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

LISTENING SESSION HEL D IN NCR ON SEPTEMBER 4 , 2014

CONTENTS: Agenda Transcript

## Chemical Facility Anti

- Terrorism Standards Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (CFATS ANPRM)

**September 4, 2014 Listening Session** 

Hosted by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS)

– National Capital Region

, 2451 Crystal Drive, Arlington, VA 22206

**Agenda**

8:00 a .m.

– 9 :00 a .m. Registration

9 :00 a .m.

– 9:20 a .m. Welcome, Introductions, and Overview Kate Finnerty , Facilitator

Caitlin Durkovich

, Assistant Secretary, Department of Homeland Security

, Office of Infrastructure Protection Dave Wulf, Department of Homeland Security

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

9 : 2 0 a .m.

– 9:30 a .m. Listening Session Format Kate Finnerty , Facilitator

9:30 a.m.

– 11:00 a .m. Session 1 Comments from Listening Session Participants

11:0 0 a .m.

– 11:15 a .m. BREAK

11:15 a.m.

– 11:45 a.m. Open Session 1 , as time permits

11:45 a.m.

– 1:00 p.m. LUNCH

1:00 p.m.

– 3 : 00 p.m. Session 2 Introduction of Panelists Scott Breor , Department of Homeland Security, Office of Infrastructure Protection Todd Klessman , Department of Homeland Security

, Office of Infrastructure Protection

Comments from Listening Session Participants

3:00 p.m.

– 3:15 p.m. BREAK

3:15 p.m.

– 3:45 p.m. Open Session 2 , as time permits

3:45 p.m.

– 4:00 p.m. Closing Comments

4 :00 p.m. 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

.

# TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS

IN THE MATTER OF: ) ) CHEMICAL FACILITY ANTI

- ) TERRORISM STANDARDS ) ) ADVANCE NOTICE OF PROPOSED ) RULEMAKING ) ) LISTENING SESSION ) )

**REVISED AND CORRECTED TRANSCRIPT**

Pages: 1 through 50

Place: Arlington, Virginia

Date: September 4, 2014



## HERITAGE REPORTING CORPORATION Official Reporters 1220 L Street, N.W., Suite 600 Washington, D.C. 20005

- 4018 (202) 628

- 4888

contract s@hrccourtreporters.com1

BEFORE THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURIT Y

IN THE MATTER OF: ) ) CHEMICAL FACILITY ANTI

- ) TERRORISM STANDARDS ) ) ADVANCE NOTICE OF PROPOSED ) RULEMAKING ) ) LISTENING SESSION ) )

U.S. Department of Homeland Security National Capital Region 2451 Crystal Drive Arlington, Virginia

Thursday, September 4, 2014

The parties met, pursuant to t he notice, at

9:05 a.m.

PARTICIPANTS : (Via Telephone)

KATE FINNERTY, Facilitator

For the Department of Homeland Security :

SCOTT BREOR CAITLIN DURKOVICH TODD KLESSMAN DAVE WULF Office of Infrastructure Protection

Speakers :

BIL L ERNY, Senior Director American Chemistry Council

JENNIFER GIBSON, Vice President, Regulatory Affairs, National Association of Chemical Distributors

Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628

- 48882

SPEAKERS: (Cont'd)

JEFF GUNNULFSEN, Director of Security and Risk Management Issues, American Fuel and

