DOCSLIB.ORG

Federal Register/Vol. 85, No. 185/Wednesday, September 23

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Federal Register/Vol. 85, No. 185/Wednesday, September 23 59788 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 185 / Wednesday, September 23, 2020 / Notices do not include confidential or a. Which requirements of the CIP an original of their comments to: proprietary information, CEII, or other Reliability Standards, including Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, sensitive or classified information in complementary requirements across the CIP Secretary of the Commission, 888 First Reliability Standards, require entities to take your responses. actions that detect and mitigate the risks Street NE, Washington, DC 20426. Q1. To what extent is the equipment associated with the use of equipment and 24. All comments will be placed in (including components) and services services provided by Covered Companies? the Commission’s public files and may provided by Covered Companies used in the b. What modifications to the CIP Standards be viewed, printed, or downloaded operation of the bulk electric system? would minimize risks associated with remotely as described in the Document a. What methods could be used to ascertain equipment and services provided by the Availability section below. Commenters the extent to which equipment and services Covered Companies? on this proposal are not required to provided by Covered Companies is used in Q4. Describe any strategies, in addition to serve copies of their comments on other the operation of the bulk electric system? compliance with the CIP Reliability b. Describe any potential complications to Standards, entities have implemented or plan commenters. system operations that may result from to implement to mitigate the risks associated IV. Document Availability implementing such methods (e.g., need to with use of equipment and services provided shut down certain activities to perform by Covered Companies. 25. In addition to publishing the full testing). Q5. What other methods could the text of this document in the Federal Q2. Describe the risks to bulk electric Commission employ outside the CIP Register, the Commission provides all system reliability and security posed by the Reliability Standards, whether through interested persons an opportunity to use of equipment and services provided by regulatory action or through voluntary view and/or print the contents of this Covered Companies? collaboration with industry and government, a. Describe the range of potential security to further address the risks to bulk electric document via the internet through the impacts to bulk electric system reliability system reliability and security posed by the Commission’s Home Page (http:// that could occur if a responsible entity uses use of equipment and services provided by www.ferc.gov) and in the Commission’s the equipment and services provided by the Covered Companies? For example, raising Public Reference Room during normal Covered Companies within its real-time awareness about the risks identified in business hours (8:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. operations infrastructure and the equipment response to the previous questions, eastern time) at 888 First Street NE, was compromised. identifying potential solutions, and assisting Room 2A, Washington, DC 20426. b. If equipment and services provided by with mitigating actions (including the Covered Companies is installed in a facilitating information sharing)? 26. From the Commission’s Home responsible entity’s real-time operations a. Describe how your organization is Page on the internet, this information is infrastructure, what controls are in place to informed of the risks to bulk electric system available on eLibrary. The full text of prevent or detect compromise? What controls reliability and security posed by the use of this document is available on eLibrary are in place to mitigate the potential effects equipment and services provided by Covered in PDF and Microsoft Word format for of compromise? Companies and what could be done to viewing, printing, and/or downloading. c. Describe the range of potential security improve this process. To access this document in eLibrary, impacts to bulk electric system reliability b. What actions has your organization type the docket number excluding the from a compromise of a responsible entity’s taken to address these risks and what systems related to non-real time bulk electric impediments exist to do so (i.e., such as last three digits of this document in the system operations (e.g., operations planning) procurement process requirements)? docket number field. resulting from the use of equipment and c. What challenges does your organization 27. User assistance is available for services provided by Covered Companies. face when identifying, containing or eLibrary and the Commission’s web site d. If equipment and services provided by removing equipment that presents supply during normal business hours from the Covered Companies is installed in a non-real chain threats from Covered Companies? Commission’s Online Support at (202) time environment (e.g. operations planning), III. Comment Procedures 502–6652 (toll free at 1–866–208–3676) what controls are in place to prevent or or email at [email protected], detect compromise? What controls are in 21. The Commission invites interested or the Public Reference Room at (202) place to mitigate the potential effects of persons to submit comments on the 502–8371, TTY (202) 502–8659. Email compromise? matters and issues proposed in this the Public Reference Room at e. Describe the potential range of security notice, including any related matters or [email protected]. impacts to bulk electric system reliability alternative proposals that commenters from a compromise of responsible entity’s By direction of the Commission. systems related to non-bulk electric system may wish