O ffic e o f Infrast r uctur e Protection

Nationa l Protect i on a n d Program s Directorate

U. S . D e partment o f Homela n d S e curi t y

Washington

, D C 2 0528



## CHEMICAL FACILITY ANTI

- TERRORISM STANDARDS

ADVANCE NOTICE OF PROPOSED RULEMAKING

EAST COAST WEBINAR LISTENING SESSION HELD ON

SEPTEMBER 26 , 2014

CONTENTS:

Agenda

Transcript

## Chemical Facility Anti

**- Terrorism Standards** 

**Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (CFATS ANPRM)** 

**September 26** 

**, 2014**  **Public Listening Session**  **Webinar**

Hosted by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS)



### Agenda

10:00 a .m.

– 10 : 15 a .m. Welcome and Overview

Kate Finnerty , Facilitator

Scott Breor , Department of Homeland Security, Office of Infrastructure Protection

Amy Graydon , Department of Homeland Security, Office of Infrastructure Protection

10:15 a .m.

– 10 : 2 0 a .m. Ground Rules for Public L istening Session

Kate Finnerty , Facilitator

10 : 20 a.m.

– 11: 20 a .m. Commencement of Public Listening Session

11: 20 a .m.

– 11: 50 a .m. Open Session (if time allows)

11: 50 a.m.

– 12 : 00 p .m. Closing Remarks and Adjournment

Persons may also submit written comments to U.S. Department of Homeland Security, National Protection and Programs Directorate,

Office of Infrastructure Protection, Infrastructure Security Compliance Division, 245 Murray Lane, Mail Stop 0610, Arlington, VA 205 2 8

- 0610

or through the Federal eRulemaki ng Portal at http://www.regulations.gov

.

