Overcoming New Technology Barriers: Technology Acceptance and Reciprocity Partnership (TARP)

1. Overcoming New Technology Barriers: Technology Acceptance and Reciprocity Partnership (TARP) Arleen O’Donnell, Mass. Dept. of Environmental Protection State-EPA Symposium on Environmental Innovation 1/25/2006 Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection

2. 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

3. Relevant Technology 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

4. 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

5. 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 states • To increase acceptance of new technologies by purchasers and reviewers.

6. 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

7. 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

8. Why is Stormwater a Problem? 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). Impaired Waters, 2002 • High Stress Basin • Medium Stress Basin Reduced Flow, 2001

9. 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.

10. Role for Innovative BMPs • Some traditional stormwater treatment BMPs are land constrained in urban areas • Beyond TSS Removal • Growing Demand for Recharge • NPDES Phase II/TMDL Compliance

11. 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

12. 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 Summary: How TARP Addresses Barriers

13. TARP Contacts • Linda Benevides, MassDEP (617) 626-1197 • Marybeth Brenner, NJDEP (609) 292-6877 Website: PADEP hosts - http://www.dep.state.pa.us/dep/deputate/pollprev/techservices/tarp/