DOCSLIB.ORG

Evaluation of Regional SLAMM Results to Establish a Consistent Framework of Data and Models

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Evaluation of Regional SLAMM Results to Establish a Consistent Framework of Data and Models Evaluation of Regional SLAMM Results to Establish a Consistent Framework of Data and Models Prepared for the Gulf Coast Prairie Landscape Conservation Cooperative June, 2015 Minor Revisions, March 2016 Evaluation of Regional SLAMM Results to Establish a Consistent Framework of Data and Models Executive Summary ....................................................................................................................................... 1 Background ................................................................................................................................................... 3 Model Summary ........................................................................................................................................ 5 SLAMM Application Methods ....................................................................................................................... 7 Study Area ................................................................................................................................................. 7 Model Time steps .................................................................................................................................... 11 Sea Level Rise Scenarios .......................................................................................................................... 11 Gap Study Area Input Raster Preparation............................................................................................... 11 Elevation Data ..................................................................................................................................... 12 Slope Layer .......................................................................................................................................... 12 Elevation correction ............................................................................................................................ 12 Wetland Layers and translation to SLAMM wetland categories ........................................................ 12 Dikes and Impoundments ................................................................................................................... 13 Percent Impervious ............................................................................................................................. 13 Gap Study Areas Parameterization ......................................................................................................... 14 Erosion Rates....................................................................................................................................... 14 Historic sea level rise rates ................................................................................................................. 15 Tide Ranges ......................................................................................................................................... 15 Salt Elevation ....................................................................................................................................... 16 Accretion Rates ....................................................................................................................................... 17 Model Calibration ................................................................................................................................... 25 Elevation Pre-processor .......................................................................................................................... 26 Freshwater Flow Polygons ...................................................................................................................... 26 Flooded Swamp ....................................................................................................................................... 27 Considerations for individual study areas ............................................................................................... 27 Study Area 1 – Monroe County, FL ..................................................................................................... 27 Study Area 2 – Naples, FL .................................................................................................................... 28 Study Area 3 – Sarasota, FL ................................................................................................................. 28 Study Area 4 – Upstream Tampa, FL ................................................................................................... 28 Warren Pinnacle Consulting, Inc. ii Study Area 5 – Lake Rousseau, FL ....................................................................................................... 28 Study Area 6 – Near Gainesville, FL .................................................................................................... 28 Study Area 7 – Upstream Lower Suwannee River, FL ......................................................................... 29 Study Area 8 – Tallahassee to Steinhatchee, FL.................................................................................. 29 Study Area 9 – St. Joe Bay and Carabelle, Florida ............................................................................... 29 Study Area 10 – Upstream Pensacola, FL ............................................................................................ 29 Study Areas 11 and 13 – Upstream Perdido, FL .................................................................................. 29 Study Area 12 – Upstream Mobile River, AL ....................................................................................... 29 Study Area 14 – Mississippi and Eastern Louisiana ............................................................................ 29 Study Area 16 – Dry Tortugas, Florida ................................................................................................ 29 Study Area 17 – Louisiana Chenier Plain ............................................................................................. 