ARCC Letter to Dr. Thom White Wolf Fassett

Re: "A Dioxin-Free Future"

February 10, 2000

Dr. Thom White Wolf Fassett
General Secretary
The General Board of Church and Society
The Methodist Building
100 Maryland Avenue, NE
Washington, DC 20002

Dear Dr. Fassett:

On behalf of the Alliance for the Responsible Use of Chlorine Chemistry (ARCC), a coalition of major American unions and companies, we are contacting you with regard to the United Methodist Church's resolution entitled "A Dioxin-Free Future" in the UMC's 1996 Book of Resolutions.

The ARCC provides a forum for unions and companies to discuss issues affecting jobs and investments in chlorine chemistry-related industries. The ARCC understands and shares the UMC's concern over potential impacts of dioxin and other forms of pollution. The ARCC's position is that the potential threats posed by dioxin (and other byproducts of production) should be strictly managed to avoid harm to people and the environment.

In that light, we respectfully request that the UMC reconsider and improve its 1996 resolution using the occasion of its General Conference in May, 2000. The UMC's position should be based on the latest scientific information available. We would ask that the UMC not base its future policy positions on the 1996 resolution, which appears to be based largely on an unpublished draft EPA document dating from 1994. In reading the resolution, we note that its tone is quite similar to that taken by a small number of activists. The resolution appears to have been crafted without any effort to involve the broader community of people most directly concerned with chlorine chemistry, including workers, producers and those who depend on its many beneficial products every day.

The resolution presents highly controversial health allegations, which are subjects of ongoing scientific study, as established facts. The resolution implies that there is broad scientific consensus that current environmental background levels of dioxin present a public health threat. This is not true; in fact, respected scientists have stated that current levels do not present a public health threat. The resolution also implies that America's unionized workers favor shutting down the chlorine chemistry industries. Chlorine chemistry industries generate significant U.S. (and global) high-wage employment. In simple terms, most workers want to clean up major industries -- not shut them down. Most workers would not favor replacing jobs with a vaguely-defined government welfare program. Last, but not least, the resolution does not mention the important fact that industry and government already have made considerable strides in addressing dioxin exposures and will continue to do so.

As a result of public action, government regulation and industry advances, dioxin emissions already have been slashed by 75 percent since the mid-1980s according to the EPA. Worker exposure has been eliminated or drastically reduced. According to EPA, new U.S. regulations and technologies affecting incinerators, medical incinerators and pulp and paper mills will further slash emissions. The result of this balanced, science-based approach is clear: substantial environmental progress, coupled with continued beneficial employment in the chlorine chemistry-based industries.

Again, thank you for your consideration. We would appreciate the opportunity to send representatives of our group, representing both unions and employers, to speak with you in advance of the UMC General Conference.

Sincerely,

CC: The Reverend Jaydee Hanson Board Members of the General Board of Church and Society