# Approaches to Safe **Nanotechnology** Managing the Health and Safety Concerns Associated with Engineered Nanomaterials

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Centers for Disease Control and Prevention National Institute for Occupational Safety and HealthPhoto Credits: Nanotrees, Ghim Wei Ho and Professor Mark Welland, Nanostructure Center, University of Cambridge

## Managing the Health and Safety Concerns Associated with Engineered Nanomaterials

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Centers for Disease Control and Prevention National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health 

# Approaches to Safe Nanotechnologyii Approaches to Safe Nanotechnology 

### This document is in the public domain and may be freely copied or reprinted. 

## Disclaimer Mention of any company or product does not constitute endorsement by the National In

stitute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH). In addition, citations to Web sites external to NIOSH do not constitute NIOSH endorsement of the sponsoring organizations or their programs or products. Furthermore, NIOSH is not responsible for the content of these Web sites. All Web addresses referenced in this document were accessible as of the publication date. 

## Ordering Information To receive documents or other information about occupational safety and health topics, contact NIOSH at Telephone: 1–800–CDC–INFO (1–800–232–4636) TTY: 1–888–232–6348 E-mail: cdcinfo@cdc.gov or visit the NIOSH Web site at www.cdc.gov/niosh
. For a monthly update on news at NIOSH, subscribe to NIOSH eNews by visiting www.cdc.gov/niosh/eNews. DHHS (NIOSH) Publication No. 2009–125 March 2009



### Safer • Healthier • PeopleTMApproaches to Safe Nanotechnology iii Nanotechnology—the manipulation of matter on a near-atomic scale to produce new structures, materials, and devices—offers the promise of unprecedented scientific advancement for many sec

tors, such as medicine, consumer products, energy, materials, and manufacturing. Nanotechnology has the power not only to improve existing technologies, but to dramatically enhance the effective

ness of new applications. Research on the potential applications of nanotechnology continues to expand rapidly worldwide. New nanotechnology consumer products emerge at a rate of three to four per week. Over the course of the next decade, nanotechnology could have a $1 trillion impact on the global economy and em

ploy two million workers—half of them residing in the U.S. While nanomaterials present seemingly limitless possibilities, they bring with them new challeng

es to understanding, predicting, and managing potential safety and health risks to workers. The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) remains committed to protecting workers now and in the future, as nanotechnology applications and uses expand. As part of these efforts, in October 2005, NIOSH released for public comment the draft document, Approaches to Safe Nanotechnology: An Information Exchange with NIOSH. Based on feedback received, NIOSH revised and updated the document in July 2006 and sought further public com

ment. This draft report has been widely cited, and the final version of the report should serve as a vital resource for stakeholders (including occupational safety and health professionals, researchers, policy makers, risk assessors, and workers in the industry) who wish to understand more about the safety and health implications of nanotechnology in the workplace. With the publication of the Approaches to Safe Nanotechnology document, NIOSH hopes to: raise awareness of the occupational safety and health issues involved with nanotechnology; make recom

mendations on occupational safety and health best practices in the production and use of nanoma

terials; facilitate dialogue between NIOSH and its external partners in industry, labor and academia; respond to requests for authoritative safety and health guidelines; and, identify information gaps and areas for future study and research. As our knowledge of nanoscience increases, so too will our efforts to provide valuable guidance on the safe handling of nanoparticles and for protecting the lives and livelihoods of nanotechnology workers.

Christine M. Branche, Ph.D. Acting Director, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health Centers for Disease Control and Prevention 

## ForewordApproaches to Safe Nanotechnology v Nanotechnology has the potential to dra

matically improve the effectiveness of a number of existing consumer and indus

trial products and could have a substantial impact on the development of new prod

ucts in all sectors, ranging from disease diagnosis and treatment to environmental remediation. Because of the broad range of possible nanotechnology applications, con

tinued evaluation of the potential health risks associated with exposure to nanoma

terials is essential to ensure their safe han

dling. Engineered nanoparticles are materi

als purposefully produced with at least one dimension between 1 and 100 nanometers. Nanoparticles * often exhibit unique physical and chemical properties that impart specific characteristics essential in making engi

neered materials, but little is known about what effect these properties may have on human health. Research has shown that the physicochemical characteristics of particles can influence their effects in biological sys

tems. These characteristics include particle size, shape, surface area, charge, chemical properties, solubility, oxidant generation potential, and degree of agglomeration. Un

til the results from research studies can fully elucidate the characteristics of nanoparticles that may pose a health risk, precautionary measures are warranted. NIOSH has developed this document to provide an overview of what is known about the potential hazards of engineered *In an attempt at standardization of terminology, the In

ternational Organization for Standardization-Technical Committee 229 has used the term nanomaterial to describe engineered nanoparticles. nanoparticles and measures that can be taken to minimize workplace exposures. Following is a summary of findings and key recommendations. 

### Potential Health Concerns The potential for nanomaterials to en



## • ter the body is among several factors that scientists examine in determining whether such materials may pose an oc

cupational health hazard. Nanomateri

als have the greatest potential to enter the body through the respiratory sys

tem if they are airborne and in the form of respirable-sized particles (nanopar

ticles). They may also come into contact with the skin or be ingested. Based on results from human and ani



## • mal studies, airborne nanoparticles can be inhaled and deposit in the respira

tory tract; and based on animal stud

ies, nanoparticles can enter the blood stream, and translocate to other organs. Experimental studies in rats have shown 

## • that equivalent mass doses of insolu

ble incidental nanoparticles are more potent than large particles of similar composition in causing pulmonary in

flammation and lung tumors. Results from in vitro cell culture studies with similar materials are generally support

ive of the biological responses observed in animals. Experimental studies in animals, cell 

## • cultures, and cell-free systems have shown that changes in the chemical 

## Executive Summaryvi Approaches to Safe Nanotechnology Executive Summary composition, crystal structure, and size of particles can influence their oxidant generation properties and cytotoxicity. Studies in workers exposed to aerosols 

## • of some manufactured or incidental microscopic (fine) and nanoscale (ul

trafine) particles have reported adverse lung effects including lung function decrements and obstructive and fibrot

ic lung diseases. The implications of these studies to engineered nanoparti

cles, which may have different particle properties, are uncertain. Research is needed to determine the 

## • key physical and chemical character

istics of nanoparticles that determine their hazard potential. 

### Potential Safety Concerns Although insufficient information ex



## • ists to predict the fire and explosion risk associated with powders of nano

materials, nanoscale combustible ma

terial could present a higher risk than coarser material with a similar mass concentration given its increased parti

cle surface area and potentially unique properties due to the nanoscale. Some nanomaterials may initiate cat



## • alytic reactions depending on their composition and structure that would not otherwise be anticipated based on their chemical composition. 

### Working with Engineered Nanomaterials Nanomaterial-enabled products such as 

## • nanocomposites, surface-coated mate

rials, and materials comprised of nano

structures, such as integrated circuits, are unlikely to pose a risk of exposure during their handling and use as ma

terials of non-inhalable size. However, some of the processes used in their pro

duction (e.g., formulating and applying nanoscale coatings) may lead to expo

sure to nanomaterials, and the cutting or grinding of such products could re

lease respirable-sized nanoparticles. Maintenance on production systems (in



## • cluding cleaning and disposal of materi

als from dust collection systems) is likely to result in exposure to nanoparticles if deposited nanomaterials are disturbed. The following workplace tasks can in



## • crease the risk of exposure to nanopar

ticles: Working with nanomaterials in

— liquid media without adequate protection (e.g., gloves) Working with nanomaterials in

— liquid during pouring or mixing operations, or where a high de

gree of agitation is involvedGenerating nanoparticles in non— enclosed systems Handling (e.g., weighing, blend

— ing, spraying) powders of nano

materials Maintenance on equipment and

— processes used to produce or fabri

cate nanomaterials and the clean

ing-up of spills and waste material containing nanomaterials Cleaning of dust collection systems

— used to capture nanoparticles Machining, sanding, drilling, or oth

— er mechanical disruptions of mate

rials containing nanoparticlesApproaches to Safe Nanotechnology vii Executive Summary 

### Exposure Assessment and Characterization Until more information becomes avail



## • able on the mechanisms underlying nanomaterial toxicity, it is uncertain what measurement technique should be used to monitor exposures in the workplace. Current research indicates that mass and bulk chemistry may be less important than particle size and shape, surface area, and surface chemistry (or activity) for some nanostructured materials. Many of the sampling techniques that 

## • are available for measuring airborne nanoaerosols vary in complexity but can provide useful information for evaluat

ing occupational exposures with respect to particle size, mass, surface area, num

ber concentration, and composition. Unfortunately, relatively few of these techniques are readily applicable to rou

tine exposure monitoring. NIOSH has initiated exposure assessment studies in workplaces that manufacture or use en

gineered nanoparticles (see Appendix Nanoparticle Emission Assessment Tech

nique for Identification of Sources and Releases of Engineered Nanomaterials ). Regardless of the metric or measurement 

## • method used for evaluating nanoaerosol exposures, it is critical that background nanoscale particle measurements be conducted before the production, pro

cessing, or handling of nanomaterials. When feasible, personal sampling is pre



## • ferred to ensure an accurate representa

tion of the worker’s exposure, whereas area sampling (e.g., size-fractionated aerosol samples) and real-time (direct reading) exposure measurements may be more useful for evaluating the need for improvement of engineering con

trols and work practices. 

### Precautionary Measures Given the limited amount of informa



## • tion about health risks that may be as

sociated with nanomaterials, taking measures to minimize worker exposures is prudent. For most processes and job tasks, the 

## • control of airborne exposure to nano

aerosols can be accomplished using a variety of engineering control tech

niques similar to those used in reduc

ing exposure to general aerosols. The implementation of a risk manage



## • ment program in workplaces where ex

posure to nanomaterials exists can help to minimize the potential for exposure to nanoparticles. Elements of such a program should include the following: Evaluating the hazard posed by the

— nanomaterial based on available physical and chemical property data, toxicology, or health-effects data Assessing the worker’s job task to

— determine the potential for expo

sure Educating and training workers in

— the proper handling of nanomate

rials (e.g., good work practices) Establishing criteria and proce

— dures for installing and evaluat

ing engineering controls (e.g., exhaust ventilation) at locations where exposure to nanomaterials might occurviii Approaches to Safe Nanotechnology Developing procedures for deter

— mining the need for and selecting proper personal protective equip

ment (e.g., clothing, gloves, respi

rators) Systematically evaluating expo

— sures to ensure that control mea

sures are working properly and that workers are being provided the appropriate personal protec

tive equipment Engineering control techniques such as 

## • source enclosure (i.e., isolating the gen

eration source from the worker) and lo

cal exhaust ventilation systems should be effective for capturing airborne nano

particles. Current knowledge indicates that a well-designed exhaust ventilation system with a high-efficiency particulate air (HEPA) filter should effectively re

move nanomaterials. The use of good work practices can 

## • help to minimize worker exposures to nanomaterials. Examples of good practices include cleaning of work ar

eas using HEPA vacuum pickup and wet wiping methods, preventing the consumption of food or beverages in workplaces where nanomaterials are handled, providing hand-washing fa

cilities, and providing facilities for showering and changing clothes. No guidelines are currently available on 

## • the selection of clothing or other ap

parel (e.g., gloves) for the prevention of dermal exposure to nanoaerosols. However, some clothing standards in

corporate testing with nanometer-sized particles and therefore provide some in

dication of the effectiveness of protec

tive clothing. Respirators may be necessary when en



## • gineering and administrative controls do not adequately prevent exposures. Currently, there are no specific limits for airborne exposures to engineered nanoparticles although occupational exposure limits exist for some larger particles of similar chemical compo

sition. It should be recognized thatexposure limits recommended for nonnanoscale particles may not be health protective for nanoparticle exposures (e.g., the OSHA Permissible Exposure Limit [PEL] for graphite may not be a safe exposure limit for carbon nano

tubes). The decision to use respiratory protection should be based on profes

sional judgment that takes into account toxicity information, exposure mea

surement data, and the frequency and likelihood of the worker’s exposure. While research is continuing, prelimi

nary evidence indicates that NIOSHcertified respirators will be useful for protecting workers from nanoparticle inhalation when properly selected and fit tested as part of a complete respira

tory protection program. 

### Occupational Health Surveillance Occupational health surveillance is an essen

tial component of an effective occupational safety and health program. The unique phys

ical and chemical properties of nanomateri

als, the increasing growth of nanotechnology in the workplace, and information suggesting that exposure to some engineered nanomate

rials can cause adverse health effects in labo

ratory animals all support consideration of an occupational health surveillance program for workers potentially exposed to engineered Executive SummaryApproaches to Safe Nanotechnology ix nanomaterials. Continued evaluation of tox

icologic research and workers potentially ex

posed to engineered nanomaterials is needed to inform NIOSH and other groups regarding the appropriate components of occupational health surveillance for nanotechnology work

ers. NIOSH has formulated interim guidance relevant to medical screening (one compo

nent of an occupational health surveillance program) for nanotechnology workers (see NIOSH Current Intelligence Bulletin Interim Guidance for Medical Screening and Hazard Surveillance for Workers Potentially Exposed to Engineered Nanoparticles at www.cdc.gov/ niosh/review/public/115/). In this document NIOSH concluded that insufficient scientific and medical evidence now exist to recom

mend the specific medical screening of work

ers potentially exposed to engineered nano

particles. However, NIOSH did recommend that hazard surveillance be conducted as the basis for implementing control measures. Executive SummaryApproaches to Safe Nanotechnology xi Foreword . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iii Executive Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . v Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xiii 1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 2 Purpose . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 3 Scope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 4 Descriptions and Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 4.1 Nano-objects
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 4.2 Ultrafine Particles
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 4.3 Engineered Nanoparticles
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 4.4 Nanoaerosol
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 4.5 Agglomerate
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 4.6 Aggregate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 5 Potential Health Concerns . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 5.1 Exposure Routes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 5.2 Effects Seen in Animal Studies
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 5.2.1 Polytetrafluoroethylene fume
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 5.2.2 Carbon nanotubes
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 5.3 Observations from Epidemiological Studies Involving Fine and Ultrafine Particles
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 5.4 Hypotheses from Animal and Epidemiological Studies
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 6 Potential Safety Hazards . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 6.1 Fire and Explosion Risk
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 6.2 Risks of Catalytic Reactions
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 7 Exposure Assessment and Characterization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 7.1 Workplace Exposures
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 7.1.1 Size-fractionated aerosol sampling
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 7.1.2 Real-time aerosol sampling
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 

## Contentsxii Approaches to Safe Nanotechnology Contents
7.1.3 Surface-area measurements
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 7.1.4 Particle number concentration measurement
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 7.1.5 Surface-area estimation
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 7.1.6 Particle number concentration mapping
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 7.2 Sampling Strategy
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 8 Guidelines for Working with Engineered Nanomaterials . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 8.1 Potential for Occupational Exposure
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 8.2 Factors Affecting Exposure to Nanomaterials
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36 8.3 Elements of a Risk Management Program
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 8.3.1 Engineering controls
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 8.3.2 Dust collection efficiency of filters
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40 8.3.3 Work practices
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41 8.3.4 Personal protective clothing
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42 8.3.5 Respirators
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44 8.3.6 Cleanup and disposal of nanomaterials
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48 9 Occupational Health Surveillance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53 10 Research Needs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59 Sources of Additional Information . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68 Appendix . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71Contents

Approaches to Safe Nanotechnology xiii This report was developed by the scientists and staff of the National Institute for Occupa

tional Safety and Health (NIOSH) who participate in the NIOSH Nanotechnology Research Center (NTRC). Paul Schulte is the manager and Charles Geraci, coordinator of the NIOSH NORA nanotechnology cross-sector program. Special thanks go to Ralph Zumwalde and Laura Hodson for writing and organizing the report and to Mark Methner for the devel

opment of the Appendix: Nanoparticle Emission Assessment Technique for Identification of Sources and Releases of Engineered Nanomaterials
. Others who contributed substantially to the writing and research described here include: Eileen Birch, Fred Blosser, Vincent Castranova, Brian Curwin, Douglas Evans, Pengfei Gao, Donna Heidel, Mark Hoover, John Howard, Vijia Karra, Bon-Ki Ku, Eileen Kuempel, Rob

ert Mercer, Arthur Miller, Vladimir Murashov, Terri Pearce, Appavoo Rengasamy, Ronald Shaffer, Anna Shvedova, Petia Simeonova, Aleksandr Stefaniak, Douglas Trout, and Leonid Turkevich. The NIOSH NTRC also acknowledges the contributions of Vanessa Becks and Gino Fazio for desktop publishing and graphic design, and Elizabeth Fryer for editing the report. 

## AcknowledgmentsApproaches to Safe Nanotechnology 1 Nanotechnology is the manipulation of mat

ter on a near-atomic scale to produce new structures, materials, and devices. This tech

nology has the ability to transform many industries and can be applied in many ways to areas ranging from medicine to manufac

turing. Research in nanoscale technologies is growing rapidly worldwide. Lux Research [2007] projects that new emerging nanotech

nology applications will affect nearly every type of manufactured product through the middle of the next decade, becoming incor

porated into 15% of global manufacturing output, totaling $2.6 trillion in 2014. Nanomaterials present new challenges to understanding, predicting, and managing potential health risks to workers. As with any material being developed, scientific data on the health effects in exposed workers are largely unavailable. In the case of nanoma
terials, the uncertainties are great because the characteristics of nanoparticles may be different from those of larger particles with the same chemical composition. Safe

ty and health practitioners recognize the critical lack of specific guidance on the safe handling of nanomaterials—especially now, when the degree of risk to exposed workers is unknown. In the meantime, the extensive scientific literature on airborne particles— including toxicology and epidemiological studies, measurement techniques, and en

gineering controls—provides the best avail

able data from which to develop interim approaches for working safely with nano

materials and to develop hypotheses for studies of new nanomaterials. The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) is working in parallel with the development and imple

mentation of commercial nanotechnology through ( 1 ) conducting strategic planning and research, ( 2 ) partnering with publicand private-sector colleagues from the Unit

ed States and abroad, and ( 3 ), making infor

mation widely available. The NIOSH goal is to provide national and world leadership for incorporating research findings about the implications and applications of nanotech

nology into good occupational safety and health practice for the benefit of all nano

technology workers. NIOSH has developed a strategic plan for coordinating nanotech

nology research and for use as a guide for en

hancing the development of new research ef

forts (www.cdc.gov/niosh/topics/nanotech/ strat_plan.html). 

## Introduction 

# 1Approaches to Safe Nanotechnology 3 With the publication of this Approaches to Safe Nanotechnology document, NIOSH hopes to do the following: Raise awareness 

## • of the occupational safety and health issues being identi

fied in the rapidly moving and chang

ing science involving implications and applications of nanotechnology. Use the best information available to 

## • make recommendations on occupa tional safety and health practices in the production and use of nanomaterials (These recommendations will be updat

ed as appropriate to reflect new informa

tion. They will address key components of occupational safety and health, includ

ing exposure monitoring, engineering controls, personal protective equipment, and administrative controls. They will draw from the ongoing NIOSH assess

ment of current best practices, technical knowledge, and professional judgment. Throughout the development of these guidelines, the utility of a hazard-based approach to risk assessment and control was evaluated and, where appropriate, recommendations are provided.) Facilitate an exchange of information 

## • between NIOSH and its external partners from ongoing research, including success stories, applications, and case studies. Respond to requests 

## • from industry, la

bor, academia, and other partners who are seeking science-based, authorita

tive guidelines. Identify information gaps 

## • where few or no data exist and where research is needed. 

## Purpose 

# 2Approaches to Safe Nanotechnology 5 This document has been developed to pro

vide a resource for stakeholders who wish to understand more about the safety and health implications and applications of nanotechnology in the workplace. The in

formation and guidelines presented here are intended to aid in evaluating the potential hazard of exposure to engineered nanoma

terials and to set the stage for the develop

ment of more comprehensive guidelines for reducing potential workplace exposures in the wide range of tasks and processes that use nanomaterials. The information in this document will be of specific interest to the following: Occupational safety and health profes



## • sionals who must ( 1 ) understand how nanotechnology may affect occupa

tional health and ( 2 ) devise strategies for working safely with nanomaterials Researchers working with or planning 

## • to work with engineered nanomateri

als and studying the potential occu

pational safety and health impacts of nanomaterials Policy and decision makers in govern



## • ment agencies and industry Risk evaluation professionals 

## • People working with or potentially ex



## • posed to engineered nanomaterials in the workplace Established safe work practices are generally based on an understanding of the hazards associated with the chemical and physical properties of a material. Engineered nano

materials may exhibit unique properties that are related to their physical size, shape, structure, and chemical composition. Con

siderable uncertainty still exists as to whether these unique properties present occupational health risks. Current information about the potential adverse health effects of engineered nanomaterials, exposure assessment, and ex

posure control is limited. However, the large body of scientific literature that exists on exposures to and responses of animals and humans to ultrafine and other airborne par

ticles may be useful in making preliminary assessments as to the health risks posed by engineered nanomaterials. Until further in
formation is available, interim safe work
ing practices should be used based on the best available information. The information and recommendations in this document are intended to aid in assessment of the poten

tial hazard of engineered nanomaterials and to set the stage for the development of more comprehensive guidelines for reducing po

tential workplace exposures. 

## Scope 

# 3Approaches to Safe Nanotechnology 7 Nanotechnology involves the manipulation of matter at nanometer † scales to produce new materials, structures, and devices. The U.S. National Nanotechnology Initiative (see http:// nano.gov/html/facts/whatIsNano. html ) defines a technology as nanotechnol

ogy only if it involves all of the following: Research and technology development 

## • involving structures with at least one dimension in the range of 1–100 nano

meters (nm), frequently with atomic/ molecular precision Creating and using structures, devices, 

## • and systems that have unique prop

erties and functions because of their nanoscale dimensions The ability to control or manipulate on 

## • the atomic scale Nanotechnology is an enabling technology that offers the potential for unprecedented advances in many diverse fields. The abil

ity to manipulate matter at the atomic or molecular scale makes it possible to form new materials, structures, and devices that exploit the unique physical and chemical properties associated with nanoscale struc

tures. The promise of nanotechnology goes far beyond extending the use of current materials. New materials and devices with intricate and closely engineered structures will allow for ( 1 ) new directions in optics, electronics, and optoelectronics, ( 2 ) devel

opment of new medical imaging and treat

ment technologies, and ( 3 ) production of

† 1 nanometer (nm) = 1 billionth of a meter (10 -9 ). advanced materials with unique properties and high-efficiency energy storage and gen

eration. Although nanotechnology-based products are generally thought to be at the precompet

itive stage, an increasing number of products and materials are becoming commercially available. These include nanoscale powders, solutions, and suspensions of nanoscale ma

terials as well as composite materials and devices having a nanostructure. Nanoscale products and materials are increasingly used in optoelectronic, electronic, magnetic, med

ical imaging, drug delivery, cosmetic, cata

lytic, and materials applications. New nano

technology consumer products are coming on the market at the rate of three to four per week, a finding based on the latest up

date to the nanotechnology consumer prod

uct inventory maintained by the Project on Emerging Nanotechnologies (PEN) ‡ (www. nanotechproject.org/inventories/consumer). The number of consumer products using nanotechnology has grown from 212 to 609 since PEN launched the world’s first online inventory of manufacturer-identified nano

tech goods in March 2006. According to Lux Research [2007], in 2006, governments, corporations, and venture capi

talists worldwide spent $11.8 billion on nano

technology research and development (R&D), which was up 13% from 2005. By 2014, Lux estimates $2.6 trillion in manufactured goods

‡ The Project on Emerging Nanotechnologies was es

tablished in April 2005 as a partnership between the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars and the Pew Charitable Trusts. 

## Descriptions and Definitions 

# 48 Approaches to Safe Nanotechnology 4 Descriptions and Definitions 4 Descriptions and Definitions

will incorporate nanotechnology—or about 15% of total global output. 

### 4.1 Nano-objects The International Organization for Standard

ization Technical Committee 229 (Nanotech

nologies) is developing globally recognized nomenclature and terminology for nano

materials. According to ISO/TS 27687:2008, nano-object is defined as material with one, two, or three external dimensions in the size range from approximately 1–100 nm. Sub

categories of nano-object are ( 1 ) nanoplate , a nano-object with one external dimension at the nanoscale; ( 2 ) nanofiber , a nano-object with two external dimensions at the nano

scale with a nanotube defined as a hollow nanofiber and a nanorod as a solid nanofiber; and ( 3 ) nanoparticle , a nano-object with all three external dimensions at the nanoscale. Nano-objects are commonly incorporated in a larger matrix or substrate referred to as a nanomaterial . Nano-objects may be suspend

ed in a gas (as a nanoaerosol), suspended in a liquid (as a colloid or nanohydrosol), or em

bedded in a matrix (as a nanocomposite). The precise definition of particle diameter depends on particle shape as well as how the diameter is measured. Particle morphologies may vary widely at the nanoscale. For in

stance, carbon fullerenes represent nanoobjects with identical dimensions in all directions (i.e., spherical), whereas sin

gle-walled carbon nanotubes (SWCNTs)typically form convoluted, fiber-like nanoobjects. Many regular but nonspherical par

ticle morphologies can be engineered at the nanoscale, including flower- and belt-like structures. Please see www.nanoscience.gat

ech.edu/zlwang/research.html for examples of some nanoscale structures. 

### 4.2 Ultrafine Particles The term ultrafine particle has tradition

ally been used by the aerosol research and occupational and environmental health communities to describe airborne particles smaller than 100 nm in diameter. Ultrafine is frequently used in the context of nano

meter-diameter particles that have not been intentionally produced but are the inciden

tal products of processes involving combus

tion, welding, or diesel engines (see Figure 4–1). The term nanoparticle is frequently used with respect to particles demonstrat

ing size-dependent physicochemical prop

erties, particularly from a materials science perspective. The two terms are sometimes used to differentiate between engineered Figure 4–1. Photomicrographs of airborne exposure to ultrafine (nanoscale) particles of welding fumes, diesel exhaust, and cerium oxide4 Descriptions and Definitions

Approaches to Safe Nanotechnology 9 4 Descriptions and Definitions ( nanoparticle ) and incidental ( ultrafine ) nanoscale particles
. It is currently unclear whether the use of source-based definitions of nanoparticles and ultrafine particles is justified from a safe

ty and health perspective. This is particular

ly the case where data on non- engineered, nanometer-diameter particles are of direct relevance to the impact of engineered par

ticles. An attempt has been made in this document to follow the general convention of preferentially using nanoparticle in the context of intentionally produced or engi

neered particles and ultrafine in the con

text of incidentally produced particles (e.g., combustion products). However, this does not necessarily imply specific differences in the properties of these particles as related to hazard assessment, measurement, or con

trol of exposures, and this remains an active area of research. Nanoparticle and ultrafine particle are not rigid definitions. For exam

ple, since the term ultrafine has been in ex

istence longer, some intentionally produced particles with primary particle sizes in the nanosize range (e.g., TiO 2 ) are often called ultrafine in the literature. 

