ENVIRONMENTAL 

PROTECTION

Information on 

Federal Agencies’ 

Expenditures and 

Coordination Related 

to Harmful Algae

Report to Congressional Committees

October 2016

GAO-17-119

United States Government Accountability Office
United States Government Accountability Office

Highlights of GAO-17-119, a report to 

congressional committees

October 2016

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

Information on Federal Agencies’ Expenditures 

and Coordination Related to Harmful Algae

What GAO Found

Twelve federal agencies reported expending an estimated total of roughly $101

million from fiscal years 2013 through 2015 to fund various research, monitoring, 

and other activities related to harmful algae—overgrowths of algae that can 

create toxic “blooms” in marine or freshwater environments. The agencies 

provided a mix of actual and estimated expenditure data and used different 

methods for collecting the data, making comparisons among agencies, and a 

federal total, inexact. Based on the data, the 5 agencies with the largest 

expenditures related to harmful algal blooms for this period—totaling roughly $86

million—were the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, $39.4 

million; National Science Foundation (NSF), $15.4 million; Environmental 

Protection Agency (EPA), $14.5 million; U.S. Geological Survey, $9 million; and 

the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS), $8 million. 

According to agency officials, these 5 agencies funded efforts to research and 

analyze harmful algal blooms; forecast, monitor, and respond to their 

occurrence; and investigate human and ecological health effects. In addition, 

other agencies expended millions of dollars funding activities to address harmful 

algae. For example, from fiscal years 2013 through 2015, the National 

Aeronautics and Space Administration reported expending nearly $2 million on 

research to improve the detection of algal blooms using satellite imagery.

Federal officials reported that their agencies coordinate in a variety of ways with 

each other and with nonfederal stakeholders to share information, expertise, and 

opportunities for collaboration on activities to address harmful algae. For 

example, since 2014, an interagency working group has been the primary, 

government-wide mechanism through which federal agencies coordinate such

activities, develop plans for future work, and identify any gaps in federal activities

and capabilities. In addition, federal officials reported that agencies participate in 

numerous groups, task forces, and other coordination efforts led by federal 

agencies, states, international organizations, or academics. Furthermore, federal 

officials reported a number of interagency partnerships directly related to their 

harmful algae work, such as NIEHS’ and NSF’s collaboration since 2005 to 

jointly fund research projects.

Harmful Algal Blooms Can Have Toxic Effects on the Environment and Aquatic Species

View GAO-17-119. For more information, 

contact J. Alfredo Gómez at (202) 512-3841 or 

gomezj@gao.gov.

Why GAO Did This Study

Harmful algal blooms are an 

environmental problem in all 50 states, 

according to EPA. While algae are 

essential to the ecosystem, providing 

food for all types of animals, these 

blooms can produce toxins that hurt 

the environment and local economies. 

Specifically, they can cause human 

illness or death from the consumption 

of seafood or water contaminated by 

toxic algae; harm aquatic and other 

animal species through neurological or 

liver damage or severe oxygen 

depletion; and hurt the seafood 

industry, recreation, and tourism. 

Harmful algal blooms occur naturally, 

but their prevalence, frequency, and 

severity are increasing—and this 

increase is influenced by climate, 

pollution, and human activities such as 

agriculture and wastewater, according 

to an interagency working group report.

The Drinking Water Protection Act 

included a provision for GAO to review 

federally funded activities related to 

harmful algal blooms. This report 

examines (1) how much federal 

agencies expended on these activities

from fiscal years 2013 through 2015 

and (2) how federal agencies 

coordinate their activities with each 

other and with nonfederal 

stakeholders. GAO collected 

information from federal agencies by 

using a questionnaire and interviewing 

agency officials.

GAO provided a draft of this report to 

the Departments of Agriculture, 

Commerce, Defense, Health and 

Human Services, and the Interior; 

EPA; NASA; and the Executive Office 

of the President for comment. Most of 

the agencies provided technical 

comments, which were incorporated as 

appropriate.
Page i GAO-17-119 Harmful Algae 

Letter 1

Background 8

Twelve Federal Agencies Reported Expending Roughly $101 

Million from Fiscal Years 2013 through 2015 on Various HABRelated Activities 16

Federal Agencies Reported Coordinating HAB-Related Activities 

in a Variety of Ways 22

Agency Comments 25

Appendix I Objectives, Scope and Methodology 27

Appendix II Federal Agencies’ Key Harmful Algal Bloom-Related Activities, 

Expenditures, and Authority 32

Appendix III Federal Agencies’ Harmful Algal Bloom-Related Coordination 87

Appendix IV Federal Agencies’ Harmful Algal Bloom-Related Websites 100

Appendix V Contact and Staff Acknowledgments 108

Related GAO Products 109

Tables

Table 1: Twelve Federal Agencies’ Reported Actual and 

Estimated Expenditures for Activities Related to Harmful 

Algal Blooms (HAB), Fiscal Years 2013-2015 19

Table 2: Seventeen Federal Agencies’ Reported Key Activities 

Related to Harmful Algal Blooms (HAB), Fiscal Years 

2013-2015 20

Table 3: Examples of Harmful Algal Blooms (HAB)-Related 

Coordination Efforts Led by Federal, State, International, 

and Academic Stakeholders 23

Contents
Page ii GAO-17-119 Harmful Algae 

Table 4: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) 

Harmful Algal Bloom (HAB)-Related Programs and 

Expenditures, Fiscal Years 2013- 2015 34

Table 5: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Harmful Algal 

Bloom (HAB)-Related Research Programs and 

Expenditures, Fiscal Years 2013-2015 38

Table 6: Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Harmful Algal 

Bloom (HAB)-Related Activities and Expenditures, Fiscal 

Years 2013-2015 43

Table 7: National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) 

Harmful Algal Bloom (HAB)-Related Programs and 

Expenditures, Fiscal Years 2013-2015 46

Table 8: Department of the Navy (Navy) Harmful Algal Bloom 

(HAB)-Related Projects and Expenditures, Fiscal Years 

2013-2015 50

Table 9: National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences 

(NIEHS) Harmful Algal Blooms (HAB)-Related Activities 

and Expenditures, Fiscal Years 2013-2015 53

Table 10: National Institute of Food and Agriculture (NIFA) 

Harmful Algal Bloom (HAB)-Related Initiatives and 

Programs and Expenditures, Fiscal Years 2013-2015 56

Table 11: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 

(NOAA) Harmful Algal Bloom (HAB)-Related Programs 

and Expenditures, Fiscal Years 2013-2015 59

Table 12: National Park Service (NPS) Harmful Algal Bloom 

(HAB)-Related Initiatives and Programs and 

Expenditures, Fiscal Years 2013-2015 65

Table 13: Natural Resources Conservation Service’s (NRCS) 

Harmful Algal Bloom (HAB)-Related Initiatives and 

Programs and Expenditures, Fiscal Years 2013-2015 68

Table 14: National Science Foundation (NSF) Harmful Algal 

Bloom (HAB)-Related Programs and Expenditures, Fiscal 

Years 2013-2015 70

Table 15: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) Harmful Algal 

Bloom (HAB)-Related Activities and Expenditures, Fiscal 

Years 2013-2015 79

Table 16: U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Harmful Algal Bloom 

(HAB)-Related Centers and Expenditures, Fiscal Years 

2013-2015 82
Page iii GAO-17-119 Harmful Algae 

Figures

Figure 1: Satellite Image of a Harmful Algal Bloom in Lake Erie in 

2011 9

Figure 2: Generalized Map Depicting Harmful Algal Blooms (HAB) 

and Related Poisoning Syndromes and Toxin 

Occurrences in the United States, 2006-2015 15

Abbreviations

AVM avian vacuolar myelinopathy

BOEM Bureau of Ocean Energy Management

CDC Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

CEQ Council on Environmental Quality

CSP Conservation Stewardship Program

CWA Clean Water Act

CyAN Cyanobacteria Assessment Network

EPA Environmental Protection Agency

EQIP Environmental Quality Incentives Program

FDA Food and Drug Administration

FWS U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

GLRI Great Lakes Restoration Initiative

HAB harmful algal bloom

HABHRCA Harmful Algal Bloom and Hypoxia Research and 

Control Act

ICES International Council for the Exploration of the Sea

IJC International Joint Commission

IOOS Integrated Ocean Observing System

IPHAB Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission of 

the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and 

Cultural Organization’s Intergovernmental Panel on 

Harmful Algal Blooms

ISSC Interstate Shellfish Sanitation Conference

IWG-HABHRCA Interagency Working Group on the Harmful Algal 

Bloom and Hypoxia Research and Control Act

NASA National Aeronautics and Space Administration

Navy Department of the Navy

NCCOS National Centers for Coastal Ocean Science

NIEHS National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences

NIFA National Institute of Food and Agriculture
Page iv GAO-17-119 Harmful Algae 

NOAA National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

NOS National Ocean Service

NPS National Park Service

NRCS Natural Resources Conservation Service

NRL Naval Research Laboratory

NSF National Science Foundation

OHHABS One Health Harmful Algal Bloom System

ORD Office of Research and Development

OSTP Office of Science and Technology Policy

OW Office of Water

PHSA Public Health Service Act

SBIR Small Business Innovation Research Grants

SDWA Safe Drinking Water Act

SERVIR Mesoamerican Regional Visualization and 

Monitoring System

STTR Small Business Technology Transfer 

USACE U.S. Army Corps of Engineers

USDA Department of Agriculture

USGS U.S. Geological Survey

This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright protection in the 

United States. The published product may be reproduced and distributed in its entirety 

without further permission from GAO. However, because this work may contain 

copyrighted images or other material, permission from the copyright holder may be 

necessary if you wish to reproduce this material separately.
Page 1 GAO-17-119 Harmful Algae 

441 G St. N.W.

Washington, DC 20548

October 14, 2016

The Honorable James M. Inhofe

Chairman

The Honorable Barbara Boxer

Ranking Member

Committee on Environment and Public Works

United States Senate

The Honorable Fred Upton

Chairman

The Honorable Frank Pallone

Ranking Member

Committee on Energy and Commerce

House of Representatives

Harmful algal blooms (HAB)—overgrowths of algae in marine or 

freshwater environments, like the one that began in May 2016 in Lake 

Okeechobee, Florida’s largest lake—are an environmental problem in all 

50 states, according to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 

While algae are essential to the ecosystem, providing food for all types of 

animals, HABs can produce toxins, and even non-toxic blooms can hurt 

the environment and local economies. Specifically, HABs can cause 

human illness or death from consumption of seafood or water 

contaminated by toxic algae; harm aquatic and other animal species 

through neurological or liver damage or severe oxygen depletion 

(hypoxia);1 and hurt the seafood industry, recreation, and tourism. While 

HABs and hypoxia can occur naturally, their prevalence, frequency, and 

severity are increasing—and this increase is influenced by climate, 

pollution, and human activities such as agriculture and wastewater, which 

can produce runoff laden with excess nutrients, according to a report by 

 1

While the focus of this report is HABs, we frequently refer to hypoxia throughout this 

report because HABs and hypoxia are, at times, interrelated. According to EPA’s website, 

hypoxia can be caused by a variety of factors, including excess nutrients, primarily 

nitrogen and phosphorus, which promote algal growth. As dead algae decompose, oxygen 

is consumed in the process, resulting in low levels of oxygen in the water.

Letter
Page 2 GAO-17-119 Harmful Algae 

the Interagency Working Group on the Harmful Algal Bloom and Hypoxia 

Research and Control Act (IWG-HABHRCA).2

HAB outbreaks in the United States with significant environmental and 

economic effects include blue-green algae (cyanobacteria) in the Great 

Lakes, “red tide” on the Gulf of Mexico coast, and “brown tide” in the midAtlantic states.3 According to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration (NOAA) and EPA websites, marine and freshwater HABs 

cause millions of dollars per year in economic losses in the United States. 

HABs reduce tourism, close beaches, and decrease the catch from both 

recreational and commercial fisheries, among other impacts. In the 

summer of 2015, NOAA pronounced a bloom from central California to 

Alaska to be the largest and most severe marine HAB recorded along the 

West Coast in at least 15 years. This HAB event resulted in massive 

economic losses because of closures of recreational and commercial 

shellfish harvesting areas in three states. For instance, shellfish 

managers shortened or closed the razor-clam season in parts of 

California, Oregon, and Washington, and closed the southern Washington 

coast to Dungeness crab fishing—the largest-ever shutdown of that 

state’s multi-million-dollar industry.4 In addition, elevated levels of a

potent neurotoxin, domoic acid, caused by this HAB event were the 

 2

For example, the incidence of hypoxia globally has increased tenfold over the past 50 

years, and by almost thirtyfold in the United States since 1960. See Harmful Algal Blooms 

and Hypoxia Comprehensive Research Plan and Action Strategy: An Interagency Report

(Washington, D.C.: Feb. 11, 2016), a report to Congress produced by the Interagency 

Working Group on the Harmful Algal Bloom and Hypoxia Research and Control Act.

3

“Red tide” is a colloquial term often used to describe HABs in marine coastal areas; 

however, the term is misleading since algal blooms can be a wide variety of colors, and 

growth of algae is unrelated to the tides. As a result, scientists prefer the term “harmful 

algal bloom” as a more appropriate descriptor for overgrowths of algae that can cause 

human, environmental, or economic harm. To the human eye, algal blooms can appear 

greenish, brown, reddish-orange, or golden, depending upon the algal species, the 

aquatic ecosystem, and the concentration of the organisms. However, many blooms 

discolor the water but are not harmful, and other blooms of highly toxic cells cause 

problems at low, and essentially invisible, cell concentrations. 

4

NOAA officials reported in July 2016 that the agency is working to quantify the economic 

losses related to this bloom; the initial estimate for losses in tourism-related spending 

related to the lost razor clam harvest is $22.7 million.
Page 3 GAO-17-119 Harmful Algae 

highest ever reported for anchovies, mussels, and crabs, exceeding 

regulatory limits by 10 times or more.5

In 2011, a then-record bloom of toxin-producing Microcystis in Lake 

Erie—a source of tourism and recreation for Ohio and Michigan, and 

Toledo’s primary drinking water supply—caused an estimated economic 

impact of roughly $71 million in lost property values, tourism, recreation, 

and water treatment.6 Three years later, another Microcystis bloom in 

Lake Erie disrupted the municipal water system, causing about 500,000 

Toledo residents to be advised not to drink their tap water for 4 days and 

incurring an estimated $65 million in economic losses.7

The Harmful Algal Bloom and Hypoxia Research and Control Act 

(HABHRCA) is the key law regarding federal HAB activities.8 HABHRCA 

designates roles and responsibilities for federal agencies to maintain and 

enhance marine and freshwater HAB programs, conduct research, 

develop and submit to Congress various reports, and carry out 

coordination and other functions through an interagency working group. 

The IWG-HABHRCA, established in October 2014 to carry out several 

activities under the law, consists of the following 14 federal agencies:

 5

According to NOAA’s website, certain types of algae produce domoic acid, which can 

accumulate in shellfish and fish without apparent ill effects, but in humans, very high 

doses of the toxin can cause death, and lower doses can cause permanent brain damage 

(short-term memory loss). 

6

Cyanobacteria, including Microcystis species—bacteria that produce a class of toxins 

known as microcystins—typically occur in freshwaters, although they have also appeared 

in marine waters. Cyanobacteria can produce two groups of toxins: neurotoxins, such as 

anatoxin-a, which can cause neurological damage, and peptide hepatotoxins, such as 

microcystins, which can cause serious damage to the liver.

7

The estimated economic losses caused by the 2011 and 2014 Lake Erie HABs were 

prepared for the International Joint Commission, an international organization created by 

the Boundary Waters Treaty, signed by Canada and the United States in 1909. See 

Economic Benefits of Reducing Harmful Algal Blooms in Lake Erie, M. Bingham, S. K. 

Sinha, and F. Lupi, Environmental Consulting & Technology, Inc. (Gainesville, Fla.: 

October 2015).

8

Pub. L. No. 105-383, Title VI, 112 Stat. 3448 (1998), as amended; 33 U.S.C. § 4001 et 

seq. 
Page 4 GAO-17-119 Harmful Algae 

• NOAA;

• EPA;

• Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) National Institute of Food and 

Agriculture (NIFA) and Natural Resources Conservation Service 

(NRCS);9

• Department of the Interior’s Bureau of Ocean Energy Management 

(BOEM), National Park Service (NPS), and U.S. Geological Survey 

(USGS);

• Department of Defense’s Department of the Navy (Navy) and U.S. 

Army Corps of Engineers (USACE);

• Department of Health and Human Services’ Centers for Disease 

Control and Prevention (CDC), Food and Drug Administration (FDA), 

and National Institutes of Health’s National Institute of Environmental 

Health Sciences (NIEHS);

• National Science Foundation (NSF); and

• National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA).

NOAA and EPA are designated by HABHRCA as having primary 

responsibility for administering a national HAB and hypoxia program for 

marine and freshwater bodies, respectively.10 Because federal agencies 

do not generally receive appropriations dedicated specifically for HABrelated activities, the extent and nature of their HAB-related expenditures 

are not readily available to Congress or the general public.

The Drinking Water Protection Act includes a provision for us to review 

federally funded HAB-related activities and to report within 90 days.

11 We 

provided you with preliminary information on November 6, 2015. This 

report provides additional information on (1) how much federal agencies 

expended on activities related to marine and freshwater HABs, and the 

 9

In addition, officials from USDA’s Agricultural Research Service and Forest Service 

reported that their agencies have participated in the IWG-HABHRCA and have conducted 

HAB-related activities in the past, but these expenditures occurred prior to fiscal year 

2013.

1033 U.S.C. § 4002(d), (h). NOAA has responsibility for the HAB and hypoxia program for 

the Great Lakes. See 33 U.S.C. § 4002(f)(2), (h).

11Pub. L. No. 114-45, § 2(b), 129 Stat. 473 (2015).
Page 5 GAO-17-119 Harmful Algae 

types of activities funded, from fiscal years 2013 through 2015; and (2) 

how federal agencies coordinate their HAB-related activities with each 

other and with nonfederal stakeholders.

For both objectives, we reviewed HAB-related laws; federal agencies’

reports on HABs; our prior work on ocean acidification, the Great Lakes, 

water quality, climate change, and interagency collaboration (a list of 

related products is included at the end of this report); and other relevant 

documents. To identify how much federal agencies expended on activities 

related to marine and freshwater HABs for fiscal years 2013 through 

2015, we conducted interviews and collected information from agency 

officials; and we identified 17 agencies that have conducted research, 

monitoring, response, or other HAB-related activities for this period.12

These agencies include the 14 participating in the interagency working 

group, plus 3 additional agencies: the Department of the Interior’s Fish 

and Wildlife Service (FWS) and the Executive Office of the President’s 

Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) and Office of Science and 

Technology Policy (OSTP).

To identify the types of activities the agencies funded in relation to marine 

and freshwater HABs, we conducted interviews with and requested data 

from the 17 relevant agencies on their HAB-related expenditures in fiscal 

years 2013, 2014, and 2015.13 To gather expenditure data, we developed 

and distributed a questionnaire that asked the 17 agencies to identify their 

HAB-related research, monitoring, or other activities at the program and 

project levels. To assess the accuracy and completeness of the 

expenditure data and to learn of any data limitations, we conducted a 

 12Based on our review of documents, interviews with federal agencies, and the agencies’

written responses to a questionnaire that, in part, asked them to identify other relevant 

agencies, we identified 17 agencies that conducted HAB-related activities in fiscal years 

2013 through 2015. We started with NOAA and EPA officials because of their lead roles, 

as designated by HABHRCA, in administering a national HAB and hypoxia program for 

marine and freshwater bodies, respectively; and we interviewed and collected information 

from additional agencies as they were identified by other agencies.

13In cases where expenditure data were not available, we used obligated funding data, 

which contributes to an inexact, federal total. Obligated funds refer, in part, to a definite 

commitment that creates a legal liability of the government for the payment of goods and 

services ordered or received. An agency incurs an obligation, for example, when it places 

an order, signs a contract, awards a grant, purchases a service, or takes other actions that 

require the government to make payments to the public or from one government account 

to another.
Page 6 GAO-17-119 Harmful Algae 

data reliability assessment through written questions and follow-up 

interviews, as necessary, with agency officials. Our questions asked for 

officials to specify if the associated activities were single-purpose in 

addressing HABs only, or if they addressed multiple purposes including 

HABs.14 Of the 17 agencies we contacted, 12 provided HAB-related 

expenditure data for fiscal years 2013 through 2015, which we 

determined were sufficiently reliable for the purpose of producing a rough 

estimate of federal HAB-related expenditures and are presented in this 

report.15

Even with the efforts we made to ensure the reliability of the data, each of 

the agencies had its own methods for collecting HAB-related expenditure 

data. For example, some agencies collected data from their databases 

using key word searches, while other agencies relied on subject matter 

experts to identify HAB-related activities and submit expenditure data. 

Some agencies provided actual expenditure data, whereas other 

agencies provided estimated expenditure data or obligated funding data. 

In addition, we asked agencies to identify whether their HAB-related 

activities were (1) single-purpose in addressing HABs only, (2) multipurpose including HABs, or (3) a mixture of both. The lack of a 

standardized approach to collecting HAB-related expenditures across the 

agencies means that any comparisons among agencies and any 

 14Our data reliability questions asked agency officials to identify whether their HAB-related 

activities were (1) single-purpose in addressing HABs only, (2) multi-purpose including 

HABs, or (3) a mixture of both. To provide a rough, estimated total for federal HAB-related 

expenditures, we excluded one agency—NRCS—that provided solely multi-purpose HABrelated expenditures for fiscal years 2013 through 2015. Specifically, NRCS provided 

expenditures that funded multi-purpose initiatives designed to improve the water quality of 

areas where HABs and hypoxia are of critical concern, but the agency does not directly 

track HAB expenditures. More information on NRCS’ multi-purpose expenditure data is 

included in app. II.

15There are five agencies that we did not present in table 1 but that are involved in HABrelated activities. For example, CEQ and OSTP are entities within the Executive Office of 

the President whose overall budgets are relatively small. According to CEQ and OSTP 

officials, their agencies do not track staff time spent on specific HAB-related activities, thus 

they reported that their agencies could not provide expenditure data. In addition, two 

agencies—BOEM and FWS—provided data that we determined were not sufficiently 

reliable for our purposes, therefore those agencies’ expenditure data are not presented in 

this report. Finally, we excluded NRCS, which provided solely multi-purpose HAB-related 

expenditure data, because NRCS officials told us they provided a generous estimate for 

initiatives that target water quality, including HABs, and we believed it could skew the 

overall federal agencies’ estimated total. 
Page 7 GAO-17-119 Harmful Algae 

estimated federal total are inexact. In addition, our questionnaire asked 

the agencies for information on (1) their key activities regarding HABs; (2) 

the purposes of these activities; (3) the specific statutory provisions 

authorizing these activities; and (4) the funding mechanisms used, such 

as grants or contracts.

To determine how federal agencies coordinate their HAB-related activities 

with each other and with nonfederal stakeholders, we collected and 

analyzed information from the agencies through interviews and our 

questionnaire on (1) their participation with each other and nonfederal 

stakeholders in interagency working groups or other mechanisms to 

share information and coordinate on HABs research, monitoring, or other 

activities;16 (2) efforts taken by federal agencies to minimize duplication; 

and (3) gaps, if any, in federal HAB-related activities. Among other things, 

we also reviewed the official notes from a nongeneralizable sample of 21 

IWG-HABHRCA twice-monthly meetings, starting from the group’s 

creation in October 2014 through July 2016. In addition, through our 

correspondence with federal agencies and our own web searches, we 

identified agencies’ publicly accessible websites describing HABs and 

HAB-related activities. See appendix I for more information on our scope 

and methodology.

We conducted this performance audit from September 2015 to October 

2016 in accordance with generally accepted government auditing 

standards. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to 

obtain sufficient, appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable basis for 

our findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives. We believe 

that the evidence obtained provides a reasonable basis for our findings 

and conclusions based on our audit objectives.

 16For the purpose of this report, we define coordination as any joint activity by two or more 

organizations that is intended to produce more public value than could be produced when 

the organizations act alone. We use the term “coordination” broadly to include interagency 

activities that others have variously defined as “collaboration,” “cooperation,” “integration,”

or “networking.” We have done so since there are no commonly accepted definitions for 

these terms, and we are unable to make definitive distinctions between these different 

types of interagency activities. See GAO, Results-Oriented Government: Practices That 

Can Help Enhance and Sustain Collaboration among Federal Agencies, GAO-06-15 

(Washington, D.C.: Oct. 21, 2005).
Page 8 GAO-17-119 Harmful Algae 

Algae are natural components of marine and freshwater flora, performing 

many roles that are vital for the health of ecosystems. Most algae are not 

harmful, and the proliferation of algae generally provides the energy 

source to fuel food webs. However, when certain conditions are 

favorable, algae can rapidly multiply, causing “blooms” and increasing the 

risk of toxin contamination of water. When algae bloom in significant 

numbers and produce toxic or harmful effects, such events are termed 

HABs. The risk is especially great for blooms caused by some species of 

cyanobacteria, historically known as blue-green algae, which typically 

occur in freshwater but may also appear in marine environments. 

Cyanobacterial HABs are of special concern because of their potential 

impacts on drinking and recreational waters. Toxins produced by 

cyanobacteria (cyanotoxins) can cause allergic and respiratory issues, 

attack the liver and kidneys, or affect the nervous system in mammals, 

including humans. Cyanobacterial HABs can also cause detrimental 

effects on aquatic ecosystems. High biomass blooms, whether of toxic or 

nontoxic species, can accumulate as thick scums and mats, which 

decompose, causing excessive oxygen consumption—which, in turn, 

leads to an increased mortality rate in local fish, shellfish, invertebrate, 

and plant populations because of hypoxia. Cyanobacterial HABs may 

also adversely affect some types of flora and fauna because they cause 

decreased light penetration. Figure 1 shows a satellite image of the thenrecord-setting cyanobacterial HAB in Lake Erie in September 2011 (an 

even larger Lake Erie HAB set a new algal biomass record in 2015), 

overlaid on a map of the lake’s tributaries. This image shows the algal 

bloom (in green) covering the entire western basin and beginning to 

expand into the central basin of Lake Erie, where it continued to grow 

until October 2011.17

 17Michalak, A.M., et al., “Record-setting algal bloom in Lake Erie caused by agricultural 

and meteorological trends consistent with expected future conditions,” Proceedings of the 

National Academy of Sciences (Washington, D.C.: Apr. 16, 2013).

Background
Page 9 GAO-17-119 Harmful Algae 

Figure 1: Satellite Image of a Harmful Algal Bloom in Lake Erie in 2011

Coastal waters of the United States are subject to most of the major HAB 

impacts and poisoning syndromes. Marine HAB impacts on animals and 

plant life include fish kills, shellfish mortalities, widespread marine 

mammal mortalities, and loss of submerged vegetation.18 Specifically, 

some types of harmful algae produce potent toxins that cause illness or 

death in humans and marine organisms—fish, seabirds, manatees, sea 

 18Submerged vegetation, such as seagrasses, provides habitat, food, and shelter to 

aquatic species; it may also stabilize sediments and help maintain water clarity. 

Marine HABs and Health 

Impacts
Page 10 GAO-17-119 Harmful Algae 

lions, turtles, and dolphins are some commonly affected animals. Other 

types of harmful algae are nontoxic to humans but cause harm to fish and 

invertebrates by damaging or clogging their gills or by forming such large 

blooms that the death, and subsequent decay, of the algae lead to 

hypoxia in the bottom waters of marine environments, forcing animals to 

either leave the area or die. Birds can also get sick by eating algae, 

drinking contaminated water, or eating contaminated fish or shellfish.

Exposure to marine HAB toxins can occur through direct contact by 

swimming (dermal exposure); breathing in aerosolized toxins (toxins in 

water turned into tiny airborne droplets or mist); or eating toxincontaminated seafood, including shellfish and finfish. Impacts on human 

health through contaminated seafood include amnesic shellfish poisoning, 

ciguatera fish poisoning, diarrhetic shellfish poisoning, neurotoxic shellfish 

poisoning, and paralytic shellfish poisoning—illnesses that have been 

reported in the United States. Two major groups of marine algae—

diatoms and dinoflagellates—produce HAB toxins that cause these 

syndromes. According to NOAA’s website, the toxins that cause these 

syndromes have been found in U.S. marine waters, and these syndromes 

have adverse human health impacts, as follows:

• Amnesic shellfish poisoning, which is caused by several species of 

Pseudo-nitzschia that produce the toxin domoic acid, produces 

gastrointestinal and neurological effects. Mild cases arise within 24 

hours of consumption of contaminated shellfish. Symptoms include 

nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, and abdominal cramps. In more severe 

cases, neurological symptoms occur, which include headaches, 

hallucinations, confusion, short-term memory loss, respiratory 

difficulty, seizures, coma, and, in extreme cases, death. These toxic 

species have been found on the Pacific Northwest coast from Canada
Page 11 GAO-17-119 Harmful Algae 

to mid-California and the Atlantic northeast coast of Canada, as well 

as the Gulf of Mexico.19

• Ciguatera fish poisoning is the most common seafood-toxin illness 

reported in the world, and certain algal species have caused this 

syndrome in many tropical and subtropical regions with coral reefs in 

the United States, including Caribbean and Pacific Islands, Florida, 

and the Gulf of Mexico.20 Ciguatoxins are transferred through the food 

chain from small toxic algae to large fish, such as grouper, and 

produce gastrointestinal, neurological, and cardiovascular symptoms 

that usually begin developing within 12 to 24 hours of eating 

contaminated fish. Gastrointestinal symptoms include diarrhea, 

abdominal pain, nausea, and vomiting occur, and neurological 

symptoms include numbness and tingling of hands and feet, 

dizziness, altered hot/cold perception, muscle aches, and low heart 

rates and blood pressure. In extreme cases, death occurs through 

respiratory failure.

