kind (almost always, similar to the material without added ENM), nano-scale particleswith some carrier matrix and some ENM (often), and finally, ENM alone (rare). Thisreview of the nanomaterial release literature illustrates a data gap relevant to the fieldof environmental risk assessment. Perhaps most critical, our review suggests that fateand transport modeling, exposure assessment, and risk assessment frameworks ingeneral <strong>for</strong> ENM uses should not be based on pristine engineered nanoparticles, butrather should be based on the released composites of ENM and the carrier matrix.M3-G.2 Furgal C, Driedger SM, Jardine CG; chrisfurgal@trentu.caTrent UniversityEVALUATING TRUST OF CONTAMINANTS AND FOOD MESSAGINGIN INUIT COMMUNITIESThe presence of contaminants (heavy metals and organic contaminants) in theCanadian Arctic environment has received increasing attention over the past few decades,most notably due to the potential risks to human health from country food(food from the land and water) contamination and in utero exposure to the fetus.Since the late 1970s federal, and more recently, Territorial and regional healthy authoritieshave been providing advisories and advice to northern Aboriginal populationsregarding their consumption of these food items as a result. Initially premisedsolely on the understanding of the risks posed to adult, and then adult and fetal andchild health, these messages have had to evolve to consider the growing and substantialevidence supporting the nutritional, social and other benefits of consumption ofthese food items as well as the current knowledge of risks posed by the consumptionof such things as fish containing methyl mercury or marine mammal blubbercontaining PCBs. The decision making process and communication of this evolvingbody of knowledge poses significant challenges <strong>for</strong> environmental and public healthprofessionals. This case study looks at the factors influencing trust in decision makeractions associated with the release of in<strong>for</strong>mation on country food consumption andenvironmental contaminants in the Inuit community of Kuujjuaq, Nunavik. Kuujjuaqis a regional centre of the Inuit region of Nunavik, northern Quebec. While being aregional centre with higher than regional average levels of participation in wage earningemployment and access to store foods, the Inuit population is still strongly connectedto the land and sea through hunting, fishing, collecting and other subsistenceactivities. As a result, communication messaging around country food safety strikes atthe heart of Inuit culture and daily life. Preliminary results from the pilot testing andinitial focus groups with community residents assessing factors influencing trust inhealth messaging on this topic will be discussed.102M3-B.1 Gaborek BJ; Bonnie.J.Gaborek@usa.dupont.comDuPont Haskell Global Centers <strong>for</strong> Health & Environmental SciencesUP IN THE AIR: COMPARISON OF EXPOSURE TOOLS FROMACROSS THE GLOBE THAT CAN PREDICT WORKER INHALATIONEXPOSURESA number of regulatory authorities across the globe, to include the U.S EnvironmentalProtection Agency (USEPA) and the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA)have integrated exposure estimation tools into their risk assessment programs. Forexample, ECHA has specified several tools to evaluate worker inhalation exposures<strong>for</strong> compliance with their Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction ofChemicals (REACH) regulation. These tools include the European Centre <strong>for</strong> Ecotoxicologyand Toxicology of Chemicals Targeted <strong>Risk</strong> Assessment tool (ECETOCTRA), the Stoffenmanager exposure model, and the Advanced REACH Tool (ART).Similarly, the USEPA uses the Chemical Screening Tool <strong>for</strong> Exposures & EnvironmentalReleases (ChemSTEER) to estimate conservative, occupational inhalationexposures and to assess the potential risks that chemicals may pose to workers. Ahost of additional tools, such as the Exposure-Fate Assessment Screening Tool (E-FAST), the Multi-Chamber Concentration & Exposure Model (MCCEM), the WallPaint Exposure Assessment Model (WPEM), and The Netherland’s National Institute<strong>for</strong> Public Health and the Environment ConsExpo consumer tool are also availableto predict inhalation exposures, but were designed