### 4.3 Engineered Nanoparticles Engineered nanoparticles are intentionally produced, whereas ultrafine particles (often referred to as incidental nanoparticles) are typically byproducts of processes such as combustion and vaporization. Engineered nanoparticles are designed with very spe

cific properties or compositions (e.g., shape, size, surface properties, and chemistry). In

cidental nanoparticles are generated in a rel

atively uncontrolled manner and are usually physically and chemically heterogeneous compared with engineered nanoparticles. 

### 4.4 Nanoaerosol A nanoaerosol is a collection of nanopar

ticles suspended in a gas. The particles may be present as discrete nano-objects, or as ag

gregates or agglomerates of nano- objects. These agglomerates may have diameters larger than 100 nm. In the case of an aerosol consisting of micrometer- diameter particles formed as agglomerates of nano-objects, the definition of nanoaerosol is open to in

terpretation. It is generally accepted that ifthe nanostructure associated with the nanoobject is accessible (through physical, chem

ical, or biological interactions), then the aerosol may be considered a nanoaerosol. However, if the nanostructure within indi

vidual micrometer-diameter particles does not directly influence particle behavior (for instance, if the nanoparticles were inaccessi

bly embedded in a solid matrix), the aerosol would not be described as a nanoaerosol. 

### 4.5 Agglomerate An agglomerate is a group of nanoparticles held together by relatively weak forces, in

cluding van der Waals forces, electrostatic forces, and surface tension [ISO 2006]. 

### 4.6 Aggregate An aggregate is a heterogeneous particle in which the various components are held to

gether by relatively strong forces, and thus not easily broken apart [ISO 2006]. Aggre

gated nanoparticles would be an example of a nanostructured material.Approaches to Safe Nanotechnology 11 Nanotechnology is an emerging field. As such, there are many uncertainties as to whether the unique properties of engi
neered nanomaterials (which underpin their commercial and scientific poten
tial) also pose occupational health risks. These uncertainties arise because of gaps in knowledge about the factors that are es

sential for predicting health risks—factors such as routes of exposure, translocation of materials once they enter the body, and interaction of the materials with the body’s biological systems. The potential health risk following exposure to a substance is gener

ally associated with the magnitude and du

ration of the exposure, the persistence of the material in the body, the inherent toxicity of the material, and the susceptibility or health status of the person exposed. More data are needed on the health risks associated with exposure to engineered nanomaterials. Re

sults of existing studies in animals and hu

mans on exposure and response to ultra

fine or other respirable particles provide a basis for preliminary estimates of the pos

sible adverse health effects from exposures to similar engineered materials on a nano

scale. Experimental studies in rodents and cell cultures have shown that the toxicity of ultrafine or nanoparticles is greater than that of the same mass of larger particles of similar chemical composition [Oberdörster et al. 1992, 1994a, b; Lison et al. 1997; Tran et al. 1999, 2000; Brown et al. 2001; Barlow et al. 2005; Duffin et al. 2007]. In addition to particle surface area, other particle char

acteristics may influence toxicity, includ

ing surface functionalization or coatings, solubility, shape, and the ability to generate oxidant species and to adsorb biological proteins or bind to receptors [Duffin et al. 2002; Oberdörster et al. 2005a; Maynard and Kuempel 2005; Donaldson et al. 2006]. More research is needed on the influence of particle properties on interactions with bio

logical systems and the potential for adverse effects. International research strategies for evaluating the safety of nanomaterials are actively being developed through coopera

tive efforts [Thomas et al. 2006]. Existing toxicity information about a given material of larger particle size can provide a baseline for anticipating the possible adverse health effects that may occur from exposure to a nanoscale material that has some of the same physicochemical properties (e.g., chem

istry, density). However, predicting the toxic

ity of an engineered nanomaterial based on its physicochemical properties may not pro

vide an adequate level of protection. 

### 5.1 Exposure Routes Inhalation is the most common route of ex
posure to airborne particles in the workplace. The deposition of discrete nano- objects in the respiratory tract is determined by the particle’s aerodynamic or thermodynamic diameter (i.e., the particle shape and size). Agglomer

ates of nano-objects will deposit according to the diameter of the agglomerate, not constitu

ent nano-objects. Research is ongoing to de

termine the physical factors that contribute to the agglomeration and de-agglomeration of nano-objects in air, suspended in aqueous me

dia, or once in contact with lung lining fluid and/or biological proteins. Evidence indicates 

## Potential Health Concerns 

# 512 Approaches to Safe Nanotechnology 5 Potential Health Concerns 5 Potential Health Concerns that the degree of agglomeration can affect the toxicity of inhaled nano-objects [Shvedova et al. 2007]. Discrete nanoparticles are deposited in the lungs to a greater extent than larger respi

rable particles [ICRP 1994], and deposi

tion increases with exercise due to increase in breathing rate and change from nasal to mouth breathing [Jaques and Kim 2000; Daigle et al. 2003] and among persons with existing lung diseases or conditions (e.g., asthma, emphysema) [Brown et al. 2002]. Based on animal studies, discrete nano

particles may enter the bloodstream from the lungs and translocate to other organs [Takenaka et al. 2001; Nemmar et al. 2002; Oberdörster et al. 2002]. Discrete nanoparticles (35–37-nm median diameter) that deposit in the nasal region may be able to enter the brain by translo

cation along the olfactory nerve, as was observed in rats [Oberdörster et al. 2004; Oberdörster et al. 2005a; Elder et al. 2006]. The transport of insoluble particles from 20–500 nm-diameter to the brain via senso

ry nerves (including olfactory and trigemi

nus) was reported in earlier studies in sever

al animal models [De Lorenzo 1970; Adams and Bray 1983; Hunter and Dey 1998]. This exposure route for nanoparticles and to nanoscale biological agents has not been studied in humans. Some studies suggest that nanomaterials could potentially enter the body through the skin during occupational exposure. Tin

kle et al. [2003] have shown that particles smaller than 1 μ m in diameter may pene

trate into mechanically flexed skin samples. A more recent study reported that nanopar

ticles with varying physicochemical proper

ties were able to penetrate the intact skin of pigs [Ryman-Rasmussen et al. 2006]. These nanoparticles were quantum dots of differ

ent size, shape, and surface coatings. They were reported to penetrate the stratum core

num barrier by passive diffusion and local

ize within the epidermal and dermal layers within 8–24 hours. The dosing solutions were 2- to 4-fold dilutions of quantum dots as commercially supplied and thus represent occupationally relevant doses. At this time, it is not fully known whether skin penetration of nanoparticles would result in adverse effects in animal models. However, topical application of raw SWCNT to nude mice has been shown to cause dermal irrita

tion [Murray et al. 2007]. Studies conducted in vitro using primary or cultured human skin cells have shown that both SWCNT and multi-walled carbon nanotubes (MWCNT) can enter cells and cause release of pro-in

flammatory cytokines, oxidative stress, and decreased viability [Monteiro-Riviere et al. 2005; Shvedova et al. 2003]. It remains un

clear, however, how these findings may be extrapolated to a potential occupational risk, given that additional data are not yet available for comparing the cell model stud

ies with actual conditions of occupational exposure. Research on the dermal exposureof nanomaterials is ongoing (www.unileipzig.de/~nanoderm/). Ingestion can occur from unintentional hand to mouth transfer of materials; this has been found to happen with traditional materials, and it is scientifically reasonable to assume that it also could happen dur

ing handling of nanomaterials. Ingestion may also accompany inhalation exposure because particles that are cleared from the respiratory tract via the mucociliary escala

tor may be swallowed [ICRP 1994 ] . Little is known about possible adverse effects from the ingestion of nanomaterials.5 Potential Health Concerns

Approaches to Safe Nanotechnology 13 5 Potential Health Concerns 

### 5.2 Effects Seen in Animal Studies Experimental studies in rats have shown that at equivalent mass doses, insoluble ultrafine particles are more potent than larger particles of similar composition in causing pulmonary inflammation, tissue damage, and lung tumors [Lee et al. 1985; Oberdörster and Yu 1990; Oberdörster et al. 1992, 1994a,b; Heinrich et al. 1995; Driscoll 1996; Lison et al. 1997; Tran et al. 1999, 2000; Brown et al. 2001; Duffin et al. 2002; Renwick et al. 2004; Barlow et al. 2005]. These studies have shown that for poorly-soluble low tox

icity (PSLT) particles, the dose-response re

lationships are consistent across particle siz

es when dose is expressed as particle surface area. In addition to particle size and surface area, studies have shown that other particle characteristics can influence toxicity. For example, although the relationship between particle surface area dose and pulmonary inflammation is consistent among PSLT particles, crystalline silica is much more in

flammogenic than PSLT particles at a given surface area dose [Duffin et al. 2007]. Reactive oxidant generation on the particle surface is an important factor influencing lung response to particles, which can be related to crystal structure. A recent study of the lung effects of rats dosed with either ultrafine anatase titanium dioxide (TiO 2) or ultrafine rutile TiO 2 showed that the anatase TiO 2 had more reactive surfaces and caused greater pulmonary inflammation and cell proliferation in the lungs of rats [Warheit et al. 2007]. In a cell-free assay designed to investigate the role of surface area and crys

tal structure on particle reactive oxygen spe

cies (ROS)-generation, Jiang et al. [2008] observed that size, surface area, and crystal structure all contribute to ROS generation.

Figure 5–1. Formation of collagen following deposition of SWCNTs in the lungs of mice14 Approaches to Safe Nanotechnology 5 Potential Health Concerns 5 Potential Health Concerns Oxidant generation was apparently associ

ated with the number of defective sites per surface area, which varied in nanoparticles in some size ranges [Jiang et al. 2008]. These studies indicate that for nanoparticles with similar properties (e.g., PSLT), the tox

icity of a given mass dose will increase with decreasing particle size due to the increasing surface area. However, the dose-response re

lationship may differ for particles with differ

ent chemical composition and other proper

ties. Consistent with these findings, a recent pulmonary instillation study with rats dosed with either fine or ultrafine TiO 2 reported no significant difference in lung responses when compared to controls, while crystal

line silica caused more severe lung responses at the same dose [Warheit et al. 2006]. How

ever, Warheit et al. [2006] were unable to ad

equately test the hypotheses about the rela

tionship between particle surface area dose and toxicity because the diameters of the fine and ultrafine TiO 2 -instilled particles did not significantly differ due to particle agglomera

tion, both being in excess of 2 μ m. When ef

forts were made to more effectively disperse fine and ultrafine particles, the effect of sur

face area on the pulmonary response in rats after intratracheal instillation was verified [Sager et al. 2008]. 5.2.1 Polytetrafluoroethylene fume Among ultrafine particles, freshly generated polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) fume (gen

erated at temperatures of more than 425 o C) is known to be highly toxic to the lungs. Freshly generated PTFE fume caused hemorrhagic pulmonary edema and death in rats exposed to less than 60 μ g/m 3 [Oberdörster et al. 1995]. In contrast, aged PTFE fume was much less toxic and did not result in mortality. This low toxicity was attributed to the increase in particle size from accumulation and to changes in surface chemistry [Johnston et al. 2000; Oberdörster et al. 2005a]. Human case studies have reported pulmonary edema in workers exposed to PTFE fume and an acci

dental death in a worker when an equipment malfunction caused overheating of the PTFE resin and release of the PTFE pyrolysis prod

ucts in the workplace [Goldstein et al. 1987; Lee et al. 1997]. While PTFE fume differs from engineered nanoparticles, these studies illustrate properties of ultrafine particles that have been associated with an acute toxic haz

ard. Enclosed processes and other engineer

ing controls appear to have been effective at eliminating worker exposures to PTFE fume in normal operations, and thus may provide examples of control systems that may be im

plemented to prevent exposure to nanopar

ticles that may have similar properties. 5.2.2 Carbon nanotubes Carbon nanotubes (CNT) are specialized forms or structures of engineered nanomate

rials that have had increasing production and use [Donaldson et al. 2006]. Consequently, a number of toxicologic studies of CNT have been performed in recent years. These stud

ies have shown that the toxicity of CNT may differ from that of other nanomaterials of similar chemical composition. For example, single-walled CNTs (SWCNT) have been shown to produce adverse effects including granulomas in the lungs of mice and rats at mass doses at which ultrafine carbon black did not produce these adverse effects [Shve

dova et al. 2005; Lam et al. 2004]. While both SWCNTs and carbon black are carbon-based, SWCNTs have a unique, convoluted, fibrous structure and specific surface chemistry that offers excellent electrical conductive proper

ties. How these characteristics may influence5 Potential Health Concerns

Approaches to Safe Nanotechnology 15 5 Potential Health Concerns

toxicity is not known. Carbon nanotubes may contain metal catalysts as byproducts of their production, which could contribute to their toxicity, or the CNTs may provide a structure that promotes fibroblast cell growth [Wang et al. 2008]. In a study of SWCNTs instilled into the lungs of rats, multi-focal granulomas (without tran

sient inflammation or persistent lesions) were observed at doses of 1 or 5 mg / kg body weight [Warheit et al. 2004]. In a study of mice in

stilled with one of several types of SWCNTs (i.e., raw, purified, iron-containing, and nick

el-containing) at doses of 0.1 or 0.5 mg/mouse (approximately 3 or 16 mg/kg body weight), dose-dependent epithelioid granulomas were observed at 7 days, which persisted at 90 days [Lam et al. 2004, 2006]. Both the raw and pu

rified forms produced interstitial inflamma

tion, while mortality (5/9 mice) was observed in the high dose group of the Ni-containing SWCNT. NIOSH researchers recently reported adverse lung effects following pharyngeal aspiration of SWCNTs in mice using doses between 10–40 μ g/mouse (approximately 0.5–2 mg / kg body weight) [Shvedova et al. 2005]. The find

ings showed that exposure to SWCNTs in mice lead to transient pulmonary inflammation, oxidative stress, decrease in pulmonary func

tion, decrease in bacterial clearance, and early onset of interstitial fibrosis. Deposition of ag

glomerates resulted in development of granu

lomas, while deposition of dispersed nanotube structures in the aspirated suspension resulted in the rapid development of interstitial fibro

sis (within 7 days), which progressed over a 30–60 day post-exposure period [Shvedova et al. 2005; Mercer et al. 2008]. Evidence in

dicates that when efforts were made to more fully disperse the SWCNT and obtain smaller structures in the aspiration suspension, fewer granulomas occurred but a 4-fold more po

tent interstitial fibrotic response was observed [Mercer et al. 2008]. Exposure to SWCNT has been observed to be more fibrogenic than an equal mass of either ultrafine carbon black or fine quartz [Shve

dova et al. 2005; Lam et al. 2004]. Based on their findings in mice, Shvedova et al. [2005] estimated that workers may be at risk of devel

oping lung lesions if they were exposed to SW

CNT over a period of 20 days at the current Figure 5–2. Deposition and clearance of MWCNTs from the conducting airways of mice following inhalation exposure16 Approaches to Safe Nanotechnology 5 Potential Health Concerns 5 Potential Health Concerns OSHA PEL for graphite (5 mg/m 3 ). Lam et al. [2004, 2006] provided similar estimates and suggested that the graphite PEL should not be used (e.g., on MSDS) as a safe concentra

tion for workers exposed to CNTs. Compared to instillation, the pharyngeal aspiration tech

nique may approximate more closely the par

ticle deposition that occurs during inhalation. Inhalation studies of CNTs may provide more definitive information about their potential toxicity in humans [Donaldson et al. 2006]. Recently, NIOSH scientists designed a system to generate an aerosol of SWCNT for a rat in

halation study [Baron et al. 2008]. Results of the inhalation exposure to SWCNT [Shvedova et al. 2008] were qualitatively similar to those of the aspiration study [Shvedova et al. 2004] with a 4-fold more potent interstitial fibrotic response similar to that reported by Mercer et al. [2008]. Another NIOSH study found markers of inflammation in the lung, aorta, and heart tissues of ApoE-/- mice after a single intra-pharyngeal instillation dose of SWCNT (10 and 40 μ g/mouse) and accelerated plaque formation after repeated doses (20 μ g/mouse once every other week for 8 weeks in mice fed an atherogenic diet) [Li et al. 2007]. MWCNTs were recently studied by intratra

cheal instillation in Sprague-Dawley rats re

ceiving 0.5, 2, or 5 mg (approximately 2, 9, or 22 mg/kg body weight) of either ground MWCNT or unground MWCNT [Muller et al. 2005]. Both forms produced pulmonary inflammation and fibrosis. Rats that received ground MWCNT showed greater dispersion in the lungs, and fibrotic lesions were ob

served in the deep lungs (alveolar region). In rats treated with MWCNT (not ground) fi

brosis showed mainly in their airways rather than in their lungs. The biopersistence of the unground MWCNT was greater than that of the ground MWCNT, with 81% vs. 36%, re

spectively, remaining in the lungs at day 60. At an equal mass dose, ground MWCNT pro

duced a similar inflammatory and fibrogenic response as chrysotile asbestos and a greater response than ultrafine carbon black [Muller et al. 2005]. Effects from the vehicle (1% Tween 80) used for administering ground and unground MWCNT to rats were not re

ported; the control group used in the study was exposed to only saline. NIOSH scientists have exposed mice by aspiration to MWCNT suspended in a simulated alveolar lining fluid rather than Tween 80. Control studies show that this suspension medium was not inflam

matory and did not mask the biological activ

ity of the particle surface. Data indicate that aspiration of dispersed MWCNT produced pulmonary inflammation, which peaked 7 days post exposure. The inflammatory re

sponse to MWCNT was greater than the in

flammatory response to SWCNT [Sriram et al. 2007]. Two recent studies investigated the hypothe

ses that CNTs can behave like asbestos. In the first study, Takagi et al. [2008] administered to p53 (+/-) mice MWCNT, fullerene, or cro

cidolite asbestos by intraperitoneal injection at doses of 3 mg/mouse. The average width of the MWCNT was approximately 100 nm, and approximately 28% of the particles were longer than 5 μ m. The particle number con

centrations of MWCNT and crocidolite were 1 × 10 9 and 1 × 10 10 (in 1-ml suspensions), respectively, although the MWCNT sample was also reported to contain mainly large ag

gregates, indicating that the number of MW

CNT fibers was vastly underestimated and much larger than for the asbestos exposure. At the termination of the study (25 weeks),mesothelial responses in the MWCNTtreated mice included moderate to severe fibrous peritoneal adhesion and peritoneal tumors. The asbestos-treated mice had simi

lar responses but to a lesser extent, while the5 Potential Health Concerns

Approaches to Safe Nanotechnology 17 5 Potential Health Concerns fullerene-treated group did not show these responses. Mesothelioma was considered by the authors as the primary cause of death, and constriction of the ileus due to severe peritoneal adhesion was considered to be the second major cause of death, suggesting that 3 mg/mouse exceeded the maximum toler

ated dose of MWCNT. Whether mesothelio

mia was a primary cause of death is some

what speculative. In a second study, Poland et al. [2008] admin

istered to mice either MWCNT (two short and two long CNT samples), nanoscale car

bon black, or amosite (short or long) at dos

es of 50 μ g/mouse by intraperitoneal injec

tion. The short CNTs were 10 nm or 15 nm in width, with no fibers larger than 15 μ m in length detected; the long CNTs were 85 nm or 165 nm in width, and 24% or 84%, re

spectively, were larger than 15 μ m in length (the percentage of fibers longer than 5 μ m was not reported). After either 24 hours or 7 days, the long MWCNT caused inflamma

tion and granulomatous lesions that were qualitatively and quantitatively similar to that caused by the long asbestos. The short, low-aspect-ratio, tangled aggregates of MW

CNT did not produce these responses at the doses used in this study. Additional studies are needed to determine if this inflammato

ry response to MWCNT would be persistent and result in tumors of the abdominal wall. Additionally, the potential for migration of MWCNT through the lungs to the mesothe

lium after inhalation requires investigation. Long-term studies are also needed to deter

mine whether CNTs can cause cancer such as mesothelioma in laboratory animals, in

cluding exposures by typical routes in hu

mans (i.e., inhalation, dermal penetration, and ingestion) and at doses that include those equivalent to potential workplace ex

posures. These studies indicate the need for more data on exposures of workers to CNTs. Maynard et al. [2004] reported relatively low short-term (approximately 30 min) airborne mass concentrations of SWCNT (0.007–0.053 mg/m 3 ) in a laboratory pro

duction facility. A recent study by Han et al. [2008] reported total airborne mass concen

trations of MWCNT from 0.21–0.43 mg/m 3 (4–6-hr sampling) in a laboratory research facility prior to use of engineering control measures; after implementing controls, the concentration decreased to nondetectable. Workers could also be exposed to ground CNTs used in polymer composites and other matrices or during cutting, grinding, or polishing of these materials. Given that exposure to SWCNT and MWCNT causes interstitial fibrosis and pulmonary inflam

mation, respectively, in rodent lungs at rela

tively low mass doses, it is prudent to mini

mize worker exposure to airborne CNTs (see Chapter 8 Guidelines for Working with Engineered Nanomaterials ). 

### 5.3 Observations from Epidemiological Studies Involving Fine and Ultrafine Particles Epidemiological studies in workers exposed to aerosols including fine and ultrafine parti

cles have reported lung function decrements, adverse respiratory symptoms, chronic ob

structive pulmonary disease, and fibrosis [Kreiss et al. 1997; Gardiner et al. 2001; An

tonini 2003]. In addition, some studies have found lung disease including elevated lung cancer and neurological effects among work

ers exposed to certain ultrafine particles (i.e., diesel exhaust particulate) [Steenland et al. 1998; Garshick et al. 2004, 2006; Hart et al. 2006] or welding fumes [Antonini 2003; Park18 Approaches to Safe Nanotechnology 5 Potential Health Concerns 5 Potential Health Concerns et al. 2006; Ambroise et al. 2007; Bowler et al. 2007]. The implications of these studies to engineered nanomaterials, which may have different particle properties, are uncertain. Studies of airborne particles and fibers in the workplace do provide relevant background information about the particle-related lung diseases and mechanisms, and some limited quantitative estimates of exposures and risk of adverse health effects. As such, these stud

ies provide a point of reference, including baseline information and estimates regard

ing possible health risks of exposure to other nanoscale particles depending on the extent to which the exposure conditions and parti

cle-biological interactions may be similar. Epidemiological studies in the general popu

lation have also shown associations between particulate air pollution and increased mor

bidity and mortality from respiratory and cardiovascular diseases [Dockery et al. 1993; HEI 2000; Pope et al. 2002, 2004]. Some epidemiological studies have shown adverse health effects associated with exposure to the ultrafine particulate fraction of air pol

lution [Peters et al. 1997, 2004; Penttinen et al. 2001; Ibald-Mulli et al. 2002; Timonen et al. 2004; Ruckerl et al. 2006] although uncertainty exists about the role of ultra

fine particles relative to other air pollutants in causing the observed adverse health ef

fects. The associations in these studies have been based on measurements of the particle number or mass concentrations of particles within certain size fractions (e.g., particulate matter with diameter of 2.5 μ m and smaller [PM 2.5 ]). In an experimental study of healthy and asthmatic subjects inhaling ultrafine carbon particles, changes were observed in the expression of adhesion molecules by blood leukocyte, which may relate to pos

sible cardiovascular effects of ultrafine par

ticle exposure [Frampton et al. 2006]. Shortterm diesel exhaust exposure (0.3 mg/ m 3 for 1 hr) in healthy volunteers was associated with mild systemic inflammation and im

paired endothelial-dependent vasodilation [Törnqvist et al. 2007]. 

