montero responded: CCNJ agreeswith ACC in how they work with theirpartners. 

There is a commitment within the industry to work with suppliers and distributors to 

make sure cradle to grave products are properly 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, NJ
are 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 programthat is not required in the ACC ResponsibleCare® Program?

o Mr. Montero responded: I amnot particularly sure what specific part of 

ResponsibleCare ®Mr. Stanislausis referencing because CCNJ is affiliatedwith ACC and 

not directly related. There is a checklist and protocol that is normally done in the ACC 

program, but NJ requires a process when going through the checklist for what they 

consider IST. The NJ exercise did show thatmany pieces were implemented, and other 

pieces will be implemented at some point. IST does not necessarily create new 

processes, but many of them were perhaps already in the pipeline for consideration by 

facilities.

• Follow-up from Mr. Stanislaus: the New Jersey DEP’s review of the program that walksthrough 

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 take 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 initially 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 things 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 there 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, NJ
o 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 

ResponsibleCare®. 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 companiesthat may be responsible for delivery of 

chemicals to and from facilities?

o Mr. Montero responded: The challenge here is how are we trying to find the West, TX 

type company through this process. Through the IST assessment, we are not going to 

get there. In regards to the ResponsibleCare ®program, many companies will audit their 

suppliers before partnering with them.How easy it is to utilize these programs will have 

to be commented from the ResponsibleCare® 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 companies 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 certain 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. Industry has 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 solve the quandary of collective collaboration between stakeholders when some 

companies do not participate in the regulatory and trade group programs and LEPCs do not have 

the resources to implement safety and security at their level?

o Mr. Montero said: Yes, and that he will have responses to this quandary conceptin the 

future.

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

• They are a faith based environmental organization in Highland Park, NJ.

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

o Green Faith has a major concern for environmental justice communities and wants to 

protect those communities 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 more clearly defined and enforced 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, NJ
o 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 single definition for high hazard facility across the Federal government.

• Agencies should maintain a publicly accessible Federal and state inspection database detailing 

high risk facilities.

o More chemical should be on the chemical of interest list.

o Database for Federal,state and local 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 process 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 their concernsto government officials.

o Systemshould be established to receive and respond to input from the public regarding 

chemical facility issues.

• Implement IST requirements.

• Government must fulfill regulatory roll zealously.

• Experience has proven that facility owners will cut corners at the expense of workers 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 agenciesshould implement mandatory ISTreview 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 conducting the Listening Session to implement 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 recommendation for community interaction?

o Mr. Kauffman responded: Those 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 do 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, NJ
o 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 made a recommendation to expand the list of chemicals? Is 

this DHS related or should it be broader?

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

• Question from Ms. Graydon: What information do you anticipate from workers and 

communities if a response/reportsystem is established?

o Mr. Kauffman responded: Those people don’t have the opportunity to speak. They should 

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 demanded 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 plant 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 jobsmust 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 better protect workers and the communities where they live.

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

o Described an example of employee involvement: Chlorine cars were stored at a facility 

fence line and the community voiced concerns. Management decided to put the cars 

the middle of the facility –which increased the risk to employees. Workers should have 

been included in that discussion.

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

treated at yourplant?

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. Stanislaus: How have changes in management been done as it relates to 

process safety?

o Mr. Hall responded: I amnot sure exactly what the regulation states, but new management 

needs to be trained as guardian of their safety processes. 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: Ispent a lot of time in that department. When business gets slow,the 

maintenance budget is the first 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 differences do you 

see from employees versus contractors?

o Mr. Hallresponded: They raised the question as a union constantly, but were never shown 

proof that contractors had the same knowledge as embedded employees. Contract 

administrator would oversee the contractors, but contractors would often ask questions of 

the employees regarding 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 releases.

• In 1970s, an explosion at the Radium Chemical Plant killed four people and sent children to the 

hospital with respiratory distress.

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

area?

• In October2012, Superstorm Sandy swept together numerous chemicalsfrom 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 Federal agencies should implement IST by replacing hazardous substances with safer 

ones or adopting safer production.

o EPA should use Clean Air Act General Duty clause section 112 to force facilities to better 

design and 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 single framework for inspection criteria. This should include cross training 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, NJ
o Community groups with workers in high industrial areassurrounding 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 just 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 responded: 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 

exposure is unknown.

• Question from Mr. Stanislaus: does 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 stormis right next to the 

prison and an immigration detention 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 between the local community and 

other resources. Risk management would need to be done. It is important to get local fire 

departments and hospitals involved.

