All right. Good morning, everyone. Just after nine AM this morning, we'll go ahead and get started. Welcome back. Vca today this morning, Thursday, October first 2020. I appreciate everyone joining us this morning. Today's topic of discussion is going to be risks and safety of land applied bio solids. We're very pleased to be joined by Dr. Greg Evangelos, professor and extension specialist at Virginia Tech with virginia cooperative extension. Dr. Daniela has a very extensive background and career in biosolids and land upon amendments. I'll allow him to provide a little bit of background on a lot of his research and some of his work, but we're pleased to have him join us. So we also ask if, if you know anyone that would benefit from this presentation, we usually get a lot of questions and myself and a lot of other egg agents across the state typically get a lot of questions from the public landowners about biosolids and asking about the safety of bio-solids. What are the uses, where it comes from? All sorts of questions. So we hope that this presentation will help to answer some of those questions, especially as we come into the minds here pretty shortly, whereby the solids will probably be applied on a larger scale. That being said, appreciate everyone joining us and Dr. Daniela, The floor is yours. Thank you for being a well as Great. Thanks so much, Robin, for the invitation to speak today on this very important. And it turns out timely topic. The majority of what I will speak on today and will be a response to a US EPA Office of Inspector General report that was critical of the US EPA land application of bio-solids program. And as I get into the presentation, you'll see which group in fact crafted the response and why. We feel that the OIG report was off base. So let me With that, we'll move on. And as usual with the biosolids talk, I'll just introduce it with a reminder exactly what biosolids are. Primarily an organic solid, semi solid or liquid product that's produced by typically municipal wastewater treatment. And it's treated in a way that it can be beneficially recycled safely. So there are a number of health and environmental issues that are typically addressed with biosolids meetings, the concerns of citizens and, and farmers who might apply this residual that we have such a long history of benefits that so few of my presentations ever go back into all the benefits of the nutrients in the organic matter. But, but these health and environmental issues tend to be a sheep's sir. So starting off the nutrients, nitrogen and phosphorus, particularly, they are central plant nutrients. But Concerns are if if applied in appropriate we it can result in eutrophication of surface water and pollution of drinking water. And our state located in the Chesapeake Bay Area is extremely important for the nutrient issues. Now the areas that we hear much of that concerns of pathogens and we concerned with any pathogens and material from both contaminated food and water, but also by rehearsals. And how does this affect human health and in this age of COBIT, I don't think I need to explain biorhythms sauce today, but with Colvin and the movement of particulates in the air. That's one way of movement, some pathogens. And finally, the general category, pollutants, which include inorganic trace elements, most of which are heavy metals, and trace organics, would choose a. We are compounds of increasing concern and concern for these are both fight of toxicity to plants. Largely uptake into the food chain or movement from where they're applied to water and how they might move to impacted individuals like human beings or other animals. So review a quick review the regulations. The regulations are at several levels than US EPA 40 CFR Part five of three, the standards for use and disposal of sewage sludge with promulgated in 1993. These are the national regulations at the federal level that cover the use of biosolids. And of course, these were craft and back in the days when biosolids were referred to just as sewage sludge rather than as the term that indicates beneficial use that as biosolids. And the, what's often called five-part fiber three figure part five of three. It's typically these regulations. They're designed to protect public health and the environment from any reasonably anticipated adverse effects of pollutants. And they also establish minimum national standards for the treatment, monitoring, use, and disposal biosolids via an extensive risk assessment that was performed back in the 19 eighties and early 19 nineties. The state of Virginia through many states, also have their own set of regulations. Virginia biosolids US EU regulations are administered by the opportunity dq1, and they must be at least as stringent, but they can be more stringent than the federal regulations. So let's look at a few of the regulatory standards that were developed. Five 3s, and then also adopted by Virginia regulations. But first we will look at one of those covering trace element concentrations. Most of these trace elements, arsenic, cadmium, copper, lead, Mercury, Molybdenum, nickel, selenium, and zinc. Our heavy metals, a few of them such as Selenium is not a heavy metal. Arsenic is a metalloid. Rest are metals whose greatest concern might be Phyton toxicity. So copper, nickel, and zinc, mere application in excessive amounts, we could result in plants dine. Molybdenum is a concern as an uptake by livestock