• Diarrhetic shellfish poisoning is a gastrointestinal illness that has 

been reported worldwide. Symptoms usually occur within 30 minutes 

to a few hours after consumption of contaminated shellfish. Symptoms 

include diarrhea, nausea, vomiting, and abdominal pain. A full 

recovery is expected within 3 days, regardless of medical treatment, 

but long-term exposure may promote tumor growth in the digestive 

system. Various species of Dinophysis and their related toxins, which 

 19According to representatives from the U.S. National Office for Harmful Algal Blooms, 

amnesic shellfish poisoning toxin (domoic acid) occurrences have also been documented 

along the southern coast of California and confirmed in the northeastern United States, 

including Long Island, Maine, and locations near Cape Cod, Massachusetts. The U.S. 

National Office for Harmful Algal Blooms, located at Woods Hole Oceanographic 

Institution, is funded by NOAA’s Center for Sponsored Coastal Ocean Research and 

supports the agency’s national program for HABs research. Specifically, the Center for 

Sponsored Coastal Ocean established the U. S. National Office for Harmful Algal Blooms 

to provide critical coordination and technical support capabilities that enhance the nation’s 

ability to respond to and manage the growing threat posed by HABs. It also provides 

liaison with the scientific community and related programs nationally and internationally.

20According to U.S. National Office for Harmful Algal Blooms representatives, ciguatera 

fish poisoning is endemic to the Hawaiian Islands; there have been clinical cases of the 

syndrome reported, as well as the detection of ciguatoxins in fish.
Page 12 GAO-17-119 Harmful Algae 

cause this syndrome, have been found along the Texas Gulf coast

and the Chesapeake Bay.

21

• Neurotoxic shellfish poisoning produces gastrointestinal and 

neurological symptoms within 3 to 6 hours of ingestion of 

contaminated shellfish. Milder cases may include symptoms of 

headaches, diarrhea, and muscle/joint pain and commonly occur 

when beachgoers are exposed to toxic aerosols produced by wave 

action. Symptoms include irritation of the throat and upper respiratory 

tract, causing asthma-like effects. More severe effects are altered 

perceptions of hot and cold, difficulty breathing, or double vision. 

Neurotoxic shellfish poisoning is caused by Karenia brevis, a toxic 

dinoflagellate found in the Gulf of Mexico and the east coast of 

Florida. Karenia brevis “red tides” are typically characterized by 

patches of discolored water, dead or dying fish, and toxic aerosols.

• Paralytic shellfish poisoning symptoms include tingling sensations 

or numbness, headaches, fever, rash, dizziness, and gastrointestinal 

illness. In severe cases, symptoms include muscular paralysis, 

respiratory difficulty, and choking sensation. Despite the severity of 

this toxin, victims generally begin to recover within 12 to 24 hours of 

intoxication. In some severe cases, victims may die from paralysis 

and respiratory failure. A number of species of the dinoflagellate 

Alexandrium, which produce a group of toxins (called saxitoxins) 

responsible for paralytic shellfish poisoning, have been observed 

along the northeast and west coasts of North America, including 

Alaska. Another species associated with this syndrome, Pyrodinium 

bahamense, has also been found in Florida. The United States has 

reported persistent problems with cases of this syndrome since the 

mid-1960s.

Each of these syndromes is caused by different species of toxic algae 

that occur in various coastal waters of the United States and the world. 

According to the U.S. National Office for Harmful Algal Blooms’ website, 

there are virtually no human populations that are free of risk, in part 

because of an increase in interstate and international transport of 

seafood. CDC officials stated that records of these syndromes are 

incomplete because their diagnosis is difficult, physicians might not

 21According to U.S. National Office for Harmful Algal Blooms representatives, Dinophysis

and diarrhetic shellfish poisoning toxins have also been detected in coastal waters of the 

Pacific Northwest (particularly Puget Sound), Long Island and Cape Cod.
Page 13 GAO-17-119 Harmful Algae 

always report cases to their health departments, and reporting to CDC is 

voluntary; however, CDC estimates that 15,910 cases of ciguatera fish 

poisoning occur in the United States annually. According to NOAA 

officials, the recent emergence of diarrhetic shellfish poisoning in U.S. 

waters, the massive domoic acid-producing bloom on the West Coast in 

2015, and the rapid expansion of cyanobacterial blooms in freshwater

indicate that HABs are an increasing threat in the United States. 

However, FDA officials stated that controls are in place to prevent 

contaminated seafood from entering interstate commerce.

Beyond human health threats, NOAA officials noted, marine HABs can 

have other deleterious impacts. For example, massive fish kills drive 

away tourists, require costly beach cleanup, and impact fisheries 

management. Some HABs kill or weaken young stages of shellfish, 

damaging shellfish aquaculture and impairing shellfish restoration. 

Furthermore, NOAA officials stated, water discoloration and accumulation 

of algae on beaches affects tourism and property values. Many of these 

effects can have serious economic impacts on communities in coastal 

areas that depend on marine resources for their livelihoods.

HABs have occurred in all 50 states in the past decade in marine waters, 

freshwaters, or both. According to the U.S. National Office for Harmful 

Algal Blooms’ website, all 50 states have been affected by cyanobacterial 

HABs, typically in many different lakes, rivers, streams, reservoirs, and 

other freshwater sources. In addition, 23 states have been affected by 

“golden algae” blooms caused by Prymnesium parvum. Furthermore, the 

dinoflagellate Karlodinium veneficum blooms along the mid-Atlantic coast; 

and brown tides caused by the rapid population growth of a minute alga, 

Aureococcus anophagefferens, have decimated multiple fisheries and 

seagrass beds in mid-Atlantic estuaries for three decades.22 A 

 22According to the U.S. National Office for Harmful Algal Blooms’ website, Prymnesium 

parvum, commonly referred to as golden algae, is one of the most problematic HAB toxins 

in the United States and has caused fish kills in Texas annually since 2001. Similarly, 

Karlodinium veneficum has been associated with toxic activity ever since its discovery in 

the 1950s, with significant fish kills in Maryland. Brown tides can also negatively affect 

shellfish (such as clams, oysters, and scallops) and submerged vegetation, and have 

been found along the Atlantic seaboard, including Maryland, New Jersey, New York, and 

Rhode Island. Another brown tide species, Aureoumbra lagunensis, has caused massive 

blooms and ecosystem impacts in Texas and Florida, according to representatives from 

the U.S. National Office for Harmful Algal Blooms. 

HAB Occurrences in the 

United States
Page 14 GAO-17-119 Harmful Algae 

generalized map appears in figure 2, depicting marine and freshwater 

HAB occurrences—as well as locations where HAB poisoning syndromes 

affecting human health have been reported, or where the associated 

toxins have been detected in fish and shellfish tissue extracts or marine 

algae samples—in the United States from 2006 through 2015.
Page 15 GAO-17-119 Harmful Algae 

Figure 2: Generalized Map Depicting Harmful Algal Blooms (HAB) and Related Poisoning Syndromes and Toxin Occurrences 

in the United States, 2006-2015

Notes: Because it is not practical to indicate the location of each cyanobacterial or golden algae 

bloom, each state experiencing these blooms is indicated by a single green circle, gold square, or 

both. Green ovals denote widespread cyanoHAB problems. In addition, this generalized map depicts 

the various HAB poisoning syndromes and toxins that have occurred in specific areas. Colored dots 

or ovals indicate locations where the incidence of a particular syndrome has been reported, or where 

the related toxins have been detected in fish and shellfish tissue extracts, marine algae, or both.
Page 16 GAO-17-119 Harmful Algae 

HABs were recorded as early as the 16th century, according to NOAA’s 

website, but human activities seem to play a role in the increased 

occurrence of some blooms. In general, HAB growth is enhanced when 

environmental conditions are optimal for a given species. These 

conditions may include natural phenomena, such as unusually high water 

temperatures; extreme weather events, such as hurricanes, floods, or 

drought; or sluggish water circulation that allows biomass to accumulate. 

One way that human activities may contribute to HABs is by supplying 

nutrients to aquatic ecosystems at a rate that “overfeeds” the algae that 

exist naturally. These nutrients (mainly nitrogen, phosphorus, and carbon) 

can originate as runoff from lawns and farmland or wastewater 

discharges from municipalities and industry. Human activity may also 

influence HABs through ecosystem disturbances such as water flow 

modifications or the introduction of new species.

Twelve federal agencies expended an estimated total of roughly $101

million from fiscal years 2013 through 2015 to fund various HAB-related 

activities—such as research and analysis, forecasting, surveillance and 

monitoring, outreach, and response—according to data reported by the 

agencies.23 Based on the data, the 5 agencies with the largest HABrelated expenditures for this period—totaling roughly $86 million—were 

NOAA ($39.4 million), NSF ($15.4 million), EPA ($14.5 million), USGS 

($9.0 million), and NIEHS ($8.0 million). According to agency officials, 

these 5 agencies provided internal and external funding for research on 

and analysis of HABs; forecasting, monitoring, outreach and response 

efforts; and investigations of human and ecological health effects, as 

follows:

• NOAA developed and provided capabilities to predict, detect, monitor, 

and respond to marine and Great Lakes HAB events. NOAA 

 23As previously noted, each of the agencies had its own methods for collecting HABrelated expenditure data, and therefore comparisons among agencies, and any estimate 

of federal expenditures for HAB-related activities, are inexact. For example, some 

agencies collected data from their databases using key word searches, while other 

agencies relied on subject matter experts. In addition to the 12 agencies whose 

expenditure data we determined were reliable for our purposes, officials from 2 agencies 

(CEQ and OSTP) reported that their agencies could not provide HAB-related expenditure 

data, and 2 agencies (BOEM and FWS) provided expenditure data that we determined 

were not sufficiently reliable for our purposes.

HAB Causes and Human 

Influence

Twelve Federal 

Agencies Reported 

Expending Roughly 

$101 Million from 

Fiscal Years 2013 

through 2015 on 

Various HAB-Related 

Activities
Page 17 GAO-17-119 Harmful Algae 

competitively funded additional research on HAB ecology, monitoring, 

prediction, mitigation, and control.

• NSF funded HAB-specific and broader research that contributed to 

the understanding of algal blooms. It also funded workshops and 

activities that built and facilitated international collaboration on HABrelated research.

• EPA funded internal research on HABs and their toxins, focused on 

four main areas: water quality, human and ecological health effects, 

monitoring and analytical methods, and drinking water treatment. It 

performed outreach to other federal agencies, state agencies, and 

academia regarding HAB-related activities.

• USGS developed laboratory analysis and field testing to detect and 

quantify HABs, researched causal factors, and developed early 

warning systems for HABs.

• NIEHS supported peer-reviewed research grants to develop 

approaches to enhance prediction of HAB events and understand the 

effects of HAB toxins on human health.

In addition, other agencies—such as FDA, CDC, and NASA—expended 

millions of dollars funding activities to address HABs, associated with 

their respective missions. For example, from fiscal years 2013 through 

2015, NASA reported expending nearly $2 million on basic and applied 

research to use satellite imagery to improve the detection of algal blooms.

Table 1 provides the estimated HAB-related expenditures for the 12 

agencies that provided expenditure data for fiscal years 2013 through 

2015.24 The agencies reported actual or estimated expenditure data, or a 

mix of both; and a few agencies also provided some obligated funding 

 24Expenditure data for CEQ, OSTP, BOEM, FWS, and NRCS are not included. CEQ and 

OSTP officials reported that their agencies do not track staff time dedicated toward 

specific HAB-related activities, and thus they could not provide expenditure data. BOEM 

and FWS provided expenditure data that we determined were not sufficiently reliable for 

our purposes. In addition, we excluded NRCS’ reported expenditure data from table 1

because NRCS officials told us that their estimated total of $208 million was a generous 

estimate for initiatives that target water quality, including HABs, and we believed it could 

skew the overall federal agencies’ estimated total.
Page 18 GAO-17-119 Harmful Algae 

data.25 Four agencies—NASA, NIEHS, NSF, and USGS—provided actual 

expenditures. NIFA officials provided estimated expenditures and 

reported that the identified NIFA funding does not include multi-purpose 

capacity awards that relate, in part, to HABs.26 Other agencies, such as 

NOAA, Navy, USACE, CDC, FDA, NPS, and EPA, provided mostly actual 

expenditures but also included some estimated HAB-related 

expenditures. For example, the identified EPA funding does not include 

multi-purpose nutrient reduction projects, nutrient monitoring, 

phytoplankton community monitoring, or assessment of nutrient reduction 

projects intended, in part, to support reductions in HABs.27 A few other 

agencies—CDC, NIEHS, and NSF—also provided some obligated 

funding data for a portion of their HAB-related activities for fiscal years 

2013 through 2015.

 25In addition, agency officials identified which HAB-related activities were single-purpose 

in addressing HABs only or a mixture of single- and multi-purpose including HABs. Five 

agencies—EPA, NIEHS, NIFA, NOAA, and USGS—provided single-purpose expenditure

data. Seven agencies—CDC, FDA, NASA, the Navy, NPS, NSF, and USACE—provided a 

mixture of both single- and multi-purpose expenditure data. One agency—NRCS—

provided solely multi-purpose HAB-related expenditures and is only presented in app. II.

26According to NIFA officials, capacity programs are supported by federal formula funding, 

which in some cases, must be matched with state funding to support research in 

agriculture, food, nutrition, and related fields at the nation’s land grant institutions. The 

funding is not delivered by project but is provided to the eligible institution as one award. 

As these awards are for projects that are subsets of larger awards, agency officials could 

not provide award amounts for the HAB-related portions of those awards during the time 

frame of our review.

27According to EPA officials, since 2010, hundreds of millions of dollars have been 

allocated for a wide array of projects intended to reduce the loading of nutrients—which 

can fuel HABs—into the Great Lakes. However, the agency could not provide expenditure 

amounts for the HAB-related portions of those projects during the time frame of our 

review. In addition, agency officials stated that 2 of EPA’s 10 regional offices did not fund 

HAB-related programs from fiscal years 2013 through 2015.
Page 19 GAO-17-119 Harmful Algae 

Table 1: Twelve Federal Agencies’ Reported Actual and Estimated Expenditures for Activities Related to Harmful Algal 

Blooms (HAB), Fiscal Years 2013-2015

Amounts in dollars 

FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 Total

Department of Agriculture

National Institute of Food and Agriculturea,b 200,000 144,000 49,968 393,968

Department of Commerce

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administrationb,c 9,761,470 13,995,227 15,692,169 39,448,866

Department of Defense

Department of the Navyc,d 343,000 353,000 353,000 1,049,000

U.S. Army Corps of Engineersc,d 300,000 543,000 862,000 1,705,000 

Department of Health and Human Services 

Centers for Disease Control and Preventionc,d,e 566,828 524,004 573,776 1,664,608

Food and Drug Administrationc,d 2,081,000 2,681,326 2,621,973 7,384,299

National Institute of Environmental Health Sciencesb,e,f 1,894,603 3,319,453 2,777,289 7,991,345 

Department of the Interior

National Park Servicec,d 50,000 50,000 12,945 112,945

U.S. Geological Surveyb,f 2,320,959 2,656,096 4,063,156 9,040,211

Environmental Protection Agencyb,c 3,233,825 5,589,751 5,680,373 14,503,950

National Aeronautics and Space Administrationd,f 344,003 230,545 1,418,915 1,993,463

National Science Foundationd,e,f 4,670,692 5,002,257 5,693,891 15,366,840

Estimated total 25,766,380 35,088,659 39,799,455 100,654,494

Legend: FY = fiscal year.

Source: GAO analysis of agencies’ responses to GAO questionnaire. | GAO-17-119

Notes: The data in this table were provided by the agencies and reflect their annual expenditures to 

address HABs for fiscal years 2013 through 2015. In some cases, the agencies provided estimated 

expenditure or obligated funding data for their HAB-related activities. Each of the agencies had its 

own methods for collecting HAB-related expenditure data. For example, some agencies collected 

data from their databases using key word searches, while other agencies relied on subject matter 

experts. Given these different methods, any federal total should be regarded as a rough estimate, 

and any comparisons among agencies’ expenditures should be regarded as inexact.

a

Agency provided an estimate for annual expenditures in fiscal years 2013 through 2015.

b

Agencies provided single-purpose expenditures.

c

Agencies provided a mixture of actual and estimated expenditures.

d

Agencies provided a mixture of both single- and multi-purpose expenditure data.

e

Agencies provided obligated expenditures.

f

Agencies provided actual expenditures.

As previously discussed, we identified 17 agencies that have conducted 

research, monitoring, or other HAB-related activities in fiscal years 2013 

through 2015. Table 2 provides 17 agencies’ key activities related to 
Page 20 GAO-17-119 Harmful Algae 

HABs, consistent with their missions and expertise, in fiscal years 2013 

through 2015.

Table 2: Seventeen Federal Agencies’ Reported Key Activities Related to Harmful Algal Blooms (HAB), Fiscal Years 2013-2015

Department or agency Component agency Key HAB-related activities

Department of 

Agriculture (USDA)a National Institute of Food and Agriculture

Supported projects focusing on agriculture and food safety; most of this 

work related to the impacts of HABs on aquaculture and ecology.

Natural Resources 

Conservation Service

Managed specific initiatives designed to improve the water quality of areas 

where HABs and hypoxia are of critical concern, but did not directly track 

HABs as a resource concern.

Department of 

Commerce

National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration

Acted as the lead federal agency on HABs occurring in ocean and coastal

waters and the Great Lakes, co-chaired the Interagency Working Group on 

the Harmful Algal Bloom and Hypoxia Research and Control Act (IWGHABHRCA), and administered the National Harmful Algal Bloom and 

Hypoxia program. Developed and operationalized HAB forecasts, as well as 

tools for HAB and toxin detection and monitoring. Conducted research and 

development to address gaps in understanding, detection, prevention, 

mitigation, and control. To complement intramural research, provided 

extramural, competitive funding to organizations outside the federal sector. 

Routinely provided advice on HABs to federal, state, and local governments.

Department of 

Defense

Department of the Navy Executed and promoted the science and technology programs of the Navy 

and the Marine Corps. Conducted a broad program of scientific research, 

technology, and advanced development. 

U.S. Army Corps of 

Engineers (USACE)

Conducted research on HABs and other aquatic invasive species, managed 

efforts to reduce negative impacts to wildlife, and completed HAB response 

plans for USACE projects.

Department of Health 

and Human Services

Centers for Disease Control 

and Prevention

Addressed public health issues and conducted health surveillance—the 

systematic collection, analysis, and interpretation of health data—to 

understand and prevent HABs. Provided laboratory support for public health 

responses to HAB-related toxins and developed and applied unique 

laboratory tests that help identify people exposed to certain toxins from 

marine and freshwater HABs.

Food and Drug Administration Conducted its own activities and supported activities conducted by others 

(e.g., universities, science laboratories, research institutions, and 

contractors) aimed at understanding, preventing, and detecting toxins that 

affect the food supply, primarily focused on seafood safety.

National Institute of 

Environmental Health 

Sciences

Supported research on (1) the health effects associated with exposure to 

HAB toxins and (2) efforts that reduce human exposure to HAB toxins.

Department of the 

Interior

Bureau of Ocean Energy 

Management 

Prepared for and participated in monthly IWG-HABHRCA meetings. 

National Park Service Responded to outbreaks of HABs within national park units and investigated 

the effects on human and animal health, such as the 2009 red tide outbreak 

at Padre Island National Seashore in Texas, which resulted in deaths of 

marine life, wildlife, and domestic animals.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Provided technical assistance and support to state, local, and federal 

agencies to address HAB events.
Page 21 GAO-17-119 Harmful Algae 

Department or agency Component agency Key HAB-related activities

U.S. Geological Survey Focused on (1) developing analytical laboratory and field methods to detect 

and quantify blooms, associated toxins, and taste-and-odor compounds; (2) 

understanding causal factors; and (3) developing early warning systems for 

potentially harmful blooms.

Environmental 

Protection Agency

Co-chaired the IWG-HABHRCA and chaired the Great Lakes Interagency 

Task Force. Developed policy and guidelines; conducted research; provided 

technical support and assistance through grants and other agreements; 

educated the public; and created partnerships with environmental agencies, 

academia, tribes, municipal water suppliers, nongovernmental 

organizations, and other federal agencies on HABs.

Executive Office of the 

President 

Council on Environmental 

Quality 

Coordinated federal environmental efforts and worked closely with agencies 

and other White House offices in developing environmental policies and 

initiatives. Served as a co-chair of the National Ocean Council.

Office of Science and 

Technology Policy 

Responsible for the overall policy direction and coordination of federal 

government-wide research and related funding on HABs and their impacts 

on public health. Served as a co-chair of the National Ocean Council.

National Aeronautics 

and Space 

Administration

Conducted basic and applied research using satellite imagery and improved 

the detection and forecasting of algal blooms.

National Science 

Foundation

Funded the discovery, learning, innovation, and research infrastructure to 

boost U.S. leadership in all aspects of science, technology, engineering, and 

mathematics research and education. Funded HAB-related research, 

education, community planning workshops, and activities that facilitated 

international collaborations.

Sources: GAO interviews with federal agency officials and agencies’ responses to GAO questionnaire. | GAO-17-119

Note: This information on agency activities for HABs is not necessarily comprehensive; it is intended 

to illustrate key activities of each agency as they relate to HABs. In addition, while the scope of this 

information is limited to fiscal years 2013 through 2015, these activities may be ongoing.

a

USDA’s Agricultural Research Service officials stated that the agency conducted general research 

on controlling nutrient losses from agricultural lands (i.e., nitrogen and phosphorus) that can cause 

HABs. In addition, Forest Service officials stated that the agency’s primary focus has been 

investigating the impacts of climate-induced stresses on water quality and quantity—and that it has 

conducted limited research examining items such as the taxonomic diversity of cyanobacteria in 

deserts, algal community response to changes in hydrology in boreal peatlands, and impact of 

invasive species on water quality. Officials from these two agencies reported having no HAB-related 

expenditures after fiscal year 2013.

Appendix II provides more detailed information on federal agencies’ key 

HAB-related activities, expenditures, and specific statutory provisions 

authorizing such activities.
Page 22 GAO-17-119 Harmful Algae 

Federal officials reported that their agencies coordinate in a variety of 

ways with each other and with state, international, and academic 

stakeholders to share information, expertise, and opportunities for 

collaboration on HAB-related activities. Federal officials also reported that 

part of the purpose of this coordination is to reduce unnecessary 

duplication and to leverage resources. Since 2014, the IWG-HABHRCA 

has been the primary, government-wide mechanism though which federal 

agencies coordinate their activities, develop plans for future work, and 

identify remaining gaps related to federal HAB activities and capabilities.28

In addition, federal agencies participate in numerous groups, task forces, 

and other coordination efforts led by federal agencies, states, 

international organizations, or academics (see table 3 for examples of 

these efforts). Furthermore, federal officials reported a number of

partnerships between two or more federal agencies (federal interagency 

partnerships) directly related to their HAB work in recent years. For 

example, NIEHS and NSF have collaborated and provided joint funding 

for some HAB-related research projects since 2005.

Appendix III provides more detailed information on federal agencies’

HAB-related coordination.

 28Since November 2015, the IWG-HABHRCA and EPA released reports to Congress that, 

in part, identified remaining gaps related to federal HAB activities and capabilities. These 

gaps encompass research, forecasting, surveillance and monitoring, outreach, and 

response. See Harmful Algal Blooms and Hypoxia Comprehensive Research Plan and 

Action Strategy: An Interagency Report (Washington, D.C.: Feb. 11, 2016), a report to 

Congress produced by the IWG-HABHRCA. Also see Environmental Protection Agency, 

Algal Toxin Risk Assessment and Management Strategic Plan for Drinking Water

(Washington, D.C.: November 2015), submitted to Congress to meet the requirements of 

the Drinking Water Protection Act (Pub. L. No. 114-45).

Federal Agencies 

Reported 

Coordinating HABRelated Activities in a 

Variety of Ways
Page 23 GAO-17-119 Harmful Algae 

Table 3: Examples of Harmful Algal Blooms (HAB)-Related Coordination Efforts Led by Federal, State, International, and 

Academic Stakeholders 

Coordination effort Description

Federal-led efforts

Great Lakes Interagency Task Force Chaired by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), this task force consists of 11 cabinet 

and other federal agency heads to coordinate the restoration of the Great Lakes. Created by a 

May 18, 2004, executive order, the task force, among other things, coordinates the 

development of consistent federal policies, strategies, projects, and priorities pertaining to the 

restoration and protection of the Great Lakes. According to EPA officials, since 2009, the task 

force has overseen the implementation of the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative (GLRI), a 

federal-led effort to carry out programs and projects for Great Lakes protection and restoration. 

In particular, the task force has overseen the development of comprehensive, multi-year action 

plans that identify goals, objectives, measurable ecological targets, and specific actions for five 

GLRI focus areas. 

Inland HAB Discussion Group Led by EPA, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), and the Centers for Disease Control and 

Prevention (CDC) to share information among federal, state, local, and industry stakeholders 

through free webinars, this informal discussion group was created out of an expressed need by 

federal researchers and state agencies to bridge a communication gap with respect to inland 

HAB research, monitoring, human and ecological health risk assessment, education, and 

outreach.

Interagency Working Group on the 

Harmful Algal Bloom and Hypoxia 

Research and Control Act (IWGHABHRCA)

Created after the HABHRCA amendments of 2014, this interagency working group is the 

primary, government-wide mechanism through which federal agencies coordinate their HABrelated activities and to report on specific topics to Congress, such as research plans and 

action strategies for addressing HABs and hypoxia. The group meets twice a month and is cochaired by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and EPA.

Mississippi River/Gulf of Mexico 

Watershed Nutrient Task Force 

(Hypoxia Task Force)

Through this EPA-led task force, federal agencies coordinate with 12 states and a national 

tribal representative to address hypoxia in the Mississippi River and the northern Gulf of 

Mexico.

National Ocean Council A cabinet-level body that oversees the implementation of the National Ocean Policy, the 

council released a plan in April 2013 that described specific actions—including four actions 

related to HABs—for federal agencies to take to address key challenges.

One Health Harmful Algal Bloom

System (OHHABS)

CDC collaborates with other federal agencies—such as EPA, USGS, NOAA, and the Food and 

Drug Administration (FDA)—and many state governments on OHHABS, an electronic system 

that is accessible to health departments and their designated animal health and environmental 

health partners for voluntary reporting of HAB events and associated cases of human and 

animal illness.

State-led efforts

Interstate Shellfish Sanitation 

Conference (ISSC)

The ISSC was formed in 1982 to foster and promote shellfish sanitation through the 

cooperation of state and federal control agencies, the shellfish industry, and the academic 

community. According to FDA officials, cooperative partners in the ISSC include FDA, NOAA, 

EPA, CDC, state agencies, industry, tribes, and other nations. Agency officials stated that 

FDA’s efforts to ensure the safety and sanitation of bivalve mollusks in interstate commerce 

includes attention to HAB toxins and involvement with the ISSC’s National Shellfish Sanitation 

Program, which determines the methods that states are allowed to use for regulatory purposes.

Ohio Lake Erie Phosphorus Task 

Force II

In 2012, the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency, in partnership with other Ohio agencies, 

reconvened the Ohio Lake Erie Phosphorus Task Force as a Phase II effort to reduce 

phosphorous loading and associated HABs in Lake Erie and surrounding watersheds. As 

members of this task force or its subcommittees, NOAA, EPA, and other federal agencies 

contributed relevant information and expertise. 
Page 24 GAO-17-119 Harmful Algae 

Coordination effort Description

International efforts

Great Lakes HABs Collaboratory Beginning in late 2015, the Great Lakes Commission and Great Lakes scientists in the United 

States and Canada launched this 2-year effort. The overall goal is to create a collective 

laboratory (“collaboratory”) to enable science-based information-sharing among scientists, as 

well as between scientists and federal, state, and local decision-makers working on HABs in 

the Great Lakes. Its initial focus will be three priority watersheds.

International Council for the 

Exploration of the Sea (ICES) 

ICES is an intergovernmental organization whose main objective is to increase the scientific 

knowledge of the marine environment and its living resources and to use this knowledge to 

provide unbiased, non-political advice to authorities. A NOAA official and an academic 

representative currently serve as the U.S. delegates to this organization. To address HABs 

specifically, the Working Group on HAB Dynamics serves as a forum to review and discuss 

HAB events and to provide advice and updates on the state of HABs on an annual basis. This 

working group also facilitates interaction among scientists working in diverse areas of HAB 

science and monitoring, and provides a forum for discussing various approaches to HAB 

research.

International Joint Commission (IJC) The IJC an international organization created by the Boundary Waters Treaty, signed by 

Canada and the United States in 1909. Its Great Lakes Water Quality Board, Great Lakes 

Science Advisory Board, and Health Professionals Advisory Board periodically address and 

coordinate research related to HABs in the Great Lakes.