For more information on the CFATS ANPRM, please visit https://www.dhs.gov/ CFATS

- Rulemaking

.1

CHE MICAL FACILITY ANTI

- TERRORISM STANDARDS 1

ADVANCE NOTICE OF PROPOSED RULEMAKING 2

EAST COAST WEBINAR LISTENING SESSION 3

4

5

Moderator: Kate Finnerty 6

Panelist Members: Amy Graydon and Scott Breor 7

Friday, September 26, 2014 8

Commencing at 10:00 a.m. Eastern Daylight Time 9

10

4601 N. Fairfax Drive, Suite 900 11

Arlington, Virginia 22203 12

13

14

15

16

17

Reported by: LaQuicia Thomas 18

Bay Area Court Reporting, Inc. 19

20

21

22

23

24

252

P R O C E E D I N G S 1

MS. FINNERTY: Good morning everyone and 2

welcome to the listening session for the Chemical 3

Facility Anti

- Terrorism Standards A dvance Notice of 4

Proposed Rulemaking, or CFATS ANPRM, that was issued 5

by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security on 6

August 18, 2014. 7

We are glad that you are able to join us this 8

morning. This is the sixth listening ses sion in a 9

series that will be held across the country, 10

including six in

- person and two via webinar. 11

My name is Kate Finnerty with Energetics 12

Incorporated. DHS, who is leading the proposed 13

rulemaking, has arranged for me to moderate today's 14

listening session. 15

Before we get started, I would like to make a 16

couple of announcements. First, I would like to 17

respectfully request that all participants exercise 18

standard webinar and phone etiquette, including 19

placing your phone on mute, refraining from using 20

the hold button and being mindful of any background 21

noise when you are selected to speak. 22

After the opening remarks and pri or to opening 23

the public listening session, we will review the 24

functions of the webinar screen that you are seeing. 253

Please note that the functions of this screen are 1

not intended for comments or questions related to 2

the CFATS ANPRM. 3

The comments provided during this session are 4

being transcribed for note

- taking purposes. A 5

transcript of each listening session will be posted 6

on a docket in the Federal Register at a later date. 7

Audio of this se ssion will not be retained. 8

The purpose of today's session is to gather 9

public comments, data or views on how the current 10

CFATS regulation, 6 C.F.R., Part 27, which was 11

issued in 2007, might be modified. Issuing the 12

Adva nce Notice of Proposed Rulemaking enables the 13

Department to provide stakeholders with an 14

opportunity to provide comments and suggestions for 15

identifying ways to make the program more effective 16

in achieving its regulatory objectives. 17

As for our agenda this morning, we are going to 18

begin with welcoming remarks, which will include a 19

brief overview of the status of the CFATS program, 20

and the remainder of the session will be dedicated 21

to hearing from you, the stakeholders. During 22

closing remarks, we will include instructions on how 23

to obtain additional information about the listening 24

sessions. 254

At this time, I would like to introduce 1

Mr. Scott Br eor, Deputy Director of the DHS 2

Infrastructure Security Compliance Division, to 3

provide welcome remarks. 4

Mr. Breor. 5

MR. BREOR: Thanks, Kate. And let me reiterate 6

to what Kate has spoken to. Thank you for taking 7

the time out of your busy schedules to join us this 8

morning. Your input is greatly beneficial to us, 9

and we truly want to make this program more 10

effective. 11

We've done a lot, we believe, over the last 12

seven years, but we know that there are definitely 13

some areas that we can improve and we need your help 14

to get to that point. 15

Just for some background, as you recall, in 16

2007 in the DHS Appropriations Act, Section 550, 17

Congress had autho rized the Department to regulate 18

security at high

- risk chemical facilities. To 19

implement this, the department developed the 20

Chemical Facility Anti

- Terrorism Standards, that we 21

all embrace as CFATS, 6 C.F.R., Part 27, to 22

imple ment that authority. 23

Today we cover approximately 3,900 facilities 24

across all 50 states. Of those facilities, 255

approximately 2,100 SSPs have been authorized. And 1

we have approved over 1,100, and we're closing in on 2

1,200. 3

As you know, potential regulation under CFATS 4

is not based on facility type. It starts with the 5

quantity of chemical of interest, COI, that the 6

facility possesses. So under the CFATS program, 7

when we think chemical facility, we regulate many 8

various types, including chemical manufacturers, 9

warehouses and distributors, chemical repackaging, 10

oil and gas, hospitals, and colleges and 11

universities and many others. 12

In Section 550 , Congress did exempt several 13

types of facilities from regulation. These include 14

facilities regulated under the Maritime 15

Transportation Security Act, MTSA, facilities 16

subject to regulation by the Nuclear Regulatory 17

Commission , facilities owned or operated by the 18

Departments of Defense or Energy and public water 19

systems and water treatment works regulated under 20

certain water quality laws administered by EPA. 21

Up until this point, we have been working to 22

strengthen the CFATS program internally at DHS. 23

Over the past two years, significant progress has 24

been made, and we've been able to make that progress 256

primarily based on improving the SSP review process, 1

seriously taking a look at all of the various steps 2

through that process and looking for efficiencies in 3

putting resources where we identify backlogs in 4

areas that needed improvement. 5

We have also, over the last couple of years, 6

made a strong effort with industry on development 7

of Alternative Security Program templates. We 8

worked with experts to evaluate and validate and 9

recommend ways to improve our tiering methodology. 10

Recently we just stood up an expert working group to 11

help us as we implement the recommendations provided 12

to us by the peer review panel that we received in 13

October of 2013. 14

