Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout20040800.tiff 2-2J2-2224 S,oaPtd FROM FRUIT/AEG =NSPECTICN 719 852 -i_ Weld County Planning Department GREELEY OFFICE FEB 2 3 2004 3.0 Animal Feces RECEIVED An/rnal feces rs a/L-rtowns~our 'afpalhagens'7/tat yam ause for dhorne illness. '' ` While it is not possible to completely exclude all animal life from all fresh produce production areas, many field programs include elements to protect crops from animal damage. Growers should review existing practices and conditions to assess the prevalence and likelihood of significant amounts of uncontrolled deposits of animal feces coming into contact with crops. Good agricultural practices for minimizing hazards from livestock include: • Domestic animals should he excluded from fresh produce fields, vineyards, and orchards during the growing season. Depending on the operation, good management practices may include keeping livestock confined (e.g., in pens or yards) or preventing their entry into fields by using physical barriers such as fences. - Where necessary, growers should consider measures to ensure that animal waste from adjacent fields or waste storage facilities does not contaminate the produce production areas. Growers should determine whether surrounding fields and farms are used for animal production. Growers may need to consider measures to ensure that animal waste from adjacent fields or waste storage facilities does not contaminate the produce production areas during heavy rains, especially if fresh produce is grown in low-lying fields or orchards. Measures might include physical barriers, such as ditches, mounds, grass/sod waterways, diversion berms, and vegetative buffer areas. a' In addition, high concentrations of wildlife (such as deer or waterfowl in a field) may increase the potential for microbial contamination. Control of wild animal populations in the field may be difficult, especially where crop production areas are adjacent to wooded areas, open meadows, and waterways. Federal, state, or local animal protection requirements must also be considered. However, to the extent possible, where high concentrations of wildlife are a concern, growers should consider establishing good agricultural practices to deter or redirect wildlife to areas with crops that are not destined for the fresh produce market. Helpful Resources: The NRCS Conservation Practice Standard 317, "Composting Facility" sets out standards for on-farm composting (USDA, SCS, December 1990) (202) 720-5157; http://www.ncg.nrcs.usda.govinhcp_2.html. NRCS AWMFH 651.1004(F), Rynk et al., "On Farm Composting Handbook,"NRAES-54 Natural Resource, Agriculture, and Engineering Service, Cooperative Extension, 152 Riley-Robb Hall, Ithaca, NY 14853-5701 (607)255-7654. R.T. Haug, 1993, "The Practical Handbook of Compost Engineering,"Tachnornics Publishing Co., Inc, Lancaster, PA. "Domestic Septage Regulatory Guidance -A Guidc to the EPA 503 Rule," EPA 832-8-92-005, Septem- ber, 1993. US EPA, "A Plain English Guide to the EPA Part 503 Biosolids Rule,"EPA 1832-R-93-003, Washington — DC, 1994. Environmental Regulation and Technology Control of Pathogens and Vector Attraction Reduction, EPA 1625/1-92/013, December 1992. El EXHIBIT 24 I 5m F00DSAFETY.G0V We should write to them. Shouldn't it be illegal to place a business that transports animals and their fecal matter, pathogens and flies around raw food storage area? National Federal-state Food Safety Conference Release No. 0069.99 Remarks As Prepared for Delivery by Secretary of Agriculture Dan Glickman National Federal-State Food Safety Conference Washington, D.C. February 23, 1999 "USDA has come a long way since the 1994 reorganization which pulled our food safety duties out of the marketing arena where there was at least an appearance of conflict of interest. Now, we have a separate, independent food safety agency run by America's first and only Undersecretary for Food Safety who is at USDA. We've also dramatically expanded our food safety research agenda going after problem pathogens that affect the entire range of foods from meats and poultry to fruits and vegetables. When this Administration came in, you would rarely hear the word public health uttered at USDA. Now, we have an Office of Public Health and Science, within our food safety mission, which is headed by some of the top food safety and public health experts in the world. These changes make a tremendous difference as we shift to a more science-based approach. "But we know that we alone cannot overcome today's significant challenges: new more virulent pathogens; old pathogens finding their way onto new foods consolidation in agriculture leading to more food being processed in one place and then shipped across the country making it harder to pull suspect food back or even to identify a problem that's so geographically dispersed; people eating more meals away from home; folks eating more imported foods, particularly produce, and a growing senior population whose immune systems are more vulnerable. "Food can be contaminated at any point from farm to table, and it becomes crystal clear that we need our respective strengths, resources and people power working together to create a seal of safety for consumers that covers every kind of food. "Greater coordination is how we achieve a seamless food safety system, and that is the ultimate goal of the President's Council on Food Safety which he created last year. "One small way we are improving coordination at the federal level is through a new Memorandum of Understanding that formalizes the working relationship between FDA and USDA inspectors. Sometimes we work in the same plants, inspecting the different products that fall under our purviews. This MOU ensures that our inspectors if they see a potential problem that does not affect 'their food'-- make sure the right person is informed. "We also have a new coalition that's come together to work on interstate shipment issues. Right now, state-inspected meat is forbidden by law from shipping across state lines. Historically, this has been a thorny issue. Some folks thought it would never work out. Well, I'll have you know that USDA is in the final stages of clearing legislation -- which we hope can be considered during this Congress to free up interstate shipments. And, I'll have you know that in this year's budget, we've asked for money to help state labs upgrade their inspection technology,so as many states as possible are in a position to take advantage of this breakthrough. "Some look at all of this work and see a hodge-podge of food safety efforts. But the fact is we at USDA are in daily collaboration with state, local and federal agencies We have a Joint Institute for Food Safety Research which is working between federal agencies, with the land-grant universities and others to develop a coordinated food safety research strategy to ensure that every federal research dollar is put to its best possible use We've more than quadrupled our food safety education budget in the past two years ... USDA provides over$40 million to the 26 states who run their own inspection efforts covering half of their costs We are working on partnerships with state veterinarians to develop and encourage producers to adopt voluntarily on-farm practices that promote food safety We helped create FORC-G, a team of federal and state food safety experts who respond to outbreaks rnuckly. effectively, and as one team, CDC-Foodborne and Diarrheal Diseases Branch Page 1 of 2 I "C DIVISION OR BACTERIAL AND Home Search Health Topics A-Z D NYCOTIC DISEASES snr¢w.14¢A Lt re IC P COPL¢ FOODBORNE $t DIARRHEAL DISEASES BRANCH HOME OFFICES LABS PROGRAMS DISEASES • Site Contents What's New Foodborne and Multistate Outbreak of Diarrheal Diseases The Foodborne and Diarrheal Diseases Salmonella Serotype Branch Programs Typhimurium Branch focuses on the control and prevention of Infections Associated ► FoodNet bacterial foodborne and diarrhea) diseases, to ► inith_orinking NARMS: Enteric prevent illness, disability and death. The Branch Unpasteurized Milk --- ► Illinois, Bacteria does this by conducting surveillance, by Indiana, Ohio. and investigating outbreaks, through applied Tennessee, 2002--2003 ► Outbreak Response & research, and by consulting with state health MMWR: Outbreaks of Surveillance Unit departments, food safety regulatory agencies, Salmonella Serotype / Safe Water System and health authorities around the world. The Enteritidis Infection Associated Branch identifies causes and sources of bacterial ► PulseNet with Eating Shell Eggs- foodborne and diarrhea) illness in order to United States, 1999- ► National Surveillance develop new prevention and control methods in 2001 for Illnesses collaborations with other public health agencies. Foodborne and Investigations have identified major new Multistate Outbreaks of Diarrheal Disease Salmonella Serotype foodborne pathogens, (e.g. Escherichia coil Poona Infections Branch programs ' Info 0157:H7, Salmonella Enteritidis in eggs) and ► Associated with Eating have been critical to meeting he challenge of the Cantaloupe from ► DLKoolan's Senate Mexico--United States �—. Testimony on Food recent Latin American cholera epidemic. As a and Canada, 2000-2002 Safety result of these investigations, new prevention efforts are being implemented to improve the Adoption the ► Reporting Foodborne p p Kauffmann-White Illness safety of food and water both in the United Scheme for Related Sites States and overseas. of Salmonella serotypes/"t '481 KB / Food Safety Office Many Branch activities depend on close Public Health collaboration between epidemiologists and the Implications of Foodborne Pathogens in microbiologists. Branch epidemiologists maintain ► the Farm_Environment surveillance activities, and conduct outbreak ppt file investigations and other special studies. They frequently consult with State and local health department officials concerning possible outbreaks or other public health issues. Branch microbiologists maintain expertise in a variety of bacterial pathogens, developing new methods to identify and characterize them. Branch microbiologists advise and support public health laboratories in each State, and are involved in many outbreak investigations. The branch is the national reference laboratory for botulism, campylobacteriosis, cholera, intestinal E. coli infections, listerlosis, salmonellosis, shigellosis, and other similar infections. With this expertise and the ongoing applied research, new pathogens are discovered, and new methods make our public health system better. http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/dbmd/foodborne/index.htm 2/23/2004 USDA/NHS Fact Sheet: FORC-G - Foodborne Outbreak Respons... Page 1 of 2 Fact Sheet U.S. Department of Agriculture U.S. Department of Health and Human Services FORC-G Many outbreaks of foodborne illness cross geographic or jurisdictional lines, requiring close inter-agency cooperation. FORC-G, the Foodborne Outbreak Response Coordinating Group, brings together federal, state, and local agencies to develop a comprehensive, coordinated, national foodborne illness outbreak response system. Specifically, FORC-G will * increase coordination and communication among these agencies and organizations; * help guide the efficient use of resources and expertise during an emergency; * and better prepare the United States to meet new and emerging threats to the food supply. FORC-G is co-chaired by the Department of Agriculture's Under Secretary for Food Safety and the Department of Health and Human Services' Assistant Secretary for Health. Other FORC-G members include representatives of the * Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; ' * Food and Drug Administration; * Food Safety and Inspection Service; * Environmental Protection Agency; * Association of Food and Drug Officials; * National Association of City and County Health Officials; * Association of State and Territorial Public Health Laboratory Directors; * Council of State and Territorial Epidemiologists; and * National Association of State Departments of Agriculture. In January, 1997, President Clinton directed the Secretary of Agriculture, the Secretary of Health and Human Services, and the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency to identify specific steps to improve the safety of the food supply. Their May 1997 report to the President recommended the creation of FORC-G. May 22, 1998 Clinton-Gore Administration Accomplishments in Food Safety October, 1997. President announces new initiative to enhance FDA oversight ove and develop guidance on good agricultural and manufacturing practices for fru .-. October, 1997. Administration announces public-private partnership to promote education, that includes the "Fight BAC" campaign . http://www.cfsan.fda.gov/-irdltpforc-g.html 2/23/2004 USDA/HHS Fact Sheet: FORC-G - Foodborne Outbreak Respons... Page 2 of 2 May, 1997. President announces comprehensive new initiative to improve the saf food supply -- "Food Safety from Farm to Table"--detailing a $43 million food program, including measures to improve surveillance, outbreak response, educa January, 1997. President announces new Early-Warning System to gather critical help stop food-borne disease outbreaks quickly and to improve prevention syst January, 1997. Administration requires generic E.coli testing for all meat and plants and Sanitation Standard Operating Procedures. August, 1996. President signs Safe Drinking Water Act of 1996. The law requir systems to protect against dangerous contaminants like crytosporidium, and gi know about contaminants in their tap water. August, 1996. President signs Food Quality Protection Act of 1996, which strea pesticides by FDA and EPA and puts important new public-health protections in children. July, 1996. President announces new regulations that modernize the nation's me inspection system for the first time in 90 years. The HACCP systems approach science-based controls and microbiological testing directly targeted at E. co Salmonella. December, 1995. Administration issues new rules to ensure the safety of seafoo regulatory approach. October, 1994. Administration declares E. coli O157:H7 an adulterant in raw gr initiates a nationwide sampling program in federally inspected plants and ret ground beef. March, 1994. Administration requires safe handling and cooking labels on raw m products. This is a mirror of the page at HTTP://www.usdagow80/news/releases/1998/051fsis Memorandum of Understanding Home http://www.cfsan.fda.gov&Ird/tpforC-g.html 2/23/2004 FDA/CFSAN Bad Bug Book Campylobacter jejuna Page 1 of 5 Bad U.S. Food & Drug Administration a Center for Food Safety& Applied Nutrition Bug Foodborne Pathogenic Microorganisms 4 Book and Natural Toxins Handbook Campylobacter jejuni Education CDC/MMWR NIH/PubMed 1. Name of the Campylobacter jejuni Is a Gram-negative slender, curved, Organism: and motile rod. It is a microaerophilic organism, which Campylobacter means it has a requirement for reduced levels of oxygen. jejuni(formerly It is relatively fragile, and sensitive to environmental known as stresses (e.g., 21% oxygen, drying, heating, Campylobacter disinfectants, acidic conditions). Because of Its fetus subsp. microaerophilic characteristics the organism requires 3 jejuni) to 5% oxygen and 2 to 10% carbon dioxide for optimal growth conditions. This bacterium is now recognized as an important enteric pathogen. Before 1972, when methods were developed for its isolation from feces, it was believed to be primarily an animal pathogen causing abortion and enteritis in sheep and cattle. Surveys have shown that C.jejuni is the leading cause of bacterial diarrhea% illness in the United States. It causes more disease than Shigella spp. and Salmonella spp. combined. Although C.jejuni is not carried by healthy individuals in the United States or Europe, it is often isolated from healthy cattle, chickens, birds and even flies. It is sometimes present in non-chlorinated water sources such as streams and ponds. Because the pathogenic mechanisms of C.jejuni are still being studied, it is difficult to differentiate pathogenic from nonpathogenic strains. However, at appears that many of the chicken isolates are pathogens. 2. Name of Campylobacteriosis is the name of the illness caused by http://www.cfsan.fda.gov/-mow/chap4.html 2/23/2004 - FDAICFSAN Bad Bug Book Campylobacter jejuni Page 2 of 5 Disease: C.Muni. It is also often known as campylobacter enteritis or gastroenteritis. 3. Major C.JeJuni infection causes diarrhea, which may be watery Symptoms: or sticky and can contain blood (usually occult) and fecal leukocytes (white cells). Other symptoms often present are fever, abdominal pain, nausea, headache and muscle pain. The illness usually occurs 2-5 days after ingestion of the contaminated food or water. illness generally lasts 7-10 days, but relapses are not uncommon (about 25% of cases). Most infections are self-limiting and are not treated with antibiotics. However, treatment with erythromycin does reduce the length of time that infected individuals shed the bacteria in their feces. The infective dose of C.Jejuni is considered to be small. Human feeding studies suggest that about 400-500 bacteria may cause illness in some individuals, while in others, greater numbers are required. A conducted volunteer human feeding study suggests that host susceptibility also dictates infectious dose to some degree. The pathogenic mechanisms of C.jejuni are still not completely understood, but it does produce a heat- labile toxin that may cause diarrhea. C.jejuni may also be an invasive organism. 4. Isolation C.jejuniis usually present in high numbers in the Procedures: diarrhea' stools of individuals, but isolation requires special antibiotic-containing media and a special microaerophilic atmosphere (5% oxygen). However, most clinical laboratories are equipped to isolate Campylobacter spp. If requested. 5. Associated C.Jejunifrequently contaminates raw chicken. Surveys Foods: show that 20 to 100% of retail chickens are contaminated. This is not overly surprising since many healthy chickens carry these bacteria in their intestinal tracts. Raw milk is also a source of infections. The bacteria are often carded by healthy cattle and by flies on farms. Non-chlorinated water may also be a source of http://www.cfsan.fda.gov/-mow/chap4.html 2/23/2004 FDA/CFSAN Bad Bug Book Campylobacter jejuna Page 3 of 5 infections. However, properly cooking chicken, pasteurizing milk, and chlorinating drinking water will kill the bacteria. 6. Frequency of C.japans the leading cause of bacterial diarrhea in the the Disease: U.S. There are probably numbers of cases in excess of the estimated cases of salmonellosis (2- to 4,000,000/year). 7. Complications are relatively rare, but infections have Complications: been associated with reactive arthritis, hemolyticuremic syndrome, and following septicemia, infections of nearly any organ. The estimated case/fatality ratio for all C jeJuni infections is 0.1, meaning one death per 1,000 cases. Fatalities are rare in healthy individuals and usually occur in cancer patients or in the otherwise debilitated. Only 20 reported cases of septic abortion induced by C.jejuni have been recorded in the literature. Meningitis, recurrent colitis, acute cholecystitis and Guillain-Barre syndrome are very rare complications. S. Target Although anyone can have a C.Jejuna infection, children Populations: under 5 years and young adults (15-29) are more frequently afflicted than other age groups. Reactive arthritis, a rare complication of these infections, is strongly associated with people who have the human lymphocyte antigen B27 (HLA-627). 9. Recovery Isolation of C.Muni from food is difficult because the from Foods: bacteria are usually present in very low numbers (unlike the case of diarrheal stools in which 10/6 bacteria/gram is not unusual). The methods require an enrichment broth containing antibiotics, special antibiotic-containing plates and a microaerophilic atmosphere generally a microaerophilic atmosphere with 5% oxygen and an elevated concentration of carbon dioxide (10%). Isolation can take several days to a week. 10. Selected Usually outbreaks are small (less than 50 people), but in http://www.cfsan.fda.gov/-mow/chap4.html 2/23/2004 FDA/CFSAN Bad Bug Book Campylobacter jejuni Page 4 of 5 Outbreaks: Bennington, VT a large outbreak involving about 2,000 people occurred while the town was temporarily using an non-chlorinated water source as a water supply. Several small outbreaks have been reported among children who were taken on a class trip to a dairy and given raw milk to drink. An outbreak was also associated with consumption of raw clams. However, a survey showed that about 50% of infections are associated with either eating inadequately cooked or recontaminated chicken meat or handling chickens. It is the leading bacterial cause of sporadic (non-clustered cases) diarrhea) disease in the U.S. In April, 1986, an elementary school child was cultured for bacterial pathogens (due to bloody diarrhea), and C. jejuni was isolated. Food consumption/gastrointestinal illness questionnaires were administered to other students and faculty at the school. In all, 32 of 172 students reported symptoms of diarrhea (100%), cramps (80%), nausea (51%), fever (29%), vomiting (26%), and bloody stools (14%). The food questionnaire clearly implicated milk as the common source, and a dose/response was evident (those drinking more milk were more likely to be ill). Investigation of the dairy supplying the milk showed that they vat pasteurized the milk at 135*F for 25 minutes rather than the required 145°F for 30 minutes. The dairy processed surplus raw milk for the school, and this milk had a high somatic cell count. Cows from the herd supplying the dairy had C. jejuniin their feces. This outbreak points out the variation in symptoms which may occur with campylobacteriosis and the absolute need to adhere to pasteurization time/temperature standards. Although other Campy/obacterspp. have been implicated in human gastroenteritis (e.g. C. kiddie, C. hyointestinaiis), it is believed that 99% of the cases are caused by C.jejuni. http://www.cfsan.fda.gov/-mow/chap4.html 2/23/2004 • FDA/CFSAN Bad Bug Book Campylobacter jejuni Page 5 of 5 Information regarding an outbreak of Campylobacter in New Zealand is found in this MMWR 40(7):1991 Feb 22. For more information on recent outbreaks see the Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Reports from CDC. 11. Education: The Food Safety Inspection Service of the U.S. Department of Agriculture has produced a background document on Campylobacter. 