Stakeholder Interest and Involvement in Technology Verification Programs

1
Stakeholder Interest and Involvement in
Technology Verification Programs

• Karen Riggs
• U.S. EPA ETV Program
• Advanced Monitoring Systems Center
• Battelle (Columbus, Ohio USA)

2
Stakeholders in U.S. EPAs Environmental
Technology Verification (ETV) Program

• gt500 active stakeholders in 21 groups
• 160 stakeholder meetings conducted
• Many stakeholders involved since
• ETV inception (10 years)
• Additional stakeholders involved as needed
• Battelles Advanced Monitoring Systems (AMS)
  Center air and water committees each have 25
  members
• Also technical panels for individual verifications

Karen Riggs Manager, Environmental Assessment
and Exposure Battelle Columbus, Ohio USA
3
Who do the ETV stakeholders represent?

• U.S. EPA Program Offices
• Other U.S. Federal Agencies
• Individual State/Local/Municipal Agencies
• Associations of State/Local/Municipal Agencies
• Individual Industrial Companies
• Industrial Associations
• Insurance and Legal Organizations
• Academic Researchers
• Private Consultants
• Subject Matter Experts (technical panels)

Karen Riggs Manager, Environmental Assessment
and Exposure Battelle Columbus, Ohio USA
4
Why are stakeholders interested in being
involved?

• Need better technologies for their applications
• Information valuable in setting
• regulations/accepting technologies
• Supportive of business/economic
• development in
• region/state/industry sector
• Data quality relevant to liability or compliance
  issues
• Access to new ideas on technologies and
  applications
• Interactions with other stakeholders
• Maintain knowledge of new technologies

EPAs Voluntary Diesel Reduction Program (VDRP)
is a stakeholder in the ETV Air Pollution Control
Technology Center, and uses ETV results to select
technologies for the VDRP-verified list, to
reduce state- or program-specific testing and
speed the adoption of novel technologies.
Karen Riggs Manager, Environmental Assessment
and Exposure Battelle Columbus, Ohio USA
5
How do stakeholders contribute to development of
the verification system?

• Identify areas of technology needs
• Identify emerging technologies
• Prioritize technologies for testing
• Represent, and distribute information to,
• their constituencies
• Identify additional stakeholders and target
  audiences for verification information
• Can influence vendor or collaborator participation

Karen Riggs Manager, Environmental Assessment
and Exposure Battelle Columbus, Ohio USA
6
What do stakeholders contribute to
individual verifications?

• Guide study design
• Review test plan and verification
  reports
• Provide in-kind support
• Test site, test personnel,
  reference analyses
• Provide co-funding
• Test collaborators make substantial contributions
• More than 700,000 U.S. and 6,800 hours of
  in-kind support to U.S. ETV program over last
  three years.

Karen Riggs Manager, Environmental Assessment
and Exposure Battelle Columbus, Ohio USA
7
Examples of organizations collaborating on ETV
AMS Center verifications

• U.S. Department of Agriculture
• DuPont Chemical Corporation
• U.S. Coast Guard
• U.S. Army
• U.S. Department of Energy
• Illinois Clean Coal Institute
• City of Columbus, Ohio
• Chlorine Chemistry Council
• Mickey Leland National Urban Air Toxics Research
  Center
• American Electric Power Company

Karen Riggs Manager, Environmental Assessment
and Exposure Battelle Columbus, Ohio USA
8
Collaboration in mercury emission
monitor verification

• Cofunding from Illinois Clean Coal Institute and
  four vendors
• In-kind support from Northern Indiana
• Public Service Company
• Coal-fired power plant as host test facility
• Facility staff operated mercury technologies
  during testing
• Laboratory space provided for reference method
  preparation and recovery
• Access to plant operations and emissions data
• Review of test plan and reports
• Technology prioritization and peer review of test
  plan and reports by stakeholders

Karen Riggs Manager, Environmental Assessment
and Exposure Battelle Columbus, Ohio USA
9
Collaboration in ballast water exchange screening
technology verification

• Cofunding from U.S. Coast Guard
• No in-kind support from collaborator (other than
  vendor)

Karen Riggs Manager, Environmental Assessment
and Exposure Battelle Columbus, Ohio USA
10
Collaboration in verification of ammonia and H2S
monitors at animal feeding operations

• Testing of 9 total technologies in 2
  verifications
• No cofunding other than from vendors
• In-kind support from U.S. Department of
  Agriculture
• Swine farm and cattle feedlot as test facilities
• USDA staff supported daily test activities
• including operation of reference method
• Materials and calibration gases provided
• Review of test plan and reports
• Hosted Technology Field Day

Karen Riggs Manager, Environmental Assessment
and Exposure Battelle Columbus, Ohio USA
11
Collaboration in dioxin emission monitor
verification

• Cofunding from four vendors
• Cofunding from
• Chlorine Chemistry Council
• EPA Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response
• EPA Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
• EPA Office of Research and Development
• In-kind support from EPA
• Use of controlled combustor as test bed
• Operation of combustor test facility and
  oversight
• of testing by EPA staff
• Hosted Technology Field Day

Karen Riggs Manager, Environmental Assessment
and Exposure Battelle Columbus, Ohio USA
12
Conclusions on Stakeholder Involvement

• Contribute to system by identifying and
  prioritizing technology needs,
  prioritizing technology
  verifications, conveying
  information, and influencing collaborators and
  vendors
• Contribute to individual verifications by
  providing in-kind support or cofunding,guiding
  test design, serving as peer reviewers
  start-to-finish involvement based on
  interest/expertise
• Karen Riggs
• Battelle
• 505 King Avenue
• Columbus, Ohio 43201-2693 USA
• [phone] riggsk_at_battelle.org

Karen Riggs Manager, Environmental Assessment
and Exposure Battelle Columbus, Ohio USA