Meeting Critical
Laboratory Needs
for Animal Agriculture

Examination of Three Options

Committee on an Analysis of the Requirements and
Alternatives for Foreign Animal and Zoonotic Disease
Research and Diagnostic Laboratory Capabilities

Board on Agriculture and Natural Resources
Board on Life Sciences
Division on Earth and Life Studies

NATIONAL RESEARCH COUNCIL
                         OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES

THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS

Washington, D.C.

www.nap.edu

THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS    500 Fifth Street, NW    Washington, DC 20001

NOTICE: The project that is the subject of this report was approved by the Governing Board of the National Research Council, whose members are drawn from the councils of the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine. The members of the committee responsible for the report were chosen for their special competences and with regard for appropriate balance.

This study was supported by Contract HSHQDC-11-D-00009/Task Order HSFLBP-12-J-00001 between the National Academy of Sciences and the Department of Homeland Security. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this publication are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the organizations or agencies that provided support for the project.

International Standard Book Number-13: 978-0-309-26129-6

International Standard Book Number-10: 0-309-26129-5

Additional copies of this report are available for sale from the National Academies Press, 500 Fifth Street, NW, Keck 360, Washington, DC 20001; (800) 624-6242 or (202) 334-3313 (Washington metropolitan area); http://www.nap.edu/.

Copyright 2012 by the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Printed in the United States of America.

THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES

Advisers to the Nation on Science, Engineering, and Medicine

The National Academy of Sciences is a private, nonprofit, self-perpetuating society of distinguished scholars engaged in scientific and engineering research, dedicated to the furtherance of science and technology and to their use for the general welfare. Upon the authority of the charter granted to it by the Congress in 1863, the Academy has a mandate that requires it to advise the federal government on scientific and technical matters. Dr. Ralph J. Cicerone is president of the National Academy of Sciences.

The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964, under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences, as a parallel organization of outstanding engineers. It is autonomous in its administration and in the selection of its members, sharing with the National Academy of Sciences the responsibility for advising the federal government. The National Academy of Engineering also sponsors engineering programs aimed at meeting national needs, encourages education and research, and recognizes the superior achievements of engineers. Dr. Charles M. Vest is president of the National Academy of Engineering.

The Institute of Medicine was established in 1970 by the National Academy of Sciences to secure the services of eminent members of appropriate professions in the examination of policy matters pertaining to the health of the public. The Institute acts under the responsibility given to the National Academy of Sciences by its congressional charter to be an adviser to the federal government and, upon its own initiative, to identify issues of medical care, research, and education. Dr. Harvey V. Fineberg is president of the Institute of Medicine.

The National Research Council was organized by the National Academy of Sciences in 1916 to associate the broad community of science and technology with the Academy’s purposes of furthering knowledge and advising the federal government. Functioning in accordance with general policies determined by the Academy, the Council has become the principal operating agency of both the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering in providing services to the government, the public, and the scientific and engineering communities. The Council is administered jointly by both Academies and the Institute of Medicine. Dr. Ralph J. Cicerone and Dr. Charles M. Vest are chair and vice chair, respectively, of the National Research Council.

www.national-academies.org

This page intentionally left blank.

COMMITTEE ON AN ANALYSIS OF THE REQUIREMENTS AND ALTERNATIVES FOR FOREIGN ANIMAL AND ZOONOTIC DISEASE RESEARCH AND DIAGNOSTIC LABORATORY CAPABILITIES

Members

TERRY MCELWAIN (Chair), Washington State University, Pullman, Washington

NANCY CONNELL, University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey, Newark

