United States
           Environmental Protection
           Agency
Office of
Solid Waste and
Emergency Response
9355.0-43
EPA/540/R-95/025
PB95-963308
March 1995
           Guidance for
           Scoping the
           Remedial Design
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                                   EPA-540/R-95/025
                                                   PB95-963308
                                                   9355.0-43
                                                   March 1995
                          GUIDANCE
                     FOR SCOPING THE
                     REMEDIAL DESIGN
              Office of Emergency and Remedial Response
                 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
                       Washington, DC 20460
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                           The policies and procedures set forth here are intended as
                           guidance to Agency and other Government employees.
                           They do not constitute rulemaking by the Agency and may
                           not be relied on to create a substantive or procedural right
                           enforceable by any other person. The Government may
                           take action that is at variance with the policies and
                           procedures in this manual.
                               Additional copies of this report may be obtained from the
                               following source:

                                   National Technical Information Service (NTIS)
                                   U.S. Department of Commerce
                                   5285 Port Royal Road
                                   Springfield, VA 22161
                                   (703) 487-4650
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                            CONTENTS
      PREFACE 	  xi

      EXECUTIVE SUMMARY                                                               xiii

      CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION                                                         1-1

         PURPOSE OF THIS GUIDANCE	  1-1

         RPM RESPONSIBILITIES 	  1-1
            EPA as the Contracting Party	  1-1
            State or Other Government Agency as the Contracting Party 	  1-3
            PRP as the Contracting Party 	  1-3
            Preparation of the SOW for Remedial Design	  1-3
            Preparation of the SOW for Remedial Design Oversight	  1-3


      CHAPTER 2 DEVELOPING A PROJECT MANAGEMENT PLAN                        2-1

         CHAPTER OVERVIEW	  2-1

         PLANNING ACTIVITIES	  2-1
            Establishing the Technical Review Team	  2-1
            Developing the Project Management Plan 	  2-2
                1.   Specifying Organization and Communications  	  2-2
                    1.1  Determining Roles and Responsibilities	  2-2
                           Establishing the Lead	  2-2
                           Assembling the Technical Review Team	  2-2
                    1.2  Establishing a Communications Matrix	  2-2
                2.    Determining Project Constraints 	  2-3
                    2.1  Funding Constraints	  2-3
                    2.2  Schedule Constraints 	  2-4
                    2.3  Other Constraints	  2-4
                           Regulations and Permits	  2-4
                           Health and Safety	  2-4
                           Equipment	  2-4
                           Access Needs	  2-4
                           Community  Involvement 	  2-4
                           Weather	  2-5
                           Change in RPMs	  2-5
                3.   Developing a Contracting Strategy for RD and RA	  2-5
                    3.1  Opportunities To Accelerate the Schedule	  2-5
                           Phasing	  2-5
                           Fast-Tracking	  2-5
                                                  111
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                         CONTENTS (continued)

                            Use of Preplaced or Prequalified Contracts	  2-6
                     3.2  Design Approach	  2-6
                            Design Specifications	  2-6
                            Performance-Based Specifications	  2-6
                     3.3  The RA Contract (for Fund-lead projects)	  2-6
                            Fixed-Price Contracts 	  2-7
                            Cost-Reimbursement Contracts  	  2-7
                            Time and Materials Contracts  	  2-8
                            Indefinite Quantity Contracts	  2-8
                            Separation  of Construction and Service Activities 	  2-8
                     3.4  RA Procurement Strategies  	  2-8
                            Competitive Procurement	  2-8
                            Sole-Source Procurement  	  2-9
                 Updating Budget and Schedule  	  2-9
      CHAPTER 3 INFORMATION COLLECTION                                            3-1

         CHAPTER OVERVIEW	  3-1

         DATA COMPILATION  	  3-1
             Site Conditions  	  3-2
                 1.   Site Description	  3-2
                     1.1  Site History and Current Status	  3-2
                     1.2  Chemical, Physical, and Geological Characteristics of Site  	  3-2
                     1.3  Proximity to Homes and Schools, and Land and Ground-Water Use
                          Surrounding Site	  3-2
                     1.4  Basis for Property Lines on Drawings	  3-2
                     1.5  Likely Future Use of Site	  3-2
                 2.    Real Estate Issues  	  3-3
                     2.1  Real Estate Requirements Assessment	  3-3
                     2.2  Real Estate and Access Issues	  3-3
                 3.   Availability of Utilities	  3-3
                     3.1  Location and Availability  	  3-3
                     3.2  Existing Agreements or Conditions  	  3-3
             Performance Standards	  3-3
             Availability of Data	  3-4
                 1.   Physical and Chemical Data Collected to Date  	  3-4
                 2.   Data Retrieval	  3-4
             Technology and Design Approach	  3-4
                 1.   Waste Characterization	  3-4
                 2.   Treatment Scheme  	  3-4
                     2.1  Schematic Diagram	  3-4
                     2.2  Pretreatment Requirements  	  3-4
                     2.3  Treatment Design Criteria  	  3-4
                 3.   Long-Term Monitoring and Maintenance Requirements	  3-5
                 4.   Sole Source or First-Time Use of a Technology or Innovative Technology  	  3-5
                 5.   Treatability Study  	  3-5
                 6.   Special Design Conditions  	  3-6
                                                    IV
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                       CONTENTS (continued)

                7.   Flexibility in Design	 3-6
                8.   Schedule Constraints That Could Affect the Rate of Treatment or Unit Size	 3-6
                9.   Confirmation Monitoring (Achievement of Performance Standards)	 3-6
            Materials 	 3-7
                1.   Volume Estimation and Basis of Calculations  	 3-7
                2.   Spatial Requirements, Staging, Logistics	 3-7
                3.   Durability of Materials	 3-7
                4.   Materials and Equipment Availability  	 3-7
                5.   Mixed Materials  	 3-8
            ARARs/Permits/State Involvement	 3-8
                1.   ARARs List	 3-8
                2.   On-Site Versus Off-Site Waste Management	 3-9
                3.   Permits and Land-Use Restrictions	 3-9
                4.   Extent of State Involvement	 3-9
            Unresolved Issues	 3-9
            Health and Safety Concerns 	 3-9
            Miscellaneous Concerns  	 3-10
                1.   Community Involvement Activities	 3-10
                2.   Confidential Business Information	 3-10
                3.   Other RD/RA Requirements  	 3-10
      CHAPTER 4 DEVELOPING THE PRELIMINARY REMEDIAL DESIGN SCHEDULE    4-1

         CHAPTER OVERVIEW	 4-1

         THE PRELIMINARY RD SCHEDULE	 4-1
            Schedule Components	 4-1
            Generic RD Schedules and Assumptions  	 4-1
            Schedule Development	 4-6

         REMEDY-SPECIFIC SCHEDULES AND ASSUMPTIONS	 4-7
            Ground-Water Treatment—Complex	 4-7
            Ground-Water Treatment—Simple	 4-7
            Ground-Water Treatment—Simple (Expedited)	 4-7
            Treatment of Soils and Sludge—Complex	 4-7
            Treatment of Soils and Sludge—Simple 	 4-8
            Civil Engineering—Complex	 4-8
            Civil Engineering—Simple	 4-8
            Civil Engineering—Simple (Expedited)	 4-8
            On-Site Thermal Destruction	 4-8

         RECOMMENDATIONS	 4-9
      CHAPTER 5 DEVELOPING AN ESTIMATE OF REMEDIAL DESIGN COSTS           5-1

         CHAPTER OVERVIEW	 5-1


                                                 v
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                        CONTENTS (continued)

         IGCE COORDINATORS	 5-1

         DEVELOPING THE ESTIMATE  	 5-1
             Estimation of Design Labor Hours and/or Level of Effort 	 5-1
             Cost Estimation	 5-2
             Design Fee Limitation	 5-2

         REMEDY-SPECIFIC COST ESTIMATES	 5-2
             Ground-Water Treatment—Complex	 5-2
                 1.    Assumptions	 5-3
                     1.1  Task 1.   Project Planning	 5-3
                     1.2  Task 2.   Community Involvement	 5-3
                     1.3  Task 3.   Data Acquisition	 5-3
                     1.4  Task 4.   Sample Analysis and Validation	 5-3
                     1.5  Task 5.   Data Evaluation 	 5-3
                     1.6  Task 6.   Treatability Study and Pilot Tests	 5-3
                     1.7  Task 7.   Preliminary Design	 5-3
                     1.8  Task 8.   Equipment and Services Procurement  	 5-3
                     1.9  Task 9.   Intermediate Design	 5-3
                     1.10 Task 10. Prefmal and Final Design	 5-3
                     1.11 Task 11. Post-Remedial Design Support	 5-3

                2.    Summary 	 5-4
             Ground-Water Treatment—Simple	 5-4
                 1.    Assumptions	 5-4
                2.    Summary 	 5-4
             Ground-Water Treatment—Simple (Expedited)	 5-4
                 1.    Assumptions	 5-4
                2.    Summary 	 5-4
             Treatment of Soils and Sludge—Complex	 5-4
                 1.    Assumptions	 5-4
                2.    Summary 	 5-5
             Treatment of Soils and  Sludge—Simple  	 5-5
                 1.    Assumptions	 5-5
                2.    Summary 	 5-5
             Civil Engineering—Complex	 5-5
                 1.    Assumptions	 5-5
                2.    Summary 	 5-5
             Civil Engineering—Simple	 5-5
                 1.    Assumptions	 5-5
                2.    Summary 	 5-5
             Civil Engineering—Simple (Expedited)	 5-5
                 1.    Assumptions	 5-5
                2.    Summary 	 5-6
             On-Site Thermal Destruction	 5-6
                 1.    Assumptions	 5-6
                2.    Summary 	 5-6
                                                  VI
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                      CONTENTS (continued)

     CHAPTER 6 DEVELOPING A STATEMENT OF WORK FOR REMEDIAL DESIGN      6-1

         INTRODUCTION	  6-1

         FUND-LEAD DESIGN	  6-1
            Roles and Responsibilities	  6-1
                1.   Remedial Project Manager's Role  	  6-1
                2.   The Designer's Role 	  6-1
            Design Reviews	  6-2
            Value Engineering During Design  	  6-3
            Developing a Fund-Lead SOW for RD	  6-3
                1.   Background 	  6-3
                2.   RACs Standard Tasks	  6-3
                    2.1  Benefits of Using Standard Tasks	  6-3
                    2.2  Use of Standard Tasks in SOWs	  6-5
                    2.3  Standard Task Categories	  6-5
                    2.4  Using a Standard Task To Develop a Detailed Task	  6-5
                    2.5  Work Breakdown Structure	  6-5
                    2.6  Completing the Detailed SOW 	  6-8

         ENFORCEMENT-LEAD DESIGN  	  6-8
            Background	  6-8
            The Consent Decree	  6-8
            Roles and Responsibilities	  6-8
                1.   RPM's Role:  Oversight	  6-9
                2.   Settling Defendants' Role:  Implementation	  6-9
            Developing an Enforcement-Lead SOW for RD/RA	  6-10


     CHAPTER 7 DEVELOPING A STATEMENT OF WORK FOR
     REMEDIAL DESIGN OVERSIGHT                                                    7-1

         CHAPTER OVERVIEW	  7-1

         ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES	  7-1
            Remedial Project Manager's Role  	  7-1
            Oversight Official's Role	  7-2
                1.   Duties and Responsibilities	  7-2
                2.   Limitations of Authority	  7-3

         DEVELOPING AN SOW FOR RD OVERSIGHT	  7-4

     LIST OF EXHIBITS

     Exhibit 1-1  The RD Process With Different Leads  	  1-2
     Exhibit 2-1  Developing the Project Management Plan: Key Decisions	  2-3
     Exhibit 2-2  Recommended Procurement Strategies for Hazardous Waste Remediation  	  2-10
     Exhibit 3-1  RD Information Collection Categories 	  3-1
                                                vu
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                      CONTENTS (continued)

     Exhibit 4-1     RACs (Response Action Contracts) Standard Tasks for Remedial Action  	 4-2
     Exhibit 4-2     Total Design Durations for Nine Remediation Categories/Schedules	 4-6
     Exhibit 5-1     List of LOE Tables (in Appendix D) for Remediation Categories	 5-3
     Exhibit 6-1     RACs Standard Tasks	 6-4
     Exhibit 6-2     Benefits From Using Standard Tasks	 6-5
     Exhibit 6-3     Excerpt From Standard Task 1 From RACs SOW 	 6-6
     Exhibit 6-4     "Detailed" Task IFrom Model (Appendix A) SOW	 6-6
     Exhibit 6-5     Superfund RD/RA Project Roles and Responsibilities (Enforcement-Lead)	 6-11
     Exhibit 6-6     Relationships Among Parties During Enforcement-Lead RD/RA	 6-12
     APPENDIXES
     APPENDIX A
MODEL STATEMENT OF WORK FOR REMEDIAL DESIGN  	A-l
            Attachment 1.   Summary of Major Submittals for the Remedial Design at	(Site) .... A-31
            Attachment 2.   Work Breakdown Structure	A-35
            Attachment 3.   Regulations and Guidance Documents 	A-43
            Attachment 4.   Transmittal of Documents for Acceptance by EPA	A-47
            Attachment 5.   Transmittal Register  	A-49

     APPENDIX B     GENERIC REMEDIATION SCHEDULES (BAR CHARTS B.1-B.9)  	B-l
            Chart B.I   Ground-Water Treatment—Complex	B-2
            Chart B.2   Ground-Water Treatment—Simple	B-3
            Chart B.3   Ground-Water Treatment—Simple (Expedited)	B-4
            Chart B.4   Treatment of Soils and Sludge—Complex	B-5
            Chart B.5   Treatment of Soils and Sludge—Simple  	B-6
            Chart B.6   Civil Engineering—Complex	B-7
            Chart B.7   Civil Engineering—Simple	B-8
            Chart B.8   Civil Engineering—Simple (Expedited)	B-9
            Chart B.9   On-Site Thermal Destruction	B-10

     APPENDIX C     GUIDANCE ON PREPARING INDEPENDENT GOVERNMENT COST
                       ESTIMATES (IGCEs)	C-l

     APPENDIX D     LEVEL OF EFFORT (LOE) ESTIMATING TABLES AND RD COST
                       ESTIMATING FORMS	D-l
            Table D.I   LOE Summary: Ground-Water Treatment—Complex  	D-2
            Table D.2   LOE Summary: Ground-Water Treatment—Simple	D-3
            Table D.3   LOE Summary: Ground-Water Treatment—Simple (Expedited)	D-4
            Table D.4   LOE Summary: Treatment of Soils and Sludge—Complex	D-5
            Table D.5   LOE Summary: Treatment of Soils and Sludge—Simple 	D-6
            Table D.6   LOE Summary: Civil Engineering—Complex	D-7
            Table D.7   LOE Summary: Civil Engineering—Simple	D-8
            Table D.8   LOE Summary: Civil Engineering—Simple (Expedited)	D-9
            Table D.9   LOE Summary: On-Site Thermal Destruction	D-10
                                                Vlll
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                     CONTENTS (continued)

            COST ESTIMATING FORMS
            Other Direct Costs and Subcontractor Descriptions	D-ll
            Independent Cost Estimate Summary Sheet	D-12
            Estimate of RD Labor Hours	D-13
            Other Direct Costs (ODCs) Estimating Form	D-14
            Travel and Per Diem Cost Estimating Form 	D-15
            Subcontract Estimating Form	D-16
            Design Cost Limitation Check	D-17

     APPENDIX E    MODEL STATEMENT OF WORK FOR REMEDIAL DESIGN OVERSIGHT E-l
            Attachment 1.   Summary of Major Submittals for the Remedial Design at	(Site) .... E-l9
            Attachment 2.   Work Breakdown Structure	E-21
            Attachment 3.   Regulation and Guidance Documents	E-27
            Attachment 4.   Transmittal of Documents for Acceptance by EPA	E-31
            Attachment 5.   Transmittal Register  	E-33

     APPENDIX F     GLOSSARY OF ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS	F-l

     INDEX	 1-1
                                               IX
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                               PREFACE
      This Guidance for Scoping the Remedial Design provides, for EPA's Remedial Project Managers
      (RPMs), information about preparing the Statement of Work (SOW) to facilitate remedial design for
      Superfund cleanup projects (both Fund-lead and Enforcement-lead). It includes instruction for preparing a
      Project Management Plan, remediation schedules, cost estimates, and model SOWs for oversight of
      Fund-lead projects and for RD oversight. The Guidance applies to Superfund Accelerated Cleanup
      Model (SACM) projects as well. The Appendixes provide schedules and forms that will be useful in
      assisting RPMs to develop complete, detailed guidance for contractors tasked with implementing remedial
      design and remedial action activities.

      Questions, comments,  and/or recommendations concerning this manual are welcomed and should be
      forwarded to:

                           Kenneth Skahn
                           Hazardous Site Control Division (5203G)
                           Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response
                           U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
                           401 M Street, SW
                           Washington, DC 20460
                           (703) 603-8801
                                                   XI
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                       EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
      This Guidance for Scoping the Remedial Design describes the activities to be performed in the
      predesign planning phase of the Superfund remedial process. The planning process involves the synthesis
      of information from the Record of Decision (ROD) and other supporting documents to determine and
      define (scope) EPA's technical and managerial requirements for the development of the remedial design
      (RD) and the implementation of remedial action (RA).

      The Guidance presents information to help in performing the basic predesign activities as follows:

         •   Preparing the RD/RA management plan

         •   Collecting predesign technical information

         •   Developing approximate RD schedules

         •   Preparing Independent Government Cost Estimates (IGCEs) for RD work assignments to be
             performed by contractors

         •   Developing the Statement of Work (SOW) for the RD

         •   Developing an SOW for the oversight of RDs conducted by Potentially Responsible Parties.

      This guidance manual is organized to lead the Remedial Project Manager through the logical progression
      of tasks to be performed as preparation to develop an SOW for the RD.
                                                   xui
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                              CHAPTER 1

                                           INTRODUCTION
  PURPOSE OF THIS GUIDANCE

  This Guidance for Scoping the Remedial Design
  describes the activities to be performed in the
  predesign planning phase of the Superfund remedial
  process. This Guidance will also apply to Superfund
  Accelerated Cleanup Model (SACM) projects such as
  non-time-critical removals and non-emergency early
  actions. Predesign planning takes place after the
  Record of Decision (ROD) has been signed.
  However, many of the appropriate activities can be
  performed before signing the ROD to expedite the
  project. The planning process involves the synthesis of
  information from the ROD and other supporting
  documents  to scope EPA's technical and managerial
  requirements for the development of the  remedial
  design (RD) and the implementation of remedial action
  (RA).

  This Guidance is addressed to EPA's Remedial
  Project Managers (RPMs). It also should be of
  interest to the other possible participants  (States, other
  Government agencies, or Potentially Responsible
  Parties (PRPs)) in the RD process in that the
  Guidance describes some of their roles and
  responsibilities. The RPM's role in the RD  scoping
  process will vary depending on the RD contracting
  party (i.e., the party that orders the services) that is
  designated as the choice to be the lead party. Exhibit
  1-1 depicts how the choice of the lead or a contracting
  party affects the RD process.

