Gloucester Board of Health, Oct. 6, 2026

right now. dominique Hurley: Alison, thank you for staying, I appreciate it. You're welcome.

dominique Hurley: Did you start the meeting? Yes, it's recorded. dominique Hurley: And you sent, you sent all of the attendees. dominique Hurley: panelist panelist invites. Speaker 1 (Annex - Conference Room): So. Speaker 1 (Annex - Conference Room): All of the attendees, that was just Joel, correct? dominique Hurley: Well, no, the attendees of the Subcommittee Meeting would also be Tom Markert and… dominique Hurley: And Jesse Dole, our two board members.

Jesse Dole I'm.

Speaker 1 (Annex - Conference Room): you.

Jesse Dole Yep, I'm here.

I'm here. Speaker 1 (Annex - Conference Room): you. dominique Hurley: How are you? dominique Hurley: See, Jesse, Tom, are you here as well? Yeah, you don't see me? dominique Hurley: Oh, now I do. That was all. I had a strange view here, I apologize. No problem. dominique Hurley: All right. dominique Hurley: We have a quorum. dominique Hurley: So this Honda order, the Eastern Waste Services Subcommittee Meeting by the Board of Health, October 6th, 2026 at 4:00 PM. dominique Hurley: We are meeting virtually today, but for the public, if they are going there, Alison is in the conference room itself standing by to allow public access. dominique Hurley: But this is a hybrid meeting, and if, we're… if we have technical difficulties, well, if we have technical difficulties in this case.

dominique Hurley: There's nobody meeting, in person, so we will be, We will be, dominique Hurley: having to reconnect in to continue the meeting. So, on the agenda, we have a few, items. I first want to call to order the subcommittee, so Dominique Hurley, Health Director.

Jesse Dole Jesse Dole member.

Marker member. dominique Hurley: Great. And just for the board's edification, we also invited Joel Favazza to this meeting and he'll join us in subsequent meetings as well as a colleague that we'll be working with throughout this process. He represents the applicant. dominique Hurley: And so, wherever possible, Joel will join us. He had late notice, of this meeting, so he may not be able to make it today. But we're hoping, as we talked about last time, that he will be able to. dominique Hurley: To, to join us in future meetings. dominique Hurley: So I don't see any public. dominique Hurley: Who were wanting to speak, and Alison, is there anybody in the room there that has anything that would like to speak?

Speaker 1 (Annex - Conference Room): No, there is not. dominique Hurley: Okie doke. dominique Hurley: And so then the next agenda item is to approve the meeting minutes from, September 9th. dominique Hurley: And, that meeting, was wholly to talk about the Conservation Commission's Notice of Intent and the third-party review of the same, or primarily around that. Does anybody have… do I have a motion to accept the meeting minutes? Motion to accept.

Jesse Dole Second.

dominique Hurley: Great, any discussion?

Jesse Dole None for me.

dominique Hurley: Okay, then to approving the meeting minutes, Dominique Curley, aye.

Jesse Dole I… Right.

dominique Hurley: Okay, great. Unanimous. dominique Hurley: Okay, dominique Hurley: So next up on the agenda item is to approve the memo for the Conservation Commission NOI, and I can share it right now on screen. Give me one minute.

dominique Hurley: Hmm. dominique Hurley: Alison, do you… have you given me rights to. Speaker 1 (Annex - Conference Room): Yes. dominique Hurley: To share here, okay? dominique Hurley: One second. It's a strange presenter layout right now. I don't know. dominique Hurley: One second, please.

dominique Hurley: Okay. Speaker 1 (Annex - Conference Room): Anyone should be able to share. dominique Hurley: Got it. dominique Hurley: I think I have it now. dominique Hurley: Can you all sing it? dominique Hurley: Can you see this… the document? Yep. dominique Hurley: Okay, terrific. dominique Hurley: And so, as we discussed during the last meeting, we had asked them to assess, conditions 14, 15, 16, 20, 24, 30, 31, and 32, for their impact on the NOI. And while the third-party review included 14, 15, and 16, it did not address 20, 24, 30, 31, and 32.

dominique Hurley: And as we went through the meeting, you know, during our last session, we called out all that they had, dominique Hurley: not attended to. There were several questions that came out. One was, you know, what are the obligations of the Conservation Commission in impacting these choices? Is this something that CONCOM might even address? We also wanted to look into whether or not. dominique Hurley: the DEP had ever requested a soil eval for condition 20 to see, you know, is there other information that might be out there that, you know, is a reason that this wasn't attended to? dominique Hurley: We did that. There was no further information as to why or why not, but we certainly know that a soil study was not done as a result of the…

dominique Hurley: I'm going to use the paraphrase, findable offenses that they had in terms of noncompliance, towards, you know, towards how they should be managing. dominique Hurley: their operation in those past years. And, and then there's a few other things to say whether or not things were in our jurisdiction. So after looking into all of these things and speaking with, you know, sort of experts around the city. We really sort of honed in on, 20. dominique Hurley: as something significant, and then also, 31, primarily because those two directly impact Conservation Commission in the work that they have to do. So as, as an example, those… the leaching tanks, just to remind you all of… of the conditions,

dominique Hurley: So, 30… dominique Hurley: Was having a plan for managing, sorting, and identifying, characterizing, and disposing of suspected contaminated or hazardous materials. dominique Hurley: And so, you know, as… as such, it's not necessarily in a notice of intent. It's something that we certainly are going to be addressing prior to… to go live. Does it or does it not impact, Conservation Commission? Seemed… dominique Hurley: less important than Condition 31, which was basically, you know, did they or did they not reference the fact that they would have leachate tanks, and that they would be alarmed. And so you can see what I… dominique Hurley: So, and then 32, the last one was that leach and tank shall not be disposed of in our wastewater treatment facility.

dominique Hurley: So… dominique Hurley: 32 not sitting on ComCom's watch, because obviously that would be, the, you know, a job that would be managed, through our DPW. dominique Hurley: And I'm not necessarily impacting groundwater infiltration. 31 certainly impacting because if those tanks would breach, that we would want to be able to manage things. And 30, again, will be handled a little bit further on. So for that reason, I only brought forward condition 31.

Jesse Dole So can I?

dominique Hurley: Can I…

Jesse Dole Talk about that? Of course. The ConCom has nothing to do with these sort of storage tanks. The DEP regulates these storage tanks under its own CMR, and they're actually they have to be… have a secondary containment system, and they have to have… be constructed to provide an alarm source, whether mechanical or electrical. So… The ConCom wouldn't… they'd have… the ConCom would have no right to withhold an order of conditions based on a tank, because the DEP regulates that through, it's the Industrial Wastewater Holding Tank, CMRs, that prior to, like. Eastern Waste Services would have to file with the DEP a certificate, but.

Jesse Dole compliance certification of the DEP before they can use these, and there's all sorts of annual testing requirements under that CMR just for industrial waste storage tanks. So, I… given that it's… and also, in order to get their. in order for the dep to grant them the I want to make sure I'm using the right term.

dominique Hurley: Flexibility?

Jesse Dole Yeah, it's the,

dominique Hurley: the.

Jesse Dole Under the 310 CMR19, that application for the permit and authorization to construct, they have to show compliance with that storage tank CMR, and that storage tank CMR actually addresses solid waste. Facilities. that's something that they're gonna have to… they're gonna have to establish and prove to DEP as part of their permitting process. So, I… We explicitly have gone beyond what is minimally required, either a mechanical or electrical alarm system in that tank. And then by CMRs, by state regulation, they have to have secondary containment. We have not only Require them to have… have an alarm system, but also that they're prohibited from

Jesse Dole On-site disposal. you know, those are the… those are the… I guess to Joel Favazza, it's a… you know, when you submit your application DEP. And your certificate… your, compliance certificate to DEP for the tanks. You know, we want to see what you what you're telling DEP you're going to install. to make sure it complies with our site assessment. So I think that independent of the order of conditions, or the NOI, and then the order of conditions that the ConCom will issue. There is independent state requirements regarding these tanks. And we have added a specified… specific requirements about Specifically, the… Not dispose… not disposing our…

Speaker 1 (Annex - Conference Room): That's a good shit.

Jesse Dole And that they've got to be double-walled with adequate leak detection system. So…

dominique Hurley: Hey Jesse, let me ask you one question on that. So it sounds like we can delete this because you're saying it's being handled under application to construct. However, in the initial application and the site suitability that DEP granted, all they had was that the leaching tanks were gonna be buried and sealed. dominique Hurley: And so…

Jesse Dole Yeah, that's not the final…

dominique Hurley: be caught at the next level of DTC.

Jesse Dole They have their specific.

dominique Hurley: Okay.

Jesse Dole It is the division of water pollution control. that enforces the… industrial wastewater holding tank CMRs. and processes the compliance certification submissions that Eastern Waste Services would have to do, even if they weren't getting the The site approval? if they were just installing the tanks since, like, 20-something years ago, you've got to go to the DEP. It's got to be an engineer-stamped plan of what you're putting in, that it's got a secondary containment system, and it's got some sort of alarm system if there is a leak. So that's gonna be a condition not only of putting the tank in, but just getting the approval to operate from the DEP. So, it's not unreasonable at all for us to tell Joel, like, you're gonna have to do this anyways.

Jesse Dole Show us your engineer-stamped plan for these tanks. And FYI, keep in mind. The site… our site assessment, or our site approval. Specifically prohibits on-site disposal of it in our municipal, treatment facility. And you've got to have some sort of alarm system, detection… leak detection system, whether that be, you know, an alarm or… whatever complies with the CMRs about these tanks.

dominique Hurley: Okay.