cause a copper deficiency. And the other heavy metals are more of a concern when they've accumulated in the soil. The hutch such a high extent that children are needing that soil could accumulate levels in their bodies that would be detrimental to their health. So the final threes resulted in two levels of standards. One called the ceiling concentration limit. And this concentration limit is the limit that any biosolids must meet in order to be able to be called biosolids and big land reply. If even one of these pollutants exceeds this limit, then the material cannot be lambda applied. The plume concentration is a more stringent limits that it's a hats. Let's lower standards that must be met. And these are applied to materials that can largely be bought over the counter. So for example, if one is applying, one is purchasing composted bio-solids from a, from a local farm and garden shop to use as one wishes, then this pollutant concentration limit would be the limit that these biosolids must adhere to for general use. What's something very advantageous is in the late 19 eighties and continuing, there was some additional regulations that were passed that required wastewater treatment plants. They're called pre-treatment regulations require wastewater treatment plants to omit industrial discharges if they want to keep their material clean enough for you, says biosolids. And since then, the level of these pollutants has been decreasing quite quickly. In 2 thousand year, 2 thousand Penn State released a report. The analysis of bio-solids from facilities all over the state of Pennsylvania from the previous five years. And for some of these elements that they analyzed, we could see that the concentrations, the mean concentrations, were not just well lowered the ceiling concentration, but they were even an order of magnitude or more lower the pollutant concentration limit. And we continue to see these pollutants, particularly heavy metals, to climb to the effect that when we go to public meetings, we rarely ever get a call or talk. We ever get a question about heavy metals, these phases, even most citizens realize heavy metals in these materials is a non-issue. So what are the issues of concern today's biosolids? Well, one of those guys were truly stands out and it's what we call trace organic. And these are largely organic chemicals that have either human uses. I've listed many of them here. Prescription drugs, fragrances, flame retardant. It's just the sort of organic compounds created by industry used in our everyday life. And then they're suddenly those and animal production uses. These don't usually end up biosolids, but I've listed them because most of these end up in manure to even greater concentrations. And we find that many of these concentrations in newer would have a higher risk than their concentrations and bike song. Another area of concern throughout the time that biosolids had been used is that of pathogens. You're talking about bacteria, viruses and parasites. And these weight methods of dissemination, how they might impact human beings. Come after the land application system. Biosolids have some treatment process applied to water. Your might undergo some tree. I mean, there are applied to land, manure, might undergo some treatment, also apply to land. And concerns might be they might reach to groundwater, more runoff surface, or they might move into the IRS. Bio aerosols might affect workers, consumers are animals. And in order to address these potential pathways of concern, the patent that 50 three rates incorporated various pathogen based regulations based on the quality of the biosolids being produced. So one class and the class that used most often not farmland or Class B by assaults. And these biosolids word, word developed by processes to significantly reduce pathogens or P SRP. They include anaerobic and aerobic digestion. They are driving lime stabilization, some partial heat treatment. These processes greatly but don't completely eliminate pathogens. So the pathogens or might be released to them even above 99% but not completely eliminate. And then additional protection after the application of class B to land is achieved through harvesting, grazing, and public access restrictions. So time periods before a cattle, for example, can be back allowed onto the pastures. Pastures in order to ensure further die off of these few pathogens remaining material. One other type of class of bio solids are called Class a. These are generated by processes to further reduce pathogens are key F or P. And these include composting, outcome, stabilization, thermal, heat treatment, and pasteurization. And these reduce pathogens to non-detectable concentrations. So that biosolids that our class say, as long as they're also lowering pollutants can be used anywhere by anyone and make and Plants can be harvested and very rapidly with no time restrictions. One of the advantages we're seeing in wastewater treatment facilities, as many of those that are classified as class B facilities are because of the process they're achieving pretty near or near or at class a. So we're seeing the concentrations of pathogens in these materials being greatly reduced. So the land application by Uppsala to us is, we're originally under the Clean Water Act. And the Clean Water Act. Skill requires EPA to review biosolids regulations at least every two years to identify additional costs of proteins. And