to discuss. Comments are due communications and operations (e.g., November 23, 2020, and Reply Issued: September 17, 2020. business networks and systems not directly Comments are due December 22, 2020. Kimberly D. Bose, related to bulk electric system operations) Comments must refer to Docket No. Secretary. resulting from the use of equipment and RM20–19–000, and must include the [FR Doc. 2020–20987 Filed 9–22–20; 8:45 am] services provided by Covered Companies. commenter’s name, the organization BILLING CODE 6717–01–P f. If equipment and services provided by they represent, if applicable, and their Covered Companies is installed in a non-bulk address. electric system communications and 22. The Commission encourages operations environment (e.g., business networks and systems not directly related to comments to be filed electronically via ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION bulk electric system operations), what the eFiling link on the Commission’s AGENCY controls are in place to prevent or detect web site at http://www.ferc.gov. The compromise? What controls are in place to Commission accepts most standard [FRL–10013–52–Region 3] mitigate the potential effects of compromise? word-processing formats. Documents What controls are in place to prevent created electronically using word- compromise of business network or systems Clean Water Act: Maryland–City of processing software should be filed in Annapolis and Anne Arundel County from migrating and impacting bulk electric native applications or print-to-PDF system operations? Vessel Sewage No-Discharge Zone for Q3. Discuss the effectiveness of the current format and not in a scanned format. Thirteen Waters—Tentative Affirmative CIP Reliability Standards in mitigating the Commenters filing electronically do not Determination risks posed by equipment and services need to make a paper filing. provided by Covered Companies used in the 23. Commenters that are not able to AGENCY: Environmental Protection operation of the bulk electric system. file comments electronically must send Agency (EPA). VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:02 Sep 22, 2020 Jkt 250001 PO 00000 Frm 00054 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\23SEN1.SGM 23SEN1 khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 185 / Wednesday, September 23, 2020 / Notices 59789 ACTION: Notice of tentative affirmative dnr.maryland.gov/boating/Documents/ Fishing Creek). While these waterbodies determination. AANDZApplication.pdf. constitute nearly all of the county’s DATES: Comments must be received in waters, a few water bodies have been SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that an writing to EPA on or before October 23, excluded. The exclusions include two application for a no-discharge zone has 2020. inter-jurisdictional rivers that border the been received from the Secretary of county (the Patapsco River and Patuxent Natural Resources and Secretary of the ADDRESSES: Comments should be sent to River), as well as Curtis Creek, which Environment on behalf of the State of Matthew A. Konfirst, U.S. creates additional inter-jurisdictional Maryland requesting a determination by Environmental Protection Agency— complications for no-discharge zone the Regional Administrator, U.S. Mid-Atlantic Region, 1650 Arch Street, management and is also the most Environmental Protection Agency Mail Code 3WD31, Philadelphia, PA heavily industrialized creek in the (EPA), Region 3, that adequate facilities 19103–2029, or emailed to county with limited recreational boating for the safe and sanitary removal and [email protected]. Only written activity. Maryland’s proposed NDZ for treatment of sewage from all vessels are comments will be considered. the 13 water bodies if approved would reasonably available for thirteen waters FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: total 27,379 acres, which would add to located in
Load more

Recommended publications
  • No-Discharge Zones for Vessel Sewage in Maryland and Virginia
    This document is scheduled to be published in the Federal Register on 05/11/2021 and available online at federalregister.gov/d/2021-09957, and on govinfo.gov 6560-50-P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [FRL 10021-74-Region 3] Clean Water Act: No-Discharge Zones for Vessel Sewage in Maryland and Virginia AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Notice–final determination. SUMMARY: On behalf of the State of Maryland, the Secretary of the Maryland Department of Natural Resources requested that the Regional Administrator, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 3 approve a no-discharge zone for thirteen water bodies in Anne Arundel County, Maryland pursuant to the Clean Water Act. After review of Maryland’s application, EPA determined that adequate facilities for the safe and sanitary removal and treatment of sewage from all vessels are reasonable available for all thirteen waterbodies within Anne Arundel County. The application is available upon request from EPA (at the email address below). DATES: This approval is effective upon the date of publication in the Federal Register on [INSTERT DATE OF PUBLICATION IN THE FEDERAL REGISTER]. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ferry Akbar Buchanan, U. S. Environmental Protection Agency – Region III. Telephone: (215) 814-2570; email address: [email protected]. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant to Clean Water Act section 312(f)(3), if any state determines that the protection and enhancement of the quality of some or all of the state’s waters require greater environmental protection, the state may designate the waters as a vessel sewage no-discharge zone. However, the state may not establish the no-discharge zone until EPA has determined that adequate pumpout facilities for the safe and sanitary removal and treatment of sewage from all vessels are reasonably available for the proposed waters.
