APPENDIX A 

Relevant Sections of Statues, Regulations, or Judicial/Administrative 

Decrees Enabling the Collection of Information for the National Listing of 

Advisories 

Clean Water Act 104, as printed in 

(http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode33/usc_sec_33_00001254----000-.html) 

Title 33: Navigation and Navigable Waters 

Chapter 26: Water Pollution Prevention and Control 

Subchapter 1: Research and Related Programs 

Section 1254: Research, investigations, training, and information 

EPA’s Clean Water Action Plan - Fish Consumption Advisories
LII / Legal Information Institute

U.S. Code collection

TITLE 33 > CHAPTER 26 > SUBCHAPTER I > § 1254

Prev | Next

§ 1254. Research, investigations, training, and information 

How Current is This?

(a) Establishment of national programs; cooperation; investigations; 

water quality surveillance system; reports 

The Administrator shall establish national programs for the prevention, 

reduction, and elimination of pollution and as part of such programs shall— 

(1) in cooperation with other Federal, State, and local agencies, conduct 

and promote the coordination and acceleration of, research, investigations, 

experiments, training, demonstrations, surveys, and studies relating to the 

causes, effects, extent, prevention, reduction, and elimination of pollution; 

(2) encourage, cooperate with, and render technical services to pollution 

control agencies and other appropriate public or private agencies, 

institutions, and organizations, and individuals, including the general public, 

in the conduct of activities referred to in paragraph (1) of this subsection; 

(3) conduct, in cooperation with State water pollution control agencies and 

other interested agencies, organizations and persons, public investigations 

concerning the pollution of any navigable waters, and report on the results of 

such investigations; 

(4) establish advisory committees composed of recognized experts in 

various aspects of pollution and representatives of the public to assist in the 

examination and evaluation of research progress and proposals and to avoid 

duplication of research; 

(5) in cooperation with the States, and their political subdivisions, and 

other Federal agencies establish, equip, and maintain a water quality 

surveillance system for the purpose of monitoring the quality of the 

navigable waters and ground waters and the contiguous zone and the oceans 

and the Administrator shall, to the extent practicable, conduct such 

surveillance by utilizing the resources of the National Aeronautics and Space 

Administration, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the 

United States Geological Survey, and the Coast Guard, and shall report on 

such quality in the report required under subsection (a) of section 1375 of 

this title; and 

(6) initiate and promote the coordination and acceleration of research 

designed to develop the most effective practicable tools and techniques for 

measuring the social and economic costs and benefits of activities which are 

subject to regulation under this chapter; and shall transmit a report on the 

results of such research to the Congress not later than January 1, 1974. 

(b) Authorized activities of Administrator 

In carrying out the provisions of subsection (a) of this section the Administrator 

is authorized to— 

(1) collect and make available, through publications and other appropriate 

Search 

this title: 

Notes 

Updates 

Parallel 

regulations 

(CFR) 

Your 

comments

US CODE: Title 33,1254. Research, investigations, training, and information Page 1 of 9

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode33/usc_sec_33_00001254----000-.html 1/4/2007
means, the results of and other information, including appropriate 

recommendations by him in connection therewith, pertaining to such 

research and other activities referred to in paragraph (1) of subsection (a) of 

this section; 

(2) cooperate with other Federal departments and agencies, State water 

pollution control agencies, interstate agencies, other public and private 

agencies, institutions, organizations, industries involved, and individuals, in 

the preparation and conduct of such research and other activities referred to 

in paragraph (1) of subsection (a) of this section; 

(3) make grants to State water pollution control agencies, interstate 

agencies, other public or nonprofit private agencies, institutions, 

organizations, and individuals, for purposes stated in paragraph (1) of 

subsection (a) of this section; 

(4) contract with public or private agencies, institutions, organizations, and 

individuals, without regard to section 3324 (a) and (b) of title 31 and section 

5 of title 41, referred to in paragraph (1) of subsection (a) of this section; 

(5) establish and maintain research fellowships at public or nonprofit 

private educational institutions or research organizations; 

(6) collect and disseminate, in cooperation with other Federal departments 

and agencies, and with other public or private agencies, institutions, and 

organizations having related responsibilities, basic data on chemical, 

physical, and biological effects of varying water quality and other information 

pertaining to pollution and the prevention, reduction, and elimination 

thereof; and 

(7) develop effective and practical processes, methods, and prototype 

devices for the prevention, reduction, and elimination of pollution. 

(c) Research and studies on harmful effects of pollutants; cooperation 

with Secretary of Health and Human Services 

In carrying out the provisions of subsection (a) of this section the Administrator 

shall conduct research on, and survey the results of other scientific studies on, 

the harmful effects on the health or welfare of persons caused by pollutants. In 

order to avoid duplication of effort, the Administrator shall, to the extent 

practicable, conduct such research in cooperation with and through the facilities 

of the Secretary of Health and Human Services. 

(d) Sewage treatment; identification and measurement of effects of 

pollutants; augmented streamflow 

In carrying out the provisions of this section the Administrator shall develop and 

demonstrate under varied conditions (including conducting such basic and 

applied research, studies, and experiments as may be necessary): 

(1) Practicable means of treating municipal sewage, and other waterborne 

wastes to implement the requirements of section 1281 of this title; 

(2) Improved methods and procedures to identify and measure the effects 

of pollutants, including those pollutants created by new technological 

developments; and 

(3) Methods and procedures for evaluating the effects on water quality of 

augmented streamflows to control pollution not susceptible to other means of 

prevention, reduction, or elimination. 

(e) Field laboratory and research facilities 

The Administrator shall establish, equip, and maintain field laboratory and 

research facilities, including, but not limited to, one to be located in the 

US CODE: Title 33,1254. Research, investigations, training, and information Page 2 of 9

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode33/usc_sec_33_00001254----000-.html 1/4/2007
northeastern area of the United States, one in the Middle Atlantic area, one in 

the southeastern area, one in the midwestern area, one in the southwestern 

area, one in the Pacific Northwest, and one in the State of Alaska, for the 

conduct of research, investigations, experiments, field demonstrations and 

studies, and training relating to the prevention, reduction and elimination of 

pollution. Insofar as practicable, each such facility shall be located near 

institutions of higher learning in which graduate training in such research might 

be carried out. In conjunction with the development of criteria under section 

1343 of this title, the Administrator shall construct the facilities authorized for 

the National Marine Water Quality Laboratory established under this subsection. 

(f) Great Lakes water quality research 

The Administrator shall conduct research and technical development work, and 

make studies, with respect to the quality of the waters of the Great Lakes, 

including an analysis of the present and projected future water quality of the 

Great Lakes under varying conditions of waste treatment and disposal, an 

evaluation of the water quality needs of those to be served by such waters, an 

evaluation of municipal, industrial, and vessel waste treatment and disposal 

practices with respect to such waters, and a study of alternate means of solving 

pollution problems (including additional waste treatment measures) with respect 

to such waters. 

(g) Treatment works pilot training programs; employment needs 

forecasting; training projects and grants; research fellowships; technical 

training; report to the President and transmittal to Congress 

(1) For the purpose of providing an adequate supply of trained personnel to 

operate and maintain existing and future treatment works and related 

activities, and for the purpose of enhancing substantially the proficiency of 

those engaged in such activities, the Administrator shall finance pilot 

programs, in cooperation with State and interstate agencies, municipalities, 

educational institutions, and other organizations and individuals, of 

manpower development and training and retraining of persons in, on 

entering into, the field of operation and maintenance of treatment works and 

related activities. Such program and any funds expended for such a program 

shall supplement, not supplant, other manpower and training programs and 

funds available for the purposes of this paragraph. The Administrator is 

authorized, under such terms and conditions as he deems appropriate, to 

enter into agreements with one or more States, acting jointly or severally, or 

with other public or private agencies or institutions for the development and 

implementation of such a program. 

(2) The Administrator is authorized to enter into agreements with public 

and private agencies and institutions, and individuals to develop and 

maintain an effective system for forecasting the supply of, and demand for, 

various professional and other occupational categories needed for the 

prevention, reduction, and elimination of pollution in each region, State, or 

area of the United States and, from time to time, to publish the results of 

such forecasts. 

(3) In furtherance of the purposes of this chapter, the Administrator is 

authorized to— 

(A) make grants to public or private agencies and institutions and to 

individuals for training projects, and provide for the conduct of training 

by contract with public or private agencies and institutions and with 

individuals without regard to section 3324 (a) and (b) of title 31 and 

section 5 of title 41; 

(B) establish and maintain research fellowships in the Environmental 

Protection Agency with such stipends and allowances, including 

traveling and subsistence expenses, as he may deem necessary to 

US CODE: Title 33,1254. Research, investigations, training, and information Page 3 of 9

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode33/usc_sec_33_00001254----000-.html 1/4/2007
procure the assistance of the most promising research fellows; and 

(C) provide, in addition to the program established under paragraph 

(1) of this subsection, training in technical matters relating to the 

causes, prevention, reduction, and elimination of pollution for 

personnel of public agencies and other persons with suitable 

qualifications. 

(4) The Administrator shall submit, through the President, a report to the 

Congress not later than December 31, 1973, summarizing the actions taken 

under this subsection and the effectiveness of such actions, and setting forth 

the number of persons trained, the occupational categories for which training 

was provided, the effectiveness of other Federal, State, and local training 

programs in this field, together with estimates of future needs, 

recommendations on improving training programs, and such other 

information and recommendations, including legislative recommendations, as 

he deems appropriate. 

(h) Lake pollution 

The Administrator is authorized to enter into contracts with, or make grants to, 

public or private agencies and organizations and individuals for 

(A) the purpose of developing and demonstrating new or improved methods 

for the prevention, removal, reduction, and elimination of pollution in lakes, 

including the undesirable effects of nutrients and vegetation, and 

(B) the construction of publicly owned research facilities for such purpose. 

(i) Oil pollution control studies 

The Administrator, in cooperation with the Secretary of the Department in which 

the Coast Guard is operating, shall— 

(1) engage in such research, studies, experiments, and demonstrations as 

he deems appropriate, relative to the removal of oil from any waters and to 

the prevention, control, and elimination of oil and hazardous substances 

pollution; 

(2) publish from time to time the results of such activities; and 

(3) from time to time, develop and publish in the Federal Register 

specifications and other technical information on the various chemical 

compounds used in the control of oil and hazardous substances spills. 

In carrying out this subsection, the Administrator may enter into contracts with, or 

make grants to, public or private agencies and organizations and individuals. 

(j) Solid waste disposal equipment for vessels 

The Secretary of the department in which the Coast Guard is operating shall 

engage in such research, studies, experiments, and demonstrations as he deems 

appropriate relative to equipment which is to be installed on board a vessel and 

is designed to receive, retain, treat, or discharge human body wastes and the 

wastes from toilets and other receptacles intended to receive or retain body 

wastes with particular emphasis on equipment to be installed on small 

recreational vessels. The Secretary of the department in which the Coast Guard 

is operating shall report to Congress the results of such research, studies, 

experiments, and demonstrations prior to the effective date of any regulations 

established under section 1322 of this title. In carrying out this subsection the 

Secretary of the department in which the Coast Guard is operating may enter 

into contracts with, or make grants to, public or private organizations and 

US CODE: Title 33,1254. Research, investigations, training, and information Page 4 of 9

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode33/usc_sec_33_00001254----000-.html 1/4/2007
individuals. 

(k) Land acquisition 

In carrying out the provisions of this section relating to the conduct by the 

Administrator of demonstration projects and the development of field 

laboratories and research facilities, the Administrator may acquire land and 

interests therein by purchase, with appropriated or donated funds, by donation, 

or by exchange for acquired or public lands under his jurisdiction which he 

classifies as suitable for disposition. The values of the properties so exchanged 

either shall be approximately equal, or if they are not approximately equal, the 

values shall be equalized by the payment of cash to the grantor or to the 

Administrator as the circumstances require. 

(l) Collection and dissemination of scientific knowledge on effects and 

control of pesticides in water 

(1) The Administrator shall, after consultation with appropriate local, State, 

and Federal agencies, public and private organizations, and interested 

individuals, as soon as practicable but not later than January 1, 1973, 

develop and issue to the States for the purpose of carrying out this chapter 

the latest scientific knowledge available in indicating the kind and extent of 

effects on health and welfare which may be expected from the presence of 

pesticides in the water in varying quantities. He shall revise and add to such 

information whenever necessary to reflect developing scientific knowledge. 

(2) The President shall, in consultation with appropriate local, State, and 

Federal agencies, public and private organizations, and interested individuals, 

conduct studies and investigations of methods to control the release of 

pesticides into the environment which study shall include examination of the 

persistency of pesticides in the water environment and alternatives thereto. 

The President shall submit reports, from time to time, on such investigations 

to Congress together with his recommendations for any necessary 

legislation. 

(m) Waste oil disposal study 

(1) The Administrator shall, in an effort to prevent degradation of the 

environment from the disposal of waste oil, conduct a study of 

(A) the generation of used engine, machine, cooling, and similar 

waste oil, including quantities generated, the nature and quality of 

such oil, present collecting methods and disposal practices, and 

alternate uses of such oil; 

(B) the long-term, chronic biological effects of the disposal of such 

waste oil; and 

(C) the potential market for such oils, including the economic and 

legal factors relating to the sale of products made from such oils, the 

level of subsidy, if any, needed to encourage the purchase by public 

and private nonprofit agencies of products from such oil, and the 

practicability of Federal procurement, on a priority basis, of products 

made from such oil. In conducting such study, the Administrator shall 

consult with affected industries and other persons. 

(2) The Administrator shall report the preliminary results of such study to 

Congress within six months after October 18, 1972, and shall submit a final 

report to Congress within 18 months after such date. 

(n) Comprehensive studies of effects of pollution on estuaries and 

estuarine zones 

US CODE: Title 33,1254. Research, investigations, training, and information Page 5 of 9

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode33/usc_sec_33_00001254----000-.html 1/4/2007
(1) The Administrator shall, in cooperation with the Secretary of the Army, 

the Secretary of Agriculture, the Water Resources Council, and with other 

appropriate Federal, State, interstate, or local public bodies and private 

organizations, institutions, and individuals, conduct and promote, and 

encourage contributions to, continuing comprehensive studies of the effects 

of pollution, including sedimentation, in the estuaries and estuarine zones of 

the United States on fish and wildlife, on sport and commercial fishing, on 

recreation, on water supply and water power, and on other beneficial 

purposes. Such studies shall also consider the effect of demographic trends, 

the exploitation of mineral resources and fossil fuels, land and industrial 

development, navigation, flood and erosion control, and other uses of 

estuaries and estuarine zones upon the pollution of the waters therein. 

(2) In conducting such studies, the Administrator shall assemble, 

coordinate, and organize all existing pertinent information on the Nation’s 

estuaries and estuarine zones; carry out a program of investigations and 

surveys to supplement existing information in representative estuaries and 

estuarine zones; and identify the problems and areas where further research 

and study are required. 

(3) The Administrator shall submit to Congress, from time to time, reports 

of the studies authorized by this subsection but at least one such report 

during any six-year period. Copies of each such report shall be made 

available to all interested parties, public and private. 

(4) For the purpose of this subsection, the term “estuarine zones” means 

an environmental system consisting of an estuary and those transitional 

areas which are consistently influenced or affected by water from an estuary 

such as, but not limited to, salt marshes, coastal and intertidal areas, bays, 

harbors, lagoons, inshore waters, and channels, and the term “estuary” 

means all or part of the mouth of a river or stream or other body of water 

having unimpaired natural connection with open sea and within which the 

sea water is measurably diluted with fresh water derived from land drainage. 

(o) Methods of reducing total flow of sewage and unnecessary water 

consumption; reports 

(1) The Administrator shall conduct research and investigations on devices, 

systems, incentives, pricing policy, and other methods of reducing the total 

flow of sewage, including, but not limited to, unnecessary water consumption 

in order to reduce the requirements for, and the costs of, sewage and waste 

treatment services. Such research and investigations shall be directed to 

develop devices, systems, policies, and methods capable of achieving the 

maximum reduction of unnecessary water consumption. 

(2) The Administrator shall report the preliminary results of such studies 

and investigations to the Congress within one year after October 18, 1972, 

and annually thereafter in the report required under subsection (a) of section 

1375 of this title. Such report shall include recommendations for any 

legislation that may be required to provide for the adoption and use of 

devices, systems, policies, or other methods of reducing water consumption 

and reducing the total flow of sewage. Such report shall include an estimate 

of the benefits to be derived from adoption and use of such devices, 

systems, policies, or other methods and also shall reflect estimates of any 

increase in private, public, or other cost that would be occasioned thereby. 

(p) Agricultural pollution 

In carrying out the provisions of subsection (a) of this section the Administrator 

shall, in cooperation with the Secretary of Agriculture, other Federal agencies, 

and the States, carry out a comprehensive study and research program to 

determine new and improved methods and the better application of existing 

methods of preventing, reducing, and eliminating pollution from agriculture, 

US CODE: Title 33,1254. Research, investigations, training, and information Page 6 of 9

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode33/usc_sec_33_00001254----000-.html 1/4/2007
including the legal, economic, and other implications of the use of such methods. 

(q) Sewage in rural areas; national clearinghouse for alternative 

treatment information; clearinghouse on small flows 

(1) The Administrator shall conduct a comprehensive program of research 

and investigation and pilot project implementation into new and improved 

methods of preventing, reducing, storing, collecting, treating, or otherwise 

eliminating pollution from sewage in rural and other areas where collection of 

sewage in conventional, communitywide sewage collection systems is 

impractical, uneconomical, or otherwise infeasible, or where soil conditions or 

other factors preclude the use of septic tank and drainage field systems. 

(2) The Administrator shall conduct a comprehensive program of research 

and investigation and pilot project implementation into new and improved 

methods for the collection and treatment of sewage and other liquid wastes 

combined with the treatment and disposal of solid wastes. 

(3) The Administrator shall establish, either within the Environmental 

Protection Agency, or through contract with an appropriate public or private 

non-profit organization, a national clearinghouse which shall 

(A) receive reports and information resulting from research, 

demonstrations, and other projects funded under this chapter related 

to paragraph (1) of this subsection and to subsection (e)(2) of section 

1255 of this title; 

(B) coordinate and disseminate such reports and information for use 

by Federal and State agencies, municipalities, institutions, and persons 

in developing new and improved methods pursuant to this subsection; 

and 

(C) provide for the collection and dissemination of reports and 

information relevant to this subsection from other Federal and State 

agencies, institutions, universities, and persons. 

