Federal Background that led up to the current wave of foodborne contamination.

Every law and  agency regulation has different terms for the chemicals or pathogens which can cause illness and
death. None of the laws work the closer these chemicals and pathogens are placed in a position for people to be
exposed. EPA claims the laws mandated the disposal of sewage effluent and sludge on land treatment sites in 1974 to
prevent contamination of surface water. Early studies show sewage treatment processes created antibiotic resistant
bacteria when plasmid-mediated genes are transferred between bacteria. The CDC term
"Etiologic agent" for infectious
agent has only been used in one 1982 wastewater treatment plant study in connection with gene transfer. CDC also
recognizes that materials containing Etiologic agents are hazardous. The term "desiccation"  has only been use in one
1981 compost study where dormant bacteria revived after one year due to increased moisture content and one 1983
study of cattle on a land application site were bacteria survived for over 70 weeks. The early studies were not
concerned that antibiotic resistant and chlorine resistant disease causing organisms could become dormant, infect
animals, or survive on and in food crops. Many of EPA's early studies were only distributed to 12 repository libraries on

Since those early studies EPA has not wanted to see in print, etiologic agent,
infectious agent  disease causing
organism or any pathogen names associated with sludge, recycled/reclaimed sewage water or drinking water.  Instead
the focus is on the names of two tests: Fecal coliform and Coliform.  The Fecal coliform test is the descendant of the
Dutch physician
Christiaan Eijkman's test which assumed that E. coli (Bacterium coli or bacillus of Escherich) was the
only thermotolerant bacteria that would ferment lactose to produce gas and/or acid within 48 hours when incubated at
112.1 deg. F -- 46 deg. C.  It was assumed that the presence of thermotolerant E. coli indicated recent fecal
contamination in water.  The Coliform test was for E. coli and similar bacteria (primarily the family
that  ferment lactose to produce gas and/or acid within 48 hours at body temperature of 97-99 deg. F. -- 37 deg.C.  We
can see from these early studies that those assumptions were wrong. The family Enterobacteriaceae are some of the
most serious disease causing organisms. Many have become much more deadly as they pass through the treatment
plants. There are other deadly soil and plant disease causing organisms that are now human pathogens that ferment
lactose under the same conditions which EPA calls false positives in the tests. The tests were modified to suppress
those bacteria and ignore all other more difficult to disinfect pathogens.

It is clear that many people at EPA and state regulators do not know or understand the history and have never seen
the studies. Why else would we find so much misleading information concerning bacteria that can cause illness and
death? And why would they want to put them so close to your children and the food they eat?
According to the
EPA's list of contaminates for the Drinking Water Act:
"Fecal coliforms are bacteria that are associated with human or animal wastes. They usually live in human or animal
intestinal tracts, and their presence in drinking water is a strong indication of recent sewage or animal waste
contamination. Not a health threat in itself; it is used to indicate whether other potentially harmful bacteria may be
present. Coliforms are naturally present in the environment; as well as feces; fecal coliforms and E. coli only come from
human and animal fecal waste."

That is not a true statement according to
EPA's own expert Mark Meckes. He states, "Since the methods used define
the organism as a "total" or "fecal" coliform then variants from a number of genera may meet the growth criteria and
therefore be designated as a coliform.  For example, most strains of
Escherichia coli will ferment lactose under the
elevated temperature test for fecal coliform and therefore will meet the definition of "fecal coliform." Similarly, some
strains of
Klebsiella will also ferment lactose under these same test conditions and will meet the definition of "fecal
coliform".   Thermotolerant strains/variants of virtually any of the Enterobacteriaceae would also be defined as "fecal
coliform" as long as they produced acid and gas under the specified test conditions."

These Enterobacteriacea (coliform) are estimated to be responsible for about 100,000 deaths each
year in the US, and account for about half of all the clinically significant bacteria isolated by hospital
[biosafety level 2] laboratories. Freezing does not destroy them -- whether in nature in the water, or
on frozen foods contaminated with the bacteria.