  The Guidance presents information for performing the
  basic predesign activities, including the following:

      •   Performance of RD/RA management planning

      •   Collection of predesign technical  information

      •   Development of approximate RD schedules

      •   Preparation of Independent Government Cost
          Estimates (IGCEs) for RD work assignments
          to be performed by contractors
    •   Development of the Statement of Work
       (SOW) for the RD

    •   Development of an SOW for the oversight of
       PRP-conducted RDs

RPM RESPONSIBILITIES

Depending on the RD contracting party, you, as RPM,
will be faced with slightly varying responsibilities,
which include developing cost estimates and
negotiation. In general, responsibilities can be
described under three different lead RD groupings,
because in all three cases you will be responsible for

    •   Developing the Project Management Plan
       (Chapter 2)

    •   Collecting predesign technical information
       (Chapter 3)

    •   Refining the RD schedule (Chapter 4)

    •   Drafting  the SOW (Chapter 6)

EPA as the Contracting Party

For EPA-lead sites (i.e., where EPA is the contracting
party), you are responsible for preparing the SOW, a
design schedule, and an IGCE. Guidance for preparing
an IGCE appears in Chapter 5. These documents will
be used in developing a work assignment to be issued
to the designer. Under no circumstances shall the
IGCE be made available to the designer. The designer
will then prepare and submit to the EPA contracting
officer a Work Plan addressing the items in the SOW,
including discussion of any need to vary from the
SOW. The designer's Work Plan will also include a
proposed schedule and cost estimate. You will  review
the Work Plan for consistency with the SOW and will
compare the designer's schedule and cost estimate
with the independently prepared Government
documents.

You will assist the Contracting Officer in negotiating
with the designer to resolve any significant differences
in the proposed design
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy
                                                   1-1

-------
  Introduction
                                            Exhibit 1-1
                                 The RD Process With Different Leads
                                         Remedial Design
                                             Scoping
                                          Statement of
                                             Work
                                          Negotiation(s)
                                        with Viable PRPs
                         Enforcement
                            Lead
                                                                       Federal
                                                                         Lead
                                                                          ±.
             RD
       CONTRACTING
           PARTY
         DESIGNER
            *EPA Contractor (ARCS or RACs)
           **Architect/Engineer or in-house design by U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
            Note: See glossary for abbreviations.
                                                1-2
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
  schedule or estimated cost. When agreement is
  reached, you will prepare the Work Plan approval
  package. This package should include documentation
  of any required deviation from the SOW or changes to
  the IGCE. Once the package is completed, you will
  forward it through the Project Officer to the
  Contracting Officer for approval.

  State or Other Government Agency as the
  Contracting Party

  As was  the case for EPA as the contracting party, you
  will be responsible for preparing a comprehensive
  SOW, a design schedule, and an IGCE. The SOW,
  schedule, and IGCE will be used to develop either a
  cooperative agreement (with a State, Indian tribe, or
  locality) or an interagency agreement. The State  or
  agency will reach a separate agreement with the
  designer to carry out the work.

  PRP as the Contracting Party

  For Enforcement-lead projects (i.e., where the PRP is
  the contracting party), you will be responsible for
  preparing an SOW (using the information contained in
  the ROD) and an RD schedule. The SOW, including
  the schedule of deliverables, will become an appendix
	Chapter 1

 to the Consent Decree. A cost estimate and SOW will
 also be needed for the performance of EPA RD
 oversight activities, usually by a Response Action
 Contracts (RACs) contractor.

 Preparation of the SOW for Remedial Design

 This guidance manual has been organized to lead you
 through the logical progression of tasks that are
 performed as preliminary preparation for the
 development of an SOW for the RD. Thus, even
 though the specific guidance for developing the SOW
 is described in Chapter 6, all the earlier chapters will
 be preparation for completion of the SOW.  In effect,
 by the time you have completed the preliminary tasks,
 much of the work required for the actual preparation
 of the SOW will have been accomplished.

 Preparation of the SOW for Remedial Design
 Oversight

 A model SOW for the performance of RD oversight
 activities for Enforcement-lead projects has been
 provided for your use (Appendix E) in preparing a
 site-specific, comprehensive RD oversight SOW.
 Oversight activities and the preparation of the
 oversight SOW are described in Chapter 7.
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy
                                                   1-3

-------
                                           CHAPTER 2

                       DEVELOPING A PROJECT MANAGEMENT PLAN
  CHAPTER OVERVIEW

  The purpose of this chapter is to provide you, the
  Remedial Project Manager (RPM), with an overview
  of the management options available for remedial
  design (RD) and remedial action (RA) to achieve the
  goals of the Record of Decision (ROD) in a timely
  manner. You should consider these options and
  develop a Project Management Plan prior to the
  initiation of the RD. The decisions made throughout
  the development of the Project Management Plan will
  be incorporated into the Statement of Work (SOW)
  and, ultimately, into the designer's Work Plan. The
  Project Management Plan is an evolving document and
  should be updated on a regular basis as the project
  becomes more defined. The U.S. Army Corps of
  Engineers (USAGE) conducts similar planning
  exercises and, although the content is slightly varied,
  these plans are made available to you for review
  before you initiate the RD/RA.

  PLANNING ACTIVITIES

  The key to effective project management is planning.
  You must devote adequate attention to the initial
  planning activities (before the RD begins) to ensure
  that the RD can proceed on time and within budget.
  During this transition period between the ROD and the
  development of the RD SOW, you should be
  concerned with undertaking the following activities
  (described in more detail below):

      •  Establish the technical review team.

      •  Develop the Project Management Plan.

      •  Update budget and schedule in CERCLIS
         (Comprehensive Environmental, Response,
         Compensation, and Liability Information
         System).

  Establishing the Technical Review Team

  The complexity of a typical RD/RA project requires
  in-depth knowledge of a variety of engineering and
  geological fields including chemical, structural,
mechanical, and electrical engineering, as well as a
knowledge of hydrogeology. Because it is unlikely that
any single RPM will possess such a broad knowledge
base, it is imperative that you assemble and coordinate
a project team that incorporates technical knowledge
in the applicable fields. The project "team" approach,
which is used by other Federal agencies engaged in
design and construction management (e.g., USAGE),
results in higher technical quality and improved project
efficiency.

Before beginning a remedial design, review the nature
of the project and select the appropriate technical
assistance. Your technical review team may include
Regional support staff (including ground-water, quality
assurance/quality control (QA/QC), risk assessment,
and engineering experts), other experienced RPMs,
representatives from USAGE, the State (who focus on
Applicable or Relevant and Appropriate Requirements
(ARARs) and permit requirements), EPA's Office of
Research and Development (ORD),  or other EPA
offices such as Air, Water, and Solid Waste. It is
important to obtain early involvement from the
pertinent State or other agency that may have the
expertise to assist in the interpretation of a regulation
to ensure compliance with the substantive
requirements.

When USAGE has been tasked to manage the
RD/RA contract, they will use the team approach by
using their own in-house resources. You must identify
additional resources,  both internal and external, to
ensure success. When issuing work assignments under
EPA contracts (e.g.,  Alternative Remedial Contracts
Strategies (ARCS), Response Action Contracts
(RACs), Emergency Response Cleanup Services
(ERCS), or Emergency and Rapid Response Services
(ERRS)), the RPM should consider use of USAGE to
serve in a "technical assistance" capacity. Such
external agencies have excellent technical resources
and can be called upon to provide a wide variety of
engineering and project management services that are
not available from EPA. You may obtain services
from USAGE by preparing an interagency agreement
(IAG) that will explain and authorize the services
needed.
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy
                                                   2-1

-------
  Developing a Plan
  Developing the Project Management Plan

  A successful project begins with the "owner" (i.e.,
  EPA). The RPM, acting on EPA's behalf, is
  responsible for the quality of the project by virtue of
  establishing the project requirements and by
  communicating these requirements to the other team
  members (including the designer and the constructor).
  To summarize the requirements of the project fully,
  carefully consider all aspects of the project, make key
  decisions, and relay this information to those parties
  who are performing the work. To prepare for meeting
  this basic owner obligation, first develop a Project
  Management Plan, which is  an analysis of the
  project's managerial goals and which includes  the
  constraints of the remedy. The purpose of preparing
  the Plan is to devise a strategy for successfully
  delivering the project on time and within budget.

  Exhibit 2-1 is an  outline of the major managerial
  decisions to be addressed in the development of the
  Plan, The content, of course, will be modified
  depending on the complexity of the remedial design
  and remedial action. For simple projects, many of the
  requirements need not be addressed~the content and
  level of detail are left for you and the technical review
  team to determine. Some questions probably cannot be
  addressed until the design is under way.  Therefore, it
  is important to continue to revisit the Project
  Management Plan and to revise it as necessary. It is
  advised that you seek technical assistance from
  experienced Regional staff or USAGE when
  developing the Project Management Plan.

      1.  Specifying Organization
         and Communications

          1.1    Determining Roles and
                Responsibilities

  Establishing the Lead

  Negotiations with viable PRPs always occur first after
  issuance of the ROD. If negotiations fail, the project
  then becomes Fund-lead and you will select the
  appropriate means of performing RD/RA. Regional
  policy may dictate when the State, USAGE, or an
  EPA contractor will conduct RD/RA, For Fund-lead
  projects, the Office of Solid Waste and Emergency
  Response (OSWER) Directive 9242.3-08, dated
  December 10, 1991, mandated a maximum RA
  threshold of up to $15 million for issuing RA
assignments to an EPA contractor; RAs estimated to
exceed $15 million were to be assigned to USAGE for
construction management. RD assignments, however,
could be made to either USAGE or an EPA contractor
at the Regions' discretion, regardless of estimated
cost. The RPM should check the current policy. If an
EPA contractor is selected, then you, with assistance
from the Project  Officer, will  evaluate the success that
a particular contractor has had on other projects.
Although it may  seem, on the surface, to be desirable
to maintain continuity from the Remedial
Investigation/Feasibility Study (RI/FS) through the RA
by using the same EPA contractor, you are expected
to carefully consider the  available options. Base your
final selection on the requirements of the project.

It is also possible for an EPA contractor to design the
remedy, while USAGE contracts for and manages the
RA. In this case, USAGE should be tasked to serve as
technical advisors during the design and should be
allowed to participate fully from post-ROD planning to
SOW development to the development of the plans
and specifications.

Assembling the Technical Review Team

Refer to the earlier section beginning on page 2-1 for
discussion of the makeup of a technical review team.

        1.2    Establishing a Communications
              Matrix

Effective communication is essential to the success of
a project. Prepare and use a communications matrix
that identifies the key team members and how
information (including submittals, memoranda,
documents, and approvals) flows among the members
to ensure successful communication. Since this matrix
may change upon discussion with the various team
members, make sure all parties agree on the
procedures before the remedial design commences.
You will need to strike a balance so that the team
members do not become inundated with too much
information, thereby creating an unnecessary
expenditure of effort in evaluating the information's
significance to the project. It is usually advisable,
however, to designate all parties to receive copies of
trarismittals, letters, project notes, records of telephone
conversations, etc., to keep everyone abreast of
project activities.
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy
                                                    2-2

-------
                                                                                              Chapter 2
                                              Exhibit 2-1
                       Developing the Project Management Plan: Key Decisions

  1.  Specify the Organizational and Communications Structure

     •   Determine roles and responsibilities
            Establish the lead
            Assemble the technical review team
     •   Establish a communications matrix

  2.  Determine Project Constraints

     •   Funding constraints
     •   Schedule constraints
     •   Other constraints
         (e.g., equipment/process availability, long-lead procurement, health and safety, predictable seasonal
         climate variations)

  3.  Develop a Contracting Strategy for RD/RA

     •   Identify opportunities to accelerate the schedule
            Phasing
            Fast tracking
            Use of preplaced contracts and prequalified contracts
     •   Select the design approach*
            Design specifications
            Performance-based specifications
     •   Identify the RA contract type*
            Fixed price
            Cost plus
            Time and materials
            Service versus construction contracts
                        •       effects on labor rates
                        •       bonding concerns
     •   Develop the RA procurement strategy*
            Competitive procurement
            Sole-source procurement

     *If project is Fund-lead
    2.  Determining Project Constraints                    2.1    Funding Constraints

You will face a number of constraints that can            You must identify all known funding constraints in
jeopardize timely project completion. By careful           order to adequately scope the project. You are
planning, you can minimize disruptions to the schedule.     responsible for understanding and ascertaining
In this section, we offer you a list of the more common
issues that can affect the schedule (and costs).                •   Availability  of funds for RD, RA, and
                                                             operation and maintenance

                                                          •   State cost share and obligations during future
                                                             years
                                                   2-3

-------
  Developing a Plan
  A shortage of RA funds for the project may result in
  the need to phase certain portions. (See section 3.1 of
  this chapter for an explanation of phasing and
  fast-tracking.) Additionally, for Fund-lead projects, a
  State's inability to fund operation and maintenance
  may affect design decisions. A cost-benefit analysis of
  capital versus operation and maintenance alternatives
  is always advisable. It is important to know in advance
  if low maintenance features should be clearly specified
  in order to prevent costly redesign efforts.

          2.2   Schedule Constraints

  Develop a schedule that contains the major milestones
  through RA completion. If available, use project
  management  scheduling software to create the
  schedule. At this point in the process, the schedule will
  be in a preliminary form; it must be continually refined
  as the project develops. You must be aware of all
  schedule commitments that have been made so that
  you can factor them into the contracting
  decisionmaking process, Decisions made during the
  development  of the Project Management Plan will also
  affect the schedule. In addition, several of the
  constraints listed below (section 2.3) could be seen as
  schedule constraints.

          2.3   Other Constraints

  The possible constraints to timely project completion
  are numerous. At this point, you need to identify as
  many roadblocks as possible that will affect the project
  schedule or the way the project is managed. Several
  issues are the most common and therefore worth
  highlighting for consideration. By carefully considering
  site-specific conditions, you can plan ahead to avoid
  later disruptions.

  Regulations and Permits

  Evaluate the logistical elements involving agencies that
  have jurisdiction  over the site. The involvement of
  other agencies who are typically outside the Superfund
  realm can cause schedule delays. It is important to
  consider all possible players who may affect the
  RD/RA or threaten its timely completion. Other
  possible agencies may include

      •   Federal agencies (e.g., National Oceanic and
          Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), natural
          resource trustees, Housing and Urban
          Development (HUD))
    •   Local planning commissions

    •   Zoning authorities

    •   County or city building and safety departments

    •   Local water and wastewater authorities

    •   Local emergency planning and response units

    •   Public utilities

    •   Traffic and highway authorities

    •   State environmental offices

Health and Safety

The management of the health and safety program will
affect completion of the project. The use of Level A
or B Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) can affect
productivity and, subsequently, the schedule.
Furthermore, there may be periods during the year
when factors such as harmful air emissions or
stormwater runoff contamination make construction
more difficult.

Equipment

The ROD may specify a process or remedy that
requires special equipment or a sole-source
procurement. For Fund-lead projects, it is important to
evaluate the delivery schedule for the equipment. If
you expect the procurement process to take a long
time, consider purchasing the equipment under a
separate contract to ensure timely delivery.

Access Needs

Identify access requirements as early as possible to
evaluate or prevent possible delays in performing RD
fieldwork.

Community Involvement*

It is generally EPA's responsibility to ensure that
community involvement activities are carefully
planned. Significant delays can result from inadequate
consideration of community concerns.
*Throughout this document, "community involvement"
is used synonymously for "community relations."
                                                    2-4
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                                                                                Chapter 2
  Weather

  When considering weather, it is necessary to evaluate
  not only the time of the year when the work will occur,
  but also the geographic location of the work site.
  Extreme temperatures, excessive rainfall, or high
  winds may make execution of an RA difficult. In the
  northern sections of the country, winter construction
  shutdowns are common.

  Change in RPMs

  Because some projects take a long time to complete, it
  is not uncommon to see a change in RPMs during the
  life of a project. To minimize disruption to the project,
  records (including the Project Management Plan)
  should be kept up to date in the event that the RPM is
  changed on short notice. Please use the modified
  Golden Rule: Document your actions for your
  successor as you would want your predecessor to
  have done for you.

      3.  Developing a Contracting Strategy for
          RDandRA

          3.1   Opportunities To Accelerate the
                Schedule

  EPA is committed to expediting cleanups at Superfund
  sites.  Therefore, every project must be evaluated for
  opportunities to accelerate the schedule. In addition,
  any constraints identified in section 2 may require you
  to review and adjust the schedule accordingly. There
  are several methods of developing an optimum
  schedule to ensure an accelerated RA: phasing,
  fast-tracking, and the use of preplaced or prequalified
  contracts.

  Phasing

  The division of a project into meaningful work
  elements that can be implemented on different
  schedules usually results in acceleration of the RD and
  RA. This strategy, called phasing, allows  certain
  elements of a project to be started ahead of others to
  lessen the hazards present at the site and  to complete
  simple prerequisite work elements ahead  of more
  complex and hazardous work elements. All elements
  are worked in unison, but each individual element has
  its own schedule and moves at its own rate through the
  process. Phasing is advantageous because the start of
  initial RA is always accelerated.
Use the following criteria to group RD/RA activities
into discrete work elements:

    •   Existing Information. Certain aspects of the
       design such as road installation, utilities
       installation, and building demolition and
       removal can proceed while data on other
       aspects of the design are gathered.

    •   Phasing by Type of Waste. Segregation of
       nonhazardous and hazardous work elements
       may be a simple criterion for project phasing.
       The engineering required for the nonhazardous
       components of a project is frequently more
       conventional and may lend itself readily to
       accelerated schedules in RD and RA.
       Examples are access roads, fences, and
       utilities. In addition, these types of work
       elements are frequently prerequisites for more
       complex elements. It makes sense to begin
       their design and construction as early as
       possible in the project to ensure that
       completion does not delay  subsequent work.

    •   Phasing by Funding Availability. As stated
       in section 2.1, funding constraints may create
       the need to phase an RA by using the
       concepts presented above.  An example would
       be funding mobilization and construction of an
       incinerator as phase one, and incinerator
       operation  as phase two.

Fast-Tracking

Phasing breaks down large, complex projects into
smaller, more manageable work elements; fast-
tracking accelerates the implementation of those
individual work elements. Fast-tracking techniques
manipulate the internal steps required to complete each
phased element, thereby reducing the overall schedule.

You may choose among several techniques by which
RD/RA can be fast-tracked:

    •   Expediting RD. Eliminate or shorten steps in
       the RD process. However, short-cutting
       involves the assumption of risk. The detail in
       an RD can be reduced, particularly for simple
       engineering efforts such as soil excavation or
       tank dismantling. The use of standard
       specifications can also expedite the RD.
                                                    2-5
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
  Developing a Plan
      •   Optimizing the RD Schedule.
          Optimization is the rearrangement of the
          sequence of RD elements to enhance the
          overall schedule. For example:

          -   The site preparation portion of a design
             (and other simple construction activities)
             can be completed and construction initiated
             while the rest of the design activities are
             ongoing.

          -   All design reviews are scheduled in
             parallel with ongoing design work so they
             are not on the critical path.

          -   The designer is required to submit design
             documents as completed in a
             process-logical order instead of retaining
             significant schematic or ROD
             interpretation documents until the
             "preliminary design" or "30-percent" phase
             is complete.

      •   Fast-Track Construction. Some projects
          can be divided into separate stages for
          construction purposes. This is generally
          accomplished by letting out each stage of
          work for construction as soon as the design is
          completed (e.g., site preparation, procurement
          of long-lead equipment, utilities installation).

  Use ofPreplaced or Prequalified Contracts

  Using preplaced or prequalified contracts will eliminate
  the solicitation and audit requirements necessary for
  contract award, allowing construction activities to
  begin in only 30 to 60 days. Additionally, long delays
  because of bid protests or bonding difficulties are
  eliminated. The type of contract is heavily influenced
  by the amount of uncertainty in the work to be
  performed and should be selected to coincide with the
  amount of detail incorporated into the design. The
  major disadvantage of preplaced or prequalified
  contracts is the  lack of competition.

          3.2   Design Approach

  Included in the RD documents are specifications that
  describe the technical requirements to be met by the
  RA contractor and the criteria for determining whether
  these requirements have been met. The two types of
  design specifications typically used within Superfund
are Design and Performance-Based Specifications.

Design Specifications

Use design specifications in solicitations when the
Government's technical requirements are definite and
can be clearly communicated to bidders. Under design
specifications, the Contracting Party is responsible for
design and any related omissions, errors, and
deficiencies in the specifications and drawings.
Remedial actions that lend themselves to design
specifications include landfill covers and traditional
ground-water treatment systems. Detailed designs
permit award solely on price and may result in a lower
cost. Also, use of a detailed design specification is
advantageous in that a firm without design capabilities
can bid on the project, thereby expanding competition.