(4) Small flows clearinghouse.— Notwithstanding section 1285 (d) of 

this title, from amounts that are set aside for a fiscal year under section 

1285 (i) of this title and are not obligated by the end of the 24-month period 

of availability for such amounts under section 1285 (d) of this title, the 

Administrator shall make available $1,000,000 or such unobligated amount, 

whichever is less, to support a national clearinghouse within the 

Environmental Protection Agency to collect and disseminate information on 

small flows of sewage and innovative or alternative wastewater treatment 

processes and techniques, consistent with paragraph (3). This paragraph 

shall apply with respect to amounts set aside under section 1285 (i) of this 

title for which the 24-month period of availability referred to in the preceding 

sentence ends on or after September 30, 1986. 

(r) Research grants to colleges and universities 

The Administrator is authorized to make grants to colleges and universities to 

conduct basic research into the structure and function of freshwater aquatic 

ecosystems, and to improve understanding of the ecological characteristics 

necessary to the maintenance of the chemical, physical, and biological integrity 

of freshwater aquatic ecosystems. 

(s) River Study Centers 

The Administrator is authorized to make grants to one or more institutions of 

higher education (regionally located and to be designated as “River Study 

Centers”) for the purpose of conducting and reporting on interdisciplinary studies 

on the nature of river systems, including hydrology, biology, ecology, economics, 

US CODE: Title 33,1254. Research, investigations, training, and information Page 7 of 9

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode33/usc_sec_33_00001254----000-.html 1/4/2007
the relationship between river uses and land uses, and the effects of 

development within river basins on river systems and on the value of water 

resources and water related activities. No such grant in any fiscal year shall 

exceed $1,000,000. 

(t) Thermal discharges 

The Administrator shall, in cooperation with State and Federal agencies and 

public and private organizations, conduct continuing comprehensive studies of 

the effects and methods of control of thermal discharges. In evaluating 

alternative methods of control the studies shall consider 

(1) such data as are available on the latest available technology, economic 

feasibility including cost-effectiveness analysis, and 

(2) the total impact on the environment, considering not only water quality 

but also air quality, land use, and effective utilization and conservation of 

freshwater and other natural resources. Such studies shall consider methods 

of minimizing adverse effects and maximizing beneficial effects of thermal 

discharges. The results of these studies shall be reported by the 

Administrator as soon as practicable, but not later than 270 days after 

October 18, 1972, and shall be made available to the public and the States, 

and considered as they become available by the Administrator in carrying out 

section 1326 of this title and by the States in proposing thermal water quality 

standards. 

(u) Authorization of appropriations 

There is authorized to be appropriated 

(1) not to exceed $100,000,000 per fiscal year for the fiscal year ending 

June 30, 1973, the fiscal year ending June 30, 1974, and the fiscal year 

ending June 30, 1975, not to exceed $14,039,000 for the fiscal year ending 

September 30, 1980, not to exceed $20,697,000 for the fiscal year ending 

September 30, 1981, not to exceed $22,770,000 for the fiscal year ending 

September 30, 1982, such sums as may be necessary for fiscal years 1983 

through 1985, and not to exceed $22,770,000 per fiscal year for each of the 

fiscal years 1986 through 1990, for carrying out the provisions of this 

section, other than subsections (g)(1) and (2), (p), (r), and (t) of this 

section, except that such authorizations are not for any research, 

development, or demonstration activity pursuant to such provisions; 

(2) not to exceed $7,500,000 for fiscal years 1973, 1974, and 1975, 

$2,000,000 for fiscal year 1977, $3,000,000 for fiscal year 1978, $3,000,000 

for fiscal year 1979, $3,000,000 for fiscal year 1980, $3,000,000 for fiscal 

year 1981, $3,000,000 for fiscal year 1982, such sums as may be necessary 

for fiscal years 1983 through 1985, and $3,000,000 per fiscal year for each 

of the fiscal years 1986 through 1990, for carrying out the provisions of 

subsection (g)(1) of this section; 

(3) not to exceed $2,500,000 for fiscal years 1973, 1974, and 1975, 

$1,000,000 for fiscal year 1977, $1,500,000 for fiscal year 1978, $1,500,000 

for fiscal year 1979, $1,500,000 for fiscal year 1980, $1,500,000 for fiscal 

year 1981, $1,500,000 for fiscal year 1982, such sums as may be necessary 

for fiscal years 1983 through 1985, and $1,500,000 per fiscal year for each 

of the fiscal years 1986 through 1990, for carrying out the provisions of 

subsection (g)(2) of this section; 

(4) not to exceed $10,000,000 for each of the fiscal years ending June 30, 

1973, June 30, 1974, and June 30, 1975, for carrying out the provisions of 

subsection (p) of this section; 

(5) not to exceed $15,000,000 per fiscal year for the fiscal years ending 

US CODE: Title 33,1254. Research, investigations, training, and information Page 8 of 9

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode33/usc_sec_33_00001254----000-.html 1/4/2007
June 30, 1973, June 30, 1974, and June 30, 1975, for carrying out the 

provisions of subsection (r) of this section; and 

(6) not to exceed $10,000,000 per fiscal year for the fiscal years ending 

June 30, 1973, June 30, 1974, and June 30, 1975, for carrying out the 

provisions of subsection (t) of this section. 

(v) Studies concerning pathogen indicators in coastal recreation waters 

Not later than 18 months after October 10, 2000, after consultation and in 

cooperation with appropriate Federal, State, tribal, and local officials (including 

local health officials), the Administrator shall initiate, and, not later than 3 years 

after October 10, 2000, shall complete, in cooperation with the heads of other 

Federal agencies, studies to provide additional information for use in 

developing— 

(1) an assessment of potential human health risks resulting from exposure 

to pathogens in coastal recreation waters, including nongastrointestinal 

effects; 

(2) appropriate and effective indicators for improving detection in a timely 

manner in coastal recreation waters of the presence of pathogens that are 

harmful to human health; 

(3) appropriate, accurate, expeditious, and cost-effective methods 

(including predictive models) for detecting in a timely manner in coastal 

recreation waters the presence of pathogens that are harmful to human 

health; and 

(4) guidance for State application of the criteria for pathogens and 

pathogen indicators to be published under section 1314 (a)(9) of this title to 

account for the diversity of geographic and aquatic conditions. 

 

Prev | Next

LII has no control over and does not endorse any external Internet 

site that contains links to or references LII.

US CODE: Title 33,1254. Research, investigations, training, and information Page 9 of 9

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode33/usc_sec_33_00001254----000-.html 1/4/2007
 

Clean Water--The Road Ahead 

 Over the past 

quarter century, America 

has made tremendous 

strides in cleaning up its 

rivers, lakes, and coastal 

waters. In 1972, the 

Potomac River was too 

dirty to swim in, Lake Erie was dying, and the Cuyahoga River was 

so polluted it burst into flames. Many rivers and beaches were little 

more than open sewers. The improvement in the health of the 

nation's waters is a direct result of a concerted effort to enhance 

stewardship of natural resources and to implement the 

environmental provisions of federal, state, tribal and local laws. In 

particular, the Clean Water Act has stopped billions of pounds of 

pollution from fouling the nation's water, doubling the number of 

waterways safe for fishing and swimming. Today, rivers, lakes, and 

coasts are thriving centers of healthy communities. 

Despite tremendous progress, 40 percent of the nation's waterways 

assessed by states are still unsafe for fishing and swimming. 

Pollution from factories and sewage treatment plants, soil erosion, 

and wetland losses have been dramatically reduced. But runoff from

city streets, rural areas, and other sources continues to degrade the 

environment and puts drinking water at risk. Fish in many waters 

still contain dangerous levels of mercury, polychlorinated biphenyls 

(PCBs), and other toxic contaminants. 

Clean Water Program at a Crossroads 

After 25 years of progress, the nation's clean water program is at a 

crossroads. Implementation of the existing programs will not stop 

serious new threats to public health, living resources, and the 

nation's waterways, particularly from polluted runoff. These

programs lack the strength, resources, and framework to finish the 

job of restoring rivers, lakes, and coastal areas. To fulfill the original 

goal of the Clean Water Act-- fishable and swimmable water for 

every American the nation must chart a new course to address the
pollution problems of the next generation. 

Charting a New Course 

In his 1998 State of the Union Address, President Clinton 

announced a major new Clean Water Initiative to speed the 

restoration of the nation's precious waterways. This new initiative 

aims to achieve clean water by strengthening public health 

protections, targeting community-based watershed protection efforts 

at high priority areas, and providing communities with new 

resources to control polluted runoff. 

On October 18, 1997, the 25th anniversary of the Clean Water Act, 

Vice President Gore directed the Department of Agriculture 

(USDA) and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to work 

with other federal agencies and the public to prepare an aggressive 

Action Plan to meet the promise of clean, safe water for all 

Americans. This Action Plan forms the core of President Clinton's 

Clean Water Initiative in which he proposed $568 million in new 

resources in his FY 1999 budget to carry it out. The Action Plan 

builds on the solid foundation of existing clean water programs and 

proposes new actions to strengthen efforts to restore and protect 

water resources. In implementing this Action Plan, the federal 

government will: 

o support locally led partnerships that include a broad array of 

federal agencies, states, tribes, communities, businesses, and 

citizens to meet clean water and public health goals; 

o increase financial and technical assistance to states, tribes, 

local governments, farmers, and others; and 

o help states and tribes restore and sustain the health of aquatic 

systems on a watershed basis. 

Four Tools for Clean Water 

Federal, state, tribal, and local governments have many tools they 

can use to clean up and protect water resources. Regulation, 

economic incentives, technical assistance, research, education, and 

accurate information all have a role to play in meeting clean water 

goals. This Action Plan is built around four key tools to achieve 

clean water goals. 

A Watershed Approach 

This Action Plan envisions a new collaborative effort by federal
state, tribal, and local governments; the public; and the private 

sector to restore and sustain the health of watersheds in the nation. 

The watershed approach is the key to setting priorities and taking 

action to clean up rivers, lakes, and coastal waters. 

Strong Federal and State Standards 

This Action Plan calls for federal, state, and tribal agencies to revise 

standards where needed and make existing programs more effective. 

Effective standards are key to protecting public health, preventing 

polluted runoff, and ensuring accountability. 

Natural Resource Stewardship 

Most of the land in the nation's watersheds is cropland, pasture, 

rangeland, or forests, and most of the water that ends up in rivers, 

lakes, and coastal waters falls on these lands first. Clean water 

depends on the conservation and stewardship of these natural 

resources. This Action Plan calls on federal natural resource and 

conservation agencies to apply their collective resources and 

technical expertise to state and local watershed restoration and 

protection. 

Informed Citizens and Officials 

Clear, accurate, and timely information is the foundation of a sound 

and accountable water quality program. Informed citizens and 

officials make better decisions about their watersheds. This Action 

Plan calls on federal agencies to improve the information available 

to the public, governments, and others about the health of their 

watersheds and the safety of their beaches, drinking water, and fish. 

A Watershed Approach-- The Key to the 

Future 

This Action Plan proposes a new collaborative effort by state, tribal, 

federal, and local governments, the private sector and the public to 

restore those watersheds not meeting clean water, natural resource, 

and public health goals and to sustain healthy conditions in other 

watersheds. 

For the past 25 years, most water pollution control efforts relied on 

broadly applied national programs that reduced water pollution from 

individual sources such as discharges from sewage treatment plants
and factories, and from polluted runoff. Today, there is growing 

recognition that clean water strategies built on this foundation and 

tailored to specific watershed conditions are the key to the future. 

Why Watersheds? 

Clean water is the product of a healthy watershed--a watershed in 

which urban, agricultural, rangelands, forest lands, and all other 

parts of the landscape are well-managed to prevent pollution. 

Focusing on the whole watershed helps strike the best balance 

among efforts to control point source pollution and polluted runoff, 

and protect drinking water sources and sensitive natural resources 

such as wetlands. A watershed focus also helps identify the most 

cost-effective pollution control strategies to meet clean water goals. 

Skipjack under sail on the Chesapeake Bay. The Chesapeake Bay Program is an 

international model of interagency and intergovernmental cooperation on a

large watershed scale. The Program sets goals for water quality and habitat 

restoration based on sound science and achieves them by developing consensusdriven strategies. For example, federal agencies are working with agricultural 

and forest landowners to develop farmland and riparian forest buffers, feedlot 

and animal strategies, and to provide technical support. Photo Credit: EPA 

Working at the watershed level encourages the public to get 

involved in efforts to restore and protect their water resources and is 

the foundation for building strong clean water partnerships. The 

watershed approach is the best way to bring state, tribal, federal, and 

local programs together to more effectively and efficiently clean up 

and protect waters. It is also the key to greater accountability and 

progress toward clean water goals. 
Key Elements of the Watershed Approach 

This Action Plan proposes a watershed approach built on several 

key elements. 

Unified Watershed Assessments. States, tribes, and federal agencies 

currently set priorities for watershed action in many different ways. 

For example, state water quality agencies are developing lists of 

impaired water bodies, defining source water protection areas for 

drinking water, identifying coastal protection priorities, and defining 

priority areas for agricultural assistance programs. Similarly, 

federal, state and tribal natural resource agencies set their priorities 

for watershed restoration and protection in various ways to meet 

their mandates for natural resource conservation. These processes 

are designed to meet valid objectives, but too often opportunities to 

work together to meet common goals are overlooked. 

This Action Plan creates a strategic opportunity for states and tribes, 

in cooperation with federal land and resource managers on federal 

lands, to take the lead in unifying these various existing efforts and 

leveraging scarce resources to advance the pace of progress toward 

clean water. As a number of states and tribes have demonstrated, 

they can meet existing requirements more efficiently and develop 

more coordinated and comprehensive priorities on a watershed 

basis. 

Unified watershed assessments are a vehicle to identify: 

o watersheds that will be targeted to receive significant new 

resources from the President's FY 1999 budget and beyond 

to clean up waters that are not meeting water quality goals; 

o pristine or sensitive watersheds on federal lands where core 

federal and state programs can be brought together to 

prevent degradation of water quality; and 

o threatened watersheds that need an extra measure of 

protection and attention. 

Watershed Restoration Action Strategies. The Action Plan encourages 

states and tribes to work with local communities, the public, and 

federal environmental, natural resource, and land management 

agencies to develop strategies to restore watersheds that are not 

meeting clean water and natural resource goals. Watershed 

Restoration Action Strategies will spell out the most important 

causes of water pollution and resource degradation, detail the 

actions that all parties need to take to solve those problems, and set 

milestones by which to measure progress Funds made available to
federal agencies through the FY 1999 Clean Water and Watershed 

Restoration Budget Initiative will be used to help states implement 

these strategies. 

Watershed Pollution Prevention. Protecting pristine or sensitive waters 

and taking preventive action when clean water is threatened by new 

activities in the watershed can be the most cost-effective approach to 

meeting clean water goals. This Action Plan encourages states, 

tribal, and federal agencies to bring core programs and existing 

resources together to support watershed pollution prevention 

strategies to keep clean waters clean. 

Watershed Assistance Grants. Federal agencies will provide small 

grants to local organizations that want to take a leadership role in 

building local efforts to restore and protect watersheds. These grants 

will ensure that local communities and stakeholders can effectively 

engage in the process of setting goals and devising solutions to 

restore their watersheds. 

Strong Federal and State Standards 

This Action Plan calls on federal, state, and tribal governments to 

strengthen existing programs to support an accelerated effort to 

attack the nation's remaining water quality problems. Federal, state, 

and tribal standards for water quality and polluted runoff are key 

tools for protecting public health, preventing polluted runoff, and 

ensuring accountability. Some of the specific actions called for in 

this Action Plan are identified below. 

Improve Assurance that Fish and Shellfish are Safe to Eat 

Federal agencies will work with states and tribes to expand 

programs to reduce contaminants that can make locally caught fish 

and shellfish unsafe to eat, particularly mercury and other persistent, 

bio-accumulative toxic pollutants, and to ensure that the public gets 

clear notice of fish consumption risks. 

Ensure Safe Beaches 

Federal, state, and local governments will work to improve the 

capacity to monitor water quality at beaches, develop new standards, 

and use new technologies such as the Internet to report public health 

risks to recreational swimmers. 

Expand Control of Storm Water Runoff 
EPA will publish final Phase II storm water regulations for smaller 

cities and construction sites in 1999. EPA will also work with its 

partners to make sure that existing storm water control requirements 

for large urban and industrial areas are implemented. 

Improve State and Tribal Enforceable Authorities to Address 

Polluted Runoff 

Federal agencies will work with states and tribes to promote the 

establishment of state and tribal enforceable authorities to ensure the 

implementation of polluted runoff controls by the year 2000. 

Define Nutrient Reduction Goals 

EPA will establish by the year 2000 numeric criteria for nutrients 

(i.e., nitrogen and phosphorus) that reflect the different types of 

water bodies (e.g., lakes, rivers, and estuaries) and different 

ecoregions of the country and will assist states and tribes in adopting 

numeric water quality standards based on these criteria. 

Reduce Pollution from Animal Feeding Operations 

EPA will publish and, after public comment, implement an Animal 

Feeding Operations Strategy for important and necessary actions on 

standards and permits. In addition, by November 1998, EPA and 

USDA will jointly develop a broad, unified national strategy to 

minimize the environmental and public health impacts of Animal 

Feeding Operations. 

Natural Resource Stewardship 

Nearly 70 percent of the United States, exclusive of Alaska, is held 

in private ownership by millions of individuals. Fifty percent, or 907 

million acres, is owned by farmers, ranchers, and their families. 

Another 400 million acres are federal lands. Most of the rainfall in 

the country falls on these lands before it enters rivers, lakes, and 

coastal waters. Effective management of these croplands, pastures, 

forests, wetlands, rangelands, and other resources is key to keeping 

clean water clean and restoring watersheds where water quality is 

impaired. 

This Action Plan commits all federal natural resource conservation 

and environmental agencies to focus their expertise and resources to 

support the watershed approach described above. In addition, these 

agencies will work with states tribes and others to enhance critical
natural resources essential to clean water. 

Federal Land Stewardship 

More than 800 million acres of the United States, including Alaska, 

is federal land. These lands contain an immense diversity and wealth 

of natural resources, including significant sources of drinking water 

and public recreation opportunities. 

