 |
|
|
Advisory Committee on Mercury Pollution
Meeting #65: Friday, January 6, 2006
Time: 1:30 pm to 3:30 pm
Location: Ethan Allen Room, State House, Montpelier, Vermont
Minutes
Members Present:
Michael Bender, Abenaki Self-Help Association, Inc.
John Berino, Fletcher Allen Health Care
Jennifer Holliday, Chittenden Solid Waste Management District
Gary Gulka, Vermont Agency of Natural Resources, Environmental Assistance
Neil Kamman, Vermont Agency of Natural Resources, Water Quality Division
Eric Palmer, Vermont Agency of Natural Resources, Fish and Wildlife Division
William Bress, Vermont Department of Health
Senator Virginia Lyons
Representative Carol Reed Hosford
Ruma Kohli, IBM (via telephone)
Guests Present:
Allison DeMag, Alliance of Auto Manufacturers
Peter Taylor, Vermont State Dental Society
Anthony Otis, Delta Dental Plan of Vermont
Daniel Ferraris D.D.S., Dentist-Burlington
Paul Burns, VPIRG
Louis Porter, VT Press Bureau
Sue Premo, interested citizen
Karen Knaebel,Vermont Agency of Natural Resources, Environmental Assistance
Alison McKay, Vermont Agency of Natural Resources, Environmental Assistance
Channel 5 News Camera person
The Committee members and interested parties gathered at the Ethan Allen Room at the State House located in Montpelier. Michael Bender called the meeting to order. Mr. Bender added that there were a significant number of items to be covered. He then stated that due to time constraints there would be very little time for non-committee members to speak. He asked that outside parties keep comments brief and to raise their hand before speaking.
Agenda Item 1
Accept minutes from December 12, 2005 meeting and possible changes to today’s agenda.
- Neil Kamman asked for changes be made under Agenda Item 2. As follows:
- First bullet, 6th line, change “…selection of prey size fish…” to “…selection of game and prey size fish…”
- First bullet, 9th line, change “…mercury level made over time.” to “…mercury levels in fish over time.”
- Third bullet, changed to “Question as to whether there was effort to work with UVM or Middlebury College in order to obtain more samples.” Mr. Kamman said it is appropriate for the state to do that type of monitoring work. UVM students have assisted in the past in obtaining fish samples.
- Fourth bullet, after the second sentence add “Also, the charge of the report addresses mercury only.”
- Fifth bullet, the word commissioners should be capitalized.
- The Committee accepted the minutes with these changes.
- Michael Bender advised the Committee that Senator Lyons’ schedule prohibited her from attending the entire meeting. He asked if the Committee would be willing to move ahead to Agenda Item 4: Discussion of draft recommendations by sub-committee and possible recommendations to the ACMP annual report, as Senator Lyons would like to be present for this discussion. The Committee agreed.
- Michael Bender noted that the Governor’s appointment documents for John Berino, Jennifer Holliday and Mary Jean Rajda are not complete and therefore they do not have voting capacity at this time. In addition, the ANR Secretary has named Gary Gulka his representative in place of Rich Phillips who recently retired.
Agenda Item 2:
Discussion of draft mercury planning report to legislature and possible recommendations to the ACMP annual report.
Agenda Item 3
Discussion of draft report regarding removal mercury-added switches and possible; recommendations to the ACMP annual report.
- Gary Gulka briefly summarized the recommendations regarding the auto section of this report. The Agency report recommends a mandated collection and removal program for convenience lighting and ABS switches in autos. Mr. Gulka noted that the previous voluntary auto switch collection program for which there was a bounty in the state of Vermont had low participation by the salvage yards. The Agency does feel automakers should help with the financial burden by funding a switch collection and recycling program. The role of the Agency would be to assist with outreach, education and compliance monitoring.
- Question as to whether there was a system to check the veracity of the log sheets to be used by the salvage businesses. Mr. Gulka indicated that the log sheets would include some sort of certification statement. In addition, it is envisioned that the switches themselves would be turned in with the log sheets.
- Question as to whether the log sheets could be submitted to the Agency as verification of participation. Mr. Gulka agreed with the suggestion and added that by doing so, enforcement visits could be tailored to businesses who appear to not be complying.
- Michael Bender read a prepared statement on behalf of the Partnership for Mercury Free Vehicles challenging the accuracy of the Agency report. Specifically, Mr. Bender speculated that there is erroneous Wisconsin data used in the report. Also, Mr. Bender believes that there is evidence that a bounty program would increase the capture rate in the auto program.
- Neil Kamman had concern that Mr. Bender was providing the input from a group outside of the meeting when in fact he had asked non-member parties at the beginning of the meeting to hold their remarks unless called upon. Karen Knaebel also noted that the Agency report had been shared with the ACMP in draft form solely for the purpose of allowing the ACMP to include comments in its report to the legislature regarding its support of the Agency report.
- After some discussion, a suggestion was made that the Committee go forward by recommending the Agency report be supported in principle, but in addition that the ACMP further recommends that performance standards be added to evaluate the effectiveness of the program. The Committee suggested that the DEC report back to the legislature be a biannual report on the success of the program and if the performance standards set by an obtainable capture rate cannot be met that the legislature determine other ways of obtaining those rates. Gary Gulka agreed to draft language for the Committee’s recommendation and distribute by e-mail to the members.
- Allison DeMag asked if she would be given the opportunity to review this email. She further stated that she finds it troubling and a conflict of interest that Mr. Bender brought in an outside interest of a national program whose number one priority is to ensure auto manufacturers pay a bounty.
