2. Courtesy of Food Technology magazine, from "Defending the Food Supply," August 2005, Vol. 59, No.8. Food Technology is a publication of the Institute of Food Technologists, www.ift.org.www.ift.org In a Food Production or Processing Setting

3. Is Our Food Safe From Attack? Is Our Food Supply Safe From Attack ?

4. The U.S. government has declared the food and agriculture sector to be one of 17 critical national infrastructures vulnerable to intentional attack.

5. How is Food Supply a Critical Infrastructure?  Most states produce 30% or less of what it’s residents eat.  Most cities have only a 3 - 5 day food supply.  The average person’s food travels 1,300 miles from farm to table.

6. Food Processing is Missouri’s Fastest Growing Industry  In 2005 Missouri ranked 12 th in value of food products shipped (2.8% of U.S. total).  In 2002 Missouri had 556 food manufacturing establishments.

7. What Type of Harm Could Occur? Intentional delivery of a harmful biological or chemical agent to the food supply system could cause:  Physical harm (illness or mortality)  Economic disruption  Direct  Indirect  International  Political unrest  Psychological harm – loss of confidence in food supply

8. Case Study: No Bleu Cheese Please!  In 1984, members of an Oregon cult intentionally contaminated restaurant salad bars with Salmonella bacteria.  Attempted to influence an election.  751 individuals became ill, 45 of those were hospitalized.

9. Food Defense focuses on security, protecting the food supply from intentional contamination. Courtesy of Food Technology magazine, from "Defending the Food Supply," August 2005, Vol. 59, No.8. Food Technology is a publication of the Institute of Food Technologists, www.ift.org. www.ift.org

10. Is Food Defense Different than Food Safety?  Food Defense focuses on protecting the food supply from intentional contamination. unintentional  Food Safety focuses on protecting the food supply from unintentional contamination.

11. The HACCP System is Not Intended for Food Defense.  HACCP considers agents that are known to occur in a specific process. Intentional contamination can involve unknown/unexpected agents.  HACCP does not plan for the recall and storage of contaminated product.  An initial vulnerability assessment is not addressed by HACCP.

12. Who Might Intentionally Contaminate a Food Product?  Disgruntled employee/former employee  Cleaning crew/temporary employee  Members of terrorist or extremist groups  Truck driver  Competitor  Visitor

13. Which Foods Could be Targeted? Targeted foods are likely:  Mixed in large batches  Uniformly mixed  Have a short shelf life

14. Case Study: Where’s The Beef?  2003 A supermarket employee intentionally contaminated 200-250 lbs. of ground beef with a pesticide.  92+ individuals became ill  Attempt to discredit supervisor  Dose per ¼ lb. burger potentially lethal Steven Adams Pittsburgh Tribune Review

15.  Easily accessible  A large serving size  Be a good environment for the agent to grow or to preserve the toxin.  Ready to eat  Without tamper evident packaging Targeted Foods (Continued)

16.  Be consumed by a “high risk population” or have an emotional impact factor

17. Potential Contaminants  Biological Agents: Cause disease or produce toxin  Chemical Agents: Causes toxicity or burns  Radiological Agents: Causes burns or radiation sickness

18. Case Study: One Lump or Two?  November 23, 2006 Alexander Litvinenko died of acute radiation poisoning due ingesting a large dose of Polonium 210.  Most likely mixed into his tea at a restaurant  1 st person to die of acute α-particle radiation effects  Highly toxic  Difficult to find and identify

19. What Makes an Attractive Agent of Intentional Contamination  Incubation period/delayed effect  Highly effective  History of use  Stability in food conditions  Available  Physical Form of the material  Low traceability

20. Following several major food recalls in the US, consumer surveys were conducted. Courtesy of Food Technology magazine, from "Defending the Food Supply," August 2005, Vol. 59, No.8. Food Technology is a publication of the Institute of Food Technologists, www.ift.org. www.ift.org

21. Consumer Confidence in Food Defense Systems After National Food Recalls Stinson et al., 2008

22. Who Do Consumers Believe is Responsible for Food Defense? Stinson et al., 2008

23. Who do Consumers Believe Should Pay for Food Defense? Stinson et al., 2008

24. Products That Consumers Believe Most Likely to be Intentionally Contaminated Stinson et al., 2008

25. Defense plans are encouraged but not required for farms and most food establishments. Courtesy of Food Technology magazine, from "Defending the Food Supply," August 2005, Vol. 59, No.8. Food Technology is a publication of the Institute of Food Technologists, www.ift.org.www.ift.org

26. Facilities Currently Required to Participate in Food Defense All vendors providing food for USDA feeding programs must now be in compliance with the Food Defense System.

27. Who Will Be Responsible?  Designate a Food Defense Coordinator to develop, maintain and evaluate the Food Defense Plan.  Make other staff aware of their responsibilities within the Food Defense Plan.

28. Five Steps for Developing a Food Defense Plan  Assess the vulnerabilities  Write a plan  Evaluate the plan  Maintain the plan

29. Assess the vulnerabilities  Gather a team of key personnel to make the assessment.  Think like someone who wants to harm your operation.  Look for areas where contamination would be spread through normal operations.  Look for sensitive areas that are not frequently observed.