12. Other A Loci index for genome Campyiobacterjejuni is Resources: available from GenBank. CDC/MMWR The CDC/MMWR link will provide a list of Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Reports at CDC relating to this organism or toxin. The date shown is the date the item was posted on the Web, not the date of the MMWR. The summary statement shown are the initial words of the overall document. The specific article of interest may be just one article or item within the overall report. NIH/PubMed The NIH/PubMed button at the top of the page will provide a list of research abstracts contained in the National Library of Medicine's MEDLINE database for this organism or toxin. mow@cfsan.fda.gov January 1992 with periodic updates Bad Bug Book Foods Home I FDA Home I Search/Subject Index I Disclaimers & Privacy Policy Accessibility/Hejp Hypertext last updated by mow/day 2003-JAN-07 http://www.cfsan.fda.gov/-mow/chap4.htm1 2/23/2004 httPliwwwseeSmall usda.gov/sbir/9 9phase2.htm Business Innovation Research (SBIR) USDA/ SBIR PHASE II TECH NICAL ABSTR ACTS FISCA L YEAR 1999 Listed below by topic area are technical abstracts (summaries of research) of Phase II projects funded under the USDA Small Business Innovation Research Program for Fiscal Year 1999. These abstracts include the TITLE OF RESEARCH: A HIGH TECHNOLOGY VERMICOMPOSTING REACTOR: PRODUCT TESTING AND COMMERCIALIZATION COMPANY: OREGON SOIL CORPORATION 1324 BEAVER LANE OREGON CITY, OR 97045 PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR:DR. KEITH FLETCHER TOPIC AREA: PLANT PRODUCTION AND PROTECTION(BIOLOGY) GRANTED AMOUNT: $230,000/24 MONTHS Disposal of organic wastes, including animal, food garden and industrial wastes, is expensive and can create environmental problems. High technology vermicomposting systems can convert such wastes into valuable horticultural growth media or soil amendments. The value of these to the horticultural industry was demonstrated clearly in Phase I research. The Oregon Soil Corporation has operated a continuous flow reactor that will process 1000 tons of waste a year for six years. Oregon Soil Corporation proposes the following research in Phase II. Improvements of the high technology reactor design, operation and efficiency. Assessment and minimization of human pathogen, plant disease and weed seed carry- over during the vermicomposting process. Field plant growth trails of annual and perennial crops to ascertain optimum rates of addition and placement of vermicomposts for field crops. Obtaining maximum economic returns from vermicomposts. • Quality standards for vermicomposts to maintain minimum product variability. • Formulation, processing and amending vermicomposts for marketing. • Market survey to identify major profitable outlets for sale of vermicomposts. During Phase II research, Oregon Soil Corporation plans to build two more reactors for its own operations and supply reactors to five commercial organizations who have agreed to adopt the technology. ANTICIPATED RESULTS/POTENTIAL COMMERCIAL APPLICATIONS OF RESEARCH The major barriers to full commercial development of high technology continuous-flow automated vermicomposting reactors have been: (i) possible transmission of human and plant pathogens in vermicomposts, (ii) lack of data establishing the commercial value of vermicomposts for horticulture and as soil amendments, and (iii) need for methods of formulating and marketing vermicomposts for maximum utilization and profits, together with development of most profitable markets. The Phase I and II research answers these needs and together with possible improvements to the reactor system and management should facilitate large-scale commercial development. TITLE OF RESEARCH: RAPID DETECTION OF ESCHERICHIA COLT 0157:H7 COMPANY: IMMUNOLOGICAL ASSOCIATES OF DENVER 717 YOSEMITE CIRCLE DENVER, CO 80220 PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR:DR. ROBERT T. MCCALMON TOPIC AREA: FOOD SCIENCE AND NUTRITION GRANTED AMOUNT: $230,000/24 MONTHS Escherichia coil 0157:H7 is an emerging cause of foodborne illness first identified as an etiological agent in 1982. There is a need for low complexity, rapid (less than four hours) detection method capable of being performed on site at food processing plants in association with Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Plans (HACCP). Ideally, this test should be simple to perform and interpret, be low cost, and be a sensitive and specific method for rapid detection of pathogenic E. coil 0157:117. Methods will be developed for the detection of viable E. coil 0157:H7 contamination of meat carcass or ground beef. This consists of specimen collection from these materials, extraction and capture of 0157:H7 RNA, isothermal amplification, and visual lateral flow detection. The final assay will be incorporated into a self contained integrated particle (SCIP) device that is easy to use, does not require expensive instrumentation, and can readily be performed on site. ANTICIPATED RESULTS/POTENTIAL COMMERCIAL APPLICATIONS OF RESEARCH Rapid and specific detection of viable pathogen contamination provides a means of monitoring food processing and effectiveness of in plant decontamination procedures. Results will be available in a time frame that permits detection of contamination prior to distribution. This should avert large recalls. The ultimate result will be a safer food supply and reduced incidence of foodborne infections. The successful development of the proposed assay has tremendous commercialization potential. There are approximately 37 million beef carcasses processed annually. In addition, E. coil 0157:H7 also contaminates water, milk, apple cider, and vegetables. - FDA/CFSAN Bad Bug Book Factors Affecting the Growth of Mic... Page 1 of 4 U.S. Food & Drug Adnini tration Bad reenter for Food Safety&Applied Nutrition Bug Foodborne Pathogenic Microorganisms Book and Natural Toxins Handbook Factors Affecting the Growth of Microorganisms in Foods Food is a chemically complex matrix, and predicting whether, or how fast, microorganisms will grow in any given food is difficult. Most foods contain sufficient nutrients to support microbial growth. Several factors encourage, prevent, or limit the growth of microorganisms in foods, the most important are aw, pH, and temperature. aw (Water Activity or Water Availability). Water molecules are loosely oriented in pure liquid water and can easily rearrange. When other substances (solutes) are added to water, water molecules orient themselves on the surface of the solute and the properties of the solution change dramatically. The microbial cell must compete with solute molecules for free water molecules. Except for Staphylococcus aureus, bacteria are rather poor competitors, whereas molds are excellent competitors. a varies very little with temperature over the range of temperatures that support microbial growth. A solution of pure water has an aw of 1.00. The addition of solute decreases the a to less than 1.00. Water Activity of Various NaCI Solutions Percent NaCI (wN) Mold Water Activity (aw) 0.9 0.15 0.995 1.7 0.30 0.99 http:/hvww.cfsan.fda.gov/-mow/app3.html 1/27/2004 • FDA/CFSAN Bad Bug Book Factors Affecting the Growth of Mic... Page 2 of 4 3.5 0.61 0.98 7.0 1.20 0.96 10.0 1.77 0.94 13.0 2.31 0.92 16.0 2.83 0.90 22.0 3.81 0.86 The a of a solution may dramatically affect the ability of heat to kill a bacterium at a given temperature. For example, a population of Salmonella typhimariam is reduced tenfold in 0.18 minutes at 60°C if the aw of the suspending medium is 0.995. If the aw is lowered to 0.94, 4.3 min are required at 60°C to cause the same tenfold reduction. An a value stated for a bacterium is generally the minimum a which supports growth. At the minimum aw, growth is usually minimal, increasing as the a increases. At a values below the minimum for growth, bacteria do not necessarily die, although some proportion of the population does die. The bacteria may remain dormant, but infectious. Most importantly, aw is only one factor, and the other factors (e.g., pH, temperature) of the food must be considered. It is the interplay between factors that ultimately determines if a bacterium will grow or not. The aw of a food may not be a fixed value; it may change over time, or may vary considerably between similar foods from different sources. pH: (hydrogen ion concentration, relative acidity or alkalinity). The pH range of a microorganism is defined by a minimum value (at the acidic end of the scale) and a maximum value (at the basic end of the scale). There is a pH optimum for each microorganism at which growth is maximal. Moving away from the pH optimum in either direction slows microbial growth. A range of pH values is presented here, as the pH of foods, even those of a similar type, varies considerably. Shifts in pH of a food with time may reflect httpwwww.cfsan.fda.gov/"mow/app3.html 1/27/2004 • FDA/CFSAN Bad Bug Book Factors Affecting the Growth of Mic... Page 3 of 4 microbial activity, and foods that are poorly buffered (i.e., do not resist -- changes in pH), such as vegetables, may shift pH values considerably. For meats, the pH of muscle from a rested animal may differ from that of a fatigued animal. A food may start with a pH which precludes bacterial growth, but as a result of the metabolism of other microbes (yeasts or molds), pH shifts may occur and permit bacterial growth. Temperature. Temperature values for microbial growth, like pH values, have a minimum and maximum range with an optimum temperature for maximal growth. The rate of growth at extremes of temperature determines the classification of an organism (e.g., psychrotroph, thermotroph). The optimum growth temperature determines its classification as a thermophile, mesophile, or psychrophile. INTERPLAY OF FACTORS AFFECTING MICROBIAL GROWTH IN FOODS: Although each of the major factors listed above plays an important role, the interplay between the factors ultimately determines whether a microorganism will grow in a given food. Often, the results of such interplay are unpredictable, as poorly understood synergism or antagonism may occur. Advantage is taken of this interplay with regard to preventing the outgrowth of C. botulinwn. Food with a pH of 5.0 (within the range for C. botulinum) and an a of 0.935 (above the minimum for C. botulinum) may not support the growth of this bacterium. Certain processed cheese spreads take advantage of this fact and are therefore shelf stable at room temperature even though each individual factor would permit the outgrowth of C. botulinum. Therefore, predictions about whether or not a particular microorganism will grow in a food can, in general, only be made through experimentation. Also, many microorganisms do not need to multiply in food to cause disease. Factors affecting growth of pathogens in foods. pH values of some foods January 1992 mow@cfsan.fda.gov http://iwww.cfsan.fda.gov/-mow/aPP3.html 1/27/2004 www.foodsafety.gov - Food Safety News and Safety Alerts Page 1 of 2 � 4 e aGateway From Fsl ?Tat�•I≥ � ` - "' �" at News & Food Safety Alerts 44 Consumer Federal Government Agencies Advice Kids, Teens, • CDC: Centers for Disease Control & Prevention & Educators (Foodborne Illness) Industry o Food Safety Activities Assistance Repo tfinesses & o News and Media Relations Product Complaints o Current Health Related Hoaxes and Rumors Foodborne Pathogens • CFSAN: Center for Food Safety & Applied Nutrition, National Food FDA Safely Programs Federal & State (Seafood, Fruits, Vegetables, Shell Eggs, and all Gov't Agencies other Non-Meat Foods) Other o What's New Topics o Product Recalls, Alerts, and Warnings Search & Site Index • EPA: Environmental Protection Agency (Pesticides & Water) o EPA News and Events o Office of Pesticide Programs News o Office of Water News • FSIS: Food Safety & Inspection Service, USDA (Meat, Poultry & Processed Egg Products) o What's New? o Product Recalls State and Local Government Web Sites • Health Warnings (Department of Health Services, California) • Recalls and Alerts (compiled by Environmental http://www.foodsafety.gov/-fsg/fsgnews.html 1/26/2004 FDA/USDA US Food Safety System Country Report Annex I: Re... Page 1 of 6 Food and Drug Administration U.S. Department of Agriculture March 3, 2000 United States Food Safety System (Table of Contents) References for the U.S. Food Safety System Country Report Annex I to the United States' National Food Safety System Paper Introduction Food Safety Gateway http://www.foodsafety.gov/ National Food Safety h_ttp:/Ivm.cfsan.fda.gov/-dms/fs-toc.html Information Network Public/Private Partnership for http //www.fightb_a_c.org/ Food Safety Education Department of Health and http://www.hhs.gov/ Human Services (DHHS) Food and Drug http://www.fda.gov/ Administration (FDA) Centers for Disease Control http://www.cdc.gov/ and Prevention (CDC) U.S. Department of http://www.usda.gov/ Agriculture (USDA) Food Safety and Inspection http://www.fsis.usda.gov/ Service (FSIS) Animal and Plant Health http://www.aphis.usda.gov/ Inspection Service (APHIS) Environmental Protection http://www.epa.ov/ http://www.foodsafety.gov/-fsg/fssyst3.html 1/27/2004 FDA/USDA US Food Safety System Country Report Annex I: Re... Page 2 of 6 Agency (EPA) U.S. Codex http://www.fsis.usda.gov/OA/codex/index.htm Links to All 50 State http://www.fsis.usda.gov/OPHS/stategov.htm Departments of Public Health http://www.fda.gov/ora/fed state/default.htm and Agriculture Links to Food Safety http:/Ifoodsafe.ucdavis.edu/fshttplinks2.htm1 Agencies and Universities Examples of National Consumer Organizations: American Council on Science http //www.acsh.org/ and Health Center for Science in the http://www.cspinet.org/ Public Interest Consumer Federation of http://www.consumerfed.org/ America Consumers Union http://www.consumer.org/ Examples of Industry Organizations: American Meat Institute http://www.meatami.org/ Biotechnology Industry http://www.bio.org/ Organization Grocery Manufacturers of http://www.gmabrands.com/ America National Food Processors http://www.nfpa-food.org/ Organization A. Laws and Implementing Regulations The Constitution http://icweb.loc.gov/globaijjudiciary.html of the United States Legislative http://www.house.gov/ Branch http://www.senate.gov/ http://lcweb.loc.gov/global/legislative/congress.html Executive Branch http://www.whitehouse.gov/ http://icweb.loc.gov/global/executiveMed.html Judicial Branch http://www.uscourts.gov/ http://www.foodsafety.govt—fsg/fssyst3.html 1/27/2004 FDA/USDA US Food Safety System Country Report Annex I: Re... Page 3 of 6 http://icweb.loc.gov/global/judiciary.html Federal Food, http://www.fda.gov/opacom/laws/fdcact/fdctoc.htm Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA) Federal Meat http://www.fda.gov/opacom/laws/meat.htm Inspection Act (FMIA) Poultry Products http://www.fda.gov/opacom/laws/pitryact.htm Inspection Act (PPIA) Egg Products http://wwvv.fda.gov/opacom/laws/eggact.htm Inspection Act (EPIA) Food Quality http://www.fda.gov/opacom/laws/foodqual/fgpatoc.htm Protection Act (FQPA) Public Health http://www.fda.gov/opacom/laws/phsvcact/phsvcact.htm Services Act (PHSA) Administrative http://www.fda.gov/opacom/laws/adminpro.htm Procedures Act (APA) Federal Advisory http://www.fdaAov/opacom/laws/fedadvca.htm Committee Act (FACA) Freedom of http://www.epa.gov/epahome/law s.htm Information Act (FOIA), The Clean Water Act, The National Environmental Protection Act, The Safe Drinking Water Act, Federal http:l/www.foodsafety.govt-fsglfssyst3.html 1/27/2004 nap:nwwwaooasalety.gvvr-ragnasystaslum' sic nwv4 FDA/USDA US Food Safety System Country Report Annex I: Re... Page 4 of 6 Insecticide and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA): B. Risk Analysis and the United States Precautionary Approach National Food http://www.foodsafety.gov/-dms/fsreport.html Safety Initiative Report, 1997 Hazard Analysis http://vm.cfsan.fda.gov/-ird/haccp.html Critical Control Point (HACCP) USDA/FDA HACCP http://www.nal.usda.gov/fnic/foodborneMbindex/009.htm Training Programs and Resources Database Risk Assessment http://www.foodsafety.gov/-fsg/fsgrisk.html Site Center for http://www.fda.gov/cvm/fda/maPpgs/fsiintro.html Veterinary Medicine, FDA Campylobacter in http:I/www.fda.govlcvm/fdalmagpgs/ralrisk.html Poultry Risk Assessment *National http://www.nationalacademies.org/nas/nas/nashome.nsf Academy of Sciences "The Use of Drugs http://www.nap.edu/catalog/5137.html in Food Animals: Benefits and Risks" "Ensuring Safe http://www.nap.edu/catalog/6163.html Food : From Production to Consumption" "Enhancing the http://www.nap.edu/catalog/9453.html Regulatory http:/hwww.foodsafety.gov/-fsg/fssyst3.html 1/27/2004 FDA/USDA US Food Safety System Country Report Annex I: Re... Page 5 of 6 Decision-Making r Approval Process for Direct Food Ingredient Technologies, Food Forum, Institute of Medicine" "Understanding httpffibooks.nap.edu/books/030905396X/html/index.html Risk: Informing Decisions in a Democratic Society" World Health http://www.who.org/ Organization (WHO) Food and http://www.fao.org/ Agriculture Organization (FAO) Office of http://www.oie.int/ international Epizootics (OIE) Annex "Precaution http://vvww.foodsafety.gov/-fsessystem.html in U.S. Food Safety http://vm.cfsan.fda.gov/-dms/fs-toc.html Decision Making" C. Dealing with New Technologies, Products, and Responding to Problems Emerging http://wvvw.cdc.govincidod/dbmd/programs.htm Infections Program (EIP) Antimicrobial http://www.fda.gov/cvmlfda/mappgs/antitoc.html Resistance Foodborne Illness http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/dbmd/foodborn.htm http://vm.cfsan.fda.gov/-mow/foodborn.html Foodborne Illness http://www.nal.usda.qov/fniclfoodbornelfoodborn.htm Education Information Center httpJ/www.foodsafety.gov/&fsg/fssyst3.html 1/27/2004 FDA/USDA US Food Safety System Country Report Annex I: Re... Page 6 of 6 • D. Transparency Access to the httpa/www.access.gpo.gov/tiara/cfr/index.html Code of Federal Regulations Office of the http://wvvw.ustr.qov/ United States Trade Representative (USTR) World Trade http://www.wto.orgl Organization (W TO) E. System Accountability Presidential http://www.whitehouse.gov/WH/html/handbook.html Oversight House and Senate http://thomas.loc.gpv/ Committees Oversight General h_t_tp://www.gao.govl_ Accounting Office U.S. Courts http://www.uscourts.gov/ In the interest of showing how food safety is discussed within civil society, websites of organizations other than the U.S. government are included in this Annex. The U.S. government is not responsible for and does not s. .caaariiy endorse the content of those non-U.S. 3ove—eazmt t .. ..,.�Si..... See the Table of Contents for adds!t ar..! U.S. Fatal Safety System documents FDA Home I USDA Home Hypertext updated by cjm/dms 2000-MAR-22 httpJlwww.foodsafety.gov!-fsg/fssyst3.html 1/27/2004 GreenTruck: Do I Need A Storm Water Permit in the Trucking L.. Page 1 of 3 w 1 TRANS•URCE 02/2000 Doc. No.3075 "Cr. Do I Need A Storm Water Permit In Tiarckc.Nfsa The Trucking Industry? SERVICES3 The Office of Compliance Fact Sheet Series �► NP,A. What Is The NPDES Storm Water Program? ► Training & Through the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System jnPere��-aces ► , ; ,,,-t (NPDES) program, EPA established phased NPDES requirements ► r:,,. us to control storm water discharges that could adversely affect e wrap the quality of waters of the United States. The storm water ► He:p program consists of two phases: ► Phase I, currently being implemented, requires permits for storm water discharges associated with an industrial activity, construction activities involving at least five acres, and separate storm water systems serving large- and medium-sized communities (i.e., those with over 100,000 inhabitants). ► Phase II was published in December 1999 and becomes effective February 7, 2000. It will address discharges from small municipalities and construction sites not covered under the Phase I program. Is My Trucking Facility Included In The Phase I Program? Phase I includes 11 categories of facilities or activities with "storm water discharges associated with industrial activity" (40 CFR 122.26). The term "storm water discharges associated with industrial activity" is defined as the discharge from any conveyance (e.g., pipe, ditch, etc.) which is used for collecting and conveying storm water and which is directly related to manufacturing, processing or raw materials storage areas at an industrial plant. For the Phase I categories, the term includes, but is not limited to, storm water discharges from industrial plant yards, immediate access roads and rail lines used or traveled by carriers of raw materials, and areas where industrial activity has taken place in the past and significant materials remain and are exposed to storm water. One of the eleven categories is transportation facilities which have vehicle maintenance shops, equipment cleaning operations, or airport de-icing operations. This category includes the following trucking industry Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) codes: SIC 42 (except 4221-25) Motor Freight and Warehousing SIC 43 U.S. Postal Service SIC 5171 Petroleum Bulk Stations and Terminals. Therefore, if your trucking facility is classified in either SIC code 42, 43, or 5171 and your facility has vehicle maintenance shops, equipment cleaning operations, or airport de-icing operations, you are required to have a Phase I storm water httpdhvww.greentruck.com/water/stonmwater/3075.html 2/10/2004 GreenTruck: Do I Need A Storm Water Permit in the Trucking I.... Page 2 of 3 permit. This typically includes facilities providing local or long- distance trucking, transfer, and/or storage services. Examples of these services are hauling by dump truck, trucking timber, contract mail carriers, furniture moving, garbage collection without disposal, over-the-road trucking, long distance trucking, and freight trucking terminals. What Kind Of Permit Do I Need? Phase I facilities must be covered by an NPDES permit regardless of whether they discharge to a municipal separate storm sewer system or directly to waters of the United States. Storm water permits provide a mechanism for monitoring the discharge of pollutants from these facilities to waters of the United States and for establishing appropriate controls. If your facility has not yet obtained an NPDES permit for your storm water discharges, then you have two options to comply. You can submit (1) an individual permit application; or (2) a Notice of Intent (NOI) to be covered under a general permit (baseline or multi-sector). Whether your facility applies for an individual permit or the general permit, you will be required to meet certain requirements including (1) developing a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP), (2) monitoring (if required), and (3) training. Individual Storm Water Permit Applications If your facility has storm water discharges and did not participate in the group application, or did not obtain coverage under the general permit by March 1996, you must obtain and submit an individual permit application consisting of Form 1 (General Information) and Form 2F (Application for Permit to Discharge Storm Water Discharges Associated with Industrial Activity). These forms can be obtained from and submitted to the permitting authority. Form 2F requires you to submit a site drainage map, potential pollutant sources, and quantitative testing data of pollutant sources. You are required to submit an individual permit application 180 days before starting a new discharge. General Storm Water Permit Applications - Baseline Or Multi-Sector If EPA is the permitting authority, your facility may be permitted under one of two types of general permits - a baseline