Overview of EPA Lead RD and RA Project Delivery Considerations

undefined
 
Kate Garufi, EPA HQ
 
Purpose
 
Focus on EPA-lead RD/RA projects
Communicate the importance of
considering RD/RA project delivery early in
the RD scoping process
Change the “stovepipe” paradigm for
scoping EPA-lead RD and RA projects
Discuss big picture considerations when
developing your RD and RA SOW
Discuss 3 RD/RA examples
Project delivery considerations
SOW development considerations
 
2
 
Outline
 
Overview of the Remedial Acquisition
Framework
RD/RA Project Delivery Strategy
Statement of Work
Overview
Developing the RD SOW
Developing the RA SOW
Examples
 
3
undefined
 
4
 
Existing Contracts
 
Superfund RD and RA services
delivered primarily through:
Interagency Agreements;
Cooperative Agreements; or
EPA Remedial Action Contracts (RACs)
RACs provide “cradle to grave” support
for the remedial program
Direct RD support
Subcontract RA
 
 
5
 
Remedial Action Contracts
 
Regionally awarded and administered
Single solicitation/single award contracts
At least two per Region
Work Assignment (WA) or Task Order
(TO) ID/IQ Contracts
TO/WA Process
Generally Cost reimbursable
No competition between RAC firms
 
6
 
Remedial Acquisition Framework
 
EPA contracts will not longer be “cradle to
grave” contracts
Separate design and remedial action activities
Design/bid/build
EPA contracts
Design and Engineering Services (DES);
Remediation Environmental Services (RES);
and
Environmental Services and Operations (ESO)
EPA may still leverage other Federal
Agencies and States through IAs and CAs
 
7
 
Major Changes that Impact RPM
role (and SOW development)
 
National Contracts
Competition at the task order level
Direct contracting for remedial action
E
P
A
 
C
O
N
T
R
A
C
T
I
N
G
 
P
A
R
T
Y
-
R
P
M
-
C
o
n
t
r
a
c
t
i
n
g
 
O
f
f
i
c
e
r
R
A
 
C
o
n
t
r
a
c
t
o
r
 
 
C
o
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
o
r
C
o
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
 
S
u
p
e
r
i
n
t
e
n
d
e
n
t
 
 
O
n
-
S
i
t
e
 
R
e
p
 
8
 
Additional information on RAF
 
The revised Sources Sought/Request for Information
(SS/RFI) has been posted to Fed Connect and Fed
Biz Opps.
 
https://www.fbo.gov/index?s=opportunity&mode=form&i
d=65baba2015ea27c769ad82435b941d0e&tab=core
&_cview
 
The posting invites vendors to review documents at
the OAM web link:
http://www.epa.gov/oamreg01/region3/SOL-R3-13-
00006/index.htm
 
Final Remedial Acquisition Framework document is
still in draft.  Expected to be released in Spring 2014.
 
9
undefined
 
10
undefined
 
11
 
What is a RD/RA Project Delivery
Strategy?
 
Strategy includes decisions regarding:
Design type (detail of specifications)
Remedial action contracting strategy
Procurement approach
Remedial action contract type
MUST be discussed and considered
early when scoping the design
 
12
 
Role of RPM in the Project
Delivery Strategy
 
RPM can influence all components of the
RD/RA project delivery strategy
Now that EPA is moving towards directly
contracting for remedial action services, RPM
involvement is scoping project delivery early in
the design in critical
Communication with contractors on design schedule
and funding constraints/requirements
Communication with HQ on RA funding needs
(timing and dollars)
Communication with EPA contracting office (type of
RA contract, timing of award, etc)
Communication with design contractor on phasing
project components, if needed
 
13
 
Why is Design Type Important for
Delivery of a Remedial Action?
 
