TABLE OF MANDATORY AND RECOMMEND ED SEPARATOR REQUIREMENTS

-1- JURISDICTION DATE ACTION Dental Offices Population

MANDATORY SEPARATORS --- STATES Connecticut Legislation: 2003. Although there is no specific mention of separators in the law, the state Department of Environmental Protection interprets the requirement that dentists follow “Best Management Practices” as requiring the installation of amalgam separators. 1,732 1 3,504,809

Maine Legislation: 2003. Expressly requires dentists to install separators. 478 2 1,321,574

Massachusetts Regulations Separators installed after 2006 to achieve 98 percent removal efficiency. Separators voluntarily installed before the effective date of the regulations need to only achieve the ISO standard of 95 percent removal efficiency

. 3,050 3 6,437,193TABLE OF MANDATORY AND RECOMMEND ED SEPARATOR REQUIREMENTS

-2- JURISDICTION DATE ACTION Dental Offices Population

MANDATORY SEPARATORS --- STATES New Hampshire Legislation: 2002 Regulations: 2005 requires installation of separators (“environmentally appropriate disposal equipment for amalgam waste to trap and dispose of mercury” Implementing. 560 4 1,314,895

New Jersey Regulation: October 1, 2007 [ N.J.A.C. 7:14A21.12(a)]

. Separator required within two

years ISO 11143 test protocol to perform at 98% or more efficiency, Draft regulations (July 2007): separators for offices that discharge waste into septic and private waste water systems. Exempts orthodontists, periodontists, endodontists, or oral and maxillofacial surgeons/ radiologists/pat hologists. DEP comments: prosthodontists are not exempt. 4,546 5 8,724,560

New York Regulations: Effective in 2006. Requires installation of separators achieving a 99 percent removal efficiency; Separators voluntarily installed before the effective date of the requirement are expected to achieve the ISO standard of 95 percent removal efficiency. 9,017 6 19,306,183

New Mexico Bill pending, not enacted as of Dec. 2007 Requires separators 593 7 1,954,599TABLE OF MANDATORY AND RECOMMEND ED SEPARATOR REQUIREMENTS

-3- JURISDICTION DATE ACTION Dental Offices Population

MANDATORY SEPARATORS --- STATE Oregon Leg. 2007 (SB 704) Requires adherence to the Oregon Dental Association’s BMP and amalgam separators (ISO standard of 95 percent removal efficiency). Dental offices constructed after January 1, 2008 separator installed when open; Existing offices: Either January 1, 2008 or, if they receive certification from the local wastewater that they are in compliance with the BMPs by the end of 2007, they can delay installing a separator until January 1, 2011. All mercury-containing dental waste must be stored in a labeled vapor-proof container and may not be incinerated. 1,825 8 3,700,758

Rhode Island Leg.: 2006. Department of Environmental Management (DEM) to develop “best management practices requiring an amalgam removal efficiency of at least 99 percent” [i.e., separators]. Another section of the same law requires installation of a separator that c onforms to ISO standard 11143. 412 9 1,067,610

Vermont Leg.: 2005 Requires installation of separators with a removal efficiency of 95 percent. 263 10 623,908TABLE OF MANDATORY AND RECOMMEND ED SEPARATOR REQUIREMENTS

-4- JURISDICTION DATE ACTION Dental Offices Population

MANDATORY SEPARATORS --- MUNICIPALITIES Duluth, MN Western Lake Superior region (Duluth, Cloquet, Hermantown, Proctor, Carlton, Scanlon, Thomson and Wrenshall, and the surrounding townships). Sewer authority paid for and installed separators. To date, all of them have apparently done

so 11

. 57 12 84,167

Fort Collins, and Boulder, CO Ordinance 13 Requires separators effective July 1, 2005. Fort Collins: 129,467 14

Boulder: 117,520 15TABLE OF MANDATORY AND RECOMMEND ED SEPARATOR REQUIREMENTS

-5- JURISDICTION DATE ACTION Dental Offices Population

MANDATORY SEPARATORS --- MUNICIPALITIES Madison Metropolitan Sewerage District, WI

Fitchburg Cottage Grove Blooming Grove

Madison Dane Blooming Grove – Waunona SD No. 2

Middleton DeForest Blooming Grove #10 Monona Male Bluff Town of Burke

Verona McFarland Burke No. 1

Shorewood Hills Burke No. 2

Waunakee Burke No. 6 Mercury Pollutant Minimization Program (PMP) September 30, 2007 As of 2006: 22.3% voluntary separators. 100% compliance with the amalgam separator installation requirement by December 31, 2008