Intergovernmental Oceanographic 

Commission of the United Nations 

Educational, Scientific, and Cultural 

Organization’s Intergovernmental 

Panel on Harmful Algal Blooms 

(IPHAB)

IPHAB aims to foster effective management of, and scientific research on, HABs to understand 

their causes, predict their occurrences, and mitigate their effects. IPHAB meets every other 

April and generates a 2-year work plan that must be endorsed by the Intergovernmental 

Oceanographic Commission the following June. IPHAB typically addresses topics of broad 

interest where global coordination will accelerate the science needed to support the 

management of HABs.

Academic-led effort

National HAB Committee Co-chaired by two researchers, this committee was established to provide a collective voice for 

the academic, management, and stakeholder communities. Its mission is to facilitate 

coordination and communication of HAB activities at a national level. The committee 

communicates these activities through the U.S. National Office for Harmful Algal Blooms, 

biennial National HAB Conferences, and listservs and websites. 

Source: Agencies’ responses to GAO questionnaire. | GAO-17-119

Most of the federal agencies within the scope of this review maintain 

information on their public websites regarding HABs and HAB-related 

research, monitoring, and other activities.29 Agency officials reported that 

they maintain such information on their websites to coordinate with each 

other and with nonfederal stakeholders on their HAB-related activities, 

reduce duplication, and raise public awareness, among other purposes. 

For example, EPA has compiled information on freshwater cyanobacterial 

 29The IWG-HABHRCA is exploring the possibility of creating a central, government-wide 

portal for information on HABs and hypoxia, according to NOAA officials.
Page 25 GAO-17-119 Harmful Algae 

HABs, including causes and prevention, detection, health and ecological 

effects, control and treatment, research by EPA and other federal 

agencies, new policies and regulations for toxins produced by 

cyanobacteria (cyanotoxins) at the state and international levels, and 

guidelines and recommendations.30

Appendix IV provides more detailed information on federal agencies’

HAB-related websites.

We provided a draft of this report to the Departments of Agriculture, 

Commerce, Defense, Health and Human Services, and the Interior; EPA; 

NASA; NSF; and the Executive Office of the President for review and 

comment. None of the agencies provided formal, written comments, but 

all except USDA and Navy provided technical comments, which we 

incorporated as appropriate.

We are sending copies of this report to the appropriate congressional 

committees; the Secretaries of Agriculture, Commerce, Defense, Health 

and Human Services, and the Interior; the Administrators of EPA and 

NASA; the Director of NSF; the Chief of Staff, Executive Office of the 

President; and other interested parties. In addition, the report is available 

at no charge on the GAO website at http://www.gao.gov.

If you or your staff have any questions about this report, please contact 

me at (202) 512-3841 or gomezj@gao.gov. Contact points for our Offices 

of Congressional Relations and Public Affairs may be found on the last 

 30As of August 2016, this website was accessible at https://www.epa.gov/nutrient-policydata/cyanohabs.

Agency Comments
Page 26 GAO-17-119 Harmful Algae 

page of this report. GAO staff who contributed to this report are listed in 

appendix V.

J. Alfredo Gómez

Director, Natural Resources and Environment
Page 27 GAO-17-119 Harmful Algae 

This report examines (1) how much federal agencies expended on 

activities related to marine and freshwater harmful algal blooms (HAB), 

and the types of activities funded, from fiscal years 2013 through 2015; 

and (2) how federal agencies have coordinated their HAB-related 

activities with each other and with nonfederal stakeholders.

For both objectives, we reviewed HAB-related laws; federal agencies’

reports on HABs; our prior work on ocean acidification, the Great Lakes, 

water quality, climate change, and interagency collaboration (a list of 

related products is included at the end of this report); and other relevant 

documents.

To identify how much federal agencies expended on activities related to 

marine and freshwater HABs, and the types of activities funded, for fiscal 

years 2013, 2014, and 2015, we conducted interviews with and requested

data from officials from the 17 relevant agencies on their HAB-related 

expenditures for this period, and we found that 12 agencies’ expenditure 

data were relevant and sufficiently reliable for the purpose of producing a 

rough estimate of federal HAB-related expenditures.1 We started with 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and 

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) officials because of their lead 

roles, as designated by the Harmful Algal Bloom and Hypoxia Research 

and Control Act (HABHRCA), in administering a national HAB and 

hypoxia program for marine and freshwater bodies, respectively; and we 

interviewed and collected information from additional agencies as they 

were identified by other agencies. An interagency working group (IWGHABHRCA), established to implement aspects of the law, consists of the 

following federal agencies:

• NOAA;

• EPA;

 1

In cases where expenditures were not available, we used obligated funding data, which 

contributes to an inexact estimate of the federal total. Obligated funds refer, in part, to a 

definite commitment that creates a legal liability of the government for the payment of 

goods and services ordered or received. An agency incurs an obligation, for example, 

when it places an order, signs a contract, awards a grant, purchases a service, or takes 

other actions that require the government to make payments to the public or from one 

government account to another.

Appendix I: Objectives, Scope and 

Methodology
Appendix I: Objectives, Scope and 

Methodology

Page 28 GAO-17-119 Harmful Algae 

• Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) National Institute of Food and 

Agriculture and Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS);2

• Department of the Interior’s Bureau of Ocean Energy Management 

(BOEM), National Park Service, and U.S. Geological Survey;

• Department of Defense’s Department of the Navy (Navy) and U.S. 

Army Corps of Engineers;

• Department of Health and Human Services’ Centers for Disease 

Control and Prevention, Food and Drug Administration, and National 

Institutes of Health’s National Institute of Environmental Health 

Sciences;

• National Science Foundation (NSF); and

• National Aeronautics and Space Administration.

In addition to these 14 agencies that participate in the interagency 

working group, we identified 3 additional agencies, based on our 

interviews, as having HAB-related expenditures in fiscal years 2013 

through 2015: the Department of the Interior’s Fish and Wildlife Service 

and the Executive Office of the President’s Council on Environmental 

Quality (CEQ) and Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP). To 

gather expenditure data, we developed and distributed a questionnaire 

that asked the agencies to identify their HAB-related research, 

monitoring, or other activities. We asked the agencies to provide 

expenditure data for these activities at the program and project levels. To 

assess the accuracy and completeness of the expenditure data and to 

learn of the agencies’ definitions of HAB-related activities and any data 

limitations, we conducted a data reliability assessment through written 

questions and follow-up interviews, as necessary, with agency officials. 

Our questions asked officials to specify if the associated activities were 

single-purpose in addressing HABs only, or if they addressed multiple 

 2

In addition, officials from USDA’s Agricultural Research Service and Forest Service 

reported that their agencies have participated in the IWG-HABHRCA and have conducted

HAB-related activities in the past, but these expenditures occurred prior to fiscal year 

2013.
Appendix I: Objectives, Scope and 

Methodology

Page 29 GAO-17-119 Harmful Algae 

purposes including HABs.3 Of the 17 agencies we contacted, 12 provided 

HAB-related expenditure data for fiscal years 2013 through 2015, which 

we determined were sufficiently reliable for our purposes and are 

presented in this report.4 For informational purposes, we present more 

detailed tables in appendix II for each of the agencies’ HAB-related 

expenditures, but we did not independently verify these amounts.

Even with the efforts we made to ensure the reliability of the data, each of 

the agencies had its own method for collecting HAB-related expenditure 

data, and therefore the numbers presented for each agency may differ 

compared to a scenario in which a single, standardized method was 

used. For this reason, comparisons of HAB-related expenditures from one 

agency to another are inexact. For example, agencies such as NOAA and 

NSF each utilized a database to track actual expenditures or obligated 

funding for HAB-related activities, whereas agencies such as Navy relied 

on subject matter experts or staff estimates. Some agencies provided 

actual expenditure data, while other agencies provided estimated 

expenditure data or obligated funding data.

In addition, we asked agencies to identify whether their HAB-related 

activities were (1) single-purpose in addressing HABs only, (2) multipurpose including HABs, or (3) a mixture of both. While we believe the 

 3

Our data reliability questions asked agency officials to identify whether their HAB-related 

activities were (1) single-purpose in addressing HABs only, (2) multi-purpose including 

HABs, or (3) a mixture of both. To provide a rough, estimated total for federal HAB-related 

expenditures, we excluded one agency—NRCS—that provided solely multi-purpose HABrelated expenditures for fiscal years 2013 through 2015. Specifically, NRCS provided 

expenditures that funded multi-purpose initiatives designed to improve the water quality of 

areas where HABs and hypoxia are of critical concern, but the agency does not directly 

track HAB expenditures. More information on NRCS’ multi-purpose expenditure data is 

included in app. II.

4

There are five agencies that we did not present in table 1 but that are involved in HABrelated activities. For example, CEQ and OSTP are entities within the Executive Office of 

the President whose overall budgets are relatively small. According to CEQ and OSTP 

officials, their agencies do not track staff time dedicated toward specific HAB-related 

activities, thus they reported that their agencies could not provide expenditure data. In 

addition, two agencies—BOEM and FWS—provided data that we determined were not 

sufficiently reliable for our purposes; therefore, those agencies’ expenditure data are not 

presented in this report. Finally, we excluded from table 1 NRCS, which provided solely 

multi-purpose HAB-related expenditure data, because NRCS officials told us that it was a 

generous estimate that target water quality, including HABs, and we believed it would 

skew the overall federal agencies’ estimated total.
Appendix I: Objectives, Scope and 

Methodology

Page 30 GAO-17-119 Harmful Algae 

data are sufficiently reliable for the purpose of producing a rough estimate 

of HAB-related expenditures, the lack of a standardized approach to 

collecting HAB-related expenditures means that any federal total should 

be regarded as a rough estimate, and any comparisons among agencies’ 

expenditures should be regarded as inexact. In addition, our 

questionnaire asked the agencies for information on (1) their agencies’

key activities regarding HABs; (2) the purposes of these activities; (3) the 

specific statutory provisions authorizing these activities; and (4) the 

funding mechanisms used, such as grants, contracts, or interagency 

agreements.

To determine how federal agencies coordinate their HAB-related activities 

with each other and with nonfederal stakeholders, we collected and 

analyzed information from the agencies through interviews and our 

questionnaire on (1) their participation with each other and nonfederal 

stakeholders in interagency working groups or other mechanisms to 

share information and coordinate on HABs research, monitoring, or other 

activities;5 (2) efforts taken by federal agencies to minimize duplication; 

and (3) gaps, if any, in federal HAB-related activities. As warranted, we 

sent the agencies follow-up requests for clarification or elaboration. We 

also received and reviewed the official notes from a nongeneralizable 

sample of 21 IWG-HABHRCA twice-monthly meetings, starting from the 

group’s creation in October 2014 through July 2016. In addition, we 

attended, in person or by phone, the following events to observe federal 

agencies’ efforts to coordinate HAB-related activities with each other and 

other stakeholders:

• Biennial conference of HAB experts and researchers, “Eighth 

Symposium on Harmful Algae in the U.S.,” led by HAB researchers 

from the Southern California Coastal Water Research Project and 

University of Southern California; the conference was held in 

November 2015 and attended by more than 250 federal and state 

 5

For the purpose of this report, we define coordination as any joint activity by two or more 

organizations that is intended to produce more public value than could be produced when 

the organizations act alone. We use the term “coordination” broadly to include interagency 

activities that others have variously defined as “collaboration,” “cooperation,” “integration,”

or “networking.” We have done so since there are no commonly accepted definitions for 

these terms, and we are unable to make definitive distinctions between these different 

types of interagency activities.
Appendix I: Objectives, Scope and 

Methodology

Page 31 GAO-17-119 Harmful Algae 

officials, academic researchers, non-profit organization 

representatives, and industry representatives;

• A nongeneralizable sample of five IWG-HABHRCA twice-monthly 

meetings from February through July 2016, based on our availability; 

and

• Three webinars focused on HABs and hypoxia in the Great Lakes, 

two of which were organized by the IWG-HABHRCA in February 2016 

and one of which was organized by the Inland HAB Discussion Group 

in March 2016.

In addition, through our correspondence with federal agencies and our 

own web searches, we identified agencies’ publicly accessible websites 

describing HABs and HAB-related activities. We conducted a general web 

search, and searched each of the agencies’ websites, using the terms 

“algae blooms” and “algal blooms.” Based on the search results, we 

identified websites that were broad or national in scope and that 

appeared to be maintained by the agency on an ongoing basis (as 

opposed to being a one-time news release or document). We then asked 

each of the agencies to review our results for their particular agency, to 

verify that we had identified the appropriate websites and to refer us to 

any additional HAB-related websites (maintained by the agency) that met 

our criteria.

We conducted this performance audit from September 2015 to October 

2016 in accordance with generally accepted government auditing 

standards. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to 

obtain sufficient, appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable basis for 

our findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives. We believe 

that the evidence obtained provides a reasonable basis for our findings 

and conclusions based on our audit objectives.
Appendix II: Federal Agencies’ Key Harmful 

Algal Bloom-Related Activities, Expenditures, 

and Authority

Page 32 GAO-17-119 Harmful Algae 

Appendix II includes additional information for federal agencies that 

reported expenditures for activities related to harmful algal blooms (HAB) 

from fiscal years 2013 through 2015 and specific statutory provisions 

authorizing such activities. We present detailed tables for each of the 

agencies’ HAB-related expenditures for informational purposes, but we 

did not independently verify these amounts.

According to agency officials, for more than 40 years, CDC has provided 

epidemiology and surveillance support to states and other partners, 

enabling them to take public health action to address non-infectious 

water-related concerns. In the late 1990s, CDC began to address public 

health issues associated with HABs. In the past several years, CDC has 

been involved with a number of HAB-related activities, including the 

following:

• collaborating with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration (NOAA) to engage citizen scientists to identify and 

report freshwater HAB events;

• collaborating with NOAA to improve a module to forecast 

cyanobacterial blooms;

• providing technical assistance and expert guidance to states that 

experience HABs;

• convening a workgroup to identify surveillance indicators and 

measures for bloom events and public health consequences;

• developing health surveillance definitions for reporting HAB-related 

human cases of illnesses, animal cases of illness, and HAB events;

• creating the One Health Harmful Algal Bloom System, a nationally 

available, online system for health agencies and their animal and 

environmental health agency partners to report HAB-related illnesses 

in animals and people, and the environmental conditions associated 

with the HABs;

• providing resources to state health departments to build capacity for 

HAB-related illness surveillance; and

Appendix II: Federal Agencies’ Key Harmful 

Algal Bloom-Related Activities, Expenditures, 

and Authority

(1) Centers for 

Disease Control and 

Prevention (CDC)

Agency’s Mission and Key 

HAB-Related Activities
Appendix II: Federal Agencies’ Key Harmful 

Algal Bloom-Related Activities, Expenditures, 

and Authority

Page 33 GAO-17-119 Harmful Algae 

• creating a CDC website about HAB-associated illnesses 

(http://www.cdc.gov/habs/).

In addition, the agency’s Division of Laboratory Sciences provides 

laboratory support for public health responses to chemical threat agents. 

For example, this division provides assistance to state and local 

laboratories responding to regional events by identifying people exposed 

to certain toxins from marine and freshwater HABs.

According to agency-provided expenditures from fiscal years 2013 

through 2015, CDC expended a total of roughly $1.7 million on public

health surveillance, waterborne disease prevention, and health 

promotion, as follows:

• $566,828 in fiscal year 2013,

• $524,004 in fiscal year 2014, and

• $573,776 in fiscal year 2015.1

For CDC’s expenditures, see table 4.

According to agency officials, CDC’s authority to address HABs is 

provided under the Public Health Service Act (PHSA), and some activities 

receive funding from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

• Sections 301(a) and 317(k)(2) of the PHSA, as amended, authorize 

public health activities research and other activities and authorize 

grants to states and other entities for public health purposes.

• EPA’s Great Lakes Restoration Initiative (GLRI) provides annual 

funding to CDC’s National Center for Emerging and Zoonotic 

Infectious Diseases through an interagency agreement. One purpose 

of the center is to build waterborne disease prevention capacity in the 

Great Lakes states to inform and evaluate GLRI activities. This 

includes systematic detection and descriptions of HABs and 

associated human and animal health effects and environmental 

impacts. The National Center for Emerging and Zoonotic Infectious 

Diseases works closely with subject matter experts in CDC’s National 

Center for Environmental Health to address three main efforts: (1) 

 1

The total numbers for fiscal years 2013 through 2015 do not add to $1.7 million because 

of rounding.

HAB-Related 

Expenditures

Legal Authority to Address 

HABs
Appendix II: Federal Agencies’ Key Harmful 

Algal Bloom-Related Activities, Expenditures, 

and Authority

Page 34 GAO-17-119 Harmful Algae 

rebuilding and launching of public health surveillance for HABs, (2) 

state waterborne disease prevention capacity-building, and (3) health 

promotion. Through partnering with other federal agencies, CDC aims 

to connect these data to better describe the occurrence and health 

consequences of HABs.

Table 4: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Harmful Algal Bloom (HAB)-Related Programs and Expenditures, 

Fiscal Years 2013- 2015

Amounts in dollars

Initiatives/ 

programs

Purpose Funding 

mechanism

/recipients

Authoritya Expendituresb

FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 Total

Public health 

surveillance 

for HABs 

Develops HAB surveillance (direct 

costs for information technology 

development and a HAB 

coordinator)

Contractc Public 

Health 

Service Act 

(PHSA). §

301

197,000 201,958 75,000 473,958

State 

waterborne 

disease 

prevention 

capacitybuilding

Provides Council of State and 

Territorial Epidemiologists fellowship 

and project support

Cooperative 

agreementsd PHSA. § 301 369,828 322,046 498, 776 1,190,650

Health 

promotion

Expands HAB-related information 

and health promotion materials

Contracte PHSA. § 301 n/a n/a n/a n/a

CDC total 566,828 524,004 573,776 1,664,608

Legend: FY = fiscal year; n/a = not applicable (i.e., agency reported no expenditures).

Source: GAO analysis of CDC expenditure data and other information. | GAO-17-119

a

Legal authority to address HABs is based on information reported by CDC officials. 

b

According to CDC officials, these amounts reflect actual, estimated, and obligated expenditures. 

CDC officials reported that the expended funds were received from the Great Lakes Restoration 

Initiative. The CDC-identified HAB-related initiatives and programs are a mixture of single- and multipurpose. We did not independently verify these amounts.

c

Public health surveillance for HABs funding recipients are private companies and CDC.

d

State waterborne disease prevention capacity-building funding recipients are the Council of State 

and Territorial Epidemiologists, which administers the council’s Applied Epidemiology fellowship, and 

CDC’s Epidemiology and Laboratory Capacity program, which funds state capacity-building work.

e

Health promotion funding recipients are a private company and CDC. The agency indirectly provides 

funding to staff and information technology development that, according to CDC officials, cannot be 

broken down into HAB-related and non-HAB-related expenditures.
Appendix II: Federal Agencies’ Key Harmful 

Algal Bloom-Related Activities, Expenditures, 

and Authority

Page 35 GAO-17-119 Harmful Algae 

According to agency officials, EPA’s mission is to protect human health 

and the environment. To accomplish this mission, the agency develops 

relevant policy and guidelines, conducts research, provides assistance 

through grants and other agreements, educates the public, and creates 

partnerships. EPA’s Office of Water (OW), Office of Research and 

Development (ORD), and EPA regions, as well as the Gulf of Mexico 

Program Office and the Great Lakes National Program Office, have been 

working together to protect public health from HABs, including toxinproducing cyanobacteria. From fiscal years 2013 through 2015, EPA’s 

research on HABs and their toxins focused on four main areas: 

• Water quality research: Explores the interrelationships among nutrient 

inputs, temperature effects, land use, and runoff and how these 

parameters affect the timing, distribution, and magnitude of HABs and 

toxin production. 

• Human and ecological health effects research: Provides information 

on human exposure to HAB toxins (e.g., dermal vs. ingestion) and 

food-chain bioaccumulation and allergenic aspects of toxins produced 

by cyanobacteria (cyanotoxins). ORD continues to develop and 

optimize analytical procedures for measuring HAB toxins in drinking 

and source waters, including the qualitative and quantitative analysis 

of microcystin toxins, which are also being examined for toxicity 

levels. 

• Monitoring/analytical methods research: Includes small-scale

monitoring, such as surface water and real-time water quality 

monitoring, to large-scale monitoring using satellite imagery. The 

ultimate objective for monitoring research is to provide communities 

and utilities with early warning detection methods to better manage 

consequences from HABs. 

• Drinking water treatment research: Provides results on optimizing 

drinking water treatment strategies and timely response to HAB 

events, such as the Toledo, Ohio, incident in August 2014 caused by

a toxic bloom in Lake Erie. 

(2) Environmental 

Protection Agency 

(EPA)

Agency’s Mission and Key 

HAB-Related Activities
Appendix II: Federal Agencies’ Key Harmful 

Algal Bloom-Related Activities, Expenditures, 

and Authority

Page 36 GAO-17-119 Harmful Algae 

According to agency-provided expenditure data from fiscal years 2013 

through 2015, EPA expended a total of roughly $14.5 million on HABrelated activities across various research efforts, as follows:

• $3.2 million in fiscal year 2013, 

• $5.6 million in fiscal year 2014, and 

• $5.7 million in fiscal year 2015.2

For specific HAB-related expenditures, see table 5, highlighting activities 

by OW, the regions, and ORD.

According to agency officials, EPA’s authority to address HABs is 

provided by three statutes and as a part of annual appropriations for the 

Great Lakes Restoration Initiative (GLRI).3

• The Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) has a goal of ensuring that 

public drinking water is safe and requires EPA to establish legally 

enforceable standards for public water systems to limit the levels of 

specific contaminants that can adversely affect public health. Under

the SDWA, EPA is proposing in its 4th Candidate Contaminant List 

and its 4th Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule the evaluation 

and monitoring of several cyanotoxins that may be present in drinking 

water systems.

• The Drinking Water Protection Act (Pub. L. No. 114-45), enacted on 

August 7, 2015, amended the SDWA in 2015 by adding Section 1459, 

which directs EPA to develop and submit a strategic plan for 

assessing and managing risks associated with algal toxins in drinking 

water provided by public water systems. The act requires the strategic 

plan to include steps and timelines to assess human health effects 

and to identify a list of algal toxins, health advisories, treatment 

 2

EPA officials reported that this funding does not include EPA’s nutrient reduction 

projects, nutrient monitoring, phytoplankton community monitoring, or assessment of 

nutrient reduction projects intended to support reductions in HABs—which have 

collectively cost hundreds of millions of dollars since fiscal year 2010.

3

The Harmful Algal Bloom and Hypoxia Research and Control Amendments Act of 2014 

assigned EPA primary responsibility for administering the freshwater aspects of the HAB 

program, except for the Great Lakes. The amendments require EPA, through an 

interagency task force, to conduct research on the ecology and impacts of freshwater 

HABs and to forecast, monitor, and respond to freshwater HABs in lakes, rivers, estuaries 

(including their tributaries), and reservoirs.

HAB-Related 

Expenditures 

Legal Authority to Address 

HABs
Appendix II: Federal Agencies’ Key Harmful 

Algal Bloom-Related Activities, Expenditures, 

and Authority

Page 37 GAO-17-119 Harmful Algae 

options, analytical and monitoring approaches, causes of HABs, 

source water protection, and collaboration and outreach.4

• The Clean Water Act (CWA) establishes the basic structure for 

regulating discharges of pollutants into waters of the United States 

and for regulating quality standards for surface waters. Under the 

CWA, EPA has implemented pollution control programs and has 

reviewed, approved, or promulgated water quality standards to restore 

and maintain the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the 

nation’s waters. Section 303(d) of the CWA requires states to identify 

those waters that are not meeting applicable water quality standards 

(impaired waters or impairments) and for which the state must 

establish Total Maximum Daily Loads for pollutants. 

• Some states have identified algal toxins and cyanobacteria 

hepatotoxic microcystins as causing recreational use impairments for 

source water on the most recent 303(d) list, and Total Maximum Daily 

Loads have been approved to address impairments to aquatic life, 

recreation, and subsistence fishing uses caused by cyanotoxins. 

Section 426 of Pub. L. No. 114-113, enacted in December 2015,

formally established the GLRI to carry out programs and projects for 

Great Lakes protection and restoration.5 GLRI action plans outline

such activities for the GLRI, which include implementation of activities 

to reduce nutrient and sediment loadings such as voluntary 

agricultural practices; tracking; voluntary, incentive-based, and 

regulatory approaches to reduce nutrient losses; education; and other 

implementation of watershed management and green infrastructure 

projects. GLRI partners will also assess the extent to which HABs are 

affected by various factors and the relationship between algal blooms 

and hypoxia. In addition, in 1972, the United States and Canada 

signed the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement to restore, protect, 

and enhance the water quality of the Great Lakes to promote the 

ecological health of the Great Lakes Basin. The countries signed 

another Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement in 1978, which was 

 4

To meet these requirements, EPA released Algal Toxin Risk Assessment and 

Management Strategic Plan for Drinking Water in November 2015.

5

Congress first made funds available for the GLRI in fiscal year 2010. In fiscal years 2010, 

2012, 2014, and 2015, Congress did not provide appropriations for GLRI purposes. 

Instead, in those fiscal years, Congress provided EPA with transfer authority, up to a 

maximum amount, to undertake GLRI programs and projects. However, in fiscal years 

2011 and 2013, Congress did provide EPA with specific appropriations for GLRI purposes.
Appendix II: Federal Agencies’ Key Harmful 

Algal Bloom-Related Activities, Expenditures, 

and Authority

Page 38 GAO-17-119 Harmful Algae 

amended several times. For example, most recently, in 2012, the 

nations added provisions to the agreement to address the effects of 

climate change, among other things.

Table 5: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Harmful Algal Bloom (HAB)-Related Research Programs and Expenditures, 

Fiscal Years 2013-2015

Amounts in dollars

Offices/ 

Regions

Purpose Funding 

mechanism/ 

recipients

Authoritya Expendituresb

FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 Total

Office of Water (OW)

Office of 

Science and 

Technology

OW is responsible for 

developing policies and 

guidelines to support the 

Clean Water Act (CWA) 

and the Safe Drinking 

Water Act (SDWA). OW 

supports the needs of the 

states and local agencies 

by creating partnerships 

and facilitating outreach 

and communication to 

protect public health in 

both surface water and 

drinking water systems.

Interagency 

agreements, 

contractc

SDWA. §§

1412(b)(1)(B) and 

(b)(1)(F); CWA. §

304(b)

306,436 202,905 30,450 539,791

Office of 

Wetlands, 

Oceans, and 

Watersheds

See OW purpose above. Grants, 

contracts, 

interagency 

agreementd

CWA. §§ 104 and 

106; 40 C.F.R.

parts 130 and 131

55,500 610,000 610,500 1,276,000

Office of 

Ground Water 

and Drinking 

Water

See OW purpose above. Contracte SDWA. §§

1412(b)(1)(B) and 

1459

26,200 261,600 513,800 801,600

Subtotal 388,136 1,074,505 1,154,750 2,617,391

Regions

Region 1 The regions support the 

needs of the states and 

local agencies by creating 

partnerships and 

facilitating outreach and 

communication to protect 

public health in both 

surface water and drinking 

water systems.

Loanf CWA. Sec. 305(b) n/a 3,740 11,740 15,480

Region 3 See region purpose

above. 

Grantg CWA. § 117 220,000 220,000 220,000 660,000
Appendix II: Federal Agencies’ Key Harmful 

Algal Bloom-Related Activities, Expenditures, 

and Authority

Page 39 GAO-17-119 Harmful Algae 

Offices/ 

Regions

Purpose Funding 

mechanism/ 

recipients

Authoritya Expendituresb

FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 Total

Region 4 and 

Gulf of Mexico 

Program Office

See region purpose 

above. 

Cooperative 

agreementh 40 C.F.R. parts 30 and 31i n/a n/a n/a n/a

Region 5 and 

Great Lakes 

National 

Program 

Officej

See region purpose 

above. 

Contracts, 

grants, 

interagency 

agreement, 

cooperative 

agreementk

Annex 4 of the 

Great Lakes Water 

Quality Agreement; 

CWA. § 104(b) 

(2),(3); annual EPA 

appropriations actsl

1,730,741 2,468,163 2,153,611 6,352,516

Region 7 See region purpose 

above.

Purchase 

cardm CWA. § 104 3,500 3,500 11,425 18,425

Region 8 See region purpose 

above. 

Contractn CWA. § 304(b) n/a n/a 26,316 26,316

Region 9 See region purpose 

above.

Supplies, 

contract, 

technical 

assistance, 

and granto

CWA. §§ 106, 305 

(b), 319; SDWA.

165,000 915,000 537,700 1,617,700

Region 10 See region purpose 

above. 

Grant, 

cooperative 

agreementp

Indian Environmental General 

Assistance 

Program Act of 

1991; CWA. §

320(g) 

124,929 106,660 288,392 519,981

Subtotal 2,244,170 3,717,063 3,249,184 9,210,418

Office of Research and Development (ORD)

ORD ORD is the scientific 

research arm of EPA and 

supports six research 

programs that identify the 

most pressing 

environmental health 

research needs. ORD 

coordinates and gets input 

from EPA program offices, 

the regions, partners, and 

stakeholders for the 

development of the 

research programs. 