Petrochemical Manufacturers

EVAN D. WOLFF Crowell & Moring, LLP

Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628

- 48883

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

(9:05 a.m.) 2

MS. FINNERTY: Good morning, everyone. 3

Welcome to the listening session for the Chemical 4

Facility Anti

- Terrori sm Standards Advance Notice of 5

Proposed Rulemaking, or CFATS ANPRM, that was issued 6

by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security on 7

August 18, 2014. We're glad that you are able to join 8

us today. 9

This is the first listening session in a 10

series that will be held across the country, including 11

six in person and two by webinar. My name is Kate 12

Finnerty with Energetics, Incorporated. DHS, who is 13

leading this effort, has arranged for me to moderate 14

today's listening session. 15

I would also like to welcome tho se that are 16

able to join us on the phone. As a reminder, you are 17

in listen

- only mode. 18

Before we get started, I would like to make 19

a couple of announcements. All stakeholders are 20

welcome to submit comments on the CFATS ANPRM. 21

Besides commenting in pers on at a listening session, 22

there are two other ways to submit written comments. 23

Both are listed on the agenda and in the Federal 24

Register notice. In brief, they are the federal e

25

Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628

- 48884

rulemaking portal at www.regulations.gov and a 1

physical mailing address sho uld you not have internet 2

access. 3

The deadline to submit comments is 4

October 17, 2014, which is 60 calendar days after the 5

publication of the ANPRM in the Federal Register . The 6

comments provided during the listening session are 7

being transcribed for not e

- taking purposes. A 8

transcript of each listening session will be posted to 9

a docket in the Federal Register

. 10

For those in the room, please always use the 11

available microphone. For those joining us via phone, 12

please excuse any technical difficulties. The 13

transcript will include all comments made today. 14

In case of emergency, you'll exit out of 15

these double doors to my left and exit the building to 16

the left. For restrooms, again, you'll exit out these 17

double doors and head to the right. We have staff 18

located in the lobby should you need assistance. 19

As a courtesy to all of those participating, 20

please put your phones on silent, and please be 21

careful with food and beverages in the auditorium. 22

The purpose of today's listening session is 23

to gather publ ic comments, data, or views on how the 24

current CFATS regulation, 6 CFR Part 27, which was 25

Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628

- 48885

issued in 2007, might be modified. Issuing the ANPRM 1

enables the Department of Homeland Security to provide 2

stakeholders with an opportunity to provide comments 3

and suggestions for identifying ways to make the 4

program more effective in achieving its regulatory 5

activities and objectives. 6

We are going to begin today with some 7

opening remarks, which will include a brief overview 8

of the status of the CFATS program. The remainder of 9

the session will be dedicated to hearing from 10

stakeholders. 11

At this time, I would like to introduce the 12

Assistant Secretary for Infrastructure Protection at 13

the Department of Homeland Security, Ms. Caitlin 14

Durkovich, Assistant Secretary. 15

MS. DURKOVICH: Okay. Thank you, Kate. 16

Good morning, everybody. Very nice to see you here 17

for the first listening session for the advance notice 18

of proposed rulemaking. Because this is the beginning 19

of a rulemaking effort and because this is one of 20

sev eral listening sessions that we will be doing 21

around the country, I have been asked to stick to the 22

script. So, if I read a bit here, apologies, but 23

again we're trying to ensure consistency as we go out 24

across the country. 25

Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628

- 48886

I think many of you in this ro om, looking at 1

some familiar faces, could probably get these on your 2

own, but bear with me as I go through these. 3

Again, it is a pleasure to see all of you 4

this morning. This is a very important effort as we 5

engage in the rulemaking process and think ab out the 6

next generation of CFATS. As many of our stakeholders 7

know, CFATS is helping make this country more secure. 8

We do face a persistent and evolving threat from 9

terrorist groups and cells, and chemical facilities 10

potentially are attractive targets bo th as a 11

successful attack on some chemical facilities could 12

potentially cause a significant number of deaths and 13

injuries and also given the fact that certain chemical 14

facilities possess materials that could be stolen or 15

diverted or converted into weapons for use offsite. 16

And let me tell you that this threat is as 17

real today as it was seven years ago. Violent 18

extremists have recently released several digital 19

magazines to inspire and justify attacks by westerners 20

in their homelands, and they talk about th e ease of 21

use and the availability of filler material. And very 22

shortly we will be releasing a product on precursor 23

materials, and many of the chemicals that are 24

contained in or that are used by the facilities 25

Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628

- 48887

regulated under CFATS are a target here. 1

Se ction 550 of the DHS Appropriations Act of 2

2007 authorizes the department to regulate security at 3

high

- risk chemical facilities. Again, as many of you 4

know in this room, under section 550, covered 5

facilities must perform security vulnerability 6

assessments and implement site security plans or SSPs 7

containing security measures that meet the DHS

- defined 8

risk

- based performance standards, and there are 18 of 9

them. 10

The department developed the Chemical 11

Facility Anti

- Terrorism Standards

-- that's 6 CFR Part 12

27

-- to implement this authority. As many of you 13

know, to determine if a facility is subject to CFATS, 14

DHS looks at the unique circumstances faced by the 15

facility, starting with the quantities of chemicals of 16

interest the facility possesses. 17

Potential reg ulation is not based on the 18

facility type, meaning that many different types of 19

facilities may be subject to CFATS

-- and this list is 20

always very interesting to me

-- including chemical 21

manufacturers, warehouses and distributors, chemical 22

repackaging oper ations, oil and gas operations, 23

hospitals, semiconductor manufacturers, paint 24

manufacturers, colleges and universities, and mining 25

Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628

- 48888

facilities. 1

Congress, however, did exempt several types 2

of facilities from regulations. Those are facilities 3

that are regu lated under the Maritime Transportation 4

Security Act or MTSA, facilities that are subject to 5

regulation by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 6

facilities that are owned or operated by either the 7

Department of Defense or the Department of Energy, and 8

public water systems and water treatment works 9

regulated under certain federal water quality laws 10

administrated by the Environmental Protection Agency. 11

Since the inception of CFATS, more than 12

3,000 facilities have voluntarily removed or reduced 13

the onsite quant ities of the chemicals of interest or 14

modified processes to the point that they are no 15

longer considered high

- risk. These actions have 16

helped reduce the number of high

- risk chemical 17

facilities throughout the nation and have 18

correspondingly made the nation more secure. 19

As of September 2, 2014, CFATS covers 3,882 20

facilities. We have 3,157 final

- tiered facilities and 21

725 preliminary

- tiered facilities across all 50 22

states. DHS has received and is in the process of 23

reviewing an estimated 4,600 SSPs and alte rnative 24

security programs. Of these, 2,039 SSPs have been 25

Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628

- 48889

authorized and 1,060 have been approved. 1

The first authorization inspection was 2

conducted during the summer of 2010, and as of 3

September 2, this Tuesday, 1,455 authorization 4

inspections have been conducted. 5

We continue to strengthen the CFATS program. 6

Dave and his team at ISCD are working to continuously 7

strengthen the program and improve the implementation 8

of CFATS. Although work remains to be done, in the 9

past two years we have made signific ant progress. 10

This includes improving the SSP review process and 11

increasing the pace of SSP reviews and approvals. 12