then the promulgate regulations address that's Clinton's well-being. November 2018, the EPA Office of Inspector General released this report and its list. And it's linked here, implying that land applications unsafe until further risk assessment was to government. As you can imagine, this report met with significant alarmed by public ended a biosolids community, particularly by the Tyler, the appointee report titled What's EPA unable to assess the impact of hundreds of unregulated pollutants, land applied biosolids, which of course, was quite alarming. So the EPA identified the OIG report, identified 352 pollutants, biosolids that cannot be considered for regulation due either to lack of data or risk assessment tools. In 61, pollutants were designated as acutely hazardous, hazardous for priority pollutants, and also add it to the base of pharmaceutical steroids and others. So a sister agency, an EPA, draft, a report that was condemning them to OIG port. The Office of Water at the Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance said we are concerned about how the science group is present within the OIG report. It's biased and raises alarm. It's taken out of context. There was great belief that it was not really scientifically based. The presence of a pollutant in biosolids and London. The report goes on to say that's not equate to scientific risk, but EPA's biosolids program is working hard to prioritize its risk assessment work for known but not yet regulated pollutants. So with the release of that report, a national biosolids group. It's not just the biosolids group, but it is a group that works on residuals and its history goes back to the original development of the five-part 53 regulations. It's a group to which I belong. The current. Group identifier help you or do you want 70 group? It began back in the mid 19 eighties. It was renewed every five years, having different numbers throughout the time. But this group consisted of scientists throughout the nation that various universities and federal agencies such as USDA, EPA, who've worked for the last 45 plus years and longer, the 45 years in this group, working on biosolids research and the research that was being developed by this group found its way into the regulations. So of course, this through the site was concerned about the lack of science and the OIG report and prepared or bottle. So the original report was drafted by subgroup in 41 7B, include such esteemed faculty and Nisbett basket, Ohio State University in Pepper University of Arizona that we Purdue University, Rochester, California agents representative from. I think it's Agency for sewage. Ooh. I forget what castor beans, but it is there statewide agency that addresses sewage agents and then a research associate working with the apps at Ohio State who sincerely. And then an independent review of this original report was provided by five additional people who are members of the w 4170, including myself, Jim, but bleeding from Colorado State. Bob broke from Colorado State, formerly EPA. We leave Michigan State, career cached enough SKY, an independent contractor who wore T5 songs. And so what was the approach used for the rebuttal? First, for the 61 priority pollutants that were identified in the report. So the group identify the concentrations of these chemicals in biosolids. And then they compared these concentrations to current standards that are used out in the environment for other reasons. One of these was the EPA's residential soil screaming limits, turn limits that that limit certain chemical compounds in the soil to certain limits so that, that residential soil can be safe to people living active sites. And then they compared them to four part fib of three regulations for risk assessment that never made its way into the original regulations because the pollutants may not have been considered a concern and then other guidelines. So there were a number let's hierarchies is a comparison of standards in order to screenings. In addition, the persistence or the half-life of these chemicals was evaluated and their mobility through the soil and debate on snow, vadose zone being the upper part and the soil profile at some that's partially filled with water but not saturate. So here's the 61 chemicals that were first identified as a priority pollutants. I'm not gonna go through all of them. But I will show you sort of something about categories. Some sort of general organics. Nitrosyl means feeds are some chemicals that when you fried bacon, become become carcinogenic in that hormones. Many These are those that are used in animal production. Berenice, pesticides that may find their way into bio solids, but that are typically applied on farmland. Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, which are the results of combustion. But some, some additional metals, antimony, beryllium, silicate, thallium, and then number of pharmaceuticals. So these compounds, again, we're first compared to the US residential soil standards. And all those that were lowered been soiled standards, which I've indicated by highlighting in red were eliminated. So those were eliminated. And then those chemicals that weren't the low risk by part five of three original Risk Assessment were identified and those are highlighted in red and those word that a women. And then the chemicals that were below it, Ohio EPA voluntary soil program highlighted in red and those word limit. And then chemicals that were likely to grade in the soil in a very short period of time having half-life of less than three months, we're eliminated and the remaining chemicals are listed here. So for this group which exist largely of hormones, the medications, there are actually no soiled standard levels for these, so we have nothing against which to assess the levels and bio solids. There were two compounds that were actually above soil screening levels, but they actually met six. So that, for example, miss chemical six of the 84 samples in a national sewage sludge survey above a USEPA cancer risk. So, so this is a small amount, only 684 samples had data Mountain and I'm not to try to minimize that concern. But a California EPA cancer standard of 1.58 was determined not to be exceeded when a child EDI 200 milligrams per day soil that had been amended with biosolids. We would be exposed. So, so there's some additional other sort of state guidelines for which this chemical was the not to be a prop 2378 tetra chloride I benzoate dioxin, that's highly toxic. Dioxin material. Epa considered setting a limit of 300 nanograms per kilogram, its parts per billion, but declined to regulate it back in the early two thousands because so few of the bio solid samples exceeded this amount, most of them will well below 100. In a national suit such survey, 2 thousand free for 113 samples exceeded it. So that's somewhat of a concern, but still a small map. So the summary of these 61 chemicals assessed by our group, we were that the 61 chemical compounds highlighted yellow IQ report that are federally regulated by not NIOSH hazardous products list or is priority pollutants have been researched extensively and previously assessed in some way by EPA. Our hierarchical risk assessment using soil screening levels and persistence. In this, spawns found most chemicals of concern, either low or non-detectable concentrations or have low persistence in biosolids and are low-risk. And the final summary, or the 61 was only a few of these biosolids may require further study and are undergoing additional startup. So what about the other 300 plus chemicals down not on the priority of Mr. wreck realists. Well, many of these are tough, toxic, believe it or not, calcium, which component of many fertilizers, limestone and sodium were even on this list. That's something to examine, which you can understand some of the concerns about the lack of science in the report. In some of these were recognized as talks, were not yet listed. And I'll talk a little bit about a group of compounds called p fast, which today is one of the fastest rising chemicals of concern in our environment. So the evaluation approach for these additional 300, 300 elements, because they were grouped into various chemical categories, such as pesticides, antibiotics, hormones, other organics, et cetera. And then they were evaluated using biosolids, Bu articles for each chemical category. And additional literature review focused on fate and transport of these chemicals, the human health impacts and are ecological effects. So we're not just concerned about their effects on human beings, but we're concerned about the effects on wildlife and frogs that insects and other wildlife. Another five, flora and fauna as. And so it was part of the original fib of three risk assessment. So here are these 370 nonetheless, the chemicals in their barracks categories. Lot of them are pharmaceuticals, those sorts of drugs that people are picking every day. Saying that antibiotics, antimicrobials, the hormones, steroids, brominated flame retardant, it's p fas, another surfactants, a group of other organic solvents that again dioxins and dioxin compounds, pesticides, pathogen. So, so these are all organic chemicals and metals in an organic or inorganic elements. And then pathogens are biological. And we showed them by a different color to indicate they are biological organisms and knocked him. So let's go through each of these different categories and the summary report after this careful review by the community. So these pharmaceuticals and personal care products, also sometimes termed PPC piece. They were examine the PPC key and the key PCP transport to surface water dissipates quickly after land application. So meaning there's very little movement to, to surface water these compounds. There's minimal reaching of these compounds. And in empirical land application studies, the concentrations the tile drainage in runoff. Muslim was much lower in wastewater treatment effluent. And this is the cleaned water that's separated from the sewage sludge at the wastewater treatment plant, which has been discharged directly into rivers and streams. So the PBGC's PPC piece entitled training runoff was lower than their concentration in the water that's being released. Tour waterways from the wastewater treatment plant. Their concentrations and surface runoff from land. Bile salt is below also artwork, aquatic Eco talk logical points. So there was a little concerned about how they would be effecting the ecology. And they were identified, it refutes many identified and reviewed studies with risk assessments greater than one. So this, you'd have to understand that risk assessment. Just saying that at some level, the group said they should be considered for future study focused on their ecological risk assessment. And these include compounds such as AdSense, which you know about these