### Technologies **for Environmental Justice Communities and Other**  **Vulnerable Populations** National Advisory Council on Environmental Policy and Technology March 26, 2012

# EPA’s Charge To NACEPT  Provide “advice ... on the identification and use of existing, or needed, technologies ... to better protect vulnerable populations”  . . . including “game-changing technologies” that have “potential to deliver relevant, actionable information” to all parties

# Case Study Communities

 **Hartford, CT:** trash -to- energy incinerator  **Rubbertown, KY (Louisville):**  “chemical corridor”  **Toledo, OH Dorr -** **Smead Brownfields:**  contaminated soils, off- gassing in basements  **Graniteville, SC:** train wreck  **Salish Kootenai College (MT):**  mold in school buildings and housing  **Lower Passaic River (NJ):** contaminated sediments

# Needed Technologies **The advisory committee**  **identified 3**  **categories of**  **needed technologies**  • **Detection, monitoring,**  **and assessment**  **technologies** • **Communication technologies**  • **Solution technologies** **—**technological solutions to correct environmental problems

# Needed Technologies (cont’d)

**Detection, Monitoring, and Assessment Technologies**  • **Range of**  **Instruments Needed:**   portable sensors for community members  more complex monitoring systems operated by specially trained people

# Needed Technologies (cont’d) **Communication Technologies** • needed to assure that residents, local agencies, and industry are fully informed about risks to the community, including:  real -time information about ambient pollution, including real -time information needed by first responders and local hospitals ;  information that residents can use to protect themselves from localized environmental exposures

# Needed Technologies (cont’d)

**Solution Technologies**  • Technological solutions to correct environmental problems are also important  

## Can be costly and difficult to identify and deploy at a particular site

# Recommendations **1. ORD should enter into**  **partnerships with EJ/VP communities**  **to develop and**  **deploy these**  **new technologies** • Need for “game- changing” technologies • Identify one or two “pilot communities” in each region to be test beds for effective detection, monitoring, and assessment technologies

# Recommendations **(cont’d) 2. ORD should**  **establish a public -**  **private task force to provide strategic advice and**  **supplement EPA’s technical expertise**  • Technology companies, regulated companies, research institutes, academia, regulators • NGOs with experience in monitoring and communication technologies + community leaders • Perhaps organized through NEJAC

- The task force would help ORD

- Inventory cutting - edge, available technologies for EJ/VP communities

- Identify technologies ready to enter the market and legal, financial barriers

- Advise about incentives

# Recommendations **(cont’d) 3. EPA should reach out to other** 

**federal agencies**  

### Model: EPA- DOT- HUD partnership on healthy communities  

### Help develop solution technologies

# Recommendations **(cont’d) 4. Provide biennial update to EJ/VP** 

**communities**  

### Update Communities  

### Reassess • Needs • Pros and cons of new technologies

# Recommendations **(cont’d) 5. Strengthen EPA capabilities to**  **support monitoring, reporting, and mitigation activities in EJ/VP**  **communities**  

### For example, address: • IT interoperability standards • Barriers to data acquisition • Needs for specialized tools • Mashups

# Questions???