Advisory Committee on Mercury Pollution
Meeting #38: Wednesday, April 24, 2002
Time: 10:00 a.m. - 12:00 p.m.
Location: Ethan Allen Room, State House
Montpelier, Vermont
MINUTES
Members Present:
Michael Bender, Abenaki Self-Help Association, Inc.
William Bress, Vermont Department of Health
Ric Erdheim, National Electrical Manufacturers Association
Neil Kamman, Vermont Agency of Natural Resources, Water Quality Division
Richard McCormack, Senate Natural Resources and Energy Committee
Rich Philips, Vermont Agency of Natural Resources, Environmental Assistance Division
Guests Present:
Allison Crowley-Demag, New England Public Affairs Group
Megan E. Mulry, Downs, Rachlin & Martin
Gary Gulka, Vermont Agency of Natural Resources, Environmental Assistance Division
Tom Benoit, Vermont Agency of Natural Resources, Environmental Assistance Division
The Committee members and interested parties gathered in the Ethan Allen Room of the Vermont State House in Montpelier, Vermont. The
meeting was called to order by Rich Phillips.
Agenda Item 1-
Accept minutes of March 25, 2002 meeting and changes to today’s agenda.
- The minutes were reviewed and approved as written
- No changes to today’s agenda
Agenda Item 2-
Discussion of H. 283 (incinerator emissions, advanced disposal fees).
- Rich Phillips handed out copies of H. 283 and reviewed its provisions. Senator McCormack indicated that the bill is dead this year and would
have to be introduced next session. Mr. Phillips discussed the provisions in the bill requiring a presorting program for mercury-added products
in any municipality sending its solid waste to a municipal incinerator. The Agency of Natural Resources would be charged with developing the
presorting program to be implemented by the municipality. Another provision of the bill would be the establishment of an advanced disposal fee
on mercury-added products covered by existing statute. The fee is specified in the bill as 8% of the wholesale market price of the product and
would be assessed at the point of distribution. Manufacturers with acceptable product take back programs could be exempted from the fee being
assessed on their products. The Agency would be charged with developing rules for the implementation and administration of the fees. Mr. Phillips
indicated that the Agency took a position on the bill. Mr. Phillips indicated that the Agency had a position on this bill last year and would
provide a copy of it at a later date. In summary, the Agency felt that the advanced disposal fee concept needed further study and evaluation
before the Agency could support it. It is not clear in the bill how the 8% fee applies to some products with mercury components. For instance,
does it apply to the full price of a larger product, like an automobile, that contains mercury – or the cost of the component? Issues such
as these would have to be defined in rule.
- Ric Erdheim indicated that an advanced disposal fee would be a tax on Vermont citizens that would drive up the cost of consumer products such
as fluorescent lamps to the detriment of energy efficiency.
- Rich Phillips suggested that the Committee provide comment and recommendations on H 283 provisions in its annual report, since we indicated
such in the annual work plan. If these provisions or some version of them are recommended by the Committee, then it may be appropriate to include
with any comprehensive mercury legislation proposed in the next legislative session.
Agenda Item 3-
Update on Mercury Strategies for Sensitive Populations.
- Gary Gulka indicated that the Committee has met twice and is focusing on outreach methods that can be used to inform health care professionals
of the mercury issue – particularly those that have interaction with pregnant women and mothers. Mr.Gulka will ask Karen Knaebel to e-mail
the ACMP Committee members a brief update on the Committee’s activities.
- Michael Bender handed out an informational piece produced by the Washington Department of Health – a bar graph showing the weekly limit
of recommended tuna consumption based on an individual’s weight. He thought that this was effective and should be considered for use by
the Vermont Dept. of Health.
Neil Kamman indicated that the figure may be very useful, but should be reworked to be more clear to the general public.
Agenda Item 4-
Discuss methods to increase collection for thermostats.
Tom Benoit of DEC gave an update of his efforts to encourage thermostat recycling through the Thermostat Recycling Corporation’s
Program with HVAC wholesalers/suppliers. He handed out a phone survey of wholesalers with TRC boxes conducted last fall. The majority of thermostats
collected through the program were through only a few wholesalers who really made an effort to promote the program. The awareness level of the program
still appears low despite a mailings to contractors, bill stuffers, and posters.
Neil indicated that spinning TRC as a marketing opportunity seems the most appropriate way to foster TRC in VT.
Ric Erdheim indicated that some wholesalers see the TRC program as a marketing opportunity. He also indicated that there are many
challenges in trying to get the word out to contractors. Direct mailings have been done and advertisements in trade publications are run periodically.