if you actually suffered from arthritis, things like Ibuprofen, trickle fan and trike with carbon rich lawyer. Antimicrobials often found. So toothpastes, acetaminophen and caffeine. So some of the compounds in our everyday life, these are the sorts of additional compounds that art was determined need additional time. Okay, hormones and steroids. So by want bonded solid does a minor source of bees compared to animal anymore. They do not persist. Hormones do not persist in the soil after land application. Hormones in biosolids are not a human health risk. And again, this is all according to review the literature. Insight restrictions imposed on class, the biosolids. Such as requiring a buffer strips and preventing excessive monks sloping lands for biosolids application. The nutrient management rates at which biosolids must be applied. These are designed to prevent run-off, minimize negative impacts of nutrients, and they certainly do that with her hormones, steroids to aquatic ecosystems. So in summary, for hormones and steroids, based on need, currents, fate and transport literature, work hormones. Concerns of risks associated with hormones and steroids and land apply biosolids are not warranted. Alright, brominated flame retardant. So these are groups of chemicals that are widely distributed, persistent in the environment so much that they're reported wisely inhuman what you're probably sitting on a chair right now, cell phone pads or had been immersed in brominated flame retardant. You're sitting at a computer whose parts are more likely treated with brominated flame retardant. If you're in a carpeted or room, there's curtains in your room. Those were likely treated with property flame Report targets. And one of the major exposure pathways, the beads are just indoor dust fit. In fact, more people who probably are in contact and flame retardant from, from their own home environment would be anywhere close to two food. Or he produced with biosolids on land. And one of the organism better heist in these compounds are CACS, who of course lay around on your carpets and love themselves. Blown brominated flame retardant do not appear to contribute largely to dust or three pathways in biosolids. And they've been phased out throughout much of your, many of these are beginning, continuing to be face out in the US. And the face outward one smart will be graded soil. Okay? Dioxins, few rands and other dioxin compounds. So even if you don't know of specifically the chemical conservative dioxins, most everyone has heard of amendment and know who their potential hazards to human beings. There's been extensive research on these for 40 years. Particularly biosolids USE pay. The association of metropolitan sewage agencies conducted a nationwide biosolids survey as second or third one in the early to thousands. And based on the surveys and risk assessments, EPA found that dioxins than dioxin compounds did not pose a significant risk to human or environmental health. That was, they were. Almost always two orders of magnitude below what would be a problem. So the announcement, EPA's decision not to regulate, along with supporting documents can be found at this link. And this goes back almost 20 years. What about pesticides and associated metabolites? So the toxicity, the fate, and transport of data had been generated as part of the pesticide registration processes. Few studies examine current use pesticides in bio solids and organic chlorine pesticide concentrations had decreased with their face out. In summary, pesticides and land applying bio solids are present at concentrations one to two orders of magnitude lower than federally allowable. And therefore, the adverse effects from pesticides entering the landscape through application of bio solid should not be considered significant risks to human or ecological health. Then we have a category, not sort of a generalized category. Other organics, catchall for solvents, plastics, PAHs, fragrances, et cetera. Many of the chemicals used in this or in this category are consumer personal care products. There in shampoos, you used toothpaste, you use fragrances, he odorants one might use. And the direct exposure to consumer and personal care products far to see anything imaginable from the indirect exposure that small concentrations and by salts applied to land, my result resorted to peer-reviewed literature leads to conclude that there is insignificant risks to human health from these remaining organic chemicals in the OIG report. So let's talk about P fas and what these are. There's not a great Association would bond solids. But you're going to, if you haven't heard out, you're going to hear about these much more. These are the leading organic chemical of concern nationwide. So these, there are currently nearly 5 thousand being produced. Well, the nu mu s. So this is maybe from a year to open. New estimate. Said there might be as many as 7 thousand beats. And to give you an idea of you don't have, this won't be on a test. You won't have to memorize these compounds, but there are so many numerous subclasses. Each of these with very unique differentiating characteristics. They, each subclass includes many with many different chain lengths and these things don't tend to degrade. They tend to convert to other isomers that could be less or even more potentially toxic than the original. The, these are sometimes referred to as forever chemicals because they