The Environmental Laws and pathogenic infectious hazardous waste

(13) The term ``toxic pollutant'' means those pollutants, or combinations of pollutants, including
disease-causing agents, which after discharge and upon exposure, ingestion, inhalation or assimilation into any
organism, either directly from the environment or indirectly by ingestion through food chains, will, on the basis of
information available to the Administrator, cause death, disease, behavioral abnormalities, cancer, genetic mutations,
physiological malfunctions (including malfunctions in reproduction) or physical deformations, in such organisms or their

(5) The term ``hazardous waste'' means a solid waste, or combination of solid wastes, which because of its quantity,
concentration, or physical, chemical, or
infectious characteristics may--
(A) cause, or significantly contribute to an increase in mortality or an increase in serious irreversible, or incapacitating
reversible, illness; or
(B) pose a substantial present or potential hazard to human health or the environment when improperly treated,
stored, transported, or disposed of, or otherwise managed.

CERCLA, Public Law 96-510, was primarily designed to close the loopholes in the Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act to protect the public and environment from a release of hazardous substances (pollutants) from inactive
hazardous waste sites. (House Report 96-1016, May 16, 1980)

in 1980, "The Agency [has] decided that growth of food-chain crops need not be banned at hazardous waste land
treatment facilities but rather should be carefully regulated." (3)
By 1983, the EPA decided, "- to avoid conceivable stigmatization, we are willing to re-name recycled hazardous wastes
"regulated recyclable materials." (4) And, in 1985, the "regulated recyclable materials" title was shortened to
"recyclable material"." (5) Not only that, but "---commercial hazardous waste derived fertilizers [which] would not have to
undergo chemical bonding to be exempt." from the law.
FR 45, No. 98, Monday, May 19, 1980, p. 33207.
FR 48, No. 65, Monday April 4, 1983, p. 14485.
FR 50, No. 3, Friday January 4, 1985 p. 646.

The Regulations and infectious Hazardous Waste

Federal Register list of EPA documented infectious disease organisms in sludge - biosolids.
Federal Register list of EPA documented cancer causing chemicals and heavy metals in sludge - biosolids

EPA decided in the preamble to Part 503 that the CERCLA exclusion for the "Normal Application of Fertilizer" would
allow sludge dumping of infectious hazardous waste, if you considered sludge (biosolids) to be a fertilizer, rather than a
solid waste under RCRA.

503.9(t) Pollutant is an organic substance, an inorganic substance, a combination of organic and inorganic
substances, or a pathogenic organism that, after discharge and upon exposure, ingestion, inhalation, or assimilation
into an organism either directly from the environment or indirectly by ingestion through the food chain, could, on the
basis of information available to the Administrator of EPA, cause death, disease, behavioral abnormalities, cancer,
genetic mutations, physiological malfunctions (including malfunction in reproduction), or physical deformations in either
organisms (humans) or offspring (children) of the organisms.

   Despite  documenting in 1989 that 5 metals were carcinogens when inhaled, EPA now claims they are not

    A Guide to the Part 503 Risk Assessment / Chapter 6 / Questions and Answers.
    Q. Were the limits for metals in the Part 503 established based on a 1 x 10,000 risk?
    A. No, the Part 503 metals were considered noncarcinogens (they do not cause or induce cancer) for the
    exposure pathways evaluated.

    Q: Were all pathways evaluated for each pollutant?
    A: No. Risk assessments were not conducted for all pathways for each pollutant. --- Where the exposure
    assessment indicated that exposure to the pollutant was not significant via a certain pathway, or where EPA
    lacked data, that pathway was not evaluated for a particular pollutant.

    Q: Understanding now that the limits for metal pollutants in biosolids used or disposed were not based on a 1 x
    10,000 risk in the  Part 503 rule, were any pollutant limits established on the basis of a 1 x 10,000 risk?
    A: Yes and No. Yes, in that pollutant limit determinations based on a 1 x 10,000 cancer risk level were made for
    potentially toxic organic pollutants that could occur in biosolids. And, no, because the pollutant limits determined
    this way were not included in the final rule, as described below.

