LIST OF USERS

Of Technology Tools and Methodologies Developed Under the Science and
Technology for Sustainability Multi-Year Plan and its Predecessor MYP

Environmental Technology and Verification (ETV) Program

1.  OPPT Using ETV Testing for Lead Test Kits: EPA Renovation Repair and
Painting Rule (see
http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/EPA-TOX/2008/April/Day-22/t8141.pdf)
requires ETV testing or approved equivalent ETV is referenced in the
Renovation, Repair and Painting Rule promulgated on March 31, 2008 that
includes a lead test kit recognition program. The recognition program
references ETV as the testing organization that will be used to evaluate
the test kits.  ETV is in the process of verifying the performance of
lead in paint test kits under an Environmental and Sustainable
Technology Evaluation (ESTE) project. 

2.  Generic Verification Protocol for Baghouse Filtration Products: A
Sept 26, 2007 memo from Steve Page, Director, OAQPS, to the EPA Regional
Air Division Directors, states OAQPS will consider use of the ETV
baghouse filtration protocol in future regulations, recommends regions
consider opportunities to employ protocols in state and local regulatory
programs, and suggests use of filter media tested under the ETV
protocol. On a related note, California’s Proposed Amended Rule 1156,
Further Reductions of Particulate Emissions from Cement Manufacturing
Facilities, June 13, 2008 states “In lieu of annual testing, the
operator who elects to use all (ETV) verified filtration products in its
baghouses shall conduct a compliance test every five years.”   

3.  Generic Verification Protocol for Diesel Exhaust Catalysts,
Particulate Filters, and Engine Modification Control Technologies for
Highway and Non-Road Use Diesel Engines The ETV Program includes three
well-accepted diesel retrofit technology protocols, which have advanced
efforts to standardize protocols across programs. The ETV protocols are
currently posted on the EPA’s Voluntary Diesel Retrofit Program (VDRP)
and ETV Web sites and can be used by retrofit technology manufacturers
and others to generate data on the performance of diesel engine retrofit
technologies. Technology vendors have submitted the data generated by
ETV using these protocols to the VDRP. VDRP has used this information to
determine, at least in part, whether to post ETV-verified technologies
on the VDRP-verified technology list. Posting on the VDRP list is
expected to reduce the amount of state- or program-specific testing
needed to evaluate retrofit technologies and determine the pollutant
reductions associated with their use.

4.  States use ETV protocols in wastewater rules and guidance:  In 2008,
ETV added seven states, in addition to two documented in 2005 or prior,
as referencing ETV in their regulations or guidance. 

	Florida - Florida Administrative Code 64E6.012, Applications for
Innovative System Permits and System Construction Permits, indicates
that an application for innovative system permits shall include:  (b)
Compelling evidence that the system will function properly and reliably
to meet the requirements of this chapter and Section 381.0065, F.S. Such
compelling evidence shall include one or more of the following from a
third-party testing organization approved through the NSF Environmental
Technology Verification Program.

	Idaho - The State Technical Guidance Manual (October 4, 2007) includes
references to "has successfully completed an EPA sanctioned
Environmental Technology Verification (ETV) test" for Extended
(Wastewater) Treatment Package Systems, as well as for nitrogen
reduction systems.

	Maryland - The BAT workgroup has adopted a protocol used by the
Environmental Protection Agency/Environmental Technology Verification
(EPA/ETV) to establish a procedure to verify the performance of nitrogen
reducing OSDS (onsite distribution systems).  Further, a review team
comprised of three engineers from MDE and one County Environmental
Health Director are reviewing the applications to ensure that each
technology has been third party evaluated to a standard at least as
stringent as the EPA/ETV's.

	Pennsylvania - The Experimental Onlot Wastewater Technology
Verification Program requires technologies accepted for performance
verification complete appropriate testing. . . following a protocol
developed by or in cooperation with ANSI and/or the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (ETV).

	Virginia - State DEQ encourages innovative technology developers and
vendors to use technology templates, such as the EPA Environmental
Technology Verification Program, to serve as means for potential
customers and regulators to see consistent descriptions, application
information, and performance data on new technologies.

