Supporting Statement Appendix

APPENDIX A

Relevant Sections of Statues, Regulations, or Judicial/Administrative
Decrees Enabling the Collection of Information for the National Listing of
Advisories
Clean Water Act 104, as printed in
(http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode33/usc_sec_33_00001254----000-.html)
Title 33: Navigation and Navigable Waters
Chapter 26: Water Pollution Prevention and Control
Subchapter 1: Research and Related Programs
Section 1254: Research, investigations, training, and information
EPA’s Clean Water Action Plan - Fish Consumption Advisories

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

Page 1 of 9

LII / Legal Information Institute

U.S. Code collection
Prev | Next

TITLE 33 > CHAPTER 26 > SUBCHAPTER I > § 1254

§ 1254. Research, investigations, training, and information
How Current is This?

(a) Establishment of national programs; cooperation; investigations;
water quality surveillance system; reports
The Administrator shall establish national programs for the prevention,
reduction, and elimination of pollution and as part of such programs shall—
(1) in cooperation with other Federal, State, and local agencies, conduct
and promote the coordination and acceleration of, research, investigations,
experiments, training, demonstrations, surveys, and studies relating to the
causes, effects, extent, prevention, reduction, and elimination of pollution;
(2) encourage, cooperate with, and render technical services to pollution
control agencies and other appropriate public or private agencies,
institutions, and organizations, and individuals, including the general public,
in the conduct of activities referred to in paragraph (1) of this subsection;

Search
this title:
Notes
Updates
Parallel
regulations
(CFR)
Your
comments

(3) conduct, in cooperation with State water pollution control agencies and
other interested agencies, organizations and persons, public investigations
concerning the pollution of any navigable waters, and report on the results of
such investigations;
(4) establish advisory committees composed of recognized experts in
various aspects of pollution and representatives of the public to assist in the
examination and evaluation of research progress and proposals and to avoid
duplication of research;
(5) in cooperation with the States, and their political subdivisions, and
other Federal agencies establish, equip, and maintain a water quality
surveillance system for the purpose of monitoring the quality of the
navigable waters and ground waters and the contiguous zone and the oceans
and the Administrator shall, to the extent practicable, conduct such
surveillance by utilizing the resources of the National Aeronautics and Space
Administration, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the
United States Geological Survey, and the Coast Guard, and shall report on
such quality in the report required under subsection (a) of section 1375 of
this title; and
(6) initiate and promote the coordination and acceleration of research
designed to develop the most effective practicable tools and techniques for
measuring the social and economic costs and benefits of activities which are
subject to regulation under this chapter; and shall transmit a report on the
results of such research to the Congress not later than January 1, 1974.
(b) Authorized activities of Administrator
In carrying out the provisions of subsection (a) of this section the Administrator
is authorized to—
(1) collect and make available, through publications and other appropriate

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

1/4/2007

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

Page 2 of 9

means, the results of and other information, including appropriate
recommendations by him in connection therewith, pertaining to such
research and other activities referred to in paragraph (1) of subsection (a) of
this section;
(2) cooperate with other Federal departments and agencies, State water
pollution control agencies, interstate agencies, other public and private
agencies, institutions, organizations, industries involved, and individuals, in
the preparation and conduct of such research and other activities referred to
in paragraph (1) of subsection (a) of this section;
(3) make grants to State water pollution control agencies, interstate
agencies, other public or nonprofit private agencies, institutions,
organizations, and individuals, for purposes stated in paragraph (1) of
subsection (a) of this section;
(4) contract with public or private agencies, institutions, organizations, and
individuals, without regard to section 3324 (a) and (b) of title 31 and section
5 of title 41, referred to in paragraph (1) of subsection (a) of this section;
(5) establish and maintain research fellowships at public or nonprofit
private educational institutions or research organizations;
(6) collect and disseminate, in cooperation with other Federal departments
and agencies, and with other public or private agencies, institutions, and
organizations having related responsibilities, basic data on chemical,
physical, and biological effects of varying water quality and other information
pertaining to pollution and the prevention, reduction, and elimination
thereof; and
(7) develop effective and practical processes, methods, and prototype
devices for the prevention, reduction, and elimination of pollution.
(c) Research and studies on harmful effects of pollutants; cooperation
with Secretary of Health and Human Services
In carrying out the provisions of subsection (a) of this section the Administrator
shall conduct research on, and survey the results of other scientific studies on,
the harmful effects on the health or welfare of persons caused by pollutants. In
order to avoid duplication of effort, the Administrator shall, to the extent
practicable, conduct such research in cooperation with and through the facilities
of the Secretary of Health and Human Services.
(d) Sewage treatment; identification and measurement of effects of
pollutants; augmented streamflow
In carrying out the provisions of this section the Administrator shall develop and
demonstrate under varied conditions (including conducting such basic and
applied research, studies, and experiments as may be necessary):
(1) Practicable means of treating municipal sewage, and other waterborne
wastes to implement the requirements of section 1281 of this title;
(2) Improved methods and procedures to identify and measure the effects
of pollutants, including those pollutants created by new technological
developments; and
(3) Methods and procedures for evaluating the effects on water quality of
augmented streamflows to control pollution not susceptible to other means of
prevention, reduction, or elimination.
(e) Field laboratory and research facilities
The Administrator shall establish, equip, and maintain field laboratory and
research facilities, including, but not limited to, one to be located in the

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

1/4/2007

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

Page 3 of 9

northeastern area of the United States, one in the Middle Atlantic area, one in
the southeastern area, one in the midwestern area, one in the southwestern
area, one in the Pacific Northwest, and one in the State of Alaska, for the
conduct of research, investigations, experiments, field demonstrations and
studies, and training relating to the prevention, reduction and elimination of
pollution. Insofar as practicable, each such facility shall be located near
institutions of higher learning in which graduate training in such research might
be carried out. In conjunction with the development of criteria under section
1343 of this title, the Administrator shall construct the facilities authorized for
the National Marine Water Quality Laboratory established under this subsection.
(f) Great Lakes water quality research
The Administrator shall conduct research and technical development work, and
make studies, with respect to the quality of the waters of the Great Lakes,
including an analysis of the present and projected future water quality of the
Great Lakes under varying conditions of waste treatment and disposal, an
evaluation of the water quality needs of those to be served by such waters, an
evaluation of municipal, industrial, and vessel waste treatment and disposal
practices with respect to such waters, and a study of alternate means of solving
pollution problems (including additional waste treatment measures) with respect
to such waters.
(g) Treatment works pilot training programs; employment needs
forecasting; training projects and grants; research fellowships; technical
training; report to the President and transmittal to Congress
(1) For the purpose of providing an adequate supply of trained personnel to
operate and maintain existing and future treatment works and related
activities, and for the purpose of enhancing substantially the proficiency of
those engaged in such activities, the Administrator shall finance pilot
programs, in cooperation with State and interstate agencies, municipalities,
educational institutions, and other organizations and individuals, of
manpower development and training and retraining of persons in, on
entering into, the field of operation and maintenance of treatment works and
related activities. Such program and any funds expended for such a program
shall supplement, not supplant, other manpower and training programs and
funds available for the purposes of this paragraph. The Administrator is
authorized, under such terms and conditions as he deems appropriate, to
enter into agreements with one or more States, acting jointly or severally, or
with other public or private agencies or institutions for the development and
implementation of such a program.
(2) The Administrator is authorized to enter into agreements with public
and private agencies and institutions, and individuals to develop and
maintain an effective system for forecasting the supply of, and demand for,
various professional and other occupational categories needed for the
prevention, reduction, and elimination of pollution in each region, State, or
area of the United States and, from time to time, to publish the results of
such forecasts.
(3) In furtherance of the purposes of this chapter, the Administrator is
authorized to—
(A) make grants to public or private agencies and institutions and to
individuals for training projects, and provide for the conduct of training
by contract with public or private agencies and institutions and with
individuals without regard to section 3324 (a) and (b) of title 31 and
section 5 of title 41;
(B) establish and maintain research fellowships in the Environmental
Protection Agency with such stipends and allowances, including
traveling and subsistence expenses, as he may deem necessary to

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

1/4/2007

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

Page 4 of 9

procure the assistance of the most promising research fellows; and
(C) provide, in addition to the program established under paragraph
(1) of this subsection, training in technical matters relating to the
causes, prevention, reduction, and elimination of pollution for
personnel of public agencies and other persons with suitable
qualifications.
(4) The Administrator shall submit, through the President, a report to the
Congress not later than December 31, 1973, summarizing the actions taken
under this subsection and the effectiveness of such actions, and setting forth
the number of persons trained, the occupational categories for which training
was provided, the effectiveness of other Federal, State, and local training
programs in this field, together with estimates of future needs,
recommendations on improving training programs, and such other
information and recommendations, including legislative recommendations, as
he deems appropriate.
(h) Lake pollution
The Administrator is authorized to enter into contracts with, or make grants to,
public or private agencies and organizations and individuals for
(A) the purpose of developing and demonstrating new or improved methods
for the prevention, removal, reduction, and elimination of pollution in lakes,
including the undesirable effects of nutrients and vegetation, and
(B) the construction of publicly owned research facilities for such purpose.

(i) Oil pollution control studies
The Administrator, in cooperation with the Secretary of the Department in which
the Coast Guard is operating, shall—
(1) engage in such research, studies, experiments, and demonstrations as
he deems appropriate, relative to the removal of oil from any waters and to
the prevention, control, and elimination of oil and hazardous substances
pollution;
(2) publish from time to time the results of such activities; and
(3) from time to time, develop and publish in the Federal Register
specifications and other technical information on the various chemical
compounds used in the control of oil and hazardous substances spills.
In carrying out this subsection, the Administrator may enter into contracts with, or
make grants to, public or private agencies and organizations and individuals.
(j) Solid waste disposal equipment for vessels
The Secretary of the department in which the Coast Guard is operating shall
engage in such research, studies, experiments, and demonstrations as he deems
appropriate relative to equipment which is to be installed on board a vessel and
is designed to receive, retain, treat, or discharge human body wastes and the
wastes from toilets and other receptacles intended to receive or retain body
wastes with particular emphasis on equipment to be installed on small
recreational vessels. The Secretary of the department in which the Coast Guard
is operating shall report to Congress the results of such research, studies,
experiments, and demonstrations prior to the effective date of any regulations
established under section 1322 of this title. In carrying out this subsection the
Secretary of the department in which the Coast Guard is operating may enter
into contracts with, or make grants to, public or private organizations and

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

1/4/2007

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

Page 5 of 9

individuals.
(k) Land acquisition
In carrying out the provisions of this section relating to the conduct by the
Administrator of demonstration projects and the development of field
laboratories and research facilities, the Administrator may acquire land and
interests therein by purchase, with appropriated or donated funds, by donation,
or by exchange for acquired or public lands under his jurisdiction which he
classifies as suitable for disposition. The values of the properties so exchanged
either shall be approximately equal, or if they are not approximately equal, the
values shall be equalized by the payment of cash to the grantor or to the
Administrator as the circumstances require.
(l) Collection and dissemination of scientific knowledge on effects and
control of pesticides in water
(1) The Administrator shall, after consultation with appropriate local, State,
and Federal agencies, public and private organizations, and interested
individuals, as soon as practicable but not later than January 1, 1973,
develop and issue to the States for the purpose of carrying out this chapter
the latest scientific knowledge available in indicating the kind and extent of
effects on health and welfare which may be expected from the presence of
pesticides in the water in varying quantities. He shall revise and add to such
information whenever necessary to reflect developing scientific knowledge.
(2) The President shall, in consultation with appropriate local, State, and
Federal agencies, public and private organizations, and interested individuals,
conduct studies and investigations of methods to control the release of
pesticides into the environment which study shall include examination of the
persistency of pesticides in the water environment and alternatives thereto.
The President shall submit reports, from time to time, on such investigations
to Congress together with his recommendations for any necessary
legislation.
(m) Waste oil disposal study
(1) The Administrator shall, in an effort to prevent degradation of the
environment from the disposal of waste oil, conduct a study of
(A) the generation of used engine, machine, cooling, and similar
waste oil, including quantities generated, the nature and quality of
such oil, present collecting methods and disposal practices, and
alternate uses of such oil;
(B) the long-term, chronic biological effects of the disposal of such
waste oil; and
(C) the potential market for such oils, including the economic and
legal factors relating to the sale of products made from such oils, the
level of subsidy, if any, needed to encourage the purchase by public
and private nonprofit agencies of products from such oil, and the
practicability of Federal procurement, on a priority basis, of products
made from such oil. In conducting such study, the Administrator shall
consult with affected industries and other persons.
(2) The Administrator shall report the preliminary results of such study to
Congress within six months after October 18, 1972, and shall submit a final
report to Congress within 18 months after such date.
(n) Comprehensive studies of effects of pollution on estuaries and
estuarine zones