DAVID HENNESSY, Iowa State University, Ames

LONNIE J. KING, The Ohio State University, Columbus

JAMES LE DUC, The University of Texas Medical Branch at Galveston

N. JAMES MACLACHLAN, University of California, Davis

BRET MARSH, Indiana State Board on Animal Health, Indianapolis

MO SALMAN, Colorado State University, Fort Collins

ALFONSO TORRES, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York

CHRISTOPHER WOLF, Michigan State University, East Lansing

Staff

CAMILLA YANDOC ABLES, Study Director and Program Officer

KATHERINE BOWMAN, Senior Program Officer

PEGGY TSAI, Program Officer

KAREN IMHOF, Administrative Coordinator

ROBIN A. SCHOEN, Director, Board on Agriculture and Natural Resources

FRANCES E. SHARPLES, Director, Board on Life Sciences

NORMAN GROSSBLATT, Senior Editor

BOARD ON AGRICULTURE AND NATURAL RESOURCES

Members

NORMAN R. SCOTT (Chair), Cornell University (Emeritus), Ithaca, New York

PEGGY F. BARLETT, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia

HAROLD L. BERGMAN, University of Wyoming, Laramie

RICHARD A. DIXON, Samuel Roberts Noble Foundation, Ardmore, Oklahoma

DANIEL M. DOOLEY, University of California, Oakland

JOAN H. EISEMANN, North Carolina State University, Raleigh

GARY F. HARTNELL, Monsanto Company, St. Louis, Missouri

GENE HUGOSON, Global Initiatives for Food Systems Leadership, St. Paul, Minnesota

MOLLY M. JAHN, University of Wisconsin-Madison

ROBBIN S. JOHNSON, Cargill Foundation, Wayzata, Minnesota

A.G. KAWAMURA, Solutions from the Land, Washington, DC

KIRK C. KLASING, University of California, Davis

JULIA L. KORNEGAY, North Carolina State University, Raleigh

VICTOR L. LECHTENBERG, Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana

JUNE BOWMAN NASRALLAH, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York

PHILIP E. NELSON, Purdue University (Emeritus), West Lafayette, Indiana

KEITH PITTS, Marrone Bio Innovations, Davis, California

CHARLES W. RICE, Kansas State University, Manhattan

HAL SALWASSER, Oregon State University, Corvallis

ROGER A. SEDJO, Resources for the Future, Washington, DC

KATHLEEN SEGERSON, University of Connecticut, Storrs

MERCEDES VÁZQUEZ-AÑÓN, Novus International, Inc., St. Charles, Missouri

Staff

ROBIN A. SCHOEN, Board Director

EVONNE P.Y. TANG, Senior Program Officer

CAMILLA YANDOC ABLES, Program Officer

KARA N. LANEY, Program Officer

PEGGY TSAI, Program Officer

KAREN L. IMHOF, Administrative Coordinator

JANET M. MULLIGAN, Senior Program Associate for Research

KATHLEEN REIMER, Senior Program Assistant

BOARD ON LIFE SCIENCES

Members

KEITH R. YAMAMOTO (Chair), University of California, San Francisco

BONNIE L. BASSLER, Princeton University, Princeton, New Jersey

VICKI L. CHANDLER, Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation, Palo Alto, California

SEAN EDDY, HHMI Janelia Farm Research Campus, Ashburn, Virginia

MARK D. FITZSIMMONS, John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation, Chicago, Illinois

DAVID R. FRANZ, Former Cdr USAMRIID, Frederick, Maryland

LOUIS J. GROSS, University of Tennessee, Knoxville

RICHARD A. JOHNSON, Arnold & Porter, LLC, Washington, DC

CATO T. LAURENCIN, University of Connecticut Health Center, Farmington

ALAN I. LESHNER, American Association for the Advancement of Science, Washington, DC

BERNARD LO, University of California, San Francisco

ROBERT M. NEREM, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta

MURIEL E. POSTON, Skidmore College, Saratoga Springs, New York

ALISON G. POWER, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York

MARGARET RILEY, University of Massachusetts, Amherst

BRUCE W. STILLMAN, Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, Cold Spring Harbor, New York

CYNTHIA WOLBERGER, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland

MARY WOOLLEY, Research!America, Alexandria, Virginia

Staff

FRANCES E. SHARPLES, Board Director

JO L. HUSBANDS, Scholar/Senior Project Director

JAY B. LABOV, Senior Scientist/Program Director for Biology Education

KATHERINE W. BOWMAN, Senior Program Officer

INDIA HOOK-BARNARD, Senior Program Officer

MARILEE K. SHELTON-DAVENPORT, Senior Program Officer

KEEGAN SAWYER, Program Officer

BETHELHEM M. BANJAW, Financial Associate

CARL-GUSTAV ANDERSON, Program Associate

SAYYEDA AYESHA AHMED, Senior Program Assistant

ORIN E. LUKE, Senior Program Assistant

This page intentionally left blank.

