# APPENDIX A

Relevant Sections of Statues, Regulations, or Judicial/Administrative Decrees Enabling the Collection of In formation for the National Listing of Advisories

Clean Water Act 104, as printed in ( http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/USCODE-2011- title33/pdf/USCODE-2011-title33-chap26- subchapI-sec1254.pdf ) Title 33: Navigation and Navigable Waters Chapter 26: Water Pollution Prevention and Control Subchapter 1: Resear ch and Related Programs Section 1254: Research, investi gations, training, and information EPA’s Clean Water Action Plan - Fish Consumption AdvisoriesPage 320 TITLE 33—NAVIGATION AND NAVIGABLE WATERS § 1254

(b) The consent of the Congress is hereby given to two or more States to negotiate and enter into agreements or compacts, not in con

flict with any law or treaty of the United States, for (1) cooperative effort and mutual as

sistance for the prevention and control of pollu

tion and the enforcement of their respective laws relating thereto, and (2) the establishment of such agencies, joint or otherwise, as they may deem desirable for making effective such agree

ments and compacts. No such agreement or compact shall be binding or obligatory upon any State a party thereto unless and until it has been approved by the Congress.
(June 30, 1948, ch. 758, title I, §103, as added Pub. L. 92–500, §2, Oct. 18, 1972, 86 Stat. 818.)
§ 1254. Research, investigations, training, and in

formation (a) Establishment of national programs; coopera

tion; investigations; water quality surveil

lance system; reports
The Administrator shall establish national programs for the prevention, reduction, and elimination of pollution and as part of such pro

grams shall— (1) in cooperation with other Federal, State, and local agencies, conduct and promote the coordination and acceleration of, research, in

vestigations, experiments, training, dem

onstrations, surveys, and studies relating to the causes, effects, extent, prevention, reduc

tion, and elimination of pollution; (2) encourage, cooperate with, and render technical services to pollution control agen

cies and other appropriate public or private agencies, institutions, and organizations, and individuals, including the general public, in the conduct of activities referred to in para

graph (1) of this subsection; (3) conduct, in cooperation with State water pollution control agencies and other inter

ested agencies, organizations and persons, public investigations concerning the pollution of any navigable waters, and report on the re

sults of such investigations; (4) establish advisory committees composed of recognized experts in various aspects of pol

lution and representatives of the public to as

sist in the examination and evaluation of re

search progress and proposals and to avoid du

plication of research; (5) in cooperation with the States, and their political subdivisions, and other Federal agen

cies establish, equip, and maintain a water quality surveillance system for the purpose of monitoring the quality of the navigable wa

ters 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 Administra

tion, 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 de

velop the most effective practicable tools and techniques for measuring the social and eco

nomic costs and benefits of activities which are subject to regulation under this chapter; and shall transmit a report on the results of such research to the Congress not later than January 1, 1974. (b) Authorized activities of Administrator In carrying out the provisions of subsection (a) of this section the Administrator is authorized to— (1) collect and make available, through pub

lications and other appropriate means, the re

sults of and other information, including ap

propriate recommendations by him in connec

tion therewith, pertaining to such research and other activities referred to in paragraph (1) of subsection (a) of this section; (2) cooperate with other Federal depart

ments and agencies, State water pollution control agencies, interstate agencies, other public and private agencies, institutions, orga

nizations, industries involved, and individuals, in the preparation and conduct of such re

search and other activities referred to in para

graph (1) of subsection (a) of this section; (3) make grants to State water pollution control agencies, interstate agencies, other public or nonprofit private agencies, institu

tions, organizations, and individuals, for pur

poses 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 6101 of title 41, referred to in paragraph (1) of subsection (a) of this sec

tion; (5) establish and maintain research fellow

ships at public or nonprofit private edu

cational institutions or research organiza

tions; (6) collect and disseminate, in cooperation with other Federal departments and agencies, and with other public or private agencies, in

stitutions, and organizations having related responsibilities, basic data on chemical, phys

ical, and biological effects of varying water quality and other information pertaining to pollution and the prevention, reduction, and elimination thereof; and (7) develop effective and practical processes, methods, and prototype devices for the preven

tion, reduction, and elimination of pollution. (c) Research and studies on harmful effects of pollutants; cooperation with Secretary of Health and Human Services In carrying out the provisions of subsection (a) of this section the Administrator shall conduct research on, and survey the results of other sci

entific studies on, the harmful effects on the health or welfare of persons caused by pollut

ants. In order to avoid duplication of effort, the Administrator shall, to the extent practicable, conduct such research in cooperation with and through the facilities of the Secretary of Health and Human Services. (d) Sewage treatment; identification and meas

urement of effects of pollutants; augmented streamflow In carrying out the provisions of this section the Administrator shall develop and dem

-Page 321 TITLE 33—NAVIGATION AND NAVIGABLE WATERS § 1254

onstrate under varied conditions (including con

ducting such basic and applied research, studies, and experiments as may be necessary): (1) Practicable means of treating municipal sewage, and other waterborne wastes to imple

ment 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 suscep

tible 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 facili

ties, including, but not limited to, one to be lo

cated in the northeastern area of the United States, one in the Middle Atlantic area, one in the southeastern area, one in the midwestern area, one in the southwestern area, one in the Pacific Northwest, and one in the State of Alas

ka, for the conduct of research, investigations, experiments, field demonstrations and studies, and training relating to the prevention, reduc

tion 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 car

ried out. In conjunction with the development of criteria under section 1343 of this title, the Ad

ministrator shall construct the facilities au

thorized for the National Marine Water Quality Laboratory established under this subsection. (f) Great Lakes water quality research

The Administrator shall conduct research and technical development work, and make studies, with respect to the quality of the waters of the Great Lakes, including an analysis of the present and projected future water quality of the Great Lakes under varying conditions of waste treatment and disposal, an evaluation of the water quality needs of those to be served by such waters, an evaluation of municipal, indus

trial, and vessel waste treatment and disposal practices with respect to such waters, and a study of alternate means of solving pollution problems (including additional waste treatment measures) with respect to such waters. (g) Treatment works pilot training programs; employment needs forecasting; training projects and grants; research fellowships; technical training; report to the President and transmittal to Congress (1) For the purpose of providing an adequate supply of trained personnel to operate and main

tain existing and future treatment works and re

lated activities, and for the purpose of enhanc

ing substantially the proficiency of those en

gaged in such activities, the Administrator shall finance pilot programs, in cooperation with State and interstate agencies, municipalities, educational institutions, and other organiza

tions and individuals, of manpower development and training and retraining of persons in, on en

tering into, the field of operation and mainte

nance of treatment works and related activities. Such program and any funds expended for such a program shall supplement, not supplant, other manpower and training programs and funds available for the purposes of this paragraph. The Administrator is authorized, under such terms and conditions as he deems appropriate, to enter into agreements with one or more States, acting jointly or severally, or with other public or pri

vate agencies or institutions for the develop

ment and implementation of such a program. (2) The Administrator is authorized to enter into agreements with public and private agen

cies and institutions, and individuals to develop and maintain an effective system for forecasting the supply of, and demand for, various profes

sional and other occupational categories needed for the prevention, reduction, and elimination of pollution in each region, State, or area of the United States and, from time to time, to publish the results of such forecasts. (3) In furtherance of the purposes of this chap

ter, the Administrator is authorized to— (A) make grants to public or private agen

cies 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 6101 of title 41; (B) establish and maintain research fellow

ships in the Environmental Protection Agency with such stipends and allowances, including traveling and subsistence expenses, as he may deem necessary to procure the assistance of the most promising research fellows; and (C) provide, in addition to the program es

tablished under paragraph (1) of this sub

section, training in technical matters relating to the causes, prevention, reduction, and elimination of pollution for personnel of pub

lic 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 effective

ness of such actions, and setting forth the num

ber of persons trained, the occupational cat

egories for which training was provided, the ef

fectiveness of other Federal, State, and local training programs in this field, together with es

timates of future needs, recommendations on improving training programs, and such other in

formation and recommendations, including leg

islative recommendations, as he deems appro

priate.

