Friday, September 24
8:00 a.m. - 8:30 a.m.	Registration & Continental Breakfast
8:30 a.m. - 9:00 a.m.	Welcome & Introductions Jane Fountain, Professor of Political Science and Public Policy; Director, Science, Technology and Society Initiative, UMass Amherst Michael Malone, Vice Chancellor for Research & Engagement, UMass Amherst
Panel 1: Constructing Frameworks for Policymaking
9:00 a.m. - 10:30 a.m.	Terry L. Medley, Global Director of Corporate Regulatory Affairs, DuPont - "Policy Guidance: Collaborations for the Responsible Development of Nanoscale Materials" Slides (PDF) | Video (mov) Timothy Malloy, Professor of Law, UCLA - "Under Construction: What are the Roads to Policy?" Slides (PDF) | Video (mov) Jordan Paradise, Associate Professor of Law, Seton Hall University - "Developing Oversight for Nanobiotechnology: Human Drugs and Medical Devices" Video (mov) | slides are not available for this presentation Panel Discussion Moderator: Jane Fountain, Professor of Political Science and Public Policy and Director of the Science, Technology and Society Initiative, UMass Amherst
10:30 a.m. - 10:50 a.m.	Break
Panel 2: International and Federal Policy Emergence
10:50 a.m. - 12:20 p.m.	Jeff Morris, National Program Director for Nanotechnology, US Environmental Protection Agency - "Global Engagement on Nano EHS: Role of the OECD in International Governance" Slides (PDF) | Video (mov) Charles L. Geraci, Jr., Coordinator, Nanotechnology Research Center, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) - "Nanotechnology and Worker Risk: Who’s At the Controls?" Slides (PDF) | Video (mov) Treye Thomas, Toxicologist & Chemical Hazards Program Leader, Office of Hazard Identification and Reduction, Consumer Product Safety Commission, "Challenges in Assessing Nanomaterial Health Risks in Consumer Products" Panel Discussion Moderator: Mark Touminen, Professor of Physics and co-Director of the Center for Hierarchical Manufacturing, UMass Amherst
12:20 p.m. - 1:45 p.m.	Lunch
1:45 p.m. - 2:00 p.m.	Remarks from the Center for Hierarchical Manufacturing Mark Touminen, Professor of Physics and co-Director of the Center for Hierarchical Manufacturing, UMass Amherst
Panel 3: NGO Perspectives on Emerging Nanotechnology Oversight and Regulation
2:00 p.m. - 3:30 p.m.	Rick Reibstein, Environmental Analyst and Policy and Outreach Manager, Office of Technology Assistance, MA Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs - "Anticipatory Constructive Engagement at the State Level" Slides (PDF) | Video (mov) Richard Sclove, Founder and Senior Fellow, The Loka Institute - "Reinventing Technology Assessment in the U.S." Slides (PDF) | Video (mov) J. Clarence Davies, Senior Fellow, Resources for the Future - "Nanotechnology and the Future of Federal Environmental Regulation" Video (mov) | slides are not available for this presentation Panel Discussion Moderator: Michael Ash, Associate Professor of Economics and Public Policy, UMass Amherst
3:30 p.m. - 4:00 p.m.	Discussion & Closing

Michael Ash
Associate Professor, Economics and Public Policy
University of Massachusetts Amherst

Biography: Michael Ash is associate professor of economics and public policy at UMass Amherst. His areas of expertise are labor, health, and environmental economics, examined primarily through quantitative models. Ash’s main interests in environmental policy include disclosure and right-to-know laws, greenhouse-gas policy, and environmental justice. At UMass, Ash co-directs the Corporate Toxics Information Project of the Political Economy Research Institute, which publishes the Toxic 100, an index that identifies the top U.S. toxic polluters among the world’s largest corporations.

J. Clarence (Terry) Davies
Senior Fellow, Resources for the Future (ret.)
Senior Advisor, Woodrow Wilson Center’s Project on Emerging Technologies

"Nanotechnology and the Future of Federal Environmental Regulation"

Abstract: The problems of regulatory oversight for nanotechnology are primarily problems with the U.S. regulatory system as a whole, not problems unique to nano. Also, nanotechnology is a harbinger of the environmental agenda of the future. The existing federal environmental regulatory system has become so weak as to be almost irrelevant. The four major regulatory agencies (EPA, FDA, OSHA, and CPSC) are starved for resources. The laws under which they operate are outdated and full of gaps and loopholes. The whole system is fragmented and unfocused, and the technological developments of the coming decades will widen the gap between what the government can do and the protection needed by the environment and the American public. The changes that need to be made are not incremental. A basic overhaul of the regulatory system is required. We need new institutions, new regulatory approaches, and new tools. The presentation will describe these needs in more detail as a way of stimulating the discussion about what the regulatory system of the future should be.