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

1/4/2007

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

Page 6 of 9

(1) The Administrator shall, in cooperation with the Secretary of the Army,
the Secretary of Agriculture, the Water Resources Council, and with other
appropriate Federal, State, interstate, or local public bodies and private
organizations, institutions, and individuals, conduct and promote, and
encourage contributions to, continuing comprehensive studies of the effects
of pollution, including sedimentation, in the estuaries and estuarine zones of
the United States on fish and wildlife, on sport and commercial fishing, on
recreation, on water supply and water power, and on other beneficial
purposes. Such studies shall also consider the effect of demographic trends,
the exploitation of mineral resources and fossil fuels, land and industrial
development, navigation, flood and erosion control, and other uses of
estuaries and estuarine zones upon the pollution of the waters therein.
(2) In conducting such studies, the Administrator shall assemble,
coordinate, and organize all existing pertinent information on the Nation’s
estuaries and estuarine zones; carry out a program of investigations and
surveys to supplement existing information in representative estuaries and
estuarine zones; and identify the problems and areas where further research
and study are required.
(3) The Administrator shall submit to Congress, from time to time, reports
of the studies authorized by this subsection but at least one such report
during any six-year period. Copies of each such report shall be made
available to all interested parties, public and private.
(4) For the purpose of this subsection, the term “estuarine zones” means
an environmental system consisting of an estuary and those transitional
areas which are consistently influenced or affected by water from an estuary
such as, but not limited to, salt marshes, coastal and intertidal areas, bays,
harbors, lagoons, inshore waters, and channels, and the term “estuary”
means all or part of the mouth of a river or stream or other body of water
having unimpaired natural connection with open sea and within which the
sea water is measurably diluted with fresh water derived from land drainage.
(o) Methods of reducing total flow of sewage and unnecessary water
consumption; reports
(1) The Administrator shall conduct research and investigations on devices,
systems, incentives, pricing policy, and other methods of reducing the total
flow of sewage, including, but not limited to, unnecessary water consumption
in order to reduce the requirements for, and the costs of, sewage and waste
treatment services. Such research and investigations shall be directed to
develop devices, systems, policies, and methods capable of achieving the
maximum reduction of unnecessary water consumption.
(2) The Administrator shall report the preliminary results of such studies
and investigations to the Congress within one year after October 18, 1972,
and annually thereafter in the report required under subsection (a) of section
1375 of this title. Such report shall include recommendations for any
legislation that may be required to provide for the adoption and use of
devices, systems, policies, or other methods of reducing water consumption
and reducing the total flow of sewage. Such report shall include an estimate
of the benefits to be derived from adoption and use of such devices,
systems, policies, or other methods and also shall reflect estimates of any
increase in private, public, or other cost that would be occasioned thereby.
(p) Agricultural pollution
In carrying out the provisions of subsection (a) of this section the Administrator
shall, in cooperation with the Secretary of Agriculture, other Federal agencies,
and the States, carry out a comprehensive study and research program to
determine new and improved methods and the better application of existing
methods of preventing, reducing, and eliminating pollution from agriculture,

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

1/4/2007

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

Page 7 of 9

including the legal, economic, and other implications of the use of such methods.
(q) Sewage in rural areas; national clearinghouse for alternative
treatment information; clearinghouse on small flows
(1) The Administrator shall conduct a comprehensive program of research
and investigation and pilot project implementation into new and improved
methods of preventing, reducing, storing, collecting, treating, or otherwise
eliminating pollution from sewage in rural and other areas where collection of
sewage in conventional, communitywide sewage collection systems is
impractical, uneconomical, or otherwise infeasible, or where soil conditions or
other factors preclude the use of septic tank and drainage field systems.
(2) The Administrator shall conduct a comprehensive program of research
and investigation and pilot project implementation into new and improved
methods for the collection and treatment of sewage and other liquid wastes
combined with the treatment and disposal of solid wastes.
(3) The Administrator shall establish, either within the Environmental
Protection Agency, or through contract with an appropriate public or private
non-profit organization, a national clearinghouse which shall
(A) receive reports and information resulting from research,
demonstrations, and other projects funded under this chapter related
to paragraph (1) of this subsection and to subsection (e)(2) of section
1255 of this title;
(B) coordinate and disseminate such reports and information for use
by Federal and State agencies, municipalities, institutions, and persons
in developing new and improved methods pursuant to this subsection;
and
(C) provide for the collection and dissemination of reports and
information relevant to this subsection from other Federal and State
agencies, institutions, universities, and persons.
(4) Small flows clearinghouse.— Notwithstanding section 1285 (d) of
this title, from amounts that are set aside for a fiscal year under section
1285 (i) of this title and are not obligated by the end of the 24-month period
of availability for such amounts under section 1285 (d) of this title, the
Administrator shall make available $1,000,000 or such unobligated amount,
whichever is less, to support a national clearinghouse within the
Environmental Protection Agency to collect and disseminate information on
small flows of sewage and innovative or alternative wastewater treatment
processes and techniques, consistent with paragraph (3). This paragraph
shall apply with respect to amounts set aside under section 1285 (i) of this
title for which the 24-month period of availability referred to in the preceding
sentence ends on or after September 30, 1986.
(r) Research grants to colleges and universities
The Administrator is authorized to make grants to colleges and universities to
conduct basic research into the structure and function of freshwater aquatic
ecosystems, and to improve understanding of the ecological characteristics
necessary to the maintenance of the chemical, physical, and biological integrity
of freshwater aquatic ecosystems.
(s) River Study Centers
The Administrator is authorized to make grants to one or more institutions of
higher education (regionally located and to be designated as “River Study
Centers”) for the purpose of conducting and reporting on interdisciplinary studies
on the nature of river systems, including hydrology, biology, ecology, economics,

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

1/4/2007

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

Page 8 of 9

the relationship between river uses and land uses, and the effects of
development within river basins on river systems and on the value of water
resources and water related activities. No such grant in any fiscal year shall
exceed $1,000,000.
(t) Thermal discharges
The Administrator shall, in cooperation with State and Federal agencies and
public and private organizations, conduct continuing comprehensive studies of
the effects and methods of control of thermal discharges. In evaluating
alternative methods of control the studies shall consider
(1) such data as are available on the latest available technology, economic
feasibility including cost-effectiveness analysis, and
(2) the total impact on the environment, considering not only water quality
but also air quality, land use, and effective utilization and conservation of
freshwater and other natural resources. Such studies shall consider methods
of minimizing adverse effects and maximizing beneficial effects of thermal
discharges. The results of these studies shall be reported by the
Administrator as soon as practicable, but not later than 270 days after
October 18, 1972, and shall be made available to the public and the States,
and considered as they become available by the Administrator in carrying out
section 1326 of this title and by the States in proposing thermal water quality
standards.

(u) Authorization of appropriations
There is authorized to be appropriated
(1) not to exceed $100,000,000 per fiscal year for the fiscal year ending
June 30, 1973, the fiscal year ending June 30, 1974, and the fiscal year
ending June 30, 1975, not to exceed $14,039,000 for the fiscal year ending
September 30, 1980, not to exceed $20,697,000 for the fiscal year ending
September 30, 1981, not to exceed $22,770,000 for the fiscal year ending
September 30, 1982, such sums as may be necessary for fiscal years 1983
through 1985, and not to exceed $22,770,000 per fiscal year for each of the
fiscal years 1986 through 1990, for carrying out the provisions of this
section, other than subsections (g)(1) and (2), (p), (r), and (t) of this
section, except that such authorizations are not for any research,
development, or demonstration activity pursuant to such provisions;
(2) not to exceed $7,500,000 for fiscal years 1973, 1974, and 1975,
$2,000,000 for fiscal year 1977, $3,000,000 for fiscal year 1978, $3,000,000
for fiscal year 1979, $3,000,000 for fiscal year 1980, $3,000,000 for fiscal
year 1981, $3,000,000 for fiscal year 1982, such sums as may be necessary
for fiscal years 1983 through 1985, and $3,000,000 per fiscal year for each
of the fiscal years 1986 through 1990, for carrying out the provisions of
subsection (g)(1) of this section;
(3) not to exceed $2,500,000 for fiscal years 1973, 1974, and 1975,
$1,000,000 for fiscal year 1977, $1,500,000 for fiscal year 1978, $1,500,000
for fiscal year 1979, $1,500,000 for fiscal year 1980, $1,500,000 for fiscal
year 1981, $1,500,000 for fiscal year 1982, such sums as may be necessary
for fiscal years 1983 through 1985, and $1,500,000 per fiscal year for each
of the fiscal years 1986 through 1990, for carrying out the provisions of
subsection (g)(2) of this section;
(4) not to exceed $10,000,000 for each of the fiscal years ending June 30,
1973, June 30, 1974, and June 30, 1975, for carrying out the provisions of
subsection (p) of this section;
(5) not to exceed $15,000,000 per fiscal year for the fiscal years ending

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

1/4/2007

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

Page 9 of 9

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

(v) Studies concerning pathogen indicators in coastal recreation waters
Not later than 18 months after October 10, 2000, after consultation and in
cooperation with appropriate Federal, State, tribal, and local officials (including
local health officials), the Administrator shall initiate, and, not later than 3 years
after October 10, 2000, shall complete, in cooperation with the heads of other
Federal agencies, studies to provide additional information for use in
developing—
(1) an assessment of potential human health risks resulting from exposure
to pathogens in coastal recreation waters, including nongastrointestinal
effects;
(2) appropriate and effective indicators for improving detection in a timely
manner in coastal recreation waters of the presence of pathogens that are
harmful to human health;
(3) appropriate, accurate, expeditious, and cost-effective methods
(including predictive models) for detecting in a timely manner in coastal
recreation waters the presence of pathogens that are harmful to human
health; and
(4) guidance for State application of the criteria for pathogens and
pathogen indicators to be published under section 1314 (a)(9) of this title to
account for the diversity of geographic and aquatic conditions.

Prev | Next
LII has no control over and does not endorse any external Internet
site that contains links to or references LII.

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

1/4/2007

Clean Water--The Road Ahead
Over the past
quarter century, America
has made tremendous
strides in cleaning up its
rivers, lakes, and coastal
waters. In 1972, the
Potomac River was too
dirty to swim in, Lake Erie was dying, and the Cuyahoga River was
so polluted it burst into flames. Many rivers and beaches were little
more than open sewers. The improvement in the health of the
nation's waters is a direct result of a concerted effort to enhance
stewardship of natural resources and to implement the
environmental provisions of federal, state, tribal and local laws. In
particular, the Clean Water Act has stopped billions of pounds of
pollution from fouling the nation's water, doubling the number of
waterways safe for fishing and swimming. Today, rivers, lakes, and
coasts are thriving centers of healthy communities.
Despite tremendous progress, 40 percent of the nation's waterways
assessed by states are still unsafe for fishing and swimming.
Pollution from factories and sewage treatment plants, soil erosion,
and wetland losses have been dramatically reduced. But runoff from
city streets, rural areas, and other sources continues to degrade the
environment and puts drinking water at risk. Fish in many waters
still contain dangerous levels of mercury, polychlorinated biphenyls
(PCBs), and other toxic contaminants.
Clean Water Program at a Crossroads
After 25 years of progress, the nation's clean water program is at a
crossroads. Implementation of the existing programs will not stop
serious new threats to public health, living resources, and the
nation's waterways, particularly from polluted runoff. These
programs lack the strength, resources, and framework to finish the
job of restoring rivers, lakes, and coastal areas. To fulfill the original
goal of the Clean Water Act-- fishable and swimmable water for
every American the nation must chart a new course to address the

pollution problems of the next generation.
Charting a New Course
In his 1998 State of the Union Address, President Clinton
announced a major new Clean Water Initiative to speed the
restoration of the nation's precious waterways. This new initiative
aims to achieve clean water by strengthening public health
protections, targeting community-based watershed protection efforts
at high priority areas, and providing communities with new
resources to control polluted runoff.
On October 18, 1997, the 25th anniversary of the Clean Water Act,
Vice President Gore directed the Department of Agriculture
(USDA) and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to work
with other federal agencies and the public to prepare an aggressive
Action Plan to meet the promise of clean, safe water for all
Americans. This Action Plan forms the core of President Clinton's
Clean Water Initiative in which he proposed $568 million in new
resources in his FY 1999 budget to carry it out. The Action Plan
builds on the solid foundation of existing clean water programs and
proposes new actions to strengthen efforts to restore and protect
water resources. In implementing this Action Plan, the federal
government will:
support locally led partnerships that include a broad array of
federal agencies, states, tribes, communities, businesses, and
citizens to meet clean water and public health goals;
o increase financial and technical assistance to states, tribes,
local governments, farmers, and others; and
o help states and tribes restore and sustain the health of aquatic
systems on a watershed basis.
o

Four Tools for Clean Water
Federal, state, tribal, and local governments have many tools they
can use to clean up and protect water resources. Regulation,
economic incentives, technical assistance, research, education, and
accurate information all have a role to play in meeting clean water
goals. This Action Plan is built around four key tools to achieve
clean water goals.
A Watershed Approach
This Action Plan envisions a new collaborative effort by federal

state, tribal, and local governments; the public; and the private
sector to restore and sustain the health of watersheds in the nation.
The watershed approach is the key to setting priorities and taking
action to clean up rivers, lakes, and coastal waters.
Strong Federal and State Standards
This Action Plan calls for federal, state, and tribal agencies to revise
standards where needed and make existing programs more effective.
Effective standards are key to protecting public health, preventing
polluted runoff, and ensuring accountability.
Natural Resource Stewardship
Most of the land in the nation's watersheds is cropland, pasture,
rangeland, or forests, and most of the water that ends up in rivers,
lakes, and coastal waters falls on these lands first. Clean water
depends on the conservation and stewardship of these natural
resources. This Action Plan calls on federal natural resource and
conservation agencies to apply their collective resources and
technical expertise to state and local watershed restoration and
protection.
Informed Citizens and Officials
Clear, accurate, and timely information is the foundation of a sound
and accountable water quality program. Informed citizens and
officials make better decisions about their watersheds. This Action
Plan calls on federal agencies to improve the information available
to the public, governments, and others about the health of their
watersheds and the safety of their beaches, drinking water, and fish.

A Watershed Approach-- The Key to the
Future
This Action Plan proposes a new collaborative effort by state, tribal,
federal, and local governments, the private sector and the public to
restore those watersheds not meeting clean water, natural resource,
and public health goals and to sustain healthy conditions in other
watersheds.
For the past 25 years, most water pollution control efforts relied on
broadly applied national programs that reduced water pollution from
individual sources such as discharges from sewage treatment plants

and factories, and from polluted runoff. Today, there is growing
recognition that clean water strategies built on this foundation and
tailored to specific watershed conditions are the key to the future.
Why Watersheds?
Clean water is the product of a healthy watershed--a watershed in
which urban, agricultural, rangelands, forest lands, and all other
parts of the landscape are well-managed to prevent pollution.
Focusing on the whole watershed helps strike the best balance
among efforts to control point source pollution and polluted runoff,
and protect drinking water sources and sensitive natural resources
such as wetlands. A watershed focus also helps identify the most
cost-effective pollution control strategies to meet clean water goals.

Skipjack under sail on the Chesapeake Bay. The Chesapeake Bay Program is an
international model of interagency and intergovernmental cooperation on a
large watershed scale. The Program sets goals for water quality and habitat
restoration based on sound science and achieves them by developing consensusdriven strategies. For example, federal agencies are working with agricultural
and forest landowners to develop farmland and riparian forest buffers, feedlot
and animal strategies, and to provide technical support. Photo Credit: EPA

Working at the watershed level encourages the public to get
involved in efforts to restore and protect their water resources and is
the foundation for building strong clean water partnerships. The
watershed approach is the best way to bring state, tribal, federal, and
local programs together to more effectively and efficiently clean up
and protect waters. It is also the key to greater accountability and
progress toward clean water goals.

Key Elements of the Watershed Approach
This Action Plan proposes a watershed approach built on several
key elements.
Unified Watershed Assessments. States, tribes, and federal agencies

currently set priorities for watershed action in many different ways.
For example, state water quality agencies are developing lists of
impaired water bodies, defining source water protection areas for
drinking water, identifying coastal protection priorities, and defining
priority areas for agricultural assistance programs. Similarly,
federal, state and tribal natural resource agencies set their priorities
for watershed restoration and protection in various ways to meet
their mandates for natural resource conservation. These processes
are designed to meet valid objectives, but too often opportunities to
work together to meet common goals are overlooked.
This Action Plan creates a strategic opportunity for states and tribes,
in cooperation with federal land and resource managers on federal
lands, to take the lead in unifying these various existing efforts and
leveraging scarce resources to advance the pace of progress toward
clean water. As a number of states and tribes have demonstrated,
they can meet existing requirements more efficiently and develop
more coordinated and comprehensive priorities on a watershed
basis.
Unified watershed assessments are a vehicle to identify:
watersheds that will be targeted to receive significant new
resources from the President's FY 1999 budget and beyond
to clean up waters that are not meeting water quality goals;
o pristine or sensitive watersheds on federal lands where core
federal and state programs can be brought together to
prevent degradation of water quality; and
o threatened watersheds that need an extra measure of
protection and attention.
o

Watershed Restoration Action Strategies. The Action Plan encourages

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

federal agencies through the FY 1999 Clean Water and Watershed
Restoration Budget Initiative will be used to help states implement
these strategies.
Watershed Pollution Prevention. Protecting pristine or sensitive waters

and taking preventive action when clean water is threatened by new
activities in the watershed can be the most cost-effective approach to
meeting clean water goals. This Action Plan encourages states,
tribal, and federal agencies to bring core programs and existing
resources together to support watershed pollution prevention
strategies to keep clean waters clean.
Watershed Assistance Grants. Federal agencies will provide small

grants to local organizations that want to take a leadership role in
building local efforts to restore and protect watersheds. These grants
will ensure that local communities and stakeholders can effectively
engage in the process of setting goals and devising solutions to
restore their watersheds.

Strong Federal and State Standards
This Action Plan calls on federal, state, and tribal governments to
strengthen existing programs to support an accelerated effort to
attack the nation's remaining water quality problems. Federal, state,
and tribal standards for water quality and polluted runoff are key
tools for protecting public health, preventing polluted runoff, and
ensuring accountability. Some of the specific actions called for in
this Action Plan are identified below.
Improve Assurance that Fish and Shellfish are Safe to Eat
Federal agencies will work with states and tribes to expand
programs to reduce contaminants that can make locally caught fish
and shellfish unsafe to eat, particularly mercury and other persistent,
bio-accumulative toxic pollutants, and to ensure that the public gets
clear notice of fish consumption risks.
Ensure Safe Beaches
Federal, state, and local governments will work to improve the
capacity to monitor water quality at beaches, develop new standards,
and use new technologies such as the Internet to report public health
risks to recreational swimmers.
Expand Control of Storm Water Runoff

EPA will publish final Phase II storm water regulations for smaller
cities and construction sites in 1999. EPA will also work with its
partners to make sure that existing storm water control requirements
for large urban and industrial areas are implemented.
Improve State and Tribal Enforceable Authorities to Address
Polluted Runoff
Federal agencies will work with states and tribes to promote the
establishment of state and tribal enforceable authorities to ensure the
implementation of polluted runoff controls by the year 2000.
Define Nutrient Reduction Goals
EPA will establish by the year 2000 numeric criteria for nutrients
(i.e., nitrogen and phosphorus) that reflect the different types of
water bodies (e.g., lakes, rivers, and estuaries) and different
ecoregions of the country and will assist states and tribes in adopting
numeric water quality standards based on these criteria.
Reduce Pollution from Animal Feeding Operations
EPA will publish and, after public comment, implement an Animal
Feeding Operations Strategy for important and necessary actions on
standards and permits. In addition, by November 1998, EPA and
USDA will jointly develop a broad, unified national strategy to
minimize the environmental and public health impacts of Animal
Feeding Operations.

Natural Resource Stewardship
Nearly 70 percent of the United States, exclusive of Alaska, is held
in private ownership by millions of individuals. Fifty percent, or 907
million acres, is owned by farmers, ranchers, and their families.
Another 400 million acres are federal lands. Most of the rainfall in
the country falls on these lands before it enters rivers, lakes, and
coastal waters. Effective management of these croplands, pastures,
forests, wetlands, rangelands, and other resources is key to keeping
clean water clean and restoring watersheds where water quality is
impaired.
This Action Plan commits all federal natural resource conservation
and environmental agencies to focus their expertise and resources to
support the watershed approach described above. In addition, these
agencies will work with states tribes and others to enhance critical

natural resources essential to clean water.
Federal Land Stewardship
More than 800 million acres of the United States, including Alaska,
is federal land. These lands contain an immense diversity and wealth
of natural resources, including significant sources of drinking water
and public recreation opportunities.
By 1999, the U.S. Department of the Interior (DOI) and USDA will
take the lead in developing a Unified Federal Policy to enhance
watershed management for the protection of water quality and the
health of aquatic systems on federal lands and for federal resource
management. Federal land managers will improve water quality
protection for over 2,000 miles of roads and trails each year through
2005 and decommission 5,000 miles each year by 2002. Federal
land managers will also accelerate the cleanup rate of watersheds
affected by abandoned mines and will implement an accelerated
riparian stewardship program to improve or restore 25,000 miles of
stream corridors by 2005.
Protect and Restore Wetlands
This Action Plan sets a goal of attaining a net increase of 100,000
wetland acres per year by the year 2005. This goal will be achieved
by ensuring that existing wetland programs continue to slow the rate
of wetland losses, improving federal restoration programs, and by
expanding incentives to landowners to restore wetlands.
Protect Coastal Waters
Federal agencies, led by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration (NOAA), will work in partnership to improve the
monitoring of coastal waters, expand research of emerging problems
like Pfiesteria, amend Fishery Management Plans to address water
quality issues, and ensure the implementation of strong programs to
reduce polluted runoff to coastal waters.
Provide Incentives for Private Land Stewardship
This Action Plan relies on a substantial increase in the technical and
financial assistance available to private landowners as the primary
means of accelerating progress toward reducing polluted runoff
from agricultural, range, and forest lands.

USDA, working with federal, state, tribal, and private partners, will
establish by 2002 two million miles of conservation buffers to
reduce polluted runoff and protect watersheds, direct new funding
for the Environmental Quality Incentives Program to support
watershed restoration, and develop as many new agreements with
states as practicable to use the Conservation Reserve Enhancement
Program to improve watersheds. The Plan also envisions new and
innovative methods to provide incentives for private landowners to
implement pollution prevention plans, including risk management
protection for adoption of new pollution prevention technologies
and market recognition for producers that meet environmental goals.
In addition, DOI will expand its existing Partners for Wildlife
Program, which restores degraded fish and wildlife habitats and
improves water quality through partnerships with landowners. The
program provides technical and financial assistance, and gives
priority to threatened and endangered species.

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

Improvements in Connecticut River water quality have led to a resurgence in
recreational fishing, especially in urban areas like Hartford, which has been the
site of major fishing tournaments in recent years. Photo Credit: Riverfront Recapture

Clean Water and Watershed
Restoration Budget Initiative
To support the new and expanded efforts to restore and protect the
nation's waters as proposed in this Clean Water Action Plan, the
President's FY 1999 budget proposes a Clean Water and Watershed
Restoration Budget Initiative. The funding provided in this budget
initiative will dramatically increase federal financial support for
clean water programs in FY 1999 and beyond. Specifically, the
Clean Water and Watershed Restoration Budget Initiative will:
o
o

o

o

o
o

increase direct support to states and tribes to carry out a
watershed approach to clean water;
increase technical and financial assistance to farmers,
ranchers, and foresters to reduce polluted runoff and enhance
the natural resources on their lands;
fund watershed assistance programs and grants to engage
local communities and citizens in leadership roles in
restoring their watersheds;
accelerate progress in addressing critical water quality
problems on federal lands, including those related to roads,
abandoned mines, riparian areas, and rangelands;
expand and coordinate water quality monitoring programs;
and
increase efforts to restore nationally significant watersheds,
such as the Florida Everglades and the San Francisco BayDelta.

Clean Water and Watershed Restoration Budget
Funding Summary
Percent Increase 1999 over 1998

35%

Total Increase 1999-2003

2,338

Total Spending 1999-2003

10,516

Total Spending 1999-2003

10,516

1998
Enacted

1999
Budget

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

248

279

484

629

200*

300*

Natural Resources Conservation Service:Locally
led conservation

0

20

Natural Resources Conservation
Service:Watershed health monitoring

0

3

Forest Service:Improve water quality on federal
lands

239

308

Agriculture Research Service:Watershed health
research

0

2

439

633

133

157

5

7

U.S. Geological Survey:Water monitoring and
assessment

125

147

Fish and Wildlife Service:Wetlands restoration

36

42

Bureau of Indian Affairs:Improve water quality
on tribal lands

0

5

299

358

Polluted runoff and toxic contaminants

0

13

Harmful algal blooms

0

9

0

22

Funding by Agency
Environmental Protection Agency:
State Grant Assistance

Water quality program management
Total, EPA

Department of Agriculture:
Natural Resources Conservation
Service:Environmental Quality Incentives
Program

Total, USDA

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

Total, DOI

National Oceanographic and
Atmospheric Administration:

Total, NOAA

Army Corps of Engineers:
Wetlands program

106

117

0

25

106

142

Florida Everglades

228

282

California Bay Delta

85

143

Elimination of overlap between Everglades and
other water programs listed above

-5

-5

Total,Interagency projects

308

420

Total Clean Water and Watershed Restoration
Initiative (with Mandatory Spending)

1,636

2,204

Challenge 21:Floodplain restoration initiative
Total, ACE

Interagency Projects:

*Indicates Mandatory Spending

Source:Office of
Management and Budget

A Continuing Commitment to Clean Water
The publication of this Action Plan is just the beginning of a longterm effort. Many of the proposed actions will provide for later
public review and comment and federal agencies are committed to
working closely with states, tribes, and others to ensure successful
implementation of specific actions.
In addition, regular reports will keep the public apprised of progress
and remaining challenges. By the end of the year 2000 and
periodically thereafter, status reports on progress in implementing
watershed restoration plans and related programs will be provided to
the President, the nation's governors, tribal leaders, and the public.

Table of Contents | Next Section

Clean Water Initiative Home

EPA HOMEPAGE/ OFFICE OF WATER/ USDA HOME/ COMMENTS/ SEARCH
http://cleanwater.gov/action/overview.html
Revised August 10, 1998

APPENDIX B

2008 Biennial National Listing of Fish Advisories
EPA-823-F-09-007, September 2009
(http://www.epa.gov/waterscience/fish/advisories/tech2008.html)

2008

EPA-823-F-09-007

2007/2008 National Listing of Fish Advisories

Biennial 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 is no
restriction on eating specific types of fish. The 2008 National Listing
of Fish Advisories (NLFA)1 database shows that the number of fish
advisories issued continues to rise.

The 2008 NLFA is available online at

www.epa.gov/fishadvisories
Background
All 50 states, the District of Columbia,
the U.S. territories of American Samoa
and Guam, and five Native American
tribes (for simplicity, referred to here as
“states”) have fish consumption advisories in place to protect their residents
from the potential health risks of eating
contaminated fish caught in local waters.
The states have developed their own fish
advisory programs over the years, and
there is variability among states in the
scope and extent of monitoring and in
the specific advice that is provided when
contaminated fish are found. Because of
this variability, it is difficult to draw national conclusions or to establish national
trends in fish advisories.

A fish consumption advisory is not a
regulation, but rather a recommendation
issued to help protect public health. These
advisories may include recommendations
to limit or avoid eating certain fish and
wildlife species caught from specific water
bodies or from water-body types (e.g.,
all lakes) due to chemical contamination. An advisory may be issued for the
general public, including recreational and
subsistence fishers, or it may be issued
specifically for sensitive populations, such
as pregnant women, nursing mothers, and
children.
An advisory for a specific water body or
water-body type may cover more than one
affected fish species or chemical

The NLFA fact sheet was produced annually through the EPA 2004 National Listing of Fish Advisories
report. In 2005, EPA decided to release subsequent fact sheets on a biennial basis because of nominal
changes in data from year to year. This fact sheet summarizes data submitted by the states and discusses
changes in data for the 2008 data reporting cycle. Advisory data for the 2007 reporting cycle and previous
years can be found on the EPA Web site at www.epa.gov/fishadvisories.

1

September 2009

2008 Biennial National Listing of Fish Advisories

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

50.0
45.0

Percent of Total Miles or Acres

contaminant. Because of the wide range in the
number of lake acres and river miles affected
by one advisory, the number of advisories does
not tell the full story of the geographic extent of
waters subject to state advice. Therefore, EPA also
provides information about the total lake acres
and total river miles for which advisories are currently in effect (Figure 1).

River Miles

40.0

Lake Acres
35.0
30.0
25.0
20.0
15.0
10.0
5.0
0.0

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

Year

Figure 1 shows the percentage of total lake acres and river miles under advisory from 1993 to
2008.

National Listing of Fish Advisories Web Site
The NLFA Web site (www.epa.gov/fishadvisories) includes information about the species and size of fish under advisory, the chemical contaminants identified in the advisory, the location of the
water body, and the population for whom the advisory was issued.
The NLFA Web site also includes data on the concentrations of
contaminants in fish tissue for 49 states/territories/tribes. Through
this Web site, users can generate national, regional, and state maps
that summarize advisory information.

Synopsis of the 2008 National Listing of Fish
Advisories
EPA’s 2008 National Listing of Fish Advisories indicates that the
number of advisories increased by 397 since 2006, bringing the
total number of advisories in effect from 3,852 in 2006 to 4,249
in 2008. Approximately 18 million lake acres and 1.4 million river
miles were under advisory in 2008, representing 43 percent of
the nation’s total lake acreage and 39 percent of the nation’s total
river miles. From 2006 to 2008, the number of lake acres under
advisory increased by 18 percent, and the number of river miles
increased by 52 percent.
The increase in lake acres and river miles under advisory from
2006 to 2008 can be attributed primarily to the issuance of several
new statewide advisories. A statewide advisory is issued to warn the
public of potential contamination of certain types of fish in specific
types of water bodies across the state, resulting in the designation
of all river miles and/or lake acres in the state as under advisory.
Four states (Delaware, Idaho, Oregon, and Wyoming) issued
new statewide advisories for all freshwaters in 2007 and 2008. As
shown in Figure 2, 38 states had statewide advisories in effect in
2008.

2

2008 Biennial National Listing of Fish Advisories

MA = 77
RI 2
CT = 2
NJ
04
DC
DE
MD = 7

Legend

No Statewide
Freshwater Advisories
Statewide Advisories
for Freshwater
Statewide Advisories
for Lakes
Statewide Coastal
Advisories

AK

HI

AS

Guam

Puerto Rico
Virgin Islands

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

Safe Eating Guidelines

Bioaccumulative Contaminants

EPA encourages states to issue safe eating guidelines when providing advisory information to inform the public that certain species
of fish from specific bodies of water have been tested and have been
shown to contain very low levels of contaminants. The states help
promote recreational fishing by identifying monitored waters where
designated fish are safe to eat without consumption restrictions.

Although there are advisories in the United States for 34 different
chemical contaminants, 97 percent of all advisories in effect in
2008 involved the following five bioaccumulative chemical contaminants: mercury, polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), chlordane,
dioxins, and dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane (DDT) (Figures 3
and 4, Table 1). These chemical contaminants accumulate in the
tissues of aquatic organisms at concentrations many times higher
than concentrations in the water and can persist for many years
in sediments, where bottom-dwelling organisms that are lower on
the food chain can accumulate them and pass them to fish that
are higher on the food chain. As a result, top predators in a food
chain (e.g., largemouth bass, walleye) may have concentrations of
bioaccumulative contaminants in their tissues that are significantly
higher than the concentrations found in the water.

The total number of safe eating guidelines increased from 20 in
1993 to 1,247 in 2006, but dropped to 874 in 2008. In 2008, safe
eating guidelines were in effect in 22 states, covering approximately
53,728 river miles (2 percent of the national total) and 2.3 million
lake acres (8 percent of the national total). These river-mile and
lake-acre figures represent decreases of 42,897 river miles and nearly 3 million lake acres since 2006. Although several states issued a
total of 120 new guidelines between 2006 and 2008, the overall
geographic area covered by these guidelines decreased because one
state rescinded almost 500 guidelines in the past 2 years.

As of 2008, 50 states, one U.S. territory, and three tribes have
issued mercury advisories. Eighty percent of all advisories in effect
in 2008 were issued, at least in part, because of mercury. In 2008,
3

2008 Biennial National Listing of Fish Advisories

there were 16.8 million lake acres and 1.3 million river miles under
advisory for mercury. This represents an increase from 2006 of 19
percent for lake acres and 42 percent for river miles. The increase
in the area under advisory was largely driven by the new statewide
mercury advisories in Idaho, Oregon, and Wyoming.

Other Bioaccumulative Contaminants
PCBs: Between 2006 and 2008, lake acres under advisory for
PCBs increased by 29 percent, and river miles under advisory
decreased by 1.5 percent.
Chlordane: All registered uses of the pesticide chlordane were
banned in the United States in 1988, and the compound continues
to degrade in the environment. Between 2006 and 2008, lake acres
under advisory for chlordane decreased by 1 percent, and river
miles under advisory decreased by 8 percent.
Dioxins: Between 2006 and 2008, lake acres under advisory for
dioxin decreased by 7 percent, and river miles under advisory
decreased by 11 percent.

DDT: The use of DDT, an organochlorine pesticide, has been
banned in the United States since 1975. Lake acres and river miles
under advisory for DDT both increased less than 1 percent from
2006 to 2008.
Other Contaminants: Three percent of all fish advisories are
caused solely by other contaminants, including organochlorine
pesticides, heavy metals, and contaminants of emerging concern
such as perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS). In 2008, approximately
2.6 million lake acres and 243,534 river miles were under advisory
for other contaminants.

Wildlife Advisories
In 2008, five states had a total of 6 wildlife advisories in effect,
down from 12 advisories in 2006. New York had a statewide advisory for waterfowl, and Maine had a statewide advisory for moose
liver and kidney. Massachusetts and Rhode Island had specific
water body advisories for frogs and turtles, while Utah had two
advisories for ducks.

Mercury
2008
2007
2006

PCBs

2005
2004
2003

Chlordane

2002
2001
2000

Dioxins

1999
1998
1997

DDT

1996
1995
1994

Other

1993

0

2,000,000

4,000,000

6,000,000

8,000,000 10,000,000 12,000,000 14,000,000 16,000,000 18,000,000

Lake Acres Under Advisory
Figure 3 shows the total lake acres under advisory for mercury, PCBs, chlordane, dioxins, DDT and other contaminants
from 1993 to 2008.

4

2008 Biennial National Listing of Fish Advisories

Mercury
2008
2007
2006

PCBs

2005
2004
2003

Chlordane

2002
2001
2000

Dioxins

1999
1998
1997

DDT

1996
1995
1994

Other

1993

0

200,000

400,000

600,000

800,000

1,000,000

1,200,000

1,400,000

River Miles Under Advisory
Figure 4 shows the total river miles under advisory for mercury, PCBs, chlordane, dioxins, DDT and other contaminants
from 1993 to 2008.

Table 1. Number of advisories and lake acres and river miles under advisory in 2006
and 2008 for each contaminant.
Contaminant

Number of Advisories

Lake Acres

River Miles

2006

2008

2006

2008

2006

2008

Mercury

3,080

3,361

14,177,175

16,808,032

882,963

1,254,893

PCBs

1,023

1,025

4,699,936

6,049,506

132,228

130,248

Chlordane

105

67

847,771

842,913

58,668

54,029

Dioxins

125

123

38,181

35,400

2,315

2,055

DDT

84

76

876,175

876,520

69,021

69,198

5

2008 Biennial National Listing of Fish Advisories

National Advice Concerning
Mercury in Fish
In 2004, EPA and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued advice for women who might become
pregnant, pregnant women, nursing mothers, and children.
(The national advice is not included in the statistics presented in this fact sheet.) The following advice from EPA
and FDA is still in effect:
By adhering to the following three recommendations for
selecting and eating fish or shellfish, women and young
children will receive the health benefits of eating fish and
shellfish and be confident that they have reduced their
exposure to the harmful effects of mercury:

• 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.

• Do not eat shark, swordfish, king mackerel, or tilefish
because they contain high levels of mercury.

Follow these same recommendations when including fish
and shellfish in a young child’s diet, but serve smaller portions.

• Eat up to 12 ounces (two average meals) each week of a
variety of fish and shellfish that are lower in mercury.

For more information about the ways to reduce mercury
exposure, consult EPA’s brochure, What You Need to Know
About Mercury in Fish and Shellfish, which is available in
several languages on EPA’s NLFA Web site at www.epa.gov/
fishadvisories.

− 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.

HECHOS

El pescado y el marisco son una parte

o que
L Usted

importante de una dieta saludable. El pescado
y el marisco contienen proteínas de alta
calidad y otros nutrientes esenciales que son
bajos en grasas saturadas y contienen ácidos
grasos omega-3. Una dieta bien equilibrada
que incluya pescados y mariscos variados
puede contribuir a la salud cardiaca, y al c
recimiento y desarrollo adecuado de los niños.
Por tanto, las mujeres y los niños pequeños en
particular deben incluir pescados o mariscos
en sus dietas debido a sus muchos beneficios
nutricionales.

사실

Para más información sobre los riesgos del mercurio
en el pescado y los mariscos, llame a la línea de
información gratuita de la Administración de

Os Sin
Faembargo,
tos casi todos los pescados y

어류와
mariscos contienen algunos rastros de
Alimentos y Medicamentos de los EE.UU. en el
패류는
중요한
건강한
Os pe mercurio. Para muchas personas, el riesgo
Thôn
요
식단을
1-888-SAFEFOOD o visite el sitio Web de la FDA
ixes
g tin th
의 단백 소입니다.
e os
impo
이루는
frmercurio
어패
ực tế
rta del
질과 기
utos
proveniente del pescado y del
sobre la seguridad de los alimentos.
do
proteí nte de
있으며
타 필수 류에는 고품
nas de uma diet mar são
, 포화
질
영양소
marisco
no
es
una
preocupación
de
salud.
es
um
지방이
a
al
방산이
se
sa
가들
ta qu
a
ncia
Cá và
적고,
풍
alidad udável. El parte
e cont is queNo
tôm, cu
오메가 어
Para más información sobre la seguridad de los
함된 균 부합니다.
e
obstante,
algunos
pescados
y
mariscos
sã
es
e ou
o
êm ác
a, sò, hế
co
-3
trọng củ
각종 어
형 잡힌
bem
idos baixos em tros nutri ntêm
n là nh
a một
패류가 지
린이의
pescados y mariscos capturados localmente visite el
ba
식사는
gr
ữn
ch
contienen
altos
niveles
tôm, cu
la
en de mercurio que
go
ax
포
성
심장 건
a, sò, hế ế độ ăn uống g thức ăn qu de mar nceada qu os omeg rdura sa tes
특히 여 장 발육에
ano
turada fetos o el sistema
강과 어
sitio Web de la EPA para ver los avisos de pesca o
các ch
a-3. U
co
e cont perjudicar
좋습니
성과 영
ất dinh n chứa hàm khoẻ mạnh.
cresci ntribuipueden
ma di a los
enha
다. 따
Cá
pa
lượ
적으로
유아의
dư
Om
m
et
pe
và
ra
ng
ỡn
comuníquese
con el departamento de salud local de
en
라서
ega-3
g thiết
protein
a sa en ix
de
to e de
장점이
es de adesarrollo de un niño
식
nervioso
vías
yếu kh
cao, crianças
포함되
senv úde do co e frutos
많은 어 단에는 영양
Một ch , và hàm lượ
ác
e
.
,
su estado. Para más información en inglés sobre las
olvi
Po
các ax
어야 합
ng
ế độ ăn
rariesgos
학
패류가
ção e
it béocrianças pe rtant
pequeño.
del mercurio en el
loại cá
uống câ chất béo bã
니다.
o, es menLos
to
반드시
pa
fr
ad
ra
ut
o
qu
pe
và
n
equa
hoà thấ
acciones de la EPA para controlar el mercurio,
os do
en
cialm
do
đảm mộ tôm, cua, sò bằng bao gồ
p.
deve
mar na aspescado
y
marisco
dependen
de
la
cantidad
enel
nu
그
te
어
m
러
m
,
eb
m
t
hế
m
패
나 거의
erosos
n có
s as
류thể
visite el sitio Web sobre mercurio de la EPA.
incl
ulhere
에 포 nhiều
và phát trái tim khoẻ
Yam Muaj Tse
모든 어
bene sude
s
수은이
된ần수은
que se coma, y de los
p ph
etas uir peyixmarisco
은 정, 보 gó함
mạ
tri
fício dipescado
패류에
의 위험
들어 있
bả
trẻ는
tseem ceeb noj
là trẻ em ển hợp lý. Bở nh
Enotre
s nutri devido es e
는 미량
들에게
ntses yog yam
습
aos se
tanto, 에 대한 niveles
1-8
i y,-SA em미tăn식
cionai
del
mercurio
en el pescado y el
trư의
의
Ntses thiab qwj
ởn약
phụ nữFO g 품
thực đơ cần đưa cá và vậ88
더
있어 어 니다. 대부
Ntses thiab qwj
m
us
s.
arg 국
신qu
분의 사
cont수
pab tau lub cev. lwm yam as
vàOD
n
e todo 많
수은은
자as부
tôm cu FE
패류를
đặ로
êm tra
c pa
담전
biệ
연
lại nhiều của mình vì 식품, 안
nrog zaub mov
rau
marisco.
Por lo tanto, la Administración de
s os
a, sò
건강상
전
t락
rte
웹, hế
in zoo nrog
nhse
g,
사n이
da하
거나çoFD
úgRtI 위험을 통해 섭취되는람
니
s de 화 peixes
lợi ích
ữnafo
kñ
và트
s시
다
g thứ
anenA
pe
o
.
ntses muaj prote lawv muaj roj nyeem tsaw
m
Edlm
ao
ww
그
e
về
od
ss
A의
c
art
er
일
러나 일
fruty Medicamentos (FDA, porPasus
ăntm
1.h
w.cfsa oas,
dinh dư
alim
cúrio
),
nàl를
ra ob
. Kev g²GMBIeRKaHfñak;énCati) 을
y ma
o ris Alimentos
entar-sn.fda.go
부 어패 으키지 않습
ỡng.
. Para os do
Tuy nh
방co
ter m
ham (nutrients cov omega-3 fattysMacids
ng
manepS
문ns해
pela
rab;Bt’qwj
e de v/cosiglas
이 \함유
iên, hầ
de in Để
류의 경
j
Gaha많rEdl
a mai
주시기
I더
titui
MN이
ingestã ais inform
enbiếinglés)
y la Agencia de Protección
manGMBIc아
u hết tất 각 지방
t thê
cua, sò
하
thiab lawv mua muaj nqaij ntses thiab
우
rir
mor
랍pe
es e fr ge
의 신경
do m
açõe
o de
에서 잡 Contudo uma pr바
thô
니ix다
, hế
sUmTUrs½BÞtamry³Bt’
cả c
uas
RKM hauj
s so
)al»sf 고 있어 태아나 수은
ar
. utosngân m
m
nigGMvbUrua
từercácú
plaw
히 al 어 , algu eocupaçã
rio ng tin
về nh
loạ
noj zaub mov
향
nhỏ. Đố n đều chứa 더cá많
(EPA,
por
sus siglas en inglés)
OOD rbs;rdæ 체계 발달
và
sobre , ligue pa ercúrio co bre os ris
은 i정
cá보
tau kom lub
tos 패류
.
어린
ns pe
oAmbiental
và는tôm 는
mộ
thiab;elx 1-888-SAFEF 을 미칠 수
에 좋지
i
ra a
ờn mar nã tôm, cua, sò, ững nguy cơ
para đưdo
b;sxu PaB
alimen
ntid
co
lojtsai
muaj kam pab
ixes
,경보 níve
yaustKi
m lượng
환da
is의
있습니
thuỷ ng với đa số nh 고t hà
a suag dâ
éføejTAkan
포함
nhfértil,
ong mujeres
SAFE
NIGahar
않은 영
de안
tos da linha grát o em pe s corrido
에
iễm thủ
nos 호
y:agsMxan;énGahar sRmantses
qu
vtßiPaBcM
ay thô
las
enxinedad
a las
된
pab menyuam
su
대e한fraconsejan
이트 thu
iều ng웹 사
m전
xeeb
tin miễn hến,
an Th
다
ân do
y
saực
청
ut
thiab
s
FO
ixes
수
er
hã
tshw
.
a
vbsa
y
e
의
úd
zoo
os
ỷ
an;
ury
은
어
ww
cú
y
ss²
um
e
thiab
ườ
문
O
ng
Bi
lwm
ăn
어
gọ
gGMbrU RKM KWCaEpñkmYy
merc phải
e. ẩm
이 ov/
e
do
iBa©wm zoo. Yog li, poj niam
phí về
ph
w.
D ou FDA nos is de info
ân
류섭rio
i điện Alimen
sistep
cá và tôm 하시i,거ng나uy
와 txog
하는 어 da.g
feto ou
일으키 v qhia류
1-8m
quemujeres
là mối
패류cov
취경
ema.g
và Dư
ntxiv
rmaç frutos
thứcmadres
cho tos
88ar
; nig sarFatucloj
visite
Estado
cMNIGlosahar b¤Tak;TgeTAk www
s
cơ또
g
x<
ni
-SA
n
u
ntses
embarazadas,
a
las
lactantes
a neov
hoob
coFE
po
an.f
州
는
에
패
tGI
ăn
e
:
hlob
nh
ntaw
,
/os
ợc
noj
bU
lub
lo
R
i
ões
.cfs
cu
ao
류
tau
락
nt
da
de
rau
go
위
củ
iễm
ph
tsum
ng
o
anCat
t/fi
xav
hu
số
a,
하
rv
의
m
,
는
s Uni
FO
êm
a
험 ntses섭
ẩm Ho
mựcca
w
FDA
ại
Cơ v/seaf
시 sò hến depe지
Th
loại cá
oso desh를de방
FDA 된 수은 Yog 양과 thiab qwj
OD ho
udxøaj;
nigGMbUrRKM
yaus yuav
senv
tias
vim
dos 1nd방
a Kỳ,
usẩm
ph
no en ebsite de
ood1
취ation cov lus
c khoẻ 기 ,바
그 어패 은 inistr
và tôm về sứ의
kh다
ặc truy que
랍니
em보
olvi
ar An pequeños
ritTab nigGasI
의 nyob
건국
kM
yog menyuam
d Safety) rbs;
zaub mov
cr
g
ú
hauv ntses
ôn
kñ
y
a
los
niños
eviten
comer
cov
888t
(Foo
함
lượ
ia
de
g
.h
Se
q¥
da
E
m
m
으
목
.
j;
sea
Adm
,
toà
nh
a
ø
.
lawv
nç
량
Tu
tm
x
i
re
류
cu
gu
ng thu
ar 州
en
라서 식
ập trang
quan 로 연 as pe
foo .ht
n của FD
에 따라and Drug 에 포 xov tooj hu dawb
ço w
a, sò, hế 록은 yww
l.
Para
inge또
nhw.e
ntses nrog
는지
iênne
ỷ ngân
rU RKMepSg²
eTot EdlmanCat
tidad
ww.cf rança do
U.S. Food
sis
GMbqwj
g
web
quen tod1do
rid
품의kas
,pa
ml.
ni
obter
아 보n실
A www.cy que
m tus함
ml
ham zoo.
mộ
달
RtI
방
hệ
as
ntaw
có
1.ht
os
s
라
man
ca
t
e
m
약
보
.go
hom
haus
rY
thầ
daim
ood
v
sa
algunos
tipos
de
pescado,
coman
ch
le
as
o
집
RtU
noj
m
de
m
e
건
국
(E
ntau
seaf
v/ost/
n.fda.
hơn
수 ứa 습m s. Po
fsan.fda peixes
kev
¾ Rtw
니다. saib tau FDA n kinh đa
ais in
dos ní 국 peix Để . Os ris
(FDA
PA)에
muaj
txog
)와 환los sis mus
따 .cfsa
cóctsthể 있hà
fo
e
니
.go
서는qhia
es e biế
hon.fda
e D다ro. Fe rtantfis
ng phát Covànta
t thêm cos
mhÁa 3 . rbbGahard
서 ve
ặc trẻ.
karrIkcMerIn
o, ha에
niglawv
EFOOD
wv/
경Zaub
임신
(연gâ
ebsit frutos do rmações
신중인
-SAF
utos
yam ntses
gas de
ythômariscos bajos en mercurio.
보호Mov
tri
Adm 찾is de mpescados
cá vàfrtôm
가능Ceev
sobre
e
g karrIklUtlas;
청 www và tôm nhỏ. Nguy
(Fral
ercú
해ển của trẻ 방y, hạ
주i ch
txhua txhua
do ng tin về độ
nig,1-888
DA, Sta
및onc부족
Proteç de Inform mar pesc
, cu
qhia 성이Faj
rio
aBén우RtI여성
a segu
cơ nh 주십
tral çã hã
시오
uv의tßiP경
chưa Agê
sis, yuav luag tsig kua hlau mercury.
Triisba
a, sò, hế
portesu& in
수유aij
, cu
an toà
있거나
vev-x
cpþl;dl;suxPaB ebHdU I nigkumartUc² CaBi
Tabess
ad
ia de 연락
y truco
ão
açõe
중인d1.ht
n củ
n đư
은glh문
y ntid
a클
si
muaj
và tôm faja, sò, hến ph 활iễm
동 thủy ng . 수sin
t’manepSgeTotGMBIs은
임
Prot 처)를
s sobr os no loca rança do
일부TgeTA
sigla o de
ab;Btau
여 ml.
eafoo
sMrkis
h ou Ambienta
a em
dUecñH®sþ
제와 관
gov/s
limennhậpos
trang we ợc đánh bắ a nhữngfis
, cua, sò
vệ A
s
thiab qwj ntses
종
ụ thuộc에 대
한ân
l,
e
loà
Mô
yuav ceev
류의 어 성 및 영유 txog kev ng
정từ
打美国
inglês련eç
함
coob, qhov yuav
k 량sU이mTak;
tở
i trưto
Ambi릭 em inglês
보
b
smRsbrbs;kumar .
qucá
K信息
된ãoEP
, hến ăn 사
saúd i entre em l no ende Peixes da visite o
请拨feem
이트vàww
kuj
는
bs;eRau
ânzejtrozos,
saTk권ñúgRsu
e poEP
neeg
o số
류
aharr更多
qhia ntxiv 아
) es
tib，
eKen
적은 어 xav
e loca
A의ental với Sở) e a ờnsg: www.e Tư vấn về Cá địa phươ
qwj ntses
rbbG
를v 피
contat
g
reço
ú
A의
ntaw
kñ
dl
Agênc
E
lượ
ng
de
và
l
thiab
ng
w.e
hauv
tau
cU
tã
TRKM
tau
o
,
88
RKM
nh
ntses
r
U
m
ng
수
o
n
하
b
장
a
ß
RbeP
pa
Y
và
pa
l
nuv
w
GM
(E
险的
실
Yog
s
noj
củ
g
do
ữn
은
1-8
패
o
m.go
ou es
bri 류thiab
uas수
Thực cy daim g thứ
engr
w
.gov/o
a Cục s de
PA po tế Tiểu ba
ulcá
관 acon
v/m
를섭
qwj ntses고
.thau：m 局s txhawj. Tiam sis, ib txhia Sa GMBIRtIrbs;하rdæ고
있m
)alk
tadual com o de w.epa.go ia de
있arBar
KYrEtbBa©ÚlRtI ni 有关鱼贝汞风
st/fish
Bảo parta
c ăn 수 hà
습lượ
aharury电话
IG咨询
습니cov
ẩm
ng ho
ction Agenph
MNmerc
니 ng. thu hereserc
ury avidar,련 웹selhandochi tiế
취할 ental
t rliê
sunahệ
免费
nxagc
hoặc liê websit
pa
m
.
txau
다ntsesn Envi
v/
vệ M
ntau
n_CaeRcI理局
às m
것을Prote gov/o
Địa ph
ayTIRbwk
ib qho
h los và Dược ph đó. Bởi vậy, 다pe
管理
quỷen que es에
của các ặc임
phàs
yog 药品
st/fis
n hệ e ww entos de Há uma lis rtamento ost/
plRbeyaC品管
ôi trư
tão서am찾아
kan;uryevbs
tsis品与
dæa tau ronm
ương
mulđư
ulia
ayk.saib
EPA-823-F-04-010
as qu
ẩm (FDA
보
n
Cơ
mus
hererau
muaj tsig merc
b¤
ng. Da
할
ờnloj
sở y tế 신ươ
saúd
fede
www.epa. ma
de
w.ep
heợcrecu
ntses
grdæ
ta de
qu
T
g
qu
ntses
dlCaehtunaM [man食品与药 OD 或访问食
ak;
qh
kas
qwj
tus
am
T
가
(E
s
an
e
b¤
nh
txog
e
ra
rau
v/
hoob
e
tiể
gr
thiab
PA
a.
s
go
ev
cob
ng
)
lo
능
en
ng
sách is, es
contat
u
và Cục se alimLusitem
v/o
ávst/
ntsesfsan.fda.go xwm ua tsis zoo
) kh
vev-xaij qhia
yog Zos lub thai,thđan
idfis
.gov/ost/fish
taduai gov/ost/fi cais e es
sobr성
as, àsHã cấp tại trang bang hoặc địa
.epa
os
alguns tando eLiê
an koj lub Xeev los(Stat
yuam
baBả
w.c
entem
Heal Dewww
SAFEFO
g mang uyên những
e as 이
o
men
ixos
ww
s는
Loca
àsncrba b h.
tauj
trẻlnh
Gs;uas muaj peev
tiv dæ
ou tri여 sh. Cliq taduais
e orvà
TaMgdua
Tuby bấm chuột web: ww임
açõe 있
IeQµaHrdæ b¤nsisayk
GMbUrRKM
plab los sis tus
iang Tiể
visite
ỏ cầ
全网
nig站
Xee
no
hoob
os v
m peuas tip
ue em
w.epa
cov
n tránh thai, bà mẹ phụ nữ sẽ em mercú com
qab haus huv
品安RtI
taus.
vào các
u ba
tin về nç, as
ntaw
o web s da EPA bais.성
的食;RbePT
yuam nyob hauv cev loj hlob tsis
Pa ,
신
.
ữngmloạ
ixes Yuade
toojnh
ñúgj Rsukrbs;Gñk . bBa¢
saib kev noj
men
co
cho co
mộ
rio.
ixcác
Chi
w
suxPaBk
site de
e frutng pe
.epa.
nrog
es ebiện ph ng và Bộ lạc
npe thiab xov lượ
k;eday
w 한 여
/fish .
i cá
eTaHCay:agNa swgEtRKb
htm
n búCov Poj Nia
www
d1.
성,mercúpara controralaobter informntaçatos
và tôm t số loại cá,
RcInl. eRKaHfñamos
. Để biế tiết Liênw.hệepa.go
os ân
kom nws lub
foo
áp của
partment). Cov
.epa.gov/ost
nyob ntaw
SPaKe
m
ngmthủ , thiab
s
los ntawm nqai
, hã
sea
nu
do
muaj
m
www
và
ury
ab;
,
no
r
Law
nA
sM
y
cu
t
v/
zos
EP
merc
r
请访
.
thê
nê
m
tru
mane
rio
Xeev
Tub
수
y
a,
，
k
mercu
tau
b ar y ập tra A nhằm kiể 유
ões
n ăn
m thông
ngân
sò, hến
m seb
ñúgRsu
xeev thiab
da EP o mercú
ntaw
l
PaBk
KY 更多kis信息
Teb Chaws,
v yuav
manbnþúMCati)art
Triba
xPaB
중
ry
chứa hà
A no
ng
abBaðasuQho
¦ nigkas
性的
Niam uas Xeetại: www.epa.gonhv/m
kuj yog nyobsux
Nias rau qhov
ntawv thấp.
,
Infor
b về thu m soát thuỷ 인 여성 .
qwj ntses
ende
Lreờrio
m Cov Poj
Yog xav tau
gov/ost/fish.
w.epa.ntses ntau npaum cas eral ¬shB½n§¦ State ¬rdæ
鱼贝安全
nigGMbUrRKM minEmnC
nyuweam
ntses thiab
erc
ỷ ngân
,
al) Cov Npe.
站
çoi khu
maçõ
qwj
; ww
fwm mercury,
Pawg
I (Tribcov
Cati)art BIkarjaMuRtI 有关当地捕获
j no
itx2000

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY

22:08 Apr 20, 2000

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

Jkt 190000

PO 00000

Frm 00022

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

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

E:\FR\FM\21APN1.SGM

pfrm01

PsN: 21APN1

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,

VerDate 182000

22:08 Apr 20, 2000

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

Jkt 190000

PO 00000

Frm 00023

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

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 [email protected],
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

E:\FR\FM\21APN1.SGM

pfrm01

PsN: 21APN1

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
[email protected], 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:
[email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The EPA
has established a public docket for this
ICR under Docket ID number OW–2003–

VerDate jul<14>2003

15:25 Aug 13, 2003

Jkt 200001

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,

PO 00000

Frm 00012

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

48605

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

E:\FR\FM\14AUN1.SGM

14AUN1

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 [email protected], 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

VerDate jul<14>2003

15:25 Aug 13, 2003

Jkt 200001

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: [email protected].
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.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

PO 00000

Frm 00013

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

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

E:\FR\FM\14AUN1.SGM

14AUN1

rmajette on PROD1PC67 with NOTICES

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

VerDate Aug<31>2005

15:49 Apr 11, 2007

Jkt 211001

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
Environmental Protection
Agency.
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:

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.

PO 00000

Frm 00019

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

18475

• E-mail: [email protected].
• 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:
[email protected].

E:\FR\FM\12APN1.SGM

12APN1

18476

Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 70 / Thursday, April 12, 2007 / Notices
What Should I Consider When I
Prepare My Comments for EPA?

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.

rmajette on PROD1PC67 with NOTICES

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.

VerDate Aug<31>2005

15:49 Apr 11, 2007

Jkt 211001

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

PO 00000

Frm 00020

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

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.

E:\FR\FM\12APN1.SGM

12APN1

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

rmajette on PROD1PC67 with NOTICES

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

VerDate Aug<31>2005

15:49 Apr 11, 2007

Jkt 211001

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
[email protected] and to
[email protected], Federal
Communications Commission, Room 1–
B441, 445 12th Street, SW., DC 20554 or
an e-mail to [email protected]. 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 [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: OMB
Control Number: 3060–XXXX.
Title: Consummation of Assignments
and Transfers of Control of Station
Authorization.
Form No.: N/A.
Type of Review: New collection.
Respondents: Business or other forprofit.
Number of Respondents: 586
respondents; 586 responses.
Estimated Time Per Response: 1 hour.
Frequency of Response: On occasion
reporting requirement.
Obligation to Respond: Required to
obtain or retain benefits.
Total Annual Burden: 586 hours.
Total Annual Cost: N/A.
Privacy Act Impact Assessment: N/A.
Nature and Extent of Confidentiality:
There is no need for confidentiality
pertaining to the information collection
requirements in this collection.
Needs and Uses: The Commission
will submit this new information
collection to the OMB after this 60-day
comment period to obtain the full threeyear clearance from them. The Federal
Communications Commission
(‘‘Commission’’) is requesting that the
Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) approve the establishment of a
new collection for consummation of
assignments and transfers of control of

PO 00000

Frm 00021

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

18477

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

E:\FR\FM\12APN1.SGM

12APN1

APPENDIX D

Survey Instrument for the 2010–2012 NLFA Reporting Cycles and the
State Fish Advisory Program Questionnaire

OMB Control Number 2040-0226
Approval Expires 02/28/2011

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
FISH CONSUMPTION ADVISORY PROGRAMS QUESTIONNAIRE
FOR SURVEY YEARS 2010, 2011, AND 2012

Please provide the following information about the agency in your state or
tribe that is responsible for issuing noncommercial (sportfishing/subsistence)
advisories or closures for chemical contamination in fish and shellfish.