(h) Lake pollution

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

vate agencies and organizations and individuals for (A) the purpose of developing and dem

onstrating new or improved methods for the pre

vention, removal, reduction, and elimination of pollution in lakes, including the undesirable ef

fects of nutrients and vegetation, and (B) the construction of publicly owned research facili

ties for such purpose.Page 322 TITLE 33—NAVIGATION AND NAVIGABLE WATERS § 1254

(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, experi

ments, and demonstrations as he deems appro

priate, 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 haz

ardous substances spills.
In carrying out this subsection, the Adminis

trator may enter into contracts with, or make grants to, public or private agencies and organi

zations 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 demonstra

tions as he deems appropriate relative to equip

ment which is to be installed on board a vessel and is designed to receive, retain, treat, or dis

charge 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 rec

reational vessels. The Secretary of the depart

ment in which the Coast Guard is operating shall report to Congress the results of such re

search, studies, experiments, and demonstra

tions prior to the effective date of any regula

tions established under section 1322 of this title. In carrying out this subsection the Secretary of the department in which the Coast Guard is op

erating may enter into contracts with, or make grants to, public or private organizations and in

dividuals. (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 Ad

ministrator may acquire land and interests therein by purchase, with appropriated or do

nated funds, by donation, or by exchange for ac

quired 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 equal

ized by the payment of cash to the grantor or to the Administrator as the circumstances require. ( l ) Collection and dissemination of scientific knowledge on effects and control of pes

ticides in water (1) The Administrator shall, after consultation with appropriate local, State, and Federal agen

cies, public and private organizations, and inter

ested 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 vary

ing quantities. He shall revise and add to such information whenever necessary to reflect devel

oping 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 to

gether with his recommendations for any nec

essary 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 gen

erated, the nature and quality of such oil, present collecting methods and disposal prac

tices, and alternate uses of such oil; (B) the long-term, chronic biological effects of the dis

posal of such waste oil; and (C) the potential market for such oils, including the economic and legal factors relating to the sale of products made from such oils, the level of subsidy, if any, needed to encourage the purchase by public and private nonprofit agencies of products from such oil, and the practicability of Federal procure

ment, on a priority basis, of products made from such oil. In conducting such study, the Adminis

trator shall consult with affected industries and other persons. (2) The Administrator shall report the prelimi

nary results of such study to Congress within six months after October 18, 1972, and shall submit a final report to Congress within 18 months after such date. (n) Comprehensive studies of effects of pollution on estuaries and estuarine zones (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 or

ganizations, institutions, and individuals, con

duct and promote, and encourage contributions to, continuing comprehensive studies of the ef

fects of pollution, including sedimentation, in the estuaries and estuarine zones of the United States on fish and wildlife, on sport and com

mercial fishing, on recreation, on water supply and water power, and on other beneficial pur

poses. Such studies shall also consider the effect of demographic trends, the exploitation of min

eral resources and fossil fuels, land and indus

trial development, navigation, flood and erosion control, and other uses of estuaries and estua

rine zones upon the pollution of the waters therein. (2) In conducting such studies, the Adminis

trator shall assemble, coordinate, and organize all existing pertinent information on the Na

tion’s estuaries and estuarine zones; carry out aPage 323 TITLE 33—NAVIGATION AND NAVIGABLE WATERS § 1254

program of investigations and surveys to supple

ment existing information in representative es

tuaries and estuarine zones; and identify the problems and areas where further research and study are required. (3) The Administrator shall submit to Con

gress, 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 tran

sitional areas which are consistently influenced or affected by water from an estuary such as, but not limited to, salt marshes, coastal and intertidal areas, bays, harbors, lagoons, inshore waters, and channels, and the term ‘‘estuary’’ means all or part of the mouth of a river or stream or other body of water having unim

paired natural connection with open sea and within which the sea water is measurably di

luted with fresh water derived from land drain

age.

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

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

tives, pricing policy, and other methods of re

ducing 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 di

rected to develop devices, systems, policies, and methods capable of achieving the maximum re

duction of unnecessary water consumption. (2) The Administrator shall report the prelimi

nary results of such studies and investigations to the Congress within one year after October 18, 1972, and annually thereafter in the report re

quired under subsection (a) of section 1375 of this title. Such report shall include recom

mendations for any legislation that may be re

quired to provide for the adoption and use of de

vices, systems, policies, or other methods of re

ducing 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, poli

cies, or other methods and also shall reflect esti

mates 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 co

operation with the Secretary of Agriculture, other Federal agencies, and the States, carry out a comprehensive study and research pro

gram to determine new and improved methods and the better application of existing methods of preventing, reducing, and eliminating pollu

tion from agriculture, including the legal, eco

nomic, and other implications of the use of such methods. (q) Sewage in rural areas; national clearinghouse for alternative treatment information; clear

inghouse on small flows (1) The Administrator shall conduct a compre

hensive program of research and investigation and pilot project implementation into new and improved methods of preventing, reducing, stor

ing, collecting, treating, or otherwise eliminat

ing pollution from sewage in rural and other areas where collection of sewage in conven

tional, communitywide sewage collection sys

tems is impractical, uneconomical, or otherwise infeasible, or where soil conditions or other fac

tors preclude the use of septic tank and drainage field systems. (2) The Administrator shall conduct a compre

hensive program of research and investigation and pilot project implementation into new and improved methods for the collection and treat

ment of sewage and other liquid wastes com

bined 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, dem

onstrations, and other projects funded under this chapter related to paragraph (1) of this sub

section 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, institu

tions, universities, and persons. (4) S MALL FLOWS CLEARINGHOUSE .—Notwith

standing 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 ob

ligated 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 Protec

tion Agency to collect and disseminate informa

tion 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 re

ferred 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 edu

-Page 324 TITLE 33—NAVIGATION AND NAVIGABLE WATERS § 1254

cation (regionally located and to be designated as ‘‘River Study Centers’’) for the purpose of conducting and reporting on interdisciplinary studies on the nature of river systems, including hydrology, biology, ecology, economics, the re

lationship between river uses and land uses, and the effects of development within river basins on river systems and on the value of water re

sources and water related activities. No such grant in any fiscal year shall exceed $1,000,000. (t) Thermal discharges The Administrator shall, in cooperation with State and Federal agencies and public and pri

vate organizations, conduct continuing compre

hensive studies of the effects and methods of control of thermal discharges. In evaluating al

ternative 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 ad

verse effects and maximizing beneficial effects of thermal discharges. The results of these stud

ies shall be reported by the Administrator as soon as practicable, but not later than 270 days after October 18, 1972, and shall be made avail

able to the public and the States, and considered as they become available by the Administrator in carrying out section 1326 of this title and by the States in proposing thermal water quality standards. (u) Authorization of appropriations There is authorized to be appropriated (1) not to exceed $100,000,000 per fiscal year for the fis

cal year ending June 30, 1973, the fiscal year end

ing 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 dem

onstration 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 fis

cal 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 fis

cal years 1983 through 1985, and $1,500,000 per fis

cal year for each of the fiscal years 1986 through 1990, for carrying out the provisions of sub

section (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 fis

cal year for the fiscal years ending June 30, 1973, June 30, 1974, and June 30, 1975, for carrying out the provisions of subsection (r) of this section; and (6) not to exceed $10,000,000 per fiscal year for the fiscal years ending June 30, 1973, June 30, 1974, and June 30, 1975, for carrying out the pro