hardly ever the grade, but they've been. One that's become very interesting because they're apparently water supplies throughout the US and they're becoming regulated throughout the US and they're associated with cancer or another eugenic activities. So ill IG report mentioning these once in a single sentence. They did did not even cause them or refer to them as an issue in bio solvents, but just talk about them as being coming issue. And they're currently the biggest concern nationally and globally. Grow date. So Let's talk a little more about P fastened land application. So where did they come from? So first of all, PFS released from land applied biosolids does occur. We know that there are very small concentrations up means imbibe solved. But application biosolids, PRB, the review to soils was not a significant contributor to the ubiquitous exposure to fasten the human after lunch. So what are the, what are the sources of these? So these non-stick sort of pots and pans that you have in your house. Teflon kinds of sources. These are sources of P fas. And again, so there are, there are everywhere around us but the, the place that there'll be neumes that however, resulting in a movement to groundwater or their use as fire fighting phones. So these everywhere there's a fire and some of the places that they're, that they've been use tremendous, tremendous amounts were military sites where these firefighting foams, where US, especially from training exercises, airports used in firefighting, training activities. Some direct this charges and air or water from these p, fast producing facilities in, in there with some land dispose the industrial wastes. So these wouldn't be biosolids per se, but these are industrial wastes from companies that produce confess and that resulted in some movement for water. There was there was one case where biosolids was impacted by a high pre fast contaminated industrial discharge in Alabama. And that's the only case. Biosolids having significant amounts of seeds. But they are also associated with paper mill sledges. In some cases, paper, paper mills were generated by certain processes, but largely where firefighting foams have been used and the movement of these into water as a prop. So except for a few worst-case scenarios involving industrial contaminated biosolids, there's no cases of excess of human exposure associated with biosolids use in agriculture. And again, keep your ears and eyes open because these mature, you'll be hearing about these chemicals in popular trade journals and news magazines. Alright, so we're moving now from what we're moving towards began. So let me end up with a few non organics and then also some of them microbial metals and other organic constituents. All but nitrogen, phosphorus, and molybdenum have natural abundance and soil that exceeds their concentration and bio-solids. These worthy additional constituents that were identified as concerned in the OIG report. For arsenic and molybdenum, we have risk-based standards, the dress final part five of three, and the science-based federal regs promulgated by US EPA Limits science-based in P application to rates approved by state nutrient management applications. So that our normal nutrient management regulations should ensure that we do not contaminate surface and groundwater with NNP from box. So the summary of the assessment of the non Listed chemicals was that there's been an extensive environmental fate and transport of data had been available for most of these. In general, most of these chemicals and bio-solids either occur below natural soil backgrounds with are non-toxic and pose no risk level. Supposed. Founded biosolids where they occur at concentrations well below risk-based levels, do not persist, persist in the environment. So these chemicals do not pose risks to human health when in a biosolids matrix. However, there are a few persistent pharmaceuticals that may require further study to Terry term than mere potential ecological impact. So now I'd like to move on to the final group of constituents address the view, an IG report. And these are the biologically based or the pathogens. And these are some of the pathogens that were listed in the OIG report. They include either variety viruses, ward some bacteria or anti resist resist, antibiotic resistant bacteria and antibiotic resistant genes. So if you remember, early on in this presentation, I spoke about pathogen risk from exposure to the biosolids. Remember in class a, biosolids since no detectable pathogen, some bears 0 risk. The risk from class B is expected the mid Medicaid gated by the sight restrictions and find with three rule, as long as there is allow sufficient time for pathogens to die off and inactivation within the soil prior to any potential human exposure. And the duration depends on land management. Potential risks from indirect exposures such as aerosols which you groundwater, were found to be small to negligible. So research does not support widespread concerns microbial hazards from land application, the biosolids. Hundreds of thousands of land applications have been performed in the US over the past 50 years. Microbial hazards from land application has been refuted by science studies. You know, peer-reviewed evidence of adverse public health effects from silicon, from microbial hazards associated from land application, the bio solids. It's always a what if scenario. And in contrast, there are