Communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament - Community Strategy Concerning Mercury {SEC(2005) 101}
Date: 2005-01-28
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: environmental law, environmental protection, fish, foodstuff, industrial pollution, mercury, public health

COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES 

Brussels, 28.01.2005 
COM(2005) 20 final 

COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE COUNCIL AND THE 
EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT 

Community Strategy Concerning Mercury 

{SEC(2005) 101} 

EN 

   EN 

 
 
 
  
1. 

INTRODUCTION 

In  December  2002  the  Commission  presented  a  report  to  the  Council  concerning 
mercury from the chlor-alkali industry1. This considered the fate of 12-15 thousand 
tonnes  of  surplus  mercury  resulting  from  the  sector’s  conversion  away  from  the 
mercury cell process. The Council reacted by inviting the Commission to present “a 
coherent strategy ... with measures to protect human health and the environment from 
the  release  of  mercury  based  on  a  life-cycle  approach,  taking  into  account 
production, use, waste treatment and emissions”. The strategy also provides a basis 
for  the  Community’s  input  to  international  debate  on  mercury  at  the  UNEP 
Governing Council in February 2005. 

This  Communication  is  accompanied  by  an  Extended  Impact  Assessment2  (ExIA) 
looking at the mercury problem and policy options in detail. It also takes account of a 
wide range of expressions on the need to act made during stakeholder consultation on 
the strategy, the processes and results of which are described in the ExIA. 

2. 

THE MERCURY PROBLEM 

2.1. 

The mercury threat 

Mercury  and  its  compounds  are  highly  toxic  to  humans,  ecosystems  and  wildlife. 
Initially  seen  as  an  acute  and  local  problem,  mercury  pollution  is  now  also 
understood to be global, diffuse and chronic. High doses can be fatal to humans, but 
even relatively low doses can have serious adverse neurodevelopmental impacts, and 
have  recently  been  linked  with  possible  harmful  effects  on  the  cardiovascular, 
immune  and  reproductive  systems.  Mercury  also  retards  microbiological  activity  in 
soil, and is a priority hazardous substance under the Water Framework Directive3. 

Mercury  is  persistent  and  can  change  in  the  environment  into  methylmercury,  the 
most  toxic  form.  Methylmercury  readily  passes  both  the  placental  barrier  and  the 
blood-brain barrier, inhibiting potential mental development even before birth. Hence 
exposure of women of child-bearing age and children is of greatest concern. 

The  largest  source  of  mercury  exposure  for  most  people  in  developed  countries  is 
inhalation  of  mercury  vapour  from  dental  amalgam.  Exposure  to  methylmercury 
mostly  occurs  via  diet.  Methylmercury  collects  and  concentrates  especially  in  the 
aquatic  food  chain,  making  populations  with  a  high  intake  of  fish  and  seafood 
particularly vulnerable. 

1 
2 
3 

COM(2002) 489 final, 6.9.2002. 
SEC(2005) 101. 
Directive 2000/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2000 establishing a 
framework  for  Community  action  in  the  field  of water  policy,  OJ  L  327,  22.12.2000, as  amended by 
Decision  2001/2455/EC  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council  of  20  November  2001 
establishing the list of priority substances in the field of water policy, OJ L 331, 15.12.2001. 

EN 

2 

   EN 

 
                                                 
Most  people  in  central  and  northern  Europe  show  bioindicators  of  exposure  below 
internationally  accepted  safe  levels  for  methylmercury.  However,  most  people  in 
coastal  areas  of  Mediterranean  countries,  and  around  1-5%  of  the  population  in 
central  and  northern  Europe,  are  around  these  levels,  and  large  numbers  among 
Mediterranean  fishing  communities  and  the  Arctic  population  exceed  them 
significantly. 

2.2. 

