Opinion is so divided about SB 1003, which would shield internal corporate environmental, health and safety audits from public or court view, that combatants can\u2019t even agree on its name.<\/p>\n
Backers say it would entice chemical and energy industries to make safety and stringent environmental protection core corporate values. They call it an \u201cenvironmental or health and safety law\u201d.<\/p>\n
Foes say it rewards corporate polluters who violate health and safety laws by dodging responsibility or even public disclosure.<\/p>\n
While its official name is the \u201cEnvironmental, Health and Safety Audit Privilege Act, critics call it the \u201cPollution Secrecy Act\u201d or \u201cRight to Know Nothing Bill\u201d.<\/p>\n
It sailed through the Senate with little notice March 14 by a 36-7 margin, with 5 senators excused, despite the act specifically excluding from the Oklahoma Open Records Act not just audits, but any documents used as exhibits or appendices or photographs\u2014even ones not collected as audit components. Also secret would be communications \u201cassociated with an environmental or health and safety audit\u201d (without defining \u201cassociated\u201d), and even documents not marked as \u201cPrivileged.\u201d<\/p>\n