30 Study Area 18 – Galveston Bay, Texas ................................................................................................ 30 Study Area 19 – Matagorda and San Antonio Bays, Texas ................................................................. 30 Study Area 20 – Baffin Bay, South Texas ............................................................................................ 30 Study Area 21 – South of Tampa, FL ................................................................................................... 31 Focal Species Approach .......................................................................................................................... 31 Results and Discussion ................................................................................................................................ 33 Seaside Sparrow .................................................................................................................................. 44 Mottled Duck ...................................................................................................................................... 48 Black Skimmer ..................................................................................................................................... 62 Conclusions and Perspectives ..................................................................................................................... 71 Recommended Data Uses and Caveats .............................................................................................. 71 References .................................................................................................................................................. 73 Appendix A – Elevation Data Sources ....................................................................................................... A-1 Appendix B – Landcover Data Sources ...................................................................................................... B-1 Appendix C – Parameters for New Study Areas ......................................................................................... C-1 Appendix D – Focal Species Analysis Statistics ......................................................................................... D-1 Warren Pinnacle Consulting, Inc. iii List of Figures Figure 1. Project Study Area ......................................................................................................................... 4 Figure 2. Study Area Boundaries ................................................................................................................... 7 Figure 3. New Study Areas in Florida ............................................................................................................ 8 Figure 4. New Study Areas in Northern Florida, Alabama, Mississippi, and Louisiana ................................. 9 Figure 5. New Study Areas in Texas .............................................................................................................. 9 Figure 6. Average historical SLR trends data in the Gulf from NOAA Gauge Station ................................. 15 Figure 7. 30-day inundation height vs. great diurnal tide range for Florida ............................................... 16 Figure 8. Accretion Locations (yellow stars) in Study Area which could be assigned locations ................. 18 Figure 9. Derived MEM3 model with Louisiana-specific regularly-flooded
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Written Testimony of Shanna Devine Worker Health and Safety Advocate
    Written Testimony of Shanna Devine Worker Health and Safety Advocate, Public Citizen’s Congress Watch Division Before the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Energy and Commerce Environment and Climate Change Subcommittee On “Mismanaging Chemical Risks: EPA’s Failure to Protect Workers” March 13, 2019 Dear Chairman Tonko, Ranking Member Shimkus, and Members of the Subcommittee, Thank you for holding this crucial hearing on the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) failure to protect workers from chemicals risks. I serve as the worker health and safety advocate for Public Citizen, a national consumer advocacy and public interest organization with more than 500,000 members and supporters. Since 1971, Public Citizen has advocated for stronger health, safety and consumer protection measures, as well as curbs on corporate wrongdoing. I previously worked as an investigator for the Government Accountability Project, a whistleblower protection and advocacy organization, where I led a multiyear dispersant whistleblower investigation. The investigation, which I understand is ongoing, examined worker health impacts from chemical exposure during the Deepwater Horizon disaster.i I worked firsthand with whistleblowers, and this testimony incorporates lessons learned by those brave individuals, who should be the pioneer witnesses providing a foundation for dispersant oversight. EPA’s failure to adequately regulate dispersants – toxic chemicals used in an unprecedented manner in response to the BP Deepwater Horizon disaster – is a tragic example of the agency’s failure to protect workers under its implementation of the Frank R. Lautenberg Chemical Safety Act, which made significant amendments to the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA). While this is by no means the only chemical that EPA has failed to protect workers from, several unique factors make it particularly timely for congressional oversight.
    [Show full text]
  • Deepwater Horizon Vs. Bouchard B120