### 5.4 Hypotheses from Animal and Epidemiological Studies The existing literature on particles and fi

bers provides a scientific basis from which to evaluate the potential hazards of engineered nanomaterials. While the properties of en

gineered nanomaterials can vary widely, the basic physicochemical and toxicokinetic principles learned from the existing studies are relevant to understanding the poten

tial toxicity of nanomaterials. For example, it is known from studies in humans that a greater proportion of inhaled nanoparticles will deposit in the respiratory tract (both at rest and with exercise) compared to larger particles [ICRP 1994; Jaques and Kim 2000; Daigle et al. 2003; Kim and Jaques 2004]. It is also known from studies in animals that nanoparticles in the lungs can be trans

located to other organs in the body; how the chemical and physical properties of the nanoparticles influence this translocation is not completely known [Takenaka et al. 2001; Kreyling et al. 2002; Oberdörster et al. 2002, 2004; Semmler et al. 2004; Geiser et al. 2005]. Due to their small size, nanoparticles can cross cell membranes and interact with subcellular structures such as mitochondria, where they have been shown to cause oxida

tive damage and to impair function of cells in culture [Möller et al. 2002, 2005; Li et al. 2003; Geiser et al. 2005]. Nanoparticles have also been observed inside cell nuclei [Porter et al. 2007a, b]. Animal studies have shown that nanoparticles are more biologically5 Potential Health Concerns

Approaches to Safe Nanotechnology 19 5 Potential Health Concerns active due to their greater surface area per mass compared with larger-sized particles of the same chemistry [Oberdörster et al. 1992; 1994a,b; 2005a; Driscoll 1996; Lison et al. 1997; Brown et al. 2001; Duffin et al. 2002; Renwick et al. 2004; Barlow et al. 2005; Sager et al. 2008]. While this increased bio

logical activity is a fundamental component to the utility of nanoparticles for industrial, commercial, and medical applications, the consequences of unintentional exposures of workers to nanoparticles are uncertain. Research reported from laboratory animal studies and from epidemiological studies have lead to hypotheses regarding the po

tential adverse health effects of engineered nanomaterials. These hypotheses are based on the scientific literature of particle expo

sures in animals and humans. This litera

ture has been recently reviewed [Donaldson et al. 2005; Maynard and Kuempel 2005; Oberdörster et al. 2005a, Donaldson et al. 2006; Kreyling et al. 2006]. In general, the particles used in past studies have not been characterized to the extent recommended for new studies in order to more fully under

stand the physicochemical properties of the particles that influence toxicity [Oberdörst

er et al. 2005b; Thomas et al. 2006]. As this research continues, more data will become available to support or refute the following hypotheses for engineered nanoparticles. Hypothesis 1: Exposure to engineered nano
particles is likely to cause adverse health ef
fects similar to ultrafine particles that have similar physical and chemical characteris
tics . Studies in rodents and humans support the hypothesis that exposure to ultrafine particles poses a greater respiratory hazard than expo

sure to the same mass of larger particles with a similar chemical composition. Studies of existing particles have shown adverse health effects in workers exposed to ultrafine par

ticles (e.g., diesel exhaust particulate, welding fumes), and animal studies have shown that ultrafine particles are more inflammogenic and tumorigenic in the lungs of rats than an equal mass of larger particles of similar com

position [Oberdörster and Yu 1990; Driscoll 1996; Tran et al. 1999, 2000]. If engineered nanoparticles have the same physicochemi
cal characteristics that are associated with reported effects from ultrafine particles, they may pose the same health concerns. Although the physicochemical characteristics of ultrafine particles and engineered nanopar

ticles can differ, the toxicologic and dosimetric principles derived from available studies may be relevant to postulating the health concerns for newly engineered particles. The biological mechanisms of particle-related lung diseases (i.e., oxidative stress, inflammation, and pro

duction of cytokines, chemokines, and cell growth factors) [Mossman and Churg 1998; Castranova 2000; Donaldson and Tran 2002] appear to be a consistent lung response for re

spirable particles including ultrafine or engi

neered nanoparticles [Donaldson et al. 1998; Donaldson and Stone 2003; Oberdörster et al. 2005a]. Toxicological studies have shown that the chemical and physical properties that in

fluence the fate and toxicity of ultrafine par

ticles may also be relevant to mechanisms in

fluencing biological exposure and response to other nanoscale particles [Duffin et al. 2002; Kreyling et al. 2002; Oberdörster et al. 2002; Semmler et al. 2004; Nel et al. 2006]. Hypothesis 2: Surface area and activity and particle number may be better predictors of potential hazard than mass. The greater potential hazard may relate to the greater number or surface area of nanopar

ticles compared with that for the same mass20 Approaches to Safe Nanotechnology 5 Potential Health Concerns concentration of larger particles [Oberdörst

er et al. 1992, 1994a,b; Driscoll et al. 1996; Tran et al. 2000; Brown et al. 2001; Peters et al. 1997; Moshammer and Neuberger 2003; Sager et al. 2008]. This hypothesis is based primarily on the pulmonary effects observed in studies of rodents exposed to various types of ultrafine or fine particles (i.e., TiO 2 , car bon black, barium sulfate, carbon black, die

sel soot, coal fly ash, toner) and in humans exposed to aerosols, including nanoscale particles (e.g., diesel exhaust, welding fumes). These studies indicate that for a given mass of particles, relatively insoluble nanoparticles are more toxic than larger particles of simi

lar chemical composition and surface prop

erties. Studies of fine and ultrafine particles have shown that particles with less reactive surfaces are less toxic [Tran et al. 1999; Duf

fin et al. 2002]. However, even particles with low inherent toxicity (e.g., TiO 2 ) have been shown to cause pulmonary inflammation, tissue damage, and fibrosis at sufficiently high particle surface area doses [Oberdörster et al. 1992, 1994a,b; Tran et al. 1999, 2000]. Through engineering, the properties of nano

materials can be modified. For example, a re

cent study has shown that the cytotoxicity of water-soluble fullerenes can be reduced by several orders of magnitude by modifying the structure of the fullerene molecules (e.g., by hydroxylation) [Sayes et al. 2004]. These structural modifications were shown to re

duce the cytotoxicity by reducing the genera

tion of oxygen radicals—which is a probable mechanism by which cell membrane damage and death occurred in these cell cultures. In

creasing the sidewall functionalization of SW

CNT also rendered these nanomaterials less cytotoxic to cells in culture [Sayes et al. 2005]. Cytotoxicity studies with quantum dots have shown that the type of surface coating can have a significant effect on cell motility and viabil

ity [Hoshino et al. 2004; Shiohara et al. 2004; Lovric et al. 2005]. Differences in the phase composition of nanocrystalline structures can influence their cytotoxicity; in a recent study comparing two types of TiO 2 nanopar ticles exposed to UV radiation, anatase TiO 2 was more cytotoxic and produced more reac

tive species than did rutile TiO 2 with similar specific surface area (153 m 2 g and 123 m 2 g of TiO 2 , respectively) [Sayes et al. 2006]. Reactive oxygen species were also associated with the cytotoxicity of TiO 2 nanoparticles to mouse microglia (brain cells) grown in culture [Long et al. 2006]. In contrast, in vitro generation of oxidant species is relatively low in purified SWCNT (contaminating metals removed), yet this material caused progressive interstitial fibrosis in vivo [Shvedova et al. 2004; 2005]. However, recent in vitro studies indicate that purified SWCNTs enhance proliferation and collagen production in fibroblasts [Wang et al. 2008]. Therefore, oxidant generation may not be the only mechanism driving the biological activity of nanomaterials. The studies of ultrafine particles may pro

vide useful data to develop preliminary hazard or risk assessments and to generate hypotheses for further testing. The studies in cell cultures provide information about the cytotoxic properties of nanomaterials that can guide further research and toxicity testing in whole organisms. More research is needed of the specific particle properties and other factors that influence the toxicity and disease development, including those characteristics that may be most predictive of the potential safety or toxicity of newly engineered nanomaterials.5 Potential Health Concerns

Approaches to Safe Nanotechnology 21 Very little is known about the safety risks that engineered nanomaterials might pose, beyond some data indicating that they pos

sess certain properties associated with safety hazards in traditional materials. Based upon currently available information, the poten

tial safety concerns most likely would in

volve catalytic effects or fire and explosion hazards if nanomaterials are found to be

have similarly to traditional materials. 

### 6.1 Fire and Explosion Risk Although insufficient information exists to predict the fire and explosion risk associated with nanoscale powders, nanoscale combus
tible material could present a higher risk than a similar quantity of coarser mate
rial, given its unique properties [HSE 2004 ]. Decreasing the particle size of combustible materials can increase combustion potential and combustion rate, leading to the possi

bility of relatively inert materials becoming highly reactive in the nanometer size range. Dispersions of combustible nanomaterial in air may present a greater safety risk than dis

persions of non- nanomaterials with similar compositions. Some nanomaterials are de

signed to generate heat through the progres

sion of reactions at the nanoscale. Such mate

rials may present a fire hazard that is unique to engineered nanomaterials. In the case of some metals, explosion risk can increase sig

nificantly as particle size decreases. The greater activity of nanoscale materials forms a basis for research into nanoenerget

ics. For instance, nanoscale Al/MoO 3 ther

mites ignite more than 300 times faster than corresponding micrometer-scale material [ Granier and Pantoya 2004 ]. 

### 6.2 Risks of Catalytic Reactions Nanoscale particles and nanostructured po

rous materials have been used as effective catalysts for increasing the rate of reactions or decreasing the necessary temperature for reactions to occur in liquids and gas

es. Depending on their composition and structure, some nanomaterials may initi
ate catalytic reactions that, based on their chemical composition, would not other
wise be anticipated [Pritchard 2004]. 

## Potential Safety Hazards 

# 6Approaches to Safe Nanotechnology 23 There are currently no national or interna

tional consensus standards on measurement techniques for nanomaterials in the work

place. If the qualitative assessment of a pro

cess has identified potential exposure points and leads to the decision to measure nano

materials, several factors must be kept in mind. Current research indicates that mass and bulk chemistry may be less important than particle size, surface area, and surface chemistry (or activity) for nanostructured materials [ Oberdörster et al. 1992, 1994 a,b; Duffin et al. 2002]. Research is ongoing into the relative importance of these different exposure metrics, and how to best charac

terize exposures to nanomaterials in the workplace. In addition, the unique shape and properties of some nanomaterials may pose additional challenges. For example, the techniques used to measure fiber concentra

tions in the workplace (e.g., phase contrast microscopy) would not be able to detect in

dividual carbon nanotubes with diameters less than 100 nm nor bundles of carbon nanotubes with diameters less than 250 nm [Donaldson et al. 2006]. NIOSH and the National Institute of Standards and Tech

nology (NIST) are collaborating on efforts to develop nanoscale reference materials for exposure assessment. Initial effort is focused on development of TiO 2 reference material. 

### 7.1 Workplace Exposures While research continues to address ques

tions of nanomaterial toxicity, a number of exposure assessment approaches can be used to help determine worker exposures to airborne nanomaterials. These assessments can be performed using traditional indus

trial hygiene sampling methods including samplers placed at static locations (area sampling), samples collected in the breath

ing zone of the worker (personal sampling), or real-time devices or methods that can be personal or static. In general, personal sam

pling is preferred to ensure an accurate repre

sentation of the worker’s exposure, whereas area samples (e.g., size-fractionated aerosol samples) and real-time (direct-reading) ex

posure measurements may be more useful for evaluating the need for improvement of engineering controls and work practices. Many of the sampling techniques that are available for measuring nanoaerosols vary in complexity but can provide useful in

formation for evaluating occupational ex

posures with respect to particle size, mass, surface area, number concentration, com

position, and surface chemistry. Unfortu

nately, relatively few of these techniques are readily applicable to routine exposure mon

itoring. Research is ongoing into developing an analytical strategy for determining both TiO 2 surface area and titanium mass from 37-mm cassette filter samplers. Current measurement techniques are described be

low along with their applicability for moni

toring nanometer aerosols. For each measurement technique used, it is vital that the key parameters associated with the technique and sampling method

ology be recorded when measuring expo

sure to nanoaerosols. This should include the response range of the instrumentation, 

## Exposure Assessment and Characterization 

# 724 Approaches to Safe Nanotechnology 7 Exposure Assessment and Characterization 7 Exposure Assessment and Characterization whether personal or static measurements are made, and the location of all poten

tial aerosol sources including background aerosols. Comprehensive documentation will facilitate comparison of exposure mea

surements using different instruments or different exposure metrics and will aid the re- interpretation of historic data as fur

ther information is developed on healthappropriate exposure metrics. Regardless of the metric and method selected for ex
posure monitoring, it is critical that mea
surements be taken before production or processing of a nanomaterial to obtain background nanoparticle exposure data. Measurements made during production or processing can then be evaluated to deter

mine if there has been an increase in particle number concentrations in relation to back

ground measurements and whether that change represents worker exposure to the nanomaterial. Table 7–1 gives a listing of in

struments and measurement methods that can be used in the evaluation of engineered nanoparticle exposures.

Figure 7–1. Examples of different sampling instruments used to measure occupational exposures to nanoparticles including the determination of real-time particle number concentrations and size-fractionated mass concentrations 7.1.1 Size-fractionated aerosol sampling Studies indicate that particle size plays an important role in determining the potential adverse effects of nanomaterials in the respi

ratory system: by influencing the physical, chemical, and biological nature of the mate

rial; by affecting the surface-area dose of de

posited particles; and by enabling deposited particles to more readily translocate to other parts of the body. Animal studies indicate that the toxicity of inhaled nanoparticles is more closely associated with the particle surface area and particle number than with the particle mass concentration when com

paring aerosols with different particle size distributions. However, mass concentration measurements may be applicable for evalu

ating occupational exposure to nanometer aerosols where a good correlation between the surface area of the aerosol and mass concentration can be determined or if tox

icity data based on mass dose are available for a specific nanoscale particle associated7 Exposure Assessment and Characterization

Approaches to Safe Nanotechnology 25 7 Exposure Assessment and Characterization with a known process (e.g., diesel exhaust particulate). Aerosol samples can be collected using in

halable, thoracic, or respirable samplers, depending on the region of the respiratory system most susceptible to the inhaled par

ticles. Since prevailing information suggests that a large fraction of inhaled nanopar
ticles will deposit in the gas-exchange re
gion of the lungs [ICRP 1994], respirable samplers would be appropriate. Respirable samplers will also collect a nominal amount of nanoscale particles that can deposit in the upper airways and ultimately be cleared or transported to other parts of the body. Table 7–1. Summary of instruments and measurement methods used in the evaluation of nanomaterial exposures * Metric Instrument or method Remarks Mass-Direct (total and/

or elemental) Size Selective Static Sampler The only instruments offering a cut point around 100 nm are cascade impactors (Berner-type low pressure impactors, or Micro orifice impactors). Allows gravimetric and chemical analysis of samples on stages below 100 nm. TEOM ®

(Tapered Element Oscillating Microbalance) Sensitive real-time monitors such as the TEOM may be useable to measure nanoaerosol mass concentration on-line with a suitable size selective inlet. Filter collection and

elemental analysis Filters may be collected with size selective presamplers or open face. Elemental analysis (e.g., carbon, metals) for mass determination. Mass-Indirect

(calculation) ELPI TM (Electrical Low Pressure Impactor) Real time size-selective (aerodynamic diameter) detection of active surface area concentration giving aerosol size distribution. Mass concentration of aerosols can be calculated when particle charge and density are known or assumed. MOUDI

(Micro-Orfice Uniform Deposit Impactor) Real time size-selective (aerodynamic diameter) by cascade impaction.
DMAS

(Differential Mobility Analyzing System) Real time size-selective (mobility diameter) detection of number concentration, giving aerosol size distribution. Mass concentration of aerosols can be calculated when particle shape and density are known or assumed. (continued) See footnotes at end of table.26 Approaches to Safe Nanotechnology 7 Exposure Assessment and Characterization 7 Exposure Assessment and Characterization

Table 7–1 (Continued). Summary of instruments and measurement methods used in the evaluation of nanomaterial exposures * Metric Instrument or method Remarks Number-Direct CPC (Condensation Particle Counter) CPCs provide real time number concentration measurements between their particle diameterdetection limits. Without a nanoparticle preseparator they are not specific to the nanometer size range. Some models have diffusion screen to limit top size to 1 μ m. OPC

(Optical Particle Counter) OPCs provide real time number concentration measurements between their particle diameter detection limits. Particle size diameters begin at 300 nm and may go up to 10,000 nm. DMAS and SMPS

(Scanning Mobility Particle Sizer) Real time size-selective (mobility diameter) detection of number concentration giving number-based size distribution. Electron Microscopy Off-line analysis of electron microscope samples can provide information on size-specific aerosol number concentration. Number-Indirect ELPI TM and MOUDI Real time size-selective (aerodynamic diameter) detection of active surface-area concentration giving aerosol size distribution. Data may be interpreted in terms of number concentration. Size-selective samples may be further analyzed

off-line. Surface Area-Direct Diffusion Charger Real-time measurement of aerosol active surfacearea. Active surface-area does not scale directly with geometric surface-area above 100 nm. Note that not all commercially available diffusion chargers have a response that scales with particle active surface-area below 100 nm. Diffusion chargers are only specific to nanoparticles if used with appropriate inlet pre-separator. ELPI TM and MOUDI Real-time size-selective (aerodynamic diameter) detection of active surface-area concentration. Active surface-area does not scale directly with geometric surface-area above 100 nm. (continued)
See footnotes at end of table.7 Exposure Assessment and Characterization

Approaches to Safe Nanotechnology 27 7 Exposure Assessment and Characterization Table 7–1 (Continued). Summary of instruments and measurement methods used in the evaluation of nanomaterial exposures * Metric Instrument or method Remarks Surface Area-Direct

(continued) Electron Microscopy Off-line analysis of electron microscope samples (previously collected on filters or other media) can provide information on particle surface-area with respect to size. TEM analysis provides direct information on the projected area of collected particles which may be related to geometric area for some particles shapes. Surface Area-Indirect

(calculation) DMAS and SMPS Real time size-selective (mobility diameter) detection of number concentration. Data may be interpreted in terms of aerosol surface-area under certain circumstances. For instance, the mobility diameter of open agglomerates has been shown to correlate with projected surface area. DMAS and ELPI TM used

in parallel Differences in measured aerodynamic and mobility can be used to infer particle fractal dimension which can be further used to estimate surface-area. *Adapted from ISO/TR 12885 Note: Inherent to all air sampling instruments in this table is the fact that they cannot discriminate the

nanoaerosol of interest from other airborne particles. Also, there is a general lack of validation regarding the response of these air sampling instruments to the full spectrum of nanoparticles that may be found in the workplace, including varieties of primary particles, agglomerates or aggregates, and other physical and chemical forms. A suite of nanoparticle reference materials are required to perform the needed validations.
Respirable samplers allow mass-based ex

posure measurements to be made using gra

vimetric and/or chemical analysis [NIOSH 1994]. However, they do not provide informa

tion on aerosol number, size, or surface-area concentration, unless the relationship between different exposure metrics for the aerosol (e.g., density, particle shape) has been previously characterized. Currently, no commercially available personal samplers are designed to measure the particle number, surface area, or mass concentration of nanoaerosols. However, several methods are available that can be used to estimate surface area, number, or mass con

centration for particles smaller than 100 nm. The use of conventional impactor samplers to assess nanoparticle exposure is limited since the impaction collection efficiencies are 200–300 nm. Low-pressure cascade im

pactors that can measure particles to 50 nm and larger may be used for static sampling since their size and complexity preclude their use as personal samplers [Marple et al. 2001; Hinds 1999]. A personal cascade impactor is available with a lower aerosol cut point of28 Approaches to Safe Nanotechnology 7 Exposure Assessment and Characterization 7 Exposure Assessment and Characterization
250 nm [Misra et al. 2002], allowing an ap

proximation of nanoscale particle mass con

centration in the worker’s breathing zone. For each method, the detection limits are on the order of a few micrograms of material on a filter or collection substrate [Vaughan et al. 1989]. Cascade impactor exposure data gath

ered from worksites where nanomaterials are being processed or handled can be used to make assessments as to the efficacy of expo

sure control measures. 7.1.2 Real-time aerosol sampling The real-time (direct-reading) measure
ment of nanometer aerosol concentra
tions is limited by the sensitivity of the instrument to detect small particles. Many real-time aerosol mass monitors used in the workplace rely on light scattering from groups of particles (photometers). This methodology is generally insensitive to par

ticles smaller than 100 nm [Hinds 1999]. Optical instruments that size individual particles and convert the measured distri

bution to a mass concentration are simi

larly limited to particles larger than 100 nm. Quantitative information gained by optical particle counters may also be limited by rel

atively poor counting efficiencies at smaller particle diameters (i.e., less than 500 nm). These instruments are capable of operating within certain concentration ranges that, when exceeded, affect the count or mass determination efficiencies due to coinci

dence errors at the detector. Similarly, the response of optical particle counters may be material-dependent according to the re

fractive index of the particle. The Scanning Mobility Particle Sizer (SMPS) is widely used as a research tool for characterizing nanoscale aerosols although its applicabil

ity for use in the workplace may be limited because of its size, cost, and the inclusion of a radioactive source. Additionally, the SMPS may take 2–3 minutes to scan an entire size distribution; thus, it may be of limited use in workplaces with highly variable aero

sol size distributions, such as those close to a strong particle source. Fast (less than 1 second), mobility-based, particle-sizing in

struments are now available commercially; however, having fewer channels, they lack the finer sizing resolution of the SMPS. The Electrical Low Pressure Impactor (ELPI) is an alternative instrument that combines diffusion charging and a cascade impactor with real-time (less than 1 second) aerosol charge measurements providing aerosol size distributions by aerodynamic diameter [Ke

skinen et al. 1992]. 7.1.3 Surface-area measurements Relatively few techniques exist to monitor exposures with respect to aerosol surface area. Particle surface is composed of inter

nal surface area attributable to pores (cavities more deep than wide), external surface area due to roughness (cavities more wide than deep), and total surface area (the accessible area of all real particle surfaces). A standard gas adsorption technique (i.e., BET) is used to measure the total surface area of powders and can be adapted to measure the specific surface area (surface area per unit mass) of engineered nanomaterials [Brunauer et al. 1938] . However, surface-area analysis by gas adsorption requires relatively large quantities of material, is not element specific, and must be performed in a laboratory. The first instrument designed to measure aerosol surface area was the epiphaniometer [Baltensperger et al. 1988]. This device mea

sures the Fuchs, or active surface area, of the aerosols by measuring the attachment rate of7 Exposure Assessment and Characterization

Approaches to Safe Nanotechnology 29 7 Exposure Assessment and Characterization radioactive ions. For aerosols less than ap

proximately 100 nm in size, measurement of the Fuchs surface area is probably a good in

dicator of external surface area (or geometric surface area). However, for aerosols greater than approximately 1 μ m, the relationship with geometric particle surface area is lost [Fuchs 1964]. Measurements of active surface area are generally insensitive to particle po

rosity. The epiphaniometer is not well suited to widespread use in the workplace because of the inclusion of a radioactive source and the lack of effective temporal resolution. This same measurement principle can be applied with the use of a portable aerosol diffusion charger. Studies have shown that these devices provide a good estimate of aerosol external surface area when airborne particles are smaller than 100 nm in diam

eter. For larger particles, diffusion chargers underestimate aerosol surface area. How

ever, further research is needed to evaluate the degree of underestimation. Extensive field evaluations of commercial instruments are yet to be reported. However, laboratory evaluations with monodisperse silver par

ticles have shown that two commercially available diffusion chargers can provide good measurement data on aerosol exter

nal surface area for particles smaller than 100 nm in diameter but underestimate the aerosol surface area for particles larger than 100 nm in diameter [Ku and Maynard 2005, 2006]. 7.1.4 Particle number concentration measurement Particle number concentration has been as

sociated with adverse responses to air pol

lution in some human studies [Timonen et al. 2004; Ruckerl et al. 2005], while in toxicologic studies, particle surface area has generally been shown to be a better predic

tor than either particle number, mass, or vol

ume concentration alone [Oberdörster and Yu 1990; Tran et al. 1999; Duffin et al. 2002]. A two-variable dose metric of particle size and volume has been shown to be the best predictor of lung cancer in rats from vari

ous types of particles [Borm et al. 2004; Pott and Roller 2005]. This illustrates some of the complexity of interpreting existing data on particle dose metric and response. While adverse health effects appear to be more closely related with particle surface area, the number of particles depositing in the respi

ratory tract or other organ systems may also play an important role. Aerosol particle number concentration can be measured relatively easily using Conden

sation Particle Counters (CPCs). These are available as hand-held static instruments, and they are generally sensitive to particles greater than 10–20 nm in diameter. Con

densation Particle Counters designed for the workplace do not have discrete size-selective inputs, and so they are typically sensitive to particles less than 1 μ m in diameter. Comin diameter. Com mercial size- selective inlets are not available to restrict CPCs to the nanoparticle size range; however, the technology exists to construct size- selective inlets based on particle mobil

ity or possibly on inertial pre-separation. An alternative approach to estimating nanopar

ticle number concentrations using a CPC is to use the instrument in parallel with an op

tical particle counter (OPC). The difference in particle count between the instruments will provide an indication of particle number concentration between the lower CPC de

tectable particle diameter and the lower OPC particle diameter (typically 300–500 nm). A critical issue when characterizing expo

sure using particle number concentration30 Approaches to Safe Nanotechnology 7 Exposure Assessment and Characterization 7 Exposure Assessment and Characterization is selectivity. Nanoscale particles are ubiq
uitous in many workplaces , from sources such as combustion, vehicle emissions, and infiltration of outside air. Particle counters are generally insensitive to particle source or composition making it difficult to dif
ferentiate between incidental and pro
cess-related nanoparticles using number concentration alone. In a study of aerosol exposures during a carbon black bagging process, Kuhlbusch et al. [2004] found that peaks in number concentration measure

ments were associated with emissions from fork lift trucks and gas burners in the vicin

ity, rather than with the process itself. In a similar manner, during an ultrafine particle mapping exercise in an automotive facility,Peters et al. [2006] found that direct gasfired heating systems systematically pro

duced high particle number concentrations throughout the facility when the heating system was in operation. Through follow up measurements, Heitbrink et al. [2007] found a high proportion of ultrafine par

ticles produced from these burners, yet little if any mass was associated with their emis

sions. Other non-process ultrafine sources were identified in an adjacent foundry [Ev

ans et al. 2008]. Together with roof mounted gas-fired heating units, additional sources included cigarette-smoking and the exhaust from a propane fueled sweeper vehicle, with the latter contributing a large fraction of the ultrafine particles. Although these issues are not unique to particle number concentra

tion measurements, orders of magnitude difference can exist in particle number concentrations depending on concomitant sources of particle emissions. Although using nanoparticle number con

centration as an exposure measurement may not be consistent with exposure metrics be

ing used in animal toxicity studies, such measurements may be useful for identify
ing nanoscale particle emissions and de
termining the efficacy of control measures. Portable CPCs are capable of measuring lo

calized particle concentrations allowing the assessment of particle releases occurring at various processes and job tasks [Brouwer et al. 2004]. 7.1.5 Surface-area estimation Information about the relationship between different measurement metrics can be used for approximating particle surface area. If the size distribution of an aerosol remains consistent, the relationship between particle number, surface area, and mass metrics will be constant. In particular, mass concentra

tion measurements can be used for deriving surface-area concentrations, assuming the constant of proportionality is known. This constant is the specific surface area (surface to mass ratio). Size distribution measurements may be ob

tained through the collection of filter samples and analysis by transmission electron mi

croscopy to estimate particle surface area. If the measurements are weighted by particle number, information about particle geom

etry will be needed to estimate the surface area of particles with a given diameter. If the measurements are weighted by mass, ad

ditional information about particle density will be required. Estimates of particle-specific surface area from geometric relation with ex

ternal particle dimensions depends upon the morphology regime of the material of inter

est and is only appropriate for smooth, regu

larly shaped, compact particles [Stefaniak et al. 2003; Weibel et al. 2005]. For example, Weibel et al. [2005] report that estimates of ultrafine TiO 2 surface area determined using a geomet

ric relationship with the physical particle size7 Exposure Assessment and Characterization

Approaches to Safe Nanotechnology 31 7 Exposure Assessment and Characterization (using TEM) were 50% lower than measured using nitrogen gas adsorption. If the airborne aerosol has a lognormal size distribution, particle surface-area concen

tration can be derived using three indepen

dent measurements. An approach has been proposed using three simultaneous mea

surements of the aerosol that included mass concentration, number concentration, and charge [Woo et al. 2001]. With knowledge of the response function of each instrument, minimization techniques can be used to es

timate the parameters of the lognormal dis

tribution leading to the three measurements used in estimating the particle surface area. An alternative approach has been proposed whereby independent measurements of par

ticle number and mass concentration are made, and the surface area is estimated by as

suming the geometric standard deviation of the (assumed) lognormal distribution [May

nard 2003]. This method has the advantage of simplicity by relying on portable instruments that can be used in the workplace. Theoreti

cal calculations have shown that estimates may be up to a factor of 10 different from the actual particle surface area, particularly when the aerosol has a bimodal distribution. Field measurements indicate that estimates are within a factor of 3 of the active surface area, particularly at higher concentrations.In workplace environments, particle surfacearea concentrations can be expected to spanup to 5 orders of magnitude; thus, surfacearea estimates may be suited for initial or preliminary appraisals of occupational expo

sure concentrations. Although such estimation methods are un

likely to become a long-term alternative to more accurate methods, they may provide a viable interim approach to estimating the surface area of nanoscale particles in the absence of precise measurement data. Ad

ditional research is needed on comparing methods used for estimating particle surfacearea with a more accurate particle surfacearea-measurement method. NIOSH is con

ducting research in this area and will com

municate results as they become available. 7.1.6 Particle number concentration mapping To better understand particle sources and contaminant migration, some investigators have adopted an aerosol mapping technique, which integrated measurements of respi

rable mass, ultrafine particle number, and active surface-area concentrations in auto

motive manufacturing facilities [Peters et al. 2006; Heitbrink et al. 2007, 2008; Evans et al. 2008]. The process relies on portable aerosol sampling instrumentation for simultaneous measurements at predetermined positions throughout a facility. The technique is some

what measurement-intensive but is useful for locating contaminant sources and deter

mining the extent of contaminant migration. Leaks and other less obvious particle sources have been identified in this way and the pro

cedure provides a powerful tool for facil

ity staff to target their contaminant control approaches most effectively. This technique relies on successive measurements at various locations, making facilities with continuous processes or those likely to achieve steady state particle number concentrations most appropriate for this approach. The approach is less successful for facilities with batch pro

cesses or those likely to experience rapid con

centration changes as, depending on where in the measurement cycle the release occurs, it may be overlooked. A high degree of vari

ability between mapping events is expected in32 Approaches to Safe Nanotechnology 7 Exposure Assessment and Characterization 7 Exposure Assessment and Characterization facilities where sporadic or batch processing occurs. 