The type of remedial action contract vehicle
should have an impact on the types of design
specifications needed
Specifications are an integral part of the remedial
action contracting package
Specifications describe the technical requirements to
be met by the RA contractor and the criteria for
determining whether these requirements have been
met.
All three components (design specifications,
procurement method and contract type) should
be considered BEFORE the design
requirements are scoped
 
14
 
Remedial Design
 
The purpose of the design is to provide
technical requirements (plans and
specifications) that provide an adequate
level of information needed for the
remedial action contractors to provide
technical approach (with labor/skill mix)
and cost proposals
In general, the design is the basis for the
statement of work for the remedial
action.
 
15
 
Types Remedial Design
Specifications
 
Detailed (Prescriptive)
Outline exactly how the remedial action
contractor should perform the activities
Performance-based
Focus on outcomes or results rather than a
process
 
16
 
What type of specifications are
Superfund remedial designs?
 
Superfund remedial designs generally
include a combination of detailed
specification and performance-based
specifications
This is due to some requirements that
must be met related to:
Government regulations on procurement
with Federal dollars;
Environmental/construction standards; or
Environmental regulations (ARARs)
 
17
 
Remedial Action Contracting
Strategy
 
Procurement Approach
Sealed bid
Two-step sealed bid
Negotiated
Remedial Action Contract Type
Firm Fixed Price
Fixed Rate
Const Reimbursable
Time and Materials
 
18
 
What RA contracting strategy is
right for my project?
 
It depends!!!
When scoping the design, keep the end in mind.
RA delivery considerations that may directly impact
the design:
Certainty of the site characterization
Site complexity
Management effort
Financial risk (EPA and contractor)
Cost Control
In general, a detailed design will be done at some
point in the RD/RA process – it is your decision on
“where” it is done:
RD contractor
RA contractor
 
19
 
Relationship Between Site
Characterization Certainty and Cost
 
20
 
Matching Site Type to Appropriate
Contracting Strategy
 
Determine level of certainty associated
with site characterization
High certainty = less flexible strategy
Low certainty = more flexible strategy
Determine the complexity of the site and
the remedial action
Simple = less flexible strategy
Complex = more flexible strategy
 
21
 
Considering Management Effort
 
22
 
Considering Financial Risk
 
Borne primarily by the contractor
Fixed price contracts
Shared by contractor and government
Time and material contracts
Borne primarily by the government
Cost reimbursement contracts
Less certain site characterization and
increased site complexity require
government to share financial risk
 
23
 
Considering Cost Control
 
24
 
How on earth do I track all of this
stuff??
 
Use a project risk register!
 
25
undefined
 
26
undefined
 
27
 
What is a Statement of Work
 
Definition
:  Description of the specific
service or tasks a contractor is required
to perform under a contract
This presentation and the examples will
focus on the development of a task
order SOW for either RD or RA
 
28
 
Why is the SOW so important?
 
The SOW is the pivotal acquisition
document for goods or services
The SOW is the key factor to determine
the task order type; OR the SOW should
comport with desire task order type
Key document for contactor preparation
of cost and technical proposals
 
29
 
Why is the SOW so important?
 
Facilitates proposal negotiations and
competition, as appropriate
Establishes conclusive baseline to
evaluate proposals; and
Establishes the standards to which you
can gauge the contractor’s performance
 
30
 
Different types of SOWs
 
Prescriptive
 
Performance-based
 
31
 
Prescriptive SOW
 
Requirements are described in terms of
processes or tasks
Government instructs the contactor
when, where, and how
In general, does not address desired
end result
Change in scope requires modification
to the contract document
 
32
 
Performance-Based SOW
 
Requirements described in terms of end result
(measurable outcome) versus how to get there
Provides a basic, top level objective(s) of the
acquisition
Enable assessment of work performance against
measurable performance standards
Contractor provides labor mix and skill set solutions
to fulfill the requirement
Used when the Government intends to provide
maximum flexibility to each offeror to propose an
innovative approach
Change is scope and adjustments to the process
without modification as long as goals are met
 