Jesse Dole So, the ConCon's not going to touch it, because it doesn't fall under the Wetlands Protection Act, or… Our,

dominique Hurley: Concom wouldn't care if their current plan didn't have such a device.

Jesse Dole I don't know, I don't know if…

dominique Hurley: get.

Jesse Dole the Wetlands Protection Act, or our Wetlands Ordinance. Or state stormwater management, standards. you know, I don't… I just… I think because they're saying, well, this is going to be all indoors. But, you know, I don't know if they're just gonna be more concerned with surface rainwater. on hot top that, you know, spills onto the soil, but, I think that's probably why, Weston and Samson just kind of They're like, well, that's addressed in a separate CMR, in a separate process.

dominique Hurley: It would have been nice if they had said that, you know, if they, because the fact that they didn't respond to any of them. dominique Hurley: You know, they just literally have nothing here to talk about for regarding any of these. And and just a reminder, all of these conditions are in existence because of something in the current plan that we had that is not there. So in the current plan, by their own testimony, they were not double walled, they are not warmed. dominique Hurley: They're just going to be single walled and buried. And that was under, you know, their. dominique Hurley: you know, their PE, stated that, which is why, you know, that's being brought forward and was made a condition. But I think what I hear you saying is that

dominique Hurley: It will certainly be caught during the application to construct because of other CMR and ConCom it sounds like will presume that this would be in place so therefore it would not be a concern of theirs. Is that a fair assumption?

Jesse Dole Yeah, it doesn't, you know, the tank… these kind of industrial wastewater holding tanks. you know, something different than stormwater, you know, rain runoff and ice melt runoff. So, I can see why you know, it would have been nice, absolutely, if Weston and Sampson had said, you know, we aren't addressing these conditions because they fall outside of the jurisdiction of the Wetlands Protection Act and our Our, wetlands ordinance. But they just didn't even bother to say that. And I saw the email from back in July between ConCom and Wesson and Samson, where ConCom said, hey, look at these two, these conditions. And Watson Samson's like, oh yeah, yeah, we're definitely going to look at the conditions and the site approval.

dominique Hurley: That is.

Jesse Dole So, so it would be nice if they pointed out, like, you know, for the purposes of the CONCOM and the jurisdiction of the CONCOM, these… these requirements fall out of the… you know, the jurisdiction the ComCom has under the WPA and the Wetlands Ordinance, so we're not going to address it in this point. That being said. Ews is going to have to address that in their application of the DEP because it's required.

dominique Hurley: actions.

Jesse Dole Not on, not only under the… the solid waste facility CMRs, but then the industrial wastewater tank CMR.

dominique Hurley: Okay, yet another CMAR to get smart on.

Jesse Dole I, I, after our last meeting, I, I, I pulled All of these, the, the 310, 19, 310, 16, 314, 18. Like, I pulled all the CMRs and went through them to try to cross-reference Because there are in that industrial wastewater tank, CMR, specifically talks about solid waste facilities, and solar-based facilities specifically talks about the tanks. And it actually goes… That 310 CMR19 about. the Solid waste management and the permitting of it. I mean, it's got a pretty lengthy discussion about leachate… leach… leach… leachate.

Jesse Dole Thanks. I mean, it's like… I want to say, you know, addresses groundwater protection systems about how to collect Leachate, how to treat it. I mean, it's about… I want to say 10 pages of that that 125-page CMR is talking about. You know, leachate not seeping into the groundwater requirements of the tanks. Things like that.

dominique Hurley: Okay, so therefore, on this agenda item, I'm guessing that you're saying we should not call this out as a gap, because, in fact, through your research, you realized that dominique Hurley: Even though, if they haven't changed it. dominique Hurley: Concom won't care because they'll presume it will be managed through other CMR.

Jesse Dole And I think I would be comfortable putting Weston and Samson on. On the spot, and say, you know, these specific conditions You know, especially 31 and 32, and we'll get to 20. Umm.

dominique Hurley: Yes.

Jesse Dole You know, is it correct that The third-party review did not comment on The leachate tanks. Collection, disposal of the leachate. Because that's not within… not within ConCom's jurisdiction under the Wetlands Protection Act and our local Wetlands ordinance.

dominique Hurley: Make a better prose. But that's the gestalt, I think, is what you're saying.

Jesse Dole Because I… it… I have a feeling we're gonna be… there'll be another… Wesson and Samson's going to be performing another third-party review when EWS does submit their application to DEP, that we want to know, like, A. we want to see your application and all the attachments that are required. And B, you know, we may want to have Wesson and Samson look through some of the specific issues we took in the site assignment.

dominique Hurley: Yeah, that's something that we have in the next agenda item when we get to the process approval, so we can definitely go there. But is it fair to say that we can remove this as a call out? Is that what your recommendation is? And Tom, do you agree? Jesse, what are you saying on the remove?

Jesse Dole Yeah, I think it's more appropriate to go to Weston and Samson and say, you know. Before we accuse you of love. giving us a poor third-party review. Just clarify, you didn't talk about the leachate tanks. secondary containment, whatever. Whatever the details of Condition 31 and 32. Was that… did you not discuss those… those site assignment conditions, because they're outside of the jurisdiction of the CONCOM?

dominique Hurley: Do you feel it's necessary for us to say why in each case it's important for them to consider it? dominique Hurley: I mean, we could…

Jesse Dole Yeah, I mean, it's… I mean, Well.

dominique Hurley: Again, I feel like.

Jesse Dole I would like to see this guy put I'd like to see it's almost a test of You know, obviously you guys must do a lot of ConCom-related stuff. The guy who gave the testimony at, the Weston and Sampson guy, Brian McCormick. He seems to have been done this many times before with landfills and solid waste facilities. I'd love to have Wesson and Samson respond without prompting them. And be like, yes, that would be more appropriate for a third-party review of the DEP application, and, you know, the requirements for solid waste facilities and industrial waste tanks. It almost… it pushes him into explaining why, without us giving us the reason why we think he screwed up. Good. Or just was incomplete.

dominique Hurley: Right, so that's this sort of paragraph. We feel these gaps are important to bring forward, that they should further evaluate the conditions and underlying rationale for the conditions to guide CONCOM as their jurisdiction allows to make clear whether the condition impacts their decision set. dominique Hurley: The committee's decision, permissions… dominique Hurley: decisions that are not, and I hear you when you say they might… they will likely say no, dominique Hurley: I guess the question on the table now is, do we need to kind of go into this level of detail of what we know to be the truth? So in other words, DEP reviewed this. This plan had single wall tanks buried and not with alarm systems and not double walled and all that other stuff.

dominique Hurley: And they approved it. dominique Hurley: And then we reviewed it, and we're, you know. dominique Hurley: We called out like that's pretty risky given its location to, you know, wetlands and the gradient of the property, et cetera. And so we called for double wall with alarm systems. dominique Hurley: I would just…

Jesse Dole I think we should hesitate on the initial, dep site.

dominique Hurley: Because it's not, like, they don't look at that level of detail.

Jesse Dole I mean, if you look at what's required for the approval to operate and begin construction. It's a lot… I think they just take a really high-level view at that first step.

dominique Hurley: Okay.

Jesse Dole And sometimes with, like, these state agencies, it's like, the first step is just show us you're at least minimally competent to do what you want to do. And if you can establish that, okay, let's now commit resources locally with what we're doing in the ConCom and everybody else on the city side, and then when it, you know, when they get to the DEP, the actual. Application for the facility permit. They're… I mean, those… those… those CMRs are pretty… pretty substantial.

dominique Hurley: Okay.

Jesse Dole So, I, I, I… Yes, I think the DEP didn't do us any favors by, like. you know, not… They didn't subject to that… they didn't subject that step and that submission to the same scrutiny and requirements as what they're going to go through when they actually want to get the permit to operate.

dominique Hurley: I hear you. dominique Hurley: All right, so in the interest of getting this memo out the door, do you think that we should call this out right now, or just call that these gaps are important to bring forward, and why don't you respond?

Jesse Dole But I'd be more comfortable just, like, point out the gaps and tell us why.

dominique Hurley: Okay. dominique Hurley: Tom… Sounds good. dominique Hurley: Well. Yep. dominique Hurley: Okay.

Jesse Dole Sorry, Dominique, I'm not trying to… Delete your… your work.

dominique Hurley: I know, it's fine. This is such a complex topic and I really appreciate that research you've done and it is echoing other feedback I've received from other departments as well. So I don't disagree with it at all. And one of the things I think is really important for us is that we stick to the swim lane we're in. dominique Hurley: And we are watching carefully, and we're making sure conditions are being met, but there's a time and a place for a condition to be verified that it's being met, and… and, you know, while we want to be sure that Conservation Commission is aware of all of the factors dominique Hurley: above its, you know, area of concern, you know, we can leave that for them to figure out, but I do… but I like the idea of at least calling out

dominique Hurley: The fact that they didn't address them and finding out why, right? dominique Hurley: Because we wrote the initial email to Concom saying, hey, these are all important for the following reasons. And so they included that in their third-party review request, which was great, but then the third-party review request, you know, we're left uncertain.

Jesse Dole Yeah.

dominique Hurley: to your point. And so then moving just to this next section, this one's a, it's kind of the same thing where we call out. dominique Hurley: That, you know, the risk here is that, you know, the stormwater designs are being done on unverified soils. dominique Hurley: Perfect.