two to three outbreaks annually associated with runoff from land applied animal manures who train well less treatment. So based on this record, it's reasonable to conclude that the presence of pathogens and Class B biosolids does not adversely affect public health. Okay, the last and, and again, one of the topics that often seems very early to the general public, which Hispanic Environmental antibiotic resistance. Rizzo in 2013, made this morning statement. Wastewater treatment plants and biosolids are blamed for increasing environmental antibiotic resistance. And so in this art, where antibiotics are bacterial cells exposed to antibiotics through selection, as we know as evolution curves result. Certain bacteria and certain genes that are selected for antibiotic resistance. And so someone getting a disease with these genes in them or exposed to a bacteria that's antibiotic resistant might not have any way to be treated in a hospital and medical setting. That's, that is the sort of the background for that. So or micro, micro, micro biologists Antarctic, WE affording one 7B. That a very simple mathematical calculation. Ooh, that doesn't even require years, years of studies in order to down, to show the lack of evidence for antibiotic resistant bacteria. So we know microbiologists at least know that anti, antibiotic resistance has been naturally occurring soils for 3 billion years. That's present in all even pristine soils. In fact, this is the way, this is where we've obtained most of our, most of our antibiotics from the penicillin. Another's grown in the soil. And for any given antibiotic, there are ten to the seventh culturable antibiotic, antibiotic resistant bacteria per gram. This is in a pristine soil. Therefore, in a farm soil for one acre furrow slice the soil, which contains nine times ten to the eighth grams per soil or to 2 million pounds of soil. We would have that amount of soil times that amount unculturable bacteria per Per gram for total, naturally occurs nine times ten to the fifth anti biotic resistant bacteria. Okay? When we apply land biosolids via additional antibiotic resistant bacteria, that the most might be 9.2 times ten to the 12th, which seems like quite a bit, and it is a large amount. But when you compare that to the, as a ratio to what's existing in the soil, it would just increase in the soil 0.1% the antibiotic resistant. So what's being added to the soil from wastewater treatment bio-solids is a small fraction of what occurs naturally. So the overall conclusions regarding the antibiotics, antibiotic resistant bacteria and antibiotic resistant genes, is that it's antibiotic activities reduce fortune, That's, that's being held onto soil particles. Degradation, that's the decomposition or break down and leaching through the soil profile and thus does not build up and soil. The natural production of antibiotics and soil has occurred for billions of years. Therefore, antibiotic resistant bacterial genes, the influence of antibiotics and so microbiota numbers in horizontal gene factor has also been in existence for billions of years until the existence of these soil mild solvents is unlikely to adversely impact public COP. Okay. So that's the that's the presentation for today. I'd just like to bring you up to date on what the US EPA Office of Water is currently doing and their potential action. So with regard to constituents of concern, currently retarding models for deterministic screening. And what we call probabilistic risk assessments, which will then be used for many of the chemicals in the OIG report using existing data. Results from these assessments ward for new regulatory standards if necessary. Data gaps may exist when biosolids, which realistic concentrations of chemical concert or land apply, and realistic actual land application of bio-solids research data. It should be used by the VP8 and conduct risk assessment and to promulgate regulation isn't future chemicals of concern. So many of the publications or concerns that are expressed by some naysayers, scientists use concentrations of chemicals outside of the biosolids matrix for at levels well higher than would ever be. Parents are encouraging box. And so with that, I will stop sharing my screen and turn it back over to Robbie and see if there's any questions that I can answer. Thank you very much, Dr. veil of great presentation. A lot of information there and now it takes a lot of time and effort to get a lot of that research and data together. So we appreciate you joining us and sharing that update this more than any questions. I know I've got one question, but any questions from any of the agents or participants on the land as more than on bio solid use, safety. Any of the topics that were discussed this morning? Also, there may be mentioned rotten. There's so much information here in this presentation that may be difficult for people to think about what it is that they would like, how they'd like to frame their questions more or get in more detail. So of course, I will certainly be glad as long as I continue to work here to, to answer questions if people want to send them to me. Well, after this presentation, and I guess this presentation has been recorded so people have the opportunity to review it and think about what I presented a little more clearly. That Dr. Daniel, I know I've had questions before from producers. We do have a couple of options for amendments of courses. The