30. Meat Plant Vulnerability Assessment

31. Countermeasures are actions taken to shield vulnerable areas, reducing the risk of intentional contamination.

32. Areas to Consider for Countermeasure Development Procedures Facility Technology Personnel

33.  Workforce  Shipping and Receiving  Visitors and Customers  Marketing Countermeasures for Procedures

34.  Light it  Lock it  Limit Access Countermeasures for Facility

35. Write the Plan  Develop a countermeasure to defend each vulnerable point identified as high risk.  Create a written plan including those countermeasures that are reasonable for the situation.  Identify the individual who will implement the countermeasure.  Set a timeline to implement the countermeasure.

36. Meat Plant Food Defense Plan

37. Should such an event occur a timely and efficient response will be critical to minimizing the damage.

38. Develop a Written Response Plan  Plan for handling of contaminated product  Emergency Planning  Facility Map  Emergency Contact Phone List  Visitor Log  Supplier/Customer Contacts  Employee Emergency Information

39. Handling of Contaminated Product  Retained or recalled product will need to be stored prior to disposal.  Storage will need to be separate from non contaminated product.  Prepare a plan for disposal, to be reviewed by FSIS and state authorities in case of an intentional contamination.  FSIS would witness the execution of the plan.

40. Meat Plant Containment and Disposal Plan

41. Facility Map  Name, address, and phone of owner/proprietor  Relationship of the facility to adjacent properties and/or structures.  Road access including transportation routes  Perimeter boundaries, include fences, and gates (with dimensions)

42. Facility Map continued  Buildings, outbuildings, doors, windows, AC/heating, ventilation  Utilities (water, gas, electric, phones) location and shutoff  Septic System and drainage areas with direction of flow  Web sites such as Google Earth www.earth.google.com

43. Parking Meat Plant Facility Map Receiving Shipping Drainage Processing H20H20 Employee Entrance Main Gate 8ft. Delivery Gate 12 ft Electric/Gas Parking Paris Road Waco Road Perimeter fence Parking Trailer parking Parking Phone Septic A/C Heating Refrigeration Cold Storage Mizzou Meats Inc. 6715 Waco Rd. Columbia MO 65202 573-874-1289 Truck Exit 12 ft. Loading Dock Storage Visitor Entry A/C Heating

44. Emergency………………………………….……….911 Columbia Police………………………………442-6131 Boone County Sheriff……............................442-6131 Missouri State Highway Patrol………1-800-525-5555 University Hospital…………………………...882-4141 Poison Control………………………...1-800-222-1222 Ameren UE…………………………….1-800-552-7583 Centurytel……………………………...1-800-824-2877 Columbia Water and Light…………………...875-2555 FSIS 24 hour emergency number…...1-866-395-9701 FDA 24 hour emergency number……1-301-443-1240 Missouri Dept. of Health and Senior Services……………………….1-800-235-5503 Missouri State Emergency Management Agency…………………1-573-526-9100 Missouri Dept of Homeland Security..1-573-522-3007 Meat Plant Emergency Phone List

45. NameAddressAffiliationDL #PhoneReason for visit Truman M. Tiger 256 Stringer Columbia MO Univ. of MOMO 456789 882-xxxxTour Herbie N. Husker 765 Maize Lincoln NE Univ. of NE 123456 389-xxxxEspionage Willie K. Wildcat 451 Apple Manhattan KS K StateKS 098763 645-xxxxSales Call Meat Plant Visitor Log NameHome #Cell #Emergency ContactContact # Reveille C. Aggie 456-xxxx931-xxxx Lassie Comehome456-xxxx Jay J. Hawk 666-xxxx123-xxxx C.J. Chickenhawk666-xxxx Judge B. Bear 675-xxxx289-xxxx Grandma Grizzly657-xxxx Sooner O. Schooner 653-xxxx191-xxxx Lil Redwagon653-xxxx Meat Plant Employee Emergency Contacts

46. CompanyPhoneContact Person Capital Consumers573-634-xxxxSue Snackstick Beefsteak Inc.573-875-xxxxFrank Flatiron CompanyPhoneContact Person Truman’s Packing Inc.573-657-xxxxPhil Flanksteak Koch123-456-xxxxSam Supplyline Meat Plant Supplier Contact List Meat Plant Customer Contact List

47. Evaluate the plan  Make unannounced entrances at various checkpoints.  Check locks in vulnerable areas.  Check employee badges.  Perform a mock recall.  Test inventory procedures.

48. Maintain the plan  Ensure that measures implemented continue to be effective.  Train the employees regarding their effort in:  Prevention  Detection  Response  Re-evaluate the plan annually or as new products, processes or facilities change.

49. Not so Fresh Salsa  Kansas City area restaurant  Customers became violently ill  Originally not know it was contamination  Restaurant closed, employees laid off  Perpetrators e arrested, restaurant reopened  Owner encouraged patrons to return  Discounts  Security Cameras  Restaurant survived

50. References  www.fsis.gov www.fsis.gov  www.cfsan.fda.gov www.cfsan.fda.gov  www.bt.cdc.gov www.bt.cdc.gov  www.dhs.gov www.dhs.gov  www.dhs.ca.gov www.dhs.ca.gov