United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of Science and
Technology (WH-551)
Washington, DC 20460
EPA 823-R-92-008C
January 1993
Water
        Press  Package
      EPA National Study of

    Chemical Residues  in Fish
         November 1992

-------
                                                                              NOV  19 1992
           DEPUTY ASSISTANT ADMINISTRATOR'S STATEMENT
       Today, the United States Environmental Protection Agency is releasing a summary of the
National Study of Chemical Residues in Fish,  a screening study the Agency conducted in
cooperation with State environmental officials.

       Some pollutants bioaccumulate in fish that live in polluted waters. This study shows that
some very persistent pollutants can be found in fish at many sites where pollution is a problem.
The study does not address commercial fishing and for those of us who get most of our fish
from commercial markets, there is no evidence here that presents  any cause for concern.
However, if a person ate a diet of two four-ounce fillets of fish per month  from the most
contaminated sites over a seventy-year lifetime there could be a lifetime cancer risk of greater
than one-in-ten-thousand.  This is a conservative upper-bound estimate based on limited data.

       Of the higher risk  sites found (46 of the 388 examined), most are contaminated with
PCBs and some are contaminated with dieldrin.  Both of these chemicals have essentially been
banned in the U.S. but they are highly persistent in the environment and have accumulated in
the bottom sediments of our waters in polluted areas, entering the ecological food chain from
those sediments.  Needed fish consumption bans  or advisories have been issued by states at the
sites of concern.  All fishers should pay attention to these  bans and advisories.   Persons
especially at risk are avid recreational fishers and subsistence fishers in polluted areas since they
may consume more fish than the average consumer and more of their fish could come from
polluted water.   Pregnant  women and  nursing mothers may also be especially sensitive to the
pollutants found.  If a fisher is not sure whether a ban or advisory is in effect in a certain area,
he or she should contact State health officials for further information.

       Again, this was a screening study and did not provide enough samples at any site to make
definitive local risk findings. The data has been released as it became available over the last
four years and this report is simply the first published summary of all of the data.  Much of the
data has already been reported by the press, especially in the local  areas of concern.

Background

       This report is based on samples of fish tissue the agency collected between 1986 and
1989,  primarily from sites expected to show some contamination.  From 1988 to 1990, the
agency released the raw  data collected in this  national  study as soon as it completed the
laboratory analyses and quality assurance checks.  Much of the information in the study has
already been the basis for various press reports on toxic pollutants in fish over the last several
years.  With the release of today's report, the final written interpretation of the data becomes
available.

       The  National Study of Chemical Residues in Fish was a follow-on effort to the 1986
National Dioxin Study which found dioxin in fish tissue taken from some sites had reached
potential levels of concern.  The Agency conducted this study to further evaluate the presence
of dioxin and dioxin-like compounds in  fish, and to  assess the extent to which other toxic

-------
pollutants may be accumulating in fish.  In 1990, the Agency released a summary of the dioxin
data in this report as part of its comprehensive Dioxin-in-Paper Integrated Risk Assessment.
Hank Habicht, EPA Deputy Administrator, briefed the press on the dioxin data at that time.

       The report being released today on the National Study of Chemical Residues in Fish
includes all of the data from samples of both bottom-feeding fish and game fish collected at 388
sites around the country between 1986 and 1989.  Of these sites, 314  were selected because of
the presence of possible dischargers  of bioaccumulative pollutants, including industrial,
agricultural or urban runoff sources.   The remaining  74  sites were selected to provide an
indication of background levels of these chemicals.  Both whole-body fish and fish fillet samples
were analyzed for a total of 60 bioaccumulative chemicals,  including 15  dioxin and furan
compounds,  10  polychlorinated biphenyls  (PCBs),  21  pesticides and herbicides, mercury,
biphenyl, and 12 other  organic compounds.

Prevalence of These Chemicals in the Environment

       With regard to the presence of chemicals of concern (as opposed to actual  or projected
health risks associated  with  such  presence), the study  found  DDE (a breakdown product of
DDT), PCBs and mercury present at the highest concentrations in these fish-tissue samples.

