Upload
madlyn-randall
View
217
Download
0
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Overcoming New Technology Barriers:
Technology Acceptance and Reciprocity Partnership (TARP)Arleen O’Donnell, Mass. Dept. of Environmental ProtectionArleen O’Donnell, Mass. Dept. of Environmental Protection
State-EPA Symposium on Environmental Innovation 1/25/2006State-EPA Symposium on Environmental Innovation 1/25/2006
Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection
Overview
Discuss relevant barriers to adoption of new technologies
Describe TARP and how it reduces these barriers
Provide an example - Stormwater treatment technologies
Invite other states to join
Relevant Technology Barriers
Lack of credible data to allow regulators to make decisions
Uncertain testing requirements Duplicative reviews under traditional state-
by-state permit systemCost of testingAcceptance by Users
What is TARP?
Collaboration of 8 states (CA, IL, MD, MA,NJ, NY, PA, VA)
Led by ECOS and coordinating with relevant EPA programs
Other states are encouraged to join Current TARP priority areas: stormwater,
beneficial use of waste, and alternative septic system designs
Goals of TARP
To maximize innovative approaches to meet states’ environmental goals
To develop common protocols to assess performance claims
To reduce permit review time in deference to a state partner’s review and verification of performance results
To improve information sharing between statesTo increase acceptance of new technologies by
purchasers and reviewers.
How TARP Works
One state is identified as a lead and each interested
state identifies a participant
Administrative support, travel and conference call
funding is provided through ECOS
After a protocol is developed, states define how
they will reciprocate in decision- making
Protocols are frequently updated
Stormwater - Example
Stormwater was selected as one of the first priority areas
Over a hundred new stormwater technologies on the market claiming performance efficiencies, many without good data
6 states developed original protocol
Why is Stormwater a Problem?
Impaired Waters, 2002
Massachusetts Example: Urban runoff and stormwater responsible for 46% of assessed river segments and 48% of assessed marine waters not supporting their designated water quality standard (MassDEP 1995).
Reduced Flow, 2001
High Stress Basin Medium Stress Basin
Stormwater Regulatory Issues
Massachusetts adopted rules in 1996 to regulate stormwater
Rules require 80% TSS Removal for new development and redevelopment in or near Wetlands
Rules assign each traditional stormwater treatment BMP a specific TSS removal credit.
Role for Innovative BMPs
Some traditional stormwater treatment BMPs are land constrained in urban areas
Beyond TSS RemovalGrowing Demand for RechargeNPDES Phase II/TMDL Compliance
TARP Stormwater Status
Protocol available on line NJ and EPA (ETV) actively testing stormwater
technologies – in the lab and in the field MA developed a searchable database (
http://www.mastep.net) to provide one-stop shop for reports, data and evaluations of stormwater technologies
Interstate team being re-activated to update protocol and discuss what reciprocity means
New states invited to join
Summary: How TARP Addresses Barriers
Lack of credible data to allow regulators to make decisions
Uncertain testing requirements
Duplicative reviews under traditional state-by-state permit system
Cost of testing
Acceptance by Users
Understand common and unique data requirements
Develop Protocol and agree to use it
Agree on reciprocity
Accept data from another state
Share information with users