Jesse Dole I have a question, and I don't know if this has been asked of Joel previously.

dominique Hurley: I wish he was on the line, but…

Jesse Dole Obviously, the DEP issued… well, I shouldn't say issue. Well, there was an agreement, with the DEP back a couple years ago for the. The consent order, which was basically stop operations and pay this fine, and apply for what you're… to get the permit that you're working under. given… that it shouldn't be surprising, and Weston Sanson's witness, you know, the construction demolition materials have been documented. Like, it should be in the business, you should expect, if you've got C&D materials, you're gonna have some hazardous materials that end up Being spilled everywhere as a result of that. I'm… I'm surprised… I don't want to say I'm surprised, but I'm very curious.

Jesse Dole whether the DEP, when they went in and said, you're operating a C&D facility without the appropriate permitting. Because the DEP will take this upon themselves to say, given that that's the activity you have engaged in, and we have pretty expansive CMRs before you… you have to meet before you can do that, we want you to hire a licensed site professional conduct an initial Testing of the soils. and have the LSP determined, is this going to trigger the mass contingency plan, which is going to require You know, ground… a bunch of well… ground wells being dug. you know, weekly, monthly, whatever, testing to see where, if there are contaminants, whether it be asbestos, or PFAS, or heavy metals.

Jesse Dole Are in the ground, and are they migrating through the soils every time it rains? I'm almost shocked that the DEP didn't pun… not only fine them, but say, go hire somebody and prove to us that you haven't contaminated this area by running this illegal C&D facility.

dominique Hurley: I know, and that came up, and that's why this condition was written, because of, like, this all came out during the hearing as well, Jesse, but the… but the reality is we don't have that information. They didn't, but that didn't mean they shouldn't have. And, you know, again…

Jesse Dole they haven't.

dominique Hurley: Pardon?

Jesse Dole If they haven't, we as the Board of Health. have conditioned our final approval on you doing that. Like, it'd be interesting to have a conversation with Jake, like, Jake, have you hired an LSP and had anybody go out there and, you know, test this stuff, or whether… before you start digging? You know, is…

dominique Hurley: This is one that the DEP is watching very closely from speaking with them. They think this is a very important condition because I was, you know, talking with them about when do condition approvals come up, at what point do we say we have them or don't have them to you in your evaluation. dominique Hurley: And he was saying… he was kind of classifying them into, like, there's things that are going to be givens, like your hours of operation. He's like, and there's things that we're going to watch really closely, like the soils. And so, I think the DEP recognizes that this is an important one, and the condition was part of the site assignment. dominique Hurley: the conditions were not contested as part of the site assignment, so now the, you know, the applicant, has to, has to, you know, do this work. And Joel actually, when he and I met the first time on the progress report, you know, kind of come up with a framework, and would that be acceptable as a way to work?

dominique Hurley: We covered this one, and he said they were looking for… dominique Hurley: Any history of what soils might have been done during that time period that we could use as a baseline to say, since this was done then, here's what has to get done now, so that they could, kind of right-size the ask, with the right kind of evidence to prove that the soils weren't contaminated, but dominique Hurley: He… I think what he told me, and the jury's still out, because they were still looking, but they hadn't been able to dominique Hurley: find that based on the history of the transactions of, you know, buy and sell of the business. And so nobody really could put their hands on any work that was done.

dominique Hurley: And so, therefore, they were going to go back and have to start from ground, you know, square one of doing the soils per… dominique Hurley: You know, CMR40. So, I know…

Jesse Dole accountability.

dominique Hurley: He's planning on doing this, but it's important that the notice of condition for this agenda item, you know, I think it's important that. dominique Hurley: That, you know, again, this part I've highlighted here, the stormwater designs are being evaluated on unverified soils, and it's pretty interesting that Weston and Sampson didn't call that out, right? Yeah.

Jesse Dole And I, I, I'm just.

dominique Hurley: I'm also.

Jesse Dole I'm curious whether it was… That's a mass contingency plan issue, not a wetlands protection You know, again, I…

dominique Hurley: issue for wetlands protection if when they break apart all of the macadam and they expose all those soils, if they are contaminated.

Jesse Dole Yeah.

dominique Hurley: and we've got runoff, we definitely have a challenge, right? Unless they believe that the straw bales or whatever they're doing during construction are adequate to stop dominique Hurley: Hazardous waste, I mean, I don't know that answer. That's why we brought it up.

Jesse Dole You know, it would be… it would be nice, because if… To have the double barrel, of… you know, not only is the Board of Health gonna be reluctant to move this project forward without testing done. Either to establish that you need… it's gonna trigger some sort of. response action under the MCP. Or it isn't. the ConCom, you know, I would like to know from the ConCom directly in Wesson and Sampson, like, under the Wetlands Protection Act, our Wetlands Protection Ordinance… Wetlands Ordinance. You know, like, tell us why you don't have concerns about the soil, you know, the soil contamination, and Why did you not?

Jesse Dole Include in your third-party review. You know, some discussion of… you know. how you can trigger the MCP through the review of a notice of intent. Or condition an order of conditions.

dominique Hurley: What's the MCV? I'm sorry, you're using…

Jesse Dole Mass contingency plan, so that, 3-10-40.

dominique Hurley: Okay.

Jesse Dole I'm gonna have to do.

dominique Hurley: No matter what. So are you saying… so either they can say, we won't accept your notice of intent until it's done, which is what I think would be appropriate, because then they have their evaluation done on verified soils. dominique Hurley: Or they can say. dominique Hurley: We'll give you here are the order of conditions. However, if your soils come back contaminated, you have to come back to us. dominique Hurley: Right.

Jesse Dole I would like to…

dominique Hurley: I speak for ConCon here, by the way, I'm just thinking, like.

Jesse Dole Yeah.

dominique Hurley: Why is it Western and Samsung bringing that up as a factor?

Jesse Dole And, you know, is it a… Is it appropriate for the ConCom to say we will not issue an order of conditions absent soil testing and either you know, their licensed site professional saying it doesn't trigger the MCP, or it does, and these are the things that we're doing in compliance with the MCP. Because it could be everything from, you know, we want you to put 6 little drill holes out there, and tell us every… every month. Is there a migration of some contaminant? to… You have to encapsulate this site. You know, or even worst case scenario, you gotta pull all the soil out and truck it to a facility that's gonna clean it and dispose of it. So…

dominique Hurley: All those things would happen. And what DEP told me is that that stuff is going to happen. If the soils aren't good, that stuff will happen. It'll be a big screeching halt.

Jesse Dole And that's my question, is the DEP, by… by just standard operating procedure in evaluating an application for a facility permit. I went through the CMR, I couldn't find anything specifically about compliance with the MCP? So… you know, that would be nice to know from both Wesson and Samson and the ConCom that Yeah, we'll conti… we'll… we'll con… we'll… our permitting process will be contingent on establishment of compliance with the MCP. Or, again, it's another situation where it's in the hands of a different agency, in this case a DEP, that says, oh yeah, every time we review an application for one of these facilities, we require soil testing and compliance with the MCP.

And isn't there a chance, Jesse, that it'll just come back clean?

Jesse Dole Yeah, or it could come back whatever levels there may be. Yeah.

Right, Trace.

Jesse Dole You'll fall below the tolerances.

The thresholds, yep.

Jesse Dole You know, I think one thing that's come up very recently that maybe wasn't a big deal 10 or 20 years ago and I don't off the top of my head, I don't know how long they've been operating a facility up there is, you know, just within the last five, six years, people have realized, you know, forever chemicals and PFAS. That are in literally everything that we use. You know, have those been seeping into the soil out there?

dominique Hurley: One of the things we have to be super, I mean that's the whole purpose for, and that all came up during hearing by the way, and that's the whole reason this condition exists. One of the guidances that I've had recently is to be sure that. dominique Hurley: you know. dominique Hurley: we look at the body of the decision, we have the condition, the condition has to be satisfied, you know, for the rationale of the body of the decision. However, we can't speculate further about what else we want. dominique Hurley: you know, beyond the conditions. So, we can, as an example, bring in now, like, yeah, but what about PFAS? You know, like, if it wasn't explicitly stated. I'm not bringing that up because it's a false statement on your part, Jesse, it's just that we have to be super careful to

dominique Hurley: stick to the that which is stated in the decision and stated in the conditions of the decision, we can't sort of go outside of the body of this document.

Jesse Dole Oh, yeah, no, I just… you know, if they have to… the soil testing is in compliance with 310 CMR40, which is a mass contingency plan, that itself… that itself has, like, tolerance limits for all kinds of you know, different different contaminants. So Yeah, and I should have prefaced it. Sometimes an out for these guys, for guys like this, and any sort of permitting process is we looked at the historic documents and there was no indication of any spill. or testing that discovered this stuff. Because 20 years ago, nobody tested for the PFAS. Like, 20 years ago, they didn't have… The, the, the, the accuracy in the testing equipment itself.