33
undefined
 
34
 
Scoping the RD SOW
 
The information contained in the RI/FS,
ROD and any subsequent investigation
activities should serve as the initial building
block for developing the RD SOW
Identify remedial action objectives, cleanup
levels
Identify technologies and level of detail under
which the remedy is described
Identify level of site characterization conducted
during the RI/FS
 
35
 
Developing the RD SOW
 
Five key remedy implementation items
that should be included in the SOW:
The treatment system or technology;
Performance standards;
Any points of compliance;
How to demonstrate compliance/completion;
and
Schedule
 
36
 
Developing the RD SOW
 
In general, the SOW for executing the
remedial design is considered
performance-based.
Strongly encouraged that EPA has a
scoping meeting with the contractor after
award to discuss RD/RA project delivery
strategy
The type of design specifications
(prescriptive versus performance-based)
must be understood by all stakeholders
before the design work begins
 
37
 
RD SOW Best Management
Practices
 
Include your technical team in the scoping
of the RD!
Write the SOW with enough flexibility to
allow for changes to the contractor work
plan without modifications to the SOW or
task order document
Keep a risk register.  Track assumptions
made during the RI/FS, ROD and the RD
scoping meeting.  As data is collected and
design proceeds, additional information
may require a change to the RD/RA project
delivery strategy.
 
38
 
Two RD delivery methods
 
EPA contracts directly with the designer
EPA contractor
USACE, State, or Tribe does work in house
EPA does not contract directly with the
designer
USACE contracts with designer
State/Tribe contracts with designer
 
39
 
EPA contracts directly with the
designer
 
40
 
RD SOW components for EPA
contracts
 
Introduction (5 musts!)
General Requirements
Schedule
Project Planning and Support
Site-specific plans
Community Relations
Pre-design investigation
Data Acquisition
Sample Analysis
Data Evaluation and Support
Treatability Study
Design Deliverables
Preliminary/Intermediate/Prefinal and Final
Post Remedial Design Support
 
41
 
EPA does not contract directly
with the designer
 
42
 
RD SOW components for IAs and
CAs
 
Introduction (5 musts!)
General Requirements
Schedule
Site specific plans
Reporting
Pre-design Investigation
Procurement of RD subcontract
Subcontract management support
Contractor oversight and reporting
Project Closeout
 
43
 
Considerations when scoping the
RD SOW for IAs and CAs
 
The USACE or State/Tribe will develop the
SOW for the design contractor
Important that the RPM discusses the
planned project delivery with the USACE or
State/Tribe prior to developing the design
Critical to ensuring deliverables comport with
contracting strategy (and available funding)
Want to avoid any need for re-design (or
deliverables not used) by the entity procuring
the remedial action contract!
 
44
undefined
 
 
45
undefined
 
46
 
Scoping the RA SOW
 
The technical plans and specifications
should drive the content of the RA SOW
Develop SOW objectives that comport with
design and account for uncertainties
The 100% design should be reviewed to
determine:
Detail of design specifications
Points of compliance/completion
Schedule
Any project phasing (if applicable)
 
47
 
Developing the RA SOW
 
The objectives of the SOW should match the detail in the
design
For an SOW with detailed design specifications, the RA SOW
should focus on implementing the design.  Any changes will
result in a change to the design and the RA SOW.
For an SOW with a more performance-based design, the RA
SOW should focus on the end goal and metrics to evaluate
progress and completion of the task
Problems with performance-based SOW and a detailed
design
Detailed design instructs – know your site complexities and
uncertainties
Performance objectives may not be met by detailed design if site
conditions or assumptions made during the design change
 May require design/SOW changes during the RA
 
48
 
RA SOW Best Management
Practices
 
Consider planned remedial action contracting
strategy (procurement approach and contract type)
when writing the SOW
Understand site assumptions and uncertainties
Revisit and update the risk register and evaluate
assumptions made in design
Evaluate likelihood of changing site conditions
Ensure contract allows for these changes (should they
occur – and they often do!)
RA contactors understand environmental
remediation and risk – if RD/RA contracting strategy
provides for a high degree of contractor financial risk,
contracts will:
Account for risk in cost proposal; or
May not bid on a project
 