visions of subsection (t) of this section. (v) Studies concerning pathogen indicators in coastal recreation waters Not later than 18 months after October 10, 2000, after consultation and in cooperation with appropriate Federal, State, tribal, and local offi

cials (including local health officials), the Ad

ministrator shall initiate, and, not later than 3 years after October 10, 2000, shall complete, in cooperation with the heads of other Federal agencies, studies to provide additional informa

tion for use in developing— (1) an assessment of potential human health risks resulting from exposure to pathogens in coastal recreation waters, including non

gastrointestinal 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 cri

teria 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. (June 30, 1948, ch. 758, title I, §104, as added Pub. L. 92–500, §2, Oct. 18, 1972, 86 Stat. 819; amended Pub. L. 93–207, §1(1), Dec. 28, 1973, 87 Stat. 906; Pub. L. 93–592, §1, Jan. 2, 1975, 88 Stat. 1924; Pub. L. 95–217, §§4(a), (b), 6, 7, Dec. 27, 1977, 91 Stat. 1566, 1567; Pub. L. 95–576, §1(a), Nov. 2, 1978, 92 Stat. 2467; Pub. L. 96–88, title V, §509(b), Oct. 17, 1979, 93 Stat. 695; Pub. L. 96–483, §1(a), Oct. 21, 1980, 94 Stat. 2360; Pub. L. 100–4, title I, §§101(a), 102, Feb. 4, 1987, 101 Stat. 8, 9; Pub. L. 102–154, title I, Nov. 13, 1991, 105 Stat. 1000; Pub. L. 105–362, title V, §501(a)(1), (d)(2)(A), Nov. 10, 1998, 112 Stat. 3283; Pub. L. 106–284, §3(a), Oct. 10, 2000, 114 Stat. 871; Pub. L. 107–303, title III, §302(b)(1), Nov. 27, 2002, 116 Stat. 2361.)

C ODIFICATION In subsecs. (b)(4) and (g)(3)(A), ‘‘section 3324(a) and (b) of title 31 and section 6101 of title 41’’ substituted for references to sections 3648 and 3709 of the Revised Stat

utes on authority of Pub. L. 97–258, §4(b), Sept. 13, 1982, 96 Stat. 1067, which Act enacted Title 31, Money and Fi

nance, and Pub. L. 111–350, §6(c), Jan. 4, 2011, 124 Stat. 3854, which Act enacted Title 41, Public Contracts.

A MENDMENTS 2002—Subsecs. (a)(5), (n)(3), (4), ( o )(2). Pub. L. 107–303 repealed Pub. L. 105–362, §501(a), (d). See 1998 Amend

ment notes below.Page 325 TITLE 33—NAVIGATION AND NAVIGABLE WATERS § 1254a

2000—Subsec. (v). Pub. L. 106–284 added subsec. (v). 1998—Subsec. (a)(5). Pub. L. 105–362, §501(d)(2)(A)(i), which directed the substitution of ‘‘not later than 90 days after the date of convening of each session of Con

gress’’ for ‘‘in the report required under subsection (a) of section 1375 of this title’’, was repealed by Pub. L. 107–303. See Effective Date of 2002 Amendment note below. Subsec. (n)(3), (4). Pub. L. 105–362, §501(a)(1), which di

rected the redesignation of par. (4) as (3) and striking out of former par. (3), was repealed by Pub. L. 107–303. See Effective Date of 2002 Amendment note below. Subsec. ( o )(2). Pub. L. 105–362, §501(d)(2)(A)(ii), which directed the substitution of ‘‘not later than 90 days after the date of convening of each session of Congress’’ for ‘‘in the report required under subsection (a) of sec

tion 1375 of this title’’, was repealed by Pub. L. 107–303. See Effective Date of 2002 Amendment note below. 1987—Subsec. (q)(4). Pub. L. 100–4, §102, added par. (4). Subsec. (u). Pub. L. 100–4, §101(a), in cl. (1) struck out ‘‘and’’ after ‘‘1975,’’, ‘‘1980,’’, and ‘‘1981,’’ and inserted ‘‘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,’’, in cl. (2) struck out ‘‘and’’ after ‘‘1981,’’ and inserted ‘‘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,’’, and in cl. (3) struck out ‘‘and’’ after ‘‘1981,’’ and inserted ‘‘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,’’. 1980—Subsec. (u). Pub. L. 96–483 in par. (1) inserted authorization of not to exceed $20,697,000 and $22,770,000 for fiscal years ending Sept. 30, 1981, and 1982, respec

tively; in par. (2) inserted authorization of the sum of $3,000,000 for each of fiscal years 1981 and 1982; and in par. (3) inserted authorization of the sum of $1,500,000 for each of fiscal years 1981 and 1982. 1978—Subsec. (u)(1). Pub. L. 95–576 authorized appro

priation of not to exceed $14,039,000 for fiscal year end

ing Sept. 30, 1980 and prohibited use of authorizations for any research, development, or demonstration activ

ity pursuant to provisions of this section. 1977—Subsec. (n)(3). Pub. L. 95–217, §6, substituted ‘‘any six-year period’’ for ‘‘any three year period’’. Subsec. (q)(3). Pub. L. 95–217, §7, added par. (3). Subsec. (u)(2). Pub. L. 95–217, §4(a), substituted ‘‘1975, $2,000,000 for fiscal year 1977, $3,000,000 for fiscal year 1978, $3,000,000 for fiscal year 1979, and $3,000,000 for fis

cal year 1980,’’ for ‘‘1975’’. Subsec. (u)(3). Pub. L. 95–217, §4(b), substituted ‘‘1975, $1,000,000 for fiscal year 1977, $1,500,000 for fiscal year 1978, $1,500,000 for fiscal year 1979, and $1,500,000 for fis

cal year 1980,’’ for ‘‘1975’’. 1975—Subsec. (u)(1). Pub. L. 93–592, §1(a), substituted ‘‘the fiscal year ending June 30, 1974, and the fiscal year ending June 30, 1975,’’ for ‘‘and the fiscal year ending June 30, 1974,’’. Subsec. (u)(2). Pub. L. 93–592, §1(b), substituted ‘‘fis

cal years 1973, 1974, and 1975’’ for ‘‘fiscal years 1973 and 1974’’. Subsec. (u)(3). Pub. L. 93–592, §1(c), substituted ‘‘fiscal years 1973, 1974, and 1975’’ for ‘‘fiscal year 1973’’. Subsec. (u)(4), (5), (6). Pub. L. 93–592, §1(d)–(f), sub

stituted ‘‘June 30, 1974, and June 30, 1975,’’ for ‘‘and June 30, 1974,’’. 1973—Subsec. (u)(2). Pub. L. 93–207 substituted ‘‘fiscal years 1973 and 1974’’ for ‘‘fiscal year 1973’’.

C HANGE OF N AME ‘‘United States Geological Survey’’ substituted for ‘‘Geological Survey’’ in subsec. (a)(5) pursuant to provi

sion of title I of Pub. L. 102–154, set out as a note under section 31 of Title 43, Public Lands. ‘‘Secretary of Health and Human Services’’ sub

stituted for ‘‘Secretary of Health, Education, and Wel

fare’’ in subsec. (c) pursuant to section 509(b) of Pub. L. 96–88 which is classified to section 3508(b) of Title 20, Education. E FFECTIVE D ATE OF 2002 A MENDMENT Pub. L. 107–303, title III, §302(b), Nov. 27, 2002, 116 Stat. 2361, provided that: ‘‘(1) I N GENERAL .—Effective November 10, 1998, section 501 of the Federal Reports Elimination Act of 1998 (Pub

lic Law 105–362; 112 Stat. 3283) is amended by striking subsections (a) [amending this section and section 1330 of this title], (b) [amending section 1324 of this title], (c) [amending section 1329 of this title], and (d) [amend

ing this section and sections 1266, 1285, 1290, and 1375 of this title]. ‘‘(2) A PPLICABILITY .—The Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1254(n)(3)) [33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.] shall be applied and administered on and after the date of enactment of this Act [Nov. 27, 2002] as if the amend

ments made by subsections (a), (b), (c), and (d) of sec

tion 501 of the Federal Reports Elimination Act of 1998 (Public Law 105–362; 112 Stat. 3283) had not been en

acted.’’

