## APPENDIX A

Relevant Sections of Statues, Regul ations, or Judicial/Administrative Decrees Enabling the Collection of Info rmation for the National Listing of Advisories

Clean Water Act 104, as printed in ( http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/ht ml/uscode33/usc_sec_33_00001254----000-.html ) Title 33: Navigation and Navigable Waters Chapter 26: Water Pollut ion Prevention and Control Subchapter 1: Research and Related Programs Section 1254: Research, investi gations, 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, investigatio ns, training, and information

How Current is This?
(a) Establishment of national progra ms; cooperation; investigations; water quality surveilla nce 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, throug h publications and other appropriate Search this title:

Notes Updates Parallel regulations (CFR) Your comments 

### Pa g e 1 of 9 US CODE: Title 33,1254. Research, investi g ations, trainin g , and information

1/4/2007 htt p ://www.law.cornell.edu/us code/html/uscode33/usc

_ sec

_ 33

_ 00001254----000-.htmlmeans, 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, in dustries involved, and individuals, in the preparation and conduct of such rese arch 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 su bsection (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 pr ocesses, methods, and prototype devices for the prevention, reduction, and elimination of pollution.

(c) Research and studies on harmful ef fects 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 welf are of persons caused by pollutants. In order to avoid duplication of effort, th e Administrator shall, to the extent practicable, conduct such research in cooperation with and through the facilities of the Secretary of Heal th 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 muni cipal 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 

### Pa g e 2 of 9 US CODE: Title 33,1254. Research, investi g ations, trainin g , and information

1/4/2007 htt p ://www.law.cornell.edu/us code/html/uscode33/usc

_ sec

_ 33

_ 00001254----000-.htmlnortheastern 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, an d 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 sha ll 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 qual ity 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 gr ants; research fellowships; technical training; report to the Presiden t and transmittal to Congress (1) For the purpose of providing an adeq uate 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 th is paragraph. The Administrator is authorized, under such terms and condit ions 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 foreca sting 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 ti me 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 

### Pa g e 3 of 9 US CODE: Title 33,1254. Research, investi g ations, trainin g , and information

1/4/2007 htt p ://www.law.cornell.edu/us code/html/uscode33/usc

_ sec

_ 33

_ 00001254----000-.htmlprocure 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 occu pational 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, includ ing 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 agenci es 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 

### Pa g e 4 of 9 US CODE: Title 33,1254. Research, investi g ations, trainin g , and information

1/4/2007 htt p ://www.law.cornell.edu/us code/html/uscode33/usc

_ sec

_ 33

_ 00001254----000-.htmlindividuals.

(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 sc ientific knowledge on effects and control of pesticides in water (1) The Administrator shall, after consulta tion 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 an y, 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 Octobe r 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 

### Pa g e 5 of 9 US CODE: Title 33,1254. Research, investi g ations, trainin g , and information

1/4/2007 htt p ://www.law.cornell.edu/us code/html/uscode33/usc

_ sec

_ 33

_ 00001254----000-.html(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 inform ation 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 ri ver or stream or other body of water having unimpaired natural connection with open sea and within which the sea water is measurably diluted with fr esh 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, an d 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 e liminating pollution from agriculture, 

### Pa g e 6 of 9 US CODE: Title 33,1254. Research, investi g ations, trainin g , and information

1/4/2007 htt p ://www.law.cornell.edu/us code/html/uscode33/usc

_ sec

_ 33

_ 00001254----000-.htmlincluding the legal, economic, and other imp lications 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 im plementation 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 im plementation into new and improved methods for the collection and treatmen t 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 meth ods 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 an d to be designated as “River Study Centers”) for the purpose of conducting an d reporting on interdisciplinary studies on the nature of river systems, including hydrology, biology, ecology, economics, 

### Pa g e 7 of 9 US CODE: Title 33,1254. Research, investi g ations, trainin g , and information

1/4/2007 htt p ://www.law.cornell.edu/us code/html/uscode33/usc

_ sec

_ 33

_ 00001254----000-.htmlthe 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 cooperatio n 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 maxi mizing 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 be come 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 

### Pa g e 8 of 9 US CODE: Title 33,1254. Research, investi g ations, trainin g , and information

1/4/2007 htt p ://www.law.cornell.edu/us code/html/uscode33/usc

_ sec

_ 33

_ 00001254----000-.htmlJune 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 indicato rs in coastal recreation waters

Not later than 18 months after Octobe r 10, 2000, after consultation and in cooperation with appropriate Federal, Stat e, tribal, and local officials (including local health officials), the Administrator sh all 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. 