Contractq SDWA. §§

1412(b)(1)(B) and 

1442(a)(1); Harmful 

Algal Bloom and 

Hypoxia Research 

and Control Act, 

especially 42 

U.S.C. § 4002(h); 

CWA. §§ 104(a)(1), 

(5), and (6)

601,519 798,183 1,276,439 2,676,141

Subtotal 601,519 798,183 1,276,439 2,676,141

EPA total 3,233,825 5,589,751 5,680,373 14,503,950

Legend: FY = fiscal year; n/a = not applicable (i.e., agency reported no expenditures). 

Source: GAO analysis of EPA data and other information. | GAO-17-119

a

Legal authority to address HABs is based on information reported by EPA officials.
Appendix II: Federal Agencies’ Key Harmful 

Algal Bloom-Related Activities, Expenditures, 

and Authority

Page 40 GAO-17-119 Harmful Algae 

b

According to EPA officials, these amounts reflect actual expenditures. The EPA-identified HABrelated research programs are single-purpose. We did not independently verify these amounts. In 

addition, agency officials stated that 2 of EPA’s 10 regional offices did not fund HAB-related programs 

from fiscal years 2013 through 2015. 

c

Office of Science and Technology funding recipients are national laboratories, a private entity, and a 

research institution.

d

Office of Wetlands, Oceans, and Watersheds funding recipients are states, tribes, a federal agency, 

and a nonprofit organization.

e

Office of Ground Water and Drinking Water funding recipients are private entities, a university, and 

science laboratories.

f

Region 1 funding recipients are research staff members.

g

Region 3 funding recipients are states.

h

Region 4 funding recipient is a university.

i

In December, 2014, EPA repealed 40 C.F.R. part 30 (Uniform Administrative Requirements for 

Grants and Agreements with Institutions of Higher Education, Hospitals, and Other Nonprofit 

Organizations) and part 31 (Uniform Administrative Requirements for Grants and Agreements with 

States and Localities), and replaced them with 2 C.F.R. § 1500.1.

j

The identified Great Lakes National Program Office funding does not include multi-purpose nutrient 

reduction projects, nutrient monitoring, phytoplankton community monitoring, or assessment of 

nutrient reduction projects intended, in part, to support reductions in HABs. According to EPA 

officials, since 2010, hundreds of millions of dollars have been allocated for a wide array of projects 

that will reduce the loading of nutrients—which can fuel HABs—to the Great Lakes. For example, 

more than 680 projects and $60 million of Great Lakes Restoration Initiative (GLRI) funds were 

invested in the Lake Erie Basin from 2010 through 2015 to reduce phosphorus, nutrient, and nonpoint

source pollution and to support related science and monitoring work. The agency could not provide 

expenditure amounts for the HAB-related portions of those projects during the time frame of our 

review.

k

Region 5 funding recipients are a private entity, federal and state agencies, and a regional planning 

commission.

l

Congress first made funds available for the GLRI in fiscal year 2010. In fiscal years 2010, 2012, 

2014, and 2015, Congress did not provide appropriations for GLRI purposes. Instead, in those fiscal 

years, Congress provided EPA with transfer authority, up to a maximum amount, to undertake GLRI 

programs and projects. However, in fiscal years 2011 and 2013, Congress did provide EPA with 

specific appropriations for GLRI purposes.

mRegion 7 funding recipient is Region 7.

n

Region 8 funding recipient is a private entity.

o

Region 9 funding recipients are states, tribes, utility companies, and municipalities.

p

Region 10 funding recipients are tribes and a university.

q

ORD funding recipients are federal agencies, research institutions, a university, and an EPA 

program.

According to agency officials, FDA is responsible for protecting public 

health by ensuring that human and animal drugs are safe and effective; 

biological products do not threaten public health; there are reasonable 

(3) Food and Drug 

Administration (FDA)

Agency’s Mission and Key 

HAB-Related Activities
Appendix II: Federal Agencies’ Key Harmful 

Algal Bloom-Related Activities, Expenditures, 

and Authority

Page 41 GAO-17-119 Harmful Algae 

assurances that medical devices are safe and effective; food is safe, 

wholesome, sanitary, and properly labeled; cosmetics are safe and 

properly labeled; and the public health and safety is protected from 

products that emit radiation. FDA’s Center for Food Safety and Applied 

Nutrition, in conjunction with the agency’s field staff promotes and 

protects the public health by ensuring that the nation’s food supply is 

safe, sanitary, wholesome, and properly labeled, and that cosmetic 

products are safe and properly labeled. FDA’s role and expertise in 

conducting activities focused on toxin-producing cyanobacteria and algae 

and public health concerns related to HABs are mission relevant and 

focused on products regulated by the agency.

Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition regulates products that may 

be affected by harmful algae, their toxins, or both, including seafood, 

dietary supplements, and bottled water. Most of FDA’s HAB activities 

focus on seafood, with fewer dedicated efforts on dietary supplements. To 

date, there have been no specific HAB activities focused on bottled water. 

FDA HAB-related activities include research program management, 

project management, domestic and international compliance and 

enforcement, regulation development and policy, emergency response 

and recovery, risk assessment, education and outreach, consumer 

education, postmarket monitoring and surveillance, domestic regulatory 

partnerships, international standards development, trade and 

partnerships, industry and academic collaboration, international 

collaboration and outreach, recalls, administrative activities, economic 

adulteration, and employee training. FDA awards small contracts to 

external entities in cases where it would be more cost-effective than the 

agency performing the work, FDA does not have the expertise or 

capability to conduct the work needed, or FDA can achieve more through 

collaboration and contributions to other’s work.

According to agency-provided expenditures from fiscal years 2013 

through 2015, FDA expended a total of roughly $7.4 million on internal 

and external activities, as follows:

• $2.1 million in fiscal year 2013, 

• $2.7 million in fiscal year 2014, and 

• $2.6 million in fiscal year 2015.

For FDA’s expenditures, see table 6.

HAB-Related 

Expenditures
Appendix II: Federal Agencies’ Key Harmful 

Algal Bloom-Related Activities, Expenditures, 

and Authority

Page 42 GAO-17-119 Harmful Algae 

According to agency officials, FDA’s authority to address HABs and their 

toxins is provided under multiple statutes, including the Federal Food, 

Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 301 et seq.); the Public Health 

Service Act (PHSA) (42 U.S.C. 243); and 21 C.F.R. part 123 (Fish and 

Fishery Products), specifically 21 C.F.R. § 123.6 (Seafood Hazard 

Analysis and Critical Control Point Plan) and 21 C.F.R. § 1240.60 

(Molluscan Shellfish). Seafood Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Point 

is a preventive system of hazard control implemented by processors to 

help ensure the safety of their products and reduce the risk of illness for 

consumers. Seafood Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Point requires 

that processors identify and control for species- and process-specific 

hazards, which would include biotoxins produced by HABs. 

FDA is designated by the Harmful Algal Bloom and Hypoxia Research 

and Control Act of 1998 (Pub. L. No. 105-383 § 603(a), 112 Stat. 3447, 

3448) as one of the federal agencies that shall participate in an 

interagency task force on HABs and hypoxia to develop reports and 

assessments for Congress. The act was most recently amended in 2014 

by Pub. L. No. 113-124, 128 Stat. 1379.

Legal Authority to Address 

HABs
Appendix II: Federal Agencies’ Key Harmful 

Algal Bloom-Related Activities, Expenditures, 

and Authority

Page 43 GAO-17-119 Harmful Algae 

Table 6: Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Harmful Algal Bloom (HAB)-Related Activities and Expenditures, Fiscal Years 

2013-2015

Amounts in dollars

Types of 

activities

Purpose Funding 

mechanism/ 

recipients

Authoritya Expendituresb

FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 Total

Intramural 

activities, 

including 

research

To identity hazardous 

sources and vectors for 

biotoxins that affect

seafood safety; develop, 

optimize and validate a 

range of methods used 

to detect toxins in 

seafood environments; 

and develop policy, 

compliance, 

enforcement, risk 

assessment, education 

and outreach, and 

respond to potential 

illnesses.

Intramuralc Federal Food, Drug, 

and Cosmetic Act (21 

U.S.C. 301 et seq.); the 

Public Health Service 

Act (PHSA) (42 U.S.C.

243); and 21 C.F.R. part 

123 (Fish and Fishery 

Products) and 21 C.F.R.

§ 1240.60 (Molluscan 

Shellfish).

1,900,000 1,995,243 2,064,774 5,960,017

External 

activities

To support the 

maintenance of 

analytical equipment to 

ensure quality control of 

data generated from 

instruments, enhance 

education and outreach 

partnerships, support 

research collaborations,

and fund student and 

post-doctoral 

participation in a 

national HAB 

conference.

Contracts, 

grant, 

interagency 

agreementd

Federal Food, Drug, 

and Cosmetic Act (21 

U.S.C. 301 et seq.); the 

PHSA (42 U.S.C. 243);

and 21 C.F.R. part 123 

(Fish and Fishery 

Products), and 21 

C.F.R. § 1240.60 

(Molluscan Shellfish).

181,000 686,083 557,199 1,424,282

FDA total 2,081,000 2,681,326 2,621,973 7,384,299

Legend: FY = fiscal year.

Source: GAO analysis of FDA expenditure data and other information. | GAO-17-119

a

Legal authority to address HABs is based on information reported by FDA officials.

b

According to FDA officials, these amounts reflect actual and estimated expenditures. The FDAidentified HAB-related activities are a mixture of single- and multi-purpose. We did not independently 

verify these amounts.

c

Intramural activities, including research, funding recipients are FDA’s Office of Regulatory Science, 

Office of Compliance, Office of Foods and Veterinary Medicine, Office of Regulatory Affairs, and the 

Office of Food Safety.

d

External activities funding recipients are universities, a science symposium, a science laboratory, a

research institution, and contractors.
Appendix II: Federal Agencies’ Key Harmful 

Algal Bloom-Related Activities, Expenditures, 

and Authority

Page 44 GAO-17-119 Harmful Algae 

According to agency officials, the purpose of NASA's Earth Science 

Division is to develop a scientific understanding of the Earth and its 

response to natural or human-induced changes, and to improve 

prediction of climate, weather, and natural hazards. A major component 

of NASA’s Earth Science Division is a coordinated series of satellite and 

airborne missions for long-term global observations of the land surface, 

biosphere, solid earth, atmosphere, and oceans. This coordinated 

approach enables an improved understanding of the Earth as an 

integrated system.

NASA also supports Executive Order 13547 that established the National 

Ocean Policy, a policy for the stewardship of the ocean, coasts, and 

Great Lakes. NASA participates in many interagency working groups, 

including the Interagency Working Group on the Harmful Algal Blooms 

and Hypoxia Research and Control Act. NASA research supports the 

working group’s scientific objectives when possible and relevant to the 

agency mission.

According to agency-provided expenditures from fiscal years 2013 

through 2015, NASA expended a total of roughly $2.0 million on HABrelated activities across various monitoring efforts and research-related 

activities, as follows:

• $344,003 in fiscal year 2013, 

• $230,545 in fiscal year 2014, and 

• $1.4 million in fiscal year 2015.6

 6

The total numbers for fiscal years 2013 through 2015 do not add to $2.0 million because 

of rounding.

(4) National 

Aeronautics and 

Space Administration 

(NASA)

Agency’s Mission and Key 

HAB-Related Activities

HAB-Related 

Expenditures
Appendix II: Federal Agencies’ Key Harmful 

Algal Bloom-Related Activities, Expenditures, 

and Authority

Page 45 GAO-17-119 Harmful Algae 

For specific HAB-related program expenditures, see table 7.

According to agency officials, NASA’s authority to address HABs is 

provided under the NASA Authorization Act, 51 U.S.C. §§ 20112 and

20113, which authorizes NASA’s Earth science research. Table 7

includes specific HAB-related expenditures organized by program and 

project: (1) NASA Ocean Biology and Biogeochemistry, (2) NASA Health 

and Air Quality Applications, (3) SERVIR (an acronym for the Spanish 

words meaning Mesoamerican Regional Visualization and Monitoring 

System), (4) Digital Earth Virtual Environment Learning Outreach Project, 

(5) Applied Remote Sensing Training, (6) Research and Analysis, and (7) 

Center for the Advancement of Science in Space HAB research grant 

project.

Legal Authority to Address 

HABs
Appendix II: Federal Agencies’ Key Harmful 

Algal Bloom-Related Activities, Expenditures, 

and Authority

Page 46 GAO-17-119 Harmful Algae 

Table 7: National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Harmful Algal Bloom (HAB)-Related Programs and

Expenditures, Fiscal Years 2013-2015

Amounts in dollars

Programs/ 

projects

Purpose Funding 

mechanism/ 

recipients

Authoritya Expendituresb

FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 Total

NASA Ocean 

Biology and 

Biogeochemistry 

NASA's Ocean Biology and 

Biogeochemistry program 

focuses on describing, 

understanding, and predicting the 

biological, ecological, and 

biogeochemical regimes of the 

upper ocean, as determined by 

observation of aquatic optical 

properties using remote sensing

data, including those from space, 

aircraft, and other suborbital 

platforms. The program has 

undertaken research regarding 

cyanobacteria and development 

of associated ocean color 

satellite data products for 

freshwater systems to develop an 

early warning indicator/data 

product for toxic and nuisance 

blooms.

Interagency 

agreement 

and 

Research 

and 

Technology 

Operating 

Planc

NASA 

Authorization Act, 

51 U.S.C. §§

20112 and 20113 

n/a n/a 97,930 97,930

NASA Health and 

Air Quality 

Applications

The NASA Health and Air Quality 

Applications program encourages

the use of Earth observations in 

air quality management and 

public health, particularly 

involving environmental health 

and infectious diseases. The 

program has undertaken projects 

that identify environmental 

thresholds that indicate the 

potential for cyanobacterial or 

Karenia brevis blooms to form or 

persist, and makes these data 

sets available to state and federal 

operational managers for HAB 

monitoring and characterization.

Interagency 

agreement, 

grantd

NASA 

Authorization Act, 

51 U.S.C. §§

20112 and 20113

318,485 n/a 330,935 649,420
Appendix II: Federal Agencies’ Key Harmful 

Algal Bloom-Related Activities, Expenditures, 

and Authority

Page 47 GAO-17-119 Harmful Algae 

Programs/ 

projects

Purpose Funding 

mechanism/ 

recipients

Authoritya Expendituresb

FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 Total

SERVIR (an 

acronym for the 

Spanish words 

meaning 

Mesoamerican 

Regional 

Visualization and 

Monitoring 

System)

The NASA Capacity Building 

Program’s SERVIR program is a 

NASA and U.S. Agency for 

International Development 

initiative that fosters applications 

of Earth observations and 

geospatial technologies to help 

developing countries assess 

environmental conditions and 

climate change to better inform 

their decision-making processes. 

SERVIR has provided HAB 

support in Latin America based 

on end user needs. 

Cooperative 

agreement 

and 

contracte

NASA 

Authorization Act, 

51 U.S.C. §§

20112 and 20113 

11,413 6,000 12,260 29,673

Digital Earth 

Virtual 

Environment 

Learning 

Outreach Project

From 2010 through 2015, this 

NASA Capacity Building Program 

has conducted feasibility projects 

that sought to build capacity for

end users and partners to use 

NASA Earth observations to 

assist with decision-making and 

policy related to HABs. The 

projects sought to apply existing 

NASA products and published 

methods to help partners make 

better decisions, and make them 

easier and faster.

Cooperative 

agreement 

and contractf

NASA 

Authorization Act, 

51 U.S.C. §§

20112 and 20113 

14,105 64,545 107,790 186,440

Applied Remote 

Sensing Training

This NASA Capacity Building 

Program offered its first water 

quality webinar in November and 

December 2014. This webinar 

covered remote sensing of 

Chlorophyll-a concentration from 

the Moderate Resolution Imaging 

Spectroradiometer, which is an 

indicator for HABs.

Cooperative 

agreement 

and 

contractg

NASA 

Authorization Act, 

51 U.S.C. §§

20112 and 

20113 

n/a 35,000 35,000 70,000
Appendix II: Federal Agencies’ Key Harmful 

Algal Bloom-Related Activities, Expenditures, 

and Authority

Page 48 GAO-17-119 Harmful Algae 

Programs/ 

projects

Purpose Funding 

mechanism/ 

recipients

Authoritya Expendituresb

FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 Total

Research and 

Analysis

The Earth Science Research and 

Analysis program enables 

advances in Earth system 

science by supporting analysis of 

data from NASA satellites and 

aircraft, as well as those of our 

international partners, and 

documents the program’s results 

in peer-reviewed literature while 

sharing results with the broader 

public. The program has funded 

research to delineate the 

presence of harmful algal 

species, their concentration, and 

their movement in an augmented 

spatial and temporal resolution 

and under clouds.

Research

and 

Technology 

Operating 

Planh

NASA 

Authorization Act, 

51 U.S.C. §§ 

20112 and 20113 

n/a n/a 710,000 710,000

Center for the 

Advancement of 

Science in Space 

HAB research 

grant project

The International Space Station 

National Laboratory, managed by 

the Center for the Advancement 

of Science in Space, issued a 

grant to study HABs using the 

Hyperspectral Imager for the 

Costal Ocean instrument, which 

provides space-borne imaging 

that samples ocean coastal 

regions.

Granti NASA 

Authorization Act, 

51 U.S.C. § 

20113

n/a 125,000 125,000 250,000

NASA total 344,003 230,545 1,418,915 1,993,463

Legend: FY = fiscal year; n/a = not applicable (i.e., agency reported no expenditures).

Source: GAO analysis of NASA data and other information. | GAO-17-119

a

Legal authority to address HABs is based on information reported by NASA officials.

b

According to NASA officials, these amounts reflect actual expenditures. The NASA-identified HABrelated programs and project are a mixture of single- and multi-purpose. We did not independently 

verify these amounts.

c

NASA Ocean Biology and Biogeochemistry program funding recipients are federal agencies.

d

NASA Health and Air Quality Applications program funding recipients are a federal agency and 

university.

e

SERVIR program funding recipients are various university representatives and contractors.

f

Digital Earth Virtual Environment Learning Outreach Project program funding recipients are various 

university representatives and contractors.

g

Applied Remote Sensing Training program funding recipients are various university representatives 

and contractors.

h

Research and Analysis program funding recipient is the NASA research center.

i

Center for the Advancement of Science in Space HAB research grant project funding recipient is the 

Naval Research Laboratory.
Appendix II: Federal Agencies’ Key Harmful 

Algal Bloom-Related Activities, Expenditures, 

and Authority

Page 49 GAO-17-119 Harmful Algae 

According to agency officials, the Navy’s mission is to maintain, train, and 

equip combat-ready naval forces capable of winning wars, deterring 

aggression, and maintaining freedom of the seas. The Office of Naval 

Research coordinates, executes, and promotes the science and 

technology programs of both the Navy and the U.S. Marine Corps. The 

Naval Research Laboratory (NRL) is the corporate research laboratory for 

the Navy and Marine Corps and conducts a broad program of scientific 

research, technology, and advanced development. Some NRL research, 

capabilities, and techniques are useful when applied to other fields, 

including HAB and hypoxia research performed by other agencies, such 

as the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Environmental 

Protection Agency, and National Aeronautics and Space Administration. 

Thus, NRL provides expertise and experience to other agencies for a 

variety of research purposes, including HAB and hypoxia research. 

According to agency-provided expenditures from fiscal years 2013 

through 2015, Navy expended a total of roughly $1.0 million on HABrelated activities across various monitoring and research-related 

activities, as follows:

• $343,000 in fiscal year 2013, 

• $353,000 in fiscal year 2014, and 

• $353,000 in fiscal year 2015.7

For specific HAB-related program expenditures, see table 8.

According to agency officials, Navy’s authority to address HABs is 

provided under 10 U.S.C. § 5013, which authorizes the Secretary to be 

responsible for, and have the authority necessary to conduct, all affairs of 

the agency. In addition, 10 U.S.C. § 7921 authorizes the Secretary to 

 7

The total numbers for fiscal years 2013 through 2015 do not add to $1.0 million because 

of rounding.

(5) Department of the 

Navy (Navy)

Agency’s Mission and Key 

HAB-Related Activities

HAB-Related 

Expenditures

Legal Authority to Address 

HABs
Appendix II: Federal Agencies’ Key Harmful 

Algal Bloom-Related Activities, Expenditures, 

and Authority

Page 50 GAO-17-119 Harmful Algae 

maximize the safety and effectiveness of all maritime vessels, aircraft, 

and members of the armed forces by means of (1) marine data collection, 

(2) numerical weather and ocean predictions, and (3) forecasting of 

hazardous weather and ocean conditions.

Table 8: Department of the Navy (Navy) Harmful Algal Bloom (HAB)-Related Projects and Expenditures, Fiscal Years 2013-

2015

Amounts in dollars

Projects Purpose Funding 

mechanism/ 

recipients

Authoritya Expendituresb

FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 Total

Internally funded projects

Dinoflagellate 

identification 

and ecological 

modeling

Study of in situ and remotely 

sensed spectral optical 

properties to identify 

dinoflagellates through field 

sampling and improvement of 

remote sensing techniques. 

Dinoflagellate information has 

been incorporated into the Naval 

Research Laboratory’s (NRL) 

ecological-circulation models for 

better understanding/prediction. 

This work supported improved 

understanding of ocean clarity, 

which is important operationally 

to the Navy. Some dinoflagellate 

species can contribute to HAB 

outbreaks.

Navy 

appropriationc 10 U.S.C. §§5013 and 7921 

343,000 353,000 353,000 1,049,000

Projects funded by other federal agencies

Improved 

characterization 

and

quantification of 

hypoxia

The National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration 

(NOAA), National Science

Foundation, and Navy 

developed a research plan to 

utilize gliders to examine 

hypoxia in coastal regions, 

including the Gulf of Mexico. 

Agency gliders were eventually 

to be incorporated into a global 

observation network. Additional 

coordination would lead to 

improved data management, 

product development, and 

data/product delivery (NOAA’s 

Integrated Ocean Observing 

System (IOOS) National Glider 

Network Plan). The product of 

this work was a white paper 

designed to focus multiagency 

efforts. 

n/ad n/ae n/a n/a n/a n/a
Appendix II: Federal Agencies’ Key Harmful 

Algal Bloom-Related Activities, Expenditures, 

and Authority

Page 51 GAO-17-119 Harmful Algae 

Projects Purpose Funding 

mechanism/ 

recipients

Authoritya Expendituresb

FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 Total

Navy total 343,000 353,000 353,000 1,049,000

Legend: FY = fiscal year; n/a = not applicable (i.e., agency reported no expenditures).

Source: GAO analysis of Navy expenditure data and other information. | GAO-17-119

a

Legal authority to address HABs is based on information reported by Navy officials.

b

According to Navy officials, these amounts reflect actual and estimated expenditures. The Navyidentified HAB-related projects are a mixture of single- and multi-purpose. We did not independently 

verify these amounts.

c

Dinoflagellate identification and ecological modeling funding recipient is the NRL at the National 

Aeronautics and Space Administration’s Stennis Space Center.

d

According to Navy officials, the Navy did not provide nor receive funding for the improved 

characterization and quantification of hypoxia project.

e

Agency did not provide legal authority.

According to agency officials, HABs are a primary focus of NIEHSsupported research activities in marine and freshwater environments. 

There are two overarching themes associated with the NIEHS HAB 

grants portfolio: (1) supporting research on the health effects associated 

with exposure to HAB toxins; and (2) supporting research that reduces 

human exposure to HAB toxins.

To accomplish this mission, NIEHS has solicited and funded grant 

applications in collaboration with the National Science Foundation, with a 

specific focus on marine and freshwater HABs. NIEHS has also 

supported peer-reviewed, unsolicited research grant applications to 

develop novel approaches to enhance prediction of HAB events and to 

better understand the adverse impacts on human health associated with 

exposures to HAB toxins. Additionally, NIEHS has supported research 

conferences that allow investigators to share published and unpublished 

research results, and has provided training opportunities for pre- and 

post-doctoral investigators to help advance this scientific field and 

develop the next generation of HAB investigators.

(6) National Institute 

of Environmental 

Health Sciences 

(NIEHS)

Agency’s Mission and Key 

HAB-Related Activities
Appendix II: Federal Agencies’ Key Harmful 

Algal Bloom-Related Activities, Expenditures, 

and Authority

Page 52 GAO-17-119 Harmful Algae 

According to agency-provided expenditure data, NIEHS expended a total 

of roughly $8 million from fiscal years 2013 through 2015 on HAB-related 

projects and activities, as follows:

• $1.9 million in fiscal year 2013, 

• $3.3 million in fiscal year 2014, and 

• $2.8 million in fiscal year 2015. 

Table 9 identifies specific HAB-related expenditures, organized by (1) 

toxicity, (2) detection, and (3) communication. 

According to agency officials, NIEHS’ authority to address HABs is 

provided under a variety of statutes. Additional information on these 

statutes follows:

• The Public Health Service Act (PHSA), particularly Sections 301 

(Public Health Research and Investigation),8 401 (NIEHS 

Organization and Authorities),9 437 (Research and Training),10 and 

463 (NIEHS Purpose),11 authorizes the activities included in table 9.

• The Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) and Small Business 

Technology Transfer (STTR) Reauthorization Act of 2011, Pub. L. No.

112-81, 15 U.S.C. 638, authorizes NIEHS to provide assistance for 

certain detection technology activities.

• The Harmful Algal Bloom and Hypoxia Research and Control Act, as 

amended, Pub. L. No. 105-83, 108-456, and 113-124, 33 U.S.C. 4001 

et seq., authorizes NIEHS participation in the Interagency Working 

Group on the Harmful Algal Bloom and Hypoxia Research and Control 

Amendments Act, and other NIEHS interagency collaboration

 8

42 U.S.C. § 241.

9

42 U.S.C. § 281.

1042 U.S.C. § 285d-2.

1142 U.S.C. § 285.

HAB-Related 

Expenditures

Legal Authority to Address 

HABs
Appendix II: Federal Agencies’ Key Harmful 

Algal Bloom-Related Activities, Expenditures, 

and Authority

Page 53 GAO-17-119 Harmful Algae 

Table 9: National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS) Harmful Algal Blooms (HAB)-Related Activities and 

Expenditures, Fiscal Years 2013-2015

Amounts in dollars

Types of activities Purpose Funding 

mechanism/ 

recipients

Authoritya Expendituresb

FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 Total

Toxicity A primary purpose of NIEHS 

research on HABs is to utilize 

multidisciplinary approaches to

• enhance understanding of the 

adverse consequences to 

human health from exposure 

to HAB toxins,

• identify mechanisms of 

toxicities,

• determine toxin exposure 

routes,

• use animal models to study 

health effects, and

• perform studies in human 

cohorts.

Grantc Public Health 

Service Act

(PHSA), 

particularly §§

301, 401, 437, 

and 463 

1,262,531 2,386,571 2,240,801 5,889,903

Detection The second focus is to support 

research of novel strategies aimed 

at preventing HAB toxin exposures 

by 

• developing state-of-the-art 

sensing approaches for 

prediction and forecasting of 

HAB events,

• improving detection of HAB 

toxin-producing 

microorganisms,

• identifying new HABproducing species,

• improving understanding of 

the geophysical conditions 

that are favorable or 

conducive to initiating HAB 

events, and

• developing translational 

approaches.

Grantd PHSA, 

particularly §§

301, 401, 437, 

and 463;

SBIR and 

STTR 

Reauthorization 

Act of 2011, 

Pub. L. No.112-

81, 15 U.S.C 

638

632,072 932,882 528,488 2,093,442

Communication A third focus of the NIEHS is to 

ensure dissemination and 

communication of research results 

through support of research 

conferences.

Grante PHSA, 

particularly §§

301, 401, 437, 

and 463 

n/a n/a 8,000 8,000

NIEHS total 1,894,603 3,319,453 2,777,289 7,991,345 

Legend: FY = fiscal year; n/a = not applicable (i.e., agency reported no expenditures); SBIR = Small Business Innovation and Research; STTR = Small 

Business Technology Transfer.

Source: GAO analysis of NIEHS data and other information. | GAO-17-119
Appendix II: Federal Agencies’ Key Harmful 

Algal Bloom-Related Activities, Expenditures, 

and Authority

Page 54 GAO-17-119 Harmful Algae 

a

Legal authority to address HABs is based on information reported by NIEHS officials.

b

According to the NIEHS officials, these amounts reflect actual and obligated expenditures. The 

NIEHS-identified HAB-related activities are single-purpose. We did not independently verify these 

amounts.

c

Toxicity activity recipients of the grants are universities.

d

Detection activity recipients of the grants are universities, a private entity, and a research institution.

e

Communication activity grant recipient is a research conference.

According to agency officials, NIFA is the extramural funding agency for 

the Department of Agriculture (USDA) and provides leadership and 

funding for programs that advance agriculture-related sciences. Since the 

Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008 directed its creation, NIFA 

has taken strides toward enhancing the impact of food, agriculture, 

natural resources, and human sciences on environment and human 

health. NIFA applies an integrated approach to ensure that 

groundbreaking discoveries in agriculture-related sciences and 

technologies reach the people who can put them into practice. NIFA 

invests in and supports initiatives that ensure the long-term viability of 

agriculture. The agency does not conduct research internally, but 

provides funding for research, extension, and education activities through 

competitive grants program and capacity programs.

In terms of human health and HABs, NIFA sponsors work that supports 

agriculturally relevant projects and the agency’s human health areas 

focus on food safety. Most of NIFA’s related work focuses on the impacts 

of HABs on aquaculture and ecology-related HABs research. NIFA 

provides funds to eligible institutions through competitive grants, capacity 

grants, and noncompetitive grants and agreements.