We continue robust engagement with industry 13

on the development of the ASP templates. We are 14

working with experts to evaluate and validate and 15

recommend ways to improve our tiering methodology, and 16

we are in the process of implementing some of those 17

recommendations. And we continue to look for and 18

introduce game

- changing initiatives, such as one

- day 19

inspections with small inspection teams, identifying a 20

corporate approach for companies with multiple 21

facilities, and increasing pre

- inspection coordination 22

and outreach. 23

We also, as I mentioned earlier, continue to 24

work on the alternative security program, which we 25

Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628

- 488810

believe is one path to compl iance, but we are also 1

exploring with industry the possibility of creating 2

segment

- specific ASPs that include options for best 3

practices that may apply to certain types of 4

facilities. We have met with various industry 5

associations, such as the National As sociation of 6

Chemical Distributors, on this topic and continue to 7

look for new opportunities for engagement. 8

Did we lose the mic? 9

MALE VOICE: I think we did. 10

MS. DURKOVICH: Does that mean I should stop 11

talking? 12

MS. FINNERTY: We have one more. 13

MS. DURKOVICH: Is that what that signal

-- 14

what that signals? All right. Am I back on? No. 15

MS. FINNERTY: We do have

-- 16

MALE VOICE: Do we have to stop? 17

MS. FINNERTY: Okay. 18

MS. DURKOVICH: Do we have to stop, or 19

should I just talk even louder? 20

THE COURT REPORTER: I can hear you. 21

MS. DURKOVICH: You can hear me? I think 22

it's the phone. Is the phone fine? 23

MS. FINNERTY: The phone will be fine. 24

Just project. 25

Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628

- 488811

MS. DURKOVICH: Project, okay. The work 1

industry has done with the department to develop ASP 2

templates is a prime example of how an agency 3

implementing a regulatory program like CFATS can work 4

with industry to develop the tools that answer 5

regulatory needs while also accounting for industry 6

realities and how industry associations c an support 7

the DHS mission. 8

As we look to the next generation of CFATS, 9

we are also working on permanent authorization for the 10

CFATS program, and we remain committed to working with 11

Congress and other security partners to establish 12

permanent authority fo r the CFATS program. As many of 13

you know in this room, we believe that permanent 14

authorization will provide you, industry, with the 15

necessary stability to move forward in effectively 16

implementing CFATS and will send a clear message to 17

facilities that may be seeking to avoid their 18

obligation to report dangerous chemicals that CFATS is 19

here to stay. 20

HR 4007, the CFATS Authorization and 21

Accountability Act of 2014, was passed in the U.S. 22

House of Representatives on July 8, 2014. The bill 23

would permanently a uthorize the CFATS program and 24

authorize appropriations for three fiscal years. The 25

Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628

- 488812

Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Government 1

Affairs passed the Senate version of the bill, 2

Protecting and Securing Chemical Facilities from 3

Terrorist Attacks Act of 2014, on July 30 of this 4

year. We are very grateful to Congress for 5

recognizing the progress of the program, and we 6

encourage them to move towards permanently authorizing 7

the program when they return. 8

A few words about Executive Order 13650, 9

Improvin g Chemical Facility Safety and Security. In 10

August of last year, as many of you know, the 11

President issued this executive order to improve the 12

safety and security of chemical facilities and to 13

reduce risk to workers, communities, and first 14

responders. Th e effort, the implementation effort, 15

was chaired by three departments, myself and DHS being 16

one, the Environmental Protection Agency, and the 17

Department of Labor's OSHA. 18

I think many of you know that we spent a 19

bulk of the earlier part of this year worki ng to 20

implement and provide a final status report to the 21

President, which we delivered on June 6 of this year. 22

The status report recognizes that information, 23

actions, and experiences of our stakeholders are 24

essential to understanding, managing, and mitiga ting 25

Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628

- 488813

the risks of potential chemical facility hazards. The 1

status report highlights the activities that are 2

already underway to improve chemical facility safety 3

and security and provides a plan for moving forward to 4

continue the initial progress. 5

There are 25 priority action areas in five 6

thematic areas that include how we strengthen 7

community planning and preparedness, how we enhance 8

federal operational coordination, how we improve data 9

management, and how we modernize policy and 10

regulations and ensure that we continue to incorporate 11

stakeholder feedback and develop best practices. 12

The status report was not a milestone or an 13

endpoint, and in fact, the tri

- chairs continue to meet 14

and we have implemented regional efforts as well. The 15

most important less on learned from this effort is that 16

every stakeholder group in the chemical facility 17

community has a role to play in ensuring safe and 18

secure operations. It is a shared commitment. It is 19

not just something that government on its own can do, 20

and we need t he commitment of all of those involved. 21

Let me close with a few notes about the 22

advance notice of proposed rulemaking. As we work to 23

continue to mature the CFATS regulatory program, we 24

have initiated this rulemaking process to help 25

Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628

- 488814

identify how to make the CFATS program more effective 1

in achieving the regulatory objectives. We believe 2

that after seven years of experience in implementing 3

the CFATS program, both the department, but the 4

regulated community as well, has gained firsthand 5

insight into how a n onprescriptive security regulation 6

can be most effective. The ANPRM will provide an 7

opportunity for the department to hear and consider 8

the views of the regulated industry and other 9

interested members of the public on their 10

recommendations for program mod ifications. 11

As Kate mentioned, we invite interested 12

persons to submit written comments, data, or views on 13

how the current regulation, 6 CFR Part 27, might be 14

improved. The public is encouraged to comment on all 15

aspects of the program, and the rulemaking covers all 16

regulatory and guidance documents, including Appendix 17

A and the list of COI covered by the program. 18

We have highlighted several topics on which 19

public comments could be particularly helpful, 20

including the general regulatory approach, the 21

trea tment of nontraditional chemical facilities, the 22

clarification of terminology, risk

- based performance 23

standards, Appendix A, consideration for small 24

businesses, and alignment with other regulatory 25

Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628

- 488815

programs. 1

As Kate mentioned, and I will just footstomp 2

th is, written comments can be submitted online through 3

the federal e

- rulemaking portal at 4

http://www.regulations.gov or by mail to the U.S. 5

Department of Homeland Security, and there is an 6

address which I'm sure we will provide you. Please 7

note that any per sonal information included in 8

submissions will be publicly available. 9

So let me end by again thanking you for 10

taking time to be here today. As we have continued to 11

implement this program, the input that we have 12

gathered from stakeholders has been critic al to 13

continuing to advance it, and this is the next chapter 14

in that process. We thank you for your time, for your 15

consideration, and we look forward to your comments 16

and suggestions on how we can continue to mature the 17

CFATS program. Back over to you. 18

MS. FINNERTY: Thank you, Assistant 19

Secretary. I have one piece of paper, but

-- 20

MS. DURKOVICH: You need it. 21

MS. FINNERTY: I need it. 22

MS. DURKOVICH: Okay. 23

MS. FINNERTY: Thank you very much. 24

MS. DURKOVICH: You're welcome. 25

Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628

- 488816

MS. FINNERTY: T hank you, Assistant 1

Secretary Durkovich, for your remarks today. Also 2

serving on our panel are two representatives of the 3

DHS Infrastructure Security and Compliance Division. 4

Mr. Dave Wulf serves as the ISCD director, and Mr.