T RANSFER OF F UNCTIONS
For transfer of authorities, functions, personnel, and assets of the Coast Guard, including the authorities and functions of the Secretary of Transportation relat

ing thereto, to the Department of Homeland Security, and for treatment of related references, see sections 468(b), 551(d), 552(d), and 557 of Title 6, Domestic Secu

rity, and the Department of Homeland Security Reor

ganization Plan of November 25, 2002, as modified, set out as a note under section 542 of Title 6. Enforcement functions of Secretary or other official in Department of Agriculture, insofar as they involve lands and programs under jurisdiction of that Depart

ment, related to compliance with this chapter with re

spect to pre-construction, construction, and initial op

eration of transportation system for Canadian and Alaskan natural gas were transferred to the Federal In

spector, Office of Federal Inspector for the Alaska Nat

ural Gas Transportation System, until the first anni

versary of date of initial operation of the Alaska Natu

ral Gas Transportation System, see Reorg. Plan No. 1 of 1979, §§102(f), 203(a), 44 F.R. 33663, 33666, 93 Stat. 1373, 1376, effective July 1, 1979, set out in the Appendix to Title 5, Government Organization and Employees. Of

fice of Federal Inspector for the Alaska Natural Gas Transportation System abolished and functions and au

thority vested in Inspector transferred to Secretary of Energy by section 3012(b) of Pub. L. 102–486, set out as an Abolition of Office of Federal Inspector note under section 719e of Title 15, Commerce and Trade. Func

tions and authority vested in Secretary of Energy sub

sequently transferred to Federal Coordinator for Alas

ka Natural Gas Transportation Projects by section 720d(f) of Title 15.

C OLUMBIA R IVER B ASIN S YSTEM ; P ROTECTION F ROM O IL S PILLS AND D ISCHARGES ; C RITERIA FOR E VALUATION
AND R EPORT TO C ONGRESS BY C OMMANDANT OF C OAST G UARD IN C ONSULTATION W ITH F EDERAL , E TC ., A GEN

CIES
Pub. L. 95–308, §8, June 30, 1978, 92 Stat. 359, set forth Congressional findings and declarations and evaluation criteria with respect to protection from oil spills and discharges and betterment of the Columbia River Basin system, with such evaluation by the Commandant of the Coast Guard to begin within 180 days after June 30, 1978, and immediate submission of the evaluation to ap

propriate Congressional committees.

C ONTIGUOUS Z ONE OF U NITED S TATES
For extension of contiguous zone of United States, see Proc. No. 7219, set out as a note under section 1331 of Title 43, Public Lands. § 1254a. Research on effects of pollutants
In carrying out the provisions of section 1254(a) of this title, the Administrator shall con

duct research on the harmful effects on the

# Clean Water--The Road Ahead

Over the past quarter century, America has made tremendous strides in cleaning up its rivers, lakes, and coastal waters. In 1972, the Potomac River was too dirty to swim in, Lake Erie wa s dying, and the Cuyahoga River was so polluted it burst into flames. Many rivers and beaches were little more than open sewers. The impr ovement in the health of the nation's waters is a direct result of a concerted effort to enhance stewardship of natural resources and to implement the environmental provisions of federal, state, tribal and local laws. In particular, the Clean Water Act has stopped billions of pounds of pollution from fouling the nation' s water, doubling the number of waterways safe for fishing and swim ming. Today, rivers, lakes, and coasts are thriving centers of healthy communities.

Despite tremendous progress, 40 percent of the nation's waterways assessed by states are still uns afe for fishing and swimming. Pollution from factories and sewage treatment plants, soil erosion, and wetland losses have been dramatically reduced. But runoff from city streets, rural areas, and othe r sources continues to degrade the environment and puts drinking water at risk. Fish in many wate rs still contain dangerous levels of me rcury, polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), and other toxic contaminants.

Clean Water Program at a Crossroads

After 25 years of progress, the nati on's clean water program is at a crossroads. Implementation of the existing programs will not stop serious new threats to public health, living resources, and the nation's waterways, particularly from polluted runoff. These programs lack the strength, resour ces, and framework to finish the job of restoring rivers, lakes, and coastal areas. To fulfill the original goal of the Clean Water Act-- fi shable and swimmable water for every American the nation must chart a new course to address the

## pollution problems of the next generation.

Charting a New Cours e

In his 1998 State of the Union Addr ess, 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 protecti on 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 loca l governments have many tools they can use to clean up and protect 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 Plan envisions a new collaborative effort by federal

## state, tribal, and local governme nts; the public; and the private sector to restore and sustain the health of watersheds in the nation. The watershed approach is the ke y to setting priorities and taking action to clean up rivers, lakes, and coastal waters.

Strong Federal and State Standards

This Action Plan calls for federal, 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 Stew ardship

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 Officia l s

Clear, accurate, and timely information is the foundation of a sound and accountable water quality pr ogram. 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 others about the health of their watersheds and the safety of their beaches, drinking water, and fish. 

# A Watershed Approach-- The Key to the Future

This Action Plan proposes a new 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 water pollution from individual sources suchas discharges from sewage treatment plants

## and factories, and from polluted runoff. Today, there is growing recognition that clean water strategies built on this foundation and tailored to specific watershed conditions are the key to the future.

Why Watersheds?

Clean water is the product of a h ealthy watershed--a watershed in which urban, agricultural, rangela nds, forest lands, and all other parts of the landscape are well- managed to prevent pollution. Focusing on the whole watershed helps strike the best balance among efforts to control point sour ce pollution and polluted runoff, and protect drinking water sources and sensitive natural resources such as wetlands. A watershed focus also helps identify the most cost-effective pollution control strate gies to meet clean water goals.

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

international model of interagency and intergovernmental cooperation on a large watershed scale. The Program sets goals for water quality and ha bit a trestoration based on sound science and achieves them by developing consensusdriven strategies. For example, federal agencies are working with a g r icultu ra l and f o rest landowners to develop f a rm lan d and riparian f o rest buffers, feed lot and animal strategies, and to provide technical support. Photo Credit: E P A



## Working at the watershed level encourages the public to get involved in efforts to restore and pr otect their water resources and is the foundation for building strong clean water partnerships. The watershed approach is the best way to bring state, tribal, federal, and local programs together to more e ffectively 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 watershed action in many different ways. For example, state water quality agencies are developing lists of impaired water bodies, defining source water protection areas for drinking water, identifying coastal protection priorities, and defining priority areas for agricultural assistance programs. Similarly, federal, state and tribal natural re source agencies set their priorities for watershed restoration and prot ection 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 adva nce the pace of progress toward clean water. As a number of states and tribes have demonstrated, they can meet existing requirements more efficiently and develop more coordinated and comprehensive priorities on a watershed basis.

Unified watershed assessments are a vehicle to identify:

o 

## watersheds that will be 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 watersheds on federal lands where core federal and state programs can be brought together to prevent degradation of water quality; and

o 

## threatened watersheds that need an extra measure of protection and attention.

Watershed Restoration Action Strategies. 

## The Action Plan encourages states and tribes to work with local communities, the public, and federal environmental, natural resource, and land management agencies to develop strategies to restore watersheds that are not meeting clean water and natural resource goals. Watershed Restoration Action Strategies will spell out the most important causes of water polluti on and resource degradation, detail the actions that all parties need to ta ke to solve those problems, and set milestones by which to measure progress Funds made available to

## federal agencies through the FY 1999 Clean Water and Watershed Restoration Budget Initiative will be used to help states implement these strategies.

