11-19-07 Science Advisory Board (sab) Hypoxia Panel Draft Advisory Report Do Not Cite or Quote




Название11-19-07 Science Advisory Board (sab) Hypoxia Panel Draft Advisory Report Do Not Cite or Quote
страница2/56
Дата22.10.2012
Размер1.55 Mb.
ТипДокументы
1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   ...   56


Dr. Thomas Armitage, Designated Federal Officer, EPA Science Advisory Board Staff Office, Washington, D.C.


Mr. David Wangsness, Designated Federal Officer, Senior Scientist on detail to SAB, U.S. Geological Survey, Atlanta, GA

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Science Advisory Board

BOARD


CHAIR

Dr. M. Granger Morgan, Lord Chair Professor in Engineering; Professor and Department Head, Department of Engineering and Public Policy, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA


SAB MEMBERS

Dr. Gregory Biddinger, Coordinator, Natural Land Management Programs, Toxicicology and Environmental Sciences, ExxonMobil Biomedical Sciences, Houston, TX


Dr. Thomas Burke, Professor and Co-Director Risk Sciences and Public Policy Institute, Bloomberg School of Public Health, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD


Dr. James Bus, Director of External Technology, Toxicology and Environmental Research and Consulting, Dow Chemical Company, Midland, MI


Dr. Deborah Cory-Slechta, J. Lowell Orbison Distinguished Alumni Professor of Environmental Medicine, Department of Environmental Medicine, School of Medicine and Dentistry, University of Rochester, Rochester, NY


Dr. Maureen L. Cropper, Professor, Department of Economics, University of Maryland, College Park, MD


Dr. Virginia Dale, Corporate Fellow, Environmental Sciences Division, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, TN


Dr. David Dzombak, Professor, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA


Dr. Baruch Fischhoff, Howard Heinz University Professor, Department of Social and Decision Sciences, Department of Engineering and Public Policy, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA


Dr. James Galloway, Professor, Department of Environmental Sciences, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA


Dr. James K. Hammitt, Professor of Economics and Decision Sciences, Harvard Center for Risk Analysis, Harvard University, Boston, MA


Dr. Rogene Henderson, Scientist Emeritus, Lovelace Respiratory Research Institute, Albuquerque, NM


Dr. James H. Johnson, Professor and Dean, College of Engineering, Architecture & Computer Sciences, Howard University, Washington, DC


Dr. Bernd Kahn, Professor Emeritus and Director, Environmental Resources Center, School of Nuclear Engineering and Health Physics, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA


Dr. Agnes Kane, Professor and Chair, Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Brown University, Providence, RI


Dr. Meryl Karol, Professor Emerita, Graduate School of Public Health, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA


Dr. Catherine Kling, Professor, Department of Economics, Iowa State University, Ames, IA


Dr. George Lambert, Associate Professor of Pediatrics, Director, Center for Childhood Neurotoxicology, Robert Wood Johnson Medical School-UMDNJ, Belle Mead, NJ


Dr. Jill Lipoti, Director, Division of Environmental Safety and Health, New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection, Trenton, NJ

Dr. Michael J. McFarland, Associate Professor, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Utah State University, Logan, UT


Dr. Judith L. Meyer, Distinguished Research Professor Emeritus, Institute of Ecology, University of Georgia, Lopez Island, WA


Dr. Jana Milford, Associate Professor, Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Colorado, Boulder, CO


Dr. Rebecca Parkin, Professor and Associate Dean, Environmental and Occupational Health, School of Public Health and Health Services, The George Washington University Medical Center, Washington, DC


Mr. David Rejeski, Director, Foresight and Governance Project, Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, Washington, DC


Dr. Stephen M. Roberts, Professor, Department of Physiological Sciences, Director, Center for Environmental and Human Toxicology, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL


Dr. Joan B. Rose, Professor and Homer Nowlin Chair for Water Research, Department of Fisheries and Wildlife, Michigan State University


Dr. James Sanders, Director, Skidaway Institute of Oceanography, University of Georgia, Savannah, GA


Dr. Jerald Schnoor, Allen S. Henry Chair Professor, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Co-Director, Center for Global and Regional Environmental Research, University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA


Dr. Kathleen Segerson, Professor, Department of Economics, University of Connecticut, Storrs, CT


