- WASHINGTON -- Federal agencies
are using secrecy rules developed after the 9/11 attacks to hide embarrassing
or controversial reports and data that the federal government once routinely
made public.
-
- Environmental groups, scientific organizations and animal-rights
advocates are complaining about increasing difficulties in obtaining information
on what government inspectors are finding about worker safety at nuclear
power plants, toxic releases at chemical plants, or tests on live animals
in scientific laboratories.
-
- In February 2002, the U.S. Agriculture Department removed
from its Web site annual reports on how scientific laboratories are treating
animals during experiments. The department said it wanted to see whether
the reports contained "homeland security information."
-
- Martin Stephens, vice president for animal research issues
at the Humane Society of the United States, said the Justice Department
ruled that the material the government is required to gather under the
Animal Welfare Act doesn't involve security concerns, but the Agriculture
Department has refused to release any recent reports or put the material
back online.
-
- "It's pretty much the only source of this information,"
Stephens said. "Without these documents, we are in the dark about
what's going on."
-
- He said the department's surveys reflect the prevalence
of live testing on animals in scientific laboratories and require documentation
for the rationale for withholding pain medication when tests are conducted.
-
- The government reports have also been used to document
that some universities that publicly deny they are involved in live animal
testing are experimenting with animals in their laboratories.
-
- The Humane Society filed suit this week seeking to obtain
the documents. Agriculture Department spokesman Jim Rogers said he could
not respond to questions on the issue because the matter is being litigated.
-
- Michele Boyd, legislative director for the watchdog group
Public Citizen, said the Nuclear Regulatory Commission removed data on
worker safety issues and health effects for a proposed Louisiana Energy
Services nuclear facility in southeastern New Mexico.
-
- "What health and worker safety information would
be of interest to terrorists?" Boyd asked. She said workers at the
plant and neighbors around it deserve to know what dangers they are facing.
-
- "We scream about it, and they don't particularly
care," Boyd said.
-
- The agency initially posted information from an environmental
impact statement on its Web site, but then withdrew some materials in December
that discussed the potentially lethal consequences of accidents.
-
- New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson joined activists in protesting
the withdrawal of the documents, saying it makes it impossible for citizens
to make informed decisions about the facility.
-
- Many other agencies are using the post 9/11 crack down
to keep secret data that once was public:
-
- - The Environmental Protection Agency is no longer releasing
the information it gathers when chemical plants dump toxic substances.
-
- - The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission is refusing
to release publicly documents that it prepared in secret on the dangers
of liquefied natural gas terminals under construction along America's coastlines.
The commission claims the material is "critical energy infrastructure
information."
-
- - Despite bitter complaints from the nation's mayors,
the Homeland Security Department won't tell police and fire departments
when dangerous shipments of hazardous materials move through their jurisdictions.
South Carolina authorities weren't alerted to the presence of a Norfolk
and Southern Railroad tanker carrying chlorine until it exploded on a railroad
siding, killing nine people. There are 90,000 shipments by rail of chlorine
each year, and the federal government cites the need to keep the information
from terrorists as justification for secrecy.
-
- - The Justice Department had been withholding details
of what's been happening in secret proceedings against immigrants since
9/11. After losing a lawsuit over the issue, the department presented the
People for the American Way Foundation with a $373,000 bill this week for
rounding up documents on the cases.
-
- A study by the Rand Corp. last year of the 36 Web sites
and more than 600 public data bases shut down after 9/11 concluded government
efforts to censor information was ill-advised and ineffective. Terrorists
would not be interested in much of the information and, in any event, it
could be obtained elsewhere in textbooks, trade journals or through non-government
sites, the study concluded.
-
- But government secrecy is expanding. The Department of
Homeland Security issued regulations last June telling government agencies
they no longer need to release environmental impact statements, and secrecy
rules are being applied not only to documents the government gathers, but
also to information the government finances.
-
- The Council on Government Relations, representing the
nation's university system, protests that scientists are facing unprecedented
new rules written into research contracts requiring them to suppress sensitive
but unclassified materials and also to receive special approval if foreigners
are involved in the government-financed research.
-
- Albert Teich, of the American Association for the Advancement
of Science, said that unlike classified research for which there are written
rules, there are no firm guidelines on how to handle sensitive but unclassified
information. In a December 2004 report, the Congressional Research Service
found the way government agencies handle sensitive but unclassified materials
differs widely across the government.
-
- "This is a gray area," he said. He worries
the bureaucracy is treating the material over-cautiously to avoid recriminations
if U.S. government documents later show up in a cave in Afghanistan.
-
- Teich said tightly applied rules prevent necessary scientific
exchange, and a preoccupation with secrecy hurts America's long-term economic
health.
-
- "The whole scientific enterprise moves forward on
the free exchange of ideas and information," he said. "We could
be shooting ourselves in the foot if we do anything that slows down this
sort of research."
-
- © 2003 The E.W. Scripps Co.
-
- http://www.knoxstudio.com/
|
