|
 |
 |
|
 |
|
Vermont Agency of Natural Resources |
|||
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
 Advisory Committee on Mercury PollutionFourth Meeting: Tuesday, February 16, 1999 MINUTES Present: The committee members and interested parties gathered in the Ethan Allen Room at the Vermont State House in Montpelier, Vermont and the meeting was called to order at 4:00 p.m. by Richard Phillips. Some committee members were unable to attend due to illness and Hollie Shanner attended via telephone because of an injury. Agenda Item 1- Accept minutes of the January 18th meeting and changes to today’s Agenda The first order of business was to accept the minutes of the January 18, 1999 meeting. It was determined because of the low attendance that this item would be determined at the next meeting. Richard Phillips requested time to go over additional items that he wished to add to the agenda at the end of the meeting. Also Richard Phillips supplied copies of the Bill, H154, which came out of the workings of this committee and would like to go over briefly. Agenda Item 2 - Develop recommendations for next steps on the Abenaki anglers study and survey William Bress advised that he has spoken to the Epidemiology Department and the Commissioner to see if the Health Department was going to do a study, would they use the River Watch Study and then build off that or would the study have to be started from scratch. Their feeling was they would prefer to start the study from scratch. Because the toxicity questions were for serious mercury poisoning, they felt they needed a study with more sensitive and subtle questions. Mr Bress also asked that if the Health Department wasn’t doing the study, could that study be used by someone else to be continued. They are looking into that possibility at this point. Mr. Bress also suggested that the Lake Champlain Basin Program has an opportunity every year to submit grants. This could be one approach that could be taken independently from working with the state. Michael Bender advised that there were telephone surveys now being conducted on women of child bearing age. He suggested that this piece might be able to tie in with another survey which is larger. Michael Bender also suggested exploring the feasibility of an aquiculture project and whether or not there is some sort of pro-active approach to solve the problem. William Bress suggested inviting someone from Fish and Wildlife to give the committee advice as to whether or not this is a realistic approach. The committee determined that if they want to move forward in support of this legislation that they needed to get much more definition of what the Health Department study would be before they went before appropriations. Representative David Deen added that the appropriation committee would be meeting on March 23rd or 24th on the house side and would be voted out of committee on March 19, 1999. Mr. Bress advised that what he was envisioning was a survey as to the amounts of fish that were consumed rather than hair or blood testing. He feels that it would be more of a consumption survey to determine how much fish the people eat and then what type of risk they are at. The advisory is set up under standards of "meals per month." Mr. Bress feels that if the survey concludes that the consumption amount is greater than the 8 ounce per meal consumption guideline, then the advisory is way off. The committee concluded that if the people are consuming larger amounts than the advisory guidelines, then they should correct by consuming the types of fish which contain less mercury. Their concern was how to reach those particular populations. It was suggested that within the next two weeks a draft be developed by Mr. Bress from the Health Department and sent on to Mr. Bender to review. This draft could then be circulated to the full committee. Agenda Item 3- Review mercury public education proposals from the Agency of Natural Resources and the Health Department. Richard Phillips presented a handout of his time table as to the proposed "Mercury Information Campaign" for the next several months. Mr. Phillips suggested a Governor’s Press Conference be held in late April which could include many areas and programs, all of which could be explained in more detail. Mr. Phillips spoke of the media blitz which would include newspaper, radio and possibly some television time to take place in May. This campaign is designed to get the information of Mercury out to the public and the contacts that they should make with the solid waste districts. Finally, Mr. Phillips conveyed that the agency had planned to develop a flyer to be distributed in May or June through the solid waste districts that would help explain the significance of the mercury issue. Sarah O’Brien suggested that distribution of flyers through doctors offices might be an effective means of notification to pregnant women. Hollie Shanner added that she felt as though health care professions needed to have information passed on to them to educate the public. Representative David Deen suggested that a direct mailing to Association such as the Vermont American Medical Association, Professional Nurses Association and other associations might be an constructive target. Richard Phillips advised the committee that the agency was compiling a list for a special mailing to large users of mercury added products which included trade associations. Michael Bender informed the committee of a mailing which was sent out to one hundred thousand physicians by the EPA nationwide which was sent out on February 5 which included both a letter and pamphlet regarding mercury and PCBs. He suggested that we might be able to borrow something from that mailing. William Bress noted that the Health Department through Emergency Management and FEMA had been awarded a grant for a mercury in schools workshop which was to be held sometime before September first. The workshop is designed for emergency responders and to also address the issues of mercury products in the schools. They are determining that the first of these would be held possibly in Rutland or Springfield. They have planned a media blitz of the event and as of yet have no agenda although they do plan to have a number of speakers. Mr. Bress noted that one speaker in particular that would be scheduled to attend would be the toxicologist from Maine who had an experience with a high school student who had loaded mercury in a water gun and went not only through the school but into several houses. Richard Phillips referred to this seminar stating that it might be very useful for some of the people who would be involved in the school clean up project. Mr. Phillips felt that although they have very good training, if this is a school orientated training it’s almost sure to contain information that might be useful. Hollie Shanner added that she would like to see school nurses invited to these workshops. It was determined that she would be the contact person for the organization of this with Mr. Bress. Michael Bender requested to submit a handout which was a study that was consistent with the direction that the committee was heading. Florida did a study of breaking flourescent lights in dumpsters; he suggested that the agency note the report as it was potentially significant in its findings. Agenda Item 4- Status of an prospects for pending legislation Representative David Deen announced