Agency name

Agency address

Agency fish advisory contact

Contact’s e-mail address

(_____)
Contact’s phone number

(_____)
Contact’s fax number

A-1

Fish Tissue Monitoring Program
1.

Did your state or tribal agency conduct routine monitoring during this past year to obtain
information about the concentrations of chemical contaminants in fish tissue for assessing human
health risks?
G Yes
G No
G Not applicable

2.

What kind of data does your state or tribal agency collect to evaluate chemical contaminant levels
in fish? (Please check all that apply.)
Captures fish and sends tissues to a lab to determine contaminant concentrations
Monitors water quality and uses data to estimate contaminant concentrations in fish
Monitors sediments and uses data to estimate contaminant concentrations in fish
Other methods (please specify)
Not applicable

G
G
G
G
G
3.
G
G
G
G
4.

G
G
G
G
5.
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
6.
G
G
G
G

How does your state or tribe conduct monitoring of contaminants in fish tissue for fish advisories?
(Please check all that apply)
Conducts one-time, nonrecurring or special surveys in particular fishing areas, watersheds, or basins
Monitors the same fishing areas, watersheds, or basins at regular intervals
Other methods (please specify)
Not applicable
During the past year, please estimate the number of stations from which your state or tribal
agency collected fish tissue that was analyzed for chemical contaminants and was used for the fish
advisory program.
0 stations
G 31-50 stations
1-10 stations
G 51-100 stations
11-20 stations
G >100 stations
21-30 stations
G Not applicable
How frequently does your state typically resample fish from waterbodies where advisories are in
effect?
Every year
Every 2 years
Every 3 years
Every 4 years
Every 5 years
Every 6 to 10 years
On an as needed basis (no set schedule)
Other (please specify)
Not applicable
In approximately how many waterbodies was fish tissue monitoring conducted within your state
during the past year?
1-10 waterbodies
G
21-30 waterbodies
11-20 waterbodies
G
31-40 waterbodies
>40 (specify number) (please specify)
Not applicable

A-2

7.
G
G
G
G
G
G

Please check how your state determines which sites to monitor
(Please check all that apply)
Accessibility of site
G Fixed-station sites
Area of concern
G High pollution potential at the site
Citizen or Agency request
G Major fishery resource
Degree of angling pressure the site receives
G Randomly selected sites
Other method (please specify)
Not applicable

Answers to questions 8 through 11 should be based on your Agency’s evaluation of fish tissue monitoring
data. Sediment analysis or water quality monitoring data may be included in your evaluation only if they are
used as the basis for determining when an advisory is needed. Note: For these questions, you may need to
consult with other individuals in your state or tribal organization.
8.

How many river, stream, or canal miles were assessed at least once during the last 3 years
specifically for the fish advisory program?
__________ miles

9.

How many lake or reservoir acres were assessed at least once during the past 3 years specifically
for the fish advisory program?
acres

10.

How many square miles of estuarine waters were assessed at least once during the past 3 years
specifically for the fish advisory program?
__________ square miles

11.

How many miles of marine coastline (coastal waters) were assessed at least once during the past
3 years specifically for the fish advisory program?
__________ miles

Types of Fish Advisories
12.

Does your state issue fish consumption advisories advising individuals to restrict fish
consumption?
G Yes
G No
G
Not applicable

13.

Does your state issue fish consumption advisories advising individuals not to consume any fish or
any fish of a particular species from a particular waterbody?
G Yes
G No
G
Not applicable

14.

Fish consumption advisories issued in your state pertain to:
(Please check all that apply)
Specific fish species analyzed by the state (e.g., largemouth bass)
Specified size class(es) for the given species analyzed (e.g., largemouth bass 15-20 inches)
Selected trophic groups (e.g., game fish, bottom feeders, or panfish)
The entire fish community (e.g., all fish)
Certain fish species purchased in stores and restaurants
Other (please specify)
Not applicable

G
G
G
G
G
G
G

A-3

15.

Does your state issue statewide or regionwide “blanket” advisories based on your sampling
effort? (A region-wide advisory may be issued for an individual HUC, river drainage basin or portion
of the state.)
Statewide:
G Yes
G No
G Not applicable
Regionwide: G Yes
G No
G Not applicable

16. Do you have legally enforced advisories or bans within your state (e.g., are fines or citations given
for fishing in posted waters)?
G
Yes
G No
17. Has your state ever issued a commercial fishing ban for chemically-contaminated fish?
G
Yes
G No
18. If your state or tribe has issued commercial fishing bans in a waterbody, do they include
consumption information for sport and subsistence fishers?
G
Yes
G No
G Not applicable
19. In addition to chemical contaminants, does your state or tribe also issue fish and/or shellfish
advisories (closures) for microbial contamination (e.g., bacteria or viruses) of a waterbody?
G
Yes
G No
G Not applicable

Sample Preparation and Analyses Procedures
20. Fish consumption advisories (no consumption and/or restricted consumption advisories) issued in
your state are based on the analysis of : (Please check all that apply)
G Fillet samples (skin on)
G Fillet samples (skin off)
G Muscle plug samples
G Whole-fish samples (skin on)
G Whole-fish samples (skin off)
G Other sample types (please specify)
G Not applicable
21. Does your state target the collection of particular indicator species, and on what is this decision
based? (Please check all that apply)
G Angler survey data
G Availability of the species
G Desire to maintain consistency with past collections
G EPA target species recommendations based on bioaccumulation potential/trophic groups
G Citizen requests
G State does not target collection of indicator species
G Other reasons (please specify)
G Not applicable
22. Does your state collect multiple size classes, by species, and submit these individual size classes for
residue analyses?
G
Yes
G No
G Not applicable
23.
G
G
G
G

Are individual fish samples or composite samples submitted for residue analyses in your state?
Individual fish samples only
Composite samples only
Both individual and composite samples are used
Not applicable

A-4

24. If individual fish samples are used, how many “individual fish” typically are needed to support an
advisory determination in a waterbody?
G 1 fish
G 3 fish
G 5 fish
G 6 to 10 fish
G 11 to 20 fish
G > 20 fish
G Other number (please specify)
G Not applicable; state uses only composite fish samples
25. If composite samples are used, how many “individual fish” typically are combined in each of your
state’s composite samples for residue analysis?
G 2 fish
G 3 fish
G 4 fish
G 5 fish
G Other number (please specify)
G Not applicable; state uses only individual fish samples
26. If composite samples are used, how many composite samples are needed to support an advisory
determination in a waterbody?
G 1 composite sample
G 2 composite samples
G 3 composite samples
G Variable; no set number
G Other number (please specify)
G Not applicable; state uses only individual fish samples
27. Assuming your state finds residue levels in exceedance of state criteria, how many years of
sampling are required at a given waterbody before a fish consumption advisory can be issued?
G 1 year
G 2 years
G 3 or more years
G Site-specific decision; no set time period established
G Other (please specify)
G Not applicable
28. If commercial fishing bans are issued in your state, on which of the following sample types are they
based? (Please check all that apply)
G Whole-fish samples (skin-on)
G Whole-fish samples (skin-off)
G Fillet samples (skin-on)
G Fillet samples (skin-off)
G Other sample types (please specify)
G Not applicable
29. How many fish tissue samples must be analyzed and found to be in exceedance of state criteria
before a commercial fishing ban is issued?
G 1 sample
G 2 samples
G 3 or more samples
G Site-specific decision; no set number established
G Not applicable

A-5

30. How many years of sampling are conducted at a given waterbody before a commercial fishing ban
can be issued?
G 1 year
G 2 years
G 3 or more years
G Site-specific decision; no set time period established
G Not applicable
31. Once an advisory is issued for a specific waterbody, what must occur for the state to rescind the
advisory?
G Residue levels of the chemical must decline below the state criterion for at least 1 year
G Residue levels of the chemical must decline below the state criterion for at least 2 years
G Residue levels of the pollutant must decline below the state criterion for at least 3 years
G Site-specific decision; no set time period established
G Other schedule or procedure (please specify)
G Not applicable
32. During this past year, please estimate the number of fish tissue samples that were submitted for
chemical analyses by your state agency?
G <20 samples
G 41-50 samples
G 21-30 samples
G 51-60 samples
G 31-40 samples
G >60 samples (please specify number)
G Not applicable
33. What pollutants did your state screen for in fish tissue samples in this past year?
(Please check all that apply)
G Aldrin
G Dicofol
G Hexachlorobenzene G PCBs
G Arsenic
G Dieldrin
G Lead
G Pentachloroanisole
G Cadmium
G Dioxins/Furans
G Lindane
G Selenium
G Chlordane
G Disulfoton
G Mercury
G Terbufos
G Chlorpyrifos
G Endosulfan
G Methoxychlor
G Toxaphene
G Chromium
G Endrin
G Mirex
G Tributyltin
G DDT and its
G Ethion
G Nonachlor
G Trifluralin
metabolites
G Heptachlor or
G Oxyfluorfen
G Other (please specify
G Diazinon
Heptachlor epoxide
G PAHs
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 Dicofol
G Hexachlorobenzene G PCBs
G Arsenic
G Dieldrin
G Lead
G Pentachloroanisole
G Cadmium
G Dioxins/Furans
G Lindane
G Selenium
G Chlordane
G Disulfoton
G Mercury
G Terbufos
G Endosulfan
G Methoxychlor
G Toxaphene
G Chlorpyrifos
G Chromium
G Endrin
G Mirex
G Tributyltin
G DDT and its
G Ethion
G Nonachlor
G Trifluralin
metabolites
G Heptachlor or
G Oxyfluorfen
G Other (please specify
G Diazinon
Heptachlor epoxide
G PAHs
35.
G
G
G
G
G
G

If your state analyzes for PCBs, what specifically is analyzed? (Please check all that apply)
Individual congeners
All Aroclor groups
Selected Aroclor groups
A combination of both Aroclors and congeners
Others (please specify)
Not applicable

A-6

State Advisory Program Funding
36.
G
G
G
G

How many dollars are spent annually in your state on routine fish tissue field collection activities?
<$1,000
G $10,000 to $24,999
$1,000 to $4,999
G $25,000 to $50,000
$5,000 to $9,999
G >$50,000 (please specify)
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.
G
G
G
G

How many dollars are spent annually in your state on laboratory analyses of fish tissue samples?
<$1,000
G $10,000 to $24,999
$1,000 to $4,999
G $25,000 to $50,000
$5,000 to $9,999
G >$50,000 (please specify)
Not applicable

39. What was the funding source for your state's laboratory analyses of fish tissue samples during this
past year? (Please check all that apply)
G State general funds
G State fishing license revenues
G State sales tax
G EPA Section 106 funds
G EPA Section 205j funds
G EPA Region funds
G EPA Grant funds
G Other (please specify)
G Not applicable
40. If no funding is currently available, is your state seeking funding to conduct a monitoring and
assessment program?
G Yes
G No
G Not applicable

Other Uses of State Advisory Data
41. For your state’s biennial 305(b) water quality report, what use support designation is assigned to
waterbodies placed under fish consumption advisory?
G Fully supporting
G
Threatened
G Partially supporting
G
Not supporting
G No assessments were made
G
Not applicable
42. If fish consumption advisories have been issued for waterbodies in your state, does your state place
these waterbodies on the state’s 303(d) list of impaired waters?
G Yes
G No
G
Not applicable

A-7

43. If commercial fishing bans have been issued for waterbodies in your state, does your state place
these waterbodies on the state’s 303(d) list of impaired waters?
G Yes
G No
G Not applicable
44. Is “fish consumption” an assigned beneficial use for waters in your state?
G Yes
G No
45.
G
G
G
G

If yes, where have these criteria for beneficial use been established?
State water quality standards
SOP for assessing beneficial uses (or related document)
Other (please specify)
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-8

