Courtesy reports

Well that sounds very polite.

Last month, an unknown amount and type of acid gas leaked from within the Domino Sugar refining facility in Chalmette, escaping into the air. The cause was also unknown, according to a notice sent to the Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality by the plant.

Such self-disclosures are sometimes known as courtesy reports, and are often the only way members of the public learn of unauthorized releases.

You might even call it "civil discourse."  Why would anyone object to such a friendly practice?

A move toward self-audits is heavily supported by Louisiana's oil, gas and chemical industries, who have pushed for some version of it since 1997. The state agency argues the program would be modeled after one designed by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency that aims to incentivize polluters to disclose and correct minor issues in plants more proactively. In exchange, companies may receive a reduction in fines and a veil of secrecy until settlement proceedings close -- or for two years, whichever comes first.

Instead of fixing a policy that upholds safe environmental standards under penalty of law, the legislature has proposed that we offer polluting industry, "incentives" to correct what the text of this article asserts are "minor issues." It's so dang nice of them!  Such a welcome change in tone from all the nasty epithets one usually hears thrown around to describe one of the nation's most cancer-ridden regions. Just ask Bill Cassidy. He knows. 

The concentration of chemical plants and refineries in mostly poor, Black areas of Louisiana drew international attention in January when President Joe Biden mentioned “Cancer Alley” in a speech about a series of executive orders targeting climate change and industrial pollution in areas with large non-white populations. Some Louisiana leaders bristled at the president’s use of the term, which many residents use to describe the Mississippi River corridor between New Orleans and Baton Rouge; Sen. Bill Cassidy called it “a slam upon our state.”

Besides, offering "incentives" rather than enforcing rules is clearly the most effective means the government has at its disposal for protecting the public from health hazards.  Everybody knows that.

But the primary aim of this bill is to keep any potential nastiness is kept out of the public discourse altogether. And, again, isn't that better for everyone's state of mind?

During the session, agency officials said information provided in self-audits that companies are already required to report would remain public. But those courtesy reports aren't legally required if the company finds that the amount released was below reportable quantities.

Bagert says it's unclear whether these notices would remain available to the public if they're provided through a self-audit.

"The question here is whether the public has a right to know information that its government is in possession of about toxic chemicals in their own community," he said. "We all could have debates about the appropriate regulation. This is something far simpler. It's even knowing that releases and spills of these toxic chemicals have taken place."

The Governor has until Thursday night to decide whether to veto this one.  But, again, why would he do that?  It seems so pleasant.  His own administration apparently lobbied for it, even.  

On the other hand, if he really wants to please everyone, he has a chance to do that too.  Since Together Louisiana and other environmental groups seem so adamant about it now, why not let rip with the veto pen this one time and make them happy.  The legislature can come back and override him later and it'll be out of his hands anyway.  That way everyone does everyone else a favor.  Perfectly courteous.