	Washington - Rules (On-site Sewage Systems, Chapter 246-272A WAC,
Effective July 1, 2007) written for Testing Requirements for Proprietary
Treatment Products requires (1) EPA/NSF Protocol for the Verification of
Wastewater Treatment Technologies / EPA Environmental Technology
Verification (April 2001) for systems designed to treat high-strength
sewage when septic tank effluent is anticipated to be greater than
treatment level E. (Such as at restaurants, grocery stores, mini-marts,
group homes, medical clinics, residences, etc.); and (2) Protocol for
the Verification of Residential Wastewater Treatment Technologies for
Nutrient Reduction/EPA Environmental Technology Verification Program
(November, 2000) for residential and high strength wastewater
applications.

	Oregon - The State Administrative Rules for Approval of New or
Innovative Technologies, Materials, or Designs for Onsite Systems
specifies that the department may approve new or innovative
technologies, materials, or designs for onsite systems pursuant to this
rule if it determines they will protect public health, safety, and
waters of the state as effectively as systems authorized in this
division. The department must base approval on one or more of the
following:  (D) Certification of the new material, technology, or design
for proposed uses by NSF International, EPA's Environmental Technology
Verification (ETV) program, or another program providing certification
equivalent to the performance demonstration required by this rule and
approved by the department.

5.  States using ETV in drinking water regulations and guidance: 
Thirty-one states responding to the 2008 Association of State Drinking
Water Administrators (ASDWA) survey indicated that they can allow for
reduced pilot testing of drinking water treatment systems for those
products with acceptable ETV reports. 

Massachusetts regulation (Massachusetts Department of Environmental
Protection, Bureau of Resource Protection – Water Supply, BRP WS 27
Permits for New Technology with Third-party Approval) states that
verification reports can be used to qualify a technology for approval,
potentially with reduced pilot testing. 

The State of Utah’s drinking water regulations specifically identify
the ETV Program as a source of performance verification data. (See Utah
Safe Drinking Water Act; R309535-13; June 2005.). The Utah Department of
Environmental Quality Web site also states: “A number of treatment
processes have undergone rigorous testing under the EPA's Environmental
Technology Verification Program (ETV). If a particular treatment process
is a "verified technology", it may be accepted in Utah without further
pilot plant testing.”  (See
http://www.drinkingwater.utah.gov/plan_review_intro.htm for quote.)  

The State of Washington's water system design manual references ETV
protocols for surface water treatment.  (See
http://www.doh.wa.gov/ehp/dw/DesignManual/chapter12.DOC)

6. Generic Verification Protocol for Determination of Emissions from
Outdoor Wood-Fired Hydronic Heaters:  EPA OAQPS is participating in the
development of a Model Rule that will help states and local agencies
that choose to regulate emissions from outdoor wood-fired hydronic
heaters (OWHH) and a voluntary program for testing and disclosing
emission performance. The OWHH has identified ETV as "an independent,
objective and high quality source of performance information" for
assessing OWHH performance; ETV published a protocol in June 2008 for
verifying OWHH performance.  (See http://www.epa.gov/woodheaters).  

Massachusetts has proposed regulation for outdoor hydronic heaters (310
CMR 7.26(50) Outdoor Hydronic Heaters) identifies ETV as a source for
emission test data (see 310 CMR 7.26(50) Outdoor Hydronic Heaters)

NESCAUM's proposed rule
(http://www.nescaum.org/topics/outdoor-hydronic-heaters) requires
testing via ETV.

7. OPP using ETV and its pesticide spray drift research to develop
pesticide risk assessment and labeling requirements.  OPP intends to use
verified drift-reduction technologies in its pesticide risk assessments
and registration decisions (Interview, J. Ellenberger, OPP, Daily
Environment Report, May 21, 2007).  The ESTE spray drift project is
covered in page 7 of the draft pesticide registration notice for
pesticide spray drift entitled " Pesticide Registration (PR) Notice
2008-X Draft: Pesticide Drift Labeling" 

8. ETV reports and data were used during EPA's decision to retain
Syngenta Method AG-625 as an approved method for atrazine, subject to
certain conditions.  (See 40 CFR Part 122, 136, et al.;  Guidelines
Establishing Test Procedures for the Analysis of Pollutants Under the
Clean Water Act; National Primary Drinking Water Regulations;  and
National Secondary Drinking Water Regulations; Analysis and Sampling
Procedures; Final Rule; March 12, 2007).  