49. What method(s) does your state currently use to calculate “noncarcinogenic” health risks and
issue fish advisories for individuals who consume fish harvested from state waters?
(Please specify all current methods used)
G EPA Fish Guidance Document
G FDA Action Levels
G Great Lakes Protocol
G Hazard Index calculations using risk assessment methodology (IRIS RfD)
G None
G Other approach (please specify)
G Not applicable
50. What noncarcinogenic risk level (i.e., individual risk within an exposed population) does your state
use to issue advisories and/or post waterbodies?
G Hazard index (please specify if hazard index is >, =, or < 1)
G FDA action levels
G Other (please specify)
G Not applicable
51. What source(s) does your state use to obtain potency factors (reference dose) to help calculate
noncarcinogenic health risks? (Please check all that apply)
G ATSDR Toxicological Profiles
G EPA Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS)
G EPA Health Effects Assessment Summary Table (HEAST)
G EPA Toxicology One-Liners Database (Office of Pesticide Programs)
G EPA Fish Guidance Document
G Great Lakes Protocol
G Hazardous Substance Data Bank (HSDB) from the National Library of Medicine
G Other sources (please specify)
G Not applicable
52. Of all the fish advisories currently in effect in your jurisdiction, including those issued last year
and in earlier years, what percentage were issued based on each of these methods?
(Please write down your best estimate of the percentage for each method)
% of advisories now in effect were issued using risk assessment methods.
% of advisories now in effect were issued using FDA action levels.
% of advisories now in effect were issued using other methods specified in question 46 and 49.
G Not applicable
53. Does your state or tribal agency have a plan to reevaluate data from sites where outdated
assessment methods were used to issue fish advisories?
G Yes
G No
G Not applicable
54. Is your state currently re-evaluating the method or approach used to establish fish advisories?
G Yes
G No
G Not applicable
55. What default value does your state use in its risk assessments as a daily fish consumption rate for
recreational fishers?
G 6.5 g/day
G 12 g/day (the value EPA is currently recommending)
G 15 g/day
G 30 g/day
G Other consumption rates (please specify value in g/day)
G Not applicable

A-9

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.
G
G
G
G
G

What default value does your state use for exposure duration in its cancer risk assessments?
30 years
70 years
75 years (the value EPA is currently recommending).
Other exposure duration (please specify value in years)
Not applicable

59.
G
G
G
G
G

What default value does your state use to estimate life expectancy in its risk assessments?
70 years
75 years
80 years
Other life expectancy (please specify value in years)
Not applicable

60. Does your state recommend a meal frequency format or number of meals over time in its advisories
(e.g., number of meals per month)?
G Yes
G No
G Not applicable
61. If your response to question 60 is yes, what assumption does your state make in its risk assessments
about meal size or portion for adults? (Please specify all that apply)
G 4 oz (114 g)
G 8 oz (227 g)
G 12 oz (341 g)
G 16 oz (454 g)
G Other (please specify value in grams)
G Not applicable
62. If your response to question 60 is yes, what assumption does your state make in its risk assessments
about meal size or portion for children? (Please specify all that apply)
G 4 oz (114 g)
G 8 oz (227 g)
G 12 oz (341 g)
G Other (please specify value in grams)
G Not applicable

A-10

63. What default value does your state use for body weight of an adult male consumer in its risk
assessments?
G 71 kg
G 70 kg
G 65 kg
G Other weight (please specify value in kg)
G Not applicable
64. What default value does your state use for body weight of an adult female consumer (including
pregnant women and nursing mothers) in its risk assessments?
G 70 kg
G 65 kg
G 62 kg
G Other weight (please specify value in kg)
G Not applicable
65.
G
G
G
G
G
G

What default value does your state use for body weight of a child in its risk assessments?
10 kg
14.5 kg
15.5 kg
Other weight (please specify value in kg)
Risk assessments not conducted for children
Not applicable

66. Please specify what age range or ranges your state uses to calculate risk with respect to children.
(Please specify all age ranges used in your state’s risk assessments for children.)
G <1 year
G <6 years
G <7 years
G <12 years
G <15 years
G <18 years
G Other age ranges (please specify)
G Risk assessments not conducted for children
G Not applicable
67. What assumption does your state make in its risk assessments about the amount of the pollutant
absorbed by the body after ingestion (percent absorption by the gut) (e.g., in pharmacokinetic
modeling)?
G 100% for all pollutants
G 75% for all pollutants
G 50% for all pollutants
G Chemical-specific % based on available data
G Other (please specify)
G Not applicable
68. Does your state use “contaminant reduction factors” in its risk calculations to account for
contaminant losses of PCBs and other organochlorine pollutants from fish tissues during cleaning,
preparation, and cooking of the fish?
G Yes
G No
G Not applicable

A-11

69. If yes, what are the pollutants and their associated contaminant reduction factors (% reduction in
pollutant level resulting from cleaning, preparing, and cooking of fish) assumed by your state?
% chlordane
% mercury
% DDE
% mirex
% DDT
% total PCBs
% dieldrin
% toxaphene
% heptachlor epoxide
% other (please specify)
G Not applicable
70.
G
G
G
G
G
G

If contaminant reduction factors are used, what are their basis?
EPA Guidance Documents
Great Lakes Protocol
Scientific literature review
Conducted own research
Other (please specify)
Not applicable

71. How does your state evaluate health risks for fish samples contaminated with multiple chemicals
with the same human health endpoints (e.g., two organochlorine pesticides)?
G Cumulative risk (add individual contaminant risks from each chemical together)
G Calculate single contaminant risk based on the most conservative carcinogenic risk value
G Either cumulative risk or single contaminant risk depending on the chemicals involved
G Other method (please specify)
G State does not evaluate health risks for multiple contaminants
G Not applicable
72. Regarding mercury, does your state assign different noncarcinogenic toxicity values to different
populations (i.e., does the state use an RfD of 1 x 10-4 mg/k/day for women of child-bearing age
and/or children versus using an RfD of 3 x 10-4 for adults in the general population)?
G Yes
G No
G Not applicable
73. What is the mercury toxicity value (i.e., RfD) used for each of the following populations?
Adults in the general population
Women of childbearing age or nursing mothers
Children
G Not applicable
74. When your state receives method detection limits (MDLs) as the reportable concentration for
contaminants from the laboratory, what value do you use for non-detects in your risk assessment?
G Zero
G Pollutant’s MDL
G Half the pollutant’s MDL
G Other value (please specify)
G Maximum likelihood indicator
G Not applicable
75. Does your state screen for lead in its fish tissue samples?
G Yes
G No
76. What assessment method do you use for lead since lead does not currently have an associated
reference dose in IRIS? (Please specify assessment method used)
G Not applicable

A-12

Targeting Fish Consumers
77. Are health risks being assessed in your state for target groups of people whose culinary habits may
differ from the customs of the majority of Americans regarding meal preparation and
consumption?
G Yes
G No
G Not applicable
78. Has your state identified the primary waterbodies fished by these target population(s)?
G Yes
G No
G Not applicable
79. Has your state made efforts to identify the fish species and the sizes of fish consumed by these target
populations?
G Yes
G No
G Not applicable
80. If yes, has your state used any of the following procedures to obtain information from these target
populations? (Please check all that apply)
G Local fish consumption surveys (creel surveys)
G Fishing license surveys
G Anecdotal information from populations of interest
G Behavioral risk surveillance surveys funded by the Centers for Disease Control
G Not applicable
81. Has your state altered its monitoring approach to address the needs of these target populations?
G Yes
G No
G Not applicable
82. If your state has altered its monitoring approach to address the needs of these target populations,
what actions have been taken? (Please check all that apply)
G State has added stations in waterbodies where the targeted populations frequently fish
G State has targeted species consumed by the target populations for residue analyses
G Other actions (please specify)
G Not applicable
83. If your state is not currently addressing the concerns of populations with a perceived higher risk, is
there a plan to do so in the future?
G Yes
G No
G Not applicable

Risk Management
84. Who prepares risk assessments on behalf of your state or tribal fish advisory program?
(Please check all that apply)
G State or Tribal Environmental Agency/Department
G State or Tribal Public Health Agency/Department
G State or Tribal Fisheries Agency/Department
G Consultant
G University
G Other (please specify)
G Not applicable
85. Does your state or tribe have written procedures for evaluating the health risks associated with
consumption of chemically-contaminated fish?
G Yes
G No
G Not applicable

A-13

86. Does your state or tribe have a group or committee that oversees the fish advisory
program/processes?
G Yes
G No
G Not applicable
87. If the answer to question 86 is yes, what professional disciplines are represented on that committee?
(Please check all that apply)
G Toxicology/epidemiology
G Fisheries
G Water pollution assessment/control
G Hazardous waste management
G Analytical chemist
G Risk communication
G Other disciplines (please specify)
G Not applicable
88. Who in your state or tribe makes the ultimate risk management decision to issue, modify, or rescind
fish advisories?
G Head of Environmental Agency/Department
G Head of Public Health Agency/Department
G Head of Fisheries Agency/Department
G Governor’s Office or Tribal Chief’s/President’s Office
G Other (please specify)
G Not applicable

Risk Communication Procedures
89. How often does your Agency revise the fish consumption advisory listings and release the
information to the public? (Please check all that apply)
(specify date: Day/Month)
G Annually; released on
G Whenever data become available (on an as-needed basis)
G Other schedules (please specify)
G Not applicable
90. Where can the public obtain copies of your agency’s printed advisory materials?
(Please check all that apply)
G Local public health departments
G State public health departments
G Other State agencies
G Doctors' offices
G Local businesses (e.g., hair styling salons)
G Businesses that issue fishing licenses (e.g., bait and tackle shops)
G WIC (Women, Infants, and Children) clinics
G Welfare offices
G Organizations (e.g.,sporting or women's clubs)
G Tourist offices
G State fisheries offices
G Tribal organizations
G Town halls
G Law enforcement officers
G State Internet site
G Other sources (please specify)
G Not applicable

A-14

91. How are your Agency's fish advisories communicated to the public?
(Please check all that apply)
G Mailed to public upon request
G Press releases distributed to media sources
G Targeted newspaper stories
G Published articles in ethnic newspapers
G Videos for ethnic groups
G Radio announcements
G Television announcements
G Radio/television talk shows
G Internet site
G Agency telephone information service (i.e., hotlines)
G Agency magazine
G Posted signs (at boat launches, stream access points, public docks, etc.)
G Posted information where fishing licenses issued
G Posters in public places (libraries, town halls, etc)
G Annual fishing regulations booklet
G Generic statewide listing booklet separate from fishing regulations
G Printed pamphlets or fact sheets
G Information presented at public meetings
G Publication of articles in state medical journal
G Publication of articles in agency annual monitoring report
G Publication of information in state 305(b) report
G Flyers distributed with trout and salmon stamps
G GIS maps posted for tribal members
G Other methods (please specify)
G Not applicable
92. Does your state or tribal fish advisory distribution plan specifically target some populations to
receive advisory information?
G Yes
G
No
G Not applicable
93.
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G

If yes, please identify all targeted populations.
Sport fishers
Subsistence fishers
Specific racial/ethnic groups (please specify)
Women of child-bearing age
Pregnant or nursing women
New parents
Tourists
Members of the general population
Others (please specify)
Not applicable

(Please check all that apply)

94. Are your state or tribal fish consumption advisories distributed to the public in languages other
than English?
G Yes
G No
G Not applicable

A-15

95.
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G

If yes, please specify all languages that apply.
Alaskan native languages
Bosnian
Cambodian
Chinese
Creole
Hmong
Japanese
Korean
Laotian

G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G

Llacano
Ojibwa
Portugese
Russian
Spanish
Tagalog
Thai
Vietnamese
Others (please specify)
Not applicable

96. Does your state or tribe evaluate the effectiveness of the fish consumption advisories?
G Yes
G
No
G Not applicable
97.
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G

If yes, how is their effectiveness determined? (Please check all that apply)
Feedback form/postcard in regulation pamphlet
Questions included in creel census program
Questions included in state BRFS (Behavior Risk Factor Survey)
Focus groups
Mailed questionnaires (to whom?)
Telephone surveys (of whom?)
Other methods (please specify)
Not applicable

98. To your knowledge, have there been any studies in your state (including federal, tribal, and
university-based studies) to evaluate human tissue contaminant levels (e.g., in blood, urine, breast
milk, or adipose tissues) or adverse human health effects related to fish consumption?
G Don’t know
G No
G Yes (please specify organization or agency)

A-16