### 7.2 Sampling Strategy Currently, there is not one sampling method that can be used to characterize exposure to nanoscale aerosols. Therefore, any attempt to characterize workplace exposure to nanoma

terials must involve a multifaceted approach incorporating many of the sampling tech

niques mentioned above. Brouwer et al. [2004] recommend that all relevant characteristics of nanomaterial exposure be measured, and a sampling strategy similar to theirs would pro

vide a reasonable approach to characterizing workplace exposure. NIOSH has developed the Nanoparticle Emission Assessment Tech

nique (NEAT) to qualitatively determine the release of engineered nanomaterials in the workplace (see Appendix). This approach may be helpful to others for the initial evaluation of workplaces where engineered nanomaterials are manufactured or used. If material release is found and if resources allow, then a more comprehensive and quantitative approach may be adopted [ Methner et al. 2007 ]. The first step to characterizing workplace ex

posures would involve identifying the source of nanomaterial emissions. A CPC used in parallel with an OPC provides acceptable capability for this purpose. It is critical to determine ambient or background particle counts before measuring particle counts during the manufacturing, processing, or handling of engineered nanomaterials. However, investigators need to be aware that background nanoscale particle counts can vary both spatially and temporally depend

ing on the unique conditions of the work

place. Subtraction of background nanoscale particle counts will be most challenging in these situations. In cases where nanomaterial handling or processing operations contrib

ute only small elevations in particle counts, it may not be possible to adequately charac

terize these increases, particularly if the back

ground particle count is relatively high. If nanomaterials are detected in the pro

cess area at elevated concentrations rela

tive to background particle number con

centrations, then a pair of filter-based, area air samples should be collected for particle analysis via transmission electron micros

copy (TEM) and for determining mass con

centration. Transmission electron microsTransmission electron micros copy can provide an estimate of the particle size distribution and, if equipped with an energy dispersive X-ray analyzer (EDS), a determination of elemental composition

Figure 7–2. Photomicrographs of airborne engineered nanomaterials ( airborne samples of engineered nanoparticles of silver, nickel, and MWCNT analyzed by TEM and EDS)7 Exposure Assessment and Characterization

Approaches to Safe Nanotechnology 33 7 Exposure Assessment and Characterization can be made to identify the nanomaterial (see Figure 7–2). Analysis of filters for mass determination of air contaminants of interest can help identify the source of the particles. Standard analyti

cal chemical methodologies (e.g., NMAM 5040 for carbon, NMAM 7303 for metals) should be employed [NIOSH 1994]. The combination of particle counters and samples for chemical analysis allows for an assessment of worker exposure to nanoma

terials (see Figure 7–3) and the characteriza

tion of the important aerosol metrics. How

ever, since this approach relies primarily on static or area sampling, some uncertainty will exist in estimating worker exposures. Figure 7–3. Combined use of the OPC, CPC, and two filter samples to determine the presence of nanomaterialsApproaches to Safe Nanotechnology 35 Engineered nanomaterials are diverse in their physical, chemical, and biological na

ture. The processes used in research, ma

terial development, production, and use or introduction of nanomaterials have the potential to vary greatly. Until further in
formation on the possible health risks and extent of occupational exposure to nano
materials becomes available, interim pro
tective measures should be developed and implemented. These measures should focus on the development of engineering controls and safe working practices tailored to the specific processes and materials where work

ers might be exposed. Hazard information that is available about common materials being manufactured in the nanoscale range (e.g., TiO 2 , beryllium) should be considered as a starting point in developing appropriate controls and work practices. The following recommendations are de

signed to aid in the assessment and control of workplace exposures to engineered nano

materials. Using a hazard-based approach to evaluate exposures and for developing pre

cautionary measures is consistent with good occupational safety and health practices [The Royal Society and The Royal Academy of Engineering 2004; Schulte et al. 2008]. 

### 8.1 Potential for Occupational Exposure Few workplace measurement data exist on airborne exposure to nanomaterials that are purposely produced and not incidental to an industrial process. In general, it is likely that processes generating nanomaterials in the gas phase (after removal of the nanomaterial from an enclosed generation system), or us

ing or producing nanomaterials as powders or slurries/suspensions/solutions (i.e., in liq

uid media), pose the greatest risk for releas

ing nanoparticles. In addition, maintenance on production systems (including cleaning and disposing of materials from dust collec
tion systems) is likely to result in exposure to nanoparticles if deposited nanomateri
als are disturbed. Exposures associated with waste streams containing nanomaterials may also occur. The magnitude of exposure to nanomaterials when working with nanopowders depends on the likelihood of particles being released from the powders during handling. NIOSH is actively conducting research to quantita

tively determine how various nanomaterials are dispersed in the workplace. Studies on exposure to SWCNTs and MWCNTs have in

dicated that the raw material may release vis

ible particles into the air when handled, that the particle size of the agglomerate can be a few millimeters in diameter, and that the re

lease rate of inhalable and respirable particles is relatively low (on a mass or number basis) compared with other nanopowders. May

nard et al. [2004] reported concentrations of respirable dust from 0.007 to 0.053 mg/ m 3 when energy was applied (vortexing) to bulk SWCNT for approximately 30 minutes. Similar findings were reported by Han et al. [2008] at a laboratory producing MWCNTs in which exposure concentrations as high as 0.4 mg/ m 3 were observed prior to the imple

mentation of exposure controls. In a health hazard evaluation conducted by NIOSH at a 

## Guidelines for Working with Engineered Nanomaterials 

# 836 Approaches to Safe Nanotechnology 8 Guidelines for Working with Engineered Nanomaterials 8 Guidelines for Working with Engineered Nanomaterials university-based research laboratory the po

tential release of airborne carbon nanotubes (CNFs) was observed at various processes [Methner et al. 2007]. General area exposure measurements indicated slight increases in airborne particle number and mass concen

trations relative to background measure

ments during the transfer of CNFs prior to weighing and mixing, and during wet saw cutting of a composite material. Since data are lacking on the generation of inhalable/ respirable particles during the production and use of engineered nanomaterials, fur

ther research is required to determine ex

posures under various conditions. NIOSH researchers are conducting both laboratory and field-based evaluations in order to ad

dress some of these knowledge gaps. Devices comprised of nanostructures, such as integrated circuits, pose a minimal risk of exposure to nanomaterials during han

dling. However, some of the processes used in their production may lead to exposure to nanomaterials (e.g., exposure to com

mercial polishing compounds that contain nanoscale particles, exposure to nanoscale particles that are inadvertently dispersed or created during the manufacturing and han

dling processes). Likewise, large-scale com

ponents formed from nanocomposites will most likely not present significant exposure potential. However, if such materials are used or handled in such a manner that can generate nanoparticles (e.g., cutting, grind

ing) or undergo degradation processes that lead to the release of nanostructured mate

rial, then exposure may occur by the inhala

tion, ingestion, and/or dermal penetration of these particles. 

### 8.2 Factors Affecting Exposure to Nanomaterials Factors affecting exposure to engineered nanomaterials include the amount of mate
rial being used and whether the material can be easily dispersed (in the case of a powder) or form airborne sprays or droplets (in the case of suspensions). The degree of contain

ment and duration of use will also influence exposure. In the case of airborne material, particle or droplet size will determine wheth

er the material can enter the respiratory tract and where it is most likely to deposit. Respi

rable particles are those capable of depositing in the alveolar (gas exchange) region of the lungs, which includes particles smaller than approximately 10 μ m in diameter [Lippmann 1977; ICRP 1994; ISO 1995]. The proportion of inhaled nanoparticles likely to deposit in any region of the human respiratory tract is approximately 30%–90% depending on fac

tors such as breathing rate and particle size. Up to 50% of nanoparticles in the 10–100 nm size range may deposit in the alveolar region, while nanoparticles smaller than 10 nm are more likely to deposit in the head and tho

racic regions [ICRP 1994]. The mass deposi
tion fraction of inhaled nanoparticles in the gas-exchange region of the lungs is greater than that for larger respirable particles. At present there is insufficient information to predict all of the situations and workplace scenarios that are likely to lead to exposure to nanomaterials. However, there are some workplace factors that can increase the po

tential for exposure: working with nanomaterials in liquid 

## • media without adequate protection (e.g., gloves) working with nanomaterials in liquid 

## • during pouring or mixing operations8 Guidelines for Working with Engineered Nanomaterials

Approaches to Safe Nanotechnology 37 8 Guidelines for Working with Engineered Nanomaterials or where a high degree of agitation is involved generating nanomaterials in the gas phase 

## • in non-enclosed systems handling (e.g., weighing, blending, spray



## • ing) powders of nanostructured materials maintenance on equipment and process



## • es used to produce or fabricate nanoma

terials cleaning up spills or waste material 

## • cleaning dust collection systems used 

## • to capture nanoparticles machining, sanding, drilling of nano



## • materials, or other mechanical disrup

tions of nanomaterials can potentially lead to the aerosolization of nanopar

ticles. 

### 8.3 Elements of a Risk Management Program Given the limited information about the health risks associated with occupational exposure to engineered nanomaterials, ap

propriate steps should be taken to minimize the risk of worker exposure through the implementation of a risk management pro

gram [Schulte et al. 2008]. Risk management programs for nanomaterials should be seen as an integral part of an overall occupational safety and health program for any company or workplace producing or using nanomate

rials or nanoenabled products. A critical ele

ment of the program should be the capability to anticipate new and emerging risks (hazard determination) and whether they are linked to changes in the manufacturing process, equipment, or the introduction of new ma

terials. This will require an ongoing assess

ment of the potential risks to workers (risk evaluation) through the systematic collection of job and product information so that de

terminations can be made regarding scenari

os (e.g., laboratory research, production and manufacture, nanoenabled product use) that place the worker in contact with nanomateri

als (see Figure 8–1). This assessment should be an ongoing cyclic process that provides feedback on potential sources of exposure and solutions taken to correct those prob

lems. For example, operations and job tasks that have the potential to aerosolize nanoma

terials (e.g., handling dry powders, spray ap

plications) deserve more attention and more stringent controls than those where the nano

materials are imbedded in solid or liquid ma

trices. Elements of the risk management pro

gram should include guidelines for installing and evaluating engineering controls (e.g., exhaust ventilation, dust collection systems), the education and training of workers in the proper handling of nanomaterials (e.g., good work practices), and the selection and use of personal protective equipment (e.g., cloth

ing, gloves, respirators). When controlling potential exposures within a workplace, NIOSH has recommended a hierarchical approach to reduce worker ex

posures (see Table 8–1) [NIOSH 1990]. The philosophical basis for the hierarchy of con

trols is to eliminate the hazard when possible (i.e., substitute with a less hazardous mate

rial) or, if not feasible, control the hazard at or as close to the source as possible. 8.3.1 Engineering Controls If the potential hazard can not be eliminat

ed or substituted with a less hazardous or non-hazardous substance, then engineer

ing controls should be installed and tai

lored to the process or job task. The type of engineering control used should take into38 Approaches to Safe Nanotechnology 8 Guidelines for Working with Engineered Nanomaterials 8 Guidelines for Working with Engineered Nanomaterials

Figure 8–1. Workplaces with potential for occupational exposure to engineered nanomaterials. The figure illustrates the life cycle of nanomaterials from laboratory research development through product development, use, and disposal. Each step of the life cycle represents opportunities for potential worker exposure to nanomaterials. Adapted from Schulte et al. 2008a.8 Guidelines for Working with Engineered Nanomaterials

Approaches to Safe Nanotechnology 39 8 Guidelines for Working with Engineered Nanomaterials

account information on the potential haz

ardous properties of the precursor materi

als and intermediates as well as those of the resulting nanomaterial. In light of current scientific knowledge about the generation, transport, and capture of aerosols [ Seinfeld and Pandis 1998 ; Hinds 1999 ], airborne exairborne ex posure to nanomaterials can most likely be controlled at most processes and job tasks using a wide variety of engineering control techniques similar to those used in reducing exposures to general aerosols [Ratherman 1996; Burton 1997]. Engineering control techniques such as source enclosure (i.e., isolating the genera

tion source from the worker) and local ex

haust ventilation systems should be effective for capturing airborne nanomaterials, based on what is known of nanomaterial motion and behavior in air (see Figure 8–2). The quantity of the bulk nanomaterial that is synthesized or handled in the manufacture of a product will significantly influence the selection of the exposure controls. Other factors that influence selection of engi

neering controls include the physical form of the nanomaterial and task duration and fre

quency. For instance, working with nanomate

rial in the slurry form in low quantities would require a less rigorous control system than those that would be required for large quan

tities of nanomaterials in a free or fine pow

der form (see Figure 8–3). Unless cutting or grinding occurs, nanomaterials that are not in free form (encapsulated in a solid, nanocom

posites, and surface coated materials) typically wouldn’t require engineering controls. Handling research quantities typically oc

curs in laboratories with ventilation con

trols. Since quantities are small, local con

tainment and control can be applied, such as low-flow vented work stations and small glove box chambers. However, as quantities are increased, care must be taken to reduce the amount of nanomaterial that is released from the process equipment and to pre

vent the migration of nanomaterials into adjacent rooms or areas. For example, the installation of local exhaust ventilation at a Table 8–1. Hierarchy of exposure controls* Control method Process, equipment, or job task 1. Elimination Change design to eliminate hazard 2. Substitution Replace a high hazard for a low hazard 3. Engineering Isolation/enclosure, ventilation (local, general) 4. Administrative Procedures, policies, shift design 5. Personal protective equipment Respirators, clothing, gloves, goggles, ear plugs *Control methods are typically implemented in this order to limit worker exposures to an acceptable

concentration (e.g., occupational exposure limit or other pre-established limit). Sources: Plog et al. 2002; NIOSH 1990.40 Approaches to Safe Nanotechnology 8 Guidelines for Working with Engineered Nanomaterials 8 Guidelines for Working with Engineered Nanomaterials

reactor used to make nanoscale engineered metal oxides and metals was found to re

duce nanoparticle exposures by 96% (mean particle number concentration) [Methner 2008]. The use of exhaust ventilation sys

tems should be designed, tested, and main

tained using approaches recommended by the American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists [ACGIH 2001]. A secondary but nonetheless important issue concerning the control of nanopar

ticle emissions is that of product loss. The properties of nanomaterials, along with the unique methods that may be employed for producing them, may mean that traditional exhaust ventilation may be more energetic than necessary for removing incidentally released nanoscale particles. For this rea

son, engineering controls need to be applied judiciously to ensure protection of workers without compromising production. 8.3.2 Dust collection efficiency of filtersCurrent knowledge indicates that a welldesigned exhaust ventilation system with a Figure 8–2. Exposure control of particles (illustration of how particle diameter-related diffusion and inertia influence particle capture efficiency in a ventilation system). Particles with a diameter of 200–300 nm have minimal diffusion and inertial properties and are easily transported by moving air and captured. Particle motion by diffusion increasingly dominates as particle diameter decreases below 200 nm. The inertial behavior of larger particles, especially those ejected from energetic processes such as grinding, increases significantly with particle diameter, enabling them to cross the streamlines of moving air and avoid capture. Adapted from Schulte et al. 2008a.8 Guidelines for Working with Engineered Nanomaterials

Figure 8–3. Factors infl uencing control selection. Several factors infl uence the selection of exposure controls for nanomaterials including quantity of nanomaterial handled or produced, physical form, and task duration. As each one of theses variables increase, exposure risk becomes greater as does the need for more efficient exposure control measures.HEPA filter should effectively remove nanoparticles [Hinds 1999]. Limited studies have reported the effi cacy of fi lter media typicallyfound in control systems (including respirators) in capturing nanoparticles. The dearth of data on fi ltration performance against nanoparticles (in particular nanoparticles smaller than 20 nm) is primarily due to the challenges in generating and quantifying particles in those size ranges. Despite these limitations, the results of some studies [Van Osdell et al. 1990] using different filter media challenged with monodispersed aerosols (silver 4–10 nm and dioctylphthalate 32–420 nm) were in agreement with classical single-fi ber theory showing an increase in filtration effi cacy for smaller size particles. No evidence for particle thermal rebound was observed. Similar results have been recently reported by Kim et al. [2007] using different fi lter media challenged with particles ranging in size from 2.5–20 nm, indicating that other fi lter medias—including those used in air purifying respirators—would behave similarly.If HEPA filters are used in the dust collection system, they should be coupled with well-designed fi lter housings. If the fi lter is improperly seated within the housing, nanoparticles have the potential to bypass the fi lter, leading to fi lter effi ciencies much less than predicted [NIOSH 2003]. 8.3.3 Work practices An integral step in establishing good work practices is having knowledge of the potential Approaches to Safe Nanotechnology 4142 Approaches to Safe Nanotechnology 8 Guidelines for Working with Engineered Nanomaterials 8 Guidelines for Working with Engineered Nanomaterials hazards in the workplace and developing formal procedures that describe actions to be taken to ensure the protection of workers. Incorporated in these procedures should be guidelines for good work practices intended to minimize worker exposure to nanomate

rials and other potentially hazardous chem

icals. Management should systemically re

view and update these procedures. Actions taken to resolve and/or improve workplace conditions should be routinely conveyed by management to workers.

Good practices for management Educating workers on the safe han



## • dling of engineered nano-objects or nano-object-containing materials to minimize the likelihood of inhalation exposure and skin contact. Providing information, as needed, on 

## • the hazardous properties of the precur

sor materials and those of the resulting nanomaterials product with instruc

tion on measures to prevent exposure.Encouraging workers to use hand

## • washing facilities before eating, smok

ing, or leaving the worksite. Providing additional control measures 

## • (e.g., use of a buffer area, decontamina

tion facilities for workers if warranted by the hazard) to ensure that engineered nanomaterials are not transported out

side the work area [US DOE 2007]. Providing facilities for showering and 

## • changing clothes to prevent the inad

vertent contamination of other areas (including take-home) caused by the transfer of nanomaterials on clothing and skin. Good practices for workers Avoiding handling nanomaterials in 

## • the open air in a ‘free particle” state. Storing dispersible nanomaterials, wheth



## • er suspended in liquids or in a dry particle form in closed (tightly sealed) containers whenever possible. Cleaning work areas at the end of each 

## • work shift, at a minimum, using either a HEPA-filtered vacuum cleaner or wet wiping methods. Dry sweeping or air hoses should not be used to clean work areas. Cleanup should be conducted in a manner that prevents worker contact with wastes. Disposal of all waste mate

rial should comply with all applicable Federal, State, and local regulations. Avoiding storing and consuming food 

## • or beverages in workplaces where nano

materials are handled. 8.3.4 Personal protective clothing Currently, there are no generally acceptable guidelines available based on scientific data for the selection of protective clothing or other apparel against exposure to nanoma

terials. This is due in part to minimal data being available on the efficacy of existing protective clothing, including gloves. In any case, although nanoparticles may penetrate the epidermis, there has been little evidence to suggest that penetration leads to disease; and no dermal exposure standards have been proposed. However, based on a recent survey of nanotechnology workplaces [ICON 2006], 84% of employers recommended personal protective equipment and clothing for em

ployees working with nanomaterials. These recommendations were generally based on conventional occupational hygiene practices8 Guidelines for Working with Engineered Nanomaterials

Approaches to Safe Nanotechnology 43 8 Guidelines for Working with Engineered Nanomaterials but also varied with the size of the company, the type of nanomaterials being handled, and the commercial sector. While some guide

lines on the use of protective clothing and gloves have been developed by organizations for use in their own laboratories (e.g., US DOE 2007) or countries (e.g., British Stan

dards Institute BSI 2008) or by consensus standards development organizations (e.g., ASTM, 2007), these are generally based upon good industrial hygiene practices rather than scientific data specific to nanomaterials. A challenge to making appropriate recom

mendations for dermal protection against nanoparticles is the need to strike a balance between comfort and protection. Garments that provide the highest level of protection (e.g., an impermeable Level A suit) are also the least comfortable to wear for long peri

ods of time, while garments that are probably the least protective (e.g., thin cotton lab coat) are the most breathable and comfortable for employees to wear. The two primary routes of exposure to particulates for workers us

ing protective clothing are direct penetration through the materials and leakage through gaps, seams, defects, and interface and clo

sure areas [Schneider et al. 1999, 2000]. The relative contributions from these two inward leakage sources are not well-understood. NIOSH has an active research program de

signed to assess the efficacy of barrier materi

als and ensembles for protection against par

ticulate hazards, including nanoparticles. The lack of available data is further compli

cated by the limitations and difficulties of current test methods, which fall into two ba

sic categories: penetration tests on material swatches to determine barrier efficiency and system-level aerosol testing to determine product ensemble integrity. The former are usually bench-scale testing methods, while the latter require an exposure chamber that is large enough for at least one human test subject or mannequin. Chamber design re

quirements for system level aerosol testing have been reviewed by Gao et al. [2007]. Little scientific data exists, but some systems level test methods are available. ISO standard method 13982 [ISO 2004a] and EN stan

dard method 943 [CEN 2002] specify the use of sodium chloride (NaCl) with a mass median aerodynamic diameter (MMAD) of 0.6 μ m to determine the barrier efficiency of protective clothing against aerosols of dry, fine dusts. The standard method issued by National Fire Protection Association [2007] is a method that is not dependent on filtra

tion-based approaches. Penetration of fluo

rophore-impregnated silica particles with a MMAD of 2.5 μ m and a geometric standard deviation of 2.6 are qualitatively visualized by black light that causes the fluorescent glow of the challenge aerosol particles. Note that the polydisperse particle challenges used in these methods include a large num

ber of nanoscale particles when measured by count rather than by mass. Particle penetration test methods can be fur

ther categorized into those that are analogous to the process used in respirator filter testing and those that are not dependent on filtra

tion-based approaches. Test methods that in

volve measuring aerosol concentrations us

ing a sampling flow rate do not mimic in-situ situations because the skin does not “breathe.” Standardized methodology is needed that is not dependent on filtration-based approaches for examining the overall barrier-effectiveness of the full protective clothing ensemble for dif

ferent materials to particulate hazards. In this respect, NIOSH has presented preliminary re

sults [Wang and Gao 2007] on development of a magnetic passive aerosol sampler for more accurate determination of particle penetration44 Approaches to Safe Nanotechnology 8 Guidelines for Working with Engineered Nanomaterials 8 Guidelines for Working with Engineered Nanomaterials through protective clothing. NIOSH is con

ducting research in this area and will commu

nicate results as they become available. The bulk of the penetration data available on clothing has been done with filtration based testing. One study found that pen

etration levels of 30–2,000-nm-sized potas

sium chloride particles through an uniden

tified military garment ranged from about 20%–60%, with the maximum penetration occurring in the range of 100–400 nm [Ho

facre 2006]. Another group of researchers studied the barrier efficiency of 10 uniden

tified fabric samples (woven, non-woven, and laminated fabrics) using 477-nm-sized latex spheres at a flow rate of 1.8 cm/second [Shavlev et al. 2000]. Particle penetration measurements ranged from 0%–54%, with three of the fabrics exhibiting a measurable pressure drop and having penetration lev

els less than 1%. In general, these findings suggest that increased external air pressure (e.g., from wind) results in increased particle penetrations. Thus, only impermeable bar

rier materials are likely to provide complete barrier protection against aerosol penetra

tion. Body movement (i.e., bellows effect) can also impact penetration [Bergman et al. 1989]. NIOSH will theoretically and empir

ically investigate wind-driven nanoparticle penetration through protective clothing in an attempt to obtain a predictive model based upon single-fiber theory. Results will be communicated as they become available. Another widely used test method incor

porates testing with nanoscale particles in solution, and therefore also provides some indication of the effectiveness of protective clothing to nanoparticles. ASTM standard F1671–03 [ASTM 2003] and ISO standard 16604 [ISO 2004b] specify the use of a 27-nm bacteriophage to evaluate the resistance of materials used in protective clothing from the penetration of blood-borne pathogens. One study [Edlich et al. 1999] evaluated the integrity of powder-free examination gloves and found that no bacteriophage penetra

tion was detected for powder-free nitrile gloves, powder-free latex gloves, nor polyvi

nyl chloride synthetic gloves. Based upon the uncertainty of the health ef

fects of dermal exposure to nanoparticles, it is prudent to consider using protective equip

ment, clothing, and gloves to minimize der

mal exposure, with particular attention given to preventing exposure of nanomaterials to abraded or lacerated skin. Until scientific data exist specific to the performance of protec

tive clothing and gloves against nanomateri

als, current industrial hygiene best practices should be followed. 8.3.5 Respirators The use of respirators is often required when engineering and administrative controls do not adequately keep worker exposures to an airborne contaminant below a regula

tory limit or an internal control target. Cur

rently, there are no specific exposure limits in the United States for airborne exposures to engineered nanomaterials although oc

cupational exposure limits and guidelines exist for airborne particles of similar chemi

cal composition regardless of particle size. Current scientific evidence indicates that nanoparticles may be more biologically re

active than larger particles of similar chemi

cal composition and thus may pose a greater health risk when inhaled. In determining the need for respirators, it would therefore be prudent to consider current exposure lim

its or guidelines (e.g., OSHA PELs, NIOSH RELs, ACGIH TLVs) for larger particles of similar composition, existing toxicologic8 Guidelines for Working with Engineered Nanomaterials