### Pa g e 9 of 9 US CODE: Title 33,1254. Research, investi g ations, trainin g , and information

1/4/2007 htt p ://www.law.cornell.edu/us code/html/uscode33/usc

_ sec

_ 33

_ 00001254----000-.html

# Clean Water--The Road Ahead

Over the past quarter century, Am erica has m a de trem endous strides in cleaning up its rivers, lakes, and coastal waters. In 1972, the Potom ac Ri ver was too dirty to swim in, Lake Erie wa s dying, and the Cuyahoga River was so polluted it burst into f l am es. Many rivers and beaches were little more than o p en sewers. The im provem ent in the health of th e nation' s waters is a direct result of a concerted effort to enhance stewardship of natural res ources and to im ple m ent the environm ental provisions of federal, state, tr ibal and loca l la ws. In particular, the Clean W a ter Act has stopped billions of pounds of pollution from fouling the nation' s water, doubling the num be r of waterways safe for fishing and swimm i ng. Today, rivers, lakes, and
coasts a r e th riving cente r s of healthy communitie s.
Despite trem endous pr ogress, 40 pe rcent of the nation' s waterways assessed by states are still uns afe for fishing and swi m m i ng. Pollution from factories and sewage treatm ent plants, soil erosion, and wetland losses have been dram a tically reduced. But runoff from city streets, rural areas, and othe r sources continues to degrade the environm ent and puts drinking water at risk. Fish in m a ny wat e rs still contain dangerous levels of m e rcury, polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), and other toxic contam inants.

Clean Water Program at a Crossroads

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

crossro a ds. I mplem entation of the existing prog ra m s will not stop serious new threats to public health, living resources, and the nation' s waterways, particularly from polluted runoff. These
program s lack the strength, resources, and fram e w ork to finish the job of restor ing riv e rs, la kes, and coa s tal area s. To f u lf ill the origin al goal of the Clean W a ter Act-- fishable and swim m a ble water for
every A m e rican the n ation m ust c ha rt a n ew cou r se to add r es s t he

### 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 foun dation 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 wate r 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 a nd 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 protec t water resources. Regulation, economic incentives, technical assi stance, 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 P lan e nvisions a new c ollaborative effort by federal

### state, tribal, and lo cal governments; the public; and the private sector to restore and sustain the h ealth of watersheds in the nation. The watershed approach is the key to setting priorities and taking action to clean up rivers, la kes, and coastal waters.

Strong Federal and State Standards

This Action Plan calls for federal, st ate, and tribal agencies to revise standards where needed and make existing programs more effective. Effective standards are key to pr otecting 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 inform ation is the foundation of a sound and accountable water quality program. Informed citizens and officials make better decisions a bout their watersheds. This Action Plan calls on federal agencies to improve the information available to the public, governments, and othe rs 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 coll aborative effort by state, tribal, federal, and local governments, the private sector and the public to restore those watersheds not meeti ng clean water, natural resource, and public health goals and to su stain healthy conditions in other watersheds.

For the past 25 years, most water pollution control efforts relied on broadly applied national programs th at reduced wate r pollution from individual sources such as discharges from sewage treatm ent p lants

### and factories, and from polluted runoff. Today, t h ere is growing recognition that clean water s t ra tegies built on this foundation and tailored to specific watershed cond itions are the key to the future.

Why Watersheds?