Watershed Pollution Prevention. 

## Protecting pristine or sensitive waters and taking preventive action when clean water is threatened by new activities in the watershed can be th e most cost-effective approach to meeting clean water goals. This Ac tion Plan encourages states, tribal, and federal agencies to bring core programs and existing resources together to support watershed pollution prevention strategies to keep clean waters clean.

Watershed Assistance Grants. 

## Federal agencies will provide small grants to local organizations that want to take a leadership role in building local efforts to restore and protect watersheds. These grants will ensure that local communities a nd 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 st ates and tribes to expand programs to reduce contaminants that can make locally caught fish and shellfish unsafe to eat, particularly me rcury and other persistent, bioaccumulative toxic pollutants, and to ensure that the public gets clear notice of fish consumption risks.

Ensure Safe Beaches

Federal, state, and local governments will work to improve the capacity to monitor water quality at beaches, develop new standards, and use new technologies such as the Internet to report public health risks to recreational swimmers.

## Expand Control of Storm Water Runoff

EPA will publish final Phase II storm water regulations for smaller cities and construction sites in 1999. EPA will also work with its partners to make sure that existi ng storm water control requirements for large urban and industria l areas are implemented.

Improve State and Tribal Enforceable Authorities to Ad dress Polluted Runoff

Federal agencies will work with states and tribes to promote the establishment of state and tribal enforceable authorities to ensure the implementation of polluted runoff controls by the year 2000.

Define Nutrient Reduction Goals

EPA will establish by the year 2000 numeric criteria for nutrients (i.e., nitrogen and phosphorus) that reflect the different types of water bodies (e.g., lakes, rivers, and estuaries) and different ecoregions of the country and will assist states and tribes in adopting numeric water quality standa rds based on these criteria.

Reduce Pollution from Animal Feeding Opera tions

EPA will publish and, after public comment, implement an Animal Feeding Operations Strategy for im portant and necessary actions on standards and permits. In addition, by November 1998, EPA and USDA will jointly develop a broad, unified national strategy to minimize the environmental and 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 management of these croplands, pastures, forests, wetlands, rangelands, and other 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 others to enhance critical

## natural resources essential to clean water.

Federal Land Stew ardship

More than 800 million acres of the United States, including Alaska, is federal land. These lands contain an immense diversity and wealth of natural resources, including signific ant sources of drinking water and public recreation opportunities.

By 1999, the U.S. Department of the Interior (DOI) and USDA will take the lead in developing a Unified Federal Policy to enhance watershed management for the protection of water quality and the health of aquatic systems on fede ral lands and for federal resource management. Federal land managers will improve water quality protection for over 2,000 miles of ro ads and trails each year through 2005 and decommission 5,000 miles each year by 2002. Federal land managers will also accelerate the cleanup rate of watersheds affected by abandoned mines and will implement an accelerated riparian stewardship program to improve or restore 25,000 miles of stream corridors by 2005.

Protect and Restore Wetlands

This Action Plan sets a goal of attaining a net increase of 100,000 wetland acres per year by the year 2005. This goal will be achieved by ensuring that existing wetland programs continue to slow the rate of wetland losses, improving federa l restoration programs, and by expanding incentives to landowners to restore wetlands.

Protect Coastal Waters

Federal agencies, led by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), will work in partnership to improve the monitoring of coastal waters, expand research of emerging problems like Pfiesteria, amend Fishery Management Plans to address water quality issues, and ensure the implementation of strong programs to reduce polluted runoff to coastal waters.

Provide Incentives for Private Land Stew ards hip

This Action Plan relies on a substantial increase in the technical and financial assistance available to private landowners as the primary means of accelerating progress toward reducing polluted runoff from agricultural, range, and forest lands.

## USDA, working with federal, state, tribal, and private partners, will establish by 2002 two million miles of conservation buffers to reduce polluted runoff and protect watersheds, direct new funding for the Environmental Quality Incentives Program to support watershed restoration, and devel op as many new agreements with states as practicable to use the Conservation Reserve Enhancement Program to improve watersheds. Th e Plan also envisions new and innovative methods to provide ince ntives for private landowners to implement pollution prevention plan s, including risk management protection for adoption of new po llution prevention technologies and market recognition for producers that meet environmental goals.

In addition, DOI will expand its existing Partners for Wildlife Program, which restores degraded fish and wildlife habitats and improves water quality through part nerships with landowners. The program provides technical and fi nancial assistance, and gives priority to threatened and endangered species.



# Informed Citizens and Officials

Effective management of wate r resources requires reliable information about water quality conditions and new tools to communicate information to the public. Federal agencies, led by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), will work with states and tribes to improve monitoring and assessment of water quality, focusing on nutrients and related pollutants. Federal agencies will also work with states and tribes to develop and use state-of-the-art systems, such as EPA's Index of Watershed Indi cators on the Internet, to communicate meaningful information to the public about water quality conditions in their communities.

Improvements in Connecticut River water quality have led to a resurgence in recreational fishing, especially in urban areas like Hartford, which has been the

site of major fishing tournaments in recent years. Photo Credit: Riverfront R ec apture

# Clean Water and Watershed Restoration Budget Initiative

To support the new and expanded effo rts to restore and protect the nation's waters as proposed in this Clean Water Action Plan, the President's FY 1999 budget proposes a Clean Water and Watershed Restoration Budget Initiative. The funding provided in this budget initiative will dramatically incr ease federal financial support for clean water programs in FY 1999 and beyond. Specifically, the Clean Water and Watershed Rest oration Budget In itiative 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 re duce polluted runoff and enhance the natural resources on their lands;

o 

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

o 

## accelerate progress in addressing critical water quality problems on federal lands, including those related to roads, abandoned mines, riparian areas, and rangelands;

o 

## expand and coordinate water quality monitoring programs; and

o 

## increase efforts to restore nationally significant watersheds,such as the Florida Everglades and the San Francisco BayDelta.



## Clean Water and Watershed Restoration Budget

Funding Summary

Percent Increase 1999 over 1998 35%

Total Increase 1999-2003 2,338

Total Spending 1999-2003 10,516

## 0 3

0 2

0 5 239 308

133 157

125 147 Total Spending 1999-2003 10,516



## Funding by Agency 1998 Enacted 1999 Budget Environmental Protection Agency:

State Grant Assistance

Polluted runoff control grants (Sec. 319) 

## 105 200
State program management grants (Sec. 106) 

## 96 116
Wetlands protection grants 

## 15 15
Water quality cooperative agreements 

## 20 19
Water quality program management 

## 248 279

Total, EPA 

## 484 629 Department of Agricu ltu re:

Natural Resources Conservation Service:Environmental Quality Incentives 

### 200* 300* Program Natural Resources Conservation Service: Locally
led conservation 

## 0 20

Natural Resources Conservation Service:Watershed health monitoring Forest Service:Improve water quality on federal lands Agriculture Research Service:Watershed health research
Total, USDA 

## 439 633 Department of the Interior:
Bureau of Land Management:Improve water quality on federal lands Office of Surface Mining:Clean streams 

## 5 7
U.S. Geological Survey:Water monitoring and
assessment

Fish and Wildlife Service:Wetlands restoration 

## 36 42
Bureau of Indian Affairs:Improve water quality on tribal lands
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

## -5 -5 Army Corps of Engineers:

Wetlands program 

## 106 117
Challenge 21:Floodplain restoration initiative 

## 0 25
Total, ACE 

## 106 142 Interagency Projects:

Florida Everglades 

## 228 282
California Bay Delta 

## 85 143 Elimination of overlap between Everglades and other water programs listed above
Total,Interagency projects 

## 308 420

Total Clean Water and Watershed Res t oration Initiative (with Mandatory Spendin g) 

## 1,636 2,204

*Indicates Mandatory Spending Source:Office of Management and Budget



# A Continuing Commitment to Clean Water

The publication of this Action Plan is just the beginning of a longterm effort. Many of the proposed actions will provide for later public review and comment and fede ral agencies are committed to working closely with states, tribes, and others to ensure successful implementation of specific actions.