primarily to estimate risks toconsumers when using products and articles in residential settings. Some of thesetools, however, may be adapted <strong>for</strong> use in predicting worker inhalation exposures.A thorough comparison of each of these tools was made: • To identify the minimalinput data set required <strong>for</strong> implementation, • To clarify the context in which each toolis relevant, • To define the limitations of each tool, and • To ascertain if adaptationsare possible <strong>for</strong> expanding the tool’s applicability. Based on this evaluation, a series ofdecision trees were developed to facilitate the selection of the proper tool <strong>for</strong> predictingworker inhalation exposures dependent on the risk assessment requirements <strong>for</strong>a particular situation.W1-B.1 Gallagher DL, Ebel E, Gallagher OD, LaBarre D, Williams M, GoldenN, Kause J, Deerfield K; dang@vt.eduVirginia TechINCORPORATING UNCERTAINTY WHEN EVALUATING RISK AS-SESSMENT METRICS: MODELING LISTERIA MONOCYTOGENESCONTAMINATION IN READY-TO-EAT DELI MEATSIn order to investigate uncertainty inclusion in food safety metrics, a secondorder Monte Carlo model of Listeria monocytogenes in ready-to-eat deli meats thatsimulated Listeria concentrations from the food processing plant through transport,retail, the consumer’s home, and consumption was developed. The model accounted
<strong>for</strong> growth inhibitor use and retail cross contamination, and used Latin Hypercubesampling <strong>for</strong> uncertainty iterations. The FAO/WHO dose response model was used<strong>for</strong> evaluating illnesses. A fixed appropriate level of protection (ALOP) risk metricwas established as a risk of illness per serving. For each uncertainty iteration, Brent’sroot finding algorithm was used to solve <strong>for</strong> the corresponding per<strong>for</strong>mance objective(PO) risk metric as an allowable Listeria concentration (cfu/g) at the processingplant where regulatory monitoring would occur. Over all 240 uncertainty iterations,an uncertainty distribution of this PO was <strong>for</strong>med. Points on this distribution representthe probability that the resulting risk per serving is less than or equal to the targetALOP <strong>for</strong> a given PO. Deconvolution testing confirmed that regulatory PO settingwould have the impact expected. Assuming the most likely industry response, nodose response uncertainty, and a target ALOP of -6.38 log10 risk of illness per serving(the median of the current estimated risk of illness distribution), a plant PO of-1.74, -2.75, and -3.39 log10 cfu/g would be required <strong>for</strong> 60%, 70%, and 80% confidencerespectively that the target ALOP is not exceeded. These are all more stringentthan the current typical monitoring level -1.40 log10 cfu/g. In general, uncertaintyfrom the dose-response portion of the model and from the nature of the industryresponse dominated the uncertainty. This work highlights some of the difficulties ofthe current risk metric framework with regard to uncertainty.P.9 Gamo M, Ogura I, Kobayashi N, Ema M, Nakanishi J; masashi-gamo@aist.go.jpNational Institute of Advanced Industrial Science and Technology (AIST)RISK ASSESSMENT OF NANOMATERIALS - TITANIUM DIOXIDE(TIO2) -Nanoscale titanium dioxide (TiO2) has been used <strong>for</strong> many years <strong>for</strong> variouspurpose, particularly, as cosmetics and photocatalysts. Although TiO2 itself is consideredinactive, there is concern that nanoscale TiO2 might pose a nonnegligible riskowing to its small size and resulting high specific surface area. Since risk assessmentand proposal <strong>for</strong> acceptable exposure limits of nanomaterials including TiO2 havebeen limited, the industries that produce or use nanoscale TiO2 have been facingdifficulties in developing strategies on controlling the exposure to and resulting riskof nanoscale TiO2. As one of the outputs of the NEDO (New Energy and IndustrialTechnology Development Organization) project “Research and Development ofNanoparticle Characterization Methods - Evaluating <strong>Risk</strong>s Associated with ManufacturedNanomaterials” (FY2006-2010) in Japan, we have developed a risk assessmentreport on TiO2. Considering the mechanism of action of TiO2 nanoparticles, lunginflammation was considered as a health-protective endpoint <strong>for</strong> assessing health riskin the workplace. The NOAEL determined from the inhalation experiment usingrat by Bermudez et al. (2004) was converted to the corresponding exposure concentration<strong>for</strong> workers, and the uncertainty factors applied were prudently determined.The acceptable exposure limit was proposed as 0.6 mg/m3 (respirable dust, 8 hoursTWA). Note that the value was set as a period-limited value from the viewpoint ofadaptive management, that is, it aims at protecting workers against subchronic exposure(approximately 15 years) and should be subjected to revision in the next 10 years.Although the risk levels in most of the workplaces where nanoscale TiO2 is handledare not significant, it is considered that installing appropriate exposure controls is necessarydepending on the type of nanoscale TiO2 and the handling processes.P.51 Georgopoulos PG, Brinkerhoff CJ, Isukapalli SS, Lioy P, Dellarco M,Landrigan P; plioy@eohsi.rutgers.eduEnvironmental & Occupational Health Sciences InstituteAN EXPOSURE INDEX ESTIMATION FRAMEWORK FOR THE NA-TIONAL CHILDREN’S STUDY (NCS)Exposure Indices (EIs) are designed to capture and summarize, in a small setof numerical values/ranges, complex distributions of potential exposures to multiplecontaminants. Typically, an EI is defined in relation to health risks associated withcommon health endpoints, and takes into account location-specific contaminant in<strong>for</strong>mationon multiple media and exposure pathways. The EI estimation frameworkdeveloped <strong>for</strong> the NCS is intended to support <strong>for</strong>mulation and testing of specificexposure-based hypotheses, to maximize the use of databases and location-specificextant data in exposure estimation, and to rank different NCS locations in relation tothe potential <strong>for</strong> environmental exposures. The NCS EI framework utilizes an ExposureIn<strong>for</strong>mation System (EXIS) that has been developed by aggregating, processing,and integrating diverse extant databases containing field data on environmental,demographic, behavioral, biological, etc. attributes at the Federal, regional, State, andlocal level. Within the EXIS, these data are supplemented by estimates from numericalmodel simulations of environmental quality and population exposures. The EXIShas been designed to support and to take advantage of the MENTOR (ModelingENvironment <strong>for</strong> TOtal <strong>Risk</strong> studies) and PRoTEGE (Prioritization/Ranking ofToxic Exposures with GIS Extension) systems. Initial EI applications have focusedon inhalation exposures potentially relevant to pregnancy outcomes such as low birthweight and pre-term birth rates. This framework is demonstrated here through itsapplication (a) <strong>for</strong> the set of all counties selected <strong>for</strong> the NCS, and (b) <strong>for</strong> NCS studysegments <strong>for</strong> Queens County, NY. These applications demonstrate the feasibility ofthe EI analysis in conjunction with extant data; however, they also illustrate variouschallenges due to heterogeneities and gaps in data. Systematic analyses of these challengeswill help prioritize future in<strong>for</strong>mation collection ef<strong>for</strong>ts <strong>for</strong> specific NCS studycomponents.103
- Page 4 and 5:
Ballroom C1Monday10:30 AM-NoonM2-A
- Page 9 and 10:
US Environmental Protection Agency
- Page 11 and 12:
Workshops - Sunday, December 4Full
- Page 13 and 14:
WK9: Eliciting Judgments to Inform
- Page 15 and 16:
These freely available tools apply
- Page 17 and 18:
Plenary SessionsAll Plenary Session
- Page 19 and 20:
10:30 AM-NoonRoom 8/9M2-F Panel Dis
- Page 21 and 22:
1:30-3:00 PMRoom 8/9M3-F Symposium:
- Page 23 and 24:
4:50 pm M4-E.5Modeling of landscape
- Page 25 and 26:
P.35 Health risk assessment of meta
- Page 27 and 28:
Works-In-ProgressP.99 Assessing the
- Page 29 and 30:
10:30 AM-NoonRoom 8/9T2-F Error in
- Page 31 and 32:
1:30-3:00 PMRoom 8/9T3-F AppliedMet
- Page 34 and 35:
8:30-10:00 AMBallroom C1W1-A Sympos
- Page 36 and 37:
10:30 AM-NoonBallroom C1W2-A Commun
- Page 38:
1:30-3:00 PMBallroom C1W3-A Communi
- Page 41 and 42:
3:30-4:30 PMRoom 8/9W4-F Environmen
- Page 43 and 44:
oth recent advances, and ongoing ch
- Page 45 and 46:
M3-H Symposium: Analyzing and Manag
- Page 47 and 48:
Part 2, we consider the use of expe