Clean water is the product of a h ealthy watershed--a watershed in which urban, agricultural, rangela nds, forest lands, and all other parts of the landscape are well- m a naged to prevent pollution. Focusing on the whole watershed h e lps strik e th e best balan ce

am ong e ffor t s to control point sour ce pollution and polluted runoff, and protect drinking water sources and sensitive na tura l re so urces such as wetlands. A watershed focus also helps identify the most cost-ef f ectiv e pollu tion c ontrol s t r a te gies to m eet clean water goals.

S

k

ip

ja ck und er sa il o n th e C h esapeake Bay

. The C h es ape ak e Bay Pr ogr am is an in terna tio na l mod e l o f in terag e n c y and in terg overnmen ta l co op era tion o n a la rg e wa tersh e d sca l e. Th e Pro g r am sets go als fo r w a ter qua lity a n d ha b i t a t restorati o n bas e d on s o und sc ience and achi eves the m by developing cons ens u sd

r iven stra teg i es. Fo r examp l e, fed e ra l a g e ncies a r e w o rki n g with a g r icu ltu ra l

a n d f

o rest lando wn ers to d evelo p f a rm lan d an d ripa rian f o rest bu ffers, feedlo t

an d a n i m al st

r a t e gi es, a n d t o pro v i d e t e c hni cal s u p

p o rt . P h ot o C r e d i t : E P

A



### Working at the watershed level enco urages th e p ublic to get involved in efforts to re store and protect their water resources and is the foundation for building strong clean water partnerships. T h e watershed approach is the best way to bring state, tribal, federal, and local program s together to m o re e ffe ctively and efficiently clean up and protect waters. It is also th e 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 waters hed 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 re source agencies set their priorities for watershed restoration and protection in various ways to meet their mandates for natural resour ce conservation. These processes are designed to meet valid objectiv es, 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 a nd resource managers on federal lands, to take the lead in unifyi ng these various existing efforts and leveraging scarce resources to advance the pace of progress toward clean water. As a number of stat es and tribes have demonstrated, they can meet existing requirement s more efficiently and develop more coordinated and comprehens ive priorities on a watershed basis.

Unified watershed assessments are a vehicle to identify:

o 

### watersheds that will be targ eted 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 watershe ds 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 natu ral resource goa ls. Watershed Restoration Action Strategies will spell out the most important causes of water pollution and re source degradation, detail the actions that all parties need to ta ke to solve those problems, and set

m ilestones b y w hich to m easure p rogress F unds m a de available t o

### 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 cl ean water is threatened by new activities in the watershed can be th e 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 pollutio n prevention strategies to keep clean waters clean.

Watershed Assistance Grants. 

### Federal agencies will provide small grants to local organizations that wa nt to take a leadership role in building local efforts to restore a nd 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 th e 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 th at can make locally caught fish and shellfish unsafe to eat, particul arly mercury and other persistent, bio-accumulative toxic pollutants, an d 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 th e Internet to report public health risks to recreational swimmers.

Expand Control of Storm Water Runoff

### EPA will publish final Phase II stor m water regulations for smaller cities and construction sites in 1999. EPA will also work with its partners to make sure that exis ting 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 st ates and tribes to promote the establishment of state and tribal en forceable 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 standard s based on these criteria.

Reduce Pollution from Animal Feeding Operations

EPA will publish and, after public comment, implement an Animal Feeding Operations Strategy for im portant and nece ssary actions on standards and permits. In addi tion, by November 1998, EPA and USDA will jointly develop a broa d, unified national strategy to minimize the environmental and pub lic health impacts of Animal Feeding Operations. 

# Natural Resource Stewardship

Nearly 70 percent of the United Stat es, 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 befo re it enters rivers, lakes, and coastal waters. Effective manageme nt of these croplands, pastures, forests, wetlands, rangelands, and ot her resources is key to keeping clean water clean and restoring wa tersheds 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 desc ribed above. In addition, these agencies will work with states tribes and o thers t o e nhance c ritical

### 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 divers ity and wealth of natural resources, including sign ificant sources of drinking water and public recreati on opportunities.