    Land Application: Thirteen pollutant limits were determined for organic pollutants using the 1 x 10,000 approach,
    but they were not included in the final Part 503 rule. The decision to drop these organic pollutants from the final
    Part 503 rule was made because: (i) the pollutant has been banned, restricted for use, or is no longer
    manufactured for use in the United States; (ii) the pollutant is not present in biosolids at significantly high
    frequencies of detection, based on data gathered from the National Sewage Sludge Survey (NSSS); or (iii) the
    limited for the pollutant identified in the biosolids risk assessment is not expected to be exceeded in biosolids that
    are used or disposed of, based on data from the NSSS.

The Public Health Security and Bioterrorism Preparedness and Response Act of 2002 (Pub. L. 107–188),
provides for the regulation of certain biological agents 1

    1 Any microorganism (including, but not limited to, bacteria, viruses, fungi, rickettsiae, or protozoa),
    or infectious substance, or any naturally occurring, bioengineered, or synthesized component of any
    such microorganism or infectious substance, capable of causing: (1) Death, disease or other
    biological malfunction in a human, an animal, a plant,  or another living organism; (2) deterioration of food,
    water, equipment, supplies, or material of any kind; or (3) deleterious alteration of the environment.

    Part § 121.1, and Part § 331.1 Definitions.

    Biological agent. Any microorganism (including, but not limited to, bacteria, viruses, fungi, rickettsiae, or
    protozoa), or infectious substance, or any naturally occurring, bioengineered, or synthesized component of any
    such microorganism or infectious substance, capable of
    (1) Death, disease, or other biological malfunction in a human, an animal, a plant, or another living organism;
    (2) Deterioration of food, water, equipment, supplies, or material of any kind; or
    (3) Deleterious alteration of the environment.

EPA's Complete Disregard for Public Health Concerning Chemicals and Infectious Waste

    letter to EPA on endocrine disruptor screening program.
    Over the past ten years, EPA has not completed a single step of this multi-stage process. This summer, the
    agency finally published its first draft list of chemicals to be screened by pesticide manufacturers for endocrine
    disrupting properties.rt This initial list of 73 chemicals is only a small fraction of the universe of 1,700 chemicals
    that the agency has identified for screening under the FQPA mandate,rz and a minute percentage of the 75,000
    chemicals currently listed on the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) Chemical Substance Inventory." EPA
    apparently has no intemal deadline for identifying subsequent sets of chemicals for testing, and no plan
    whatsoever for ensuring that all chemicals of potential concern will be tested.

    EPA also apparently has no internal deadlines for completing the testing process even for this initial set of 73
    chemicals. Based on EPA staff s rough estimates for the timing of each step of the testing and assessment
    process, it may take seven years or more to complete tests for this group of 73.'* Assuming that EPA identified
    the same number of chemicals for testing each year, testing for the pesticide chemicals alone would not be
    completed for roughly 30 years, and testing for other chemicals listed under the TSCA Inventory could take
    hundreds of years. This pace is unacceptably slow and fails to protect the American public from thousands of
    dangerous chemicals that may interfere with vital biological processes.

    Hazardous Waste Rules
    Appendix V to Part 261 [Reserved for Infectious Waste Treatment Specifications]  
    Appendix VI to Part 261 [Reserved for Etiologic Agents]  

    Etiologic agents, vectors, and materials containing etiologic agents are recognized as hazardous materials.
    Etiologic agents are those microorganisms and microbial toxins that cause disease in humans and include
    bacteria, bacterial toxins, viruses, fungi, rickettsiae, protozoans, and parasites. These disease-causing
    microorganisms may also be referred to as infectious agents. Arthropods and other organisms that transmit
    pathogens to animals (including humans) are called vectors.  http://www.cdc.gov/od/eaipp/

    If only one bacteria survives treatment it can cause adverse health effects because, according to the Federal
    Drug Administration, "A single bacterium can grow to millions in 10 to 12 hours! Water, wind, insects, plants, and
    animals can carry bacteria."  http://www.foodsafety.gov/~dms/a2z-b.html

    WEF promotes stormwater runoff pollution on agricultural land under the CWA exclusion, but they are going to
    manage urban stormwater pollution under the CWA?