Mercury concentration in effluent from 2004 to 2006 relatively constant 223,389 16

Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Ordinance Requires amalgam separators 500 17 1.1 million people in a420 squaremile service

area 18TABLE OF MANDATORY AND RECOMMEND ED SEPARATOR REQUIREMENTS

-6- JURISDICTION DATE ACTION Dental Offices Population

MANDATORY SEPARATORS --- MUNICIPALITIES Palo Alto, East Palo Alto, Los Altos, Los Altos Hills, and Mountain View, CA Ordinance Separators installed by 2005

100% Compliance (EPA-HQOW-2006-0771-0463( 132 19 Palo Alto: 57,809 20

East Palo Alto: 32,784 Los Altos Hills: 8,308 Mountain View: 70,090 San Francisco and surrounding Bay Area communities, CA--The cities are: East Palo Alto, Los Altos, Los Altos Hills, Mountain View, Palo Alto, Richmond Annex, and the Union Ordinance A San Francisco ordinance provides that dentists must obtain a permit and either monitor their dental office wastewater or install a separator to be deemed in compliance. 520 eventually will install separator 339 of the 520 (65.2%) have installed

an amalgam separator 21 San Francisco: 744,041 22

East Palo Alto: 32,784 Los Altos: 27,483 Los Altos Hills: 8,308 Mountain View: 70,090 Palo Alto: 57,809 Richmond Annex: 102,120

Sanitary District (Fremont, Newark and Union City) Ordinance A San Francisco ordinance provides that dentists must obtain a permit and either monitor their dental office wastewater or install a separator to be deemed in compliance.TABLE OF MANDATORY AND RECOMMEND ED SEPARATOR REQUIREMENTS

-7- JURISDICTION DATE ACTION Dental Offices Population MANDATORY SEPARATORS --- MUNICIPALITIES East Bay Municipal Utility District (Alameda Albany Berkely El Cerrito Emeryville Kensington Oakland Piedmont) Our wastewater system serves approximately 640,000 peoplein an 83-squaremile area of Alameda and Contra Costa counties along the Bay's east shore, extending from Richmond on the north, southward to San Leandro. 312 23 Alameda: 70,699 Albany: 15,965 Berkeley: 101,555 El Cerrito: 22,600 Emeryville: 8,751 Kensington: 4,936 Oakland: 397,067 Piedmont: 10,540TABLE OF MANDATORY AND RECOMMEND ED SEPARATOR REQUIREMENTS

-8- JURISDICTION DATE ACTION Dental Offices Population MANDATORY SEPARATORS --- MUNICIPALITIES KING COUNTY, WA (Alderwood, Algona, Auburn, Bellevue, Black Diamond, Bothell, Brier, Carnation, Cedar River, Coal Creek, Cross Valley, Highlands Sewer District, Issaquah, Kent, Kirkland, Lake Forest Park, Lakehaven, Mercer Island, Muckleshoot Indian Tribe, Northeast Sammamish, Northshore, Olympic View, Pacific,Redmond, Renton, Ronald Sammamish Plateau, Seattle, Skyway, Soos Creek, Tukwila, Valley View, Vashon, Woodinville Ordinance Requires dentists to adhere to numerical limits for discharge and be subject to fines for violations or to install an amalgam separator and be deemed in compliance. 1,500 24 1,826,732 25TABLE OF MANDATORY AND RECOMMEND ED SEPARATOR REQUIREMENTS

-9- JURISDICTION DATE ACTION Dental Offices Population MANDATORY SEPARATORS --- MUNICIPALITIES Solon, Ohio Ordinance Requires dentists to install separators 22,257 26

Wichita, KS Ordinance Requires a two-phase

program. Phase I is the purchase and installation of certain equipment, filters, etc; beyond the ordinary traps and filters; Phase II would have required installation of separators in 2004 if City didn’t achieve expected reductions from Phase I. In 2003, about 80% of dentists did install separators during Phase I, so there was no need to implement Phase II. 200 27 357,698 28

Narragansett Bay area, Rhode Island Amalgam separators are considered part of BMPs by Narragansett Bay Commission State rule means all dental offices are covered (see Rhode Island entry) 360,000 29

