Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: E who wrote (20662)	12/20/2003 6:06:23 PM
From: E	Respond to of 793800

This is a very interesting item, imo. The subject of these paras is the danger of Homeland Security regs being used for liability exemption, or a "Get out of jail free" card for companies: "The Homeland Security Act allows companies to make voluntary submissions of information about critical infrastructure to the Department of Homeland Security. The idea is to encourage firms to share information crucial to running and protecting those facilities. But under the terms of the law, when a company does this, the information is exempted from public disclosure and cannot be used without the submitting party's permission in any civil proceeding, even a government enforcement action. Some critics see this as a get-out-of-jail-free card, allowing companies worried about potential litigation or regulatory actions to place troublesome information in a convenient "homeland security" vault. "The sweep of it is amazing," says Beryl Howell, former general counsel to the Senate Judiciary Committee. "Savvy businesses will be able to mark every document handed over [to] government officials as `CII' to ensure their confidentiality." Companies "wanted liability exemption long before 9/11," adds Patrice McDermott, a lobbyist for the American Library Association, which has a tradition of advocacy on right-to-know issues. "Now, they've got it." ...When Congress passed the law, it said the antidisclosure provision would apply only to information submitted to the Department of Homeland Security. The department recently proposed extending the provision to cover information submitted to any federal agency. A department spokesman did not respond to requests for comment." usnews.com

To: E who wrote (20662)	12/20/2003 11:49:40 PM
From: Ilaine	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793800

I know a lot of information was removed from on-line access after 9/11. Maps, diagrams, descriptions, including, I assume, the location of the Aberdeen weapons base, which is actually a very sensitive place, militarily. A good navigation map of the Chesapeake Bay area would be about all one needed for monitoring discharge of effluents, and then you'd have to be able to collect and test water samples from a small boat. That's the way that is done. Copies of internal monitoring and tests could be achieved via FOIA - assuming that the composition of the effluent isn't classified. But the source you cite says that the citizens wanted information on tracking the pollution sources - it's almost definitely a point source, wouldn't you think? And you can't really expect a map of the discharge point. At any rate, we're speaking at the level of broad generalities, which conveys almost no useful information. I am a splitter, not a lumper. Excessive lumping makes me itchy. That's why I asked about specific information you were deprived of, if any.