A global perspective 

Although  mercury  is  released  by  natural  sources  like  volcanoes,  additional  releases 
from  anthropogenic  sources,  like  coal  burning  and  use  in  products,  have  led  to 
significant  increases  in  environmental  exposure  and  deposition.  Past  releases  have 
also  created  a  “global  pool”  of  mercury  in  the  environment,  part  of  which  is 
continuously  mobilised,  deposited  and  re-mobilised.  Further  emissions  add  to  this 
global pool circulating between air, water, sediments, soil and biota. 

Elevated mercury concentrations occur in many parts of the world. Some are largely 
due to local sources, especially small scale gold mining in South America, Africa and 
Asia. But as a transboundary pollutant, mercury also can be transported globally to 
regions  far  from  its  source.  This  means  that  some  pollution  of  a  local  character, 
viewed in the short term, adds to the global pool in the long term. It has also led to 
contamination of regions with few or no mercury sources, like the Arctic. 

3. 

OBJECTIVES  

from  methylmercury 

A  key  aim  is  to  reduce  mercury  levels  in  the  environment  and  human  exposure, 
the  problem  of 
especially 
methylmercury in fish  will  probably take decades,  as  present  levels are  due  to past 
emissions, and would take time to fall even without further releases. The Community 
has already taken much action to reduce mercury emissions and uses. This does not 
mean that no more can be done, but highlights the importance of full implementation 
of existing measures by Member States, and of making progress at the global level. 

fish.  But  eliminating 

in 

The strategy therefore has the following objectives: 

•  Reducing mercury emissions. 

•  Reducing  the  entry  into  circulation  of  mercury  in  society  by  cutting  supply  and 

demand. 

•  Resolving  the  long-term  fate  of  mercury  surpluses  and  societal  reservoirs  (in 

products still in use or in storage). 

•  Protecting against mercury exposure. 

•  Improving understanding of the mercury problem and its solutions. 

•  Supporting and promoting international action on mercury. 

EN 

3 

   EN 

 
Progress,  gaps  and  additional  actions  to  be  taken  are  described  below  for  each 
objective. References to the short and medium terms relate to the next 3 years and 4-
6 years respectively. Longer term actions will be identified following review of the 
strategy. 

4. 

REDUCING EMISSIONS 

Mercury  releases  have  generally  risen  with  industrialisation.  Global  atmospheric 
emissions grew about 20% from 1990-2000. European emissions fell about 60% over 
this  period,  but  Europe  remains  a  major  source  of  mercury  deposited  in  other 
continents and the Arctic. 

One of the main source of mercury releases is coal burning. Coal burning in plants 
above 50 MWth is covered by the IPPC Directive4 – as are other major sources like 
the metals, cement and chemical industries – and Directive 2001/80/EC5. 

The  IPPC  Directive  is  therefore  a  key  Community  tool  to  reduce  emissions  of 
mercury  and  other  pollutants.  Permitting  of  IPPC  installations,  with  limited 
exceptions for some new Member States, is to be complete by 30 October 2007. The 
Commission is publishing a series of BAT reference (BREF) documents to support 
IPPC implementation. 

Action  1.  The  Commission  will  assess  the  effects  of  applying  IPPC  on  mercury 
emissions,  and  consider  if  further  action  like  Community  emission  limit  values  is 
needed, as data under the IPPC and EPER6 reporting requirements are submitted, and 
in a broader strategy review by the end of 2010. This will include review of the co-
benefit  effect  of  controls  to  be  implemented  by  1  January  2008  under  Directive 
2001/80/EC to reduce sulphur dioxide emissions from large combustion plants. 

Action  2.  The  Commission  will  encourage  Member  States  and  industry  to  provide 
more  information  on  mercury  releases  and  prevention  and  control  techniques,  so 
conclusions can be drawn in BREFs helping to reduce emissions further. The second 
edition  of  the  chlor-alkali  BREF  will  include  information  to  address  the  risk  of 
releases in decommissioning mercury cells. 

Small  combustion  plants  and  residential  coal  burning  are  also  significant  mercury 
sources. Control of such facilities is more likely to be cost-effective when considered 
on  a  multi-pollutant,  rather  than  a  single  substance,  basis.  This  is  already  being 
examined  in  the  Clean  Air  for  Europe  (CAFE)  programme  for  “classical”  air 
pollutants such as ammonia and sulphur dioxide. 