Los Angeles, CA Ordinance Requires BMPs 1,200 30 3,849,378 31

NE Ohio (NEORSD) Administrative orders to 1,100 service

area dentists.(April 1, 2002,) Requires BMPs Recommends separators 1,100 32 4,500,000 33TABLE OF MANDATORY AND RECOMMEND ED SEPARATOR REQUIREMENTS

-10- JURISDICTION DATE ACTION COMPLIANCE Population MANDATORY --- MUNICIPALITIES Sum of Population Covered by a Mandatory Separators

47,956,089 Total Percent of the US Population 16%TABLE OF MANDATORY AND RECOMMEND ED SEPARATOR REQUIREMENTS

-11- JURISDICTION DATE ACTION DENTAL OFFICES Population

STATE/MUNICIPAL RECOMMENDED PROGRAM Colorado- Colorado-Colorado Dental Association agreement Recommends separators 2,366 34 4,753,377

Wisconsin Wisconsin—Dane County. Wisconsin Dental Association and Dane County Dental Society agreement Recommends separators 2,023 35 5,556,506

Washington State (outside of King County) Memorandum of Understanding 36 Separator installation rates increased to 80% from 2003 to 2005 37 2,102 38 4,569,066

Minneapolis-St. Paul, MN MCES-State Dental Association agreement Recommends separators 99% compliance 724 39 372,833 and 273,535TABLE OF MANDATORY AND RECOMMEND ED SEPARATOR REQUIREMENTS

-12- JURISDICTION DATE ACTION DENTAL OFFICES Population

STATE MERCURY REDUCTIO N PROGRAM --- UNCERTAIN Sum of Population Covered by guidance 11.232 million Total Percent of the US Population 3.7% SUMMARY STATE/MUNICIPAL RECOMMENDED OR VOLUNTARY PROGRAM Total number of dental offices = 122,918

Dentist that use amalgam ~36,798 Sum of Population Covered by Mandatory and Voluntary Separators 63,481,406 Total percent of dental offices covered by Mandatory or Recommended Separators

28.7% Total Percent of the US Population Covered by Mandatory and Recommended Separators 21.1%

1 Memorandum from Derek Singer, ERG, to Jan Matuszko, EPA, Subject: Dental Amalgam Best Management Practices: Separators: Summary of E ffectiveness, Current Use and Cost (DCN 04852) at Appendix 1 (September 26, 2007).

2 Memorandum from Derek Singer, ERG, to Jan Matuszko, EPA, Subject: Dental Amalgam Best Management Practices: Separators: Summary of E ffectiveness, Current Use and Cost (DCN 04852) at Appendix 1 (September 26, 2007).

3 Memorandum from Derek Singer, ERG, to Jan Matuszko, EPA, Subject: Dental Amalgam Best Management Practices: Separators: Summary of E ffectiveness, Current Use and Cost (DCN 04852) at Appendix 1 (September 26, 2007).

4 Memorandum from Derek Singer, ERG, to Jan Matuszko, EPA, Subject: Dental Amalgam Best Management Practices: Separators: Summary of E ffectiveness, Current Use and Cost (DCN 04852) at Appendix 1 (September 26, 2007).TABLE OF MANDATORY AND RECOMMEND ED SEPARATOR REQUIREMENTS

-13- 5 Memorandum from Derek Singer, ERG, to Jan Matuszko, EPA, Subject: Dental Amalgam Best Management Practices: Separators: Summary of E ffectiveness, Current Use and Cost (DCN 04852) at Appendix 1 (September 26, 2007).

6 Memorandum from Derek Singer, ERG, to Jan Matuszko, EPA, Subject: Dental Amalgam Best Management Practices: Separators: Summary of E ffectiveness, Current Use and Cost (DCN 04852) at Appendix 1 (September 26, 2007).

7 Memorandum from Derek Singer, ERG, to Jan Matuszko, EPA, Subject: Dental Amalgam Best Management Practices: Separators: Summary of E ffectiveness, Current Use and Cost (DCN 04852) at Appendix 1 (September 26, 2007).

8 Memorandum from Derek Singer, ERG, to Jan Matuszko, EPA, Subject: Dental Amalgam Best Management Practices: Separators: Summary of E ffectiveness, Current Use and Cost (DCN 04852) at Appendix 1 (September 26, 2007).

9 Memorandum from Derek Singer, ERG, to Jan Matuszko, EPA, Subject: Dental Amalgam Best Management Practices: Separators: Summary of E ffectiveness, Current Use and Cost (DCN 04852) at Appendix 1 (September 26, 2007).

