Nov

28

Fun with Fungi

Posted by at 11:20 pm on November 28, 2006
Category: BIS

coccidioides immitisLast Friday, BIS released a final rule implementing certain understandings of the annual plenary of the Australia Group in June. The new rules apply controls to pipes, vessels, valves and related equipment made of niobium or niobium alloys. It also changed the classifications for shiga-like ribosome inactivating proteins and for the fungi coccidioides immitis and coccidioides posadisii from ECCN 1C360 to ECCN 1C351, which appears to have stricter controls. This change will also make coccidioides immitis and coccidioides posadisii the first fungi to be controlled under 1C351.

Some interesting background information on the two fungi is provided by Tom Volk, a biology professor at the University of Wisconsin at LaCrosse. According to Professor Volk infection with either of the related fungi often results in a mild disease that confers then confers lifetime immunity to the disease. In other cases it may result in much more serious, and possibly fatal, illness. It is endemic to semi-arid areas, most notably the San Joaquin Valley in California. Infection occurs by inhalation of the spores.

Professor Volk has this to say about the weaponization of the fungi:

Since this is the most virulent of the fungal pathogens, it should never be grown out in culture except under very controlled conditions, such as using gloved transfer hood and in screw cap vials. The fungus produces its small arthrospores in abundance in culture. If these escape, they can cause lab infections. These arthrospores can pass through a 2 mm filter found in normal biological safety cabinets/ hoods! It is a very dangerous organism. There have been persistent rumors that it is being developed for use in biological warfare, but it could probably not be grown in a large enough quantity to be used for use in bioterrorism because of the danger it would pose for the people growing it.

Professor Volk’s page on the two fungi has more interesting information, including some unpleasant pictures of the effect of the pathogens, all of which will convince you that even if they don’t have much use as CBW agents it is still probably a good idea to regulate their export.

Permalink

Bookmark and Share

Copyright © 2006 Clif Burns. All Rights Reserved.
(No republication, syndication or use permitted without my consent.)

One Comment:

This regulation, issued in final form, violates Section 13 of the EAA, which requires that all rules imposing export controls be issued in proposed form with opportunity for public comment, or in case of emergency, in interim form with opportunity for public comment. Given that the AG decision was taken last June, there’s no good reason for failing to issue it in proposed form. Nor is the expiration of the EAA and reliance on IEEPA an excuse to cite the foreign affairs exception under the Administrative Procedures Act: The 1946 legislative history compiled by the Judiciary Committee as a guide to interpretation of the Administrative Procedures Act makes it clear that the foreign affairs function exclusion was intended to apply only to diplomatic and consular activity, not regulation of trade.

As a result of the requirement for notice and comment rulemaking, this “final rule” is also invalid under the Regulatory Flexibility Act for failure to undertake the regulatory flexibility analysis and consultation with small entities. As a result, any adversely affected small entity may challenge the final rule. But they had best act quick, the RFA requires that an action for judicial review be brought within one year.

Comment by Mike Deal on December 1st, 2006 @ 3:17 pm