Chemical Facility Anti-Terrorism Standards, 48693-48696 [2014-19356]
Download as PDF
48693
Proposed Rules
Federal Register
Vol. 79, No. 159
Monday, August 18, 2014
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER
contains notices to the public of the proposed
issuance of rules and regulations. The
purpose of these notices is to give interested
persons an opportunity to participate in the
rule making prior to the adoption of the final
rules.
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Office of the Secretary
Programs Directorate, Office of
Infrastructure Protection, Infrastructure
Security Compliance Division, 245
Murray Lane, Mail Stop 0610,
Arlington, VA 20528–0610.
Jon
MacLaren, Rulemaking Section Chief,
Office of Infrastructure Protection,
Infrastructure Security Compliance
Division, 245 Murray Lane SW., Mail
Stop 0610, Washington, DC 20528;
telephone 703–235–5263.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
6 CFR Part 27
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
[Docket No. DHS–2014–0016]
Abbreviations and Terms Used in This
Document
RIN 1601–AA69
Chemical Facility Anti-Terrorism
Standards
National Protection and
Programs Directorate, DHS.
ACTION: Advance notice of proposed
rulemaking.
AGENCY:
Section 550 of the Department
of Homeland Security Appropriations
Act of 2007 provides the Department of
Homeland Security (DHS or
Department) with the authority to
regulate the security of high risk
chemical facilities. To implement this
authority, DHS issued the Chemical
Facility Anti-Terrorism Standards
(CFATS) regulation in 2007. DHS is
initiating this rulemaking process as a
step towards maturing the CFATS
program and to identify ways to make
the program more effective in achieving
its regulatory objectives. This Advance
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
(ANPRM) provides an opportunity for
the Department to hear and consider,
during the development of an updated
CFATS regulation, the views of
regulated industry and other interested
members of the public on their
recommendations for program
modifications.
SUMMARY:
Written comments must be
submitted on or before October 17,
2014.
DATES:
You may submit comments,
identified by docket number DHS–
2014–0016, by one of the following
methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
• Mail: U.S. Department of Homeland
Security, National Protection and
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
ADDRESSES:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:38 Aug 15, 2014
Jkt 232001
ANPRM—Advance Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking
ASP—Alternative Security Program
CFATS—Chemical Facility Anti-Terrorism
Standards
CFR—Code of Federal Regulations
COI—Chemicals of Interest
CSAT—Chemical Security Assessment Tool
CVI—Chemical-terrorism Vulnerability
Information
DHS or Department—Department of
Homeland Security
E.O.—Executive Order
FR—Federal Register
Pub. L.—Public Law
RBPS—Risk Based Performance Standards
SSP—Site Security Plan
STQ—Screening Threshold Quantity
SVA—Security Vulnerability Assessment
I. Background
Section 550 of the Department of
Homeland Security Appropriations Act
of 2007 1 (Pub. L. 109–295) authorized
the Department to regulate the security
of chemical facilities that, in the
discretion of the Secretary, present high
levels of security risk. Under the Section
550 authority, on April 9, 2007, DHS
issued the CFATS interim final rule,
codified at 6 CFR part 27. See 72 FR
17688.2 Additionally, in November
2007, the Department adopted as
Appendix A to CFATS a final list of
over 300 Chemicals of Interest (COI) that
pose significant risks to human life or
health if released, stolen or diverted, or
sabotaged. DHS also adopted some
additional provisions that clarify how
Appendix A is to be applied under
1 The CFATS authorizing statue can be found
online at: https://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/
chemsec_cfats_lawsregsec_authorizing_statute.pdf.
2 The CFATS interim final rule can be found
online at: https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-200704-09/pdf/E7-6363.pdf.
PO 00000
Frm 00001
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
CFATS. See 72 FR 65396.3 Publication
of the Appendix A regulations brought
the CFATS interim final rule into full
effect.
Under CFATS, any chemical facility
(other than certain facilities expressly
exempted by Section 550) 4 that
possesses any COI at or above the
applicable Screening Threshold
Quantity (STQ) specified in Appendix A
for that COI must complete and submit
to DHS through the Chemical Security
Assessment Tool (CSAT) 5 certain
consequence-based information (the
‘‘Top-Screen’’). Any facility initially
determined to be high-risk after DHS’s
review of the facility’s Top-Screen and/
or other relevant information that comes
to the Department’s attention, is
assigned a preliminary risk-based tier
(Tiers 1–4) 6 and must then submit to
DHS a Security Vulnerability
Assessment (SVA) per section 27.215
(Tier 4 facilities may submit an
Alternate Security Program (ASP) in
lieu of an SVA). DHS evaluates the SVA
and other relevant information to make
a final determination as to whether the
facility is high-risk and, if so, which tier
it should be assigned to. Any facility
that is finally determined to be high-risk
must submit, obtain DHS approval of,
and then implement a Site Security Plan
(SSP), or ASP in lieu of an SSP, that
describes the security measures the
facility utilizes to meet the appropriate
3 Appendix A can be found online at: https://
www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2007-11-20/pdf/075585.pdf.
4 Exempted facilities include facilities regulated
pursuant to the Maritime Transportation Security
Act of 2002, Public Law 107–295, as amended;
public water systems, as defined by Section 1401
of the Safe Drinking Water Act, Public Law 93–523,
as amended; treatment works, as defined in Section
212 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act,
Public Law 92–500, as amended; any facility owned
or operated by the Department of Defense or the
Department of Energy, or any facility subject to
regulation by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
5 The CSAT is an information technology system
primarily designed to collect facility information
through specific applications for submitting TopScreens, SVAs, SSPs, and ASPs. See 6 CFR 27.105.
6 CFATS places covered, high-risk chemical
facilities into one of four tiers, with Tier 1 facilities
being the highest risk and Tier 4 facilities being the
least high-risk. Facilities that do not present a highrisk do not receive a Tier level and are not subject
to additional CFATS requirements. When
determining if a facility is high-risk, the Department
is primarily focused on the potential consequences
associated with a successful terrorist attack on the
facility (including the use of stolen or diverted
materials in a separate attack offsite). A threat factor
also is incorporated into the risk assessment for
facilities with release hazards.
