From:	ECR <@verizon.net>
Sent:	Thursday, July 18, 2019 10:02 PM
To:	Information, BWSC (DEP)
Subject:	Comments on Revisions to 310 CMR 40.0000

As a practicing LSP working for small and mid-sized clients since the mid-1990s, I offer the 
following comments on the proposed 2019 revisions to the MCP:
40.0006 Definition of Monitoring Well: This definition would appear to require that monitoring 
wells at all sites need to have GPS coordinates. The cost impact at legacy sites with many dozens 
of wells would be significant, and, in my opinion, would outweigh the benefits of having this 
information. At homeowner sites and many small commercial sites, this requirement would 
increase costs with little or no benefit to human health or the environment. It is therefore 
recommended that the GPS coordinate requirement be deleted.
40.0926(8)(1): It is suggested that ???the contamination??? be changed to ???the soil 
contamination??? to make it clear that the 2,000-square-foot limit applies to the contaminated 
soil area and not downgradient plumes. Also ???contamination most likely??? should be changed 
to ???contamination is most likely.??? 
40.0926(9)(a): The proposed revision is overly conservative in my opinion, and in particular will 
negatively impact homeowners. Unless many samples are taken, the 95% UCL will not typically 
be significantly lower than the maximum concentration. Coupled with the uncertainty associated 
with indoor sources of chemicals, and the potential for household chemicals to be included in 
APH fractions but not meet the standards for subtraction from those fractions, the proposed 
revision will likely result in a large number of sites where significantly more resources than 
necessary are spent to demonstrate that a Condition of No Significant Risk exists. The added 
inconvenience of additional sampling rounds to homeowners, and the anxiety produced during 
longer periods of uncertainty over whether their indoor air is safe, are additional negative 
impacts of this proposed revision.
40.1025 and 40.1026: The Department's need for more detailed operating information from 
vapor-pathway AEPMMs should be weighed against the increased costs and complexity that will 
result. The proposed addition of continuous remote monitoring of vacuum levels at each vapor 
extraction point significantly increases cost and complexity by replacing simple manometers 
with (at least) electronic vacuum monitors and transmitters. Failures of these components will 
undoubtedly increase maintenance costs and produce numerous false alarms. The use of simple 
sub-slab systems has allowed homeowners to reliably and inexpensively control vapor migration 
of OHM and radon for decades, and the adoption of the proposed regulation would act as a 
disincentive to their future use. At a minimum, an exemption to these requirements should be 
made for homeowner fuel oil spills (if agreed to by the homeowner). A less expensive and 
simpler alternative to requiring real-time vacuum monitoring would be to require each system to 
report its status (on or off) once each 24 hours using technology currently employed for vapor-
pathway AEPMMs.
40.1403(2)(a)3: The requirement to obtain written approval from municipalities before e-mail 
transmission of notices is allowed effectively neutralizes the efficiency benefits that were 
originally intended by the proposed revision. Requiring each consultant to obtain a written 
statement from each municipality places an undue burden on both parties. E-mail is has been a 
widely accepted, convenient, and rapid means of communication for many years, and its use for 
notification of municipalities should not be discouraged by instituting additional paperwork 
requirements.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the proposed revisions.
Richard Doherty, PE, LSP
Engineering & Consulting Resources, Inc.