By 1999, the U.S. Department of the Interior (DOI) and USDA will take the lead in developing a Un ified Federal Policy to enhance watershed management for the protection of water quality and the health of aquatic systems on fede ral lands and for federal resource management. Federal land manage rs 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 prog rams continue to slow the rate of wetland losses, improving federa l restoration programs, and by expanding incentives to landowne rs to restore wetlands.

Protect Coastal Waters

Federal agencies, led by the Na tional Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), will work in partnership to improve the monitoring of coastal waters, expa nd 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 Pr ivate 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 f e deral, s t a t e, triba l , and pr ivate p a rtn e r s , will estab lish by 2002 two m illion m iles o f conservation buffers to reduce polluted runoff and protect watersheds, direct new funding for the Environm ental Quality Incentives Program to support watershed restoration, and devel op as m a ny new agreem ents with states as practicable to u s e th e Conservation Reserve Enhancem ent Program to improve watersheds. Th e Plan also envisions new and innovative m e thods to provide ince ntives for private landowners to im ple m ent pollution prevention plan s, including risk m a nagem e nt protection f o r adoption of new pollution prevention technologies and m a rket recognition for producers that m eet environm ental goals.

In addition, DOI will ex pand its exis ting Partners for W ildlife Program , which restores degraded fish and wildlife habitats and im proves water quality through partnerships with landowners. The
program provides technical and fi nancial assistance, and gives priority to th reatened and endangered species.


# Informed Citizens and Officials

Effective managem e nt of wate r resources requires reliable inform ation about water qualitycond itions and new tools to communicate inform ation to the pub li c. Federal agencies, led by the U.S. Geological Su rvey ( U SGS), will work with s t ate s and tribes to im prove m o nitoring and assessm ent of water quality, focusing on nutrients an d rela ted pollutan t s. Fede ral ag encie s will a l so work with states and tribes to develop and use s t ate-of-the-art sys t em s, such as EPA' s Index of W a tershed Indi ca tors on the In tern et, to communicate m eaningful inform ation to the public about water quality cond itions in th eir comm unities.

Imp r o vemen ts in Conn ecticu t River wa ter q u a lity h a v e led to a resu rg en ce in

recrea tion a l fish i ng , esp eci a lly in u r b a n a r ea s like Ha rtford , w h ich ha s been th e site of major fishing tour naments in recent y e ars. P h o t o C r e d it : R i v e r front R e c apt ure

# 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. Th e funding provided in this budget initiative will dramatically incr ease federal financial support for clean water programs in FY 1999 and beyond. Specifically, the Clean Water and Watershed Restor ation Budget Initiative will:

o 

### increase direct support to stat es and tribes to carry out a watershed approach to clean water;

o 

### increase technical and financ ial assistance to farmers, ranchers, and foresters to redu ce polluted runoff and enhance the natural resources on their lands;

o 

### fund watershed assistance progr ams and grants to engage local communities and citizen s in leadership roles in restoring their watersheds;

o 

### accelerate progress in addre ssing critical water quality problems on federal lands, includ ing 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 Everglad es 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 10,516Total 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:

Wet l a nd s pr og ram 

### 106 117

Ch allen g e 21 :Flo od p l ain rest oratio n in itiativ e 

### 0 25

To tal, ACE 

### 106 142 Interagen cy Projects:

Flori d a E v ergl ades 

### 228 282

Califo r n i a Bay Delta 

### 85 143

El im i n at i on o f ove rl ap bet w ee n E v er gl ade s a n d
ot he r wat e r pr o g ram s l i s t e d ab ove 

### -5 -5

To tal,In terag e ncy p r oj ects 

### 308 420

Total Cle a n Water and W a ters hed Res t oration Initiative (with Man d atory Spendin g ) 

### 1,636 2,204

*I n d i cat es M a ndat o ry Spe n di ng Source: Office of M a nagem e nt and B u d g et



# A Continuing Commitment to Clean Water

The publication of this Action Planis just the beginning of a longterm effort. Many of the proposed actions will provide for later public revie w and comm ent and f e de ral agencies are committed to working closely with states, tribes, and others to ensure successful im ple m entation of specific actions.