    [Show full text]
  • Title 26 Department of the Environment, Subtitle 08 Water
    Presented below are water quality standards that are in effect for Clean Water Act purposes. EPA is posting these standards as a convenience to users and has made a reasonable effort to assure their accuracy. Additionally, EPA has made a reasonable effort to identify parts of the standards that are not approved, disapproved, or are otherwise not in effect for Clean Water Act purposes. Title 26 DEPARTMENT OF THE ENVIRONMENT Subtitle 08 WATER POLLUTION Chapters 01-10 2 26.08.01.00 Title 26 DEPARTMENT OF THE ENVIRONMENT Subtitle 08 WATER POLLUTION Chapter 01 General Authority: Environment Article, §§9-313—9-316, 9-319, 9-320, 9-325, 9-327, and 9-328, Annotated Code of Maryland 3 26.08.01.01 .01 Definitions. A. General. (1) The following definitions describe the meaning of terms used in the water quality and water pollution control regulations of the Department of the Environment (COMAR 26.08.01—26.08.04). (2) The terms "discharge", "discharge permit", "disposal system", "effluent limitation", "industrial user", "national pollutant discharge elimination system", "person", "pollutant", "pollution", "publicly owned treatment works", and "waters of this State" are defined in the Environment Article, §§1-101, 9-101, and 9-301, Annotated Code of Maryland. The definitions for these terms are provided below as a convenience, but persons affected by the Department's water quality and water pollution control regulations should be aware that these definitions are subject to amendment by the General Assembly. B. Terms Defined. (1) "Acute toxicity" means the capacity or potential of a substance to cause the onset of deleterious effects in living organisms over a short-term exposure as determined by the Department.
    [Show full text]
  • NON-TIDAL BENTHIC MONITORING DATABASE: Version 3.5
    NON-TIDAL BENTHIC MONITORING DATABASE: Version 3.5 DATABASE DESIGN DOCUMENTATION AND DATA DICTIONARY 1 June 2013 Prepared for: United States Environmental Protection Agency Chesapeake Bay Program 410 Severn Avenue Annapolis, Maryland 21403 Prepared By: Interstate Commission on the Potomac River Basin 51 Monroe Street, PE-08 Rockville, Maryland 20850 Prepared for United States Environmental Protection Agency Chesapeake Bay Program 410 Severn Avenue Annapolis, MD 21403 By Jacqueline Johnson Interstate Commission on the Potomac River Basin To receive additional copies of the report please call or write: The Interstate Commission on the Potomac River Basin 51 Monroe Street, PE-08 Rockville, Maryland 20850 301-984-1908 Funds to support the document The Non-Tidal Benthic Monitoring Database: Version 3.0; Database Design Documentation And Data Dictionary was supported by the US Environmental Protection Agency Grant CB- CBxxxxxxxxxx-x Disclaimer The opinion expressed are those of the authors and should not be construed as representing the U.S. Government, the US Environmental Protection Agency, the several states or the signatories or Commissioners to the Interstate Commission on the Potomac River Basin: Maryland, Pennsylvania, Virginia, West Virginia or the District of Columbia. ii The Non-Tidal Benthic Monitoring Database: Version 3.5 TABLE OF CONTENTS BACKGROUND ................................................................................................................................................. 3 INTRODUCTION ..............................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Nautical Information for Skippers and Crews
    Sail Plan Pentagon Sailing Club 2016 Memorial Day Raft­up: “STORM FRONT COMING” 28­30 May 2016 Nautical Information for Skippers and Crews FLOAT PLAN ******************************************************************************************** References: NOAA Charts ­12270 Chesapeake Bay – Chesapeake Eastern Bay and South River; 1:40,000 ­12266 Chesapeake Bay – Chesapeake – Choptank and Herring Bay; 1:40,000 ­12280 Chesapeake Bay – 1:200,000 Pentagon Sailing Club Raft­Up Guidelines (revised 06/2005; link online at the PSC site under “Raft­Up”) Saturday, 28 May 16. Sail from Annapolis, MD the Chesapeake Bay to Trippe Creek, vicinity of Choptank River. Raft up Saturday night (see Navigation below). Distance from Annapolis (direct route past Thomas Point to Choptank River, Tred Avon River, then