E:\FR\FM\18AUP1.SGM
18AUP1
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
48694
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 159 / Monday, August 18, 2014 / Proposed Rules
level of performance under 18
applicable Risk Based Performance
Standards (RBPS).
During the review process, DHS
compares specific security measures
reported in the SSP against the RBPS to
determine whether the SSP adequately
addresses the applicable RBPS in a
manner commensurate with the
facility’s risk-based tier and other
circumstances as outlined in section
27.230. Once DHS has determined that
the SSP appears to be adequate, DHS
will authorize the SSP or ASP, and
notify the facility as such via a Letter of
Authorization. DHS Chemical
Inspectors must then conduct an on-site
authorization inspection in accordance
with sections 27.245(a)(ii) and 27.250.
The results of the authorization
inspection help to inform DHS’s
decision on whether the SSP or ASP
should be approved. Upon approval, the
Department issues the facility a Letter of
Approval, after which the facility is
subject to compliance inspections to
verify that the facility is carrying out its
approved SSP or ASP. See 6 CFR
27.245(a)(iii). The regulations also
establish procedures for DHS to notify a
facility that the SSP or ASP is deficient,
require consultations between DHS and
the facility to try to resolve specific
deficiencies, and authorize DHS to issue
a Letter of Disapproval if the
deficiencies are not addressed by the
facility in a timely manner. See 6 CFR
27.245(b).
Since the publication of the CFATS
interim final rule, the Department has
met several significant milestones. As of
June 17, 2014, DHS has received more
than 48,500 Top-Screens submitted by
chemical facilities. As of June 17, 2014,
DHS has notified more than 8,895
facilities that it has initially designated
them as high-risk and thus, they are
required to submit SVAs. DHS has
completed its review of approximately
8,830 submitted SVAs. As of June 17,
2014, CFATS covers 4,019 high-risk
facilities nationwide; of these 4,019
facilities, 3,261 are currently subject to
final high-risk determinations and
submission of an SSP or ASP; and 758
are currently pending a final tier. As of
June 17, 2014, the Department has
authorized SSPs/ASPs for 1,648
facilities, conducted authorization
inspections at 1,204 facilities, and
approved SSPs/ASPs for 859 facilities.7
7 Under 6 CFR 27.245(a)(2), DHS ‘‘may
disapprove a Site Security Plan that fails to satisfy
the risk-based performance standards established in
27.230.’’ If DHS were to disapprove an SSP or ASP,
DHS would also simultaneously issue, pursuant to
6 CFR 27.300(a), an Order directing the facility to
re-submit its SSP/ASP to include security measures
that satisfy applicable RBPS. If the facility fails to
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:52 Aug 15, 2014
Jkt 232001
The CFATS program is an important
part of our Nation’s counterterrorism
efforts. DHS works with our industry
stakeholders to keep dangerous
chemicals out of the hands of those who
wish to do us harm. Since the CFATS
program was created, DHS has engaged
with industry to identify high-risk
chemical facilities to ensure they have
security measures in place to reduce the
risks associated with the possession of
chemicals of interest. The progress
made in the CFATS program over the
last several years has significantly
enhanced the security of the Nation’s
chemical infrastructure; however, to
more fully mature the program, DHS is
initiating this rulemaking process to
help it identify how to make the CFATS
program more effective in achieving its
regulatory objectives. In particular, DHS
is interested in comments on the topics
described in Part IV of the ANPRM to
include the general regulatory approach,
treatment of non-traditional chemical
facilities, clarification of terminology,
Risk Based Performance Standards,
Appendix A, considerations for small
businesses, and alignment with other
regulatory programs.
Further, on August 1, 2013, the
President issued Executive Order (E.O.)
13650—Improving Chemical Facility
Safety and Security, to enhance the
safety and security of chemical facilities
and reduce the risks associated with
hazardous chemicals to owners,
operators, workers, and communities.
The E.O. directs the Federal
Government to: improve operational
coordination with State, local, and tribal
partners; enhance Federal agency
coordination and information;
modernize policies, regulations, and
standards; and work with stakeholders
to identify best practices.8 As detailed
in the May 2014 E.O. Final Report, DHS
is taking a number actions to build a
stronger CFATS program, one of which
is the issuance of this ANPRM as an
initial step in seeking input on
improving the CFATS regulations
themselves.9
do so, DHS could then assess civil penalties and/
or direct the facility to cease some or all operations,
pursuant to 6 CFR 27.300(b). Under 6 CFR 27.310,
however, the facility has the option of contesting
any disapproval/order through an administrative
adjudication. To date, DHS has not disapproved any
SSPs/ASPs.
8 The E.O. established a Chemical Facility Safety
and Security Working Group to oversee the effort,
which is tri-chaired by the Department of Labor, the
Department of Homeland Security, and the
Environmental Protection Agency, and includes
leadership and subject matter experts from the
Department of Justice, the Department of
Agriculture, and the Department of Transportation.
9 For more information on E.O. 13650 and the
May 2014 Final Report, visit: https://www.osha.gov/
chemicalexecutiveorder/.
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
II. Written Comments
A. In General
This ANPRM will provide an
opportunity for the Department to hear
and consider the views of regulated
industry and other interested members
of the public on their recommendations
for CFATS program modifications and
improvements.
DHS invites interested persons to
submit written comments, data, or
views on how the current CFATS
regulations, 6 CFR part 27, might be
improved. Comments that would be
most helpful to DHS include the
questions and issues identified in Part
IV of this document. Please explain the
reason for any comments with available
data, and include other information or
authority that supports such comments.