permit or a multi-sector permit. Both permits require the development of a SWPPP and periodic discharge monitoring. EPA has finalized baseline general permits in those states without NPDES authorization. More recently, EPA finalized the multi-sector general permit which provides coverage for 20 specific industries in the states and territories without NPDES authorization. Check with your EPA Regional office for more information on these permits. Note: The baseline general permit expired on September 1997 and is being terminated by EPA. However, EPA is currently temporarily reissuing the baseline general permit NOI. The multi-sector permit expires in 2000 but is constantly being revised. Where Do I Get A Storm Water Permit? As of January 2000, EPA has authorized 41 states and 1 http://w•vw.greentruck.comlwater/stonnwater/3075.html 2/10/2004 GreenTruck: Do I Need A Storm Water Permit in the Trucking 1... Page 3 of 3 territory to administer the NPDES program, including the storm water program (except the Virgin Islands). Where permit authority has not been delegated to the state or territory, you must apply for permits directly from EPA rather than the state authority. EPA has not delegated authority to the following states and territories: Alaska, Arizona, District of Columbia, Florida, Idaho, Maine (currently seeking delegation), Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Mexico, Puerto Rico, Pacific Territories, Texas (currently acquiring delegation), and Federal Tribal Reservations. Contact your permitting authority, either EPA or your state, to find out how to obtain a permit application and whether the individual or general permit is required. Complete the application as directed. Note: Avoid delays! Submit permit applications well in advance of any deadlines. Additional Information: For more information on the NPDES storm water program, please consult EPA's Overview of the Storm Water Program, EPA 833-R-96-008, June 1996, or call EPA's Office of Water Resource Center at (202) 260-7786. GREENTRUCK HOME I AIR & FUEL I PREVENTION I REFERENCE I SPILLS I STORAGE I WASTE I WATER NEWS I COMMUNITY I TRAINING & CONFERENCES I CT STAFF I CONTACT US I SITE MAP I HELP Copyright American Trucking Associations, All Rights Reserved Read ATA's Y2K Statement httpdhvww.greentruck.comhvater/stonnwater/3075.html 2/10/2004 Chapter 8 Surface Disposal of Domestic Septage Domestic septage is defined in the Part 503 regulation velop a description of how it was achieved. The certifi- as the liquid or solid material removed from a septic cation and the description must be kept for 5 years. tank, cesspool, portable toilet,Type III marine sanitation If vector attraction reduction is not achieved by alkali device, or a similar system that receives only domestic 0e sewage (househpld, non-commercial, non-industrial addition (as described above), the owner or operator of sew ge)(see Sec[3.2.2).Table 3-2 in C ph per 3TisTs the surface disposal site must achieve vector attraction me characteristic of septage. reduction by injecting or incorporating the domestic sep- sis tage into the soil, or by covering it with soil daily. Celli- The most common, and usually most economical, fication that all these requirements have been met and method of domestic septage disposal is land application a description of how they were met must be developed (e.g., land spreading, irrigation, overland flow)which is and maintained for 5 years. (Figure 8-1 shows the re- not addressed in this manual. Disposal at an existing quired certification statement.) virestawalertietrnent plant is a viable and economical option if the plant is reasonably close to the source and If domestic septage is placed in a monofill (such as a has adequate processes and capacity to handle the trench), surface impoundment, dedicated disposal site domestic septage. or other sludge-only surface disposal site, its disposal is covered by the requirements in the Part 503 regulation Surface disposal practices for domestic septage include for such disposal sites(except for requirements for pol- placement in monofills(trenches), lagoons, and munici- lutant limits and pathogen reduction).These requirements pal solid waste landfills. are discussed further in Chapters 3, 4, 5, 7, 9, and 10. If domestic septage is placed in a municipal solid waste 8.1 Regulatory Requirements for landfill, its disposal is covered by the requirements of Surface Disposal of Domestic 40 CFR Part 258 for the disposal of non-hazardous Septage waste. These requirements are discussed in Section 3.4.3. Note that because of the requirement that waste The regulatory requirements for the surface disposal of pass the Paint Filter Liquids Test (see Section 3.4.3), domestic septage are not as extensive as those for domestic septage must be dewatered so that it contains sewage sludge. Neither the pollutant limits nor the no free liquid before it can be placed in a municipal solid pathogen requirements of Part 503 apply if domestic waste landfill. septage is placed on an active sewage sludge unit.The regulation does, however, specify requirements for vec- Compliance with federal regulations governing domestic tor attraction reduction for domestic septage that is sur- septage does not ensure compliance with state require- face disposed. ments.State programs may not define domestic septage the same way as the federal regulations. In addition, Two alternatives are available for placing domestic sep- state requirements may be more restrictive or may be tage on an active sewage sludge unit(see Options 9-12, administered in a different manner from the federal regu- Table 3-9 in Chapter 3). One alternative is to achieve lation. It is important to check with the state seamy vector attraction reduction by raising the pH of the do- coordinator to find out about state requirements. mestic septage to 12 with alkali addition for 30 minutes, and maintaining the pH at 12 or greater for 30 minutes 8.2 Domestic Septage Disposal Lagoons without adding more alkali. If pH reduction is used to achieve vector attraction reduction, each container of The use of lagoons for septage disposal is a common domestic septage must be monitored for compliance.The alternative in rural areas.As discussed in Section 7.5.3, person who placed the domestic septage on the active if the lagoon is not part of the treatment process then sewage sludge unit must then certify that vector attrao- these lagoons are considered surface disposal sites tion reduction was achieved (see Figure 8-1) and de- under the Part 503 rule. 157 • An individtaal placing domestic septage on a surface disposal site must maintain the following ratification statement for 5 years: "I certify.mid=penalty of law,that the vector attraction redaction regavements in§503.33(b)(12)bavelhave not been met.This determination has been made under my direction and supervision in accon)ace with the system designed to ensue that qualified personnel properly gather and evaluate the information used to determine that the vector amsction requirements have been met.lam aware that ti nre am significant penalties for false certification,including the possibility of fine and imprisonment" The owner or operator of the surface disposal site must maintain the following certification statement for 5 years: 1 certify,under penalty of law,that the management practices in§503.24 and the vector attraction reduction requirements in[insert§503.33(b)(9) through§503.33(b)(l 1)when anc of those requirements is mot]hevelbeve not been met.This determination has been made under my direction and supervision in accordance with the system designed to ensure that qualified persotmel properly gather and evaluate the information used to determine dm the management practices[and the vector attraction requirements,if appropriate]have been met.t am aware that mere are significant penalties for false certification including the potability of fine and imprisonment" Sig nature Date Figure 8-1. Certifications required when domestic septage is placed In a surface disposal site(U.S. EPA, 1994). Domestic septage disposal lagoons are usually a maxi- trench to remain uncovered to permit as many solids to mum of 1.8 m (6 ft) deep and allow no effluent or soil settle, as well as liquids to evaporate and leach out, as infiltration. These lagoons require placement of domes- possible. Then the solids, as well as some bottom and tic septage in small incremental lifts (15 to 30 cm, or 6 sidewall material,are removed and the trench is reused to 12 in.)and sequential loading of multiple lagoons for (U.S. EPA, 1984). optimum drying. Most are operated in the unheated anaerobic or facultative stage. Odor problems may be Additional information on monofills is presented in Sec- reduced by placing the lagoon inlet pipe below liquid lion 7.5.2. level and having water available for haulers to immedi- ately wash any spills into the lagoon inlet line(U.S.EPA, 8.4 Codisposal at Municipal Solid Waste 1994).Section 7.5.3 presents detailed information about Landfill Unit lagoon design. Design information for codisposal at a municipal solid 8.3 Monofills (Trenches) for Domestic waste landfill is presented in Section 7.6; codisposal Septage Disposal operation is discussed in Section 9.3.3. Domestic septage is placed sequentially in multiple 8.5 References trenches in small lifts, 15 to 20 cm (6 to 8 in.), to minimize drying time. When the trench is filled with 1. U.S. EPA. 1994. A plain English guide to the EPA 503 biosolids domestic septage, 0.6 m (2 ft) of soil should be role. EPN832/R-93/003. placed as a final covering,and new trenches opened. 2. U.S. EPA. 1984. Handbook: Septage treatment and disposal. An alternate management technique allows a filled EPA/625/6-84/009.Cincinnati,OH(Octube,). 158 317-1 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE NATURAL RESOURCES CONSERVATION SERVICE CONSERVATION PRACTICE STANDARD COMPOSTING FACILITY, (No.) Code 317 DEFINITION: facility and its operation as appropriate to minimize the occurrence of equipment hazards This is a treatment component of an agricultural and biological agents during the composting management system for the biological process. stabilization of organic material. Facility Siting. All composting facilities, PURPOSE: including portable rotary drum composters,shall be located according to the minimum siting buffer To reduce the pollution potential of organic distances contained in ADEM Administrative agricultural wastes to surface and ground water. Code Chapter 335.6-7,as amended(AFO/CAFO Rule). CONDITIONS WHERE PRACTICE APPLIES: applies The bottom elevation of the composting facility This practice where: shall be above the seasonal high water table and Organic waste material isgenerated by on soils with an acceptable permeability that does • r9 not allow materials.to c ontaminatellie around agricultural production or pr. essing; y, Production swine and poultry in-vessel • A cam tin facili is a component of a composters shall have a 4-in. minimum thickness Pce 9 tY po concrete Dad un decihe primary and secondary planned agricultural waste managementDins_ Evaluate other site-paving needs in terms system;and, of effects of equipment operation on wearability, soil compaction, and the potential for • A composting facility can be constructed, contamination from compost and petrol products. operated, and maintained without polluting air and/or water resources. Ideally,compost facilities should be kniggl outeideO11021glains. However,if site CRITERIA: restrictions require location within a floodplain, they shall be protected from inundation or General Criteria Applicable to all Purposes damage from a 25 year flood event,or larger. Laws and Regulations. The installation and Locate compost facilities so prevailing winds and operation of the composting facility shall comply landscape arrangement,elements such as building with all federal, state,and local laws, rules,and dorsandprotect landforms,visual and vegetation minimize regulations,and to rules and regulations odors and the resource. established by the state veterinarian's office, state Runoff. Divert surface runoff from outside and local health departments,and the Alabama drainage areas around the compost Department of Environmental Management g facility and. Pa 9 Collect runoff from the compost and utilize (ADEM). Prior approval from the state or dispose of it properly. Evaluate the effects of veterinarian's office must be obtained before changed infiltration conditions on groundwater using compost off the farm of origin. Compost recharge,and evaluate changes in volumes and from single-stage composters and mini- rates of runoff caused by the location of the composters may be spread only on the farm of operation. Properly manage movement of origin. The producer will be responsible for organic material, soluble substances, and securing the necessary permits to install the substances attached to solids carried by runoff. composter and for properly managing the unit on a daily basis. Carbon-Nitrogen Ratio. Calculate the amounts of the various ingredients to establish the desired Safety. Safety and personal protection features carbon-nitrogen ratio(C:N)of the mix to be and practices shall be incorporated into the composted. The initial compost mix shall result in a carbon to nitrogen ratio between 25:1 and 40:1. Conservation practice standards are reviewed periodically,and updated if needed. To obtain the NRCS,AL current version of this standard,contact the Natural Resources Conservation Service. March 2003 317-2 Facility structural elements such as permanent Compost with a greater carbon to nitrogen ratio bins,concrete slabs, and roofs shall meet the can be used if nitrogen immobilization is not a requirements of Alabama NRCS Conservation concern or if composting organic materials that Practice Standard, Waste Storage Facility- decompose at a high rate(or are highly unstable) Code 313. with associated high odor production. Moisture. Provision shall be made for Where more than two ingredients are to be maintaining adequate moisture in the compost blended,the two main ingredients are to be used mix throughout the compost period within the in the analysis for the desired C:N and mixed range of 40 to 65 percent(wet weight basis). The accordingly. Adding up to 50 percent by weight of composting process may become inhibited when other ingredients to improve workability and air moisture falls below approximately 40 percent. movement is permissible as long as the C:N of Water used for moisture control must be free of the added ingredient does not exceed the target deleterious substances. C:N of the compost. Carbon Source. A dependable source of Production swine and poultry in vessel carbonaceous material with a high carbon to composting shall be done under a cover to nitrogen ratio(C:N)shall be stored and available prevent excess moisture from accumulating in by the the compost and contamination of runoff to mix with nitrogen rich waste materials. composting material. Bulking Materials. Add bulking materials to the Temperature of Compost Mix. Manage as necessary to enhance aeration. pe po the compost to attain and then maintain the internal The bulking material may be the carbonaceous temperature for the duration required to meet material used in the mix or a non-biodegradable management goals. material that is salvaged at the end of the compost period. If a non-biodegradable material When the management goal is to reduce is used, provision shall be made for its salvage. pathogens,the compost shall attain a temperature greater than 130°F for at least Odor. Develop a compost mix that encourages 5 days as an average throughout the compost aerobic microbial decomposition and avoids mass. These temperature and time criteria may nuisance odors. be achieved during either primary or secondary composting stages or as the cumulative time of Select carbonaceous material that, when blended with the nitrogenous material,will result in the greater than 130°F in both stages. desired pH. The blended material should have a Tuming/Aeration. The frequency of pH at or slightly below neutral for best odor tuming/aeration shall be appropriate for the control. Where odors do not present a problem, composting method used and to attain the a pH of S to 9 is acceptable, but strong ammonia desired amount of moisture removal and and amine related odors may be present during temperature control while maintaining aerobic the first 2 weeks. degradation. Mortality Composting. When composting the carcasses of animal mortalities,all body parts Pile Configuration. Compost piles for must be covered in least 6 in.of carbonaceous windrowed and static piles should be triangular to material at all times. This applies to any stage of parabolic in cross-sectional form with a base any composting process,except rotary drum width to height ratio of about 2 to 1. Increased composters. For rotary drum composters,follow surface area favorably affects evaporation and the criteria given herein. natural aeration and increases the area exposed to infiltration. Facility Size and Type. Establish the number and size of the composter units on the basis of Composting Period. Continue the composting locally determined normal animal loss rates and process long enough for the compost mix to the amount of raw material planned for active reach the stability level where it can be safely composting plus space required for curing. stored without undesirable odors. It shall also possess the desired characteristics for its use, Selection of the composting facility/method shall such as lack of noxious odor,desired moisture be based on the availability of raw material,the content, level of decomposition of original desired quality of final compost,and the components,and texture. The compost period equipment,labor,time,and land available. may involve primary and secondary composting as required to achieve these characteristics. NRCS,AL March 2003 317-3 Visual inspection and temperature measurements This formula gives reasonable results for a flock will provide needed evaluation of compost status. life up to 75 days. For a flock life over 75 days, If raw body parts remain after a composting cycle, provide primary bin volume for at least 30 days of the material should be turned, covered with at mortality in a minimum of two primary bins. least 6 in.of the carbonaceous material,and Provide secondary volume as needed for the allowed to undergo another composting cycle. storage period required. The resource engineer Test the finished compost as appropriate to should be contacted for guidance in these assure that the required stabilization has been situations. reached. Single-staged composters and mini-composters Storage. Provide properly designed storage may be used only for flocks of up to 45,000 facilities sized for the appropriate storage period. roasters, 60,000 broilers, or 120,000 Cornish Protect composted material from the weather by hens without approval of the state conservation roofs or other suitable covers. Structures must engineer(SCE). Single-stage composters and meet the requirements of Alabama NRCS mini-composters will not be used for any birds of Conservation Practice Standard,Waste Storage 5 lbs.or more. Facility-Code 313. Table 1 provides suggested values to use for Use of Finished Compost Land application of various types of birds and provides the design finished compost shall be in accordance with factors used to determine first stage volume of Alabama NRCS Conservation Practice Standard, multiple stage composting units. The design Nutrient Management-Code 590. factor is multiplied by the number of birds initially placed on farm to find first stage volume. Additional Criteria for Poultry Anticipated mortality is included in this factor. Process. The composting process uses a The total volume is divided by the volume of an simple mixture of dry poultry manure, poultry individual composting bin to determine the carcasses,wheat straw,and water. (Other number of bins required. carbon sources such as peanut hulls,cotton seed hulls, etc., may be used in place of straw. Poultry No. of bins=Total 1st stage volume manure cake has also been found to be an Volume of single bin acceptable material in lieu of dry poultry manure and wheat straw.) The components of the Bins for multiple stage composting are typically mixture must be added according to guidelines to 5 ft. high, 5 ft.deep, and 10 ft. across the front. ensure proper growth of the bacteria and fungi However,depth and width may be adjusted to needed for decomposition. Litter used for accommodate the equipment on hand. The composting should be managed to ensure volume required in the second stage will be equal adequate bacterial counts and temperatures are to the first stage,as minimum. In north Alabama, present. Guidance for operation and the second stage should have at least twice the maintenance of poultry compost facilities can be first stage volume to provide winter storage, found in NRCS Alabama Guide Sheet unless additional storage is otherwise provided. No.AL 317, Composting Poultry Mortality. Mini-composters are to be 4 feet x 4 feet x 4 feet. Design. For meat-producing poultry(broilers, Each bin of the mini-composter shall be built with Cornish hens,etc.)the volume required for each -in.space between each horizontal board. stage of multiple stage composting units is: Commercially supplied single stage units may be up to 5 ft. in one horizontal dimension. Nb x M x Wb x VF = Vol(CF) Alabama engineering form,AL-ENG-25F, Nd provides details on the methodology used in Where: Nb=number of birds in flock sizing facilities and may be used for other types M =mortality rate as a decimal of poultry. Table 2 provides a quick summary of Wb=weight of birds at maturity the number of bins required in the first stage of a VF=volume factor(2.5 for two-stage multi-stage broiler composting unit using composters, 3.75 for single-stage 5 ft.x 5 ft. x 10 ft. bins. and mini-composters) Nd=number of days of flock life NRCS, AL March 2003 317-4 Table 1. Poultry Data and Multiple Stage Composter Design Factors (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) Avg. Multiple Stage Poultry Loss Flock Cycles Mkt. Composter Tvoe Rate Life Per Yr. Wqt. Design Factor (%) (wks.) (lbs.) (cu.ft./bird) Broiler 4.5-5.5 6-7 5.5-6 4.2 0,0125 Roaster Females 3 6 4 4.0 0.0071 Males 8 10 4 7.5 0.0214 Laying Hens 14 60-65 0.9 4.5 0.0035 Breeding Hens 10-12 60-65 0.9 7-8 0.0048 Males 20-25 40-45 1.1 10-12 0.0238 Turkey Female 5-6 13-14 3 14 0.0196 Turkey Lg. Tom 9 16-16.5 3 24 0.0468 Feather Prod. 12 18-18.5 2.5 28-32 0.0741 *((b)as decimal/(c)(days)]x(e)x 2.5=(f) Volume of 1"Stage=(f)x No. of animals Table 2. Number of First Stage Composter Bins Required for Broilers Using 5 ft. x 5 ft.x 10 ft. bins. No. of Lbs.dead/day Volume in No. of bins Broilers On day 42* 1°'Stage** in 1"Stacie*'* —lbs.— —cf.