Jump to main content.

July 24 and 25, 2007 Mercury Stocks Stakeholder Panel Meeting

You will need Adobe Reader to view some of the files on this page. See EPA's PDF page to learn more.

Agenda
Day 1: July 24, 2007

Welcome (9:00-9:05)
     Wendy Cleland-Hamnett, EPA Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics

Introductions and Meeting Process (9:05-9:15)
     Sheila Canavan, Facilitator

Presentation (9:15-9:45): Federal Mercury Storage Part 2 (Hawthorne, NV facility, community reaction, and other options considered by DOD besides consolidated storage)
     Dennis Lynch, Department of Defense, Defense Logistics Agency

Presentation (9:45-10:15): Air Monitoring and Emissions Data from Storage of Mercury
     Dr. Joseph Graney, Binghamton University

Break (10:15-10:30)

Presentation (10:30-11:15): Mercury Storage in Nevada (DOD Mercury at Hawthorne)
     Dr. Colleen Cripps, State of Nevada Department of Conservation and Natural Resources

Presentation (11:15-11:45): Mercury Storage in Wisconsin (Holtrachem mercury)
     Suzanne Bangert, State of Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, and Brad Buscher/Peder Larson, Mercury Waste Solutions, Inc.

Stakeholder Discussion (11:45-12:30)

  1. Which entities (e.g., state or private company) should be considered capable and should be allowed to store mercury; what would be the criteria for selection? What would be criteria for selecting entities that would handle the mercury prior to storage, e.g. transportation or collection? Would public/private partnerships work here? How?

  2. Where should storage be allowed geographically (e.g., multiple sites or a single site, abandoned mines, warehouses, etc.)? What variables should be considered for determining the location (e.g. transport and storage costs, environmental safety, liability)?

Lunch (12:30-1:45)

Presentation (1:45-2:30): Primary Mining of Mercury
     Tom Groeneveld, US EPA, David Lennett, Natural Resources Defense Council, and Joseph Pollara, Newmont Mining Corporation

Presentation (2:30-3:00): Byproduct Mercury from Domestic Mining
     Dr. Glenn Miller, University of Nevada-Reno and Joseph Pollara, Newmont Mining Corporation

Presentation (3:00-3:30): Byproduct Mercury from International Mining
     Joseph Pollara, Newmont Mining Corporation

Break (3:30-3:45)

Stakeholder Discussion (3:45-4:30)

  1. If there were a storage solution for excess mercury, would byproduct mercury be a preferred source to meet the US demand?

  2. What other options exist for foreign-generated byproduct mercury besides shipment to the US for processing?

  3. What factors might affect the future quantity of mercury from mining byproduct? If mining byproduct is a long-term source, should reporting be required?

Follow-up Stakeholder Discussion (4:30-5:00)

Adjourn

Agenda
Day 2: July 25, 2007

Welcome (9:00-9:05)
     Wendy Cleland-Hamnett, USEPA Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics

Introductions and Meeting Process (9:05-9:15)
     Sheila Canavan, Facilitator

Presentation (9:15-9:30): Overview of Changes in Global Demand
     Tom Groeneveld, US EPA

Presentation (9:30-10:15): Artisanal and Small-Scale Gold Mining in Developing Countries
     Dr. Kevin Telmer, University of Victoria (British Columbia) and UNIDO Global Mercury Project

Break (10:15-10:30)

Presentation (10:30-11:00): NGO Perspective
     Michael Bender, Mercury Policy Project

Stakeholder Discussion (11:00-11:45)

  1. For each option to manage domestic mercury supplies, what are the likely effects?

Lunch (11:45-1:00)

Presentation (1:00-1:45): Costs of Storage: Construction, Packaging, Transportation, Logistical, Insurance, and Operating Costs in Perpetuity
     Dennis Lynch, Department of Defense, Defense Logistics Agency
     Bill Fortune, Department of Energy

Presentation (1:45-2:15): Technical Standards for Storage
     Dennis Lynch, Department of Defense, Defense Logistics Agency

Stakeholder Discussion (2:15-4:00, with break from 3:00 to 3:15)

  1. For non-federal storage, who should be responsible for initial and ongoing storage, including costs, ownership of stocks, environmental liability and security? How would stocks from state and local collection programs be handled with respect to these issues?

  2. Should types of storage mimic the DOD model? If not, what technical standards should apply to storage? (e.g., physical standards, such as packaging, handling, monitoring for leaks, inspections)

  3. Are legislative or regulatory changes needed to make some of these suggestions happen? If so, what are they?

Public Comment (4:00-4:30)

Follow-up Stakeholder Discussion (4:30-5:00)
     Next meeting: September 20, 2007, Washington, DC
     Discussion of draft agenda for September meeting

Adjourn

Attendees

Susan Keane Natural Resources Defense Council
Paul Aberhathy Association of Lighting and Mercury Recyclers
Christer Sundberg MRT System AB (Sweden)
Sven Stenarson MRT System AB (Sweden)
Craig Lorch Total Reclaim, Inc.
Mark McMillan Colorado Dept of Public Health & Environment
Colleen Cripps Nevada Division of Environmental Protection
Mike Egges Nevada Division of Environmental Protection
Peder Larson Mercury Waste Solutions, Inc.
Pat Baskfield Mercury Waste Solutions, Inc.
Lynn Petros-Winn Recycle Technologies
Steve Barnett Southeast Recycling
Steven Gross Southeast Recycling
Ray Graczyk Northeast Lamp Recycling Company
Christopher Worley Colorado School of Mines
Kevin Telmer University of Victoria, British Columbia
Jerry DiCerbo Department of Energy
Steve Barringer Barrick Gold
Tripp Baltz Bureau of National Affairs
Wendy Cleland-Hamnett U.S. EPA
Timothy Lehman U.S. EPA
Linda Barr U.S. EPA
Sue Slotnick U.S. EPA
Sara McGurk U.S. EPA
Tom Groeneveld U.S. EPA
Maria Doa U.S. EPA
Sheila Canavan U.S. EPA
Naceema Thompson BLH Technologies

 

Jump to main content.