Performance-Based Specifications

Performance-based specifications set forth the
operational requirements for item(s) being procured.
They advise the RA contractor of what the final
product must be capable of performing. If the RA
contractor has undertaken an impossible task, meets
technological problems, or cannot complete
performance  because of its lack of experience,  the
contractor bears the risk of loss. Performance-based
specifications are typically used where a more
complex treatment technology will be employed. The
performance specification is generally more easily
prepared and can result in a reduction in the time
required to prepare the RD. However, additional time
is usually required for evaluating the proposals
submitted, and the additional risks assumed by the RA
contractor usually result in higher construction costs.

        3.3   The RA Contract
           (for Fund-lead projects)

The Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) defines
the system that the United States Government must
use to obtain contractual services. There are four
general types of contracts available under FAR: fixed
price, cost reimbursement, time and materials, and
indefinite quantity. The two types of contracts most
commonly  used are fixed price and cost
reimbursement. The use of fixed-price contracts
forces the Government to do a thorough investigation
and design before solicitation. The benefit of this work
is twofold: it results in a contract that minimizes risk to
the Government and
                                                     2-6
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                                                                                  Chapter 2
  that has the lowest price at the time of award for
  comparable technical quality. In contrast, the use of
  cost-reimbursement contracts allows for expedited
  solicitation while placing greater demands on the
  Government in terms of contract administration, risk
  allocation, and potential cost.

  Fixed-Price Contracts

  Fixed-price contracts (lump sum, unit price, or a
  combination of the two) establish a firm price for the
  supplies, services,  equipment, or construction being
  acquired. In fixed-price contracts, the ceiling or target
  price is adjusted only when an event occurs  or a
  contingency arises that can cause a modification, as
  stated in the contract. Public agencies use only
  fixed-price contracts in acquisitions made by selecting
  from sealed bids.

  Lump sum. A lump-sum (firm-fixed-price)  contract is
  an agreement  to pay the contractor a specified price in
  return for certain specified performance. The price
  paid is not subject to adjustment as a result of the cost
  history developed during performance of the contract.
  The contractor's profit or loss is related  entirely to its
  ability to control costs. Since this type of contract
  places the maximum risk and cost responsibility upon
  the contractor, it provides the contractor with the
  maximum incentive for effective performance. The
  resultant benefit is increased profits.  Because the
  contractor's cost experience is not a factor in
  determining compensation under the contract, the
  administrative costs to both the contractor and the
  public agency  are kept to a minimum.

  The lump-sum (firm-fixed-price) contract is  used when
  reasonably definite specifications are available and
  whenever fair and reasonable prices can be
  established at  the outset. This type of contract is
  especially suited to the acquisition of supplies, services,
  equipment, and construction where realistic cost
  estimates can  be made. However, if the contractor has
  to place a significant contingency factor in its contract
  price to cover  fluctuations in labor or material costs, or
  to protect itself from its inability to estimate  the costs,
  then the use of a lump-sum (firm-fixed-price) contract
  is not appropriate.

  Unit price. In a unit-price contract, the  selection of
  the offerer of  the lowest bid is based on estimated
  quantities, whereas payments to the successful offerer
  are based on actual quantities. That is, the sum to be
paid is the aggregate total determined by the quantity
of work actually performed, calculated according to
the unit price set out in the offer. If the estimated
quantities are faulty, an offer may be mathematically
unbalanced by an offerer who recognizes the real
situation and who, consequently, may attempt to gain
an evaluation advantage by offering high on the
underestimated units and low on the overestimated
units. The solicitation should state that if there is
reasonable doubt that an award would result in the
lowest cost to the agency (materially unbalanced), then
the offer may be considered nonresponsive. Also, a
clause should be included in the contract that would
permit the negotiation of any unit price when the
following changes occur: (1) changes in quantities
exceed 15 percent of the estimated quantity, and (2)
the change in price for that item is significant.

The unit-price contract shifts  some of the cost risk
away from the contractor.  Therefore, the burden is on
the agency to ensure that the  estimated quantities are
a reasonably  accurate representation of the actual
anticipated needs in light of relevant factors and past
experience. The estimated quantities should offer a
reasonable probability that award to the offerer of the
lowest bid will, in fact, result in the lowest ultimate  cost
to the agency.

Cost-Reimbursement Contracts

The cost-reimbursement contract provides for
payment to the contractor of all (or sometimes a
portion of) its allowable costs. In addition to costs,
these contracts  provide for the payment of a fee to the
contractor. Cost-reimbursement contracts establish an
estimate of total cost for the purpose of obligating
funds and establishing a cost ceiling. The contractor
must notify the public agency when costs approach the
ceiling, for the contractor may not exceed the ceiling
(except at its expense) without the prior approval or
subsequent ratification by the public agency. When the
contractor's costs reach the cost ceiling, it must stop
and await further instructions from the agency. A
cost-reimbursement contract may allow a project to be
fast-tracked from the ROD into RA; however, its use
requires enhanced oversight to more closely monitor
contract costs. Cost-reimbursement contracts are
suitable for use when the costs of performance cannot
be estimated with the accuracy necessary for a fixed-
price contract. The cost risk falls on the public agency.
                                                      2-7
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
  Developing a Plan
  Time and Materials Contracts

  Time and materials contracts may be obtained by using
  either sealed bids or negotiated procurements. The
  Government selects this type of contract when it is not
  possible at the time of contract preparation to
  accurately estimate the scope (extent or duration) of
  work required. The contract calls for the provision of
  direct labor hours at an hourly rate and the provision of
  materials at a designated cost. The proposal
  documents contain estimated quantities for bid
  evaluation purposes.  Time and materials contracts
  require the use of time and cost standards applicable to
  the particular work items and require appropriate
  surveillance by Government personnel.

  Indefinite Quantity Contracts

  Indefinite quantity contracts are like time and materials
  contracts in that they may be obtained using either
  sealed bids or negotiated procurements. The
  Government uses this type of contract when it is
  impossible to determine in advance the precise
  quantities of supplies or services that will be needed
  for designated activities during a definite contract
  performance period. The method of ordering work
  must be stated, as well as minimum/maximum orders
  allowable during a specific time period. In order to
  provide a basis of cost for items to be ordered,
  regulations require the development of a
  fixed-unit-price schedule (SOW) before award. The
  bid proposal contains estimated quantities for bid
  evaluation purposes.

  Separation  of Construction and Service Activities

  For Fund-lead projects, whether a remedial action is
  determined to be construction (construction, alteration,
  or repair, including dredging, excavating, and painting)
  or service (operating a treatment unit) will affect the
  labor wage rates and bonding concerns. The plans and
  specifications should distinguish between the two types
  of activities  so that appropriate labor wage rates
  (Davis-Bacon  rates for construction and Service
  Wage rates for service) can be applied. For
  construction work funded in whole or in part under
  Section 104(g)(l) of the Comprehensive
  Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability
  Act (CERCLA), the law requires that all laborers and
  mechanics employed by contractors be paid wages at
  rates not less than those prevailing on projects of a
  similar character within the same locality as
  determined by the Secretary of Labor in accordance
  with the Davis-Bacon Act.
Federal construction projects require RA constructors
to post performance and payment bonds. Historically,
bonds have been difficult to obtain when the remedial
action exceeded $20 million. Separating the remedial
action into service and construction activities results in
lower overall cost of the construction and increases
the chances for the potential RA constructors to obtain
bonds.

       3.4    RA Procurement Strategies

Competitive Procurement

EPA's Guidance on Expediting Remedial Design
and Remedial Actions (EPA/540/G-90/006, August
1990) states that

   The strategy for expediting procurement methods
   is to match the appropriate procurement method to
   the type of work being procured. For example, the
   fastest procurement is when sealed bidding is used
   to procure work for which standard specifications
   are available. The time required to put together the
   invitation for bids is short because it simply
   involves joining standard contract documents to
   standard specifications along with a description of
   the work. Standard specifications are available for
   a broad variety of work including such items as
   water mains, wells, pumping systems, some
   treatment processes, and various types of earth
   work. If these items are part of a project, then the
   expediting strategy should include the possibility of
   separating them out and procuring them through
   sealed bidding.

   On the other hand, sealed bidding can be a slow
   method of procurement if used for complex work
   for which standard  specifications do not exist. The
   slowness is caused by the need to develop detailed
   design specifications. Under these circumstances,
   it may be faster to use the negotiated procurement
   method with performance specifications, which
   require less technical detail. The contractor then
   submits within his proposal a plan for the
   development of detailed specifications after the
   award of the contract.  Therefore, the award  of the
   contract for complex work will usually occur
   sooner if the negotiated procurement method is
   used. Another procurement method discussed
   below, two-step sealed bidding, is similar to
   negotiated in this respect; that is, it is suitable for
   complex work for which no standard specifications
   exist.
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                                                                              Chapter 2
          Considering the above discussion, one time-
          saving procurement method is to look for
          significant work elements which can be
          procured early by way of sealed bidding with
          standard specifications. This can be done at
          the same time that requests for proposals are
          being developed for the more complex portions
          of the project, In this manner, the appropriate
          procurement method is matched to specific
          type of work with the result that each work
          element is awarded in the shortest possible
          time. This process assumes that the various
          elements of work are large enough to warrant
          separate procurement actions, and that
          construction schedule issues are taken into
          consideration.

  Descriptions of the essential  features of each
  procurement method can be found  on pp. 32-39 of the
  Guidance on Expediting Remedial Design and
  Remedial Actions. Recommended procurement
  strategies for the various categories of remediation are
  provided as Exhibit 2-2.

  Sole-Source Procurement

  The use of sole-source or noncompetitive procurement
  is the least favored method of obtaining an item or
  service. Thus, the use of sole-source procurement is
  prohibited except in  the following four cases:

      (1)  The item is available from only a single
          source.
      (2)  A public exigency or emergency exists,
          justifying its use.
      (3)  Competition is inadequate.
      (4)  The EPA award official authorizes it.

  To  use sole-source procurement, the RPM must
  adequately justify the need for it. Brand name and
performance specifications sometimes disguise what is
really a sole-source procurement. If only one brand of
equipment can meet the specification, this results in a
disguised sole source.

FAR requirements for sole-source procurement are
found in FAR Subpart 6.3. The FAR has specific
procedures that must be met, including obtaining the
approval of the EPA's "Competition Advocate" (FAR
6.5) before procurement.

Updating Budget and  Schedule

First you must establish a preliminary budget and
schedule for the project. This information must be
incorporated into CERCLIS  by the Region to ensure
that funding is available when the design process
begins and to facilitate other planning and project
management activities. These estimated costs and
dates are intended to serve merely as benchmarks;
however, they should be periodically refined and
updated in CERCLIS as they become more  detailed
and accurate. Failure to update CERCLIS will hinder
efforts to properly fund and schedule the project,
possibly resulting in work  stoppages, scheduling delays,
cost overruns, and a general  reduction in project
quality.

Once the ROD is signed, review the budget and
schedule for both remedial design and remedial action
for accuracy. Budget considerations for a PRP-lead
site might include ensuring sufficient funding for
oversight activities and community involvement needs.
Consult with the Independent Government Cost
Estimate (IGCE) Coordinator, the Information
Management Coordinator, or other experienced staff
in the Region to ensure consistency with similar
ongoing projects and available  historical cost data.
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
  Developing a Plan
Exhibit 2-2
Recommended Procurement Strategies for Hazardous Waste Remediation
Remediation Schedule
Ground-Water
Treatment — Complex
Ground-Water
Treatment — Simple
Treatment of
Soils and
Sludge — Complex
Treatment of
Soils and Sludge — Simple
Civil
Engineering — Complex
Civil
Engineering — Simple
On-Site Thermal
Destruction
Specification
• Design
• Performance
• Design
• Design
• Performance
• Functional
• Design
• Design
• Performance
• Design
• Performance
• Functional
Procurement
• Two-Step Bid
• Request for Proposal
• Invitation for Bid
• Two-Step Bid
• Request for Proposal
• Invitation for Bid
• Two-Step Bid
• Request for Proposal
• Invitation for Bid
• Request for Proposal
Contact
• Fixed Price
• Indefinite Quantity
• Time and Materials
• Cost Reimbursement
• Fixed Price
• Fixed Price
• Indefinite Quantity
• Time and Materials
• Cost Reimbursement
• Fixed Price
• Fixed Price
• Indefinite Quantity
• Cost Reimbursement
• Fixed Price
• Fixed Price
• Indefinite Quantity
• Time and Materials
• Cost Reimbursement
     Adapted from the technical paper titled "Acquisition Selection for Hazardous Waste Remediation" by William
  R Zobel, PE.
                                                  2-10
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                              CHAPTERS

                                   INFORMATION COLLECTION
  CHAPTER OVERVIEW

  As Remedial Project Manager, you should compile
  existing predesign information to facilitate a smooth
  transition from the Record of Decision (ROD) to the
  remedial design (RD) process and to provide the
  remedial designer with a clear understanding of the
  technical objectives of the RD. The information will
  serve as the initial building block for developing the RD
  Statement of Work (SOW) for both Fund-lead and
  Enforcement-lead projects.

  The listing of collected data will serve as an up-to-date
  inventory of any information pertinent to the RD.
  Provide the list to the designer as an appendix to the
  SOW. This will make it possible for both you and the
  designer to identify additional predesign information
  needs and will enable them to plan for the budgeting
  and scheduling requirements.

  It is your responsibility to be as thorough as possible in
  providing all relevant information. It remains the
  responsibility of the designer, however, to verify the
  completeness of the information provided to ensure
  that the data will yield a design that when implemented
  will meet all Applicable or Relevant and Appropriate
  Requirements (ARARs). Exhibit 3-1 lists the nine
  major categories of information that should be
  collected.

  DATA COMPILATION

  Relevant data are needed by the designer in order to
  understand the objectives of the RD. The data will be
  collected by means of the following activities:

     •   Define current site conditions.

     •   Describe the selected remedy.

     •   Identify applicable regulatory requirements.

     •   Summarize available data and identify possible
        additional data needs (or treatability studies not
        performed for the Feasibility Study (FS)).
   •   State all known, unresolved issues.

The primary information sources include the Remedial
Investigation/Feasibility Study (RI/FS) and the ROD,
along with any other relevant documents available to
you. Document the information sources that you use.

For Fund-lead sites, you may obtain much of the
information you need through a predesign discussion
session. This meeting, which should be held soon after
the ROD is signed, will involve you, in-house technical
experts, the RI/FS contractor, and other Regional
personnel with prior experience in design and
construction activities. It may also include
representatives from other Government agencies, the
State, and the designer. Discussion topics should
include design-limiting site conditions, the availability
and need for additional data, the need to define
treatment schemes or processes, the need for
treatability studies, the selected design approach and
milestone dates, and the existence of any unresolved
issues.
                   Exhibit 3-1
      RD Information Collection Categories

    Site Conditions

    Performance Standards

    Availability of Data

    Technology and Design Approach

    Materials

    ARARs/Permits/State Involvement

    Unresolved Issues

    Health and Safety Concerns

    Miscellaneous Concerns
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy
                                                    3-1

-------
  Information Collection
  In listing sources of technical information, consider the
  following points:

     •   Keep the narrative brief.

     •   Use bulleted points whenever possible.

     •   Provide references to sources of information
        (title and  description of document, document
        number, revision number, date).

     •   Present pertinent data in logically organized
        tables.

     •   Provide flow diagrams to describe treatment
        schemes  or processes for the selected remedy.

     •   Provide supporting information either as
        attachments or as  a list of references.

  We discuss the  potential data items to be collected in
  the pages that follow. It is left to your discretion and
  that of the review team to determine the content and
  level of detail for the information provided under each
  topical heading. For simple design projects, many of
  the items need not be addressed. Whenever this is the
  case, headings for unused sections should be retained
  for consistency  and followed by the words "NOT
  USED."

  Site Conditions

      1.  Site Description

  Provide a brief  description of the site and past and
  present site activities, including reference to  any
  previous or ongoing removal or remedial activities.
  There is no need to rewrite this information if it can be
  referenced in the ROD.

          1.1  Site History and Current Status

  Provide a summary of background information that
  would be useful to the designer. Include a brief
  description of the dimensions, location, and history of
  the site; the level of contamination found in each
  medium; and other pertinent facts about the site in
  general. Also identify the time period for which the
  description applies. The designer will know whether
  there has been sufficient delay  between the
  assembling of predesign  technical information and the
  start of the design to require an update the site status.
Mention any individuals who have useful knowledge of
the site.

       1.2 Chemical, Physical, and Geological
             Characteristics of Site

Provide a brief description of the general topography
(rolling, flat, steep slopes), types of soil, vegetation,
geologic  characteristics (depth to bedrock), depth to
ground water, areas of contamination, and any unusual
features known about the site. These features need to
be described only if they are not satisfactorily
described in the RI, FS, or ROD.

       1.3   Proximity to Homes and Schools,
             and Land and Ground-Water Use
             Surrounding Site

Provide a description of the distances to the nearest
residences, schools, or businesses. Possible or
preferred access routes should also be described. Also
include a brief description of the surrounding land and
ground-water usage.

The designer will use this information (1) to estimate
the extent to which contingency planning will be
necessary during the RD and remedial action (RA)
phases, and (2) to evaluate the need for perimeter
monitoring, noise reduction controls, siting
arrangements,  or temporary relocation of affected
residents.

       1.4   Basis for Property Lines on
             Drawings

Indicate,  whenever possible, whether property lines
shown on existing topographic (topo) maps, drawings,
or sketches of the site are based on an actual site
survey or merely scaled from existing drawings, field
sketches, or topo maps. (Scaled measurements are
less reliable, since they can be in error by 25 feet or
more.)

Indicate whether the site has been mapped for the
project and whether field notes are available.
Alternatively, to indicate the level of accuracy of site
drawings, note any existing topographical data obtained
by others (e.g., U.S. Geological Survey) that have
been used for the RI/FS.

       1.5   Likely Future Use of Site

Provide a description, if known, of the proposed future
use of the site.  This information makes it
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy
                                                     3-2

-------
                                                                                              Chapter 3
  easier for the designer to tailor the design to future
  needs.

      2.   Real Estate Issues

          2.1   Real Estate Requirements
               Assessment

  Obtain an assessment of real estate issues in the form
  of a Real Estate Planning Report (REPR). The REPR
  will provide information on real estate properties or
  easements that must be acquired or from which
  residents must be relocated before RA proceeds. Real
  estate information includes data on estimated acreage,
  number of owners and their names, property  value,
  problems, and the need for temporary relocation of
  affected residents or businesses. Make arrangements
  for completion of the REPR before preparing the
  preliminary design (submitted when approximately 30
  percent of the design is complete) by either the
  designer or the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
  (USAGE) under an interagency agreement (IAG).
      2.2
Real Estate and Access Issues
  Point out any restrictions or special agreements made
  with State or local officials or property owners. Special
  agreements might include requirements such as the
  following:

      •   Limiting the use of a primary access road to
          certain times of the day to minimize the
          disruption to local traffic

      •   Limiting excessive noise and traffic congestion
          by using alternative transportation routes for
          equipment and materials

      •   Strengthening a bridge so that it may provide
          an access route for heavy construction
          vehicles

      •   Using or acquiring property that could affect
          the design or restrict the construction

      3.  Availability of Utilities

          3.1   Location and Availability

  Describe the location, if known, of any utilities (gas,
  electric, water, sewer, Publicly  Owned Treatment
  Works (POTW), and telephone) available for use at
  the site. When known, include information on the
maximum capacity of each utility and the name and
telephone number of a contact person. This
information probably can be obtained from the
preparer of the RI/FS.

       3.2   Existing Agreements or Conditions

Describe any discussions or agreements made with a
utility or local boards. Include the date of the
discussion and the name of the representative(s) who
attended the meeting.