-- 5

FEMALE VOICE: Hello, s tranger. 6

MS. FINNERTY: And Mr. Scott Breor serves as 7

the deputy director. Thank you for joining us today. 8

The remainder of the session today is set 9

aside to hear from the stakeholders, as the Assistant 10

Secretary mentioned, and before we open the floo r to 11

hear from the stakeholders, I would like to outline 12

the format and the ground rules for today's session. 13

This is a listening session with the purpose to hear a 14

diverse set of opinions from across the broad spectrum 15

of stakeholders who have an interes t in improving and 16

streamlining the CFATS rule. 17

We hope to hear a range of suggestions 18

today, and all viewpoints are welcome. As such, we 19

are not seeking consensus on any of the topics that 20

the Assistant Secretary outlined. 21

There are a variety of stak eholders 22

participating today with a variety of viewpoints, and 23

in order for today to be constructive, we ask that 24

everyone respect each other's opinions. All 25

Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628

- 488817

presenters are asked to comment directly on the topics 1

related to the rule. I will also note tha t specific 2

suggestions and supporting data are the most helpful 3

comments today. 4

We hope to have time to hear from everyone 5

who would like to speak today, but if we cannot get to 6

you, please, you are encouraged to provide comments 7

via the two mechanisms t hat the Assistant Secretary 8

and I have mentioned. They are noted on the agenda. 9

The rest of the day will include morning and 10

afternoon sessions. At the beginning of each session, 11

I will ask those who signed up to speak to come 12

forward and sit at the fr ont row of seats. 13

Individuals will have a maximum of five minutes to 14

present to the panel, which does include any 15

introduction to your comments. Members of the panel 16

may then ask clarifying questions. 17

I will then open the floor to anyone who 18

would like to speak on the topics, and again, 19

individuals will be asked to join us at the front row, 20

and you will have five minutes to present. To help us 21

stay on track today and make sure that everyone does 22

have an opportunity to speak, we have a dedicated 23

staff t o watch the time carefully, and our timekeeper 24

is sitting over to my left, hopefully in the good 25

Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628

- 488818

sight line of the speakers. She will raise a yellow 1

card when you have one minute remaining and a red card 2

when your time is up. We also have a clock here ne xt 3

to me so that you can monitor your time as you wish. 4

We again ask that you respect everyone's time and stay 5

within the designated timeframe. 6

So, if there are no questions about the 7

process, we'll go ahead and get started. I would like 8

to ask the fol lowing individuals who registered to 9

present to please come forward and join us in any 10

order in the front row. We have Mr. Erny, Ms. Gibson, 11

Mr. Gunnulfsen, Ms. Hilton, and Mr. Wolff. If any of 12

you are joining us today, please join us here at the 13

front r ow. We do have our microphones working. 14

Okay. Our first speaker may join us. If 15

you would like to stand up, if that's most comfortable 16

for you. I think it will be easier for everyone to 17

hear. And you have five minutes. 18

MR. ERNY: Five minutes. Wh en does the 19

clock start? Give me a raise

-- 20

MS. FINNERTY: Right now. 21

MR. ERNY: Go. 22

MS. FINNERTY: Go. 23

MR. ERNY: So I'm going to immediately start 24

breaking all the rules, right? Unfortunately, I don't 25

Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628

- 488819

think ACC has had enough time to really put together a 1

lot of detail, the level of detail that you guys are 2

looking for, but we are going to be spending a lot of 3

time to do that over the course of the next several 4

weeks, and our written comments will have a lot of 5

good stuff I think for you guys to consider. 6

With that said, I do want to cover some 7

basic sort of fundamental things, issues that I think 8

would have the most impact in the near term to improve 9

the program. Unfortunately or fortunately depending 10

on your viewpoint, the regulatory process is a long 11

process. It can take two or three years perhaps by 12

beginning, starting the process until folks actually 13

have to implement anything. 14

I think that many of the issues addressed in 15

the advance notice will likely have limited impact 16

from where we are today, all right? And we'll 17

elaborate on that in the proposed rule. It doesn't 18

mean they're not important, but if you look two or 19

three years down the road, I think hopefully you guys 20

are going to be through the vast majority of initial 21

approvals of site security plans. So now we're 22

talking about new programs, new facilities coming into 23

the program, that sort of thing. 24

So anyway, from that perspective, I do want 25

Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628

- 488820

to cover some high

- level issues. Before I do that, I 1

just want to commend you guys for all the work that 2

you've done. You've made considerable progress. You 3

really have stepped up to the plate to provide 4

leadership, which was sorely needed 18 months ago, and 5

you've done that. 6

You've listened to industry. You've 7

partnered with us. I th ink we've provided you a lot 8

of great insights of our lessons learned with the 9

process. Some of the most significant advances I 10

think has to do with your embracing the ASP process, 11

the corporate review process, the pre

- inspection 12

planning initiatives. Al l of that has really helped I 13

think tremendously to move the program forward. 14

However, more needs to be done, and I think 15

we all recognize that. I think the prospect of taking 16

another three, four, or five years to get through the 17

rest of these approvals in the tier

- three and tier

18

four category just is going to be unacceptable. We've 19

got to figure out a way to streamline these lower

- tier 20

risk facilities and get them through the process and 21

get them started. 22

Some of the issues I think that you can 23

focus on in the near term to do that is certainly the 24

risk hearing methodology. These companies and 25

Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628

- 488821

security managers need to understand what risks 1

they're trying to protect against and what are the 2

threats. So, from that perspective, having sort of an 3

undefi ned risk hearing process is problematic. And 4

you guys all know that, and I know you're moving 5

forward with the expert panel. I would just encourage 6

you to expedite that to the extent possible and get 7

through that. 8

But there are some other issues that I think 9

you can probably address through technical amendments 10

to the rule, things like clarifying the retermination 11

process, material modifications, clarifying things 12

like what's a commercial

- grade item, you know, what is 13

a mixture. How do you determine a mixture and whether 14

it applies to CFATS rule? These are the kinds of 15

issues that I hear from my members frequently. 16

What does the yellow mean? 17

MS. FINNERTY: One minute. 18

MR. ERNY: Okay. So I'm going to jump down 19

to the most important aspect. I ha d to skip through 20

some of this. Maybe I can come back. 21

Personal surety. We've been going through 22

this far too long. This has got to be resolved. And 23

I realize it's caught in the political process right 24

now. I can tell you that my members in ACC are 25

Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628

- 488822

concerned about this. We've got increased threats, 1

ISIS. We've got potentially hundreds of Americans 2

that perhaps have no criminal backgrounds, anything, 3

can apply for jobs within the chemical industry. 4

We've got to be able to get by the political 5

proc ess. And I can tell you that my membership is 6

willing to voluntarily submit employee information to 7

the department to have them vet it against the TSDB 8

data. We can talk about how to do that in a way that 9

doesn't violate the Paperwork Reduction Act, et 10

c etera. So I look forward to working with you in the 11

future to be able to do that. Thank you. 12

MS. FINNERTY: Thank you, sir. And we will 13

have some time after all of the registered speakers in 14

order to gather additional comments. 15

Does the panel have q uestions? 16

MR. WULF: I don't know if I

-- oh, I don't 17

know if I have questions, but I do want to thank you, 18

Bill, for the very thoughtful comments and all of the 19

input we've received from ACC, from yourself and your 20

membership over the last couple years. It's been 21

absolutely key to helping us move the program forward, 22