According to agency-provided expenditures from fiscal years 2013 

through 2015, NIFA expended a total of roughly $393,968 on initiatives 

that focus on the impacts of HABs on aquaculture and ecology related 

research, as follows:

• $200,000 in fiscal year 2013, 

(7) National Institute 

of Food and 

Agriculture (NIFA)

Agency’s Mission and Key 

HAB-Related Activities

HAB-Related 

Expenditures
Appendix II: Federal Agencies’ Key Harmful 

Algal Bloom-Related Activities, Expenditures, 

and Authority

Page 55 GAO-17-119 Harmful Algae 

• $144,000 in fiscal year 2014, and 

• $49,968 in fiscal year 2015.12

For NIFA’s expenditures, see table 10.

According to agency officials, NIFA’s authority to address HABs is 

provided under a variety of statutes, as follows:

• 7 U.S.C. 301 authorizes tribal research grants that support agricultural 

research addressing high-priority concerns of tribal, national, or

multistate significance. Grants support investigative and analytical 

studies in the food and agricultural sciences. Funds are awarded on a 

competitive basis.

• Section 7406 of the Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008 

(Pub. L. No. 110-246) amended section 2(b) of the Competitive, 

Special, and Facilities Research Grant Act as amended (7 U.S.C. 

450i(b)) to authorize the Secretary of Agriculture to make competitive 

grants to promote research in food, agriculture, and related areas. 

Under that authority, USDA established the Agriculture and Food 

Research Initiative as a competitive grant program to provide funding 

for fundamental and applied research, education, and extension to 

address food and agricultural sciences.

• Competitive, Special, and Facilities Research Grant Act, as amended 

and codified at 7 U.S.C. 450i(c), authorizes the Secretary of 

Agriculture to make grants, for periods not to exceed 3 years, for 

special emphasis awards to facilitate or expand promising food and 

agricultural research, extension, or education programs. 

 12NIFA officials reported that this funding does not include multi-purpose capacity awards 

that relate, in part, to HABs. According to agency officials, capacity programs are 

supported by federal formula funding, which in some cases, must be matched with state 

funding to support research in agriculture, food, nutrition, and related fields at the nation’s 

land grant institutions. The funding is not delivered by project, but is provided to an eligible 

institution as one award. As these projects are subsets of larger awards, agency officials 

could not provide award amounts for the HAB-related portions of those awards within the 

time frame of our review. 

Legal Authority to Address 

HABs
Appendix II: Federal Agencies’ Key Harmful 

Algal Bloom-Related Activities, Expenditures, 

and Authority

Page 56 GAO-17-119 Harmful Algae 

Table 10: National Institute of Food and Agriculture (NIFA) Harmful Algal Bloom (HAB)-Related Initiatives and Programs and 

Expenditures, Fiscal Years 2013-2015

Amounts in dollars

Initiatives/ 

programs

Purpose Funding 

mechanism/ 

recipients

Authoritya Expendituresb

FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 Total

Tribal Colleges 

Research Grants 

Program

To determine the seasonal 

variation of algicidal bacteria in 

Northern Puget Sound and 

relationship with HABs.

Grantsc 7 U.S.C. § 

450i(c) and 16 

U.S.C. § 582a-8

200,000 n/a n/a 200,000

Post-doctoral 

fellowships

To evaluate impacts of HABs 

on shellfish aquaculture and 

sustainable mitigation 

strategies.

Agriculture 

and Food 

Research 

Initiatived

7 U.S.C. §§

450i(b) and (c); 

16 U.S.C. §

582a-8

n/a 144,000 n/a 144,000

Water for 

Agriculture 

Challenge Area

To launch a symposium series 

entitled the 2015 Healthy Soils 

for Healthy Waves dedicated to 

whole systems management 

practices for agricultural lands 

that affect the nation’s waters.

Agriculture 

and Food 

Research 

Initiativee

7 U.S.C. § 

450i(b) and (c); 

16 U.S.C. §

582a-8

n/a n/a 49,968 49,968

NIFA total 200,000 144,000 49,968 393,968

Legend: FY = fiscal year; n/a = not applicable (i.e., agency reported no expenditures).

Source: GAO analysis of NIFA expenditure data and other information. | GAO-17-119

a

Legal authority to address HABs is based on information reported by NIFA officials.

b

According to NIFA officials, these amounts reflect estimated expenditures. The NIFA-identified HABrelated initiatives and programs are single-purpose. We did not independently verify these amounts.

c

Tribal Colleges Research Grants Program funding recipient is a college.

d

Post-doctoral fellowships funding recipient is a university.

e

Water for Agriculture Challenge Area funding recipient is a university.

According to agency officials, NOAA’s mission is to understand and 

predict climate, weather, oceans, and coasts, to share that knowledge 

and information with others, and to conserve and manage coastal and 

marine ecosystems and resources. The Harmful Algal Bloom and 

Hypoxia Research and Control Amendments Act of 2014 designates 

NOAA as the lead federal agency in addressing HABs occurring in ocean 

(8) National Oceanic 

and Atmospheric 

Administration 

(NOAA)

Agency Mission and Key

HAB-Related Activities
Appendix II: Federal Agencies’ Key Harmful 

Algal Bloom-Related Activities, Expenditures, 

and Authority

Page 57 GAO-17-119 Harmful Algae 

and coastal waters and the Great Lakes. NOAA programs improve the 

understanding of HABs and their impacts and develop tools for HAB and 

toxin detection, forecasting, and response. NOAA addresses the 

continuum from research to operations through a mix of in-house 

expertise and competitive awards to partners in academia, industry, and 

state and local governments.

According to agency officials, from fiscal years 2013 through 2015, NOAA 

expended a total of roughly $39.4 million on HAB-related activities across 

various extramural and intramural programs, as follows: 

• $9.8 million in fiscal year 2013, 

• $14.0 million in fiscal year 2014, and 

• $15.7 million in fiscal year 2015.13

For specific HAB-related program expenditures, see table 11.

According to agency officials, NOAA’s authority to address HABs is 

provided under a variety of statutes, including HABHRCA, the National 

Sea Grant College Program Act, and the Integrated Coastal and Ocean 

Observation System Act of 2009. Table 11 includes NOAA HAB-related 

expenditures organized by (1) intramural HAB expenditures supporting 

HABHRCA for HAB forecasting, detection, and event response; (2) 

program management, coordination, and ship time; (3) HABHRCA-named 

competitive research on monitoring, response, prevention, control, and 

mitigation; and (4) other competitive research programs (e.g., those 

administered by the National Sea Grant College Program and the 

Integrated Coastal and Ocean Observation System Program). Additional 

information on these statutes follows.14

 13The total numbers for fiscal years 2013 through 2015 do not add to $39.4 million 

because of rounding. These numbers differ from those reported to Congress in NOAA’s 

“HABHRCA Spending 2010-2015” table, which includes hypoxia work.

14The Marine Mammal Protection Act mandates that NOAA establish unusual mortality 

event working groups, among other things, to investigate the likely causes of marine 

mammal deaths. In response, NOAA has developed surveillance capabilities that identify 

algal toxin exposure in marine wildlife populations. NOAA monitors stranded and dead 

mammals for domoic acid (the toxin responsible for amnesic shellfish poisoning), saxitoxin 

(the most potent toxin of the paralytic shellfish toxins), and the toxins responsible for 

diarrhetic shellfish poisoning.

HAB-Related 

Expenditures

Legal Authority to Address 

HABs
Appendix II: Federal Agencies’ Key Harmful 

Algal Bloom-Related Activities, Expenditures, 

and Authority

Page 58 GAO-17-119 Harmful Algae 

• HABHRCA recognizes NOAA as the lead federal agency on HABs 

occurring in ocean and coastal waters and the Great Lakes.

• The National Sea Grant College Program Act specifically included 

“university research on the biology, prevention, and forecasting of 

harmful algal blooms” within its authorization of appropriations for 

NOAA competitive grants through fiscal year 2014. HAB-related 

research is conducted by Sea Grant College-funded scientists, as 

described in table 11. 

• The Integrated Coastal and Ocean Observation System Act of 2009 

authorizes NOAA, other federal agencies, and nonfederal partners to 

provide coastal and ocean observations, technologies, and data 

management and communication systems. These can help address 

HABs. 
Appendix II: Federal Agencies’ Key Harmful 

Algal Bloom-Related Activities, Expenditures, 

and Authority

Page 59 GAO-17-119 Harmful Algae 

Table 11: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Harmful Algal Bloom (HAB)-Related Programs and 

Expenditures, Fiscal Years 2013-2015

Amounts in dollars

Programs Purpose Funding 

mechanism/ 

recipients

Authoritya Expendituresb

FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 Total

Intramural HAB expenditures supporting HABHRCA

Harmful Algal 

Bloom

Forecasting 

HAB forecasts alert coastal 

managers to blooms before they 

cause serious damage. Shortterm (once or twice weekly) 

forecasts identify which blooms 

are potentially harmful, where 

they are, how big they are, and 

where they are likely headed. 

Longer-term, seasonal forecasts 

predict the severity of HABs for 

the bloom season in a particular 

region. 

Internal base 

fundingc Harmful Algal Bloom and 

Hypoxia 

Research and 

Control Act 

(HABHRCA),

§ 603, as 

amended in 

2004; 

HABHRCA, 

§§ 603A 

(f)(2), (f)(3), 

and (h)(1)(b),

added in 2014

1,100,000 1,391,600 1,437,100 3,928,700

HAB detection, 

toxicity, and 

early warning

Detection: Develop fast, 

accurate and cost-effective 

identification protocols that are 

used by coastal and public 

health managers to protect lives 

and livelihoods.

Toxicity: Work with managers to 

incorporate information on how 

algae and toxin distributions and 

concentrations vary during a 

bloom event into predictive 

models. 

Early warning: Provides health 

officials, environmental 

managers and water treatment 

facility operators with 

information to focus their testing 

to guide beach and shellfish bed 

closures or water treatment in a 

more appropriate time frame. 

Internal base 

fundingd HABHRCA, § 603, as 

amended in 

2004; 

HABHRCA, 

§§ 603A 

(f)(2), (f)(3) 

and (h)(1)(b), 

added in 2014

2,000,001e 2,305,017e 2,555,463 6,560,481e

Harmful Algal 

Bloom Event 

Response

Program

NOAA responds to HAB events 

by coordinating access to 

technology and expertise, 

assisting with detection and 

identification of HABs and 

toxins, and ensuring proper 

scientific documentation to add 

to the HAB knowledge base.

Internal base 

fundingf HABHRCA, § 603, as 

amended in 

2004; 

HABHRCA, § 

603A (f)(2), 

as added in 

2014

261,620 258,368 369,785 889,773

Subtotal 3,361,621 3,954,985 4,062,348 11,378,954
Appendix II: Federal Agencies’ Key Harmful 

Algal Bloom-Related Activities, Expenditures, 

and Authority

Page 60 GAO-17-119 Harmful Algae 

Programs Purpose Funding 

mechanism/ 

recipients

Authoritya Expendituresb

FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 Total

Program management, coordination, and ship time

Program 

management, 

coordination, 

ship time

NOAA leads or co-leads 

coordination of the interagency 

working group and other 

regional, national, and 

international HAB efforts and 

groups. This also includes 

grants management and 

administration, program 

management, ship time, and 

support to the National HAB 

Office. Efforts are spread 

across forecasting, detection, 

control, mitigation, and event 

response.

Internal base 

fundingg HABHRCA 1,777,997 1,727,997 1,415,000 4,920,994 

Subtotal 1,777,997 1,727,997 1,415,000 4,920,994 

HABHRCA-named National Ocean Service (NOS) competitive research programsh

Ecology and 

Oceanography 

of Harmful 

Algal Blooms 

A national, competitive research 

funding program with two broad 

goals: to develop information 

and tools, predictive models and 

forecasts, and prevention 

strategies to aid managers in 

coastal environments, including 

the Great Lakes, and to learn 

how toxins are transferred 

across and up the food chain, 

including biosynthesis and 

metabolism of toxins, and 

assess the impacts of toxins on 

higher trophic levels.

Administered 

by the 

National 

Centers for 

Coastal 

Ocean 

Science 

(NCCOS) as 

cooperative 

agreementsi

HABHRCA, § 

603, 

amended in 

2004;

HABHRCA, § 

603A, added 

in 2014 

1,755,000 2,405,000 2,970,000 7,130,000 

Monitoring and 

Event 

Response for 

Harmful Algal 

Blooms 

The program builds capacity 

along our coasts for enhanced 

HAB monitoring and response. 

This helps NOAA and state 

partners identify when beaches, 

shellfisheries, and marine 

animals are at risk from harmful 

algae, and to make informed 

decisions that protect public 

health and safeguard our 

coastal economies.

Administered 

by NCCOS 

as 

cooperative 

agreementsj

HABHRCA, § 

603, as 

amended in 

2004; 

HABHRCA, § 

603A, added 

in 2014 

1,328,000 1,661,00 1,286,000 4,275,000
Appendix II: Federal Agencies’ Key Harmful 

Algal Bloom-Related Activities, Expenditures, 

and Authority

Page 61 GAO-17-119 Harmful Algae 

Programs Purpose Funding 

mechanism/ 

recipients

Authoritya Expendituresb

FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 Total

Prevention, 

Control and 

Mitigation of 

Harmful Algal 

Blooms 

The program funds research to 

move promising HAB 

technologies from development 

to demonstration, and finally to 

application, culminating in 

widespread use. The program 

also funds socioeconomic 

research, assessing societal 

impacts of HAB events at local 

scales, the impact of HAB 

events on coastal economies, 

and the costs and benefits of 

mitigation strategies to aid 

managers in devising costeffective management 

strategies.

Administered 

by NCCOS 

as 

cooperative 

agreementsk

HABHRCA, § 

603 as 

amended in 

2004; 

HABHRCA, § 

603A added 

in 2014 

603,000 853,000 677,000 2,133,000

Harmful Algal 

Bloom Event 

Response

Program

NOAA provides supplemental 

financial support for 

investigating a unique event. In 

partnership with the U.S. 

National Office for Harmful Algal 

Blooms, modest funding is 

available from NOAA to help 

defray costs of immediate 

mobilization of sampling, 

supplies, and analytical 

services.

Administered 

through 

Cooperative 

Institute for 

the North 

Atlantic 

Region, a 

NOAA 

cooperative 

institutel

HABHRCA, § 

603, as 

amended in 

2004; 

HABHRCA, § 

603A (f)(2), 

(f)(3) and 

(h)(1)(b), 

added in 2014

18,159 20,540 13,282 51,981

Subtotal 3,704,159 4,939,540 4,946,282 13,589,981

Other competitive research programs

Sea Grant 

College 

Program

The HAB research projects 

funded by Sea Grant College 

Program are typically small 

(under $100,000 per year) 

hypothesis-driven research and 

tool development (including 

monitoring tool development). 

They complement and often 

leverage projects funded 

through NOS HAB programs. In 

line with the program’s mission, 

Sea Grant College’s extension 

funding provides stakeholder 

engagement and community 

outreach and education on HAB 

issues.

Administered 

by Sea 

Grant 

College as 

grantm

HABHRCA, § 

603, as 

amended in 

2004;

Sea Grant 

College Act § 

212(a) 

503,693 1,379,705 1,523,539 3,406,937
Appendix II: Federal Agencies’ Key Harmful 

Algal Bloom-Related Activities, Expenditures, 

and Authority

Page 62 GAO-17-119 Harmful Algae 

Programs Purpose Funding 

mechanism/ 

recipients

Authoritya Expendituresb

FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 Total

Coastal Storms 

Program

The Coastal Storms Program is 

a national effort to make 

communities safer by reducing 

negative impacts of coastal 

storms. Sea Grant College 

administered the Great Lakes 

funds for this program in FY 

2015, focusing on nutrient 

reductions in response to the 

extensive HAB in Lake Erie.

NOS funds 

administered 

by Sea 

Grant 

College as a 

grantn

HABHRCA, § 

603, as 

amended in 

2004; Sea 

Grant College 

Act § 212(a)

n/a n/a 1,080,000 1,080,000 

Integrated 

Ocean 

Observing 

System 

Research 

Program

The program provides coastal 

and ocean observations, 

technologies, and data 

management and 

communication systems that 

can help address HABs. 

Administered 

by Integrated 

Ocean 

Observing 

System 

(IOOS) as a 

cooperative 

agreemento

Integrated 

Coastal and 

Ocean 

Observation 

Act of 2009 

414,000 1,993,000 2,665,000 5,072,000 

Subtotal 917,693 3,372,705 5,268,539 9,558,937

NOAA total 9,761,470 13,995,227 15,692,169 39,448,866

Legend: FY = fiscal year; HABHRCA = Harmful Algal Bloom and Hypoxia Research and Control Act; n/a = not applicable (i.e., agency reported no 

expenditures).

Source: GAO analysis of NOAA data and other information. | GAO-17-119

a

Legal authority to address HABs is based on information reported by NOAA officials.

b

According to NOAA officials, these amounts reflect actual and estimated expenditures. The NOAAidentified HAB-related programs are a mixture of single- and multi-purpose. We did not independently 

verify these amounts. 

c

Harmful Algal Bloom Forecasting receives internal funding and partners with universities, research 

institutions, science laboratories, federal agencies, and state agencies.

d

HAB detection, toxicity, and early warning receives internal funding and partners with federal 

agencies, universities, NOAA science centers, state agencies, research institutions, scientific 

research committees, science laboratories, private entities, and tribes.

e

Indicates estimated amounts were included in total.

f

Harmful Algal Bloom Event Response Program receives internal funding and partners with states 

governments, state agencies, research institutions, federal agencies, NOAA science centers, 

universities, tribes, and marine sanctuaries.

g

Program management, coordination, ship time receives internal funding.

h

According to NOAA, the HABHRCA-named NOS competitive research is funded by the Competitive 

Research Programs, Projects, and Activities within NOS. The intramural HAB expenditures 

supporting HABHRCA; program management, coordination, and ship time; and other competitive 

research are funded separately.

i

Ecology and Oceanography of Harmful Algal Blooms recipients of the NCCOS-administered 

cooperative agreements are universities, research institutions, state agencies, science laboratories, 

and NOAA science centers.

j

Monitoring and Event Response for Harmful Algal Blooms recipients of the NCCOS-administered 

cooperative agreements are universities, research institutions, science laboratories, federal agencies, 

tribes, private entities, and NOAA science centers. 
Appendix II: Federal Agencies’ Key Harmful 

Algal Bloom-Related Activities, Expenditures, 

and Authority

Page 63 GAO-17-119 Harmful Algae 

k

Prevention, Control and Mitigation of Harmful Algal Blooms recipients of the NCCOS-administered 

cooperative agreements are universities, research institutions, science laboratories, and state 

agencies.

l

Harmful Algal Bloom Event Response Program recipients of the NCCOS-administered cooperative 

agreements are universities, science laboratories, research institutions, state agencies, private 

entities, federal agencies, NOAA science centers, tribes, and marine sanctuaries.

mSea Grant College recipients of the Sea Grant College-administered grants are universities and 

research institutes.

n

Coastal Storms Program recipients of the Sea Grant College-administered funds are universities and 

research institutes.

o

IOOS recipients of the IOOS-administered cooperative agreements are federal government 

agencies, research institutes, NOAA science centers, universities, observation systems, and science 

laboratories. 

According to agency officials, NPS responds to HAB events that have an 

impact on human or animal health, at the request of park units. The 

agency’s response efforts are limited to identifying hazards; consulting on 

management strategies; arranging for diagnostic testing of specimens; 

and connecting the park unit with additional public health resources, such 

as state health departments and the Environmental Protection Agency. 

The agency’s response activities are intended to assist park managers in 

developing appropriate partnerships and effectively preventing and 

addressing HABs on-site; communicating agency-wide strategies; 

understanding the severity of the problem; and implementing 

management strategies that minimize the risk to aquatic life, the public, 

and employees. In addition, NPS is developing a website to assist parks 

with HAB response activities, update staff on the current scientific 

understanding of HABs, and allow the agency to track HABs within park 

units. NPS officials reported that the website should be completed and 

available to the public by the end of calendar year 2016.

According to agency-provided expenditures from fiscal years 2013 

through 2015, NPS expended a total of roughly $112,945 on website 

development, identifying HAB concentrations, and performing disease 

outbreak investigations, as follows:

• $50,000 in fiscal year 2013, 

• $50,000 in fiscal year 2014, and 

(9) National Park 

Service (NPS)

Agency’s Mission and Key 

HAB-Related Activities

HAB-Related 

Expenditures
Appendix II: Federal Agencies’ Key Harmful 

Algal Bloom-Related Activities, Expenditures, 

and Authority

Page 64 GAO-17-119 Harmful Algae 

• $12,945 in fiscal year 2015.

For NPS’ expenditures, see table 12.

According to agency officials, NPS’ authority to address HABs is provided 

under the National Park Service Organic Act, as amended, 54 U.S.C. §

100101(a); Title II of the National Parks Omnibus Management Act of 

1998, 54 U.S.C. §§ 100701-100706; and NPS Management Policies.

• The National Park Service Organic Act, as amended, 54 U.S.C. §

100101(a), authorizes the agency to conserve and provide for the 

enjoyment of the scenery, natural and historical objects, and wildlife in 

national park system units in such manner and by such means as will 

leave them unimpaired for the enjoyment of future generations.

• Title II of the National Parks Omnibus Management Act of 1998, 54 

U.S.C. §§ 100701-100706, authorizes the agency to enter into 

cooperative agreements with colleges and universities, including land 

grant schools, in partnership with other federal and state agencies to 

conduct research, monitor and take inventory of long-term trends in 

the condition of national park resources, make parks available for 

scientific study, and integrate study results into management 

decisions.

• NPS Management Policies (2006), section 4.6.3, states that the 

agency will “work with appropriate governmental bodies to obtain the 

highest possible standards available under the Clean Water Act for 

the protection for park waters; take all necessary actions to maintain 

or restore the quality of surface waters and ground waters within the 

parks, consistent with the Clean Water Act and all other applicable 

federal, state, and local laws and regulations; and enter into 

agreements with other agencies and governing bodies, as 

appropriate, to secure their cooperation in maintaining or restoring the 

quality of park water resources.”

Legal Authority to Address 

HABs
Appendix II: Federal Agencies’ Key Harmful 

Algal Bloom-Related Activities, Expenditures, 

and Authority

Page 65 GAO-17-119 Harmful Algae 

Table 12: National Park Service (NPS) Harmful Algal Bloom (HAB)-Related Initiatives and Programs and Expenditures, Fiscal 

Years 2013-2015

Amounts in dollars

Initiatives/ 

programs

Purpose Funding 

mechanism/ 

recipients

Authoritya Expendituresb

FY 2013 FY2014 FY 2015 Total

Natural Resource Stewardship and Science Directorate / Water Resources Division 

Development of an 

informational 

website

Of the 413 NPS units, there are 

88 units that are considered 

ocean, coastal, or Great Lake 

parks, in addition to other park 

units that have extensive surface 

water bodies. HABs have the 

potential to affect all of these 

park units, and it is therefore 

important to prepare for these 

events and preserve park 

resources. NPS is developing a 

website to maintain a public 

health and ecological HAB 

events reporting system. The 

website will also provide a point 

of contact for park managers to 

partner with local, state, and 

federal health and environmental 

agencies that can provide park 

personnel with technical 

assistance for managing HAB 

events. 

Cooperative 

agreementsc NPS Management 

Policies (2006), 

section 4.6.3

n/a n/a 6,945 6,945

Identify 

concentrations

The initiative identifies HAB 

concentrations to protect public 

health at three park units in 

Michigan—Isle Royale National 

Park and Pictured Rocks and 

Sleeping Bear Dunes National 

Lakeshores—through the U.S. 

Geological Survey (USGS)/NPS 

Water Quality Partnership 

Program. 

Internal fundsd 54 U.S.C. §§ 

100701-100706

50,000 50,0000 n/a 100,000

Subtotal 50,000 50,000 6,945 106,945

Visitor and Resource Protection Directorate / Office of Public Health

Lake Mead 

National Recreation 

Area disease 

outbreak 

investigations

Staff members perform NPS 

disease outbreak investigations 

and respond to HAB incidents.

Base fundinge 54 U.S.C. § 

100101 

n/a n/a 6,000 6,000

Subtotal n/a n/a 6,000 6,000

NPS total 50,000 50,000 12,945 112,945

Legend: FY = fiscal year; n/a = not applicable (i.e., agency reported no expenditures).

Source: GAO analysis of NPS expenditure data and other information. | GAO-17-119
Appendix II: Federal Agencies’ Key Harmful 

Algal Bloom-Related Activities, Expenditures, 

and Authority

Page 66 GAO-17-119 Harmful Algae 

a

Legal authority to address HABs is based on information reported by NPS officials.

b

According to NPS officials, these amounts reflect actual and estimated expenditures. The NPSidentified HAB-related initiatives and programs are a mixture of single- and multi-purpose. We did not 

independently verify these amounts.

c

Development of an informational website funding recipients are staff members.

d

NPS receives USGS scientific expertise through the USGS/NPS Water Quality Partnership Program.

e

Lake Mead National Recreation Area disease outbreak investigations funding recipients are the

Office of Public Health and Natural Resource Stewardship and Science Directorate staff members.

According to agency officials, NRCS is an agency within the Department 

of Agriculture with a mission of improving the health of our nation’s 

natural resources while sustaining and enhancing the productivity of 

American agriculture. The agency provides voluntary assistance through 

partnerships with private landowners, managers, and communities to 

protect, restore, and enhance the lands and waters upon which people 

and the environment depend. NRCS provides two broad categories of 

conservation assistance—financial and technical. 

NRCS offers financial and technical assistance through several programs 

to help agricultural producers make and maintain conservation 

improvements on their land. The Conservation Stewardship Program 

encourages eligible agricultural producers to address natural resource 

concerns and improve and conserve the quality and condition of natural 

resources, such as soil and water. The Environmental Quality Incentives 

Program provides technical and financial assistance to help eligible 

agricultural producers implement conservation practices that sustain food 

production while addressing soil, water, and air quality natural resources 

concerns, among other things. NRCS also works with partners to 

leverage additional conservation assistance for agricultural producers and 

landowners in priority conservation areas.

Although NRCS does not directly track HABs as a resource concern or 

track HAB-related activities through its financial management systems, 

the agency does have specific, multi-purpose initiatives designed to 

improve the water quality of areas where HABs and hypoxia are of critical 

concern, such as within the Gulf of Mexico. These initiatives address 

(10) Natural 

Resources 

Conservation Service 

(NRCS)

Agency’s Mission and Key 

HAB-Related Activities
Appendix II: Federal Agencies’ Key Harmful 

Algal Bloom-Related Activities, Expenditures, 

and Authority

Page 67 GAO-17-119 Harmful Algae 

other resource concerns such as improving wildlife habitats, soil health 

and erosion, air quality, and limited water availability. Thus, the 

expenditure amounts included in table 13 fund assistance programs to 

improve water quality, which includes but is not limited to HABs.

According to agency-provided expenditures from fiscal years 2013 

through 2015, NRCS expended a total of roughly $208 million on various, 

multi-purpose conservation assistance programs to improve water quality, 

which includes but is not limited to HABs, as follows:

• $57 million in fiscal year 2013, 

• $66 million in fiscal year 2014, and 

• $85 million in fiscal year 2015.

For NRCS’ multi-purpose expenditures to improve water quality, see table 

13.

According to agency officials, NRCS’ authority to offer financial and 

technical assistance to producers to address water quality issues, such 

as HABs, is provided under the Food, Conservation, and Energy Act, 

which authorizes and reauthorizes NRCS’ voluntary conservation 

programs. Table 13 includes multi-purpose expenditures to improve water 

quality, including HABs, organized by the following agency initiatives: (1) 

Chesapeake Bay Watershed Initiative, (2) Gulf of Mexico Initiative, (3) 

National Water Quality Initiative, (4) Bay Delta Initiative, (5) Illinois 

River/Eucha-Spavinaw Watersheds Initiative, and (6) Mississippi River 

Basin Healthy Watersheds Initiative.

HAB-Related 

Expenditures

Legal Authority to Address 

HABs
Appendix II: Federal Agencies’ Key Harmful 

Algal Bloom-Related Activities, Expenditures, 

and Authority

Page 68 GAO-17-119 Harmful Algae 

Table 13: Natural Resources Conservation Service’s (NRCS) Harmful Algal Bloom (HAB)-Related Initiatives and Programs and 

Expenditures, Fiscal Years 2013-2015

Amounts in dollars

Initiatives/ 

programs

Purpose Funding 

mechanism/ 

recipients

Authoritya Expendituresb

FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 Total

Chesapeake Bay Watershed Initiative

Environmental 

Quality 

Incentives 

Program 

(EQIP)

To provide technical and 

financial assistance to help 

producers implement 

conservation practices that 

sustain food production while 

addressing soil, water, and air 

quality natural resources 

concerns, among other things. 

Contractc 16 U.S.C §

3839aa-2 

16,398,194 16,938,095 26,027,053 59,363,342

Conservation 

Stewardship 

Program 

(CSP)

To encourage producers to 

address primary resource 

concerns and improve the 

quality and condition of natural 

resources, such as soil and 

water quality, among other 

things, in a comprehensive way.