traditional bio solid amendment. But then there's also, as you mentioned, other industrial tight waste, biosolids, I guess I'm not sure if it's a proper term for those those products, but that's also an option enough hasn't questions from landowners on on those products. And I know you mentioned in your presentation the concern with the p fast compounds in those products. It dino where folks can get more information on that or, or some more literature to, to see if that's if the PFS compounds or of concern, is that something that is going to be heavily regulated or just any information you can provide on that for folks that may be considering that option. So the work with work with Well, let me first address that sort of initial comment that you had about these sort of industrial by-products and and you're right, we don't refer to those as biosolids. They could be while they may be biological in origin, meaning that they might require some microbial wastewater treatment, such as at a waste paper mills lunch facility, or a lot of the food wastes, cross food processing waste such ads, chicken, chicken processing wastes or other food processing waste, Sorry, Pac considered industrial waste because they are not form to directly there's an industrial process. So those are usually, they're regulated also by the state as industrial waste products separately then biosolids. Paper mill sludge is, as a group, do not contain high amounts of p fast, but there have been some that contain them in parts of New England, which is where the source of some of these Fast compounds moving two to ground water was first identified. At this stage, the pdfs regulations are in the development stage and their first being developed at what will be acceptable in the groundwater. And then that's not that's not quite clear at this point. And before they can start to regulate what's actually in the amendments to be apply. They have to understand how much can be allowed and water without posing a risk. And then backtrack that the calculations to determine what would be acceptable in various ways. But as you saw from this presentation there, they're all around us and in soils are ready in many of the products that we use. With that icon. I'll stop. Thank you. Craig has say We've got another question in the chat box here. Had the acres applied I sin and for bio solids, is this what the question's referring to? Had the acres applied declined in Virginia in recent years? No. The the acres receiving biosolids didn't Virginia or aren't staying? Well, that there had been isn't as much application and bio solids as there ever has. It's not being reduced per se. However, one of our biggest suppliers to the state, which had been the Blue Plains facility in Washington DC, has changed their practice in going from a line stabilized be product to a Class a product. And much of this product is now being sold in bags and in bulk to, not to farmers, but to, to landscapers and other citizens. Oh, this is resulting in maybe less material going to forms, but more going into residential areas. I guess flea, you've done a great job. Dr. vanilla, provide a lot of information. So as as he said, if you have questions, please let us know and we'd be glad to reach out and hopefully get you some answers for those questions. Because we do know that this is a topic of concern for landowners and produce or so. If you get those questions for the agents on the line, please please reach out to Dr. van that hopefully can help answer those. So appreciate everyone join us this morning. Thank you, Dr. vein, for the great presentation and all the updates on the topic. There'll be a great resource to share with folks on the topics. So we appreciate you provide net uptake. Thanks for the invitation and I look forward to hearing from people in the future. I'm a good guy. Thank you, Gregg. And for those on the line, next week will be joined for a topic of discussion. We're going to hopefully have David Kindig from the Department of Conservation and Recreation for those of you that don't know, David, he kind of heads up the nutrient management plans sector in DC are and we're going to have him come on and talk to us about some updates on future regulation, what we're looking at in the pipeline potentially for mandated nutrient management plans, but also to talk a little bit about nutrient management plans that their value and importance and in a little bit of background on those plans. So if you have producers that are interested in that topic, please encourage them to, to join us next week. If those you from the public side, uh, please join us if that's a topic of concern for you. So with that being said, just like to take a few seconds to ask for you to please follow the link on the screen too, to our evaluation. If you've joined us in the past or today, please let us know how we're doing and if you have a topic you'd like for us to address. And also just like to take a quick second to thank that production team of ages that makes this effort possible. Mike broadest, Stephanie Rommel, check Trent Jones, lower magazine a and eight Olsen, thank you for joining us today and helping us get set up on Facebook Live. And also we really appreciate your efforts with that. So with that being said, thank you again for joining us this morning BCA today. We look forward to seeing everyone again next week, and I hope everyone has a great rest of your Thursday. Take care.