Present:
Marc Aarens, Academic Legislative Issues, UC Office of the President
George Alexeeff, Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment
Syed Ali, State Water Resources Control Board
Richard Bode, Calif. Air Resources Board
Steven Book, Dept. of Health Services
Arthur Fong, Corporate Environmental Affairs, IBM Corporation
Kean  Goh,  Dept. of  Pesticide Regulation
John Knezovich, TSR&TP Interim Director
Bruce LaBelle, Dept. of Toxic Substances  Control
Jerold Last, TSR&TP Director Emeritus
Steve Macaulay, Calif.  Urban Water Agencies
Marion Miller, TSR&TP Associate Director
Lisa Stevenson, TSR&TP Program Manager
Leslie Stewart, League of Women Voters
Jim Stratton, Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment
Mika Pringle Tolson, TSR&TP Program Technical Coordinator
Winona Victery, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

Not Present:
Martin Bloes, Geomatrix Consultants
Tam Doduc, Calif. Environmental Protection Agency
Charles Lapin, Lapin & Associates
Cathie Magowan, Office of the V.P.  Academic Affairs, UC Office of the President
Laureen O'Connell, Office of Research, UC Office of the President
Kip Wiley, Senate Office of Research

Jim Stratton brought the meeting to order at 10:10am and asked everyone to introduce themselves.  Minutes from the spring meeting were reviewed.  Leslie Stewart motioned to approve the minutes as is.  All were in favor and none opposed.

Stratton asked the committee to bring up any current and emerging areas of interest.

Richard Bode presented details on the Air Resources Board's (ARB) $6 million extramural research program.  He handed out copies of the draft annual plan for research for 2004-05.  Bode said Cal EPA would like to publicize the availability of research funds more broadly in the future. When the announcement for 2005-06 funds is available, he would like the TSR&TP to disseminate it to the program's email lists and post it on the website.  Bode provided some details on the process.  The ARB requests one page concept papers for research areas from public and university researchers.  These concept papers are evaluated by a research screening committee at the ARB who then solicits full proposals from a select group.  The proposals are reviewed and final funding decisions are made by the Executive Office.  The ARB has a 10-year strategic plan for areas they want to fund such as environmental justice, long-range health effects of air pollution, atmospheric chemistry, and an innovative technology program for pollution control. Time frame:  concept papers will be due in early spring.  Bode will send a copy of last year's plan to the TSR&TP Director's Office to show what research has been funded.  About $6 million is available per year, and proposal funding is proportionate to the work being done.  For example, a 2-3 year project on atmospheric chemistry could be funded for $50,000. UC and other research institutions are welcome to apply. Bode said he would like to see more pre-proposals from UC researchers.

Bruce LaBelle asked if the TSR&TP research needs of MTBE and perchlorate are still pertinent.  Marion Miller responded that perchlorate is still a topical issue – it's not going away.  Winona Victery said their EPA science advisory board meeting in September had a presentation on perchlorate and there's still a lot of interest in where this is going.  

Victery said EPA Region 9 has been focusing on regional issues such as the Central Valley and San Joaquin air quality and water quality, south coast air quality, border air quality, and border issues in general. Region 9 will be meeting with the CDC and various air quality agencies at the end of October, and this is an opportunity to put ideas together for integrated projects where they can benefit each other.  Another important issue for the EPA right now is health and environmental indicators for measuring results.

Arthur Fong mentioned that a hot issue for the IT industry is nanotechnology.  There's lots of activity in planning for pilot projects.  On November 7-11, the International Congress of Nanotechnology will hold the 2004 Nano World Expo in San Francisco.  One of the key issues for discussion is the societal and environmental impacts of nanotechnology.  The European Union (EU) recently issued a report on risk assessment of nanotech.  Standard risk assessment is not possible at this point because there's too little data.  The government sponsored program on nanotech is setting aside ~10% of its research funds on society and environmental health and safety issues –a total of > $900 million will be spent on nanotechnology R&D this year.  Fong said the ability to do inhalation studies with nanoparticles is somewhat limited.  There are really no definitive or accurate measurements of exposure levels at the present and this is an area where UC researchers can make contributions.  John Knezovich asked if there are other issues besides inhalation.  Fong answered that fate and transport, life cycle analysis, what happens to the particles in the atmosphere and UV interactions are all issues.  Very few studies have been published on the aquatic toxicology of these nanoparticles.  The IT industry is particularly interested in protecting researchers and the probability of emissions and release and their potential health impacts once nanoparticles enter the consumer market.  George Alexeeff added that bioavailability in general and how these nanoparticles interact biologically are also concerns.  Fong mentioned that IBM has been approached by cancer researchers who are trying to incorporate nanoparticles into chemotherapy.  They are difficult to radiolabel and no one knows what happens to nanoparticles when they get into the cells.  Fong said basic pharmacokinetic and toxicity studies are also needed.

Stratton asked about staffing issues companies are facing.  Fong said there's an anticipated shortage of tens of thousands of scientists and engineers who would have an understanding of nanotech. According the government, nanotechnology is the next transformative industry in how it's going to change and shape our economy.

Syed Ali asked if UC Davis has courses on nanotechnology.  Last answered that there are courses for nanotech, but nanotoxicology is still lacking.  We're still a long way away from a skilled workforce, but groups are organizing to become centers on the topic.  Last asked if industry is doing anything proactive to increase researchers in this area.  Fong responded that he's part of a committee to determine the areas of research that are of interest to IT.  There's a pot of money available to fund research in nanotoxicology – there are data gaps that are of specific interest to the semiconductor industry.

Fong added that he's concerned about how the benefits of nanotech will be applied to society. People at the lower end of the socioeconomic spectrum are less likely to benefit, but may suffer the environmental consequences.  Public perception of nanotechnology is also a huge concern for the industrial sector.

