Mercury Remediation

Home inspected this morning was previously remediated for Mercury contamination.

Homeowner had dropped an oral thermometer on the floor that broke into small pieces. Homeowner utilized the Central Vacuum to remove the pieces of glass from the floor.

Central Vacuum needed to be replaced along with all of the related interior piping due to the potential of mercury contamination.

Cost of remediation was in excess of $10,000.

Has anyone else ever heard of something like this.

Mercury, is that the silver liquid we would catch on Nickels as kids?

No Joe I have never heard of a $10,000 Mercury remidiation, but it would not surprise me either.

http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/hac/pha/rosemore/rms_p1.html

There was this story recently about mercury clean up cost from compact fluorescent bulbs. STORY

EPA recommendations

for CFLs and mercury thermometers

http://www.dph.state.ct.us/EOHA/Documents/mercury%20health%20effects.pdf

My guess Joe is the vacuum cleaner technique was not a good solution and probably spread the Mercury more.

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&ct=res&cd=7&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.newmoa.org%2Fprevention%2Fmercury%2Fsmallspills.doc&ei=b5WSRrv-M4G6hQOlyoWFCQ&usg=AFQjCNHHTz-oLvr4H6O7tEvrjE4FX_rYNw&sig2=QWn2rqdecUPBNnlxRPzIng

Who initiated the need for remediation? Was there another party that discovered and required the remediation?

As a child I remember playing with Mercury, holding in the palm of my hand. Should I be worried?

In the ‘chicken little’ era (today), anything any time I hear someone say “potentially” contaminated, the ambulance chasers come out(the remediators).

Warning, heading off topic! I had a friend that was doing muffler work on his car. A bracket came off and punctured the gas tank. He got rags and dammed it up, and soaked it up. The local firefighters down the block smelt gas, were bored and rolled out an engine. After they were done, he was $10,000 in the hole (this was in 92). They said the tank held 10+ gallons, they smelt gas, they see the rags, the tank is leaking, and there was soil by it. The whole yard was ‘potentially contaminated’ now. They said pay a remediator, or pay a fine plus a remediator. He paid to have the yard cleaned up, and since he couldn’t PROVE nothing ended up in the grass, he paid dearly. :frowning:

Ok back to the OP, to add insult to injury, the central vac probly exhausted to the outside. :wink:

tom

Per disclosure, the remediation was initiated by the Homeowner. Owner questioned, after vacuuming, whether vacuuming was a proper method for cleaning.

Recommended cleanup levels range between 0.0003 mg/m3 and 0.001 mg/m3.

Test results were reported as BDL (Below Detection Limit). Homeowner opted to follow thru with a full remediation to be safe.

Joe you always have the interesting stories.

tom

$10,000 to remediate something Below Detection Limits, good work if you can get it.

Sounds like home owner is tooting his own horn or is dumb as a plant and has more dollars than sense. Who wants to be a Super Hero? :roll:

Hi Joe:

I’ve done tons of mercury remediation and exposure assessments (in fact just completed one in a doctor’s office about two months ago).

What specific questions do you have?

Caoimhín P. Connell
Forensic Industrial Hygienist
www.forensic-applications.com

(The opinions expressed here are exclusively my personal opinions and do not necessarily reflect my professional opinion, opinion of my employer, agency, peers, or professional affiliates. The above post is for information only and does not reflect professional advice and is not intended to supercede the professional advice of others.)

AMDG

Aren’t most oral thermometers now Mercury Free?

With test results below detectable limits, and no mercury recovered, is it possible that mercury was never present?

Exactly. I would scare me seeing enviromental testing done with a Ouija Board.

:wink:

Hi Joe:

Aren’t most oral thermometers now Mercury Free?

I don’t know the answer to that question. I do know that I encounter (Hg) mecury thermometers more frequently than their non-mercury replacements. Very recently (last couple of weeks), the EC banned the sale of new Hg containing instruments, but apparently that won’t effect those devices already on the market.

A few weeks ago, a doctor in Denver was using a sphygmomanometer that contained a large quantity of Hg. The instrument fell of the table, broke and released about one pound of Hg onto the carpet.

A couple of years ago, in a residence built in the 1920’s, some asbestos abatement knuckledraggers bashed out an old-fashioned residential gas regulation system in the basement and released about 70 pounds of Hg into the home.

Hg is all over the place; fluorescent lights, residential thermostats, heck, even those kid’s shoes with the flashing lights contain elemental Hg.

With test results below detectable limits, and no mercury recovered, is it possible that mercury was never present?

Not necessarily, since you never defined your “detectable limits.”

Posit:

*Environmental Consultant: Hi Homeowner – Good news! I tested for Hg in your home, and it was below detectable limits. *

Homeowner: Great! By the way, what was your detection limit?

Environmental Consultant: Six pounds per house.

Homeowner: Uh… you mean … all you can tell me is that there is less than six pounds of Hg in my home.

Environmental Consultant: Yeah, well, you never actually asked me to define my data quality objectives before I started, you know…

Sampling for Hg is exactly like sampling for mould; until you have defined your data quality objectives, and performed your sampling according to those DQOs, you don’t know what the results mean, and you may have “test results” but you don’t have any data. Similar to a Pro-Lab mould report - you might as well have used a Ouija board.

[FONT=Arial]It is entirely possible to have half a pound of a gazillion little beads of Hg embedded in the carpet or the wood, and yet still have “results that are below the detectable limits." What were the detection limits that were used, how representative were the samples? And, did the samples meet the data quality objectives? (i.e. what were the DQOs). Do you have a “laboratory report” or do you have usable data?
[/FONT]
Cheers,
Caoimhín P. Connell
Forensic Industrial Hygienist
[FONT=Arial]www.forensic-applications.com](http://www.forensic-applications.com)[/FONT]

(The opinions expressed here are exclusively my personal opinions and do not necessarily reflect my professional opinion, opinion of my employer, agency, peers, or professional affiliates. The above post is for information only and does not reflect professional advice and is not intended to supercede the professional advice of others.)

AMDG

I think I have six pounds of amalgam(sp) fillings in my mouth. :wink:

I too have amalgam fillings. Which brings up an important aspect of Hg which is the concept of “bioavailability.” Just because a toxic material is present does not mean that it poses an health risk.

A good example is the sparkling crystal at a formal dining set from which we sip our fine wine (or in my case old whiskey). What makes good crystal sparkle? Why, it’s good old fashioned toxic lead!

However, the lead is bound as a silicate and, therefore, not bioavailable.

Just 33 mls of Hg weighs in at a whopping one pound (a standard six-pack of beer bottles filled with Hg would weigh almost 70 pounds). So, it’s pretty easy to loose half a pound of Hg into a carpet.

Cheers,
Caoimhín P. Connell
Forensic Industrial Hygienist
www.forensic-applications.com

(The opinions expressed here are exclusively my personal opinions and do not necessarily reflect my professional opinion, opinion of my employer, agency, peers, or professional affiliates. The above post is for information only and does not reflect professional advice and is not intended to supercede the professional advice of others.)

AMDG