4 

5 

6 

Council  Directive  96/61/EC  of  24  September  1996  concerning  integrated  pollution  prevention  and 
control, OJ L 257, 10.10.96. 
Directive  2001/80/EC  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council  of  23  October  2001  on  the 
limitation  of  emissions  of  certain  pollutants  into  the  air  from  large  combustion  plants,  OJ  L  309, 
27.11.2001. 
Commission  Decision  2000/479/EC  of  17  July  2000  on  the  implementation  of  a  European  pollutant 
emission  register  (EPER)  according  to  Article  15  of  Council  Directive  96/61  concerning  integrated 
pollution prevention and control, OJ L192, 28.7.2000. 

EN 

4 

   EN 

 
                                                 
Action  3.  The  Commission  will  undertake  a  study  in  2005  of  options  to  abate 
mercury emissions from small scale coal combustion, to be considered alongside the 
broader CAFE assessment. 

Some  Member  States  identify  dental  amalgam  as  a  significant  source  of  mercury 
releases, including via dental surgeries and cremation. Treatment of dental amalgam 
waste is covered by Community waste law7. 

Action 4. The Commission will review in 2005 Member States’ implementation of 
Community  requirements  on  the  treatment  of  dental  amalgam  waste,  and  will  take 
appropriate steps thereafter to ensure correct application.  

Emissions from crematoria are not covered by Community law, but are regulated in 
several  Member  States,  and  are  also  the  subject  of  an  OSPAR  Recommendation. 
Reports on emissions by parties to this Recommendation, first due by 30 September 
2005, will give an indication of effectiveness and whether further action is required. 
Similar control is encouraged in other Member States where cremation takes place. 

More  broadly  the  proposal  for  a  Directive  on  priority  substances  under  the  Water 
Framework Directive will include quality standards for mercury to be met by 2015, 
which  will  be  relevant  in  IPPC  permitting,  for  example.  Adoption  of  the  measures 
will  start  the  framework  Directive’s  20-year  period  for  cessation  or  phasing-out  of 
emissions, discharges and losses. 

5. 

REDUCING SUPPLY 

Mercury is traded freely on the world market. Current global supply is around 3,600 
tonnes  per  year.  The  EU  is  the  major  exporter,  with  a  net  annual  export  of  around 
1,000  tonnes.  The  price  of  mercury  has  fallen  dramatically  since  its  peak  in  the 
1960s,  standing  relatively  stably  at  around  €5  per  kilogramme  for  most  of  the  past 
decade. The economic impact of the mercury trade is therefore very small. The low 
price and ready supply  also  encourage continued  use  of  mercury  outside  Europe  in 
activities such as gold mining. 

Mercury compounds used as pesticides are subject to the Rotterdam Convention on 
the  Prior  Informed  Consent  Procedure  for  Certain  Hazardous  Chemicals  and 
Pesticides  in  International  Trade.  This  is  implemented  in  the  Community  by 
Regulation (EC) No. 304/20038, which also bans export of cosmetic soaps containing 
mercury  and  requires  export  notification  of  mercury  compounds  for  all  other  uses. 
There  are  no  Community  or  international  restrictions  on  trading  metallic  mercury. 
However,  analysis  in  the  ExIA  suggests  that  the  export  of  mercury  from  the 
Community should be phased out. 

7 

8 

Commission Decision (2000/532/EC) of 3 May 2000 replacing Decision 94/3/EC establishing a list of 
wastes pursuant to Article 1(a) of Directive 75/442 on waste and Council Decision 94/904 establishing 
a list of hazardous waste pursuant to Article 1(4) of Council Directive 91/689EEC on hazardous waste, 
OJ L226/3, 6.9.2000 (as amended). 
Regulation  (EC)  No.  304/2003  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council  of  28  January  2003 
concerning the export and import of dangerous chemicals, OJ L 63, 6.3.2003. 