Approaches to Safe Nanotechnology 45 8 Guidelines for Working with Engineered Nanomaterials data on the specific nanoparticle, and the likelihood of worker exposure (e.g., airborne concentration, time exposed, job task). The decision to institute respiratory pro

tection should be based on a combination of professional judgment and the results of the hazard assessment and risk manage

ment practices recommended in this docu

ment. The effectiveness of administrative, work-practice, and engineering controls can be evaluated using the measurement techniques described in Chapter 7 Expo

sure Assessments and Characterization. If worker exposure to airborne nanomaterials remains a concern after instituting control measures, the use of respirators can provide further worker protection. Several classes of respirators exist that can provide different levels of protection when properly fit tested on the worker. Table 8–2 lists various types of particulate respirators that can be used; information is also provided on the level of exposure reduction that can be expected along with the advantages and disadvantages of each respirator type. To assist respirator users, NIOSH has published the document NIOSH Respirator Selection Logic (RSL) that provides a process that respirator program administrators can use to select appropriate respirators [NIOSH 2004] (see www.cdc. gov/niosh/docs/2005-100/default.html ). As new toxicity data for individual nanomate

rials become available, NIOSH will review the data and make recommendations for respirator protection. When respirators are required for use in the workplace, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) respiratory protection standard [29 CFR 1910.134] re

quires that a respiratory program be estab

lished that includes the following program elements: ( 1 ) an evaluation of the worker’s ability to perform the work while wearing a respirator, ( 2 ) regular training of person

nel, ( 3 ) periodic environmental monitoring, ( 4 ) respirator fit testing, and ( 5 ) respira

tor maintenance, inspection, cleaning, and storage. The standard also requires that the selection of respirators be made by a person knowledgeable about the workplace and the limitations associated with each type of res

pirator. OSHA has also issued guidelines for employers who choose to establish the vol

untary use of respirators [29 CFR 1910.134 Appendix D]. Table 8–2 lists the NIOSH assigned pro

tection factors (APF) for various classes of respirators. The APF is defined as the mini

mum anticipated protection provided by a properly functioning respirator or class of respirators to a given percentage of prop

erly fitted and trained users. The APF values developed by NIOSH are based in part on laboratory studies and take into consider

ation a variety of factors including the in

ward leakage caused by penetration through the filter and leakage around the respirator face seal. The relative contributions of these two sources of inward leakage are critical because for many applications the predomi

nant source of exposure to the respirator wearer results from leakage around the face seal (due to a poor fit) and not penetration directly through the filter media. In 2006, OSHA published updated APF values that supersede the NIOSH APF values [Federal Register 2006]. In general there is good agreement between the NIOSH and OSHA APF values, but management should con

sult the OSHA standard prior to using the values in Table 8–2 directly. NIOSH is not aware of any data specific to respirator face seal leakage of nanopar

ticles. However, numerous studies have46 Approaches to Safe Nanotechnology 8 Guidelines for Working with Engineered Nanomaterials 8 Guidelines for Working with Engineered Nanomaterials been conducted on larger particles and on gases/vapors with one total inward leakage (TIL) study that used nanoparticles. For ex

ample, work done by researchers at the U.S. Army RDECOM on a head-form showed that mask leakage (i.e., simulated respira

tor fit factor) measured using submicron aerosol challenges (0.72 μ m polystyrene latex spheres) was representative of vapor challenges such as sulfur hexafluoride (SF 6 ) and isoamyl acetate (IAA) [Gardner et al. 2004]. Other studies using particles larger than 100 nm have shown that face seal leak

age can be affected by particle size, howev

er, the impact of this is still the subject of some debate. A recently completed labora

tory study to measure TIL protection fac

tors of four NIOSH certified N95 filtering facepiece respirator models donned by hu

man test subjects exposed to 40–1,300 nm particles found that the minimal protection factors were observed for particles between 80–200 nm [Lee 2008]. The geometric mean of the protection factors for all four models across all particle sizes tested was 21.5; but wide model-to-model variation was ob

served. NIOSH is conducting a laboratory study to determine whether nanoparticle face seal leakage is consistent with the leak

age observed for larger particles and gases/ vapors. Results will be communicated as they become available. NIOSH certifies respirators in accordance with 42 CFR Part 84. As noted earlier, the NIOSH RSL contains a process for select

ing respirators for protection against par

ticular hazards. The two respirator classes (air purifying respirators and powered air purifying respirators) most commonly used for protection against particulates use filter media to collect/trap particles before they reach the user’s breathing zone. Among the various test methods and criteria NIOSH uses as part of the certification process, respirator filter performance testing is the one most affected by the particle size. Since respirator users are exposed to a variety of hazards in different scenarios, respirator certification filtration testing was designed to use worst-case test conditions (e.g., dif

ferent particle sizes and flow rates), so that filter performance in the workplace would not be worse. The NIOSH certification test for N-designated respirators uses a polydis

perse distribution of NaCl particles with a count median diameter (CMD) of 0.075 +/- 0.020 μ m and a geometric standard de

viation (GSD) of less than 1.86 [NIOSH 2005a]. NIOSH tests R- and P-designated respirators using a polydispersal of dioctyl phthalate (DOP) particles with a CMD of 0.185 +/- 0.020 μ m and a GSD of less than 1.60 [NIOSH 2005b]. For the lognormal distribution of NaCl aerosols used in the N series certification test, a broad range of particle sizes (e.g., 95% of the particles lie in the range of 22–259 nm) with a MMD of about 240 nm is used to determine whether the respirator filter performance is at least 95, 99, or 99.97% efficient. Most of the par

ticles penetrating through the filter are mea

sured simultaneously using a forward light scattering photometer. However, as noted in a recent review, the instrumentation used in the NIOSH certification test is not capable of measuring the light scattering of all parti

cles less than 100 nm [Eninger et al. 2008a]. Particles larger than 0.3 μ m are collected most efficiently by impaction, interception, and gravitational settling, while particles smaller than 0.3 μ m are collected most ef

ficiently by diffusion or electrostatic attrac

tion [Hinds 1999]. In the development of the test method used for respirator certifi

cation, penetration by particles with an ap

proximate 0.3 μ m diameter was considered8 Guidelines for Working with Engineered Nanomaterials

Approaches to Safe Nanotechnology 47 8 Guidelines for Working with Engineered Nanomaterials to be the worst case because these particles were considered to be in the range of the most penetrating particle size [Stevens and Moyer 1989; TSI 2005; NIOSH 1996 ]. How

ever, in practice, the most penetrating parti

cle size range (MPPS) for a given respirator can vary based on the type of filter media employed and the condition of the respira

tor. For example, the most penetrating par

ticle size for N95 air purifying respirators containing electrostatically charged filter media can range from 50–100 nm [Martin and Moyer 2000; Richardson et al. 2005] to 30–70 nm [Balazy et al. 2006; Eninger et al. 2008b]. These test results were recently con

firmed by NIOSH [Rengasamy et al. 2007] in which five different models of respirators with N95 filters were challenged with 11 dif

ferent monodisperse NaCl particles ranging in size from 20–400 nm. The monodisperse aerosol penetrations showed that the MPPS was in the 40-nm range for all respirator models tested. Under the aggressive labora

tory test conditions employed in the study, mean penetration levels for 40-nm particles ranged from 1.4%–5.2%, which suggested that the respirators would be effective at capturing nanoparticles in the workplace. The NIOSH study also investigated whether there was a correlation between filtration performance using the existing NIOSH certification protocol for N series air puri

fying respirators and the filtration perfor

mance against monodisperse particles at the MPPS. A good correlation (r = 0.95) was found (e.g., respirators that performed bet

ter using the NIOSH certification test also had higher filter efficiencies against mono

disperse 40-nm nanoparticles), which is not surprising given that changes in filtration performance follow a consistent trend as a function of particle size. According to single fiber filtration theory, below the most penetrating particle size, filtration efficiency will increase as particle size decreases. This trend will continue until the particles are so small that they behave like vapor molecules. As particles approach molecular size, they may be subject to ther

mal rebound effects, in which particles lit

erally bounce through a filter. As a result, particle penetration will increase. The exact size at which thermal rebound will occur is unclear. However, a study by Heim et al. [2005] found that there was no discernable deviation from classical single-fiber theory for particles as small as 2.5-nm diameter. Subsequently, a NIOSH-funded contract with the University of Minnesota [Kim et al. 2007; Pui et al. 2006] and another study [Kim et al. 2006] showed that the penetra

tion of nanoparticles through fibrous filter media decreased down to 2.5 nm as expect
ed by the single fiber filtration theory. Ther

mal rebound phenomena were observed for nanoparticles below 2 nm diameter [Kim et al. 2006]. Recent studies provide addi

tional data on nanoparticle penetration for NIOSH certified N95 and P100 filter

ing face-piece respirators [Rengasamy et al. 2008a], NIOSH certified N95 and Europe

an Certified FFP1 respirators [Huang et al. 2007], and FFP3 filter media [Golanski et al. 2008] using particles greater than 4 nm. Based on these preliminary findings, NIOSH-certified respirators should provide the expected levels of protection if properly selected and fit tested as part of a complete respiratory protection program. However, as noted elsewhere [Rengsamy et al. 2007], in the unlikely event that the workplace ex

posure consists of a large percentage of par

ticles in the most penetrating particle size range, management should take this infor

mation into account during the respirator48 Approaches to Safe Nanotechnology 8 Guidelines for Working with Engineered Nanomaterials 8 Guidelines for Working with Engineered Nanomaterials selection process, perhaps by choosing a res

pirator with higher levels of filtration per

formance (e.g., changing from an N95 to a P100, even though the APF will remain the same) as suggested by OSHA [Federal Reg

ister 2006] or by selecting a respirator with a higher APF (e.g., full face-piece respirator or powered air purifying respirator). Dust masks, commercially available at hardware/ home improvement stores, are often con

fused with NIOSH approved N95 filtering facepiece respirators because of their simi

lar appearance. However, dust masks are not respirators and are not approved by NIOSH for respiratory protection. One study found that penetration of 40-nm NaCl nanopar

ticles range from 4.3%–81.6% for the seven dust mask models studied [Rengasamy et al. 2008b]. Dust masks should not be used in place of NIOSH-approved respirators for protection against nanoparticles
. NIOSH is continuing to study the pro

tection afforded by NIOSH-certified res

pirators against emerging hazards such as engineered nanomaterials—including workplace- protection-factor studies—to en

sure they provide expected levels of protec

tion. NIOSH is also committed to updating 42 CFR Part 84—the regulatory language that provides NIOSH the authority to cer

tify the performance of respirators in the United States—using a modular approach to rulemaking. Recently, NIOSH proposed the use of a TIL test as part of the respira

tor certification process for half-mask air purifying particulate respirators, includ

ing those having elastomeric and filtering face-pieces. The test protocol used to obtain benchmark TIL data for 101 half-face piece respirator models used 40–60 nm size am

bient nanoparticles [NIOSH 2007]. Once implemented as part of the NIOSH certifi

cation process, the TIL tests should result in half-mask respirators with increased fitting performance. Future rulemaking activities may also include revisions to the filtration test to reflect changes in filtration perfor

mance resulting from use of new technolo

gies (e.g., electret filter media). Results will be communicated as they become available. 8.3.6 Cleanup and disposal of nanomaterials No specific guidance is currently available on cleaning up nanomaterial spills or contamina

tion on surfaces; however, recommendations developed in the pharmaceutical industry for the handling and cleanup of pharmaceutical compounds might be applicable to worksites where engineered nanomaterials are manu

factured or used [Wood 2001]. Until relevant information is available, it would be prudent to base strategies for dealing with spills and contaminated surfaces on current good prac

tices, together with available information on exposure risks including the relative impor

tance of different exposure routes. Standard approaches for cleaning powder spills in

clude using HEPA-filtered vacuum cleaners, or wiping up the powder using damp cloths or wetting the powder prior to dry wiping. Liquid spills are typically cleaned by applying absorbent materials/liquid traps. Damp cleaning methods with soaps or cleaning oils are preferred. Cleaning cloths should be properly disposed. Use of com

mercially available wet or electrostatic mi

crofiber cleaning cloths may also be effective in removing particles from surfaces with minimal dispersion into the air. Drying and reusing contaminated cloths can result in re-dispersion of particles. Energetic cleaning methods such as dry sweeping or the using of compressed air8 Guidelines for Working with Engineered Nanomaterials

Approaches to Safe Nanotechnology 49 8 Guidelines for Working with Engineered Nanomaterials should be avoided or only used with precau

tions that assure that particles suspended by the cleaning action are trapped by HEPA filters. If vacuum cleaning is employed, care should be taken that HEPA filters are installed properly and bags and filters changed accord

ing to manufacturer’s recommendations. While vacuum cleaning may prove to be ef

fective for many applications, the following issues should be considered. Forces of attrac

tion may make it difficult to entrain parti

cles off surfaces with a vacuum cleaner. The electrostatic charge on particles will cause them to be attracted to oppositely charged surfaces and repelled by similarly charged surfaces. A similarly charged vacuum brush or tool may repel particles, making it diffi

cult to capture the aerosol or even causing it to be further dispersed. Vigorous scrub

bing with a vacuum brush or tool or even the friction from high flow rates of material or air on the vacuum hose can generate a charge. The vacuum cleaners recommended for cleaning copier and printer toners have electrostatic-charge-neutralization features to address these issues. When developing procedures for cleaning up nanomaterial spills or contaminated surfaces, consideration should be given to the potential for exposure during cleanup. Inhalation exposure and dermal exposure will likely present the greatest risks. Consid

eration will therefore need to be given to ap

propriate levels of personal protective equip

ment. Inhalation exposure in particular will be influenced by the likelihood of material reaerosolization. In this context, it is likely that a hierarchy of potential exposures will exist, with dusts presenting a greater inha

lation exposure potential than liquids, and liquids in turn presenting a greater poten

tial risk than encapsulated or immobilized nanomaterials and structures. As in the case of any material spill or cleaning of contaminated surfaces, the handling and disposal of the waste material should follow existing federal, state, or local regulations. Table 8–2. Air-purifying particulate respirators
Respirator type NIOSH assigned protection

factor Advantages Disadvantages Filtering facepiece

(disposable) 10

– Lightweight

– No maintenance or cleaning

needed

– No effect on mobility – Provides no eye protection

– Can add to heat burden

– Inward leakage at gaps in face

seal

– Some do not have adjustable

head straps

– Difficult for a user to do a seal

check

– Level of protection varies greatly

among models

– Communication may be difficult (continued)50 Approaches to Safe Nanotechnology 8 Guidelines for Working with Engineered Nanomaterials 8 Guidelines for Working with Engineered Nanomaterials Table 8–2 (Continued). Air-purifying particulate respirators
Respirator type NIOSH assigned protection

factor Advantages Disadvantages Filtering facepiece

(disposable) (continued) – Fit testing required to select proper facepiece size

– Some eyewear may interfere with

the fitElastomeric halffacepiece 10

– Low maintenance

– Reusable facepiece and

replaceable filters and cartridges

– No effect on mobility – Provides no eye protection

– Can add to heat burden

– Inward leakage at gaps in face

seal

– Communication may be difficult

– Fit testing required to select

proper facepiece size

– Some eyewear may interfere with

the fitPowered with loosefitting facepiece 25

– Provides eye protection

– Offers protection for

people with beards, missing dentures or facial scars

– Low breathing resistance

– Flowing air creates cooling

effect

– Face seal leakage is generally

outward

– Fit testing is not required

– Prescription glasses can be

worn

– Communication easier

than with elastomeric halffacepiece or full-facepiece respirators

– Reusable components and

replaceable filters – Added weight of battery and blower

– Awkward for some tasks

– Battery requires charging

– Air flow must be tested with flow

device before use

(continued)8 Guidelines for Working with Engineered Nanomaterials

Approaches to Safe Nanotechnology 51 8 Guidelines for Working with Engineered Nanomaterials Table 8–2 (Continued). Air-purifying particulate respirators
Respirator type NIOSH assigned protection

factor Advantages DisadvantagesElastomeric fullfacepiece with N-100, R-100, or P-100 filters 50

– Provides eye protection

– Low maintenance

– Reusable facepiece and

replaceable filters and cartridges

– No effect on mobility

– More effective face seal than

that of filtering facepiece or elastomeric half-facepiece respirators – Can add to heat burden

– Diminished field-of-vision

compared to half-facepiece –Inward leakage at gaps in face seal –Fit testing required to select

proper facepiece size –Facepiece lens can fog without

nose cup or lens treatment –Spectacle kit needed for people

who wear corrective glassesPowered with tightfitting half-facepiece or full-facepiece 50 –Provides eye protection with full-facepiece –Low breathing resistance –Face seal leakage is generally

outward –Flowing air creates cooling

effect –Reusable components and

replaceable filters –Added weight of battery and blower –Awkward for some tasks–No eye protection with halffacepiece –Fit testing required to select

proper facepiece size –Battery requires charging –Communication may be difficult –Spectacle kit needed for people

who wear corrective glasses with full face-piece respirators –Air flow must be tested with flow

device before useApproaches to Safe Nanotechnology 53 Occupational health surveillance is an essen

tial component of an effective occupational safety and health program. The unique phys

ical and chemical properties of nanomateri

als, the increasing growth of nanotechnology in the workplace, and information suggesting that exposure to some engineered nanomate

rials can cause adverse health effects in labo

ratory animals all support consideration of an occupational health surveillance program for workers potentially exposed to engineered nanomaterials [Schulte et al. 2008a]. Contin

ued evaluation of toxicologic research and workers potentially exposed to engineered nanomaterials is needed to inform NIOSH and other groups regarding the appropriate components of occupational health surveil

lance for nanotechnology workers. NIOSH has developed interim guidance relevant to medical screening (one compo

nent of an occupational health surveillance program) for nanotechnology workers (see NIOSH Current Intelligence Bulletin: In

terim Guidance on Medical Screening and Hazard Surveillance for Workers Potentially Exposed to Engineered Nanoparticles, www. cdc.gov/niosh/review/public/115/). Medical screening is only part of a complete safety and health management program that fol

lows the hierarchy of controls and involves various occupational health surveillance measures. Since specific medical screening of workers exposed to engineered nanoparticles has not been extensively discussed in the sci

entific literature, this document is intended to fill the knowledge gap on an interim basis. Increasing evidence indicates that exposure to some engineered nanoparticles can cause adverse health effects in laboratory animals, but no studies of workers exposed to the few engineered nanoparticles tested in animals have been published. The current body of evidence about the possible health risks of occupational exposure to engineered nano

particles is quite small. Insufficient scien

tific and medical evidence now exists to rec

ommend the specific medical screening of workers potentially exposed to engineered nanoparticles. Nonetheless, the lack of evi

dence on which to recommend specific medical screening does not preclude its con

sideration by employers interested in tak

ing precautions beyond standard industrial hygiene measures [Schulte et al. 2008b]. If medical screening recommendations ex

ist for chemical or bulk materials of which nanoparticles are composed, they would ap

ply to nanoparticles as well. Ongoing research on the hazards of engi

neered nanoparticles is needed along with the continual reassessment of available data to determine whether specific medical screening is warranted for workers who are producing or using nanoparticles. In the meantime, the following recommendations are provided for the management of workplaces where em

ployees may be exposed to engineered nano

particles in the course of their work: Take prudent measure to control work



## • ers’ exposures to nanoparticles. Conduct hazard surveillance as the ba



## • sis for implementing controls. 

## Occupational Health Surveillance 

# 954 Approaches to Safe Nanotechnology 9 Occupational Health Surveillance Continue use of established medical 

## • surveillance approaches. NIOSH will continue to examine new re

search findings and update its recommen

dations about medical screening programs for workers exposed to nanoparticles. Ad

ditionally, NIOSH is seeking comments on the strengths and weaknesses of exposure registries for workers potentially exposed to engineered nanoparticles.9 Occupational Health Surveillance

Approaches to Safe Nanotechnology 55 NIOSH has developed a strategic plan for research on several occupational safety and health aspects of nanotechnology. The plan is available at www.cdc.gov/niosh/topics/ nanotech/strat_plan.html . NIOSH has fo

cused its research efforts in the following 10 critical topic areas to guide in addressing knowledge gaps, developing strategies, and providing recommendations. Exposure Assessment 1. Determine key factors that influence

— the production, dispersion, accumu

lation, and re-entry of nano materials into the workplace. Determine how possible expo

— sures to nanomaterials differ by work process. Assess possible exposure when

— nanomaterials are inhaled or set

tle on the skin. Toxicity and Internal Dose 2. Investigate and determine the

— physical and chemical properties (e.g., size, shape, solubility, sur

face area, oxidant generation po

tential, surface functionalization, surface charge, chemical compo

sition) that influence the poten

tial toxicity of nanomaterials. Determine the deposition pattern

— of nanoparticles in the lung and their translocation to the interstiti

um and to extrapulmonary organs. Evaluate short- and long-term ef

— fects of pulmonary exposure to nanomaterials in various organ systems and tissues (e.g., lungs, brain, cardiovascular). Determine if intratracheal instil

— lation or pharyngeal aspiration can mimic the biological response to inhalation exposure to nano

materials. Determine the dermal effects of

— topical exposure to nano-objects, whether these nano-objects can penetrate into the skin, and whether they can cause immune alterations. Determine the genotoxic and carci

— nogenic potential of nano-objects. Determine biological mechanisms

— for potential toxic effects. Determine whether in vitro screen

— ing tests can be predictive on in vivo response. Create and integrate models to

— help assess potential hazards. Determine whether a measure

— other than mass is more appro

priate for determining toxicity. Epidemiology and Surveillance 3. Evaluate existing exposure and

— health data for workers employed in workplaces where nanoma

terials are produced and used, with emphasis on improving our understanding of the value and 

## Research Needs 

# 1056 Approaches to Safe Nanotechnology 10 Research Needs 10 Research Needs utility of establishing exposure registries for workers potentially exposed to engineered nanoma

terials.Assess the feasibility of industry— wide exposure and epidemiologi

cal studies of workers exposed to engineered nanomaterials, with emphasis on workers potentially exposed to engineered carbona

ceous nanomaterials. Integrate nanotechnology safety

— and health issues into existing haz

ard surveillance mechanisms and continue reassessing guidance re

lated to occupational health sur

veillance for workers potentially exposed to engineered nanomate

rials. Build on existing public health

— geographical information systems and infrastructure to enable effec

tive and economic development of methods for sharing nanotech

nology safety and health data. Risk Assessment 4. Determine how existing expo

— sure-response data for fine and ultrafine particles (human or ani

mal) may be used to identify the potential hazards and estimate the potential risks of occupational exposure to nanomaterials. Develop a framework for assessing

— the potential hazards and risks of occupational exposure to nano

materials, using new toxicologic data on engineered nanomateri

als and standard risk assessment models and methods. Measurement Methods 5. Evaluate methods used to measure

— the mass of respirable particles in the air and determine whether this measurement can be used to measure nanomaterials. Develop and field-test practical

— methods to accurately measure airborne nanomaterials in the workplace. Develop, test, and evaluate systems

— to compare and validate sampling. Engineering Controls and Personal 6. Protective Equipment Evaluate the effectiveness of en

— gineering controls in reducing occupational exposures to nano

aerosols and developing new con

trols when needed.Evaluate the suitability of control— banding techniques when addi

tional information is needed and evaluate the effectiveness of alter

native materials. Evaluate and improve current per

— sonal protective equipment. Develop recommendations (e.g.,

— use of respiratory protection) to prevent or limit occupational ex

posures to nanomaterials. Fire and Explosion Safety 7. Identify physical and chemical

— properties that contribute to dusti

ness, combustibility, flammability, and conductivity of nanomaterials.10 Research Needs

Approaches to Safe Nanotechnology 57 10 Research Needs Recommend alternative work prac

— tices to eliminate or reduce work place exposures to nanomaterials. Recommendations and Guidance 8. Use the best available science to

— make interim recommendations for workplace safety and health prac

tices during the production, use, and handling of nanomaterials. Evaluate and update mass-based

— occupational exposure limits for airborne particles to ensure good, continuing precautionary practices. Communication and Information 9. Establish partnerships to allow

— for identification and sharing of research needs, approaches, and results. Develop and disseminate train

— ing and education materials to workers, employers, and occu

pational safety and health pro

fessionals. Applications 10. Identify uses of nanotechnology for

— application in occupational safety and health. Evaluate and disseminate effective

— applications to workers, employ

ers, and occupational safety and health professionals.Approaches to Safe Nanotechnology 59 ACGIH [2001]. Industrial ventilation: a manual of recommended practice. Cincinnati, OH: American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists. Adams RJ, Bray D [1983]. Rapid transport of for

eign particles microinjected into crab axons. Nature 303 :718–720. Ambroise D, Wild P, Moulin J-J [2007]. Update of a meta-analysis on lung cancer and welding. Scand J Work Environ Health 32 (1):22–31. Antonini JM [2003]. Health effects of welding. Crit Rev Toxicol 33 (1):61–103. ASTM Subcommittee F23.40 [2003]. Standard test method for resistance of materials used in protective clothing to penetration by blood-borne pathogens using Phi–X174 bacteriophage penetration as a test system. West Conshohocken, PA: American Society for Testing and Materials, ASTM F1671–03. ASTM Committee E2535–07 [2007]. Standard guide for handling unbound engineered nanoscale par

ticles in occupational settings. West Conshohocken, PA: ASTM International. Balazy A, Toivola M, Reponen T, Podgorski A, Zim

mer A, Grinshpun SA [2006]. Manikin-based filtra

tion performance evaluation of filtering-facepiece respirators challenged with nanoparticles. Ann Oc

cup Hyg 50 (3):259–269. Baltensperger U, Gaggeler HW, Jost DT [1988]. The epiphaniometer, a new device for continuous aerosol monitoring. J Aerosol Sci 19 (7):931–934. Barlow PG, Clouter-Baker AC, Donaldson K, Mac

Callum J, Stone V [2005]. Carbon black nanoparticles induce type II epithelial cells to release chemotaxins for alveolar macrophages. Part Fiber Toxicol 2 (14). Baron PA, Deye GJ, Chen B, Schwegler-Berry D, Sh

vedova AA, Castranova V [in press]. Aerosolization of single-walled carbon nanotubes for an inhalation study. Inhal Toxicol. Bergman W, Garr J, Fearon D [1989]. Aerosol penetra

tion measurements through protective clothing in small scale simulation tests. Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory. Presented at: 3 rd International Symposium on Protection against Chemical Warfare Agents, UMEA, Sweden, June 11–16. Borm PJA, Schins RPF, Albrecht C [2004]. Inhaled particles and lung cancer, Part B: Paradigms and risk assessment. Int J Cancer 110 :3–14. Bowler RM, Roels HA, Nakagawa S, Drezgic M, Di

amond E, Park R, Koller W, Bowler RP, Mergler D, Bouchard M, Smith D, Gwiazda R, Doty RL [2007]. Dose-effect relationships between manganese expo

sure and neurological, neuropsychological and pul

monary function in confined space bridge welders. Occup Environ Med 64 (3):167–177. British Standards Institute [2008]. Nanotechnolo

gies, Part 2: Guide to safe handling and disposal of manufactured nanomaterials. PD 6699–2:2007 [ www.bsi-global.com/upload/Standards%20&%20 Publications/Nanotechnologies/PD6699-2.pdf ]
. Brouwer DH, Gijsbers JHJ, Lurvink MWM [2004]. Personal exposure to ultrafine particles in the work

place: exploring sampling techniques and strategies. Ann Occup Hyg 48 (5):439–453. Brown DM, Wilson MR, MacNee W, Stone V, Don

aldson K [2001]. Size-dependent proinflamma

tory effects of ultrafine polystyrene particles: a role for surface area and oxidative stress in the en

hanced activity of ultrafines. Toxicol App Pharmacol 175 (3):191–199. Brown JS, Zeman KL, Bennett WD [2002]. Ultrafine particle deposition and clearance in the healthy and obstructed lung. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 166 :1240–1247. Brunauer S, Emmett PH, Teller E [1938]. Adsorption of gases in multimolecular layers. J Am Chem Soc 60 :309. Burton J [1997]. General methods for the control of airborne hazards. In: DiNardi SR, ed. The occupational environment—its evaluation and control. Fairfax, VA: American Industrial Hygiene Association. 