We've also introduced initiatives such as 15

streamlining inspections where we work with owners 16

and operators to do a lot of the inspection work 17

prior to actually arriving on site. And then 18

arriving on site with a proper number of inspectors 19

to try to minimize the time on site to not only make 20

our effor ts more efficient where we can, then do 21

multiple facilities per week with the same 22

inspection team, but also minimize the burden on a 23

facility. 24

And we've also been trying to capitalize on 257

what we refer to as the corporate approach for 1

companies with multiple facilities. There's 2

approximately 60 corporates that have seven or more 3

facilities that make up a quarter of the facilities 4

that we regulate. So working with them, making it 5

more efficie nt for them and capitalizing on what 6

those same type security practices are from facility 7

to facility makes our inspections more efficient. 8

ISCD is also exploring with industry the 9

possibility of creating segment

- specific Alternative 10

Security Programs. We have met with various 11

industry associations such as the National 12

Association of Chemical Distributors, on this topic. 13

And as a matter of fact, I just got their latest 14

draft this morning which we will be taking a look 15

at. So that has been a great help in improving the 16

program. 17

We are also pleased to see the efforts being 18

made towards permanent authorization for CFATS. The 19

Department supports a permanent authorization for 20

CFATS and is committed to working with Congress and 21

other security partners to establish a permanent 22

authority for the program. DHS firmly believes that 23

the permanent aut horization will provide industry 24

with the necessary stability to move forward in 258

effectively implementing CFATS and will send a clear 1

message to facilities that may be seeking to avoid 2

their obligation to report dangerous chemicals that 3

the CFATS program is here to stay and that CFATS 4

will not be going away. 5

H.R. 4007, the CFATS Authorization and 6

Accountability Act of 2014 was passed in the House 7

in July. The bill would permanently authorize the 8

CFATS program and authorizes the appropriations for 9

three fiscal years. The Senate Committee on 10

Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs passed 11

the Senate version. One amendment was added to H.R. 12

4007, and they also amended the authorized 13

appropriations for four years. So we are grateful 14

for that, and we look forward to the bill 15

proceeding. 16

But as you think about CFATS, you must think 17

about the larger conte xt of regulatory and voluntary 18

programs. So we ask that as you take a look at our 19

program and you're providing comments

-- and we not 20

only are grateful for you providing comments today, 21

but we also ask you to provide comments to th e 22

Federal Register

-- please look at it in the larger 23

context. 24

Over the last year, we have been doing a lot of 259

work with EPA, OSHA, and other federal partners and 1

also industry and state and local and community 2

inte rest groups to work on Executive Order 13650. 3

And back in June, a document was released, "Actions 4

to Improve Chemical Facility Safety and Security

- A 5

Shared Commitment." I ask all of you to please 6

review that document. Improving chemical facility 7

safety and security is definitely going to take the 8

work of all of us. CFATS definitely has a role in 9

that, but it needs to be viewed in a larger context 10

of all the programs and efforts that are out there. 11

A nd, as we work to improve CFATS, we need to be 12

mindful of those other programs and efforts to make 13

the program work better as a whole in that universe. 14

The Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking that 15

was released did highlight s everal topic areas, but 16

it clearly is what we refer to as that "clean dry 17

erase board." We want to improve this program. We 18

have all learned over the last seven years. And we 19

want to seek your input to take it to the next 20

level. 21

We did identify certain aspects in the ANPRM. 22

We did ask to take

-- comments on the general 23

regulatory approach. Right now, if a chemical has a 24

COI and it's above the screening threshold quantity, 2510

they submi t a Top

- Screen. As it goes through the 1

process, they eventually

-- Site Security Plan is 2

authorized. Then we do an Authorization Inspection. 3

And then we're finally to the compliance side. 4

Maybe that can be done in a more efficient manner. 5

If you have ideas, suggestions, please let us know. 6

We also asked for comment on the treatment of 7

nontraditional chemical facilities. I didn't 8

mention earlier, but some of our chemical facilities 9

are prisons. Y ou know, does a prison need to 10

complete a Site Security Plan? Can we have various 11

tools and methods in our regulatory approach, or 12

does everything need to be the completion of a Site 13

Security Plan? A comment on that would be great ly 14

beneficial. 15

Clarification of terminology. We learned that 16

in our work on the Executive Order

-- and, we also 17

know that in our regulatory framework

-- that there are 18

words that we use that are also used by EPA and 19

others that are used in a different manner, and we 20

ask for comment on that to make sure that we address 21

all of those. 22

The Risk

- Based Performance Standards. 23

Presently we have 18. We have heard over the years 24

that there's overlap. So in that overlap, whether, 2511

you know, the perimeter security, what you put in 1

play there could also be utilized with the respect 2

to the assets security. Is there a better way to 3

present and frame the R isk

- Based Performance 4

Standard? 5

Appendix A are a list of chemicals

- of

- interest. 6

Should other chemicals be added; should 7

some of the chemicals be removed; are the screening 8

threshold quantities right? Appreciate comment on 9

that. 10

And, also, we ask about consideration for small 11