       Specifically, the study found that:

       1.    22 of the 60 tested chemicals were detectable in  fish tissue samples at more than
             half of the sites;

       2.    DDE, a  breakdown product of DDT, was found at almost every site;

       3.    Total PCBs, mercury, and biphenyl were  detected at more than 90% of the sites;

       4.     Seven of the 15 dioxin/furan compounds were  found  at more than half of the
              sites; and

       5.     Fifteen of the other 45 compounds were detected at very low levels at more than
              half of the sites.

Correlations  Between Sources and Pollutants

       EPA could not  identify a correlation between specific sources and most of the
pollutants analyzed.  However, as previously announced in 1990,  pulp and paper mills using
chlorine appear to be the dominant source category of certain types of dioxin and furan (2,3,7,8
TCDD and 2,3,7,8 TCDF) found in these fish samples  collected between 1986 and 1989.

-------
2.
Human Health Risks and Follow-on Actions to Reduce Risk

       Presence of pollutants does not necessarily mean that a health or environmental „ risk
exists.  Therefore, wherever it was possible to do so,  EPA evaluated,the levels of pollutants.
found, the hazards associated with those levels and the  ways people might be exposed to the
pollutants. This process allowed us to evaluate whether there were risks to human health from
the pollutants of concern at 110 of the sites in the study.

       1.     Two pollutants, PCBs  and dieldrin, were found at levels with estimated upper-
             bound human health cancer risks equal to or greater than one in ten thousand for
             the  average fish-eating population (persons  eating two  four-ounce  fillets  of
             freshwater or estuarine fish per month).  PCBs were found at these levels at 42
             sites and dieldrin was  found at these levels at 6 sites.  Our estimate of risk is
             quite conservative  for average fish-eaters since  most  people  would  not  be
             expected to eat a steady diet of fish caught at contaminated sites.

             Risks for dioxins and  furans were not estimated in this study because EPA is
             currently reassessing the health effects associated with dioxin.  However, risks
             for dioxins and furans were estimated and released in 1990 based on EPA's 1984
             risk assessment.  The  study being released today reports the concentrations of
             these chemicals found  in fish tissue.

             Other pollutants  which could cause health  problems were not detected in high
             enough concentrations  to pose a human health concern for the average fish-eating
             population.

             Insufficient samples were  taken to predict risk at some sites.    Insufficient
             information is available on hazards of some pollutants to predict risk associated
             with them.  Therefore, risk projections are included for only 110 of the sites in
             the survey.

       The Agency has released the data  from this study to  the States, industries, and to other
interested parties since 1988 as analyses were completed. The States have used this information
to focus their monitoring activities, to set fishing advisories and bans, and to limit discharges
from  many  sources.   Industry has  used the data to  plan  and  implement pollution control
programs.  States  have issued fishing bans or fishing advisories at 41 of the 46 sites where
consumption of fish could pose a human health problem under certain circumstances. Additional
monitoring at the remaining five sites has not indicated the need for advisories to date.

       Partly in response to this study, some industry dischargers have token significant steps
to reduce discharges of toxic pollutants.  In particular,  many pulp and paper mills have made
a substantial investment to change their operating practices to reduce discharges of dioxins and
furans.  This industry is  planning more monitoring at the 104  chlorine-bleaching mills  to
quantify reductions of dioxin in their  effluent.
3.
4.

-------
       EPA is also taking a variety of actions to improve our ability to assess toxic pollutant
 contamination  and to assist the States as they implement abatement, control  and public
 information programs. These actions include:
       1.


       2.

       3.


       4.


       5.
Establishing a task force to assist the States in determining fish contaminant levels
of concern;

Requiring States to adopt water quality standards for toxic pollutants of concern;

Developing pollution prevention and control strategies for inclusion in enforceable
permits issued to sources of bioaccumulative toxic pollutants;

Developing a Sediment Management Strategy to guide our  programs to prevent
and remediate contaminated sediments, a source of fish contamination; and

Developing guidance on fish sampling and analysis to promote consistent and
defensible risk assessments in the future.
       In addition, the Water Resources Development Act of 1992 requires EPA to conduct a
comprehensive national survey of data on sediment quality in the United States. It also requires
EPA to identify locations where pollutants in sediment pose a threat to the quality of drinking
water supplies, fisheries resources,  and marine habitats and  it  requires EPA to  conduct  a
continuing program to  assess sediment quality and its impacts.

SUMMARY

       Today's study found contamination offish at some of the targeted contaminated sites, but
did not  find high-risk concentrations  of pollutants in fish throughout the country.   The
information  gathered  from  this study cannot  be used  to evaluate the quality of fish on
supermarket shelves.