9. EPA referenced nine ETV verification reports and two verification
protocols in the final drinking water LT2 rule.  (See 40 CFR Parts 9,
141, and 142; National Primary Drinking Water Regulations: Long Term 2
Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule; Final Rule; January 5, 2006) 
Additionally, EPA defined a set of test conditions that must be met for
an acceptable challenge test to be used for compliance with the
LT2ESWTR. These conditions provide only a framework for the challenge
test and States may develop additional testing requirements. The draft
Toolbox Guidance Manual identifies the ETV Protocol for Equipment
Verification Testing for Physical Removal of Microbiological and
Particulate Contaminants as containing sections that provide guidance
for developing and conducting a bag and cartridge filter challenge test
for LT2ESWTR.  

10. TV reports and data were used to inform the development of
Continuous Instrumental Test Methods Rule.  (See, 40 CFR Part 60; Update
of Continuous Instrumental Test Methods; Final Rule; May 15, 2006 at
http://www.epa.gov/EPA-AIR/2006/May/Day-15/a4196.htm).

11. The California State Lands Commission (Commission) Marine Invasive
Species Program’s (MISP) Ballast Water Treatment Technology Testing
Guidelines is based on the ETV “Draft generic protocol for
verification of ballast water treatment technologies” which was
developed as a joint effort by ETV’s WQPC and the USCG.  (See
http://www.slc.ca.gov/Spec_Pub/MFD/Ballast_Water/Documents/TestingGuidel
inesFinal_101008.pdf for more information)   

Others can be found in the two case study documents we produced in 2006.
 They can be found at http://www.epa.gov/etv/pubs/600r06001pv.pdf and
http://www.epa.gov/etv/pubs/600r06082pv.pdf, respectively.

Sustainable Materials And Residuals managemenT (SMART) Decision Support
Tool (Previously referred to as the Municipal Solid Waste DST)

Sandra Cointreau

Solid Waste Management Advisor

World Bank

Brian Bahor

Covanta Projects, Inc.

Fairfield, NJ 07004

Frank Ferraro

Wheelabrator Technologies, Inc.

Hampton, NH  03842

Daniel Dietch

CH2MHILL  

Coral Gables, FL  33134

William Brandes and Jesse Miller

EPA, Office of Solid Waste

1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, N. W. 

Washington, DC 20460

H. Scott Matthews

Associate Professor of Civil and Environmental Engineering and Public
Policy

Research Director, Green Design Institute Carnegie Mellon University

Pittsburgh, PA 15213

Debra R. Reinhart, PhD, PE, BCEE

Interim Director NanoScience Technology Center

Interim Assistant VP for Research

University of Central Florida

Orlando, FL  32826

Jenna R. Jambeck, Ph.D.

Research Assistant Professor

Environmental Research Group

Department of Civil/Environmental Engineering 

University of New Hampshire 

Durham, NH  03824

Application of SMART Tool

The tool has been used to support decisions at the global, national,
regional and community levels.  Places where it has been applied in one
or multiple municipal solid waste (MSW) studies are as follows:  

Communities include: Anderson County, S.C.; Atlanta, Georgia; Edmonton,
Alberta; Lucas County, Ohio; Madison, Wisconsin; Minneapolis, Minnesota;
Portland, Oregon; Seattle, Washington; Spokane, Washington; Tacoma,
Washington; and Wake County, N.C.; U.S. EPA’s RTP Facility

State or Regional studies include: Great River Regional Waste Authority,
Iowa; California; Delaware; Georgia; Hawaii; New York; Virgin Islands;
Washington; Wisconsin;; U.S. Navy Region Northwest; Greater Regional
Vancouver

The tool has also been used in a U.S. GHG Study for U.S. Conference of
Mayors and globally in World Bank funded study of 10 different
communities of which 8 are in economically developing countries.  

Example applications of the SMART-DST include:

Estimate the environmental and cost implications of existing and new 
management  programs such as expansion of curb-side recycling programs

Develop waste management plans in a more regional/integrated fashion

Quantify carbon emissions or emission reductions for GHG reduction
programs or in meeting renewable portfolio standards

Evaluate new waste management technologies such as waste conversion
technologies

Measure progress over time in meeting environmental goals

Identify which materials in MSW will obtain greater environmental
benefit from source reduction and materials recovery programs.