- 20,000 100 250 1 40,000 200 500 2 60,000 300 750 3 80,000 400 1,000 4 100,000 500 1,250 5 120,000 600 1,500 6 140,000 700 1,750 7 160,000 800 2,000 8 180,000 900 2,250 9 200,000 1,000 2,500 10 'Assumes mature weight of 4.2 lbs.;flock loss of 5%. **(Total weight loss near maturity)x(2.5 cf/lb.dead wgt)=cu.ft.of storage required. ***Bin dimensions: 5 ft. x 5 ft. 10 ft.or 250 cf. NRCS,AL March 2003 317-5 Additional Criteria for Swine primary bin floor space per 150 lbs. of annual mortality. Process. Composting of swine involves larger carcasses and bones which are harder to degrade • Volume recommendation-Provide 1 cu.ft.of than poultry. Composting times will be longer and primary composter bin space per 20 lbs. of the compost mix more critical to give good results. annual mortality for pigs heavier than 100 lbs. - Guidance for operation and maintenance for an stacked 5 ft.deep. This equals 1 sq.ft.of in-vessel swine compost facility can be found in primary bin floor space per 100 lbs. of annual Alabama NRCS Guide Sheet No.AL 317A- mortality. Composting Swine Mortality. The suggested recipes in the guide sheet shall be carefully followed • Average bin size= 10 ft. x 6 ft.x 5 ft.deep= until it is determined that the process is working 60 sq.ft.or 300 cubic feet. Properly managed, well. All composting operations should be prepared this should handle about 2,250 lbs.of to dispose of catastrophic mortality according to lightweight carcasses per compost cycle or Alabama NRCS Guide Sheet No.AL 3178- 9,000 lbs. per year(4 cycles). For heavier Emergency Disposal of Dead Animals. feeders, sows, boars,or gilts, it may handle only Design. To allow for catastrophic mortality, 1,500 lbs. per cycle or 4,500 lbs. per year additional capacity should be allowed. The following (3 des). design parameters are suggested as the minimum requirements with carefully managed bins: Growing-Finishing Unit.Assumptions: Mortality Averages 3% • One cubic foot of primary composter should Growout from 40 lbs.to 240 lbs.per hog accommodate about 5 to 8 lbs.of swine 2.75 batches per year(17 weeks in,2 weeks out) carcass at any given time. Nursery pigs and small feeder pigs can be loaded into a bin at Average death loss per batch: 7 to 8 lbs. per cubic foot. Heavy feeders and 2,625 lbs.of carcass per 625 animals finished sows should be loaded into primary bins at 4,200 lbs.of carcass per 1000 animals finished about 5 lbs. per cubic foot. Average death loss per year: • The secondary bin size should not be less than 7,220 lbs.of carcass per 625 head capacity the primary volume,and should be twice the 11.550 lbs.of carcass per 1000 head capacity primary volume for winter storage in north Alabama, unless additional storage is otherwise Number of standard size primary bins: 2 bins minimum,regardless of facility size provided. 1.6 bin per 625 head capacity • Properly managed primary bins loaded with 2.6 bins per 1000 head capacity small pigs and lightweight feeder carcasses can be turned into the secondary bin in 60 days or Middle or P2 Unit. Assumptions: less after the last carcass is placed in the bin. Mortality averages 3% Allowing 90 days per cycle for filling and Growout from 10 lb.to 601b.per hog composting,each bin can be filled 4 times per 7 batches per year(6 weeks in,2 weeks out) year with the lighter carcasses. Average death loss per batch: • Heavy feeders and sows may have to stay more 1,680 lbs.of carcass per 1600 animals finished than 60 days in the primary bin. Allowing Average death loss per year 120 days per cycle for filling and composting, 11,760 lbs.of carcass per 1600 head capacity each bin can be filled no more than 3 times per year. Number of standard size primary bins: 2 bins minimum,regardless of facility size • Volume recommendation-Provide 1 cu.ft.of 1.3 bins per 1,600 head capacity primary composter bin space per 30 lbs.of annual mortality for pigs up to about 100 lbs. - stacked 5 ft.deep. This equals 1 sq.ft.of NRCS,AL March 2003 317-6 Farrowlnu unit. Assumptions: volume requirements for a specific flock can vary Sow and boar mortality averages 3% greatly from this design volume. In case of larger Average weight all sows,boars,and gins=375 lbs. than normal losses,excess material may be 19 live pigs born per sowlgift per year removed from the rotary drum, stockpiled on a concrete pad,and covered with at least 6 in.of 2 dead pigs born per sow/gift per year Pig mortality averages 3% carbonaceous or bulking material. The material weight=3 to 40 lbs. shall be protected from rain,and will then finish the Pig composting process as a static pile. Average death loss per year per 100 sows: Operation. The rotary drum composter shall be 1200 lbs.sows,boars,gilts operated and maintained in accordance with the 600 lb s.lbs.fetus manufacturer's instructions. On initial start-up,the 1200 lbs.pigs drum is filled to one-fourth capacity with Number of standard size primary bins: carbonaceous material. Mortalities and an 2 bins minimum,regardless of facility size approximately equal volume of carbonaceous 1 bin per 150 sow rapac y material are added and the drum rotated until the contents are thoroughly mixed. The drum shall not Additional Criteria for Rotary Drum Composting be filled above approximately 75%of its total height in order to insure a thorough and complete mixing of Process. Rotary drum composting uses a drum the contents when the drum is rotated. The partially filled with composting material that can be moisture content and temperature of the compost rotated by mechanical means. As organic material should be monitored daily during the composting is added to the drum,the drum is rotated to mix the period. Appropriate steps should be taken as new ingredients and add oxygen to the existing needed to maintain the moisture content and ingredients. This results in a faster composting temperature at the required levels. process than with other methods. Due to the short cycle time required when used for production Additional Requirements. The state veterinarian poultry, it is critical that the compost mix be will issue a permit for the use of a rotary drum managed for optimum temperatures. This may require keeping a pile of material"hot"for use in the composter in Alabama,and the following are drum. This may be done by mixing various required during its operation: carbonaceous and bulking materials at the proper moisture in a pile outside the drum so that it • A daily worksheet shall be kept showing date, preheats to 130°F or more before being added to age of birds, number of dead birds added, the drum composter. pounds of dead birds added,temperature inside composter as well as outside temperature, Design. Rotary drum design capacity is determined by the actual weight of mortalities during the cycle • After the flock is sold,final mortality shall be divided by the design drum loading rate of 3 lbs.of placed in composter and rotated each day for mortality per gallon of total drum capacity. When three days,and then it shall rest for three days. used for poultry,the actual weight of mortalities can If the internal temperatures have been sufficient be determined from producer records,or the (above 130°F),compost can then be spread, following formula may be used for determining composter capacity: • The compost shall be spread on the grower's premise. If it cannot,a permit shall be obtained Nb x Mx Wb x WF = Vol(Gal) from the state veterinarian or animal industries 3 office for an alternative solution,and Where: Nb= number of birds in flock • The rotary drum composter itself must be M =modality rate as a decimal maintained either under a suitable shelter or on Wb=weight of birds at maturity a minimum 4 in.thick concrete pad extending WF =weight factor(use 0.25 for birds with 4 ft. in front and back of the unit, or both. Wb of 4.5 lbs.or less, 0.33 for larger birds) The state veterinarian's office may be contacted to obtain the permit application form and worksheets. This design capacity may be used to select the size and number of rotary drum units required. Actual NRCS,AL March 2003 317-7 Additional Criteria for Other Animals and Food for a specified period of time. Correct proportions of Processing Wastes the various compost ingredients are essential to minimize odors and to avoid attracting flies, rodents, Other animals and food processing wastes from and other small animals. agricultural operations can successfully be composted. Guidance from the state environmental Carbon Source. A dependable source of engineer on design criteria shall be used in the carbonaceous material must be available. The design. material should have a high carbon content and high carbon to nitrogen ratio(C:N). Wood chips, CONSIDERATIONS: sawdust, peanut hulls, straw, corn cobs, bark, peat moss,and well-bedded horse manure are good Types. Four types of composting operations are sources of carbon. covered in this standard:aerated windrows, static piles, in-vessel,and rotary drum. Aerated windrows Moisture Control Large amounts of water are are more suited to large volumes of organic material needed during the composting process because that are managed by power equipment used to turn operating temperatures evaporate water. A source the composting material periodically. Periodic of water should be available for compost pile turning re-aerates the windrows, promoting the moisture control from start-up through completion. composting process. Proper moisture facilitates the composting process and helps control odors. A mixture that is too wet Organic material in static piles is initially mixed to a will become anaerobic, creating potentially offensive homogeneous condition and not turned again conditions. throughout the composting process. Static pile material must have the proper moisture content and Equipment Needs. Appropriate equipment should bulk density to facilitate air movement throughout be available for mixing,turning, and hauling the pile. Forced air might be necessary to facilitate composted material and carbonaceous material. the composting process. Appropriate long stem thermometers should be available for monitoring the temperatures during the In-vessel composting in a totally enclosed structure composting process. is performed on a blended organic material under conditions where temperature and air flow are Bulking Materials. Bulking materials may be strictly controlled. In-vessel composting also added to enhance air flow within the composting includes naturally aerated processes where organic material. This will result in higher composting materials are layered in the vessel in a specified temperatures and a more efficient composting sequence. Layered, in-vessel materials are usually process. Piles that are too compact will inhibit the turned once to facilitate the process. Vessel composting process. The carbonaceous material dimensions must be consistent with equipment to can be considered as a bulking agent. Where it is be used for management of compost. desirable to salvage carbonaceous material, provisions for removing the material, such as Rotary drum composting uses a round,enclosed screening, should be made. drum which can be mechanically rotated. The unit may be stationary or portable for direct field Management. Composting operations require spreading. Rotation of the drum aids in aeration close management. Management capabilities of and mixing of the material and facilitates the the operator and availability of labor should be composting process. If properly managed, this assessed as part of the planning and implementing method results in faster decomposition and a process. smaller volume of compost than other methods. Economics. Benefits associated with the ultimate Process. Composting is accomplished by mixing use of the composted material should be compared an energy source(carbonaceous material)with a to the capital expenditure and operating costs of the nutrient source(nitrogenous material)in a composting operations. In addition to cost return, prescribed manner to meet aerobic microbial benefits can include environmental protection, metabolic requirements. The process is performed improved handling,disposal of dead poultry and under specific moisture and temperature conditions other farm animal mortalities,odor control, and reduced need for storage volume. NRCS, AL March 2003 317-8 Effects of Composting on Water Quality. PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS: Composting should improve water quality by eliminating alternative methods of disposal that Plans and specifications for organic composting could pollute surface and ground water. Also, since facilities shall be in keeping with this standard and poultry compost is higher in organic nitrogen than shall describe the requirements for applying the broiler litter, the potential for leaching and loss in practice to achieve its intended purpose. Plans and surface runoff will be reduced. The bacteria and specifications include construction plans, drawings, viruses associated with the carcasses and the job sheets,construction specifications, narrative manure are essentially destroyed, making compost statements in conservation plans,or other similar a safer fertilizer than plain broiler litter. Caution documents. For single-stage and mini-composters, must still be taken to prevent spreading near the conservation plan will include a statement surface waters because the high level of organic indicating that the owner/operator has been advised matter, if allowed to enter water, could cause of possible problems with this type of system, oxygen depletion problems. including fly and odor problems, consolidation and difficulty of removal of the material, high manual Rotary Drum Composting. Protect the compost labor requirements, and rain entering the system. A within the unit from excess moisture during rainfall written operation and maintenance plan shall be by providing some form of cover for the unit. developed with full knowledge and input of the Consider the equipment required to operate a owner-operator and included with the documents portable unit during both the composting process provided to the owner-operator. The Construction and the land application of the compost. Specification for Alabama NRCS Conservation Practice Standard,Waste Storage Facility- Consider the type and availability of material to be Code 313,will be utilized for the construction of a used in the composting recipe. Maintain a"hot' compost facility. litter pile to facilitate the process. OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE: Consider the method to be used to uniformly spread the compost from a stationary rotary drum unit. Temperature. For best results,operating temperatures of the composting material should be Facility Siting. All composting facilities, including 130°F to 170°F once the process has begun. portable rotary drum composters,should be located Operating temperatures should be reached within according to the Minimum Distance Requirements about 7 days and remain elevated for up to 14 days for Waste Storage Facilities in Alabama NRCS to facilitate efficient composting. The material Conservation Practice Standard,Waste Storage should remain at or above 110°F for the remainder Facility-Code 313. of the designated composting period. For best results, temperatures inside a rotary drum General. Develop an initial compost mix with a composter should be maintained above 130°F carbon to nitrogen ratio of at least 30:1 to reduce during the composting process. most offensive odors. If temperatures fall significantly during the Minimize odors and nitrogen loss by selecting composting period and odors develop,or if the carbonaceous material that,when blended with the material does not reach operating temperatures, nitrogenous material, provides a balance of investigate piles for moisture content, porosity,and nutrients and porous texture for aeration. thoroughness of mixing. Compost managed at the Maximize solar warming by aligning piles north to required temperatures will favor destruction of any south configured with moderate side slopes. pathogens and weed seeds. Uncovered outdoor composting may require Excessive temperature in the composted material of collecting runoff water from the area for storage and 190°F or more can indicate the potential for a fire to land application. Storage structures must meet the develop. To prevent fires in litter or compost piles, requirements of Alabama NRCS Conservation follow the recommendations in Alabama NRCS Practice Standard,Waste Storage Facility- Guide Sheet No.AL 313-Preventing Fires in Litter Code 313. In order to prevent pending and Storage Structures. sogginess, do not locate piles(windrows)across the slope. r-. NRCS,AL March 2003 317-9 Aeration. Heat generated by the process causes Land Applying the Compost. Compost should be piles to dehydrate. As the process proceeds, analyzed for nutrient content and land applied in material consolidates,and the volume of voids accordance with Alabama NRCS Conservation through which air flows decreases. Materials Practice Standard, Nutrient Management- selected for the composting mix should provide for Code 590. adequate air movement throughout the composting process. Periodically turning the piles and Other Animal and Food Processing Wastes. The maintaining proper moisture levels for windrows and operation and maintenance of composting facilities static piles will normally provide adequate aeration. for other dead animals and for food processing wastes from agricultural operations can be similar to Nutrients. Keep compost well aerated to minimize those for poultry and swine. Engineers should nitrogen loss by denitrification. Keep pH at neutral receive guidance from the state environmental or slightly lower to avoid nitrogen loss by engineer for specific operation and maintenance ammonification. High amounts of available carbon requirements. will aid nitrogen immobilization. Phosphorus losses will be minimized when the composting process is REFERENCES managed according to the requirements of this standard. Include compost nutrients in nutrient ADEM Administrative Code Chapter 335-6-7,as management plans and determine the effects of use amended(AFO/CAFO Rule). and management of nutrients on the quality of NRCS Alabama Conservation Practice Standards surface and ground water as related to human and Nutrient Management-Code 590 livestock consumption. Waste Storage Facility-Code 313 Waste Utilization-Code 633 Testing Needs. Test compost material for carbon, Alabama NRCS Guide Sheets nitrogen, moisture,and pH if compost fails to reach Composting Poultry Mortality-AL 317 Composting Swine Mortality-AL 317A desired temperatures or if odor problems develop. The finished compost material should be Emergency in rif Dead Animals-AL 317B periodically tested for constituents that could cause AlabamaAEGNRCS-Worksheet kg Forms plant phytotoxicity as the result of application to AL-ENG-25E- Requirementsto Determine Litter crops. Composted materials that are prepared for Production and Storage for the retail market willrequire testing for labeling Poultry AL-ENG-25F ons. AL-ENG-25F-Worksheet to Determine Size of purposes. Dead Bird Composter/Incinerator Alabama Poultry Waste Management-Waste Maintaining the Structures. The compost Utilization and Facilities Design Workbook. structure should be inspected at least twice each Arkansas Swine Composting Guidelines. year when portions of the facility are empty. NEH Part 651,Agricultural Waste Management Replace any damaged wooden parts or hardware. Field Handbook,Chapter 10. Roof structures should be examined for structural integrity. Walls of composters that are constructed with lumber treated to a 0.25 pcf retention level may need replacing during the life of the structure. NRCS,AL March 2003 WW4 ✓c,%u5ctu ,i7v/nr�rubsl�� rc� i�/lcf75}Yurts/2�oa /�uc;d5ril�<y pdF ENSURING FOOD SAFETY Panel Manager-Dr. Susan Sumner,Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University Program Director- Dr.Etta Saltos Safety of food products is of paramount importance to the producer,processor,distributor,and consumer. The research program in food safety focuses on research questions involving disease-causing microorganisms,their products,naturally occurring toxicants which contaminate food. The program emphasizes detection,prevention,and control. Projects may focus either on pre- or post-harvest/slaughter origin of the microbial agent or toxicant. Additionally, the program supports research on the identification of obstacles to adopting safe food habits, with particular emphasis on factors affecting consumer attitudes and behavior,as well as the development of intervention strategies to improve food safety habits. 2000-02590 Novel Molecular Approaches to Eradicating E.coil O157 From the Bovine GI Tract Foster,J.W. University of South Alabama;Department of Microbiology and Immunology;Mobile,AL 36688 Grant 01-35201-09955; $230,810; 3 Years Entemhernonhagic E. colt(EHEC)cause a variety of gastrointestinal infections. EHEC serotype 0157:H7 has emerged as an important foodbome pathogen that threatens many aspects of the food industry. A crucial component of 0157:H7 pathogenesis and epidemiology is its ability to survive environmental stresses imposed by the infected host. The sucrecsful pathogen survives this assault through the induction of microbial stress response systems. The investigators have identified two EHEC stress response systems essential for this organism to survive in the bovine gastrointestinal tract,an important reservoir of 0157:H7.This project will test strategies designed to corrupt these stress response systems, thereby rendering O157 unable to survive in the gastrointestinal tract. (Strategy 1)A natural E. coli peptide was found that dramatically inhibits the activity of as, an important stress response sigma factor required to transcribe numerous stress response genes. The smallest peptide retaining anti-as activity will be determined and its activity optimized for use as an antimicrobial agent (Strategy 2)Several O157:H7- specific bacteriophage have been identified and will be used to design an antimicrobial phage•cocktail• that will be tested for its ability to kill O157 In the calf shedding modeL In addition to phage that can kill O157,other phage may be useful as O157 •smart bombs• designed to deliver genes encoding antimicrobial peptides directly to O157. Although this project specifically addresses the problem of O157 in the farm environment, its success will have a broad impact on the design and implementation of antimicrobial therapies for many infectious agents. 