Dr. Kristin Shrader-Frechette, O'Neil Professor of Philosophy, Department of Biological Sciences and Philosophy Department, University of Notre Dame, Notre Dame, IN


Dr. Philip Singer, Professor, Department of Environmental Sciences and Engineering, School of Public Health, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC


Dr. Kerry Smith, W.P. Carey Professor of Economics, Dept. of Economics, Carey School of Business, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ


Dr. Deborah Swackhamer, Interim Director and Professor, Institute on the Environment, University of Minnesota, St. Paul, MN


Dr. Thomas L. Theis, Director, Institute for Environmental Science and Policy, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, IL


Dr. Valerie Thomas, Anderson Interface Associate Professor, School of Industrial and Systems Engineering, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA


Dr. Barton H. (Buzz) Thompson, Jr., Robert E. Paradise Professor of Natural Resources Law at the Stanford Law School and Director, Woods Institute for the Environment Director, Stanford University, Stanford, CA


Dr. Robert Twiss, Professor Emeritus, University of California-Berkeley, Ross, CA


Dr. Lauren Zeise, Chief, Reproductive and Cancer Hazard Assessment Branch, Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment, California Environmental Protection Agency, Oakland, CA


SCIENCE ADVISORY BOARD STAFF

Mr. Thomas Miller, Designated Federal Officer, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW

1400F, Washington, DC, 20460, Phone: 202-343-9982, Fax: 202-233-0643, (miller.tom@epa.gov)


Table of Contents


1. Introduction 10

1.1. Hypoxia and the Northern Gulf of Mexico – A Brief Overview 10

1.2. Science and Management Goals for Reducing Hypoxia 12

1.3. EPA Science Advisory Board (SAB) Hypoxia Advisory Panel 14

1.4. The SAB Panel’s Approach 16

2. Characterization of Hypoxia 18

2.1. Processes in the Formation of Hypoxia in the Gulf of Mexico. 18

2.1.1. Historical Patterns and Evidence for Hypoxia on the Shelf 18

2.1.2. The Physical Context 21

2.1.3. Role of N and P in Controlling Primary Production 32

2.1.4. Other Limiting Factors and the Role of Si 38

2.1.5. Sources of Organic Matter to the Hypoxic Zone 40

2.1.6. Denitrification, P Burial, and Nutrient Recycling 46

2.1.7. Possible Regime Shift in the Gulf of Mexico 49

2.1.8. Single Versus Dual Nutrient Removal Strategies 52

2.1.9. Current State of Forecasting 55

3. Nutrient Fate, Transport, and Sources 61

3.1. Temporal Characteristics of Streamflow and Nutrient Flux 61

3.1.1. MARB Annual and Seasonal Fluxes 67

3.1.2. Subbasin Annual and Seasonal Flux 75

3.1.3. Key Findings and Recommendations on Temporal Characteristics 86

3.2. Mass Balance of Nutrients 88

3.3. Nutrient Transport Processes 102

3.4. Ability to Route and Predict Nutrient Delivery to the Gulf 112

4. Scientific Basis for Goals and Management Options 125

4.1. Adaptive Management 125

4.2. Setting Targets for Nitrogen and Phosphorus Reduction 130

4.3. Protecting Water Quality and Social Welfare in the Basin 136

4.4. Cost-Effective Approaches for Non-point Source Control 148

4.4.1. Voluntary programs – without economic incentives 149

4.4.2. Existing Agricultural Conservation Programs 150

4.4.3. Emissions and Water Quality Trading Programs 152

4.4.4. Agricultural Subsidies and Conservation Compliance Provisions 153

4.4.5. Taxes 156

4.4.6. Eco-labeling and Consumer Driven Demand 156

4.4.7. Key Findings and Recommendations on Cost Effective Approaches 157

4.5. Options for Managing Nutrients, Co-benefits, and Consequences 159

4.5.1. Agricultural drainage 159

4.5.2. Freshwater Wetlands 161

4.5.3. Conservation Buffers 166

4.5.4. Cropping systems 171

4.5.5. Animal Production Systems 173

4.5.6. In-field Nutrient Management 180

4.5.7. Effective Actions for Other Non-Point Sources 200

4.5.8. Most Effective Actions for Industrial and Municipal Sources 203

4.5.9. Ethanol and Water Quality in the MARB 207

4.5.10. Integrating Conservation Options 213

5. Summary of Findings and Recommendations 223

5.1. Charge Questions on Characterization of Hypoxia 223

5.2. Charge Questions on Nutrient Fate, Transport and Sources 225

5.3. Charge Questions on Goals and Management Options 227

5.4. Conclusion 229



Table of Figures


Figure 1: Map of the frequency of hypoxia in the northern Gulf of Mexico, 1985-2005. Taken from N.N. Rabalais, LUMCON, 2006. 10