       It is important to emphasize too, that this study contains little, if any,  information that
has not been released before. These data have already been used  by State and local governments
to implement fish consumption advisories and prevention and remediation actions in many of the
high-risk areas. We are encouraged that their efforts, as well as EPA's efforts, have reduced
public exposure to toxic chemicals in these areas.

       There is a word of caution,  however.   Avid recreational fishers and, in  particular,
subsistence fishers should be aware that fish taken from some waterways may  contain elevated
levels of pollutants that  could be: harmful to human health.  It is particularly important that these
persons be attentive to  — and observe -• restrictions on consumption suggested in State fishing
bans or advisories.

       I will be pleased to answer any questions that you might have.

-------
              United States
              Environmental Protection
              Agency
Communications, Education,
And Public Affairs
(A-107)
              Note to Correspondents
        WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 18,  1992
      EPA's  Deputy  Assistant   Administrator  for  Water,   Martha

Prothro, will hold a press briefing tomorrow to release a study of

chemical residues in fish taken from polluted waters.

      EPA previously released all of the fish tissue concentrations
measured for the study as they became available at different times
since 1986. This is  the first time those data have been compiled in
one  document.  The study does not  address the overall quality of
commercial fishing.

      The study is a compilation of  data on  fish  samples  collected
between 1986 and 1989 at 388 sites and analyzed for 60  pollutants.
Most  of the sites (314)  were targeted areas located near both point
and  non-point  sources  of pollution such as pulp  and paper  mills,
Superfund sites,  industrial  complexes and urban  and agricultural
runoff. At 46 sites, contaminants were found at  levels that could
present health concerns for regular consumers of fish caught below
the sites.

      Industry, states  and EPA  have  been  taking action to  reduce
pollutant discharges since the study was undertaken. Over the past
several years, states have issued fishing advisories and/or bans at
41 of the 46 sites of concern. Recent monitoring at the other five
sites shows no need for advisories.

      The briefing will  be held tomorrow, November 19, at 11:00 a.m.
in room 642, East Tower,  U.S.  EPA,  401 M. St., S.W.,  Washington,
D.C.  Copies of the study will be available at  the briefing.

      For more information, contact  Sean McElheny  at 202-260-1387.
                                           John Kasper, Director
                                           Press Services Division
                                           202-260-4355
R-242

-------
              United States
              Environmental Protection
              Agency
  Office of Science and
  Technology (WH-551)
  Washington, DC 20460
EPA823-F-92-001
November 1992
              Water
 National Study of  Chemical  Residues
 In  Fish  Fact Sheet
                      0-0   XOX
What \» the study?

The National Study of Chemical Residues in Fish
(NSCRF, formerly the National Bioaccumulation Study,
or NBS) is a one-time screening investigation to deter-
mine the prevalence and sources of selected
bioaccumulative pollutants in fish. Fish samples were
collected at 388 sites nationwide (Figure 1, below) and
analyzed for 60 pollutants including PCBs, dioxins,
furans, and mercury.

The sites sampled included 314 "targeted" sites
thought to be influenced by various point and nonpoint
pollutant sources.  Targeted sites included pulp and
paper mills (chlorine and non-chlorine), wood preserv-
ing operations, certain refineries, Superfund sites, pub-
licly-owned treatment works  (POTWs), sites near
industrial complexes, and sites that could be influenced
by runoff from urban or agricultural areas.  Other sites
included 35 background locations and 39 USGS sites
to provide national coverage.

Why was the study performed?

The study began in 1986 as an outgrowth of EPA's
National Dioxm Study, a nationwide investigation of
2,3,7,8 tetrachiorodibenzo-p-dioxin (2,3,7,8 TCDD)
contamination of soil, water, sediment, air and fish.
Some of the highest concentrations of 2,3,7,8 TCDD
were detected in fish. The Agency initiated the Na-
tional Study of Chemical Residues in Fish to investi-
                   Figure 1
        Location of Btoaccumulation Study
                Sampling Sites
 gate whether there may be other toxic  pollutants
 bjoaccumulating in fish. The NSCRF is also part of
 EPA's response to a petition from the Environmental
 Defense Fund (EOF) and the National Wildlife Feder-
 ation (NWF). This petition requests EPA to conduct an
 aquatic monitoring survey of the occurrence of dioxins
 and furans.

 Who performed the study?