Trippe Creek and raft up location) is approximately 33 nm Sunday, 29 May 16. Exit Trippe Creek, Tred Avon River, then Choptank River to Campbell’s Boatyard LLC, Bachelor’s Point Marina (Oxford, MD). Dinner will be held at “The Masthead at Pier Street Marina” restaurant in Oxford, MD; cocktails from 5pm, and dinner from 6 to 8pm. Monday, 30 May 16. Sail back to respective points of origin NAVIGATION ******************************************************************************************** Saturday, 28 May: Sail from Annapolis, MD to Raft up destination is in the Trippe Creek vic 038º 42.8 North; 076º 07.3 West. See Chart A and B. From Annapolis R “2” Fl R 2.5s (Lat 038º 56.4 N; Lon 076º 25.3 W) ­Sail from R “2” Fl R 2.5s 185º M to WP A (Lat 038º
    [Show full text]
  • Submerged Aquatic Vegetation Protection Zones
    PUBLIC NOTICE The Maryland Department of Natural Resources Fishing and Boating Services Submerged Aquatic Vegetation Protection Zones WHAT THIS NOTICE DOES The Secretary of the Maryland Department of Natural Resources announces delineations of submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV) protection zones. The zones are delineated in the Code of Maryland Regulation (COMAR) 08.02.01.12. The most recent update became effective February 8, 2021. This notice supersedes any notices about delineations of SAV protection zones issued prior to February 8, 2021. PROHIBITED GEAR IN SAV PROTECTION ZONES The use of a hydraulic clam dredge, traditional bottom dredge, or shinnecock rake in an SAV protection zone is prohibited. WHY THIS IS NECESSARY SAV protection zones are delineated for the protection from uprooting and the restoration of SAV. The zones are delineated in accordance with Natural Resources Article, §4-1006.1, Annotated Code of Maryland. AREAS The following areas are SAV protection zones: County of SAV Protection Zone Page Numbers Anne Arundel 1 Calvert 2—3 Dorchester 3—4 Kent 4—5 Queen Anne’s 5—6 Saint Mary’s 6—8 Somerset 8—18 Talbot 18—23 Worcester 23—26 Anne Arundel County All of the waters of Old Colony Cove and Herring Bay enclosed by a line beginning at a point at or near the shore of Old Colony Cove along the shore at the entrance to Herrington Harbour defined by Lat. 38°43.709' N, Long. 76°32.510' W; then running approximately 309° True to a point at or near the shore of Old Colony Cove defined by Lat.
    [Show full text]
  • David Clickner, Et Ux. V. Magothy River Association, Inc., Et Al. No. 13, September Term, 2011, Opinion by Greene, J
    David Clickner, et ux. v. Magothy River Association, Inc., et al. No. 13, September Term, 2011, Opinion by Greene, J. REAL PROPERTY LAW – PRESCRIPTIVE EASEMENTS – Public prescriptive rights may be acquired over privately owned portions of beaches located along inland waterways. It was error, however, for the trial court, under the circumstances of this case, to apply the general presumption of adversity to the public use of a beach that was unimproved and in a general state of nature. Instead, the proper presumption was that public use of the land was by permission of the owners. Therefore, the burden was on the claimants to overcome the presumption of permission by proving that the use was, in fact, adverse. IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF MARYLAND No. 13 September Term, 2011 DAVID CLICKNER, et ux. v. MAGOTHY RIVER ASSOCIATION, INC., et al. Bell, C.J. Harrell Battaglia Greene Adkins Barbera *Murphy, Joseph F., Jr. (Retired, specially assigned), JJ. Opinion by Greene, J. Filed: January 20, 2012 *Murphy, J., participated in the hearing and in the conference of this case in regard to its decision after being recalled pursuant to the Constitution, Art. IV, Sec. 3A but did not participate in the adoption of this opinion. Six individuals and the Magothy River Association, Inc. (collectively, “Association” or “Appellees”) brought suit against the recent purchasers of Dobbins Island, David and Diana Clickner (“Clickners” or “Appellants”), seeking to establish a public right to use a beach located alongside the island’s northern crescent area. Following a bench trial on the merits, the trial judge determined that Appellees had demonstrated the existence of a prescriptive easement on behalf of the public and ordered the removal of portions of a fence erected on the beach by Appellants.