The Department encourages interested
parties to provide specific data that
documents the potential costs of
modifying the existing regulatory
requirements pursuant to the
commenter’s suggestions; the potential
quantifiable benefits including security
and societal benefits of modifying the
existing regulatory requirements; and
the potential impacts on small
businesses of modifying the existing
regulatory requirements.
DHS requests that commenters
discuss potential economic impacts,
whenever possible, in terms of
quantitative benefits (e.g., reductions in
injuries, fatalities, and property
damage), costs (e.g., compliance costs or
decreases in production), and offsets to
costs (e.g., less need for maintenance
and repairs) when providing feedback
on this ANPRM. DHS also requests that
commenters provide data and
information on economic effects that
suggestions may have on market
conditions or services (e.g., market
structure and concentration), and in
particular, any special circumstances
related to small entities, such as
potential market-structure disruptions
or uniquely high costs that small
entities may bear.
DHS requests that commenters
discuss economic impacts in as specific
terms as possible. For example, if a
regulatory or policy change would
necessitate additional employee
training, then helpful information
would include the following: The
training courses necessary; the types of
employees or contractors who would
receive the training; topics covered; any
retraining necessary; and the training
costs if conducted by a third-party
vendor or in-house trainer. The
Department invites comment on the
time and level of expertise required to
implement commenter suggestions,
E:\FR\FM\18AUP1.SGM
18AUP1
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 159 / Monday, August 18, 2014 / Proposed Rules
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
even if dollar-cost estimates are not
available.
Feedback that simply states a
stakeholder feels strongly that DHS
should modify CFATS, without
including actionable data, including
how the proposed change would impact
the costs and benefits of CFATS, is
much less useful to DHS. To help DHS
organize and review all comments,
please identify the relevant provision of
6 CFR part 27 that relates to the specific
comment provided (e.g., 6 CFR 27.100).
If the commenter’s suggestion is on a
topic that is not covered by the current
regulation, please note that in the
submission.
Written comments may be submitted
electronically or by mail, as explained
previously in the ADDRESSES section of
this ANPRM. To avoid duplication,
please use only one of these methods to
submit written comments.
Except as provided below, all
comments received, as well as pertinent
background documents, will be posted
without change to https://
www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information provided.
B. Handling of Proprietary, Sensitive
and Chemical-Terrorism Vulnerability
Information
Interested parties are encouraged to
submit comments in a manner that does
not include any discussion of trade
secrets, proprietary commercial or
financial information, Chemicalterrorism Vulnerability Information
(CVI), or any other category of sensitive
information 10 that should not be
disclosed to the general public. If it is
not possible to avoid such discussion,
however, please specifically identify
any proprietary or sensitive information
contained in the comments with
appropriate warning language (e.g., any
CVI must be marked and handled in
accordance with the requirements of 6
CFR 27.400(f)), and submit them by mail
to the individual listed in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.
DHS will not place any proprietary or
sensitive comments in the public
docket; rather, DHS will handle them in
accordance with applicable safeguards
and restrictions on access. See e.g., 6
CFR 27.400. See also the DHS CVI
Procedural Manual, ‘‘Safeguarding
Information Designated as CVI,’’
September 2008, located on the DHS
Web site at: www.dhs.gov/criticalinfrastructure-chemical-security. DHS
will hold any such comments in a
separate file to which the public does
not have access, and place a note in the
10 For example, information covered under
Sensitive Security Information (SSI).
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:52 Aug 15, 2014
Jkt 232001
public docket that DHS has received
such materials from the commenter.
DHS will provide appropriate access to
such comments upon request to
individuals who meet the applicable
legal requirements for access to such
information.
III. Listening Sessions
A. Purpose
The Department plans to hold
multiple public listening sessions to
solicit the public’s views on the ANPRM
and how the current CFATS regulation
might be improved. DHS plans to
announce dates, times and locations of
these public listening sessions on the
Department’s Chemical Security Web
site at www.dhs.gov/criticalinfrastructure-chemical-security.
B. Procedures and Participation for the
Listening Sessions
Each meeting will be open to the
public. DHS will use sign-in sheets to
voluntarily collect contact information
from the attending public and to
properly log oral comments received
during the sessions. Providing contact
information will be voluntary, and
members of the public may also make
oral comments without providing their
names. Seating may be limited, but
session organizers will make every effort
to accommodate all participants. A
listening session may adjourn early if all
commenters present have had the
opportunity to speak prior to the
scheduled conclusion of the session. For
information on facilities or services for
individuals with disabilities or to
request special assistance at the public
listening sessions, contact Mr. Jon
MacLaren at the telephone number or
email address indicated under the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of
this ANPRM.
For members of the public who
cannot attend a scheduled listening
session, a copy of any presentation
provided by the Department at the
sessions will be made available via the
Department’s Chemical Security Web
site at www.dhs.gov/criticalinfrastructure-chemical-security. In
addition, DHS will place a transcript of
each of these public listening sessions
in the docket for this rulemaking.
IV. Questions for Commenters
To help DHS identify ways, if any, to
improve the manner in which it
administers CFATS, DHS seeks public
comments on any and all aspects of 6
CFR part 27, including both the CFATS
Interim Final Rule and Appendix A.
Areas that DHS is most interested in
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
48695
receiving comments on include, but are
not limited to, the following:
a. General Regulatory Approach—
Comments on how the Department
could continue to improve its current
approach toward identifying CFATS
covered facilities and ensuring their
compliance with CFATS requirements,
such as:
(1) the information submission
processes (i.e., the Top-Screen, SVA,
and SSP submissions) and associated
schedules; 11
(2) the means and methods by which
facilities claim a statutorily exempt
status and whether or not commenters
think that deletions, additions or
modification to the list of exempt
facilities should be considered;
(3) the use of ASPs in lieu of SVAs
and, in particular, the current limitation
on the use of ASPs in lieu of SVAs to
Tier 4 facilities;
(4) the, scope, tier applicability and
processes for submitting and reviewing
SSPs and ASPs;
(5) the processes for submitting and
evaluating requests for redetermination
by chemical facilities previously
determined by DHS to be high-risk; and
(6) the issuance of orders and the
regulatory enforcement process.