Figure 2: Map showing the extent of the Mississippi-Atchafalaya River basin. 11

Figure 3: Plots of the PEB index (%PEB) in sediment cores from the Louisiana shelf. Higher values of the PEB index indicate lower dissolved oxygen contents in bottom waters. Taken from Osterman et al. (2005). 20

Figure 4: Change in the relative importance of the Atchafalaya flow to the combined flows from the Mississippi and Atchafalaya Rivers over the 20th Century. Reprinted from Bratkovich et al. (1994). 24

Figure 5: Modelled surface salinity showing the freshwater plumes from the Atchafalaya and Mississippi Rivers during upwelling favorable winds (top panel) and during downwelling favorable winds 8 days later (bottom panel). Adapted from Hetland and DiMarco (2007). 26

Figure 6: Proposed diversions of Mississippi effluents for coastal protection. From Coastal Protection and Restoration Authority (CPRA) of Louisiana, 2007 Integrated Ecosystem Restoration and Hurricane Protection: Louisiana’s Comprehensive Master Plan for a Sustainable Coast. CPRA, Office of the Governor (La) 117 pp. 27

Figure 7: An illustration depicting different zones (Zones 1-4, numbered above) in the NGOM during the period when hypoxia can occur. These zones are controlled by differing physical, chemical, and biological processes, are variable in size, and move temporally and spatially. Diagram created by D. Gilbert. 29

Figure 8: Response of natural phytoplankton assemblages from coastal NGOM stations to nutrient additions, March through September. All experiments, except those done in September, indicate a strong response to P additions. Taken from Sylvan et al., 2006. 34

Figure 9: NASA-SeaWiFS image of the Northern Gulf of Mexico recorded in April, 2000. This image shows the distributions and relative concentrations of chlorophyll a, an indicator of phytoplankton biomass in this region. Note the very high concentrations (orange to red) present in the inshore regions of the mouths of the Mississippi and Atchafalaya Rivers. 35

Figure 10: Estimated extent of agricultural drainage based on the distribution of row crops, largely corn and soybean, and poorly drained soils (per D. Jaynes, National Soil Tilth Lab, Ames, IA). 62

Figure 11: Land cover based on Landsat data (adapted from Crumpton et al., 2006). 63

Figure 12: Flow weighted average nitrate concentrations estimated from STORET data selected to exclude point source influences (adapted from Crumpton et al., 2006). 63

Figure 13: Flow-weighted average nitrate and reduced N versus percent cropland (adapted from Crumpton et al., 2006). 64

Figure 14: MARB nitrate-N fluxes for 1955 through 2005 water years comparing estimates from various methods for 1979 to 2005. Based on USGS data from Battaglin (2006) and Aulenbach et al. (2007). 66

Figure 15: Comparison (percent and absolute basis) of MARB nitrate-N fluxes to LOADEST 5 yr method for 1979 through 2005 water years. Based on USGS data from Battaglin (2006) and Aulenbach et al. (2007). 67

Figure 16: Schematic showing locations of MARB monitoring sites (Aulenbach et al., 2007). 68

Figure 17: Flow and available nitrogen monitoring data for the MARB for 1955 through 2005 water years. (LOWESS, Locally Weighted Scatterplot Smooth, curves shown in red). LOWESS describes the relationship between Y and X without assuming linearity or normality of residuals, and is a robust description of the data pattern (Helsel and Hirsch, 2002). 69

Figure 18: Flow, available phosphorus, and available silicate monitoring data for the MARB for 1955 through 2005 water years. (LOWESS curves shown in red). Based on USGS data from Battaglin (2006) and Aulenbach et al. (2007). 70

Figure 19: Ratio of total N to total P and dissolved silicate to dissolved inorganic N for MARB for the 1980 through 2005 water years. Based on USGS data from Battaglin (2006) and Aulenbach et al. (2007). 71