as has input from across the stakeholder community, 23

the community certainly. 24

You know, we recognize the need to continue 25

Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628

- 488823

to work though the backlog. You know, we have very 1

much stepped u p the pace. You know, it will take two 2

to three years to get through the backlog, but we're 3

going to continue to look at game

- changing initiatives 4

to further implement things like the corporate 5

approach to look at ASPs, and hopefully that will get 6

us thro ugh the backlog even more quickly. 7

You know, with respect to the technical 8

amendments you mentioned, I'd be interested in any 9

further thoughts about how we go about that. One of 10

the things we have been looking at as we continue to 11

try to mature the prog ram is getting into a regular 12

cycle of pushing out guidance publicly, whether 13

through interpretive opinions, rulings, whatever we 14

call them, and getting those published. 15

So I would be very, very interested in 16

thoughts on how we best approach that. OMB s ometimes 17

has something to say about what is and is not 18

significant guidance, and, you know, any input on that 19

and how we could develop a streamlined process for 20

getting that sort of guidance out to stakeholders 21

would be appreciated. I know I'm not really supposed 22

to be making speeches but to listen today. 23

(Laughter.) 24

MR. WULF: I apologize. 25

Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628

- 488824

MS. FINNERTY: Thank you. Our next speaker, 1

please? I would note our IT system, as we're already 2

noting, is a little bit finicky this morning, so to 3

make sure e verybody can hear, including everybody 4

behind you, make sure that you

-- I just want to 5

remind all speakers to use the microphones. Thank 6

you. 7

MS. GIBSON: No problem. Good morning. I'm 8

Jennifer Gibson. I'm Vice President of Regulatory 9

Affairs for th e National Association of Chemical 10

Distributors. We have been very involved with the 11

CFATS program from the beginning. We have several 12

member facilities who are regulated by the program, 13

ranging from large companies that have 40 or so 14

facilities to small individual owners. Most of our 15

members are small businesses, and a good portion of 16

them are family

- owned. 17

So like you all, we haven't had a whole lot 18

of time to digest all the questions asked in the 19

announced notice, and we will be submitting written 20

c omments and look forward to doing that as we collect 21

input from our members, and we are also encouraging 22

our members out there to participate in the listening 23

sessions and give you the real

- world perspective since 24

they are the ones actually on the ground d ealing with 25

Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628

- 488825

the regulation. 1

I'm just going to make a few general 2

comments. You'll hear more from us later. But first 3

of all, like Bill, I commend you on the progress 4

you've made with this program. It got off to a rocky 5

start six, seven years ago but i n the past two years 6

have made lots and lots of progress. The fact that 7

you all have approved over 1,000 site security plans 8

is great evidence of that. And I think the steps 9

you've taken to really try to better coordinate 10

inspectors and inspections among companies that have 11

multiple facilities, that's been a good development. 12

Also the continued use and encouragement of 13

the ASPs, alternate security programs. I know there 14

was a lot of confusion at first about that because of 15

the way the SVAs were structu red that only tier

- fours 16

could submit that. I think there was an impression 17

for quite some time that only tier

- fours could submit 18

actual plans. So that, I think companies now realize 19

that's open to everyone. We look forward to 20

continuing to work on that

. 21

But one thing you could do there is as more 22

and more ASPs are developed, to the extent that you 23

could share examples with the regulated community to 24

make it easier, that would be helpful and further 25

Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628

- 488826

encourage companies to adopt those. 1

Regarding your outreach, we commend you for 2

really working with industry to work through some of 3

the problems with CFATS. You've always made 4

yourselves available at industry meetings, through the 5

Chemical Security Summit, with encouraging the use of 6

compliance assistanc e visits. That's been very 7

helpful, and we encourage you to continue that as the 8

program moves forward. 9

Just a couple of challenges with CFATS. You 10

all are well aware of this. The tiering methodology 11

is troubling. You know, that's been an issue for 12

q uite some time. A couple of years ago, several 13

facilities have even had retiering notices after they 14

had made the investment for a certain tier. And I 15

know we're about to convene

-- you're about to convene 16

an expert panel to look at this once and for all , and 17

hopefully that will be resolved and that can be 18

transparent as possible while balancing the security 19

issues involved in that. 20

And also, just the whole uncertainty, the 21

regulatory uncertainty, with that. The facilities are 22

out there wondering, okay , am I tier four, am I tier 23

one. What's going to happen? But I know you all are 24

well aware of that and will work with the industry to 25

Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628

- 488827

make sure there is a smooth transition for anyone who 1

is affected there. 2

And finally, the other issue that I heard 3

fro m my members that I think could be improved is just 4

the whole resubmittal and resubmission process. It's 5

a very, very cumbersome process, and I think switching 6

to the ASP will resolve a lot of that. The SSP, it's 7

been discovered it can result in 900 page s that 8

neither agrees with the plan, nor something that the 9

inspectors can really inspect against. 10

But as companies do switch to ASPs, which do 11

produce real plans and makes it more clear for the 12

inspectors to look at all these issues, there needs to 13

be a way to better get them in the system in a more 14

efficient way. I know you all are aware of that, but 15

that's kind of the level of confusion now. Should I 16

switch to an ASP? Well, the timing of all this, how 17

does it work, so anything you can do to make tha t more 18

smooth would be much appreciated. 19

And that's really all I have today. As I 20

said, you'll hear from us some more, and we do look 21

forward to submitting written comments. 22

MR. BREOR: Thank you so much, Jennifer. 23

MS. FINNERTY: Thank you. Does th e panel 24

have followup questions or statements? 25

Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628

- 488828

MR. WULF: I'm going to try not to make a 1

statement because

-- 2

(Laughter.) 3

MS. FINNERTY: Every time? 4

MR. WULF: No, I won't, I won't. Thank you, 5

Jennifer. That's very, very much appreciated. 6

I cou ld try to ask a question. I'm supposed 7

to ask questions. You know, with respect to the 8

tiering methodology

-- and, you know, we are about to 9

launch the

-- I'm going to get the term

-- the tier 10

advisory board, and as we continue to move through the 11

proces s of implementing the recommendations of the 12

peer review panel, what do you all think

-- and I 13

don't know if I'm allowed to jump ahead and include 14

the soon

- to

- be

- speakers

-- are the biggest challenges 15

for us in the tiering process? We're certainly 16

committ ed to trying to enhance transparency. 17

MS. GIBSON: From our perspective, the 18

biggest concern

-- and you're aware of this

-- is that 19

what's going to change. 20

MR. WULF: Yeah. 21

MS. GIBSON: And what about these companies 22

who have made investments and the n they turn out not 23

to be regulated? 24

MR. WULF: Yeah. 25

Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628

- 488829

MS. GIBSON: And those who didn't think they 1

would be regulated all of a sudden are. 2

MR. WULF: Sure. 3

MS. GIBSON: I guess having a smooth 4

transition would be

-- 5

MR. WULF: Yeah. 6

MS. GIBSON:

-- would be the most important 7

part. 8

MR. WULF: Yeah. 9

MS. GIBSON: I know you all know that. 10

MS. FINNERTY: Great. Thank you. 11

Did you want to hear from the rest of the 12

panel or wait until they speak? 13

MR. WULF: That works for me. 14

MR. GUNNULF SEN: Just real quick. From our 15

perspective, the same thing as Jennifer's members. 16

The process kind of going forward once you decide what 17

things need to be done and how that will be 18

implemented, whether that's kind of a piecemeal or 19

bowling approach or h ow that will be done and how that 20

will be communicated is

-- 21

MR. WULF: Yeah. 22

MR. GUNNULFSEN:

-- the main concern right 23

now. 24

MR. WULF: Yeah. 25

Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628

- 488830

MR. WOLFF: Just a different point is as you 1

go with a transparent system and you end up with 2

facilities that are going to be regulated, you're also 3

going to end up with facilities, especially the 4

nonchemical facilities, that are going to be now 5

interfacing with state and local and other elements of 6

the national security assemblage and they're probably 7

not pr epared to do that. 8

And so I think I guess the point is when we 9

go through and both take away the transparency of just 10

facilities ending up on the list but ending up 11

actually understanding why, states are going to start 12

to follow that process. 13

So I thin k you really need to think through 14

what are the unintended consequences of the 15

transparency, which I, along with everyone else, think 16

is a really good thing. But there needs to be a 17

dialogue with some of the other organizations, 18

including EPA, as a part o f this process, but also the 19

state and local organizations because that's going to 20

be I think a challenge for some of the state 21

regulators to not say, oh, this is a great idea, we're 22

going to pick up on this. And I don't think that's 23

your intent, and I do n't think that's sort of a use of 24

the program, but there could be sort of a pitfall that 25

Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628

- 488831

is involved. 1

MS. FINNERTY: Great. Thank you. Did you 2

have a comment as well? 3

MR. ERNY: Yeah. Maybe something real 4

quick. 5

MS. FINNERTY: Please, if you would , answer 6

the question directly. Thank you. 7

MR. ERNY: Sure. Bill Erny with ACC. And 8

kind of along the same lines as on the transparency 9

issue. You know, I think that, you know, to the 10

extent that you can get the facility security 11

organization manager or the director or somebody at 12

the site that has a responsibility for security at 13

that site directly involved when you're talking 14

through the tiering, the risk, you know, they're the 15

guys who are going to be, you know, implementing 16

measures, putting capit al investments in place, 17

getting approvals from management, so they're the guys 18

on the front line. They need to understand what the 19

risks and threats are. 20

So I would highly encourage you to engage 21

them in a lot more detail around why they're tiered, 22

wha t are the threats, and how they can best implement 23

some of the security practices. All right. Thank 24

you. 25

Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628

- 488832

MS. FINNERTY: Thank you. 1

Our next speaker. 2

MR. GUNNULFSEN: Hi. My name is Jeff 3

Gunnulfsen. I'm with American Fuel and Petrochemical 4

Manufac turers, so we represent both refineries and 5

special chemical sites, so we are on both sides of the 6

aisle affected by CFATS and other regulatory security 7

programs. We've been involved with the CFATS program 8

since the very beginning. We've had members that were 9

involved with the RAMCAP program a long time ago and 10

generally support the program and this general 11

regulatory approach and review that's happening, which 12

I think is long overdue, and it's the right time to do 13

it anyway. We've had a lot of inside th e building 14

discussions, but it's time to put something really on 15

paper and start going forward. 16

A couple

-- these are general thoughts. 17

We're still getting our arms around all of this, 18

putting it more succinct, but some general regulatory 19

approach

- type issues. In the ANPRM is some questions 20

of us eliminating the authorization inspection staff. 21

In general, we would support that, but what we have 22

found is even our members, which are big multinational 23

guys, like the conversation during those steps. 24

So w hether there is some type of compliance 25

Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628

- 488833

assistance visit that takes that place or some type of 1

dialogue where folks come to the site and they can run 2

some questions and understand some issues. They still 3

want that to be part of the process. 4

Also, maybe a way to quicken the general 5

overall process is to add some timelines or deadlines 6

for ASP and SSP reviews going forward. That may 7

quicken the process all around. Obviously we support 8

dealing with the internal modification issue as the 9

program matures. That will become more and more of a 10

technical legal issue. We had a proposal we submitted 11

in 2010 to DHS

-- I will submit it again with these 12

comments

-- that talks about ranges and what you can 13

do there, similar to some other recording type 14

programs with in other agencies, like EPA. 15

Clarification of terminology is huge. We 16

have this fuel terminal issue that's staying out there 17

that some of these terms really affect them, like 18

commercial grade of a particular amount, but also it 19

affects the chemical mixt ures as well. So that really 20

needs to be clarified, along with some other terms, 21

like what is a high

- risk facility, security breach. 22

All of these need to be looked at and discussed a 23

little bit further and really told to the stakeholders 24

what is meant by that and what is meant by that when 25

Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628

- 488834

you're looking at the risk of that site. 1

In terms of all the streamlining, the risk

2

based performance standard, we have found that some of 3

them

-- and you probably have seen this too

-- are 4

identical and overlap, part icularly your RBPS 1, 2, 5

and 4. All of those could probably be combined. 6

You've probably seen that in some of the ASPs anyways. 7

So, if you could maybe the next go

- around of 8

the RBPS guide, which I would recommend probably with 9

some lessons learned and some input from industry 10

could probably be done, eliminate some of those, and 11

also, if you can, put in some examples for all those 12

RBPS areas. I know you can't say because of risk

13

based, performance

- based, but folks like to see 14

examples. The original dra ft guides did have 15

examples, and folks thought that was helpful 16

originally. 17

Alignment with other regulatory programs, 18

that's in the ANPRM as well. Two areas or maybe three 19

areas that come to mind, looking at the EPA RMP 20

program, with other

-- with our A ppendix A list of 21

chemicals, particularly with fuels. I have to bring 22

that up, the PSP issue as well. 23

There are other programs that vet against 24

the TSDB that need to be recognized as well, which 25

Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628

- 488835

you've heard us say that many times. But also we're 1

seein g a big push on transparency, which is good and 2

bad as well because a lot of security or perhaps 3

security

- sensitive information now wants to be shared 4

with the public, like pipeline mapping and railroads 5

and all of that. So I think we need to look at what 6

is CVI, what is SSI, and FOUO, the President's 7

executive order, can help with all of that, and we're 8

looking for you to kind of lead that charge. 9

Let's see. And also, we would support one 10

another, as I said too, such as getting the most out 11

of the time that we have to work on this. The 12

regulatory program does take a long time. Some of 13