Performance Standards

For each medium to be addressed (e.g., soil, ground
water, air) include, if appropriate, the following
information on the ROD's remediation standards,
goals, requirements,  or objectives:

    •   Clearly defined treatment or performance
       standards

    •   Applicable point(s) of compliance (e.g., 5 ppm
       trichloroethylene (TCE) in ground water at the
       discharge point to the stream)

    •   Percentage or order of magnitude reduction
       expected from treatment

    •   Best Demonstrated Available Treatments
       (BDATs)

    •   Maximum discharge levels to be attained
       throughout the plume/soil matrix, at property
       boundaries, or at the point of release into
       surface water or air

    •   Specific types of analyses (Toxicity
       Characteristic Leaching Procedure (TCLP),
       total waste analyses) that will be used to
       document achievement of required reductions

    •   Criteria for disposal of treated materials

       S   delisting of residual ash

       S   demonstrating that treated wastes do not
           exhibit Resource Conservation and
           Recovery Act (RCRA) characteristics

       S   meeting notification and certification
           requirements
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy
                                                    3-3

-------
  Information Collection
          S  shipping to an off-site RCRA Treatment,
             Storage, and Disposal (TSD) facility

      •   A description of the level of closure or capping
          that is required (RCRA Subtitle C or D)

  Information that is already clearly presented in the
  ROD or FS, and that is appropriately referenced, need
  not have lists provided concerning target cleanup goals
  and objectives.

  Availability of Data

      1.  Physical and Chemical Data Collected to
          Date

  Identify all available data and documents that may be
  pertinent to design activities, providing information on
  the date of collection and the physical location of each
  round of data.  Include all of the following:

      •   "Available for review"  analytical data collected
          to date

      •   Survey notes (including the location of
          monuments and benchmarks) and engineering
          or physical data (soil strength and
          compressibility)

      •   Soil boring logs

      •   Treatability studies

  Note, for design purposes, any known data gaps or
  areas of significant data variability and the relative
  accuracy of the data. You may find it useful to request
  the RI/FS contractor to identify data items and possible
  data gaps for the design. Such data could be included
  in either the FS or a post-ROD  design planning
  submittal.

  A listing of physical and chemical data collections will
  aid in developing the design SOW. It will also enable
  you and the designer to determine the availability of
  required data.  Emphasize two facts: that this data
  listing does not necessarily constitute a complete
  catalog of all data that will be needed, and that it
  remains the responsibility  of the designer to identify all
  data needs for the appropriate design  of the remedy.

      2.  Data Retrieval

  Make provisions for clear labeling and proper storage
of all site data. This will make it possible for the data
to be readily identified and retrieved by the designer if
the remedial design will not begin immediately after the
ROD is signed.

Technology and Design Approach

    1.  Waste Characterization

Review the site data on wastes and develop a general
description of the wastes to be treated. Whenever
appropriate, prepare a table or chart to provide
information on the type, location, condition, uniformity,
volume, and any unusual features  (e.g., high toxicity,
high oil and grease content) of the waste. If this
information is listed in the ROD or FS, it can be
referenced and a new list does not need to be created.

    2.  Treatment Scheme

List any description of the selected treatment process
including any pertinent design criteria or parameters
from the ROD, if present.

       2.1     Schematic Diagram

When you have enough information, give the designer
a schematic diagram that indicates the basic features
of the selected treatment process. The RI/FS  and
treatability studies may provide additional schematics
as well. Be careful to avoid giving the designer
schematics that have more detail about the treatment
process than is provided in the ROD or that would lock
the designer into an illconceived equipment
configuration.

       2.2     Pretreatment Requirements

If pretreatment requirements are specified in the
ROD, describe (to the extent possible) the type,
purpose, and level of treatment to be achieved.
Reference the ARARs or other mechanisms from
which the performance criteria have been derived.

       2.3     Treatment Design Criteria

List or describe any treatment performance criteria
identified in the ROD. These may include the
following:

    •  Input and output rates
                                                     3-4
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                                                                                Chapter 3
      •   Maximum and minimum flow rates

      •   Extraction rates

      •   Influent or effluent quality

      •   Sampling frequency and test methods

  For the RD to proceed smoothly, these criteria must be
  established before the design is begun.

  Describe any unusual operating or site conditions that
  could affect the specified technology. For instance,
  you may know from the RI/FS that an existing landfill,
  which is slated to be capped, has unusually steep
  slopes. Providing this information to the designer will
  allow her or him to anticipate the need for a special
  cover design to provide long-term stability on the
  slopes. Likewise, the designer should be made aware
  of any unusual bedrock formations before designing a
  diversion trench because this information could affect
  construction phasing, cost, and design.

      3.  Long-Term Monitoring and Maintenance
          Requirements

  Review the remedy specified in the ROD and predict
  the kinds of long-term activities that will have to be
  performed. Long-term activities involve monitoring and
  maintaining cleanup equipment that might be used for
  extended periods.  Examples include maintenance of
  ground-water extraction and treatment equipment,
  periodic maintenance of mechanical and electrical
  parts, and continual exchange of carbon filters for air
  stripping or chemicals for a metal precipitation
  process. For each type of long-term activity, include
  information  on the frequency of sampling and
  inspections, the parameters of the analysis to be
  performed, and the timeframe for these activities.

  Longer term (30-year) programs may be required to
  meet certain RCRA postclosure requirements for
  capped areas containing hazardous wastes. Activities
  for these programs could  consist of regular inspection
  for erosion and subsidence, periodic maintenance of
  the leachate collection and treatment system, the
  vegetative cover, and the  ground-water monitoring
  system.

  Estimate the basic requirements for monitoring: include
  regulatory requirements, performance requirements,
  and reevaluation periods.  Explain that the designer is
  responsible for verifying the completeness of this
estimate and for determining the frequency and type of
sampling or monitoring needed to meet the
performance requirements.

Provide information on who (State or Potentially
Responsible Parties) will be responsible for the
monitoring and maintenance of the site. Explain that
the responsible party may have input on design
considerations that need to be established at the
beginning of the design, such as the complexity of
monitoring systems and the automation of systems.

Explain that when the design calls for engineering
solutions that leave contaminants on-site, a compliance
monitoring program should also be developed or
required from the contractor. This program should be
designed to provide sufficient information to allow you
to determine whether the protectiveness of the remedy
has been maintained. These plans will aid in the
performance of the 5-year review of the remedy (see
Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response
(OSWER) Directive 9355.7-02, dated May 23, 1991).

    4.  Sole  Source or First-Time Use of a
        Technology or Innovative Technology

Point out any potential requirements for specialized or
patented equipment that is likely to be required to meet
the goals of the ROD. Also, describe specialized
equipment that has been used in predesign activities
(bench-scale treatability pilot studies) that also will be
required for the RA. This information can prevent
delays in completing and implementing the RA by
alerting the designer to the need to make provisions for
early procurement or installation of the equipment. The
procurement of equipment may require a significant
lead  time, and RA time may increase significantly if
the RA contractor has to make major adjustments to
calibrate the equipment before treatment.

If noncompetitive (sole-source) procurement is
anticipated for a Fund-lead project, include or
reference information that the designer can use to
justify the procurement. Providing justification for a
noncompetitive procurement will place additional
requirements  on the procuring agent.

    5.  Treatability Study

Tell  the designer if it will be necessary to perform a
treatability study (bench or pilot scale) during the
design. The primary purpose of the treatability study
should be to obtain scale-up information, and
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy
                                                     3-5

-------
  Information Collection
  not to determine whether a treatment technology will
  be effective. Do not automatically require treatability
  studies if a detailed database already exists for the
  contaminants of concern. Treatability studies may not
  be required when adequate treatability data are
  available from the RI/FS, or when information already
  exists about the performance of the treatment process
  because it has been used elsewhere on wastes like
  those found at the site. Consult with the technical
  review team, technical advisors employed by the
  RI/FS contractor, equipment vendors, and the Office
  of Research and Development's (ORD's) Superfund
  Technical Assistance Response Team (START) to
  confirm the appropriate design approach. Also, give
  the designer some flexibility in determining the
  necessity of these studies or tests.

  When treatability studies are required, they  should
  follow accepted protocols. When using certain
  remedies, such as innovative technologies for
  difficult-to-treat wastes,  the use of scaled-up versions
  during design should be considered. This method
  allows better assessment of, for example, separation
  techniques  or volatilization rates, or estimated changes
  in heat transfer rates.

      6.  Special Design Conditions

  Describe any special conditions required of the
  technologies being used  and, if known, state why these
  conditions were established. Special conditions may  be
  associated with an ARAR or an agreement with State
  or local officials. For example, normally, it may be
  acceptable to operate an incinerator as long as stack
  emissions fall within a certain range for the various
  particulates or gases involved. However, for a given
  site, the federally established range of emissions may
  not be acceptable to State or local officials; as a result,
  higher efficiencies may be required. Other conditions
  could include specific requirements for a trial burn or
  off-site disposal, or restrictions on the operating hours
  because of the noise levels produced by treatment
  equipment operated adjacent to a residential
  neighborhood.

      7.  Flexibility in Design

  When the ROD allows flexibility in design,  do not
  attempt to restrict the designer to the use of a specific
  technology or material. Instead, point out the flexibility
  allowed, and encourage a review of
available alternatives and consultation with appropriate
technical advisors, as previously indicated for pilot
studies.

Explain that the designer should include a comparison
of life-cycle costs (capital, operating, replacement) in
the evaluation of treatment processes. This
comparison of life-cycle costs should not be confused
with the value engineering study that must also be
conducted.

    8.  Schedule Constraints That Could Affect
        the Rate of Treatment or Unit Size

Point out any target date that must be met (because of
court mandate, permit requirements), since this date
could affect the rate at which treatment must be
performed. Knowledge of this date will enable the
designer to make better decisions concerning
treatment unit sizes or numbers and the scheduling of
construction activities.

    9.  Confirmation Monitoring (Achievement of
        Performance Standards)

Confirmation  monitoring is the sampling and analysis
program that is performed during and after the
removal of wastes or contaminated soils, or
ground-water remediation, and prior to project
closeout. Its purpose is to determine  whether the final
cleanup levels have been met for the hazardous
constituents of concern. The monitoring is done by
acquiring sufficient environmental media sampling data
to confirm that no residual contamination in excess of
the approved  levels remains as a threat to human
health and the environment and that the remedy is,
therefore, complete.

Explain that a confirmation monitoring activity may be
a necessary element of the project design
requirements, if not already specified in the ROD.
Under these circumstances, the designer would need
to supply information on specific aspects of monitoring,
such as the number of samples and the degree of
statistical accuracy that would be required.

Guidance on confirmation monitoring can be found in
Methods for Evaluating the Attainment of Cleanup
Standards: Volume 1—Soils and Solid Media
(February 1989, EPA 230/02-89-042) and  Volume
2—Ground Water (July 1992).
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy
                                                     3-6

-------
                                                                                                Chapter 3
  Similarly, the designer must call for or develop
  requirements for a shakedown or testing program to
  demonstrate that equipment installed by the RA
  contractor performed as the designer intended.

  Materials

      1.  Volume Estimation and Basis of
          Calculations

  Describe the degree of accuracy of existing RI/FS
  data for the following items:

      •    Volume estimates

      •    Delineations of contaminated areas

      •    Chemical and physical descriptions of all
          contaminated  materials to be stored, treated,
          or disposed of

      •    Estimates of off-site disposal needs (drums,
          ash, sludge)

  You and the technical review team should review
  these  items closely, as the accuracy of these values is
  vital to the validity of cost estimates and to the proper
  design and implementation of the RA. For example, an
  on-site RCRA disposal unit built to handle an original
  volume that was inaccurately estimated  may not have
  the capacity to contain the actual increased volume.
  Knowledge of relevant volume uncertainties will
  enable the designer to gather more data or to
  incorporate conservative design estimates for
  processes such as on-site excavation, treatment, and
  disposal.

      2.  Spatial Requirements, Staging, Logistics

  You and the technical review team should evaluate
  and advise the designer of the possible need for large
  areas  to stage materials and to construct or operate
  the project. For example, incineration, solidification or
  stabilization, and other soil or sludge treatment
  remedies often require space for the following
  activities:

      •    Dewatering

      •    Source separation

      •    Dredging

      •    Ash, sludge, and materials treatment and
          storage
    •   Tank containment

    •   Stockpiling

    •   Staging of equipment or materials

    •   Decontamination

    •   Treating

    •   Locating access roads, trailers, and buildings

Explain that the designer must consider carefully aad
determine whether project components should be
located on-site or off-site and whether in a
contaminated or uncontaminated zone. For certain
projects, the acquisition of easements or the outright
purchase of properties may be an efficient means for
implementing the remedy (using an underground
discharge line to connect with a sewage treatment
plant intercepting sewer for purposes of groundwater
treatment). In addition, depending on remedy
uncertainties, you and the technical review team may
want to provide a flexible design. This design would
allow for expansion by including provisions for
additional unit processes, pumps, and various other
items or materials needed to accommodate increased
flow capacities or additional treatment processes that
might arise during remedial action.

    3.  Durability of Materials

Explain that testing the durability of materials with
regard to physical and chemical characteristics may be
warranted for certain design components.  For
example, process system integrity can be affected by
wet and dry or freeze and thaw cycling, inadequate
design-life assumptions, or corrosion from contact with
chemically contaminated media.

If the total volume of materials processed  or the length
of operation for a treatment facility is tentative,
conservative estimates may be warranted, and more
durable materials may be appropriate (e.g., using
stainless steel instead of carbon steel piping).

    4.  Materials and Equipment Availability

Alert the designer to review the project and advise you
whenever the selected remedy requires locating a
source for large quantities of a particular material.
Certain materials or equipment needed during the
remedial action may require long-lead procurement,
                                                     3-7
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
  Information Collection
  significant distances or size limitations for
  transportation, or extensive off-site involvement. As an
  example of off-site involvement, you may need to alert
  the designer to give early attention to determining the
  availability of off-site borrow sources or treatment or
  disposal facilities if the remedy calls for any of the
  following:

      •   Placement of an extensive clay cap

      •   UseofaPOTW

      •   Placement of riprap on embankments,
          requiring large quantities of 6-inch stone

      •   Disposal of on-site treatment plant sludge or
          spent carbon

      5.  Mixed Materials

  List any ROD requirements for the handling of
  contaminated materials, particularly if the requirements
  relate to heterogeneous materials. For example, for
  certain remedies such as soil washing, it is often
  necessary to separate out large particles (so that the
  fine ones can be treated). For such remedies, the level
  of separation and treatment required for the materials
  should be described to the extent known. Also include
  a description of the waste to be handled when it
  contains materials such as the following:

      •   Organic matter (roots, bushes, trees)

      •   Large cobbles or boulders

      •   Debris (tires, batteries, autos, machinery,
          drums, tanks)

      •   Difficult-to-treat materials (creosoted piles,
          oily sediments)

  State, if known, whether any permit waivers or
  treatability variances, such  as soil and debris variances
  under the RCRA land disposal restrictions, should be
  pursued.

  ARARs/Permits/State Involvement

      1. ARARs List

  OSWER Directive 9355.7-03, Permits and Permit
  "Equivalency" Processes for CERCLA On-Site
  Response Actions (February 19,  1992), states that
    Remedial actions must comply with those
    requirements that are determined to be ARARs at
    the time of ROD signature. [The proposed and
    final 1982 National Oil and Hazardous Substances
    Pollution Contingency Plan (NCP)] [S]ection
    300.430(f)(l)(ii)(B),  in effect, "freezes" ARARs
    when the ROD is signed unless compliance with
    newly promulgated or modified requirements is
    necessary to ensure the protectiveness of the
    remedy. If ARARs were not frozen at this point,
    promulgation of a new or modified requirement
    could result in a reconsideration of the remedy and
    a restart of the lengthy design process, even if
    protectiveness was not compromised.  This lack of
    certainty would adversely affect the operation of
    the [Comprehensive Environmental Response,
    Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA)]
    program, would be inconsistent with Congress'
    mandate to expeditiously clean up sites, and could
    adversely affect negotiations with potentially
    responsible parties.

List or reference the ARARs that were in effect on
the date that the ROD was signed and therefore are
required as part of the remedy. This  list will be useful
in preparing the design SOW, and in establishing an
initial agreement between EPA and the designer as to
which ARARs must be met in the design.

Explain that the designer must ensure the  accounting
of all appropriate ARARs, off-site permits, and TBCs
(nonpromulgated or enforceable Federal or State "To
Be Considered" criteria, advisories, guidance, or
proposed standards) that need to be followed or
attained during the RD/RA. An example of a TBC is a
requirement that all electrical codes  be met when
constructing a pump station or force  main. Duplicative
ARARs should not appear on this list, for they should
already have been screened out during ROD
development. Categorize the ARARs as either
chemical-specific, location-specific, or action-specific.
Also, identify TBCs that should be addressed during
the RA.

Identify for the designer (to the extent possible) any
ARARs, variances, waivers, and exemptions that have
been used or are available for use. This might include
a land ban treatability variance or a waiver of certain
Maximum Concentration Levels (MCLs) for
remediating contaminated ground water in fractured
bedrock.
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy
                                                    3-S

-------
                                                                                                 Chapter 3
  Explain that the designer is responsible for any
  potential ARARs that can be established only during
  design—for example, through treatability studies to be
  conducted or through specific processes selected
  during design to satisfy the general remedy selected.

      2.  On-Site Versus Off-Site Waste
          Management

  The Comprehensive Environmental Response,
  Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) and the
  National Contingency Plan (NCP) provide that
  "on-site"* actions will be exempt from having to obtain
  Federal, State, and local permits through administrative
  procedures. Although on-site actions must comply with
  (or waive) the substantive requirements of the permits,
  these RAs will generally proceed more quickly than
  off-site actions. In contrast, off-site actions must
  usually meet the substantive and often lengthy
  administrative permit components of these ARARs,
  and comply with the requirements of the Off-Site
  Policy (in accordance with CERCLA §121(d)(3).

      3.  Permits and Land-Use Restrictions

  Provide a preliminary list of off-site permits to be
  obtained. Point out situations where institutional
  controls such as restrictive easements or water-use
  restrictions are needed, and note all parties who have
  specific responsibilities for implementing controls:
  EPA, the State, the local government and/or the
  designer or constructor. For example, the designer
  may be required to develop a restrictive easement
  prohibiting the use of certain wells as a potable water
  supply.

      4.  Extent of State Involvement

  Describe the anticipated responsibilities of the State
  during the RD. Include the role of the State in

      •   help in applying State-developed RD/RA
          ARARs

      •   helping to resolve  and expedite permitting
          issues

      •   gaining access to properties
Unresolved Issues

Provide a list of all known, unresolved issues; include
enough detail to enable the designer to understand the
concerns of everyone involved. For example, a local
sanitation board could be reluctant to accept
wastewater from the site for treatment at their
POTW. The board's concerns might include the
impact of the wastewater on the treatment process or
the ability of the plant to accommodate additional
volumes of water during peak flow periods. When you
resolve issues of this type with help from the designer
early in the process, substantial cost savings may
result.

Health and Safety Concerns

Alert the designer to potential health and safety
concerns (air releases, traffic) that may be posed by
the site and the planned remedial activities at the site
both for on-site workers and for the neighboring
community.

List or reference all known threats posed by the site
and the planned remedial activities. Reference and
require modification and reuse of any existing data or
Health and Safety Plan (HASP) from previous work
at the site. This list will facilitate the preparation of a
site-specific HASP for any on-site activities to be
performed by the designer or by the RA contractor, as
defined and required by 29 CFR 1910.120 and 40 CFR
300.150.

The designer should be required to delineate the
nonhazardous portions of the post-RD work,  because
the efficiency of work in hazardous areas is limited in
direct proportion to the level of protective clothing
required.

