Advancing the Eco-Responsible Design and Disposal of Engineered Nanomaterials 9 -10 March 2009

1. Advancing the Eco-Responsible Design and Disposal of Engineered Nanomaterials 9 -10 March 2009 Rice University, Houston, Texas Sponsor Recognition Participants from: Australia, Austria, Canada, Denmark, France, Mexico, Sweden, Switzerland, UK, USA

2. ICON: A New Model for Interaction Academics Industry Government Industry Trade Groups Research Commercialization Gov/Reg/Law PublicOversight Gov Policy Makers Regulators Lawyers Non-Governmental Organizations Social/Ethical Researchers Information regarding potential environmental and health risks of nanotechnology to foster risk reduction and maximize societal benefit. 2

3. Database/VJ on nanoEHS research Survey of current workplace practices ICONsultations with diverse stakeholders Quality Information about Risks & Benefits New ES&T paper: DOI: 10.1021/es702158q Knowledge Base Best Practices Communications International nanoEHS research needs assessment 3 ICON Working Groups

4. Good Nano Guide Wiki • Protected Internet site on occupational practices for the safe handling of nanomaterials • Multiple stakeholders contribute, share and discuss information • Modern, interactive, up-to-date 4 http://icon.rice.edu/projects.cfm?doc_id=12207

5. International NanoEHS Research Needs

6. Report downloaded >500 times Media Event at Wilson Center Japanese translation of executive summary National Academies now studying NanoEHS research needs House Science Committee testimony on research needs Predicting Nano-Biointeractions 26 research needs prioritized into 2-, 5- and 10-yr goals May 1, 2008 “Independent efforts such as this one add tremendous value to the work we’re doing at the governmental level.” Sally Tinkle, NIEHS 6 NSF BES-0646107 October 31, 2007

7. Key Findings from Workshop 1 CHALLENGE: Nanomaterial properties are not static throughout lifecycle Tools and models must be developed that can describe the dynamic nature of nanomaterials throughout their lifecycle. CHALLENGE: Chemical composition is not the ideal or sole property on which to focus A set of screening tools is needed to correlate the functional properties of nanomaterials with their potential for biological interaction. CHALLENGE: Exposure scenarios are too diverse to draw general conclusions Exposure assessment studies are needed to enable predictions about implications of physicochemical properties for net dose. 7

8. Key Findings from Workshop 2 CHALLENGE: Nanoparticle surfaces undergo changes during interactions in biological environments Quantitative models are needed to describe how the properties of NPs control the nature and extent of biomolecular interactions at their surface. CHALLENGE: Existing mass-based metrics of measuring dose and dose rate may underestimate NP impacts Dose and dose rate may need to be validated independently for NPs. CHALLENGE: In vitro assays are practical given nanomaterial diversity but may be poor predictors of in vivo endpoints Better biomarkers are essential to address the vast diversity of NP types and to develop strong correlative models for predicting in vivo endpoints based on in-vitro results. 8

9. Workshop Planning Team Jamie Lead, University of Birmingham (Co-chair) Pedro Alvarez, Rice University (Co-chair) Vicki Colvin, Rice University Tracy Hester, Bracewell & Giuliani, LLP Barbara Karn, USEPA Kristen Kulinowski, Rice University Vicki Stone, Napier University Rapporteurs John Fortner Nastassja Lewinski Jaesang Lee Dong Li Shaily Mahendra Support Personnel David Johnson Denise Benoit Marilu Campos Teresa Champion Carlos Garcia Matt Huff Chris Rodriguez

10. Monday 3/9/09 8:15 – 8:30 Logistics and organization 8:30 – 8:-45 Overview #1, Colvin 8:45 – 9:00 Overview #2, Hughes 9:00 – 9:10 Overview #3, Golam Mustafa 9:15 – 9:30 Overview #4, Lead 9:30 -12:00 Brainstorming 1 on Design priorities (3 min each). 12:00 – 1:00 Lunch 1:00 – 3:30 Brainstorming 2 on Disposal priorities (3 min each). 3:30 – 4:00 Break 4:00 – 5:00 Full group discussion of consolidated themes 5:00 – 5:45 Break 6:15 – 8:30 Presentation by Michael Depledge and Reception at BIPP Tuesday 3/10/09 8:00 Continental breakfast 8:15 – 8:30 Summary of day 1 discussion and day 2 logistics 8:45 - 12:00 Work in teams to elaborate on assigned issue 12:00 – 1:00 Lunch. 1:00 – 3:30 Team presentations (10 @ 15 min each including Q&A) 3:30 – 4:00 Break 4:00 – 5:00 Group discussion focused on integration and synthesis 5:00 – 5:30 Polish write ups, incorporate feedback & group discussion

11. Nominal Group Technique Consensus planning tool to prioritize issues according to their importance, intellectual merit, practicality, and achievability.

12. Day 1 Logistics: Safe Design • Alphabetically, 3 minutes each to answer: What critical knowledge gaps and opportunities exist to inform and advance the design of environmentally benign nanomaterials? • Title of Priority Issue • Description • Importance/Significance

13. Potential Categories for Answers • Structure-Activity Relationships • Metrology, quantification and tracing NPs in the environment • Computational Modeling of Nanoparticle Modifications in the Environment • Towards Predicting Multimedia Fate, Transport & Exposure Rapporteurs will record and post your priority issue on the wall under best fitting category

14. Day 1 Logistics: Safe Disposal • Alphabetically, 3 minutes each to answer: What critical knowledge gaps and opportunities exist to inform and advance the management of wastes containing nanomaterials? • Title of Priority Issue • Description • Importance/Significance

15. Potential Categories for Answers • Minimization and Disposal of Nanomaterial Production Wastes • Release and Exposure Scenarios/Source Dynamics • Impact of Nanomaterials on Environmental Protection Infrastructure • Information Needs for Waste Disposal Companies and Recyclers Rapporteurs will record and post your priority issue on the wall under best fitting category

16. Day 2 Deliverables • One category will be assigned per group, to discuss research priorities • 8 PowerPoint presentations (15 min) • Word document summarizing priority issues and approaches/challenges, to serve as a basis for a white paper • Optional: review or position paper later