2000-02589 Effect of Phagosome Activities on Canspylobacter jejuni Pathogenesis Joens,L.A. University of Arizona;Department of Veterinary Science and Microbiology;Tucson,AZ 85721 Grant 01-35201-09948; $250,000; 3 Years Campylobacter jejuni is considered responsible for 3 million cases of acute gastroenteritis per year,making it the single most common cause of bacterial gastn>enteritis in the U.S.Few factors associated with C.jejuni virulence have been identified. Progress in this important research area has been hampered by the lack of genetic tools (transposons,transduction systems)to examine or identify virulence factors. To date,roughly 90 C jejuni genes have been characterized,only six of which are related to virulence. Therefore,the construction of the katA mutant and the demonstration that catalase production is important in the survival of the organism in phagocytic cells is a -- major step toward understanding mechanisms this pathogen uses to successfully interact with the host and cause disease. The investigators will determine what effect phagosome acidity has on the survival of C.jejuni. The maturity of the C.jejuni-phagosome will be determined. Inhibitors to the formation of the respiratory burst and precursors for nitrous oxide production will be used to abrogate the bactericidal activity of the phagosome. Finally,using the newborn pig model,the investigators will examine the pathogenicity of both the sodB and katA mutant 2000-02446 Immunoelectrochemical/Optical Biosensor with a Capillary Bioseparator/Bioreactor for Rapid Detection of Pathogens in Poultry and Meat Products Li,Y.;Liu,Y. University of Arkansas;Department of Poultry Science;Fayetteville,AR 72701 Grant 01-35201-10056; $130,000; 1.5 Years The overall goal is to develop a biosensor system for rapid detection of several major pathogens in poultry and meat products. Three phases will be followed to approach the goal: (1) design and fabricate a capillary immune-separator/bioreactor for bacterial separation and enzymatic amplification; (2) develop a flow-injection biosensor system based on the in n n-separatovbioreactor and electrochemical/optical transducers;and(3)evaluate the biosensor system using processed raw and cooked poultry and meat products. In Phase I, to be fimded first, an hmnwn-separator/bioreactor will be designed and constructed using a capillary column with immobilized antibodies.A layer of active membrane will be coated on the inner wall of the capillary for bonding of antibodies.By injecting samples and then enzyme-labeled antibodies,antibody-pathogen-enzyme labeled antibody conjugates will be formed in the capillary. Substrates will be injected to generate the signals required for electrochemical/optical measurements.The conditions of antibody immobilization,bacterial separation,enzymatic reaction and amplification will be optimized to maximize the capture efficacy and biological signals and minimize noises.Major pathogens found in taw and cooked poultry and meat products,including Salmonella typhimurium,Listeria monocytogenes,E.soli and Campylobacter jejuni,will be tested. This proposed research will provide the poultry and meat industry with new technology for rapid detection of pathogens on site or on line. This will help the industry enhance HACCP programs, minimize product recalls and clear international trade barriers due to microbial contamination. Consequently,this will help the whole society ensure food safety,and reduce foodbome diseases and related medical cost. 2000-02635 Factors Affecting Colonization of Plants by Human Pathogenic Bacteria Lindow,S.E.; Suslow,T. University of California,Berkeley;Department of Plant and Microbial Biology;Berkeley,CA 94720-3102 Grant 01-35201-10058;$275,000; 2 Years The surfaces of plants are normally colonized by large numbers of bacteria,called epiphytes,which include plant pathogens,other saprophytic and beneficial bacteria as well as human pathogenic bacteria such as E. coli and Salmonella. Preliminary studies have shown that while E. soli and Salmonella strains can grow on moist plants,they are hypersensitive to the stress of dry leaf surfaces compared to other bacteria found on plants indicating that stress tolerance is a determining factor in their epiphytic colonization.We will determine the differences among successful plant colonists and human pathogens in such intrinsic stress tolerance by measuring their growth and survival after inoculation onto plants under a variety of controlled conditions as well as in the field. This information will enable the extensive background information on other leaf surface colonists to be extrapolated to predict the behavior of human pathogens on plants and to devise better methods to avoid or eradicate human pathogens on plants. While epiphytes can occur as solitary cells, the majority of the population often occurs in relatively large aggregates which can contribute to the survival of stresses on leaves and successful immigration to a leaf We will determine the extent to which the survival of human pathogens on leaves is dependent on the numbers of indigenous bacteria present on a leaf and, at small scales,will study the role of bacterial aggregates in survival and proliferation of such strains using microscopic techniques to quantify and evaluate the viability of bacteria on leaves. 2000-02539 DNA Adenine Methylase Mutants of S typhimurium as Modified Live Vaccines in 2 Calves Mahan,M.J. University of California,Santa Barbara;Dept.of Molecular,Cellular,and Developmental Biology,Santa Barbara, CA 93106 Grant 01-35201-10188;$310,000;3 Years Salmonella is the most commonly isolated infectious enteric bacterial pathogen of dairy cattle and the most common disease associated with human consumption of beef and dairy products. In recent years there has been a rise in the incidence and severity of human cases of salmonellosis,in part due to the emergence of the antimicrobial resistant S. typhimurium in cattle populations. On large commercial dairy fanns it is very common for cattle to be exposed to many Salmonella strains and for calves to become infected shortly after birth. Under these conditions it would be desirable to have a Salmonella vaccine capable of stimulating immtmity to many Salmonella strains. The overall goal of this proposal is to test the hypothesis that S. typhimurium lacking the DNA adenine methylase(Dam) are effective live vaccines against Salmonella infection of cattle. This proposal is based on our rcwrh discovery that S. typhimurium containing mutations in the Dam gene are totally avirulent yet confer full protection against murine typhoid fever when used as live vaccines. We propose to determine whether Dam-derivatives of Salmonella are attenuated for virulence in calves and whether they can serve as live vaccines that elicit immunity to many Salmonella strains. The proposed vaccines will have a profound influence on reducing salmonellosis in cattle and on improving the safety of beef and dairy products. Moreover,these vaccines may have utility in other livestock species,which would provide a means of controlling Salmonella in livestock production systems and enhancing the safety of the food fly. 2000-02490 Mortality Kinetics of Bacterial Populations Exposed to High Pressure Hoover,D.G.;Daniels,W.B. University of Delaware;Department of Animal&Food Sciences and Department of Physics&Astronomy;Newark, DE 19717-1303 Grant 01-35201-09947; $230,000; 3 Years The goal of this project is to collect and analyze data from the high hydrostatic pressure processing(HPP) of microbial pathogens and surrogate organisms in foods using a multiple-vessel pressure unit designed for measurement of microbial destruction kinetics. This research project will provide information germane to appropriate processing parameters which can be applied to assure the microbiological safety of foods preserved using HPP. Modeling the information will provide a summary of the experimental data for use in future commercial applications. This will increase in importance as HPP becomes more readily accepted by the food industry. U.S.and international consumers are demanding minimally processed foods that resemble raw or fresh-hilce products in sensory quality(e.g., flavor,texture and appearance)and nutrient content as compared to their highly heat-processed counterparts,while retaining similar levels of safety and convenience. This project will specifically address the nonlinear nature of HPP-derived semllogarithmic survival curves. Since a logarithmic(first-order)rate of death is normally assumed in the predictive microbiology of HPP, there is a food safety concern associated with extrapolation of the process end-point beyond the linear region. This practice canes the danger of underestimating HPP-resistant organisms remaining in the processed food. Since limited experience and history exist on use of HPP in the production of large quantities of food,the reliance on first-order kinetics to project the level of risk and process effectiveness warrants examination to ensure the safety of HPP foods. 2000-02512 Microbiological Safety of Citrus Fruit for Juice Processing Goodrich,RM.;Parish,M.E. University of Florida;Citrus Research&Education Center;Lake Alfred,FL 33850 Grant 01-35201-10059; $200,000;2 Years Fruit products such as citrus juices have traditionally been considered'low-risk"with mcspeut to foodbome 3 illness. High levels of acidity, characteristic of citrus juices, have not typically supported the growth of human pathogens. Furthermore, because almost all citrus juices undergo significant food processing steps such as concentration,freezing,aseptic packaging,and/or pasteurization,the overall food safety risk to Americans consuming citrus juices has been quite minimal throughout the 50-year history of mass citrus juice marketing. However,in the last 5 years,a number of high profile cases of foodb rwe illness have been linked to the consumption of fruit juices, particularly apple and orange juices.In most of these cases,the juice was consumed in a fresh(norrpasteuriaed)fond Fresh juice is preferred by some consumers who view it as a more natural product with superior flavor characteristics. However,it is clear that fresh juice presents a potential food safety risk,and the U.S.Food and Drug Administration (FDA),who is charged with ensuring the safety of flesh juices,has little actual data available to assess the extent of these risks Successful completion of this project, which will extensively evaluate the microbial contamination of oranges entering a juice extraction facility over the course of 2 fruit seasons, will provide data to both fresh and processed juice product's regarding the potential for further foodbome illness associated with citrus juice. This research will directly impact an industry with ammst$10 billion in corusmrer sales,and provide infomuation from which science-based food safety regulations can be forted. 2000-02630 Phase variation and expression of capsular polysaccharide in Vibrio vulnificus Wright,A.C. University of Florida;Department of Food Science and Human Nutrition;Gainesville,FL 32611 New Investigator Award;Grant 01-35201-09954;$260,000;3 Years Vibrio vulnifncus is a natural bacterial inhabitant of bays and estuaries along the entire U.S. coastline. It causes devastating disease in humans and continues to be the leading cause of mortalities related to seafood consumption. Disease is primarily associated with eating raw oysters or with exposure of wounds to seawater. Aggressive attempts to increase public awareness have not been successful in reducing the number of cases, and increased dependence on foreign seafood markets and aquaculture may exacerbate the problem. The underlying disease mechanisms are still elusive;however, several laboratories have demonstrated that most, if not all,virulent strains produce a polysaccharide capsule. Interestingly,when grown under laboratory conditions,about 1 in every 1000 encapsulated cells spontaneously becomes capsule deficient and is no longer able to cause disease. This process is called phase variation and is a common theme for a number of bacterial species. The process is reversible, and deficient strains can recover capsular polysaccharide (CPS) expression. Phase variation may be driven by selective pressure front environmental factors such as starvation or stress. The genetic basis for phase variation in V. vulnifncus is unlmown. The investigators-previous work described factors that regulate CPS expression and identified a genetic locus for V. vulnifncus CPS. Phase variation correlated with rearrangements at this locus. The proposed research will investigate the genetic basis for phase variation, and its influence on survival in the oyster. These studies should elucidate important disease determinants, increase understanding of the relationship of V. vu/nif cus to oysters,and perhaps provide future technologies with applications to seafood and aquaculture industries. 2000-02515 Persistent Colonization by E. coli O157:117 in Ruminants Comick,N.A. Iowa State University;Veterinary Medical Research Institute;Ames,IA 50011 New Investigator Award;Grant 01-35201-10057; $185,000;3 Years Escherichia coli O157:H7 and other Shiga toxin-producing E. coli (STEC) cause acute gastrointestinal illness in people.The majority of human disease is associated with the consumption of contaminated foods,many of which originate from cattle, The principal problem appeals to be that STEC become established in the intestinal tract of mature cattle or sheep,which then serve as a reservoir. The long-term goal of the proposed research is to eliminate cattle and sheep as a reservoir of STEC. The central hypothesis is that virulence factors produced by STEC confer an advantage to the organism that allows for the development of an asymptomatic carrier-shedder state.In preliminary C studies,the investigator has developed a sheep model for the cant-shedder state of E. coli O157:H7.This model will be used to complete two objectives to test the hypothesis: 1)Determine if intimin(a bacterial protein required for one type of attachment in the intestine)is required for E.coli O157:H7 to establish a persistent population in mature sheep. 2)Determine if Shiga toxin increases the population of E.colt O157:H7 in mature sheep. This research will benefit US agriculture by determining if either intimin or Shiga toxin should be fittther investigated as a potential vaccine candidate to eliminate E. coli O157:H7 from cattle and sheep. 2000-02908 Whole Genome Scan for Host-Adapted Salmonella Pathogenicity Genes in Swine Lichtensteiger,C.A.;Vimr,E.R University of Illinois,Urbana-Champaign;Department of Veterinary Pathobiology;Urbana,IL 61802 Grant 01-35201-09949;$250,611; 3 Years Salmonella is a top foodborne pathogen of concern in the pork industry. Pork-based salmonellosis starts with carcass contamination at the slaughter house with feces from infected pigs (non-ill carrier pigs). Raising Salmonella-free animals is the ultimate means to prevent foodbome salmonellosis. The mechanism of Salmonella infection (coloniation) varies with animal host and bacterial species. To gain basic information on colonization mechanisms of Salmonella in pigs,we propose a functional genonics study of S. typhimurium and S. choleraesuis. In our study we will generate signature tagged mutants of Salmonella and screen the pools of mutants for loss of ability to colonize pigs. The mutants will have a random gene tagged;this will inactivate the gene and provide a unique nuclear tag for mutant identification. Mutants that fail to colonize will be confirmed attenuated by a mixed challenge infection with wild type Salmonella. The signature tag will also allow cloning,sequencing,characterizing the gene that was inactivated. Some of the colonization genes will have functional homologues in the DNA database;while others will have structural homologues previously unknown to be involved in colonization or be novel genes not previously known. The colonization genes or their protein products are targets for future applied studies to develop means to raise Salmonella-fire pigs. These means include novel vaccines that prevent colonization or competitive exclusion cultures by non-pathogenic bacteria that inhibit colonization by pathogenic bacteria 2000-02587 Genetic Determinants of Salmonella in Chickens and Mice Maloy,S. University of Illinois,Urbana-Champaign;Depasunent of Microbiology;Urbana, IL 61801 Grant 01-35201-09950; $195,000; 3 Years Salmonella enterica are a large group of bacteria that are a major ea»sr of food poisoning. A common same ofhuman food poisoning is via Salmonella strains that infect fame anrtnatc Salmonella strains produce distinct disease symptoms in different animals. Some Salmonella strains cause relatively mild disease,but strains with new , pernicious virulence properties arise rapidly. Such new strains often seem to have acquired changes in host-specificity that allowed them to infect a different animal host.If we understood what determines host specificity we could develop approaches to limit this problem,but very little is known about what determines the host-specificity of bacteria.Our experiments will use genetic approaches to compare Salmonella Enteritidis,which has a broad host range and infects humans, chickens, and mice, with Salmonella Pullorum, a host-specific strain that only infects chickens. We plan to identify the genes that determine host-specificity in these two strains of Salmonella. These studies will provide novel approaches to limit the development and spread of virulent Salmonella strains between farm animals and from farm animals to humans,and approaches to circumvent the emergence of new infectious diseases in farm animals. 2000-02457 Sources of Genetic Resistance to Reduce Fumonisin in Corn-based Foods White,D.G.;Pataky,J.K. University of Illinois,Urbana-Champaign;Department of Crop Sciences;Urbana, IL 61801 5 • Grant 01-35201-10060;$175,000;2 Years Fumonisins are mycatoxins produced by the fungi Fusarium verticillioides and F.prof feratum. These two fimgi cause Fusarium ear rot which is the most commonly occurring ear and kernel rot disease of corn. Both fungi also are often found in association with non-rotted kernels. Fumonisins cause serious health problems in animals and potentially in humans. Because of the large and diverse number of corn-based food products consumed by humans, even a minimal possibility of human health problems associated with consumption of corn products creates a serious public health concern. The long term goal of this project is to identify genetic resistance to Fusarium ear rot and to the production of fumonisins in corn that can be incorporated into widely grown commercially acceptable corn hybrids. Grain of resistant hybrids will have lower levels of fumonisins and the corn-based food products that can be made from them will also have low levels of fumonisins. In order to accomplish this goal we will evaluate 1,200 com inbred lines, representing a large diversity of corn genotypes, in Fl crosses with a susceptible widely used, agronomically acceptable,corn inbred. Inbreds that are resistant in Fl crosses will then be studied to further identify those that can be used to create resistant,commercially acceptable,corn hybrids. 2000-02627 The Effect of Antibiotics on Shiga toxin Phage Movement in Ruminants Acheson D.W.K. New England Medical Center,Division of Infectious Diseases;Boston,MA 02111 Grant 01-35201-10168;$240,000; 3 Years Shiga toxin-producing E.coli(STEC)such as E. coli O157:H7 are Unpin Lint emerging pathogens in the United States. Following intestinal infection, the production of Shiga toxins by STEC results in serious and fife-threatening complications. The genes encoding these potent toxins are present on viral particles known as bacteriophages. We have previously found that when mice are infected with O157 treating them with certain antibiotics leads to an increase in toxin expression.The antibiotics also lead to increased movement of the viruses from the O157 strain into other E. coli in the mouse intestine.Our hypothesis is that certain antibiotics used in agriculture lead to increased movement of toxin genes carried by the viruses from one bacterial strain to another in the intestine of farm animals such as sheep and cattle.Our project will examine the effects of antibiotics used in agriculture on the movement of labeled toxin bacteriophages in the intestines of sheep. If this occurs in farm animals it is not only a critical issue that has to be considered in the use of certain antibiotics, but may go a long way in explaining the emergence of Shiga toxin positive O157 and other STEC serotypes. By understanding more about the variations between different Shiga toxin-encoding bacteriophages and learning what drives them to move from one strain to another we will be better placed to prevent the spread of bacteriophages and the potential evolution of a Shiga toxin-producing organism even more deadly than E. coli O157:H7. 2000-02600 Characterization of Multiple Antibiotic Resistance Among Enterohemorrhagic Escherichia con Meng,J.;White,D.G.;DebRoy,C;Zhao,S;Wagner,D. University of Maryland,College Park;Department of Nutrition and Food Science; College Park,MD 20742 Grant 01-35201-09951;$250,000; 3 Years During the past decade, bacteria that cause human diseases have developed resistance to many of the antibiotics commonly used for treatment. Excessive use for treating animal diseases,and subtherapeutic applications of antibiotics for disease prevention and growth promotion in animal husbandry may have played a significant role in accelerating the emergence of antibiotic-resistant bacteria Such organisms can then be transferred from animals to humans through the foal chain.Enterohanonhagic E.coli(EHEC)have been a significant cause of foodbome illness in the United States. These pathogens also have been acquiring resistance phenotypes. In order to control the emergence and spread of antibiotic resistance, we need to better understand the trend of resistance and the mechanisms that lead to antibiotic resistance in foodbome pathogens. The present study is aimed at determining the progression of antimicrobial resistance phenotypes among EHEC isolates of animal and human origin over the past (p' • thirty years. At the conclusion of the proposed research,the investigators will generate baseline data on the trend of antibiotic resistance in EHEC which may help elucidate the role that the use of antibiotics in food animals plays in the development of antibiotic resistance in foodbome pathogens. The will also have a better understanding of the genetic basis of the development of antibiotic resistance in these pathogens and of how heterologous resistance determinants are acquired and disseminated. 2000-02632 A Sensitive,Accurate and Rapid Method for Detection of Foodborne Pathogens Kim,C.H.;Vayda,M.E.;Boettcher,K. University of Maine,Department of Biochemistry,Microbiology,and Molecular Biology,Orono,ME 04469 Strengthening Award;Grant 01-35201-09951; $180,000;2 Years Our ability to ensure the safety of the nations food supply depends on the availability of accurate,rapid, dependable and inexpensive detection systems.The most reliable methods for assessing food contamination involve enrichment and selective culture conditions.Although sensitive enough to identify a single colony-forming unit,culture assays are time consuming, typically requiring 4 to 7 days. Over the past decade, researchers worldwide have developed several rapid diagnostic agents for common food contaminants. However, rapid and sensitive implementation of these procedures for routine food screening is hampered by the requirement for skilled operators, inhibition by food constituents, and expense. In this proposal, the investigators seek to develop an inexpensive, sensitive,nor-polymerise chain reaction assay that is simple enough to be used by food processors or regulators to screen for known food contaminants. The approach employs rolling circle amplification of pathogen targets using sequence specific"molecular padlocks",which we have used for detection of other bacterial targets. We will first demoitsuate the efficacy of this assay for L. monocytogenes,because of potential application to the dairy,blueberry, potato, meat processing and seafood industries in Maine. The long range goal of this study is to develop an automated procedure using a suite of molecular padlocks to screen for suspected food pathogens including Salmonella spp.,E. colt O157:H7 and S. aureus. 