    EVALUATION OF US FEDERAL OIL SPILL POLICIES: BOUCHARD B120 AND DEEPWATER HORIZON BY: QUINN RELIHAN THESIS ADVISOR: DR. ILENE KAPLAN PURPOSE • TO COMPARE AND CONTRAST THE BACKGROUND, IMPACTS AND TREATMENT OF TWO MAJOR OIL SPILLS AND INVESTIGATE THE APPROPRIATENESS OF EXISTING ENVIRONMENTAL POLICIES AND ANY NEED FOR NEW AND/OR DIFFERENT POLICIES https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fossil_fuel_regulations_in_the_United_States METHOD: IN-DEPTH CASE STUDIES BOUCHARD B120 DEEPWATER HORIZON https://www.cerc.usgs.gov/orda_docs/CaseDetails?ID=966 https://www.britannica.com/event/Deepwater-Horizon-oil-spill MAJOR POLICIES • OUTER CONTINENTAL SHELF LANDS ACT (OCSLA) 1953 • COAST GUARD AND MARITIME TRANSPORTATION ACT (CGMTA) • NATIONAL CONTINGENCY PLAN (NCP) 1968 OF 2006 • PORT AND WATERWAYS SAFETY ACT OF 1972 • PIPELINE SAFETY, REGULATORY CERTAINTY AND JOB CREATION ACT 2011 • SPILL PREVENTION CONTROL AND COUNTERMEASURE (SPCC) 1973 • RESTORE ACT 2011 • CLEAN WATER ACT 1972 • OFFSHORE PRODUCTION AND SAFETY ACT OF 2011 • PORT AND TANKER SAFETY ACT 1978 • PIONEERS ACT 2012 • CERCLA 1980 • CONSOLIDATED APPROPRIATIONS ACT 2012 • OIL SPILL LIABILITY TRUST FUND (OSLTF) 1986 • BUREAU OF SAFETY AND ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT • OIL POLLUTION ACT (OPA) 1990 REVISIONS 2019 • TANK VESSEL AND FACILITY RESPONSE PLANS 2004 RESULTS OF CASE STUDY COMPARISON BOUCHARD B120 BOTH DEEPWATER HORIZON • LACKED PROACTIVE LEGISLATION • SIZE: 98,000 GALLONS • SIZE: ~4.9 MILLION GALLONS • LONG-TERM & SHORT-TERM EFFECTS • RESPONSIBLE PARTIES: BP, TRANSOCEAN • RESPONSIBLE PARTY: BOUCHARD
    [Show full text]
  • Deepwater Horizon: a Preliminary Bibliography of Published Research and Expert Commentary
    1 US Department of Commerce National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Deepwater Horizon: A Preliminary Bibliography of Published Research and Expert Commentary Compiled by Chris Belter NOAA Central Library Current References Series No. 2011-01 First Issued: February 2011 Last Updated: 13 May 2014 NOAA Central Library 2 About This Bibliography This bibliography attempts to list all of the published research and expert commentary that has resulted from the Deepwater Horizon oil spill. It includes peer-reviewed journal articles and book chapters, technical reports released by scientific agencies and institutions, and editorials published in peer-reviewed journals. The peer-reviewed publications and technical reports in this bibliography are sorted into three subject categories: natural, medical, and social sciences. Data sets, fact sheets, maps, and news items not published in peer-reviewed journals are outside the scope of this bibliography. In addition to this bibliography, the NOAA Central Library has also compiled a more comprehensive bibliography on oil spills and oil spill remediation around the world entitled "Resources on Oil Spills, Response, and Restoration: A Selected Bibliography". The Library has also created the Deepwater Horizon Repository, a fully searchable public repository of data and information produced in response to the Deepwater Horizon oil spill. Note: Publications marked with a were written by at least one NOAA-affiliated author. Effective 13 May 2014, this bibliography will no longer be updated. Contents
    [Show full text]
  • Building Community Resilience to Large Oil Spills
    C O R P O R A T I O N MELISSA L. FINUCANE, AARON CLARK-GINSBERG, ANDREW M. PARKER, ALEJANDRO U. BECERRA-ORNELAS, NOREEN CLANCY, RAJEEV RAMCHAND, TIM SLACK, VANESSA PARKS, LYNSAY AYER, AMANDA F. EDELMAN, ELIZABETH L. PETRUN SAYERS, SHANTHI NATARAJ, CRAIG A. BOND, AMY E. LESEN, REGARDT J. FERREIRA, LEAH DRAKEFORD, JACQUELINE FIORE, MARGARET M. WEDEN, K. BRENT VENABLE, A. BARRIE BLACK Building Community Resilience to Large Oil Spills Findings and Recommendations from a Synthesis of Research on the Mental Health, Economic, and Community Distress Associated with the Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill rr-A409-1_cover_8.5x11_v6.indd All Pages 6/25/20 12:08 PM For more information on this publication, visit www.rand.org/t/RRA409-1 Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data is available for this publication. ISBN: 978-1-9774-0535-7 Published by the RAND Corporation, Santa Monica, Calif. © Copyright 2020 RAND Corporation R® is a registered trademark. Cover: Johannes Schmitt-Tegge/dpa/Alamy Live News. Limited Print and Electronic Distribution Rights This document and trademark(s) contained herein are protected by law. This representation of RAND intellectual property is provided for noncommercial use only. Unauthorized posting of this publication online is prohibited. Permission is given to duplicate this document for personal use only, as long as it is unaltered and complete. Permission is required from RAND to reproduce, or reuse in another form, any of its research documents for commercial use. For information on reprint and linking permissions, please visit www.rand.org/pubs/permissions. The RAND Corporation is a research organization that develops solutions to public policy challenges to help make communities throughout the world safer and more secure, healthier and more prosperous.
    [Show full text]
  • Health and the Deepwater Horizon Gulf Oil Spill JSOST Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill Principal Investigator (PI) Conference St
    Health and the Deepwater Horizon Gulf Oil Spill JSOST Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill Principal Investigator (PI) Conference St. Petersburg, FL, October 5‐6, 2010 Edward J. Trapido, Sc.D., F.A.C.E. Associate Dean for Research LSUHSC School of Public Health Professor and Wendell Gauthier Chair for Cancer Eppgyidemiology Coordinator of Gulf Oil Spill Research LSU Health Sciences Center- New Orleans Deputy Director, Stanley S . Scott Cancer Center Co-Director, Gulf Health Consortium Photo: 6/26/10 Still in Our Headlines Still In Our Community: “Art for A rt’ s S ak e” 10-02-10” (53 Barrels) Oil Analytes of Interest OSHA’ s Concerns • Benzene (crude oils high in BTEX, benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylene) , • Benzo(a)pyrene (a polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon reproductive , formed when oil or gasoline burns), • CbCarbon diid(itidioxide (inerting a tmosp here, bypro duc tft of com bus ti)tion), • Carbon monoxide (byproduct of combustion) Ethyl benzene (high in gasoline), • Hydrogen sulfide (oils high in sulfur, decaying plants and animals), • Methyl tert-butyl ether (MTBE) (octane booster and clean air additive for gasoline, or pure MTBE)- potentially carcinogenic in humans; carcinogenic in animals • Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) (occur in crude oil, and formed during burning of oil), • Sulfuric acid (byproduct of combustion of sour petroleum product), • Toluene (high BTEX crude oils), Xylenes (high BTEX crude oils). NOAA: A More Positive View • Chemical nature of the oil Mississippi Canyon Block 252 (MS252) oil is a South Louisiana sweet crude oil (crude oil is termed sweet if it is low in sulfur). MS252 oil is a complex mixture of thousands of chemical compounds.