In addition, regular reports will k eep the public apprised of progress and rem a ining challenges. By the end of the year 2000 and period ically thereafter, s t atus reports on progress in im ple m enting watershed re stora tion p l a n s and relate d program s will be p r ovided to the President, the nation' s governors, tribal lead ers, 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 National Listing of Fish Advisories 

# 2008 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 ofthis 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 acresand 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 thestate. States are also continuing to issue safe eating guidelines to inform the public that fish fromspecific 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 SiteThe 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
YearPercent 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 GuidelinesEPA 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 andlake-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 in2008 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 Gu am Pu er to Ric o
Vi rg in Is la nd s No S ta te wi de Fr es hwater A dv isor ie s St at ewid e Advi so ri es fo r Fr eshw ater St at ew id e Advi so ri es fo r Lakes St at ew id e Co as ta l A dv is or ie s DC

MA = 77 RI 2 CT = 2 NJ 04

DE
MD = 7



### Legend2008 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 Advisory2008 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 Advisory2008 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 fishand 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.

**E**

l 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 W eb de la FDA sobr e la seguridad de los alimentos

. Para más información sobre la seguridad de los pescados y mariscos capturados localmente visite el sitio W eb de la EP A para ver los avisos de pesca o comuníquese con el depar tamento de salud local de su estado . Para más información en inglés sobre las acciones de la EPA para controlar el mercurio, visite el sitio W eb sobr e mer curio de la EP A

. **HECHOS**

EP A-823-F-04-010 

# L **o**

**q**

**u e**  **U**

**s t**  **e**

**d N** 

**e**

**c e** 

**s**

**i t**  **a S**  **a**

**b e** 

**r S**  **o**

**b**

**r e** 

**e**

**l M** 

**e**

**r c** 

**u**

**r i**  **o e** 

**n**

**e**

**l P**  **e**

**s c**  **a**

**d**

**o**

**y l**  **o**

**s M** 

**a**

**r i**  **s c**  **o**

**s**

**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** O s 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 ou visite o website de Segurança dos Alimentos da FDA no endereço 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 e Frutos 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, đ ang mang thai, bà mẹ cho con bú và trẻ nhỏ cần tránh một số loại cá, và nên ăn 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 . Hãy bấm chuột vào các Chi tiết Liên hệ Liên bang, Tiểu bang và Bộ lạc. Để biết thêm thông 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 로 연락하시거나 FDA의 식품안전 웹 사이트 www.cfsan.fda.gov/ seafood1.html 를 방문해 주시기 바랍니다. 각 지방에서 잡히는 어패류의 안전에 대한 더 많은 정보는 환경보호청의 어류섭취경 고 웹 사이트 www.epa.gov/ost/fish 를 방 문하시거나 州 또는 지방 보건국으로 연 락하시기 바랍니다. 州 또는 지방 보건국 의 목록은 www.epa.gov/ost/fish 에서 찾 아 보실 수 있습니다