Contractd 16 U.S.C. §

3838e 

8,899,520 11,473,762 8,785,044 29,158,326

Subtotal 25,297,714 28,411,857 34,812,097 88,521,668

Gulf of Mexico Initiative

EQIP See EQIP purpose above. Contractc 16 U.S.C §

3839aa-2

1,732,926 1,408,192 1,386,131 4,527,249

Subtotal 1,732,926 1,408,192 1,386,131 4,527,249

National Water Quality Initiative

EQIP See EQIP purpose above. Contractc 16 U.S.C §

3839aa-2

13,705,212 20,139,892 23,578,347 57,423,451

Subtotal 13,705,212 20,139,892 23,578,347 57,423,451

Bay Delta Initiative

EQIP See EQIP purpose above. Contractc 16 U.S.C §

3839aa-2

10,027,327 10,852,623 15,162,298 36,042,248

CSP See CSP purpose above. Contractd 16 U.S.C. §

3838e

1,551,781 2,441,284 1,174,305 5,167,370

Subtotal 11,579,108 13,293,907 16,336,603 41,209,618

Illinois River/Eucha-Spavinaw Watersheds Initiative

EQIP See EQIP purpose above. Contractc 16 U.S.C §

3839aa-2

4,282,551 3,083,076 2,500,844 9,866,471

Subtotal 4,282,551 3,083,076 2,500,844 9,866,471

Mississippi River Basin Healthy Watersheds Initiative

EQIP See EQIP purpose above. Contractc 16 U.S.C §

3839aa-2

68,994 39,069 6,182,470 6,290,533
Appendix II: Federal Agencies’ Key Harmful 

Algal Bloom-Related Activities, Expenditures, 

and Authority

Page 69 GAO-17-119 Harmful Algae 

Initiatives/ 

programs

Purpose Funding 

mechanism/ 

recipients

Authoritya Expendituresb

FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 Total

Regional 

Conservation 

Partnership 

Program

To use existing NRCS programs 

to further conservation, 

restoration, and sustainable use 

of soil, water, and wildlife 

resources through eligible 

partners, such as state and local 

governments; tribes; and 

producer associations, groups, 

and cooperatives.

Contracte 16 U.S.C. §

3871 

n/a n/a 76,296 76,296

Subtotal 68,994 39,069 6,258,766 6,366,829

NRCS total 56,666,505 66,375,993 84,872,788 207,915,286

Legend: FY = fiscal year; n/a = not applicable (i.e., agency reported no expenditures).

Source: GAO analysis of NRCS expenditure data and other information. | GAO-17-119

a

Legal authority to address HABs is based on information reported by NRCS officials.

b

According to NRCS officials, these amounts reflect estimated expenditures. The NRCS-identified 

HAB-related initiatives and programs are multi-purpose. We did not independently verify these 

amounts.

c

EQIP funding recipients are agricultural producers who voluntarily participate in the program.

d

CSP funding recipients are agricultural producers who voluntarily participate in the program.

e

Regional Conservation Partnership Program funding recipients are agricultural producers who 

voluntarily participate in the program.

According to agency officials, the NSF is responsible for advancing 

science and engineering in the United States across a broad and 

expanding spectrum of disciplines. NSF’s mission is to promote the 

progress of science; to advance the national health, prosperity and 

welfare; to secure the national defense; and other purposes. To achieve 

its mission, NSF funds discovery, learning, innovation, and research 

infrastructure to boost U.S. leadership in all aspects of science, 

technology, engineering, and mathematics research and education. NSF 

investments span all scientific and engineering disciplines. While NSF 

does not have a specifically mandated area of research, NSF-supported 

activities may include: research focused on HABs such as the Oceans 

and Human Health Initiative; research that may have a broader scope 

than HABs but contributes to the understanding of HABs; education and 

community planning activities (workshops) related to HABs; activities that 

(11) National Science 

Foundation (NSF)

Agency’s Mission and Key 

HAB-Related Activities
Appendix II: Federal Agencies’ Key Harmful 

Algal Bloom-Related Activities, Expenditures, 

and Authority

Page 70 GAO-17-119 Harmful Algae 

build and facilitate international collaboration; and infrastructure that may 

have multiple uses, including supporting activities focused on HABs.

According to agency-provided expenditures from fiscal years 2013 

through 2015, NSF expended a total of roughly $15.4 million on HABrelated activities across various monitoring and research-related 

activities, as follows:

• $4.7 million in fiscal year 2013, 

• $5.0 million in fiscal year 2014, and 

• $5.7 million in fiscal year 2015.

For specific HAB-related program expenditures, see table 14.

According to agency officials, NSF’s authority to address HABs is 

provided under the National Science Foundation Act of 1950, as 

amended, 42 U.S.C. § 1861 et seq. Table 14 includes specific HABrelated expenditures organized by NSF organizations: (1) NSF-wide 

investments; (2) Directorate for Geosciences; (3) Directorate for 

Biological Sciences; (4) Directorate for Engineering; and (5) Office of 

International Science and Engineering.

Table 14: National Science Foundation (NSF) Harmful Algal Bloom (HAB)-Related Programs and Expenditures, Fiscal Years 

2013-2015

Amounts in dollars

Organizations/ 

programsa Purpose Funding mechanism/ 

recipients

Authorityb Expendituresc

FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 Total

NSF-wide investments

Science, 

Engineering, and 

Education for 

Sustainability

The program’s mission is to 

advance science, engineering, 

and education to inform the 

actions needed by society for 

environmental and economic 

sustainability and human wellbeing. 

Standard 

grantd National Science Foundation Act of 

1950, as 

amended, 42 

U.S.C. § 1861 et

seq.

800,000 786,428 n/a 1,586,428 

Research 

Experiences for 

Undergraduates 

This activity supports active 

research participation by 

undergraduate students in any of 

the areas of research funded by 

NSF.

Continuing 

and standard 

grantse

National Science 

Foundation Act of 

1950, as 

amended, 42 

U.S.C. § 1861 et 

seq.

n/a 417,379 470,209 887,588

Subtotal 800,000 1,203,807 470,209 2,474,016

HAB-Related 

Expenditures

Legal Authority to Address 

HABs
Appendix II: Federal Agencies’ Key Harmful 

Algal Bloom-Related Activities, Expenditures, 

and Authority

Page 71 GAO-17-119 Harmful Algae 

Organizations/ 

programsa Purpose Funding mechanism/ 

recipients

Authorityb Expendituresc

FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 Total

Directorate for Geosciences

Biological 

Oceanography 

Program

The Biological Oceanography 

Program supports research in 

marine ecology, broadly defined 

as relationships among aquatic 

organisms and their interactions 

with ocean or Great Lakes 

environments. Projects submitted 

to the program for consideration 

are often interdisciplinary efforts. 

Continuing 

grantf National Science 

Foundation Act 

of 1950, as 

amended, 42 

U.S.C. § 1861 

et seq.

40,000 40,000 165,586 245,586

Oceans and 

Human Health

NSF and the National Institute of 

Health's National Institute of 

Environmental Health Sciences 

jointly fund research on marinerelated health issues through the 

Centers for Oceans and Human 

Health and through individual 

research projects focusing on 

oceans and human health, as 

well as the Great Lakes and 

human health. 

Continuing 

grantg National Science 

Foundation Act 

of 1950, as 

amended, 42 

U.S.C. § 1861 

et seq.

2,075,657 2,122,367 1,895,658 6,093,682 

Hydrologic 

Sciences 

Program

The Hydrologic Sciences 

Program focuses on the fluxes of 

water in the environment that 

constitute the water cycle, as well 

as the mass and energy 

transport function of the water 

cycle. The program supports the 

study of processes from rainfall 

to runoff to infiltration and

streamflow; evaporation and

transpiration; the flow of water in 

soils and aquifers; and the 

transport of suspended, 

dissolved, and colloidal 

components. The program also 

funds research on how water 

interacts with the landscape and 

the ecosystem, as well as how 

the water cycle and physical, 

chemical, and biological 

processes are altered by land 

use and climate.

Continuing 

granth National Science 

Foundation Act 

of 1950, as 

amended, 42 

U.S.C. § 1861 

et seq.

165,818 n/a n/a 165,818

Subtotal 2,281,475 2,162,367 2,061,244 6,505,086
Appendix II: Federal Agencies’ Key Harmful 

Algal Bloom-Related Activities, Expenditures, 

and Authority

Page 72 GAO-17-119 Harmful Algae 

Organizations/ 

programsa Purpose Funding mechanism/ 

recipients

Authorityb Expendituresc

FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 Total

Directorate for Biological Sciences

Long-Term 

Ecological 

Research 

Program

To address ecological questions 

that cannot be resolved with 

short-term observations or 

experiments, NSF established 

the Long-Term Ecological 

Research Program in 1980. Two 

components differentiate the 

program’s research from projects 

supported by other NSF

programs: (1) the research is 

located at specific sites chosen 

to represent major ecosystem 

types or natural biomes, and (2) 

it emphasizes the study of 

ecological phenomena over long 

periods of time based on data 

collected in five core areas. 

Long-term studies are essential 

to achieving an integrated 

understanding of how 

populations, communities, and 

other components of ecosystems 

interact, as well as to test 

ecological theory. Ongoing 

research at program sites must 

test ecological theories and 

significantly advance 

understanding of the long-term 

dynamics of populations, 

communities, and ecosystems. It 

often integrates multiple 

disciplines and, through crosssite interactions, examines 

patterns or processes over broad 

spatial scales.

Continuing 

granti National Science 

Foundation Act 

of 1950, as 

amended, 42 

U.S.C. § 1861 

et seq.

1,280,000 1,280,000 2,088,453 4,648,653
Appendix II: Federal Agencies’ Key Harmful 

Algal Bloom-Related Activities, Expenditures, 

and Authority

Page 73 GAO-17-119 Harmful Algae 

Organizations/ 

programsa Purpose Funding mechanism/ 

recipients

Authorityb Expendituresc

FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 Total

Ecosystem 

Studies 

Program

The Ecosystem Studies Program 

supports investigations of 

ecosystem structure and function 

across a diversity of spatial and 

temporal scales to advance 

understanding of (1) material and 

energy fluxes and 

transformations within and 

among ecosystems; (2) roles and 

relationships of ecosystem 

components in whole-system 

structure and function; (3) 

ecosystem dynamics, resilience, 

and trajectories of change 

through time; and (4) linkages 

among ecosystems in space and

time.

Standard 

grantj

National 

Science 

Foundation Act 

of 1950, as 

amended, 42 

U.S.C. § 1861 

et seq.

197,568 n/a n/a 197,568

Division of 

Biological 

Infrastructure’s 

General 

Thematic 

Program

The Division of Biological 

Infrastructure empowers 

biological discovery by investing 

in the development and 

enhancement of biological 

research resources, human 

capital, and biology centers and 

other mid- to large-scale 

infrastructure. These 

investments support advances in 

all areas of biological research.

Standard 

grantk National Science 

Foundation Act 

of 1950, as 

amended, 42 

U.S.C. § 1861 

et seq.

111,649 n/a n/a 111,649

Subtotal 1,589,217 1,280,000 2,088,453 4,957,670
Appendix II: Federal Agencies’ Key Harmful 

Algal Bloom-Related Activities, Expenditures, 

and Authority

Page 74 GAO-17-119 Harmful Algae 

Organizations/ 

programsa Purpose Funding mechanism/ 

recipients

Authorityb Expendituresc

FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 Total

Directorate for Engineering

Environmental 

Engineering

The goal of the Environmental 

Engineering program is to 

encourage transformative 

research which applies scientific 

and engineering principles to 

avoid or minimize solid, liquid, 

and gaseous discharges, 

resulting from human activities 

on land, inland and coastal 

waters, and air, while promoting 

resource and energy 

conservation and recovery. The 

program also fosters cuttingedge scientific research for 

identifying, evaluating, and 

monitoring the waste assimilative 

capacity of the natural 

environment and for removing or 

reducing contaminants from 

polluted air, water, and soils. Any 

proposal investigating sensors, 

materials, or devices that does 

not integrate these products with 

an environmental engineering 

activity or area of research may 

be returned without review. Major 

areas of interest include 

enhancing the availability of highquality water supplies and 

addressing the fate and transport 

of contaminants of emerging 

concern in air, water, and soils.

Standard 

grantl National Science 

Foundation Act 

of 1950, as 

amended, 42 

U.S.C. § 1861 

et seq.

n/a 298,488 68,874 367,362
Appendix II: Federal Agencies’ Key Harmful 

Algal Bloom-Related Activities, Expenditures, 

and Authority

Page 75 GAO-17-119 Harmful Algae 

Organizations/ 

programsa Purpose Funding mechanism/ 

recipients

Authorityb Expendituresc

FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 Total

Directorate for Engineering

Partnerships for 

Innovation

The Partnerships for Innovation’s

Building Innovation Capacity 

program supports academicindustry partnerships that are led 

by an interdisciplinary academic 

research team collaborating with 

at least one industry partner. In 

this program, there is an

emphasis on the quality, 

composition, and participation of 

the partners, including the 

appropriate contributions for 

each role. These partnerships 

focus on the integration of 

technologies into a specified 

human-centered service system 

with the potential to achieve 

transformational change by 

improving an existing service 

system or by spurring the 

creation of an entirely new smart 

service system. The selected 

service system should function 

as a test bed. 

Standard 

grantm National Science 

Foundation Act 

of 1950 as 

amended, 42 

U.S.C. § 1861 

et seq.

n/a n/a 1,000,000 1,000,000

Subtotal n/a 298,488 1,068,874 1,367,362

Office of International Science and Engineering

Catalyzing New 

International 

Collaborations

The Catalyzing New International 

Collaborations program supports 

the participation of U.S.-based 

researchers and students in 

activities intended to catalyze 

new international research 

collaborations.

Standard 

grantn National Science 

Foundation Act 

of 1950, as 

amended, 42 

U.S.C. § 1861 

et seq.

n/a 57,595 n/a 57,595
Appendix II: Federal Agencies’ Key Harmful 

Algal Bloom-Related Activities, Expenditures, 

and Authority

Page 76 GAO-17-119 Harmful Algae 

Organizations/ 

programsa Purpose Funding mechanism/ 

recipients

Authorityb Expendituresc

FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 Total

Office of 

International 

Science and 

Engineering

An Eastern Asia and Pacific 

Summer Institutes for U.S. 

Graduate Students award 

provides U.S. graduate students 

in science, engineering, and 

education: (1) firsthand research 

experiences in Australia, China, 

Japan, Korea, New Zealand, 

Singapore, or Taiwan; (2) an 

introduction to the science, 

science policy, and scientific 

infrastructure of the respective 

location; and (3) an orientation to 

the society, culture, and 

language. It is expected that 

these awards will help students 

initiate professional relationships 

to enable future collaboration 

with foreign counterparts. The 

award includes participation in 

the Pre-Departure Orientation, a 

summer stipend of $5,000, and a 

round-trip airplane ticket to the 

host location. Partner agencies 

pay in-country living expenses 

during the summer sessions.

Fellowshipo National 

Science 

Foundation Act 

of 1950, as 

amended, 42 

U.S.C. § 1861 

et seq.

n/a n/a 5,111 5,111

Subtotal n/a 57,595 5,111 62,706

NSF total 4,670,692 5,002,257 5,693,891 15,366,840

Legend: FY = fiscal year; n/a = not applicable (i.e., agency reported no expenditures).

Source: GAO analysis of NSF expenditure data and other information. | GAO-17-119

a

According to NSF officials, the NSF organizations and programs are not specifically HAB focused, 

but include HAB-related activities as a subset of projects. 

b

Legal authority to address HABs is based on information reported by NSF.

c

According to NSF officials, these amounts reflect actual and obligated expenditures. The NSFidentified HAB-related programs are a mixture of single- and multi-purpose. We did not independently 

verify these amounts.

d

Science, Engineering, and Education for Sustainability funding recipients are universities. 

e

Research Experiences for Undergraduates funding recipients include universities.

f

Biological Oceanography program funding recipient is a scientific committee.

g

Oceans and Human Health funding recipients include research institutions and universities.

h

Hydrologic Sciences program funding recipients are universities.

i

Long-Term Ecological Research program funding recipient is a university.

j

Ecosystem Studies program funding recipient is a university.

k

Division of Biological Infrastructure’s General Thematic program funding recipients are a science 

laboratory and consortium.

l

Environmental Engineering funding recipients are universities.

mPartnerships for Innovation funding recipient is a research institution.
Appendix II: Federal Agencies’ Key Harmful 

Algal Bloom-Related Activities, Expenditures, 

and Authority

Page 77 GAO-17-119 Harmful Algae 

n

Catalyzing New International Collaborations funding recipient is a university.

o

Office of International Science and Engineering funded an individual recipient.

According to agency officials, USACE operates and manages more than 

300 water projects, which include public recreation and environmental 

stewardship responsibilities on 12 million acres, including more than 4 

million acres in aquatic systems. USACE conducts research on HABs and 

other aquatic invasive species under two, directly funded research 

programs: the Aquatic Plant Control Research Program and the Aquatic 

Nuisance Species Research Program. These research programs aim to 

(1) provide science-based guidance on developing or using new 

technologies for managing, preventing, and monitoring aquatic invasive 

species; (2) improve the efficacy and diversity of available management 

options; (3) reduce the impacts of aquatic invasive species on federally 

listed (threatened and endangered) species; (4) reduce operations and 

maintenance costs associated with aquatic invasive species 

management; and (5) develop solutions regarding these species based 

on field needs.

Additionally, USACE makes efforts to reduce negative impacts on wildlife 

resources, most notably bald eagles. The agency noted that the increase 

of hydrilla—an invasive plant—has been an ongoing issue for all aquatic 

habitat resource-based agencies. Avian vacuolar myelinopathy (AVM), a 

disease produced by a toxin that comes from cyanobacteria, attacks 

birds’ nervous system and has been linked to hydrilla. The highest 

concentrations of cyanobacteria that produce AVM are found on hydrilla, 

which is increasing in acres at lakes and reservoirs throughout the 

southeastern and south central United States, but the toxin-producing 

algae also persist on other native, submerged plants. This problem has 

been most evident to USACE at lakes and reservoirs in its Southeast and 

Southwest Divisions. Since 1998, 84 bald eagle deaths are suspected to 

have been caused by AVM at J. Strom Thurmond Lake bordering Georgia 

and South Carolina. Additional funds have been directed toward removing 

hydrilla at these USACE projects where AVM has been confirmed to 

reduce AVM-related mortalities. 

(12) U.S. Army Corps 

of Engineers 

(USACE)

Agency’s Mission and Key 

HAB-Related Activities
Appendix II: Federal Agencies’ Key Harmful 

Algal Bloom-Related Activities, Expenditures, 

and Authority

Page 78 GAO-17-119 Harmful Algae 

According to agency officials, from fiscal years 2013 through 2015, 

USACE expended a total of roughly $1.7 million on HAB-related activities 

across various response efforts and research and technology-related 

activities, as follows:

• $300,000 in fiscal year 2013, 

• $543,000 in fiscal year 2014, and 

• $862,000 in fiscal year 2015. 

For specific HAB-related program expenditures, see table 15.

According to agency officials, the following statutes authorize USACE to 

address HABs:

• The River and Harbor Act of 1958, section 104, as amended, 

authorized the Aquatic Plant Control Research Program, which is the 

research component of the Aquatic Plant Control program.

• The Non-Indigenous Aquatic Nuisance Prevention & Control Act of 

1990 authorized the Aquatic Nuisance Species Research Program,

and the National Invasive Species Act of 1996 reauthorized the 

program.

HAB-Related 

Expenditures

Legal Authority to Address 

HABs
Appendix II: Federal Agencies’ Key Harmful 

Algal Bloom-Related Activities, Expenditures, 

and Authority

Page 79 GAO-17-119 Harmful Algae 

Table 15: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) Harmful Algal Bloom (HAB)-Related Activities and Expenditures, Fiscal 

Years 2013-2015

Amounts in dollars

Types of activities Purpose Funding 

mechanism/ 

recipients

Authoritya Expendituresb

FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 Total

Management and 

response activities 

related to HABs

Activities provide and 

fund staff at multipurpose projects 

responding to HABs at 

public beaches or other 

public access areas.

Internal 

fundingc River and Harbor Act of 1958, § 104, as 

amended 

300,000 500,000 600,000 1,400,000

Research and 

technology transfer 

activities

Activities provide 

science-based guidance 

on developing or using

new technologies for 

managing, preventing, 

and monitoring aquatic 

invasive species; 

improve the efficacy and 

diversity of available 

management options; 

reduce the impacts of 

aquatic invasive species 

on federally listed 

(threatened and 

endangered) species;

reduce operations and 

maintenance costs 

associated with aquatic 

invasive species 

management; and 

develop solutions 

regarding these species 

based on field need.

Internal 

fundingd River and Harbor Act of 1958, § 104, as 

amended; NonIndigenous Aquatic 

Nuisance Prevention 

& Control Act of 1990; 

and reauthorization 

by National Invasive 

Species Act of 1996 

n/a 43,000 262,000 305,000

USACE total 300,000 543,000 862,000 1,705,000

Legend: FY = fiscal year; n/a = not applicable (i.e., agency reported no expenditures).

Source: GAO analysis of USACE expenditure data and other information. | GAO-17-119

a

Legal authority to address HABs is based on information reported by USACE officials. 

b

According to USACE officials, these amounts reflect actual expenditures. The USACE-identified 

HAB-related activities are a mixture of single- and multi-purpose. We did not independently verify 

these amounts. 

c

Management and response activity funding recipients are internal USACE personnel labor, supplies 

and materials, travel, and contracting services.

d

Research and technology transfer activity funding recipients are a university and federal employee 

labor, supplies and materials, travel, and report editing and formatting services.
Appendix II: Federal Agencies’ Key Harmful 

Algal Bloom-Related Activities, Expenditures, 

and Authority

Page 80 GAO-17-119 Harmful Algae 

According to agency officials, USGS HAB science is focused on (1) 

developing analytical laboratory and field methods to detect and quantify 

blooms and associated toxins and taste-and-odor compounds; (2) 

understanding causal factors, environmental fate and transport of 

cyanotoxins, and ecological processes; and (3) developing early warning 

systems for potentially harmful blooms. Studies range in scale from 

individual water bodies to those that are regional or national in scope, and 

are conducted in collaboration with a variety of local, state, federal, and 

tribal partners. 

According to agency-provided expenditure data from fiscal years 2013 

through 2015, USGS expended a total of roughly $9 million on HABrelated activities across various monitoring and research-related 

activities, as follows:

• $2.3 million in fiscal year 2013, 

• $2.7 million in fiscal year 2014, and 

• $4.1 million in fiscal year 2015.15

For specific HAB-related program expenditures, organized by science 

centers, see table 16.

According to agency officials, USGS’ authority to address HABs is 

provided under a variety of statutes. Additional information on these 

statutes follows.

USGS is directed to classify the public lands and examine the geological 

structure, mineral resources, and products within and outside the national 

domain under the Organic Act of March 3, 1879, as amended, 43 U.S.C. 

 15The total numbers for fiscal years 2013 through 2015 do not add to $9 million because 

of rounding.

(13) U.S. Geological 

Survey (USGS)

Agency Mission and Key 

HAB-Related Activities

HAB-Related 

Expenditures

Legal Authority to Address 

HABs
Appendix II: Federal Agencies’ Key Harmful 

Algal Bloom-Related Activities, Expenditures, 

and Authority

Page 81 GAO-17-119 Harmful Algae 

§ 31 et seq. The statute establishes the Office of the Director of the 

United States Geological Survey under the Department of the Interior. 

The Consolidated and Further Continuing Appropriations Act, 2015, 

provides the USGS water resources mission area with funding for use in 

matching states’, municipalities’, and tribes’ contributions to cooperative 

water efforts. The act authorizes USGS to use its appropriations “to 

perform surveys, investigations, and research covering topography, 

geology, hydrology, biology and mineral water resources of the United 

States, its territories and possessions.”16 Jointly funded programs 

(programs that may be matched up to 50 percent by federal dollars) are 

considered when the study is mutually advantageous to USGS and 

localities, states, and tribes. These cooperative, jointly funded programs 

are reviewed and renegotiated annually to ensure that they respond to 

the needs of localities, states, and tribes and to the USGS’ national 

priorities. This authority appears in USGS’ annual appropriations bill 

language, which states that “no part of this appropriation shall be used to 

pay more than one-half the cost of topographic mapping or water 

resources data collection and investigations carried on in cooperation with 

States and municipalities.” 

 16Similar provisions appeared in USGS appropriations for fiscal years 2012 through 2014.
Appendix II: Federal Agencies’ Key Harmful 

Algal Bloom-Related Activities, Expenditures, 

and Authority

Page 82 GAO-17-119 Harmful Algae 

Table 16: U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Harmful Algal Bloom (HAB)-Related Centers and Expenditures, Fiscal Years 2013-

2015

Amounts in dollars

Science centers Purpose Funding 

mechanism/

recipientsa

Authorityb Expendituresc

FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 Total

USGS Nebraska 

Water Science 

Center

Understand causal 

factors.

Cooperative 

agreement

Consolidated and 

Further Continuing 

Appropriations Act, 

2015, Pub. L. No. 

113-235, 128 Stat. 

2130, 2404 (2014)

97,615 94,859 117,429 309,903

USGS Wetland 

and Aquatic 

Research Center

Conduct research on 

how HABs affect 

animals.

Salaries, 

reimbursable 

agreement

Consolidated and 

Further Continuing 

Appropriations Act, 

2015, Pub. L. No. 

113-235, 128 Stat. 

2130, 2404 (2014)

n/a n/a 12,500 12,500

USGS Texas 

Water Science 

Center

Identify cyanobacteria 

and associated 

compounds and develop 

an early warning system 

in a drinking-water supply 

reservoir.

Cooperative 

agreement

Consolidated and 

Further Continuing 

Appropriations Act, 

2015, Pub. L. No. 

113-235, 128 Stat. 

2130, 2404 (2014)

100,000 100,000 100,000 300,000

USGS IndianaKentucky Water 

Science Center 

Research and monitor 

bodies of water (e.g.,

lakes) in Kentucky.

Reimbursable 

agreement

Consolidated and 

Further Continuing 

Appropriations Act, 

2015, Pub. L. No. 

113-235, 128 Stat. 

2130, 2404 (2014)

n/a n/a 425,000 425,000

USGS 

Washington Water 

Science Center

Develop a water balance 

and nutrient budget in 

order to determine the 

amount and timing of 

nutrient delivery.

Cooperative 

agreement, 

reimbursable 

agreement

Consolidated and 

Further Continuing 

Appropriations Act, 

2015, Pub. L. No. 

113-235, 128 Stat. 

2130, 2404 (2014)

95,400 n/a n/a 95,400

USGS Louisiana 

offices of the 

Lower Mississippi 

Gulf Water 

Science Center 

(formerly the 

Louisiana Water 

Science Center)

Identify types of HABsforming algae and 

associated compounds in 

bodies of water (e.g. 

lakes) in Louisiana.

Cooperative 

agreement

Consolidated and 

Further Continuing 

Appropriations Act, 

2015, Pub. L. No. 

113-235, 128 Stat. 

2130, 2404 (2014)

133,185 201,337 144,300 478,822
Appendix II: Federal Agencies’ Key Harmful 

Algal Bloom-Related Activities, Expenditures, 

and Authority

Page 83 GAO-17-119 Harmful Algae 

Science centers Purpose Funding 

mechanism/

recipientsa

Authorityb Expendituresc

FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 Total

USGS Kansas 

Water Science 

Center

Develop informational 

materials on USGS HAB

research, develop new 

tools to better understand 

and predict HABs, and 

publish USGS HAB

research in journal 

articles/reports.

Salary, travel, 

reimbursable 

agreement, 

contracts, 

equipment, 

supplies

Consolidated and 

Further Continuing 

Appropriations Act, 

2015, Pub. L. No. 

113-235, 128 Stat. 

2130, 2404 (2014)

613,841 590,144 873,881 2,077,866

USGS Ohio Water 

Science Center

Identify types of HABforming algae and 

associated compounds in 

bodies of water (e.g.,

lakes) in Ohio,

understand causal 

factors and community 

interactions in the Great 

Lakes, and develop new 

tools to better understand 

and predict 

cyanobacterial HABs.

Staff, supplies, 

equipment, 

travel, 

reimbursable 

agreement

Consolidated and 

Further Continuing 

Appropriations Act, 

2015, Pub. L. No. 

113-235, 128 Stat. 

2130, 2404 (2014)

n/a 108,000 337,479 445,479

USGS Columbia 

Environmental 

Research Center

Develop analytical 

laboratory and field 

methods to detect and 

quantify blooms and 

associated toxins and 

taste-and-odor 

compounds; conduct 

research on how HABs 

affect animals.

Research and 

analysis

Consolidated and 

Further Continuing 

Appropriations Act, 

2015, Pub. L. No. 

113-235, 128 Stat. 

2130, 2404 (2014)

81,103 58,965 285,138 425,206

USGS Great 

Lakes Science 

Center

Research and monitor 

bodies of water (e.g.,

lakes) across the Great 

Lakes and its sources of 

water, assessing 

potential health risks 

associated with exposure 

to certain types of algae 

and associated diseasecausing organisms.

Mail, lab, 

sample 

processing, 

supplies 

(lab/field), 

equipment, 

salary, travel, 

wireless 

communication 

conference, 

printing and 

reproduction, 

student 

contracts, Great 

Lakes 

Restoration 

Initiative (GLRI)

Consolidated and 

Further Continuing 

Appropriations Act, 

2015, Pub. L. No. 

113-235, 128 Stat. 

2130, 2404 (2014)

56,937 193,694 339,524 590,155
Appendix II: Federal Agencies’ Key Harmful 

Algal Bloom-Related Activities, Expenditures, 

and Authority

Page 84 GAO-17-119 Harmful Algae 

Science centers Purpose Funding 

mechanism/

recipientsa

Authorityb Expendituresc

FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 Total

USGS Illinois 

Water Science 

Center

Research and monitor 

bodies of water (e.g.,

lakes) in Illinois.

Cooperative 

agreement

Consolidated and 

Further Continuing 

Appropriations Act, 

2015, Pub. L. No. 

113-235, 128 Stat. 

2130, 2404 (2014)

29,000 32,000 60,000 121,000

USGS Michigan 

Water Science 

Center

Document occurrence of 

HABs and toxins, work 

with the National Park 

Service (NPS) through 

the USGS/NPS Water 

Quality Partnership to 

determine baseline algal 

toxin concentrations on 

pre-determined NPS 

locations, and

understand causal 

factors and community 

interactions in the Great 

Lakes.

GLRI, staff, 

supplies, 

equipment, 

travel

Consolidated and 

Further Continuing 

Appropriations Act, 

2015, Pub. L. No. 

113-235, 128 Stat. 

2130, 2404 (2014)

210,000 50,000 480,000 740,000

USGS Upper 

Midwest 

Environmental 

Sciences Center

Evaluate how gradients 

in environmental 

conditions influence 

ecological processes,

such as secondary 

production. 

GLRI, salary 

and operations

Consolidated and 

Further Continuing 

Appropriations Act, 

2015, Pub. L. No. 

113-235, 128 Stat. 

2130, 2404 (2014)

73,716 77,043 124,494 275,253

USGS 

Wyoming/Montana 

Water Science 

Center

Develop a water balance 

and nutrient budget in 

order to determine the 

amount and timing of 

nutrient delivery.

Cooperative 

agreement, 

reimbursable 

agreement

Consolidated and 

Further Continuing 

Appropriations Act, 

2015, Pub. L. No. 

113-235, 128 Stat. 

2130, 2404 (2014)

700 725 1,300 2,725

USGS South 

Atlantic Water 

Science Center

Document occurrence of 

HABs and toxins in the 

southeastern United 

States.

Sampling 

efforts, 

cooperative 

agreement, 

research and 

analysis

Consolidated and 

Further Continuing 

Appropriations Act, 

2015, Pub. L. No. 

113-235, 128 Stat. 

2130, 2404 (2014)

284,219 127,235 100,800 512,254

Oklahoma Water 

Resources 

Research Institute

Research and monitor 

bodies of water (e.g.,

lakes) in Oklahoma.

Grant Consolidated and 

Further Continuing 

Appropriations Act, 

2015, Pub. L. No. 

113-235, 128 Stat. 

2130, 2404 (2014)

25,000 n/a n/a 25,000
Appendix II: Federal Agencies’ Key Harmful 

Algal Bloom-Related Activities, Expenditures, 

and Authority

Page 85 GAO-17-119 Harmful Algae 

Science centers Purpose Funding 

mechanism/

recipientsa

Authorityb Expendituresc

FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 Total

Washington Water 

Resources 

Research Institute

Understand causal 

factors, and research and 

monitor bodies of water 

(e.g., lakes) in 

Washington.

Grant Consolidated and 

Further Continuing 

Appropriations Act, 

2015, Pub. L. No. 

113-235, 128 Stat. 

2130, 2404 (2014)

n/a 27,478 n/a 27,478

North Dakota 

Water Resources 

Research Institute

Understand causal 

factors of HAB formation. 

Grant Consolidated and 

Further Continuing 

Appropriations Act, 

2015, Pub. L. No. 

113-235, 128 Stat. 

2130, 2404 (2014)

n/a 7,300 n/a 7,300

Georgia Water 

Resources 

Research Institute

Understand causal 

factors, and evaluate 

how gradients in 

environmental conditions 

influence ecological 

processes such as 

secondary production. 

Grant Consolidated and 

Further Continuing 

Appropriations Act, 

2015, Pub. L. No. 

113-235, 128 Stat. 

2130, 2404 (2014)

n/a 18,000 n/a 18,000

District of 

Columbia Water 

Resources 

Research Institute

Monitor urea 

concentrations and HAB 

productivity and 

physiology, and evaluate 

how gradients in 

environmental conditions 

influence ecological 

processes, such as 

secondary production. 

Grant Consolidated and 

Further Continuing 

Appropriations Act, 

2015, Pub. L. No. 

113-235, 128 Stat. 

2130, 2404 (2014)

12,466 15,000 n/a 27,466

Indiana Water 

Resources 

Research Institute

Develop new tools to 

better understand and 

predict cyanobacterial 

HABs.

Grant Consolidated and 

Further Continuing 

Appropriations Act, 

2015, Pub. L. No. 

113-235, 128 Stat. 

2130, 2404 (2014)

n/a n/a 15,000 15,000

Ohio Water 

Resources 

Research Institute

Develop new tools to 

better understand and 

predict cyanobacterial 

HABs.

Grant Consolidated and 

Further Continuing 

Appropriations Act, 

2015, Pub. L. No. 

113-235, 128 Stat. 

2130, 2404 (2014)

n/a n/a 24,455 24,455

Pennsylvania 

Water Resources 

Research Institute

Develop new tools to 

better understand and 

predict cyanobacterial 

HABs.

Grant Consolidated and 

Further Continuing 

Appropriations Act, 

2015, Pub. L. No. 

113-235, 128 Stat. 

2130, 2404 (2014)

n/a n/a 17,900 17,900
Appendix II: Federal Agencies’ Key Harmful 

Algal Bloom-Related Activities, Expenditures, 

and Authority

Page 86 GAO-17-119 Harmful Algae 

Science centers Purpose Funding 

mechanism/

recipientsa

Authorityb Expendituresc

FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 Total

USGS Oregon 

Water Science 

Center

Research and monitor 

bodies of water (e.g.,

lakes) across Oregon; 

conduct research on how 

HABs affect animals; 

assess potential health 

risks associated with 

exposure to certain types 

of algae and associated 

disease-causing 

organisms; develop new 

tools to better understand 

and predict 

cyanobacterial HABs; 

and evaluate how 

gradients in 

environmental conditions 

influence ecological 

processes, such as 

secondary production. 

Reimbursable 

agreement, staff 

salary and 

expenses, 

contracts, 

cooperative 

agreement

Consolidated and 

Further Continuing 

Appropriations Act, 

2015, Pub. L. No. 

113-235, 128 Stat. 

2130, 2404 (2014)

507,776 954,316 603,956 2,066,048

USGS total 2,320,959 2,656,096 4,063,156 9,040,211

Legend: FY = fiscal year; n/a = not applicable (i.e., agency reported no expenditures).

Source: GAO analysis of USGS data and other information. | GAO-17-119

a

Each science center is the funding recipient.

b

Legal authority to address HABs is based on information reported by USGS officials. Similar 

provisions appeared in USGS appropriations for fiscal years 2012 through 2014. See Consolidated 

Appropriations Act, 2012, Pub. L. No. 112-74, 125 Stat. 786, 993 (2011); Consolidated and Further 

Continuing Appropriations Act, 2013, Pub. L. No. 113-6, § 1101(a)(3), 127 Stat. 198, 412 (2013); and 

Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2014, Pub. L. No. 113-76, 128 Stat. 5, 296 (2014).

c

According to USGS officials, these amounts reflect actual expenditures. The USGS-identified HABrelated centers are single-purpose. We did not independently verify these amounts.
Appendix III: Federal Agencies’ Harmful Algal 

Bloom-Related Coordination

Page 87 GAO-17-119 Harmful Algae 

Appendix III provides information on federal agencies’ reported 

coordination related to harmful algal blooms (HAB).

Federal officials we interviewed reported that their agencies coordinate in 

a variety of ways with each other and with nonfederal stakeholders to 

share information, expertise, and opportunities for collaboration on HABrelated activities. Specifically, federal agencies reported participating in 

numerous groups, task forces, and other coordination efforts led by 

federal agencies, states, international organizations, or academics, as 

described below. Since 2014, the Interagency Working Group on the 

Harmful Algal Bloom and Hypoxia Research and Control Act (IWGHABHRCA) has been the primary, government-wide mechanism through 

which federal agencies coordinate their HAB-related activities, develop 

plans for future work, and identify remaining gaps related to federal HAB 

activities and capabilities. In addition, federal officials reported a number 

of partnerships between two or more federal agencies (federal 

interagency partnerships) directly related to their HAB work in recent 

years, of which we provide examples below. 

Federal officials also reported that part of the purpose of this collaboration 

is to minimize duplication and to leverage resources in HAB research, 

monitoring, response, and other activities. For example, as part of their 

administrative reviews prior to awarding grants, the National Institute of 

Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS) and the Centers for Disease 

Control and Prevention (CDC) review grant proposals to ensure that there 

is no overlap or duplication of effort with other federally funded research. 

In addition, Food and Drug Administration (FDA) officials reported that 

their agency assisted the U.S. Army Medical Research Institute of 

Infectious Diseases by expanding the use of a validated analytical 

method for detecting saxitoxin in seafood to identify the toxin’s potential 

use as a threat agent. In this manner, FDA officials stated, the U.S. Army 

leveraged existing, federally funded resources to adapt a HAB toxin 

analytical method to enhance medical capabilities to detect such threat 

agents.

Appendix III: Federal Agencies’ Harmful Algal 

Bloom-Related Coordination

Federal Agencies 

Reported 

Coordinating HABRelated Activities in a 

Variety of Ways 
Appendix III: Federal Agencies’ Harmful Algal 

Bloom-Related Coordination

Page 88 GAO-17-119 Harmful Algae 

Great Lakes Interagency Task Force

Chaired by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the Great Lakes 

Interagency Task Force brings together 11 cabinet and other federal 

agency heads to coordinate the restoration of the Great Lakes. Created 

by a May 18, 2004, executive order, the task force, among other things,

coordinates the development of consistent federal policies, strategies, 

projects, and priorities pertaining to the restoration and protection of the 

Great Lakes. According to EPA officials, since 2009, the task force has 

overseen the implementation of the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative 

(GLRI), a federal-led effort to carry out programs and projects for Great 

Lakes protection and restoration. In particular, the task force has 

overseen the development of comprehensive, multi-year action plans that 

identify goals, objectives, measurable ecological targets, and specific 

actions for five GLRI focus areas. EPA officials also stated that hundreds 

of millions of dollars have been allocated since 2010 for a wide array of 

projects intended to reduce nutrient loads in the Great Lakes—nutrients 

that can fuel HABs. For example, EPA officials reported that in response 

to the 2014 drinking water incident in Toledo, Ohio, nearly $12 million in 

GLRI funds was provided to federal and state agencies for projects 

intended to reduce and monitor HABs in the western basin of Lake Erie.

Inland HAB Discussion Group 

Formed and facilitated by EPA, U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), and 

CDC, this informal discussion group shares information through free 

webinars (1 to 2 times per year) among federal, state, local, and industry 

stakeholders about HAB research, monitoring, human and ecological 

health risk assessment, education, and outreach. According to EPA’s 

website, the group was created out of an expressed need by federal 

researchers and state agencies to bridge a communication gap with 

respect to inland HABs, and the group has been meeting periodically by 

conference call since May 2011.The group had its genesis from earlier 

efforts such as the International Symposium on Cyanobacteria Harmful 

Algal Blooms meeting sponsored by EPA in 2005, the Harmful Algal 

Blooms-Related Illness Surveillance System sponsored by CDC, and 

USGS efforts assisting states with sample collection and study design 

guidance. 

Groups, Task Forces, and 

Other HAB-Related 

Coordination Efforts

Federal-Led Efforts
Appendix III: Federal Agencies’ Harmful Algal 

Bloom-Related Coordination

Page 89 GAO-17-119 Harmful Algae 

IWG-HABHRCA

As the primary, government-wide mechanism for sharing information and 

coordinating HAB-related activities, this interagency working group was 

created after the 2014 reauthorization of the Harmful Algal Bloom and 

Hypoxia Research and Control Act (HABHRCA) to convene relevant 

federal agencies to discuss HAB and hypoxia events and to develop 

related reports and assessments for Congress.1 Co-chaired by the 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and EPA, the 

group meets twice per month to share information and coordinate HABrelated research, monitoring, and other activities. For example, the group 

convenes regularly scheduled briefings that aim to stimulate and enhance 

interagency collaboration on HABs, ranging from toxin testing to shellfish 

management. Between July 2015 and June 2016, several agencies (EPA, 

NOAA, FDA, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, USGS, and CDC) made 

presentations on their HAB-related activities to the group. Furthermore, 

the group held a half-day meeting in October 2015 that focused, in part, 

on reducing duplication across the federal government. 

This interagency working group is also responsible for developing reports 

to Congress mandated by HABHRCA’s reauthorization in 2014 that 

collectively identify progress, plans for future work, and remaining gaps 

related to HABs and hypoxia.2 To develop the first such report—Harmful 

Algal Blooms and Hypoxia Comprehensive Research Plan and Action 

Strategy: An Interagency Report, released in February 2016—the IWG‐

HABHRCA coordinated with local, state, tribal, and federal government 

 1

An earlier interagency task force, called the Interagency Working Group on HABs, 

Hypoxia, and Human Health, addressed the HABHRCA 2004 requirements for reports that 

specifically addressed marine and freshwater HAB and hypoxia management to be 

submitted to Congress. That task force fulfilled those requirements with five reports issued 

from 2007 through 2010 and then disbanded until the 2014 reauthorization of HABHRCA. 

2

The reports to Congress mandated by the HABHRCA amendments of 2014 are (1) HAB 

and Hypoxia Comprehensive Research Plan and Action Strategy (this report was released 

in February 2016; see below); (2) Report on the implementation of the HAB and Hypoxia 

Action Strategy (due 2 years after the Comprehensive Research Plan and Action Strategy 

was submitted to Congress); (3) Great Lakes Integrated Assessment for Harmful Algal 

Blooms and Hypoxia (this was incorporated into the HAB and Hypoxia Comprehensive 

Research Plan and Action Strategy, released in February 2016); (4) Great Lakes HAB and 

Hypoxia Plan (this report was under development as of July 2016); and (5) Biennial 

Progress Report on the Northern Gulf of Mexico Hypoxia (the first report was released in 

August 2015). 
Appendix III: Federal Agencies’ Harmful Algal 

Bloom-Related Coordination

Page 90 GAO-17-119 Harmful Algae 

entities and consulted with stakeholders.3 As part of this effort, the IWGHABHRCA held a series of webinars in April 2015 focused on different 

U.S. geographic regions, which were designed to initiate conversation 

between federal representatives and stakeholders on HABs and hypoxia.

Agenda topics included regional priorities for HABs research, needs for 

handling HAB and hypoxia events, and communication methods used to 

educate the public. The group held a similar series of webinars in 

February 2016 that were tailored to the Great Lakes to promote 

discussion and solicit stakeholder feedback.

To operate more efficiently, NOAA officials stated, the group also 

organized four subgroups to provide focus and expertise on key aspects 

of the HABHRCA-required reports to address specific issues related to 

HABs, hypoxia, the Great Lakes, and “engagement” (strategies, 

webinars, and other materials, such as informational documents). The 

group is overseen by the National Science and Technology Council’s 

Subcommittee on Ocean Science and Technology, which is co-chaired by 

the Office of Science and Technology Policy, NOAA, and the National 

Science Foundation (NSF). The subcommittee is responsible for 

developing coordinated interagency strategies and advancing national 

ocean science and technology priorities, among other things. 

Mississippi River/Gulf of Mexico Watershed Nutrient Task Force 

(Hypoxia Task Force)

Formally known as the Mississippi River/Gulf of Mexico Watershed 

Nutrient Task Force, the Hypoxia Task Force convenes federal agencies 

led by EPA, 12 states, and a national tribal representative to address 

hypoxia in the Mississippi River and the northern Gulf of Mexico. 

Specifically, a team of federal and university researchers and agricultural 

extension educators from the 12 states along the Mississippi and Ohio 

 3

Since November 2015, the IWG-HABHRCA and EPA released reports to Congress that 

identified progress, plans for future work, and remaining gaps related to federal HAB 

activities and capabilities. These gaps encompass research, forecasting, surveillance and 

monitoring, outreach, and response. See Harmful Algal Blooms and Hypoxia 

Comprehensive Research Plan and Action Strategy: An Interagency Report (Washington, 

D.C.: Feb. 11, 2016), a report to Congress produced by the IWG-HABHRCA. Also see 

Environmental Protection Agency, Algal Toxin Risk Assessment and Management 

Strategic Plan for Drinking Water (Washington, D.C.: Nov. 2015), submitted to Congress 

to meet the requirements of the Drinking Water Protection Act (Pub. L. No. 114-45).
Appendix III: Federal Agencies’ Harmful Algal 

Bloom-Related Coordination

Page 91 GAO-17-119 Harmful Algae 

Rivers has partnered with the task force to increase efforts to manage 

complex natural resource management issues. The group is working to 

(1) expand and encourage the use of science-based nutrient 

management and other practices that help to reduce nutrient losses; (2) 

identify opportunities for states to share information; and (3) create a 

network of leaders, including farmers, who strategize about agriculturalbased nutrient losses. According to EPA officials, in December 2014, the 

Hypoxia Task Force issued nutrient reduction strategies to target 

nutrients from all sources that flow into the Mississippi River and 

contribute to Gulf of Mexico hypoxia. EPA officials also stated that over 

20 peer-reviewed publications describing the ecosystem mechanisms 

regulating nutrients and hypoxia in the northern Gulf of Mexico were 

published, and hypoxia modeling and monitoring workshops were 

conducted in 2011, 2012, and 2013. In August 2015, the Hypoxia Task 

Force released its first biennial report to Congress, as required by the 

HABHRCA amendments of 2014, to report on continued progress toward 

reducing nutrient loads to the northern Gulf of Mexico, summarize lessons 

learned in implementing nutrient reduction strategies, and describe any 

adjustments to its strategies for reducing Gulf hypoxia.4

National Ocean Council 

A cabinet-level body that oversees the implementation of the National 

Ocean Policy, the council was established as a result of an executive 

order. In April 2013, the council released the National Ocean Policy 

Implementation Plan, which described specific actions—including four

related to HABs—for federal agencies to take. These actions are intended 

to translate policy goals into on-the-ground changes to address key 

challenges, streamline federal operations, save taxpayer dollars, and 

promote economic growth. According to Natural Resources Conservation 

Service (NRCS) officials, the Water Quality and Sustainable Practices on 

Land subgroup of the council’s Interagency Policy Committees reports on 

the status of 36 implementation plan action items, including the 4 actions 

related to HABs:5

 4

Environmental Protection Agency, Mississippi River/Gulf of Mexico Watershed Nutrient 

Task Force: 2015 Report to Congress (Washington, D.C.: August 2015).

5

The year denotes the calendar year that the action item was planned for completion. The 

named agencies have responsibility for jointly completing the actions.
Appendix III: Federal Agencies’ Harmful Algal 

Bloom-Related Coordination

Page 92 GAO-17-119 Harmful Algae 

• 2014 – Develop, working with the seafood industry, new rapidassessment methods to detect HAB toxins, petrochemicals, industrial 

and residential chemical contaminants, microbial contamination, and 

spoilage in seafood. (NOAA, FDA, and EPA were the designated 

implementing agencies.)

• 2014 – Improve infrastructure, including availability of standards and 

probes, shared-use facilities, monitoring platforms, and training, to 

develop the expertise necessary for state-of-the-art national 

capabilities for HAB monitoring and detection and improving accuracy 

of HAB forecasting. (NOAA, FDA, National Institute of Standards and 

Technology, and USGS were the designated implementing agencies.) 

• 2014 – Provide more reliable models for HAB forecasts and 

coordinated training for state and local officials to improve regional 

capabilities for HAB monitoring, assessment, forecasting, and 

response. (NOAA and CDC were the designated implementing 

agencies.)

• 2015 – Develop and deploy rapid, field-based detection systems for 

various HAB-causing species and their toxins. (NOAA, FDA, and 

USGS were the designated implementing agencies.)

One Health Harmful Algal Bloom System (OHHABS)

CDC collaborates with federal agencies, such as EPA, USGS, NOAA, 

and FDA, and many state governments on OHHABS, an electronic 

system for voluntary reporting of HAB-related illnesses and events. 

Launched in June 2016, this surveillance system is accessible to health 

departments and their designated animal health and environmental health 

partners and collects data on HAB events and associated cases of 

human and animal illness. OHHABS is an example of CDC’s “One 

Health” surveillance—an approach that recognizes that human, animal, 

and environmental health are interconnected, and that these three health 

communities can more effectively address many linked health challenges 

by working together. 
Appendix III: Federal Agencies’ Harmful Algal 

Bloom-Related Coordination

Page 93 GAO-17-119 Harmful Algae 

Interstate Shellfish Sanitation Conference (ISSC)

The ISSC was formed in 1982 to foster and promote shellfish sanitation 

through the cooperation of state and federal control agencies, the 

shellfish industry, and the academic community. According to FDA 

officials, cooperative partners in the ISSC include FDA, NOAA, EPA, 

CDC, state agencies, industry, tribes, and other nations. To ensure the 

safety and sanitation of bivalve mollusks (e.g., oysters, clams, mussels, 

and scallops) in interstate commerce, proposals are submitted to the 

ISSC for adoption into the National Shellfish Sanitation Program. For 

example, FDA officials stated that the agency submits proposals on 

validated detection methods from the agency’s HAB toxin projects for 

inclusion in the program; such methods must be adopted by the program

in order for states to be allowed to use them for regulatory purposes. 

Additionally, this cooperative program adopted guidance levels for 

biotoxins that are acceptable in bivalve mollusks. FDA officials stated that 

having this arrangement enables the agency to expend its federal funds 

primarily on development and validation of methods for detecting HAB 

toxins in shellfish, while state programs focus on implementing those 

methods to monitor and make decisions about shellfish harvesting bans 

when necessary. 

Ohio Lake Erie Phosphorus Task Force II 

In 2012, the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency, in partnership with 

the Ohio Lake Erie Commission, the Ohio Department of Agriculture, and 

the Ohio Department of Natural Resources, reconvened the Ohio Lake 

Erie Phosphorus Task Force as a Phase II effort. The purpose of this task 

force’s second phase was to reduce phosphorous loading and associated 

HABs in Lake Erie and surrounding watersheds by (1) developing 

reduction targets for total and dissolved reactive phosphorus that can be 

used to track future progress and (2) developing policy and management 

recommendations based upon new and emerging data and information. 

As members of this task force or its subcommittees, NOAA, EPA, and 

 6

NOAA officials also reported that while only a few states have task forces dedicated 

specifically to HABs, NOAA scientists routinely provide advice to states on HABs. 

Standing groups to which NOAA contributes include the California Harmful Algal Bloom

Monitoring and Alert Program, the Interstate Shellfish Sanitation Conference (ISSC), the 

Olympic Region Harmful Algal Blooms Partnership, and the Gulf of Mexico Alliance Water 

Resources Team.

State-Led Efforts6
Appendix III: Federal Agencies’ Harmful Algal 

Bloom-Related Coordination

Page 94 GAO-17-119 Harmful Algae 

other federal agencies (Agricultural Research Service, NRCS, and 

USGS) contributed relevant information and expertise. For example, a 

NOAA model showing the relationship between nutrient loads and the 

size and duration of a bloom were central to the task force’s 

recommended nutrient load targets for the Maumee River watershed, a 

tributary to Lake Erie. Additionally, EPA officials stated that the agency 

provided $122,429 via a grant to the Ohio Environmental Protection 

Agency to reconvene this task force and build upon its 2010 report and to 

broaden participation to include agribusiness representatives and crop 

consultants.

Great Lakes HABs Collaboratory

Beginning in late 2015, the Great Lakes Commission and Great Lakes 

scientists from the United States and Canada (initially coordinated by 

USGS’ Great Lakes Science Center) launched a 2-year effort to create a 

HABs Collaboratory.7 The overall goal is to create a collective laboratory 

(“collaboratory”) to enable science-based information-sharing among 

scientists, as well as between scientists and federal, state, and local 

decision-makers working on HABs in the Great Lakes. 

The HABs Collaboratory partnership model builds on similar coordination 

efforts to address certain invasive species in the Great Lakes. Initially, the

effort will focus on the three GLRI priority watersheds (Saginaw 

River/Bay, Maumee River/western basin of Lake Erie, and Lower 

Fox/Green Bay). HABs Collaboratory efforts will include (1) establishing 

the HABs Collaboratory by identifying and engaging the appropriate 

scientists and managers, (2) developing a common knowledge basis of 

current science and science needs, and (3) developing strategies for 

transmitting key scientific information to managers and for getting 

management feedback to support science-based decisions.

 7

The Great Lakes Commission is an interstate agency that promotes the use and 

conservation of water and related natural resources of the Great Lakes Basin and St. 

Lawrence River. Commission products and services focus on communication and 

education, information integration and reporting, facilitation and consensus-building, and 

policy coordination and advocacy.

International Efforts
Appendix III: Federal Agencies’ Harmful Algal 

Bloom-Related Coordination

Page 95 GAO-17-119 Harmful Algae 

Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission of the United 

Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization’s 

Intergovernmental Panel on Harmful Algal Blooms (IPHAB)

IPHAB aims to foster effective management of, and scientific research on, 

HABs to understand their causes, predict their occurrences, and mitigate 

their effects. In 2015, IPHAB reviewed progress on harmful algae 

priorities and initiatives in partnership with other international 

organizations, such as the International Council for the Exploration of the 

Sea and the International Maritime Organization, according to NOAA 

officials. IPHAB meets every other April and generates a 2-year work plan 

that must be endorsed by the Intergovernmental Oceanographic 

Commission the following June, NOAA officials stated, and IPHAB 

typically addresses topics of broad interest where global coordination will 

accelerate the science needed to support the management of HABs. 

According to officials from NOAA—which chaired the panel from 2010 to 

2014 and leads the U.S. delegation to IPHAB—these collaborative efforts 

include the following:

• rapid progress on HAB detection method development and 

technology transfer;

• synthesizing information on the likely impacts of climate change on 

HAB distributions and impacts;

• collaboration on improving HAB forecasting capabilities;

• identification of HAB threats to finfish aquaculture;

• coordination of international testing standards to support international 

commerce in fish and shellfish;

• documentation of HAB taxonomy online to serve as a global resource 

for identification of HAB species; and

• forging connections with health and food organizations (e.g., the 

World Health Organization and the Food and Agriculture Organization

of the United Nations) to better address the impacts of HABs on 

human health and food security.
Appendix III: Federal Agencies’ Harmful Algal 

Bloom-Related Coordination

Page 96 GAO-17-119 Harmful Algae 

International Council for the Exploration of the Sea (ICES) 

ICES is an intergovernmental organization whose main objective is to 

increase the scientific knowledge of the marine environment and its living 

resources and to use this knowledge to provide unbiased, non-political 

advice to authorities. According to NOAA officials, the United States has 

been a member of ICES since 1912 and, in recent years, has 

strengthened its leadership role, particularly in the advisory committees 

on marine pollution and on fisheries management, to direct the 

organization's work toward issues and concerns of U.S. interest. NOAA 

officials also reported that U.S. representatives participate in many of the 

ICES advisory and standing committees. Each ICES member country has 

two delegates, NOAA officials stated, and the current U.S. delegates are

from NOAA’s Northeast Fisheries Science Center and from academia.

According to ICES’ website, the organization considers both how human 

activities affect marine ecosystems and how ecosystems affect human 

activities. In this manner, ICES aims to ensure that best-available science 

is accessible for decision-makers to make informed choices about the 

sustainable use of the marine environment and ecosystems. To achieve 

this objective, ICES prioritizes, organizes, delivers, and disseminates 

research needed to fill gaps in marine knowledge related to ecological, 

political, societal, and economic issues. ICES delivers scientific 

publications, information, and management advice requested by member 

countries and international organizations and commissions.

To address HABs specifically, the Working Group on HAB Dynamics 

serves as a forum for ICES and the Intergovernmental Oceanographic 

Commission to review and discuss HAB events and to provide advice and 

updates on the state of HABs annually, according to NOAA officials. This 

working group also facilitates interaction among scientists working in 

diverse areas of HAB science and monitoring and provides a forum for 

discussing various approaches to HAB research. Serving as a liaison to 

the working group on behalf of NOAA, agency officials stated, the U.S. 

National Office for Harmful Algal Blooms interacts with federal and 

academic colleagues to compile annual reports of HAB events in the 

United States and to update decadal maps for all U.S. HAB events.

International Joint Commission (IJC)

The IJC is an international organization created by the Boundary Waters 

Treaty, signed by Canada and the United States in 1909. According to 

NOAA officials, the IJC has set up more than 20 boards, made up of 
Appendix III: Federal Agencies’ Harmful Algal 

Bloom-Related Coordination

Page 97 GAO-17-119 Harmful Algae 

experts from the United States and Canada, to help it carry out its 

responsibilities; the Great Lakes Water Quality Board, Great Lakes 

Science Advisory Board, and Health Professionals Advisory Board 

periodically address and coordinate research related to HABs in the Great 

Lakes. For example, NOAA serves on the Great Lakes Science Advisory 

Board and provides advice on HAB and hypoxia research, which the IJC 

uses to identify needs and recommendations for water quality work in the 

Great Lakes region. In turn, NOAA uses IJC recommendations to inform 

the agency’s goals, products, and services. 