By 1999, the U.S. Department of the Interior (DOI) and USDA will 

take the lead in developing a Unified Federal Policy to enhance 

watershed management for the protection of water quality and the 

health of aquatic systems on federal lands and for federal resource 

management. Federal land managers will improve water quality 

protection for over 2,000 miles of roads and trails each year through 

2005 and decommission 5,000 miles each year by 2002. Federal 

land managers will also accelerate the cleanup rate of watersheds 

affected by abandoned mines and will implement an accelerated 

riparian stewardship program to improve or restore 25,000 miles of 

stream corridors by 2005. 

Protect and Restore Wetlands 

This Action Plan sets a goal of attaining a net increase of 100,000 

wetland acres per year by the year 2005. This goal will be achieved 

by ensuring that existing wetland programs continue to slow the rate 

of wetland losses, improving federal restoration programs, and by 

expanding incentives to landowners to restore wetlands. 

Protect Coastal Waters 

Federal agencies, led by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration (NOAA), will work in partnership to improve the 

monitoring of coastal waters, expand research of emerging problems 

like Pfiesteria, amend Fishery Management Plans to address water 

quality issues, and ensure the implementation of strong programs to 

reduce polluted runoff to coastal waters. 

Provide Incentives for Private Land Stewardship 

This Action Plan relies on a substantial increase in the technical and 

financial assistance available to private landowners as the primary 

means of accelerating progress toward reducing polluted runoff 

from agricultural, range, and forest lands. 
USDA, working with federal, state, tribal, and private partners, will 

establish by 2002 two million miles of conservation buffers to 

reduce polluted runoff and protect watersheds, direct new funding 

for the Environmental Quality Incentives Program to support 

watershed restoration, and develop as many new agreements with 

states as practicable to use the Conservation Reserve Enhancement 

Program to improve watersheds. The Plan also envisions new and 

innovative methods to provide incentives for private landowners to 

implement pollution prevention plans, including risk management 

protection for adoption of new pollution prevention technologies 

and market recognition for producers that meet environmental goals. 

In addition, DOI will expand its existing Partners for Wildlife 

Program, which restores degraded fish and wildlife habitats and 

improves water quality through partnerships with landowners. The 

program provides technical and financial assistance, and gives 

priority to threatened and endangered species. 

Informed Citizens and Officials 

Effective management of water resources requires reliable 

information about water quality conditions and new tools to 

communicate information to the public. Federal agencies, led by the 

U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), will work with states and tribes to 

improve monitoring and assessment of water quality, focusing on 

nutrients and related pollutants. Federal agencies will also work with 

states and tribes to develop and use state-of-the-art systems, such as 

EPA's Index of Watershed Indicators on the Internet, to 

communicate meaningful information to the public about water 

quality conditions in their communities. 

Improvements in Connecticut River water quality have led to a resurgence in

recreational fishing, especially in urban areas like Hartford, which has been the 

site of major fishing tournaments in recent years. Photo Credit: Riverfront Recapture 
Clean Water and Watershed 

Restoration Budget Initiative 

To support the new and expanded efforts to restore and protect the 

nation's waters as proposed in this Clean Water Action Plan, the 

President's FY 1999 budget proposes a Clean Water and Watershed 

Restoration Budget Initiative. The funding provided in this budget 

initiative will dramatically increase federal financial support for 

clean water programs in FY 1999 and beyond. Specifically, the 

Clean Water and Watershed Restoration Budget Initiative will: 

o increase direct support to states and tribes to carry out a 

watershed approach to clean water; 

o increase technical and financial assistance to farmers, 

ranchers, and foresters to reduce polluted runoff and enhance 

the natural resources on their lands; 

o fund watershed assistance programs and grants to engage 

local communities and citizens in leadership roles in 

restoring their watersheds; 

o accelerate progress in addressing critical water quality 

problems on federal lands, including those related to roads, 

abandoned mines, riparian areas, and rangelands; 

o expand and coordinate water quality monitoring programs; 

and 

o increase efforts to restore nationally significant watersheds, 

such as the Florida Everglades and the San Francisco BayDelta. 

Clean Water and Watershed Restoration Budget 

Funding Summary

Percent Increase 1999 over 1998 35%

Total Increase 1999-2003 2,338

Total Spending 1999-2003 10,516
Total Spending 1999-2003 10,516

Funding by Agency 1998 

Enacted 

1999 

Budget 

Environmental Protection Agency:

State Grant Assistance

 Polluted runoff control grants (Sec. 319) 105 200 

 State program management grants (Sec. 106) 96 116 

 Wetlands protection grants 15 15 

 Water quality cooperative agreements 20 19 

Water quality program management 248 279 

Total, EPA 484 629 

Department of Agriculture:

Natural Resources Conservation 

Service:Environmental Quality Incentives 

Program

200* 300* 

Natural Resources Conservation Service:Locally 

led conservation 0 20 

Natural Resources Conservation 

Service:Watershed health monitoring 0 3 

Forest Service:Improve water quality on federal 

lands 239 308 

Agriculture Research Service:Watershed health 

research 0 2 

Total, USDA 439 633 

Department of the Interior:

Bureau of Land Management:Improve water 

quality on federal lands 133 157 

Office of Surface Mining:Clean streams 5 7 

U.S. Geological Survey:Water monitoring and 

assessment 125 147 

Fish and Wildlife Service:Wetlands restoration 36 42 

Bureau of Indian Affairs:Improve water quality 

on tribal lands 0 5 

Total, DOI 299 358 

National Oceanographic and 

Atmospheric Administration:

Polluted runoff and toxic contaminants 0 13 

Harmful algal blooms 0 9 

Total, NOAA 0 22 
Army Corps of Engineers:

Wetlands program 106 117 

Challenge 21:Floodplain restoration initiative 0 25 

Total, ACE 106 142 

Interagency Projects: 

Florida Everglades 228 282 

California Bay Delta 85 143 

Elimination of overlap between Everglades and

other water programs listed above

-5 -5 

Total,Interagency projects 308 420 

Total Clean Water and Watershed Restoration 

Initiative (with Mandatory Spending) 1,636 2,204 

*Indicates Mandatory Spending

Source:Office of 

Management and Budget

A Continuing Commitment to Clean Water 

The publication of this Action Plan is just the beginning of a longterm effort. Many of the proposed actions will provide for later 

public review and comment and federal agencies are committed to 

working closely with states, tribes, and others to ensure successful 

implementation of specific actions. 

In addition, regular reports will keep the public apprised of progress 

and remaining challenges. By the end of the year 2000 and 

periodically thereafter, status reports on progress in implementing 

watershed restoration plans and related programs will be provided to 

the President, the nation's governors, tribal leaders, and the public. 
Table of Contents | Next Section 

Clean Water Initiative Home 

EPA HOMEPAGE/ OFFICE OF WATER/ USDA HOME/ COMMENTS/ SEARCH 

http://cleanwater.gov/action/overview.html 

Revised August 10, 1998 
APPENDIX B 

2008 Biennial National Listing of Fish Advisories 

EPA-823-F-09-007, September 2009 

(http://www.epa.gov/waterscience/fish/advisories/tech2008.html)
2007/2008 2008National Listing of Fish Advisories 

Biennial National Listing of Fish Advisories 

EPA-823-F-09-007

September 2009

The 2008 NLFA is available online at

www.epa.gov/fishadvisories

Since 1993, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has made 

available to the public an annual compendium of information on locally 

issued fish advisories and safe eating guidelines. This information is provided 

to EPA by the states, U.S. territories, Native American tribes, and local 

governments that issue fish consumption advisories and safe eating guidelines 

to inform people about the recommended level of consumption for fish 

caught in local waters. Fish consumption advisories provide advice to limit or 

avoid eating certain fish due to contamination with chemical pollutants. Safe 

eating guidelines are designations of monitored waters where there is no 

restriction on eating specific types of fish. The 2008 National Listing 

of Fish Advisories (NLFA)1

 database shows that the number of fish 

advisories issued continues to rise.

Background 

All 50 states, the District of Columbia, 

the U.S. territories of American Samoa 

and Guam, and five Native American 

tribes (for simplicity, referred to here as 

“states”) have fish consumption advisories in place to protect their residents 

from the potential health risks of eating 

contaminated fish caught in local waters. 

The states have developed their own fish 

advisory programs over the years, and 

there is variability among states in the 

scope and extent of monitoring and in 

the specific advice that is provided when 

contaminated fish are found. Because of 

this variability, it is difficult to draw national conclusions or to establish national 

trends in fish advisories.

A fish consumption advisory is not a 

regulation, but rather a recommendation 

issued to help protect public health. These 

advisories may include recommendations 

to limit or avoid eating certain fish and 

wildlife species caught from specific water 

bodies or from water-body types (e.g., 

all lakes) due to chemical contamination. An advisory may be issued for the 

general public, including recreational and 

subsistence fishers, or it may be issued 

specifically for sensitive populations, such 

as pregnant women, nursing mothers, and 

children.

An advisory for a specific water body or 

water-body type may cover more than one 

affected fish species or chemical 

1 The NLFA fact sheet was produced annually through the EPA 2004 National Listing of Fish Advisories 

report. In 2005, EPA decided to release subsequent fact sheets on a biennial basis because of nominal 

changes in data from year to year. This fact sheet summarizes data submitted by the states and discusses 

changes in data for the 2008 data reporting cycle. Advisory data for the 2007 reporting cycle and previous 

years can be found on the EPA Web site at www.epa.gov/fishadvisories.
2008 Biennial National Listing of Fish Advisories 

2

contaminant. Because of the wide range in the 

number of lake acres and river miles affected 

by one advisory, the number of advisories does 

not tell the full story of the geographic extent of 

waters subject to state advice. Therefore, EPA also 

provides information about the total lake acres 

and total river miles for which advisories are currently in effect (Figure 1). 

States are increasingly issuing statewide advisories 

to warn the public of the potential human health 

risks from chemical contamination of certain 

species of fish from all water bodies within the 

state. States are also continuing to issue safe eating guidelines to inform the public that fish from 

specific water bodies have been tested for chemical contaminants and that, based on those results, 

certain species of fish from those water bodies 

are safe to eat without consumption restrictions. 

As states increase their monitoring activities, 

the quantity of available information about fish 

contamination also increases, resulting in better 

public health protection.

National Listing of Fish Advisories Web Site

The NLFA Web site (www.epa.gov/fishadvisories) includes information about the species and size of fish under advisory, the chemical contaminants identified in the advisory, the location of the 

water body, and the population for whom the advisory was issued. 

The NLFA Web site also includes data on the concentrations of 

contaminants in fish tissue for 49 states/territories/tribes. Through 

this Web site, users can generate national, regional, and state maps 

that summarize advisory information.

Synopsis of the 2008 National Listing of Fish 

Advisories 

EPA’s 2008 National Listing of Fish Advisories indicates that the 

number of advisories increased by 397 since 2006, bringing the 

total number of advisories in effect from 3,852 in 2006 to 4,249 

in 2008. Approximately 18 million lake acres and 1.4 million river 

miles were under advisory in 2008, representing 43 percent of 

the nation’s total lake acreage and 39 percent of the nation’s total 

river miles. From 2006 to 2008, the number of lake acres under 

advisory increased by 18 percent, and the number of river miles 

increased by 52 percent. 

The increase in lake acres and river miles under advisory from 

2006 to 2008 can be attributed primarily to the issuance of several 

new statewide advisories. A statewide advisory is issued to warn the 

public of potential contamination of certain types of fish in specific 

types of water bodies across the state, resulting in the designation 

of all river miles and/or lake acres in the state as under advisory. 

Four states (Delaware, Idaho, Oregon, and Wyoming) issued 

new statewide advisories for all freshwaters in 2007 and 2008. As 

shown in Figure 2, 38 states had statewide advisories in effect in 

2008.

0.0

5.0

10.0

15.0

20.0

25.0

30.0

35.0

40.0

45.0

50.0

1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008

Year

Percent of Total Miles or Acres

River Miles

Lake Acres

Figure 1 shows the percentage of total lake acres and river miles under advisory from 1993 to 

2008.
2008 Biennial National Listing of Fish Advisories 

3

Safe Eating Guidelines

EPA encourages states to issue safe eating guidelines when providing advisory information to inform the public that certain species 

of fish from specific bodies of water have been tested and have been 

shown to contain very low levels of contaminants. The states help 

promote recreational fishing by identifying monitored waters where 

designated fish are safe to eat without consumption restrictions. 

The total number of safe eating guidelines increased from 20 in 

1993 to 1,247 in 2006, but dropped to 874 in 2008. In 2008, safe 

eating guidelines were in effect in 22 states, covering approximately 

53,728 river miles (2 percent of the national total) and 2.3 million 

lake acres (8 percent of the national total). These river-mile and 

lake-acre figures represent decreases of 42,897 river miles and nearly 3 million lake acres since 2006. Although several states issued a 

total of 120 new guidelines between 2006 and 2008, the overall 

geographic area covered by these guidelines decreased because one 

state rescinded almost 500 guidelines in the past 2 years.

Figure 2 shows the states with statewide advisories in effect in 2008.

Bioaccumulative Contaminants 

Although there are advisories in the United States for 34 different 

chemical contaminants, 97 percent of all advisories in effect in 

2008 involved the following five bioaccumulative chemical contaminants: mercury, polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), chlordane, 

dioxins, and dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane (DDT) (Figures 3 

and 4, Table 1). These chemical contaminants accumulate in the 

tissues of aquatic organisms at concentrations many times higher 

than concentrations in the water and can persist for many years 

in sediments, where bottom-dwelling organisms that are lower on 

the food chain can accumulate them and pass them to fish that 

are higher on the food chain. As a result, top predators in a food 

chain (e.g., largemouth bass, walleye) may have concentrations of 

bioaccumulative contaminants in their tissues that are significantly 

higher than the concentrations found in the water.

As of 2008, 50 states, one U.S. territory, and three tribes have 

issued mercury advisories. Eighty percent of all advisories in effect 

in 2008 were issued, at least in part, because of mercury. In 2008, 

HI

AK

AS

Guam Puerto Rico

Virgin Islands

No Statewide

Freshwater Advisories

Statewide Advisories

 for Freshwater

Statewide Advisories

 for Lakes

Statewide Coastal 

 Advisories

DC 

MA = 77

RI 2

CT = 2

NJ 04

DE

MD = 7

Legend
2008 Biennial National Listing of Fish Advisories 

4

there were 16.8 million lake acres and 1.3 million river miles under 

advisory for mercury. This represents an increase from 2006 of 19 

percent for lake acres and 42 percent for river miles. The increase 

in the area under advisory was largely driven by the new statewide 

mercury advisories in Idaho, Oregon, and Wyoming. 

Other Bioaccumulative Contaminants

PCBs: Between 2006 and 2008, lake acres under advisory for 

PCBs increased by 29 percent, and river miles under advisory 

decreased by 1.5 percent. 

Chlordane: All registered uses of the pesticide chlordane were 

banned in the United States in 1988, and the compound continues 

to degrade in the environment. Between 2006 and 2008, lake acres 

under advisory for chlordane decreased by 1 percent, and river 

miles under advisory decreased by 8 percent.

Dioxins: Between 2006 and 2008, lake acres under advisory for 

dioxin decreased by 7 percent, and river miles under advisory 

decreased by 11 percent. 

DDT: The use of DDT, an organochlorine pesticide, has been 

banned in the United States since 1975. Lake acres and river miles 

under advisory for DDT both increased less than 1 percent from 

2006 to 2008. 

Other Contaminants: Three percent of all fish advisories are 

caused solely by other contaminants, including organochlorine 

pesticides, heavy metals, and contaminants of emerging concern 

such as perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS). In 2008, approximately 

2.6 million lake acres and 243,534 river miles were under advisory 

for other contaminants.

 Wildlife Advisories 

In 2008, five states had a total of 6 wildlife advisories in effect, 

down from 12 advisories in 2006. New York had a statewide advisory for waterfowl, and Maine had a statewide advisory for moose 

liver and kidney. Massachusetts and Rhode Island had specific 

water body advisories for frogs and turtles, while Utah had two 

advisories for ducks.

Figure 3 shows the total lake acres under advisory for mercury, PCBs, chlordane, dioxins, DDT and other contaminants 

from 1993 to 2008.

0 2,000,000 4,000,000 6,000,000 8,000,000 10,000,000 12,000,000 14,000,000 16,000,000 18,000,000

Other

DDT

Dioxins

Chlordane

PCBs

Mercury

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

2003

2002

2001

2000

1999

1998

1997

1996

1995

1994

1993

Lake Acres Under Advisory
2008 Biennial National Listing of Fish Advisories 

5

Contaminant Number of Advisories Lake Acres River Miles

2006 2008 2006 2008 2006 2008

Mercury 3,080 3,361 14,177,175 16,808,032 882,963 1,254,893

PCBs 1,023 1,025 4,699,936 6,049,506 132,228 130,248

Chlordane 105 67 847,771 842,913 58,668 54,029

Dioxins 125 123 38,181 35,400 2,315 2,055

DDT 84 76 876,175 876,520 69,021 69,198

Table 1. Number of advisories and lake acres and river miles under advisory in 2006 

and 2008 for each contaminant.

Figure 4 shows the total river miles under advisory for mercury, PCBs, chlordane, dioxins, DDT and other contaminants 

from 1993 to 2008.

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

2003

2002

2001

2000

1999

1998

1997

1996

1995

1994

1993

0 200,000 400,000 600,000 800,000 1,000,000 1,200,000 1,400,000

Other

DDT

Dioxins

Chlordane

PCBs

Mercury

River Miles Under Advisory
2008 Biennial National Listing of Fish Advisories 

6

National Advice Concerning 

Mercury in Fish 

In 2004, EPA and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued advice for women who might become 

pregnant, pregnant women, nursing mothers, and children. 

(The national advice is not included in the statistics presented in this fact sheet.) The following advice from EPA 

and FDA is still in effect:

By adhering to the following three recommendations for 

selecting and eating fish or shellfish, women and young 

children will receive the health benefits of eating fish and 

shellfish and be confident that they have reduced their 

exposure to the harmful effects of mercury:

•	 Do not eat shark, swordfish, king mackerel, or tilefish

because they contain high levels of mercury. 

•	 Eat up to 12 ounces (two average meals) each week of a

variety of fish and shellfish that are lower in mercury. 

− Five of the most commonly consumed fish that 

are low in mercury are shrimp; canned, light tuna; 

salmon; pollock; and catfish. 

− Albacore (“white”) tuna is another commonly 

consumed fish that has more mercury than canned, 

light tuna. Eat up to 6 ounces (one average meal) of 

albacore tuna per week. 