DHS also requests that the commenter
provide, in as much detail as possible,
an explanation why the regulatory
approach should be modified,
streamlined, expanded, or removed, as
well as specific suggestions of the ways
DHS can better achieve its regulatory
objectives.
b. Treatment of Non-Traditional
Chemical Facilities—DHS recognizes
that a one-size-fits-all approach may not
be optimal for such a diverse regulated
community, and requests comments
regarding the applicability of existing
CFATS requirements and processes
(e.g., Top-Screen/SVA/SSP formats and
submission schedules; risk-based
performance standards; holding times
for COI) to non-traditional chemical
facilities covered under CFATS.12 DHS
also is particularly interested in
comments on maintaining, lifting, or
partially lifting the indefinite extension
from the Top-Screen submission
11 Submission schedules are detailed in 6 CFR
27.210.
12 The expansive and dynamic nature of the
community that uses potentially hazardous
chemicals and that have facilities that are covered
by CFATS include, but are not limited to many
types of facilities that are not traditionally
considered ‘‘chemical facilities,’’ such as
agricultural product manufacturers; microchip
manufacturers; paint and coatings manufacturers;
mines; hospitals; racecar tracks; and colleges and
universities. With the exception of agricultural
production facilities, the CFATS processes and
requirements are the same for all covered facilities.
E:\FR\FM\18AUP1.SGM
18AUP1
48696
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 159 / Monday, August 18, 2014 / Proposed Rules
deadline for agricultural production
facilities issued in December 2007.13
c. Clarification of Terminology—
Comments regarding the utility, clarity
and accuracy of definitions currently
found in 6 CFR 27.105, such as, but not
limited to, the definitions of ‘‘A
Commercial Grade’’ and ‘‘A Placarded
Amount.’’ DHS also seeks comments on
the utility of including definitions, and
what those definitions should be, for the
terms ‘‘material modifications,’’ ‘‘critical
asset,’’ and ‘‘site asset;’’ and
‘‘inspection.’’ DHS invites comments on
recommendations for additional terms
used in the current CFATS regulations
that may warrant further clarification.
d. Risk Based Performance
Standards 14—Comments on whether
and how DHS should clarify or modify
the 18 RBPS in 6 CFR 27.230, whether
DHS should combine and/or eliminate
any of the existing RBPS, and whether
DHS should adopt any additional RBPS.
e. Appendix A—Comments on all
aspects of CFATS Appendix A,
including:
(1) Comments on the possible
addition of chemicals to, and/or the
deletion or modification of certain COI
currently listed in Appendix A;
(2) any term utilized in 6 CFR 27.203,
and the applicability and/or
modification of STQs as the bases for
listing COI (e.g., by security issue(s));
and
(3) the concentration and mixtures
rules associated with Appendix A,
which are described in 6 CFR 27.204.
f. Small Business Considerations—
Comments regarding considerations
specific to small businesses.
g. Alignment with Other Regulatory
Programs—Comments regarding how
the Department may be able to better
align CFATS and other existing
chemical facility regulations, including
comments on any duplication or overlap
that may exist between CFATS and
another regulatory program.15 When
providing comments on this topic, DHS
encourages commenters to provide the
specific citations to the regulatory
regimes that may duplicate or overlap
with the requirements under CFATS as
well as a specific description of the
duplicative or overlapping
requirements.
In addressing these topics, DHS
encourages interested parties to provide
specific data that documents the
potential costs of modifying the existing
regulatory requirements pursuant to the
commenter’s suggestions; the potential
quantifiable benefits including security
and societal benefits of modifying the
existing regulatory requirements; and
the potential impacts on small
businesses of modifying the existing
regulatory requirements. Commenters
might also address how DHS can best
obtain and consider accurate, objective
information and data about the costs,
burdens, and benefits of the CFATS
Interim Final Rule and Appendix A, and
whether there are lower cost alternatives
that would allow the Department to
continue to achieve its security goals
consistent with the law.
Jeh Charles Johnson,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2014–19356 Filed 8–15–14; 8:45 am]
Examining the AD Docket
BILLING CODE 9110–9P–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
13 In
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
December 2007, DHS exercised its discretion
under the CFATS regulation by granting an
indefinite extension from the Top-Screen
submission deadline for agricultural production
facilities that use chemicals of interest (COI) and
COI-containing products for agricultural production
purposes (see 73 FR 1640). Examples of agricultural
production facilities include: farms, ranches and
range land, livestock facilities, turf grass growers,
golf courses, nurseries and floricultural operations,
and public and private parks.
14 CFATS establishes eighteen Risk-Based
Performance Standards (RBPSs) that identify the
areas for which a facility’s security posture will be
examined, such as perimeter security, access
control, personnel surety, and cyber security. To
meet the RBPSs, covered facilities are free to choose
whatever security programs or processes they deem
appropriate, so long as they achieve the requisite
level of performance in each applicable area. The
programs and processes that a high-risk facility
ultimately chooses to implement to meet these
standards must be described in the Site Security
Plan (SSP) that every high-risk chemical facility
must develop pursuant to the regulations. The
RBPS guidance document is available online at:
https://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/chemsec_cfats_
riskbased_performance_standards.pdf.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:52 Aug 15, 2014
Jkt 232001
[Docket No. FAA–2014–0578; Directorate
Identifier 2013–SW–048–AD]
RIN 2120–AA64
Airworthiness Directives; Airbus
Helicopters Deutschland GmbH
(Previously Eurocopter Deutschland
GmbH) (Airbus Helicopters)
Helicopters
Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM).
AGENCY:
We propose to adopt a new
airworthiness directive (AD) for Airbus
SUMMARY:
15 Information on other chemical safety and
security programs that may impact CFATSregulated facilities is provided in the preamble to
the CFATS Final Rule (see 72 FR 17689), as well
as the E.O. 13650 May 2014 Final Report.
