Great Lakes Article:

States acting on their own to reduce mercury emissions
By Maureen Groppe
Gannett News Service
02/17/04

WASHINGTON -- Reeling in a big catch is a challenge for Wisconsin fishermen. An even bigger one: figuring out which fish are safe to eat based on a 20-page state advisory.

Of 1,200 bodies of water tested in Wisconsin, nearly all contained fish with unsafe levels of mercury. So state officials decided not to wait for the federal government do something about the problem. Last year, they proposed reducing emissions from coal-fired power plants, the largest unregulated source of mercury contamination.

Some of the 42 other states with fish-consumption advisories, including Ohio, also are acting on their own to control such emissions.

"There's a concern about mercury because it's such a toxic substance. States have chosen not to wait," said Larry Morandi, who follows the issue for the National Conference of State Legislatures.

Connecticut approved requirements last year for a 90 percent reduction in power plant emissions.

New emissions rules are expected to take effect later this year in New Jersey and Massachusetts, and officials in Illinois and Michigan are expected to recommend new rules this spring.

Lawmakers in Ohio, Minnesota and Virginia also are pushing to restrict emissions containing mercury.

"People are recognizing that their personal lives are being affected, and they have the ability to address the problem locally," said Felice Stadler, a mercury expert at the National Wildlife Federation.

Federal environmental officials have proposed new regulations for power plants, but environmental groups and officials in some states say they don't go far enough. And the regulations face likely delays because of expected legal challenges.

Mercury is a naturally occurring metal that becomes a toxic pollutant when released into the air, water and soil by human activity. Exposure at high levels can damage the brain, kidneys and developing fetuses.

People are most directly exposed by eating contaminated fish. Mercury accumulates in fish after rain washes emissions into waterways.

In Wisconsin, officials are worried about both the health of the state's fish eaters and the economy.

"(Fishing) is certainly an important industry to us," said Jon Heinrich, a policy analyst with the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources' Bureau of Air Management. "We certainly don't want to do anything to threaten that, and we would like people to understand that we're not ignoring the issue."

Policy-makers at the state's Department of Natural Resources adopted a proposal last year to reduce power-plant emissions by 40 percent by 2010 and 80 percent by 2015. But the plan has been stalled by the state legislature.

George Meyer, head of the Wisconsin Wildlife Federation, is confident that new rules eventually will be adopted.

"It's our feeling that we have the right to have the fish that we catch clean enough to be able to feed our families," Meyer said.

States that are enacting the toughest restrictions on emissions tend to be those with fewer coal-fired power plants. By acting first, these states can argue more forcefully that mercury from plants in other states is blowing into their areas and that those states should take action, said Morandi.

New Jersey's environment commissioner, Bradley M. Campbell, said that if his state's rules were enacted nationally, "annual mercury emissions from coal-fired power plants alone would decline from approximately 48 tons to about five tons."

Neil Brown, manager of external affairs for PSEG Power, which owns coal-fired plants in Connecticut and New Jersey, said a single national emissions standard would be the simplest way to address the mercury problem.

But his utility cooperated with Connecticut on the new emissions requirements in order to avoid the struggles linked to past efforts to regulate pollutants. The new requirements include a fallback provision: State officials can lower their emissions standard if they determine that power companies have done everything possible to reduce mercury by 90 percent.

"However, we're going to do our best to meet the requirements that are in the bill, and we think the target is achievable," Brown said.

In Wisconsin, utilities are not backing the state's proposed 80 percent reduction.

"We're uncertain about how well it would work and what the cost would be," said Kris McKinney, manager of environmental policy for We Energies, the state's largest utility.

McKinney said the utility is on target to reduce mercury emissions by 50 percent over the next decade, but an 80 percent reduction by 2015 may be unrealistic.

"The technology does not exist right now to do it," McKinney said. "That's what we're investigating."

Even states that have gone ahead with new rules would like to see national action.

"Mercury is transported wide, wide distances," said Anne Gobin, who heads Connecticut's Bureau of Air Management. "We can't solve it as an isolated problem in Connecticut."