• Follow-up from Mr. Stanton: Is this what the LEPCs should do? Should there be something 

different than the LEPC structure?

o Ms. Greenberg responded: Residents and communitymembers 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. Emergency personnel were not present. It is beneficial to do an innovative

strategy to define emergency response.

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

o Ms. Greenberg responded: 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 Finnertymade an announcement that there are currently no speakers currently registered for the 

night session. If no one wants to speak upon the start of the 6 pmsession, 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
• Talked 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 whistleblowers aggressively.

• It is a difficult process for many workersto undertake when reporting safety violations.

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

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

talk to workers.

o Since then, there is much more 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 process safety requirements, like mechanical integrity, each 

manager has a different perspective and cost thresholds when maintaining these standards 

and requirements. 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: What are your experienceswith near misses?

o Mr. Pajak responded: Reporting near missesis done through the SAP AGsystem 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 process. In the case of a facility doing something wrong, they are less likely to 

report near misses properly. It tends to be that not knowing about near misses can 

cause a big hitin the future. Facilities should not lose the opportunity to fix a problem 

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:

• Organization 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, NJ
o 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 wastold that I

was not in the evacuation zone, and that they probably had colds, and I should not 

worry about the spill.

o I kept calling the response number, but kept getting the same responsethat Ishould not 

worry about the effects.

o I eventually talked to the doctor, but the doctor did not have expertise for treatment of 

exposure to the spilled chemical.

o Overall, at least 100 people went to the hospital, and 700 evacuations occurred 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 focus on preventing accidents, but there also must be a focus on 

better emergency preparedness. 

o My experience is that the Gloucester response team was not prepared to respond to 

such an accident.

o I would like better focus placed on IST.

• Question from Mr. Stanislaus: When was it recognized that you were in the evacuation zone and 

what was done after that?

o Ms. Sheehan responded: There 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 that the testing equipment was faulty.

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

• Organization thatprotects consumers and promotes good governmentin New Jersey.

• The 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 within 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 existfor immediate implementation.

EO 13650 Public Listening Session Page 16

February 27, 2014

Newark, NJ
o 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 dangerous 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 Pennsylvania.

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

o NJ needs to be a proactive leadernot a reactive cleanup state.

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

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

o She submitted 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 

personal notes. It is saying that many people live close to chemical facilities and are at 

risk to chemical issues. They urge EPA underthe Clean Air Act to implement IST 

standards better.

Carol Gay, President NJ Industrial Union Council, commented:

• Far too many deaths occur due to reactive chemical accidentsthat 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 will translate to higher health care costs down the road.

• Stricter enforcementmeasures 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 they 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 EnergyWaste Pond Collapse occurred recently in North Carolina.

EO 13650 Public Listening Session Page 17

February 27, 2014

Newark, NJ
o In NJ, hundreds were sickened due to the Vinyl Chloride release in the Conrail Train 

derailment.

• Disregard for health and safety is immoral.

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

• Workers are the first line of defense against these catastrophes. Engaging themwill 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 protect us, so we need to protect them with 

maximum protection.

• Question from Mr. Stanislaus: Describe your organization?

o Ms. Gay responded: It is a State wide labor federation representing 125,000 workersin 

New Jersey. It is a Federation of organizations.

Debra Coyle-McFadden, Work Environment Council, remarked:

• Focus on New Jersey TCPA successes and related recommendationsthey 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 IST Implementation summary reported 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 also 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 economically unfeasible, seven failed to 

conduct the proper quantitative analysis.

o More than 1/3 of the facilities are using chlorine, hydrofluoric 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 Working Group when 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, NJ
o IST reviews should be put online. Communities and workers have a right to know that 

facilities have made proper efforts to make facilities safer and more secure.

o Require facility management to better document their claims. They should be required 

to quantify economic benefits when switching 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 Clean 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 Federal Governmentshould do an environmental justice 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 Once done, then disaster plans must be created that specifically address environmental 

justice issues including:

• Evacuation;

• Rebuilding and return;

• Health consequences;

• Community input;

• Prevention; and

• It should also address the factors that make these communities 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 withstand 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 cumulative impacts affects

environmental justice communities.

o This comes from a NJ DEP analysis.

EO 13650 Public Listening Session Page 19

February 27, 2014

Newark, NJ
o 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 from episodic, accidental releases?

o Mr. Sheets responded: I amtalking about both of them. Cumulative impacts are related 

to releases that happen and how they contribute to pollution that already exists in the 

community in addition to catastrophe issues. In catastrophes, it is the catastrophes

themselvesthat are the main focus.