Figure 20: Flow and nitrogen flux for the MARB during spring (April, May, and June) for the period 1979-2005. (LOWESS curve shown in red). Based on USGS data from Battaglin (2006) and Aulenbach et al. (2007). 73

Figure 21: Flow, phosphorus, and silicate flux for the MARB during spring (April, May, and June) for the period 1979-2006. (LOWESS curve shown in red). Based on USGS data from Battaglin (2006) and Aulenbach et al. (2007). 74

Figure 22: Sum of April, May and June fluxes as a percent of annual (water year basis) for combined Mississippi mainstem and Atchafalaya River. Box plots show median (line in center of box), 25th and 75th percentiles (bottom and top of box, respectively), 10th and 90th percentiles (bottom and top error bars, respectively) and values < 10th percentile and > 90th percentile (solid circles below and above error bars, respectively). Based on USGS data from Battaglin (2006) and Aulenbach et al. (2007). 74

Figure 23: Ratio of total N to total P and silicate to dissolved inorganic N for the MARB during spring (April, May, and June) for the period 1980-2006. Based on USGS data from Battaglin (2006) and Aulenbach et al. (2007). 75

Figure 24: Location of nine large subbasins comprising the MARB that are used for estimating nutrient fluxes (from Aulenbach et al., 2007). 76

Figure 25: Net N inputs and annual nitrate-N fluxes and yields for the Ohio River subbasin. (LOWESS curves for riverine nitrate-N shown in red.) Based on USGS data from Battaglin (2006) and Aulenbach et al. (2007). 80

Figure 26: Net N inputs and annual nitrate-N fluxes and yields for the upper Mississippi River subbasin. (LOWESS curves for riverine nitrate-N shown in red.) Shown in green is a recalculated net N input for the upper Mississippi River basin, increasing soybean N2 fixation from 50 to 70% of above ground N, and a soil net N mineralization rate from 0 to 10 kg N/ha/yr. Based on USGS data from Battaglin (2006) and Aulenbach et al. (2007). 82

Figure 27: Total P and particulate/organic P fluxes for the Ohio River near Grand Chain, Illinois. (LOWESS curves shown in black and red). Based on USGS data from Battaglin (2006) and Aulenbach et al. (2007). 84

Figure 28: Spring water flux and nitrate-N flux for the Mississippi River at Grafton and the Ohio River at Grand Chain, IL for water years 1975-2005. (LOWESS curves shown in red.) Based on USGS data from Battaglin (2006) and Aulenbach et al. (2007). 85

Figure 29: Spring nitrate-N flux (sum of April, May, and June) for the Mississippi River at Grafton plus Ohio River at Grand Chain subbasins compared to the combined Mississippi and Atchafalaya River for 1979 through 2005. Based on USGS data from Battaglin (2006) and Aulenbach et al. (2007). 86

Figure 30: Area of major crops planted in the MARB from 1941 through 2007. Adapted from McIsaac, 2006. 89

Figure 31: Nitrogen mass balance components and net N inputs for the MARB, as calculated by McIsaac et al. (2002) and updated through 2005 by McIsaac (2006). 91

Figure 32: Net N inputs for the four major regions of the MARB through 2005. Adapted from McIsaac, 2006. 92

Figure 33: Nitrogen mass balance components and net N inputs for the upper Mississippi River basin, as calculated by McIsaac et al. (2002) and updated through 2005 by McIsaac (2006). 93

Figure 34: Phosphorus mass balance components and net P inputs for the MARB. Adapted from McIsaac, 2006. 95

Figure 35: Net P inputs for the four major subbasins of the MARB through 2005. Adaptive from McIsaac, 2006. 97

Figure 36: Phosphorus mass balance components and net N inputs for the upper Mississippi River basin. Adapted from McIsaac, 2006. 98

Figure 37: Total phosphorus point source fluxes as a percent of total flux for the MARB for 2004 by hydrologic region. 100

Figure 38: Percentage of nutrient inputs to streams that are removed by instream and reservoir processes as predicted by the SPARROW model (Alexander et al., in press). 103

Figure 39: N removed in aquatic ecosystems (as a % of inputs) as a function of ecosystem depth/water travel time (modified from David et al., 2006). Values shown are for 23 years in an Illinois reservoir (David et al., 2006), French reservoirs (Garnier et al., 1999), Illinois streams (an average from Royer et al., 2004), agricultural streams (Opdyke et al., 2006), and rivers (Seitzinger et al., 2002). The curve from Seitzinger et al. (2002) is not as steep as the curve that includes information from reservoirs in an agricultural region. 105