2000-02527 Incorporating Humidity into Microbial Inactivation Models for Convection Cooking of Meats Marks,B.P; Smith,D.M.;Ryser,E.T. Michigan State University;Department of Agricultural Engineering;East Lansing,MI 48824-1323 Grant 01-35201-09952;$130,000; 2 Years Major growth in the market for fully-cooked meat products and recent changes in federal regulations have resulted in a significant need to validate process lethality in commercial cooking systems. Regulations state that processors must validate new or altered process schedules by scientifically supportable means. However,existing models for pathogen inactivation, based on limited-scope laboratory tests, are insufficient to predict results in commercial convection cooking environments. Preliminary results suggest that differences in process humidity are a primary cause for this insufficiency. Consequently,the long-term goal of the proposed research is to develop improved methods for design and operation of thermal processes,based on the critical control criterion of pathogen inactivation. The specific objectives are: (1) To develop a quantitative, population-based model for thermal inactivation of a Salmonella"cocktail"in ground poultry breast meat subjected to air convection treatments,(2)To formulate novel secondary models that relate the thermal inactivation parameters to humidity,(3)To test the effect of heating rate on the validity of the inactivation model,and(4)To validate the inactivation models with pilot-scale data Very small samples of ground meat will be inoculated with the target organisms and heated in a unique laboratory moist air heating system. Pathogen inactivation models will be developed from the resulting data The predictive ability of these models will then be tested by comparing them to transient data from inoculated heating tests in a pilot-scale convection/steam oven.The resulting models will ultimately help optimize process design and operation to ensure product safety. • 2000-02444 Genetics of Zearalenone Biosynthesis and Grain Colonization by Gibberella zeae Trail,F. Michigan State University;Department of Botany and Plant Pathology;East Lansing,MI 48824 Grant 01-35201-10062;$200,000;3 Years Zearalenone is a mycotoxin produced by the filamentous fungus, Gibberella zeae,during the colonization of grain including corn,barley and wheat G. zeae,the head scab fungus, is a devastating pathogen that has caused economic losses across North Dakota,Minnesota and South Dakota that approached one billion dollars in 1993 and from$200-400 million in subsequent years.Zearalenone has estrogenic effects on mammals,including humans,and continued low levels of exposure may pose a health risk The proposed research will focus on understanding the biosynthesis of zearalenone by G. zeae and the relationship between zearalenone production and colonization of stored grain by G. zeae. Specificmlly,the investigators will isolate the gene encoding the main enzyme,a polyketide synthase,involved in zearalenone production and determine the role of zearalenone in the fungal life cycle. We will isolate and sequence genes expressed during zearalenone biosynthesis and from G. zeae colonizing grain.Through a type of genomics analysis called microanays,we will identify those genes expressed specifically during colonization and mycotoxin production and those expressed during both processes. These will be used to develop a model for analysis of potential control compounds using this same technology. The genomics approach will expedite analysis of gene expression during these specific stages. An understanding of zearalenone biosynthesis,its relationship to the proliferation of G. zeae, and the genetic mechanisms involved in grain colonization will allow practical means for control of mycotoxins produced by G. zeae. 2000-02524 RNA Aptamers for Food Safety Diagnostics Miller,E.S. North Carolina State University;Department of Microbiology;Raleigh,NC 27695-7615 Grant 01-35201-09911;$145,000; 2 Years Using molecular selection methods, random sequences in RNA libraries can be synthesized and rare molecules selected that bind with high affinity to a chosen target molecule.The most widely used procedure,termed SELEX(Systematic Evolution ofLigands by Exponential enrichment),has generated high-affinity RNA aptamers of numerous molecules. The objectives of this program are to isolate RNA aptamers that directly bind and detect bacteria in complex mixtures such as food products, thereby eliminating elaborate culture or on-she molecular methods. Strains of E. coli,Salmonella and Staphylococcus will be used as whole-cell targets in isolating high- affinity RNA aptamers that bind the surface of these bacteria The specific aims of this program are to : i) Prepare bacteria as selecting and counter-selecting targets relevant to food safety;n)Select RNA aptamers that bind surface molecules of target bacteria with high affinity and high specificity; iii) Characterize and appropriately modify the selected diagnostic aptamers;and iv)Conjugate the RNA aptamers to assay reagents for diagnostic format. The significance of this approach is the potential to rapidly develop detection systems that function as well or better than antibodies.The system potentially can be adapted to any biological or molecule of food safety concern and employed at various stages of food processing,manufacturing or consumer delivery. 2000-02518 Safe Food Preservation Wolf-Hall,C.E.;Garden-Robinson,J. North Dakota State University;Departments of Cereal Science and Food and Nutrition;Fargo,ND 58104 Strengthening Award; Grant 01-35201-09953;$60,000; 2 Years More questions are answered annually on food preservation than any other type of question in family and consumer sciences,and the North Dakota State University food preservation home page accounts for about one-third of the organizations Internet "hits". With the proliferation of the Internet, canning and other food preservation information has become widely available,with untested recipes shared among web users and circulated on home pages. Improperly canned food could pose a public health threat due to the possibility of botulism toxin. Recently, • interest in home food preservation has grown and county extension agents have expressed concern in responding to questions about foods that have been unprupcily canned,particularly salsa products and canned quick breads. The long-teen goal of this project is to determine the safety of home-canned food recipes and disseminate this information to consumers through consumer education directed by Extension outreach programs. The four objectives of this project are: 1)to evaluate the potentially hazardous nature of six canned quick bread recipes and six salsa recipes (as varied as possible) obtained from the Internet and popular magazines, based on pH and water activity measurement;2)to evaluate the survival and outgrowth of C. sporogenes spores in two different fonnulations of canned quick bread recipes obtained from the Internet;3)to develop a consumer extension publication based on the results of the research study; and 4)to develop,adapt and pilot a train-the-trainer lesson plan and media materials for extension agents detailing current safe food preservation recommendations for popular fonds such as salsa 2000-02544 Genetics and Ecology of E. coli O157:117 Subpopulations Benson,A.K.;Ju,J. University of Nebraska;Department of Food Science and Technology;Lincoln,NE 68583-0919 Grant 01-35201-10115; $215,000;2 Years The presence of E. coli 0157:117 in cattle and the subsequent potential for transmission to humans through contaminated beef poses a significant problem to the food production industry,regulatory officials,and consumers alike. Recent studies using high resolution methods for chromosome comparison have demonstrated the existence of two genetically distinct subpopulations of this organism that have appamndy unique ecological niches. Since one of the subpopulations was underrepresented among human clinical isolates that were tested,the hypothesis arose that this subpopulation is either less virulent or is inefficiently transmitted to humans through contaminated beef hi order to test this hypothesis, tools need to be developed to facilitate precise measurement of the distribution of these subpopulations and to enhance our understanding of the genetic basis for their unique ecologies. The experiments outlined in this proposal are therefore designed to use genomics and bioinfomratics to identify the DNA sequence of all chromosome alterations that distinguish the two subpopulations. These sequences will provide two very critical tools to promote our understanding of the potential for these subpopulations for virulence in humans. First, a polymerase chain reaction-based method will be devised that can rapidly categorize E. coli O157:H7 isolates into the two different subpopulations. This method will facilitate large-scale epidemiological studies on transmission patterns of the subpopulations in animal and human environments. Secondly, understanding the nature of the chromosome alterations will provide a means for genetically dissecting the consequences of the alterations on the physiology and ecology of the subpopulations and allow us to begin making connections between selective and suppressive forces that are at work in different animal production environments. 2000-02510 Identification of Salmonella Adbesins for Colonization of Chickens Wilmes-Riesenberg,M. Bowling Green State University;Department of Biological Sciences;Bowling Green,OH 43403 Grant 01-35201-10150; $135,000; 3 Years Salmonellosis represents a serious global problem. The incidence of infection resulting from haunt ne pathogens continues to increase worldwide despite extensive research and changes at the production and processing levels. Salmonella is one of the leading causes of bacterial foodborne disease outbreaks. The long-term objective of this research is to reduce or eliminate Salmonella contamination of poultry. An understanding of the mechanism of Salmonella adherence to chicken cells could be particularly valuable in the following situations: (1)developing an efficacious live oral vaccine to prevent Salmonella colonization; (2)identifying potential changes in diet that might reduce Salmonella colonization;or(3)identifying a means of treating chicken carcasses that may reduce the numbers of attached bacteria. Preliminary data support the hypothesis that Salmonella synthesize a surface protein that is induced by growth in high iron environments and which functions in binding the bacterial pathogen to host cells. The specific goals for this grant period are: (1) to continue studies to identify Salmonella adhesins that function in • colonization of chickens;(2)to determine if any newly identified adhesin is made by other serotypes of S. enterica which colonize chickens;(3)to determine if induction of an immune response to these adhesins will reduce the ability of S. typhimurium and other Salmonella serotypes to colonize chickens; and (4)to identify genes which encode proteins regulating the iron-induced adhesin and to evaluate their role in virulence. The investigators' approach will involve using a variety of genetic and molecular biology techniques to identify mutants unable to synthesize adhesins. 2000-02621 The Role of Catabolite Repression in Clostridium perfringens Food Poisoning Melville,S.B. University of Tennessee,Memphis;Department of Microbiology and homunology;Memphis,TN 38163 Grant 01-35201-10114;$240,000;3 Years Clostridium perfringens is one of the most frequent causes of food poisoning in people. C. perfringens often contaminates prepared food, due to its ability to produce a heat-resistant spore. After cooking, the spores germinate and the bacterium grows at an extremely rapid rate if the food is not refrigerated. When contaminated food is eaten, C.perfringens sporulates and produces a potent enterotoxin in the intestines,which causes the disease symptoms. An essential feature of C.perfringens food poisoning is the bacterium's ability to regulate the uptake and metabolism of nutrients from the food it is growing in. The global transcriptional regulatory protein,CcpA,has been shown to be a primary regulator of carbohydrate utilization in other gram positive bacteria. The three objectives of this proposal are designed to determine what role CepA plays in C.perfringens'ability to grow in food products and regulate carbohydrate utilization. The objectives of the proposed research are: (1)determine if glucose acts as a catabolite repressor of alternative sugar metabolism during growth and sporulation of C.perfringens;(2)determine the role the CcpA regulatory protein plays in C.perfringens ability to grow rapidly in foodstuffs;and(3)identify the molecular mechanism of CcpA activity in C.perfringens.Together,these studies will help to characterize an essential regulatory component in C.perfringens food poisoning. These results may also help us to come up with better food handling techniques to lower the incidence of this very common disease. 2000-02613 Verification of Safe Cooking Endpoints in Beef and Pork by Multiple Antigen ELISA Keeton,J.T;Miller,D.R. Texas A&M University;Department of Animal Science;College Station,TX 77843 Grant 01-35201-10169;$150,000; 2 Years Contamination of processed meats by pathogenic organisms has caused foodbome disease outbreaks throughout the U.S.in recent years,and the publicity has provided the impetus for new procedures to reduce disease risks. Recent USDA-PSIS regulations require that pathogens be destroyed in frilly-cooked products;thus,they must meet or exceed the minimum safe cooking endpoint temperatures(EPTs)and this endpoint must be verified Current methods for determining the EPT achieved in products after cooking and in imported meats are deficient at present Diagnostic tests based on immunoassay technology(i.e.,'dipsticks,'like those used in home pregnancy tests)have become popular in the food industry due to their reliability,ease of use,sensitivity and low cost. The investigators' studies have shown that proteins present in meat muscle tissue may be useful as post-cooking 'molecular thermometers'and they have demonstrated their potential for use in EPT tests. They also found that no single meat protein can accurately predict the EPT reached,but by determining the ratio of 3 or more proteins using a diagnostic 'dipstick'it should be possible to accurately assess the EPT reached at any time post-cooking. The investigators propose to develop a device to measure multiple meat proteins covering the appropriate EPT range(s)for beef and pork products. This concept presents a new approach and device for EPT testing. It will be rapid, accurate and inexpensive and will meet a critical need for verifying the safety of commercially cooked products,including those prepared at fast food outlets. 2000-02614 Minimizing Salmonella Enteritidis Invasion During Induced Molting Rieke, S.C. Texas A&M University,Poultry Science Department;College Station,TX 77843-2472 Grant 01-35201-09946; $79,190; 2 Years Salmonellosis is one of the most common foodbome diseases with an estimated 800,000 to 4 million human infections reported each year in the United States. During the past 10 to 15 years, the number of cases of gastroenteritis due to Salmonella enterica subspecies enterica serovar Enteritidis (S. Enteritidis) infections has greatly increased in the United States and Europe and by 1995, S. Enteritidis comprised 25% of all foodbome Salmonella isolates. Between 1985 and 1991, over 80% of S. Enteritidis infections in the United States were associated with table eggs and this may be linked to the specific stressful management practice of inducing a molt to stimulate multiple egg-laying cycles in hens. Sixty percent of the estimated 240 million laying hens nationwide are force molted with the practice growing more popular.Feed withdrawal is the primary method used in the layer industry to induce molting However, feed withdrawal dramatically enhances S. Enteritidis recovery from clops, increases invasion of organs in chickens and increases horizontal transfer in flocks.The poultry industry needs alternative molting procedures that do not require feed withdrawal but allow managers to keep the economic advantages of recycling laying hens by molting without causing a S. Enteritidis contamination problem. The investigators plan to determine whether molt induction diets will minimize S Enteritidis and if key characteristics in the chicken crop mictoenviromnent can be linked with limiting S. Enteritidis colonization and pathogenesis.This will provide the poultry industry with a scientifically based rationale for possible management alternatives that reduce molting as a major risk for S. Enteritidis contamination. 2000-01126 LC/MS Equipment Research Enhancement for Department of Veterinary Sciences Galey,F. University of Wyoming;Department of Veterinary Sciences;Laramie,WY 82070 Equipment Grant; Grant 01-35201-09908; $50,000; 1 Year Researchers in the Department of Veterinary Sciences and collaborators are currently involved in investigations about the fate of antibiotics in milk, drug disposition in minor food animal species, and the neutraceuticalnatural product chemistry. The LC/MS from this proposal is a scientific instrument that will allow for detection and chemical structural identification of compounds in meat and milk Compounds that can be detected using this instrument include antibiotics as well as other small molecules such as some natural products. Specifically, this instrument will allow for development of methods that can confirm the presence of these compounds when they are suspected of contaminating milk and meat Once new methods are developed, the instrument will allow for development of grants to study the fate over time of a drug or natural toxin in an animal as well as studies that survey the extent of contamination of various food animal products. GreenTruck: Waste Front Page Page 1 of 3 '.... w*z4.�.. �.3's�.x..,'XYa.�L ti' , Arm.' c E,.. ► WATFE TRANSOURCE u CONTACTS/LINKS XManaging Hazardous Waste EPA Web Sites: From Vehicle Maintenance ► Hazardous Waste 1 Universal Waste Hazardous wastes present a dancer to ► Vehicle Maintenance T ucktIN S human health and the environment ► Used Oil Man,gem,-it SERVICESI through direct exposure to the wastes Program ► News or by potential exposures from scare contact./web ► Community transportation and disposal. Hazardous Sites: ► Training S. wastes are defined and regulated by ► State Solid and Conferences the Resource Conservation and Hazardous Waste Contacts ► CT Staff Recovery Act, known as RCRA ("Rick- I. state-specific Universal 1 Contact Us Rah"). Waste Regulations Web ► Site Map site ► Help RCRA In Focus RCRA in Focus provides an overview of the basic federal regulations covering wastes that are likely to be hazardous in your business. It also provides recycling and pollution prevention options to help businesses decrease the amount of hazardous waste they produce. Hazardous Waste: A Guide For Small Businesses EPA's user-friendly manual is targeted to small quantity generators of hazardous wastes. The manual helps small businesses determine whether they generate hazardous waste and provides comprehensive information on how to comply with the federal hazardous waste regulations for small quantity generators. Batteries, Pesticides, Thermostats, Lamps Wastes Universal wastes are generated in a wide variety of settings by a large number of facilities, including residences and offices, and may be present in significant volumes in non- hazardous waste management systems. The Universal Waste Rule currently applies to batteries, pesticides, thermostats and fluorescent lamps. State-Specific Universal Waste Regulations State adoption of the 1995 Universal Waste Rule is optional because the rule is less stringent than the previous requirements under RCRA. States can http://www.greentruck.com/waste/index.html 2/10/2004 GreenTruck: Waste Front Page Page 3 of 3 or petroleum-based solvents. For many shops, the paperwork, management requirements and training imposed because of the use of large quantities of hazardous substances and generation of large quantities of hazardous waste has become quite burdensome and time consuming. Vehicle Painting Painting operations generate both solid and hazardous wastes including waste solvent, paint, sandblasting grit and rags and can also produce air emissions and discharges to wastewater treatment plants. Resource Conservation Recovery Act, Clean Water Act and Clean Air Act requirements may pertain to vehicle painting. GREENTRUCK HOME I AIR & FUEL I PREVENTION I REFERENCE I SPILLS I STORAGE I WASTE I WATER NEWS I COMMUNITY f TRAINING & CONFERENCES I GT STAFF I CONTACT US I SITE MAP I HELP Copyright American Trucking Associations, All Rights Reserved Read ATA's Y2K Statement As- http://www.greentruck.comlwaste/index.html 2/10/2004 . GreenTruck: Waste Front Page Page 2 of 3 create different standards (except for batteries due to the Battery Act), but they have to be equivalent to the federal regulations. Disposal Of Used Antifreeze Many vehicle maintenance operations generate used antifreeze. Before use, antifreeze is not considered a hazardous waste. However, after antifreeze goes through a radiator it may become contaminated, causing the used antifreeze to exceed one of the hazardous waste definitions thresholds. Servicing A/C Systems Refrigeration service activities are regulated under the Clean Air Act which is designed to prevent ozone depletion by requiring the capture and recovery of used refrigerants, the use of certified recycling equipment, and the training and certification of all operators. Recycling Used Batteries Batteries contain acids, lead and other pollutants that may escape to nearby surface waters or percolate into groundwater sources when improperly stored or disposed. Vehicle batteries should never be disposed of with routine solid waste. Battery recycling agreements should be in place with your battery supplier. Disposal Of Vehicle Fluids Changing vehicle fluids includes oil, transmission, hydraulic, brake and antifreeze changes and lubricating greases. The primary environmental impact from fluid changes is potential surface and groundwater contamination resulting from spills or improper disposal of fluids and solid debris. Used Oil Management If you are one of the many people who change their own motor oil, you need to know how to properly dispose of the used oil. Did you know the used oil from one oil change can contaminate 1 million gallons of groundwater if dumped down a storm drain? Parts Washing Traditional parts cleaning technologies utilize either caustics, natural solvents http://www.greentruck.com/waste/index.html 2/10/2004 Protection of Environment - Oil Pollution Prevention Page 1 of 6 TITLE 40--PROTECTION OF ENVIRONMENT 40 CFR Part 112 Revised as of July 1, 1998 PART 112—OIL POLLUTION PREVENTION Sec. 112.1 General applicability. (a)This part establishes procedures, methods and equipment and other requirements for equipment to prevent the discharge of oil from non-transportation-related onshore and offshore facilities into or upon the navigable waters of the United States or adjoining shorelines. ( V&A.