In addition, regular reports will ke ep the public apprised of progress and remaining challenges. By the end of the year 2000 and periodically thereafter, status reports on progress in implementing watershed restoration plans and related programs will be provided to the President, the nation's governors, tribal leaders, and the public.

### Table of Contents 

## | Next Section



## Clean Water Initiative Home

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

htt

p ://clea nwa te r.go v/action/o v e r vie w.h tml Revised August 10, 1998

# APPENDIX B

2011 National Listing of Fish Advisories EPA-820-F-13-058, December 2013 (http://water.epa.gov/sci tech/swguidance/fishshellfish/fishadvisori es/upload/Technical- Fact-Sheet-2011.pdf)

## 2011 National Listing of Fish Advisories

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 are no restrictions on eating specific types of fish.
The 2011 National Listing of Fish Advisories (NLFA) 1 

### database shows that the
number of fish advisories issued continues to rise as additional waters are sampled.



## Background

All 50 states, the District of Columbia, the
U.S. territories of American Samoa and Guam (for simplicity, referred to here as “states”) and five Native American tribes have fish consumption advisories in place to protect consumers from the potential health risks of eating contaminated fish caught in local waters. The states and tribes have developed their own fish advisory programs over the years, and there is variability among states and tribes in the scope and extent of monitoring and in the specific advice that is provided when
contaminated fish are found. Because of this variability, it is difficult to draw
national conclusions or to establish
national trends in fish advisories.
A fish consumption advisory is not a regulation, but rather a recommendation issued to help protect public health. These advisories may include recommendations to limit or avoid eating certain fish and wildlife species caught from specific waterbodies or from waterbody 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.
A specific waterbody or waterbody type may be under advisory for more than one affected fish species or chemical contaminant. For this reason, the total number of advisories does not convey the geographic extent of the waters subject to state advice. Therefore, EPA also reports

1 This fact sheet summarizes data submitted by the states and discusses changes in advisories for the 2011 data reporting cycle. Advisory data for the 2010 reporting cycle and previous years can be found on the EPA website at water.epa.gov/scitech/ swguidance/fishshellfish/fishadvisories

. 

# 2011 National Listing of Fish Advisories

EPA

- 820

- F

- 13

- 058 December 2013

The 2011 NLFA is available online at: 

## http://water.epa.gov/scitech/swguidance/fishshellfish/fishadvisories

### 2 

## 2011 National Listing of Fish Advisories

the data as the percentage of lake acres
and river miles for which advisories are currently in effect on a national level (Figure 1).

States issue statewide advisories to warn the public of the potential human
health risks from chemical contamination of certain species of fish
from all waterbodies within the state. States also issue safe eating guidelines to inform the public that fish from specific waterbodies have been tested for chemical contaminants and that, based on those results, certain species
of fish from those waterbodies are safe to eat without consumption
restrictions. As states and tribes increase their monitoring activities, the quantity of available information about fish contamination also increases, resulting in better public health protection.



## National Fish Advisory Program Website

The National Fish Advisory Program website ( http:// water.epa.gov/scitech/swguidance/fishshellfish/
fishadvisories/ ) provides information about fish advisories, fish consumption advice, risks and benefits of fish consumption, national technical guidance and reports, the fish advisory newsletter, the NLFA database, and state fish advisory program contacts.

The NLFA database also contains data on waterbodies under advisory and the concentrations of contaminants in fish tissue for
49 states. By searching the NFLA application, users can generate national, regional, and state reports that summarize advisory and
fish tissue information.



## Synopsis of the 2011 National Listing of Fish Advisories

The EPA’s 2011 National Listing of Fish Advisories indicates
that the number of waterbodies with active fish advisories had a net increase of 223, from 4,598 in 2010 to 4,821 in 2011. Approximately 17.7 million lake acres and 1.36 million river miles were under advisory in 2011, representing 42.3 percent of the nation’s total lake acreage and 36 percent of the nation’s total river miles (Figure 1). While the number of advisories increased between 2010 and 2011, the percent of the nation’s river miles under advisory remained unchanged because advisories issued were for small waterbodies. As shown in Figure 2, 37 states (including the District of Columbia) had statewide advisories in
effect in 2011.
Waterbodies are often under advisory for multiple contaminants, species and/or species size classes. A change to the number of acres or miles in the national percentages reported above Figure 1. Percentage of total lake acres and river miles under advisory from 1993 to 2011.

Photo Credit: Rob Shaut

### 3 

## 2011 National Listing of Fish Advisories

indicates that advisories have been issued at new waterbodies (not already under advisory for another contaminant and/or species) or that all active advisories have been rescinded at a particular waterbody. In 2011, five
rescinded advisories were subtracted from the national total. Those advisories were in Arkansas (1), Colorado (2), and Nebraska (2).



## Safe Eating Guidelines

The EPA encourages states to issue safe eating guidelines when providing advisory information to inform the public that certain species of fish from specific waterbodies have been tested and have been shown to contain very low levels of contaminants. Safe eating guidelines are recommendations for unlimited or unrestricted consumption of specific species of fish from a given waterbody. Safe eating guidelines issued by states promote healthy eating. The states help promote recreational fishing by identifying monitored waters where designated fish are safe to eat.
Safe eating guidelines are currently in effect at 1,040 waterbodies. This represents an increase of 132 waterbodies between 2010 and 2011. In 2011, safe eating guidelines were in effect in 21 states covering approximately 53,252 river miles (2 percent of the national total as reported in 2011) and 2.9 million lake acres (10 percent of the national total as reported in 2011).
The river

- mile and lake

- acre figures represent an increase of 7 rivers (22 miles) and 124 lakes (371,286 acres) since 2010.



## Bioaccumulative Contaminants

Although there are advisories in the United States for 34 different chemical contaminants, 94 percent of all advisories in effect in 2011 involved the following five bioaccumulative

Figure 2. States with statewide advisories in effect in 2011.

### 4 

## 2011 National Listing of Fish Advisories

chemical contaminants: mercury, polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), chlordane, dioxins, and dichlorodiphenyltrichloro

ethane (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 higher
concentrations of bioaccumulative contaminants in their
tissues than concentrations of contaminants found in the

water. Other bioaccumulative compounds that states monitor include perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS), perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) and pentachloroanilsole. PFOS and PFOA are known as contaminants of emerging concern, broadly defined as “a chemical or material that is a perceived, potential, or real threat to human health or the environment, or lacks published health standards. A contaminant may also be “emerging” because of the discovery of a new source or a new exposure pathway to humans, or a new detection method or treatment technology has been developed” (USEPA 2013) 2 

### . While no fish advisories due to PFOA, PFOS, or pentachloroanisole were issued in 2011, several state programs are beginning to collect data for these compounds.


### Mercury: As of 2011, 50 states, 1 U.S. territory, and 3 tribes had mercury advisories in effect. Eighty

- one percent of all

Figure 3. Total lake acres under advisory for mercury, PCBs, chlordane, dioxins, DDT, and other

contaminants from 1993 to 2011. 2 USEPA. (2013). Emerging Contaminants: Perfluorooctane Sulfonate (PFOS) and Perfluorooctanoic Acid (PFOA); Emerging Contaminants Fact
Sheet

— PFOs and PFOA. Retrieved October 29, 2013, from: http://www.epa.gov/fedfac/pdf/ec_technical_fs_pfos_pfoa_march_2013.pdf

.