49
 
Two delivery methods
 
EPA contracts directly with the remedial
action contractor
 
EPA does not contract directly with the
designer
 
 
50
 
EPA contracts directly with the
remedial action contractor
 
51
 
RA SOW components for EPA
contracts - prescriptive
 
Introduction
General Requirements
Project Planning and Support
Community Involvement
Site specific plans
Project Requirements
Management
Implement design
QA/QC
Deliverables
Schedule
 
52
 
RA SOW components for EPA
contracts – performance-based
 
Introduction
General Requirements
Project Planning and Support
Community Involvement
Site specific plans
Performance Requirements
Technical
Project Management
Deliverables
Schedule
 
53
 
EPA does not contract directly with
the remedial action contractor
 
Old RAC model
USACE or other Federal Agency (IA)
State or Tribe (CA)
 
54
 
RA SOW components for IAs and
CAs
 
Introduction
General Requirements
Schedule
Project Planning and Support
Community Involvement
Site specific plans
Procurement of subcontract
Subcontract management support
Detailed resident inspection
Cleanup Validation
Project Closeout
 
55
 
Considerations when scoping the
RA SOW for IAs and CAs
 
The USACE or State/Tribe will develop the
SOW for the remedial action contractor
Important that the RPM discusses the
planned project delivery with the USACE or
State/Tribe during the development of the
design
Critical to ensuring deliverables comport with
contracting strategy and Agency or state
requirements and to avoid procurement delays
 
56
undefined
 
 
57
 
Overview
 
3 Projects
Group survey to determine RD/RA
project delivery strategy
Given the RD/RA project delivery
strategy, discuss:
RD SOW development
RA SOW development
 
58
 
Things to Consider
 
RD/RA Project Delivery Strategy considerations:
Site characterization
Site/remedy complexity
Contract flexibility needs
Cost control considerations
Oversight needs
RD SOW development considerations
Preliminary design investigation needs
Treatability study needs
Design deliverable needs
RA SOW development considerations
Is prescriptive SOW appropriate?
Might a performance-based SOW be more appropriate?
 
59
 
Project #1
 
Residential yard contaminated with lead
Result of aerial deposition (smelter)
Well defined nature and extent of
contamination
Remedy calls for excavation of two feet
of contaminated soil and backfill
Well defined and/or less complex remedial
technology
 
 
60
 
Project #2
 
DNAPL contamination present in
saturated zone under an abandoned
building
Nature and extent of contamination not well
defined
Remedy calls for thermal treatment of
source zone
Remedy goal:  Reduce source area by 90%
 
 
61
 
Project #3
 
62
 
PCB contamination in St. Lawrence
River
Heavy tidal influence
Heavy boat traffic
Remedy includes dredging on PCB
contamination > 50 ppb and capping of
PCB contamination < 50 ppb
 
Helpful References
 
OSWER 9355.0-43, 
Guidance for Scoping the Remedial Design
,
March 1995.
http://www.epa.gov/superfund/cleanup/pdfs/rdra/scopingrd.pdf
OSWER 9355.0-04B, 
Remedial Design/Remedial Action
Handbook
, June 1995.
 
 
http://www.epa.gov/superfund/cleanup/pdfs/rdrabook/table.pdf
Other relevant RD/RA guidance
 
 
http://www.epa.gov/superfund/cleanup/rdra.htm
 
63
undefined
 
64
Slide Note
Embed
Share

This presentation discusses the importance of considering project delivery early in the scoping process of EPA-led Remedial Design and Remedial Action projects. It aims to change the paradigm for scoping projects, focusing on big-picture considerations and providing examples of project delivery and statement of work development considerations.

  • EPA
  • Remedial Design
  • Remedial Action
  • Project Delivery
  • Scoping

Uploaded on Oct 06, 2024 | 0 Views


Download Presentation

Please find below an Image/Link to download the presentation.