National HAB Committee 

Established to provide a collective voice for the academic, management, 

and stakeholder communities, this committee’s mission is to facilitate 

coordination and communication of HAB activities at a national level. Its 

activities include:

• fostering communication between all components of the HAB 

community and communicate these activities through the U.S. 

National Office for Harmful Algal Blooms (located at Woods Hole 

Oceanographic Institution), biennial National HAB Conferences (most 

recently held in November 2015), and listservs and websites;

• responding to requests from Congress or federal and state entities for 

information or guidance on HAB issues; and

• raising the visibility and understanding of HAB issues nationally.

Co-chaired by researchers from an academic institution and a non-profit 

marine research institution, the committee’s formal and ex-officio 

members include NOAA, EPA, CDC, FDA, NIEHS, NSF, and USGS. The 

committee was formed after the need for better coordination within the 

HAB research and management communities—and for enhanced 

communication with federal agencies—was identified in Harmful Algal 

Research and Response: A National Environmental Science Strategy

2005-2015,

8 a report published in 2005 with support from NOAA’s 

National Centers for Coastal Ocean Science.

 8

Ramsdell, J.S., D.M. Anderson, and P.M. Glibert (Eds.), Ecological Society of America, 

Harmful Algal Research and Response: A National Environmental Science Strategy 

2005–2015 (Washington, D.C., 2005).

Academic-Led Effort
Appendix III: Federal Agencies’ Harmful Algal 

Bloom-Related Coordination

Page 98 GAO-17-119 Harmful Algae 

Through our interviews with agency officials and their written responses 

to our questionnaire, we identified a number of partnerships between two 

or more federal agencies directly related to their HAB work in recent 

years.9 This list is not comprehensive but is intended to illustrate 

examples of federal interagency, HAB-related partnerships beyond the 

coordination efforts discussed above. Additional examples of such 

partnerships are identified in the IWG-HABHRCA report to Congress,

Harmful Algal Blooms and Hypoxia Comprehensive Research Plan and 

Action Strategy: An Interagency Report.

EPA leads this multi‐federal agency project with USGS, NASA, and 

NOAA to use remote-sensing ocean color satellite data to develop an 

early warning system to protect the environment and human health. A 

collaborative effort officially launched in October 2015, of CyAN’s is to 

support the environmental management and public use of U.S. lakes and 

estuaries by providing the ability to detect and quantify algal blooms and 

related water quality using satellite data records. Specifically, NOAA 

officials stated, NOAA currently uses remote sensing and modeling to 

monitor and forecast HABs in larger bodies of water, such as Lake Erie 

and along ocean coasts. CyAN aims to expand these monitoring and 

detection capabilities to provide data that the federal partners can use to 

improve HAB monitoring products and extend them to smaller lakes and 

reservoirs throughout the United States. In this manner, NOAA and EPA 

officials added, the partnership is building on, rather than reinventing, 

HAB detection techniques developed by NOAA and applying those 

techniques to other freshwater systems. In 2015, according to the CyAN 

Project’s website, the agencies began using ocean color satellite data to 

help develop an early warning indicator for algal blooms in freshwater 

systems and an information distribution system for expedient public 

health advisories. The project will initially focus on selected states—, 

including Ohio, Florida, California, Vermont, New Hampshire, 

Massachusetts, Connecticut, and Rhode Island—for the first year, and 

then will expand to all 48 continental states.

According to NIEHS officials, the two agencies meet periodically to 

exchange information and coordinate research efforts on human health 

 9

Based on the information we received from the agencies, these partnerships have 

involved only federal agencies, but we did not independently evaluate whether the 

partnerships may have also involved nonfederal stakeholders.

Federal Interagency 

Partnerships

Cyanobacteria Assessment 

Network (CyAN) Project

EPA and NIEHS
Appendix III: Federal Agencies’ Harmful Algal 

Bloom-Related Coordination

Page 99 GAO-17-119 Harmful Algae 

effects of cyanotoxins. Prior discussions have focused on toxicology 

research needs for microcystins, cylindrospermopsin, and anatoxins that 

could be addressed by the National Toxicology Program, an interagency 

program based at NIEHS. 

Beyond their collaboration on the working group focused on OHHABS, 

FDA officials reported that these two agencies have a regularly scheduled 

conference call to discuss foodborne HAB surveillance, specifically. This 

collaboration is aimed at sharing information and reporting events, 

ensuring consistency in case definitions, and eliminating duplication of 

effort.

According to EPA officials, EPA, CDC, USGS, NOAA, and FDA share 

expertise and develop methods to detect HAB-associated toxins in 

biological specimens.

These two agencies collaborate and provide joint funding for some HABrelated research projects. According to NIEHS officials, this active and 

ongoing collaboration has been in effect since 2005 between NIEHS’ 

Oceans and Human Health Program and NSF’s Division of Ocean 

Sciences. For example, NIEHS officials stated, the two agencies

collaborated in supporting eight HAB-related projects whose grantees 

were conducting research on health effects of HABs as well as research 

on developing novel strategies for forecasting HAB events, as of March 

2016. NIEHS officials also stated that there are clear boundaries in terms 

of what each agency supports in each grant that corresponds to the two 

agencies’ different missions. This collaboration, in NIEHS officials’ view,

fosters the transdisciplinary approaches of these grants and addresses

questions that cut across the specific areas of research that each agency 

typically supports.

USGS has assisted the National Park Service with collecting and testing 

water samples and ensuring that appropriate and necessary research is 

conducted within national park units to inform protection of wildlife and 

human health. For example, from 2012 to 2013, USGS collected samples 

from 4 Lake Michigan beach sites at Sleeping Bear Dunes National 

Lakeshore and from 16 inland lakes across three national park units in 

Michigan and detected microcystins at several sites. The results of this 

study provided baseline information to park managers and scientists 

about the occurrence, types, and levels of algal toxins that had not 

previously been observed.

FDA and CDC

Interagency Group on HABs 

Research

NIEHS and NSF

USGS and National Park 

Service
Appendix IV: Federal Agencies’ Harmful Algal 

Bloom-Related Websites

Page 100 GAO-17-119 Harmful Algae 

Most of the federal agencies within the scope of this review maintain 

information on their public websites regarding harmful algal blooms (HAB) 

and related research, monitoring, and other activities.1 Agency officials 

reported that they maintain such information on their websites to 

coordinate with each other and nonfederal stakeholders on their HABrelated activities, reduce duplication, and raise public awareness, among 

other purposes. Through our correspondence with federal agencies and 

our own web searches, we identified the following publicly accessible 

websites describing HABs and HAB-related activities, organized by the 

agencies maintaining them:2

HAB-Associated Illness (http://www.cdc.gov/habs/): Provides a brief 

description and links to frequently asked questions; illness and 

symptoms; sources of exposure and risk factors; factors that promote 

HAB growth; how to stay healthy and prevent illness; publications, data, 

and statistics; health promotion materials; and One Health Harmful Algal 

Bloom System (OHHABS), an electronic system for voluntary reporting of 

HAB events and associated cases of human and animal illness.

Technical Assistance in State and Local Response to HABs

(http://www.cdc.gov/nceh/hsb/cwh/technical_hab.htm): Briefly describes 

that public health representatives may consult and receive technical 

assistance from CDC to develop their responses to HAB events, and 

provides recent examples of such assistance given to state and federal 

agencies. 

Commercial Space-Borne Hyperspectral HAB Products 

(http://www7333.nrlssc.navy.mil/view_project.php?project=ruhul_algal_bl

oom): Briefly describes and provides images from the Naval Research 

Laboratory’s work using space-borne sensors to develop more reliable 

detection, quantification, and identification of HABs to help mitigate health 

risk and economic damages. Navy describes these sensors as ideal tools 

for HAB detection because of their spatial coverage and low cost.

 1

As of August 2016, there is no central, government-wide portal for information on federal 

HAB-related activities, but according to National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

officials, the Interagency Working Group on the Harmful Algal Bloom and Hypoxia 

Research and Control Act is exploring the possibility of creating one for HABs and 

hypoxia.

2

The websites cited were accessible as of August 2016.

Appendix IV: Federal Agencies’ Harmful 

Algal Bloom-Related Websites

Centers for Disease 

Control and 

Prevention (CDC)

Department of the 

Navy (Navy)
Appendix IV: Federal Agencies’ Harmful Algal 

Bloom-Related Websites

Page 101 GAO-17-119 Harmful Algae 

Cyanobacterial HABs

(https://www.epa.gov/nutrient-policy-data/cyanohabs): Contains links to 

information on what freshwater cyanobacterial HABs are, causes and 

prevention, detection, health and ecological effects, control and 

treatment, research by EPA and other federal agencies, news, policies 

and regulations for toxins produced by cyanobacteria (cyanotoxins) at the 

state and international levels, and guidelines and recommendations.

Epidemiology & Health Effects of Cyanobacteria

(https://www.epa.gov/water-research/epidemiology-health-effects-cyanob

acteria): Briefly describes EPA research on (1) drinking water treatment 

safety; (2) characterizing cyanobacterial toxins; (3) determining toxigenic 

properties; (4) cyanobacteria, nutrients, and land use; (5) disease 

outbreaks related to toxic algal blooms; and (6) development and 

application of a fiber optic array system for detection and enumeration of 

potentially toxic cyanobacteria.

Inland HAB Discussion Group

(https://www.epa.gov/nutrient-policy-data/inland-hab-discussion-group):

Describes the group and provides links to webinars dating back to 

October 2012 and contact information for CDC, U.S. Geological Survey 

(USGS), and EPA.

Nutrient Pollution – HABs

(https://www.epa.gov/nutrientpollution/harmful-algal-blooms): Contains 

links for more information on causes, effects, “what you can do to help” 

(volunteer to monitor waterbodies), preventing nutrient pollution (in your 

home, yard, community, and classroom), webinars, videos, and national 

and state resources. 

National Ocean Council 

(https://www.whitehouse.gov/administration/eop/oceans): Provides 

information on the council and the National Ocean Policy; the National 

Ocean Policy Implementation Plan to address challenges facing the 

ocean, our coasts, and the Great Lakes (including four action items 

related to HABs); the final recommendations of the Interagency Ocean 

Policy Task Force; and marine planning, a science-based tool that 

regions can use to address specific ocean management challenges and 

advance their economic development and conservation objectives.

Subcommittee on Ocean Science and Technology 

(https://www.whitehouse.gov/administration/eop/ostp/nstc/oceans): 

Briefly describes the subcommittee’s purpose and provides links to 

documents and reports, such as the Harmful Algal Blooms and Hypoxia 

Environmental 

Protection Agency 

(EPA) 

Executive Office of 

the President
Appendix IV: Federal Agencies’ Harmful Algal 

Bloom-Related Websites

Page 102 GAO-17-119 Harmful Algae 

Comprehensive Research Plan and Action Strategy: An Interagency

Report to Congress in February 2016; a scientific assessment of hypoxia 

in U.S. coastal waters from 2010; older scientific assessments of marine 

and freshwater HABs from 2008; a HAB management and response 

assessment and plan from 2008; and a national assessment of efforts to 

predict and respond to HABs in U.S. waters from 2007. As previously 

stated, the subcommittee oversees the Interagency Working Group on 

the Harmful Algal Bloom and Hypoxia Research and Control Act (IWGHABHRCA) and is co-chaired by the Office of Science and Technology 

Policy, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 

and the National Science Foundation (NSF).

Bad Bug Book 

(http://www.fda.gov/Food/FoodborneIllnessContaminants/CausesOfIllnes

sBadBugBook/): Provides current information about the major known 

agents, including HAB toxins, that cause foodborne illness. Each chapter 

in the book is about a pathogen—a bacterium, virus, or parasite—or a 

natural toxin that can contaminate food and cause illness. The book 

contains scientific and technical information about the major pathogens 

that cause these kinds of illnesses. A separate “consumer box” in each 

chapter provides non-technical information about what can make a 

person sick and, more important, how to prevent illness. The second 

edition of the Bad Bug Book was published in 2012 by FDA’s Center for 

Food Safety and Applied Nutrition.

Seafood (http://www.fda.gov/Food/PopularTopics/ucm341987.htm): 

Provides access to content about seafood, including fish and shellfish, 

from across the Food section of fda.gov. Grouped according to target 

audiences, these links include access to up-to-date consumer information 

and advice, guidance documents, regulation, and science and research 

content. Some information accessible on this page relates to, but may not 

be specific to, HAB toxins. 

Citizen Scientists Track Algal Blooms 

(https://re.grc.nasa.gov/citizen-scientists-track-algal-blooms/):

Encourages general aviation pilots, functioning as citizen scientists, to 

help develop an early warning system to alert communities of ensuing 

algal blooms along the coastline. Provides an opportunity for pilots to 

obtain high-resolution aerial images and videos as they fly over 

potentially affected waterways.

Food and Drug 

Administration (FDA)

National Aeronautics 

and Space 

Administration 

(NASA)
Appendix IV: Federal Agencies’ Harmful Algal 

Bloom-Related Websites

Page 103 GAO-17-119 Harmful Algae 

Database of Environmental Health Science Research Funded by 

NIEHS (http://tools.niehs.nih.gov/portfolio/index.cfm/): Allows users to 

search for research funded by NIEHS using key words (e.g., algal 

bloom). The site also lists some active HAB research grantees, and 

provides links to their published research findings, through the “Search 

By Topic” option under the “Oceans and Human Health Centers” row in 

the “Center And Center-Like Programs” table. Other HAB research 

grantees can be identified using a keyword search.

HABs (http://www.niehs.nih.gov/health/topics/agents/algal-blooms/index.cfm):

Briefly describes what HABs are, why HABs occur, how people are 

exposed, health effects, and other impacts. Also provides information on 

NIEHS efforts to (1) study potential long-term health effects of low-dose 

exposure to HAB toxins, (2) develop rapid detection of HABs to help state 

officials protect public health with minimal economic impacts to fisheries 

and recreational areas, (3) improve prediction, and (4) study a compound 

produced by certain HABs that can help to remove mucus from the lungs 

and may have potential as a treatment for cystic fibrosis.

Oceans and Human Health 

(http://www.niehs.nih.gov/research/supported/centers/oceans/index.cfm):

Briefly describes how oceans can affect human health in many ways, 

such as by eating toxin-contaminated seafood, swimming in or drinking 

toxin-contaminated water, and breathing airborne HAB toxins; NIEHS 

and NSF jointly funded research on marine-related health issues, 

including techniques for more accurate and earlier detection of HABs; 

and other relevant NIEHS efforts. The site also provides links to program 

highlights and publications.

Oceans – Water Quality

(https://www.nps.gov/subjects/oceans/water-quality.htm): Briefly 

describes various threats to water quality, including plastics, solid waste, 

chemical waste, toxic waste, HABs, disease, oil spills, and noise.

Great Lakes Restoration Initiative 

(http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detailfull/national/home/?cid=n

rcsdev11_023903): Briefly describes, among other things, that (1) the 

Great Lakes Restoration Initiative (GLRI) was launched in 2010 with 

NRCS as one of a number of federal agency partners; (2) GLRI helps 

NRCS accelerate conservation efforts on private lands located in 

targeted watersheds throughout the Great Lakes region by working with 

farmers and landowners to combat invasive species, protect watersheds 

and shorelines from non-point source pollution, and restore wetlands and 

National Institute of 

Environmental Health 

Sciences (NIEHS)

National Park Service 

Natural Resources 

Conservation Service 

(NRCS) 
Appendix IV: Federal Agencies’ Harmful Algal 

Bloom-Related Websites

Page 104 GAO-17-119 Harmful Algae 

other habitat areas; (3) the lakes suffer from pollution—caused by urban 

runoff and sprawl, sewage disposal, agriculture, industry, and other 

sources—that damages the aquatic ecosystems and poses risks to 

human health; and (4) algal blooms in Lake Erie have underscored the 

importance of continued conservation efforts.

Great Lakes HABs and Hypoxia

(http://www.glerl.noaa.gov/res/HABs_and_Hypoxia/): Allows access to 

NOAA’s Great Lakes Environmental Research Laboratory resources, 

such as Water Quality and Monitoring Data from field monitoring and 

continuous, real-time observations in western Lake Erie and two other 

lakes; Lake Erie HAB Bulletins—which provide biweekly forecasts—

dating back to July 2009; near-real-time information on the presence of 

microcystin in western Lake Erie; hyperspectral and satellite images;3

and an experimental “Western Lake Erie HAB Tracker,” a tool that 

combines remote sensing, monitoring, and modeling to produce daily 5-

day forecasts of bloom transport and concentration. The site also 

provides links to frequently asked questions, publications, a HAB photo 

gallery, and a Hypoxia Warning System that is under development to 

provide information to drinking water managers in the central Lake Erie 

basin.

Integrated Ocean Observing System (IOOS) – HABs and Hypoxia

(https://ioos.noaa.gov/project/ott-habs-hypoxia/): Describes IOOS’ Ocean 

Technology Transition Project awards related to HABs and hypoxia. 

IOOS' Ocean Technology Transition Project works with scientists and 

industry to make operational technologies to monitor ocean conditions 

that can affect human health. IOOS has funded four such projects in 

support of HAB and hypoxia detection and monitoring.

National Centers for Coastal Ocean Science (NCCOS) – Harmful 

Algal Blooms (https://coastalscience.noaa.gov/research/habs/default): 

 3

NOAA’s Great Lakes Environmental Research Laboratory and the University of 

Michigan's Cooperative Institute for Limnology and Ecosystems Research began a weekly 

airborne campaign in 2015 to assist in improvements to HAB forecasting by capturing 

images of HABs in western Lake Erie. The flyovers are done in collaboration with 

researchers at NASA that have been flying their own airborne imaging sensor. Airborne 

images are hyperspectral, meaning they contain many more (e.g. hundreds of) bands of 

discrete wavelengths than a typical spaceborne satellite and a broader visible range than 

the human eye can see.

NOAA 
Appendix IV: Federal Agencies’ Harmful Algal 

Bloom-Related Websites

Page 105 GAO-17-119 Harmful Algae 

Provides an overview of HABs and links to NOAA’s NCCOS research 

programs (Ecology and Oceanography; Monitoring and Event Response;

and Prevention, Control, and Mitigation), forecasting, HABHRCA, 

sensors, marine biotoxin impacts, rapid response, and other related 

topics.

National Ocean Service – Harmful Algal Blooms 

(http://oceanservice.noaa.gov/hazards/hab/): Provides links to NOAA’s 

forecast for red tide in Florida, a West Coast HAB update, HAB forecast 

bulletins, research, “ecoforecasting” services, and additional information. 

NCCOS – Our Research Projects

(https://coastalscience.noaa.gov/projects): Allows access to NCCOS’ 

research projects; users can search by title, a project’s primary 

contact(s), keyword or phrase in the project’s description, research area 

(including HABs), or regional area.

NCCOS – Phytoplankton Monitoring Network

(https://products.coastalscience.noaa.gov/pmn/): Promotes a better 

understanding of HABs through volunteer monitoring, provides resources 

for current and prospective volunteers, and allows volunteers to submit 

new data and view historical data.4

NOAA Harmful Algal Bloom Operational Forecast System 

(http://tidesandcurrents.noaa.gov/hab/overview.html): Houses NOAA’s 

HAB operational forecast system, which aims to assist HAB mitigation 

through early detection and forecasting in the Gulf of Mexico; and 

provides links to local beach condition reports in Florida and Texas, 

bulletins, health information, and other resources. 

Northwest Fisheries Science Center – HAB Research Partnerships 

(https://www.nwfsc.noaa.gov/hab/research/research_partnerships/): 

Provides information on the SoundToxins partnership, a phytoplankton 

 4

Phytoplankton are microscopic, photosynthetic organisms, such as microalgae and 

cyanobacteria, that produce much of the world’s oxygen. As reported in the IWGHABHRCA report to Congress, Harmful Algal Blooms and Hypoxia Comprehensive 

Research Plan and Action Strategy: An Interagency Report (Washington, D.C.: Feb. 11, 

2016), NOAA staff train citizen volunteers in the Phytoplankton Monitoring Network on 

sampling techniques and identification methods for over 50 phytoplankton types, including 

10 that are potentially toxin-producing. At the time of the report, 250 sites in 22 states and 

U.S. territories—including schools, universities, civic groups, and state and federal 

agencies—were collecting phytoplankton and environmental data. The report also states 

that since the inception of the program in 2001, more than 275 algal blooms and 15 toxic 

events had been reported by network volunteers.
Appendix IV: Federal Agencies’ Harmful Algal 

Bloom-Related Websites

Page 106 GAO-17-119 Harmful Algae 

and toxin monitoring program that provides early warning for HABs in 

Puget Sound; a Pacific Northwest HAB forecasting bulletin; and the 

Olympic Region Harmful Algal Blooms Partnership.

Northwest Fisheries Science Center – Wildlife Algal-Toxin Research 

and Response Network for the U.S. West Coast

(https://www.nwfsc.noaa.gov/research/divisions/efs/warrnwest/): Hosts a 

West Coast-wide surveillance program that monitors for domoic acid, 

saxitoxin, and the toxins responsible for diarrhetic shellfish poisoning. 

The sampling network consists of federal, state, public, private, and 

academic partners and the major marine mammal stranding networks.

Award Search Database (http://www.nsf.gov/awardsearch/): Provides 

access to a searchable database of award abstracts for all NSF-funded 

research projects, dating back to 1989. The database is searchable using 

key terms (such as algal bloom), title, abstract, names, institutions, 

programs, and other information associated with an award.

Aquatic Nuisance Species Research Program 

(https://el.erdc.dren.mil/ansrp/ansrp.html): Provides USACE managers 

and operational personnel with information on aquatic nuisance species, 

including basic life history and ecological information, risk assessment 

tools, preventative strategies, and cost-effective and environmentally 

sound management options. The program is an expansion of USACE’s

Zebra Mussel Research Program and provides information not only on 

zebra mussels, but on all aquatic nuisance species fauna, including HAB 

species. The program’s main objective is to conduct interdisciplinary 

research on the prevention, control, and management of aquatic 

nuisance species that affect USACE projects and public facilities. 

Reports from research conducted on HAB species can be found in the 

website’s Technology Transfer section.

Louisville District

(http://www.lrl.usace.army.mil/Missions/Civil-Works/Water-Information/HA

Bs/): Provides contact information for reporting signs of a potential HAB 

in Kentucky, Indiana, Ohio, and the Ohio River; and information on HAB 

conditions, cyanobacteria threshold values, what HABs are, and what 

causes them to form.

BioData – Aquatic Bioassessment Data for the Nation 

(https://aquatic.biodata.usgs.gov/landing.action): Provides an online 

database of biological community and physical habitat (“bioassessment”) 

data, which includes information on the occurrence of algal species, 

NSF

U.S. Army Corps of 

Engineers (USACE)

USGS
Appendix IV: Federal Agencies’ Harmful Algal 

Bloom-Related Websites

Page 107 GAO-17-119 Harmful Algae 

collected by USGS scientists in stream ecosystems across the nation. 

The database contains data from over 15,000 fish, aquatic 

macroinvertebrate, and algae community samples as part of USGS’ 

mission to describe and understand the Earth.

Cyanobacterial Blooms: Tastes, Odors, and Toxins

(http://ks.water.usgs.gov/cyanobacteria): Provides information from 

USGS’ Kansas Water Science Center on water-related research lecture 

series, current study areas, and relevant publications dating back to 

2002. 

Drinking Water Exposure to Chemical and Pathogenic 

Contaminants: Algal Toxins and Water Quality

(http://health.usgs.gov/dw_contaminants/algal_toxins.html): Provides an 

overall description and links to algal toxin studies, fact sheets, USGS 

algal-related studies, methods, and protocols. 

USGS Publications Warehouse (https://pubs.er.usgs.gov): Provides 

access to over 130,000 publications written by USGS scientists over the 

past century (including those on algal blooms and toxins), and is 

searchable using key terms.

Water Quality Portal (http://www.waterqualitydata.us/): Integrates data, 

including HAB and hypoxia data, collected by over 400 state, federal, 

tribal, and local agencies for this cooperative effort by USGS, EPA, and 

the National Water Quality Monitoring Council. 
Appendix V: Contact and Staff 

Acknowledgments

Page 108 GAO-17-119 Harmful Algae 

J. Alfredo Gómez, (202) 512-3841 or gomezj@gao.gov

In addition to the contact named above, Diane Raynes (Assistant 

Director), Josey Ballenger, Mark Braza, Leah English, and Richard 

Johnson made major contributions to this report. Ellen Fried, Carol Henn, 

Karen Howard, Mae Liles, and Sarah Veale also made contributions to 

this report.

Appendix V: Contact and Staff 

Acknowledgments

GAO Contact 

Staff 

Acknowledgments
Related GAO Products

Page 109 GAO-17-119 Harmful Algae 

Aquatic Invasive Species: Additional Steps Could Help Measure Federal 

Progress in Achieving Strategic Goals. GAO-16-49. Washington, D.C.: 

November 30, 2015.

Climate Change: HHS Could Take Further Steps to Enhance 

Understanding of Public Health Risks. GAO-16-122. Washington, D.C.: 

October 5, 2015.

Great Lakes Restoration Initiative: Improved Data Collection and 

Reporting Would Enhance Oversight. GAO-15-526. Washington, D.C.: 

July 21, 2015.

Ocean Acidification: Federal Response Under Way, but Actions Needed 

to Understand and Address Potential Impacts. GAO-14-736. Washington, 

D.C.: September 12, 2014.

Managing for Results: Implementation Approaches Used to Enhance 

Collaboration in Interagency Groups. GAO-14-220. Washington, D.C.: 

February 14, 2014.

Clean Water Act: Changes Needed If Key EPA Program Is to Help Fulfill 

the Nation’s Water Quality Goals. GAO-14-80. Washington, D.C.: 

December 5, 2013.

Great Lakes Restoration Initiative: Further Actions Would Result in More 

Useful Assessments and Help Address Factors That Limit Progress.

GAO-13-797. Washington, D.C.: September 27, 2013.

Water Quality: EPA Faces Challenges in Addressing Damage Caused by 

Airborne Pollutants. GAO-13-39. Washington, D.C. January 24, 2013.

Managing for Results: Key Considerations for Implementing Interagency 

Collaborative Mechanisms. GAO-12-1022. Washington, D.C.: September 

27, 2012.

Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations: EPA Needs More Information 

and a Clearly Defined Strategy to Protect Air and Water Quality from 

Pollutants of Concern. GAO-08-944. Washington, D.C.: September 4, 

2008.

Climate Change: Agencies Should Develop Guidance for Addressing the 

Effects on Federal Land and Water Resources. GAO-07-863.

Washington, D.C.: August 7, 2007.

Related GAO Products
Related GAO Products

Page 110 GAO-17-119 Harmful Algae 

Environmental Information: Status of Federal Data Programs That 

Support Ecological Indicators. GAO-05-376. Washington, D.C.: 

September 2, 2005.

Environmental Protection: Coordinated Federal Efforts Are Being 

Undertaken to Address Harmful Algae. GAO/RCED-99-192. Washington, 

D.C.: June 30, 1999.

(100340)
The Government Accountability Office, the audit, evaluation, and investigative 

arm of Congress, exists to support Congress in meeting its constitutional 

responsibilities and to help improve the performance and accountability of the 

federal government for the American people. GAO examines the use of public 

funds; evaluates federal programs and policies; and provides analyses, 

recommendations, and other assistance to help Congress make informed 

oversight, policy, and funding decisions. GAO’s commitment to good government 

is reflected in its core values of accountability, integrity, and reliability.

The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no cost is 

through GAO’s website (http://www.gao.gov). Each weekday afternoon, GAO 

posts on its website newly released reports, testimony, and correspondence. To 

have GAO e-mail you a list of newly posted products, go to http://www.gao.gov

and select “E-mail Updates.”

The price of each GAO publication reflects GAO’s actual cost of production and 

distribution and depends on the number of pages in the publication and whether 

the publication is printed in color or black and white. Pricing and ordering 

information is posted on GAO’s website, http://www.gao.gov/ordering.htm. 

Place orders by calling (202) 512-6000, toll free (866) 801-7077, or 

TDD (202) 512-2537.

Orders may be paid for using American Express, Discover Card, MasterCard, 

Visa, check, or money order. Call for additional information.

Connect with GAO on Facebook, Flickr, Twitter, and YouTube.

Subscribe to our RSS Feeds or E-mail Updates. Listen to our Podcasts.

Visit GAO on the web at www.gao.gov.

Contact:

Website: http://www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm

E-mail: fraudnet@gao.gov

Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or (202) 512-7470

Katherine Siggerud, Managing Director, siggerudk@gao.gov, (202) 512-4400, 

U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7125, 

Washington, DC 20548

Chuck Young, Managing Director, youngc1@gao.gov, (202) 512-4800

U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7149 

Washington, DC 20548

James-Christian Blockwood, Managing Director, spel@gao.gov, (202) 512-4707

U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7814, 

Washington, DC 20548

GAO’s Mission

Obtaining Copies of 

GAO Reports and 

Testimony

Order by Phone

Connect with GAO

To Report Fraud, 

Waste, and Abuse in 

Federal Programs

Congressional 

Relations

Public Affairs

Strategic Planning and 

External Liaison

Please Print on Recycled Paper.