10 Memorandum from Derek Singer, ERG, to Jan Matuszko, EPA, Subject: Dental Amalgam Best Management Practices: Separators: Summary of E ffectiveness, Current Use and Cost (DCN 04852) at Appendix 1 (September 26, 2007).

11 Amalgam Waste Management - Issu es and Answers, available at < http://www.p2pays.org /ref%5C04/03853.pdf >.

12 Mercury in Municipal Wastewater. Tim Tuominen, WLSSD, Rebecca Flood, MCES (September 19, 2007) available at < http://www.mnei.org/policy/images/HgTMDLmee tinginfo/WastewaterTreatment.pdf > at 15 of 35. 140 separators were installed in these offices. Id. at 16 of 35.

13 http://www.ci.boulder.co.us/files/Utilities/ WRAB/August%2021,%202006/item2_attacha.pdf

.

14 http://fcgov.com/utilities/pdf/water-supply.pdf

15 http://www.bouldercolorado.gov/file s/Utilities/Projects/wwtp_mp_2007.pdf at 13 of 225.

16 http://www.madsewer.org/CommunitiesServed.htm

17 http://www.mmsd.com/ne ws/detail.cfm?id=10

.

18 http://www.mmsd.com/about/index.cfm

19 City of Palo Alto, Advanced Mercury Source Control Study, 2004 Annual Report of Activity at page 3 of 22 (February 2005), available at <http ://www.city.palo-alto.ca.us/civica/f ilebank/blobdload.asp?BlobID=3741>.

20 http://factfinder.census.gov

21 http://www.sfenvironment.org/ downloads/library/pdf1e.pdf.

22 http://factfinder.census.gov

23 East Bay Municipal Utility District, 2006 Pretreatment and Pollution Prevention Report at 5-11 (2007), available

at <http://www.ebmud.com/wastewater/industrial_&_commerc ial_permits_&_fees/pollution_prevention_program/ann ual_report/ww_pollution_prevention_annualreport_2006.pdf >.

24 Management of hazardous dental wastes in King County, 1991-2 000 at 4 (2005), available at <http://www.govlink.org/hazwaste/publi cations/HazDentalWasteMgmt.pdf>.TABLE OF MANDATORY AND RECOMMEND ED SEPARATOR REQUIREMENTS

-14- 25 http://dnr.metrokc.gov /wtd/mwpaac/index.htm

26 http://factfinder.census.gov

27 http://www.wichitagov.org/CityOffices/Water AndSewer/SewageTreatme nt/SilverMercury.htm

28 http://factfinder.census.gov

29 http://www.narrabay.co m/factsFigures.asp

.

30 Dental Offices and Clinic s Program: Project Overvi ew (2005), available at < http://www.lacity.org/SAN/ens2h_dental.pdf .>.

3131 http://factfinder.census.gov

32 Regional Sewer District, Keith J. Linn, NEORSD Envi ronmental Specialist, Dental Mercury at the Northeast Ohio at 14 of 36 (December 2, 2002) , available at < http://www.epa.gov/regi on5/air/mercury/meetings/Linn.pdf >.

33 Cite

34 Memorandum from Derek Singer, ERG, to Jan Matuszko, EPA, Subject: Dental Amalgam Best Management Practices: Separators: Summary of E ffectiveness, Current Use and Cost (DCN 04852) at Appendix 1 (September 26, 2007).

35 Memorandum from Derek Singer, ERG, to Jan Matuszko, EPA, Subject: Dental Amalgam Best Management Practices: Separators: Summary of E ffectiveness, Current Use and Cost (DCN 04852) at Appendix 1 (September 26, 2007).

36 Washington State, Department of Ecology, Memorandum of Understanding, Dental Compliance Follow-up Report (July 26,)., available at <http://www.ecy.wa.go v/pubs/0604011.pdf>.

37 Washington State, Department of Ecology, Memorandum of Understanding, Dental Compliance Follow-up Report at 1 (July 26,)., available at <http://www.ecy.wa.gov/pubs/0604011.pdf>.

38 Washington State, Department of Ecology, Memorandum of Understanding, Dental Compliance Follow-up Report at 9 (July 26,)., available at <http://www.ecy.wa.gov/pubs/0604011.pdf>.

39 Mercury in Municipal Wastewater. Tim Tuominen, WLSSD, Rebecca Flood, MC ES (September 19, 2007) available at < http://www.mn-ei.org/policy/images/HgTMD Lmeetinginfo/WastewaterTreatment.pdf > at 27 of 35.