The content on the website is provided AS IS for your information and personal use only. It may not be sold, licensed, or shared on other websites without obtaining consent from the author. Download presentation by click this link. If you encounter any issues during the download, it is possible that the publisher has removed the file from their server.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. EPA EPA- -LEAD RD AND RA LEAD RD AND RA- - OVERVIEW OF RD/RA OVERVIEW OF RD/RA PROJECT DELIVERY AND PROJECT DELIVERY AND CONSIDERATIONS FOR CONSIDERATIONS FOR SCOPING YOUR RD AND RA SCOPING YOUR RD AND RA SOWS SOWS Kate Garufi, EPA HQ

  2. Purpose Focus on EPA-lead RD/RA projects Communicate the importance of considering RD/RA project delivery early in the RD scoping process Change the stovepipe paradigm for scoping EPA-lead RD and RA projects Discuss big picture considerations when developing your RD and RA SOW Discuss 3 RD/RA examples Project delivery considerations SOW development considerations 2

  3. Outline Overview of the Remedial Acquisition Framework RD/RA Project Delivery Strategy Statement of Work Overview Developing the RD SOW Developing the RA SOW Examples 3

  4. Overview of the remedial Overview of the remedial acquisition framework acquisition framework 4

  5. Existing Contracts Superfund RD and RA services delivered primarily through: Interagency Agreements; Cooperative Agreements; or EPA Remedial Action Contracts (RACs) RACs provide cradle to grave support for the remedial program Direct RD support Subcontract RA 5

  6. Remedial Action Contracts Regionally awarded and administered Single solicitation/single award contracts At least two per Region Work Assignment (WA) or Task Order (TO) ID/IQ Contracts TO/WA Process Generally Cost reimbursable No competition between RAC firms 6

  7. Remedial Acquisition Framework EPA contracts will not longer be cradle to grave contracts Separate design and remedial action activities Design/bid/build EPA contracts Design and Engineering Services (DES); Remediation Environmental Services (RES); and Environmental Services and Operations (ESO) EPA may still leverage other Federal Agencies and States through IAs and CAs 7

  8. Major Changes that Impact RPM role (and SOW development) National Contracts Competition at the task order level Direct contracting for remedial action EPA CONTRACTING PARTY - RPM - Contracting Officer RA Contractor Constructor Construction Superintendent On-Site Rep 8

  9. Additional information on RAF The revised Sources Sought/Request for Information (SS/RFI) has been posted to Fed Connect and Fed Biz Opps. https://www.fbo.gov/index?s=opportunity&mode=form&i d=65baba2015ea27c769ad82435b941d0e&tab=core &_cview The posting invites vendors to review documents at the OAM web link: http://www.epa.gov/oamreg01/region3/SOL-R3-13- 00006/index.htm Final Remedial Acquisition Framework document is still in draft. Expected to be released in Spring 2014. 9

  10. Questions? Questions? 10

  11. RD/RA project delivery RD/RA project delivery strategy strategy 11

  12. What is a RD/RA Project Delivery Strategy? Strategy includes decisions regarding: Design type (detail of specifications) Remedial action contracting strategy Procurement approach Remedial action contract type MUST be discussed and considered early when scoping the design 12

  13. Role of RPM in the Project Delivery Strategy RPM can influence all components of the RD/RA project delivery strategy Now that EPA is moving towards directly contracting for remedial action services, RPM involvement is scoping project delivery early in the design in critical Communication with contractors on design schedule and funding constraints/requirements Communication with HQ on RA funding needs (timing and dollars) Communication with EPA contracting office (type of RA contract, timing of award, etc) Communication with design contractor on phasing project components, if needed 13

  14. Why is Design Type Important for Delivery of a Remedial Action? The type of remedial action contract vehicle should have an impact on the types of design specifications needed Specifications are an integral part of the remedial action contracting package Specifications describe the technical requirements to be met by the RA contractor and the criteria for determining whether these requirements have been met. All three components (design specifications, procurement method and contract type) should be considered BEFORE the design requirements are scoped 14