that the bill had been introduced in Natural Resources and Energy. He advised that he made the presentation to the committee last week about the bill being a product of this committee. He noted that the bill had four recommendations that not everybody agreed to, but that there was nothing in the legislation itself. He further commented that any of the exceptions that went to the legislation were agreed to by members of the committee. Mr. Deen said that he didn’t think the legislation crossed the line in terms of the source separation issue. This, he commented was because what it attempts to do is clarify the language was lifted from the house passed version of the legislation to give the agency clearer guidance as to what was meant. The question in committee, noted Mr. Deen, is if ".028" is an achievable goal on a financial basis; his answer to them was yes. Mr. Deen further commented that he believed the whole notion of ."028" came out of the New England states, New York State and the Eastern Providence agreement. He continued that the entire agreement process had moved forward and was signed in the region and is now a regional standard. Mr. Deen said that the bill had made the committee’s priority list for action, was introduced, and in place. Richard Phillips added that there were two bills that affect last years mercury legislation. The first of these bills, he believes, puts a hold on the effectiveness of the labeling provisions of the statute until the secretary can certify that there are northeastern states that have adopted similar legislation with a population of over ten million. Mr. Phillips believes that it essentially delays the implementation of labeling. Secondly, Mr. Phillips added, that a bill had been presented which would automatically eliminate the automobile industry from the mercury labeling requirements. The committee discussed the project funding for the mercury labeling legislation which had been passed. There was discussion as to the determination of the estimation for cost of the project. Mr. Phillips suggested that the figures for the project were more than likely low. Hollie Shanner asked for clarification of the school clean up program as her experiences with mercury clean-up had shown the costs to be very high. Mr. Phillips stated that the school project was not geared towards emergency clean up. Richard Phillips advised that the Agency of Natural Resources was implementing a school clean-up project which was designed to remove all toxic materials from the schools. This constituted inventorying all toxic materials at the school, packing them up for removal, identifying and disposal. Michael Bender informed the committee that he was aware of programs in other states that did some sort of fund matching for implementing programs to remove hazardous wastes. Since this program was not only for mercury products, he felt as though it was a possibility which could be explored. The committee discussed the high cost of emergency mercury clean up. Mr. Phillips noted that the highest figure that they had for clean ups in school the last year with UVM assisting was $2,300. This figure included all the chemicals in the laboratory in the school which were deemed to be toxic and unnecessary which were removed. By far the most expensive part of the project, Mr. Phillips added was the disposal cost itself. They do not believe that they will spend that kind of money for each school. The committee agreed that the cost of "mercury clean up" was far greater than the cost of prevention. William Bress advised the committee that he met with the school indoor air committee and he had a paragraph added to their report regarding mercury. Agenda Item 5- Develop 1999 Committee Work Plan It was agreed upon that the Committee Work Plan should not be addressed at this meeting. It was further agreed that this item would become the first agenda item at the next meeting. Representative David Deen also advised that he would no longer be able to remain as chair of the committee, however, he felt as though he wanted to see the committee through getting the legislation introduced.. He advised that he was planning to share the written materials and brief Mary Sullivan with Natural Resources so that she could effectively replace him. Additional agenda items- Richard Phillips presented a copy of a letter which was written to the Division of Environmental Permits in New York State from Richard Valentinetti, Director of Air Pollution Control Division regarding the Adirondack Resource Recovery Facility for the committee’s review. An additional agenda item was added at the request of Richard Phillips. He supplied a hand-out of three proposed letters which he planned to submit to Oak Industries, Inc., Association of Internal Automobile Manufacturers and The Blodgett Oven Company. These letters were in direct response to alternative mercury labeling requests by these manufacturers. Mr. Phillips suggested to the manufacturers that simplified wording for these labels show as: "Contains Mercury - Don’t Put in Trash - Recycle or Dispose as Hazardous Waste." The letters are intended to establish policy for like products. The first manufacturer, Oak Industries, Inc., requested labeling of paper with a wire fastener which was unacceptable to the agency. Mr. Phillips has made alternate suggestions and this proposal is still under review. Secondly, the automobile manufacturer was instructed that all mercury-containing devices in the vehicle must be tagged. Mr. Phillips suggested that the door post have a label with reference to the owners manual for internal products indicating "mercury containing devices herein." The Blodgett Oven Company of Vermont is addressing wording on labels of which Mr. Phillips has responded. Michael Bender requested a day to review the information. Several miscellaneous issues were discussed by the committee. The committee agreed that they would like to see legislation passed which essentially bans all use of mercury products within three years unless specifically exempted with criteria. Michael Bender acknowledged that there are plans to introduce such a bill in the next few days. The committee also indicated that they would like to see the Governor propose to the public a plan to switch over from mercury thermometers to non-mercury thermometers by use of a public service announcement. Hollie Shanner suggested that Fletcher Allen might be interested in an opportunity to assist in such a public service announcement. It was suggested that a meeting between Michael Knight, Hollie Shanner, Richard Phillips and Michael Bender take place to facilitate such an advertisement. The meeting concluded shortly before 6:00 p.m. with the members selecting the date for the next meeting to be set for 4:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m. on March 31, 1999 in the Ethan Allen Room of the Vermont State House, 115 State Street, Montpelier, Vermont. Three agenda items were agreed upon for consideration: 1. To develop the "1999 Committee Work Plan" as the primary topic, 2. To have someone come in to talk about aquiculture. Richard Phillips agreed that he would contact someone from Fish and Wildlife to attend the meeting, 3. Continued discussion regarding public service announcements and media coverage. Additional agenda items are welcome from any Committee member.
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
 |