85 



- 24 - 

 only, to ourselves and to States, for deciding when seafood 

 might be adulterated within the meaning of the FDSC act. 



We are often asked why we have not issued more tolerances. The 

 answer is complex, but in large measure, there are two reasons. 

 First, as FDA has testified many times, the tolerance setting 

 process is unwieldy and can take years to accomplish. Second, 

 the knowledge required for a tolerance is not easily obtained. 

 Unlike food additives, chemical contaminants do not have 

 "sponsors" who submit data to the agency. The toxicity of many 

 potential chemical contaminants is not well known. Finally 

 consumption data, which are necessary to determine exposure 

 levels, are expensive to obtain. 



In addition, problems with contaminants tend to be regional. 

 FDA has long debated the appropriateness of establishing 

 national tolerances based on high exposure levels that occur in 

 very localized areas. 



FDA sponsored a chemical contaminant conference in May to 

 address these types of issues. The participants, many of whom 

 were State officials from across the country, shared 

 information on chemical contaminants, exchanged views on 

 priorities for data collection, discussed regional versus 

 national solutions, and other matters. The conference 

 represents the beginning of a long term process to develop a 



TI—QQQ n 