Advise the designer of the following contingencies:

    •    Potential for off-site migration of toxic vapors
        or particulates that might result from remedial
        activities

    •    Associated controls, such as dust suppression,
        that may be required to minimize health risks
        to off-site receptors
      * "On-site," according to the NCP, may include the areal extent of contamination (as well as reasonably close
  noncontiguous facilities having wastes compatible with a selected treatment or disposal approach) and all suitable
  areas, in close proximity to the contamination, involved in implementation of the response action.
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
  Information Collection
      •   Applicable community air emission standards
          (an example of an ARAR)

      •   Site-specific risks from chemical, biological, or
          physical hazards (such as unusual employee
          exposure)

      •   Potential for fire or explosion

  Air dispersion modeling might be recommended for
  predicting potential off-site concentrations. Ambient
  monitoring requirements as well  as realtime air
  monitoring with action levels may also be required at
  the site perimeter to determine the need for
  implementing control measures.

  Miscellaneous Concerns

      1.  Community Involvement Activities

  Summarize the community involvement activities that
  have taken place. Highlight any special interests or
  concerns that the community has expressed.  Include a
  preliminary list of additional community involvement
  activities that should be performed as part of the
  design and construction efforts.

  List or reference representatives of citizen groups that
  have expressed interest in the site.
    2.  Confidential Business Information

Identify any documents being used for the site RD that
also contain confidential business information.
Reference each document and its location in the files.
Responsibilities for safeguarding confidential business
information are explained in EPA's guidance
document entitled Contractor Requirements for the
Control and Security ofRCRA Confidential
Business Information, dated March 1984, available
from OSWER's Confidential Business Information
Office.

    3.  Other RD/RA Requirements

Explain that designer- or RA contractor-developed
documents should be provided for each RA and should
be called for in the project specifications. These might
include a Health and Safety Plan, an Emergency
Response Plan, a Community Involvement Plan, a
Field Sampling and Analysis Plan, a Quality Assurance
Project Plan, or an Operation and Maintenance Plan.
These plans may have been developed for an earlier
design or for the RI/FS and can be provided to the
designer for modification rather than having the
designer start from scratch.
                                                   3-10
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                             CHAPTER 4

                                DEVELOPING THE PRELIMINARY
                                  REMEDIAL DESIGN SCHEDULE
  CHAPTER OVERVIEW

  Successful management of a remedial design (RD)
  depends on maintaining schedules and budgets and
  resolving problems quickly. Techniques for establishing
  good RD management include requirements for
  monthly Remedial Project Manager (RPM) and
  revision of the RD schedule. The designer may not
  change the RD schedule without your prior written
  approval. This chapter will help you develop a
  preliminary schedule to be used during negotiations.
  Because you may not have all the skills, experience, or
  insight to develop the schedule, you should rely on the
  technical review team to help you. To develop the
  schedule, first produce a comprehensive list of
  activities or subtasks that,  when completed, will
  achieve the goals  specified in the Record of Decision
  (ROD). In contrast to the  preliminary schedule that
  you prepare, the final, established RD schedule is
  prepared by the designer.  The final schedule must
  specify reasonable goals, contain sufficient detail to
  allow monitoring of progress on key activities, and
  follow the approved Work Plan.

  THE PRELIMINARY RD SCHEDULE

  Schedule Components

  You are responsible for negotiating the preliminary RD
  schedule with the State, other Government agencies,
  or a remedial contractor (for Fund-lead projects) or
  with the Potentially Responsible Party (PRP) (for
  Enforcement-lead projects). As a starting point for
  negotiation, develop a preliminary, independent RD
  schedule—consistent with the draft design Statement
  of Work (SOW) (see Chapter 6 and Appendix
  A)—using the 11  standard RD tasks as the basis for
  establishing schedule milestones. Request that the
  contracting party (the State, other Government agency,
  remedial contractor, or PRP) develop a schedule in a
  similar manner by separating the work into tasks. This
  parallel organization will provide a common basis for
  evaluating differences between the two schedules.
Initially, the durations for the individual tasks can be
approximated by referring to the generic RD schedules
in Appendix B and selecting or adapting values from
the tables. (It is anticipated that CERCLIS 3 will be
used to record historic data, including the durations of
standard tasks for work assignments, from which new
data schedules can be developed.)

Generic RD Schedules and Assumptions

The generic RD schedules found in Appendix B were
developed to match the 11 standard tasks found in
ARCS (Alternative Remedial Contracting Strategy)
contracts for RD work assignments. This generic
schedule can also be used with slight modification to
establish schedule durations for the similar standard
tasks for RD found in the RACs (Response Action
Contracts) SOW and summarized in Exhibit 4-1.

The assumptions used in developing the generic RD
schedules typically apply to all the schedules
regardless of the technology applied to remedy the
site.  If the design activities differ from these
assumptions, adjust the schedule accordingly. These
assumptions are listed below.

    •   The Feasibility Study data are sufficient to
        specify the bench and pilot testing for any
        treatability study.

    •   Design reviews are conducted in parallel with
        the continuing design process rather than in
        series.

    •   The duration of individual activities for each of
        the remedy-specific schedules was  selected
        based on a review of ongoing RD projects and
        on discussions with consultant and regulatory
        personnel knowledgeable about the various
        cleanup technologies, the design requirements,
        and procurement and planning needs.
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy
                                                    4-1

-------
  Preliminary Schedule
                                               Exhibit 4-1
                 RACs (Response Action Contracts) Standard Tasks for Remedial Action

   TASK 1:  PROJECT PLANNING AND SUPPORT

   •   Attend scoping meeting
   •   Conduct site visit
   •   Develop work plan and associated cost estimate
        -  prepare construction cost estimate
        -  initiate discussion regarding 6% design limitation
   •   Negotiate work plan and make necessary revisions
   •   Provide conflict-of-interest disclosure
   •   Evaluate  existing data and documents
   •   Prepare the following (or reference existing) plans:
          Site Management Plan
          Field Sampling Plan
          Quality Assurance Project Plan
       -  Health and Safety Plan
   •   Develop an EPA-approved laboratory quality assurance program
   •   Develop/review qualifications of the laboratory
   •   Accommodate external  audits or review mechanisms
   •   Perform site-specific project management
   •   Manage, track, and report status of site-specific equipment
   •   Prepare meeting minutes

   TASK 2:  COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT

   •   Update Community Involvement Plan
   •   Prepare fact sheets
   •   Prepare or update site mailing list
   •   Provide public meeting and/or open house support
   •   Implement other community involvement activities
   •   Prepare presentation materials

   TASK 3:  DATA ACQUISITION

   •   Environmental survey
   •   Mobilization/demobilization
   •   Test boring and monitoring well installation and development
   •   Soil boring, drilling, and testing
   •   Environmental sampling/monitoring, including the following:
          ground water
          surface soil
          soil boring/permeability
          air
   •   Physical/chemical testing
   •   Field-generated waste characterization and disposal in accordance with local, State, and Federal regulations

                                          (continued on next page)
                                                    4-2
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                        	Chapter 4

                                         Exhibit 4-1 (continued)
   TASK 4:  SAMPLE ANALYSIS
   •   Perform environmental sample analysis
   •   Perform waste sample analysis
   •   Produce analytical data
   •   Task implementation mechanisms include:
           field screening
           Contract Laboratory Program
           subpool or Team subcontracts laboratories
           Regional Environmental Services Division
           Environmental Response Team laboratory
           regionally procured laboratories

   TASK 5:  ANALYTICAL SUPPORT AND DATA VALIDATION

   •   Collect, prepare, and ship environmental samples in accordance with the Field Sampling Plan; the following
       may be required:
           field screening
           ground-water sampling
           surface/subsurface soil sampling
           surface water and sediment sampling
           air monitoring and sampling
           biota sampling
   •   Develop Data Quality Objectives
   •   Request, obtain, and perform oversight of analytical services
   •   Coordinate with the EPA Sample Management Office, the Regional Sample Control Coordinator, and/or
       the Environmental Services Division
   •   Implement the EPA-approved laboratory quality assurance program
   •   Provide sample management
   •   Perform data validation
   •   Review data for useability for its intended purpose
   •   Provide reports on data validation and useability

   TASK 6:  DATA EVALUATION

   •   Data useability evaluation/field quality assurance/quality control
   •   Data reduction and tabulation
   •   Comparison of data acquired during design with historic data
   •   Data trend evaluation and/or modeling and submission of Technical Memorandum

   TASK 7:  TREATABILITY STUDY/PILOT TESTING

   •   Provide test facility  and equipment
   •   Test and operate equipment
   •   Retrieve sample for testing
   •   Prepare Technical Memorandum
   •   Characterization and disposal of residuals in accordance with local, State, and Federal regulations

                                          (continued on next page)
                                                   4-3
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
  Preliminary Schedule
                                          Exhibit 4-1 (continued)

   TASK 8:  PRELIMINARY DESIGN

   •   Prepare preliminary design, including the following specific components:
           recommended project delivery strategy and scheduling
           preliminary construction schedule, including project phasing
           specifications outline
           preliminary drawings
           basis of design report
           preliminary cost estimate
           a detailed statement of how all applicable or relevant and appropriate requirements as well as Federal
           and State public health and safety environmental requirements and standards will be met
           land acquisition/easement requirements
           technical support to EPA/State/USACE in land acquisition
           conduct and/or assist in value engineering screening

   TASK 9:  EQUIPMENT/SERVICES/UTILITIES

   •   Procure long-lead equipment, services, and/or utilities

   TASK 10: INTERMEDIATE DESIGN

   •   Prepare intermediate design, including the following specific components:
           update construction schedule
           preliminary specifications
           intermediate  drawings
           basis of design report
           revised cost estimate
           a revised detailed statement of how all applicable or relevant and appropriate requirements as well as
           Federal and State public health and safety  environmental requirements and standards will be met, if
           required
           an intermediate design review/briefing for EPA
           Initiate VE study if VE screening identified potential project savings

   TASK 11: PREFINAL/FINAL DESIGN

   •   Prepare the prefmal design, including the following specific components:
           subcontract award document
           prefmal design specifications
           prefmal drawings
           basis of design report/design analysis
           revised cost estimate
           a prefmal/final design review/briefing for EPA
           biddability (offerability) and constructability reviews
           revised project delivery strategy
           the 100% design submittal shall include the final plans and specifications in reproducible format, a final
           cost estimate, and a schedule of the overall remedial action
           report results of VE study and incorporate accepted VE recommendations into final design

                                          (continued on next page)
                                                    4-4
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                                                                                Chapter 4
    TASK 12:
                        Exhibit 4-1 (continued)

POST-REMEDIAL DESIGN SUPPORT
    •   Solicit the procurement
    •   Evaluate offers received
    •   Inform EPA Contracting Officer of the best qualified/cost-effective offer
    •   Perform prebid (presolicitation) activities, including:
           duplication and distribution of contract documents
           advertising/soliciting of bids
           issuing addenda
           prebid (presolicitation) meetings
           resolution of bidder (offerer) inquiries
           on-site visits
           compilation of contract documents
           resolicit bids/offers and repackage documents if necessary
    •   Perform preaward activities, including:
           receipt of bids (offers)
           determination of responsive, responsible bidders (offerers)
           bid (offer) tabulation
           bid (offer) analysis
           receipt of followup items from lowest responsible bidder (offerer)
           review of EEO, MBE requirements, SDB subcontracting plans, etc.
           reference checks
           request for consent from EPA
    •   Write site-specific plans before beginning Remedial Action field activities, including
           Site Management Plan
           Sampling and Analysis Plan
       -   Health and Safety Plan
           Community Involvement Plan

    TASK 13:   WORK ASSIGNMENT CLOSE OUT

    •   Return documents to EPA or other document repositories
    •   Duplicate, distribute, and store files
    •   Archive files to meet Federal Records Center requirements
    •   Use microfiche, microfilm, or other EPA-approved data storage technology
    •   Prepare a Work Assignment Close Out Report
      The intermediate design submittal and formal value
      engineering (VE) are not required for the Simple
      designs.

      The pilot-scale equipment is available; i.e.,
      long-lead procurement or fabrication is not
      required.
                                         Laboratory analysis is conducted similar to EPA's
                                         data quality objectives (DQO) Level III; i.e., full
                                         Contract Laboratory Program (CLP) validation is
                                         not required.

                                         Resource requirements do not restrain the duration
                                         of an activity.
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy
                                                    4-5

-------
  Preliminary Schedule
  Schedule Development

  EPA has developed nine remediation categories (see
  Exhibit 4-2, Total Design Durations for Nine
  Remediation Categories/Schedules) that encompass
  the universe of technologies being used to remediate
  National Priorities List sites. These nine remedy-
  specific, generic schedules are included as Charts B. 1
  through B.9 in Appendix B. We recommend the "bar
  chart" format to depict the generic RD schedules
  because it provides a clear display of each task,
  including the start and completion dates and the
  relationship to other tasks. Other formats are also
  acceptable; their usage will depend on the complexity
  of the project. The generic RD schedules can be used
  to develop an initial site-specific schedule; however,
  when you use the schedules, consider (1) the
  assumptions used in preparing the schedules, and (2)
  the recommendations provided in this chapter.

  You and the technical review team will have
  knowledge of site data that will enable you to select
  the remedy-specific, generic RD schedule appropriate
  for the site. Wherever two or more remedy categories
  are applicable to the same site (e.g., ground-water
  treatment and on-site thermal destruction) and the
  design activities for both remedy categories are to be
  conducted in parallel, a base generic schedule is to be
  selected.
The schedule for the remedy of longest overall
duration should be selected as the base schedule, with
the schedule for the other remedy incorporated into it.
The longest duration for each common task should be
used in the base schedule and the total duration revised
accordingly.

Such use of the generic RD  schedules will result in an
approximate, first-cut schedule. This schedule can then
be used directly for simple projects, or as the basis for
refinement into more detailed, site-specific schedules
for projects that are complex or that vary from the
assumptions for the generic  schedules. The
site-specific  schedule may differ from the first-cut
schedule by taking into account features such as the
deletion of certain standard design activities that may
have been previously performed or the consideration
of unique technical design requirements for the site
that will cause revision of the time estimates for some
of the standard tasks.

You may also use "Timeline" software, along with a
computer module that was developed by EPA based
on the same  principal remediation categories and
schedules included as Charts B.I through B.9 in
Appendix B. Additional information on this EPA-
developed system can  be obtained from  Regional
Local Area Network (LAN) Administrators.
                                                Exhibit 4-2
                    Total Design Durations for Nine Remediation Categories/Schedules
             Remedy/Schedule                                                   Total Duration*
                                                                                   (months)
       1.   Ground-Water Treatment—Complex                                        13-16
       2.   Ground-Water Treatment—Simple                                          10-13
       3.   Ground-Water Treatment—Simple (Expedited)                                4-7
       4.   Treatment of Soils and/or Sludge—Complex                                 13-19
       5.   Treatment of Soils and/or Sludge—Simple                                     9-13
       6.   Civil Engineering—Complex                                                13-15
       7.   Civil Engineering—Simple                                                   9-13
       8.   Civil Engineering—Simple (Expedited)                                        4-7
       9.   On-Site Thermal Destruction                                               12-15
           *Estimated durations are based on completed remedial management (REM) contract design
           projects. Shorter durations could be achieved through the use of performance specifications or
           "off-the-shelf "designs.
                                                    4-6
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                                                                                Chapter 4
  REMEDY-SPECIFIC SCHEDULES AND
  ASSUMPTIONS

  Nine characteristic RD categories typify the universe
  of remedial actions being considered or implemented at
  Superfund sites. A general definition of the nature of
  each of the nine principal categories, along with the
  assumptions that were made in developing the generic
  schedule for each category, is described below. (See
  Exhibit 4-2 above for these nine principal remediation
  categories and their range of durations from RD start
  to 100-percent design approval.) These schedules have
  been developed using reasonable approximations for
  performing the standard tasks; however, each
  Superfund site must be individually analyzed to
  determine whether the approximate durations apply.

  It should be noted, as previously discussed, that a
  site-specific design may have a combination of these
  remedies as the overall project solution. It is assumed,
  in that case, that the component remedies are applied
  in parallel and that the more complex, time-consuming
  remedy will determine the overall project duration.

  Ground-Water Treatment—Complex
  (Appendix B, Chart B.I)

  This design category is for withdrawal  of ground
  water, treatment and discharge or disposal of ground
  water,  and surface water or leachate treatment. The
  technology categories include physicochemical or
  biological treatment of liquids. Specific technologies
  may include air stripping, carbon adsorption, metals
  precipitation, ion change, multimedia filtration, aerobic
  and anaerobic biodegradation, evaporation, and
  distillation. However, the aquifer, contaminants,
  duration of operation and maintenance (O&M),
  disposal requirements, performance monitoring
  difficulties, and pumping and treatment system design
  effort is a more complex, time-consuming effort than
  in the Simple case. Innovative water treatment
  technologies may be considered.

      Scheduling assumptions
      •  The complexity of the aquifer  system requires
         extensive aquifer testing.

      •  The contaminants present and the processes
         selected require pilot-scale testing in addition
         to bench-scale testing.

      •  The complexity of the design effort dictates an
       intermediate design submittal.

Ground-Water Treatment—Simple
(Appendix B, Chart B.2)

In the Simple case, the technologies are proven for the
contaminants of concern and are available in
"off-the-shelf package treatment units. In addition, the
aquifer characteristics are not complex, and standard
pumping systems are used.

    Scheduling assumptions
       •   Bench-scale testing without pilot-scale
           treatability testing is sufficient for design.

    •   The following are not required:
           Extensive aquifer testing and collection of
           chemical analytical data
           Intermediate design submittal.

Ground-Water Treatment—Simple (Expedited)
(Appendix B, Chart B.3)

EPA has developed expedited categories for sites
where the RD is simple and straightforward and
where additional data collection is not required. Sites
where the scope is limited to minor removal actions or
administrative controls fall into these categories.

    Scheduling assumptions
    •   A single contractor performs the Remedial
       Investigation/Feasibility Study (RI/FS), the
       RD, and construction management.

    •   The following are not required:
           Additional data collection to support the
           RD
           Treatability studies
       -   VE
           Intermediate design submittal.

    •   Client agrees at predesign meeting to initiate
       some aspects of design before approval of the
       Work Plan.

Treatment of Soils and Sludge—Complex
(Appendix B, Chart B.4)

This design category includes the physical, chemical,
or biological treatment or volatilization of soils and
sludges. All nonthermal destruction  of solids is treated
under this category. As a result of complex
contaminants and site conditions,
                                                     4-7
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
  Preliminary Schedule
  innovative processes requiring extensive testing and
  development are required.

      Scheduling assumptions
      •   The selected process requires extensive
          bench- and pilot-scale testing.

      •   The design magnitude and complexity dictate
          the submittal of an intermediate design
          package.

  Treatment of Soils and Sludge—Simple
  (Appendix B, Chart B.5)

  In the Simple case, the process chosen is a well-
  proven technology for the contaminants of concern
  and for the existing site conditions.

      Scheduling assumptions
      •   Bench- and pilot-scale testing programs are
          required; however, they are relatively short.

      •   The simplicity of design activity and magnitude
          of the  design effort allow elimination of the
          intermediate design submittal.

      •   Formal VE is not required.

  Civil Engineering—Complex
  (Appendix B, Chart B.6)

  This design process is principally a civil engineering
  design. The Complex case may require a more
  extensive data collection or design effort such as a
  Resource Conservation and Recovery  Act (RCRA)
  cap,  extensive  or complicated excavation or demolition
  activities, or the design of other engineered structures.

      Scheduling assumptions
      •   The magnitude of data-gathering activities is
          greater than in the Simple case, making the
          durations of sampling and analysis also
          greater.

      •   An intermediate design submittal is required.

      •   VE is  required.
Civil Engineering—Simple
(Appendix B, Chart B.7)

As with the Complex case, this design is principally a
civil engineering design. This category will contain
such remedies as fencing, ground-water monitoring,
and minor earthwork, demolition, or removal activities.

