| Coliform -- USDA - EPA Debunking Human sewage harms sheep foetuses The original question to the below listed sludge/biosolids scientific experts was: Does anyone actually know what a generic coliform is? I ask the question because it is used for testing sludge and everyone says it doesn't cause human disease. It appears that not one of these sludge scientists know the answer. But they want to debunk the writer and the study. Subject: Re: Human sewage harms sheep foetuses Date: 7/11/2007 10:39:46 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time From: BynJam Reply To: To: [email protected], FPecar4525, [email protected], SMITH. [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected] CC: [email protected], [email protected], stevens.rick@epa. gov, [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], gordon. [email protected], [email protected], Mark. [email protected], [email protected], LBAROLDI@OCSD. COM, [email protected], Robert.O'[email protected], maureen. [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected] Mr. Chaney: It would have been so much simpler, if your, or one of your cohorts had answered the original question. You might not have wanted to acknowledge to some of these scientists that a generic coliform is 12 deadly human pathogens: Escherichia coli, Enterobacter, Salmonella, Shigella, Yesinia (Black Plague) and the lesser known, Edwardsiella, Citrobacter, Klebsiella, Serratia, Proteus, Morganella, and Providencia? On the other hand, you might not have wanted to admit in evidence you didn't know? EPA has made a little joke about its criminal activity of exposing public health to these disease organisms: “When the news media announce a "boil water emergency," reporters often speak of a "total coliform violation." Coliforms are a group of bacteria, most of which are harmless. At first glance, it might seem strange that a harmless group of bacteria such as coliforms could cause such commotion. But like police tape and chalk outlines, coliform bacteria are often found at the scene of a crime even though they are not themselves criminals.” Now how can we lead the world in science, if we can not be honest with the public, or the rest of the world? Best of regards on your retirement. Jim Bynum In a message dated 7/11/2007 8:59:44 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, Rufus. [email protected] writes: Dear Mr. Pecarich et al.: The original discussions had nothing to do with coliforms. I simply failed to change the topic of a group discussion about evidence of adverse effects on sheep from use of biosolids on land under the 503 Rule in the US. I am making no comment and providing no advice about coliforms. Sorry for any confusion. Rufus Chaney -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, July 11, 2007 10:22 AM To: Chaney, Rufus; [email protected]; [email protected]; SMITH. [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected] Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]; stevens.rick@epa. gov; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; gordon. [email protected]; [email protected]; Mark. [email protected]; [email protected]; LBAROLDI@OCSD. COM; [email protected]; Robert.O'[email protected]; maureen. [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected] Subject: Re: Human sewage harms sheep foetuses In a message dated 7/11/2007 5:07:05 AM Pacific Daylight Time, Rufus. [email protected] writes: Dear Mr. Bynum and others: Blind copies of group messages in an open discussion such as was being made in consideration of the UK news article on sheep and biosolids is generally considered a discourtesy. Those who receive CC copies are consider potential participants. Clearly any message cannot be considered a secret, but most follow rules of courtesy in email communications. I will not address the claims in your message of today because so many of them are baseless. The science is there if you look for it, and if you don’t recognize the errors of your claims, nothing I say can affect your opinion. As we both know from years of antagonistic discussions about biosolids and composts use in agriculture. We disagree and let us leave it at that. If others want to discuss the science addressed by the news article and the body of research on sheep and biosolids, let us continue that discussion. Regards all, Rufus Chaney Beltsville, MD Make sure you read about the EPA's current efforts to review and probably amend the cuurent concepts of total coliform and water distribution systems. It seems clear that gatekeepers such as Rufus Chaney and others in the "mindguarding" effort are not recognizing the new awareness of the inadequacy of the current measurement metrics as well as the post- wastewater treatment pathogen re-growth and the role of pipeline biofilms. A mind is a terrible thing to waste. Frank Pecarich SUMMARY: As required by section 9(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA or Agency) is giving notice that it is establishing the Total Coliform Rule Distribution System Advisory Committee (TCRDSAC). The purpose of the TCRDSAC is to provide advice and make recommendations to the Agency on revisions