Stratton asked about water issues.  Macaulay brought up the fate of pharmaceuticals. Last said the TSR&TP has funded research in this area.  Steve Book commented that pharmaceuticals are not counted as toxics but they are perceived as being toxic. Ali added that it's also about impacts to aquatic life and other animals.

Alexeeff said the issue of plant uptake and uptake in biological systems is important for perchlorate.  Early on it was thought that perchlorate was too water soluble for bioconcentration, but we've found that it is concentrated in plant material as a result of transpiration.  The questions are: what are the differences in bioconcentration in different plant material?  And what other water-soluble compounds should we look at for similar kinds of concentration? 

Steve Macaulay asked whom he could contact at UC about the fate of pharmaceuticals in the environment.  Last answered that David Sedlak of UC Berkeley has done a lot of work in this area.

Book said concerns about the non-detectables in wastewater are more and more important as we start moving toward desalination.  Are there unique things in seawater?  For example, there is concern about whether the neurotoxins from diatoms will be removed. Stewart added that disposal of the sludge is also a concern.  How much does treatment take out and what happens to the sludge afterward?

Kean Goh said the Department of Pesticide Regulation has been pleasantly surprised with West Nile mosquito control. To his knowledge, the Department has not received any complaints or concerns on adverse environmental or health impacts from insecticide applications. Stratton commented that West Nile Virus has been detected everywhere in California, but we've been able to keep infections down because there are a number of preventative measures in place.

Jerry Last began the Report from the Director's Office by introducing John Knezovich as the new interim director.  Knezovich has served as a member of the TSR&TP Executive Committee, and as an Associate Director of the program. Knezovich gave some background on his experience.  He has been a scientist at Lawrence Livermore National Lab for the past 21 years, and director of the Center for Accelerator Mass Spectrometry (CAMS) since 1998.  The mass spec technology has broad applications to biomedicine, pharmacology, and toxicology.  For example, the center has the ability to measure radiolabeled compounds such as carbon 14 at one million times lower than conventional detection techniques, allowing scientists to perform experiments that we didn't even know we could perform.  CAMS scientists collaborate with UC campuses and with campuses all over the country. CAMS was built in the late 1980s partly with funding from the UC Office of the President. Knezovich said he was attracted to CAMS by the ability to bring together interdisciplinary research teams to solve problems, and this is also what attracts him to the TSR&TP.  He believes toxicology problems can be attacked from many different angles, and his major challenge in the next few years as director is to reinvigorate the lead campus programs. Knezovich sees his role as bringing faculty members together in areas recommended by this committee to do interdisciplinary research. 

Knezovich announced that the TSR&TP has a new RFP out for lead campus groups and proposals will be evaluated at the spring 2005 Executive Committee meeting.

Stratton mentioned that it's difficult to get input from the industry sector.  Stratton suggested that UCOP and TSR&TP think of ways of expanding methods for getting input from industry to identify emerging issues.  The Advisory Committee meeting format seems not to be effective for industry, although it's good for state agencies.  Knezovich agreed that geography is an issue for these meetings.  He welcomes recommendations on how to broaden the perspective of this group.  Stratton said videoconferencing, surveys, listserves, and solicitations to specific companies or trade groups might be helpful in connecting with industry.

Mika Tolson announced the 2005 TSR&TP Symposium to be held in Sacramento April 22-23, at the Sheraton Grand Hotel and the Sacramento Convention Center.  All Advisory Committee members are invited and encouraged to attend.  The theme will focus on policy and the regulatory connection with toxics.  Knezovich asked the committee for keynote speaker suggestions.  The secretary of Cal EPA was suggested.  Another suggestion was Dick Jackson, the current state public health officer, to talk about the public health aspects of the built environment.  He's the author of a book on public health and urban sprawl.  Victery added that he's also a very entertaining speaker.

Marc Aarens gave the budget report from UCOP.   He said this is another year of budget cuts, but next year UC will be under the state compact which will pay for increases in enrollment and funding for UC growth needs and faculty and staff salaries.  But, research funding is not part of the compact.  There probably won't be additions to the research cuts we've seen over the last few years, but the funding won't be restored to pre-cut levels either.  Research will likely be a steady state for the next couple of years.  

The committee broke for lunch at 12:15pm and reconvened at 12:45pm for George Alexeeff's presentation on the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA).

OEHHA is one of the six departments of Cal EPA – with approximately 115 staff and 1/6 of the budget.  There are 35-40 Ph.D. toxicologists of which 30 came from UC Davis.  OEHHA's focus is to look at health hazards in the environment, specifically on dose-response issues.  Their mission is to find chemicals that are bad actors and come up with regulations to protect the public. 

Bode presented a prioritized list of OEHHA's current concerns that have implications for UC research.  He would like to work with TSR&TP to try to get more funding for UC research in these areas. 

1. Risk for infants and children
1. Disposition of toxicity at different ages
2. Bioavailability from different sources, particularly of metals
1. Food sources versus water sources
3. Volatilization – especially for soils and water
1. Transfer from either soil to air or water to air
2. How this affects indoor environments

Jim Stratton asked if there was any old business.  There was none.  New business?  Lunchtime speakers?  John Knezovich mentioned that he'll invite Bob Spear to talk about his new TSR&TP research program on the toxic impacts of California's urban growth.  He asked the committee for suggestions for other topic areas.  Last said nanotoxicology is high on the list. 

Due to the problems with caterers entering the Cal EPA building, Stratton asked the committee for alternative locations. Macaulay volunteered his building at 455 Capitol Mall on the 7^th floor.  It's currently undergoing renovations, but they should be complete before the spring meeting. 

The meeting adjourned at 1:28pm.

---