    Scheduling assumptions
    •   No treatability studies are required.

    •   Data-gathering activities include collection of
        survey, geotechnical, and chemical analytical
        data.

    •   The simplicity of the design activity and
        magnitude of the design effort allow
        elimination of the intermediate design
        submittal.

Civil Engineering—Simple (Expedited)
(Appendix B, Chart B. 8)

Both of the expedited categories were developed for
sites where the RD is simple and straightforward and
where additional data collection is not required. Sites
where the scope is limited to minor removal actions or
administrative controls also fall into these categories.

    Scheduling assumptions
    •   A single contractor performs the RI/FS, the
        RD, and construction management.

    •   The following are not required:
           Additional data collection to support the
           RD
           Treatability studies
        -   VE
           Intermediate design submittal.

    •   Client agrees at predesign meeting to initiate
        some aspects of design before approval of the
        Work Plan.

On-Site Thermal Destruction
(Appendix B, Chart B.9)

This design category includes on-site incineration,
pyrolysis, or in situ vitrification.
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                                                                                Chapter 4
      Scheduling assumptions
      •   Performance specifications are produced in
          the design of the thermal destruction unit.

      •   Detailed design of auxiliary systems is
          required (e.g., water supply, electricity, fuel,
          material handling).

      •   Bench-scale treatability and a pilot-scale test
          burn are required.  It is assumed that pilot test
          burns are conducted at an existing facility.

  RECOMMENDATIONS

  Consider the following recommendations to further
  enhance the usefulness of the concept of a generic
  RD schedule:

      •   To maximize cost and technical efficiencies
          and to become aware of and to correct
          possible deficiencies, initiate the technical
          reviews (biddability, constructibility,
          environmental, claims prevention, and
          operability) as early as possible during
          intermediate design. For similar reasons,
          initiate VE screening early in the project
          schedule and conduct a formal VE review, if
          appropriate, during intermediate design.

      •   The use of "standard" specifications
          (specifications modeled for a particular type of
          equipment or treatment process and then
          modified to be site-specific) or the  use of
completed plans and specifications for a
similar remedy as a starting point for design
will save time and resources. Standard
specifications are currently available from the
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. A list of these
standard specifications can be obtained by
calling Ms. Tommian McDaniel at (202) 504-
4363.

For sites where  RD will be conducted outside
the limits of the assumptions presented here,
obtain specific information about duration
requirements  and current practice for
procurement, interagency agreements, owner
reviews, and other factors that may affect the
start or overall duration of an RD.

For sites where early RA starts are required
to protect the health and safety of the public or
for other reasons, you can organize the
RD/RA schedule to allow for early RD
completion and RA implementation on the
simplest operable units first. This  method
allows earlier RA starts with simultaneous
design of the more complex operable units.

The standard tasks for RD services are
described in more detail in the model SOW
(Appendix A), and use of the standard tasks is
intended to provide a consistent method of
reporting design work. Use them as much as
possible.
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                              CHAPTER 5

                                    DEVELOPING AN ESTIMATE
                                   OF REMEDIAL DESIGN COSTS
  CHAPTER OVERVIEW

  For Fund-lead projects, EPA's Work Assignment
  Manager (WAM) is required to prepare an
  Independent Government Cost Estimate (IGCE)
  before issuing the work assignment to the selected
  remedial designer. The Federal Acquisition
  Regulation (FAR) at 48 CFR 36.603 requires that an
  independent estimate of the cost of design services be
  prepared for each contract or contract modification
  (work assignment) that is expected to exceed $25,000.
  As the WAM of the contract action,  it is your
  responsibility as Remedial Project Manager (RPM) to
  develop the IGCE during preparation of the Statement
  of Work (SOW) for the remedial design (RD). This
  estimate should include a projection of the labor hours
  necessary to accomplish the work as well as
  subcontractor costs and other direct costs (ODCs),
  which may include travel and per diem,
  communications, equipment, sampling and laboratory
  analysis, printing, and computer time.

  This chapter provides information on the preparation of
  the IGCE to be used in negotiating a reasonable price
  for the design of a remedial action (RA) project.
  IGCEs are important when cost reimbursement
  contracts are the method of contracting because  very
  little risk falls to the contractor, and the Government
  must be in a position to determine if the proposed costs
  are fair and reasonable. You should  also prepare an
  estimate to establish the cost when developing either
  (1) an interagency agreement with another
  Government agency (the U.S. Army Corps of
  Engineers), or (2) a cooperative agreement with a
  State for the performance of a remedial design.

  When a Potentially Responsible Party (PRP) is the
  project lead, you must have a general understanding of
  the PRP's design costs, although a detailed estimate is
  not necessary. You will have to prepare a detailed
  IGCE for RD oversight and community involvement
  activities.

  Guidance on the roles and responsibilities for preparing
  IGCEs for work assignments was issued as OSWER
  Directive 9202.1-2, dated July 29, 1993.
  A copy of this Guidance is provided in Appendix  C
along with OERR Directive 9355.5-01/FS, (September
1989), ARCS' Construction Contract Modification
Procedures.

IGCE COORDINATORS

A number of Regional offices have cost estimators to
help RPMs/WAMs to prepare IGCEs. In other
Regions, RPMs/WAMs can seek the assistance of the
Project Officer. The IGCE Coordinators can provide
information on labor rates, per diem, travel, and ODCs.
They may also be able to provide computer program
spreadsheets for estimating costs.

DEVELOPING THE ESTIMATE

In preparing a cost estimate for an RD project, first
divide the work into the 13 standard tasks for RD
work assignments issued under Superfund RACs
(Response Action Contracts).  (See Exhibit 4-1,
Chapter 4.) The activities to be performed under each
task should then be outlined in as much detail as
possible, consistent with the draft RD SOW. (See
Chapter 6 and Appendix A.)

While many of the activities are similar for various
sites, each site will have characteristics that require an
individual evaluation of the resources necessary to
complete the RD. To determine the needed resources,
each task should be evaluated for the specific site to
estimate its complexity and to identify obstacles that
might affect its completion. Consider factors such as
the  amount of detail required in each of the design
documents and the level of expertise needed to
evaluate the data and develop the documents. By
dividing the work into discrete tasks and defining each
functional activity and product in as much detail as
possible, you can more accurately estimate the labor
hours required to accomplish the work at a given site.

Estimation of Design Labor Hours and/or Level
of Effort

Data that characterize the range of the labor hours  or
level of effort (LOE) for the 11  standard tasks for RD,
found in ARCS (Alternative Remedial
                                                   5-1
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
  Estimate of Costs
  Contracting Strategy) contracts, for the Complex,
  Simple, and Simple (Expedited) versions of the nine
  principal categories of RA are provided in Appendix
  D, Tables D.I through D.9. (See Exhibit 5-1, List of
  LOE Tables for Remediation Categories.) These
  tables can also be used with slight modification to
  establish an estimate of the LOE required to perform
  work for the 13 standard tasks for RD found in the
  RACs  Sow. These LOE estimates do not include
  labor hours required for program management (i.e.,
  cost and schedule control and management reporting).
  The data are to be used as a rough check on the more
  detailed site-specific estimate of labor hours that the
  RPM has prepared for the standard tasks. When a site
  uses a  combination of categories of RA (e.g., On-Site
  Thermal Destruction and Civil Engineering-Simple),
  the labor-hour range may not be completely additive
  for a given task; again,  evaluate the functional
  activities that comprise each of the  11 standard tasks.
  Then use your best professional judgment, in
  conjunction with historical data from similar work
  assignments, to estimate the number of labor hours
  needed to complete each task.

  Cost Estimation

  Once you have estimated the labor hours for all
  required tasks, the final step in developing the IGCE is
  relatively straightforward. Obtain the total direct labor
  costs by multiplying the total labor hours by an
  estimated loaded hourly rate that falls somewhere
  between the high and low rates listed in the specific
  contract. The loaded hourly rate includes the costs of
  fringe benefits and overhead.

  The IGCE should also include ODCs and the cost of
  subcontracts (site surveys, drilling). Other direct costs
  include such items as travel or equipment and are
  computed based on past experience or from
  established cost parameters such as per diem and
  travel costs. You can also determine these costs by
  considering the individual activities that comprise each
  task. Accounting records for similar projects will
  provide useful data to verify your estimate. Examples
  of typical ODCs and subcontractor activities for the 11
  standard tasks (under ARCS) are included in the LOE
  charts  (D.1-D.9) provided
in Appendix D. These charts are based on early
Superfund work assignments. Use these examples as
a starting point, keeping in mind that they represent an
approximation of the LOE requirements for RD.

Appendix D also contains sample forms for use in
preparing an IGCE for RD work assignments. The
IGCE should include the information outlined on these
sample forms even though formats may vary across
Regions. Contact your Regional IGCE Coordinator to
obtain computer-based spreadsheets for cost estimate
compilation.

Design Fee Limitation

For federally funded projects, the total fee for the
preparation of designs, plans, drawings, and
specifications must not exceed 6 percent of the
estimated construction cost. The FAR at 48 CFR
15.903(d)(l)(ii) states that:

    For architect-engineering services for public works
    or utilities, the contract price for the estimated cost
    and fee for production and delivery of designs,
    plans, drawings, and specifications shall not
    exceed 6 percent of the estimated cost of
    construction of the public work or utility, excluding
    fees.

This statutory limitation, however, applies to the
estimated cost of design only; other costs such as
travel, site surveys, sampling and analysis, and printing
are not subject to the 6-percent design cost ceiling.
The design cost estimate should, therefore, include a
calculation of the 6-percent ceiling to verify that
neither your estimated design costs nor the
contractor's proposed  design costs exceed the
statutory limit for the project. A form for this purpose
is provided in Appendix D.

REMEDY-SPECIFIC COST ESTIMATES

Assumptions used to analyze the activities for each
standard task in the nine remediation categories  are
presented in the following paragraphs.*

Ground-Water Treatment—Complex
(See Appendix D, Table D.I)
      *The Ground-Water Treatment—Complex remediation category is presented in greater detail than the other
  eight categories to serve as a template or guide for developing the other schedules.
                                                    5-2
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                                                                             Chapter 5
                                                Exhibit 5-1
                      List of LOE Tables (in Appendix D) for Remediation Categories
                             Remedy

                     Ground-water Treatment—Complex
                     Ground-water Treatment—Simple
                     Ground-water Treatment— Simple (Expedited)
                     Treatment of Soils and Sludge—Complex
                     Treatment of Soils and Sludge—Simple
                     Civil Engineering—Complex
                     Civil Engineering—Simple
                     Civil Engineering—Simple (Expedited)
                     On-Site Thermal Destruction
                                                 Table

                                                  D.I
                                                  D.2
                                                  D.3
                                                  D.4
                                                  D.5
                                                  D.6
                                                  D.7
                                                  D.8
                                                  D.9
      1.   Assumptions

          1.1   Task 1.  Project Planning

  Three technical experts (civil engineering,
  hydrogeology, and chemical process engineering) are
  needed to support the Work Plan preparations. The
  contracting party will consolidate comments to
  maximize efficiency of review and comment
  resolution.

          1.2   Task 2.  Community Involvement

  This task builds on the community involvement
  activities of the predesign Remedial Investigation/
  Feasibility Study (RI/FS) phase. Level of effort is
  proportional to the schedule. Activities include revision
  of an existing Community Involvement Plan, one public
  meeting, and continued community involvement
  support through the start of construction.

          1.3   Task 3.  Data Acquisition

  Four technical specifications are required:  drilling and
  well installation, laboratory analytical services,
  surveying, and waste disposal. In the example, a field
  data collection effort that takes 6 weeks, including a
  2-week pumping test, is assumed.
          1.4   Task 4.
Sample Analysis and
Validation
          1.5   TaskS. Data Evaluation
                               Twenty samples are analyzed and validation is
                               conducted by using data quality objectives (DQO)
                               Level III.

                                      1.6  Task 6.  Treatability Study and Pilot
                                                    Tests

                               For contracting and evaluation, assume that one
                               contract modification is issued and that one person is
                               needed at the site periodically to oversee the pilot test
                               programs.
                                      1.7  Task 7.

                                      1.8  Task 8.
Preliminary Design

Equipment and Services
Procurement
                               We assume that at least five permits will be required,
                               including the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
                               System (NPDES), air, wetlands, erosion and
                               sedimentation control, and local municipality. The RA
                               contractor will acquire the building and construction
                               permits.

                                      1.9   Task 9.   Intermediate Design

                                      1.10 Task 10.  Prefinal and Final Design
                                                              1.11 Task 11.
Post-Remedial Design
Support
                               Essentially there should be no difference in LOE
                               between prescriptive and performance specifications.
                               Most site designs will require the use of both
                               prescriptive specifications for site-specific
                               requirements, such as earthwork, and performance
                               specifications for many of the innovative
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy
                                                   5-3

-------
  Estimate of Costs
  technologies that have limited performance histories.

  You can reduce the LOE, however, by using
  "standard" specifications or by giving the designer
  completed plans and specifications for a similar
  remedy to use as a starting point for the new design.

  The final technical design reviews (constructibility,
  biddability, operability, environmental, and claims
  prevention) are included here.

  The Operation and Maintenance Manual is, at this
  stage, a detailed "specification" to guide the
  contractor. The Manual is completed by the RA
  contractor during startup operations.

      2.  Summary

  The total estimated LOE for the Ground-Water
  Treatment—Complex version of the generic RD
  schedule is 8,750 to 11,149 hours. With a schedule of
  13 months (to approval of 100-percent design), this
  loading is  equivalent to 4a to 51A full-time positions.

  Ground-Water Treatment—Simple
  (See Appendix D, Table D.2)

      1.  Assumptions

  Task 3, data acquisition, is set at 6 weeks with 10
  samples collected and analyzed. Also, we assume that
  a pumping test is  not required. The design task's LOE
  is estimated at one-third that of the Complex design.
  The submittal of an intermediate design and formal
  value engineering (VE) are not included in this design.
  The LOE required to obtain permits and site access is
  held constant for  all cases. Permit requirements are
  typically tied  to specific data acquisition and reporting
  formats irrespective of the complexity of the design.

      1.  Summary

  The total estimated LOE for the Ground-Water
  Treatment—Simple version of the generic RD
  schedule is 3,368 to 4,691 hours. With a schedule of 10
  months (to approval of 100-percent design), this
  loading is equivalent to 2 to 3 full-time positions.
Ground-Water Treatment-Simple (Expedited)
(See Appendix D, Table D.3)

    1.  Assumptions

The expedited schedule assumes that no additional
field data collection is required to complete the design.
A portable, "off-the-shelf' treatment system will be
selected. The treatment system vendor will supply
much of the design analysis.

The product of the design tasks will be a package
consisting of 20 specifications (civil, chemical, and
mechanical) and 5 drawings (site plan,  general
arrangement, piping and instrumentation diagram,
electrical diagram, and process  diagram).

    2.  Summary

The total estimated LOE for the Ground-Water
Treatment—Simple (Expedited) version of the generic
RD schedule is 1,641 to 2,225 hours. With a 4-month
schedule (to approval of 100-percent design), this
loading is equivalent to 21A to 3l/2 full-time positions.
Treatment of Soils and Sludge-
(See Appendix D, Table D.4)

    1.  Assumptions
-Complex
Field data acquisition requires specifications for five
activities: drilling, surveying, analytical laboratory,
geotechnical laboratory, and waste disposal service.

The average National Priority List site is 10 acres.
Assume the field data collection requires 5 weeks and
includes the collection of 300 samples; all but 30 are
analyzed using an on-site laboratory. Assume that one
technology of a complex nature will be studied under
the treatability task.

The design criteria to be considered include civil and
process engineering, health and safety, and
environmental. The design components are estimated
using a large east coast Superfund project as a
template. This project design package included 50
specifications and 33 drawings.
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy
                                                    5-4

-------
                                                                                                Chapter 5
      2.  Summary

  The total estimated LOE for the Treatment of Soils
  and Sludge—Complex version of the generic RD
  schedule is 10,850 to 13,463 hours. With a 17-month
  schedule (to approval of 100-percent design), this
  loading is  equivalent to 4 to 5 full-time positions.
  Treatment of Soils and Sludge-
  (See Appendix D, Table D.5)

      1.  Assumptions
-Simple
  This category is considered appropriate for a 1-acre
  site. Fifty samples are taken during the field
  investigation, of which  10 are sent to an off-site
  analytical laboratory. Design criteria and design
  activities are similar to those in the Complex category;
  however, LOE is considerably reduced. As with the
  other Simple  categories, the intermediate design
  submittal and VE are not required.

      2.  Summary

  The total estimated LOE for the Treatment of Soils
  and Sludge—Simple version of the generic RD
  schedule is 4,406 to 5,860 hours. With a 9-month
  schedule (to approval of 100-percent design),  this
  loading is equivalent to 3 to 4 full-time positions.

  Civil Engineering—Complex
  (See Appendix D, Table D,6)

      1.  Assumptions

  The model for this design category was a large east
  coast Superfund site that included several  activities:
  soil excavation, water treatment, a slurry wall, and
  building decontamination. The actual LOE for this site
  was reduced by removing the ground-water treatment
  aspect from consideration.

  The activities of field data collection are assumed to be
  similar to those required in the Soils and
  Sludge—Complex category.  Similar design criteria are
  considered. An intermediate design submittal  and
  formal VE are included in this category.
    2.  Summary

The total estimated LOE for the Civil
Engineering—Complex version of the generic RD
schedule is 10,720 to 13,605 hours. With a 12-month
schedule (to approval of 100-percent design), this
loading is equivalent to 5% to TA full-time positions.

Civil Engineering—Simple
 (See Appendix D, Table D.7)

    1.  Assumptions

The field data acquisition consists of installing three
shallow monitoring wells and excavating several test
pits. Ten samples are analyzed at an off-site
laboratory. Four design criteria are considered in
developing the basis of design: civil, hydrogeologic,
environmental, and health and safety.

The design is straightforward, with 20 specifications
and 5 drawings  required for the procurement package.
The design reviews are performed by a single person
(rather than a team) and the operability review is not
performed.

    2.  Summary

The total estimated LOE for the Civil
Engineering—Simple version of the generic RD
schedule is 3,106 to 4,187 hours. With a 9-month
schedule (to approval of 100-percent design), this
loading is equivalent to 21A to 3 full-time positions.

Civil Engineering—Simple (Expedited)
(See Appendix D, Table D.8)

    1.  Assumptions

In this generic category, there are no activities for field
data collection and no laboratory analysis. A Basis of
Design Report is issued.  The design activities are
simple and uncomplicated with minimal institutional
concerns.
                                                     5-5
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
  Estimate of Costs
      2.  Summary

  The total estimated LOE for the Civil
  Engineering—Simple (Expedited) version of the
  generic RD schedule is 1,633 to 2,210 hours. With a
  4-month schedule (to approval of 100-percent design),
  this loading is equivalent to 21A to 3l/2 full-time
  positions.

  On-Site Thermal Destruction
  (See Appendix D, Table D.9)

      1.  Assumptions

  An existing Superfund incineration project with a
  required quantity of excavation close to 20,000 cubic
  yards was selected as the template for the generic
  design.

  Some water treatment will be necessary for
  incineration of sludges (treating effluent of the
  dewatering effort). Treatability studies are required at
  the bench scale for the water treatment and at bench
  and pilot scales for the material to be incinerated. Five
  specifications are needed to
conduct activities for field data collection.

The LOE to support the activities for field data
collection is assumed to be similar to that required for
the Treatment of Soils and Sludge—Simple category.
A 1-acre site with a required depth of excavation of 10
feet satisfies the area and volume assumptions
presented here and under the Soils and
Sludge—Simple category.

Four design criteria are considered:  civil and process
(including electromechanical) engineering,
environmental, and health and safety.

The design  activities are similar to the Complex
categories previously described and  include formal VE
and an intermediate design submittal.