## References60 Approaches to Safe Nanotechnology References References Castranova V [2000]. From coal mine dust to quartz: mechanisms of pulmonary pathogenicity. Inhal Tox 12 (Suppl 3):7–14. Daigle CC, Chalupa DC, Gibb FRMorrow PE, Ober

dorster G, Utell MJ, Frampton MW [2003]. Ultrafine particle deposition in humans during rest and exer

cise. Inhal Toxicol 15 (6):539–552. De Lorenzo AJD [1970]. The olfactory neuron and the blood-brain barrier. In: Wolstenholme GEW, Knight J, eds. Taste and smell in vertebrates. CIBA Founda

tion Symposium series. London: J&A Churchill, pp. 151–176. Dockery DW, Pope CA, Xu X, Spengler JD, Ware JH, Fay ME, Ferris BG, Speizer BE [1993]. An association between air pollution and mortality in six U.S. cities. N Engl J Med 329 (24):1753–1759. Donaldson K, Li XY, MacNee W [1998]. Ultrafine (nanometer) particle mediated lung injury. J Aerosol Sci 29 (5–6):553–560. Donaldson K, Tran CL [2002]. Inflammation caused by particles and fibers. Inhal Toxicol 14 (1):5–27. Donaldson K, Stone V [2003]. Current hypotheses on the mechanisms of toxicity of ultrafine particles. Ann 1st Super Sanita 39 (3):405

– 410. Donaldson K, Tran L, Jimenez LA, Duffin R, Newby DE, Mills N, MacNee W, Stone V [2005]. Combus

tion-derived nanoparticles: a review of their toxicol

ogy following inhalation exposure. Part Fibre Toxi

col. 2 (10):14. Donaldson K, Aitken R, Tran L, Stone V, Duffin R, Forrest G, Alexander A [2006]. Carbon nanotubes: a review of their properties in relation to pulmo

nary toxicology and workplace safety. Toxicol Sci 92 (1):5–22. Driscoll KE [1996]. Role of inflammation in the de

velopment of rat lung tumors in response to chronic particle exposure. In: Mauderly JL, McCunney RJ, eds. Particle overload in the rat lung and lung cancer: im

plications for human risk assessment. Philadelphia, PA: Taylor & Francis, pp. 139–152. Duffin R, Tran CL, Clouter A, Brown DM, MacNee W, Stone V, Donaldson K [2002]. The importance of surface area and specific reactivity in the acute pul

monary inflammatory response to particles. Ann Oc

cup Hyg 46 :242–245. Duffin R, Tran L, Brown D, Stone V, Donaldson K [2007]. Proinflammogenic effects of low-toxicity and metal nanoparticles in vivo and in vitro: highlighting the role of particle surface area and surface reactivity. Inhal Toxicol 19 (10):849–856. Edlich RF, Suber F, Neal JG, Jackson EM, Williams FM [1999]. Integrity of powder-free gloves to bac

teriophage penetration. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater 48 :755–758. Elder A, Gelein R, Silva V, Feikert T, Opanashuk L, Carter J, Potter R, Maynard A, Ito Y, Finkelstein J, Oberdörster G [2006]. Translocation of inhaled ultra

fine manganese oxide particles to the central nervous system. Environ Health Perspect 114 :1172–1178. Eninger RM, Honda T, Reponen T, McKay R, Grin

shpun SA [2008a]. What does respirator certification tell us about filtration of ultrafine particles? J Occup Environ Hyg 5 :286–295. Eninger RM, Honda T, Adhikari A, Heinonen-Tanski H, Reponen T, Grinshpun SA [2008b]. Filter perfor

mance of N99 and N95 facepiece respirators against viruses and ultrafine particles. Ann Occup Hyg 52 (5):385–396. 71 Fed. Reg. 50121–50192 [2006]. Occupational Safety and Health Administration: assigned protec

tion factors, final rule [www.osha.gov/pls/oshaweb/ owadisp.show_document?p_table=FEDERAL_ REGISTER&p_id=18846]. European Committee for Standardization [2002]. C EN 943–1:2002: Protective clothing against liquid and gaseous chemicals, aerosols and solid particles.Performance requirements for ventilated and nonventilated “gas-tight” (Type 1) and “non-gas-tight” (Type 2) chemical protective suits. Brussels: Euro

pean Committee for Standardization. Evans DE, Heitbrink WA, Slavin TJ, Peters TM [2008]. Ultrafine and respirable particles in an automotive grey iron foundry. Ann Occup Hyg 52 (1):9–21. Frampton MW, Stewart JC, Oberdorster G, Morrow PE, Chalupa D, Pietropaoli AP, Frasier LM, Speers DM, Cox C, Huang LS, Utell MJ [2006]. Inhalation of ultrafine particles alters blood leukocyte expres

sion of adhesion molecules in humans. Environ Health Perspect 114 (1):51–58. Fuchs NA [1964]. The mechanics of aerosols. Ox

ford, England: Pergamon Press.References

Approaches to Safe Nanotechnology 61 References Gao P, King WP, Shaffer R [2007]. Review of cham

ber design requirements for testing of personal pro

tective clothing ensembles. J Occup & Environ Hyg 4 (8):562–571. Gardiner K, van Tongeren M, Harrington M [2001]. Respiratory health effects from exposure to carbon black: results of the phase 2 and 3 cross sectional studies in the European carbon black manufacturing industry. Occup Environ Med 58 (8):496–503. Gardner P, Hofacre K, Richardson A [2004]. Com

parison of simulated respirator fit factors using aero

sol and vapor challenges. J Occup and Environ Hyg 1 (1):29–38. Garshick E, Laden F, Hart JE, Rosner B, Smith TJ, Dockery DW, Speizer FE [2004]. Lung cancer in railroad workers exposed to diesel exhaust. Environ Health Perspect 112 (15):1539–1543. Garshick E, Laden F, Hart JE, Smith TJ, Rosner B [2006]. Smoking imputation and lung cancer in rail

road workers exposed to diesel exhaust. Am J Ind Med 49 (9):709–718. Geiser M, Rothen-Rutishauser B, Kapp N, Schurch S, Kreyling W, Schulz H, Semmler M, Im Hof V, Hey

der J, Gehr P [2005]. Ultrafine particles cross cel

lular membranes by nonphagocytic mechanisms in lungs and in cultured cells. Environ Health Perspect 113 (11):1555–1560. Golanski L, Guiot A, Tardif F [2008]. Are conventional protective devices such as fibrous filter media, respira

tor cartridges, protective clothing and gloves also effi

cient for nanoaerosols? Brussels, Germany: European Community, Nanotech2 Project. Goldstein M, Weiss H, Wade K, Penek J, Andrews L, Brandt-Rauf P [1987]. An outbreak of fume fever in an electronics instrument testing laboratory. J Occup Med 29 :746–749. Granier JJ, Pantoya ML [2004]. Laser ignition of nano

composite thermites. Combust Flame 138 :373–382. Han JH, Lee EJ, Lee JH, So KP, Lee YH, Bae GN, Lee S-B, Ji JH, Cho MH, Yu IJ [2008]. Monitoring mul

tiwalled carbon nanotube exposure in carbon nano

tube research facility. Inhal Toxicol 20 (8):741–749. Hart JE, Laden F, Schenker MB, Garshick E [2006]. Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease mortality in diesel-exposed railroad workers. Environ Health Perspect 114 (7):1013–1017. HEI [2000]. Reanalysis of the Harvard Six Cities Study and the American Cancer Society Study of Particulate Air Pollution and Mortality. Cambridge, MA: Health Effects Institute. Heim M, Mullins B, Wild M, Meyer J, Kasper, G [2005]. Filtration efficiency of aerosol particles be

low 20 nanometers. Aerosol Sci Tech 39 :782–789. Heinrich U, Fuhst R, Rittinghausen S, Creutzenberg O, Bellmann B, Koch W, Levsen K [1995]. Chronic inChronic in halation exposure of wistar rats and 2 different strains of mice to diesel-engine exhaust, carbon-black, and titanium-dioxide. Inhal Toxicol 7 (4):533–556. Heitbrink WA, Evans DE, Peters TM, Slavin TJ [2007]. The characteristion and mapping of very fine particles in an engine machining and assembly facil

ity. J Occup Environ Hyg 4 :341–351. Heitbrink WA, Evans DE, Ku BK, Maynard AD, Slavin TJ, Peters TM [forthcoming]. Relationships between particle number, surface area, and respirable mass concentration in automotive engine manufacturing. J Occup Environ Hyg. Hinds WC [1999]. Aerosol technology: properties, behavior, and measurement of airborne particles. 2nd ed. New York: Wiley-Interscience. Hofacre KC [2006]. Aerosol penetration of fabric swatches. Unpublished paper presented at the Ele

vated Wind Aerosol Conference, Arlington, VA, Sep

tember 2006. Hoshino A, Fujioka K, Oku T, Suga M, Ssaki Y, Ohta T [2004]. Physicochemical properties and cellular tox

icity of nanocrystal quantum dots depend on their surface modification. Nano Lett 4 (11):2163–2169. HSE [2004]. Horizon scannon information sheet on nanotechnology. Sudbury, Suffolk, United Kingdom: Health and Safety Executive [ www.hse.gov/pubns/ hsin1.pdf ]. Huang SH, Chen CW, Chang CP, Lai CY, Chen CC [2007]. Penetration of 4.5 nm to 10 μ m aerosol par

ticles through fibrous filters. J Aero Sci 38 :719–727. Hunter DD, Dey RD [1998]. Identification and neuro

peptide content of trigeminal neurons innervating the rat nasal epithelium. Neuroscience 83 (2):591–599.62 Approaches to Safe Nanotechnology References References Ibald-Mulli A, Wichmann HE, Kreyling W, Peters A [2002]. Epidemiological evidence on health ef

fects of ultrafine particles. J Aerosol Med Depos 15 (2):189–201. International Council on Nanotechnology (ICON) [2006]. A survey of current practices in the nanotech

nology workplace. [ http://cohesion.rice.edu/Centers

AndInst/ICON/emplibrary/ICONNanotechSurvey

FullReduced.pdf ]. ICRP [1994]. Human respiratory tract model for ra

diological protection. Oxford, England: Pergamon, Elsevier Science Ltd., International Commission on Radiological Protection, Publication No. 66. ISO [2004a]. Protective clothing for use against solid particulates. Part 2: Test method of determination of inward leakage of aerosols of fine particles into suits. ISO Standard 13982–2. Geneva, Switzerland: Inter

national Organization for Standardization. ISO [2004b]. ISO 16604:2004: Clothing for protection against contact with blood and body fluids: determi

nation of resistance of protective clothing materials to penetration by blood-borne pathogens; test method using Phi-X 174 bacteriophage. Geneva, Switzerland: International Organization for Standardization. ISO [1995]. Air quality; particle size fraction defini

tions for health-related sampling, ISO 7708. Geneva, Switzerland: International Organization for Stan

dardization. ISO [2006]. Workplace atmospheres; ultrafine, nano

particle and nano-structured aerosols; exposure char

acterization and assessment. Geneva, Switzerland: International Standards Organization. Document no. ISO/TC 146/SC 2/WG1 N324, 32 pages. Jaques PA, Kim CS [2000]. Measurement of total lung deposition of inhaled ultrafine particles in healthy men and women. Inhal Toxicol 12 (8):715–731. Jiang J, Oberdorster G, Elder A, Gelein R, Mercer P, Biswas P [2008]. Does nanoparticle activity depend upon size and crystal phase? Nanotox 2 (1):33–42. Johnston CJ, Finkelstein JN, Mercer P, Corson N, Gelein R, Oberdorster G [2000]. Pulmonary effects induced by ultrafine PTFE particles. Toxicol Appl Pharmacol 168 :208–215. Keskinen J, Pietarinen K, Lehtimaki M [1992]. Electri- Electri

cal low pressure impactor. J Aerosol Sci 23 :353–360. Kim CS, Jaques PA [2004]. Analysis of total respira

tory deposition of inhaled ultrafine particles in adult subjects at various breathing patterns. Aerosol Sci Technol 38 :525–540. Kim CS, Bao L, Okuyama K, Shimada S, Niinuma H [2006]. Filtration efficiency of a fibrous filter for nanoparticles. J Nanopart Res 8 :215 –221. Kim SE, Harrington MS, Pui DYH [2007]. Experi

mental study of nanoparticles penetration through commercial filter media. J Nanopart Res 9 :117–125. Kreiss K, Mroz MM, Zhen B, Wiedemann H, Barna B [1997]. Risks of beryllium disease related to work processes at a metal, alloy, and oxide production plant. Occup Environ Med 54 (8):605–612. Kreyling WG, Semmler M, Erbe F, Mayer P, Takenaka S, Schulz H, Oberdorster G, Ziesenis A [2002]. Translocation of ultrafine insoluble iridium particles from lung epithelium to extrapulmonary organs is size dependent but very low. J Toxicol Environ Health 65 (20):1513–1530. Kreyling WG, Semmler-Behnke M, Moller W [2006]. Ultrafine particle-lung interactions: does size mat

ter? J Aerosol Med 19 (1):74–83. Ku BK, Maynard AD [2005]. Comparing aerosol sur

face-area measurements of monodisperse ultrafine silver agglomerates by mobility analysis, transmis

sion electron microscopy and diffusion charging. J Aerosol Sci 36 :1108–1124. Ku BK, Maynard AD [2006]. Generation and inves

tigation of airborne silver nanoparticles with specific size and morphology by homogeneous nucleation, coagulation and sintering. J Aerosol Sci 37 :452–470. Kuhlbusch TAJ, Neumann S, Fissan H [2004]. Number size distribution, mass concentration, and par

ticle composition of PM1, PM2.5, and PM10 in bag filling areas of carbon black production. J Occup En

viron Hyg 1 (10):660–671. Lam CW, James JT, McCluskey R, Hunter RL [2004]. Pulmonary toxicity of single-wall carbon nanotubes in mice 7 and 90 days after intratracheal instillation. Toxicol Sci 77 :126–134. Lam CW, James JT, McCluskey R, Arepalli S, Hunter RL [2006]. A review of carbon nanotube toxicity and assessment of potential occupational and environ

mental health risks. Crit Rev Toxicol 36 :189–217.References

Approaches to Safe Nanotechnology 63 References Lee KP, Trochimowicz HJ, Reinhardt CF [1985]. Pul

monary response of rats exposed to titanium diox

ide (TiO 2 ) by inhalation for two years. Toxicol Appl Pharmacol 79 :179–192. Lee CH, Guo YL, Tsai PJ, Chang HY, Chen CR, Chen CW, Hsiue TR [1997]. Fatal acute pulmonary oede

ma after inhalation of fumes from polytetrafluoro

ethylene (PTFE). Eur Res J 10 :1408–1411. Lee SA, Grinshpun SA, Reponen T [2008]. Respiratory performance offered by N95 respirators and surgical masks: Human subject evaluation with NaCl aerosol representing bacterial and viral particle size range. Ann Occup Hyg 52 (3):177–85. Epub 2008 Mar 7. Lippmann M [1977]. Regional deposition of par

ticles in the human respiratory tract. In: Lee DHK, Murphy S, eds. Handbook of physiology; section IV, environmental physiology. Philadelphia, PA: Wil

liams and Wilkins, pp. 213–232. Li N, Sioutas C, Cho A, Schmitz D, Misra C, Sempf J, Wang MY, Oberley T, Froines J, Nel A [2003]. Ul

trafine particulate pollutants induce oxidative stress and mitochondrial damage. Environ Health Perspect 111 (4):455–460. Li Z, Hulderman T, Salmen R, Chapman R, Leonard SS, Young S-H, Shvedova A, Luster MI, Simeonova PP [2007]. Cardiovascular effects of pulmonary ex

posure to single-wall carbon nanotubes. Environ Health Perspect 115 :377–382. Lison D, Lardot C, Huaux F, Zanetti G, Fubini B [1997]. Influence of particle surface area on the toxicity of insoluble manganese dioxide dusts. Arch Toxicol 71 (12):725–729. Long TC, Saleh N, Tilton RD, Lowry GV, Veronesi B [2006]. Titanium dioxide (P25) produces reac

tive oxygen species in immortalized brain microglia (BV2): implications for nanoparticle neurotoxicity. Environ Sci & Technol 40 (14):4346–4352. Epub 16 June 2006. Lovric J, Bazzi HS, Cuie Y, fortin, GRA, Winnik FM, D Maysinger [2005]. Differences in subcellular distribu

tion and toxicity of green and red emitting CdTe quan

tum dots. J Mol Med 83 (5):377–385. Epub 2005 Feb 2. Lux Research [2007]. The Nanotech Report, 5th Edi

tion. New York: Lux Research. Marple VA, Olson BA, Rubow KL [2001]. Inertial, gravi

tational, centrifugal, and thermal collection techniques. In: Baron PA, Willeke K, eds. Aerosol measurement: principles, techniques and applications. New York: John Wiley and Sons, pp. 229–260. Martin S, Moyer E [2000]. Electrostatic respira

tor filter media: filter efficiency and most penetrat

ing particle size effects. App Occup Environ Hyg 15 (8):609–617. Maynard AD [2003]. Estimating aerosol surface area from number and mass concentration measure

ments. Ann Occup Hyg 47 (2):123–144. Maynard AD, Baron PA, Foley M, Shvedova AA, Kisin ER, Castranova V [2004]. Exposure to carbon nano

tube material: aerosol release during the handling of unrefined single walled carbon nanotube material. J Toxicol Environ Health 67 (1):87–107. Maynard AM, Kuempel ED [2005]. Airborne nano

structured particles and occupational health. J Nano

particle Research 7 (6):587–614. Mercer RR, Scabilloni J, Wang L, Kisin E, Murray AR, Schwegler-Berry D, Shvedova AA, Castranova V [2008]. Alteration of depositon pattern and pulmonary re

sponse as a result of improved dispersion of aspirated single walled carbon nanotubes in a mouse model. Am J Physiol Lung Cell Mol Physiol 294 :L87–L97. Methner MM, Birch ME, Evans DE, Ku BK, Crouch KG, Hoover MD [2007]. Mazzulxeli LF, ed: Case study: Identification and characterization of poten

tial sources of worker exposure to carbon nanofibers during polymer composite laboratory operations. J Occup Environ Hyg 4 (12):D125–D130. Methner MM [2008]. Engineering case reports: Old L, ed. Effectiveness of local exhaust ventilation (LEV) in controlling engineered nanomaterial emissions during reactor cleanout operations. J Occup Environ Hyg 5 (6):D63

– D69. Misra C, Singh M, Shen S, Sioutas C, Hall PM [2002]. Development and evaluation of a personal cascade impactor sampler (PCIS). J Aerosol Sci 33 (7):1027–1048. Moller W, Hofer T, Ziesenis A, Karg E, Heyder J [2002]. Ultrafine particles cause cytoskeletal dys

functions in macrophages. Toxicol Appl Pharmacol 182 (3):197–207.References Moller W, Brown DM, Kreyling WG, Stone V [2005]. Ultrafi ne particles cause cytoskeletal dysfunctions inmacrophages: role of intracellular calcium. Part Fibre Toxicol 2 (7):12. Monteiro-Riviere NA, Nemanich RJ, Inman AO, Wang YY, Riviere JE [2005]. Multi-walled carbonnanotube interactions with human epidermal keratinocytes. Toxicol Lett 155 (3):377–384. Moshammer H, Neuberger M [2003]. The active surface of suspended particles as a predictor of lung function and pulmonary symptoms in Austrian school children. Atmos Environ 37 (13):1737–1744. Mossman B, Churg A [1998]. Mechanisms in the pathogenesis of asbestosis and silicosis. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 157 :1666–1680. Muller J, Huaux F, Moreau N, Misson P, Heilier J-F, Delos M, Arras M, Fonseca A, Nagy JB, Lison D [2005]. Respiratory toxicity of multi-wall carbon nanotubes. Toxicol Appl Pharmacol 207 :221–231.Murray AR, Kisin E, Kommineni C, Kagan VE, Castranova V, Shvedova AA [2007]. Single-walled carbon nanotubes induce oxidative stress and infl ammation in skin. Toxicologist 96 :A1406. National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) [2007]. NFPA 1994 standard on protective ensembles for fi rst responders to CBRN terrorism incidents. Nel A, Xia T, Madlen L, Li W [2006]. Toxic potential of materials at the nanolevel. Science 311 :622–627.Nemmar A, Hoet PHM, Vanquickenborne B, Dinsdale D, Thomeer M, Hoylaerts MF, Vanbilloen H, Mortelmans L, Nemery B [2002]. Passage of inhaledparticles into the blood circulation in humans. Circulation 105 :411–414.NIOSH [1990]. NIOSH testimony on the Occupational Safety and Health Administration proposed rule on health standards: methods of compliance.Cincinnati, OH: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health.NIOSH [1994]. NIOSH manual of analytical methods (NMAM®). 4th ed. By Schlecht PC, O’Connor PF, eds. Cincinnati, OH: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, DHHS (NIOSH) Publication 94–113 [www.cdc.gov/niosh/nmam/]. NIOSH [1996]. NIOSH guide to the selection and use of particulate respirators certified under 42 CFR 84. Cincinnati, OH: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, DHHS (NIOSH) Publication No. 96–101. NIOSH [2003]. Filtration and air-cleaning systems to protect building environments. Cincinnati, OH: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centersfor Disease Control and Prevention, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, DHHS (NIOSH) Publication No. 2003–136. NIOSH [2004]. NIOSH respirator selection logic. Cincinnati, OH: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, DHHS (NIOSH) Publication No. 2005–100 [www.cdc.gov/niosh/docs/2005-100/]. NIOSH [2005a]. Procedure No. RCT–APR–STP–0057, 0058, 0059, Revision 1.1. Cincinnati, OH: Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for DiseaseControl and Prevention, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health [ www.cdc.gov/niosh/ npptl/stps/pdfs/RCT-APR-0057%2058%2059.pdf ]. NIOSH [2005b]. Procedure No. RCT–APR– STP–0051, 0052, 0053, 0054, 0055, 0056, Revision 1.1. Cincinnati, OH: Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health [ www.cdc.gov/niosh/npptl/stps/pdfs/ RCT-APR-0051%2052%2053%2054%2055%2056. pdf ]. NIOSH [2009]. Current intelligence bulletin: interimguidance on medical screening of workers potentially exposed to engineered nanoparticles. Cincinnati,OH: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health [www.cdc.gov/niosh/docs/2009-116/]. NIOSH [2007]. Docket Number 036: Total Inward Leakage Test for Half-Mask Air-Purifying Particulate Respirators; Total Inward Leakage Test for Half-mask Air-purifying Particulate Respirators. Procedure No. Approaches to Safe Nanotechnology 64References

Approaches to Safe Nanotechnology 65 References RCT–APR–STP–0068, January 31, 2007 [ www.cdc. gov/niosh/docket/NIOSHdocket0036.html ]. Oberdörster G, Yu [1990]. The carcinogenic poten

tial of inhaled diesel exhaust: a particle effect? J Aero sol Sci 21 :S397–S401. Oberdörster G, Ferin J, Gelein R, Soderholm SC, Fin

kelstein J [1992]. Role of the alveolar macrophage in lung injury—studies with ultrafine particles. Environ Health Perspect 97 :193–199. Oberdörster G, Ferin J, Lehnert BE [1994a]. Cor

relation between particle-size, in-vivo particle per

sistence, and lung injury. Environ Health Perspect 102 (S5):173–179. Oberdörster G, Ferin J, Soderholm S, Gelein R, Cox C, Baggs R, Morrow PE [1994b]. Increased pul

monary toxicity of inhaled ultrafine particles: due to lung overload alone? Ann Occup Hyg 38 (Suppl 1):295–302. Oberdörster G, Gelein RM, Ferin J, Weiss B [1995]. Association of particulate air pollution and acute mortality: involvement of ultrafine particles? Inhal Toxicol 7 (1):111–124. Oberdörster G, Sharp Z, Atudorei V, Elder A, Gelein R, Lunts A, Kreyling W, Cox C [2002]. Extrapulmo

nary translocation of ultrafine carbon particles fol

lowing whole-body inhalation exposure of rats. J Toxicol Environ Health 65 Part A(20):1531–1543. Oberdörster G, Sharp Z, Atudorei V, Elder A, Gelein R, Kreyling W, Cox C [2004]. Translocation of in- Translocation of in

haled ultrafine particles to the brain. Inhal Toxicol 16 (6–7):437–445. Oberdörster G, Oberdörster E, Oberdörster J [2005a]. Nanotoxicology: an emerging discipline evolving from studies of ultrafine particles. Environ Health Perspect 113 (7):823–839. Oberdörster G, Maynard A, Donaldson K, Castra

nova V, Fitzpatrick J, Ausman K, Carter J, Karn B, Kreyling W, Lai D, Olin S, Monteiro-Riviere N, War

heit D, Yang H [2005b]. Principles for characterizing the potential human health effects from exposure to nanomaterials: elements of a screening strategy. Part Fibre Toxicol 2 :8. Park RM, Bowler RM, Eggerth DE, Diamond E, Spencer KJ, Smith D, Gwiazda R [2006]. Issues in neurological risk assessment for occupational exposures: the Bay Bridge welders. Neurotoxicology 27 (3):373

