Regarding the Associated Press story ``Chlorine: Safe Chemical or Toxic Threat?'' Dec. 15: It reports a 1992 proposal for a phaseout of the industrial use of chlorine in the Great Lakes region. Bonnie Rice of Greenpeace's Chlorine Free Campaign states, ``Using chlorine is going to end life as we know it....''
How do we define the term ``using chlorine''? To clarify the Greenpeace position it would be useful to inquire whether Ms. Rice is referring to free, bound, molecular, free-radical, ionic, or covalent chlorine, the properties of which are vastly different.
Does Rice's unqualified statement relate to the use of chlorine in the purification of drinking water for more than a century? Volcanoes have been puffing out poisonous chlorine gas since before the Pleistocene Epoch.
We need a workable definition of ``using chlorine,'' including an indication of what kind and how much, and less of the currently fashionable knee-jerk reaction to the ``toxic-chemical'' syndrome. Robert B. Henn, Ambler, Pa.
Your letters are welcome. For publication they must be signed and include your address and telephone number. Only a selection can be published, and none acknowledged. Letters should be addressed to ``Readers Write,'' and can be sent by Internet E-mail (200 word maximum) to OPED@RACHEL.CSPS.COM, by fax to 617-450-2317, or by mail to One Norway St., Boston, MA 02115