EN 

5 

   EN 

 
                                                 
Action  5.  As  a  pro-active  contribution  to  a  proposed  globally  organised  effort  to 
phase out primary production of mercury and to stop surpluses re-entering the market 
as  described  in  section  10,  the  Commission  intends  to  propose  an  amendment  to 
Regulation  (EC)  No.  304/2003  to  phase  out  the  export  of  mercury  from  the 
Community by 2011.  

The  main  global  supplier  is  the  Spanish  state-owned  firm  MAYASA.  Under  an 
agreement  made  in  2001,  MAYASA  buys  the  EU  chlor-alkali  sector’s  surplus 
mercury for resale. MAYASA also sells mercury that it has made from ore mined in 
Almadén, Spain. Mercury production in Almadén peaked at around 2,800 tonnes in 
1941, but has since fallen as the market has declined, and recently as the chlor-alkali 
industry  has  provided  an  alternative  source.  The  recent  total  supply  by  MAYASA 
has been around 1,000 tonnes of mercury per year. 

The ExIA finds that, even without an export ban, the negative environmental impacts 
of  primary  mercury  mining  and  production,  and  their  questionable  economic 
viability,  support  the  ending  of  these  particular  activities.  Spain  has  stated  that 
mining and production in Almadén had already been stopped temporarily before the 
adoption of this strategy, and does not anticipate that they will restart. 

The  Commission  recognises  the  historical  economic  and  social  significance  of 
mercury  production  and  trade  in  Almadén,  dating  back  to  Roman  times.  The 
Commission  also  strongly  supports  the  provision  of  help  to  develop  new  areas  of 
business and employment. The area is already eligible for Community support as part 
of  an  Objective  1  region  (Castile-la-Mancha),  and  is  expected  to  remain  so  in  the 
next Structural Fund programming period. 

6. 

REDUCING DEMAND 

Mercury demand is around 3,600 tonnes per year globally, and in 2003 was around 
300  tonnes in the  then  15 EU Member  States. Use of mercury is  declining, at both 
global  and  EU  levels,  yet  some  significant  uses  remain.  The  main  global  uses  are 
gold mining, batteries and the chlor-alkali industry, together accounting for over 75% 
of consumption. Of these, only use in the chlor-alkali industry is presently significant 
across the EU, but the mercury cell process is not considered to be BAT9 under the 
IPPC Directive, and is being phased out. Mercury use in gold mining is known to be 
significant  in  French  Guyana  (where  the  French  authorities  are  considering  a  ban) 
but  not  in  the  European  region  of  the  EU.  Directive  91/157/EEC10  limits  use  of 
mercury in batteries. 

9 

10 

Reference Document on Best Available Techniques (BAT) in the Chlor-Alkali Manufacturing Industry 
adopted by the Commission in December 2001, http://eippcb.jrc.es. 
Council  Directive  91/157/EEC  of  18  March  1991  on  batteries  and  accumulators  containing  certain 
dangerous substances, OJ L 078, 26.3.91. 

EN 

6 

   EN 

 
                                                 
As  the  chlor-alkali  industry  phases  out  mercury  cells,  dental  amalgam  will  become 
the EU’s major mercury use. It is therefore appropriate to re-examine the scope for 
substitution.  This  is  especially  important  as  Member  States  can  encourage 
substitution,  but  the  coverage  of  dental  amalgam  under  the  medical  devices 
Directive11 limits the scope for restrictive national measures. 

Action  6.  In  the  short  term  the  Commission  will  ask  the  Medical  Devices  Expert 
Group  to consider  the  use of mercury  in dental amalgam, and will seek an opinion 
from  the  Scientific  Committee  on  Health  and  Environmental  Risks,  with  a  view  to 
considering whether additional regulatory measures are appropriate. 