– 384. Penttinen P, Timonen KL, Tiittanen P, Mirme A, Russkanen J, Pekkanen J [2001]. Ultrafine particles in urban air and respiratory health among adult asthmatics. Eur Respir J 17 (3):428–435. Peters A, Dockery DW, Heinrich J, Wichmann HE [1997]. Short-term effects of particulate air pollution on respiratory morbidity in asthmatic children. Eur Respir J 10 (4):872–879. Peters A, von Klot S, Heier M, Trentinaglia I, Hor

mann A, Wichmann HE, Lowel H [2004]. Exposure to traffic and the onset of myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med 351 (17):1721–1730. Peters TM, Heitbrink WA, Evans DE, Slavin TJ, May

nard AD [2006]. The mapping of fine and ultrafine particle concentrations in an engine machining and assembly facility. Ann Occup Hyg 50 (3):249–257. Plog BA, Niland J, Quinlan PJ, eds. [2002]. Funda

mentals of industrial hygiene, 5 th ed. Itasca, IL: Na

tional Safety Council. Poland CA, Duffin R, Kinloch I, Maynard A, Wal

lace WAH, Seaton A, Stone V, Brown S, MacNee W, Donaldson K [2008]. Carbon nanotubes introducedinto the abdominal cavity of mice show asbestoslike pathogenicity in a pilot study. Nat Nanotech 3 (7):423–428. Epub 2008 May 20. [www.nature.com/ naturenanotechnology]. Pope CA, Burnett RT, Thun MJ, Calle EE, Krewski E, Ito K, Thurston GD [2002]. Lung cancer, cardio

pulmonary mortality and long term exposure to fine particulate air pollution. JAMA 287 (9):1132–1141. Pope CA, Burnett RT, Thurston GD, Thun MJ, Calle EE, Krewski D, Godleski JJ [2004]. Cardiovascular mortality and long-term exposure to particulate air pollution: epidemiological evidence of general pathophysiological pathways of disease. Circulation 109 (1):71–74. Porter AE, Gass M, Muller K, Skepper JN, Midgley P, Welland M [2007a]. Direct imaging of single-walled carbon nanotubes in cells. Nat Nanotech 2 :713–717. Porter AE, Gass M, Muller K, Skepper JN, Midgley P, Welland M [2007b]. Visualizing the uptake of C60 to the cytoplasm and nucleus of human mono

cyte-derived macrophage cells using energy-filtered66 Approaches to Safe Nanotechnology References References transmission electron microscopy and electron to

mography. Environ Sci Technol 41 (8):3012–3017. Pott F, Roller M [2005]. Carcinogenicity study with nineteen granular dusts in rats. Eur J Oncol 10 (4):249–281. Pritchard DK [2004]. Literature review—explosion hazards associated with nanopowders. United King

dom: Health and Safety Laboratory, HSL/2004/12. Pui DYH, Kim SC [2006]. Penetration of nanopar

ticles through respirator filter media. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota, Mechanical Engineer

ing Department, Particle Technology Laboratory. NIOSH Contract No. 254–2005–M–11698 for Na

tional Personal Protective Technology Division. Ratherman S [1996]. Methods of control. In: Plog B, ed. Fundamentals of industrial hygiene. Itasca, IL: National Safety Council. Rengasamy S, Verbofsky R, King WP, Shaffer RE[2007]. Nanoparticle penetration through NIOSHapproved N95 filtering-facepiece respirators. J Int Soc Res Prot 24 :49–59. Rengasamy S, King WP, Eimer B, Shaffer RE [2008a]. Filtration performance of NIOSH-approved N95 and P100 filtering-facepiece respirators against 4–30 nanometer size nanoparticles. J Occup Environ Hyg 5 (9):556–564. Rengasamy S, Eimer BC, Shaffer RE [2008b]. Nano

particle filtration performance of commercially available dust masks. J Int Soc Res Prot 25 :27. Renwick LC, Brown D, Clouter A, Donaldson K [2004]. Increased inflammation and altered mac

rophage chemotactic responses caused by two ultra

fine particles. Occup Environ Med 61 :442–447. Richardson, AW, Eshbaugh, JP, Hofacre, KC, Gardner PD [2005]. Respirator filter efficiency testing against particulate and biological aerosols under moderate to high flow rates. Columbus, OH: Battelle Memorial Institue. Contract Report No. SP0700–00–D–3180. Ruckerl R, Ibald-Mulli A, Koenig W, Schneider A, Woelke G, Cyrys J, Heinrich J, Marder V, Frampton M, Wichmann HE, Peters A [2006]. Air pollution and markers of inflammation and coagulation in pa

tients with coronary heart disease. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 173 (4):432–441. Ryman-Rasmussen JP, JE Riviere JE, NA MonteiroRiviere [2006]. Penetration of intact skin by quan- Penetration of intact skin by quan

tum dots with diverse physicochemical properties. Toxicol Sci 91 (1):159–165. Sager T, Porter D, Castranova V [2008]. Pulmonary response to intratracheal instillation of fine or ultra

fine carbon black or titanium dioxide: Role of sur

face area. Toxicologist 102 :A1491. Sayes CM, Fortner JD, Guo W, Lyon D, Boyd AM, Ausman KD, Tao YJ, Sitharaman B, Wilson LJ, Hughes JB, West JL, Colvin VL [2004]. The differ

ential cytotoxicity of water-soluble fullerenes. Nano Letters 4 (10):1881–1887. Sayes CM, Liang F, Hudson JL, Mendez J, Guo W, Beach JM, Moore VC, Doyle CD, West JL, Billups WE, Ausman KD, Colvin VL [2005]. Functional

ization density dependence of single-walled car

bon nanotubes cytotoxicity in vitro. Toxicol Lett 161 (2):135–142. Sayes CM, Wahi R, Kurian PA, Liu Y, West JL, Aus

man KD, Warheit DB, Colvin VL [2006]. Correlating nanoscale titania structure with toxicity: a cytotox

icity and inflammatory response study with human dermal fibroblasts and human lung epithelial cells. Toxicol Sci 92 (1):174–185. Schneider T, Cherrie JW, Vermeulen R, Kromhout H [1999]. Conceptual model for assessment of dermal exposure. J Occup Environ Med 56 :765–773. Schneider T, Cherrie JW, Vermeulen R, Kromhout H [2000]. Dermal exposure assessment. Ann Occup Hyg 44 (7):493–499. Schulte P, Geraci C, Zumwalde R, Hoover M, Kue

mpel E [2008a]. Occupational risk management of engineered nanoparticles. J Occup Environ Hyg 5: 239–249. Schulte PA, Trout D, Zumwalde R, Kuempel E, Geraci C, Castranova V, Mundt DJ, Mundt KA, Halperin WE [2008b]. Options for occupational health surveil

lance of workers potentially exposed to engineered nanoparticles: state of the science. J Occup Environ Med 50 :517–526. Seinfeld JA, Pandis SN [1998]. Atmospheric chemistry and physics. New York: John Wiley and Sons. Semmler M, Seitz J, Erbe F, Mayer P, Heyder J, Oberdorster G, Kreyling WG [2004]. Long-termReferences

Approaches to Safe Nanotechnology 67 References
clearance kinetics of inhaled ultrafine insoluble irid

ium particles from the rat lung, including transient translocation into secondary organs. Inhal Toxicol 16 (6–7):453–459. Shalev I, Barker RL, McCord MG, Tucker PA, Lisk BR [2000]. Protective textile particulate penetration screening. Performance of protective clothing: 7th Symposium, ASTM STP 1386, West Conshohock

en, PA: American Society for Testing and Materials, ASTM pp. 155–161. Shiohara A, Hoshino A, Hanaki K, Suzuki K, Yama

moto K [2004]. On the cytotoxicity of quantum dots. Microbiol Immunol 48 (9):669–675. Shvedova AA, Kisin ER, AR Murray, Gandelsman VZ, Maynard AD, Baron PA, Castranova V [2003]. Exposure to carbon nanotube material: assessment of the biological effects of nanotube materials using human keratinocyte cells. J Toxicol Environ Health 66 (20):1909–1926. Shvedova AA, Kisin ER, Murray AR, Schwegler-Berry D, Gandelsman VZ, Baron P, Maynard A, Gunther MR, Castranova V [2004]. Exposure of human bronchial epithelial cells to carbon nanotubes cause oxidative stress and cytotoxicity. In: Proceedings of the Society for Free Radical Research Meeting, Paris, France: Society for Free Radical Research Interna

tional, European Section, June 26–29, 2003. Shvedova AA, Kisin ER, Mercer R, Murray AR, John

son VJ, Potapovich AI, Tyurina YY, Gorelik O, Arepalli S, Schwegler-Berry D [2005]. Unusual inflammatory and fibrogenic pulmonary responses to single walled carbon nanotubes in mice. Am J Physiol Lung Cell Mol Physiol 289 (5):L698–708. Epub 2005 Jun 10. Shvedova AA, Sager T, Murray A, Kisin E, Porter DW, Leonard SS, Schwegler-Berry D, Robinson VA, Cas

tranova V [2007]. Critical issues in the evaluation of possible effects resulting from airborne nanoparticles. In: Monteiro-Riviere N and Tran L (eds). Nanotech

nology: characterization, dosing and health effects. Philadelphia, PA: Informa Healthcare, pp. 221–232. Shvedova AA, Kisin E, Murray AR, Johnson V, Gore

lik O, Arepalli S, Hubbs AF, Mercer RR, Stone S, Frazer D, Chen T, Deye G, Maybnard A, Baron P, Ma

son R, Kadiiska M, Stadler K, Mouithys-Mickalad A, Castranova V, Kaagan VE [2008]. Inhalation of car

bon nanotubes induces oxidative stress and cytokine response causing respiratory impairment and pul

monary fibrosis in mice. Toxicologist 102 :A1497. Sriram K, Porter DW, Tsuruoka S, Endo M, Jefferson AM, Wolfarth MG, Rogers GM, Castranova V, Luster MI [2007]. Neuroinflammatory response following exposure to engineered nanomaterials. Toxicologist 96 :A1390. Steenland K, Deddens J, Stayner L [1998]. Diesel exhaust and lung cancer in the trucking industry: exposure-response analyses and risk assessment. Am J Ind Med 34 (3):220–228. Stefaniak AB, Hoover MD, Dickerson RM, Peter

son EJ, Day GA, Breysse PN, Kent MS, Scripsick RC [2003]. Surface area of respirable beryllium metal, oxide, and copper alloy aerosols and implications for assessment of exposure risk of chronic beryllium dis

ease. Am Ind Hyg Assoc J 64 :297–305. Stevens G, Moyer E [1989]. Worst case aerosol testing parameters: I. sodium chloride and dioctyl phthalate aerosol filter efficiency as a function of particle size and flow rate. Am Ind Hyg Assoc J 50 (5):257–264. Takagi A, Hirose A, Nishimura T, Fukumori N, Ogata A, Ohashi N, Kitajima S, Kanno J [2008]. Induction of mesothelioma in p53+/- mouse by intraperitoneal application of multi-wall carbon nanotube. J Toxicol Sci 33 (1):105–16. Takenaka S, D Karg, C Roth, H Schulz, A Ziesenis, U Heinzmann, P Chramel, Heyder J [2001]. Pulmo

nary and systemic distribution of inhaled ultrafine silver particles in rats. Environ Health Persp 109 (sup

pl. 4):547–551. The Royal Society, The Royal Academy of Engineering [2004]. Nanoscience and nanotechnologies. London, UK: The Royal Society and The Royal Academy of En

gineering [ www.nanotec.org.uk/finalReport.htm ]. Thomas K, Aguar P, Kawasaki H, Morris J, Nakan

ish J, Savage N [2006]. Research strategies for safety evaluation of nanomaterials, part VIII: international efforts to develop risk-based safety evaluations for nanomaterials. Toxic Sci 92 (1):23–32. Timonen KL, G Hoek, J Heinrich, A Bernard, B Brunekreef, J de Hartog, K Hameri, A Ibald-Mulli, A Mirme, A Peters, P Tiittanen, WB Kreyling, J Pek

kanen [2004]. Daily variation in fine and ultrafine particulate air pollution and urinary concentrations68 Approaches to Safe Nanotechnology References References of lung Clara cell protein CC16. Occup Environ Med 61 (11):908–914. Tinkle SS, Antonini JM, Rich BA, Robert JR, Salmen R, DePree K, Adkins EJ [2003]. Skin as a route of exposure and sensitization in chronic beryllium dis

ease. Environ Health Perspect 111 (9):1202–1208. Törnqvist H, Mills NL, Gonzalez M, Miller MR, Robinson SD, Megson IL, Macnee W, Donaldson K, Söderberg S, Newby DE, Sandström T, Blomberg A [2007]. Persistent endothelial dysfunction in humans after diesel exhaust inhalation. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 176 (4):395–400. Tran CL, Cullen RT, Buchanan D, Jones AD, Miller BG, Searl A, Davis JMG, Donaldson K [1999]. Investiga

tion and prediction of pulmonary responses to dust, part II. In: Investigations into the pulmonary effects of low toxicity dusts. Contract Research Report 216/1999. Suffolk, UK: Health and Safety Executive. Tran C, Buchanan LD, Cullen RT, Searl A, Jones AD, Donaldson K [2000]. Inhalation of poorly soluble particles. II. Influence of particle surface area on inflammation and clearance. Inhal Toxicol 12 (12):1113–1126. TSI [2005]. Mechanisms of filtration for high efficiency fibrous filters. Application Note ITI–041, TSI Incorpo

rated [www.tsi.com/AppNotes/appnotes.aspx?Cid=24 &Cid2=195&Pid=33&lid=439&file=iti_041#mech]. US DOE [2007]. Approach to Nanomaterial ES&H, U.S. Department of Energy’s Nanoscale Science Research Centers. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Energy. VanOsdell DW, Liu BYH, Rubow KL, Pui DYH [1990]. Experimental-study of submicrometer and ultrafine particle penetration and pressure-drop for high-effi

ciency filters. Aerosol Sci Technol 12 (4):911–925. Vaughan NP, Milligan BD, Ogden TL [1989]. Filter weighing reproducibility and the gravimetric detec

tion limit. Ann Occup Hyg 33 (3):331–337. Wang ZM, Gao P [2007]. A study on magnetic pas

sive aerosol sampler for measuring aerosol particle penetration through protective ensembles. Unpub

lished paper presented at the 26 th Annual Conference of the American Association for Aerosol Research. Reno, NV, September 24–28. Wang L, Castranova V, Rojanasakul Y, Lu Y, Scabil

loni J, Mercer RR [2008]. Direct fibrogenic effects of dispersed single walled carbon nanotubes on human lung fibroblasts. Toxicologist 102 :A1499. Warheit DB, Laurence BR, Reed KL, Roach DH, Reyn

olds GA, Webb TR [2004]. Comparative pulmonary toxicity assessment of single-wall carbon nanotubes in rats. Toxicol Sci 77 :117–125. Warheit DB, Webb TR, Sayes CM, Colvin VL, Reed KL [2006]. Pulmonary instillation studies with nanoscale TiO 2 rods and dots in rats: toxicity is not dependent upon particle size and surface area. Toxi

col Sci 91 (1):227–236. Warheit DB, Webb TR, Reed KL, Frerichs S, Sayes CM [2007]. Pulmonary toxicity study in rats with three forms of ultrafine-TiO 2 particles: differential responses related to surface properties. Toxicology 230 :90–104. Wiebel A, Bouchet R, Boulch F, Knauth P [2005]. The big problem of particle size: a comparison of meth

ods for determination of particle size in nanocrystal

line anatase powers. Chem Mater 17 :2378–2385. Woo KS, Chen DR, Pui DYH, Wilson WE [2001]. Use of continuous measurements of integral aerosol pa

rameters to estimate particle surface area. Aerosol Sci Technol 34 :57–65. Wood JP [2001]. Containment in the pharmaceutical in

dustry. New York: Marcel Dekker, Inc. 

### Sources of Additional Information Aitken RJ, Creely KS, Tran CL [2004]. Nanoparticles: an occupational hygiene review. HSE Research Report 274. UK Health and Safety Executive [ www.hse.gov. uk/research/rrhtm/rr274.htm ]. Balazy A, Podgórski A, Grado L [2004]. Filtration of nanosized aerosol particles in fibrous filters: I. Exper

imental results. Warsaw Poland: Warsaw University of Technology, Department of Chemical and Process Engineering. Baron PA, Willeke K [2001]. Aerosol measurement. Principles, techniques and applications. New York: Wiley-Interscience. Blake T, Castranova V, Schwegler-Berry D, Baron P, Deye GJ, Li CH, Jones W [1998]. Effect of fiber length on glass microfiber cytotoxicity. J Toxicol Environ Health 54 (Part A)(4):243–259.References

Approaches to Safe Nanotechnology 69 References Borm PJA [2002]. Particle toxicology: from coal min

ing to nanotechnology. Inhal Toxicology 14 :311–324. Byrd DM, Cothern CR [2000]. Introduction to risk analysis. Rockville, MD: Government Institutes. Castranova V [1998]. Particles and airways: basic bio

logical mechanisms of pulmonary pathogenicity. Appl Occup Environ Hyg 13 (8):613–616 . Conhaim RL, Eaton A, Staub NC, Heath TD [1988]. Equivalent pore estimate for the alveolar-airway barrier in isolated dog lung. J Appl Physiol 64 (3):1134–1142. Driscoll KE, Costa DL, Hatch G, Henderson R, Ober

dörster G, Salem H, Schlesinger RB [2000]. Intratra- Intratra

cheal instillation as an exposure technique for the evaluation of respiratory tract toxicity: uses and limi

tations. Toxicol Sci 55 (1):24–35. EC [2004]. Nanotechnologies: a preliminary risk analysis on the basis of a workshop organized in Brus

sels, March 1–2, 2004, by the Health and Consumer Protection Directorate General of the European Commission. Brussels, Germany: European Com

mission [http://www.certh.gr/dat/7CF3F1C6/file. pdf?633556363252496250]. EPA [1992]. Guidelines for exposure assessment. Washington, DC: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Faux SP, Tran CL, Miller BG, Jones AD, Monteiller C, Donaldson K [2003]. In vitro determinants of par- In vitro determinants of par

ticulate toxicity: the dose-metric for poorly soluble dusts. Research report 154. Suffolk, UK: Health and Safety Executive. Ferin J, Oberdörster G [1992]. Translocation of par

ticles from pulmonary alveoli into the interstitium. J Aerosol Med5 (3):179–187. Gibbs JP, Crump KS, Houck DP, Warren PA, Mosley WS [1999]. Focused medical surveillance: a search for subclinical movement disorders in a cohort of U.S. workers exposed to low levels of manganese dust. Neurotoxicol 20 (2–3):299–313. Hardman R [2006]. A toxicologic review of quan

tum dots: toxicity depends on physicochemical and environmental factors. Environ Health Perspect 114 (2):165–172. Hayes AW, ed. [2001]. Principles and methods of toxi

cology. 4th ed. Philadelphia, PA: Taylor and Francis. Hoet PHM, Bruske-Hohlfeld I, Salata OV [2004]. Nanoparticles-known and unknown health risks. J Nanobiotech 2 (12):1–15. Hofmann W, Sturm R, Winkler-Heil R, Pawlak E [2003]. Stochastic model of ultrafi ne particle deposiStochastic model of ultrafine particle deposi tion and clearance in the human respiratory tract. Ra

diat Prot Dosim 105 (1–4):77–80. Hood E [2004]. Nanotechnology: looking as we leap. Environ Health Perspect 112 (13):A741–A749. Huckzko A, Lange H [2001]. Carbon nanotubes: ex

perimental evidence for a null risk of skin irritation and allergy. Fullerene Sci Tech 9 (2):247–250. Huckzko A, Lange H, Calko E, Grubeck-Jaworska H, Droszez P [2001]. Physiological testing of carbon nanotubes: are they asbestos-like? Fullerene Sci Tech 9 (2):251–254. Keller A, Fierz M, Siegmann K, Siegmann HC, Filipp

ov A [2001]. Surface science with nanosized particles in a carrier gas. J Vac Sci Technol A 19 (1):1–8. Klaassen CD, Amdur MO, Doull J [1986]. Casarett and Doull’s toxicology: the basic science of poisons. New York: Macmillan Publishing Company. Last JM [1983]. A dictionary of epidemiology. New York: Oxford University Press. Lee KW, Liu BYH [1981]. Experimental study of aero

sol filtration by fibrous filters. Aerosol Sci Technol 1 (1):35–46. Lee KW, Liu BYH [1982]. Theoretical study of aero

sol filtration by fibrous filters. Aerosol Sci Technol 1 (2):147–162. Li N, Sioutas C, Cho A, Schmitz D, Misra C, Sempf J, Wang MY, Oberley T, Froines J, Nel A [2003]. Ul

trafine particulate pollutants induce oxidative stress and mitochondrial damage. Environ Health Perspect 111 (4):455–460. Maynard AD [2001]. Experimental determination of ultrafine TiO 2 de-agglomeration in surrogate pulmo

nary surfactant—preliminary results. Inhaled Par

ticles IX, Cambridge, UK: The British Occupational Hygiene Society. Maynard AD [2002]. Experimental determination of ultrafine TiO 2 de-agglomeration in surrogate pulmo

nary surfactant—preliminary results. Ann Occup Hyg 46 (Suppl 1):197–202.70 Approaches to Safe Nanotechnology Sources of Additional Information NCI [1979]. Bioassay of titanium dioxide for pos

sible carcinogenicity. Technical Report Series No. 97. Bethesda, MD: National Cancer Institute. Nemmar A, Vanbilloen H, Hoylaerts MF, Hoet PHM, Verbruggen A, Nemery BS [2001]. Passage of intratra- Passage of intratra

cheally instilled ultrafine particles from the lung into the systemic circulation in hamster. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 164 (9):1665–1668. NFPA [1994]. Standard on protective ensembles for first responders to CBRN terrorism incidents. Quincy, MA: National Fire Protection Association . Nichols G, Byard S, Bloxham MJ, Botterill J, Daw

son NJ, Dennis A, Diart V, North NC, Sherwood JD [2002]. A review of the terms agglomerate and aggre

gate with a recommendation for nomenclature used in powder and particle characterization. J Pharm Sci 91 (10):2103–2109. Nel A, Xia T, Madler L, Li N [2006]. Toxic potential of materials at the nanolevel. Science 311 :622–627. NIOSH [1987]. NIOSH guide to industrial respira

tory protection. Cincinnati, OH: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Institute for Occu

pational Safety and Health, DHHS (NIOSH) Publica

tion No. 87–116, Appendix B. NRC [1994]. Science and judgement in risk assess

ment. Washington D.C.: National Academy Press. Oberdörster E [2004]. Manufactured nanomateri

als (Fullerenes, C60) induce oxidative stress in brain of juvenile largemouth bass. Environ Health Perspect 112 (10):1058–1062. Oberdörster G, Ferin J, Finkelstein J, Soderholm S [1992]. Thermal-degradation events as healthhazards—Particle Vs gas-phase effects, mechanistic studies with particles. Acta Astronaut 27 :251–256. OSHA [1998]. Occupational Safety and Health Ad

ministration, OSHA 3143 (revised): industrial hy

giene. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration. Patty [2000]. Patty’s industrial hygiene and toxicology. New York: John Wiley and Sons. Pflucker F, Wendel V, Hohenberg H, Gärtner E, Will T, Pfeiffer S, Wept F, Gers-Barlag H [2001]. The human stratum corneum layer: an effective barrier against dermal uptake of different forms of topically applied micronised titanium dioxide. Skin Pharmacol Appl Skin Physiol 14 (Suppl 1):92–97. Pui DYH, Chen D [2002]. Experimental and model

ing studies of nanometer aerosol filtration. Sponsored by the Department of Energy. Minneapolis, MN: Uni

versity of Minnesota, Particle Technology Laboratory. Grant No. DOEIDE–FG02–98ER1490. Rao GVS, Tinkle S, Weissman DN, Antonini JM, Kas

hon ML, Salmen R, Battelli LA, Willard PA, Hoover MD, Hubbs AF [2003]. Effi cacy of a technique for ex- Efficacy of a technique for ex

posing the mouse lung to particles aspirated from the pharynx. J Toxicol Environ Health 66 (15):1441–1445. Renwick LC, Donaldson K, Clouter A [2001]. Impair

ment of alveolar macrophage phagocytosis by ultrafine particles. Toxicol Appl Pharmacol 172 (2):119–127. Roels H, Lauwerys R, Buchet JP, Genet P, Sarhan MJ, Hanotiau I, Defays M, Bernard A, Stanescu D [1987]. Epidemiologic survey among workers exposed to man

ganese—effects on lung, central-nervous- system, and some biological indexes. Am J Ind Med 11 (3):307–327. Schultz J, Hohenberg H, Plücker F, Gärtner E, Will T, Pfeiffer S, Wepf R, Wendel V, Gers-Barlag H, Wittern KP [2002]. Distribution of sunscreens on skin. Adv Drug Deliv Rev 54 (Suppl 1):S157–S163. Scott R [1997]. Basic concepts of industrial hygiene. Boca Raton, LA: Lewis Publishers. Stefaniak AB, Hoover MD, Dickerson RM, Peterson EJ, Day GA, Breysse PN, Kent MS, Scripsick RC [2003]. Surface area of respirable beryllium metal, oxide, and copper alloy aerosols and implications for assessment of exposure risk of chronic beryllium disease. Am Ind Hyg Assoc J 64 (3):297–305. Thomas K, Sayre P [2005]. Research strategies for safety evaluation of nanomaterials, Part 1: evaluation the human health implications of exposure to nano

scale materials. Toxicol Sci 87 (2):316–321. Wang HC [1996]. Comparison of thermal rebound theory with penetration measurements of nanometer particles through wire screens. Aerosol Sci Technol 24 (3):129–134. Wang HC, Kasper G [1991]. Filtration efficiency of nanometer-size aerosol-particles. J Aerosol Sci 22 (1):31–41. Wennberg A, Iregren A, Struwe G, Cizinsky G, Hag

man M, Johansson L [1991]. Manganese exposure in steel smelters a health-hazard to the nervous-system. Scand J Work Environ Health 17(4):255–262.Sources of Additional Information

Approaches to Safe Nanotechnology 71 

### 1.0 Introduction This appendix describes a technique that can be used by industrial hygienists for conduct

ing initial workplace assessments for possiblenanoparticle emissions. It allows a semiquantitative evaluation of processes and tasks in the workplace where releases of engi

neered nanoparticles may occur. NIOSH uses several sampling approaches simultaneously with the goal of obtaining key physicochemi

cal particle metrics: number concentration, qualitative size, shape, degree of agglomera

tion, and mass concentration of elemental constituents of interest. 

### 2.0 Scope Employers, workers, and researchers en

gaged in the production and use of engi

neered nanomaterials have expressed an interest in determining whether these nano

materials are hazardous and if the potential for worker exposure exists. NIOSH has an active toxicology program to assess the po

tential hazards of engineered nanoparticles. Unfortunately these studies require long time periods and fall behind the pace of pro

duction and use of these nanomaterials. To assist in answering the latter of these ques

tions, NIOSH established a nanotechnol

ogy field research team tasked with visiting facilities and collecting information about the potential for release of nanomaterials and worker exposure at those facilities. The initial challenges that the field research team encountered were: 1) determining which exposure metric (e.g., mass, particle num

ber concentration, particle surface area) for engineered nanoparticles would provide a consistent body of knowledge to align with the toxicological results observed in experi

mental animal studies; and 2) selecting a sampling method based on metrics that were practical and would provide reproduc

ible results. Engineered nanomaterials can be measured in the workplace using a vari

ety of instrumentation including: condensa

tion particle counter (CPC); optical particle counter (OPC); scanning mobility particle sizer (SMPS); electric low pressure impac

tor (ELPI); aerosol diffusion charger; and tapered element oscillating microbalance (TOEM), which vary in complexity and field portability. Unfortunately, relatively few of the above instruments are readily applica

ble to routine exposure monitoring due to non-specificity, lack of portability, difficulty of use, and high cost. NIOSH researchers have developed and used a field assessment strategy for determining exposures to engi

neered nanoparticles that could be adopted by other health and safety professionals in the evaluation of occupational exposures [Methner, et. al. 2007; Methner, 2008]. Since there are currently no exposure lim

its specific to engineered nanomaterials, this technique is used to determine whether Nanoparticle Emission Assessment Technique for Identification of Sources and Releases of Engineered Nanomaterials



## Appendix72 Approaches to Safe Nanotechnology Appendix Appendix airborne releases of engineered nanomateri

als occur. This assessment, which compares particle number concentrations and relative particle size at the potential emission source to background particle number concen

trations and particle size, provides a semiquantitative means for determining the ef

fectiveness of existing control measures in reducing engineered nanoparticle exposures. This procedure utilizes portable direct-read

ing instrumentation supplemented by filterbased air samples (source-specific and per

sonal breathing zone [PBZ]). The use of filter samples is crucial for particle identification because direct-reading instruments used for determining particle number concentrations are incapable of identifying the composition of the particles. 

### 3.0 Summary of the On-Site Initial Assessment The initial assessment uses a combination of direct-reading, handheld instruments (CPC and OPC) and filter-based sampling (e.g. 37-mm diameter filter cassettes) for subse

quent chemical and microscopic analyses (Figure 1). This semi-quantitative approach was first described by Maynard et al. [2004] and NIOSH has adopted a similar approach. The technique includes determining particle number concentration using direct-read

ing, handheld particle counters at potential emission sources and comparing those data to background particle number concentra

tions. If elevated concentrations of suspect

ed nanoparticles are detected at potential emission sources, relative to the background particle number concentrations, then a pair of filter-based, source-specific air samples are collected with one sample analyzed by transmission electron microscopy (TEM) or scanning electron microscopy (SEM) for particle identification and characterization, and the other used for determining the el

emental mass concentration (Figure 2). A second pair of filter-based air samples may also be collected in the personal breathing zone of workers. Breathing zone samples are analyzed in the same manner as the area air samples (i.e., by TEM and elemental mass). 