    [Show full text]
  • The Gulf STUDY Four Years After the Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill
    Environmental Factor, May 2014 The GuLF STUDY four years after the Deepwater Horizon oil spill By Robin Mackar On April 20, 2010, the Deepwater Horizon rig exploded in the Gulf of Mexico, releasing more than 210 million gallons of oil. NIEHS, as part of the federal government's response, provided safety training for the more than 100,000 volunteer cleanup workers and initiated the GuLF STUDY (http://www.gulfstudy.nih.gov/) (Gulf Long-term Follow-up Study) - the largest study ever conducted on the potential health effects of an oil spill. In an April 11 teleconference, Dale Sandler, Ph.D., lead researcher for the GuLF STUDY and chief of the NIEHS Epidemiology Branch, updated members of the media, the public, and study participants on the progress of the study. More than 30 reporters participated in the call, and in the days that followed, several hundred media outlets published stories about the GuLF STUDY. On April 17, Sandler presented a similar overview to NIEHS staff, at the request of David Miller, Ph.D., head of the NIEHS Laboratory of Toxicology and Pharmacology. Stay engaged, get second health exam Sandler emphasized that while much progress has been made, study participants need to stay involved over the long term. Researchers are contacting all participants to conduct telephone interviews on current health status. In addition, they are inviting participants living within 60 miles of Mobile, Ala. and New Orleans to take part in a second comprehensive health exam. NIEHS has partnered with health clinics at the University of South Alabama College of Medicine (http://www.usahealthsystem.com/com) and Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center School of Medicine (http://www.medschool.lsuhsc.edu/) to conduct the health exams, which will focus on neurological, respiratory, and mental health issues.
    [Show full text]
  • Bayesian Models for Analyzing Worker Exposure to Airborne Chemicals During the Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill Cleanup and Response
    Bayesian Models for Analyzing Worker Exposure to Airborne Chemicals During the Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill Cleanup and Response A THESIS SUBMITTED TO THE FACULTY OF THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA BY Caroline P. Groth IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Sudipto Banerjee Gurumurthy Ramachandran July, 2017 c Caroline P. Groth 2017 ALL RIGHTS RESERVED Acknowledgements I would like to thank members of the GuLF STUDY including Mark Stenzel, Patri- cia Stewart, Dale Sandler (PI), Richard Kwok (Co-PI), Lawrence Engel, Aaron Blair, Tran Huynh, Harrison Quick, Sudipto Banerjee, Gurumurthy Ramachandran, Wendy McDowell, Caitlin Roush, and Susan Arnold. I would especially like to thank my primary advisor Sudipto Banerjee for his support and encouragement throughout my dissertation. Without his support, this would not have been possible. I would also like to thank Mark Stenzel and Patricia Stewart for their efforts co- ordinating the exposure assessment effort. Their expertise in industrial hygiene and chemistry allowed us to develop the models enclosed in this dissertation. Additionally, I would like to thank Harrison Quick for teaching me Bayesian statistics my first year and acting like a mentor to me over the years. I would also like to especially thank Lynn Eberly for serving as a research mentor for me while my advisors have been away. Finally, I would like to thank the participants in the GuLF STUDY. Without their participation in this study, this research would not be possible. This research was supported by the Intramural Research Program of the NIH, Na- tional Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (Z01 ES102945) and the NIH Com- mon Fund.
    [Show full text]
  • What Caused the Blowout Preventer to Fail?
