WIXLIB

Introduction and Background to theMercury Chemical Action PlanComments Related to the Goals of the Mercury ChemicalAction PlanThe Draft Mercury Chemical Action Plan statedThe Mercury Chemical Action Plan is designed to meet two, co-equal goals:1. Virtual elimination of the use and release of anthropogenic mercury in Washington State.2. Minimize human exposure to anthropogenic mercury.“Virtual elimination” is defined for this document as a reduction of mercury releases to the air,water and land from anthropogenic, or man-made, sources using life-cycle management practices(e.g., pollution prevention and release controls) so as to approach the levels and fluxes ofmercury that would be expected from naturally-occurring processes. This virtual eliminationgoal is identical to that expressed in the U.S. Environmental Protection agency (EPA) WorkingDraft: PBT National Action Plan for Mercury, the Canada-US Binational Toxics Strategy for theGreat Lakes and in the tri-lateral North American Regional Action Plan developed by Canada,the US and Mexico.The purpose of the Mercury Chemical Action Plan his to prevent new mercury from entering theenvironment and reduce the contribution of existing sources. Since eating fish is the greatestsource of mercury exposure for most people (as opposed to breathing mercury or absorbing itthough the skin), preventing the entry of mercury into the environment is the best way to reducemercury exposure that causes health effects.The long-term strategy for reducing exposure to mercury is to lower concentrations ofmethylmercury in fish by limiting mercury releases into the atmosphere from burning mercurycontaining fuel and waste and from other industrial processes. Reducing the use of consumerproducts that use mercury, trading in mercury-using products for those that don’t, also helps toprevent spills that contribute to environmental mercury contamination. Mercury that is releasedinto the atmosphere today may end up on our dinner table tomorrow. Children are especiallysensitive to the damaging effect of mercury on the development of their nervous and circulatorysystems. Damage to children’s ability to learn and control their behavior has great social andeconomic cost. Heart disease is a major killer of adults. There is evidence that early exposure tomercury damages blood vessels in the heart and those leading to the brain. Prevention ofmercury exposure has great public benefit in health and well-being. Damage to wildlife that issimilar in nature to damage in humans has also been reported. Reducing mercury benefits ourecosystems as well.Page 1

Public CommentsOrg-1: When developing a Chemical Action Plan on a Persistent Bioaccumulative Toxins, onewould assume that all sources of contamination would be considered in creating the CAP.Although, we have found that is not the case. According to Ecology staffer, Cheri Peele,Ecology is limiting its scope for the Mercury Chemical Action Plan only to products that useMercury in WA. By such a limitation, Ecology is looking at pounds of pollution and ignoringtons of mercury deposited in WA.Org-3: The Councils agree that mercury may pose a risk to human health in certaincircumstances and commends DOE for addressing concerns raised by mercury exposure.However, DOE’s first goal, the “virtual elimination of the use and release of anthropogenicmercury in Washington State,” fails to consider whether, or to what extent, the virtualelimination of the use and release of anthropogenic mercury in Washington will reduceexposures and risks to Washington residents. That goal fails to recognize that significant sourcesof mercury originate well outside the State (likely in other counties) and that significant sourcesof mercury released in the state may be non-anthropogenic. Therefore, it is unclear whether anyactions proposed in the Mercury CAP will significantly reduce actual exposures and risks toState residents.Org-3: DOE’s second goal of the Mercury CAP, to “minimize human exposure toanthropogenic mercury,” again fails to recognize the potential significance of non-anthropogenicsources of mercury. Further, although the second goal comes closer to considering potentialrisks, the Mercury CAP fails to assess and specifically manage human exposures to mercury.Rather, DOE appears to assume that human exposures will be minimized when anthropogenicmercury uses and releases in the State are eliminated. DOE does not attempt to demonstrate inthe draft Mercury CAP a link between the elimination of the use and release of anthropogenicmercury in the State, and decreased human mercury risks. In any event, it is unlikely that thereis such a direct link. This is an issue that DOE must address when it attempts to manage mercuryand other PBTs. We urge DOE to develop a process now to scientifically assess human risks,and to determine effective means to control those risks.Org-7: I think it would be extremely hard to virtually eliminate the use and release ofanthropogenic mercury in Washington Minimize human exposure is a little bit easier becauseyou could tell people and aware them of mercury but I don’t think many people will takeresponse to it. (Lindsey de Haan)Org-9: Develop a framework that will eventually eliminate new mercury pollution.Org-9: Develop a framework that will reduce mercury pollution over time.Org-15: Page 1, paragraph 4: Addition: "The Mercury Chemical Action Plan .The numberone source of mercury for most people is from their mercury amalgam dental fillings. TheWorld Health Organization (WHO), Document 118, 1991, p. 36. shows that the average dailyexposure to mercury in fish is 3 ug, while the average daily exposure to mercury in dentalamalgams is between 3.8-21 ug. A National Institute of Dental (NIDR) study of 1147 militaryPage 2