### 5 

## 2011 National Listing of Fish Advisories

Contaminant Number of Waterbodies Under Advisory Lake Acres River Miles

2010 2011 2010 2011 2010 2011

Mercury 3,710 3,921 16,396,422 16,404,769 1,143,327 1,144,045

PCBs 1,084 1,102 6,071,877 6,080,041 131,224 131,657

Chlordane 60 60 824,290 824,290 53,893 53,893

Dioxins 128 129 35,400 35,400 2,333 2,333

DDT 58 67 876,470 876,571 68,884 68,927 Table 1. Number of waterbodies under advisory and size of waters under advisory, by contaminant, for 2010 and 2011

— as documented in the NLFA database. Figure 4. Total river miles under advisory for mercury, PCBs, chlordane, dioxins, DDT, and other contaminants from 1993 to 2011.

### 6 

## 2011 National Listing of Fish Advisories

DDT: The use of DDT, a highly persistent organochlorine pesticide, was banned in the United States in 1975. Nine new DDT advisories were issued in 2011, increasing from 58 in 2010 to 67 in 2011. In 2011 there were 876,571 lake acres and 68,927 river miles under advisory for DDT, an increase of 101 acres and
43 miles.



### Other Contaminants: In 2011, approximately six percent of all active advisories were issued for other contaminants, which include petroleum compounds, heavy metals, and organo

chlorine pesticides. These advisories cover approximately 2.5 million lake acres and 243,304 river miles. Aldrin is the only new contaminant for which an advisory was issued in 2011. The Texas Department of State Health Services issued an advisory for the insecticides aldrin and dieldrin after a laboratory test showed elevated levels of the contaminants along with PCBs in fish samples collected from Lake Worth, Texas.



## National Advice Concerning Mercury in Fish

In 2004, the EPA and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued advice for women who might become pregnant, pregnant women, nursing mothers, and children:
By adhering to the following three recommendations for selecting and eating fish or shellfish, women and young children will receive the health benefits of eating fish and shellfish and be confident that they have reduced their exposure to the harmful effects of mercury:
Do not eat shark, swordfish, king mackerel, or tilefish because they contain high levels of mercury.
Eat up to 12 ounces (two average meals) each week of a variety of fish and shellfish that are lower in mercury.

− Five of the most commonly consumed fish that are low in mercury are shrimp, canned light tuna, salmon, pollock, and
catfish.

− Albacore (“white”) tuna is another commonly consumed fish that has more mercury than canned light tuna. Eat up to 6 ounces (one average meal) of albacore tuna per week.
Check local advisories about the safety of fish caught by family and friends in local lakes, rivers, and coastal areas. If no advice is available, eat up to 6 ounces (one average meal) per week of fish caught from local waters, but do not consume any other fish during that week.
Follow these same recommendations when including fish and shellfish in a young child’s diet, but serve smaller portions.
For more information about the ways to reduce mercury exposure, consult EPA’s brochure, What You Need to Know advisories in effect were issued, at least in part, because of mercury. In 2011, 211 new mercury advisories were issued (173 lakes; 37 rivers; 1 bayou). In total, approximately 16.4
million lake acres and 1.1 million river miles were under advisory for mercury in 2011, an increase of 8,347 acres and
718 miles from 2010.



### PCBs: Twenty

- three percent of all advisories in effect in 2011 were due to PCBs. Between 2010 and 2011, PCB
advisories were issued for 8 lakes and 11 rivers. Approximately 6.1 million lake acres and 132,000 river miles were under advisory for PCBs in 2011, representing an increase of 8,154 lake acres and 433 river miles from 2010.



### Chlordane: All registered uses of the pesticide chlordane
were banned in the United States. in 1988. Between 2010 and 2011, lake acres and river miles under advisory for
chlordane remained the same. No new advisories were
issued.



### Dioxins: No new lake or river advisories were issued for dioxins in 2011. One new dioxin advisory was issued for an estuary in 2011. In 2011 there were 35,400 lake acres and 2,333 river miles under advisory for dioxin, the same
numbers as in 2010.

Photo Credit: Rob Shaut

### 7 

## 2011 National Listing of Fish Advisories

About Mercury in Fish and Shellfish, available on EPA’s
NLFA website at http://water.epa.gov/scitech/swguidance/ fishshellfish/outreach/advice_index.cfm

. On the website, this publication is available to download in several languages, including Cambodian, Chinese, Hmong, Korean, Portuguese, Vietnamese and Spanish.



## EPA Fish Contamination Studies

Monitoring the concentrations of persistent, bioaccumulative, and toxic (PBT) chemicals in fish tissue is an important national activity for assessing the quality of U.S. waters, estimating human health risk from fish consumption, and tracking the effectiveness of pollution control programs. Since 1998, EPA has conducted fish tissue studies to support critical agency missions that include evaluating water quality of U.S. lakes and rivers based on chemical concentrations in fish, providing information to the general public on the range and levels of chemical contaminants found in fish commonly caught and consumed by recreational and subsistence fishers, and generating data to measure the effectiveness of air and water pollution control programs.
In 2009, EPA released the results of a national screening

level survey of 268 PBT chemicals in fish from U.S. lakes and reservoirs including mercury, arsenic, dioxins and furans, the full complement of PCB congeners, and a large number of pesticides and semivolatile organic compounds. Results from this statistically

- designed study allowed EPA to estimate the percentage of lakes and
reservoirs in the United States with chemical
concentrations in fish tissue that are above levels of potential concern for humans who eat fish.
In addition to monitoring the legacy persistent organic
contaminants and toxic metals that form the basis for most of the advisories described in this report, EPA has expanded the evaluation of contaminants in fish tissue to include contaminants of emerging concern. EPA’s sampling and analysis activities include the collection and analysis of fish tissue samples to determine the occurrence of pharmaceuticals and personal care products (PPCPs), brominated flame retardants (i.e., polybrominated diphenyl ethers or PBDEs), and perfluorinated compounds (PFCs, e.g., PFOA or PFOS) as part of national studies of
fish from lakes and rivers. Fish tissue samples collected from urban river segments as a part of the 2008

- 09 National Rivers and Streams Assessment (NRSA) were analyzed for the presence of PPCPs, PBDEs, and PFCs. In addition, a suite of persistent organic compounds were analyzed and mercury levels determined in all river samples (urban and non

- urban) in this national study. In 2010, the EPA also collected fish tissue samples at 157 statistically representative nearshore locations in the five Great Lakes (about 30 sites per lake) as part of the National Coastal Condition Assessment. Samples from the Great Lakes are being analyzed for mercury, PCBs, PBDEs, PFCs, and fatty acids. EPA will collect fish tissue samples during the 2013

- 14 NRSA to allow the evaluation of temporal trends in fish tissue contamination (for mercury, PBDEs, and PFCs) by comparing
results to the 2008

- 09 NRSA. For more information about these studies, contact Leanne Stahl ( stahl.leanne@epa.gov ).



## Fish Contamination Program Activities
Fish Consumption Rate Analysis

In support of federal, state and tribal water quality and advisory programs, EPA is reviewing fish consumption rates based on data reported by the Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention in the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES). Fish consumption data from five NHANES cycles (2003

- 2012) are being analyzed to determine trends in fish consumption as well as the extent to which fish consumption rates (FCRs) may have changed since the analysis of fish consumption data that was derived from the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Continuing Survey of Food Intake by Individuals (CSFII), in 2000. The CSFII data served as the basis for the current EPA default FCRs of 17.5 grams of fish/ day for recreational fishers and 142.5 grams fish/day for Photo Credit: Patrick Fulkrod

### 8 

## 2011 National Listing of Fish Advisories



# Additional Information:
For more information about specific advisories within a state, contact the appropriate state agency listed on EPA’s Fish Advisory Program website: http://water.epa.gov/scitech/swguidance/ fishshellfish/fishadvisories

. 