    Vol. 34 No. 15 31 March 2011 What Caused the Blowout Preventer to Fail? Det Norske Veritas (DNV) recently released a lengthy Electronic control pods are used to communicate report detailing the company’s forensic examination with the control panel on the rig and then activate of the Deepwater Horizon blowout preventer solenoids that, in turn, operate “various hydraulic (BOP), the failed “last line of defense” against the circuits and mechanical components on the blowout that occurred on 20 April 2010 at BP plc’s BOP Stack.” Macondo/MC252 well (see OSIR, 29 April 2010 and subsequent issues). The forensic investigation of the On the evening of 20 April 2010, the upper annular BOP is only a small part of the Joint Investigation (UA) of the Macondo/MC252 well was closed as (JI) of the event by the US Bureau of Ocean part of a series of two negative pressure tests. About Energy Management, Regulation and Enforcement 30 minutes after completing the second test, well (BOEMRE) and the US Coast Guard (USCG). An fluids started spilling onto the rig floor. The first additional report from the JI regarding the BOP is explosion is believed to have occurred at 21:49; the expected to be released within the next month; a Emergency Disconnect Sequence (EDS) activated full investigative report, addressing other aspects of from the bridge was noted at 21:56. It appears that the blowout, including the loss of 11 rig workers, is sometime between test completion and the activation of anticipated to be released later this summer. the EDS, the upper VBRs were closed and locked an action consistent with well control procedures.
    [Show full text]
  • Seagrass Communities of the Gulf Coast of Florida: Status and Ecology
    CLINTON J. DAWES August 2004 RONALD C. PHILLIPS GEROLD MORRISON CLINTON J. DAWES University of South Florida Tampa, Florida, USA RONALD C. PHILLIPS Institute of Biology of the Southern Seas Sevastopol, Crimea, Ukraine GEROLD MORRISON Environmental Protection Commission of Hillsborough County Tampa, Florida, USA August 2004 COPIES This document may be obtained from the following agencies: Tampa Bay Estuary Program FWC Fish and Wildlife Research Institute 100 8th Avenue SE 100 8th Avenue SE Mail Station I-1/NEP ATTN: Librarian St. Petersburg, FL 33701-5020 St. Petersburg, FL 33701-5020 Tel 727-893-2765 Fax 727-893-2767 Tel 727-896-8626 Fax 727-823-0166 www.tbep.org http://research.MyFWC.com CITATION Dawes, C.J., R.C. Phillips, and G. Morrison. 2004. Seagrass Communities of the Gulf Coast of Florida: Status and Ecology. Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission Fish and Wildlife Research Institute and the Tampa Bay Estuary Program. St. Petersburg, FL. iv + 74 pp. AUTHORS Clinton J. Dawes, Ph.D. Distinguished University Research Professor University of South Florida Department of Biology Tampa, FL 33620 [email protected] Ronald C. Phillips, Ph.D. Associate Institute of Biology of the Southern Seas 2, Nakhimov Ave. Sevastopol 99011 Crimea, Ukraine [email protected] Gerold Morrison, Ph.D. Director, Environmental Resource Management Environmental Protection Commission of Hillsborough County 3629 Queen Palm Drive Tampa, FL 33619 813-272-5960 ext 1025 [email protected] ii TABLE of CONTENTS iv Foreword and Acknowledgements 1 Introduction 6 Distribution, Status, and Trends 15 Autecology and Population Genetics 28 Ecological Roles 42 Natural and Anthropogenic Effects 49 Appendix: Taxonomy of Florida Seagrasses 55 References iii FOREWORD The waters along Florida’s Gulf of Mexico coastline, which stretches from the tropical Florida Keys in the south to the temperate Panhandle in the north, contain the most extensive and diverse seagrass meadows in the United States.