Figure 40: A Conceptual Framework for Hypoxia in the Northern Gulf of Mexico. 126

Figure 41: Percent mass nitrate removal in wetlands as a function of hydraulic loading rate. Best fit for percent mass loss = 103*(hydraulic loading rate)-0.33. R2 = 0.69. Adapted from Crumpton et al. (2006, in press). 163

Figure 42: Observed NO3 mass removal (blue points) versus predicted NO3 mass removal (blue surface) based on the function [mass NO3 removed = 10.3*(HLR) 0.67 * FWA] for which R2 = 0.94. Blue lines are isopleths of predicted mass removal at intervals of 250 kg ha/yr. The dashed, red line represents the isopleth for mass removal rate of 290 kg ha/yr suggested by Mitsch et al. (2005a). The green plane intersecting function surface represents organic N export. Adapted from Crumpton et al. (2006, in press). 164

Figure 43: Recoverable manure N, assuming no export of manure from the farm, using 1997 census data. Adapted from USDA (2003) with the author’s permission. 174

Figure 44: Recoverable manure P, assuming no export of manure from the farm, using 1997 census data. Adapted from USDA (2003) with the author’s permission. 175

Figure 45: Fertilizer N consumption as anhydrous ammonia in leading corn-producing states for years ending June 30. 181

Figure 46: Changes in the consumption of principal fertilizer N sources used in the six leading corn-producing states (IA, IL, IN, MN, NE, and OH) for years ending June 30. 182

Figure 47: Percentage of N fertilized corn acreage which received some amount of N in the fall. 183

Figure 48: USDA ARMS data for the three states with highest fall N application, showing total amount of fall applied N for that crop. Also shown are Illinois sales data for the same period. 184

Figure 49: Fraction of annual fertilizer N tonnage in Illinois sold in the fall. 185

Figure 50: Average corn yields in six leading corn-producing states (IA, IL, IN, MN, NE, and OH), 1990-2006 (Source:USDA National Agricultural Statistics Service). 188

Figure 51: Variability in soil test P levels in typical farmer fields in Minnesota (2007 personal communication with Dr. Gary Malzer, University of Minnesota) 195

Figure 52: Effect of variable-rate versus uniform rate application of liquid swine manure on changes in soil test phosphorus in Iowa fields [2007 personal communication with Dr. Antonio Mallarino, Iowa State University and Wittry and Mallarino (2002)]. 196

Figure 53: Effect of variable rate versus uniform rate application of fertilizer P on soil test P in multiple Iowa fields across multiple years (2007 personal communication with A. Mallarino, Iowa State University). 197

Figure 54: Annual average deposition of NOy across the United States (kg N /hectare-year) based on beta-testing runs of the CMAQ model. Note the very high rates of deposition in the Ohio River basin. Courtesy of Robin Dennis, NOAA. 292


List of Tables


Table 1: A partial summary of papers published following the Integrated Assessment related to sources of organic matter to the Gulf of Mexico. 44

Table 2: Site name and corresponding map number for sites discussed in the following section. 77

Table 3: Average annual nutrient fluxes for the five large subbasins in the MARB for the 2001-2005 water years. (Percent of total basin flux shown in parentheses.) 77

Table 4: Average annual nutrient fluxes for ten subbasins in the MARB for the 2001-2005 water years.. Some subbasin fluxes are calculated as the difference between the upstream and downstream monitoring station. (Percent of total basin flux shown in parentheses.) 78

Table 5: Average annual nutrient yields for the five large subbasins in the MARB for water years 2001-2005. 79

Table 6: Average annual nutrient yields for nine subbasins in the MARB for the 2001 - 2005 water years. Some subbasin yields are calculated as the difference between the upstream and downstream monitoring stations. 79

Table 7: Acres of wetlands created, restored or enhanced in major subbasins of the Mississippi River from 2000-2006 under the Wetland Reserve Program (WRP), Conservation Reserve Program (CRP), Conservation Reserve Enhancement Program (CREP), Environmental Quality Incentive Program (EQIP), and Conservation Technical Assistance (CTA). (Personal communication, Mike Sullivan, USDA). 109