these do need to be done to the regulatory program, 14

some of these do not. And ASPs, corporate reviews, 15

eliminating RV gases, eliminating some timelines or 16

setting some timelines probably could all be done, and 17

more compliance assistance without FR notice and 18

comment review. That's all I got for now. 19

MS. FINNERTY: Thank you, sir. 20

Does the panel have comments or questions? 21

MR. BREOR: I have just a clarifying. 22

Tha nks, Jeff. I really appreciate the input. Just a 23

question and a comment with the EPA RMP program. Are 24

you speaking to the fact that

-- just recognizing that 25

Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628

- 488836

we do both have the same chemicals or more to the fact 1

that maybe some of the things that they i dentify on 2

the safety side is overlapping what we look at on the 3

security side? 4

MR. GUNNULFSEN: A little bit of both, not 5

just the chemical risk but more specifically their 6

view of fuels and mixtures too and why that was not 7

included in the RMP. But I would look at both of 8

those issues. 9

MS. FINNERTY: Thank you. 10

Any other comments? 11

(No response.) 12

MS. FINNERTY: The next presenter, please. 13

MR. WOLFF: Hi. My name is Evan D. Wolff 14

with the incorrect and organized nongovernment 15

spelling

-- have no relationship with Director Wulf 16

for the record. I am a partner at Crowell & Moring 17

and managing director of The Chertoff Group, although 18

-- today on behalf of the clients or at least none 19

that I know of. 20

So I'd like to just

-- I agree with much of 21

wh at both my colleagues to the left have said, so I 22

just want to add in a couple points and clarify a 23

couple points. The first is, you know, it's my 24

personal belief that the exemptions as spelled out in 25

Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628

- 488837

section 5A are clear, and also they represent the law 1

of what Congress wanted to make exempt for the program 2

and where they expected you to regulate it in terms of 3

high

- risk facilities. 4

I think there really could be some greater 5

clarification on what those exemptions represent, how 6

those boundaries are bein g managed. I think, you 7

know, when we get into some of the facilities that 8

there has been some discussion around whether their 9

parts are managed properly, that there could be some 10

further clarification and also better coordination 11

within the department so we don't have multiple 12

components of DHS interacting with a single facility 13

because they fall under, for example, CFATS 14

jurisdiction. And that's something that once again 15

doesn't really need to be clarified in legislation. I 16

think the legislation is ver y clear. I think the 17

regulation in

- house is where the clarification can 18

come. 19

Regarding the one thing that wasn't 20

discussed so far is the chemicals

- of

- interest list. I 21

think we're at an inflection point where we've 22

learned, where we've all learned what represents high

23

risk facilities and the chemical footprint did they 24

have and what doesn't. I think we can take that 25

Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628

- 488838

information and simplify the list, reduce the list, 1

and also clarify some of the STQs where they really 2

aren't

-- where there's not a dire ct relationship 3

between your authority of a high

- risk facility and the 4

STQ list doesn't state it. 5

I agree with Jeff's comments on risk

- based 6

performance standards. I think 10 is a good number, 7

and I think we should try to simplify it, simplify the 8

list not only where we have just a bunch focusing on 9

physical security but also with the example that went 10

before that Jeff used but also ones that we can 11

actually think about how they can be implemented in 12

using a risk

- based methodology and not require an 13

ente rprise or an exorbitant command structure that I 14

think sometimes that leads to. 15

Regarding the personal surety and the 16

information protection program, I think the 17

duplicative programs that the Department of Homeland 18

Security operates via CVI and SSI and T WIC and others 19

is inefficient for industry and inefficient for DHS. 20

And I think this is a great inflection point to 21

consider to make those programs a lot more efficient. 22

I think many companies have release to the SSI 23

protections, and therefore we can per haps think about 24

how we can consolidate these programs so we don't have 25

Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628

- 488839

so many markings, especially as now we see other 1

elements of the department starting to mark documents 2

and other government agencies, for example, FERC using 3

their own marketing system

. 4

And then my last point is on the use of 5

approaches for nonchemical facilities. I think, you 6

know, EPA over the last 40 years, and you can take any 7

media with any of the media laws, but I'll pick on the 8

Clean Air Act. What firms have learned in their 9

implementation is in addition to the rulemaking and 10

the regulations that they release, it's also the 11

guidelines and their industry developed guidelines. 12

They've become so helpful for some of the sectors 13

that, for example, are targeted by pulp and paper 14

mi lls as the latest example are covered by the Clean 15

Air Act but oftentimes have industry sector

- wide 16

approaches of how they can implement it that really 17

can be helpful. And a much more efficient way for 18

industry and for government to approach this is in 19

go vernment a single step sort of approaches to look at 20

as you start inspecting, and there's an investment on 21

some of the front end. 22

And I realize industry would also have to 23

come together on standards or standardize their 24

approaches towards compliance. Bu t if we look at, for 25

Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628

- 488840

example, the pipeline sectors, the history of working 1

with TSA on pipeline security guidelines, there are 2

examples of sectors that would want to do this. And 3

so I humbly ask that you consider doing something like 4

that. I think there could be some back

- end rewards 5

with that. Thank you very much. 6

MS. FINNERTY: Thank you. 7

Does the panel have questions or comments? 8

MR. WULF: I don't know that I have any 9

questions, although clearly I want to thank you for 10

the very thoughtful comme nts, as always, as always, 11

Evan. Well, maybe one quick one. 12

You mentioned an approach to nonchemical 13

companies. Can you maybe clarify that a little bit? 14

MR. WOLFF: Well, you know

-- 15

MR. WULF: About the scope of nonchemical. 16

MR. WOLFF: So

-- 17

MS. FINNERTY: You turned the mic off. 18

MR. WULF: Am I blocking? I'm sorry. 19

MR. WOLFF: Well, you know, the list of 20

nonchemical companies includes any facility that wants 21

to

-- that's required to complete a top

- screen that 22

doesn't produce managed

-- a nd I'm not going to

-- I 23

guess I'll try to describe whether or not

-- citing a 24

formal definition of what a chemical facility is, I 25

Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628

- 488841

didn't prepare much for that. But a company that 1

isn't involved in the manufacturing, production, or 2

storage of chemicals, b ut rather those that use or 3

transport chemicals

-- 4

MR. WULF: Got you. 5

MR. WOLFF:

-- those that use chemicals for 6

other sectors. Universities, hospitals, manufacturing 7

are some of the examples that I in my experience of 8

advising companies have come a cross. And oftentimes 9

what I found is there are patterns of how they locate, 10

store and manage these chemicals where they don't 11

have, you know, any experience with TIH chemicals or 12

other chemicals, the expertise really that the 13

chemical manufacturing/chemi cal production companies 14

have. 15

And so I think, you know, this is where, you 16

know, I think there is an opportunity to take a 17

different approach for those facilities as they 18

approach this. And this is where I've sort of used my 19

perhaps poor example where EPA has taken this approach 20

of working with industry and was clear in the vast 21

improved

-- the last few years with bringing in new 22

leadership of the program that you want to work with 23

industry. And I think this is a specific area you can 24

do that. 25

Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628

- 488842

MR. WU LF: Yeah. Thank you, Evan. 1

MS. FINNERTY: Okay. Thank you. 2

Mr. Breor? 3

MR. BREOR: Nothing. 4

MS. FINNERTY: Thank you. Has Ms. Hilton 5

been able to join us yet, our final pre

- registered 6

speaker? 7

MALE VOICE: She won't be here today. 8

MS. FINNER TY: No? Thank you very much, 9

sir. 10

We're at the end of our pre

- registered 11

speaker portion. What I'd like to do is provide an 12

opportunity for any of our speakers that have already 13

spoken to have another five minutes at the microphone. 14

Is there anybody else that would like to address us 15

for another five minutes? 16

MR. WOLFF: I have a copy of the 17

Constitution in my background. 18

(Laughter.) 19

MR. ERNY: I'm good. I think we've probably 20

addressed all the major issues as far as I can see. 21

MS. FINNERTY: The comment was that the 22

speakers have collectively addressed the issues this 23

morning already. Thank you very much. 24

So what I'd like to do since we have 25

Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628

- 488843

concluded the pre

- registered speaker portion is to 1

take a brief break. We'll take a 15

- minute brea k. I 2

have 9:55 on my clock. We will resume at 10:10, if I 3

do my math correctly, Eastern Time. Please feel free 4

to move about the room, and we will resume again at 5

10:10 with open session. 6

For those on the phone, we will place you on 7

mute to reduce any background noise, and I will return 8

the phones to live. 9

(Whereupon, a brief recess was taken.) 10

MS. FINNERTY: Welcome back, everybody, from 11

the break. We're now going to open the floor for any 12

additional comments related to the CFATS Advance 13

Notice o f Proposed Rulemaking. For those that are 14

interested in speaking during our open session, I'd 15

like to invite you to join us in the first row seats. 16

(Pause.) 17

MS. FINNERTY: It appears that we do not 18

have any speakers at this time for open session. I 19

w ill keep the floor open and the mic open for any 20

additional comments, and we will be in open session 21

until our break for lunch at 11:45 Eastern. 22

Wonderful. Thank you. Everyone in the room 23

may continue to enjoy discussions on these topics. 24

Please feel free to move about the room. And when I 25

Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628

- 488844

return back to the podium, that will indicate that we 1

have another speaker for the open session. For those 2

on the phone, I will return you to mute so you can 3

reduce the background noise. And thank you very much. 4

Again, we are in open session until 11:45 this 5

morning. I'll return to the podium when we have 6

additional speakers. Thank you. 7

(Whereupon, a brief recess was taken.) 8

MS. FINNERTY: Good morning. This is the 9

Chemical Facility Anti

- Terrorism Standards Advance 10

Notice of Proposed Rulemaking. We continue to be in 11

open session. It is 11 a.m. Eastern. We will be in 12

open session until 11:45 this morning, when we will 13

break for lunch. Has anybody joined us this morning 14

to provide additional public comment s? 15

(No response.) 16

MS. FINNERTY: Seeing none, I will continue 17

to mute the phone and will be here in the room again 18

until 11:45 a.m. Eastern, when we will break. 19

(Whereupon, a brief recess was taken.) 20

MS. FINNERTY: Welcome back to the listening 21

ses sion for the Chemical Facility Antiterrorism 22

Standards Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking. We 23

have completed our morning session, and we'll now be 24

breaking for our lunchtime. We'll resume the 25

Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628

- 488845

listening session at 1 p.m. Eastern. After a brief 1

recap o f the session purpose and process, we'll resume 2

with stakeholder presentations. Thank you. 3

(Whereupon, at 11:45 a.m., the listening 4

session in the above

- entitled matter was recessed, to 5

reconvene at 1:00 p.m. this same day, Thursday, 6

September 4, 2014.) 7

// 8

// 9

// 10

// 11

// 12

// 13

// 14

// 15

// 16

// 17

// 18

// 19

// 20

// 21

// 22

// 23

// 24

// 25

26

Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628

- 488846

A F T E R N O O N S E S S I O N 1

(1:02 p.m.) 2

MS. FINNERTY: Good afternoon, and thank you 3

for rejoining us at the listening session for the 4

Chemical Facility Anti

- Terrorism Standards Advance 5

Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, or CFATS ANPRM, that 6

was issued by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security 7

on August 18, 2014. 8

I'm Kate Finnerty with Energetics, 9

Incorporated. I am the moderator for today. Before 10

we resume the session, I would like to introdu ce a new 11

panelist joining us this afternoon. Mr. Todd Klessman 12

is a senior policy advisor for the DHS Infrastructure 13

Security and Compliance Division. Thank you for 14

joining us today. 15

I'd also like to recap today's purpose and 16

process. The purpose of t oday's session is to gather 17

public comments, data, or views on how the current 18

CFATS regulation, 6 CFR Part 27, issued 6/20/2007, 19

might be modified. 20

Issuing an ANPRM enables the department to 21

invite stakeholders with an opportunity to provide 22

comments an d suggestions for identifying ways to make 23

the program more effective in achieving its regulatory 24

objectives. We hope to hear a range of suggestions 25

Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628

- 488847

today. All viewpoints are welcome. As such, we are 1

not seeking consensus today on any of the topics. Al l 2

presenters are asked to keep their comments directly 3

related to the topics contained in the rule. 4

Finally, the comments provided during this 5

session are being transcribed for note

- taking 6

purposes. A transcript of each listening session will 7

be posted on a docket in the Federal Register . We are 8

currently in open session for the remainder of the 9

afternoon, which will run until 4:00 Eastern. 10

If there is anybody that's here in the room 11

that would like to provide public comments, the floor 12

is available f or five minutes. 13

(No response.) 14

MS. FINNERTY: Seeing none, we will remain 15

in open session until 4:00 Eastern. I will return to 16

the microphone if and when we do have public 17

commenters enter the room today. For those on the 18

phone, thank you for joinin g us. I will place you on 19

mute to reduce background noise. Thank you. 20

(Whereupon, a brief recess was taken.) 21

MS. FINNERTY: Good afternoon. This is the 22

listening session for Chemical Facility Anti

- Terrorism 23

Standards Advance Notice of Proposed Rulem aking, or 24

CFATS ANPRM. We are currently in open session for the 25

Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628

- 488848

listening session. We will remain so until 4:00 1

Eastern time. All phones are currently on mute 2

pending the arrival of any additional public comments. 3

Thank you. 4

For a break? 5

FEMALE VOI CE: Sure. 6

MS. FINNERTY: Okay. We'll do 15 minutes. 7

FEMALE VOICE: Sounds great. 8

MS. FINNERTY: Good afternoon. This is the 9

listening session for the Chemical Facility Anti

10

Terrorism Standards Advance Notice of Proposed 11

Rulemaking, or CFATS ANPRM. We are currently in a 12

listening session until 4 p.m. At this point, we will 13

take a 15

- minute break. It is 2:30 Eastern. We will 14

return to the listening session at 2:45 Eastern. 15

(Whereupon, a brief recess was taken.) 16

MS. FINNERTY: Welcome back to the listening 17

session for the Chemical Facility Anti

- Terrorism 18

Standards Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, the 19

CFATS ANPRM. We are currently in open session for the 20

listening session. It is 2:45 p.m., and we will be in 21

open session until 4 p.m. All phones have been placed 22

on mute to reduce background noise, until there is a 23

time when public comment is received today. Thank 24

you. 25

Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628

- 488849

(Whereupon, a brief recess was taken.) 1

MS. FINNERTY: Okay. Thank you for 2

participating in today's listening session on the 3

Chemical Facility Anti

- Terrorism Standards Advance 4

Notice of Proposed Rulemaking. We are now closing the 5

public portion of today's listening session and moving 6

to closing comments. 7

Please visit the docket to view listening 8

session notes and to su bmit additional comments. 9

Please visit the Chemical Security website to visit 10

the remaining schedule of listening sessions. We are 11

now adjourned. 12

(Whereupon, at 3:45 p.m., the listening 13

session in the above

- entitled matter was concluded.) 14

// 15

// 16

// 17

// 18

/ / 19

// 20

// 21

// 22

// 23

// 24

// 25

Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628

- 488850

REPORTER'S CERTIFICATE

DOCKET NO.: N/A

CASE TITLE: CFATS ANPRM Listening Session

HEARING DATE: September 4, 2014

LOCATION: Arlington, Virginia

I hereby certify that the proceedings and

evidence are contained fully and accurately on the

tapes and notes reported by me at the hearing in the

above case before the U.S. Department of Homeland

Security.

Date: September 4, 2014

Diane Humke Official Reporter Heritage Reporting Corporati on Suite 600 1220 L Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20005

- 4018

Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628

- 4888