January 26, 2006

Desk Officer for PHMSA
Office of Management and Budget
725 17th Street, NW
Washington, DC 20503

Dear Sir or Madam:

The Dangerous Goods Advisory Council (DGAC) is an international, non-profit, educational organization dedicated to the promotion of the safe transportation of hazardous materials/dangerous goods. We are writing in response to PHMSA’s Notice and Request for Comments [Docket No. RSPA – 2005-20036 (Notice No. 05-10)] published in the Federal Register on December 28, 2005. DGAC comments apply to information collection for Hazardous Materials Security Plans (OMB Control Number: 2137-0612).

DGAC believes the estimated burden hours is too low and believes that the regulations could be revised to reduce the number of respondents while providing a more appropriate level of security for hazardous materials shipments.

The PHMSA December 28, 2005 notice estimates that 42,000 shippers and carriers are subject to the security plan requirement resulting in 42,200 responses and 247,250 total burden hours annually. This suggests that on average, the time required for each security plan is roughly 6 hours. While DGAC agrees that approximately 42,000 entities are affected by the requirement, DGAC does not agree with the estimated number of responses and the estimated burden hours. Many shippers and carriers have to prepare more than one security plan. For example, shippers who transport hazardous materials from more than one facility must prepare a security plan for each facility. DGAC recommends that PHMSA assume that 15% (i.e., the percent of entities considered big businesses for PHMSA registration purposes) of the respondents subject to security plan requirements must on average prepare 3 security plans resulting in 55,000 annual responses. The notice is not clear on whether the estimated burden hours shown represents the time to prepare new security plans or the time needed to update plans annually. DGAC believes that both efforts should be taken into account. DGAC has previously commented that the average time necessary to prepare a plan is 200 hours in comparison to the 20 hours previously estimated in PHMSA’s security plan final rule. DGAC estimates that 10% of the responses are new plans and estimates that 25 hours are necessary to update existing plans annually. On this basis, DGAC estimates 2,337,500 total burden hours.

DGAC believes that the applicability of the security plan regulation could be restricted to a smaller number of entities without significantly diminishing the overall security of hazardous materials in transportation. Currently the regulation applies to all shippers and carriers engaged in transporting placarded loads of hazardous materials. DGAC notes that many placarded load shipments contain materials that pose little or no security risk. For example, paints and swimming pool compounds may be transported in placarded load shipments. These materials are readily available to consumers in retail outlets and it is unlikely that a person with malevolent intent would intercept shipments of such materials to acquire them. Many covered materials pose no significant security risk. As the Federal government progresses toward a risk based approach to security, DGAC believes that PHMSA should also take a more risk based approach toward the application of the security plan regulation. In this respect, DGAC notes that the United Nations Model Regulations on the Transport of Dangerous Goods also includes requirements for security plans similar to those in the HMR. The UN Model Regulation includes an indicative list of high consequence materials “which have the potential for misuse in a terrorist incident and which may, as a result, produce serious consequences such as mass casualties or mass destruction.” The UN security plan requirement only applies to high consequence materials. DGAC further notes that the list was devised with active participation by the Department of Transportation. DGAC believes that using the UN Indicative List of Materials as the criterion for applicability of the security plan regulation would focus attention on those materials more likely to pose a true security risk while reducing the number of respondents preparing security plans to less than 25% of the current number. In addition use of the UN Indicative List offers the added benefit of further harmonization of US and international transport regulations.

DGAC also notes that regulations for Security Sensitive Information in 49 CFR Parts 15 and 1520 may also apply to security plans prepared in accordance with the PHMSA requirements. Clarification of this issue is pending based on the attached DGAC letters to DOT Secretary Mineta and DHS Assistant Secretary for TSA Hawley. Should the SSI requirements be found to apply, additional document management and marking requirements would also apply.

DGAC appreciates the opportunity to comment on the information collection budget notice.

Sincerely,

Michael Morrissette
President

Enclosures