    2.   Summary

The total estimated LOE for the On-Site Thermal
Destruction version of the generic RD schedule is
9,411 to 12,939 hours. With a 12-month schedule (to
approval of 100-percent design), this loading is
equivalent to between 51A and 7 full-time positions.
                                                    5-6
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                              CHAPTER 6

                           DEVELOPING A STATEMENT OF WORK FOR
                                         REMEDIAL DESIGN
  INTRODUCTION

  The purpose of this chapter is to guide you, the
  Remedial Project Manager (RPM) in developing a
  site-specific, project-specific Statement of Work
  (SOW) for remedial design (RD). The chapter is
  divided into discussions of the development of either a
  Fund-lead or Enforcement-lead SOW. A model
  Fund-lead SOW based on the  13 standard tasks found
  in RACs (Response Action Contracts) is provided in
  Appendix A.

  FUND-LEAD DESIGN

  Roles and Responsibilities

      1. Remedial Project Manager's Role

  When EPA decides to assign a design project to one
  of its  remedial contractors (i.e., EPA acting as the
  "contracting party"), you must establish the tone and
  level of the performance required. Your role is not to
  be all-knowing, but to marshal the resources needed to
  perform the task at hand. You will be responsible for
  establishing and maintaining connection with the
  technical review team, articulating particular needs,
  assuring that funding is available, establishing project
  requirements, making decisions affecting RD, and
  providing other essential information. Failure to fulfill
  these  responsibilities can have serious consequences,
  regardless of the talent and abilities of the  other team
  members.

  Among your responsibilities as RPM are the following
  tasks;

      •   Prepare a complete, detailed SOW for design.

      •   Communicate project  objectives and critical-
         need dates.

      •   Identify  special expertise needed and form a
         multidisciplinary technical  review team.

      •   Establish reasonable and attainable design
         criteria.
    •   Require the designer to implement programs
       for quality assurance, quality control, and peer
       review.

    •   Provide timely reviews and approvals.

    •   Allow freedom for innovation in design. (Do
       not impose undue restraints.)

    •   Stress completeness, timeliness, and
       professional presentation of submittals.

    •   Assure that value engineering (VE),
       biddability, constructibility, operability, claims
       prevention, and environmental reviews of the
       design are conducted.

    •   Be prepared to coordinate, negotiate, and
       resolve conflicts in a timely manner.

    •   Assure that both the cost and the schedule for
       the RD are reasonable.

Effective communication with the technical  review
team members and the remedial designer is a key
element of a successful RD  effort. Clear
communication about relevant facts, schedules,
requirements, expectations, status  of work, and funding
is critical in any quality project. Lack of
communication about changes  and delay in sharing
new information both result in  wasted time and money.

    2.  The Designer's Role

The designer's primary role  is  to conceive, plan, and
provide quality design solutions in response to the
stated requirements of the contracting party. This
effort is documented by plans and specifications and
other remedial action (RA) contract documents
(submittals) used for solicitation and award  of the RA
contract.  After the designer  has completed these
documents, the contracting party reviews and
approves them.

The designer follows the design development criteria
and the Basis of Design approved by the contracting
party, who plans and executes  the design effort.  For
example, the designer is
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy
                                                    6-1

-------
  Developing an SOW for Remedial Design
  primarily responsible for design-phase activities such
  as the following.

      •   Planning and managing the design

      •   Coordinating and communicating

      •   Monitoring and controlling design costs and
          schedules

      •   Providing professionally qualified staff

      •   Performing design-related quality control

      •   Designing in compliance with codes and
          standards,  laws and regulations, and regulatory
          agency requirements

      •   Arranging for appropriate design reviews and
          peer reviews

  In addition to the responsibilities stated in the
  designer's contract, the designer is responsible for
  protecting the public health, safety, and welfare under
  State licensing laws and for conforming to the code of
  ethics of the design profession.

  Designers are responsible for providing professional
  quality work that meets professional standards of care,
  skill, and diligence. If the designer fails to meet these
  standards, or fails in any other contractual duty, the
  party that contracted for the design must review the
  circumstances involved, including the resulting
  damages and subsequent recovery activities.

  By common law, if it is found that a design defect has
  been the result of either (1) the  designer's lack of the
  ordinary skill, knowledge, and judgment possessed by
  members of the profession, or (2) the designer's
  failure to apply professional knowledge and skill, then
  the party that contracted for design would be entitled
  to recover from the designer the amount of damages
  suffered. The damages suffered will vary with the
  circumstances of each  case. In most instances, the
  damages are considered to be the cost of the RA that
  would not have been incurred had the design not been
  defective because of professional negligence on the
  designer's part.

  Such damages might include the cost of redesign to
  correct the defect during RA and damages to the RA
  contractor attributed to the delay. However, proving
  fault with the designer will likely be far more difficult
  than using the technical review process to make sure
that the work is done correctly in the first place.

Design Reviews

It is your responsibility to assure that the technical
review team reviews and comments on the design
documents and other contractor submittals. These
activities may occur concurrently with or prior to other
design activities. In the latter case, design activities do
not begin until the review is completed, all comments
are resolved,  and approval to proceed is granted.
Concurrent reviews eliminate the inefficiencies and
delays caused by stopping  and restarting design at the
30- and 60-percent stages; however, in a concurrent
review, there is a risk of proceeding with the design of
a feature that could require change as  a result of the
technical review. Other methods for speeding the
remedial design process are discussed  in the document
entitled Guidance  on Expediting Remedial Design
and Remedial Action.

You will coordinate the review process, including
collecting the review comments and providing the
designer with a concise comments package. This will
allow you to  screen and respond to comments that
need not be passed on to the designer. The designer
has a professional responsibility regarding the
consequence  of the comments  on the design and must
communicate any adverse effects to you.

The review of the plans and specifications and other
required design submittals  by the technical review
team generally is for administrative purposes only.
That is, the review should ensure that the project will
achieve its remediation goals and that its performance
and operations requirements have been correctly
identified. The structural, mechanical,  and electrical
aspects of the design documents should be reviewed in
detail by a qualified member of the technical review
team. However, EPA's acceptance of the plans and
specifications does not relieve the designer of
professional liability for the adequacy of the design.

The duration  of review activities for any particular
project is a function of the  complexity of both the site
characteristics and the design,  as well  as of the
administrative requirements of the party who contracts
for design, and the design reviewers. The  specific
review and approval activities, which are the
responsibility of both you and the technical review
team, should be clearly and separately identified on the
project schedule. This level of
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy
                                                     6-2

-------
                                                                                              Chapter 6
  precision will reinforce the responsibilities of all parties
  and will provide early knowledge of any consequences
  of allowing these activities to move onto the critical
  path of the design process.

  Value Engineering During Design

  It is your responsibility to ensure that VE screening
  and a VE study, if appropriate, are conducted on each
  Fund-lead RD. We recommend that for most designs,
  either the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USAGE),
  the Bureau of Reclamation (USER), or an independent
  firm with the requisite experience be tasked to perform
  the work. The designer can be tasked to conduct the
  VE study if the screening performed during
  preliminary design indicates the need for the study  and
  if an independent and objective study can be
  conducted by the design firm. (See Value
  Engineering Fact Sheet, Publication 9335.5-03FS,
  May 1990.) The items to be reviewed in screening a
  design are identified and discussed in the RD/RA
  Handbook, Publication 9355.5-22 (8/93 Draft).

  Developing a Fund-Lead SOW for RD

      1. Background

  The Fund-lead SOW describes the project-specific
  professional services to be accomplished by the
  designer. The SOW should be clear, concise, and
  enforceable. Services are grouped by tasks that are
  defined and correlated with services required, level of
  effort by  the designer, project time, and compensation.

  The designer is expected to produce certain
  documents during the development of the project.
  Among these are the RD Work Plan, cost estimates
  and schedule, preliminary design and outline
  specifications, and final design. Each of these
documents is the result of one or more subtasks
defined in the SOW, and each is scheduled for delivery
to EPA on a mutually agreed-upon schedule.

You and the designer share the responsibility and the
obligations for on-time performance of assigned tasks
and subtasks, which may include providing existing
information on the project, arranging for additional
specialized information necessary for design,
coordinating activities with other project team
members, arranging for permits and approvals from
other agencies, making prompt decisions, and other
activities influencing the designer's ability to perform
under the terms of the agreement. EPA's  commitment
to quality requires that these responsibilities be
discussed and written into the SOW.

    2.  RACs Standard Tasks

Included in each of the RACs is an SOW  that contains
a full description of typical contractor services.
General categories of remedial response activities are
further subdivided into standard tasks. (See Exhibit
6-1, RACs Standard Tasks, on page 6-4.) You should
use the standard tasks for a given activity  to develop a
detailed SOW to obtain contractor assistance for a
work assignment.

       2.1   Benefits of Using Standard Tasks

We strongly recommend that you use the  standard
tasks (and the model RD SOW found in Appendix A)
when you prepare a remedial design SOW for a RACs
work assignment. The standard tasks for RD provide
uniformity in the remedial process and will ultimately
benefit Superfund management  functions and
objectives. Some of the benefits derived from using
standard tasks are listed on page 6-5 in Exhibit 6-2.
                                                    6-3
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
  Developing an SOW for Remedial Design
                                               Exhibit 6-1
                                         RACs Standard Tasks
      Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Study (RI/FS)

          Task   1   Project Planning and Support
          Task   2   Community Involvement
          Task   3   Field Investigation
          Task   4   Sample Analysis
          Task   5   Analytical Support and Data Validation
          Task   6   Data Evaluation
          Task   7   Assessment of Risk
          Task   8   Treatability Study/Pilot Testing
          Task   9   Remedial Investigational Report
          Task  10   Remedial Alternatives Screening
          Task  11   Remedial Alternatives Evaluation
          Task  12   FS Report and RI/FS Report
          Task  13   Post RI/FS Support
          Task  14   Negotiation Support
          Task  15   Administrative Record
          Task  16   Work Assignment Close Out

      Remedial Design

          Task   1   Project Planning and Support
          Task   2   Community Involvement
          Task   3   Data Acquisition
          Task   4   Sample Analysis
          Task   5   Analytical Support and Data Validation
          Task   6   Data Evaluation
          Task   7   Treatability Study/Pilot Testing
          Task   8   Preliminary Design
          Task   9   Equipment/Services/Utilities
          Task  10   Intermediate Design
          Task  11   Prefmal/Final Design
          Task  12   Post-Remedial Design Support
          Task  13   Work Assignment Close Out

      Remedial Action

          Task   1   Project Planning and Support
          Task   2   Community Involvement
          Task   3   Development and Update of Site-Specific PlansData Acquisition
          Task   4   Procurement of Subcontract
          Task   5   Management Support
          Task   6   Detailed Resident Inspection
          Task   7   Cleanup Validation
          Task   8   Remedial Action Implementation
          Task   9   Project Performance
          Task  10   Project Completion and Close Out
          Task  11   Work Assignment Close Out
                                                  6-4
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                                                                              Chapter 6
                                               Exhibit 6-2
                                   Benefits From Using Standard Tasks

                Establishes a common framework for remedial activities among the Regions, Headquarters, and
                contractors

                Results in cost savings because contractors can prepare Work Plans more efficiently in response
                to similarly structured SOWs

                Provides a checklist and Work Breakdown Structure (WBS) for work plan negotiations and
                tracking activities that are included in the SOW for a work assignment

                Enables the development of cost databases to help estimate the cost of future remedial activities

                Facilitates the development of SOW templates and, therefore, saves time and resources.
         2.2 Use of Standard Tasks in SOWs

  The detailed SOW that you develop for an RD will
  give the contractor the information needed to plan,
  schedule, estimate the cost of, and execute the work.
  The SOW must provide adequate detail on the project
  requirements so that you and the contractors can
  independently develop accurate budgets or cost
  estimates.

  The recommended approach to establishing project
  requirements in the SOW for a work assignment is to
  rely on the standard tasks established in the RACs, to
  further define these specific activities, and to expand
  on site-specific requirements.
         2.3   Standard Task Categories

  Exhibit 6-1 shows the standard tasks for three (RI/FS,
  RD, and RA) of the five Fund-lead work areas found
  in the Statement of Work in RACs. Remedial Design
  includes the specific activities that occur between the
  signing of the Record of Decision (ROD) and the
  completion of design activities.
       2.4   Using a Standard Task To
             Develop a Detailed Task

The examples shown in Exhibits 6-3 and 6-4 on pages
6-6 to 6-7 illustrate the process of using a standard
task to develop the detailed task description for a work
assignment. The standard task is provided exactly as it
appears in the RACs. This task provides a starting
point for developing each detailed task of the SOW.
The standard task is expanded, broken down into
subtasks,  and tailored to the specific conditions of the
site. It is important to remember that sufficient detail is
required at the subtask level to provide clear
instructions to the  contractor and to facilitate
preparation of the  Independent Government Cost
Estimate  (IGCE).

       2.5   Work Breakdown Structure

A work breakdown structure (WBS) is simply a
numbering system for tasks and subtasks. Use of a
WBS is recommended as the best approach for
organizing the SOW. This approach allows you to
organize the work assignment in the framework of the
standard tasks. From this framework,  you can develop
the project schedule and the IGCE. A standard WBS
has been  developed for RD SOWs (based on the
RACs standard tasks  and the model RD SOW found
in Appendix A) and is used in the examples shown in
Exhibits 6-3 and 6-4.
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy
                                                   6-5

-------
  Developing an SOW for Remedial Design
   Explanation
   This text is the standard
   task reproduced
   verbatim from the
   RACS contract SOW.
                    Exhibit 6-3
 Excerpt From Standard Task 1 From RACs SOW

TASK  1    PROJECT PLANNING AND SUPPORT
This task includes work efforts related to project initiation and support. Typical
activities the contractor may be tasked to perform include but are not limited to:

•  Attend scoping meeting
•  Conduct site visit
•  Develop work plan and associated cost estimate
       Prepare construction cost estimate
       Initiate discussion regarding 6% design limitation
•  Negotiate work plan and make necessary revisions as a result of EPA
   comments and/or negotiated agreements
                                                Exhibit 6-4
                            "Detailed" Task 1 From Model SOW (Appendix A)
       Explanation
       Provide a task overview and
       objective.

       Location of meetings should be
       specified for budgeting
       purposes.

       A Health and Safety Plan
       (HASP) is required for the site
       visits.
          The purpose of this task is to determine how the site-specific
          remediation goals, as specified in the ROD, will be met. The following
          activities shall be performed as part of the project planning task:

          1.1.1   Attend scoping meeting. Before developing the Work Plan, the
                 contractor shall attend a scoping meeting to be held at the EPA
                 Regional Office.

          1.1.2   Conduct a site visit. The contractor shall conduct a site visit with
                 EPA's RPM/WAM during the project planning phase to assist in
                 developing a conceptual understanding of the RD requirements
                 for the site. Information gathered during the visit shall be used to
                 better scope the project and to help determine the extent of
                 additional data necessary to implement the RD. A Health and
                 Safety Plan (HASP) is required for the site visit. The contractor
                 shall prepare a report that documents all EPA, contractor, and
                 site personnel present at the visit; all decisions made during the
                 visit; any action items assigned, including person responsible and
                 due date; any unusual occurrences during the visit; and any
                 portions of the site that were not accessible to the contractor and
                 the effect of this on the RD. The contractor shall prepare a trip
                 report and submit it to the RPM/WAM within 10 calendar days
                 of the site visit.

                     (continued on next page)
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy
                                                    6-6

-------
                                                                                               Chapter 6
   To control expenses, limit review to
   pertinent documents specific to the
   site.
   Define scope and schedule
   requirements.
   Minimize FSP preparation costs by
   requiring use of the existing FSP.
   Identify if audit will be performed
   and specify contractor response
   items.
   EPA does not approve
   contractor's HASP, but reviews it
   to ensure that it is complete and
   adequately protective.
          Exhibit 6-4
"Detailed" Task 1 (Continued)
1.1.3   Evaluate existing data and documents, including the Remedial
       Investigation/Feasibility Study (RI/FS), Applicable or Relevant
       and Appropriate Requirements (ARARs), the Record of
       Decision (ROD), and other data and documents as directed by
       the EPA. This information shall be used to determine if any
       additional data are needed for RD implementation. The
       documents available for review are listed in Attachment 3.
1.1.4   Develop a Work Plan including a schedule and cost estimate for
       the RD. Provide confirmation that there is no conflict of interest.
       Attend a meeting to negotiate the Work Plan.
1.1.5   After approval of the Work Plan, prepare a Site Management
       Plan (SMP) that will provide EPA with a written understanding
       of how access, security, contingency procedures, management
       responsibilities, and waste disposal are to be handled.
1.1.6   Prepare a Field Sampling Plan (FSP) that defines the sampling
       and data collection methods that shall be used for the project. It
       shall include sampling objectives, sample locations and
       frequency, sampling equipment and procedures, and sample
       handling and analysis. The FSP shall be written so that a field
       sampling team unfamiliar with the site would be able to gather
       the samples and field information required. The FSP developed
       for the RI/FS should be used whenever possible in preparing the
       FSP for the RD.
1.1.7   Prepare a Quality Assurance Proj ect Plan (QAPP) in
       accordance with QAMS-005/80 (December 29,  1980). The
       QAPP shall describe the project objectives and organization,
       functional activities, and  quality assurance/quality control
       (QA/QC) protocols that shall be used to achieve the desired
       Data Quality Objectives (DQOs). The DQOs shall, at a
       minimum, reflect use of analytical methods (for identifying
       contamination and addressing contamination) consistent with the
       levels for remedial  action objectives identified in the National
       Contingency Plan.
1.1.8   Prepare a site-specific Health and Safety Plan (HASP) that
       specifies employee training, protective equipment, medical
       surveillance requirements, standard operating procedures, and a
       contingency plan in accordance with 29 CFR 1910.120 1(1) and
       (1)(2). Use the HASP developed for the RI/FS, whenever
       possible, in preparing the HASP for the RD. A task-specific
       HASP must also be prepared to address health and safety
       requirements for site visits.
1.1.9   Perform site-specific management including monitoring of
       costs, preparation of Monthly Progress Report, and
       preparation and submittal of invoices.
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy
                                                    6-7

-------
  Developing an SOW for Remedial Design
         2.6  Completing the Detailed SOW

  Develop the detailed SOW for an RD work
  assignment task by task from the standard tasks using
  the same task numbers (i.e., WBS) as are listed for
  the standard tasks. If a standard task is not needed for
  a particular work assignment (e.g., if intermediate
  design is not required for a given RD), the numbering
  order should be kept intact and the words "omitted" or
  "not used" inserted after the task number.

  Expand each standard task to  provide the level of
  detail shown for our example. A model SOW for RD
  is provided as Appendix A of this Guidance. The
  purpose of this model SOW is to give you an effective
  tool for ensuring development of consistent and
  appropriate SOWs. Model SOWs are also available
  from Project Officers in most Regional Offices. There
  is an IGCE Coordinator in each Regional Office who
  can confirm that the level of detail used for tasks in the
  SOW is sufficient to allow preparation of the IGCE.
  The IGCE Coordinator can also be called on to review
  the detailed tasks for completeness.

  Clear, detailed SOWs using standard tasks result in an
  understanding of project requirements. Planning the
  project in advance through a detailed SOW provides
  benefits such as the occurrence of fewer problems
  later in the project and the ability to track costs and
  schedules for use in estimating future work.

  ENFORCEMENT-LEAD DESIGN

  Background

  The purpose of this section on Enforcement-lead
  design is to give you general guidance for developing a
  site-specific, project-specific SOW for remedial
  design. The Guidance will address only the
  preparation of the SOW that is an attachment to a
  Consent Decree (CD) for RD. The Guidance does not
  address the preparation of a remedial design SOW for
  use with either a Unilateral Administrative Order
  (UAO) or an Administrative Order on Consent
  (AOC).