The main mercury product group not covered by Community law is measuring and 
control equipment. The Commission is due to present proposals to include medical 
devices  and  monitoring  and  control  instruments  under  Directive  2002/95/EC12, 
which  already  covers  lighting  and  other  electrical  and  electronic  equipment. 
However,  some  of  the  larger  mercury  uses  in  this  product  group  (thermometers, 
blood pressure gauges and barometers) are not electrical or electronic equipment, so 
would  not  be  covered.  The  ExIA  finds  that  additional  action  in  this  area  is 
appropriate. 

Action  7.  The  Commission  intends  to  propose  in  2005  an  amendment  to  Directive 
76/769/EEC13  to  restrict  the  marketing  for  consumer  use  and  healthcare  of  non-
electrical or electronic measuring and control equipment containing mercury. 

Action  8.  The  Commission  will  further  study  in  the  short  term  the  few  remaining 
products  and  applications  in  the  EU  that  use  small  amounts  of  mercury.  In  the 
medium  to  longer  term,  any  remaining  uses  may  be  subject  to  authorisation  and 
consideration  of  substitution  under  the  proposed  REACH  Regulation14,  once 
adopted. 

7. 

ADDRESSING SURPLUSES AND RESERVOIRS 

The largest holding of mercury in the EU is that of the chlor-alkali industry. Given 
the  intention  to  phase  out  exports,  much  of  this  mercury  will  need  to  be  stored  or 
disposed of. Some Member States are already developing policies in this area15. The 
ExIA finds that permanent disposal would be optimal from an environmental point of 
view,  but  is  presently  too  expensive  and  technically  uncertain  to  pursue  at 

11 
12 

13 

14 

15 

Council Directive 93/42/EEC of 14 June 1993 concerning medical devices, OJ L 169, 12.7.93. 
Directive  2002/95/EC  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council  of  27  January  2003  on  the 
restrictions of the use of certain hazardous substances in electrical and electronic equipment (RoHS), OJ 
L 37, 13.2.2003. 
Directive  76/769/EEC  on  the  approximation  of  the  laws,  regulations  and  administrative  provisions  of 
the Member States relating to restrictions on the marketing and use of certain dangerous substances and 
preparations, OJ L 262, 27.9.76. 
Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council concerning the Registration, 
Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH), establishing a European Chemicals 
Agency and amending Directive 1999/45/EC and Regulation (EC) {on Persistent Organic Pollutants}, 
COM(2003) 644 final, 29.10.2003. 
For  example,  Sweden  has  introduced  a  requirement  for  stabilisation  and  storage  of  mercury  in  deep 
bedrock, while Germany is examining the idea of storing metallic mercury in disused salt mines. 

EN 

7 

   EN 

 
                                                 
Community  level.  The  need  to  find  cost-efficient  storage  arrangements  is  therefore 
an important area for further examination. 

Action 9. The Commission will take action to pursue the storage of mercury from the 
chlor-alkali industry, according to a timetable consistent with the intended phase out 
of  mercury  exports  by  2011.  In  the  first  instance  the  Commission  will  explore  the 
scope for an agreement with the industry. 

There  is  also  a  large  amount  of  mercury  in  products  already  circulating  in  society. 
Once  a  product  becomes  “waste”,  present  Community  policy  generally  encourages 
recovery  over  disposal.  More  active  collection  and  recycling  of  mercury  could  be 
considered.  However,  some  Member  States  argue  that  mercury  should  not  be 
recovered  for  re-use,  but  rather  should  be  taken  out  of  circulation  via  storage  or 
disposal. 

Action 10. The Commission will undertake further study in the short to medium term 
of the fate of mercury in products already circulating in society. 

8. 

PROTECTING AGAINST EXPOSURE 

A  recent  opinion  of  the  European  Food  Safety  Authority  (EFSA)  on  the  risk  from 
mercury  in  food16  found  that  people  who  eat  a  lot  of  fish  and  fishery  products,  in 
particular  large  predatory  fish,  can  reach  or  exceed  the  established  safe  levels.  The 
Commission  is  reviewing  risk  management  options  in  the  light  of  EFSA's  opinion, 
including  the  maximum  limits  in  Regulation  (EC)  No.  466/200117  on  the  mercury 
content  of  fishery  products.  However,  the  scope  to  reduce  these  levels  is  limited. 
Other solutions, like the targeted consumer advice issued by the Commission18 and 
Member States, are also needed. 