Jesse Dole And also, whatever limits may have been appropriate 20 years ago have been found to be incredibly inappropriate now. So, they always say, oh, well, we looked through historical documents, and we have no… there's no evidence of a spill, or, you know… and they try to say that to avoid having to do current current testing to find out what is actually there, rather than going back and saying, oh, well, there's no big deal. So. So I… If they're going to have to do that testing. and be subject to triggering the testing and remediation requirements of the MCP as part of the DEP process to get their permit to operate, then we… obviously, we want to see that. But also…

dominique Hurley: That's our next agenda item, Jesse, in terms of going through each one. But this is literally for ConComm and NOI right now, right? So if we want to say, and I think this is where you're heading. dominique Hurley: you know, we want to call it the importance of the gaps that we're missing in this third-party review. We asked for these. They included 14, 15, and 16, but didn't address 20, 24. dominique Hurley: 30, 31, and 32. Peer review accepts several of the engineering decisions on face value. However, the underlying Board of Health record contains direct expert testimony regarding potential soil contamination and other importance of leaching containment. And then we sort of… I would say I can call this back, but I would say ditch that now, and then just go for…

dominique Hurley: The statement. dominique Hurley: Because, like, we feel these gaps in the NOI are important to bring forward to the Commission for evaluation, and also the NOI third-party review here. dominique Hurley: are important to bring forward to the Commission for the evaluation and issuance of the Notice of Conditions, and that Westland and Samson should further evaluate the conditions and underlying rationale for 2024, 30, 31, and 32 to guide the Conservation Commission as their jurisdiction allows to make clear whether the condition impacts the Commission's decision set or not. dominique Hurley: Does that… dominique Hurley: it's kind of, you know, telling them to go back and make sure they do their finished goods. I get all the points you're making, but I also feel as though,

dominique Hurley: What can we affect in this room right now, you know?

Jesse Dole Yeah, PodCom, like, include… The soil testing and compliance with any. required, you know, testing and remediation, or TELUS. We can't do that under the Wetlands Protection Act. Because we're gonna… we have a right to get it, whether we get it through the ConCom the CONCOM, order of conditions Or we get it. through the DEP, or we make them do it themselves as part of our site assignment.

dominique Hurley: Which we already have. I mean, they're already in there. Yeah, so…

Jesse Dole It's gonna be done as part of some other permitting process. We want to see it. And yeah.

dominique Hurley: Just the place where it impacts wetlands. dominique Hurley: Yep. You know.

Jesse Dole And it's an order of conditions, not a notice of conditions.

dominique Hurley: Sorry, it's an order of conditions?

Jesse Dole Yep.

dominique Hurley: What'd I call it?

Jesse Dole It's easy. You call it the notice because of the notice of intent.

Okay.

Jesse Dole Oh, the last paragraph, the first sentence of the last paragraph.

dominique Hurley: Thank you. Acronym toxicity.

Jesse Dole Yeah, MCP, NOI.

you. dominique Hurley: on the site decision conditions. dominique Hurley: underlying rationale for those conditions.

Jesse Dole I don't do enough concom related stuff to know how frequently they can.

dominique Hurley: I really appreciate it.

Jesse Dole Absolutely.

dominique Hurley: I don't know CMR though, it's really helpful. dominique Hurley: And again, I got similar guidance that it was sort of like, fret not, this won't be the only opportunity to be sure that this condition is being attended to. However, this is the place where Conservation Commission is going to weigh in on whether or not there is risk to dominique Hurley: to the wetlands and that is. you. dominique Hurley: part of our decision set, right? And so that's why it's important here that they have all the information they need to understand whether or not there's a risk to these waters.

Jesse Dole Hmm.

dominique Hurley: Okay, do you all agree that this is enough or should we have a closing paragraph about we encourage Conservation Commission to take these items into consideration in the order of conditions? dominique Hurley: Or do you feel like this message here is enough?

Jesse Dole I think it's enough.

dominique Hurley: Okay. dominique Hurley: Anything on your side, Tom? Do you agree with these actions? I'm good. dominique Hurley: All right, great. So then I will take this and this will be the memo back to Concom to hopefully have Weston and Sampson weigh in. Are you guys OK if I wordsmith this one a little bit better based on once I read the sentences more carefully?

Jesse Dole Yeah.

Sure. dominique Hurley: one's.

Jesse Dole Correct me, Chuck. Chuck is the chair of the con con, correct? He's not in engineering or planning or.

dominique Hurley: No, Chuck is the conservation agent for the city.

Jesse Dole Okay.

dominique Hurley: He's a city employee that kind of is the interface to the Conservation Commission.

Jesse Dole Yep, we have our… we have our own here, too.

dominique Hurley: I'll put his title in there.

Jesse Dole Hmm.

dominique Hurley: All right. dominique Hurley: Okay, so that is a memo to CONCOM for the NOI. So the next item that we have is the geothermal explosive engineering feasibility documentation. And so dominique Hurley: That document I know I sent out to all. I'm happy to pull it up. Tom, I think you had in your review written back and said that this seems to suffice. After reviewing it, one of the things that dominique Hurley: you know, I had thought initially, like, oh, let's give it to FIRE, and FIRE's like, I don't look at this, I don't look at anything until I have a verified blaster submitting me for a permanent application. This isn't that, so they won't take a look at it. dominique Hurley: They… and then I had, our, sanitarian take a look at it, and he was saying that, you know, they call out all the things you're asking them to call out, whether or not they're authorized to do this work or not.

dominique Hurley: You know, you know, could be in question, but this person is a PE, right? And then he also, no, not he, another, another. dominique Hurley: kind of city team member said, you know, you could ask them to come and present to the Board of Health and have any questions that the Board has offered to them. But the reality is, this is them saying that it is feasible for them to blast with the proper protections that are required. dominique Hurley: And if, you know, I was thinking that, therefore. dominique Hurley: this condition has been met. They show us to be feasible, and we can send a memo saying this condition has been met. If in the process of, you know, application to construct, or, building permits, or blasting permits.

dominique Hurley: Further information, you know, is found out that dominique Hurley: Makes blasting feasibility, impossible, you know, we, we reserve the right to, you know, come back and reopen this condition.

Jesse Dole Yeah, I mean, until they get a… An actual… demolition company or blasting company to come in. tell them how they're going to do it. It's all it's theoretical based on geology of the rock itself.

dominique Hurley: So we said, prove that you can do it, and they're like, we can do it. It's like, okay, so you're saying you can do it. We're gonna accept, and I'll get, like, the legalese on this one, but we're gonna accept this on its face value, assuming you have a proper expertise. dominique Hurley: And then we'll go ahead and, you know, kind of send that out, but saying if any, any information throughout the process, we deserve the right to kind of say that, you know, this condition will not be met.

Jesse Dole Yeah, because I beat myself up even more and I went to go look at the CMRs about the state fire code CMRs, specifically about blasting explosives, things like that.

dominique Hurley: Yeah.

Jesse Dole I mean, it's going to be on the contractor to really satisfy those requirements, not necessarily EWS.

dominique Hurley: Yeah, they're definitely not meeting the CMR in any way with that document. They didn't do the surveys, they just did walk arounds. You know, but do we push on this knowing that before they can… dominique Hurley: Before they can blast, they have to have this done properly. Their cursory look is basically saying, yeah, the site plan can stand as is. dominique Hurley: Because we can do this blasting that we want to to cut into this wall. And so that was, you know, that's what came up as the rationale for why we wanted to look at this, because the site is too small. dominique Hurley: And unless they make it larger, you know, the trucks can't get by. dominique Hurley: And so the chief is… the chief still has to sign off on a plan that shows that there's enough

dominique Hurley: clearance, so that the emergency management vehicles can get through. That's a separate condition than this one. dominique Hurley: So I move that we accept this as, finished goods, and we'll just put a paragraph or two together that describes the fact that we are presuming that they've hired, an appropriate expert for this evaluation, that through the course of, application to construct and or, dominique Hurley: Permitting from other state, city, city. dominique Hurley: departments, this is deemed infeasible, we, you know, revoke the right to rescind that this condition has been met, which I don't even think we have to write that, because… dominique Hurley: We already have 8.

dominique Hurley: So, agree? Yep, yep, we… dominique Hurley: Excellent. Yay. We knocked off position Eugene. So excited. Okay.

Jesse Dole I can't imagine…

dominique Hurley: Okay.

Jesse Dole Again, I mean, this is… this is.

dominique Hurley: Yeah. dominique Hurley: All right, I'm going to stop sharing this document and share the status report. And then that's our last agenda item. So this is, let me just make sure Joel's not on the other line here. dominique Hurley: No different than a different member of the public's here. So I'd like to now share the process review draft. dominique Hurley: With you… And, zoom meeting here… Go back into… We share… dominique Hurley: So, I'm lost in my Zoom thing here one second, please.

dominique Hurley: Okay. dominique Hurley: So what I'm going to share now is a draft document. dominique Hurley: But it's fairly… it's looking fairly finished at this point, and my hope is that we can go through each one, and we can align on what we're doing, and make sure that… can you guys all see my screen, by the way?

