Detailed Evaluation Criteria

Except as provided in 310 CMR 40.0857(2), the remedial action alternatives identified by the initial screening shall be evaluated using the following criteria: 40.0858: continued (1) The comparative effectiveness of the alternatives in terms of: (a) achieving a Permanent or Temporary Solution under 310 CMR 40.1000; (b) reusing, recycling, destroying, detoxifying, or treating oil and hazardous material at the disposal site; and (c) reducing levels of untreated oil and hazardous material at the site to concentrations that achieve or approach background. (2) The comparative short-term and long-term reliability of the alternatives, including: (a) the degree of certainty that the alternative will be successful; and (b) the effectiveness of any measures required to manage residues or remaining wastes or control emissions or discharges to the environment. (3) The comparative difficulty in implementing each alternative in terms of: (a) technical complexity of the alternative; (b) where applicable, the integration of the alternative with existing facility operations and other current or potential remedial actions; (c) any necessary monitoring, operations, maintenance or site access requirements or limitations; (d) the availability of necessary services, materials, equipment, or specialists; (e) the availability, capacity and location of necessary off-site treatment, storage and disposal facilities; and (f) whether the alternative meets regulatory requirements for any likely approvals, permits or licenses required by the Department, or other state, federal or local agencies. (4) The comparative costs of the alternatives, including: (a) costs of implementing the alternative, including without limitation: design, construction, equipment, site preparation, labor, permits, disposal, operation, maintenance and monitoring costs; (b) costs of environmental restoration, potential damages to natural resources, including consideration of impacts to surface waters, wetlands, wildlife, fish and shellfish habitat; and (c) the relative total consumption of energy resources in the implementation and operation of the alternatives, and externalities associated with the use of those resources, including greenhouse gases and other air pollutants. (5) The comparative risks of the alternatives including without limitation: (a) the short-term on-site and off-site risks posed during implementation of the alternative associated with any excavation, transport, disposal, containment, construction, operation or maintenance activities, or discharges to the environment from remedial systems; (b) on-site and off-site risks posed over the period of time required for the alternative to attain applicable remedial standards, including risks associated with ongoing transport, disposal, containment, operation or maintenance activities, or discharges from remedial systems; and (c) the potential risk of harm to health, safety, public welfare or the environment posed to human or environmental receptors by any oil and/or hazardous material remaining at the disposal site after the completion of the remedial action. (6) The comparative benefits of the alternatives including without limitation: (a) the benefit of restoring natural resources; (b) providing for the productive reuse of the site; (c) the avoided costs of relocating people, businesses, or providing alternative water supplies; and (d) the avoided lost value of the site. (7) The comparative timeliness of the alternatives in terms of eliminating any uncontrolled sources of oil and/or hazardous material and achieving of a level of No Significant Risk as described in 310 CMR 40.0900. (8) The relative effect of the alternatives upon non-pecuniary interests, such as aesthetic values.