### 4.0 Air Sampling Instrumentation and Filter Media Used in the Initial Assessment The following instrumentation is used by NIOSH; however, use does not constitute endorsement. 4.1 TSI model 3007 (or model 8525) (TSI Inc, Shoreview, MN), handheld con

densation particle counter (CPC), which uses isopropanol to condense on particles so they can be counted The TSI units provide a non-spe

cific measure of the total number of particles independent of chemi

cal identity per cubic centimeter of air (P/cm 3 ). The measureable range is between 10–1,000 nm for model 3007, or between 20–1,000 nm for model 8525. The range of detec

tion for these instruments is re

ported by the manufacturer to be 0–100,000 P/cm 3
. 4.2 ART Instruments Hand Held Particle Counter (HHPC-6, ART Instruments, Grants Pass, Oregon), which operates on optical counting principles using laser light scattering. The HHPC-6 optical particle coun

ter (OPC) can measure the total number of particles per liter (P/L)Appendix

Approaches to Safe Nanotechnology 73 Appendix of air independent of chemical iden

tity within six specific size ranges. The OPC used by the NIOSH field research team provides particle counts in the following size cut

points: 300 nm; 500 nm; 1,000 nm; 3,000 nm; 5,000 nm; and 10,000 nm. The range of detection for this instru

ment is reported by the manufacturer to be 0−70,000 P/L. Different manu

facturers’ OPCs may have slightly dif

ferent particle size ranges and could be substituted. 4.3 Appropriate air sampling filter media (e.g. mixed cellulose ester, quartz fi

ber filter) are selected depending on nanoparticle type and desired analyt

ical information (e.g., determination of particle morphology using TEM or SEM, elemental analysis for met

als, elemental analysis for carbon) 4.4 Air sampling pumps capable of sam

pling at high flow rates (e.g., 7 liters per minute or other flow rate depend

ing upon the duration of the task and the appropriate NIOSH method, if a method is available) 4.5 Sampling pump flow calibrator 4.6 If desired, personal cascade impactor or respirable cyclone (see 5.3.3) 4.7 If desired, cassette conductive cowl (see 5.3.3) 4.8 Optional research-grade particle analyzers for expanded surveys (see 5.6.1) 4.9 Optional surface sampling sup

plies such as substrate (e.g., Ghost WipesTM), disposable 10 cm × 10 cm templates, sterile containers, and nitrile gloves for handling media (see 5.6.2) 

### 5.0 Evaluation of Potential Releases of Engineered Nanomaterials 5.1 Identify Potential Sources of Emissions The overall purpose of this step is to develop a list of target areas and tasks that will be evaluated with the par

ticle analyzers. The initial assessment involves iden

tifying the potential sources of en

gineered nanomaterial emissions by reviewing the type of process, process flow, material inputs and discharges, tasks, and work practices. When available, literature (e.g., MSDS, re

cords of feedstock materials) is re

viewed to gain an understanding of the engineered nanomaterials being produced or used, including their physicochemical properties such as size, shape, solubility, and reactivity. Once the potential sources of emis

sions have been identified from the process review, the industrial hygien

ist (or other qualified person): Conducts an observational walk



## • through survey of the produc

tion area and processes to locate potential sources of emissions. Determines the frequency and 

## • duration of each operation and the type of equipment used for handling and containment of the material.74 Approaches to Safe Nanotechnology Appendix Appendix Determines the presence/absence 

## • of general and local exhaust ven

tilation and other engineering controls. (This initial assess

ment includes identifying points of potential system failure that could result in emission from the containment/control system [e.g., hole in duct, deteriorated sealing gasket]). Determines the process points 

## • where containment is deliber

ately breached (e.g., opening system for product retrieval or for cleaning). 5.2 Conduct Particle Concentration Sampling 5.2.1 Background measurements Determining the contribution of background particle concentrations on measurements made for the parti

cles of interest (e.g., engineered nano

particles) is an important evaluation of assessing the possible airborne re

lease of engineered nanoparticles. Ideally, during the initial assessment, the industrial hygienist (or other qual

ified person), will determine the aver

age airborne particle concentration at various processes and adjacent work areas with the CPC and OPC before the processing or handling of nano

materials begins. If the background particle concentrations are high (val

ues are relative and will vary with pro

cesses and facilities), an assessment is made as to whether there may be a source of incidental nanoparticles in the area. Incidental nanoparticles may be generated from a variety of sources, including vacuum pumps, natural gas heating units, gasoline/propane/die

sel powered fork lift trucks, or other combustion activities such as welding, soldering, or heat-sealing. The CPC and OPC can be used to check these sources for incidental nanoparticle releases. Outdoor or re-circulated air supply from the building ventilation system should also be considered as a possible source of nanoparticles [Pe

ters et al. 2006]. Measurements of background parti

cle concentrations are repeated after the active processing, manufacturing, or handling of the nanomaterial has ended. An average background con

centration is then computed and sub

tracted from the measurements made during processing, manufacturing, or the handling of engineered nanoma

terials. This approach is acceptable only if background particle counts remain relatively stable throughout the measurement period and particle emissions from the process under in

vestigation are sufficiently elevated above background. For other situ

ations, correcting for particle back

ground concentrations becomes more complex requiring additional sampling over an extended time pe

riod to determine the source(s) and magnitude of background particle concentrations. This type of evalua

tion is generally outside the scope of the initial assessment described here. 5.2.2 Area sampling Once initial background particle con

centrations have been determined, measurements of airborne particle concentrations and size ranges areAppendix

Approaches to Safe Nanotechnology 75 Appendix made with the CPC and OPC simul

taneously at locations near the sus

pected or likely emission source (e.g., opening a reactor, handling product, potential leak points in the ventila

tion system). Airborne particle con

centrations are determined before, during, and after each task or opera

tion to identify those factors (e.g., controls, worker interaction, work practices) that may affect airborne particle concentrations. This infor

mation is used to identify processes,locations, and personnel for filterbased air sampling (5.3). 5.3 Conduct Filter-based Area and Personal Air Sampling 5.3.1 Area air sampling A pair of filter-based, air samples are collected at process/task locations and/or workers engaged in process operations where suspected engi

neered nanomaterial emissions may occur, based on air sampling results using the CPC and OPC. Filter-based area air samples provide more specific information on the engineered nanomaterial of inter

est (e.g., size, shape, mass). The pair of air samples includes one sample analyzed for elemental mass and one sample analyzed by electron micros

copy. For example, one sample might be collected for metals determination (e.g., NIOSH Method 7300, 7303) or elemental carbon (e.g., NIOSH Method 5040) depending on the composition of the engineered nano

material. The other sample would be collected for particle characterization (e.g., size, shape, dimension, degree of agglomeration) by TEM or SEM using the measurement techniques specified in NIOSH Methods 7402, 7404, or other equivalent methods [NIOSH 1994]. The source-specific air samples are collected as close as possible to the suspected emission source but out

side of any existing containment, to increase the probability of detecting any possible release of engineered nanomaterials. Sampling duration generally matches the length of time in which the potential exposure to the engineered nanomaterial exists at the task or specific process. In cases where the duration of the tasks associated with the potential airborne release of nanomaterials is short (e.g., min

utes), a relatively high air sampling flow rate may be required (approxi

mately 7 liters per minute) to ensure adequate particle loading on the filter media. If specific information is de

sired on the worker’s potential expo

sure to the engineered nanomaterial then PBZ samples should be collect

ed using the two- sample filter-based sampling strategy described above. If the particle number concentrations (using CPC or OPC) are substantially high, then shorter sampling times for the TEM or SEM sample may be nec

essary to avoid overloading the filter and interfering with particle charac

terization. The specific sampling time should be based on direct-reading instrument results and professional judgment of the industrial hygien

ist. In general, filter samples are col

lected for the duration of a given task, normally 15–30 minutes. If the76 Approaches to Safe Nanotechnology Appendix Appendix direct-reading instruments indicate a high particle number concentration the sampling time can be shortened to 5–10 minutes, or both a short- and long-duration sample may be col

lected to ensure an adequate sample for electron microscopy analysis. See Table 1 for additional sampling time guidance. However, the sampling times in Table 1 were based on col

lection of asbestos fibers by NIOSH Method 7402 and may not be appli

cable for much smaller engineered nanoparticles. See Figures 3–5 for ex

ample TEM micrographs. A minimum of 2 background filter samples are collected distant from the potential sources of engineered nanoparticle exposure to serve as an indicator of ambient particle identi

fication and concentration. 5.3.2 Personal air samples When possible, personal breathing zone (PBZ) air samples are collected on workers likely to be exposed to en

gineered nanomaterials (e.g., engaged in active handling of nanomaterials or operating equipment previously identified as emitting nanoparticles). If measurements obtained with the CPC and OPC indicate that nano

particles are being emitted at a specif

ic process where a worker is located, then the collection of PBZ samples may be warranted. PBZ samples are analyzed in the same manner as the area air samples (i.e., by TEM and elemental mass). It may be necessary to collect samples at a relatively high flow rate (e.g., 7 liters per minute) if the duration of the task and the resulting potential exposure is short. 5.3.3 Optional sample collection In the event that measurements made by the OPC indicate a large fraction (over 50%) of particles ex

ceeding 1,000 nm in size, the use of a personal cascade impactor or respi

rable cyclone sampler in tandem with a filter-based air sampling cassette may be required for both the mass and TEM/SEM analyses to eliminate large particles that may interfere with analysis and be of limited interest. The use of an impactor or cyclone will require using a flow rate appro

priate for the particle cut size and is usually in the range of 1.7–2.5 liters per minute. Open-face, and impactor or cyclone samples may be collected side by side to allow a more thorough interpretation of analytical results. Additionally, if it is anticipated that the nanoparticles of interest will have a tendency to be electrostatically at

tracted to the sides of the plastic air sampling cassette, a conductive cowl may be necessary to eliminate par

ticle loss and subsequent underesti

mation of the airborne nanoparticle concentration. The use of a personal cascade impactor, respirable cyclone, or conductive cowl is made at the dis

cretion of the industrial hygienist (or other qualified person). If the facility is manufacturing or us

ing TiO 2 , then the sampling should in

clude the sampling recommendations found in the NIOSH Draft Document: Evaluation of Health Hazard and Recom

mendations for Occupational Exposure to Titanium Dioxide ( www.cdc.gov/Appendix

Approaches to Safe Nanotechnology 77 Appendix niosh/review/public/TiO2/default. html ),which recommends collecting a mass-based airborne measurement using NIOSH Method 0600. 5.4 Quality Assurance and Quality Control To ensure valid emission measure

ments, the following quality assurance and control steps should be taken:Use factory calibrated direct

## • reading particle analyzers Perform daily zero-checks on all 

## • particle counters before each use Calibrate pumps before and af



## • ter each sampling day Submit for analysis any process, 

## • background, and bulk mate

rial samples along with field and media blanks to a labora

tory accredited by the American Industrial Hygiene Association (AIHA) 5.5 Data Interpretation Since the size of airborne engineered nanoparticles and the degree of ag

glomeration may be unknown at the time of sample collection, the use of direct-reading, particle sizing/ counting instruments may provide a semi-quantitative indication of the magnitude of potential emissions, provided background particle num

ber subtraction can be successfully accomplished. The particle number concentration measurements taken with the CPC and OPC will provide a measurement of particles larger than the ASTM definition of nanoparticles (1–100 nm) [ASTM 2006]. However, the two particle counters can be usedsimultaneously to obtain a semiquantitative size differential evalu

ation of the aerosol being sampled. The CPC provides a measure of to

tal particles per cm 3 in the size range of 10–1,000 nm (or 20–1,000 nm). The OPC provides the total number of particles per liter of air within six specific size ranges: 300 nm; 500 nm; 1,000 nm, 3,000 nm, 5,000 nm and > 10,000 nm. If necessary, the data from the CPC and OPC can be used together to determine the number concentration of nanoscale particles. For example, a high particle number concentration on the CPC, in com

bination with a high particle num

ber concentration in the small size ranges (300–500 nm) on the OPC, may indicate the possible presence of nanoscale particles. Conversely, a low CPC particle number concentration, in combination with a high OPC particle number concentration in the larger size ranges (> 1,000 nm) may indicate the presence of larger par

ticles and/or engineered nanoparticle agglomerates. These assumptions of nanoparticles versus larger particles and/or nanoparticle agglomerates may be verified by TEM or SEM anal

ysis. 5.5.1 Selectivity Selectivity is a critical issue when characterizing exposure using air

borne particle number concentration. Airborne nanoparticles are present in many workplaces and often origi

nate from multiple sources such as combustion, vehicle emissions, and78 Approaches to Safe Nanotechnology Appendix Appendix infiltration of outside air. Particle counters are generally not selective to particle source or composition, mak

ing it difficult to differentiate between incidental and process-related nano

particles using number concentration alone. The CPC and OPC are used to identify sources of nanoparticles and the filter-based samples are used to verify the size, shape, and chemical composition of the nanoparticles with the goal of differentiating between incidental and engineered nanopar

ticles. 5.5.2 Limitations The exposure assessment technique does have some limitations includ

ing: Although this issue is not unique



## • to particle number concentra

tion measurements, orders of magnitude difference can exist in aerosol number concentra

tions, depending on the number and types of sources of particle emissions. Monitoring over sev

eral days and during different seasons can provide a better un

derstanding of the variability that might exist in airborne particle number concentrations found in background measurements and in measurements made at sources where engineered nano

materials are handled. The upper dynamic range of 

## • the CPC is 100,000 P/cm 3 . A dilutor, consisting of a modi

fied HEPA filter cartridge placed upstream of the inlet, can ex

tend the range of the CPC when particle number concentrations are greater than 100,000 P/cm 3 [Peters et al. 2006; Heitbrink et al. 2007; Evans et al. 2008]. The analysis of air samples by 

## • TEM or SEM with energy dis

persive X-ray spectrometry can provide information on the el

emental composition of the nanomaterials. However, TEM and SEM analysis can be com

promised if there is particle overload on the filter. Alterna

tively, if the loading is too sparse, an accurate assessment of par

ticle characteristics may not be possible (see 5.3.1). Note that area samples are col



## • lected as closely as possible to the source of emission to allow for more accurate determination of a nanoparticle release and to identify locations most likely to result in worker exposure. Therefore, results from this type of sampling should not be interpreted as representative of worker exposure. However, samples collected in such a fash

ion should serve as an indicator of material release and the pos

sible need for controls. 5.6 Expanded Research (In Depth Assessments) 5.6.1 Research instrumentation A major obstacle in conducting more specific measurement of engineered nanomaterials in the workplace is a lack of field-portable instruments that can be easily maneuvered withinAppendix

Approaches to Safe Nanotechnology 79 Appendix a facility or easily worn by a worker to provide an indication of PBZ expo

sure. Additionally, there is no single instrument capable of measuring the numerous potential exposure metrics associated with engineered nanoma

terials (e.g., number concentration, surface area, size, shape, mass concen

tration) [Maynard and Aitken 2007]. Although the following instruments lack field portability and ease of use, they can measure many of the desir

able exposure metrics and provide information about the particle size distribution. These research-grade particle analyzers are not usually part of the initial assessment but are used when additional knowledge about the nanoscale particle temporal or spatial exposure variation or size dis

tribution is desired. 5.6.1.1 Particle Surface-Area Analyzers Toxicology studies have indicated that surface area of nanoparticles may be an important exposure dose metric. Portable aerosol diffusion chargers may be used to provide estimates of external aerosol surface area when airborne particles are smaller than 100 nm in diameter, but these may tend to overestimate external surface area when particles are larger than 100 nm in diameter. These instru

ments are based on diffusion charging followed by detection of the charged aerosol using an electrometer. The TSI AerotrakTM 9000 Nanoparticle Aerosol Monitor does not measure to

tal active surface area but indicates the surface area of particles which may be deposited in the lung in units of square micrometers per cubic centimeter, corresponding to either the tracheo

bronchial or alveolar regions of the lung. The Ecochem DC 2000-CE measures the total particle surface area. These devices are currently being evaluated as part of the process used by NIOSH to conduct initial assess

ments. These particle surface analyz

ers are used as area samplers. 5.6.1.2. Scanning Mobility Particle Sizer More specific depictions of particles by size (diameter) and number can greatly improve the ability to evaluate possible releases of engineered nano

particles. One particular instrument, the Scanning Mobility Particle Sizer (SMPS) measures particle diameters from 2.5–1,000 nm and can display data as a size and number distribu

tion using up to 167 size channels. The SMPS is widely used as a re

search tool for characterizing nano

scale aerosols. The SMPS employs a continuous, fast-scanning technique to provide high-resolution measure

ments. However, the SMPS may take 2–3 minutes to scan which may not be useful for the process screening in workplaces with highly variable aero

sol size distributions. Its applicability for use in the workplace may be lim

ited because of its size, cost, and use of an internal radioactive source. The Fast Mobility Particle Sizer (FMPS) is similar to the SMPS but has a much faster response time (approx

imately 1 second). However, because it has fewer particle size channels, it does not include the same level of de

tail on particle size distributions that can be determined with the SMPS.80 Approaches to Safe Nanotechnology Appendix Appendix The FMPS and SMPS are used as area samplers. 5.6.1.3 Low Pressure Impactors The Electrical Low Pressure Impactor (ELPI) combines diffusion charging and a cascade impactor to provide aerosol size distributions by aerody

namic diameter as determined real time by mass and number collected on a series of plates. Low pressure cascade impactors offer the ability to size particles and then conduct secondary analyses (e.g., metals analysis). However, these in

struments are sensitive to harsh field conditions and are not considered portable. The ELPI is used as an area sampler. 5.6.1.4 Tapered Element Oscillating Mi

crobalance The tapered element oscillating mi

crobalance (TEOM) is commonly used for sampling aerosols less than 1 μ m in diameter, however, the sam

pling inlet can be set to select different size fractions. The TEOM determines mass by detecting a change in vibra

tion frequency across a particle-col

lecting substrate. The TEOM can be configured to provide size-differenti

ated mass measurements and is used as an area sampler. 5.6.2 Surface sampling Surface sampling to detect the pres

ence of engineered nanomaterials is not routinely part of the initial assess

ment but may be conducted to deter

mine if surface contamination exists. Surface sampling does not provide size-specific information but may be useful for determining whether engi

neered nanomaterials have migrated away from active production or han

dling areas and have contaminated nonproduction work areas. The de

cision to collect surface samples is made in the field at the discretion of the industrial hygienist (or other qualified person), and is dependent on direct observation and the nano

material of interest. For example, surface sampling was completed at a quantum dot facility after observ

ing dusty surfaces in areas adjacent to the production area. In order to de

termine if the dust was contaminated with quantum dots, surface samples were collected and analyzed for the chemical components of the quan

tum dots produced by that facility. Surface wipe samples are collected using a pre-moistened substrate such as Ghost WipeTM towelettes in ac

cordance with NIOSH Method 9102 for elements or the NIOSH method for specific elements (e.g., NIOSH Method 9100 for lead). When collect

ing wipe samples, the following steps should be followed: Don a pair of nitrile disposable 

## • gloves Wipe the surface within a dispos



## • able 10 cc × 10 cc template using four horizontal s-shaped strokes Fold the exposed side of the wipe 

## • in and wiping the same area with four vertical s-shaped strokes Fold the wipe, exposed side in, and 

## • placing it into a sterile containerAppendix

Approaches to Safe Nanotechnology 81 Appendix Gloves and template are discard

ed after each sample collection toeliminate the possibility of crosscontaminating successive samples. Wipe samples may be collected from undisturbed horizontal surfaces throughout the facility at locations suspected to be contaminated and in areas expected to be free of engi

neered nanomaterials. Wipe samples are analyzed following the appropri

ate NIOSH method for the chemical substance of interest. 

### 6.0 Conclusions The NIOSH initial assessment tech

nique uses complimentary approaches to semi-quantitatively evaluate the po

tential releases of engineered nanopar

ticles. Two different particle counters are used in a parallel and differential manner to evaluate the total particle number relative to background and the relative size distribution of the particles. If this initial evaluation in

dicates an elevated number of small particles, which could potentially be the engineered nanoparticle of inter

est, then the particle counters are used to detect the source of the emissions. If nanoparticles are found and deter

mined to be emitted from a specific process (versus background incidental nanoscale particles), then additional samples are collected for qualitative measurement of particle size and shape, (by TEM or SEM analysis) and for determination of elemental mass concentration (by chemical analysis). The initial assessment technique is useful for determining wheth

er airborne releases of engineered nanomaterials are occurring at po

tential emission sources. This assess

ment provides a semi-quantitative means for determining whether ex

isting measures are adequate for con

trolling nanomaterial emissions or if additional controls may be required. The NIOSH emission assessment technique may be useful to health and safety professionals who are in

terested in determining whether re

lease of nanomaterials occurs in the workplace. Where possible, use of the technique should be repeated in workplaces of interest to gain a better understanding of the daily fluctuations in airborne exposures at processes and tasks in which en

gineered nanomaterials occur and for determining potential sources of background particle number concen

trations. A more systematic and rou

tine assessment of the workplace can provide more definitive information on the performance of control mea

sures and if additional actions are needed to reduce worker exposure. The initial assessment technique can be expanded or modified to determine additional metrics (Figure 6). Research initiatives addressing more compre

hensive process monitoring, particle metrics, personal exposure monitoring, and method/approach development and validation are currently underway within NIOSH. As this information becomes available, revisions to the Ap

proaches to Safe Nanotechnology doc

ument will be made. Information about contacting the nanotechnology field research team is available at: [www.cdc.gov/niosh/82 Approaches to Safe Nanotechnology Appendix Appendix docs/2008-121], see the Fact Sheet: NIOSH Nanotechnology Field Re

search Effort [NIOSH 2008]. 

### 7.0 ReferencesASTM International [2006] ASTME2456–06 Standard terminology re

lating to nanotechnology Evans DE, Heitbrink WA, Slavin TJ, Peters TM [2008]. Ultrafine and re

spirable particles in an automotive grey iron foundry. Ann Occup Hyg 52 (1):9–21. Heitbrink WA, Evans DE, Peters TM, Slavin TJ [2007]. The characteriza

tion and mapping of very fine par

ticles in an engine machining and assembly facility. J Occup Environ Hyg 4 :341–351. NIOSH [2008]. NIOSH Fact Sheet: NIOSH Nanotechnology Field Re

search Effort, Cincinnati, OH: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Con

trol and Prevention, National In

stitute for Occupational Safety and Health. DHHS (NIOSH) Publication No. 2008–121 [http://www.cdc.gov/ niosh/docs/2008-121/]. NIOSH [1994]. NIOSH manual of analytical methods (NMAM®), 4th ed. By Schlecht PC, O’Conner PF, eds. Cincinnati, OH: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health. DHHS (NIOSH) Publication No. 94–113 [ www.cdc. gov/niosh/nmam/ ]. Maynard A, Aitken R [2007]. Assessing exposure to airborne nanomaterials: current abilities and future require

ments. Nanotoxicology 1 (1):26–41. Maynard A, Baron P, Foley M, Shve

dova A, Kisin E, Castranova V [2004] Exposure to carbon nanotube ma

terial: Aerosol release during the handling of unrefined single walled carbon nanotubes material. J Toxi

cology. Environmental Health Part A, 67 : 1; 87–107. Methner MM, Birch ME, Evans DE, Ku BK, Crouch KG, Hoover MD [2007]. Mazzukelli LF, ed: Case study: Identification and characterization of potential sources of worker ex

posure to carbon nanofibers during polymer composite laboratory op

erations. J Occup Environ Hyg 4 (12): D125–D130. Methner M [2008]. Engineering case reports. Old L, ed. Effectiveness of lo

cal exhaust ventilation in controlling engineered nanomaterial emissions during reactor cleanout operations. J Occup Environ Hyg 5 (6): D63–D69. Peters T, Heitbrink W, Evans D, Slavin T, Maynard A [2006]. The mapping of fine and ultrafine particle concen

trations in an engine machining and assembly facility. Ann Occup Hyg 50 (3):1–9.Appendix Table 1. Approximate sampling times for TEM grid based on particle number concentrations * . Open-faced cassettes TEM grid 25-mm 37-mm 47-mm Diameter (mm) 3.0 25.0 37.0 47.0 Eff ective diameter (mm) 3.0 22.2 34.2 44.2 Eff ective collection area 7 385 916 1531 (mm 2 ) Flow (L/min) 0.1 7 7 7 Desired Loading (#/mm 2 ) 1.E+06 1.E+06 1.E+06 1.E+06 Air concentration (#/cm 3 ) Time (min) 250 282.7 220.2 523.4 874.8 500 141.4 110.1 261.7 437.4 1,000 70.7 55.0 130.8 218.7 2,000 35.3 27.5 65.4 109.4 4,000 17.7 13.8 32.7 54.7 8,000 8.8 6.9 16.4 27.3 16,000 4.4 3.4 8.2 13.7 32,000 2.2 1.7 4.1 6.8 64,000 1.1 0.9 2.0 3.4 128,000 0.6 0.4 1.0 1.7

* NIOSH NMAM Method 7402 Asbestos by TEM and personal communication with

Dr. Aleksandr Stefaniak (NIOSH)

Approaches to Safe Nanotechnology 8384 Approaches to Safe Nanotechnology Appendix Appendix

Figure 1. A demonstration of the initial assessment technique with side-by-side sampling using (from left to right) the OPC, co-located open-face filter cassettes, and the CPC: examples of PBZ and source-specific filter-based sampling setup.Appendix

Approaches to Safe Nanotechnology 85 Appendix

Figure 2. Summary of the initial assessment technique

Figure 4. Electron microscopy micrograph of a carbon nanofiber and carbon nanotube Figure 3. Electron microscopy micrograph of a carbon nanofiber Carbon Nanotube
Carbon Nanofiber86 Approaches to Safe Nanotechnology Appendix

Figure 5. Electron microscopy micrograph of an agglomerated nanoparticle of nickel oxide

Figure 6. Considerations for expanded nanomaterial assessmentsAppendixTo receive NIOSH documents or more information aboutoccupational safety and health topics, contact NIOSH at1–800–CDC–INFO(1–800–232–4636)TTY: 1–888–232–6348E-mail: cdcinfo@cdc.govor visit the NIOSH Web site atwww.cdc.gov/niosh.For a monthly update on news at NIOSH, subscribe toNIOSHeNewsby visitingwww.cdc.gov/niosh/eNews.DHHS (NIOSH) Publication No. 2009–125safer • healthier • peopletmDelivering on the Nation’s promise:safety and health at work for all peoplethrough research and prevention

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Centers for Disease Control and Prevention National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health 4676 Columbia Parkway Cincinnati, Ohio 45226–1998 Official Business Penalty for Private Use $300