Jesse Dole Yes.

dominique Hurley: Okay, so this document will be shared after this meeting with Joel, with other members of the public. It will become a public document and it is meant for us to be able to track and monitor how we're doing against conditions. dominique Hurley: And so just for the sake of reminding the virtual room. dominique Hurley: Somebody's in here tooling around, so let me drive for one minute. Just for the sake of reminding the virtual room what we're doing across the x-axis of the things that we're working on. So what's the condition? What do we believe to be the requirement of that condition to be met? dominique Hurley: When is the moment in time when that will be met? What is the expectation?

dominique Hurley: That we have for finished goods, and then we get into sort of the status stuff, like where's the status of this, what date was it submitted, where is it in our review process, and anything that we need to kind of keep track of. And if we have links, like you can see here, I have some add some links here. dominique Hurley: Where I haven't had a moment to update all of them that are relevant. dominique Hurley: So, what I've done between the last time we've spoken and now is really work to simplify this, and I've done a few things. First of all, from a phase standpoint, the options are pre-ATC, meaning before I can apply for application to construct, I have to do this condition.

dominique Hurley: pre-building permit, so before I can apply to the city to build, I have to do this, condition. dominique Hurley: pre-go-live, which is… parallels closely the, application to operate, or whatever it's called at DEP. I'm sorry not to know that actual term, but there's another point in time where they submit a whole other set of. dominique Hurley: operational processes, and that's actually a place where DEP says we weigh in pretty heavily to make sure that things are operating as we expect. dominique Hurley: So that, you know, my right to operate applicant to DEP. And so I call that pre-go live, right? dominique Hurley: And then ongoing operations, those things that they're gonna have to do in an ongoing manner after they're going concerned and running.

dominique Hurley: So this used to have six of them. It had a whole lot of nuance. And if we can just keep it this simple, I think we can all kind of know that we're going to be looking at things with the right timing. dominique Hurley: what I did to get to what I assigned in these was pour over the condition, pour over an expectation that might be written in the condition, like pre-ATC, you must. And then… dominique Hurley: I also tried to work on what's the expectation to meet that condition, and a couple of considerations here. dominique Hurley: The first is that in these conditions, these are conditions that we are asking the applicant to do. dominique Hurley: And so, as an example, we say to the applicant, you have to file a notice of intent.

dominique Hurley: And so what we can't do is what I did for the blasting permit, is go to the chief now and say, hey, is this okay with you, right? Because the chief is like, this is out of cycle, I'm not going to approve this, it's not what I do, I'm not putting… I'm not putting my name on this, and it's appropriately so. And so that brought up the fact that, although we can look for expertise around our city departments. dominique Hurley: This is on the applicant to do, and so when we want the chief to approve something. dominique Hurley: We put to the applicant that good or finished means that you have an approval from the chief. dominique Hurley: That his trucks can get around the building, or that the blasting will work, right?

dominique Hurley: And so, that's not a good example in the last example, because we already said that this one's fine, because it won't be caught by other things. And so, I've done that for each one here. So, first of all, the first condition is comply with all applicable local and state. dominique Hurley: And so I have required versus recommended. dominique Hurley: So required is that, they copy us, to Board of Health on all submissions to federal, state, and local authorities that show approvals by governing body. dominique Hurley: I think that's an appropriate way to say, like, we know, when you are affecting a statute and complying to a statute, we have proof that you're following that, because we see the appropriate approvals generated.

dominique Hurley: Recommended would that… would be that they come to us as a courtesy review to be sure that any of their… any of our conditions are also cooked into whatever they're doing there, so that dominique Hurley: It demonstrates to the board that they understand. dominique Hurley: that these conditions are with them for life. You know, it's not just something that they had to get done to now move forward. We are the authorized, sort of approving body going forward for all the work that they do. I mean, DEP has to give them the right to operate, but once they are a going concern. dominique Hurley: You know, they're sitting kind of under our watch and enforcement arm, and so… dominique Hurley: And I think Joe, Joel, if he was on the line, would agree with this that wherever possible, we should collaborate to make sure that the board is nodding and saying, yep, that hits the goal there, that you know, you're spot on there.

dominique Hurley: And we work early and often to make sure that the board perspective on what their concerns were and what those conditions are, are being attended to in anything that they're doing. So this recommended here. dominique Hurley: provide the Board of Health with the courtesy review period. dominique Hurley: So that we have a chance to comment, and then I'm also reminding them that we want to copy the board on all communications with city departments regarding this project. dominique Hurley: So, any comments on that one? I kind of want to just go through all of them today and make sure you guys are aligned on them. dominique Hurley: Anything you. here. dominique Hurley: For number one.

dominique Hurley: I'm good. You can also tell me, by the way, that I'm overcooking. I will absolutely take critique on this. dominique Hurley: Been on a bit of an island trying to make sure that it's right-sized and not onerous and doable and practical. dominique Hurley: Well…

Jesse Dole We may or may not reach that point, so, I mean, let's… You can always go backwards if it turns out.

spot. dominique Hurley: But do you see anything wrong in this first condition for expectations? Do you feel like those are valid?

Jesse Dole I think that's reasonable.

dominique Hurley: Okay. dominique Hurley: And in some cases, this is in progress, because dominique Hurley: Some of these things have been sent to us. So condition two is a tricky one. Condition two says that they have to document compliance with all conditions to the Board of Health satisfaction. And so required per the ATC per our, you know, what we physically wrote in this conditions document. dominique Hurley: Is 12, 14, 15, 17, 18, 19, 20, right? Those are all required pre-ATC. dominique Hurley: But we believe, or I believe, after looking carefully at all of these, is that if they can brief us pre-ATC, so when they have their application, to construct ready to go. dominique Hurley: At some period in time when it's fairly finished.

dominique Hurley: They're going to meet with the board or meet with us and they're going to walk us through the ATC component parts and call out elements of that ATC that address our conditions. dominique Hurley: Right? So that they can say like, listen, you have this like hours of operation are this. Here in this part of the HEC, you can see that we're explicitly stating how we're going to be operating and here is the mirror of the hours that you're providing. dominique Hurley: So it's our chance to look at that application to construct and witness that they've attended to all conditions where possible, right? Because some things may not be possible. dominique Hurley: at that time, or it may not be required by the ATC at that time, in which case they should say, you know, we looked through all the conditions, here's where they're all hitting in the ATC. These other four conditions really don't happen until well later. The ATC's not even asking for these until, authorization to operate.

dominique Hurley: So we're going to attend to them then. And we would be like, okay, that sounds great. So then we can say to, dominique Hurley: you know, to DEP, condition two has been met, right? We see it in their application to construct, we see it echoed, we know that these that aren't in there, they have a plan for them, and that's a little difference than show us a plan for everything prior to ATC. dominique Hurley: We're sort of right-sizing it to say, show me that it exists in your ATC, and if we're going to get to exactly how later on, just help us understand that, so we know where in the process you'll be good to go. That's a little different than cooked and uncooked, which is how Joel's been talking about it before. So we're kind of, you know, kind of

dominique Hurley: Not asking to do much more than present what they're already delivering, but we're asking for a time period to comment to be sure that we see all presence of our conditions. dominique Hurley: What do you guys think of that one?

Jesse Dole Sorry.

Well, I like your analogy. It's not just cooked and uncooked, I guess, and it's nice to have some transparency in terms of process. So that we get to our comfort level, you know? Yeah. So, I understand it. dominique Hurley: And then I guess my question to Joel here, and Jesse, do you have anything you want to add there?

Jesse Dole No.

dominique Hurley: So my question to Joel is when is the best time for doing this? Like I don't know where they are in their timing for the HEC 'cause they've got a lot of other stuff they have to get done. But maybe if you can start to tell us what to plan for that, that would be helpful. Yep. dominique Hurley: Okay. dominique Hurley: Let's delete this. dominique Hurley: Okay, so now the third one is the site assignment conditions. dominique Hurley: apply to applicant and all successors of interest or control, and so the original plan I had here for number 3 was that we would have that. dominique Hurley: documented, as, you know, traveling with the sale of the company, so, you know, you would not be able to close the deal unless the Board of Health approved the new player being able to handle all these conditions, that kind of thing.

dominique Hurley: Joel felt that a better way to do that, and you can see this in the comments, so I wanted to bring this forward to you, is that if they put the site decision added to the registry of deeds, he feels it can accomplish the same thing, because it's tying the decision to the property. dominique Hurley: My challenge that I wanted to run by you all is that what if the property owner is one person and the business owner is a different person? So then does the property owner have to ensure all these things are being done by the business owner? dominique Hurley: And so I don't… I'm not a lawyer here, Jesse, I don't know if you can weigh in, if you have an alternative suggestion here, but what can we do to make sure that,

Jesse Dole They wanted to transfer…

dominique Hurley: for perpetuity.

Jesse Dole if they wanted to transfer ownership or operation of the… ownership of the site, operation of the facility, they've got to go back to the DEP to do that. There's a whole other… there's a transfer of… it's not transfer. Let me think about that. I'll look at the CMR about solid waste facilities, because it's not as simple as just changing the name on the trucks, or the sign. They've got to go back to the DEP for approval to do that. So, let me ponder that one. Because I know, for example, if you get a… you get a special permit, or. You know, variances or things like that, that those will get. Special permit will get recorded at the Registry of Deeds, so that everybody knows that those were the conditions.

Jesse Dole That allowed you to do the… do what you did on the property. But I mean, that's an interesting… and I also don't know, I mean, that… that our… Situations, conditions on the ground can change. CMRs can change, general laws can change. Whatever we put in the, the, the Our local site assignment decision. Maybe outdated, for good or bad. 20 years from now, when EWS sells the company to Republic.

dominique Hurley: Okay, so I'm going to gray that one out until we do a little bit more work here, okay? dominique Hurley: Does that make sense? But that would be pre-building permit, by the way. So they can go as far as they want, but before they can actually do anything to those grounds, we have that. dominique Hurley: We have that, you know, attached to the deed. Now, we can do that sooner if you want, but it's not required period ATC. dominique Hurley: What are your thoughts on that? Are you fine with it pre-building permit as a timeframe for it to get done? dominique Hurley: I guess you won't know until we know what we want to do. We could just table this one for now.