men conducted in 1998 revealed that men with amalgams had almost 4 times as much mercury intheir urine. It also showed that 90% of the mercury was from mercury amalgams. Thus, theNIDR study confirmed the WHO report conclusion that amalgams are the main source ofmercury in the human body. Kingman A et al., NIDR Research, "Mercury concentrations inurine and blood associated with amalgam exposure in the US military population", Journal ofDental Research, 1998, 77(3):461-71.Terminating the placement of mercury amalgam dental fillings is the best way to reduce mercuryexposure that causes health effects.Org-19: NWPPA compliments the Department on their thoughtful, step-by-step approach toaddressing Persistent Bioaccumulative Toxins (PBT) in Washington. The Mercury ChemicalAction Plan (MCAP) is the first targeted effort and we encourage the Department to maintaintheir commitment to an inclusive PBT strategy (characterized by staff at the Sept. 26th Forum)as: Pollution prevention Public education on the “societal problem” Promote alternatives where available, and Effectively manage past releases where management is economically feasible and costeffective.NWPPA believes Ecology’s tenets of education, pollution prevention advocacy and voluntarycooperation are vital to a successful Strategy where all citizens have a role to play in PBTreduction.Org-19: NWPPA supports the MCAP goals on targeting anthropogenic sources of mercury forreduction and on minimizing exposure to anthropogenic mercury.Ind-15: There are two ways to be a leader. One is to have a vision and get everyone to line upbehind you. The other is to see line of visionaries and to stand in front of them.This latter opportunity is open to ecology today. Much heavy lifting on mercury has been donealready. If even the most far-reaching version of the chemical action plan were passed,Washington will simply be joining others around the nation and globe that are addressing themercury issue.PubMtg: Dave Stitzhal, Environmental Consultant. Comment made at the September 26, 2002Draft Mercury Chemical Action Plan Public Forum – Tacoma:Plan needs to have a vision. A lot of “heavy lifting” has been done today, and here is a low riskopportunity for Ecology to be a leader. Manufacturers should pay for the life-cycleresponsibility of Hg in their products. The solutions proposed in the draft plan are funded by thetaxpayers. Ecology needs to shrug off those motivated by money. For Ecology to be a realleader, it should take steps to: Place the cost on industry/manufacturer Phase-out mercury products Set up mercury disposal optionsPage 3