Preface

In April 2012, the National Research Council convened a committee to provide advice on the requirements and alternatives for ensuring the nation has the necessary foreign animal and zoonotic disease research and diagnostic laboratory capabilities. In less than three months after the first public meeting to gather information, held on the rather inauspicious date of Friday the 13th (of April), the committee produced this report that analyzes three options for meeting our nation’s biocontainment facility needs. The committee developed a conceptual framework for an ideal system that would best capture the broad intellectual capital of the United States and would take strategic advantage of investments in laboratory infrastructure during the last decade. It was against this backdrop that the committee considered the three options. The first of three options specified in the committee’s statement of task was to build the National Bio- and Agro-Defense Facility (NBAF) as currently designed. The committee also evaluated whether two alternative options could provide the needed capability and capacity for addressing disease threats. These two alternative options were to build an NBAF of reduced size and scope (“NBAF-lite,” as the committee colloquially referred to it during discussions), and to maintain our current national biocontainment laboratory on Plum Island, with large-animal biosafety level 4 containment capacity provided by foreign laboratories.

A report of this nature and with our timeline does not happen without the commitment and dedicated efforts of many people. That commitment was not only to the task at hand but to a $165 billion animal agricultural enterprise that could suffer catastrophic losses as a result of diseases that are among the world’s most infectious and most virulent. The commitment also extended to a nation that is struggling with economic realities as formidable as any we have faced for 75 years, to a nation that correctly questions a billion-dollar investment in a new facility, and to a leadership that must make decisions about that investment. We trust that this report will be a valuable resource in helping to make critical decisions that affect the security of our food supply, the viability of our agriculture industry, and the public health of our country. The committee dedicated itself to this study with those overarching considerations always in mind.

Committee members brought a broad array of experience and expertise to the discussions. Each of them made valuable contributions to this report, and my thanks go to them for their extraordinary efforts. The National Research Council staff who supported the project were outstanding. Their contributions, both directly and behind the scenes, and their timely encouragement of the chair when there seemed to be no possible way to accomplish our task in the allotted time, were invaluable. I thank all of them on behalf of a grateful committee.

Terry McElwain, DVM, PhD, Chair
Committee on an Analysis of the
Requirements and Alternatives for Foreign
Animal and Zoonotic Disease Research and
Diagnostic Laboratory Capabilities

Acknowledgments

The committee is grateful to all those who participated in our public sessions and those who provided information about their laboratories.

This report has been reviewed in draft form by persons chosen for their diverse perspectives and technical expertise in accordance with procedures approved by the National Research Council’s Report Review Committee. The purpose of the independent review is to provide candid and critical comments that will assist the institution in making its published report as sound as possible and to ensure that the report meets institutional standards of objectivity, evidence, and responsiveness to the study charge. The review comments and draft manuscript remain confidential to protect the integrity of the deliberative process. We wish to thank the following individuals for their review of the report:

Ivan Damnjanovic, Texas A&M University

John R. Henneman, The Pennsylvania State University

James M. Hughes, Emory University

Barbara Johnson, Johnson & Associates, LLC

Michael Lairmore, University of California, Davis

David T. Marshall, North Carolina Department of Agricultureand Consumer Services

Thomas McKenna, Wisconsin Veterinary Diagnostic Laboratory

John P. Moore, Weill Cornell Medical College

Frederick A. Murphy, The University of Texas Medical Branchat Galveston

Derrell Peel, Oklahoma State University

James A. Roth, Iowa State University

Harry Snelson, American Association of Swine Veterinarians

Although the reviewers listed above have provided many constructive comments and suggestions, they were not asked to endorse the conclusions or recommendations, nor did they see the final draft of the report before its release. The review of the report was overseen by Dr. May Berenbaum, University of

Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, and Dr. Lynn Goldman, George Washington University. Appointed by the National Research Council, they were responsible for making certain that an independent examination of the report was carried out in accordance with institutional procedures and that all review comments were carefully considered. Responsibility for the final content of the report rests with the authoring committee and the institution.