    [Show full text]
  • Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill Exposures and Nonfatal Myocardial Infarction in the Gulf STUDY Jean Strelitz1 , Lawrence S
    Strelitz et al. Environmental Health (2018) 17:69 https://doi.org/10.1186/s12940-018-0408-8 RESEARCH Open Access Deepwater Horizon oil spill exposures and nonfatal myocardial infarction in the GuLF STUDY Jean Strelitz1 , Lawrence S. Engel1,2, Richard K. Kwok2, Aubrey K. Miller2, Aaron Blair3 and Dale P. Sandler2* Abstract Background: Workers involved in the response and clean-up of the 2010 Deepwater Horizon oil spill faced possible exposures to crude oil, burning oil, dispersants and other pollutants in addition to physical and emotional stress. These exposures may have increased risk of myocardial infarction (MI) among oil spill workers. Methods: Gulf Long-term Follow-up (GuLF) STUDY participants comprise individuals who either participated in the Deepwater Horizon response efforts or registered for safety training but were not hired. Oil spill-related exposures were assessed during enrollment interviews conducted in 2011–2013. We estimated risk ratios (RR) and 95% confidence intervals for the associations of clean-up work characteristics with self-reported nonfatal MI up to three years post-spill. Results: Among 31,109 participants without history of MI prior to the spill, 77% worked on the oil spill. There were 192 self-reported MI during the study period; 151 among workers. Among the full cohort, working on the oil spill clean-up (vs not working on the clean-up) and living in proximity to the oil spill (vs further away) were suggestively associated with a possible increased risk of nonfatal MI [RR: 1.22 (0.86, 1.73) and 1.15 (0.82, 1.60), respectively]. Among oil spill workers, working for > 180 days was associated with MI [RR for > 180 days (vs 1–30 days): 2.05 (1.05, 4.01)], as was stopping working due to heat [RR: 1.99 (1.43, 2.78)].
    [Show full text]
  • Contents Oct
    Contents OCT. 09, 2020 (click on page numbers for links) CHEMICAL EFFECTS CONTACT US Four-week inhalation toxicity study of 1-propanol in F344 rats ......................... 3 Toxicity and deleterious effects of Artemisia annua essential oil [email protected] extracts on mulberry pyralid (Glyphodes pyloalis) .................................................... 3 tel +61 3 9572 4700 fax +61 3 9572 4777 ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH Valorisation of Fruits, their Juices and Residues into Valuable 1227 Glen Huntly Rd (Nano)materials for Applications in Chemical Catalysis and Environment .. 4 Glen Huntly Rethinking Environmental Carcinogenesis .................................................................. 5 Victoria 3163 Australia Hazardous air pollutants and telomere length in the Sister Study .................. 5 OCCUPATIONAL Estimates of Occupational Inhalation Exposures to Six Oil-Related Compounds on the Four Rig Vessels Responding to the Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill ......................................................................................................................... 6 Assessment of occupational exposure to fine particulate matter in dental prosthesis laboratories in Kocaeli, Turkey .................................................... 8 Respiratory Health and Inflammatory Markers-Exposure to Cobalt in the Swedish Hard Metal Industry ............................................................................... 8 PHARAMACEUTICAL/TOXICOLOGY Contamination, suffering and womanhood: Lay explanations of breast cancer
    [Show full text]
  • Bp Oil Spill: Human Exposure and Environmental Fate
    THE BP OIL SPILL: HUMAN EXPOSURE AND ENVIRONMENTAL FATE HEARING BEFORE THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENT OF THE COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND COMMERCE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES ONE HUNDRED ELEVENTH CONGRESS SECOND SESSION JUNE 10, 2010 Serial No. 111–132 ( Printed for the use of the Committee on Energy and Commerce energycommerce.house.gov U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 77–909 WASHINGTON : 2013 For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800 Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001 VerDate Mar 15 2010 00:18 Feb 20, 2013 Jkt 077909 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 5011 Sfmt 5011 E:\HR\OC\A909.XXX A909 pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with HEARING COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND COMMERCE HENRY A. WAXMAN, California, Chairman JOHN D. DINGELL, Michigan JOE BARTON, Texas Chairman Emeritus Ranking Member EDWARD J. MARKEY, Massachusetts RALPH M. HALL, Texas RICK BOUCHER, Virginia FRED UPTON, Michigan FRANK PALLONE, JR., New Jersey CLIFF STEARNS, Florida BART GORDON, Tennessee NATHAN DEAL, Georgia BOBBY L. RUSH, Illinois ED WHITFIELD, Kentucky ANNA G. ESHOO, California JOHN SHIMKUS, Illinois BART STUPAK, Michigan JOHN B. SHADEGG, Arizona ELIOT L. ENGEL, New York ROY BLUNT, Missouri GENE GREEN, Texas STEVE BUYER, Indiana DIANA DEGETTE, Colorado GEORGE RADANOVICH, California Vice Chairman JOSEPH R. PITTS, Pennsylvania LOIS CAPPS, California MARY BONO MACK, California MICHAEL F. DOYLE, Pennsylvania GREG WALDEN, Oregon JANE HARMAN, California LEE TERRY, Nebraska TOM ALLEN, Maine MIKE ROGERS, Michigan JANICE D. SCHAKOWSKY, Illinois SUE WILKINS MYRICK, North Carolina CHARLES A.
    [Show full text]