Jesse Dole Yeah.

dominique Hurley: Yeah. dominique Hurley: Okay, dominique Hurley: Another little tricky one. So, constructive facility and substantial compliance with proposed conditions. We talked about this one a little bit before. This is that Exhibit 5 is the plan that was presented, which was, referred… it was very rudimentary, to say the least. dominique Hurley: And so as things go, they're going to keep changing. And so pre-ATC, the recommendation here is that they present any changes from Exhibit 5 during the hearing process to the Board of Health. dominique Hurley: Subcommittee that will be submitted to the ATC. So this would be accomplished during that ATC briefing, potentially, and it would literally say, hey, here are the variances from the first plan that you saw before. We had one tank, now we have two tanks. We had

dominique Hurley: You know, the driveway curving to the right, now we're having the driveway curving to the left. No material impact on any of these pigeons, right? dominique Hurley: And then once they go through the application to construct period, where there could be more changes at the request of the DEP, they would come back again, pre-building permit, and say, okay, we're out of that phase, now we're going for the permit, and here's what's changed, right, to that, dominique Hurley: They are coming to us at two big points of, of operation, showing us that the plan is still the plan. dominique Hurley: And then I have this last piece that all dated plan… all dated plan versions with approvals are maintained to prove compliance.

dominique Hurley: With Condition 4. So, at each time, we would send them a letter, like, we're going to send them for Condition 19 to say, like, at pre-HEC, Condition 4 has been met. However, we want to see it again pre-building permit. At pre-building permit, Condition 4 has been met, you know, so that we have that check-in point. dominique Hurley: To be sure that the plan has not changed materially as it relates to the things that we're accountable for. dominique Hurley: Does that sound like a good plan?

Jesse Dole Sure.

your. dominique Hurley: Of course, I have over here that we can only ever take into account that what we're accountable for, which is an obvious one, but… dominique Hurley: And then Joel had said at the earlier meeting, let's think about when that is. And that's what I've done between now and then. I have it at these two points in times, pre-ATC and pre-building permits. So instead of coming in with every change, these are the two big moving timeframes that you got to come in and talk to us. dominique Hurley: John? dominique Hurley: Anybody? dominique Hurley: Speak up if you have a question. dominique Hurley: Okay. Good year. dominique Hurley: All right, good. dominique Hurley: Removing all fencing, this is already in play, I don't know what the status is, but I have that, it is done when we have an email from the City of Gloucester Legal Department that the fence has been satisfactorily removed from city property.

dominique Hurley: And I don't know that, that's going to be a problem to get, but I think that would mean that fencing material and property from city property, we have proof that that happened. dominique Hurley: Right? This is all relevant now because it's in play. When Joel is next on, he can give us the status of where this sits. dominique Hurley: And these are all the letters that… dominique Hurley: I know Concom approved the removal of the fencing, and the city had sent a cease and desist, so they had to speed this one up. dominique Hurley: So we care about a pre-building permit, right? But before that, I don't think we care, because it doesn't really impact the ATC in any way. dominique Hurley: So then we have a bunch of things that are, like, we're going to be having ongoing watching, like the hours of operation, the C&D waste intake cap, the acceptance of yard waste, and food, municipal solid waste, and compostables.

dominique Hurley: The establishment of a customer reservation system. dominique Hurley: prohibit vehicle queuing. And so, in all cases, for these kinds of things, is pre-go-live, right? And again, in the ATC, if they're talking about these things, because the ATC is demanding that they do talk about these things, they would be, as part of Condition 2, showing us how they're attending to these hours of operation. dominique Hurley: But pre-go-live, they have to demonstrate to us how scale logs, reservation systems, websites, and site operation documentation ensure that the operations will only be this. dominique Hurley: And so, when we get to ongoing operations, when we have the right under Condition 11 to inspect.

dominique Hurley: we would, pre-work on what that inspection will entail, right? So, these are the things that we'll be inspecting against, and so… dominique Hurley: in their pre-go live. They're going to tell us what reports we're going to have available to us on site when we show up. dominique Hurley: And then, which is that Condition 11, but then that also helps them show us that pre-go-live, they're ready to operate as planned. And so I do that consistently for any of those go-live kind of things here. And again, if it's coming up in ATC, or. dominique Hurley: ability to operate, We, you know, pre-go live is really authorization to operate to kind of intersect. dominique Hurley: That we would then, you know, kind of have our ability to… to work with them on how we'll exactly see that these hours and these requirements will be met.

dominique Hurley: Does that make sense? dominique Hurley: Before it said, show me a prospective plan. dominique Hurley: That demonstrates how you'll build operations to effect, and that seemed pretty onerous. dominique Hurley: but that they will at the right time be able to demonstrate to our satisfaction. dominique Hurley: Hello? Is that… you guys? ahead. dominique Hurley: If you're nodding or not, because I'm looking at my spreadsheet, not your faces. We're good? I'm good here.

Jesse Dole I had to unmute myself, yep.

dominique Hurley: Alrighty. dominique Hurley: Now Condition 11 is, pre-go-live and post-go-live, because dominique Hurley: For Condition 11, because of all the work we're doing with pre-ATC and all the different points of check-in. dominique Hurley: That's where, we would then, for Condition 11, have a documentation of all reports expected to ensure conditions are being met, right? So… because we can enter at any point and inspect to be sure that they are complying appropriately to all of the terms that are required, frankly, under the CMR, as well as what we put here in conditions. dominique Hurley: And so, this is what we would say that this condition is met in pre-go-live by documenting all reports expected, so we should then have, like, a, okay, here's the walkthrough, here's what you've got, we've aligned on all these things in the past, here's the master log of what we'll be looking at.

dominique Hurley: And then, you know, that condition is met if, upon ongoing operations, all of those logs are available. dominique Hurley: And important to understand, if at any time a log is showing us, you know, greater than the 270 tons, or greater than the 149, you know, diesel trucks per day. dominique Hurley: Those are grounds to rescind the permit to operate or not the permit to operate, but the the site suitability. dominique Hurley: And so, it's in their best interest to align with us early and often on what we want to see, and so that they know their own trigger points against the same. So I'm hoping that this won't be onerous, because they have to do it anyways. dominique Hurley: And Jesse, I don't know if you looked into what has to go into an ATC or not. Did you look at that? I haven't had a chance to go into what the DEP's looking for explicitly.

Jesse Dole I'd have to go pull it out and take a look at it.

dominique Hurley: Okay. dominique Hurley: that's something I'm not really privy to, but I would count on Joel to be, like, in the spirit of what we're trying to do, here's what I'm putting in the ATC that attends to your condition. dominique Hurley: Umm. dominique Hurley: So… Does that sound good for 11? Yep. dominique Hurley: Okay, good. So 12… dominique Hurley: This is a tough one because they, you know, they can't come up with these number of truck trips that are pretty important for us to have the baseline to show that they have, it's something like they can't have more than 136, added trips. dominique Hurley: per day, for a total of 149 per day, of diesel traffic. And the challenge we've had here consistently is that we've never been able to, get to what the actual numbers are that they're using. So we don't…

dominique Hurley: we don't have confidence necessarily, and I'm not speaking new information here. I think throughout the decision-making and the hearing, it was pretty obvious that nobody understands how that math was done. dominique Hurley: The guidance that I've been giving, though, is that we, you know, we have the right, because we've asked for it, for it to be delivered, and that is that they can provide us with records indicating actual, and average daily truck trips of diesel traffic for the existing operation today, which is operating as a recycling facility. dominique Hurley: And that we would be able to see, you know, we'd be able to have record, therefore, of, like, what are the actual number of trucks? Is their math accurate?

dominique Hurley: We can't, in the assessment, say. dominique Hurley: oh, we now want more information to make sure we made a good decision, but we have the right to say in this ask, is the information we were giving accurate, and does it change any calculation that we've been doing? So this log right now is pretty important, and so pre-ATC, dominique Hurley: They have to give us the, dominique Hurley: Logs of the current diesel truck traffic. dominique Hurley: And apparently, they've been tracking that since last July, so they could do July to July, and we have a whole year of operation. I don't know where that stands or why they haven't submitted it, but that is something that's required pre-ATC.

dominique Hurley: They did not dispute this, again, any of these conditions, so they have to comply to them or they're not met. dominique Hurley: And then pre-go-live, you know, when we look at how can you make sure that when we start to run, you don't exceed that 149 per day to and from the facility. dominique Hurley: So, that is pre-go-live, just like we're doing up top, like, show us how your scale log, your reservation system, website, and site operation documentation is going to make sure that you won't exceed that 149, because that would lead us to, ongoing ops, where dominique Hurley: Per Condition 11, when we come in and request the logs, we should never see more than 149 per day, right?

dominique Hurley: And same thing with ongoing operations, actual and average diesel trucks. It can't just be what's the averages quarterly report. I've got to be able to go in there and inspect and witness that they are complying to this really important requirement. Okay. dominique Hurley: So those are the recommendations for expectations to meet conditions 12. dominique Hurley: Anything? It looks like that data may be available if they would just produce it, right? This 12-month run from July to July? dominique Hurley: Yeah, and Joel had told me in the past that they were running that, that they had started to count, so I don't know why it hasn't been submitted, but, I mean, this is something that I would have read here if I was flagging this, because this is a pre-ATC requirement, that is a pretty big barrier,

dominique Hurley: To move forward. It's like the soil testing or something like that, you know? Yeah. dominique Hurley: Yeah, exactly. dominique Hurley: And you guys know, probably, that you can put filters on row 8 and pull up by pre-go live and kind of look at everything if you want a reality check. dominique Hurley: Limiting residential drop-offs to Saturday, 7am to 12. dominique Hurley: It's the same thing as we had before, in terms of, you show me before you go live, and I should be able to witness that afterwards. dominique Hurley: 14, this is notice of intent. dominique Hurley: You know. So we sent. They did send the notice of intent to the Conservation Commission. dominique Hurley: And I'm gonna send you, I'm having it reviewed right now, but I have some feedback on sort of, like, how we look at the document overall and, and set our conditions for what is done or not.

dominique Hurley: And, dominique Hurley: So, one school of thought is, they submitted the notice, it's fine. Another school of thought is, they submitted the notice, it's not adequate, we need more information. So, until we have that, you know, it's not considered, complete. So… dominique Hurley: So, you know, a notice of intent to the Conservation Commission is fine, but if CONCOM says, no, this is a danger to the wetlands because of these things that are in existence, well then, condition, you know, that goes back to some of the core criteria of, dominique Hurley: of us saying that it is a suitable site. So we… so we have to, at some level, know that we have dominique Hurley: proof that ConCom has completed its valuation. And so I added here

dominique Hurley: the notice of conditions, not notice of conditions. What's it called again, Jesse? What road conditions? Huh? dominique Hurley: the. Melissa, you're on m. dominique Hurley: confidence.