Table 8. Attributes of models used to estimate sources, transport and/or delivery of nutrients to the Gulf of Mexico. 113

Table 9: Annual and spring (sum of April, May, June) average flow and N and P fluxes for the MARB for the 1980 to 1996 reference period compared to the most recent five year period (2001 to 2005). Load reductions in mass of N or P also shown. 132

Table 10: Summary of Study features of Basin wide Integrated Economic-Biophysical Models 142

Table 11: Summary of Policies and Findings from Integrated Economic-Biophysical Models 144

Table 12: Areas (ha) of conservation buffers installed in the six sub-basins of the MARB for FY 2000 - FY2006. 169

Table 13: Status of implementation of permits under the 2003 CAFO rule for states within the MARB. Data provided by EPA Office of Wastewater Management, 2007. 176

Table 14: Estimates of manure production and N and P loss to water and air from Animal Feeding Operations within the Mississippi River basin, on information from the 2002 U.S. Census of Agriculture (adapted from Aillery et al., 2005). 178

Table 15: Partial N balance for 4-year rate study by Jaynes et al. (2001). The last two columns added here and were not part of original table. 191

Table 16: Estimated changes in N losses from cropping changes predicted by FAPRI from 2007-2013. 210

Table 17: Potential total nitrogen (TN) and phosphorus (TP) reduction efficiencies (percent change) in surface runoff, subsurface flow, and tile drainage. Estimates are average values for a multiple year basis, and some of the numbers in this table are based on a very small amount of field information. 215

Table 18: Anticipated benefits associated with different agricultural management options. 219

Table 19: Anticipated benefits associated with other management options. 220

Table 20: Comparison of MART estimated sewage treatment plant annual effluent loads of total N and P and values from measurements at each plant for 2004. 300

Table 21: Farming System and Nutrient Budget. 302

Table 22: Number of animals and amount of manure produced and N and P excreted within the MARB states based on information from the 1997 U.S. Census of Agriculture (data obtained from USDA-ERS, http://ers.usda.gov/data/MANURE/). 303


Glossary of Terms


Algae: A group of chiefly aquatic plants (e.g., seaweed, pond scum, stonewort, phytoplankton) that contain chlorophyll and may passively drift, weakly swim, grow on a substrate, or establish root-like anchors (steadfasts) in a water body.

1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   ...   56

Похожие:

11-19-07 Science Advisory Board (sab) Hypoxia Panel Draft Advisory Report Do Not Cite or Quote iconBoard of Elections – Advisory Opinion 1398 – 1399

11-19-07 Science Advisory Board (sab) Hypoxia Panel Draft Advisory Report Do Not Cite or Quote iconPanel Report on the draft Replacement London Plan

11-19-07 Science Advisory Board (sab) Hypoxia Panel Draft Advisory Report Do Not Cite or Quote iconDraft: August 2July xxanuary x19, 20065 abstract [For presentation at the Advisory Group on apec financial System Capacity Building meeting at Seattle, February 28, 2007.]

11-19-07 Science Advisory Board (sab) Hypoxia Panel Draft Advisory Report Do Not Cite or Quote iconDraft – do not quote or distribute

11-19-07 Science Advisory Board (sab) Hypoxia Panel Draft Advisory Report Do Not Cite or Quote iconRanch hand advisory committee

11-19-07 Science Advisory Board (sab) Hypoxia Panel Draft Advisory Report Do Not Cite or Quote iconMedical Devices Advisory Committee

11-19-07 Science Advisory Board (sab) Hypoxia Panel Draft Advisory Report Do Not Cite or Quote iconPositions, training & advisory roles

11-19-07 Science Advisory Board (sab) Hypoxia Panel Draft Advisory Report Do Not Cite or Quote iconVeterinary medicine advisory committee

11-19-07 Science Advisory Board (sab) Hypoxia Panel Draft Advisory Report Do Not Cite or Quote iconAdvisory committee on immunization practices

11-19-07 Science Advisory Board (sab) Hypoxia Panel Draft Advisory Report Do Not Cite or Quote iconNational Vaccine Advisory Committee (nvac)

Разместите кнопку на своём сайте:
Библиотека


База данных защищена авторским правом ©lib.znate.ru 2014
обратиться к администрации
Библиотека
Главная страница