businesses. We do have facilities where the owner 12

and operator is one. We have been able to work with 13

that individual, but we

-- you know, from one to 14

thou sands, our program covers the gamut. Again, 15

comment in that area. 16

And of course, as I mentioned with respect to 17

the work on the Executive Order, the alignment with 18

other regulatory programs. 19

So, you know, clearly th at really paints a

-- 20

or gives you a broad area, and we're asking for any 21

thought that you might have to help us with this 22

program. 23

And as I mentioned earlier, we appreciate your 24

comments today. If you are not speaking today but 2512

just listening, that's fine. Hopefully, as you 1

listen, that will generate ideas and recommendations 2

that you can then submit to us. And we ask that you 3

submit those comments to the Federal eRulemaking 4

Portal, which is www.regulations.gov or you can mail 5

it to the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, 6

National Protection and Programs Directorate, Office 7

of Infrastructure Protection, Infrastructure 8

Security Compliance Division at 245 Murray Lane. 9

And I believe that this will be given to you in a 10

webinar, excellent, so I'm not going to read further 11

on that. 12

So, again, thank you for taking the time to be 13

here today. We look forward to hearing your 14

comments and suggestions on how DHS can mature the 15

CFATS program. And with that, I will pass it back 16

to Kate. 17

MS. FINNERTY: Thank you, Mr. Breor. 18

I would also like to introduce our second 19

panelist for this morning's webinar, Ms. Amy 20

Graydon, Branch Chief with the DHS Infrastructure 21

Security Compliance Division. 22

MS. GRAYDON: Good morning. 23

MS. FINNERTY: Thank you for joining us. 24

The remainder of this session today is set 2513

aside to hear from you, the stakeholders. First, I 1

would like to outline the format and ground rules 2

for today's session. This is a listening session 3

with the purpose to hear a diverse set of opinions 4

from across the broad spectrum of stakeholders who 5

have an interest in improving and streamlining the 6

CFATS rule. As such, we are not seeking a 7

discussion or consensus today on any of the topics. 8

All presenters are asked to keep their comments 9

directly related to the topics described in Part 4 10

of the ANPRM as listed by Mr. Breor. I will also 11

note that specific suggestions and supporting data 12

are the most helpful comments. 13

All presenters are also asked to keep their 14

comments limited to five minutes, including any 15

introduction to your remarks. The panel may ask 16

clarifying questions after your presentation. 17

We hope to have tim e to hear from everyone who 18

would like to speak today, but if we cannot get to 19

you, you are encouraged to provide comments in 20

writing via one of the two mechanisms that are 21

listed in the Federal Register notice and were 22

listed by Mr. Breor. And, again, we will put those 23

on the screen as we go throughout the webinar today. 24

Currently on the screen you can see the 2514

regulations.gov address. 1

Also any materials related to your presentation 2

today tha t you would like to formally submit should 3

be submitted via one of these options. The deadline 4

to submit comments is October 17, 2014, which is 60 5

calendar days after publication of the ANPRM in the 6

Federal Register. 7

The remainder of our webinar will include two 8

parts, time permitting. In the first part, I will 9

call upon each person who signed up in advance to 10

present today. I will ask the operator to open your 11

line when it is your turn to speak for your 12

allocated five minutes. If time allows, I will then 13

open the floor to anyone else who would like to 14

speak on the topics also with a five

- minute maximum. 15

At this time, I would l ike to introduce one of 16

our webinar team members, Ms. Victoria Frena, to 17

briefly introduce the functions of the webinar 18

screen. 19

Ms. Frena. 20

MS. FRENA: Good morning. The CFATS ANPRM is 21

posted in the file sharin g box in the lower left 22

corner should you wish to download a copy. Click on 23

the PDF and press save to my computer. If you need 24

technical assistance, please e

- mail gia@hq.dhs.gov. 2515

When presenting, your time warnings will appea r 1

on the presentation warning box, which will be 2

maximized during the presentations. There is also a 3

timer on the left

- hand side which will be timing 4

your presentation during your allocated five 5

minutes. If you wish to speak during our open 6

session, please press *1 or start a chat with 7

the host to add your name to the list. You can 8

start a chat with the host by clicking the upper 9

right

- hand button in the chat pod on your left

- hand 10

side. A drop

- down will appear. Hover over "start a 11

chat with" and then select the host option. Please 12

include your name. Thank you. 13

MS. FINNERTY: Thank you, Ms. Frena. 14

I will now open the public listening session. 15

I will first proceed with those who signed up in 16

advance to present. 17

If Mr. Benjamin Hall is on the line, please 18

dial *1 to indicate your line is ready to open 19

with the operator. 20

(Pause.) 21

MS. FINNERT Y: I'll move on to the next person 22

on the list. 23

Karen Messana, if you are on the line, please 24

dial *1. 2516

THE OPERATOR: Mr. Hall, you may proceed. 1

MR. HALL: Okay. So I don't have any comments 2

at this poin t in time. So I'll, you know, open the 3

floor to the next commenter. 4

MS. FINNERTY: Thank you, sir. 5

Operator, you may close that line. 6

Has Karen Messana joined us yet? If so, please 7

dial *1. 8

If Mr. S tephen Morin has joined us, please dial 9

*1. 10

If Mr. Matthew O'Callaghan has joined us, 11

please dial *1. 12

(Pause.) 13

MS. FINNERTY: We have three names in the queue 14

right now. If Karen Messana, Stephen Morin or 15

Matthew O'Callaghan are on the line, please dial 16

*1 to queue up with the operator. 17

If Ms. Kathryn Phin is on the line, please dial 18