Michael Bender indicated that bounty systems or programs can be effective in promoting participation and asked Mr. Erdheim whether TRC has discussed
or considered such programs. Mr. Erdheim indicated that a bounty system is unlikely to be supported by thermostat manufacturers. The manufacturers,
through TRC have expressed a willingness to collect every mercury thermostat that they can.
Mr. Erdheim indicated that the state of Indiana has had an aggressive program based on a pledge program. It may be worth talking to
Indiana about its experiences. Florida seems to have been successful.
Gary Gulka indicated that VT DEC would be taking steps to further promote the program this year. These efforts may include direct
mailings to contractors and follow up with wholesalers to make sure that their program is visible. Mr. Gulka indicated that a mailer or marketing
piece could be effective and inquired whether TRC would be willing to help with something that might be useful as a generic marketing piece in several
states. Mr. Erdheim indicated that he would like to discuss this further with DEC to see if TRC could be of assistance.
Agenda Item 5-
Discuss dental issues: Peter Taylor’s response to ACMP information request; Best Management Practices Procedures; Amalgam separator research
issue.
- Neil Kamman indicated that he had received and reviewed a research proposal by Tony French to investigate the impact to groundwater of dental
offices on septic systems. He believed that the proposal was well thought out. There is a scarcity of information available on the subject.
The proposal would help to answer the question of whether mercury from dental offices has the potential to get into ground water. It does not
address any potential impacts to surface water. There seems to be some interest in Massachusetts on this topic, but as of yet there is an issue
of how such a research proposal would be funded. An important piece of information we are lacking is how many dental offices in Vermont are
on septic systems. Peter Taylor indicated that no information was available. Mr. Kamman indicated that there certainly were some, based on dental
offices locations in towns that do not have wastewater treatment facilities. Mr. Kamman indicated that a potential problem with the study was
in finding a dental office site willing to participate in a study that could open the office up to potential liability. Mr. Bender suggested
contacting the Waste Management Division’s hazardous sites program to see if there were any existing hazardous sites that incorporates
a dental office.
- There was also concern raised about the variability of potential discharge from a dental office given the potential variation over time (i.e.
any mercury in a septic tank or sludge represents not a point in time of discharge but an extended period of operation, in which conditions
could vary considerably).
- Mr. Gulka mentioned an EPA grant program for Persistent Bioaccumulative Toxics (PBTs), of which mercury is one. He indicated that such a study
proposal might be eligible for funding. Michael Bender indicated that he would look into it.
- Dental amalgam separator research: Mr. Gulka updated the group on the STEP research project on amalgam separators. Some results from field-testing
and bench scale testing of four commercial separator units were expected by July 1. Mr. Bender expressed concern that the study design and results
may not provide all the information needed to make recommendations on the types of separator units that will be most effective. Mr. Gulka expressed
similar concerns.
- Mr. Bender provided the Committee with a copy of New Hampshire legislation which will require dental offices to provide pamphlets to patients
on the risks and benefits of dental materials, such as amalgam, and discuss with patients the choices or restorative materials available for
use. The NH DES will be required to develop rules related to amalgam waste control equipment.
- Mr. Bender suggested that at the next advisory committee meeting, the group hear from a few experts in the field of dental amalgam wastewater
control. He suggested that the Committee arrange a conference call with Owen Boyd of Solmetex and Mark Stone from the Great Lakes region.
- Mr. Gulka updated the group on VT DEC’s Best Management Practices Guidelines for Dental Offices. The document has been signed by the
Commissioner and will be distributed with the help of the Vermont State Dental Society to about 250 dental offices.
Agenda Item 6-
Other Topics Not on Agenda.
Mr. Kamman indicated that the new mercury in fish poster and fish advisory poster were being posted around the state at all access
areas on lakes. This will be accomplished throughout spring and summer, by the Water Quality Division, Community Work Offender Program, and Fish
& Wildlife.
Mr. Gulka indicated that the a letter from DEC to all hospitals has gone out through the Vermont Association of Hospitals and Health
Care Systems. The letter seeks the voluntary cooperation of hospitals on mercury reduction. The letter was positively received at a board meeting
and the hospitals indicated that they would assign a contact person to work with DEC.
Agenda Item 7-
Set date and agenda for next meeting.
The next meeting was set for June 18, 2002 from 10:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m. in the conference room at the Environmental Assistance Division,
Waterbury state complex, Waterbury, Vermont.
The Committee agreed that there would be no meetings in July and August.
Agenda items include update on all work plan items. In addition, the Committee considered a possible conference call with experts
on the dental amalgam separator issue.
|