 EPA Regions and State personnel were involved in the
 selection of sites and sample collection. An EPA Work
 Group provided continuing review of the study and the
 final draft was sent to 62 reviewers and seven experts
 outside EPA for a final round of comments.

 The samples were analyzed by the EPA laboratory at
 Duluth for 60 compounds, including 10 PCBs 15 diox-
 ms/furans, 21 pesticides/herbicides, mercury, biphe-
 nyl, and 12 other organic compounds. Chemicals were
 selected  for analysis based on  the potential of the
 compound to bioaccumuiate in fish, the potential for
 human health effects, the persistence of tne chemical
 in tiie environment, and existence of analytical meth-
 ods for detecting the compound in fish tissue.

 When was the study performed?

 The  study was initiated hi 1986. Fish samples were
 collected beginning in 1986 and continuing through
 1989.  Most of the samples were collected in  1987.
 Laboratory analyses were conducted between 1987
 and 1990. States received the data as soon as QA/QC
 was completed on each sample.The data analyses and
 report preparation were conducted between  1988 and
 1990.

 What did the study find?

 Of the 60 compounds studied, the  most frequently
 detected pollutant was DDE found at over 98 percent
 of all sites sampled (Table 1). This compound is a
 metabolic breakdown product of DDT which was a
 widely used pesticide and is extremely persistent in the
 environment. Other compounds detected at more than
 90 percent of the sites are mercury, total PCBs and
 biphenyl.  PCBs were detected at the highest concen-
 tration with a maximum value of 124,000 parts per
 billion (ppb), and an average concentration of 1,890
ppb.

Seven of the 15 dioxin/furan compounds and 15 of the
other 45 compounds were detected at over 50 percent

-------
of the sites .  The two most frequently detected dioxin
and furan compounds wets both found at 89 percent
of the sites. The dioxin compound considered to be the
most toxic. 2,3,7,8 TCDD, was found at 70 percent of
the sites at a maximum concentration of 204  parts per
trillion (ppt) and an average concentration of  6.8 ppt.

Statistical analyses of various source categories show
that putp and paper mills using chlorine appear to be
the dommant-(statistically significant) source  category
of 2.3.7,8 TCDD and 2,3,7,8 TCDF found in fish tissue.
For the other dioxins/furans,  the statistical correlation
tests showed no dominant source category. Based on
a simple comparison of median fish tissue concentra-
tions, however,  highest concentrations for penta-
furans  occurred  near  Superfund sites, highest for
hexa-furans occurred near refinery/other industry sites,
and highest for penta-and hexa-dioxins occurred near
paper mills using chlorine. Using the same statistical
correlation tests as for dioxins/furans, no  single domi-
nant source  category was identified for the  other 45
chemicals. However, a number of observations can be
drawn from the data. For example, while the median
PCS concentration was below detection at tha 20
background  sites where RGBs were sampled. PCB
values ranged from 213 to 525  ppb for industrial urban
sites, paper mills using chlorine, refinery/other industry
sites, non-chlorine paper mills and Superfund sites.

Cancer risks were estimated for 106 targeted and 4
background  sites having fillet  data.  Using  EPA as-
sumptions (ie., upper-bound cancer potency factors,
6.5 grams/day consumption  rate), PCBs  are the only
chemical to exceed a health  risk at one in ^thousand
(Table 2). The cancer risk exceeded the 1 or risk level
(one in ten thousand) at 42 sites for PCBs and at 6 sites
for dieldrin.  PCB use  was  restricted in 1982 and
dieldrin use  was banned in 1985.  Risks for dioxins
and furahs were not estimated because of the ongoing
dioxin nsk assessment.

What do the results maan to  us?

EPA projects upper bound cancer risks to exceed one
in ten thousand at 46 sites where fish are contaminated
by high levels of PCBs and/or dieldrin. Three of these
sites had risks above this level for more than one of
these compounds.  States have adopted fish bans or
advisories at 41 of the 46 sites where consumption of
fish could be a human health problem. Additional
monitoring at the remaining  5  sites has not  indicated
the need for advisories to date.

General Questions and Answers

*   Has EPA provided outside review of the report and
    peer review of the site selection process  and ana-
    lytical methods?

Sites were selected by EPA  regional or state staff
based on proximity to point/nonpoint sources. Many of
the sites were targeted because of known  dioxin
contamination.
The NSCRF report was sent to 62 agency personnel
and seven experts outside of the Agency for review. We
believe that technical comments have been addressed.
Analytical methods were developed  by EPA's DUuth
Lab and  reviewed by national experts at Wright State
University and  Columbia Research Laboratory and
found to be adequate for purposes of this study.