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4702
Helicopters Model MBB–BK 117 C–2
helicopters with certain duplex trim
actuators installed. This proposed AD
would require repetitively inspecting
the lateral and longitudinal trim
actuator output levers for correct torque
of the nuts. This proposed AD is
prompted by a design review that the
attachment screws can become lost
under certain circumstances. The
proposed actions are intended to
prevent the loss of an attachment screw,
which could result in movement of the
output lever in an axial direction,
contact of a bolt connecting the control
rod to an output lever with the actuator
housing, and subsequent loss of
helicopter control.
DATES: We must receive comments on
this proposed AD by October 17, 2014.
ADDRESSES: You may send comments by
any of the following methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Docket: Go to
https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the
online instructions for sending your
comments electronically.
• Fax: 202–493–2251.
• Mail: Send comments to the U.S.
Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M–30, West Building
Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 1200
New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington,
DC 20590–0001.
• Hand Delivery: Deliver to the
‘‘Mail’’ address between 9 a.m. and 5
p.m., Monday through Friday, except
Federal holidays.
Sfmt 4702
You may examine the AD docket on
the Internet at https://
www.regulations.gov or in person at the
Docket Operations Office between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through
Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD
docket contains this proposed AD, the
European Aviation Safety Agency
(EASA) AD, the economic evaluation,
any comments received, and other
information. The street address for the
Docket Operations Office (telephone
800–647–5527) is in the ADDRESSES
section. Comments will be available in
the AD docket shortly after receipt.
For service information identified in
this proposed AD, contact Airbus
Helicopters, Inc., 2701 N. Forum Drive,
Grand Prairie, TX 75052; telephone
(972) 641–0000 or (800) 232–0323; fax
(972) 641–3775; or at https://
www.airbushelicopters.com/techpub.
You may review the referenced service
information at the FAA, Office of the
Regional Counsel, Southwest Region,
2601 Meacham Blvd., Room 663, Fort
Worth, Texas 76137.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Matt
Wilbanks, Aviation Safety Engineer,
E:\FR\FM\18AUP1.SGM
18AUP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 159 (Monday, August 18, 2014)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 48693-48696]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-19356]
========================================================================
Proposed Rules
Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains notices to the public of
the proposed issuance of rules and regulations. The purpose of these
notices is to give interested persons an opportunity to participate in
the rule making prior to the adoption of the final rules.
========================================================================
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 159 / Monday, August 18, 2014 /
Proposed Rules
[[Page 48693]]
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Office of the Secretary
6 CFR Part 27
[Docket No. DHS-2014-0016]
RIN 1601-AA69
Chemical Facility Anti-Terrorism Standards
AGENCY: National Protection and Programs Directorate, DHS.
ACTION: Advance notice of proposed rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Section 550 of the Department of Homeland Security
Appropriations Act of 2007 provides the Department of Homeland Security
(DHS or Department) with the authority to regulate the security of high
risk chemical facilities. To implement this authority, DHS issued the
Chemical Facility Anti-Terrorism Standards (CFATS) regulation in 2007.
DHS is initiating this rulemaking process as a step towards maturing
the CFATS program and to identify ways to make the program more
effective in achieving its regulatory objectives. This Advance Notice
of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPRM) provides an opportunity for the
Department to hear and consider, during the development of an updated
CFATS regulation, the views of regulated industry and other interested
members of the public on their recommendations for program
modifications.
DATES: Written comments must be submitted on or before October 17,
2014.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by docket number DHS-
2014-0016, by one of the following methods:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
Mail: 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 20528-0610.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jon MacLaren, Rulemaking Section
Chief, Office of Infrastructure Protection, Infrastructure Security
Compliance Division, 245 Murray Lane SW., Mail Stop 0610, Washington,
DC 20528; telephone 703-235-5263.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Abbreviations and Terms Used in This Document
ANPRM--Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
ASP--Alternative Security Program
CFATS--Chemical Facility Anti-Terrorism Standards
CFR--Code of Federal Regulations
COI--Chemicals of Interest
CSAT--Chemical Security Assessment Tool
CVI--Chemical-terrorism Vulnerability Information
DHS or Department--Department of Homeland Security
E.O.--Executive Order
FR--Federal Register
Pub. L.--Public Law
RBPS--Risk Based Performance Standards
SSP--Site Security Plan
STQ--Screening Threshold Quantity
SVA--Security Vulnerability Assessment
I. Background
Section 550 of the Department of Homeland Security Appropriations
Act of 2007 \1\ (Pub. L. 109-295) authorized the Department to regulate
the security of chemical facilities that, in the discretion of the
Secretary, present high levels of security risk. Under the Section 550
authority, on April 9, 2007, DHS issued the CFATS interim final rule,
codified at 6 CFR part 27. See 72 FR 17688.\2\ Additionally, in
November 2007, the Department adopted as Appendix A to CFATS a final
list of over 300 Chemicals of Interest (COI) that pose significant
risks to human life or health if released, stolen or diverted, or
sabotaged. DHS also adopted some additional provisions that clarify how
Appendix A is to be applied under CFATS. See 72 FR 65396.\3\
Publication of the Appendix A regulations brought the CFATS interim
final rule into full effect.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The CFATS authorizing statue can be found online at: https://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/chemsec_cfats_lawsregsec_authorizing_statute.pdf.
\2\ The CFATS interim final rule can be found online at: https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2007-04-09/pdf/E7-6363.pdf.