*1. 19

And if Lawrence Zacarese is on the line, please 20

dial *1. 21

(Pause.) 22

MS. FINNERTY: We are currently in the public 23

listening session, and we are anticipating comments 24

from those who signed up in advance to provide 2517

public comments. If I call your name, please dial 1

*1 to queue up with the operator. Karen 2

Messana, Stephen Morin, Matthew O'Callaghan, Kathryn 3

Phin, Lawrence Zacarese. Please dial *1 to 4

queue up with the operator. 5

Operator, do we have any of those names dialing 6

*1 at this p oint? 7

THE OPERATOR: No, ma'am. We do not. 8

MS. FINNERTY: Okay. Thank you very much. 9

I will now open the public listening session 10

for any additional comments. We will return to 11

those who signed up in advance as they are able to 12

join us this morning. 13

So, again, we're opening the floor for 14

additional comments related to the CFATS Advance 15

Notice of Proposed Rulemaking. And if you are 16

having trouble signing in, please use 877

- 91 7

- 8926. 17

And we have an access code on the screen there, 18

3179655. 19

We are asking that all comments be limited to 20

five minutes and that all comments

-- all comments 21

do come through our phone line. You have a maximum 22

of five minutes to provide public comments. If you 23

are interested in providing public comments, please 24

dial *1 at this time and you'll queue up with 2518

the operator. 1

(Pause.) 2

THE OPERATOR: We have a comment, if you would 3

like to hear it, from Cynthia Hilton. 4

MS. FINNERTY: Thank you. 5

MS. HILTON: Hey, can you hear me? 6

MS. FINNERTY: Yes, we can. 7

MR. BREOR: Yes, we can. Good morning. 8

MS. HILTON: Okay. Good morning. I 9

appreciate, you know, that you're making this 10

opportunity available and that we shouldn't, you 11

know, waste your valuable time, so maybe I'll be 12

wasting it, but we will be providing comments. So 13

don't think that the lack of, you know, 14

participation means that people are not interested. 15

Everybody I know is very interested, and I think you 16

will be getting a lot of written comments. 17

But I just want to pick up on your comment, 18

S cott, about these nontraditional, for lack of a 19

better word, kind of populations that you are 20

seeing, and you mentioned prisons and rhetorically 21

asked whether or not, you know, they would need to 22

submit something. I would like to j ust suggest a 23

similar argument could be made for our industry. We 24

have been regulated for a long time by ATF, have 2519

standards and it seems a little bit strange to us 1

that individuals who work there who access those 2

sites, you know, can possess high explosives but 3

somehow they may or may not be able to possess 4

precursor chemicals. So, I'm just going to say that, 5

just as a heads up, we will be addressing that issue 6

in our comments. 7

Also, hopefully, this is relevant maybe hopefully 8

to this whole issue, but earlier this week there was 9

a teleconference, which involved Secretary Johnson 10

and trying to talk about, you know, current risks 11

that are out there. An d one of the commenters 12

brought up a concern about exploding targets. I 13

don't know if you were listening in on that, but I 14

just want to clear the record because the Secretary 15

said, well, that's for ATF, but exploding may be in 16

the term of this, the colloquial term, but these 17

things are really aluminum powder and ammonium 18

nitrate and separately they're not an explosive. So 19

really these things are

-- it's clearly in your 20

sandbox. So I would just encoura ge you to also look 21

at the risks that are presented by that. 22

And by the way, at that same session, I tried 23

to ask a question. I realize in retrospect that it 24

probably was the wrong way it was phrased. I was 2520

trying to br ing up CFATS by congratulating or 1

thanking the Secretary for his support for 2

legislation to give authorization to this program, 3

and I was trying to get around to some of the 4

Risk

- Based Performance Standards that might be out 5

of date. And so another thing we'll be commenting 6

on is Risk

- Based Performance Standard 13, which 7

appears to be based on the color

- coded tiering that 8

we had which we don't have anymore. 9

So why don't I just stop there. I don't know 10

if you want to comment at all, but those are just 11

some thoughts for the day. Thank you. 12

MS. FINNERTY: Thank you, Ms. Hilton. 13

Do we have questions from the panel? 14

MR. BREOR: No. I'll just say, Cyn thia, thanks 15

for your comments. And on the nontraditional, 16

greatly look forward to what your input is on that. 17

You know, as you know, that was also a big effort 18

with the work on the Executive Order was to fully 19

understand wha t the regulatory fabric was and where 20

there were gaps and where we did have areas that 21

possibly did overlay on one another. So, we'll look 22

forward to that. 23

We did

-- when the Homeland Security Advisory 24

System went away

- - we did update that within our 2521

program. The SSP is updated, everything in the CSAT 1

tool and there's also a fact sheet. So, we are in 2

line with the current process that the Department 3

uses for RBPS 13. But, you know, 13 and many of the 4

other RBPSs, you know, if there's better ways of 5

assessing those security areas or if there's, you 6

know, ways that some of them can be merged, you 7

know, we definitely want to hear input on that. 8

And I hear you on the exploding targets. You 9

know, that is a concern of ours along with cold 10

packs and other items like that, so thank you. 11

MS. HILTON: Scott, I don't know if I'm still 12

-- if you can hear me

-- 13

MS. FINNERTY: Yes. 14

MS. HILTON:

-- but I really appreciate your 15

comments. 16

And then can I just ask, because this is like a 17

totally dumb question, if you've updated

-- because 18

I've

-- you know, some of us are a t a disadvantage 19

because we

-- we're not the inputter into the system 20

and, you know, you

-- 21

MR. BREOR: Right, right. 22

MS. HILTON:

-- the way it's currently set up. 23

So many, many people out there who feel impacts are 24

-- or can't really understand, you know, what is 2522

there and what the tools are and that kind of thing. 1

So I do apologize if I have dated information, but 2

you will recall the risk

- based guidance that you put 3

out in

-- I can't r emember what year, a couple of 4

years ago. 5

MR. BREOR: Yeah. 6

MS. HILTON: Is there

-- I

-- frankly before 7

even, you know, keying up, you know me, you know, I 8

would have tried to see if there was something more 9

c urrent. I couldn't find it. Could you direct me 10

to, you know, more up

- to

- date guidance on the 11

risk

- based standards? 12

MR. BREOR: Yeah. I'll follow up with you 13

separately, Cynthia. On that document itself, that 14

document has not been revised, but I could send you 15

current information that would pertain to that. 16

MS. HILTON: Okay. 17

MR. BREOR: We've been trying to, you know, 18

maximize the use of FAQs to keep everybody current 19

on revisions and perspectives of that document. 20

MS. HILTON: Okay. Appreciate it. Sorry 21

everybody. Thank you. 22

MS. FINNERTY: Thank you, Ms. Hilton. 23

Operator, you may close the line now. 24

We are curren tly in the open session for the 2523

public listening session for the Chemical Facility 1

Anti

- Terrorism Standards Advance Notice of Proposed 2

Rulemaking. If you are interested in providing 3

public comments today, please press *1 to queue 4

up with the operator. 5

THE OPERATOR: And we do have a comment from 6

Mr. George Loder. 7

MR. LODER: Yes. Good morning. 8

MS. FINNERTY: Good morning. 9

MR. LODER: A couple of comments from the 10

industr y side that I work in. I have a couple 11

plants that are covered as the chemicals of 12

interest. In all cases, those chemicals of interest 13

are contained in a mixture of which it would take 14

some pretty significant laboratory scientific effort 15

to extract the materials to create the risk that 16

support being covered by the standard. One case is 17

aluminum paste that contains an aluminum powder. 18

And I'm curious about any effort to look at this 19

from a risk

- based approach versus strictly 20

identifying chemicals of interest based on a cast 21

number. 22

MR. BREOR: So you're asking the chemicals 23

identified in Appendix A, the 322 chemicals, they're 24

-- you know, when Appendix A was originally put 2524

together, a lot was leveraged, of course, EPA RMP 1

and also on

-- for the work with respect to theft 2

diversion type chemicals, work that DOJ had done, 3

also work that EPA had done, DoD had done. It was 4

really an interagency effort. It's been seven 5

years. 6

Your input

-- and we've heard input like yours 7

from others with respect to some of the chemicals 8

identified on Appendix A and also how we have 9

mixtures framed wit hin the regulation itself. We 10

need that input. You know, we want to update and 11

revise Appendix A. We want to take a look at the 12

screening threshold quantities on the chemicals that 13

are there. We also believe that possibly there' s 14

chemicals that can be removed, but then we also 15

recognize that there's chemicals that probably 16

should be added. 17

So your input is critical to this, especially 18

on that situation. And the more you can provide to 19

us, the better because at the end of the day, we're 20

going to have to support whatever direction we go 21

with the proper analysis. 22

MS. FINNERTY: Mr. Loder, do you have 23

additional public comments at this time? 24

MR. LODER: One additional one and that's 2525

related to ammonium nitrate. I see that the OSHA 1

Process Safety Management standard, the EPA 2

Risk

- Management Program have both

-- as well as this 3

proposed change specifically lis ted ammonium nitrate 4

as an additionally regulated material. And I know 5

there's been also some discussion about the ATF 6

having interest in regulating it as well. And I 7

guess my comment would be to leave that to ATF to 8

regulat e. 9

MS. FINNERTY: Thank you, sir. 10

Do we have additional questions from the panel? 11

MR. BREOR: No. I'll just say again, you know, 12

provide feedback to OSHA and EPA on their RFIs. 13

That's why they have those out an d they're asking 14

that question in that perspective. And, you know, 15

we are doing the same within the CFATS. You know, 16

as you know, ammonium nitrate is currently part of 17

our Appendix A, and that is something that we will 18

also be looking at in this review of the work on the 19

ANPRM. 20

MS. FINNERTY: Thank you, Mr. Loder. 21

Operator, you may close the line and open any 22

next line that's available. 23

THE OPERATOR: The next comment is from 24

Ms. Maureen Kotlas. 2526

MS. KOTLAS: Thank you. Can hear you hear me 1

okay? 2

MS. FINNERTY: Yes, ma'am. 3

MS. KOTLAS: Thank you. My name is Maureen 4

Kotlas. I'm the Environmental Health and Safety 5

Directo r at a research university, and I'd like to 6

just mention a couple of comments related to some of 7

the challenges that we face in the university and 8

college sector on complying with CFATS. 9

When CFATS was first enacted years ago, the 10

college and university sector did speak with the 11

Department of Homeland Security, and we appreciated 12

the considerations that were given to us on some of 13

the challenges that were just really impossible to 14

overcome in how we managed our chemicals on our 15

campuses. And while that helped to some degree, 16

there are still a lot of challenges. 17

I'm also affiliated with a national campus 18

safety association who's been involved in these 19

discussions. And I'm aware that that association 20

will be submitting written comments, but I think 21

it's important to mention that the challenges we 22

face can be very diverse depending on the type of 23

college and university and the size of the colle ge 24

and university and whether they are regulated at the 2527

federal or state or even sometimes local level for 1

chemical safety and security, and so it's very hard 2

in a written comment to be able to encompass all of 3

the concerns. 4

So one of the things that I took interest in, in 5

the introduction, was this idea that you mentioned 6

about the segment

- specific Alternative Security 7

Program or plan. And, again, that's a challenge to 8

develop something tha t would work for everyone. But 9

I think frankly the challenges we have are, one, 10

trying to secure facilities that have very small 11

quantities of hazardous substances that are 12

distributed and used in small quantities among 13

vario us research groups and laboratories, and those 14

inventories are constantly in flux, they're 15

constantly being used in experiments, as you can 16

imagine, and trying to build security around a 17

facility where the chemical may not even be t here 18

the next day is one of the challenges. 19

We, of course, also in our missions educate 20

students, and the students, both undergraduate and 21

graduate level students, work in our laboratories. 22

And to have performance standar ds requiring 23

background checks and personnel surety can be 24

impossible and sometimes actually illegal for us to 2528

have to control that at that level. 1

So I guess my comment here would be we're very 2

interested