Action 11. In the short term, EFSA will investigate further specific dietary intakes of 
different  types  of  fish  and  seafood  among  vulnerable  subpopulations  (e.g.  pregnant 
women, children). 

Action 12. The Commission will provide additional information concerning mercury 
in  food  as  new  data  become  available.  National  authorities  will  be  encouraged  to 
give advice in the light of local specificities. 

16 
17 

18 

http://www.efsa.eu.int/science/contam/contam_opinions/259_en.html. 
Commission  Regulation  (EC)  No  466/2001  of  8  March  2001  setting  maximum  levels  for  certain 
contaminants in foodstuffs, OJ L 77, 16.3.2001. 
http://europa.eu.int/comm/food/food/chemicalsafety/contaminants/information_note_mercury-fish_12-
05-04.pdf. 

EN 

8 

   EN 

 
                                                 
Community  law  also  limits  the  mercury  content  of  drinking  water19.  The  recently 
agreed  4th  air  quality  daughter  Directive20  does  not  set  a  target  value  or  quality 
standard  for  mercury  –  levels  observed  in  ambient  air  are  below  those  believed  to 
have adverse health effects – but concentrations and deposition are to be measured to 
show geographical and temporal trends. 

The  existing  Community  legislation  on  health  and  safety  at  work  provides  an 
adequate framework to protect workers against risks to their health and safety from 
exposure  to  mercury.  Under  this  framework,  the  Commission  is  developing  an 
occupational exposure limit value for mercury. 

More  broadly,  action  will  be  taken  under  the  European  Environment  and  Health 
Action  Plan  2004-201021  to  improve  determination  of  human  exposure,  by 
developing integrated monitoring of the environment and food and investigating the 
scope  for  a  coherent  approach  to  biomonitoring.  This  will  cover  a  range  of 
environmental stressors including mercury. 

9. 

IMPROVING UNDERSTANDING 

Gaps in knowledge on the mercury problem and its possible solutions can be filled 
by research, development and pilot projects. Areas for such activities include human 
health effects, how mercury moves or is retained in the environment, and questions 
of  ecosystem  sensitivity  and  toxicity.  Effort  should  also  be  directed  at  addressing 
issues  associated  with  mercury  in  products,  emissions  and  wastes,  particularly  the 
development  of  techniques  to  reduce  mercury  releases  from  coal  combustion  and 
other  major  sources,  and  to  treat,  stabilise  and  permanently  dispose  of  surplus 
mercury and mercury-containing wastes. 

Action  13.  Priorities  for  mercury  research  will  be  addressed  in  the  7th  RTD 
Framework Programme and other appropriate funding mechanisms. 

10. 

SUPPORTING AND PROMOTING INTERNATIONAL ACTION 

It  is  important  to  make  progress  in  addressing  the  mercury  problem  globally,  in 
particular to reduce emissions, and also to reduce supply and demand. 

There  is  considerable  potential  to  reduce  mercury  emissions  and  foster  the  use  of 
BAT,  especially  in  the  power,  metals,  cement,  chlor-alkali  and  waste  sectors.  EU 
action has already reduced emissions significantly, and can be offered as an example 
in  international,  regional  and  bilateral  fora.  Technology  transfer  will  also  be 
important. 

19 

20 

21 

Council  Directive  98/83/EEC  of  3  November  1998  on  the  quality  of  water  intended  for  human 
consumption, OJ L 330, 5.12.98. 
Proposed  Directive  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council  relating  to  arsenic,  cadmium, 
mercury, nickel and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in ambient air, COM(2003) 423 final, 16.7.2003. 
Final text not yet published in the Official Journal. 
COM(2004) 416 final, 9.6.2004. 