to the Total Coliform Rule (TCR), and on what information about distribution systems is needed to better understand the public health impact from the degradation of drinking water quality in distribution systems. EPA has determined that this Advisory Committee is in the public interest and will assist the Agency in performing its duties as directed in the 2006 EPA Appropriations Act. For the revision effort, EPA would like the Advisory Committee to advise the Agency on how the rule could be revised to improve implementation and strengthen public health protection. For the distribution system issues, EPA would like the Committee to evaluate available data and research on aspects of distribution systems that may create risks to public health and consider how to address the risks. TCRDSAC will be composed of approximately 16 members who will serve as representative members and regular government employees (RGE). In selecting nominees for a balanced committee, EPA will consider candidates from EPA, State and local public health and regulatory agencies; Native American tribes; large and small drinking water suppliers; consumer, environmental and public health organizations; and local elected officials. Copies of the Committee Charter will be filed with the appropriate congressional committees and the Library of Congress. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jini Mohanty, (Mail Code 4607M) Office of Ground Water and Drinking Water, Office of Water, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20460, by e-mail [email protected], or call (202) 564-5269. Dated: June 22, 2007. Benjamin H. Grumbles, Assistant Administrator, Office of Water. [FR Doc. E7-12649 Filed 6-28-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P Subj: Re: Human sewage harms sheep foetuses Date: 7/11/2007 6:53:37 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time From: BynJam To: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], gkester@casaweb. org CC: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], Bastian. [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], brian. [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]. UK, [email protected], [email protected], Jessie. [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], Robert. O'[email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], FPecar4525 Dear Mr. Chaney: Planning to involve others in a scheme to debunk the study Human sewage harms sheep foetuses would also seem to be a discourtesy. I consider it a courtesy to the potential participants to advise them that they may be getting into a situation that could be very embarrassing. You say my claims are baseless! You say the science is there if I look for it! Mr. Chaney I didn't write the book I quoted from, your name is on the book. For 18 years I've looked for the science. Lets see what else your are not telling the UK potential participants: Think leafy vegetables. United States Department of Agriculture studies (1974) indicated there could be very serious problems with tobacco grown on land where toxic sewage sludge was used because of the high uptake of Cadmium. "Chaney et al. (84)--- observed Cd (Cadmium) content in tobacco to be 15 to 20 ppm at 1 ppm in the soil, and 45 ppm with 2 ppm Cd in the soil." (1) North Carolina State University studies found, "3. The bottom leaves of tobacco consistently had the highest Cd concentrations. With tobacco grown on Norfolk soil at Ph 5.2 and 1.8 ppm Cd in the soil, the Cd content in the lower leaves averaged 73 ppm compared to 26 ppm in leaves higher up the stalk." In one worst-case study conducted by the U.S. Department of Agriculture and the University of Maryland in Beltsville, Maryland, there was some damage to joints of cattle from high iron contained in biosolids applied directly onto forages and immediately grazed. In these studies, cattle were forced to graze forages that were treated each week with the high iron-containing biosolids. * The Beltsville Aerated Pile Method for composting sewage sludge, currently failed biosolids, was developed. Today, the method is used by more than 160 municipalities. In a 1979 study, Marsh and Millner (USDA) said, "Spores of Aspergillus fumigatus have been found to be abundantly present in the outdoor air at a site where large scale experimental composting of sewage sludge is in progress at Beltsville, Maryland. According to a 1973 study done by John Walker, when he was with the USDA in Beltsville, liming doesn't prevent regrowth of Salmonella. When John Walker (USDA) and a colleague conducted experiments to determine what would happen to disease organisms in limed soil, they found Salmonella organisms even at the highest lime levels, which indicated that Salmonella had regrown when the pH dropped. (p. 46) No one is talking about the fact liming sludge creates Hexavelent chromium by turning chromium 3 into chromium 6. USDA's Beltsville research center has been a Superfund site since the 80s. Why would you want help in debunking a study when USDA has already proven the danger? Best regards, Jim Bynum In a message dated 7/11/2007 5:07:06 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, Rufus. [email