- The Committee agreed that Allison DeMag would receive the email and be given the opportunity to comment.
- There was concern the amount of mercury (10 lbs.) in appliances indicated in the report was too low. Gary Gulka stated that the appliances referred to in this report were white goods and there is an explanation on page 15 of the report as to how that number was arrived at.
- Due to time constraints, the appliance and thermostat recommendations were not discussed. However, these recommendations will be explored at the next meeting.
- The Committee stated that if any one has further recommendations about this report, they should send those comments by email to Karen Knaebel by noon on Wednesday, January 4th.
Agenda Item 4
Discussion of draft recommendation by sub-committee and possible recommendations to the ACMP annual report.
- Michael Bender stated the sub-committee met to address issues of most concern related to dental amalgam, fish exposure and vaccines. Mr. Bender summarized the three sub-committee recommendations based on the findings of S.84 last year and explained the rationale for each. The first recommendation in regard to dental clinics, the second in regard to grocery store postings and the third in regard to Thimerosal.
- Regarding the dental recommendation, there was concern that the Committee did not have adequate time to hear testimony and have a satisfactory airing of the issues to fully understand all the issues to the level of making recommendations in the Committee report. Neil Kamman stated that he felt there were two areas of issues, one that addressed notification of patients and the other that identified a standard of care. Mr. Kamman suggested that it would be more appropriate for the legislature to explore the latter issue.
- The dental recommendation was modified to read: Dental clinics should provide information about the advantages and disadvantages to human health and the environment from using filling containing mercury and other materials. In addition, we recommend that the legislature consider whether or not amalgam should be placed in pregnant women or children.
- The Committee agreed that the last sentence of the dental recommendation rationale stating the Committee recommends an approach similar to that of Norway, Canada and Sweden should be deleted.
- Suggestion to have the Vermont Department of Health collaborate with the Vermont Dental Society to develop materials to be distributed by dental clinics. Michael Bender expressed support for the ACMP to also be involved in the collaboration. The Committee agreed that collaboration should be between all three parties.
- It was further agreed that the grocery posting recommendation be modified to read: Retail stores shall provide appropriate consumption guidelines for mercury in fish purchased in stores in Vermont, provided by the Vermont Department of Health.
- It was agreed that the following sentence be added to the end of the rationale statement for the Thimerosal recommendation: Surely, Vermont doesn’t want to be a state where mercury containing vaccines are dumped when other states are passing laws to keep it away from their citizens.
- The Committee agreed to include all three recommendations as amended in their report.
Agenda Item 5
Discussion of ACMP annual report regarding recommendations and next year’s work plan.
- Neil Kamman suggested the Committee revisit posting Mercury Advisories in all access areas as part of the work plan for this year.
- The Committee agreed to discuss this item further at the next meeting.
Agenda Item 6
Other topics not on agenda.
- Michael Bender distributed a letter for Committee approval, addressed to Senators Leahy and Jeffords and Congressman Sanders. Mr. Bender felt it important to recognize that Senator Leahy has commented on exposure issues before. Mr. Bender stated that ACMP has sent a letter to the Vermont congressional delegation in the past.
- Suggestion that the letter specify that Thimerosal is used as a preservative. Also, attention was called to paragraph two, line four where Thimerosal was misspelled.
- Karen Knaebel pointed out that under normal Committee procedure, the Committee first determines a letter should be written. Second, a person is appointed to write such letter. Third, that draft is then reviewed by the Committee. Mr. Bender stated the letter was the result of sub-committee recommendations after it was brought to their attention that federal legislation has passed or was pending that could preempt state law in some of the areas the sub-committee was recommending.
- Michael Bender said that he would revise the letter and distribute the new version before the next meeting.
- Anthony Otis referenced the first paragraph of the letter and asked if there was any Federal legislation regarding dental amalgam proposed or in place that would preempt state law. Michael Bender answered that there is no Federal legislation proposed but there could be.
- Mr. Otis was concerned in that he believed such open-ended recommendations are dangerous. He further questioned why there was a rush to send this letter. Mr. Bender indicated that the Thimerosal component was the reason for rushing the letter. Mr. Otis then suggested that the letter be sent without the Thimerosal component to allow more time for input for this section. Michael Bender stopped Mr. Otis advising him that there was no more time for public comment.
- Some of the guests questioned if they were going to have an opportunity to comment on this letter at a later time. Mr. Bender stated they would not be given another opportunity to comment.
- Peter Taylor stated that he was not able to comment at the moment because this was the first time he has seen this letter. Mr. Bender stated this would be Mr. Taylor’s only opportunity to comment on the letter.
- Karen Knaebel suggested to the Committee that since the letter would be on the agenda for discussion at the next meeting and if the Committee agreed, outside comments could be e-mailed directly to her for distribution to the Committee prior to the next meeting. The Committee agreed and there was a deadline for receipt of comments by noon on Wednesday, January 11th and that comments would be forwarded to the Committee members by the end of business day on January 11, 2006.
Agenda Item 7
Set date for next meeting.
- The Committee felt it necessary to have another meeting to finalize all the recommendations. A meeting was set for Friday, January 13th, from 8:30-9:30am. There was suggestion that this meeting could be held via conference call. It was noted that since the ACMP was a public meeting that a location must be established to allow outside parties the opportunity to attend. Members would be given the opportunity to attend by telephone and a location would be announced via e-mail and posted on the web site.
|
|
|
|
