Environmental Technology Verification (ETV) Program helping innovation, removing barriers

1. Teresa Harten, ETV Director State-EPA Symposium on Environmental Innovation and Results January 24-25, 2006 Denver, Colorado Environmental Technology Verification (ETV) Programhelping innovation, removing barriers

2. ETV Objectives • Provide credible performance information for commercial-ready technology to help solve high-risk environmental problems. Aid: • Policymakers and Regulators in making policy and permitting decisions for innovative technologies • Vendors/Developers in selling and further developing innovative technologies • Purchasers in making decisions to purchase innovative technologies

3. ETV Successes • 349 Verifications, 84 protocols since 1995 • Supports solving important environmental problems • Increasing: • Collaboration and privatization: funding from vendors and other partners at over 50% from others (30% cash and 20% in-kind) • Stakeholder participation – over 800 stakeholders in 21 groups • Web and international interest - >1.5 M hits/year • Over 50 homeland security technology verifications completed

4. Six ETV Centers • ETV Air Pollution Control Technology Center RTI International • ETV Advanced Monitoring Systems Center Battelle • ETV Drinking Water Systems Center NSF International • ETV Greenhouse Gas Technology Center Southern Research Institute • ETV Water Quality Protection Center NSF International • ETV P2 Coatings and Coating EquipmentPilot Concurrent Technologies Corporation

5. ETV Partners with States and others • U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration • Multi-parameter water probes, atrazine detection • U.S. Coast Guard • Ballast water treatment • U.S. Dept of Energy; States of Massachusetts, Connecticut; Illinois Clean Coal Institute • Continuous emission mercury monitors • U.S. Dept of Defense • Monitors for explosives, PCBs in soils; dust suppressants • States of Alaska, Pennsylvania, Michigan, California • Drinking water arsenic treatment

6. ETV Partners with States and others • States of/counties in Georgia, Kentucky, Michigan and EPA SBIR Program Storm water treatment • States of New York, Colorado Waste to energy • DuPont, USGS Nutrient monitors • Chlorine Chemistry Council, EPA-Office of Solid Waste and EPA-Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards Dioxin monitors • U.S. Dept of Agriculture Ambient ammonia monitors, hydrogen sulfide monitors

7. Clean Air Compliance in Texas,NOX Reduction Technology and ETV • NOx implicated in ground level ozone violations • 10 million population exposed • Texas is making $1 – 1.5 B available though 2010 for retrofits; grants available for verification and technology purchase • EPA SBIR (Small Business Innovative Research) to call for NOx technology proposals • ETV Program – to provide technology verification • Air Pollution Control Technology Center • Greenhouse Gas Technology Center • EPA Office of Transportation and Air Quality makes decisions on technology acceptance • EPA Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards makes decisions on State Implementation Plan (SIPs) credits

8. ETV Outreach • Stakeholders provide outreach • Centers provide specific outreach to users, especially state and local regulators • Example: NSF embarking on new effort to engage states in value of verification. Utah advises verification of drinking water equipment. • ETV program outreach – conferences (exhibits and presentations), website, papers, field days and press events

9. Association of State Drinking Water Administrators (ASDWA) Survey - 2003 • 24 states use ETV to reduce frequency/length of site specific pilot testing • 13 states use ETV reports as prerequisite to consideration of the technology • 15 states use ETV data as primary source for decision-making “[The] ETV drinking water initiative is …. an effective and useful tool to attain a more streamlined approach to technology application” and “in a relatively short time frame, state programs have significantly increased their awareness and use of protocols and test plans.” Bridgett O’Grady, ASDWA, 2004

11. Case Study: Diesel Retrofit • 7 technologies verified in 2003-5 • 6 reduce particulate matter (PM) by 21to 95% • Verification makes eligible for EPA’s Voluntary Diesel Retrofit grants program • 1,230 technologies installed as result of verification and grants • At 10% market penetration, for 7 yr use • reduction in PM calculated to be 9K to 31K tons • avoided premature mortality calculated to be 683 – 2,380 fewer deaths • $5 -18M in monetary benefits calculated

12. Case Study: Arsenic Removal from Drinking Water • Up to 3,900 small drinking water systems need options • 8 technologies verified in 2001-2004 (3 more in 2005 but not part of case study) • Average removal efficiencies of 50-95%; most reduced arsenic levels to 5 ppb or less • If 10% market penetration is achieved, • 1.3 to 1.9 avoided cases of lung and bladder cancer per year • 0.7 to 1.0 avoided deaths from the prevention of these cancers per year • $4.8 million to $6.8 million in savings per yeardue to the prevention of these cancers • Reduce pilot testing costs • ASDWA survey notes that most states use ETV to reduce the frequency and length of pilot testing