Reader Comment 04-01-10 LEPC Response

Jim Lupacchino, from Day & Zimmermann Security Services, responded to a blog posting from last week that had been continuing the discussion of hazard communication. Jim wrote: “I respect the spirit of your commentary. Recognizing that wind speed, humidity and dispersion rates impact the spread of a "threat cloud", I would suggest that there are companies that work with chlorine and anhydrous ammonia that are in close communication with LEPCs'.“Perhaps the LEPCs' could stand up and recognize the companies that share the risks of onsite poison inhalation hazards and demonstrate corporate citizenship in their respective communities.” I agree that there are almost certainly companies out there that do a good job of keeping their neighbors informed about their on-site chemical hazards. Unfortunately those companies seldom make the news for their communications skills. This is the reason that I wrote the posting that started the original discussion; they do deserve recognition, both from their communities and others in the industry. When I see news reports about this type of pro-active community outreach, I will certainly recognize it. It does seem to me that most companies seem to be trying to take the tack of remaining invisible. They do everything that they can to stay below the level of public perception. A lot of this has to do with the bad press that the chemical industry gets when individual facilities do a bad job of handling information sharing during incidents. Bayer CropScience got a lot more bad press for their handing of their Aug 2008 incident than Barton Solvents got good press for the proactive way they handled the results of their catastrophic fire in Kansas City in July 2007. Having said that, every company that holds significant quantities of release toxic COI has a legal and moral obligation to keep their potentially affected neighbors fully aware of the potential hazards from those chemicals and how to respond to potential releases. Trying to educate the public during a catastrophic release is a waste of time and could get hundreds of people killed. Hunkering down and ignoring the press when outsiders point out the hazards in ways that are designed to get people upset only ensures that the public gets a one-sided presentation of the hazard. And it certainly won’t do anything to help prevent a panic in the event of a significant yet non-catastrophic event. I agree with Jim that local LEPC’s should let the public know when facilities are cooperative and proactive in providing emergency response planners with the necessary information needed to get their jobs done properly. They also need to blow the whistle when that cooperation is not forth coming, the point made by Fred Millar in his earlier comment. What we really need is a spirit of cooperation and communication between high-risk facilities and their neighbors. After all, they are inexorably tied together; that is what makes the facility at high-risk of being a terrorist target and what puts the community at risk for the consequences of a terrorist attack.