  15. Remedial Design The purpose of the design is to provide technical requirements (plans and specifications) that provide an adequate level of information needed for the remedial action contractors to provide technical approach (with labor/skill mix) and cost proposals In general, the design is the basis for the statement of work for the remedial action. 15

  16. Types Remedial Design Specifications Detailed (Prescriptive) Outline exactly how the remedial action contractor should perform the activities Performance-based Focus on outcomes or results rather than a process 16

  17. What type of specifications are Superfund remedial designs? Superfund remedial designs generally include a combination of detailed specification and performance-based specifications This is due to some requirements that must be met related to: Government regulations on procurement with Federal dollars; Environmental/construction standards; or Environmental regulations (ARARs) 17

  18. Remedial Action Contracting Strategy Procurement Approach Sealed bid Two-step sealed bid Negotiated Remedial Action Contract Type Firm Fixed Price Fixed Rate Const Reimbursable Time and Materials 18

  19. What RA contracting strategy is right for my project? It depends!!! When scoping the design, keep the end in mind. RA delivery considerations that may directly impact the design: Certainty of the site characterization Site complexity Management effort Financial risk (EPA and contractor) Cost Control In general, a detailed design will be done at some point in the RD/RA process it is your decision on where it is done: RD contractor RA contractor 19

  20. Relationship Between Site Characterization Certainty and Cost Cost Increasing Certainty Increasing 20

  21. Matching Site Type to Appropriate Contracting Strategy Determine level of certainty associated with site characterization High certainty = less flexible strategy Low certainty = more flexible strategy Determine the complexity of the site and the remedial action Simple = less flexible strategy Complex = more flexible strategy 21

  22. Considering Management Effort Less Flexible Strategy Less Management Effort More Management Effort More Flexible Strategy 22

  23. Considering Financial Risk Borne primarily by the contractor Fixed price contracts Shared by contractor and government Time and material contracts Borne primarily by the government Cost reimbursement contracts Less certain site characterization and increased site complexity require government to share financial risk 23

  24. Considering Cost Control Less Flexible Strategy More Cost Control Less Cost Control More Flexible Strategy 24

  25. How on earth do I track all of this stuff?? Use a project risk register! 25

  26. Questions? Questions? 26

  27. Statement of work overview Statement of work overview 27

  28. What is a Statement of Work Definition: Description of the specific service or tasks a contractor is required to perform under a contract This presentation and the examples will focus on the development of a task order SOW for either RD or RA 28

  29. Why is the SOW so important? The SOW is the pivotal acquisition document for goods or services The SOW is the key factor to determine the task order type; OR the SOW should comport with desire task order type Key document for contactor preparation of cost and technical proposals 29

  30. Why is the SOW so important? Facilitates proposal negotiations and competition, as appropriate Establishes conclusive baseline to evaluate proposals; and Establishes the standards to which you can gauge the contractor s performance 30

  31. Different types of SOWs Prescriptive Performance-based 31

  32. Prescriptive SOW Requirements are described in terms of processes or tasks Government instructs the contactor when, where, and how In general, does not address desired end result Change in scope requires modification to the contract document 32

  33. Performance-Based SOW Requirements described in terms of end result (measurable outcome) versus how to get there Provides a basic, top level objective(s) of the acquisition Enable assessment of work performance against measurable performance standards Contractor provides labor mix and skill set solutions to fulfill the requirement Used when the Government intends to provide maximum flexibility to each offeror to propose an innovative approach Change is scope and adjustments to the process without modification as long as goals are met 33

  34. Developing the remedial Developing the remedial design statement of work design statement of work 34

  35. Scoping the RD SOW The information contained in the RI/FS, ROD and any subsequent investigation activities should serve as the initial building block for developing the RD SOW Identify remedial action objectives, cleanup levels Identify technologies and level of detail under which the remedy is described Identify level of site characterization conducted during the RI/FS 35