\3\ Appendix A can be found online at: https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2007-11-20/pdf/07-5585.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Under CFATS, any chemical facility (other than certain facilities
expressly exempted by Section 550) \4\ that possesses any COI at or
above the applicable Screening Threshold Quantity (STQ) specified in
Appendix A for that COI must complete and submit to DHS through the
Chemical Security Assessment Tool (CSAT) \5\ certain consequence-based
information (the ``Top-Screen''). Any facility initially determined to
be high-risk after DHS's review of the facility's Top-Screen and/or
other relevant information that comes to the Department's attention, is
assigned a preliminary risk-based tier (Tiers 1-4) \6\ and must then
submit to DHS a Security Vulnerability Assessment (SVA) per section
27.215 (Tier 4 facilities may submit an Alternate Security Program
(ASP) in lieu of an SVA). DHS evaluates the SVA and other relevant
information to make a final determination as to whether the facility is
high-risk and, if so, which tier it should be assigned to. Any facility
that is finally determined to be high-risk must submit, obtain DHS
approval of, and then implement a Site Security Plan (SSP), or ASP in
lieu of an SSP, that describes the security measures the facility
utilizes to meet the appropriate
[[Page 48694]]
level of performance under 18 applicable Risk Based Performance
Standards (RBPS).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ Exempted facilities include facilities regulated pursuant to
the Maritime Transportation Security Act of 2002, Public Law 107-
295, as amended; public water systems, as defined by Section 1401 of
the Safe Drinking Water Act, Public Law 93-523, as amended;
treatment works, as defined in Section 212 of the Federal Water
Pollution Control Act, Public Law 92-500, as amended; any facility
owned or operated by the Department of Defense or the Department of
Energy, or any facility subject to regulation by the Nuclear
Regulatory Commission.
\5\ The CSAT is an information technology system primarily
designed to collect facility information through specific
applications for submitting Top-Screens, SVAs, SSPs, and ASPs. See 6
CFR 27.105.
\6\ CFATS places covered, high-risk chemical facilities into one
of four tiers, with Tier 1 facilities being the highest risk and
Tier 4 facilities being the least high-risk. Facilities that do not
present a high-risk do not receive a Tier level and are not subject
to additional CFATS requirements. When determining if a facility is
high-risk, the Department is primarily focused on the potential
consequences associated with a successful terrorist attack on the
facility (including the use of stolen or diverted materials in a
separate attack offsite). A threat factor also is incorporated into
the risk assessment for facilities with release hazards.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
During the review process, DHS compares specific security measures
reported in the SSP against the RBPS to determine whether the SSP
adequately addresses the applicable RBPS in a manner commensurate with
the facility's risk-based tier and other circumstances as outlined in
section 27.230. Once DHS has determined that the SSP appears to be
adequate, DHS will authorize the SSP or ASP, and notify the facility as
such via a Letter of Authorization. DHS Chemical Inspectors must then
conduct an on-site authorization inspection in accordance with sections
27.245(a)(ii) and 27.250. The results of the authorization inspection
help to inform DHS's decision on whether the SSP or ASP should be
approved. Upon approval, the Department issues the facility a Letter of
Approval, after which the facility is subject to compliance inspections
to verify that the facility is carrying out its approved SSP or ASP.
See 6 CFR 27.245(a)(iii). The regulations also establish procedures for
DHS to notify a facility that the SSP or ASP is deficient, require
consultations between DHS and the facility to try to resolve specific
deficiencies, and authorize DHS to issue a Letter of Disapproval if the
deficiencies are not addressed by the facility in a timely manner. See
6 CFR 27.245(b).
Since the publication of the CFATS interim final rule, the
Department has met several significant milestones. As of June 17, 2014,
DHS has received more than 48,500 Top-Screens submitted by chemical
facilities. As of June 17, 2014, DHS has notified more than 8,895
facilities that it has initially designated them as high-risk and thus,
they are required to submit SVAs. DHS has completed its review of
approximately 8,830 submitted SVAs. As of June 17, 2014, CFATS covers
4,019 high-risk facilities nationwide; of these 4,019 facilities, 3,261
are currently subject to final high-risk determinations and submission
of an SSP or ASP; and 758 are currently pending a final tier. As of
June 17, 2014, the Department has authorized SSPs/ASPs for 1,648
facilities, conducted authorization inspections at 1,204 facilities,
and approved SSPs/ASPs for 859 facilities.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ Under 6 CFR 27.245(a)(2), DHS ``may disapprove a Site
Security Plan that fails to satisfy the risk-based performance
standards established in 27.230.'' If DHS were to disapprove an SSP
or ASP, DHS would also simultaneously issue, pursuant to 6 CFR
27.300(a), an Order directing the facility to re-submit its SSP/ASP
to include security measures that satisfy applicable RBPS. If the
facility fails to do so, DHS could then assess civil penalties and/
or direct the facility to cease some or all operations, pursuant to
6 CFR 27.300(b). Under 6 CFR 27.310, however, the facility has the
option of contesting any disapproval/order through an administrative
adjudication. To date, DHS has not disapproved any SSPs/ASPs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The CFATS program is an important part of our Nation's
counterterrorism efforts. DHS works with our industry stakeholders to
keep dangerous chemicals out of the hands of those who wish to do us
harm. Since the CFATS program was created, DHS has engaged with
industry to identify high-risk chemical facilities to ensure they have
security measures in place to reduce the risks associated with the
possession of chemicals of interest. The progress made in the CFATS
program over the last several years has significantly enhanced the
security of the Nation's chemical infrastructure; however, to more
fully mature the program, DHS is initiating this rulemaking process to
help it identify how to make the CFATS program more effective in
achieving its regulatory objectives. In particular, DHS is interested
in comments on the topics described in Part IV of the ANPRM to include
the general regulatory approach, treatment of non-traditional chemical
facilities, clarification of terminology, Risk Based Performance
Standards, Appendix A, considerations for small businesses, and
alignment with other regulatory programs.