Jesse Dole Well, order of conditions, notice of intent, order and conditions.

dominique Hurley: Thank you. dominique Hurley: Sorry, I'll get better at this. dominique Hurley: This is Wade. dominique Hurley: Not there to be here. dominique Hurley: Oh. dominique Hurley: Yeah, so the notice of intent is delivered, and the order of conditions is generated, demonstrating the completed process, right? dominique Hurley: Any questions on that one?

Jesse Dole Nope.

dominique Hurley: Okay. dominique Hurley: 15, gloucester DPW for permission to connect. dominique Hurley: And so, obviously, if they can't connect to the MS4 for any reason, then they are in defiance of the things that we considered that came up with Condition 15. So, I'm saying that proof of submission of the application to DPW for permission to connect, and… dominique Hurley: Confirmation from DPW that that application is thorough, complete and approval or denial is delivered, right? So.

Jesse Dole Yep.

dominique Hurley: That's kind of what we have to make sure is in all places. dominique Hurley: 16 stormwater BMPs, best management practices to treat runoff. dominique Hurley: you know, the SWPP will be on file with the Board of Health. dominique Hurley: And that is approved, either through ConCom and or DPW. And so, that is proof that they are properly managing stormwater to the best practices. And, I think I can augment this with what department is actually the approving body. dominique Hurley: And when it will be finalized, just, you don't know off the top who would… who would approve an SWPPP, do you?

Jesse Dole I think that would be part of the order of conditions from the ComCom, because it was discussed in the third-party review. That being said, the DPW's also got to approve of.

dominique Hurley: Yeah, I feel.

Jesse Dole unless.

dominique Hurley: But it has to be delivered also to ComCom for evaluation. dominique Hurley: But I'm not clear on that. That's my gap, I can find that out. And so, who's the approving body? dominique Hurley: But no matter what, we need the final one.

Jesse Dole Yes.

dominique Hurley: Okay, because right now we only have the preliminary, we don't have the actual. dominique Hurley: Coordinating the fire trucks with the fire department and city engineers are required that they gain approval from the City of Gloucester Fire and Engineering that the plan submitted for ATC has appropriate clearance for sites and ramps. I have that as a pre-ATC. dominique Hurley: And I know that Joel had told me that he's meeting with fire to get the final plans. Fire's offering courtesy response. So our memorandum of acceptance of that condition has to be saying like, if anything changes. dominique Hurley: this condition reopens.

Jesse Dole multiple.

dominique Hurley: You can have that in every approval letter. dominique Hurley: Okay, the supplemental traffic study, and Tom, thank you so much for bringing that to my attention. Again, it was delivered, we had a third-party review, there were some gaps called out, dominique Hurley: In one case, they just have a categorical statement on truck limit, they didn't tell us how, but one of the things they definitely didn't do, was deliver on 18I, so they did not… dominique Hurley: they called 18I 18… they called 18J 18I, they skipped 18I altogether, and Weston and Samson did not catch that. dominique Hurley: And so, I think we have to write back to, to… dominique Hurley: As a next action, we have to let them know about that.

Maybe we could throw that into the letter. dominique Hurley: Yes, I think we should throw this into a letter, because we have to get back to them on 18 to say that these conditions… 18A through X have been met, 18I has been not met. I think 18B, we're unhappy with what they've done, but they're holding strong to say it's not going to exceed 149. dominique Hurley: And so, all we can do, and this is a question, is, like, should we document that to NEPA? Because they are, getting out of an environmental, a NEPA activity that's required if they're within X, miles of an, environmental justice area. And. dominique Hurley: And so, but because they were keeping their truck limits down, they were able to say that this isn't impacting. But again, they can't prove that their truck number isn't going to be higher.

dominique Hurley: The counter to that, that others in the city have told me is, the. dominique Hurley: They gotta stick to 149. If they go over that, they've defied the conditions of the agreement. And so. dominique Hurley: Doesn't matter what their historical numbers are, or what they, you know, think they are or are not going to do with outside parties versus our internal, users from the City of Gloucester, it can't… it can't exceed 149. Is that an average Dominique or is that an absolute?

dominique Hurley: So we can follow on. dominique Hurley: I'd have to go back, Tom, to read into the document. Yeah, that's right. dominique Hurley: It's all of their math, all of their traffic studies are based on that number, not exceeding that number. And so that's helped them say like, there will only be one truck every three minutes or… dominique Hurley: You know, it's not dramatic improvement, so all of the traffic studies hinged off of that number, and that number was also the actual approval that they got. And in the body of the decision. dominique Hurley: They actually call out. dominique Hurley: That that was the… Original number that they put into their application.

dominique Hurley: And…

Jesse Dole So, I'm looking at it, it's…

dominique Hurley: It's okay.

Jesse Dole well.

dominique Hurley: Item two, it's like, it's pretty.

Jesse Dole It's a pretty detailed…

dominique Hurley: It's like three pages of content, but it'll catch you up on that.

Jesse Dole Applicant shall limit. Oh. Limit additional average daily truck trips. to no more than 149 per day over a duration of a year. Well, that's…

years. dominique Hurley: Tell them they have to show the average M daily. dominique Hurley: So we're not just looking at that annually. They also say that the proposed facility on page 9 of the decision will generate 136 additional average daily trips. dominique Hurley: of diesel vehicles, and so that's something that was pretty important, in MEPA's evaluation of their application, which was part of the site approval that the DEP went through before us. dominique Hurley: And so a lot hinges on them sticking to these numbers. I think they're very aware of that. And we have the authorization to ensure that they are dominique Hurley: sticking to that, and then pre-ATC, dominique Hurley: you know, they need to give us this study, and if that's… this study does anything to dispute any of the calculations, which I don't believe it did, except that they didn't address 18I, which specifically calls out that the modeling will not impact bike traffic and.

dominique Hurley: What was it? dominique Hurley: collection of, I's assessment of potential impact from additional truck traffic from the proposed facility on pedestrians and cyclists on McMoria Avenue and Essex Avenue. So that was not done, or addressed in any way. Neither was it caught by the third-party review process because of the INJ, dominique Hurley: You know, see how the error happened, for sure. dominique Hurley: We'll get on that. So, so I will, I will write a memo on that one. Okay. Good. dominique Hurley: You guys want to see that memo or are you okay with me getting out the door? I'm good. dominique Hurley: Okay.

dominique Hurley: Okay, 19 we just talked about and we agreed the condition has been met. Yay. Client and DEH to send memo to same effect. dominique Hurley: Right. dominique Hurley: Okay, 20, we know they have not started to our knowledge. I think they're looking into LSP suppliers right now, but we don't, again, when Joel joins us for the next one, maybe he can give us an update. dominique Hurley: 21 handling all waste on the inside, suspend intake and post social notices if storage capacity is hit. dominique Hurley: And so, again, these are more of the same, where they have to kind of prove beforehand that they're ready to do it, and then prove via log request to satisfy Condition 11 that they are, in fact, doing it.

dominique Hurley: So 21, 22, 23, and 24 are all the same. dominique Hurley: And 25 as well. dominique Hurley: Okay, any questions on those? Those are all sort of, like, ongoing ops, but… dominique Hurley: If we can see it pre-ATC, if we can see it authorized, does it operate? But we at least can have a perspective on what they're planning and know what to look for when we inspect. Good. dominique Hurley: Yep, okay, good. 10,000 annually renewed payment bond to the city for road cleanups. I'm saying pre-building permit that gets set up because obviously they're gonna be building and trucking and doing stuff and so proof of bond set up and paid to the city is what they would have to deliver. dominique Hurley: To us, so that we know that that condition has been met.

dominique Hurley: Here's another one. Pre and post, pre-go live, they can show us, and then post-go live is part of inspection. dominique Hurley: Same thing with keeping facility door closed, using these air filters that are required. Again, they're going to show us up front how they're going to do it, and then ongoing, we'll approve that they're doing it. dominique Hurley: Likewise, for 30, a pre-approved plan for managing, sorting, and disposing. So. dominique Hurley: This could come up sooner. Maybe we want to say this is pre-ATC. They've already done a preliminary waistband compliance narrative. Maybe we could give that a read and see if that satisfies enough for Condition 2 to be met as it relates to 30. So maybe we could put that on our next agenda item, our next meeting.

dominique Hurley: Because that has been submitted, and Joel suggested that, is that adequate? What's that, the waste bin? Yeah. dominique Hurley: Yeah, this document over here, Tom, the waste bank compliance narrative. Yep. dominique Hurley: Which is a document that Joel had sent to us in, as part of that NOI. dominique Hurley: Same time frame. So… He had asked us at the time, does this satisfy, you know, dominique Hurley: like, how we… how… if this is attending to it or not. He had to do this for part of his pre-ATC stuff, I believe, and he'd sent that to us as well. We've never formally looked at it. dominique Hurley: So, can I suggest that we bring that up at our next subcommittee meeting, and by then we'll have reviewed it and know whether or not it is compliant?