  36. Developing the RD SOW Five key remedy implementation items that should be included in the SOW: The treatment system or technology; Performance standards; Any points of compliance; How to demonstrate compliance/completion; and Schedule 36

  37. Developing the RD SOW In general, the SOW for executing the remedial design is considered performance-based. Strongly encouraged that EPA has a scoping meeting with the contractor after award to discuss RD/RA project delivery strategy The type of design specifications (prescriptive versus performance-based) must be understood by all stakeholders before the design work begins 37

  38. RD SOW Best Management Practices Include your technical team in the scoping of the RD! Write the SOW with enough flexibility to allow for changes to the contractor work plan without modifications to the SOW or task order document Keep a risk register. Track assumptions made during the RI/FS, ROD and the RD scoping meeting. As data is collected and design proceeds, additional information may require a change to the RD/RA project delivery strategy. 38

  39. Two RD delivery methods EPA contracts directly with the designer EPA contractor USACE, State, or Tribe does work in house EPA does not contract directly with the designer USACE contracts with designer State/Tribe contracts with designer 39

  40. EPA contracts directly with the designer EPA CONTRACTING PARTY - RPM - Contracting Officer Design Contractor Design Engineer 40

  41. RD SOW components for EPA contracts Introduction (5 musts!) General Requirements Schedule Project Planning and Support Site-specific plans Community Relations Pre-design investigation Data Acquisition Sample Analysis Data Evaluation and Support Treatability Study Design Deliverables Preliminary/Intermediate/Prefinal and Final Post Remedial Design Support 41

  42. EPA does not contract directly with the designer EPA Contracting Party: USACE State/Tribe RD Subcontractor Design Engineer 42

  43. RD SOW components for IAs and CAs Introduction (5 musts!) General Requirements Schedule Site specific plans Reporting Pre-design Investigation Procurement of RD subcontract Subcontract management support Contractor oversight and reporting Project Closeout 43

  44. Considerations when scoping the RD SOW for IAs and CAs The USACE or State/Tribe will develop the SOW for the design contractor Important that the RPM discusses the planned project delivery with the USACE or State/Tribe prior to developing the design Critical to ensuring deliverables comport with contracting strategy (and available funding) Want to avoid any need for re-design (or deliverables not used) by the entity procuring the remedial action contract! 44

  45. Questions? Questions? 45

  46. Developing the remedial Developing the remedial action statement of work action statement of work 46

  47. Scoping the RA SOW The technical plans and specifications should drive the content of the RA SOW Develop SOW objectives that comport with design and account for uncertainties The 100% design should be reviewed to determine: Detail of design specifications Points of compliance/completion Schedule Any project phasing (if applicable) 47

  48. Developing the RA SOW The objectives of the SOW should match the detail in the design For an SOW with detailed design specifications, the RA SOW should focus on implementing the design. Any changes will result in a change to the design and the RA SOW. For an SOW with a more performance-based design, the RA SOW should focus on the end goal and metrics to evaluate progress and completion of the task Problems with performance-based SOW and a detailed design Detailed design instructs know your site complexities and uncertainties Performance objectives may not be met by detailed design if site conditions or assumptions made during the design change May require design/SOW changes during the RA 48

  49. RA SOW Best Management Practices Consider planned remedial action contracting strategy (procurement approach and contract type) when writing the SOW Understand site assumptions and uncertainties Revisit and update the risk register and evaluate assumptions made in design Evaluate likelihood of changing site conditions Ensure contract allows for these changes (should they occur and they often do!) RA contactors understand environmental remediation and risk if RD/RA contracting strategy provides for a high degree of contractor financial risk, contracts will: Account for risk in cost proposal; or May not bid on a project 49

  50. Two delivery methods EPA contracts directly with the remedial action contractor EPA does not contract directly with the designer 50

Related


More Related Content

giItT1WQy@!-/#giItT1WQy@!-/#giItT1WQy@!-/#giItT1WQy@!-/#giItT1WQy@!-/#