Further, on August 1, 2013, the President issued Executive Order
(E.O.) 13650--Improving Chemical Facility Safety and Security, to
enhance the safety and security of chemical facilities and reduce the
risks associated with hazardous chemicals to owners, operators,
workers, and communities. The E.O. directs the Federal Government to:
improve operational coordination with State, local, and tribal
partners; enhance Federal agency coordination and information;
modernize policies, regulations, and standards; and work with
stakeholders to identify best practices.\8\ As detailed in the May 2014
E.O. Final Report, DHS is taking a number actions to build a stronger
CFATS program, one of which is the issuance of this ANPRM as an initial
step in seeking input on improving the CFATS regulations themselves.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ The E.O. established a Chemical Facility Safety and Security
Working Group to oversee the effort, which is tri-chaired by the
Department of Labor, the Department of Homeland Security, and the
Environmental Protection Agency, and includes leadership and subject
matter experts from the Department of Justice, the Department of
Agriculture, and the Department of Transportation.
\9\ For more information on E.O. 13650 and the May 2014 Final
Report, visit: https://www.osha.gov/chemicalexecutiveorder/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. Written Comments
A. In General
This ANPRM will provide an opportunity for the Department to hear
and consider the views of regulated industry and other interested
members of the public on their recommendations for CFATS program
modifications and improvements.
DHS invites interested persons to submit written comments, data, or
views on how the current CFATS regulations, 6 CFR part 27, might be
improved. Comments that would be most helpful to DHS include the
questions and issues identified in Part IV of this document. Please
explain the reason for any comments with available data, and include
other information or authority that supports such comments. The
Department encourages interested parties to provide specific data that
documents the potential costs of modifying the existing regulatory
requirements pursuant to the commenter's suggestions; the potential
quantifiable benefits including security and societal benefits of
modifying the existing regulatory requirements; and the potential
impacts on small businesses of modifying the existing regulatory
requirements.
DHS requests that commenters discuss potential economic impacts,
whenever possible, in terms of quantitative benefits (e.g., reductions
in injuries, fatalities, and property damage), costs (e.g., compliance
costs or decreases in production), and offsets to costs (e.g., less
need for maintenance and repairs) when providing feedback on this
ANPRM. DHS also requests that commenters provide data and information
on economic effects that suggestions may have on market conditions or
services (e.g., market structure and concentration), and in particular,
any special circumstances related to small entities, such as potential
market-structure disruptions or uniquely high costs that small entities
may bear.
DHS requests that commenters discuss economic impacts in as
specific terms as possible. For example, if a regulatory or policy
change would necessitate additional employee training, then helpful
information would include the following: The training courses
necessary; the types of employees or contractors who would receive the
training; topics covered; any retraining necessary; and the training
costs if conducted by a third-party vendor or in-house trainer. The
Department invites comment on the time and level of expertise required
to implement commenter suggestions,
[[Page 48695]]
even if dollar-cost estimates are not available.
Feedback that simply states a stakeholder feels strongly that DHS
should modify CFATS, without including actionable data, including how
the proposed change would impact the costs and benefits of CFATS, is
much less useful to DHS. To help DHS organize and review all comments,
please identify the relevant provision of 6 CFR part 27 that relates to
the specific comment provided (e.g., 6 CFR 27.100). If the commenter's
suggestion is on a topic that is not covered by the current regulation,
please note that in the submission.
Written comments may be submitted electronically or by mail, as
explained previously in the ADDRESSES section of this ANPRM. To avoid
duplication, please use only one of these methods to submit written
comments.
Except as provided below, all comments received, as well as
pertinent background documents, will be posted without change to https://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided.
B. Handling of Proprietary, Sensitive and Chemical-Terrorism
Vulnerability Information
Interested parties are encouraged to submit comments in a manner
that does not include any discussion of trade secrets, proprietary
commercial or financial information, Chemical-terrorism Vulnerability
Information (CVI), or any other category of sensitive information \10\
that should not be disclosed to the general public. If it is not
possible to avoid such discussion, however, please specifically
identify any proprietary or sensitive information contained in the
comments with appropriate warning language (e.g., any CVI must be
marked and handled in accordance with the requirements of 6 CFR
27.400(f)), and submit them by mail to the individual listed in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ For example, information covered under Sensitive Security
Information (SSI).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
DHS will not place any proprietary or sensitive comments in the
public docket; rather, DHS will handle them in accordance with
applicable safeguards and restrictions on access. See e.g., 6 CFR
27.400. See also the DHS CVI Procedural Manual, ``Safeguarding
Information Designated as CVI,'' September 2008, located on the DHS Web
site at: www.dhs.gov/critical-infrastructure-chemical-security. DHS
will hold any such comments in a separate file to which the public does
not have access, and place a note in the public docket that DHS has
received such materials from the commenter. DHS will provide
appropriate access to such comments upon request to individuals who
meet the applicable legal requirements for access to such information.
III. Listening Sessions
A. Purpose
The Department plans to hold multiple public listening sessions to
solicit the public's views on the ANPRM and how the current CFATS
regulation might be improved. DHS plans to announce dates, times and
locations of these public listening sessions on the Department's
Chemical Security Web site at www.dhs.gov/critical-infrastructure-chemical-security.
B. Procedures and Participation for the Listening Sessions
Each meeting will be open to the public. DHS will use sign-in
sheets to voluntarily collect contact information from the attending
public and to properly log oral comments received during the sessions.
Providing contact information will be voluntary, and members of the
public may also make oral comments without providing their names.
Seating may be limited, but session organizers will make every effort
to accommodate all participants. A listening session may adjourn early
if all commenters present have had the opportunity to speak prior to
the scheduled conclusion of the session. For information on facilities
or services for individuals with disabilities or to request special
assistance at the public listening sessions, contact Mr. Jon MacLaren
at the telephone number or email address indicated under the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this ANPRM.
For members of the public who cannot attend a scheduled listening
session, a copy of any presentation provided by the Department at the
sessions will be made available via the Department's Chemical Security
Web site at www.dhs.gov/critical-infrastructure-chemical-security. In
addition, DHS will place a transcript of each of these public listening
sessions in the docket for this rulemaking.