# For more information about the NLFA or EPA’s Fish Advisory Program, contact:
Jeff Bigler, National Program Manager National 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 subsistence fishers. EPA expects to complete the FCR analysis
in 2014.



### National Guidance on Conducting Fish Consumption Surveys

EPA is in the process of updating its National Guidance on Conducting Fish and Wildlife Consumption Surveys, last published in 1998 (see http://water.epa.gov/scitech/swguidance/
fishshellfish/fishadvisories/index.cfm ).

EPA expects that this new guidance will take approximately two years to develop and publish.



### NHANES Analysis
In support of the EPA 2011

- 2015 Strategic Plan, EPA has analyzed the measurement of blood mercury levels in women of reproductive age as reported in NHANES. EPA has finalized and is preparing to release a report detailing the analysis of NHANES 1999

- 2010 survey data. The report presents EPA’s investigation of trends over time in blood mercury concentrations and fish consumption in women 16

- 49 years of age. EPA expects to release the report in the fall of 2013 on the EPA Fish Advisory Program website at http:// water.epa.gov/scitech/swguidance/fishshellfish/fishadvisories/. Additionally, EPA is analyzing the 1999

- 2000 and 2003

- 2010 NHANES data and developing a report on the
distribution of PFOS concentrations in U.S. women of reproductive age (16 to 49 years) and the relationship with finfish and shellfish consumption. EPA plans to release a report in Spring 2014 on the Fish Advisory Program
website.



### Report on Assessing the Effectiveness of a Mississippi Delta Fish Advisory
In cooperation with the Mississippi Department of Environmental Quality (MDEQ) and the FDA, EPA conducted a survey to evaluate the effectiveness of the Regional Mississippi Delta fish advisory issued by MDEQ in 2001. MDEQ issued the advisory because certain species of fish harvested from Delta waters had high levels of DDT and toxaphene. EPA and MDEQ conducted the survey to
understand the extent to which the Delta residents who catch and/or eat wild caught fish from the Delta were aware of the advisory, and for those aware, the changes they have made in the types of fish they catch and eat since hearing of the advisory. The final report can be accessed on the EPA Fish Advisory Program website at: http://water.epa.gov/ scitech/swguidance/fishshellfish/fishadvisories/.

# APPENDIX C

Federal Register Notice for Original Information Collection Request

for the National Listing of Advisories April 21, 2000 (Volume 65, Number 78, pages 21415–21416).

Federal Register Notice for Renewal Information Collection Request

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

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

Federal Register Notice for Renewal Information Collection Request for the National Listing of Advi sories October 25, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 205, pages 65478– 65479).

### 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** 


### 65478 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 205 / Monday, October 25, 2010 / Notices

1 Interventions may also be filed electronically via the Internet in lieu of paper. See the previous discussion on filing comments electronically. file a motion to intervene pursuant to Rule 214 of the Commission’s Rules of Practice and Procedures (18 CFR 385.214). 1 Only intervenors have the right to seek rehearing of the Commission’s decision.

Affected landowners and parties with environmental concerns may be granted intervenor status upon showing good cause by stating that they have a clear and direct interest in this proceeding which would not be adequately represented by any other parties. You do not need intervenor status to have your comments considered.

Additional information about the project is available from the Commission’s Office of External Affairs, at (866) 208–FERC or on the FERC Web site ( http://www.ferc.gov ) using the eLibrary link. Click on the eLibrary link, click on ‘‘ General Search ’’ and enter the docket number excluding the last three digits in the Docket Number field ( i.e., CP10–457). Be sure you have selected an appropriate date range. For assistance, please contact FERC Online Support at FercOnlineSupport@ferc.gov or toll free at (866) 208–3676, or for TTY, contact (202) 502–8659. The eLibrary link also provides access to the texts of formal documents issued by the Commission, such as orders, notices, and rulemakings.

In addition, the Commission offers a free service called eSubscription which allows you to keep track of all formal issuances and submittals in specific dockets. This can reduce the amount of time you spend researching proceedings by automatically providing you with notification of these filings, document summaries, and direct links to the documents. Go to http://www.ferc.gov/ esubscribenow.htm.
Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2010–26825 Filed 10–22–10; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 6717–01–P**

**ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY** 
**[EPA–HQ–OW–2007–0201, FRL–9216–9]**
**Agency Information Collection Activities: Proposed Collection;**  **Comment Request; National Listing of Fish Advisories (Renewal), EPA ICR**  **Number 1959.04, OMB Control Number 2040–0226** 

**AGENCY :**  Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). **ACTION :**  Notice.

**SUMMARY :**  In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. ), this document announces that EPA is planning to renew an existing approved Information Collection Request (ICR) to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). This ICR is scheduled to expire on February 28, 2011. 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 December 27, 2010.

**ADDRESSES :**  Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA–HQ– OW–2007–0201, by one of the following methods:

• Online: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments.

• E-mail: OW-Docket@epa.gov.

• Mail: EPA Docket Center, Environmental Protection Agency, Water Docket, Mailcode C28221T, 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 http:// 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 http:// www.regulations.gov or e-mail. The http://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 http:// 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/dockets.

**FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT :**  LCDR Samantha Fontenelle, Office of Science and Technology, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460; telephone number: (202) 566–2083; fax number: (202) 566–0409; e-mail address: fontenelle.samantha@epa.gov.

**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 http:// 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 8:30 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.

Use http://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,


### 65479 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 205 / Monday, October 25, 2010 / Notices

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: National Listing of Fish Advisories (Renewal).

ICR numbers: EPA ICR No. 1959.04, OMB Control No. 2040–0226.

ICR status: This ICR is currently scheduled to expire on February 28, 2011. 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, 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 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 biennial 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.

Burden Statement: The annual public reporting and recordkeeping burden for the collection of information is estimated to average 36.26 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: Up to 92. Frequency of response: Annual. Estimated total average number of responses for each respondent: 3.

Estimated total annual burden hours: 3,336 labor hours.

Estimated total annual burden costs: $125,697.09. No capital or startup costs are required. Are there changes in the estimates from the last approval?

There is a decrease of 229 hours in the total estimated respondent burden compared with that identified in the ICR currently approved by OMB. This decrease reflects a change in how the States, Tribes and territories provide the fish advisory data to EPA. The data tool is no longer being used by States to enter data into the NLFA database. 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: October 15, 2010. Ephraim S. King, Director, Office of Science and Technology.
[FR Doc. 2010–26882 Filed 10–22–10; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 6560–50–P**

**ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY** 

**[FRL–9216–8]**

**National Environmental Justice Advisory Council; Notification of**  **Public Meeting and Public Comment**

**AGENCY :**  Environmental Protection Agency.

**ACTION :**  Notification of Public Meeting.

**SUMMARY :**  Pursuant to the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA), Public Law 92–463, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) hereby provides notice that the National Environmental Justice Advisory Council (NEJAC) will meet on the dates and times described below. All meetings are open to the public. Members of the public are encouraged to provide comments relevant to the specific issues


# APPENDIX D

Survey Instrument for the 2012–201 5 NLFA Reporting Cycles and the State Fish Advisory Program Questionnaire

## A-1 OMB Control Number 2040-0226 Approval Expires 11/30/2014



## UNITED STATES ENVIRONM ENTAL PROTECTION A GE NC Y FISH CONSUM PTION ADVISORY PROGRAM S QUE S T I ONN AI RE FO R SURVEY YEARS 2012

− 2015

Please provide the following information about the agency in your state or tribe that is r es p on si b le for issuing noncom m ercial ( spo rt fi shi n g/ sub si st ence)

a d viso r ies or clos u r es for chemical contamination in fish and s h ellfis h

.

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)