Biography: Terry Davies is a political scientist who has been involved in environmental policy for 45 years. He is a retired Senior Fellow at Resources for the Future and a Senior Advisor to the Woodrow Wilson Center’s Project on Emerging Technologies. His previous positions include Director of the Center for Risk Management at Resources for the Future, Assistant Administrator for Policy at the US Environmental Protection Agency, Executive Director of the National Commission on the Environment, Executive Vice President of the Conservation Foundation, and Assistant Professor of Public Policy at Princeton University. He has also held positions at Bowdoin College, the U.S. Bureau of the Budget, and the U.S. Council on Environmental Quality. Dr. Davies has written several books and numerous articles about environmental policy. He chaired the National Academy of Sciences’ Committee on Decision Making for Chemicals in the Environment and co-authored the reorganization plan that created the Environmental Protection Agency. He has a BA from Dartmouth College and a PhD in American Government from Columbia University. In 2000 he was elected a Fellow of the American Association for the Advancement of Science for his contributions to the use of science and analysis in environmental policy.

Moderator: Jane Fountain
Professor, Political Science and Public Policy
Director, Science, Technology and Society Initiative
University of Massachusetts Amherst

Biography: Jane E. Fountain is Professor of Political Science and Public Policy and Adjunct Professor of Computer Science at the University of Massachusetts Amherst. Previously, she served for 16 years on the faculty of the John F. Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University. Professor Fountain is the founder and Director of the National Center for Digital Government, based at the University of Massachusetts Amherst, which was established with support from the National Science Foundation to develop research and infrastructure for the emerging field information technology and governance. During the past decade, the National Center has sponsored research workshops, seminars, doctoral and post-doctoral fellowships and visiting faculty from throughout the world in addition to its active research programs. Professor Fountain also directs the Science, Technology and Society Initiative, a campus-wide effort based at the Center for Public Policy and Administration at the University of Massachusetts. The STS Initiative is designed to build social science, policy and cross-disciplinary research on a range of social, political and economic challenges posed by science and technology.

Charles L. Geraci, Jr.
Coordinator, Nanotechnology Research Center
National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH)
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services

"Nanotechnology and Worker Risk: Who’s At the Controls?"

Slides (PDF) | Video (mov)

Abstract: Nanotechnology is predicted to improve many aspects of human life. By 2015, it is estimated to represent $3.1 trillion in manufactured goods. Data is emerging that exposure to nanomaterials may pose a health risk to workers. If the economic promise of nanotechnology is to be achieved, ways need to be found to protect nanotechnology workers now. The Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 gave the responsibility to protect workers to the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) and the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) through research, standards adoption and standards enforcement. Since 1980, adopting new occupational health standards has grown more complex. The increased complexity has greatly slowed efforts to adopt protective standards for toxic agents that are well-known to pose significant risks. The likelihood of rapidly adopting standards to protect workers from nanomaterials, whose risks are just emerging, seems even more unlikely. Use of the OSHAct’s general duty clause to protect workers is a limited way to control worker risk and it also seems uncertain at this time. Could a national partnership involving nanotech manufacturers and downstream users, workers, academic researchers, safety and health practitioners exert control over worker risk? A National Nanotechnology Partnership would generate knowledge about the nature and extent of worker risk, utilize that knowledge to develop risk control strategies to protect nanotechnology workers now, and provide an evidence base for recommendations for a mandatory nanotechnology program standard at a future date.

Biography: Dr. Charles Geraci is Coordinator of the NIOSH Nanotechnology Research Center. He has 35 years of Industrial Hygiene practice experience that has included the federal government, consulting, and private industry. Among his professional experiences, Dr. Geraci was Director of a regional laboratory for DataChem Laboratories; Associate Director of HS&E at the Procter & Gamble Company; and Director of Industrial Hygiene for two consulting firms. Dr. Geraci earned a B.S. in chemistry from the University of Cincinnati and a Ph.D. in chemistry from the Michigan State University. He is certified by the American Board of Industrial Hygiene in both the Comprehensive Practice and the Chemical Aspects of Industrial Hygiene and in 1999 he was elected a Fellow of the American Industrial Hygiene Association. Dr. Geraci provides overall coordination and strategic guidance to the nanotechnology research program at NIOSH and collaborates internationally with other country programs on various aspects of nanotechnology workplace safety and health. He has authored or co-authored many of the papers that have helped set the direction for proactive thinking in nanotechnology safety and health. He directly manages a number of nanotechnology projects in the Institute that focus on the development and dissemination of workplace risk management guidelines, including the document “Approaches to Safe Nanotechnology”. Dr. Geraci sponsors the NIOSH nanotechnology field team that is conducting visits to nanomaterial producers and users to characterize exposures, evaluate controls, and develop best practices.