IV. Questions for Commenters
To help DHS identify ways, if any, to improve the manner in which
it administers CFATS, DHS seeks public comments on any and all aspects
of 6 CFR part 27, including both the CFATS Interim Final Rule and
Appendix A. Areas that DHS is most interested in receiving comments on
include, but are not limited to, the following:
a. General Regulatory Approach--Comments on how the Department
could continue to improve its current approach toward identifying CFATS
covered facilities and ensuring their compliance with CFATS
requirements, such as:
(1) the information submission processes (i.e., the Top-Screen,
SVA, and SSP submissions) and associated schedules; \11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ Submission schedules are detailed in 6 CFR 27.210.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(2) the means and methods by which facilities claim a statutorily
exempt status and whether or not commenters think that deletions,
additions or modification to the list of exempt facilities should be
considered;
(3) the use of ASPs in lieu of SVAs and, in particular, the current
limitation on the use of ASPs in lieu of SVAs to Tier 4 facilities;
(4) the, scope, tier applicability and processes for submitting and
reviewing SSPs and ASPs;
(5) the processes for submitting and evaluating requests for
redetermination by chemical facilities previously determined by DHS to
be high-risk; and
(6) the issuance of orders and the regulatory enforcement process.
DHS also requests that the commenter provide, in as much detail as
possible, an explanation why the regulatory approach should be
modified, streamlined, expanded, or removed, as well as specific
suggestions of the ways DHS can better achieve its regulatory
objectives.
b. Treatment of Non-Traditional Chemical Facilities--DHS recognizes
that a one-size-fits-all approach may not be optimal for such a diverse
regulated community, and requests comments regarding the applicability
of existing CFATS requirements and processes (e.g., Top-Screen/SVA/SSP
formats and submission schedules; risk-based performance standards;
holding times for COI) to non-traditional chemical facilities covered
under CFATS.\12\ DHS also is particularly interested in comments on
maintaining, lifting, or partially lifting the indefinite extension
from the Top-Screen submission
[[Page 48696]]
deadline for agricultural production facilities issued in December
2007.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ The expansive and dynamic nature of the community that uses
potentially hazardous chemicals and that have facilities that are
covered by CFATS include, but are not limited to many types of
facilities that are not traditionally considered ``chemical
facilities,'' such as agricultural product manufacturers; microchip
manufacturers; paint and coatings manufacturers; mines; hospitals;
racecar tracks; and colleges and universities. With the exception of
agricultural production facilities, the CFATS processes and
requirements are the same for all covered facilities.
\13\ In December 2007, DHS exercised its discretion under the
CFATS regulation by granting an indefinite extension from the Top-
Screen submission deadline for agricultural production facilities
that use chemicals of interest (COI) and COI-containing products for
agricultural production purposes (see 73 FR 1640). Examples of
agricultural production facilities include: farms, ranches and range
land, livestock facilities, turf grass growers, golf courses,
nurseries and floricultural operations, and public and private
parks.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
c. Clarification of Terminology--Comments regarding the utility,
clarity and accuracy of definitions currently found in 6 CFR 27.105,
such as, but not limited to, the definitions of ``A Commercial Grade''
and ``A Placarded Amount.'' DHS also seeks comments on the utility of
including definitions, and what those definitions should be, for the
terms ``material modifications,'' ``critical asset,'' and ``site
asset;'' and ``inspection.'' DHS invites comments on recommendations
for additional terms used in the current CFATS regulations that may
warrant further clarification.
d. Risk Based Performance Standards \14\--Comments on whether and
how DHS should clarify or modify the 18 RBPS in 6 CFR 27.230, whether
DHS should combine and/or eliminate any of the existing RBPS, and
whether DHS should adopt any additional RBPS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ CFATS establishes eighteen Risk-Based Performance Standards
(RBPSs) that identify the areas for which a facility's security
posture will be examined, such as perimeter security, access
control, personnel surety, and cyber security. To meet the RBPSs,
covered facilities are free to choose whatever security programs or
processes they deem appropriate, so long as they achieve the
requisite level of performance in each applicable area. The programs
and processes that a high-risk facility ultimately chooses to
implement to meet these standards must be described in the Site
Security Plan (SSP) that every high-risk chemical facility must
develop pursuant to the regulations. The RBPS guidance document is
available online at: https://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/chemsec_cfats_riskbased_performance_standards.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
e. Appendix A--Comments on all aspects of CFATS Appendix A,
including:
(1) Comments on the possible addition of chemicals to, and/or the
deletion or modification of certain COI currently listed in Appendix A;
(2) any term utilized in 6 CFR 27.203, and the applicability and/or
modification of STQs as the bases for listing COI (e.g., by security
issue(s)); and
(3) the concentration and mixtures rules associated with Appendix
A, which are described in 6 CFR 27.204.
f. Small Business Considerations--Comments regarding considerations
specific to small businesses.
g. Alignment with Other Regulatory Programs--Comments regarding how
the Department may be able to better align CFATS and other existing
chemical facility regulations, including comments on any duplication or
overlap that may exist between CFATS and another regulatory
program.\15\ When providing comments on this topic, DHS encourages
commenters to provide the specific citations to the regulatory regimes
that may duplicate or overlap with the requirements under CFATS as well
as a specific description of the duplicative or overlapping
requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ Information on other chemical safety and security programs
that may impact CFATS-regulated facilities is provided in the
preamble to the CFATS Final Rule (see 72 FR 17689), as well as the
E.O. 13650 May 2014 Final Report.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In addressing these topics, DHS encourages interested parties to
provide specific data that documents the potential costs of modifying
the existing regulatory requirements pursuant to the commenter's
suggestions; the potential quantifiable benefits including security and
societal benefits of modifying the existing regulatory requirements;
and the potential impacts on small businesses of modifying the existing
regulatory requirements. Commenters might also address how DHS can best
obtain and consider accurate, objective information and data about the
costs, burdens, and benefits of the CFATS Interim Final Rule and
Appendix A, and whether there are lower cost alternatives that would
allow the Department to continue to achieve its security goals
consistent with the law.
Jeh Charles Johnson,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2014-19356 Filed 8-15-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-9P-P