  The Consent Decree

  After the ROD is signed, EPA will attempt to
  negotiate a CD, an agreement with  the Potentially
  Responsible Parties (PRPs) for them to implement
  the remedy selected in the ROD. If the negotiations
are successful, the site will be a PRP-financed site.
This scenario is often referred to as an
Enforcement-lead project. If the negotiations are not
successful, the site will be a Fund-financed site (i.e.,
EPA will manage and fund the project).

For Enforcement-lead  sites, EPA enters into a CD
with the PRPs, at which time  the parties become the
Settling Defendants. The CD—the primary
enforcement document for EPA—specifies the
responsibilities of the Settling  Defendants for
implementing an RD project. Major components of the
CD include the ROD and the  SOW. The SOW
specifies the tasks, activities, and submittals that must
be completed to fully implement the selected remedy
for the site.

Roles and Responsibilities

Key individuals who understand their corresponding
roles and responsibilities during an RD/RA project are
necessary for project success. As the EPA
representative, you are  primarily responsible for
developing the SOW, for defining the necessary tasks
and submittals, and for overseeing the Settling
Defendants' activities in the implementation of an
RD/RA project. To fulfill this  role, you must have  a
clear understanding of EPA's role in an
Enforcement-lead RD/RA project. If State personnel
or other parties are involved, the responsibilities of
each of these parties must also be understood and
addressed.

The Settling Defendants, responsible for day-to-day
management of the RD/RA project, must have a clear
understanding of the technical and administrative
requirements for implementing an RD/RA project.
Under the terms specified in the CD, the Settling
Defendants are required to identify the names and
professional qualifications of the key individuals (such
as the Supervising Contractor) representing the
Settling Defendants, and to provide this information to
you for approval. Furthermore, the detailed Work
Plans that the Settling Defendants are required to
submit at the start of the RD and RA phases of the
project must formally document the roles and
responsibilities of all key individuals involved.

As you can see, delineating the roles and
responsibilities of the key individuals representing EPA
and the Settling Defendants is critical to ensuring
effective implementation and oversight of
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                                                                                Chapter 6
  the RD/RA tasks. A more complete discussion of
  these respective roles follows. Additional guidance on
  roles and responsibilities in an Enforcement-lead
  RD/RA project can be found in the Super fund
  Guidance on EPA Oversight of Remedial Designs
  and Remedial Actions Performed by Potentially
  Responsible Parties (April 1990).

      1.  RPM's Role: Oversight

  As RPM, you have the overall responsibility for
  ensuring that the Settling Defendants satisfy the
  requirements of the CD and the SOW. To accomplish
  this, you are responsible for drafting the final SOW
  and reviewing  and approving submittals specified in the
  SOW. EPA's approval of a submittal or activity is
  intended to ensure that the RD/RA tasks are
  implemented in a manner that is consistent with the
  selected remedy  in the ROD.

  In developing an SOW, you will identify these items:

         •    The RD tasks that are relevant to the
              specific project (not all projects will
              require every task that is listed in the
              model SOW)

         •    The major submittals (plans, drawings,
              reports) associated with each of these
              tasks

         •    A delivery schedule for all required
              submittals prepared and executed by the
              Settling Defendants

  It is critical that you develop a clear and
  comprehensive SOW that is specific to the site and to
  the remedy selected in the ROD. This enables you (1)
  to effectively monitor and oversee the Settling
  Defendants' activities in implementing the RD project,
  and (2) to enforce the requirements of the CD and the
  SOW.

  As mentioned  previously, a clear and concise SOW
  should alleviate many potential problems that could
  otherwise result from misunderstandings either in
  terminology or in schedule dates for submittals.
  However,  even the best-written SOW might not
  address everything that can arise. Once the SOW is
  final, it is critical that you meet with the Settling
  Defendants to  discuss both the SOW and details of the
  RD task requirements. This meeting will ensure that all
parties clearly understand their respective roles and
responsibilities and will allow questions to be answered
immediately. Finally, the meeting also provides an
opportunity for you and the Settling Defendants'
Project Coordinator to meet and establish rapport.

You will be assisted in the oversight role  by an
Oversight Official. The Oversight Official is generally
tasked by EPA to give you technical support in
reviewing submittals and monitoring on-site activities.
We recommend using other Federal agencies (e.g.,
USAGE) to help with oversight. See Chapter 7 for
more detail on oversight of RD performance by the
Settling Defendants.

You may rely on other EPA or State agency staff for
technical and administrative support, if needed. These
individuals are not considered key personnel but may
play a role in the RD project.

You will determine the precise responsibilities of key
project individuals based on the scope of the RD
project. A summary of the roles and responsibilities
and reporting relationships of key individuals are
provided in Exhibits 6-5 and 6-6, respectively.

    2.  Settling Defendants'  Role:
       Implementation

Although EPA reviews and approves submittals
throughout the RD/RA project,  the ultimate
responsibility for implementation of the selected
remedy lies with the Settling Defendants. EPA review
and approval of your Work Plan or design is merely  a
statement on acceptability with regard to RA goals in
accordance with the ROD and the CD; it in no way
guarantees the success of the design in meeting the
specified performance standards. The Settling
Defendants' Project Coordinator is the focal  point for
project management and communication  with EPA.
The Project Coordinator handles various
responsibilities: planning, budgeting, selecting
contractors, managing contracts, monitoring the
progress of project activities, and supporting EPA in
community involvement activities.

The Project Coordinator is assisted by a Supervising
Contractor who is responsible for the technical
requirements  of the RD project. All other contractors
and subcontractors report to the Supervising
Contractor, including the RD professional (lead
contractor for implementing the RD).
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
  Developing an SOW for Remedial Design
  The QA Official, designated by the Project
  Coordinator, ensures that QA procedures and
  requirements are established and met. In this role, the
  QA Official routinely interacts with the supervising
  contractor.  Quality Assurance comprises plans and
  actions, identified by the Project Coordinator, to ensure
  that the remedy meets the project requirements.

  Developing an Enforcement-Lead SOW for RD

  The Enforcement-lead SOW is a written document
  that you develop to define the scope of the RD project
  activities that will be undertaken by the Settling
  Defendants to meet the requirements of the CD.
  Ultimately, the SOW will specify the scope of each
  task and any associated activities required to
  implement  the remedy selected in the ROD.

  The SOW should identify the extent of the Settling
  Defendants' obligations for each task and activity. The
  Settling Defendants will use the SOW to prepare the
  RD Work Plan and other specified submittals
  necessary to implement the selected remedy. Also,
  because these submittals are critical to your evaluation
  of the performance of the Settling Defendants in
  meeting their obligations under the CD and SOW, the
  SOW must specify the outcome of each  task and  all
  required submittals.

  The "performance  standards" section includes cleanup
  standards, standards of control, quality criteria, and
  other substantive requirements, criteria, or limitations,
  including all ARARs set forth in the ROD. To help
  ensure enforceability, this section must be well written,
  clear,  and concise. This section should list all ARARs
  from the ROD, provide all cleanup goal criteria or
  standards from tables or charts in the ROD, and
  provide a complete description of all RA objectives
  and remediation goals provided in the ROD.
You should clearly identify performance requirements
to be met by the Settling Defendants, as well as
EPA's role in the attainment of the performance
standards (e.g., EPA shall confirm that the Settling
Defendants met the cleanup standard numbers by . .
.). The performance standards in the ROD, SOW, and
CD must be consistent.

If the ROD is well written and comprehensive, much
of the information on performance standards can be
lifted directly from the document with minimal change.
If any ARARs or performance standards in the ROD
require clarification, the SOW should resolve any
discrepancies or ambiguities in an enforceable way.
However, in all cases, the performance standards
listed in the SOW must be consistent with the ROD
(unless EPA is contemplating a ROD amendment or
Explanation of Significant Differences (BSD), in which
case the standards should be consistent  with the
revised ROD).

A poorly written SOW can cause serious
communication problems between EPA and the
Settling Defendants. Ambiguity can result in
misunderstandings and the execution of activities that
do not conform to the CD and SOW. These
misunderstandings can also produce incomplete
submittals, schedule delays, and disputes—possibly
requiring resolution in court.

Enforcement-lead model SOWs have been developed
by each Regional Office; we recommend that you use
the one preferred by your management. Compare the
technical content of the preferred Regional SOW with
the model SOW for Fund-lead RD (in Appendix A) as
a check for completeness. Besides using Regional
model SOWs, canvass the Region (and  possibly other
Regions) for recent SOWs written for similar
remedies.
                                                   6-10
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                                                            Chapter 6
                                     Exhibit 6-5
                  Superfund RD/RA Project Roles and Responsibilities
                                 (Enforcement-Lead)
Title
EPA Project
Coordinator/Remedial
Project Manager (RPM)


Settling Defendants'
Project Coordinator






Settling Defendants'
Alternate Project
Coordinator
Supervising Contractor








Remedial Design
Professional (Designer)


Remedial Action
Contractor

Quality Assurance
Official

Oversight Official






Designated by
EPA




Settling Defendants







Settling Defendants


Settling Defendants








Settling Defendants



Settling Defendants


Settling Defendants


EPA






Role
Oversee and monitor
compliance



Manage project







Assist Settling
Defendants Project
Coordinator
Principal Contractor
to supervise and
direct RD/RA






Implement remedial
design tasks


Implement remedial
action tasks

Implement
Construction Quality
Control Program
Monitor compliance
for RPM





Major Responsibilities
• Documents and maintains administrative
record
• Coordinates EPA review of designs and plans
prepared by Settling Defendants
• Implements Community Relations Plan
• Coordinates Implementation of remedial
design/remedial action (RD/RA) tasks
• Manages budget, schedule, and contracts
• Supports EPA's Community Relations
activities
• Prepares and reviews RD/RA plans
• Communicates with EPA on progress of
RD/RA Implementation
• As assigned by Settling Defendants' Project
Coordinator

Supervises implementation of all RD/RA tasks
Defines subtasks of RD/RA necessary to
Implement the RD/RA
Functions as the lead contractor at the site
Scopes out other contractors needed
Directs remedial design professional
Directs remedial action contractor
Supervises the implementation of all RD/RA
plans
• Conducts Value Engineering analysis
• Prepares design plans and specifications
• Implements field sampling and treatabillty
studies (as needed)
• Directs and oversees construction activities
• Maintains records
• Conducts Inspections and testing
• Examines and tests materials, procedures,
and equipment during construction
• Implements Quality Assurance programs
• Evaluates professional qualifications of
Setting Defendants' professional staff
• Reviews technical report and plans
• Monitors activities of the Quality Assurance
Official
• Reviews and approves Construction Quality
Assurance Project Plan










z

3
(9
<§
3
3











to "^
C n
•§ ^
3. §
—

O
§
SZt
Ji >
•g ID
a. c
1
Ml
1
w
                                         6-11
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
  Developing an SOW for Remedial Design
                                               Exhibit 6-6
                         Relationships Among Parties During Enforcement-Lead RD/RA



t
t
Remedial Design
Professional
RPM


Settling
Defendants'
Project
Coordinator

Sen
Defen
Super
Contr


ing
tents'
vising
actor

Quality
Assurance
Official
t
t
t




|






t
Hn4^WI^MB
t
t


Remedial
Action
Contractor
        Legend: solid line = formal relationship; broken line = informal communication.
                                                  6-12
Word-searchable version — Not a true copy

-------
                                                CHAPTER 7

                                DEVELOPING A STATEMENT OF WORK
                                 FOR REMEDIAL DESIGN OVERSIGHT
  CHAPTER OVERVIEW

  Remedial design (RD) oversight involves monitoring
  remedial design activities to ensure that the Settling
  Defendants comply with the Consent Decree (CD),
  Statement of Work (SOW), and applicable regulations
  (e.g., performance standards, permit limitations, and
  regulatory requirements). The overall objective of
  oversight is to focus your efforts as Remedial Project
  Manager (RPM) on environmental protection,
  consideration of public health concerns, overall project
  quality, scheduling, major changes based on changed
  field conditions, emergency actions, the preparation of
  design documents, and project closeout. While you
  have oversight responsibility, and ideally use the
  technical review team, you may choose to task another
  Federal agency or a remedial contractor to carry  out
  certain oversight activities to lessen the workload and
  to gain the needed technical expertise of the
  contractor. When developing a site-specific SOW for
  RD oversight by a remedial contractor or other
  Federal agency, it is your responsibility to establish the
  appropriate level of oversight for the project.

  ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES

  Remedial Project Manager's Role

  It is your responsibility to oversee the Settling
  Defendants' activities and to monitor compliance with
  all RD requirements included by incorporation or
  reference within the CD.

  Depending on the complexity of the RD activities, the
  level of involvement in oversight varies in terms of
  what you deem necessary to perform adequate
  oversight.  However, in most instances, you will ensure
  that EPA and its representatives review RD submittals
  (e.g., Work Plan, Health and Safety Plan (HASP),
  Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP), preliminary
  design package).
You should use a high level of oversight at the
beginning of the RD, determined by requirements
specified in the CD, the complexity of the RD, past
performance of the Settling Defendants, the
qualifications of the Settling Defendant's design team,
and any other relevant factors affecting the RD and
the implementation of the remedial action (RA). The
level of this oversight may  then be adjusted
accordingly as implementation proceeds, based on the
performance of the Remedial Designer.

You may choose to obtain  the services  of an Oversight
Official to assist in carrying out some of the oversight
activities. The Oversight Official functions under some
form of contractual (in the  case where work is
assigned to a remedial contractor) or interagency
agreement with EPA and reports directly to you.

During RD, you should initiate the following oversight
activities to be carried out with the help of an
Oversight Official:

    •  Conduct periodic progress meetings with the
       Settling Defendants to address  the status of
       project design activities, schedule changes,  test
       results, observations and findings, issues of
       noncompliance, and upcoming activities. The
       frequency of the meetings depends on the
       environmental significance of site activities
       and the level of oversight desired. (Generally,
       the frequency will be spelled out in the CD.)

    •  Verify that data collection activities are not
       endangering public health and that the
       Contingency Plan is implemented in the event
       of an accident or emergency.

    •  Monitor the RD Quality Assurance (QA)
       program, including review of the sampling
       results and testing and inspection reports
       (prepared by the QA official).
                                                    7-1
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
  Developing an SOW for RD Oversight
      •   Coordinate interaction among all Government
          entities involved, including State and local
          municipalities.

      •   Enhance community involvement by providing
          RD status reports to representatives of the
          public or to other agencies.

      •   Document all contacts with the  Settling
          Defendants  concerning implementation of
          theRD.

      •   Verify that RD tasks are completed.

      •   Verify that the Settling Defendants are in
          compliance. If it is determined that the Settling
          Defendants  fail to comply, approach the
          problem in a constructive manner:

          -   Identify the problem and devise corrective
             actions that are consistent with the CD

          -   Document all contacts with  the Settling
             Defendants concerning the inadequacies of
             the implementation

          -   Discuss the proposed corrective action with
             Regional management to ensure that there
             is a consistent Regional approach in
             overseeing the Settling Defendants'
             response activities

          -   If necessary, contact the office of Regional
             counsel for advice on how to proceed in the
             event that enforcement becomes necessary

  Oversight Official's Role

  The RD Oversight Official assists you in observing
  performance of the work of the design contractor
  (designer). The Oversight Official reports to you and
  supports you in monitoring compliance with the CD
  and the Record of Decision (ROD).

      1.  Duties and Responsibilities

  The responsibilities of the Oversight Official during
  remedial design could include the following activities:
Conferences and Meetings:

Attend meetings with the designer (e.g.,
predesign conferences, progress briefings, and
other project-related meetings) and document
all decisions that are made in meetings and
conversations with EPA.

Observation:

Make observations of RD data collection
activities (e.g., field sampling, treatability
study) proceeding in  accordance with the RD
Work Plan and the QAPP.

Maintain a  diary or log of observations as a
result of site visits.

Modifications:

Evaluate suggestions  from the designer and/or
the contracting party for modifications to
drawings and specifications, and report
recommendations to EPA.
Report to the RPM any actions that the RD
contractor or the Settling Defendants take in
interpreting the SOW or ROD documents in a
way that may materially affect either the work
in progress or the original intent of the plans
and specifications.

Submittals:

Review RD contractor submittals including
preliminary, intermediate, and final design
drawings and specifications, and various
documents including the RD Work Plan,
Community Involvement Plan, Site Safety
Plan, Field Sampling and Analysis Plan, and
QAPP. The review should include checking
the documents for conformance with CD,
ROD, standard engineering practices, and
applicable EPA policies, guidance, and
regulations.

Review submittals prepared by the Settling
Defendants at your request.
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy
                                                     7-2

-------
                                                                                                 Chapter 7
          Schedules:

          Review the progress schedule, and schedule
          of submittals prepared by the designer, and
          consult with EPA concerning acceptability.

          Liaison:

          Assist in obtaining (from EPA) additional
          details or information when required for proper
          execution of the work.

          Consult with EPA in advance of scheduled
          major tests, site visits,  or start of important
          phases  of the work.

          Inspection:

          Accompany visiting inspectors representing
          the public or other agencies having jurisdiction
          over the project; record the results of these
          inspections and report them to EPA.

          Records:

          Maintain orderly files for correspondence,
          reports of conferences, review of drawing and
          specifications, clarifications and interpretations
          of the CD, ROD, progress reports, and other
          project-related documents.

          Reports:

          Review progress reports of the RD contractor
          and furnish the RPM with routine reports on
          the schedule and progress of work.

          Furnish EPA with weekly reports of the
          progress of the work and the designer's
          compliance with the work schedule and
          schedule of submittals.

          Safety Concerns:

          Immediately notify the authorized
          representative of the RD contractor or Settling
          Defendants of any observed activities that
          present imminent and
        substantial endangerment to the public health
        or welfare or environment, and follow up with
        an appraisal of the situation to the RPM.

        Advise EPA as promptly as possible of
        discharges and releases that can affect natural
        resources or any endangered or threatened
        species, or that can result in destruction or
        adverse modification of the habitat of such
        species.

        Report to EPA on the designer's and
        contracting party's compliance with on-site
        worker health and safety requirements.

        Submit pollution reports to EPA as significant
        developments occur.

        Report any on-site accident immediately to
        EPA.

    2.   Limitations of Authority

The Oversight Official is limited from performing the
following activities:

    •    Shall not authorize any deviation from the
        project documents.

    •    Shall not undertake any of the responsibilities
        of the  designer or contracting party.

    •    Shall not issue directions relative to, or assume
        control over, any aspect of the means,
        methods, techniques, sequences, or procedures
        of design.

    •    Shall not issue directions regarding, or assume
        control over, safety precautions and programs
        in connection with site visits by the designer.

    •    Shall not accept submittals from anyone other
        than the contracting party.

    •    Shall not participate in specialized field or
        laboratory tests or inspections conducted by
        others.
                                                     7-3
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
  Developing an SOW for RD Oversight
      DEVELOPING AN SOW FOR RD
      OVERSIGHT

  The SOW included in each of the RACs (Response
  Action Contracts) contains a work area for RD/RA
  oversight. From this work area a more detailed Model
  SOW that clearly denotes the  activities to be
  performed by the contractor has been developed and is
  included in Appendix E of this guidance. As explained
  in Chapter 6, you should prepare a detailed
  site-specific SOW, using the Model RD Oversight
  SOW, that incorporates a work breakdown structure
  (or numbering system for tasks and subtasks).
The purpose of the Model SOW is to give you an
effective tool for ensuring the development of
consistent and appropriate SOWs for RD oversight.
The Model  SOW and work breakdown structure
should be used as the framework for developing a
detailed, site-specific SOW that describes the duties
and responsibilities of the Oversight Official as listed
earlier in this chapter. There is  an Independent
Government Cost Estimate (IGCE) Coordinator in
each Regional office who should be asked to confirm
that the level of detail used for tasks in the SOW is
sufficient to allow preparation of the IGCE.
                                                   7-4
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------