Good, yeah, that's okay. dominique Hurley: Yep. dominique Hurley: Okay, I'm just gonna put November…

dominique Hurley: Okay, if we have to do it a little sooner, I'll find that out. dominique Hurley: But I'm saying that that's pre-go-live anyway, so, I mean, so long as he has the plan for doing that. dominique Hurley: I'm… I don't know that we need that to be done in advance of ATC, but if it's in the ATC, that's great, let's have a look at it, right? dominique Hurley: And I think that had to be… this is for the ATC, if I remember correctly. dominique Hurley: Then we get into these double-walled leaching tanks. dominique Hurley: you know, I'm, like, pre-building permit, we're looking… he can demonstrate that we see that, and what did you have… you had said it's a, stamped engineering plan, right?

dominique Hurley: gain approval from city engineering that the tanks in are installed correctly and required on operations that we can see the same. So I think what we can add here. dominique Hurley: Pre-building permit, we would have, like, via stamped engineering plans.

Jesse Dole Yeah, they're gonna have to have a staffed engineering plan for the tanks.

dominique Hurley: Pardon me?

Jesse Dole They're gonna have to have a stamped engineering plan for the tank. Tanks. Anyways, for the DEP. So… Right, it's under commission.

dominique Hurley: In addition to, we say anytime any of these conditions are addressed, show us. Yep. But our drop dead would be pre-go live that, you know, or sorry, pre-building permit. You've got to… dominique Hurley: No matter what, no matter what DEP says, which sounds like DEP's got it covered, but no matter what, before you build anything here, you've got to show us that those tanks are double-lined and formed.

Jesse Dole Absolutely. With some sort of alarm system to detect leakage.

dominique Hurley: Right. dominique Hurley: And again, this is just the paraphrase of the condition, it's not the full condition. dominique Hurley: 32, lesion tanks may not be disposed of at a treatment plant, maintain volume logs, and report lesion exports. And so, pre-go-live, again, how are you going to be managing this? And then, what reports did we see to prove that you are, in fact, disposing of them, not in Gloucester? dominique Hurley: So you can have, dominique Hurley: you know, haul records, basically, because we already did that for a lot of accepted hauling today. I just want to be sure this is not going into our wastewater treatment plant. dominique Hurley: Or anybody's cabinet, like, whatever they should be treating it, they can be.

dominique Hurley: Missions control OPS plan. And so this is pre building permit again. Submit plan and how this will be managed. Gain approval from the Board of Health on this plan document understanding that any change must be reviewed and approved because. dominique Hurley: This is absolutely within our authorization and jurisdiction as well, and so, we would work in advance on how that is done, and then we would again, provide the logs as planned. dominique Hurley: Simple one to be sure that we have dominique Hurley: 24-7 contact information available to everybody, and that's just pre-go-live, you know, that's been delivered by copying the health department. dominique Hurley: Engaging an independent third-party inspector, Condition 35, for quarterly operational reviews, pre-go-live. This is satisfied by proof of a third-party contract inspector with timing for reports and showing, form and format.

dominique Hurley: and then ongoing is that they are actually delivering those reports. And again, any time they're not doing this, they're in. They're in breach of their suitability, which means they their ability to operate is is not available. So they're going to take these pretty seriously. dominique Hurley: Engaging an independent consultant for operational noise testing at four abutter locations. So pre-go live, proof that you contracted that person with where they're going to be testing and post-go live, delivering the reports as expected. dominique Hurley: And the final one is for 37, ban the drinking for on-site well water at 24 and 25, which are their properties. dominique Hurley: and record a permanent deed restriction on 25 on the 25 well, and so

dominique Hurley: We're saying that proof is that we have that deep restriction in place prior to building permit. dominique Hurley: So, that would be… dominique Hurley: the goal, and then as we work with Joel, you know, Joel can add, you know, documents here, and, you know, in our meetings, he can be contributing to where the status are of things, and if it's all right with you, I can meet with Joel in an ongoing manner to make sure that this is always updated in time for our meeting, but be sure that, you know. dominique Hurley: We're… I'm sort of helping you know, build that… dominique Hurley: making sure that this is ready for prime time when we meet. We have a set agenda of what we're going to get done in that room.

dominique Hurley: Is that alright with you all? By me. Okay. dominique Hurley: And then I've added this other tab that basically has all of the CMRs. So this is the citing section of what the decision set is. This is the criterion that if you go and read the CMR that we address, this is where in the CMR it is. This is what page of the decision it's talked about. dominique Hurley: And then here's sort of a quick summary of what the board found, and candid disclosure, I used AI to do this assessment, and I've poured through it, but there could still be some dominique Hurley: briandmurphy: hallucinations, so the best path is to always go back and read that part of the decision yourself, but this will give you the gist of what the finding was.

dominique Hurley: Whether or not we had an associated condition. dominique Hurley: And then where there was an associated condition, now we have it called out. So you know where conditions came from, right? So you can come up here and add a filter. dominique Hurley: and say, like, I just want to, you know, do only condition 33. And so this will take you to where condition 33 was talked about in the document. dominique Hurley: And help you understand what was called out. dominique Hurley: As important, for, dominique Hurley: you know, for condition 33. Does that make sense? dominique Hurley: It's just like a cheat sheet for you all to help us all kind of remember everything. dominique Hurley: But always go back and read, read the actual page and the dis- and, you know.

dominique Hurley: There's two schools of thought right now, and I hope to have clarity. I'm working hard to get clarity. The MAHB school of thought is saying, like, listen, the document is one document, it all stands together, which is how we approached it in our decision-making process. dominique Hurley: Other schools of thought are saying, yeah, so one side's the rationale to validate that the conditions are whole, and then the other side is just saying the condition only says this. dominique Hurley: And, and so the jury's still out, but it is clear that we have, the authorization to ensure that this is, a suitable site based on these criteria. dominique Hurley: If we have existing evidence that's called out in this document, which is where you would see these pieces here, then that is, you know, reason to add a condition to be sure that that, you know, particular side of what we're trying to do is.

dominique Hurley: making sure that it's not posing risk to health and, you know, public health and safety. dominique Hurley: Then, you know, wherever we found gaps. dominique Hurley: that's what was the cause of the condition. So the condition's never there for the heck of it, right? The condition's always there because of a gap. dominique Hurley: In the… in the application, or conflicting testimony by the applicant. dominique Hurley: And it's really important for us to remember that, that it's our job to make sure that, you know, the terms of what they have applied for are appropriate. We can't add and say, oh, now we want to know something else. dominique Hurley: But we still have the accountability to hold to all of these Cmrs.

dominique Hurley: And then the other thing that's important to think about is that once we're, you know, we're through the decision, and so there's requirements during the decision-making process that you have to assume that the operational processes will be great. dominique Hurley: And that, you know, it's gonna run great. However, we have to trust but verify because if it's not, it's on us to be sure as the governing body here locally. dominique Hurley: around transfer stations that they're being run appropriately. And so, yeah, we have to assume that dominique Hurley: that the DEP will handle all of these things, but we also have the right to be sure that our additional requirements are also being handled for the conditions that were written and for the CMR that is required.

dominique Hurley: Does that make sense? Yep. dominique Hurley: Cool. dominique Hurley: Anything there, Jesse, that you're not agreeing with?

Jesse Dole Nope.

dominique Hurley: Please tell me if you are.

Jesse Dole Nope.

dominique Hurley: All right. dominique Hurley: Okay. dominique Hurley: So that… I have this as a draft, just so that anybody viewing this… this will be a public document, we'll keep it posted on our site, so we can always see the updates to it. I'm going to put clearly at the top that it's a working document, and that these things can change, but it's designed to help us all collaborate effectively. dominique Hurley: All right.

Jesse Dole Good.

Awesome. dominique Hurley: Any other concerns of the Subcommittee?

Jesse Dole Not at this time.

dominique Hurley: All right. The one thing I will add is that in the Board of Health Meeting on Thursday as part of my update. dominique Hurley: Do you agree that we should tell them that we are asking the third-party review to be more thorough, that we are moving to approve the geothermal explosive engineering feasibility document? dominique Hurley: And that we have aligned on a process for managing the status. And those would be my updates to the board, having them likely Condition 19 would need to get voted on.

Jesse Dole Yep.

dominique Hurley: Alrighty. dominique Hurley: I feel like a little bit of relief here, because I feel like it's finally, like, organized and controllable. But really, if anything's not working, please let me know. Oh, good work. dominique Hurley: All right. dominique Hurley: Then, if there's no other concerns of the Subcommittee, I move to adjourn for the second.

Jesse Dole Second.

dominique Hurley: Great. dominique Hurley: Everybody, Dominique is a yes.

Jesse Dole Yes.

dominique Hurley: Tommy, you're a yes? Yes. dominique Hurley: All right, have a great night. I'll see you guys in a few days. And don't forget, we're meeting here in the Annex for the board meeting, not in Harbormaster.

Jesse Dole Yep.

dominique Hurley: Okay. Got it.

Jesse Dole Alright, take care.

Take care, guys. dominique Hurley: Appreciate your help. Bye.