Timothy Malloy
Professor of Law
University of California, Los Angeles

"Under Construction: What are the Roads to Policy?"

Slides (PDF) | Video (mov)

Abstract: The very existence of this workshop suggests that the hazards of nanotechnology are a social problem in need of resolution. The definition of this problem, its scope and the “right” solution are all matters of social construction. Various participants in business, government, non-governmental organizations and academia are engaged in competitive claims-making in an effort to frame the problem and institutionalize the solution. Using the methods of the sociology of social problems, this presentation will address several competing constructions of the nanotechnology problem and their associated solutions, with emphasis on the claims-making strategies used. In particular, the presentation will critically examine the rhetoric and underlying grounds of three types of proposed solutions: self-regulation, private-public partnerships, and prescriptive regulation. It will also set out an alternative construction and solution— the concept of iterative regulation—and provide examples of its use under current law.

Biography: Timothy Malloy is Professor of Law at the University of California, Los Angeles. He teaches Environmental Aspects of Business Transactions, Regulatory Lawyering, Regulation of the Business Firm, and Contracts.  With Dr. John Froines of the School of Public Health , Malloy is a Faculty Director of the interdisciplinary UCLA Sustainable Technology and Policy Program. After receiving his law degree, Professor Malloy clerked for Judge Donald W. VanArtsdalen of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. He joined the UCLA faculty in 1998, after spending a combined 11 years in practice at private firms and at the United States Environmental Protection Agency, Region III. Professor Malloy's research interests focus on environmental, chemical and nanotechnology policy, regulatory policy, and organizational theory, with particular emphasis on the relationship between regulatory design and implementation and the structure of business organizations. In addition, he has worked and written extensively in the area of risk governance and pollution prevention, melding together his academic interests with his work in the Sustainable Technology Policy Program. Professor Malloy received a B.A.from Villanova University, and a J.D. from the University of Pennsylvania.

Terry. L. Medley
Global Director, Corporate Regulatory Affairs
DuPont

"Policy Guidance: Collaborations for the Responsible Development of Nanoscale Materials"

Slides (PDF) | Video (mov)

Abstract: Meeting the challenges of an emerging technology requires collaboration among government, public/private sector and other stakeholders. This applies to both technology innovation as well as regulatory oversight/governance. This presentation will focus on “the relative roles of public, private and non-profit actors in the provision of policy guidance”. In this regard, I will discuss an example of a broad collaboration across all interested government agencies aimed at technology innovation and early identification of potential risks. Specifically, the President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (PCAST) 2010 report on the National Nanotechnology Initiative (NNI). The NNI is a 25 Federal agency framework that ensures U.S. leadership in nanotechnology by investing in fundamental research on further understanding of nanoscale phenomena and facilitating technology transfer. In my opinion, the NNI is an
excellent example of the type of collaboration that is needed to advance science and risk-based policy for responsible nanotechnology development.

Biography: Terry L. Medley is Global Director of Corporate Regulatory Affairs at DuPont Safety, Health, Environmental and Sustainable Growth Center. Prior to joining DuPont in May of 1998, Mr. Medley was Administrator of the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) at U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) - a 6,000-person science and regulatory agency charged with protecting the health of the U.S. plant and animal resources. At USDA he played a central role in the development of the U.S. Federal regulatory policy for biotechnology. He has over 30 years experience in science, environmental and regulatory matters with a particular focus in biotechnology, nanotechnology and environmental protection laws. He is recognized  internationally as an expert on biotechnology, nanotechnology and environmental regulatory matters. He has served on numerous international steering committees, advisory committees and expert working groups, reviewing the biosafety of biotechnology products and the environmental, health and safety aspects of intentionally engineered nanoscale materials.  He has published numerous papers and is a frequent speaker at national and international conferences. He is a member of the U.S. National Academies, National Research Council’s Board on Environmental Studies and Toxicology, a member of the University of Pennsylvania’s Center for Bioethics External Advisory Board and he served two three-year terms as a member of the U.S. National Academies, National Research Council’s Board on Agriculture and Natural Resources. His current responsibilities include leading the DuPont Nanotechnologies Safety Health and Environment Advisory Team. He served as the DuPont project lead for development of the Environmental Defense fund-DuPont Nano Risk Framework document for the responsible development of nanomaterials. He is the outgoing Chair of the American Chemistry Council’s Nanotechnology Panel; Chair of the Business Industry Advisory Committee (BIAC) Nanotechnology Committee; and the BIAC delegation lead to the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD)’s Working Party on Manufactured Nanomaterials (WPMN). He served as a member of the 2010 Working Group for the Presidents Council of Advisors for Science and Technology (PCAST) reviewing the National Nanotechnology Initiative (NNI). He graduated cum laude from Amherst College and received a Doctor of Jurisprudence degree from the University of Virginia.

