Toxics in the Environment

Issue

Should the state of Minnesota adopt environmental health risk regulations before there is scientific justification? Is state legislation necessary? Should the Legislature pass a mercury regulation bill?

Policy

• Public policy on environmental health risks must be based on scientific data that has been subjected to peer review and generally accepted in the scientific community.  This standard was adopted by the Legislature in 2001 and must not be compromised.  No new legislation is necessary.
• The Minnesota Chamber supports implementation of the Mercury Emissions Reduction Act of 2006 which establishes a goal of reducing mercury emissions from power plants by 90 percent by 2014.
• The Minnesota Chamber supports the Mercury Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) adopted in July 2006 by the Pollution Control Agency (PCA) as required by the federal Clean Water Act.  The TMDL establishes a long-range goal of reducing mercury emissions in Minnesota by 93 percent. The Chamber participated in a process with other stakeholders and the PCA to develop an implementation plan for achieving the reduction goals. The stakeholder group recommended a strategy to achieve the 93-percent reduction by 2025. Based upon this recommendation, the PCA will now develop an implementation plan.  The plan must consider the cost of implementation strategies and the impact on Minnesota’s economy.The Legislature should not consider any further mercury reduction legislation until the plan is implemented.

Business Impact

The PCA estimates that 90 percent of the mercury deposition in rural Minnesota and 70 percent of the deposition in urban areas results from emissions transported in the atmosphere from other states and countries. Minnesota industries will be at a significant competitive disadvantage if the state imposes mercury reduction regulations or strategies that are not required in a national program. Such regulations or strategies will have minimal impact on mercury deposition in Minnesota. In addition, cost-effective technologies are not available for many sources.

Regulating various substances or materials suspected of being health risks without credible scientific data and consistent criteria for the application of standards adversely affects Minnesota industry and commerce. In the past, inconsistent standards and procedures in environmental assessments have delayed projects and increased costs.