Require clear labeling of productsPrevent the use of dental amalgamIndustry is not being held responsible. Ecology and Health needs to be motivated by health.Ecology’s Review and Analysis of Public CommentsReview of the comments above indicates a variety of viewpoints and perspectives about the needto further reduce anthropogenic mercury sources in Washington. The comments assert that: Naturally occurring mercury sources may also provide a route of human health exposure. Anthropogenic sources of mercury from outside Washington need to be considered. Mercury amalgam fillings are the number one exposure source of mercury for many people.Ecology was directed by the Washington State Legislature to: “Develop a mercury chemicalaction plan that includes, but is not limited to:1. Identifying current mercury uses in Washington;2. Analyzing current state and federal laws, regulations, rules, and (1) voluntary measures thatcan be used to reduce or (2) eliminate mercury;3. Identifying mercury reduction and elimination options; and4. Implementing actions to reduce or eliminate mercury uses, and (1) releases ”Ecology has developed the MCAP with this directive in mind. In the final MCAP, Ecologyadded text addressing naturally occurring mercury in Washington and what is known aboutsources of mercury migrating from outside of Washington’s borders. Ecology defers to theWashington State Department of Health (DOH) regarding the issues associated with humanexposure to mercury from mercury amalgam fillings.Ecology’s ConclusionsEcology recognizes there are a variety of views about the need to further reduce anthropogenicmercury releases in Washington State. Ecology agrees that the overall mercury problem in ourenvironment and in certain parts of the food chain is part of a larger global problem. Ecologybelieves everyone needs to do their part in working towards the goals of “virtual elimination”and minimizing human exposures to mercury. Ecology believes that a significant reduction inthe annual load of mercury released to Washington’s environment can be achieved by: Reducing the number of fluorescent lamps, thermostats, thermometers, and other productsroutinely disposed of to Washington’s landfills and incinerators.Redirecting mercury-laden medical waste away from autoclaves.Collecting amalgam waste prior to down-the-drain disposal.Ecology has little authority to direct out-of-state sources of mercury. Simply waiting for“someone else to solve the problem” is not acceptable when easily achievable common-sensesolutions are available.Page 4

Comments Related to Exposure to MercuryThe Draft Mercury Chemical Action Plan statedHuman beings can be exposed through three routes of exposure:1. Eating certain fish that are long-lived or are predators that have accumulated mercury in theirtissues through the food web.2. Inhaling mercury vapor from liquid mercury spills (a problem in enclosed spaces only) and toa limited amount from amalgams3. Skin absorption through contact with liquid mercury or creams and unguents containingmercury in any formPublic CommentsOrg-3: To the extent DOE chooses not to undertake further analyses and develop a scientificrisk-based approach for managing mercury exposures, however, we believe that DOE shouldclearly explain in the Mercury CAP that its recommended actions may not lead to significantdecreases in mercury exposure or risks to Washington residents. For example, Washingtonresidents should not be misled to believe that the additional controls on mercury uses anddisposal recommended in the Mercury CAP will necessarily decrease mercury levels in fish.Further, DOE should attempt to quantify and present the financial and societal costs associatedwith the proposed actions – most of which will be borne in a variety of manners by Stateresidents. Costs to Washington residents could mount as DOE develops CAPs and takes actionfor other PBTs. State residents should understand that significant state spending and additionalburdens placed on residents may not result in significant mercury reductions.Org-15: 80% of Americans have mercury amalgam dental fillings. They are the number onesource of mercury vapor exposure. Spills of elemental mercury are a much rarer source ofexposure for most Americans, but one that can cause a risk of a temporary high exposure that cancause serious harm.Org-31: The gravity of the toxicity posed by mercury – a potent neurotoxin -- is of significantconsequence. The necessity to phase out mercury in consumer and health care products, andfrom environmental releases, has been recognized by the state’s major medical associations. TheWashington Academy of Family Physicians, Washington State Medical Association, andWashington State Public Health Association have each endorsed resolutions encouraging thephaseout of mercury from products and practices. In doing so, these associations recognized thatpermanent harm can be caused – particularly to children and developing fetuses –by mercuryexposure. These effects include learning and behavioral disabilities, birth defects, and seriousimpacts to the kidneys and lungs.Page 5

DOH’s Review and Analysis of Public CommentsComments provided reiterate the consequences of mercury toxicity and note that silver-mercuryamalgam dental restorations are the primary source of exposure to elemental mercury vapor.DOH’s ConclusionsThe Washington State Department of Health concurs with the public comments presented.Page 6

Comments Related to Exposure to Mercury VaporThe Draft Mercury Chemical Action Plan statedEle

The Mercury Chemical Action Plan is designed to meet two, co-equal goals: 1. Virtual elimination of the use and release of anthropogenic mercury in Washington State. 2. Minimize human exposure to anthropogenic mercury. "Virtual elimination" is defined for this document as a reduction of mercury releases to the air,