Jeff Morris
National Program Director for Nanotechnology
Office of Research and Development
US Environmental Protection Agency

"Global Engagement on Nano EHS: Role of the OECD in International Governance"

Slides (PDF) | Video (mov)

Abstract: This presentation discusses how an international venue, originating within the chemicals  governance community, by addressing nanotechnology as evolved into a forward-looking forum for addressing the implications of emerging technology. The different approaches of the European Union and the United States in managing chemicals under REACH and TSCA have received considerable attention elsewhere and are not the subject of this paper. Fundamentally, however, there are more similarities than differences, since the governments in both jurisdictions share the goal of providing for the health and safety of their citizens and environments.  Recognizing their common interest in addressing any potential risks from nanomaterials so that the environmental and other social benefits from nanotechnology may be maximized, in 2006 the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) established a Working Party on Manufactured Nanomaterials (WPMN). National governments, as well as regional governing bodies such as the European Commission, directly apply OECD approaches to their respective activities, such as through the OECD Mutual Acceptance of Data program. They also use OECD activities more indirectly to inform their decisions and actions on the governance of chemicals. The WPMN has proven to be a valuable forum for fostering relationships between nations on nanotechnology and the environment.

Biography: Jeff Morris is EPA’s National Program Director for Nanotechnology, and is responsible for managing EPA’s Nanomaterials Research Program. Jeff also co-leads the US delegation to the Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development’s Working Party on Manufactured Nanomaterials, and co-chairs the Working Party’s test guidelines steering group. Jeff led the development of EPA’s 2007 Nanotechnology White Paper the 2009 EPA Nanomaterials Research Strategy. Jeff has been with EPA for 18 years, and previously served as director of EPA’s Office of Science Policy. Jeff’s own research activities focus on how the use of language in the environmental policy arena, in particular statements relating to risk, impacts the richness of environmental protection discourse and the range of decision-making options considered by policy makers.

Jordan Paradise
Associate Professor of Law
Seton Hall University School of Law

"Developing Oversight for Nanobiotechnology: Human Drugs and Medical Devices"

Video (mov) | slides are not available for this presentation

Abstract: The ability to utilize and control atoms and molecules at the nanoscale has catalyzed the emerging field of nanomedicine -- the application of nanotechnology to health and medicine. Nanotechnology and nanobiotechnology have the potential to provide tools for in vitro and in vivo diagnostics for much earlier detection of disease; facilitate targeted drug delivery and regenerative medical applications; supply anti-microbial coatings for implanted medical devices; and enable devices that seek, bind to, and destroy tumor cells. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the gatekeeper to clearance and approval of medical and health care products in the U.S., will be largely responsible for the oversight of the clinical research, approval and marketing of nanotechnology products. An inability to adequately regulate and monitor these technologies could have a substantial impact on public health; likewise, excessive regulation may ultimately hamper the development of valuable or even life-saving products. This presentation will present research findings that evaluate the current oversight of human drugs and medical devices by FDA and assess the application of these oversight frameworks to products of nanobiotechnology. The presentation will briefly examine issues of definition, product categorization, and U.S. oversight generally, and will then focus on specific challenges faced by the FDA regarding drug and medical device products at the nanoscale. I will be descriptive as to novel questions and potential gaps in the current regulatory structure, with some normative recommendations for evaluating these types of products in the future.