    [Show full text]
  • MDE-Water Pollution
    Presented below are water quality standards that are in effect for Clean Water Act purposes. EPA is posting these standards as a convenience to users and has made a reasonable effort to assure their accuracy. Additionally, EPA has made a reasonable effort to identify parts of the standards that are not approved, disapproved, or are otherwise not in effect for Clean Water Act purposes. Title 26 DEPARTMENT OF THE ENVIRONMENT Subtitle 08 WATER POLLUTION Chapters 01-10 Title 26 DEPARTMENT OF THE ENVIRONMENT ........................................................................................... 1 Subtitle 08 WATER POLLUTION .................................................................................................................... 1 Chapters 01-10 ................................................................................................................................................ 1 Title 26 DEPARTMENT OF THE ENVIRONMENT ........................................................................................... 2 Subtitle 08 WATER POLLUTION .................................................................................................................... 2 Chapter 01 General ......................................................................................................................................... 2 .01 Definitions................................................................................................................................................. 3 .02 Principles of Water Pollution Control....................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Maryland Historical Magazine, 1946, Volume 41, Issue No. 4
    MHRYMnD CWAQAZIU^j MARYLAND HISTORICAL SOCIETY BALTIMORE DECEMBER • 1946 t. IN 1900 Hutzler Brothers Co. annexed the building at 210 N. Howard Street. Most of the additional space was used for the expansion of existing de- partments, but a new shoe shop was installed on the third floor. It is interesting to note that the shoe department has now returned to its original location ... in a greatly expanded form. HUTZLER BPOTHERSe N\S/Vsc5S8M-lW MARYLAND HISTORICAL MAGAZINE A Quarterly Volume XLI DECEMBER, 1946 Number 4 BALTIMORE AND THE CRISIS OF 1861 Introduction by CHARLES MCHENRY HOWARD » HE following letters, copies of letters, and other documents are from the papers of General Isaac Ridgeway Trimble (b. 1805, d. 1888). They are confined to a brief period of great excitement in Baltimore, viz, after the riot of April 19, 1861, when Federal troops were attacked by the mob while being marched through the City streets, up to May 13th of that year, when General Butler, with a large body of troops occupied Federal Hill, after which Baltimore was substantially under control of the 1 Some months before his death in 1942 the late Charles McHenry Howard (a grandson of Charles Howard, president of the Board of Police in 1861) placed the papers here printed in the Editor's hands for examination, and offered to write an introduction if the Committee on Publications found them acceptable for the Magazine. Owing to the extraordinary events related and the revelation of an episode unknown in Baltimore history, Mr. Howard's proposal was promptly accepted.
    [Show full text]
  • Maryland Stream Waders 10 Year Report
    MARYLAND STREAM WADERS TEN YEAR (2000-2009) REPORT October 2012 Maryland Stream Waders Ten Year (2000-2009) Report Prepared for: Maryland Department of Natural Resources Monitoring and Non-tidal Assessment Division 580 Taylor Avenue; C-2 Annapolis, Maryland 21401 1-877-620-8DNR (x8623) [email protected] Prepared by: Daniel Boward1 Sara Weglein1 Erik W. Leppo2 1 Maryland Department of Natural Resources Monitoring and Non-tidal Assessment Division 580 Taylor Avenue; C-2 Annapolis, Maryland 21401 2 Tetra Tech, Inc. Center for Ecological Studies 400 Red Brook Boulevard, Suite 200 Owings Mills, Maryland 21117 October 2012 This page intentionally blank. Foreword This document reports on the firstt en years (2000-2009) of sampling and results for the Maryland Stream Waders (MSW) statewide volunteer stream monitoring program managed by the Maryland Department of Natural Resources’ (DNR) Monitoring and Non-tidal Assessment Division (MANTA). Stream Waders data are intended to supplementt hose collected for the Maryland Biological Stream Survey (MBSS) by DNR and University of Maryland biologists. This report provides an overview oft he Program and summarizes results from the firstt en years of sampling. Acknowledgments We wish to acknowledge, first and foremost, the dedicated volunteers who collected data for this report (Appendix A): Thanks also to the following individuals for helping to make the Program a success. • The DNR Benthic Macroinvertebrate Lab staffof Neal Dziepak, Ellen Friedman, and Kerry Tebbs, for their countless hours in
    [Show full text]
  • Summary of Decisions Regarding Nutrient and Sediment Load Allocations and New Submerged Aquatic Vegetation (SAV) Restoration Goals
    To: Principal Staff Committee Members and Representatives of Chesapeake Bay “Headwater” States From: W. Tayloe Murphy, Jr., Chair Chesapeake Bay Program Principals’ Staff Committee Subject: Summary of Decisions Regarding Nutrient and Sediment Load Allocations and New Submerged Aquatic Vegetation (SAV) Restoration Goals For the past twenty years, the Chesapeake Bay partners have been committed to achieving and maintaining water quality conditions necessary to support living resources throughout the Chesapeake Bay ecosystem. In the past month, Chesapeake Bay Program partners (Maryland, Virginia, Pennsylvania, the District of Columbia, the Environmental Protection Agency and the Chesapeake Bay Commission) have expanded our efforts by working with the headwater states of Delaware, West Virginia and New York to adopt new cap load allocations for nitrogen, phosphorus and sediment. Using the best scientific information available, Bay Program partners have agreed to allocations that are intended to meet the needs of the plants and animals that call the Chesapeake home. The allocations will serve as a basis for each state’s tributary strategies that, when completed by April 2004, will describe local implementation actions necessary to meet the Chesapeake 2000 nutrient and sediment loading goals by 2010. This memorandum summarizes the important, comprehensive agreements made by Bay watershed partners with regard to cap load allocations for nitrogen, phosphorus and sediments, as well as new baywide and local SAV restoration goals. Nutrient Allocations Excessive nutrients in the Chesapeake Bay and its tidal tributaries promote undesirable algal growth, and thereby, prohibit light from reaching underwater bay grasses (submerged aquatic vegetation or SAV) and depress the dissolved oxygen levels of the deeper waters of the Bay.