Contents

SUMMARY

1  INTRODUCTION

Background

The Committee’s Task

Organization of the Report

References

2  CRITICAL NEED TO PROTECT US AGRICULTURE

Importance of Animal Agriculture

Critical Infrastructure to Protect Animal Health

Animal Diseases of Concern

Diagnostic Needs

Agroterrorism

Summary

References

3  AN INTEGRATED NATIONAL SYSTEM FOR ADDRESSING FOREIGN ANIMAL DISEASES AND ZOONOTIC DISEASES

The Role of a National Laboratory Facility in an Integrated System

Summary

References

4  ANALYSIS AND CONCLUSIONS ABOUT THREE APPROACHES FOR PROVIDING US INFRASTRUCTURE TO COUNTER FOREIGN ANIMAL DISEASE AND ZOONOTIC DISEASE THREATS

Previous Long-Term Planning Efforts

The Laboratory Infrastructure Needed for a Foreign Animal Disease and Zoonotic Disease Research and Diagnostic Facility, Regardless of Location and Size

Analysis of Option 1: The Proposed National Bio- and Agro-Defense Facility as Currently Designed

Analysis of Option 2: A National Bio- and Agro-Defense Facility of Reduced Size and Scope

Analysis of Option 3: Maintaining Current Capabilities at Plum Island Animal Disease Center While Leveraging ABSL-4 Large-Animal Capacity Through Foreign Laboratories

Conclusions about the Three Options

Other Options

Summary

References

5  OVERARCHING CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATION

Analysis of the Three Options

Considerations for Fulfilling National Needs

References

APPENDIXES

A COMMITTEE BIOSKETCHES

B MEETING AGENDAS

C BRIEF HISTORY OF THE PLUM ISLAND ANIMAL DISEASE CENTER

List of Tables, Figures, and Boxes

TABLES

2-1        World Organisation for Animal Health List of Animal Diseases 2012

2-2        Priority List of Diseases of Concern

2-3        Most Serious Animal Disease Threats in the United States Listed on the National Vaccine Stockpile List

3-1        Selected Federal, State, and University BSL-3Ag, BSL-4 and ABSL-4 Laboratories in the United States and Their Capacity and Capability

3-2        Selected International BSL-3Ag and BSL-4Ag/ABSL-4 Laboratories and Their Capacity and Capability

4-1        Possible Location of Key Laboratory-Based Components of the Ideal System for Countering Foreign Animal and Zoonotic Disease Threats

4-2        Summary of NBAF Capacity and Capabilities

4-3        Numbers and Types of Large Animals that can be Handled in the Proposed NBAF Animal Rooms

4-4        Approximate Facility Size and Construction Cost Reductions

4-5        Comparison of Space Available at PIADC and the Proposed NBAF

FIGURES

S-1        Components of an integrated system for addressing foreign animal disease and zoonotic disease threats

3-1        Components of an integrated system for addressing foreign animal disease and zoonotic disease threats

3-2        National Animal Health Laboratory Network

3-3        Selected federal, state, national biocontainment laboratory and regional biocontainment laboratory BSL-3, BSL-3Ag, and BSL-4 facilities

3-4        Rates of performance improvement of recombinant-DNA technology and synthetic biology

4-1        Comparison of the three options analyzed by the committee with the components of an ideal laboratory infrastructure

4-2        Re-envisioned NBAF of reduced size and scope, focusing on critical core components for which capacity cannot be effectively provided at other locations

BOXES

S-1        Conclusions and Recommendation for Meeting Critical Laboratory Needs

1-1        Statement of Task

2-1        Summary of Agricultural Screening Tools Workshops Sponsored by DHS

3-1        Laboratory Biosafety Levels and Types of Pathogens Handled at Each Level

3-2        Training Courses Offered at the Plum Island Animal Disease Center

3-3        The National Animal Health Laboratory Network

3-4        Detecting Foot-and-Mouth Disease Virus in Milk: A Case Study of Collaboration

4-1        Vaccine Challenge Studies

Acronyms and Abbreviations