. Federal, State & Tribal Contacts

( 연방

, 주 및 부족 연락처 ) 를 클릭 해 주십시오

. 수은 문제와 관련된 EPA 의 활동에 대한 정보는 EPA 의 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 lojsaib 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 RtInigGMbUrRKM KWCaEpñkmYyy:agsMxan;énGahar sRmab;suxPaB . RtI nigGMbUrRKMmanCatiRbU:etGIunx<s; nig sarFatuciBa©wmBiess2 d3⁄4éTeTot EdlmanCatixøaj;Eq¥t kñúgkMritTab nigGasIudxøaj; GUemhÁa 3 . rbbGahard3⁄4 RtwmRtUvrYmman RtI nigGMbUrRKMepSg2 Gacp þl ;dl ;s uxPaB ebHd Ug karr Ikl Utlas ; n igkarr Ikc Mer In d 3⁄4smRsbrbs;kumar . dUecñH®sþI nigkumartUc2 CaBiess KYrEtbBa©ÚlRtI nigGMbUrRKM cUlkñúgrbbGaharrbs;eK EdlCaehtunaM [manplRbeyaCn_CaeRcInxagcMNIGahar . eTaHCay:agNa swgEtRKb;RbePTRtI nigGMbUrRKMTaMgGs; manbnþúMCati)art . sMrab;mnusSPaKeRcIn eRKaHfñak;eday Cati)art BIkarjaMuRtI nigGMbUrRKM minEmnCabBaðasuxPaB K 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 鱼类和贝类是健康膳食的重要组成部 分,富含优质蛋白和其它必需营养成份, 而且饱和脂肪含量较低,并含有ω-3脂 肪酸。包括了多种鱼贝的均衡膳食有益 于心脏健康和儿童正常生长发育。所以, 尤其是妇女和儿童的膳食中应有鱼或 贝,因为它们富含多种营养价值。 然而,几乎所有的鱼贝都含有微量汞。对 大多数人来说,食用鱼贝毋须担忧汞的 健康风险。但是,某些鱼贝含汞量较高, 可能会损害未出生婴儿或儿童正处于 发育中的神经系统。鱼贝的汞风险取决 于摄入的鱼贝总量和它们的含汞水平。 因此,食品与药品管理局(FDA)和环境 保护署(EPA)建议可能怀孕的女性、孕 妇、哺乳期妇女和儿童不要摄取某些鱼 类,而是要食用含汞较低的水产品。 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

. 事实 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-06-0042008 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 Advi sories April 21, 2000 (Volume 65, Number 78, pages 21415–21416).

Federal Register Notice for Renewal Information Collection Request

for the National Listing of Adviso ries August 14, 2003 (Volume 68, Number 157, pages 48605–48606).

Federal Register Notice for Renewal Information Collection Request for the National Listing of Advi sories April 12, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 70, pages 18475–18477).

### 21415 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 78 / Friday, April 21, 2000 / Notices

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


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

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


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

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

.


### 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.


### 18477 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 70 / Thursday, April 12, 2007 / Notices

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-daycomment 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** 


## APPENDIX D

Survey Instrument for the 2010–2012 NLFA Report ing 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 agenc y 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 es timate contaminant concentrations in fish G Monitors sediments and uses data to estim ate 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 numb er 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 fi sh 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 advi sories 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 wi thin 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 fish ing 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 contaminatio n (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 samp les 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 “i ndividual 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 “individua l 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 compos ite 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 stat e, 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 waterb ody, what must occur for the state to rescind the advisory? G Residue levels of the chemical must declin e 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 numb er 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 labo ratory 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 fo r 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 po tency 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 us ing 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 ex posure 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 est imate 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 assu mption 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 assu mption 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 mo thers) 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 stat e 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 ri sk assessments about the amount of the pollutant absorbed by the body after ingestion (percent ab sorption 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 facto rs” in its risk calculations to account for contaminant losses of PCBs and other organochlorin e 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 associ ated 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 contamin ant risks from each chemical together) G Calculate single contaminant risk based on th e 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 differen t 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 limit s (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 si nce lead does not currently have an associated reference dose in IRIS? (Please sp ecify assessment method used)

G Not applicable

### A-13 

## Targeting Fish Consumers

77. Are health risks being assessed in your state for ta rget 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 waterb odies 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 approac h 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 wher e the targeted populations frequently fish G State has targeted species consumed by th e target populations for residue analyses G Other actions (please specify) G Not applicable

83. If your state is not currently addressing the con cerns 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 prof essional 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 availa ble (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 licen ses (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 advi sories 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 distri bution 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 adviso ries 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 e ffectiveness of the fish consumption advisories? G Yes G No G Not applicable

97. If yes, how is their effectiveness de termined? (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 he alth effects related to fish consumption? G Don’t know G No G Yes (please specify organization or agency)