protected] writes: Dear Mr. Bynum and others: Blind copies of group messages in an open discussion such as was being made in consideration of the UK news article on sheep and biosolids is generally considered a discourtesy. Those who receive CC copies are consider potential participants. Clearly any message cannot be considered a secret, but most follow rules of courtesy in email communications. I will not address the claims in your message of today because so many of them are baseless. The science is there if you look for it, and if you don’t recognize the errors of your claims, nothing I say can affect your opinion. As we both know from years of antagonistic discussions about biosolids and composts use in agriculture. We disagree and let us leave it at that. If others want to discuss the science addressed by the news article and the body of research on sheep and biosolids, let us continue that discussion. Regards all, Rufus Chaney Beltsville, MD -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Tuesday, July 10, 2007 7:08 PM To: Chaney, Rufus; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected] Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; Bastian. [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; brian. [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]. UK; [email protected]; [email protected]; Jessie. [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; Robert. O'[email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected] Subject: Re: Human sewage harms sheep foetuses Mr. Chaney: You should know there are no secrets anymore. As I understand it, you prophesied this some 20 years ago, when you said it would take 20 years for the harm to show up. I take your answer to mean you have no idea what a generic coliform is. http://thewatchers. us/Coliform_where-are-scientists.html As you can see, it is sad to see recommendations based on misinformation and too little research. I am glad you mentioned the Guide to the 503 Risk Assessment, which you helped write. I am still wondering what the purpose was. After all, you stated on page 110 there was no science involved. According to the document,,the sludge health risk assessment was only based on looking at 13 organic chemicals which were either already banned, no longer manufactured or restricted for use. These were dropped from consideration in the rule. The document ignored a large list of chemicals known to cause death, cancer and other bodily harm through the air, water and food chain. EPA has admitted (1989) there are at least twenty-one carcinogens (cancer causing agents) in sludge which were removed from the final 503. (FR 54,p. 5777). In spite of its own research, the document said it did not consider any of the cancer causing hazardous metals in sludge to be cancer causing agents for the risk assessment. See below. EPA has admitted (1989) that five of the admitted twenty-one carcinogens in sludge are carcinogenic when inhaled in dust -- Arsenic, Beryllium, Cadmium, Chromium IV and Nickel. (FR 54, p. 5777) In spite of that, EPA said in 1993, The Agency concluded that Congress intended that EPA develop the part 503 pollutant limits for a broader range of substances that might interfere with the use and disposal of sewage sludge, not just the 126 priority pollutants"? (FR. 58, 32, p. 9327) EPA listed 25 pathogens which it claimed only caused gastroenteritis, including part of the coliform group, but forgot to included some very deadly bacteria and viruses. I hope you have a nice retirement. Best Jim Bynum In a message dated 7/10/2007 1:34:15 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, Rufus. [email protected] writes: Dear Mr. Bynum: I recall your antagonistic view of biosolids, and note that your question is not related to the topic of discussion. In addition, you were not copied or addressed by the original messages. Last, I believe you know how to find the Guide to the Risk Assessment, and other UW-EPA documents about use of biosolids. The several documents at the EPA biosolids website clearly answer your questions about coliforms, and I refer you to this complete source of such information for answers to your question. Regards, Rufus Chaney -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Tuesday, July 10, 2007 1:24 PM To: [email protected]; Chaney, Rufus; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected] Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; Bastian. [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; brian. [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]. UK; [email protected]; [email protected]; Jessie. [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; Robert. O'[email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected] Subject: Re: Human sewage harms sheep foetuses Gentlemen, This was some interesting research as well as interesting comments. Which brought a major question on sludge research to my mind. Does anyone actually know what a generic coliform is? I ask the question because it is used for testing sludge and everyone says it doesn't cause human disease. I am looking forward to your answer. Jim Bynum |