I 
110TH CONGRESS 
1ST SESSION H. R. 1533 
To provide for the establishment of a national mercury monitoring program. 
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 
MARCH 15, 2007 
Mr. ALLEN introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee 
on Energy and Commerce 
A BILL 
To provide for the establishment of a national mercury 
monitoring program. 
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa-
tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 
This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Comprehensive Na-
tional Mercury Monitoring Program Establishment Act’’. 
SEC. 2. FINDINGS. 
Congress finds the following: 
(1) Mercury is a potent neurotoxin of signifi-
cant ecological and public health concern. Exposure 
to mercury occurs largely by consumption of con-
taminated fish. Children and women of childbearing 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
18:08 Mar 16, 2007
Jkt 059196
PO 00000
Frm 00001
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H1533.IH
H1533
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with BILLS
age who consume large amounts of fish are at high 
risk of adverse effects. It is estimated that 200,000 
to 400,000 children born each year in the United 
States have been exposed to mercury levels in their 
mothers’ wombs high enough to impair neurological 
development. The Centers for Disease Control and 
Prevention have found that eight percent of the 
women in the United States of childbearing age have 
blood mercury levels in excess of values deemed safe 
by the Environmental Protection Agency. 
(2) As of 2004, fish consumption advisories due 
to mercury contamination have been issued for 44 
States, 
including 
statewide 
advisories 
for 
freshwaters and 12 statewide advisories for coastal 
waters. These advisories represent more than 52,000 
square kilometers of lakes and 1,230,000 kilometers 
of rivers. Yet, fish and shellfish are an important 
source of dietary protein, and a healthy fishing re-
source is important to the economy. The extent of 
fish consumption advisories underscores the exten-
sive human and ecological health risk posed by mer-
cury pollution. 
(3) In most locations, the primary route for 
mercury input to aquatic ecosystems is by atmos-
pheric transport and deposition. Mercury’s inter-
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
18:08 Mar 16, 2007
Jkt 059196
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H1533.IH
H1533
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with BILLS
action with the environment and bioaccumulation in 
biota are not fully understood. Computer models and 
other assessment tools predict varying effectiveness 
in reducing mercury concentrations in fish, and no 
broad-scale data sets exist to test model predictions. 
(4) In September 2003, the Society of Environ-
mental Toxicology and Chemistry convened a work-
shop of 32 mercury scientists to develop a system to 
measure and document changes resulting from re-
ductions in mercury emissions in the United States. 
The resulting plan is documented in the book ‘‘State 
of Science for Mercury Effects: Assessment for 
Aquatic and Terrestrial Environments’’, published in 
2007. 
(5) On January 1, 2005, ‘‘Monitoring the Re-
sponse to Changing Mercury Deposition’’ was pub-
lished in the periodical Environmental Science and 
Technology. The article proposed a ‘‘holistic, multi-
media, long-term mercury monitoring program’’. 
(6) Many regulations limiting mercury emis-
sions have either gone into effect or will soon be en-
acted, but scientists are not adequately measuring 
the environmental benefits of reduced mercury emis-
sions. As governments advance regulations, govern-
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
18:08 Mar 16, 2007
Jkt 059196
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H1533.IH
H1533
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with BILLS
ments should document whether their rules are ef-
fective. 
(7) On May 15, 2006, the Office of Inspector 
General of the Environmental Protection Agency 
issued a report entitled, ‘‘Monitoring Needed to As-
sess Impact of EPA’s Clean Air Mercury Rule 
(CAMR) on Potential Hotspots’’, Report No. 2006– 
P–0025, which states, in part: ‘‘Without field data 
from an improved monitoring network, EPA’s ability 
to advance mercury science will be limited and ‘util-
ity-attributable’ hotspots that pose health risks may 
occur and go undetected’’ and ‘‘We recommend that 
EPA develop and implement a mercury monitoring 
plan to (1) assess the impact of CAMR, if adopted, 
on mercury deposition and fish tissue; and (2) evalu-
ate and refine mercury estimation tools and mod-
els’’. 
(8) On January 4, 2007, ‘‘Contamination in 
Remote Forest and Aquatic Ecosystems in the 
Northeastern U.S.: Sources, Transformations and 
Management Options’’ and ‘‘Biological Mercury 
Hotspots in the Northeastern U.S. and Southeastern 
Canada’’ were published in the journal BioScience. 
The authors identified five biological mercury 
hotspots and nine areas of concern in the north-
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
18:08 Mar 16, 2007
Jkt 059196
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H1533.IH
H1533
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with BILLS
eastern United States and southeastern Canada as-
sociated primarily with atmospheric mercury emis-
sions and deposition. They further located an area 
of particularly high mercury deposition adjacent to 
a coal-fired electric utility in southern New Hamp-
shire. The authors of the studies concluded that 
local impacts from mercury emissions should be 
closely monitored in order to assess the impact of 
State and Federal policies. 
SEC. 3. MONITORING PROGRAM. 
(a) ESTABLISHMENT.—The Administrator of the En-
vironmental Protection Agency, in consultation with the 
United States Fish and Wildlife Service, the United States 
Geological Survey, the Forest Service, the National Park 
Service, and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Ad-
ministration, shall establish a national scale mercury mon-
itoring program. For purposes of such program, the Ad-
ministrator of the Environmental Protection Agency shall 
select multiple monitoring sites in ecoregions of the United 
States. 
(b) AIR AND WATERSHED.—The program under this 
section shall monitor long-term changes in mercury levels 
in the air and watershed, including— 
(1) at locations selected under subsection (a) 
that the Administrator of the Environmental Protec-
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
18:08 Mar 16, 2007
Jkt 059196
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H1533.IH
H1533
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with BILLS