• Follow-up from Mr. Stanislaus: We heard in Baton Rouge and Houston aboutthe lack of ability 

for community residents to participate in local planning activities. Can you speak to that?

o Mr. Sheets responded: They are doing a lot of work on climate change and this shows a 

similar pattern. Learned from Superstorm Sandy that non-governmental organizations 

(NGO) participated in recovery, but they were left on their own. NGOs were not 

incorporated in emergency planning and rebuild planning.Government has to work in 

partnership with NGOs, community organizations, and environmental justice 

organizationsthat are part of the community to get their feedback. Added 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 connect 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 organizations in getting the word out. Can you talk 

about that a bit?

o Mr. Sheets responded: Environmental justice communities dispute the report after 

Sandy that the local response was adequate. Environmental justice organizations and 

NGOs played a role in getting the word out, but they went far beyond that with Sandy. 

They provided food, got public 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 Camilo-Osorio 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, United Steel Workers(USW), commented:

EO 13650 Public Listening Session Page 20

February 27, 2014

Newark, NJ
• USW members are highly skilled and highly trained operators of these facilities and are hurt the 

most when accidents happen.

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

• Worker involvement is very important. They know all of the equipment 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 should 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 practices.

• 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).UrgesOSHA to initiate rulemaking to update the standard and it 

should include more worker participation:

o Should 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 hazardous chemicals including reactive chemicals.

• In moving forward, it is important that Federal 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: Can you expand on addressingnear 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 investigates 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 addressing near misses.

o Mr. Tal responded: This 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: Could you expand on workers being established on investigation 

teams?

o Mr. Tal responded: Workers know the facility and do not have a vested interestin 

covering anything up. This includes OSHA and private investigations. It should be 

transparent.

EO 13650 Public Listening Session Page 21

February 27, 2014

Newark, NJ
Leeann 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 

chemical processes.

• We need to be proactive.

• Emergency response community needs to listen to the medical community

• What does switching to less dangerous alternativesmean?

o Fewer worker casualties;

o Fewer family financial hardships as a result;

o Environmental 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.

• Agrees that 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: Do you distinguish between the sizes of the facility in your

recommendation? How should smaller facilities do an IST analysis?

o Ms. Sinpatanasakulresponded: it should be mandatory for everyone, but government 

assistance should exist for smaller facilities that cannot economically get themselves 

into compliance.

Open 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 better 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. It 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 near misses:

o Many of them are swept under the rug. Union officials are the ones that typically bring up 

the 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, butI think there is a large backlog in processing them.

• In regards to Homeland Security:

o When they do inspections, they should involve more participants from workers and 

employee representativeslike DEP - TCPA and OSHA does.

Capt. Bill Sheehan, Hackensack River Keeper, remarked:

• Member of the International WaterkeeperAlliance with 210 programs around the world.

• We advocate 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 sued 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.

• Thinkmy job should be obsolete, and the job would be obsoleteif 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 riverwhich 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 connectwith Kuehne Chemical is rebuffed.

• Environmental 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 storm flood 

issues?

o Capt. Sheehan responded: Participated 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 built on old wetlands that were filled 

with God knows whatin the late 1800s and early 1900s. The chemical companies have been 

on it ever since. The land is polluted, is continually being polluted, and the Newark 

community continues to bear the brunt and carry an unfair burden. Storms will always be a 

problem in dislodging these issues.He shared a story about a plastic drum floating in the 

riverafter Tropical Storm Floyd.He knew better then to handle it himself and called the DEP 

Emergency Response people to recoverthe 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, NJ
it 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 

substantial. 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: 

• Thanked everyone for participating.

• 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 speakers 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 Federal and state right-to-know laws be maintained and strengthened by requiring 

facilities to identify all chemicals used in theirmanufacturing 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 to use it.

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

• If a disaster occurswithout 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 sheets 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 considered a command center for disasters and 

disaster drills, so they are part of the emergency planning.

• Question from Mr. Kulick: Do they do decontamination drills as well?

o Ms. Barton’s response: Yes, they do. This includes tagging and decontamination showers. 

They do the drills during normal daily operations. 

• Question from 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 very prepared. Do you think this is the case everywhere?

o Ms. Barton responded: Not 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 offer.

• 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 session concluded.

EO 13650 Public Listening Session Page 25

February 27, 2014

Newark, NJ
Participant 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 (InPerson & 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 07102

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 PilotProgram 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. – 6:25 p.m. Listening Session Format

Kate Finnerty, Facilitator

6:25 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, Arlington, VA 

20598-0610. Comments will also be accepted by email at: EO.Chemical@hq.dhs.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.