- Page 49 and 50:
T4-E Symposium: Food Safety Risk Pr
- Page 51 and 52:
While integral to guiding the devel
- Page 53 and 54: have contributed to past difficulti
- Page 55 and 56: M2-C.1 Abraham IM, Henry S; abraham
- Page 58 and 59: serious accident of the Tokyo Elect
- Page 60 and 61: een found that independence assumpt
- Page 62 and 63: W4-I.1 Beach RH, McCarl BA, Ohrel S
- Page 64 and 65: M4-A.1 Berube DM; dmberube@ncsu.edu
- Page 66 and 67: W4-A.1 Boerner FU, Jardine C, Dried
- Page 69 and 70: M2-G.1 Brink SA, Davidson RA; rdavi
- Page 71 and 72: M4-H.5 Buede DM, Ezell BC, Guikema
- Page 73 and 74: same scientists’ environmental he
- Page 75 and 76: periods of time. Successful adaptat
- Page 77 and 78: P.123 Charnley G, Melnikov F, Beck
- Page 79 and 80: derived from mouse and rat testes t
- Page 81 and 82: esources under any circumstance in
- Page 83 and 84: W4-B.3 Convertino M, Collier ZA, Va
- Page 85 and 86: addition, over 10% thought that eve
- Page 87 and 88: Reference Dose (RfD). The average e
- Page 89 and 90: W2-H.2 Demuth JL, Morss RE, Morrow
- Page 91 and 92: T4-H.4 Dingus CA, McMillan NJ, Born
- Page 93 and 94: methods research priorities and pot
- Page 95 and 96: W3-A.2 Eggers SL, Thorne SL, Sousa
- Page 97 and 98: tions) were < 1 for sub-populations
- Page 99 and 100: sociated with model error. Second,
- Page 101 and 102: inter-donation interval to mitigate
- Page 103: Fukushima nuclear accident coverage
- Page 107 and 108: W1-C.1 Goble R, Hattis D; rgoble@cl
- Page 109 and 110: stakeholders. The utility of this m
- Page 111 and 112: T2-E.4 Guidotti TL; tee.guidotti@gm
- Page 113 and 114: M4-C.2 Haines DA, Murray JL, Donald
- Page 115 and 116: providing normative information of
- Page 117 and 118: then allow both systems to operate
- Page 119 and 120: tious disease outbreaks. Several cl
- Page 121 and 122: P.122 Hosseinali Mirza V, de Marcel
- Page 123 and 124: W2-B.1 Isukapalli SS, Brinkerhoff C
- Page 125 and 126: M3-G.3 Jardine CG, Driedger SM, Fur
- Page 127 and 128: P.88 Johnson BB, Cuite C, Hallman W
- Page 129 and 130: metrics to provide risk management
- Page 131 and 132: M4-C.1 Koch HM, Angerer J; koch@ipa
- Page 133 and 134: certainty factors) and comparative
- Page 135 and 136: T3-D.4 LaRocca S, Guikema SD, Cole
- Page 137 and 138: P.71 Lemus-Martinez C, Lemyre L, Pi
- Page 139 and 140: of excretion, and the increased che
- Page 141 and 142: M2-D.4 MacKenzie CA, Barker K; cmac
- Page 143 and 144: isk appetite and optimal risk mitig
- Page 145 and 146: ameters, and enabled a more robust
- Page 147 and 148: over the nature and format of infor
- Page 149 and 150: Analysis (PRA). Existing parametric
- Page 151 and 152: explosion of a bomb in a building,
- Page 153 and 154: T3-G.3 Nascarella MA; mnascarella@g
- Page 155 and 156:
corresponding slowdown in container
- Page 157 and 158:
ing the scope and usage of the cybe
- Page 159 and 160:
dose for a variety of exposure scen
- Page 161 and 162:
“nanofibers”) is relatively und
- Page 163 and 164:
ment (CEA), which provides both a f
- Page 165 and 166:
T3-D.2 Resurreccion JZ, Santos JR;
- Page 167 and 168:
shore wind turbines have yet been b
- Page 169 and 170:
T2-D.3 Rypinski AD, Cantral R; Arth
- Page 171 and 172:
time and temperature, determining t
- Page 173 and 174:
esponse to requests from the EC, th
- Page 175 and 176:
ers and inspectors. Analysis examin
- Page 177 and 178:
smoked salmon, and associated expos
- Page 179 and 180:
and 95th percentiles). Increasing t
- Page 181 and 182:
esponse relationship for B. anthrac
- Page 183 and 184:
variation on Day 0. Results showed
- Page 185 and 186:
sidered. The most significant resul
- Page 187 and 188:
lived in a apartment (not including
- Page 189 and 190:
W3-C.4 von Stackelberg KE; kvon@eri
- Page 191 and 192:
P.12 Waller RR, Dinis MF; rw@protec
- Page 193 and 194:
W2-B.6 Wang D, Collier Z, Mitchell-
- Page 195 and 196:
iomonitoring “equivalent” level
- Page 197 and 198:
T4-H.2 Winkel D, Good K, VonNiederh
- Page 199 and 200:
mation insufficiency, risk percepti
- Page 201 and 202:
choices. This work examines these s
- Page 203 and 204:
sults and possible intended or unin
- Page 205 and 206:
AAbadin HG.................... 36,
- Page 207 and 208:
Gray GM............................
- Page 209 and 210:
Peters E...........................
- Page 211 and 212:
SECOND FLOOR Floor MapConvention Ce