•	 Check local advisories about the safety of fish caught by

family and friends in local lakes, rivers, and coastal areas. 

If no advice is available, eat up to 6 ounces (one average 

meal) per week of fish caught from local waters, but do 

not consume any other fish during that week. 

Follow these same recommendations when including fish 

and shellfish in a young child’s diet, but serve smaller portions.

For more information about the ways to reduce mercury 

exposure, consult EPA’s brochure, What You Need to Know 

About Mercury in Fish and Shellfish, which is available in 

several languages on EPA’s NLFA Web site at www.epa.gov/

fishadvisories. 

El pescado y el marisco son una parte 

importante de una dieta saludable. El pescado 

y el marisco contienen proteínas de alta 

calidad y otros nutrientes esenciales que son 

bajos en grasas saturadas y contienen ácidos 

grasos omega-3. Una dieta bien equilibrada 

que incluya pescados y mariscos variados 

puede contribuir a la salud cardiaca, y al c 

recimiento y desarrollo adecuado de los niños. 

Por tanto, las mujeres y los niños pequeños en 

particular deben incluir pescados o mariscos 

en sus dietas debido a sus muchos beneficios 

nutricionales. 

Sin embargo, casi todos los pescados y 

mariscos contienen algunos rastros de 

mercurio. Para muchas personas, el riesgo 

del mercurio proveniente del pescado y del 

marisco no es una preocupación de salud. 

No obstante, algunos pescados y mariscos 

contienen altos niveles de mercurio que 

pueden perjudicar a los fetos o el sistema 

nervioso en vías de desarrollo de un niño 

pequeño. Los riesgos del mercurio en el 

pescado y el marisco dependen de la cantidad 

de pescado y marisco que se coma, y de los 

niveles del mercurio en el pescado y el 

marisco. Por lo tanto, la Administración de 

Alimentos y Medicamentos (FDA, por sus 

siglas en inglés) y la Agencia de Protección 

Ambiental (EPA, por sus siglas en inglés) 

aconsejan a las mujeres en edad fértil, a las 

mujeres embarazadas, a las madres lactantes 

y a los niños pequeños que eviten comer 

algunos tipos de pescado, y que coman 

pescados y mariscos bajos en mercurio. 

Para más información sobre los riesgos del mercurio 

en el pescado y los mariscos, llame a la línea de 

información gratuita de la Administración de 

Alimentos y Medicamentos de los EE.UU. en el 

1-888-SAFEFOOD o visite el sitio Web de la FDA 

sobre la seguridad de los alimentos. 

Para más información sobre la seguridad de los 

pescados y mariscos capturados localmente visite el 

sitio Web de la EPA para ver los avisos de pesca o 

comuníquese con el departamento de salud local de 

su estado. Para más información en inglés sobre las 

acciones de la EPA para controlar el mercurio, 

visite el sitio Web sobre mercurio de la EPA. 

HECHOS 

EPA-823-F-04-010 

L o que

Usted

Necesita

Saber

Sobre el

Mercurio

en el

Pescado y

los

Mariscos

Aviso de la EPA y la FDA de 2004 para: Las mujeres en edad fértil, las mujeres embarazadas, las madres lactantes y los niños pequeños 

Os peixes e os frutos do mar são uma parte 

importante de uma dieta saudável. Eles contêm 

proteínas de alta qualidade e outros nutrientes 

essenciais que são baixos em gordura saturada 

e contêm ácidos graxos omega-3. Uma dieta 

bem balanceada que contenha peixes e frutos 

de mar contribui para a saúde do coração e para 

o crescimento e desenvolvimento adequado 

de crianças. Portanto, especialmente mulheres 

e crianças pequenas devem incluir peixes e 

frutos do mar nas suas dietas devido aos seus 

numerosos benefícios nutricionais. 

Entretanto, quase todos os peixes e frutos do 

mar contêm traços de mercúrio. Para a maior 

parte das pessoas, o risco de ingerir mercúrio 

ao alimentar-se de peixes e frutos do mar não 

constitui uma preocupação para a sua saúde. 

Contudo, alguns peixes e frutos do mar contêm 

altos níveis de mercúrio que podem causar 

danos a um feto ou ao desenvolvimento do 

sistema nervoso de crianças pequenas. Os riscos 

dependem da quantidade de peixes e frutos do 

mar ingeridos e dos níveis de mercúrio contidos 

neles. Portanto, a Administração de Alimentos 

e Drogas (FDA por sua sigla em inglês) e a 

Agência de Proteção Ambiental (EPA por sua 

sigla em inglês) estão aconselhando às mulheres 

que podem engravidar, às mulheres grávidas, às 

mulheres que estão amamentando e às crianças 

pequenas que evitem alguns tipos de peixes e 

que se alimentem com peixes e frutos do mar 

baixos em mercúrio.

Para obter mais informações sobre os riscos corridos 

pela ingestão de mercúrio contido em peixes e frutos 

do mar, ligue para a linha grátis de informações 

sobre alimentos da FDA nos Estados Unidos 1-888-

SAFEFOOD

Alimentos da FDA no endereço 

 ou visite o website de Segurança dos 

www.cfsan.fda.

gov/seafood1.html

Para obter mais informações sobre a segurança dos 

. 

peixes e frutos do mar pescados no local, visite o 

website de Informações sobre Peixes da Agência de 

Proteção Ambiental no endereço www.epa.gov/ost/

fish ou entre em contato com o departamento de 

saúde local ou estadual. Há uma lista de contatos 

dos departamentos de saúde locais e estaduais no 

website www.epa.gov/ost/fish. Clique em contatos 

federais, estaduais ou tribais. Para obter informações 

sobre as ações da EPA para controlar o mercúrio, 

visite o website de mercúrio da EPA no endereço 

www.epa.gov/mercury. 

Os Fatos

Informações para

Mulheres Que Podem Engravidar 

Mulheres Grávidas 

Mães Que Estão Amamentando 

Crianças Pequenas

da Administração de Alimentos e Drogas dos Estados Unidos 

e da Agência de Proteção Ambiental dos Estados Unidos

EPA-823-F-06-005

O Que Você

Precisa

Saber

Sobre

Mercúrio

em Peixes

Frutos

e

do Mar

Cá và tôm, cua, sò, hến là những thức ăn quan 

trọng của một chế độ ăn uống khoẻ mạnh. Cá và 

tôm, cua, sò, hến chứa hàm lượng protein cao, 

các chất dinh dưỡng thiết yếu khác, các axit béo 

Omega-3, và hàm lượng chất béo bão hoà thấp. 

Một chế độ ăn uống cân bằng bao gồm nhiều 

loại cá và tôm, cua, sò, hến có thể góp phần bảo 

đảm một trái tim khoẻ mạnh, trẻ em tăng trưởng 

và phát triển hợp lý. Bởi vậy, phụ nữ và đặc biệt 

là trẻ em cần đưa cá và tôm, cua, sò, hến vào 

thực đơn của mình vì những thức ăn này mang 

lại nhiều lợi ích về dinh dưỡng.

Tuy nhiên, hầu hết tất cả các loại cá và tôm, 

cua, sò, hến đều chứa một hàm lượng thuỷ ngân 

nhỏ. Đối với đa số nhiều người, nguy cơ nhiễm 

thuỷ ngân do ăn cá và tôm, cua, sò, hến không 

phải là mối lo ngại về sức khoẻ. Tuy nhiên, một 

số loại cá và tôm, cua, sò, hến có chứa hàm 

lượng thuỷ ngân cao hơn và có thể gây hại cho 

hệ thần kinh đang phát triển của trẻ chưa sinh 

hoặc trẻ nhỏ. Nguy cơ nhiễm thủy ngân từ cá 

và tôm, cua, sò, hến phụ thuộc vào số lượng cá 

và tôm, cua, sò, hến ăn vào và hàm lượng thuỷ 

ngân trong những thức ăn đó. Bởi vậy, Cơ quan 

Thực phẩm và Dược phẩm (FDA) và Cục Bảo 

vệ Môi trường (EPA) khuyên những phụ nữ sẽ 

mang thai, 

và trẻ nhỏ cần tránh một số loại cá, và nên ăn 

đang mang thai, bà mẹ cho con bú 

những loại cá và tôm, cua, sò, hến chứa hàm 

lượng thủy ngân thấp.

Để biết thêm thông tin về những nguy cơ nhiễm thủy 

ngân từ cá và tôm, cua, sò, hến, xin hãy gọi điện cho 

đường dây thông tin miễn phí về thức ăn của Cơ 

quan Thực phẩm và Dược phẩm Hoa Kỳ, 

1-888-SAFEFOOD hoặc truy nhập trang web 

Thực phẩm An toàn của FDA www.cfsan.fda.gov/

seafood1.html. 

Để biết thêm thông tin về độ an toàn của những loài 

cá và tôm, cua, sò, hến được đánh bắt ở địa phương, 

hãy truy nhập trang web Tư vấn về Cá của Cục Bảo 

vệ Môi trường: www.epa.gov/ost/fish hoặc liên hệ 

với Sở Y tế Tiểu bang hoặc Địa phương. Danh sách 

chi tiết liên hệ của các sở y tế tiểu bang hoặc địa 

phương được cung cấp tại trang web: www.epa.

gov/ost/fish

Liên bang, Tiểu bang và Bộ lạc. Để biết thêm thông 

. Hãy bấm chuột vào các Chi tiết Liên hệ 

tin về các biện pháp của EPA nhằm kiểm soát thuỷ 

ngân, hãy truy nhập trang web về thuỷ ngân của EPA 

tại: www.epa.gov/mercury. 

Thông tin thực tế

Lời khuyên dành cho

Những phụ nữ có thể mang thai

Những phụ nữ đang mang thai

Bà mẹ cho con bú

Trẻ nhỏ

từ Cơ quan Thực phẩm và Dược phẩm Hoa Kỳ, 

Cục Bảo vệ Môi trường Hoa Kỳ

Những 

Thông tin 

Cần biết về 

Thuỷ ngân 

có trong 

Cá và Tôm, 

Cua, Sò, 

Hến

EPA-823-F-06-002

어류와 패류는 건강한 식단을 이루는 

중요한 요소입니다. 어패류에는 고품질

의 단백질과 기타 필수 영양소가 들어 

있으며, 포화지방이 적고, 오메가-3 지

방산이 풍부합니다. 각종 어패류가 포

함된 균형 잡힌 식사는 심장 건강과 어

린이의 성장 발육에 좋습니다. 따라서 

특히 여성과 영유아의 식단에는 영양학

적으로 장점이 많은 어패류가 반드시 

포함되어야 합니다. 

그러나 거의 모든 어패류에는 미량의 

수은이 들어 있습니다. 대부분의 사람

들에게 있어 어패류를 통해 섭취되는 

수은은 건강상 위험을 일으키지 않습

니다. 그러나 일부 어패류의 경우 수은

을 더 많이 함유하고 있어 태아나 어린

아이의 신경체계 발달에 좋지 않은 영

향을 미칠 수 있습니다. 어류와 패류에 

포함된 수은이 일으키는 위험은 섭취

하는 어패류의 양과 그 어패류에 포함

된 수은의 함량에 따라 달라집니다. 따

라서 식품의약국(FDA)와 환경보호청

(EPA)에서는 임신 가능성이 있거나 임

신중인 여성, 수유중인 여성 및 영유아

의 경우 일부 종류의 어류를 피하고 수

은 함량이 적은 어패류를 섭취할 것을 

권장하고 있습니다.

어패류에 포함된 수은의 위험에 대한 더 많

은 정보는 미 식품의약국 수신자 부담 전화 

1-888-SAFEFOOD

식품안전 웹 사이트 

로 연락하시거나 FDA의 

www.cfsan.fda.gov/

seafood1.html를 방문해 주시기 바랍니다.

각 지방에서 잡히는 어패류의 안전에 대한 

더 많은 정보는 환경보호청의 어류섭취경

고 웹 사이트 www.epa.gov/ost/fish를 방

문하시거나 州 또는 지방 보건국으로 연

락하시기 바랍니다. 州 또는 지방 보건국

의 목록은 www.epa.gov/ost/fish에서 찾

아 보실 수 있습니다. Federal, State & Tribal 

Contacts(연방, 주 및 부족 연락처)를 클릭

해 주십시오. 수은 문제와 관련된 EPA의 

활동에 대한 정보는 EPA의 수은 관련 웹 

사이트 www.epa.gov/mercury에서 찾아 보

실 수 있습니다.

사실

어패류에 

함유된

수은에

관한

모든

정보

임신할 가능성이 있는 여성,

임신한 여성,

수유 중인 여성,

그리고 영유아를 위해 

미 식품의약국과

미 환경보호청이

드리는 조언

EPA-823-F-05-014

Ntses thiab qwj ntses yog yam tseem ceeb noj 

nrog zaub mov pab tau lub cev. Ntses thiab qwj 

ntses muaj protein zoo nrog rau lwm yam as 

ham (nutrients), lawv muaj roj nyeem tsawg, 

thiab lawv muaj cov omega-3 fatty acids. Kev 

noj zaub mov uas muaj nqaij ntses thiab qwj 

ntses muaj kam pab tau kom lub plawv ua hauj 

lwm zoo thiab pab menyuam yaus loj sai thiab 

loj hlob zoo. Yog li, poj niam thiab tshwj xeeb 

yog menyuam yaus yuav tsum noj ntses los 

sis qwj ntses nrog lawv cov zaub mov vim tias 

lawv muaj ntau hom as ham zoo.

Tab sis, yuav luag txhua txhua yam ntses 

thiab qwj ntses muaj tsig kua hlau mercury. 

Rau tib neeg feem coob, qhov yuav kis tau 

mercury thaum noj ntses thiab qwj ntses kuj 

tsis yog ib qho txaus txhawj. Tiam sis, ib txhia 

ntses thiab qwj ntses muaj tsig mercury ntau 

dua uas muaj peev xwm ua tsis zoo rau tus 

menyuam nyob hauv plab los sis tus menyuam 

mos kom nws lub nrog cev loj hlob tsis taus. 

Qhov yuav kis tau mercury los ntawm nqaij 

ntses thiab qwj ntses kuj yog nyob ntawm seb 

yus noj ntses thiab qwj ntses ntau npaum cas 

thiab seb cov mercury nyob hauv cov nqaij no 

muaj ntau npaum cas. Vim li no, lub hoob kas 

saib xyuas zaub mov thiab tshuaj (Food and 

Drug Administration-FDA) thiab lub hoob kas 

tiv thaiv liaj teb (Environmental Protection 

Agency-EPA) thiaj li hais kom cov poj niam uas 

tseem yuav xeeb tub, cov twb xeeb tub lawm, 

cov tseem pub niam mis rau menyuam, thiab 

cov menyuam yau kom tsis txhob noj qee yam 

ntses es tsuas noj cov ntses thiab qwj ntses uas 

muaj tsig mercury tsawg tsawg xwb.

Yog xav tau ntawv qhia ntxiv txog cov mercury 

nyob hauv ntses thiab qwj ntses, hu rau lub hoob 

kas U.S. Food and Drug Administration cov lus 

qhia txog kev noj haus ntawm tus xov tooj hu dawb 

1-888-SAFEFOOD los sis mus saib tau FDA daim 

vev-xaij qhia Ceev Faj Zaub Mov www.cfsan.fda.

gov/seafood1.html.

Yog xav tau ntawv qhia ntxiv txog kev yuav ceev faj 

cov ntses thiab qwj ntses uas nuv tau hauv zej zos, 

mus saib tau Environmental Protection Agency daim 

vev-xaij qhia txog ntses www.epa.gov/ost/fish los 

sis tiv tauj koj lub Xeev los yog Zos lub hoob kas loj 

saib kev noj qab haus huv (State or Local Health Department). Cov npe thiab xov tooj ntawm cov hoob 

kas xeev thiab zos no muaj nyob ntawm www.epa.

gov/ost/fish. Nias rau qhov Teb Chaws, Xeev, thiab 

Pab Pawg (Tribal) Cov Npe. Yog xav tau ntawv 

qhia txog EPA cov kev ua los tswj fwm mercury, 

mus saib rau EPA daim vev-xaij qhia txog mercury 

ntawm www.epa.gov/mercury.

Yam Muaj Tseeb

Lus cob qhia rau

Cov Poj Niam uas Yuav Xeeb Tub

Cov Poj Niam uas Xeeb Tub Lawm

Cov Poj Niam uas Pub Niam Mis rau Menyuam

Menyuam Yaus

los ntawm U.S. Food and Drug Administration 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Yam Koj 

Yuav 

Tsum Tau 

Paub Txog 

Ntawm 

Mercury 

hauv Nqaij 

Ntses thiab 

Qwj Ntses

EPA-823-F-06-003

gGMbUrRKM KWCaEpñkmYyy:agsMxan;énGahar sRmab;suxPaB . 

 nigGMbUrRKMmanCatiRbU:etGIunx<s; nig sarFatuciBa©wmBiess2

eTot EdlmanCatixøaj;Eq¥t kñúgkMritTab nigGasIudxøaj; 

mhÁa 3 . rbbGahard3⁄4 RtwmRtUvrYmman RtI nigGMbUrRKMepSg2

cp þl ;dl ;s uxPaB ebHd Ug karr Ikl Utlas ; n igkarr Ikc Mer In 

smRsbrbs;kumar . dUecñH®sþI nigkumartUc2 CaBiess 

KYrEtbBa©ÚlRtI nigGMbUrRKM cUlkñúgrbbGaharrbs;eK 

dlCaehtunaM [manplRbeyaCn_CaeRcInxagcMNIGahar .

eTaHCay:agNa swgEtRKb;RbePTRtI nigGMbUrRKMTaMgGs; 

manbnþúMCati)art . sMrab;mnusSPaKeRcIn eRKaHfñak;eday 

Cati)art BIkarjaMuRtI nigGMbUrRKM minEmnCabBaðasuxPaBK Y

eGayxVl;eT . b:uEnþRtI nigGMbUrRKMEdlman)artkñúgkMritx<s; 

Gac maneRKaHfñak;dl;TarkminTan;ekIt nigkarrIkcMerInRbB1⁄2n§ 

srésRbsaTrbs;kumar . eRKaHfñak;énCati)artEdlman 

enAkñúgRtI nigGMbUrRKMsßitenAelIcMnYnRtI nigGMbUrRKMEdl 

briePaK nigkMriténCati)artEdlmanenAkñúgRtI nigGMbUrRKM 

enaH . dUecñHrdæ)al »sf nigcMNIGahar (FDA) nig 

Pñak;garkarBarbrisßan (EPA) pþl;dMbUnμandl;®sþIEdl 

GacmanépÞeBaH ®sþImanépÞeBaH mþaykMBugbMe)AkUn nig 

kumartUc2 RtUvecosvagRbePTxøHénRtI nigbriePaKRtI nig 

GMbUrRKMNaEdlmanCati)arttic . 

sMrab;Bt’manepSg2GMBIeRKaHfñak;énCati)art EdlmanenA kñúgRtI 

nigGMbUrRKM sUmTUrs1⁄2BÞtamry3Bt’manGMBIcMNI GaharEdl\

tKitéføeTAkan;elx 1-888-SAFEFOOD rbs;rdæ)al»sf 

nigcMNIGahar b¤Tak;TgeTAkan;evbsay suvtßiPaBcMNIGahar 

(Food Safety) rbs; FDA www.cfsan.fda.gov/

seafood1.html

sMrab;Bt’manepSgeTotGMBIsuvtßiPaBénRtI nig 

RbePTRKMEdl eKensaTkñúgRsuk sUmTak;TgeTA 

kan;evbsayTIRbwkSa GMBIRtIrbs;rdæ)alkarBarbrisßan 

www.epa.gov/ost/fish b¤Tak;Tgrdæ b¤naykdæan 

suxPaBkñúgRsukrbs;Gñk . bBa¢IeQμaHrdæ b¤naykdæan 

suxPaBkñúgRsukmanenA www.epa.gov/ost/fish . 

cucelI Federal ¬shB1⁄2n§¦ State ¬rdæ¦ nig Tribal 

Contacts ¬TMnak;TMngkulsm1⁄2<n§¦ . sMrab;Bt’manelI 

skmμPaBrbs; EPA edIm,IRtYtBinitüCati)art sUm

Tak; TgeTAkan;evbsay www.epa.gov/mercury .

