Bill Erny, the Senior Director for Regulatory and Technical
Affairs at the American Chemistry Council, left an interesting
comment on my first
blog post (BTW: there should be at least one more posting in that series,
probably this weekend) about the establishment of the Alternative Security
Program (ASP) developed by that organization. While all reader comments are
appreciated, it is particularly nice to have input from people directly
involved in the development of important programs like this one (HINT: Is
anyone in ISCD willing to comment?).
Time Savings
Bill did take exception to my comment:
“One thing is very clear to me, it
is going to take much more work to complete the ACC ASP than it would be to
answer the questions in the DHS SSP.”
He responded:
“However, your observation that the
ASP would take more work to complete is not actually the case. In fact, the
opposite was reported by several owner/operators who were involved in the pilot
testing and said that the ASP saves significant time over the SSP. This is true
mainly due to the amount of duplication that is eliminated in the ASP versus
the SSP.”
This would certainly be true if the facility in question was
already providing the level of detail really required for the proper analysis
of the Site Security Plan submission. Since most facilities are not giving ISCD
enough information I, think I’ll stand by my comment. But please don’t
misunderstand me; this is almost certainly a good thing. A little extra time
ensuring that facility submits the required information will save time in the
long run as ISCD will not have to conduct Pre-Authorization Inspections with
all of the follow-up delays that that has been causing.
More Useful Information
Bill makes another interesting point that should be obvious
in retrospect:
“The DHS field inspectors who
participated in the pilots also reported that the ACC ASP offers a significant
improvement over the SSP for use during auditing.”
The data format in the current SSP data submission tool (I
really do hate that DHS calls this a site security plan) is designed to be used
by a computer, not people. Printing out a copy of the SSP submission has got to
be one of the greatest wastes of trees in the federal bureaucracy. The ACC ASP,
on the other hand should read and feel like an actual security plan for the
facility. It should be a document that people at the facility should actually
be able to use in the management of the plan and it will be a very helpful
document for anyone that wants to audit the program.
No comments:
Post a Comment