-- I know my colleagues and I feel very 3

strongly that we understand the need for chemical 4

security and safety in today's world, but we are 5

struggling as a sector and very concerned that if 6

there's changes to CFATS t hat might add more 7

chemicals or change anything that would require more 8

of our sector to be regulated, that it's going to 9

change the face of the university and college world. 10

And so if there's a way for us to have more direct 11

communication with DHS aside from just written 12

comments, I think that would be welcomed and 13

certainly needed. And I thank you for giving me the 14

time to comment. 15

MS. FINNERTY: Thank you, ma'am. 16

Questions or co mments from the panel? 17

MR. BREOR: I'll say thanks, Maureen, because, 18

you know, Amy and I, you know, we know that this is 19

an area, this is a sector that since we've stood up 20

Infrastructure Security Compliance Division, we 21

have been, not as far as struggling with but an area 22

that we know that more work needs to be done in, and 23

not just within the university sector, but you raised 24

a good point with respect to the temporal aspect of 2529

our program. Not o nly the university sector, but other 1

sectors are also wrestling with that situation where 2

you have the COI for a limited time period on site. 3

Even though you might have it on site multiple times 4

in a year, how do you actually do tha t within our 5

program? 6

So, we look forward to your comments, and I'm sure 7

there will be contact information provided with 8

those comments so that we can reach out to you and 9

continue this dialogue. 10

MS. FINNERTY: Ms. Kotlas, do you have 11

additional public comments at this time? 12

MS. KOTLAS: No, I don't. Just thank you very 13

much for those comments. I appreciate it. 14

MS. FINNERTY: Thank you, ma'am. 15

Operator, you may close the line and open the 16

next. 17

THE OPERATOR: The next comment is from 18

Mr. Fred Kershner. 19

MR. KERSHNER: Yes. Good morning. I 20

appreciate the opportunity to speak. I work within 21

the chemical industry. 22

I have two quick comments, the first being the 23

CSAT SSP process. I, and I'm sure other colleagues, 24

but I obviously can only speak for myself, would 2530

recommend reducing the length and the complexity of 1

the online process as well as eliminating the vast 2

redundancies between the various RBPS sections 3

within the online process and overall just improving 4

the user friendliness of the program. The length of 5

time that it takes to n avigate through the SSP and 6

the amount of work that it takes to ensure that 7

there's consistency among the many redundant 8

questions results in I think a lot of unwarranted 9

time and a lot of heartache and headache among those 10

of us who have to try to defend the process. 11

My second comment is that it would be very 12

helpful for DHS to provide guidance on dealing with 13

protections of confidential information, CVI, that 14

is otherwise or may otherwise be publi cly available 15

through existing regulations, not the least of which 16

would be RMP and EPCRA and SARA. It makes it very 17

difficult for us to try to walk the fine line 18

between what we must say to community and the media 19

and neighbors regarding our processes, our 20

chemicals, et cetera, and emergency response aspects 21

and what we're not permitted to say as part of the 22

DHS CVI requirements. Thank you for the 23

opportunity. 24

MS. FINNERTY: Thank you, sir. 2531

Do we have comments or questions from the 1

panel? 2

MR. BREOR: Fred, definitely hear you on the 3

CSAT SSP. You know, we've tried to make 4

improvements over the last year. Back in 2012, we 5

went ar ound the Nation and conducted listening 6

sessions to hear what people would like to see with 7

respect to improvements, and we've been trying to 8

work those in, you know, set up in a prioritized 9

manner. We've been in recently

-- you kn ow, 10

hopefully what we have been able to put into place 11

in the most recent months, you know, it seems small, 12

but, you know, those little things have been 13

impactful to facilities, you know, basic things like 14

page number and the pre

- population of data and also 15

as you go through the Site Security Plan, now you 16

can go directly to the RBPS instead of having to 17

cycle and acknowledge each one. That seems minor, 18

but I know that's just a small step, you know, in 19

front of a larger step that we need to take with 20

respect to that. 21

We also

-- you know, it's fascinating, you 22

know, to go through the Site Security Plan, which at 23

the end of the day, you know, you could have 24

hundreds of pages; whereas if you use Alternative 2532

Security Program templates that's out there, you 1

know, it could be as minimal as 30 pages. 2

So, we think more work needs to be done to 3

tighten up the Site Security Plan. A nd as we go 4

through the process of addressing the areas that the 5

expert Peer Review Panel identified, you know, we 6

want to, as we change the tiering methodology, 7

ensure that the questions in the Top

- Screen and SVA 8

are only to those data points necessarily

-- that 9

are necessary to do tiering and that there's not 10

questions in there that aren't being utilized by the 11

program. And we think we can also help reduce the 12

questions on the front end in CSAT. 13

Guidance on CVI, that was a major discussion 14

during the work on the Executive Order. More will 15

be forthcoming on that. But we know that there's a 16

fine line between the information that we share and 17

also knowing that with tho se chemicals, that there's 18

also the security concern. So thank you for your 19

comments on that. 20

MS. FINNERTY: Mr. Kershner, do you have 21

additional public comments at this time? 22

MR. KERSHNER: No, I don't. Thank you very 23

much. 24

MS. FINNERTY: Thank you, sir. 2533

Operator, you may close that line and open the 1

next. 2

THE OPERATOR: Thank you. The next question or 3

comment is from Mr. Chris Granberg. 4

MR. GRANBERG: Hi. Good morning. I actually 5

have a question more than a comment, but it is 6

related to your request for comments on the 7

Risk

- Based Performance Standards, and I appreciate 8

any clarity you can provide. 9

Back in February, DHS used an ICR to solicit 10

comment on its implementation of the personnel 11

surety program requirements. And I was wondering if 12

the Department had made a decision regarding whether 13

it would seek to incorporat e those PSP requirements 14

in a future rulemaking like an ANPRM or whether it 15

intends to issue final PSP guidance through a notice 16

of approval on the ICR. And if it's the latter 17

through an ICR, is there a timeline for issuing a 18

notice of approval? Thank you. 19

MR. BREOR: Presently, the ICR on personnel 20

surety with respect to the Terrorist Screening 21

Database check, that is with OMB. So, a timeline 22

with OMB, you know, don't know. It's under review. 23

MR. GRANBERG: Okay. 24

MR. BREOR: You know, in that ICR, you know, we 2534

did limit to rolling out the program to Tier 1 and 1

Tier 2. So right now, our idea is to, you know, sort 2

of crawl, walk, run. So to move beyond Tie r 1 and 3

Tier 2 and, you know, for 3s and 4s, that would 4

require an additional ICR overtone. Right now we 5

just have the one ICR for Tier 1 and Tier 2 6

