Ultra Guard ... Two Additional UV Projects in Ontario.

VANCOUVER, British Columbia--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Sept. 29, 1999--

Service Systems International Ltd.'s (OTC BB:SVSY) subsidiary, UV Systems Technology Inc, reports the award of two additional UV projects in Ontario:

1. The Mohawk Council of Akwasasne (St. Regis)

2. The Community of Deep River

In both projects the finalist being evaluated by Greer Galloway Consultants against Ultra Guard(TM)'s advanced Technology was Trojan Technologies Inc. (TSE: TUV), the company that presently holds the lion's share of the world UV disinfection market.

The St. Regis project is a retrofit of an existing facility that was using chemical disinfection, sodium hypochlorite. The flow treated is undergoing an expansion from 400 cubic-meters per day to 1080 cubic-meters per day. Ultra Guard(TM) was chosen because of the lower capital and life cycle costs as well as smaller footprint and automatic lamp wiping system. The consultant explored the use of both the Trojan System UV3000(TM) (low-pressure low-intensity) and Trojan System UV4000(TM) (medium-pressure high-intensity) systems. Apart from higher costs, the Trojan UV4000(TM) (with automated wiping) required more lamps and was not able to fit the existing plant footprint without costly modifications. The Trojan UV3000(TM) had higher capital & life cycle costs and did not have automated cleaning. Through its higher efficiency, Ultra Guard(TM) was able to satisfy the community's disinfection needs with a two-lamp system compared to 48 Trojan UV3000(TM) lamps.

The Deep River project involves the replacement of the existing gaseous chlorine technology with a new UV disinfection plant. A Trojan System UV4000(TM) was originally chosen and specified for the project to treat 2227 cubic-meters per day. The community was concerned about the overall costs and asked the designer/contractor, Thorburn Penny Ltd., to look for a more cost effective solution. Ultra Guard(TM) was ultimately chosen based on the significant cost savings. Compared to the proposed Trojan UV4000(TM) 8-lamp system, Ultra Guard(TM) only needed 3 of its proprietary low-pressure high-intensity lamps when combined with its patented reactor chamber.

"The significance of these projects is more than revenues," says Peter Z. Colak, Vice President - Sales & Marketing, UV Systems Technology Inc. "When these awards are coupled to the Peterborough project they demonstrate the range of plant sizes throughout which Ultra Guard(TM) is competitive. We are winning bids from small size to world scale facilities against low-pressure low-intensity as well as the latest, medium-pressure high-intensity systems. They speak to Ultra Guard(TM)'s unique advantages that influence favorable economics and allow for easy retrofit of existing chemical disinfection plants.

"Furthermore, the Deep River project gives us an opportunity to demonstrate for Thorburn Penny, a company owned by one of the largest global utility operators, Azurix (an Enron Corp. subsidiary). It is clear that our technology has value beyond equipment sales for a private utility operator who has to provide treated water or wastewater at a fixed price per gallon over a 20-year contract. By demonstrating the significant savings at this `municipally operated' installation we could use it as a model for possible replication on a much larger scale throughout their worldwide operations. It is our intention to use actual performance results obtained from Deep River and other pertinent projects to explore such opportunities with Azurix. We feel that the features and cost benefits of the Ultra Guard(TM) Technology will be of interest to such water and wastewater operating companies as Vivendi (USFilter), Suez Lyonnaise des Eaux (Infilco Degremont Inc.), Bechtel Group Inc. (International Water Ltd., U.S. Water), Black & Veatch (Paterson Candy Limited) and Anglian Water Plc."

Certain of the foregoing information are forward-looking statements regarding future events or the future financial performance of the company, and are subject to a number of risks and other factors which could cause the actual results to differ materially from those contained in the forward-looking statements. Among such factors are: general business and economic conditions, customer acceptance of and demand for the Company's products, the Company's overall ability to design, test, and introduce new and improved products on a timely basis, regulatory constraints, and the risk factors listed from time to time in documents filed by the Company with the SEC.