•   Has  EPA proposed stringent enough follow-up, ac-
    tions?

Steps EPA wiH take for PCBs and dieldrin are outlined
below. lnaUcases,Statesan3inftebestpositiontoaddress
site-specific problems and EPA wil continue to help them
do so.

•   Have states been provided with  sufficient time to
    review the report prior to its public release?

States have  had access to fish contamination data for
several years.  Additionally, the states wil be provided
advance copies of the report.

What should EPA do n«xt?

Measures are being taken  by EPA to protect
human health  and affected aquatic ecosystems.
Such work  includes:

•   Formation of a Task Force to develop a federal
    action plan  to assist states in  monitoring fish and
    developing advisories.

•   Adoption of water quality standards by states for
    pollutants of concern and approval/disapproval by
    EPA.

•   Establishment of a national protocol fora consistent
    risk-based approach for issuing advisories.

•   Development of EPA's sediment management
    strategy to prevent and remediate this source of
    fish contamination.

•   Development  of  pollution  prevention and control
    strategies for point and nonpoint  sources of  these
    pollutants.

Study Limitations

The risks presented in this report  represent a na-
tional screening assessment and not a detailed local
assessment of risks to specific populations.  Such
detailed risk assessments would consider the num-
ber of people exposed and incorporate local con-
sumption rates  and patterns.   Furthermore,  a
detailed assessment would require a greater number
of fish samples per site than collected for this screen-
ing study. Additionally, this study does not address
all the bioaccumulative pollutants that may be pre-
sent in surface  waters.

-------
                                            TABLE 1
      Summary of Prevalence and Concentration for Bioaccumulative Compounds
Chemical
Percent of
Sites Detected
. .- ' !-"
Max
Concentration
C
Mean Median
oncentratJon In
Kkground sites
(Mean)
Units in po/g or ppt by wet weight
Dtorira
1 ,2,3,4,6,7,8 HpCDD
2,3,7,8 TCDD
1,2,3,6,7,8 HxCDD
1 25.7,8 PeCDO
125.7,8,9 HxCDD
12,3,4,7,8 HxCDD
Furans
2,3,7.8 TCDF
2,3,4,7,8 PeCDF
1 ,2,3,4,6,7,8 HpCDF
1 2,3,7,8 PeCDF
1 5,3,4,7,8 HxCOF
2,3,4,6,7,8 HxCOF
1 2,3,6,7,8 HXCDF
12,3,4,7,8,9 HpCDF
12,3,7,8.9 HxCDF
TEC'

Other Chemicals2
DDE
Mercury
Siphenyl
Total PC8s
NonacHor, trans
Chtoidw, cts
PentacMoroanisote
ChtorrJane, trans
DioMrin
Alpha-BHC
1 2.4 Trichlorobenzena
rwxdctitofotxjnzsn©
Gamma-BHC
1 2.3 Trichlorobenzene
Mirex
Nonechtor, ds
Oxyctitordmo
Chtoipyrtos
Penfachtorabenzera
Heptachtor EpoxWe
Dteofol
125.4 TeUadrtmuOenzene
TrffluraSn
1,35TrW*>robenzar»
Endrtn
1255TECB
12,45 TECS
MethoxyeWor
lifipmijeiln
Nitrogen
Hexachbrobutadlefie
Heptacttor
Perthane
PentachioronlU uOunze ne
Dlphenyl Disuffide

89
70
69
54
38
32

89
64
54
47
42
32
21
4
1
N/A


99
92
94
91
77
64
64
61
60
55
53
46
42
43
38
35
27
26
22
16
16
13
12
11
11
9
9
7
4
3
3
2
1
1
1

249
204
101
54.0
24.8
37.6

404
56.4
58.3
120.0
45.3
19.3
30.9
2.57
0.9S
213


14000
1800
131
124000
477
378
647
310
450
44.4
265
913
83.3
69.0
22S
127
243
344
125
632
74.3
76.7
458
14.9
162
28.3
1*U1
loo
28.3
393
37.5
17.9
164
762
5.12
15.5
324

10.5
6.89
4.30
2.38
1.16
1.67

13.6
3.06
1.91
1.71
2.35
124
1.74
124
122
11.1
Units In ng/g or ppb by

295
260
2.7
1890
312
21.0
10.8
16.7
28.1
2.41
3.10
5.80
2.70
127
336
8.77
4.75
4.09
1.18
2.19
0.98
0.47
5.98
0.12
1.69
0.34
1.71
0.33
1.32
0.46
0.17
0.57
0.35
0.03
0.09
0.02

2.83
1.38
1.32
0.93
0.69
124

2.97
0.75
0.72
0.45
1.42
0.98
1.42
1.30
1.38
2.80
wet weight

58.3
170
0.64
209
922
3.66
0.92
2.68
4.16
0.72
0.14
ND
NO
ND
ND
NO
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND

1.61
056
0.39°
0.77
0.3Sf
0.39*

1.61
0.50
0.3
0.43
022*
022*
0.22*
ND
0.22*
0.59


5628
0.34
0.42
46.9
5.68*
520*
0.59
520*
14.31
0.72
0.17
0.60
0.14
0.15
0.70
5.68'
050
0.40
0.03
1.60
027
0.03
10.8
0.02
2.00
0.01
ND
0.01
NO
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
TEC represents the sum of toxtety-welgMed concentrations of al dtadns and furans relative to 2,3,75 TCDD.
The number of compounds shown her* te 36; the oltemnce is the result ot grouping 3 Individual PCS conpounds wtth 1 to 10 chlorines.
Five of the PC8« were found at concentrations above SO percent; the remainder were found between 3 and 35 percent.
Mean concentration of 1 2.3,6,7,8 HxCDD; 1 25,7,85 HxCDD; and 1 2.3,4,7,8, HxCDD.
                                                                 .
Mean concentration of 1 25,4.75 HxCOF; 2,3,4,6,75 HxCOF; 1 25,6.75 KxCOF; and 125,75,9 HxCDF.
Mean concentration of nonachtor, tram and nonecntor, ch.
Mean concentration ot Utoniane. ds and chtortane, trans.

-------
                                        TABLE!
                     Number of Sites with Estimated Upper-Bound Risks

                                     TARGETED STTFS
                             No. of Sites
                             with Fillet
 Chemical
               >10H
                                                                                    10°
   D«U   f>l in 1.000,000) (>1 in 100,00) Ol in 10.000)   (>1 in 1.000)
 PCBs
 Dieldrin
 Combined Chlordane
 DDE
 Heptachlor Epoxide
 Alpfaa-BHC
 Mirex
 HCB
 Gamma-BHC
 Heptachlor
 Dicofol
 Hexachlorobutadiene
 Pentachloroanisole
 Trifluralin
   106
   106
   106
   106
   106
   106
   106
   106
   106
   106
   106
  .106
   106
   106
89
53
44
40
 9
11
 g
 5
 0
 0
 0
 0
 0
 0
79
31
10
10
 2
 1
 2
 0
 0
 0
 0
 0
 0
 0
42
 6
 0
 0
 0
 0
 0
 0
 0
 0
 0
 0
 0
 0
10
 0
 0
 0
 0
 0
 0
 0
 0
 0
 0
 0
 0
 0
Chemical
                                  BACKGROUND SITES
No. of Sites
wtthFilkt     >10'6         >10'5        >10~*
   Data  (>1 in 1,000,000) (>1 in 100,000) (>1 in 10,000)   (>1 in 1,000)
PCBs
DDE
    4'
    4
               I
               0
            0
            0
               0
               0
Basis: 1) Used EPA (i.e.. upper bound) cancer potency factors.
     2) Used consumption rate of 6.5 grams/day.
     3) Used average fillet concentrations at the few sites with multiple samples.
Combined chlordane is the sum of cis- and trans-chlordane isomers, cis- and trans-nonachlor isomers, and
oxychlordane.
                                                                                          755

-------
SITES WITH ESTIMATED RISK GREATER THAN 10"» (1 in 10,000)




