PROTECT - INVESTIGATION
FINAL NOTE OF CHEMICAL HAZARD IDENTIFICATION AND RISK SURVEILLANCE (CHaIRS)
GROUP MEETING
DATE & TIME: 9 SEPTEMBER 2009 AT 10:00AM
VENUE: MEETING HELD VIA TELECONFERENCE
ATTENDEES
Chris Livesey (Chair)
Veterinary Laboratories Agency
Jo Payne
Veterinary Laboratories Agency
John Caseley
Food Standards Agency
Christina Baskaran
Food Standards Agency
Ovnair Sepai
Health Protection Agency
Steve Wyllie
Department for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs
David Harris
Animal Health
Alison Gowers
Environment Agency
John Cuthbert
Health and Safety Laboratory
Martin Ball
Health and Safety Executive
Martin Rose
Food and Environment Research Agency
David Webb
Veterinary Medicines Directorate
WELCOME & INTRODUCTIONS
1.
The Chair welcomed attendees to the meeting. Apologies for absence had been received from
Rebecca Garcia (Defra). Christina Baskaran was deputizing for Jillian Spindura, Martin Ball was
deputizing for Chris Mawdsley and John Cuthbert was deputizing for Paul Johnson. Two papers (an
agenda and a final note of the 3rd CHaIRS Meeting on 30 June 2009) were circulated to members prior
to the meeting.
MATTERS ARISING
2.
The Secretary provided a verbal update on matters arising from the last CHaIRS Group
meeting in June, as follows:
At the June meeting, one member asked whether there had been any feedback from the UK
Zoonoses, Animal Diseases and Infections Group (UKZADI) about the CHaIRS briefing paper.
It was explained that this action was still outstanding as the CHaIRS Secretariat was still
awaiting a response from the UKZADI Secretariat. It was agreed that this action would be
followed up.
ACTION: STEVE WYLLIE
Another action concerned additional items for the group’s forward work plan. Since the last
meeting the Secretariat had not received any additional suggested work items for the group and
the Secretary repeated his request for suggestions from members, to help the Secretariat
delineate a suitable work plan for the group over the coming months.
ACTION: ALL
One member queried at the last meeting whether it was acceptable to forward incident
notifications to others within their organisation. It was confirmed that the Secretariat had since
checked this point with the Agency’s Information and Knowledge Management Unit, who
confirmed that provided the scope of the dissemination was sufficiently narrow (e.g. to assist
officials in carrying out their investigations) then this should be acceptable. However, it was
added that if the intention is to use the data for other means (e.g. marketing purposes), then, on
the basis that the party in question has not been consulted, this would constitute a breach of
the Data Protection Act, in their view. On the basis of the information provided, Members
agreed that incident notifications could be disseminated.
1
Regarding a recent lead poisoning incident where the source was thought to be a clay pigeon
shoot, it was suggested at the last meeting that to prevent similar incidents to this occurring in
future, a code of practice should be drawn up, with input from the Clay Pigeon Shooting
Association (CPSA) and British Association for Shooting and Conservation (BASC). The
Secretariat confirmed that this suggestion has been passed to Agency colleagues that deal with
Incident Prevention for further consideration.
Another suggestion at the last meeting was to give consideration to including LACORS within
the CHaIRS group (on the basis of LA involvement in a number of these incidents). The
Secretariat confirmed that they had since spoken to Les Bailey (LACORS) about this matter.
Due to other pressures of work, LACORS are currently unable to commit to providing a full time
member for the group. However, they have asked to be sent agenda papers and minutes and
have also indicated that they may be able to attend or contribute, on an ad hoc basis, in future
depending on the subject matter and its importance.
[FOIA s31(1)(g) and s31(2)(a) and (c)]
2
[FOIA s31(1)(g) and s31(2)(a) and (c)]
3
[FOIA s31(1)(g) and s31(2)(a) and (c)]
SUITABILITY OF RECYCLED MATERIAL FOR USE IN ANIMAL BEDDING
3.