— (b) Except as provided in paragraph (d) of this section,this part applies to owners or operators of non- transportation-related onshore and offshore facilities engaged in drilling, producing,gathering,storing, processing, refining,transferring, distributing or consuming oil and oil products, and which,due to their location, could reasonably be expected to discharge oil in harmful quantities, as defined in part 110 of this chapter, into or upon the navigable waters of the United States or adjoining shorelines. (c)As provided in section 313 (86 Stat. 875)departments, agencies, and instrumentalities of the Federal government are subject to these regulations to the same extent as any person, except for the provisions of Sec. 112.6. (d)This part does not apply to: (1)Facilities, equipment or operations which are not subject to the jurisdiction of the Environmental Protection Agency, as follows: (i)Onshore and offshore facilities,which, due to their location, could not reasonably be expected to discharge oil into or upon the navigable waters of the United States or adjoining shorelines. This determination shall be based solely upon a consideration of the geographical, locational aspects of the facility(such as proximity to navigable waters or adjoining shorelines, land contour, drainage, etc.) and shall exclude consideration of manmade features such as dikes, equipment or other structures which may serve to restrain, hinder, contain, or otherwise prevent a discharge of oil from reaching navigable waters of the United States or adjoining shorelines; and (ii) Equipment or operations of vessels or transportation-related onshore and offshore facilities which are subject to authority and control of the Department of Transportation, as defined in the Memorandum of Understanding between the Secretary of Transportation and the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, dated November 24, 1971, 36 FR 24000. (2)Those facilities which, although otherwise subject to the jurisdiction of the Environmental Protection Agency, meet both of the following requirements: Cu)The underground buried storage capacity of the facility is 42,000 gallons or less of oil, and (ii)The storage capacity,which is not buried, of the facility is 1,320 gallons or less of oil, provided no single container has a capacity in excess of 660 gallons. (e)This part provides for the preparation and implementation of Spill Prevention Control and Countermeasure -- Plans prepared in accordance with Sec. 112.7, designed to complement existing laws, regulations, rules, standards, policies and procedures pertaining to safety standards, fire prevention and pollution prevention rules, so as to form a comprehensive balanced Federal/State spill prevention program to minimize the potential for oil discharges. Compliance with this part does not in any way relieve the owner or operator of an onshore or an httpdhvww.logcc.oklaoststate.ok.us/Oil%20Pollution%20Act/Oil... 2/23/2004 Protection of Environment - Oil Pollution Prevention Page 2 of 6 offshore facility from compliance with other Federal, State or local laws. [38 FR 34165, Dec. 11, 1973, as amended at 41 FR 12657, Mar.26, 1976] Sec. 112.2 Definitions. For the purposes of this part: Adverse weather means the weather conditions that make it difficult for response equipment and personnel to cleanup or remove spilled oil, and that will be considered when identifying response systems and equipment in a response plan for the applicable operating environment. Factors to consider include significant wave height as specified in Appendix E to this part, as appropriate, ice conditions,temperatures,weather-related visibility, and currents within the area in which the systems or equipment are intended to function. Complex means a facility possessing a combination of transportation-related and non-transportation-related components that is subject to the jurisdiction of more than one Federal agency under section 311 p) of the Clean Water Act. Contract or other approved means: (1)A written contractual agreement with an oil spill removal organization(s)that identifies and ensures the availability of the necessary personnel and equipment within appropriate response times; and/or (2)A written certification by the owner or operator that the necessary personnel and equipment resources, owned or operated by the facility owner or operator, are available to respond to a discharge within appropriate response times; and/or r (3)Active membership in a local or regional oil spill removal organization(s)that has identified and ensures adequate access through such membership to necessary personnel and equipment to respond to a discharge within appropriate response times in the specified geographic areas; and/or (4)Other specific arrangements approved by the Regional Administrator upon request of the owner or operator. Discharge includes but is not limited to, any spilling, leaking, pumping, pouring, emitting, emptying or dumping. For purposes of this part,the term discharge shall not include any discharge of oil which is authorized by a permit issued pursuant to section 13 of the River and Harbor Act of 1899(30 Stat. 1121, 33 U.S.C. 407), or sections 402 or 405 of the FWPCA Amendments of 1972 (86 Stat. 816 et seq., 33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). Fish and wildlife and sensitive environments means areas that may be identified by either their legal designation or by evaluations of Area Committees (for planning) or members of the Federal On-Scene Coordinator's spill response structure (during responses).These areas may include wetlands, National and State parks, critical habitats for endangered/threatened species,wilderness and natural resource areas, marine sanctuaries and estuarine reserves, conservation areas, preserves,wildlife areas,wildlife refuges, wild and scenic rivers, recreational areas, national forests, Federal and State lands that are research national areas, heritage program areas, land trust areas, and historical and archeological sites and parks. These areas may also include unique habitats such as: aquaculture sites and agricultural surface water intakes, bird nesting areas,critical biological resource areas, designated migratory routes, and designated seasonal habitats. Injury means a measurable adverse change, either long-or short-term, in the chemical or physical quality or the viability of a natural resource resulting either directly or indirectly from exposure to a discharge of oil, or exposure to a product of reactions resulting from a discharge of oil. Maximum extent practicable means the limitations used to determine oil spill planning resources and response times for on-water recovery,shoreline protection,and cleanup for worst case discharges from onshore non- http.//www.iog cc.okla osf.state.ok.us/Oi I%20Poilution%20Act/Oi I... 2/23/2004 Protection of Environment - Oil Pollution Prevention Page 3 of 6 transportation-related facilities in adverse weather. It considers the planned capability to respond to a worst case discharge in adverse weather, as contained in a response plan that meets the requirements in Sec. 112.20 or in a specific plan approved by the Regional Administrator. The term navigable waters of the United States means navigable waters as defined in section 502(7) of the FWPCA, and includes: (1)All navigable waters of the United States, as defined in judicial decisions prior to passage of the 1972 Amendments to the FWPCA (Pub. L. 92-500), and tributaries of such waters; (2) Interstate waters; (3) Intrastate lakes, rivers, and streams which are utilized by interstate travelers for recreational or other purposes; and (4) Intrastate lakes, rivers, and streams from which fish or shellfish are taken and sold in interstate commerce. Navigable waters do not include prior converted cropland. Notwithstanding the determination of an area's status as prior converted cropland by any other federal agency, for the purposes of the Clean Water Act,the final authority regarding Clean Water Act jurisdiction remains with EPA. Offshore facility means any facility of any kind located in, on, or under any of the navigable waters of the United States,which is not a transportation-related facility. Oil means oil of any kind or in any form, including, but not limited to petroleum, fuel oil, sludge, oil refuse and oil mixed with wastes other than dredged spoil. Oil Spill Removal Organization means an entity that provides oil spill response resources, and includes any for- profit or not-for-profit contractor, cooperative, or in-house response resources that have been established in a geographic area to provide required response resources. Onshore facility means any facility of any kind located in, on, or under any land within the United States, other than submerged lands,which is not a transportation-related facility. Owner or operator means any person owning or operating an onshore facility or an offshore facility, and in the case of any abandoned offshore facility, the person who owned or operated such facility immediately prior to such abandonment. Person includes an individual, firm, corporation, association, and a partnership. Regional Administrator, means the Regional Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, or his designee, in and for the Region in which the facility is located. Spill event means a discharge of oil into or upon the navigable waters of the United States or adjoining shorelines in harmful quantities, as defined at 40 CFR part 110. Transportation-related and non-transportation-related as applied to an onshore or offshore facility, are defined in the Memorandum of Understanding between the Secretary of Transportation and the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency,dated November 24, 1971, 36 FR 24080. United States means the States,the District of Columbia,the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico,the Canal Zone, Guam,American Samoa,the Virgin Islands, and the Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands. Vessel means every description of watercraft or other artificial contrivance used, or capable of being used as a means of transportation on water, other than a public vessel. http://www.iog cc.okla osf.state.ok.us/Oil%20Poilution%20Act/Oil... 2/23/2004 Protection of Environment - Oil Pollution Prevention Page 4 of 6 Worst case discharge for an onshore non-transportation-related facility means the largest foreseeable discharge in adverse weather conditions as determined using the worksheets in Appendix D to this part. [38 FR 34165, Dec. 11, 1973, as amended at 58 FR 45039,Aug. 25, 1993; 59 FR 34097,July 1, 1994] Sec. 112.3 Requirements for preparation and implementation of Spill Prevention Control and Countermeasure Plans. (a) Owners or operators of onshore and offshore facilities in operation on or before the effective date of this part that have discharged or, due to their location, could reasonably be expected to discharge oil in harmful quantities, as defined in 40 CFR part 110, into or upon the navigable waters of the United States or adjoining shorelines, shall prepare a Spill Prevention Control and Countermeasure Plan (hereinafter"SPCC Plan"), in writing and in accordance with Sec. 112.7. Except as provided for in paragraph (t)of this section,such SPCC Plan shall be prepared within six months after the effective date of this part and shall be fully implemented as soon as possible, but not later than one year after the effective date of this part. (b) Owners or operators of onshore and offshore facilities that become operational after the effective date of this part, and that have discharged or could reasonably be expected to discharge oil in harmful quantities, as defined in 40 CFR part 110, into or upon the navigable waters of the United States or adjoining shorelines, shall prepare an SPCC Plan in accordance with Sec. 112.7. Except as provided for in paragraph (f) of this section, such SPCC Plan shall be prepared within six months after the date such facility begins operations and shall be fully implemented as soon as possible, but not later than one year after such facility begins operations. (c) Owners or operators of onshore and offshore mobile or portable facilities,such as onshore drilling or workover rigs, barge mounted offshore drilling or workover rigs, and portable fueling facilities shall prepare and implement an SPCC Plan as required by paragraphs (a), (b) and (d) of this section.The owners or operators of such facility need not prepare a new SPCC Plan each time the facility is moved to a new site. The SPCC Plan may be a general plan, prepared in accordance with Sec. 112.7, using good engineering practice. When the mobile or portable facility is moved, it must be located and installed using the spill prevention practices outlined in the SPCC Plan for the facility. No mobile or portable facility subject to this regulation shall operate unless the SPCC Plan has been implemented. The SPCC Plan shall only apply while the facility is in a fixed (non-transportation) operating mode. (d) No SPCC Plan shall be effective to satisfy the requirements of this part unless it has been reviewed by a Registered Professional Engineer and certified to by such Professional Engineer. By means of this certification the engineer, having examined the facility and being familiar with the provisions of this part, shall attest that the SPCC Plan has been prepared in accordance with good engineering practices. Such certification shall in no way relieve the owner or operator of an onshore or offshore facility of his duty to prepare and fully implement such Plan in accordance with Sec. 112.7, as required by paragraphs (a), (b)and (c) of this section. (e) Owners or operators of a facility for which an SPCC Plan is required pursuant to paragraph(a), (b)or(c) of this section shall maintain a complete copy of the Plan at such facility if the facility is normally attended at least 8 hours per day, or at the nearest field office if the facility is not so attended, and shall make such Plan available to the Regional Administrator for on-site review during normal working hours. (f) Extensions of time. (1)The Regional Administrator may authorize an extension of time for the preparation and full implementation of an SPCC Plan beyond the time permitted for the preparation and implementation of an SPCC Plan pursuant to paragraph (a), (b)or(c)of this section where he finds that the owner or operator of a facility subject to paragraphs (a), (b)or(c)of this section cannot fully comply with the requirements of this part as a result of either nonavailability of qualified personnel, or delays in construction or equipment delivery beyond the control and without the fault of such owner or operator or their respective agents or employees. (2)Any owner or operator seeking an extension of time pursuant to paragraph (f)(1) of this section may submit a letter of request to the Regional Administrator. Such letter shall include: http://www.iog cc.oklaosf.state.ok.us/Oi I%20Pollutio n%20Act/Oil... 2/23/2004 Protection of Environment - Oil Pollution Prevention Page 5 of 6 (i)A complete copy of the SPCC Plan, if completed; (ii)A full explanation of the cause for any such delay and the specific aspects of the SPCC Plan affected by the delay; (iii)A full discussion of actions being taken or contemplated to minimize or mitigate such delay; (iv)A proposed time schedule for the implementation of any corrective actions being taken or contemplated, including interim dates for completion of tests or studies, installation and operation of any necessary equipment or other preventive measures. In addition,such owner or operator may present additional oral or written statements in support of his letter of request. (3)The submission of a letter of request for extension of time pursuant to paragraph (f)(2)of this section shall in no way relieve the owner or operator from his obligation to comply with the requirements of Sec. 112.3 (a), (b)or(c). Where an extension of time is authorized by the Regional Administrator for particular equipment or other specific aspects of the SPCC Plan,such extension shall in no way affect the owner's or operator's obligation to comply with the requirements of Sec. 112.3 (a), (b) or(c)with respect to other equipment or other specific aspects of the SPCC Plan for which an extension of time has not been expressly authorized. [38 FR 34165, Dec. 11, 1973, as amended at 41 FR 12657, Mar. 26, 1976] Sec. 112.4 Amendment of SPCC Plans by Regional Administrator. (a) Notwithstanding compliance with Sec. 112.3, whenever a facility subject to Sec. 112.3 (a), (b) or(c) has: Discharged more than 1,000 U.S. gallons of oil into or upon the navigable waters of the United States or adjoining shorelines in a single spill event, or discharged oil in harmful quantities, as defined in 40 CFR part 110, into or upon the navigable waters of the United States or adjoining shorelines in two spill events, reportable under section 311(b)(5) of the FWPCA, occurring within any twelve month period,the owner or operator of such facility shall submit to the Regional Administrator,within 60 days from the time such facility becomes subject to this section,the following: (1) Name of the facility; (2)Name(s)of the owner or operator of the facility; (3) Location of the facility; (4)Date and year of initial facility operation; (5)Maximum storage or handling capacity of the facility and normal daily throughput; (6) Description of the facility, including maps,flow diagrams, and topographical maps; (7)A complete copy of the SPCC Plan with any amendments; (8)The cause(s) of such spill, including a failure analysis of system or subsystem in which the failure occurred; (9)The corrective actions and/or countermeasures taken, including an adequate description of equipment repairs and/or replacements; (10)Additional preventive measures taken or contemplated to minimize the possibility of recurrence; http://www.iogcc.oklaosf.state.ok.us/Oll%20 Pollution%20Act/OII... 2/23/2004 Protection of Environment - Oil Pollution Prevention Page 6 of 6 (11) Such other information as the Regional Administrator may reasonably require pertinent to the Plan or spill event. (b) Section 112.4 shall not apply until the expiration of the time permitted for the preparation and implementation of an SPCC Plan pursuant to Sec. 112.3 (a), (b), (c)and (f). (c)A complete copy of all information provided to the Regional Administrator pursuant to paragraph (a) of this section shall be sent at the same time to the State agency in charge of water pollution control activities in and for the State in which the facility is located. Upon receipt of such information such State agency may conduct a review and make recommendations to the Regional Administrator as to further procedures, methods, equipment and other requirements for equipment necessary to prevent and to contain discharges of oil from such facility. (d)After review of the SPCC Plan for a facility subject to paragraph (a)of this section,together with all other information submitted by the owner or operator of such facility, and by the State agency under paragraph (c)of this section,the Regional Administrator may require the owner or operator of such facility to amend the SPCC Plan if he finds that the Plan does not meet the requirements of this part or that the amendment of the Plan is necessary to prevent and to contain discharges of oil from such facility. (e)When the Regional Administrator proposes to require an amendment to the SPCC Plan, he shall notify the facility operator by certified mail addressed to, or by personal delivery to,the facility owner or operator,that he proposes to require an amendment to the Plan, and shall specify the terms of such amendment. If the facility owner or operator is a corporation, a copy of such notice shall also be mailed to the registered agent, if any, of such corporation in the State where such facility is located. Within 30 days from receipt of such notice,the facility owner or operator may submit written information, views, and arguments on the amendment. After considering all relevant material presented,the Regional Administrator shall notify the facility owner or operator of any amendment required or shall rescind the notice. http:l/www.iogcc.oklaosf.state.ok.us/Oil%20 Pollution%20Act/Oil... 2/23/2004 Environmental Protection Agency Region 6 South Central S... Page 10 of 20 result in product leakage when oil drains through a corroded coil to discharge into a neart To control leakage through defective internal heating coils,the following factors should Ix • The steam return or exhaust lines from intemal heating coils that discharge into an course should be monitored for contamination or routed to a settling tank,skimmer separation system to remove oil; • Consider using external heating coils and insulating the sides of the tank if necessi Because of the problems encountered with internal steam-heating coils,there has movement away from their use to more modern external heat-exchanger systems. Environmental Protection Agency Region 6 South Central Sup... Page 1 of 20 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Superfund--Region 6: South Central Serving Louisiana,Arkansas,Oklahoma,New Mexico,Texas and 66 Tribes c; Contact S!§I Print Version Search:1 r'O EPA hHome>Rein >Suoerfsnd>Outreach Guides-Oil Pollution>Large Volume Transfer SuperFund Spill Prevention Requirements for Facilities Topics Conducting Large Volume Transfer Operation: Site Summaries - Arkansas • Louisiana `� Louisiana New Mexico Oklahoma .` " Texas � �' '✓ "g Info Bulletins/Fact Sheets Decision Documents Overview File Structure Phase This guide is intended for facilities that transfer oil products to or from tanker trucks, r Folder Categories vessels,railcars, and pipelines.All facilities that refine, store and distribute oil conduct• Information operations. Some transfer products in high frequencies and volumes,such as pipeline tra terminal facilities, marine terminals, refinery marketing facilities, railyards, home heating c Five Year Reviews lubricating oil distributors, and others involved in the distribution of refined product. This g discusses the equipment and operating practices needed to meet the requirements of the Pollution Prevention Regulation in Title 40 Code of Federal Regulations(CFR) Part 112,t includes the Spill Control and Countermeasure (SPCC) Plan requirements and the Facilit Brownfields Program Plan(FRP) requirements. The SPCC requirements are the focus of this guide; other guid' available for facility response planning requirements (40 CFR 112.20 and 112.21)and ger Response& information on the Oil Pollution Prevention Regulation. Prevention Due to the special circumstances for facilities involved in large volume transfer operationE CERCUS these facilities are subject to muttiagency jurisdictions for oil spill prevention and response reason,this guide addresses other agency regulatory jurisdictions. For additional informa NPL List other agency regulatory programs, contact information is provided in this guide. New NPL Sites Recommended practices for pollution prevention and avoiding discharges of oil are also ii this guide.These practices may also assist facilities in achieving compliance with the SP( Pollution Reports requirements and reduce the possibility of product loss and a discharge. Outreach Guides A discharge is essentially a spill that reaches a navigable water or adjoining shoreline. 