              WITH ADVISORIES OR BANS
EPA Region
Region 2












Region 3









Region 4



RegionS
Waterfaody
Hudson R.
Lake Ontario
Grass R.
Lake Ontario
Niagara R.
Eighteen Mile Creek
Oswego Harbor
Hudson R.
Niagara R. Delta
Oswegatchie R.
PassaicR.
Arthur Kill R.
Newark Bay
Red Lion Creek
Baltimore Harbor
Little Valley Creek
Delaware R.
N. Br. Susquehanna R.
Susquehanna R.
Schuylkill R.
Delaware R.
KaaawhaR.
Ohio R.
CoosaR.
Chattahoochee R.
MudR.
Nonconnah Creek
Waukegan Harbor
qty
Fort Miller, NY
Olcott,NY
Massena,NY
Rochester, NY
N. Tonawanda, NY
01cott,NY
Oswego, NY
Peekskill, NY
Porter, NY
Newton Falls, NY
Newark, NJ
Carteret, NJ
Elizabeth, NJ
Tybouts Comer, DE
Baltimore, MD
Paoli, PA
Torresdale, PA
Ransom, PA
Pittson, PA
Philadelphia, PA
Eddystone, PA
Winfield, WV
Wheeling, WV
State Line, AL
Austell, GA
RusseUville, KY
Memphis, TN
Waukegan, IL

-------
EPA Region
                                    Waterfaodv
                                                                              City.
                                  Mississippi R.
                                      East St. Louis, IL
                                  Mississippi R.
                                         Quincy, IL
                                  Kalamazoo R.
                                                                          Saugatnck,.MI
                                   Esctnab*.R.
                                                                          Escanaba, MI
                                    Rouge R.
                                       River Rouge, MI
                                 Muslcegon Lake
                                        Muskegon, MI
                                  Mississippi R.
                                       Red Wing, MN
                                  Milwaukee R.
                                                                         Milwaukee, WI
                                  Shefaoygan R.
                                         Kohler, WI
                                  Wisconsin R.
                                                                    U. Pentenwell Flow, WI
 Region 6
 Calcasieu R.
                                                                         Moss Lake, LA
                                 Neches R. (tidal)
                                       Port Arthur, TX
 Region 7
Missouri River
                                                                         Lexington, MO

-------
ADDITIONAL MONITORING ONLY (NO ADVISORIES OR BANS NEEDED)
EPA Region
Region 3

Region 5
Region 9
Region 10
Waterbodv
Roanoke R.
S. Br. Elizabeth River
FoxR.
Blanco Drain
Owyhee River
Location
Brookneal, VA
Norfolk, VA
Geneva, IL
Salinas, CA
Owyhee, OR

-------
                            OPA REGIONAL DIRECTORS
                                     JULY 1992
Region 1  EPA9115
Chris  Jendras
OPA  US EPA
JFK  Federal Building
Boston MA 02203
COMM:  (617)  565-2713
FAX  :          X3415
Region a   HPA9212
Jim Marshall
OEP US EPA
26  Federal Plaza
New York,  NY 10278
COMM:  (212)  264-2515
FAX :           X8109
 Region 3   EPA9315
 Janet Viniski
 OPA US EPA
 841 Chestnut St.
 Philadelphia,PA 191(
 COMM:  (215)  597-937|
 FAX :          X096I
Region  4   EPA9413
Hagan Thompson
OPA US  EPA
345 Courtland str.  NE
Atlanta GA 30365
COMM: (404)  347-3004
FAX :          X3721

Region  7   EPA9715
Rowena  Michaels
726 Minnesota Ave.
Kansas  City, KS 66101
COMM: (913)  551-7003
FAX :          X7066
Region  5   EPA9513
Margaret McCue
OPA US  EPA
77 w. Jackson Blvd.
Chicago, IL  60604
COMM: (312)  353-2072
FAX :          X1155

Region  8   EPA9812
Nola Cooke
999 18th Str.
Denver, CO 80202
COMM: (303)  294-1692
FAX :          X7665
Region  6  BPA9621
Phil  Charles
OPA US  EPA
1445  Ross Ave.
Dallas, TXX 75202
COMM: (214) 655-644'
FAX :          X211J

Region  9   EPA9912
Virginia Donohue
75 Hawthorne St.
San Fran., CA 94105
COMM: (415) 744-102<
FAX :          X160!
Region 10  EPA9018
Bob Jacobson
OPA US EPA
1200 6th Ave.
Seattle WA 98101
COMM: (206) 553-1203
FAX :          X0149
RTP LAB  EPA8070
Debbie Janes
Environ. Reseaarch Ctr,
Research Triangle Pk.
RTP, NC 27711
COMM: (919) 541-4577
FAX :          X1831
Cincinnati  EPA8061
Andy Avel
Environ. Research C1
26 W. Martin L. Kinc
Cincinnati, OH  452<
COMM: (513) 569-7771
FAX :          X777(

-------