Biography: Jordan Paradise is an Associate Professor of Law at Seton Hall Law School where she teaches Food & Drug Law, Administrative Law, and Law and the Life Sciences. She researches and publishes on issues at the intersection of law, science and technology. She served as Co-Principal Investigator on a 4-year National Science Foundation Grant No. 0608791, “Evaluating Oversight Models for Active Nanostructures and Nanosystems: Learning from Past Technologies in a Societal Context” (September 2006-August 2010). This multi-institution grant brought together experts in law, bioethics, public policy, medicine, engineering, and social science to integrate a range of analytic methods and perspectives in order to develop appropriate oversight frameworks for emerging products and applications of nanobiotechnology. She is an editor and author on the Winter 2009 issue of the Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics devoted to this topic. Her publications have appeared in both peer-reviewed and legal publications, including Science; Nature Reviews Genetics; Risk Analysis; Journal of Law, Medicine& Ethics; Food & Drug Law Journal; Yale Journal of Health Policy, Law & Ethics; Minnesota Journal of Law, Science & Technology; Temple Journal of Science, Technology & Environmental Law; and the International Journal of Intellectual Property Management.

Rick Reibstein
Manager, Outreach and Policy
Office of Technical Assistance and Technology
Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs
Commonwealth of Massachusetts

"Anticipatory Constructive Engagement at the State Level"

Slides (PDF) | Video (mov)

Abstract: The prospects of nanotechnology, (both bright and dark), have stimulated interest at state government levels, primarily relating to the promise of economic development opportunities, but also to potential environmental, health and safety (EHS) harms.  This talk will describe the Safe Development approach in Massachusetts, which posits strong EHS protection and preventive design as good for business as well as workers, the public, and the environment.  The Safe Development concept is aimed at resolving conflicts concerning precaution and avoiding both Type I (overregulation) and Type II errors (underregulation). Precaution may be effectively included in policy discussions when its plain meaning remains clearly understood and its value is acknowledged and shared.  Likewise, the universe of stakeholders potentially affected by nanotechnologies (positively or negatively) can be easily identified and acknowledged to serve as a fundamental concept in policy dialogue, as can the idea that public dialogue is better than behind-the-scenes decision-making.  Other simple, basic concepts can be applied to the nanotechnology discussion, such as the virtue of taking a holistic, life-cycle perspective; the value of the principle and act of recognizing rights to information; the role of empathy;  and the clear differences between free, releasable nanoparticles and those that are embedded (at least until end-of-life).  The experience of prompting public discussion on nanotechnology in the state of Massachusetts has provided an example of the importance of articulating clear and simple concepts in addressing this legally and technically complex issue.  Some starting principles for policy discussions will be offered in the context of relating the presenter’s experience working on two state conferences and an interagency working group, and developing guidance on Safe Development of Nanotechnology.

Biography: Rick Reibstein has developed initiatives for the Massachusetts Toxics Use Reduction program since its inception in 1989, first as Assistant Director of the Office of Technical Assistance, and after a three-year detail as an enforcement attorney at U.S. EPA, as manager of outreach and policy.  He has also briefly worked as an enforcement attorney at Mass Department of Environmental Protection.  For OTA, Reibstein initiated the onsite technical assistance services the office provides, training engineers in how to spot toxics use reduction opportunities and present options to companies.  He has also trained the U.S. EPA, Brazil, Chile, and others in establishing and conducting onsite technical assistance for pollution prevention.  In the 1990’s he led efforts to apply preventive strategies to hospitals, schools and municipalities; created the environmentally preferable purchasing program of the state of Massachusetts; and as part of the EPA’s Common Sense Initiative was a co-founder of the national Electronic Product Recovery and Recycling Roundtable, which prompted attention to the electronic waste stream.  He has taught environmental law and policy at BU since 1990, and has also taught at Northeastern and Clark, and currently teaches at Suffolk.  In 2004 he founded the Regulated Community Compliance Project which has provided courses on why and how to comply with federal rules pertaining to lead, to real estate professionals throughout New England.  Reibstein has published in Environmental Law Reporter, Pollution Prevention Review, the Journal of Environmental Economics, and the International Journal of Cleaner Production.

Richard Sclove
Founder and Senior Fellow
The Loka Institute

"Reinventing Technology Assessment in the U.S."