facilities only. 7

MS. FINNERTY: Thank you. 8

Mr. Granberg, do you have additional public 9

comments related to the CFATS ANPRM? 10

MR. GRANBERG: No, ma'am. Thank you very much. 11

MS. FINNERTY: Thank you, sir. 12

Operator, you may close the line. 13

A gain, we are in open session for the CFATS 14

ANPRM listening session. As a reminder, DHS is 15

interested in comments on the topics described in 16

Part 4 of the ANPRM as listed by Mr. Breor earlier 17

today. For those of you that are just n ow joining 18

us, those include the general

-- the rules general 19

regulatory approach, treatment of nontraditional 20

chemical facilities, clarification of terminology, 21

the Risk

- Based Performance Standards, the chemicals 22

of interest list in Appendix A, considerations for 23

small businesses, and alignment with other regulatory 24

programs. 2535

Operator, you may open the next line. 1

THE OPERATOR: Thank you. And we have another 2

comment from Ms. Cynthia Hil ton. 3

MS. FINNERTY: Ms. Hilton, you may proceed. 4

Ms. Hilton, your phone may be on mute. You may 5

proceed. 6

MS. HILTON: I am so sorry everyone. 7

Scott, hi, I'm back. Earlier I thought I heard 8

a comment about ammonium nitrate, and I appreciate 9

the fact that you're not seeking consensus on 10

anything. So I'm going to help you achieve that 11

goal. 12

As you know, ammonium nitrate is extremely 13

important to our ind ustry, and we have

-- our 14

position has consistently been that explosives 15

are

-- should be regulated by ATF and precursor 16

chemicals should be regulated by you. You do 17

regulate

-- or you have authority to regulate 18

ammonium nitr ate, and we are not trying to upset 19

that apple cart. We think that if precursors start 20

to be handed off to ATF where do you draw that line? 21

there are many, many chemicals that you regulate 22

that would be an explosive precursor that if you're 23

going to hand off AN, you'd hand off a whole bunch 24

of other stuff. So, in as much as right now ATF does 2536

not have, you know, security regulations that apply 1

to AN, we would, you know, believe that this is your 2

missio n and we that want to work with you to get it 3

right. But, that's our position. Thank you for 4

allowing me to say that. 5

MS. FINNERTY: Thank you. 6

Do we have questions or comments from the 7

panel? 8

MR. BREOR: No. Thanks, Cynthia. Appreciate 9

that. Yeah, I just didn't want to go down all the 10

various divisions and perspectives of AN. So I hear 11

you. 12

MS. HILTON: I understand that and we're not 13

seeking consensus, but it was important to get a 14

non

- consensus view on the record. 15

MS. FINNERTY: Thank you, Ms. Hilton. Do you 16

have additional public comments related to the ANPRM 17

at this time? 18

MS. HILTON: N o. Thank you. 19

MS. FINNERTY: Thank you. 20

Operator, you may close the line and open the 21

next. 22

Okay. Hearing no additional speakers in the queue, I 23

would like to run down our list of those who have 24

register ed in advance to speak to see if any of you 2537

have been able to join us since the top of the hour. 1

If you hear your name, please dial *1 to line up 2

in the queue with the operator. Karen Messana, 3

Stephen Morin, Matthew O'Callaghan, Ka thryn Phin, 4

Lawrence Zacarese. Again, if you heard your name 5

and would like to submit public comments today, 6

please dial *1. 7

We will remain in open session until 8

approximately 11:50 Eastern time. In that time, if 9

you would like to submit public comments, please 10

dial *1. I will mute the phones to reduce 11

background noise and will announce when an 12

additional speaker has arrived. Thank you. 13

(Pause.) 14

MS. FINNERTY: Good morning. This is the 15

public listening session webinar for the Chemical 16

Facility Anti

- Terrorism Standards Advance Notice of 17

Proposed Rulemaking, or CFATS ANPRM. We are 18

currently in open session until 11:50 a.m. Eastern. 19

If you are interested in providing public 20

comments today, please press *1 to queue up with 21

the operator. Thank you. 22

(Pause.) 23

MS. FINNERTY: For those that signed up in 24

advance for the CFATS ANPRM public l istening 2538

session, if you hear your name, please dial *1 1

to queue up with the operator. Karen Messana, 2

Stephen Morin, Matthew O'Callaghan, Kathryn Phin, 3

Lawrence Zacarese. Thank you. Please dial *1 4

to queue up with the opera tor. 5

(Pause.) 6

MS. FINNERTY: Operator, you may open lines of 7

any of those that have indicated that they're 8

interested in providing public comments. 9

THE OPERATOR: There is no one in the queue at 10

this time. 11

MS. FINNERTY: Thank you, ma'am. 12

(Pause.) 13

MS. FINNERTY: Just a reminder, if anybody is 14

interested in providing public comments to the CFATS 15

ANPRM listening session webinar, the line is 16

available for five

- minute public comments. Please 17

dial *1 to line up in the queue with the 18

operator. Thank you. 19

(Pause.) 20

MS. FINNERTY: Good morning and thank you again 21

for joining us for the listening session webinar for 22

the Chemical Facility Anti

- Terrorism Standards 23

Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking. This now 24

concludes the public listening session portion of 2539

our webinar. 1

I would now like to turn to Mr. Scott Breor, 2

Deputy Dire ctor of DHS ISCD for closing comments. 3

MR. BREOR: Thanks, Kate. Again, I want to 4

thank everyone for taking the time today to 5

participate. If you read the report that was 6

submitted to the President back in June, I think one 7

thing we got right in that report and that's the 8

identification that it's a shared commitment. We 9

definitely want to work to improve this program, but 10

we're going to need your help in doing so. So I ask 11

you please provide us comments to the Federal 12

Register, and we definitely want to utilize 13

everyone's input to make CFATS stronger. 14

So, again, thank you for taking your time 15

today, and I look forward to continuing a dialogue 16

as we move forward in the rulemaking process. 17

MS. FINNERTY: Thank you, Mr. Breor. 18

Again, thank you all for participating in 19

today's listening session for the CFATS ANPRM. 20

Please visit the docket in the Federal Register to 21

view listeni ng session notes and to submit 22

additional comments. Please visit the CFATS 23

regulation website which is listed on your screen to 24

view the remaining schedule of listening sessions. 2540

We are now adjourned. 1

(Whereupon, at 11:56 a.m., the 2

webinar listening session concluded.) 3

4

* * * * * 5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

2541

COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA AT LARGE, to wit: 1

I, L AQUICIA THOMAS, Court Reporter and Notary 2

Public in and for the Commonwealth of Virginia at Large, 3

and whose commission expires February 28, 2018, do 4

certify that the foregoing is a true, correct, and full 5

transcript of the proceedings. 6

I further certify that I am neither related to or 7

associated with any counsel or party to the proceedings; 8

nor otherwise interested in the event thereof. 9

10

11

12

________________________________ 13

LaQuicia Thomas 14

Notary Public 15

Commonwealth of Virginia at Large 16

Notary No. 7363169 17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25