    [Show full text]
  • River Herring Program – 2009‐2016 Grants
    River Herring Program – 2009‐2016 Grants RIVER HERRING PROGRAM River Herring NORTHEAST REGION Assessing Sustainability of Maine River Herring Runs Maine Department of Marine Resources Maine Award Amount....................................................................... $400,483 Grantee Match ...................................................................... $415,340 Total Project ............................................................................ $815,823 Collect river herring population data on numerous rivers in order to create management and harvest models to help ensure the sustainability of the fishery. Project will also hire an education specialist to work with inland communities to help gain acceptance for reintroduction of river herring. River Herring Bycatch Avoidance in Small Mesh Fisheries (MA) University of Massachusetts Massachusetts Award Amount....................................................................... $305,640 Grantee Match ...................................................................... $376,929 Total Project ............................................................................ $682,569 Develop river herring bycatch avoidance incentive systems based on models that identify and predict high concentrations of river herring. Project will help to minimize bycatch of river herring in the Atlantic herring and mackerel fisheries in New England. Updated May 2017 River Herring Program – 2009‐2016 Grants Identification and Modeling of Alewife Stock Structure Gulf of Maine Research Institute
    [Show full text]
  • Nesting in Chesapeake Bay Regions of Concern
    W&M ScholarWorks VIMS Articles Virginia Institute of Marine Science 9-2015 Decadal re-evaluation of contaminant exposure and productivity of ospreys (Pandion haliaetus) nesting in Chesapeake Bay Regions of Concern RS Lazarus BA Rattner PC McGowan Robert Hale Virginia Institute of Marine Science et al Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.wm.edu/vimsarticles Part of the Environmental Sciences Commons Recommended Citation Lazarus, RS; Rattner, BA; McGowan, PC; Hale, Robert; and al, et, "Decadal re-evaluation of contaminant exposure and productivity of ospreys (Pandion haliaetus) nesting in Chesapeake Bay Regions of Concern" (2015). VIMS Articles. 1661. https://scholarworks.wm.edu/vimsarticles/1661 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Virginia Institute of Marine Science at W&M ScholarWorks. It has been accepted for inclusion in VIMS Articles by an authorized administrator of W&M ScholarWorks. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Environmental Pollution 205 (2015) 278e290 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Environmental Pollution journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/envpol Decadal re-evaluation of contaminant exposure and productivity of ospreys (Pandion haliaetus) nesting in Chesapeake Bay Regions of Concern * Rebecca S. Lazarus a, b, Barnett A. Rattner a, , Peter C. McGowan c, Robert C. Hale d, Sandra L. Schultz a, Natalie K. Karouna-Renier a, Mary Ann Ottinger b, 1 a U.S. Geological Survey, Patuxent Wildlife Research Center, Beltsville, MD 20705, USA b Marine-Estuarine Environmental Sciences Program and Department of Animal and Avian Sciences, University of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742, USA c U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Chesapeake Bay Field Office, Annapolis, MD 21401, USA d Virginia Institute of Marine Science, College of William and Mary, Gloucester Point, VA 23062, USA article info abstract Article history: The last large-scale ecotoxicological study of ospreys (Pandion haliaetus) in Chesapeake Bay was con- Received 30 March 2015 ducted in 2000e2001 and focused on U.S.
    [Show full text]