PaBBit

GIVEdlGñk

RtUv

dwg

GMBI

Cati)art

EdlmankñúgRtI

nig

GMbUrRKM

dMbUnμansMrab;

®sþIEdlGacmanépÞeBaH

®sþIEdlmanépÞeBaH

mþaykMBugbMe)AkUn

kumartUc2

BI

rdæ)al»sf nigcMNIGaharshrdæGaemrik

TIPñak;garkarBarbrisßanshrdæGaemrik 

EPA-823-F-05-013

有关鱼贝汞风险的更多信息,请拨打美国

食品与药品管理局免费咨询电话:1-888-

SAFEFOOD 或访问食品与药品管理局

的食品安全网站 www.cfsan.fda.gov/

seafood1.html.

有关当地捕获鱼贝安全性的更多信息,请访

问环境保护署的鱼类咨询网站 www.epa.

gov/ost/fish 或与您所在的州或当地卫生

局联系。www.epa.gov/ost/fish 列出了州或

当地卫生局的联络方式。点击联邦、州和部

落联络链节。有关环境保护署采取措施进

行汞控制的信息,请访问该署的汞资讯站点

www.epa.gov/mercury.

鱼贝汞

风险须

知

给以下人群的忠告

可能怀孕的女性

孕妇

哺乳期妇女

儿童

由美国食品与药品管理局和美国环境保护署提供

EPA-823-F-06-004
2008 Biennial National Listing of Fish Advisories 

7

EPA Fish Advisory Program Activities

The National Forum on Contaminants in Fish

This forum is a biennial event sponsored by EPA to bring 

together public health and environmental professionals from 

states, tribes, and other interested groups to discuss the many 

issues related to assessing risks and benefits of fish consumption. 

The next forum is scheduled for November 2–5, 2009, in 

Portland, Oregon. More information on the forum is available 

online at www.epa.gov/waterscience/fish/forum.

Mississippi Delta Fish Consumption Survey

EPA’s Fish Advisory Program is partnering with FDA and the 

Mississippi State Department of Environmental Quality to assess 

the awareness and effectiveness of existing fish consumption 

advisories in the Mississippi Delta. Objectives of the study are to:

•	 Determine the extent to which Delta sport and subsistence

fishers and their families are aware of the advisory and its 

recommendations;

•	 Determine the extent to which Delta sport and subsistence

fishermen and their families have changed their fish 

consumption behaviors as a result of the Delta advisory; and

•	 Document specific behavior changes, such as changes in the

amount of fish consumed, method of fish preparation used, 

and species of fish consumed and avoided.

The survey is scheduled to be completed in early 2010, at which 

time results will be published.

EPA Fish Contamination Research 

Fish Tissue Contaminant Studies

As part of our ongoing contaminant assessment activities, EPA 

has expanded the evaluation of contaminants in fish tissue to 

include Contaminants of Emerging Concern. Moving beyond 

the legacy of persistent organic contaminants and toxic metals, 

EPA’s sampling and analysis activities include a pilot study of the 

occurrence of pharmaceuticals and personal care products 

(PPCPs) in five effluent-dominated streams, completed in 2008, 

and ongoing sampling of fish as part of a nationally representative 

study of fish caught in urban rivers. Fish tissue samples collected 

from urban river segments as a part of the National Rivers and 

Streams Assessment will be analyzed for the presence of PPCP 

compounds and perfluorinated organic compounds (e.g., PFOS, 

perfluorooctanoic acid). In addition, a full suite of persistent organic compounds will be analyzed and mercury levels determined 

in all the river samples (urban and non-urban) in this national 

study. For further information about these studies, contact 

Leanne Stahl (stahl.leanne@epa.gov). 

Additional Information 

For more information about specific advisories within 

a state, contact the appropriate state agency listed on 

EPA’s NLFA Web site at www.epa.gov/fishadvisories.

For more information about the NLFA 

or EPA’s Fish Advisory Program, contact: 

Jeff Bigler, National Program Manager

Fish Advisory Program

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

Office of Science and Technology (4305T) 

1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW 

Washington, DC 20460 

Telephone: (202)566-0389

E-mail: bigler.jeff@epa.gov
APPENDIX C 

Federal Register Notice for Original Information Collection Request 

for the National Listing of Advisories April 21, 2000 (Volume 65, 

Number 78, pages 21415–21416). 

Federal Register Notice for Renewal Information Collection Request 

for the National Listing of Advisories August 14, 2003 (Volume 68, 

Number 157, pages 48605–48606). 

Federal Register Notice for Renewal Information Collection Request 

for the National Listing of Advisories April 12, 2007 (Volume 72, 

Number 70, pages 18475–18477). 
Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 78 / Friday, April 21, 2000 / Notices 21415

CAG–23.

Omitted

CAG–24.

Docket#, CP00–14, 000, Buccaneer Gas

Pipeline Company, L.L.C.

Other#s, CP00–15, 000, Buccaneer Gas

Pipeline Company, L.L.C.

CP00–16, 000, Buccaneer Gas Pipeline

Company, L.L.C.

CAG–25.

Docket#, CP00–45, 000, Eastern Shore

Natural Gas Company

CAG–26.

Docket#, CP00–6, 000, Gulfstream Natural

Gas System, L.L.C.

Other#s, CP00–7, 000, Gulfstream Natural

Gas System, L.L.C.

CP00–8, 000, Gulfstream Natural Gas

System, L.L.C.

CAG–27.

Omitted

CAG–28.

Docket#, CP96–684, 001, Interenergy

Sheffield Processing Company, Bear Paw

Energy, L.L.C.

CAG–29.

Omitted

CAG–30.

Docket#, RP99–471, 001, Williams Field

Services Group, Inc. v. El Paso Natural

Gas Company

CAG–31.

Docket#, CP97–315, 003, Independence

Pipeline Company

Other#s, CP97–319, 002, ANR Pipeline

Company

CP97–320, 001, Independence Pipeline

Company

CP97–321, 001, Independence Pipeline

Company

CP98–200, 002, National Fuel Gas Supply

Corporation

CP98–540, 002, Transcontinental Gas Pipe

Line Corporation

CAG–32.

Docket#, CP96–687, 002, Iroquois Gas

Transmission System

Hydro Agenda

H–1.

Reserved

Electric Agenda

E–1.

Reserved

Oil and Gas Agenda

I.

Pipeline Rate Matters

PR–1.

Reserved

II.

Pipeline Certificate Matters

PC–1.

Reserved

David P. Boergers,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 00–10204 Filed 4–19–00; 3:51 pm]

BILLING CODE 6717–01–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

[FRL–6582–7]

Agency Information Collection

Activities: Proposed Collection;

Comment Request; Information

Collection Request for the National

Listing of Advisories

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

SUMMARY: In compliance with the

Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C.

3501 et seq.), this document announces

that EPA is planning to submit the

following new Information Collection

Request (ICR) to the Office of

Management and Budget (OMB):

Information Collection Request for the

National Listing of Advisories (EPA ICR

Number 1959.01). Before submitting the

ICR to OMB for review and approval,

EPA is soliciting comments on specific

aspects of the proposed information

collection as described below.

DATES: Comments must be submitted on

or before June 20, 2000.

ADDRESSES: Jeffrey Bigler, U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency,

Office of Science and Technology, 401

M Street SW., Maildrop 4305,

Washington, DC 20460, (202) 260–1305,

by e-mail at bigler.jeff@epa.gov, or

download a copy off the Internet at

http://www.epa.gov/icr and refer to EPA

ICR No. 1959.01.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Jeffrey Bigler at EPA, (202) 260–1305, by

e-mail at bigler.jeff@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Affected Entities

Entities potentially affected by this

action are those which issue fish

consumption advisories within their

state, territory, or tribal jurisdictions.

Title

Information Collection Request for the

National Listing of Advisories (EPA ICR

Number 1959.01). This is a request for

a new collection.

Abstract

Release of chemical contaminants into

our Nation’s waters from industrial

pollution, sprawling urbanization, and

introduction of new pesticides in

agriculture poses potentially serious

public health problems. Recent studies

have confirmed that adverse health

effects can result from consumption of

chemically-contaminated fish from

contaminated waters. These adverse

affects have been one of EPA’s long

standing concerns. They are also

directly related to such Clean Water Act

responsibilities as water quality

standards, surface water quality, and to

the Agency’s effort to ensure that the

waters of the United States are both

‘‘fishable’’ and ‘‘swimmable.’’ Based on

results from the 1998 National Listing of

Fish and Wildlife Advisories (NLFWA)

database, fish consumption advisories

have been issued by 47 states and from

100 to 200 new advisories are issued

every year nationwide.

EPA believes there is a need to

maintain and improve the existing

quality and availability of public

information concerning fish advisories,

which includes but is not limited to

monitoring and risk assessment

activities and the issuance of advisories.

Primary responsibility for these

activities lies with each state, territory,

or tribal jurisdiction, however, several

agencies often share responsibilities for

these activities. Consequently, EPA’s

Office of Water will conduct an annual

fish advisory survey which will be sent

to environmental and health officials

from state, territorial, and tribal agencies

specifically responsible for the issuance

of fish advisories. This survey will

collect information (electronically via

the Internet and on paper) on the

location of advisories and agencies and

persons responsible for maintaining and

issuing advisories for lakes and rivers,

and for estuarine and coastal marine

waterbodies. Responses to the

questionnaire (either on paper or

electronically via the Internet) are

needed to assess public health risks of

consuming chemically-contaminated

fish, and to make this information

available to the public.

The EPA will use the information to

update existing advisory information in

the EPA’s National Listing of Fish and

Wildlife Advisories (NLFWA) electronic

database which has archived fish

advisory data since 1994. The results of

the nationwide data collection effort are

shared with the states, territories, tribes,

other federal agencies and the general

public through access to the NLFWA

database which can be queried for

specific information and through

distribution of the annual Fish Advisory

Fact Sheet via the Internet. Results of

this and past surveys will be available

at EPA’s NLFWA web site (http://

www.epa.gov/OST/fish/). Information

from these surveys has stimulated

nationwide dialogue on fish

consumption advisories involving

agencies and the public. This

information is being used to identify

and clarify issues that will lead to the

continued development of national

guidance to assist states on sampling

21416 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 78 / Friday, April 21, 2000 / Notices

and analysis, risk assessment

procedures, risk management practices,

and risk communication procedures that

will further protect human health.

The purpose of the new collection is

two-fold. First, the survey is needed to

continue to collect and update

quantitative information on the number

of advisories issued by states, territories,

and tribes annually, including detailed

information on species sampled,

chemical contaminants involved,

waterbodies under advisory (including

freshwater, estuarine, and marine

waterbodies), target populations to

which the advisory refers (e.g., pregnant

women, nursing mothers, and young

children), geographic location of each

advisory, and tissue residue data

supporting the states’ advisories. In

addition, the expanded questionnaire

portion of the survey will provide

information on monitoring procedures

used to collect and analyze fish

samples, risk assessment methodologies

used to evaluate fish tissue residue data

and issue advisories, and risk

communication procedures used to

communicate the human health risks of

consuming chemically-contaminated

species. From this information, EPA can

determine how to most effectively

provide assistance to state, territorial,

and tribal fish advisory programs to

improve effectiveness among

jurisdictions through the use of

appropriate procedures for sampling,

chemical analysis, risk assessment, and

risk communication. Completion of this

survey is voluntary and the information

requested is part of the state public

record associated with issuing the

advisories. Over the last few years, the

states have requested guidance from

EPA in their fish advisory programs and

a more comprehensive questionnaire

will provide the states with the

opportunity to identify those advisory

areas for which they most need EPA

assistance.

An agency may not conduct or

sponsor, and a person is not required to

respond to, a collection of information

unless it displays a currently valid OMB

control number. The OMB control

numbers for EPA’s regulations are listed

in 40 CFR part 9 and 48 CFR chapter 15.

The EPA would like to solicit

comments to:

(i) Evaluate whether the proposed

collection of information is necessary

for the proper performance of the

functions of the agency, including

whether the information will have

practical utility;

(ii) Evaluate the accuracy of the

agency’s estimate of the burden of the

proposed collection of information,

including the validity of the

methodology and assumptions used;

(iii) Enhance the quality, utility, and

clarity of the information to be

collected; and

(iv) Minimize the burden of the

collection of information on those who

are to respond, including through the

use of appropriate automated electronic,

mechanical, or other technological

collection techniques or other forms of

information technology, e.g., permitting

electronic submission of responses.

Burden Statement:

The annual public reporting and

record keeping burden for this

collection of information is estimated to

average 36.5 hours per response. Burden

means the total time, effort, or financial

resources expended by persons to

generate, maintain, retain, or disclose or

provide information to or for a Federal

agency. This includes the time needed

to review instructions; develop, acquire,

install, and utilize technology and

systems for the purposes of collecting,

validating, and verifying information,

processing and maintaining

information, and disclosing and

providing information; adjust the

existing ways to comply with any

previously applicable instructions and

requirements; train personnel to be able

to respond to a collection of

information; search data sources;

complete and review the collection of

information; and transmit or otherwise

disclose the information.

Respondents/Affected Entities: State,

territory, and tribal environmental and

health agencies (50 states, District of

Columbia, 5 territories, and 36 tribal

agencies).

Estimated Number of Respondents:

92.

Frequency of Response: Annually.

Estimated Total Annual Hours

Burden: 3,358 hours.

Estimated Total Annualized Cost

Burden (non-labor costs): $552.00.

Geoffrey H. Grubbs,

Director, Office of Science and Technology.

[FR Doc. 00–10035 Filed 4–20–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

[FRL–6583–9]

Agency Information Collection

Activities: Submission for OMB

Review; Comment Request; Resource

Conservation and Recovery Act

(RCRA) Corrective Action Information

Request

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

SUMMARY: In compliance with the

Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C.

3501 et seq.), this document announces

that the following Information

Collection Request (ICR) has been

forwarded to the Office of Management

and Budget (OMB) for review and

approval: RCRA Corrective Action

Information Request (EPA ICR No.

1939.01). The ICR describes the nature

of the information collection and its

expected burden and cost; where

appropriate, it includes the actual data

collection instrument.

DATES: Comments must be submitted on

or before May 22, 2000.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For

a copy of the ICR contact Sandy Farmer

at EPA by phone at (202) 260–2740, by

email at farmer.sandy@epamail.epa.gov,

or download off the Internet at http://

www.epa.gov/icr and refer to EPA ICR

No. 1939.01. For technical questions

about the ICR contact Heather Harris at

(703) 308–6101.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Title: Resource Conservation and

Recovery Act (RCRA) Corrective Action

Information Request (EPA ICR No.

1939.01). This is a new collection.

Abstract: This information collection

is in response to an April 15, 1999

request from Congress concerning the

RCRA Corrective Action program.

Included in this inquiry were certain

questions which only the state offices

have the information to answer. EPA

intends to obtain this information from

the states by means of a questionnaire.

The questionnaire includes facility

specific questions on all RCRA Cleanup

Baseline facilities, enforcement orders,

state authority, and federal funding.

Responses to this request will be

mandatory and all information will be

used to respond to Congress and to

provide an accurate picture of the

current state of the program. An agency

may not conduct or sponsor, and a

person is not required to respond to, a

collection of information unless it

displays a currently valid OMB control

number. The OMB control numbers for

Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 157 / Thursday, August 14, 2003 / Notices 48605

via the Internet in lieu of paper; see 18 

CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the 

instructions on the Commission’s Web 

site under the ‘‘e-Filing’’ link. The 

Commission strongly encourages 

electronic filings.

Magalie R. Salas, 

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 03–20687 Filed 8–13–03; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6717–01–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

[OW–2003–0076, FRL–7544–3] 

Agency Information Collection 

Activities: Proposed Collection; 

Comment Request; National Listing of 

Advisories, EPA ICR Number 1959.02, 

OMB Control Number 2040–0026

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

SUMMARY: In compliance with the 

Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 

3501 et seq.), this document announces 

that EPA is planning to submit a 

continuing Information Collection 

Request (ICR) to the Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB). This is 

a request to renew an existing approved 

collection. This ICR is scheduled to 

expire on January 31, 2004. Before 

submitting the ICR to OMB for review 

and approval, EPA is soliciting 

comments on specific aspects of the 

proposed information collection as 

described below.

DATES: Comments must be submitted on 

or before October 14, 2003.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

referencing Docket ID No. OW–2003–

0076, to EPA online using EDOCKET 

(our preferred method), by e-mail to 

OW-Docket@epa.gov, or by mail to: EPA 

Docket Center, Environmental 

Protection Agency, Water Docket 

MC4101T, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., 

NW., Washington, DC 20460, attention: 

Information Collection Request for the 

National Listing of Advisories.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Jeffrey D. Bigler, National Program 

Manager, National Fish and Wildlife 

Contamination Program (4305T), Office 

of Science and Technology, U.S. EPA, 

1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., 

Washington, DC 20460; telephone 

number: (202) 566–0389; fax number: 

(202) 566–0409; e-mail address: 

bigler.jeff@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The EPA 

has established a public docket for this 

ICR under Docket ID number OW–2003–

0076, which is available for public 

viewing at the Water Docket in the EPA 

Docket Center (EPA/DC), EPA West, 

Room B102, 1301 Constitution Ave., 

NW., Washington, DC. The EPA Docket 

Center Public Reading Room is open 

from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday 

through Friday, excluding legal 

holidays. The telephone number for the 

Reading Room is (202) 566–1744, and 

the telephone number for the Water 

Docket is (202) 566–2426. An electronic 

version of the public docket is available 

through EPA Dockets (EDOCKET) at 

http://www.epa.gov/edocket. Use 

EDOCKET to obtain a copy of the draft 

collection of information, submit or 

view public comments, access the index 

listing of the contents of the public 

docket, and to access those documents 

in the public docket that are available 

electronically. Once in the system, 

select ‘‘search,’’ then key in the docket 

ID number identified above. 

Any comments related to this ICR 

should be submitted to EPA within 60 

days of this notice. The EPA’s policy is 

that public comments, whether 

submitted electronically or in paper, 

will be made available for public 

viewing in EDOCKET as EPA receives 

them and without change, unless the 

comment contains copyrighted material, 

CBI, or other information whose public 

disclosure is restricted by statute. When 

EPA identifies a comment containing 

copyrighted material, EPA will provide 

a reference to that material in the 

version of the comment that is placed in 

EDOCKET. The entire printed comment, 

including the copyrighted material, will 

be available in the public docket. 

Although identified as an item in the 

official docket, information claimed as 

CBI, or whose disclosure is otherwise 

restricted by statute, is not included in 

the official public docket, and will not 

be available for public viewing in 

EDOCKET. For further information 

about the electronic docket, see EPA’s 

Federal Register notice describing the 

electronic docket at 67 FR 38102 (May 

31, 2002), or go to http://www.epa.gov./

edocket.

Affected entities: Entities potentially 

affected by this action are 

Administrators of Public Health and 

Environmental Quality Programs in 

State and tribal governments (NAICS 

92312/SIC 9431 and NAICS 92411/SIC 

9511). 

Title: National Listing of Advisories. 

Abstract: The National Listing of Fish 

and Wildlife Advisories (NLFWA) 

Database contains information on the 

number of new advisories issued by 

each state, territory, or tribe annually. 

The advisory information collected 

identifies the waterbody under advisory, 

the fish or shellfish species and size 

ranges included in the advisory, the 

chemical contaminants and residue 

levels causing the advisory to be issued, 

the waterbody type (river, lake, estuary, 

coastal waters), and the target 

populations to whom the advisory is 

directed. This information is collected 

under the authority of section 104 of the 

Clean Water Act, which provides for the 

collection of information to be used to 

protect human health and the 

environment. The results of the survey 

are shared with states, territories, tribes, 

other federal agencies, and the general 

public through the NLFWA database 

and the distribution of annual fish 

advisories fact sheets. The responses to 

the survey are voluntary and the 

information requested is part of the state 

public record associated with the 

advisories. No confidential business 

information is requested. An agency 

may not conduct or sponsor, and a 

person is not required to respond to, a 

collection of information unless it 

displays a currently valid OMB control 

number. The OMB control numbers for 

EPA’s regulations in 40 CFR. The EPA 

would like to are listed in 40 CFR part 

9. 

The EPA would like to solicit 

comments to: 

(i) Evaluate whether the proposed 

collection of information is necessary 

for the proper performance of the 

functions of the Agency, including 

whether the information will have 

practical utility; 

(ii) Evaluate the accuracy of the 

Agency’s estimate of the burden of the 

proposed collection of information, 

including the validity of the 

methodology and assumptions used; 

(iii) Enhance the quality, utility, and 

clarity of the information to be 

collected; and 

(iv) Minimize the burden of the 

collection of information on those who 

are to respond, including through the 

use of appropriate automated electronic, 

mechanical, or other technological 

collection techniques or other forms of 

information technology, e.g., permitting 

electronic submission of responses. 

Burden Statement: The annual public 

reporting burden for the collection of 

information (averaged over the first 

three years of the information collection 

request) is 3,566 labor hours per year. 

This includes one response per year 

from 92 respondents with an average of 

38.76 hours per response. The total 

annualized cost to the respondents is 

estimated at $529.00. No capital or 

startup costs are required. Burden 

means the total time, effort, or financial 

resources expended by persons to 

generate, maintain, retain, or disclose or 

48606 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 157 / Thursday, August 14, 2003 / Notices 

provide information to or for a Federal 

agency. This includes the time needed 

to review instructions; develop, acquire, 

install, and utilize technology and 

systems for the purposes of collecting, 

validating, and verifying information, 

processing and maintaining 

information, and disclosing and 

providing information; adjust the 

existing ways to comply with any 

previously applicable instructions and 

requirements; train personnel to be able 

to respond to a collection of 

information; search data sources; 

complete and review the collection of 

information; and transmit or otherwise 

disclose the information.

Dated: August 8, 2003. 

Geoffrey H. Grubbs, 

Director, Office of Science and Technology.

[FR Doc. 03–20779 Filed 8–13–03; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

[OW–2003–0064, FRL–7544–6] 

Agency Information Collection 

Activity: Proposed Collection; 

Comment Request; Questionnaire for 

Nominees for the Annual National 

Clean Water Act Recognition Awards 

Program, EPA ICR 1287.06, OMB 

Control Number 2040–0101

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

SUMMARY: In compliance with the 

Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 

3501 et seq.), this document announces 

that EPA is planning to submit a 

continuing Information Collection 

Request (ICR) to the Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB). This is 

a request to renew an existing approved 

collection. This ICR is scheduled to 

expire on February 29, 2004. Before 

submitting the ICR to OMB for review 

and approval, EPA is soliciting 

comments on specific aspects of the 

proposed information collection as 

described below.

DATES: Comments must be submitted on 

or before October 14, 2003.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

referencing docket ID number OW–

2003–0064, to EPA online using 

EDOCKET (our preferred method), by

e-mail to ow-docket@epa.gov, or by mail 

to: EPA Docket Center, Environmental 

Protection Agency, Office of Water 

Docket, MC 4101–T, 1200 Pennsylvania 

Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Maria E. Campbell, Municipal 

Assistance Branch, MC 4204–M, 

Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 

Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, 

DC 20460; telephone number: 202–564–

0628; fax number: 202–501–2396; e-mail 

address: campbell.maria@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: EPA has 

established a public docket for this ICR 

under Docket ID number OW–2003–

0064, which is available for public 

viewing at the Office of Water Docket in 

the EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC), EPA 

West, Room B102, 1301 Constitution 

Ave., NW., Washington, DC. The EPA 

Docket Center Public Reading Room is 

open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., 

Monday through Friday, excluding legal 

holidays. The telephone number for the 

Reading Room is (202) 566–1744, and 

the telephone number for the Office of 

Water Docket is (202) 566–2426. An 

electronic version of the public docket 

is available through EPA Dockets 

(EDOCKET) at http://www.epa.gov/

edocket. Use EDOCKET to obtain a copy 

of the draft collection of information, 

submit or view public comments, access 

the index listing of the contents of the 

public docket, and to access those 

documents in the public docket that are 

available electronically. Once in the 

system, select ‘‘search,’’ then key in the 

docket ID number identified above. 

Any comments related to this ICR 

should be submitted to EPA within 60 

days of this notice. EPA’s policy is that 

public comments, whether submitted 

electronically or in paper, will be made 

available for public viewing in 

EDOCKET as EPA receives them and 

without change, unless the comment 

contains copyrighted material, CBI, or 

other information whose public 

disclosure is restricted by statue. When 

EPA identifies a comment containing 

copyrighted material, EPA will provide 

a reference to that material in the 

version of the comment that is placed in 

EDOCKET. The entire printed comment, 

including copyrighted material, will be 

available in the public docket. Although 

identified as an item in the official 

docket, information claimed as CBI, or 

whose disclosure is otherwise restricted 

by statute, is not included in the official 

public docket, and will not be available 

for public viewing in EDOCKET. For 

further information about the electronic 

docket, see EPA’s Federal Register

notice describing the electronic docket 

at 67 FR 38102 (May 31, 2002), or go to 

http://www.epa.gov./edocket.

Affected entities: Entities potentially 

affected by this action are public 

wastewater treatment plants, 

municipalities, industries, universities, 

manufacturing sites and States. 

Title: Questionnaire for Nominees for 

the Annual National Clean Water Act 

Recognition Awards Program. 

Abstract: This ICR requests reapproval to collect data from EPA’s 

National Clean Water Act Recognition 

Awards nominees. The awards are for 

the following program categories: 

Operations and Maintenance (O&M) 

Excellence, Biosolids (Biosolids) 

Management Excellence, Combined 

Sewer Overflow Control (CSO) Program 

Excellence and Storm Water (SW) 

Management Excellence.

Note: Information collection approval for 

the Pretreatment Awards Program is included 

in the National Pretreatment Program ICR 

(OMB No. 2040.0009, EPA ICR No. 0002.09), 

approved through September 30, 2003. The 

National Clean Water Act Recognition 

Awards Program is managed by EPA’s Office 

of Wastewater Management (OWM). The 

Awards Program is authorized under Section 

501(e) of the Clean Water Act, as amended. 

The Awards Program is intended to provide 

recognition to municipalities and industries 

which have demonstrated outstanding 

technological achievements, innovative 

processes, devices or other outstanding 

methods in their waste treatment and 

pollution abatement programs. 

Approximately 50 awards are presented 

annually. The achievements of these award 

winners are summarized in reports, news 

articles, national publications, and Federal 

Register Notice.

Submission of information on behalf 

of the respondents is voluntary. No 

confidential information is requested. 

The Agency only collects information 

from award nominees under a currently 

valid OMB control number. The OMB 

control numbers for EPA’s regulations 

are listed in 40 CFR part 9 and 48 CFR 

chapter 15. An agency may not conduct 

or sponsor, and a person is not required 

to respond to, a collection of 

information unless it displays a 

currently valid OMB control number. 

The OMB control numbers for EPA’s 

regulations in 40 CFR are listed in 40 

CFR part 9. Based on the data collection, 

national panels will evaluate the 

nominees’ efforts and recommend 

finalists. The collections will be used by 

the respective awards programs to 

evaluate and determine which 

abatement achievements should be 

recognized. A regulation in the Federal 

Register on February 8, 2002, (67 FR 

6138, February 8, 2002) establishes a 

framework for the annual Clean Water 

Act Recognition Awards. 

As currently structured, the O&M 

awards category has nine sub-categories 

which recognize municipal 

achievements. The biosolids awards 

category has four sub-categories which 

recognize municipal biosolids 

operations, technology and research 

Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 70 / Thursday, April 12, 2007 / Notices 18475 

particular application, either a 

competing development application or a 

notice of intent to file such an 

application. Submission of a timely 

notice of intent to file a development 

application allows an interested person 

to file the competing application no 

later than 120 days after the specified 

comment date for the particular 

application. A competing license 

application must conform with 18 CFR 

4.30(b) and 4.36. 

p. Notice of Intent: A notice of intent 

must specify the exact name, business 

address, and telephone number of the 

prospective applicant, and must include 

an unequivocal statement of intent to 

submit, if such an application may be 

filed, either a preliminary permit 

application or a development 

application (specify which type of 

application). A notice of intent must be 

served on the applicant(s) named in this 

public notice. 

q. Proposed Scope of Studies Under 

Permit: A preliminary permit, if issued, 

does not authorize construction. The 

term of the proposed preliminary permit 

would be 36 months. The work 

proposed under the preliminary permit 

would include economic analysis, 

preparation of preliminary engineering 

plans, and a study of environmental 

impacts. Based on the results of these 

studies, the Applicant would decide 

whether to proceed with the preparation 

of a development application to 

construct and operate the project. 

r. Comments, Protests, or Motions To 

Intervene: Anyone may submit 

comments, a protest, or a motion to 

intervene in accordance with the 

requirements of Rules of Practice and 

Procedure, 18 CFR 385.210, 385.211, 

385.214. In determining the appropriate 

action to take, the Commission will 

consider all protests or other comments 

filed, but only those who file a motion 

to intervene in accordance with the 

Commission’s Rules may become a 

party to the proceeding. Any comments, 

protests, or motions to intervene must 

be received on or before the specified 

comment date for the particular 

application. 

s. Filing and Service of Responsive 

Documents: Any filings must bear in all 

capital letters the title ‘‘COMMENTS’’, 

‘‘NOTICE OF INTENT TO FILE 

COMPETING APPLICATION’’, 

‘‘COMPETING APPLICATION’’, 

‘‘PROTEST’’, and ‘‘MOTION TO 

INTERVENE’’, as applicable, and the 

Project Number of the particular 

application to which the filing refers. 

Any of the above-named documents 

must be filed by providing the original 

and the number of copies provided by 

the Commission’s regulations to: The 

Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission, 888 First Street, NE., 

Washington, DC 20426. An additional 

copy must be sent to Director, Division 

of Hydropower Administration and 

Compliance, Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission, at the above-mentioned 

address. A copy of any notice of intent, 

competing application or motion to 

intervene must also be served upon each 

representative of the Applicant 

specified in the particular application. 

t. Agency Comments: Federal, state, 

and local agencies are invited to file 

comments on the described application. 

A copy of the application may be 

obtained by agencies directly from the 

Applicant. If an agency does not file 

comments within the time specified for 

filing comments, it will be presumed to 

have no comments. One copy of an 

agency’s comments must also be sent to 

the Applicant’s representatives. 

Philis J. Posey, 

Acting Secretary. 

[FR Doc. E7–6922 Filed 4–11–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6717–01–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

[EPA–HQ–OW–2007–0201; FRL–8297–9] 

Agency Information Collection 

Activities: Proposed Collection; 

Comment Request; Information 

Collection Request for the National 

Listing of Fish Advisories, EPA ICR 

Number 1959.03, OMB Control Number 

2040–0226 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency. 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: In compliance with the 

Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 

3501 et seq.), this document announces 

that EPA is planning to submit a request 

to renew an existing approved 

Information Collection Request (ICR) to 

the Office of Management and Budget 

(OMB). This ICR is scheduled to expire 

on September 30, 2007. Before 

submitting the ICR to OMB for review 

and approval, EPA is soliciting 

comments on specific aspects of the 

proposed information collection as 

described below. 

DATES: Comments must be submitted on 

or before June 11, 2007. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–

OW–2007–0201, by one of the following 

methods: 

• www.regulations.gov: Follow the 

on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

• E-mail: OW-Docket@epa.gov. 

• Fax: 202–566–9744. 

• Mail: EPA Docket Center 

[Information Collection Request for the 

National Listing of Fish Advisories], 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Water Docket MC4101T, 1200 

Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, 

DC 20460. 

• Hand Delivery: EPA Docket, EPA 

West Room 3334, 1301 Constitution 

Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460. Such 

deliveries are only accepted during the 

Docket’s normal hours of operation, and 

special arrangements should be made 

for deliveries of boxed information. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OW–2007–

0201. EPA’s policy is that all comments 

received will be included in the public 

docket without change and may be 

made available online at 

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information provided, unless 

the comment includes information 

claimed to be Confidential Business 

Information (CBI) or other information 

whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Do not submit information that you 

consider to be CBI or otherwise 

protected through www.regulations.gov 

or e-mail. The www.regulations.gov Web 

site is an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, 

which means EPA will not know your 

identity or contact information unless 

you provide it in the body of your 

comment. If you send an e-mail 

comment directly to EPA without going 

through www.regulations.gov your 

e-mail address will be automatically 

captured and included as part of the 

comment that is placed in the public 

docket and made available on the 

Internet. If you submit an electronic 

comment, EPA recommends that you 

include your name and other contact 

information in the body of your 

comment and with any disk or CD–ROM 

you submit. If EPA cannot read your 

comment due to technical difficulties 

and cannot contact you for clarification, 

EPA may not be able to consider your 

comment. Electronic files should avoid 

the use of special characters, any form 

of encryption, and be free of any defects 

or viruses. For additional information 

about EPA’s public docket visit the EPA 

Docket Center homepage at http:// 

www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Erica Fleisig, National Fish Advisory 

Program (4305T), Office of Science and 

Technology, U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania 

Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460; 

telephone number: (202) 566–1057; fax 

number: (202) 566–0409; e-mail address: 

fleisig.erica@epa.gov. 


rmajette on PROD1PC67 with NOTICES
18476 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 70 / Thursday, April 12, 2007 / Notices 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

How Can I Access the Docket and/or 

Submit Comments? 

EPA has established a public docket 

for this ICR under Docket ID No. EPA–

HQ–OW–2007–0201, which is available 

for online viewing at 

www.regulations.gov, or in person 

viewing at the Water Docket in the EPA 

Docket Center (EPA/DC), EPA West, 

Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave., 

NW., Washington, DC. The EPA/DC 

Public Reading Room is open from 8 

a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through 

Friday, excluding legal holidays. The 

telephone number for the Reading Room 

is 202–566–1744, and the telephone 

number for the Water Docket is (202) 

566–2426. 

Use www.regulations.gov to obtain a 

copy of the draft collection of 

information, submit or view public 

comments, access the index listing of 

the contents of the docket, and to access 

those documents in the public docket 

that are available electronically. Once in 

the system, select ‘‘search,’’ then key in 

the docket ID number identified in this 

document. 

What Information Is EPA Particularly 

Interested in? 

Pursuant to section 3506(c)(2)(A) of 

the PRA, EPA specifically solicits 

comments and information to enable it 

to: 

(i) Evaluate whether the proposed 

collection of information is necessary 

for the proper performance of the 

functions of the Agency, including 

whether the information will have 

practical utility; 

(ii) Evaluate the accuracy of the 

Agency’s estimate of the burden of the 

proposed collection of information, 

including the validity of the 

methodology and assumptions used; 

(iii) Enhance the quality, utility, and 

clarity of the information to be 

collected; and 

(iv) Minimize the burden of the 

collection of information on those who 

are to respond, including through the 

use of appropriate automated electronic, 

mechanical, or other technological 

collection techniques or other forms of 

information technology, e.g., permitting 

electronic submission of responses. In 

particular, EPA is requesting comments 

from very small businesses (those that 

employ less than 25) on examples of 

specific additional efforts that EPA 

could make to reduce the paperwork 

burden for very small businesses 

affected by this collection. 

What Should I Consider When I 

Prepare My Comments for EPA? 

You may find the following 

suggestions helpful for preparing your 

comments: 

1. Explain your views as clearly as 

possible and provide specific examples. 

2. Describe any assumptions that you 

used. 

3. Provide copies of any technical 

information and/or data you used that 

support your views. 

4. If you estimate potential burden or 

costs, explain how you arrived at the 

estimate that you provide. 

5. Offer alternative ways to improve 

the collection activity. 

6. Make sure to submit your 

comments by the deadline identified 

under DATES. 

7. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, 

be sure to identify the docket ID number 

assigned to this action in the subject 

line on the first page of your response. 

You may also provide the name, date, 

and Federal Register citation. 

What Information Collection Activity or 

ICR Does This Apply to? 

Affected entities: Entities potentially 

affected by this action are 

Administrators of Public Health and 

Environmental Quality Programs in 

State and tribal governments (NAICS 

92312/SIC 9431 and NAICS 92411/SIC 

9511). 

Title: Information Collection Request 

for the National Listing of Fish 

Advisories. 

ICR numbers: EPA ICR No. 1959.03, 

OMB Control No. 2040–0226. 

ICR status: This ICR is currently 

scheduled to expire on September 30, 

2007. An Agency may not conduct or 

sponsor, and a person is not required to 

respond to, a collection of information, 

unless it displays a currently valid OMB 

control number. The OMB control 

numbers for EPA’s regulations in title 40 

of the CFR, after appearing in the 

Federal Register when approved, are 

listed in 40 CFR part 9, and are 

displayed either by publication in the 

Federal Register or by other appropriate 

means, such as on the related collection 

instrument or form, if applicable. The 

display of OMB control numbers in 

certain EPA regulations is consolidated 

in 40 CFR part 9. 

Abstract: The National Listing of Fish 

Advisories (NLFA) database contains 

information on the number of new 

advisories issued by each state, territory, 

or tribe annually. The advisory 

information collected identifies the 

waterbody under advisory, the fish or 

shellfish species and size ranges 

included in the advisory, the chemical 

contaminants and residue levels causing 

the advisory to be issued, the waterbody 

type (river, lake, estuary, coastal 

waters), and the target populations to 

whom the advisory is directed. This 

information is collected under the 

authority of section 104 of the Clean 

Water Act, which provides for the 

collection of information to be used to 

protect human health and the 

environment. The results of the survey 

are shared with states, territories, tribes, 

other federal agencies, and the general 

public through the NLFA database and 

the distribution of annual fish advisory 

fact sheets. The responses to the survey 

are voluntary and the information 

requested is part of the state public 

record associated with the advisories. 

No confidential business information is 

requested. An agency may not conduct 

or sponsor, and a person is not required 

to respond to, a collection of 

information unless it displays a 

currently valid OMB control number. 

The OMB control numbers for EPA’s 

regulations in 40 CFR are listed in 40 

CFR part 9. 

Burden Statement: The annual public 

reporting and recordkeeping burden for 

this collection of information is 

estimated to average 38.76 hours per 

response. Burden means the total time, 

effort, or financial resources expended 

by persons to generate, maintain, retain, 

disclose or provide information to or for 

a Federal agency. This includes the time 

needed to review instructions; develop, 

acquire, install, and utilize technology 

and systems for the purposes of 

collecting, validating, and verifying 

information, processing and 

maintaining information, and disclosing 

and providing information; adjust the 

existing ways to comply with any 

previously applicable instructions and 

requirements which have subsequently 

changed; train personnel to be able to 

respond to a collection of information; 

search data sources; complete and 

review the collection of information; 

and transmit or otherwise disclose the 

information. 

The ICR provides a detailed 

explanation of the Agency’s estimate, 

which is only briefly summarized here: 

Estimated total number of potential 

respondents: 92. 

Frequency of response: Annual. 

Estimated total average number of 

responses for each respondent: 3. 

Estimated total annual burden hours: 

3,566 labor hours. 

Estimated total annual burden costs: 

$124,755.08. No capital or startup costs 

are required. 


rmajette on PROD1PC67 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 70 / Thursday, April 12, 2007 / Notices 18477 

Are There Changes in the Estimates 

From the Last Approval? 

There is no change in the total 

estimated respondent burden compared 

with that identified in the ICR currently 

approved by OMB. 

What Is the Next Step in the Process for 

This ICR? 

EPA will consider the comments 

received and amend the ICR as 

appropriate. The final ICR package will 

then be submitted to OMB for review 

and approval pursuant to 5 CFR 

1320.12. At that time, EPA will issue 

another Federal Register notice 

pursuant to 5 CFR 1320.5(a)(1)(iv) to 

announce the submission of the ICR to 

OMB and the opportunity to submit 

additional comments to OMB. If you 

have any questions about this ICR or the 

approval process, please contact the 

technical person listed under FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. 

Dated: April 6, 2007. 

Ephraim King, 

Director, Office of Science and Technology. 

[FR Doc. E7–6947 Filed 4–11–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS 

COMMISSION 

Notice of Public Information 

Collection(s) Being Submitted for 

Review to the Office of Management 

and Budget 

April 4, 2007. 

SUMMARY: The Federal Communications 

Commission, as part of its continuing 

effort to reduce paperwork burden 

invites the general public and other 

Federal agencies to take this 

opportunity to comment on the 

following information collection(s), as 

required by the Paperwork Reduction 

Act (PRA) of 1995, Public Law 104–13. 

An agency may not conduct or sponsor 

a collection of information unless it 

displays a currently valid control 

number. No person shall be subject to 

any penalty for failing to comply with 

a collection of information subject to the 

Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) that 

does not display a valid control number. 

Comments are requested concerning (a) 

whether the proposed collection of 

information is necessary for the proper 

performance of the functions of the 

Commission, including whether the 

information shall have practical utility; 

(b) the accuracy of the Commission’s 

burden estimate; (c) ways to enhance 

the quality, utility, and clarity of the 

information collected; and (d) ways to 

minimize the burden of the collection of 

information on the respondents, 

including the use of automated 

collection techniques or other forms of 

information technology. 

DATES: Written Paperwork Reduction 

Act (PRA) comments should be 

submitted on or before June 11, 2007. If 

you anticipate that you will be 

submitting PRA comments, but find it 

difficult to do so within the period of 

time allowed by this notice, you should 

advise the FCC contact listed below as 

soon as possible. 

ADDRESSES: Direct all PRA comments to 

Jasmeet K. Seehra, Office of 

Management and Budget, Room 10236 

NEOB, Washington, DC 20503, (202) 

395–3123, or via fax at 202–395–5167 or 

via Internet at 

Jasmeet_K._Seehra@omb.eop.gov and to 

Judith-B.Herman@fcc.gov, Federal 

Communications Commission, Room 1–

B441, 445 12th Street, SW., DC 20554 or 

an e-mail to PRA@fcc.gov. If you would 

like to obtain or view a copy of this 

information collection after the 60-day 

comment period, you may do so by 

visiting the FCC PRA Web page at: 

http://www.fcc.gov/omd/pra. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For 

additional information or copies of the 

information collection(s), contact Judith 

B. Herman at 202–418–0214 or via the 

Internet at Judith-B.Herman@fcc.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: OMB 

Control Number: 3060–XXXX. 

Title: Consummation of Assignments 

and Transfers of Control of Station 

Authorization. 

Form No.: N/A. 

Type of Review: New collection. 

Respondents: Business or other forprofit. 

Number of Respondents: 586 

respondents; 586 responses. 

Estimated Time Per Response: 1 hour. 

Frequency of Response: On occasion 

reporting requirement. 

Obligation to Respond: Required to 

obtain or retain benefits. 

Total Annual Burden: 586 hours. 

Total Annual Cost: N/A. 

Privacy Act Impact Assessment: N/A. 

Nature and Extent of Confidentiality: 

There is no need for confidentiality 

pertaining to the information collection 

requirements in this collection. 

Needs and Uses: The Commission 

will submit this new information 

collection to the OMB after this 60-day 

comment period to obtain the full threeyear clearance from them. The Federal 

Communications Commission 

(‘‘Commission’’) is requesting that the 

Office of Management and Budget 

(OMB) approve the establishment of a 

new collection for consummation of 

assignments and transfers of control of 

station authorization. In addition, the 

Commission is requesting the OMB’s 

approval of mandatory electronic filing 

of consummations of assignments and 

transfers of control of licenses for all 

telecommunications services. 

A consummation is a party’s 

notification to the Commission that a 

transaction (assignment or transfer of 

control of station authorization) has 

been completed within a designated 

period of time. A consummation is 

applicable to all international 

telecommunications services, including 

International High Frequency (IHF), 

Section 214 Applications (ITC), Satellite 

Space Stations (SAT), Submarine Cable 

Landing Licenses (SCL) and Satellite 

Earth Station (SES) stations. 

Currently, applicants send multiple 

letters to various offices within the 

Commission for each file number and 

call sign that are part of the 

consummation. The new, proposed 

consummation module will eliminate 

the applicant’s requirement to notify the 

Commission by letter with the details of 

the consummation. With this new 

collection, the applicant will complete 

an on-line form (consummation module) 

in the Commission’s electronic 

International Bureau Filing System 

(‘‘IBFS’’). After the applicant enters the 

FCC Registration Number (FRN) in the 

form, the system will generate a list of 

file numbers and call signs that are 

related to the FRN. The applicant can 

select the file numbers and call signs 

that are part of the consummation. The 

consummation module: (1) Saves time 

for the applicants and the Commission 

staff because the information is readily 

accessible for viewing and processing 24 

hours a day/7 days a week, (2) 

eliminates the applicants completion by 

paper and mailing of letters, and (3) 

expedites the Commission staff’s receipt 

of consummations in a timely manner. 

The Commission has authority for this 

information collection pursuant to 47 

CFR 1.767, 25.119, 63.24(e), 73.3540 

and 73.3541. Without this collection of 

information, the Commission would not 

have critical information such as a 

change in a controlling interest in the 

ownership of the licensee. Furthermore, 

the Commission would not have the 

authority to review assignments and 

transfers of control of satellite licenses 

to determine whether the initial license 

was obtained in good faith with the 

intent to construct a satellite system. 

Federal Communications Commission. 

Marlene H. Dortch, 

Secretary. 

[FR Doc. E7–6936 Filed 4–11–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6712–01–P 


rmajette on PROD1PC67 with NOTICES
APPENDIX D 

Survey Instrument for the 2010–2012 NLFA Reporting Cycles and the 

State Fish Advisory Program Questionnaire 
A-1

OMB Control Number 2040-0226

Approval Expires 02/28/2011

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

 FISH CONSUMPTION ADVISORY PROGRAMS QUESTIONNAIRE

FOR SURVEY YEARS 2010, 2011, AND 2012

Please provide the following information about the agency in your state or

tribe that is responsible for issuing noncommercial (sportfishing/subsistence)

advisories or closures for chemical contamination in fish and shellfish. 

Agency name 

Agency address

Agency fish advisory contact

Contact’s e-mail address

(_____) 

Contact’s phone number 

(_____)

Contact’s fax number 
A-2

Fish Tissue Monitoring Program

1. Did your state or tribal agency conduct routine monitoring during this past year to obtain

information about the concentrations of chemical contaminants in fish tissue for assessing human

health risks?

G Yes G No G Not applicable

2. What kind of data does your state or tribal agency collect to evaluate chemical contaminant levels

in fish? (Please check all that apply.)

G Captures fish and sends tissues to a lab to determine contaminant concentrations 

G Monitors water quality and uses data to estimate contaminant concentrations in fish

G Monitors sediments and uses data to estimate contaminant concentrations in fish

G Other methods (please specify)

G Not applicable

3. How does your state or tribe conduct monitoring of contaminants in fish tissue for fish advisories?

(Please check all that apply)

G Conducts one-time, nonrecurring or special surveys in particular fishing areas, watersheds, or basins

G Monitors the same fishing areas, watersheds, or basins at regular intervals

G Other methods (please specify)

G Not applicable

4. During the past year, please estimate the number of stations from which your state or tribal

agency collected fish tissue that was analyzed for chemical contaminants and was used for the fish

advisory program.

G 0 stations G 31-50 stations

G 1-10 stations G 51-100 stations

G 11-20 stations G >100 stations

G 21-30 stations G Not applicable

5. How frequently does your state typically resample fish from waterbodies where advisories are in

effect?

G Every year

G Every 2 years 

G Every 3 years

G Every 4 years

G Every 5 years 

G Every 6 to 10 years

G On an as needed basis (no set schedule)

G Other (please specify)

G Not applicable

6. In approximately how many waterbodies was fish tissue monitoring conducted within your state

during the past year?

G 1-10 waterbodies G 21-30 waterbodies

G 11-20 waterbodies G 31-40 waterbodies

G >40 (specify number) (please specify)

G Not applicable
A-3

7. Please check how your state determines which sites to monitor 

(Please check all that apply)

G Accessibility of site G Fixed-station sites

G Area of concern G High pollution potential at the site

G Citizen or Agency request G Major fishery resource

G Degree of angling pressure the site receives G Randomly selected sites

G Other method (please specify)

G Not applicable

Answers to questions 8 through 11 should be based on your Agency’s evaluation of fish tissue monitoring

data. Sediment analysis or water quality monitoring data may be included in your evaluation only if they are

used as the basis for determining when an advisory is needed. Note: For these questions, you may need to

consult with other individuals in your state or tribal organization.

8. How many river, stream, or canal miles were assessed at least once during the last 3 years

specifically for the fish advisory program?

__________ miles

9. How many lake or reservoir acres were assessed at least once during the past 3 years specifically

for the fish advisory program?

 acres

10. How many square miles of estuarine waters were assessed at least once during the past 3 years

specifically for the fish advisory program? 

__________ square miles

11. How many miles of marine coastline (coastal waters) were assessed at least once during the past

3 years specifically for the fish advisory program?

__________ miles

Types of Fish Advisories

12. Does your state issue fish consumption advisories advising individuals to restrict fish

consumption?

G Yes G No G Not applicable

13. Does your state issue fish consumption advisories advising individuals not to consume any fish or

any fish of a particular species from a particular waterbody?

G Yes G No G Not applicable

14. Fish consumption advisories issued in your state pertain to: 

(Please check all that apply) 

G Specific fish species analyzed by the state (e.g., largemouth bass)

G Specified size class(es) for the given species analyzed (e.g., largemouth bass 15-20 inches)

G Selected trophic groups (e.g., game fish, bottom feeders, or panfish)

G The entire fish community (e.g., all fish)

G Certain fish species purchased in stores and restaurants

G Other (please specify)

G Not applicable
A-4

15. Does your state issue statewide or regionwide “blanket” advisories based on your sampling

effort? (A region-wide advisory may be issued for an individual HUC, river drainage basin or portion

of the state.)

Statewide: G Yes G No G Not applicable

Regionwide: G Yes G No G Not applicable

16. Do you have legally enforced advisories or bans within your state (e.g., are fines or citations given

for fishing in posted waters)?

G Yes G No

17. Has your state ever issued a commercial fishing ban for chemically-contaminated fish?

G Yes G No

18. If your state or tribe has issued commercial fishing bans in a waterbody, do they include

consumption information for sport and subsistence fishers?

G Yes G No G Not applicable

19. In addition to chemical contaminants, does your state or tribe also issue fish and/or shellfish

advisories (closures) for microbial contamination (e.g., bacteria or viruses) of a waterbody?

G Yes G No G Not applicable

Sample Preparation and Analyses Procedures

20. Fish consumption advisories (no consumption and/or restricted consumption advisories) issued in

your state are based on the analysis of : (Please check all that apply)

G Fillet samples (skin on)

G Fillet samples (skin off)

G Muscle plug samples

G Whole-fish samples (skin on)

G Whole-fish samples (skin off)

G Other sample types (please specify) 

G Not applicable

21. Does your state target the collection of particular indicator species, and on what is this decision

based? (Please check all that apply)

G Angler survey data

G Availability of the species

G Desire to maintain consistency with past collections

G EPA target species recommendations based on bioaccumulation potential/trophic groups

G Citizen requests

G State does not target collection of indicator species

G Other reasons (please specify)

G Not applicable

22. Does your state collect multiple size classes, by species, and submit these individual size classes for

residue analyses?

G Yes G No G Not applicable

23. Are individual fish samples or composite samples submitted for residue analyses in your state?

G Individual fish samples only

G Composite samples only

G Both individual and composite samples are used

G Not applicable
A-5

24. If individual fish samples are used, how many “individual fish” typically are needed to support an

advisory determination in a waterbody?

G 1 fish

G 3 fish

G 5 fish

G 6 to 10 fish

G 11 to 20 fish

G > 20 fish

G Other number (please specify) 

G Not applicable; state uses only composite fish samples

25. If composite samples are used, how many “individual fish” typically are combined in each of your

state’s composite samples for residue analysis?

G 2 fish

G 3 fish

G 4 fish

G 5 fish

G Other number (please specify)

G Not applicable; state uses only individual fish samples

26. If composite samples are used, how many composite samples are needed to support an advisory

determination in a waterbody?

G 1 composite sample

G 2 composite samples

G 3 composite samples

G Variable; no set number

G Other number (please specify)

G Not applicable; state uses only individual fish samples

27. Assuming your state finds residue levels in exceedance of state criteria, how many years of

sampling are required at a given waterbody before a fish consumption advisory can be issued? 

G 1 year

G 2 years

G 3 or more years

G Site-specific decision; no set time period established

G Other (please specify) 

G Not applicable

28. If commercial fishing bans are issued in your state, on which of the following sample types are they

based? (Please check all that apply)

G Whole-fish samples (skin-on)

G Whole-fish samples (skin-off)

G Fillet samples (skin-on)

G Fillet samples (skin-off)

G Other sample types (please specify)

G Not applicable

29. How many fish tissue samples must be analyzed and found to be in exceedance of state criteria

before a commercial fishing ban is issued? 

G 1 sample

G 2 samples

G 3 or more samples 

G Site-specific decision; no set number established

G Not applicable
A-6

30. How many years of sampling are conducted at a given waterbody before a commercial fishing ban

can be issued? 

G 1 year

G 2 years

G 3 or more years

G Site-specific decision; no set time period established

G Not applicable

31. Once an advisory is issued for a specific waterbody, what must occur for the state to rescind the

advisory?

G Residue levels of the chemical must decline below the state criterion for at least 1 year

G Residue levels of the chemical must decline below the state criterion for at least 2 years

G Residue levels of the pollutant must decline below the state criterion for at least 3 years

G Site-specific decision; no set time period established

G Other schedule or procedure (please specify)

G Not applicable

32. During this past year, please estimate the number of fish tissue samples that were submitted for

chemical analyses by your state agency?

G <20 samples G 41-50 samples

G 21-30 samples G 51-60 samples

G 31-40 samples G >60 samples (please specify number) 

G Not applicable

33. What pollutants did your state screen for in fish tissue samples in this past year? 

(Please check all that apply)

G Aldrin

G Arsenic

G Cadmium

G Chlordane

G Chlorpyrifos

G Chromium

G DDT and its

metabolites

G Diazinon

G Dicofol

G Dieldrin

G Dioxins/Furans 

G Disulfoton

G Endosulfan

G Endrin

G Ethion

G Heptachlor or

Heptachlor epoxide

G Hexachlorobenzene

G Lead 

G Lindane 

G Mercury

G Methoxychlor 

G Mirex 

G Nonachlor 

G Oxyfluorfen

G PAHs

G PCBs

G Pentachloroanisole 

G Selenium

G Terbufos

G Toxaphene

G Tributyltin

G Trifluralin

G Other (please specify

34. Of the pollutants listed, which ones are of primary human health concern in your state waters

(specify up to 5 pollutants). 

G Aldrin

G Arsenic

G Cadmium

G Chlordane

G Chlorpyrifos

G Chromium

G DDT and its

metabolites

G Diazinon

G Dicofol

G Dieldrin

G Dioxins/Furans 

G Disulfoton

G Endosulfan

G Endrin

G Ethion

G Heptachlor or

Heptachlor epoxide

G Hexachlorobenzene

G Lead 

G Lindane 

G Mercury

G Methoxychlor 

G Mirex 

G Nonachlor 

G Oxyfluorfen

G PAHs

G PCBs

G Pentachloroanisole 

G Selenium

G Terbufos

G Toxaphene

G Tributyltin

G Trifluralin

G Other (please specify

35. If your state analyzes for PCBs, what specifically is analyzed? (Please check all that apply)

G Individual congeners

G All Aroclor groups

G Selected Aroclor groups

G A combination of both Aroclors and congeners

G Others (please specify)

G Not applicable
A-7

State Advisory Program Funding

36. How many dollars are spent annually in your state on routine fish tissue field collection activities?

G <$1,000 G $10,000 to $24,999 

G $1,000 to $4,999 G $25,000 to $50,000 

G $5,000 to $9,999 G >$50,000 (please specify) 

G Not applicable

37. What was the funding source for your state’s fish tissue collection activities during the past year?

(Please check all that apply)

G State general funds

G State fishing license revenues 

G State sales tax

G EPA Section 106 funds 

G EPA Section 205j funds

G EPA Region funds

G EPA Grant funds

G Other (please specify)

G Not applicable

38. How many dollars are spent annually in your state on laboratory analyses of fish tissue samples?

G <$1,000 G $10,000 to $24,999 

G $1,000 to $4,999 G $25,000 to $50,000 

G $5,000 to $9,999 G >$50,000 (please specify) 

G Not applicable

39. What was the funding source for your state's laboratory analyses of fish tissue samples during this

past year? (Please check all that apply)

G State general funds

G State fishing license revenues 

G State sales tax

G EPA Section 106 funds 

G EPA Section 205j funds

G EPA Region funds

G EPA Grant funds

G Other (please specify)

G Not applicable

40. If no funding is currently available, is your state seeking funding to conduct a monitoring and

assessment program?

G Yes G No G Not applicable

Other Uses of State Advisory Data

41. For your state’s biennial 305(b) water quality report, what use support designation is assigned to

waterbodies placed under fish consumption advisory?

G Fully supporting G Threatened

G Partially supporting G Not supporting

G No assessments were made G Not applicable

42. If fish consumption advisories have been issued for waterbodies in your state, does your state place

these waterbodies on the state’s 303(d) list of impaired waters?

G Yes G No G Not applicable
A-8

43. If commercial fishing bans have been issued for waterbodies in your state, does your state place

these waterbodies on the state’s 303(d) list of impaired waters?

G Yes G No G Not applicable

44. Is “fish consumption” an assigned beneficial use for waters in your state?

G Yes G No

45. If yes, where have these criteria for beneficial use been established?

G State water quality standards

G SOP for assessing beneficial uses (or related document)

G Other (please specify)

G Not applicable

Risk Assessment Methodology

46. What method(s) does your state currently use to calculate “carcinogenic” health risks and issue

advisories for individuals who consume fish harvested from state waters? 

(Please specify all current methods used)

G Risk assessment methodology

G Food and Drug Administration (FDA) action levels

G None

G Other approach (please specify) 

G Not applicable

47. What carcinogenic risk level (i.e., individual risk within an exposed population) does your state use

to issue advisories and/or post waterbodies?

G 1:10,000 (10-4)

G 1:100,000 (10-5)

G 1:1,000,000(10-6)

G FDA action level

G Other (please specify)

G Not applicable

48. What source(s) does your state use to obtain cancer potency factors to help calculate

“carcinogenic” health risks? (Please check all that apply) 

G ATSDR Toxicological Profiles

G EPA Fish Guidance Document

G EPA Health Effects Assessment Summary Table (HEAST)

G EPA Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS)

G EPA Toxicology One-Liners Database (Office of Pesticide Programs)

G Great Lakes Protocol

G Hazardous Substance Data Bank (HSDB) from the National Library of Medicine

G IARC Monographs

G Other sources (please specify) 

G Not applicable
A-9

49. What method(s) does your state currently use to calculate “noncarcinogenic” health risks and

issue fish advisories for individuals who consume fish harvested from state waters?

(Please specify all current methods used)

G EPA Fish Guidance Document

G FDA Action Levels

G Great Lakes Protocol

G Hazard Index calculations using risk assessment methodology (IRIS RfD)

G None

G Other approach (please specify)

G Not applicable

50. What noncarcinogenic risk level (i.e., individual risk within an exposed population) does your state

use to issue advisories and/or post waterbodies?

G Hazard index (please specify if hazard index is >, =, or < 1)

G FDA action levels

G Other (please specify)

G Not applicable

51. What source(s) does your state use to obtain potency factors (reference dose) to help calculate

noncarcinogenic health risks? (Please check all that apply)

G ATSDR Toxicological Profiles

G EPA Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS)

G EPA Health Effects Assessment Summary Table (HEAST)

G EPA Toxicology One-Liners Database (Office of Pesticide Programs)

G EPA Fish Guidance Document

G Great Lakes Protocol

G Hazardous Substance Data Bank (HSDB) from the National Library of Medicine

G Other sources (please specify) 

G Not applicable

52. Of all the fish advisories currently in effect in your jurisdiction, including those issued last year

and in earlier years, what percentage were issued based on each of these methods? 

(Please write down your best estimate of the percentage for each method)

 % of advisories now in effect were issued using risk assessment methods. % of advisories now in effect were issued using FDA action levels. % of advisories now in effect were issued using other methods specified in question 46 and 49.

G Not applicable

53. Does your state or tribal agency have a plan to reevaluate data from sites where outdated

assessment methods were used to issue fish advisories?

G Yes G No G Not applicable

54. Is your state currently re-evaluating the method or approach used to establish fish advisories?

G Yes G No G Not applicable

55. What default value does your state use in its risk assessments as a daily fish consumption rate for

recreational fishers? 

G 6.5 g/day 

G 12 g/day (the value EPA is currently recommending)

G 15 g/day

G 30 g/day

G Other consumption rates (please specify value in g/day)

G Not applicable
A-10

56. What default value does your state use in its risk assessments as a daily fish consumption rate for

subsistence fishers? 

G 6.5 g/day

G 15 g/day

G 30 g/day

G 87 g/day 

G 124 g/day (the value EPA is currently recommending)

G Other consumption rates (please specify value in g/day)

G Not applicable

57. What default value does your state use in its risk assessments as a daily fish consumption rate for

children? 

G 2.0 g/day

G 4.0 g/day

G 6.5 g/day

G Other consumption rates (please specify value in g/day)

G Not applicable

58. What default value does your state use for exposure duration in its cancer risk assessments? 

G 30 years

G 70 years 

G 75 years (the value EPA is currently recommending).

G Other exposure duration (please specify value in years)

G Not applicable

59. What default value does your state use to estimate life expectancy in its risk assessments?

G 70 years

G 75 years

G 80 years 

G Other life expectancy (please specify value in years)

G Not applicable

60. Does your state recommend a meal frequency format or number of meals over time in its advisories

(e.g., number of meals per month)?

G Yes G No G Not applicable

61. If your response to question 60 is yes, what assumption does your state make in its risk assessments

about meal size or portion for adults? (Please specify all that apply)

G 4 oz (114 g)

G 8 oz (227 g)

G 12 oz (341 g)

G 16 oz (454 g)

G Other (please specify value in grams)

G Not applicable

62. If your response to question 60 is yes, what assumption does your state make in its risk assessments

about meal size or portion for children? (Please specify all that apply)

G 4 oz (114 g)

G 8 oz (227 g)

G 12 oz (341 g)

G Other (please specify value in grams)

G Not applicable
A-11

63. What default value does your state use for body weight of an adult male consumer in its risk

assessments? 

G 71 kg

G 70 kg

G 65 kg

G Other weight (please specify value in kg)

G Not applicable

64. What default value does your state use for body weight of an adult female consumer (including

pregnant women and nursing mothers) in its risk assessments? 

G 70 kg

G 65 kg

G 62 kg

G Other weight (please specify value in kg)

G Not applicable

65. What default value does your state use for body weight of a child in its risk assessments? 

G 10 kg

G 14.5 kg

G 15.5 kg

G Other weight (please specify value in kg)

G Risk assessments not conducted for children

G Not applicable

66. Please specify what age range or ranges your state uses to calculate risk with respect to children.

(Please specify all age ranges used in your state’s risk assessments for children.)

G <1 year

G <6 years 

G <7 years

G <12 years

G <15 years 

G <18 years

G Other age ranges (please specify)

G Risk assessments not conducted for children

G Not applicable

67. What assumption does your state make in its risk assessments about the amount of the pollutant

absorbed by the body after ingestion (percent absorption by the gut) (e.g., in pharmacokinetic

modeling)?

G 100% for all pollutants

G 75% for all pollutants

G 50% for all pollutants

G Chemical-specific % based on available data 

G Other (please specify)

G Not applicable

68. Does your state use “contaminant reduction factors” in its risk calculations to account for

contaminant losses of PCBs and other organochlorine pollutants from fish tissues during cleaning,

preparation, and cooking of the fish?

G Yes G No G Not applicable
A-12

69. If yes, what are the pollutants and their associated contaminant reduction factors (% reduction in

pollutant level resulting from cleaning, preparing, and cooking of fish) assumed by your state?

 % chlordane % DDE % DDT % dieldrin % heptachlor epoxide

G Not applicable

 % mercury % mirex % total PCBs % toxaphene % other (please specify)

70. If contaminant reduction factors are used, what are their basis?

G EPA Guidance Documents

G Great Lakes Protocol

G Scientific literature review

G Conducted own research

G Other (please specify) 

G Not applicable

71. How does your state evaluate health risks for fish samples contaminated with multiple chemicals

with the same human health endpoints (e.g., two organochlorine pesticides)?

G Cumulative risk (add individual contaminant risks from each chemical together)

G Calculate single contaminant risk based on the most conservative carcinogenic risk value

G Either cumulative risk or single contaminant risk depending on the chemicals involved

G Other method (please specify)

G State does not evaluate health risks for multiple contaminants

G Not applicable

72. Regarding mercury, does your state assign different noncarcinogenic toxicity values to different

populations (i.e., does the state use an RfD of 1 x 10-4 mg/k/day for women of child-bearing age

and/or children versus using an RfD of 3 x 10-4 for adults in the general population)?

G Yes G No G Not applicable

73. What is the mercury toxicity value (i.e., RfD) used for each of the following populations?

Adults in the general population

Women of childbearing age or nursing mothers

Children G Not applicable

74. When your state receives method detection limits (MDLs) as the reportable concentration for

contaminants from the laboratory, what value do you use for non-detects in your risk assessment?

G Zero

G Pollutant’s MDL

G Half the pollutant’s MDL

G Other value (please specify)

G Maximum likelihood indicator

G Not applicable

75. Does your state screen for lead in its fish tissue samples? 

G Yes G No

76. What assessment method do you use for lead since lead does not currently have an associated

reference dose in IRIS? (Please specify assessment method used)

G Not applicable
A-13

Targeting Fish Consumers

77. Are health risks being assessed in your state for target groups of people whose culinary habits may

differ from the customs of the majority of Americans regarding meal preparation and

consumption?

G Yes G No G Not applicable

78. Has your state identified the primary waterbodies fished by these target population(s)?

G Yes G No G Not applicable

79. Has your state made efforts to identify the fish species and the sizes of fish consumed by these target

populations?

G Yes G No G Not applicable

80. If yes, has your state used any of the following procedures to obtain information from these target

populations? (Please check all that apply)

G Local fish consumption surveys (creel surveys)

G Fishing license surveys

G Anecdotal information from populations of interest 

G Behavioral risk surveillance surveys funded by the Centers for Disease Control

G Not applicable

81. Has your state altered its monitoring approach to address the needs of these target populations?

G Yes G No G Not applicable

82. If your state has altered its monitoring approach to address the needs of these target populations,

what actions have been taken? (Please check all that apply)

G State has added stations in waterbodies where the targeted populations frequently fish 

G State has targeted species consumed by the target populations for residue analyses

G Other actions (please specify)

G Not applicable

83. If your state is not currently addressing the concerns of populations with a perceived higher risk, is

there a plan to do so in the future?

G Yes G No G Not applicable

Risk Management

84. Who prepares risk assessments on behalf of your state or tribal fish advisory program? 

(Please check all that apply)

G State or Tribal Environmental Agency/Department

G State or Tribal Public Health Agency/Department

G State or Tribal Fisheries Agency/Department

G Consultant

G University

G Other (please specify)

G Not applicable

85. Does your state or tribe have written procedures for evaluating the health risks associated with

consumption of chemically-contaminated fish?

G Yes G No G Not applicable
A-14

86. Does your state or tribe have a group or committee that oversees the fish advisory

program/processes?

G Yes G No G Not applicable

87. If the answer to question 86 is yes, what professional disciplines are represented on that committee? 

(Please check all that apply)

G Toxicology/epidemiology

G Fisheries

G Water pollution assessment/control

G Hazardous waste management

G Analytical chemist

G Risk communication

G Other disciplines (please specify) 

G Not applicable

88. Who in your state or tribe makes the ultimate risk management decision to issue, modify, or rescind

fish advisories?

G Head of Environmental Agency/Department

G Head of Public Health Agency/Department

G Head of Fisheries Agency/Department

G Governor’s Office or Tribal Chief’s/President’s Office

G Other (please specify) 

G Not applicable

Risk Communication Procedures

89. How often does your Agency revise the fish consumption advisory listings and release the

information to the public? (Please check all that apply)

G Annually; released on (specify date: Day/Month)

G Whenever data become available (on an as-needed basis)

G Other schedules (please specify)

G Not applicable

90. Where can the public obtain copies of your agency’s printed advisory materials? 

(Please check all that apply)

G Local public health departments

G State public health departments

G Other State agencies

G Doctors' offices

G Local businesses (e.g., hair styling salons)

G Businesses that issue fishing licenses (e.g., bait and tackle shops)

G WIC (Women, Infants, and Children) clinics

G Welfare offices

G Organizations (e.g.,sporting or women's clubs)

G Tourist offices

G State fisheries offices

G Tribal organizations

G Town halls

G Law enforcement officers 

G State Internet site

G Other sources (please specify)

G Not applicable
A-15

91. How are your Agency's fish advisories communicated to the public? 

(Please check all that apply)

G Mailed to public upon request

G Press releases distributed to media sources

G Targeted newspaper stories

G Published articles in ethnic newspapers

G Videos for ethnic groups

G Radio announcements

G Television announcements

G Radio/television talk shows

G Internet site

G Agency telephone information service (i.e., hotlines)

G Agency magazine

G Posted signs (at boat launches, stream access points, public docks, etc.)

G Posted information where fishing licenses issued

G Posters in public places (libraries, town halls, etc)

G Annual fishing regulations booklet

G Generic statewide listing booklet separate from fishing regulations

G Printed pamphlets or fact sheets

G Information presented at public meetings

G Publication of articles in state medical journal

G Publication of articles in agency annual monitoring report

G Publication of information in state 305(b) report

G Flyers distributed with trout and salmon stamps

G GIS maps posted for tribal members

G Other methods (please specify)

G Not applicable

92. Does your state or tribal fish advisory distribution plan specifically target some populations to

receive advisory information? 

G Yes G No G Not applicable

93. If yes, please identify all targeted populations. (Please check all that apply)

G Sport fishers

G Subsistence fishers

G Specific racial/ethnic groups (please specify)

G Women of child-bearing age

G Pregnant or nursing women

G New parents

G Tourists

G Members of the general population

G Others (please specify) 

G Not applicable

94. Are your state or tribal fish consumption advisories distributed to the public in languages other

than English? 

G Yes G No G Not applicable
A-16

95. If yes, please specify all languages that apply. 

G Alaskan native languages

G Bosnian

G Cambodian

G Chinese

G Creole

G Hmong

G Japanese

G Korean

G Laotian

G Llacano

G Ojibwa

G Portugese

G Russian

G Spanish

G Tagalog

G Thai

G Vietnamese

G Others (please specify) 

G Not applicable

96. Does your state or tribe evaluate the effectiveness of the fish consumption advisories?

G Yes G No G Not applicable

97. If yes, how is their effectiveness determined? (Please check all that apply)

G Feedback form/postcard in regulation pamphlet

G Questions included in creel census program

G Questions included in state BRFS (Behavior Risk Factor Survey)

G Focus groups

G Mailed questionnaires (to whom?) 

G Telephone surveys (of whom?) 

G Other methods (please specify) 

G Not applicable

98. To your knowledge, have there been any studies in your state (including federal, tribal, and

university-based studies) to evaluate human tissue contaminant levels (e.g., in blood, urine, breast

milk, or adipose tissues) or adverse human health effects related to fish consumption?

G Don’t know

G No

G Yes (please specify organization or agency)