1 definition can be found in 40 CFR 112.2(b). Key Topics Regional http:/lwww.epa.gov/Region6/6sf/sfsites/oil/transfer.htm 2/23/2004 Environmental Protection Agency Region 6 South Central Sup... Page 2 of 20 Adminstrator Mukiagency Jurisdiction About Region 6 Air Brownfields Facilities(complexes) may be regulated by more than one agency under the Oil Pollution (OPA). The EPA is responsible for the nontransportation-related facilities located landwar Cleanup coastline*. The Department of Interior(DOI)Minerals Management Service (MMS) is rest Ecosystems offshore nontransportation-related facilities located seaward of the coastline, including ce Emergencies pipelines. The Department of Transportation (DOT) United States Coast Guard (USCG) c designated agency is responsible for deepwater ports and fixed offshore facilities. The EF Employee Directory responsible for facilities in inland lakes and rivers, including certain piping, and coastal an Employmentlandward of the low water mark.The USCG handles transportation-related offshore faciliti landward of the coastline,while the DOT, Office of Pipeline Safety (OPS)handles all onsl Enforcement pipelines. The OPS is a component of the Research and Special Programs Administratiot Environmental Justice Facilities conducting large volume tran FOIA * The term coastline is defined as"the line operations are often regulated by mon of ordinary low water along that portion regulatory body under OPA based on I Grants/Procurement of the coast which is in direct contact jurisdictions identified above. In additic Laboratory with the open sea and the line marking and oil spill prevention programs,facili Newsroom the seaward limit of inland waters," e.g., also be regulated by the following (this inclusive): Resource Conservation anc low tide. Along the Gulf Coast this line Pesticides Act(RCRA), Title 1 -Underground Ste has been determined by the courts and (UST) regulations (40 CFR Part 280 ar Superfund runs along the coastal barrier islands. DOT railcar and tanker truck loading a Training The jurisdiction over facilities along the unloading requirements in 49 CFR Pai Waste coastline of the state of Alaska is 174, 177, and 179; DOT OPS regulatit determined on a case-by-case basis by transportation of hazardous liquids by Water MMS. 49 CFR Part 195;the DOT USCG regi more topics.... facilities transferring oil or hazardous r bulk in 33 CFR Part 154; and the Occt Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) requirements for flammable and combustible lic storage in 29 CFR 1910.106. Many sites at which oil is transferred in bulk to or from vessels are likely to include both a transportation-related transfer area regulated by the USCG and a nontransportation-relati storage area regulated by the EPA. The division of authority is such that pipelines or hoses leading to and from over-water op would be regulated by the USCG requirements, for transfers to or from a vessel with a ca barrels or more,while the terminal and any transfer sites within the terminal would be reg EPA.The first valve within the secondary containment area constitutes the change in juri: Similarly, for pipeline terminals,the OPS regulates the transportation-related portion of th, running to, or from, a fixed facility,while EPA would regulate the terminal and transfer site facility. Railyards have similar divisions of authority,with the railcars and tracks regulated operations within the railyard regulated by EPA. Integrated Contingency Planning On June 5, 1996,the EPA published a notice in the Federal Register announcing the ava the National Response Team's (NRT's) Integrated Contingency Plan (ICP)Guidance("on This guidance is to help owners and operators prepare emergency response plans for the The one plan provides a mechanism for consolidating multiple response and contingency facilities may have prepared to manage many regulations in one functional emergency re The notice contains the suggested ICP outline and guidance on how to develop an ICP ai demonstrate compliance with the regulatory requirements. The policies set out in this noti http://www.epa.gov/Region6/6sf/sfsites/oil/transfer.htm 2/23/2004 Environmental Protection Agency Region 6 South Central Sup... Page 3 of 20 intended solely as guidance and do not supersede any regulatory requirements. The ICP cross-referenced to the applicable sections and page numbers of the regulatory requirem requirements of regulations incorporated into the ICP must be met. Two components of EPA's Oil Pollution Prevention Regulation may be included as a part These are the FRP (40 CFR 112.20 and 112.21)and the oil spill contingency plan and commitment of manpower, equipment,and materials (40 CFR 112.7(d)(1) and (d)(2)) requirements of 40 CFR 112.7(d) must be met by those facilities demonstrating impractia installation of containment or diversionary structures as required by 40 CFR 112.7(c). The following regulations contain response or contingency planning requirements that car addressed through the ICP.The list does not include state and local emergency responsf requirements. Facilities are encouraged to coordinate the development of ICPs with relev and local agencies. EPA's Oil Pollution Prevention Regulation (SPCC and FRP Requirements): 40 CFR 112.; 112.20-112.21. MMS's Facility Response Plan Regulation: 30 CFR 254. RSPA's(OPS) Pipeline Response Plan Regulation:49 CFR 194. EPA's Risk Management Programs Regulation: 40 CFR 68. OSHA's Emergency Action Plan Rules: 29 CFR 1910.38(a),29 CFR 1926.35. OSHA's Hazardous Waste Operations and Emergency Response (HAZWOPER)Standar 1910.120, 29 CFR 1926.65. EPA's RCRA Contingency Planning Requirements: 40 CFR 264/265 Subpart D and 40 C USCG's Facility Response Plan Regulation: 33 CFR 154, Subpart F. Federal Agency Contact Information EPA's Oil Pollution Prevention Regulation David Lopez, MS 5203G, U.S. EPA 401 M Street, SW, Washington, DC 20460 (703)603-8707 or EPCRA/RCRA/Superfund Hotline at(800) 424-9346 U.S. Coast Guard's Facility Response Plan Regulation LCDR Mark Hamilton, U.S. Coast Guard, Commandant(G-MOR), 2100 2nd Street, SW, Washington, DC 20593, (202)267-1983 (E-mail M.Hamilton/G-M03@CGSMTP.uscg.mil) DOT/RSPA's Pipeline Response Plan Regulation Jim Taylor, U.S. Department of Transportation, Room 2335, 400 7th Street, SW,Washington, DC 20590 (202)366-8860 (E-mail OPATEAM@RSPA.DOT.GOV) http://www.epa.gov/Region6/6sf/sfsites/oil/transfer.htm 2/23/2004 . Environmental Protection Agency Region 6 South Central Sup... Page 4 of 20 • OSHA Regulations Contact either your Regional or Area OSHA office by calling directory service or the National Information Line at(800) 326-2577 DOI/MMS Facility Response Plan Regulation Larry Ake, U.S. Department of the Interior—Minerals Management Service, MS 470( 381 Elden Street, Herndon,VA 22070-4817 (703) 787-1567 (E-mail Larry_Ake@SMTP.MMS.GOV) EPA's Risk Management Program Regulation William Finan, U.S. EPA, Mail Code 5101, 401 M Street, SW, Washington, DC 20460, (202)260-0030(E-mail homepage.ceppo@epamail.epa.gov) RCRA's Contingency Planning Requirements Contact the EPCRA/RCRA/Superfund Hotline at(800)424-9346 Applicability of EPA's SPCC Requirements EPA's SPCC requirements (40 CFR 112.1 through 112.7) apply to nontransportation-rela that could reasonably be expected to discharge oil into or upon the navigable waters of th States or adjoining shorelines, and that have (1)a total underground buried storage cape' than 42,000 gallons; or(2) a total aboveground oil storage capacity of more than 1,320 ga an aboveground oil storage capacity of more than 660 gallons in a single container. Some facilities may not be regulated if,due to their location,they could not reasonably be discharge oil into navigable waters of the U.S. or adjoining shorelines. SPCC-regulated fa also comply with other federal, state, or local laws,some of which may be more stringent. Many facilities involved with high volume product transfers associated with pipelines and vessels are also subject to the Facility Response Plan (FRP) requirements of 40 CFR 11: requirements can be found at 40 CFR 112.20, 112.21 and associated Appendices A-F. As outlined in 40 CFR 112.20(0(1), a facility has the potential to cause substantial harm a therefore, must prepare an FRP if: • The facility transfers oil over water to or from vessels and has a total oil storage ca including both aboveground storage tanks(ASTs) and underground storage tanks greater than or equal to 42,000 gallons; or • The facility's total oil storage capacity, including both ASTs and USTs, is greater th to one million gallons, and one of the following is true: • The facility lacks secondary containment that is able to contain the capacity of the within each storage area plus freeboard to allow for precipitation; • The facility is located at a distance such that a discharge from the facility could cat an environmentally sensitive area; httpJ/www.epa.gov/Region6/6sf/sfsites/oil/transfer.htm 2/23/2004 Environmental Protection Agency Region 6 South Central Sup... Page 5 of 20 • The facility is located at a distance such that a discharge from the facility would shi public drinking-water intake; or • The facility has had a reportable spill greater than or equal to 10,000 gallons within years. All facilities must document the determination of substantial harm by completing the "Cert the Applicability of the Substantial Harm Criteria Checklist," provided as Attachment C-II i C of 40 CFR 112. This certification should be kept with the facility's SPCC Plan. SPCC and Specific Spill Prevention Requirem( SPCC: Preparation and Certification [40 CFR 112.3] The owner or operator of an SPCC-subject facility is required to have a written site-specif prevention plan, which details how a facility's operations comply with the requirements of 112. Requirements for specific elements to be included in the SPCC Plan are found in 40 CFR SPCC Plan must be reviewed and certified by a Registered Professional Engineer who is SPCC and has examined the facility.To be in compliance,the facility's SPCC Plan must t the applicable requirements for drainage, bulk storage tanks,tank car and truck loading a unloading,transfer operations (intrafacility piping), inspections and records, security, and Most importantly,the facility must fully implement the SPCC Plan. Newly constructed fad facilities that make modifications must prepare or revise their SPCC Plan within six mono Modifications may include, for example, changes in piping arrangements or installation or tanks. Containment and Diversionary Structures [40 CFR 112.7(c)] SPCC requires containment of drainage from the operating areas of a facility to prevent o contaminated runoff from reaching storm drains, streams (perennial or intermittent), ditchi bays, and other navigable waters. Secondary containment and diversionary structures should be in place to contain oil-cone drainage (e.g., rainwater) or leaks around fuel dispensers, pipelines, valves,joints,transit connections, and tanks. For these purposes, facilities should use dikes, berms, curbing, c gutters,trenches, absorbent material, retention ponds,weirs, booms, and other bafflers o preventive systems. SPCC requirements are performance-based,which permits facility of operators to substitute alternative forms of spill containment if the substitute provides sub equivalent protection against discharges to navigable waters to that provided by the syste 40 CFR 112.7(c). Substantially equivalent containment systems may be possible for AST systems (e.g., sm walled ASTs equipped with spill prevention devices)that generally have capacities of les: 12,000 gallons.Alternative containment systems may not be appropriate for tank systems 12,000 gallons or for systems that consist of several tanks connected by manifolds or oth' arrangements that would permit a volume of oil greater than the capacity of one tank to bi a result of a single system failure. Facilities conducting transfer operations may have spills that could be released to watery✓ http://www.epa.gov/Region6/6sf/sfsites/oll/transfer.htm 2/23/2004 Environmental Protection Agency Region 6 South Central Sup... Page 6 of 20 means other than direct overland flow. For example, if a terminal does not have adequate diking to prevent spills from oil transfer operations,then a release may reach a storm drai empties into a navigable waterway. Many transfer operations utilize drip pans or drains ur connections which may route spills to an oil-water separator or onsite wastewater treatme Trained personnel must inspect the effluent prior to discharging so these systems must bi controlled. Systems which automatically discharge to a storm drain,sewer or other offsite not in compliance with the regulations.An automatic system is not acceptable because if overloaded, a malfunction and a discharge of oil is likely to happen. Facility Drainage [40 CFR 112.7(e)(1)] Diked Areas Facilities most often use poured concrete walls or earthen berms to contain drainage and secondary containment for storage tanks and curbing and catchment basins for truck loading/unloading areas. These contained areas are considered diked areas. Concrete at dike containment structures around storage tanks may accumulate significant amounts of Drain lines, which must be watertight, are usually installed through the dike walls and are drain accumulated storrnwater from the diked area. These lines should be fitted with vatic positive means of closure that are normally sealed closed and locked to prevent any oil di from escaping the diked area. These valves must be open-close manual valves; flapper v not acceptable. These valves must be opened to drain rainwater and resealec drainage by trained and authorized facility personnel only. Add records must be kept of such drainage events (i.e., date,time names) and made part of the SPCC Plan. The accumulated n must be examined and determined to be free of oil contamina dai 6/ /' diked areas are drained. If any oil sheen or accumulation of of r observed, an alternate method of draining the diked area mus employed. The contaminated water may be diverted to an one treatment plant or oil-water separator; however,the adequacy systems is determined on a case-by-case basis for each one's adherence to good engine practices and ability to retain a spill in the event of a system malfunction. Facilities may employ many different types and designs of drainage control systems and • separators. Facilities must implement a system that is consistent with good engineering p based on the size and complexity of their operations. The secondary containment structure must be impervious and must prevent water and fun percolating through the soil, contaminating the soil and groundwater and possibly surfacir aboveground into navigable waters or adjoining shorelines. Undiked Areas Other operating areas that do not have secondary containment systems specifically desig those areas (otherwise referred to as"localized containment') are considered undiked arc Drainage must be controlled for undiked areas which may include truck or engine washdc piping and manifold areas,garage bays, and fuel islands.All undiked areas can be desigi control drainage through a combination of curbing,trenches, catchment basins, and reten as necessary to retain a spill. These structures must be inspected and examined for integ effectiveness. For example, if a paved area is improperly graded or if a curb is deterioratii contaminated water may escape from the facility. For this reason, a Professional Enginee certify the SPCC Plan to ensure that the drainage system is adequately designed and prc maintained in accordance with good engineering practices. httpJ/www.epa.gov/Region6/6sf/sfsites/oil/transfer.htm 2/23/2004 Environmental Protection Agency Region 6 South Central Sup... Page 7 of 20 Whatever techniques are used,the facility's drainage systems should be adequately engi prevent oil from reaching navigable waters in the event of equipment failure or human err facility. Oil Storage: Bulk Storage Tanks, Portable Tanks, Drums,and Oil-Containing Equips CFR 112.7(e)(2)] Many types of units are used to store oil products. Storage containers or tanks may be lot aboveground, underground, partially underground, and inside buildings. Tank Material No tank should be used for the storage of oil unless its construction material is compatible material stored and conditions of storage such as pressure, physical and chemical proper temperatures. It is recommended that the construction, materials, installation, and use of tanks conform relevant portions of industry standards,such as American Petroleum Institute (API), Natic Protection Association (NFPA), Underwriters Laboratory (UL), or American Society of Me. Engineers (ASME),which may be required in the application of good engineering practice or local regulations. Secondary Containment All storage containers(e.g.,tanks, oil-water separators) must have secondary cantalnmei entire contents of the largest single container within the containment area, plus sufficient allow for precipitation.An alternative system could consist of a complete drainage trench arranged so that a spill could terminate and be safely confined in a catchment basin. The structure must be sufficiently impervious to the types of oil products stored at a facility. Dil should be free of pooled oil;spills should be removed promptly. The volume of freeboard should be based on regional rainfall patte Facilities in states with large amounts of rainfall (e.g., Washington, 1. Hawaii, and the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico)will require seconc 4 containment to accommodate greater amounts of water. taw Precipitation data is available from the National Oceanic and Atma Administration's (NOAA) National Climatic Data Center(NCDC). TI can be reached by telephone at(704) 271-4800 and at http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/ol/climate on the worldwide web. The following table describes the most common secondary containment systems. �I http://www.epa.gov/Region6/6sf/sfsites/oilltransfer.htm 2/28/2004 Environmental Protection Agency Region 6 South Central Sup... Page 8 of 20 Secondary Containment Systems Type of System Description Poured Concrete Walls Poured concrete walls are strong,fairly watertight, and resi: petroleum penetration if adequately designed and maintain. according to good engineering practices. Limitations: • conventional concrete is not totally impervious to pet any spill left inside a containment area may eventual penetrate the concrete and could contaminate groun sources. Therefore, spills inside diked areas should I up as soon as possible. • the expansion and contraction of piping which runs t containment walls create potential areas of weaknes • grouting in expansion joints requires maintenance to weak points,which may allow petroleum penetration Containment Curbs Containment curbs are similar to speed bumps and are ofte where vehicles need to access the containment area. Limitations: • they fill up with rainwater more rapidly than higher cc areas; and • they can be worn down as a result of vehicle crossin Containment Pits or trenches are belowgrade containment structures,wt Pits/Trenches be covered with metal grates and lined with concrete. Limitations: • earthen structures have the potential for groundwate contamination unless constructed with appropriate n • if pits and trenches are not properly supported,they quickly; and • they pose a danger since people can fall into them if not properly maintained. Earthen Berms Earthen berms containing clay or bentonite mixtures are co used at very large oil storage facilities. Limitations: • earthen berms are subject to water and wind erosior require frequent rebuilding; • sandy soil does not effectively contain oil spills;grou contamination may result. Impervious liners of clay c membranes may be required to contain oil spills; anc http://www.epa.gov/Region6/6sfIsfsites/oil/transfer.htm 2/23/2004 .Environmental Protection Agency Region 6 South Central Sup... Page 9 of 20 • vegetation inside bermed areas is a fire hazard and the operators ability to detect spills or defective equi addition,the root systems of plants, such as trees, sl bushes, could degrade the berm and promote leakat Concrete Block Walls Concrete block walls are also commonly used for containm Limitations: • settling eventually separates or cracks the blocks an the integrity of the wall. • concrete blocks are very porous therefore they do nc liquid-tight seals between mortared joints. • water and ice penetrate the blocks and eventually br apart due to the different phases of water. Tank Integrity -Inspections and Testing ASTs should be properly maintained to prevent oil leaking from bolts, gaskets, rivets, sea other part of the tank.The older riveted or bolted steel tanks tend to "weep"oil from rivets Personnel should note visible oil leaks on an inspection form and report them to the pery of spill prevention. Leaks should be repaired immediately. In some cases,the product in t require removal. Another area of concern for ASTs is tank bottom deterioration. Tank bottoms may be subj extensive corrosion,which may not be evident during visual inspections. Measures must I prevent this corrosion based on the type of tank installation and tank foundation.Corrosio can be provided by dielectric coatings and carefully engineered cathodic protection. Soft have installed double-bottom tanks to reduce the corrosion factor. Corrosion of a tank's surface may also result in tank failure. Corrosion that is concentrate' areas of a tank's surface or"pitting"creates a high potential for tank failure. If tanks are n. may form causing the tank to leak. Tank supports and foundations should also be inspect cracks, crumbling, deterioration, and seepage. ASTs should be subjected to periodic integrity testing. Some of the accepted methods for the following: • X-ray or radiographic analysis measures wall thickness and detects cracks and cre metal. • Ultrasonic analysis measures shell metal thickness. • Hydrostatic testing shows leaks caused by pressure. • Visual inspection detects some cracks, leaks, or holes. • Magnetic flux eddy current test used in conjunction with ultrasonic analysis detects Internal Heating Coils Internal steam-heating coils are sometimes used in heavy oil tanks to maintain the oil in a viscous state in cold weather. The deterioration of the steam-heating coils from internal a http://www.epa.gov/Regions/6sf/sfsites/oil/transfer.htm 2/23/2004 Hello