Let me begin by stating that the issues we will be addressing today are of critical importance to the citizens of Florida. In the last several months I have heard from the Florida Propane Gas Association, the Florida Farm Bureau, Florida Citrus Mutual, and the Florida Tobacco and Candy Association, as well as over 100 farmers, restaurant owners, and other small business owners in Florida regarding the adverse impact to their businesses that is anticipated as a result of the EPA's application of Section 112(r) of the Clean Air Act to the propane industry.
I have also heard from many Floridians who are concerned about the presence of flammable materials in their local communities. These individuals have a right to this information so they can participate in developing emergency response strategies.
The two main questions we will be discussing today mirror the concerns raised to me by these Floridians. First, we will be hearing differing views on whether Congress intended for Section 112(r) to include propane as a substance for which an EPA Risk Management Plan is required. Of particular interest to me is the process by which the EPA decided to list propane as one of those substances requiring a Risk Management Plan. There are three factors listed in Section 112 of the Clean Air Act which the EPA is required to use in listing substances. I am interested in learning from the EPA what type of analyses were completed with relation to propane and its performance against each of these criteria.
Second, we will be discussing whether or not the publication and widespread dissemination of Risk Management Plans and worst case scenario data would provide potential terrorists with targets for domestic terrorism. As many of you know, Florida has a long-standing tradition of full access to information. Our entire state government operates under a "Sunshine Law" requiring that government actions be open to the public.
It is with this tradition in mind that I offer my support for rational, well-organized community-right-to-know policies which provide incentives for good management of hazardous materials and ensure that local communities can develop adequate risk management strategies.
Today we will be hearing from several witnesses who will provide their views on the potential dangers associated with dissemination of risk management data to the general public. I look forward to hearing the results of this testimony and working with the members of this SubCommittee to identify any action that may be necessary.