EN 

9 

   EN 

 
                                                 
Global  demand  for  mercury  is  already  decreasing,  but  the  nature  of  the  mercury 
problem  makes  it  important  to  take  steps  to  further  manage  demand  downwards. 
Measures  should  be  taken  to  phase  out  mercury  use  where  suitable  alternatives  are 
available,  and  to  strictly  control  it  where  they  are  not.  The  Commission  considers 
that purposeful demand reduction efforts could cut global mercury use significantly – 
to around 1,000 tonnes or less by 2020. This relies especially on cutting use in the 
chlor-alkali  sector  and  batteries,  where  great  potential  has  again  been  illustrated  in 
the EU, and in gold mining. 

However, the fall in global demand will not meet its potential if mercury supply stays 
high and cost low, stimulating continued and new uses. Parallel action is needed to 
reduce supply. The US decision to store mercury previously stockpiled for strategic 
purposes is welcomed. 

Action  14.  The  Community,  Member  States  and  other  stakeholders  should  pursue 
input to international fora and activities, and bilateral engagement and projects with 
third countries, including technology transfer, to address the mercury problem. 

Action 15. The Commission will consider establishing a specific funding scheme for 
research  and  pilot  projects  to  reduce  mercury  emissions  from  coal  combustion  in 
countries  with  a  high  dependency  on  solid  fuels,  e.g.  China,  India,  Russia,  etc., 
similar to the CARNOT programme that promotes the clean and efficient use of solid 
fuels. 

Action 16. The Community should promote an initiative to make mercury subject to 
the PIC procedure of the Rotterdam Convention. 

Action  17.  The  Community  and  Member  States  should  continue  to  support  work 
under  the  Heavy  Metals  Protocol  to  the  UNECE  Convention  on  Long  Range 
Transboundary Air Pollution. 

Action  18.  The  Community,  Member  States  and  other  stakeholders  should  also 
support the UNEP Global Mercury Programme, e.g. through review of materials and 
provision of technical knowledge and human and financial resources. 

Action  19.  The  Community  and  Member  States  should  support  global  efforts 
contributing  to  reduced  use  of  mercury  in  the  gold  mining  sector,  e.g.  the 
UNDP/GEF/UNIDO Global Mercury Project. They will also consider possibilities to 
support  individual  developing  countries  through  the  various  instruments  related  to 
development cooperation assistance, taking national strategies for development into 
account. 

Action  20.  To  reduce  mercury  supply  internationally,  the  Community  should 
advocate a global phase-out of primary production and encourage other countries to 
stop  surpluses  re-entering  the  market,  under  an  initiative  similar  to  that  of  the 
Montreal  Protocol  on  substances  that  deplete  the  ozone  layer.  To  support  this 
objective, the envisaged amendment of Regulation (EC) No. 304/2003 would phase 
out the export of mercury from the Community by 2011. 

EN 

10 

   EN 

 
11. 

REVIEW 

The ExIA identifies a number of significant milestones in the short to medium term 
under  current  Community  and  international  measures  which  will  enable  further 
review  of  the  mercury  problem,  the  success  of  policies  and  possible  additional 
actions. More broadly, the Commission intends to review the mercury strategy as a 
whole by the end of 2010. This review will also meet the requirement to report under 
the  4th  air  quality  daughter  Directive  by  this  time  on  the  merit  of  further  action  on 
mercury,  taking  account  of  measures  adopted  pursuant  to  this  strategy.  The 
Commission  intends  to  conduct  the  review  using  data  from  various  sources  and 
covering all media, rather than just from an air quality perspective. 

12. 

CONCLUSIONS 

Mercury poses a threat in the Community and globally. This Communication marks 
the first step in the implementation of a coherent Community strategy on this subject. 
It  is  presented  ahead  of  the  intended  legislative  proposals  announced  herein,  to 
enable  conclusion  of  a  Community  position  on  mercury  in  time  for  the  UNEP 
Governing Council of February 2005. 

The  Commission  requests  the  Council,  in  response  to  its  invitation  to  present  a 
mercury  strategy,  and  the  European  Parliament,  to  endorse  the  approach  set  out  in 
this Communication. 

EN 

11 

   EN