Waste Reduction Algorithm (WAR Algorithm) 

[These are researchers who used WAR in their own research projects not
just citations.]

1)  Auburn University (Auburn, AL)

2)  Brandenburg Technical University Cottbus (Cottbus, Germany)

3)  Chinese Academy of Sciences (Beijing, China)

4)  Danish Technical University (Lyngsby, Denmark)

5)  ETH Institute for Chemical and Bioengineering (Zurich, Switzerland)

6)  Kuwait University (Safat, Kuwait)

7)  Memorial University of Newfoundland (St. John, Newfoundland, Canada)

8)  National University of Colombia (Caldas, Colombia)

National University of Singapore (Singapore, Singapore)

Polytechnic University of Catalunya (Barcelona, Spain)

South China University of Technology (Guangzhou, China)

Swiss Federal Institute of Technology (Zurich, Switzerland)

The National University of the South (Buenos Aires, Argentina)

Tsinghua University (Beijing, China)

University of California Los Angeles (Los Angeles, CA)

University of Illinois – Chicago (Chicago, IL)

University of Melbourne (Melbourne, Australia)

University of Nevada (Reno, NV)

University of Oldenburg (Oldenburg, Germany)

University of Paderborn (Paderborn, Germany)

University of Porto (Porto, Portugal)

University of Tennessee (Knoxville, TN)

University of Toledo (Toledo, OH)

University of Trieste (Trieste, Italy)

Xian Jiaotong University (Xian, China)

Zhongyuan Institute of Technology (Zhengzhou, China)

WAR Downloads

-  416 downloads TOTAL (since 2004)

-  92 downloads in FY09

-  Historical Distribution (59 % academia; 12 % industry; 9 %
government; 8 % other; 12 % unspecified)

Toxicity Estimation Software Tool (T.E.S.T.)

Mario Negri Institute for Pharmacological Research (Milan, Italy)

University of North Carolina (Chapel Hill, NC)

TEST Downloads (software put on   HYPERLINK "http://www.epa.gov" 
www.epa.gov  during summer of 2008)

-  38 downloads in FY09

Methodology for an Incentive-based Approach to Decentralization of
Stormwater Management

Metropolitan Sewer district of Greater Cincinnati, Karen Ball

Cleveland Metroparks, John Mack

Northeast Ohio Regional Sewer District, Linda Mayer-Mack, Kyle
Dreyfuss-Wells

USEPA Region 5, Bob Newport

Methodology for a Multidisciplinary Approach to Examining Regional
Sustainability

Adam State College, Rafe Weston

US EPA Region 2, Puerto Rico, Carl-Axel Soderberg

Life Cycle Assessment

National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL)

United States Postal Service

EPA Office of Solid Waste (OSW)

EPA Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards (OAQPS)

EPA Office of Prevention, Pesticides, and Toxics (OPPT)

Kimberly-Clarke

Treated Wood Council

Aluminum Association

International Copper Association

American Coal Ash Association

Life Cycle Inventory Database

National Renewable Energy Laboratory

GreenBlue (a non-profit)

United Nations Environment Programme

Tool for the Reduction and Assessment of Chemical and Other
Environmental Impacts (TRACI )

1)	US Green Building Council Leadership in Energy and Environmental
Design (LEED),

2)	National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) Building for
Environmental and Economic Sustainability (BEES),

Region 9 Remediation Technology Evaluation,

US Marine Corps’ Environmental Knowledge and Assessment Tool (EKAT),

International Design Center for the Environment’s eLCie software,

Pre Consultants’ SimaPro (software for LCA),

The Institute for Market Transformation to Sustainability Emergency
SMART Building Product Standard,

8)	The Institute for Market Transformation to Sustainability, SMART 2.0
Flooring Standard,

The Institute for Market Transformation to Sustainability, SMART
Sustainable Textile Standard 2.0,

Draft American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) Standard D7075 -
04 – Standard Practice for Evaluating and Reporting Environmental
Performance of Biobased Products,

11)	National Science Foundation (NSF) International/American National
Standard NSF 140 – 2005 – Sustainable Carpet Assessment Draft
Standard,

Listed within the draft ASTM Standard D7075 - 04 – Standard Practice
for Evaluating and Reporting Environmental Performance of Biobased
Products.

 PAGE   

 PAGE   8 