The Chair introduced this item. At the June meeting the group discussed the issue of recycled
material being used as animal bedding, to ascertain whether there are any animal health, food safety or
operator safety issues associated with this current practice. As a first step, it was agreed that the group
focus in the first instance on paper sludge ash.
4.
It was confirmed at the June meeting that, under a draft EA quality protocol, paper sludge ash
was permitted for use, among other things, as a desiccant for animal bedding. The Chair commented
that the relevant EA protocols and position statements are impressive. The Chair also highlighted
Section 3.13 of the report which states the composition of PSA will vary with input materials, operational
procedures and technology used for combustion.
5.
Members were asked for their views regarding paper sludge ash (PSA) and its use as bedding.
The Chair added that EA has since suggested additionally discussing plasterboard and demolition
waste too under this item. Consequently comments were sought on the use of this material as bedding
too.
6.
One member confirmed that if members had specific concerns about the draft quality protocol
there was still time to comment. Another comment was that whilst safe recycling should be promoted,
the use of novel recycled materials in the husbandry of farm animals need to be monitored in case
unexpected adverse reactions occur. In addition, if combustion was inefficient, dioxins contamination
would probably be higher and PAH content could be significant1. One member commented that he had
no problem with raising awareness but added that any article needed to be suitably balanced. The
member added that the article should include a suitable contact for technical advice re: use of PSA. It
was agreed that to raise awareness re: this issue an item should be included within the VLA’s regular
newsletter. EA asked to have sight of the draft.
ACTION: JO PAYNE
7.
It was confirmed that the EA is assessing the risks associated with the use of plasterboard and
demolition materials for animal bedding. EA are aware that plasterboard may contain insulation
materials such as fibreglass and fungistats in addition to cardboard and gypsum. Demolition materials
can include plastics and metals from plumbing and electrical installations as well as insulation materials.
8.
HSL offered to make samples of plasterboard collected for other purposes available to EA. VLA
and FSA offered to make staff available to contribute to the EA risk assessments for these materials. It
1 Assuming effective combustion etc, the hazards arising from this material could include; respiratory irritation and skin irritation
(with implications for mastitis where the product is used as a bedding conditioner) arising from dust and metals in the ash.
4
was suggested that the major plasterboard manufacturers should be asked what is present in their
products. Although this may be commercially sensitive they stand to gain a method of disposal by
recycling if they are able to share this information.
9.
It was agreed that as part of the ongoing risk assessment process the EA will obtain input from
other group members wishing to contribute.
ACTION: ALISON GOWERS
HANDLING ARRANGEMENTS RE: RESTRICTED DOCUMENTS
10.
The Secretariat confirmed that at the last meeting there was discussion about e-mail security
arrangements as three departments (EA, HPA and HSL) were not part of the gsi network and so could
not be e-mailed ‘restricted’ documents. Clarification was sought regarding whether these departments
were in the process of becoming gsi enabled or had equivalent e-mail security arrangements in place.
The Secretary confirmed that both EA and HSL are in the process of getting gsi. HPA however said that
there are no immediate plans to introduce gsi within their organisation.
11.
Members queried whether the correspondence on individual incidents could be circulated under
a ‘protect’ rather than ‘restricted’ marking. If this were the case then all this correspondence could be
sent via e-mail, regardless of whether recipients were part of the gsi network. The Secretariat agreed to
clarify this point with their security and legal experts and report back to the group as soon as possible.
In the interim current procedures would continue.
ACTION: JOHN CASELEY
AOB
12.
As the meeting had run out of time at this point it was agreed that two items would be deferred
until the next meeting, namely contamination of animal feed with lead and discussion of the MRL for
copper in ruminant liver.
NEXT MEETING: 2 DECEMBER 2009 (PM) IN AVIATION HOUSE, LONDON
John Caseley
CHaIRS Secretariat
September 2009
5