Appendix vii

To the editor:

This letter is in reference to the article that was printed in the Daily Courier last Wednesday, titled "Residents Ask Review of Chip Mill Application." I would like to clear up a few points.

First, Cathy Baldwin, the corporate communications manager for Willamette Industries, said, "the company was not required to notify state environmental officials about the release" that occurred in Johnsonburg, Pennsylvania. 120 homes were sprayed with a black liquid substance. Ms. Baldwin said "that the substance was not hazardous." It wasn't hazardous; it was caustic. When does a substance that is caustic not become hazardous? Please don't insult our intellect, Willamette. It is interesting to note that James Self, the Secretary with the Department of Environmental Protection in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, states in a letter dated February 2, 1996, that "the law requires notification of a release within 24 hours." After being "notified by an anonymous complaint" and dispatching "an emergency response team member to the scene" a call was received from Willamette. I am quoting Mr. Self, "We are encouraging Willamette, in the future, to notify us as soon as possible if there should be any accidental releases." Why didn't Willamette use its corporate responsibility and notify officials of this liquid substance called "black liquid?" Is this the first "accidental release" that has happened in a Willamette plant? Absolutely not. Why isn't safe equipment installed when a plant is being built to avoid unnecessary harm and gross feelings of "bad will" to the citizens living in the area around the plant? This is not a good neighbor, as Ms. Baldwin quotes.

Secondly, to read the court case about the Malvern, Arkansas' residents is heart wrenching. In 1993, the state of Arkansas fined Willamette $60,000 for "operating outside state pollution laws." To live in this neighborhood where a company of this magnitude has violated your very existence with particle emissions damaging health and property is an atrocity. I wonder if Cathy Baldwin or Steven Rogel, the CEO of Willamette, would like to live next to this wood product plant in Hot Springs County, Arkansas? I don't think so. And yes, it's true as Ms. Baldwin cites that Willamette did take "action to correct emission problems." However, why didn't this company which has so much money, build this plant from start to finish with all the necessary safety equipment installed before actual production began? A good neighbor would have.

If Willamette Industries purports to be "good neighbors," than why do the residents of Johnsonburg and Kane, Pennsylvania; Albany, Oregon; Malvern, Arkansas; and the list goes on and on, have to be industrial police in order to keep this irresponsible corporate neighbor in line? The list of litigation, suits pending, and fines is proof of their unethical track record. Willamette's answer is to fix the problem after the damage is done or don't bother to address the issue at all.

And lastly, can Rutherford County residents afford to take a chance on letting Willamette continue to aggressively use negligence and greed to set up a business, which continues to make an incredible amount of money at the expense of its citizens? The answer is an unequivocal no!

Lynne Faltraco
Union Mills