Slides (PDF) | Video (mov)

Abstract: Around the world the pace of technological change is increasing. The far-reaching social ramifications are, however, often not understood until after new technologies become entrenched. Historically this has resulted in important lost opportunities, significant social and environmental costs, and channeling societal development down long-term unhealthy paths. Technology assessment (TA) is a practice intended to enhance societal understanding of the broad implications of science and technology, creating the possibility of improved decision-making. Beginning in 1972, the United States led the world in institutionalizing TA, until the Congress closed its Office of Technology Assessment (OTA) in 1995. Meanwhile TA is flourishing in Europe, where 18 TA agencies have developed many innovative TA practices, including highly effective methods involving participation by everyday citizens. Participatory technology assessment (pTA) strengthens the social and ethical analysis of technology, complementing the expert-based approaches used by the former OTA. European pTA methods have been adapted, tested, and proven in the U.S. at least 16 times. The time is ripe to institutionalize a robust national TA capability incorporating both expert and participatory methods. The Internet makes it possible to envision organizing such an endeavor on a distributed, agile and open basis, harnessing collaborative efficiencies and supporting broad public engagement.

Biography: Richard Sclove is Founder and Senior Fellow of The Loka Institute, a non-profit organization dedicated to making research, science and technology responsive to democratically decided priorities. He is also a co-founder of ECAST, the Expert & Citizen Assessment of Science & Technology network.  As a U.S. pioneer in participatory technology assessment (pTA), Sclove has worked at the Danish Board of Technology, initiated the first U.S. adaptation of a Danish-style consensus conference (1997), and helped organize World Wide Views on Global Warming, the first globe-encompassing pTA exercise in world history (2009). Dr. Sclove has published extensively in both scholarly and popular venues, including Science magazine, The Chronicle of Higher Education, Technology Review, The Washington Post, and The New York Times. The American Political Science Association honored Sclove’s book, Democracy and Technology, with the Don K. Price Award as “the year’s best book on science, technology and politics.” He is a Fellow of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, and held the Ciriacy‑Wantrup Postdoctoral Fellowship in Economics at the University of California at Berkeley. Sclove earned a B.A. in environmental studies from Hampshire College and graduate degrees in nuclear engineering (M.S.) and political science (Ph.D.) from MIT.

Treye A. Thomas
Toxicologist
Chemical Hazards Program Leader
Office of Hazard Identification and Reduction
U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission

"Challenges in Assessing Nanomaterial Health Risks in Consumer Products"

Slides and video are not available for this presentation.

Abstract: The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) is an independent regulatory agency created in 1973. CPSC’s jurisdiction includes over 15,000 types of consumer products used in or around the home. The potential safety and health risks of nanomaterials, as with other compoundsthat are incorporated into consumer products, can be assessed under existing CPSC statutes, regulations and guidelines. The introduction of consumer products containing nanomaterials into the marketplace may require unique exposure and risk assessment strategies. One of the primary data needs will be the identification of the specific nanomaterial in the consumer product.  Identifying any potential health hazards from a specific product will require characterization of the materials to which a consumer is exposed during product use, including assessment of the size distribution of the materials released.  Once the exposure has been characterized, toxicological data that is appropriate for the particle sizes represented in the exposure assessment will be used in any assessment of health risks.    

Biography: Dr. Thomas is a toxicologist and leader of the Chemical Hazards Program team in the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission’s (CPSC) Office of Hazard Identification and Reduction.  His duties include establishing priorities and projects to identify and mitigate potential health risks to consumers resulting from chemical exposures during product use.  Dr. Thomas has conducted comprehensive exposure assessment studies of chemicals in consumer products and quantified the potential health risks to consumers exposed to these chemicals. Specific activities have included conducting exposure and/or health hazard assessments of flame retardant (FR) chemicals, combustion by-products, indoor air pollutants, and compounds used to pressure-treat wood.  Dr. Thomas is the leader of the CPSC nanotechnology team, and is responsible for developing agency activities and policy for nanotechnology.  Dr. Thomas has served as a CPSC representative on a number of nanotechnology committees including the ILSI/HESI Nanomaterial Environmental, Health, and Safety Subcommittee, the Federal NSET and NEHI sub-committees, and the International Council on Nanotechnology (ICON).  Thomas received a Bachelors degree in Chemistry from the University of California, Riverside, an MS in Environmental Health Sciences from UCLA, and a PhD in Environmental Sciences at the University of Texas, Health Science Center, Houston.  He completed a post-doctoral fellowship in Industrial Toxicology at the Warner-Lambert Corporation (now Pfizer Pharmaceutical). 

Moderator: Mark Tuominen
Professor, Physics
co-Director, MassNanoTech
UMass Amherst

Biography: Mark Tuominen is Professor of Physics and Co-Director of the Center for Hierarchical Manufacturing at the University of Massachusetts Amherst.

Slides (PDF)

This workshop is supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant No. 0531171. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation.