Kate Garufi EPA HQ Purpose Focus on EPAlead RDRA projects Communicate the importance of considering RDRA project delivery early in the RD scoping process Change the stovepipe paradigm for scoping EPAlead RD and RA projects ID: 695950
Download Presentation The PPT/PDF document "EPA-lead RD and RA - Overview of RD/R..." is the property of its rightful owner. Permission is granted to download and print the materials on this web site for personal, non-commercial use only, and to display it on your personal computer provided you do not modify the materials and that you retain all copyright notices contained in the materials. By downloading content from our website, you accept the terms of this agreement.
Slide1
EPA-lead RD and RA- Overview of RD/RA Project Delivery and Considerations for Scoping your RD and RA SOWs
Kate Garufi, EPA HQSlide2
PurposeFocus on EPA-lead RD/RA projects
Communicate the importance of considering RD/RA
project
delivery early in the RD scoping processChange the “stovepipe” paradigm for scoping EPA-lead RD and RA projectsDiscuss big picture considerations when developing your RD and RA SOWDiscuss 3 RD/RA examples Project delivery considerationsSOW development considerations
2Slide3
OutlineOverview of the Remedial Acquisition FrameworkRD/RA Project Delivery Strategy
Statement of Work
Overview
Developing the RD SOWDeveloping the RA SOWExamples
3Slide4
Overview of the remedial acquisition framework4Slide5
Existing ContractsSuperfund RD and RA services delivered primarily through:
Interagency Agreements;
Cooperative Agreements; or
EPA Remedial Action Contracts (RACs)RACs provide “cradle to grave” support for the remedial programDirect RD supportSubcontract RA
5Slide6
Remedial Action ContractsRegionally awarded and administeredSingle solicitation/single
award contracts
At least two per Region
Work Assignment (WA) or Task Order (TO) ID/IQ ContractsTO/WA ProcessGenerally Cost reimbursableNo competition between RAC firms
6Slide7
Remedial Acquisition FrameworkEPA contracts will not longer be “cradle to grave” contracts
Separate design and remedial action activities
Design/bid/build
EPA contractsDesign and Engineering Services (DES);Remediation Environmental Services (RES); andEnvironmental Services and Operations (ESO)EPA may still leverage other Federal Agencies and States through IAs and CAs
7Slide8
Major Changes that Impact RPM role (and SOW development)
National Contracts
Competition
at the task order levelDirect contracting for remedial action
EPA –
CONTRACTING PARTY
RPM
Contracting
Officer
RA Contractor – Constructor
Construction Superintendent –
On-Site Rep
8Slide9
Additional information on RAFThe revised
Sources Sought/Request for Information (SS/RFI)
has been posted to Fed Connect and Fed Biz Opps.
https://www.fbo.gov/index?s=opportunity&mode=form&id=65baba2015ea27c769ad82435b941d0e&tab=core&_cview
The posting invites vendors to review documents at the OAM web link
:
http
://
www.epa.gov/oamreg01/region3/SOL-R3-13-00006/index.htm
Final Remedial Acquisition Framework document is still in draft. Expected to be released in Spring 2014.
9Slide10
Questions?10Slide11
RD/RA project delivery strategy11Slide12
What is a RD/RA Project Delivery Strategy?
Strategy includes decisions regarding:
Design type (detail of specifications)
Remedial action contracting strategyProcurement approachRemedial action
c
ontract
t
ype
MUST be discussed and considered early when scoping the design
12Slide13
Role of RPM in the Project Delivery Strategy
RPM can influence all components of the RD/RA project delivery strategy
Now that EPA is moving towards directly contracting for remedial action services, RPM involvement is scoping project delivery early in the design in critical
Communication with contractors on design schedule and funding constraints/requirementsCommunication with HQ on RA funding needs (timing and dollars)
Communication with EPA contracting office (type of RA contract, timing of award, etc)
Communication with design contractor on phasing project components, if needed
13Slide14
Why is Design Type Important for Delivery of a Remedial Action?
The type of remedial action contract vehicle
should
have an impact on the types of design specifications neededSpecifications are an integral part of the remedial action contracting package Specifications describe the technical requirements to be met by the
RA
contractor and the criteria for determining whether
these
requirements have been
met.
All
three components (design specifications, procurement method and contract type) should be considered BEFORE the design requirements are scoped
14Slide15
Remedial DesignThe purpose of the design is to provide technical requirements (plans and specifications) that provide an adequate level of information needed for the remedial action contractors to provide technical approach (with labor/skill mix) and cost proposals
In general, the design is the basis for the statement of work for the remedial action.
15Slide16
Types Remedial Design SpecificationsDetailed (Prescriptive)
Outline exactly how the remedial action contractor should perform the activities
Performance-based
Focus on outcomes or results rather than a process16Slide17
What type of specifications are Superfund remedial designs?Superfund remedial designs generally include a combination of detailed specification and
performance-based
specifications
This is due to some requirements that must be met related to:Government regulations on procurement with Federal dollars; Environmental/construction standards; or Environmental regulations (ARARs)
17Slide18
Remedial Action Contracting StrategyProcurement Approach
Sealed bid
Two-step sealed bid
NegotiatedRemedial Action Contract TypeFirm Fixed PriceFixed RateConst Reimbursable Time and Materials
18Slide19
What RA contracting strategy is right for my project?
It depends!!!
When scoping the design, keep the end in mind.
RA delivery considerations that may directly impact the design: Certainty of the site characterizationSite complexityManagement effortFinancial risk (EPA and contractor)Cost
Control
In general, a detailed design will be done at some point in the RD/RA process – it is your decision on “where” it is done:
RD contractor
RA contractor
19Slide20
Relationship Between Site Characterization Certainty and Cost
Cost
Increasing
Certainty Increasing
20Slide21
Matching Site Type to Appropriate Contracting StrategyDetermine level of certainty associated with site characterization
High certainty = less flexible strategy
Low certainty = more flexible strategy
Determine the complexity of the site and the remedial actionSimple = less flexible strategyComplex = more flexible strategy
21Slide22
Considering Management Effort
22Slide23
Considering Financial RiskBorne primarily by the contractor
Fixed price contracts
Shared by contractor and government
Time and material contractsBorne primarily by the governmentCost reimbursement contractsLess certain site characterization and increased site complexity require government to share financial risk
23Slide24
Considering Cost Control
24Slide25
How on earth do I track all of this stuff??
Use a project risk register!
25Slide26
Questions?26Slide27
Statement of work overview27Slide28
What is a Statement of WorkDefinition: Description of the specific service or tasks a contractor is required to perform under a contract
This presentation and the examples will focus on the development of a task order SOW for either RD or RA
28Slide29
Why is the SOW so important?The SOW is the pivotal acquisition document for goods or services
The SOW is the key factor to determine the task order type; OR the SOW should comport with desire task order type
Key document for contactor preparation of cost and technical proposals
29Slide30
Why is the SOW so important?Facilitates proposal negotiations and competition, as appropriate
Establishes conclusive baseline to evaluate proposals; and
Establishes the
standards to which you can gauge the contractor’s performance30Slide31
Different types of SOWsPrescriptive
Performance-based
31Slide32
Prescriptive SOWRequirements are described in terms of processes or tasks
Government instructs the contactor when, where, and how
In general, does not address desired end result
Change in scope requires modification to the contract document32Slide33
Performance-Based SOWRequirements described in terms of end
result (measurable outcome) versus how to get there
Provides a basic, top level objective(s) of the
acquisitionEnable assessment of work performance against measurable performance standardsContractor provides labor mix and skill set solutions to fulfill the requirementUsed when the Government intends to provide maximum flexibility to each offeror to propose an innovative approachChange is scope
and adjustments to the process without
modification as long as goals are met
33Slide34
Developing the remedial design statement of work34Slide35
Scoping the RD SOWThe information contained in the RI/FS, ROD and any subsequent investigation activities should serve as the initial building block for developing the
RD SOW
Identify remedial action objectives, cleanup levels
Identify technologies and level of detail under which the remedy is describedIdentify level of site characterization conducted during the RI/FS
35Slide36
Developing the RD SOWFive key remedy implementation items that should be included in the SOW:
The treatment system or technology;
Performance standards;
Any points of compliance;How to demonstrate compliance/completion; andSchedule36Slide37
Developing the RD SOW In general, the SOW for executing the remedial design is considered performance-based.
Strongly encouraged that EPA has a scoping meeting with the contractor after award to discuss RD/RA project delivery strategy
The type of design specifications (prescriptive versus
performance-based) must be understood by all stakeholders before the design work begins
37Slide38
RD SOW Best Management PracticesInclude your technical team in the scoping of the RD!
Write
the SOW with enough flexibility to allow for changes to the contractor work plan without modifications to the SOW or task order document
Keep a risk register. Track assumptions made during the RI/FS, ROD and the RD scoping meeting. As data is collected and design proceeds, additional information may require a change to the RD/RA project delivery strategy.
38Slide39
Two RD delivery methodsEPA contracts directly with the designerEPA contractor
USACE, State, or Tribe does work in house
EPA does not contract directly with the designer
USACE contracts with designerState/Tribe contracts with designer39Slide40
EPA contracts directly with the designer
40
EPA –
CONTRACTING PARTY
RPM
Contracting
Officer
Design Contractor
Design
EngineerSlide41
RD SOW components for EPA contractsIntroduction (5 musts!)
General Requirements
Schedule
Project Planning and SupportSite-specific plansCommunity RelationsPre-design investigationData AcquisitionSample Analysis
Data Evaluation and Support
Treatability Study
Design Deliverables
Preliminary/Intermediate/Prefinal and Final
Post Remedial Design Support
41Slide42
EPA does not contract directly with the designer
42
EPA
Contracting Party:
USACE
State/Tribe
RD Subcontractor
Design EngineerSlide43
RD SOW components for IAs and CAsIntroduction (5 musts!)
General Requirements
Schedule
Site specific plansReportingPre-design InvestigationProcurement of RD subcontractSubcontract management supportContractor oversight and reporting
Project Closeout
43Slide44
Considerations when scoping the RD SOW for IAs and CAs
The USACE or State/Tribe will develop the SOW for the design contractor
Important that the RPM discusses the planned project delivery with the USACE or State/Tribe prior to developing the design
Critical to ensuring deliverables comport with contracting strategy (and available funding)Want to avoid any need for re-design (or deliverables not used) by the entity procuring the remedial action contract!
44Slide45
Questions?
45Slide46
Developing the remedial action statement of work46Slide47
Scoping the RA SOWThe technical plans and specifications should drive the content of the RA
SOW
Develop SOW objectives that comport with design and account for uncertainties
The 100% design should be reviewed to determine:Detail of design specificationsPoints of compliance/completionScheduleAny project phasing (if applicable)
47Slide48
Developing the RA SOWThe objectives of the SOW should match the detail in the design
For an SOW with detailed design specifications, the RA SOW should focus on implementing the design. Any changes will result in a change to the design and the RA SOW.
For an SOW with a more
performance-based design, the RA SOW should focus on the end goal and metrics to evaluate progress and completion of the task Problems with performance-based SOW and a detailed designDetailed design instructs – know your site complexities and uncertainties
Performance objectives may not be met by detailed design if site conditions or assumptions made during the design change
May require design/SOW changes during the RA
48Slide49
RA SOW Best Management PracticesConsider planned remedial action contracting strategy (procurement approach and contract type) when writing the
SOW
Understand site assumptions and uncertainties
Revisit and update the risk register and evaluate assumptions made in designEvaluate likelihood of changing site conditions Ensure contract allows for these changes (should they occur – and they often do!)RA contactors understand environmental remediation and risk – if RD/RA contracting strategy provides for a high degree of contractor financial risk, contracts will:
Account for risk in cost proposal; or
May not bid on a project
49Slide50
Two delivery methodsEPA contracts directly with the remedial action contractor
EPA does not contract directly with the designer
50Slide51
EPA contracts directly with the remedial action contractor
EPA –
CONTRACTING PARTY
RPM
Contracting
Officer
RA Contractor – Constructor
Construction Superintendent – On-Site Rep
51Slide52
RA SOW components for EPA contracts - prescriptive
Introduction
General Requirements
Project Planning and SupportCommunity InvolvementSite specific plansProject RequirementsManagementImplement designQA/QC
Deliverables
Schedule
52Slide53
RA SOW components for EPA contracts – performance-based
Introduction
General Requirements
Project Planning and SupportCommunity InvolvementSite specific plansPerformance RequirementsTechnical Project ManagementDeliverables
Schedule
53Slide54
EPA does not contract directly with the remedial action contractorOld RAC model
USACE or other Federal Agency (IA)
State or Tribe (CA)
54
EPA
RPM
CONTRACTING PARTY
RAC
Contractor
USACE
State/Tribe
RA Subcontractor – Constructor
Construction Superintendent –
On-Site RepSlide55
RA SOW components for IAs and CAsIntroduction
General
Requirements
ScheduleProject Planning and SupportCommunity InvolvementSite specific plansProcurement of subcontractSubcontract management supportDetailed resident inspection
Cleanup Validation
Project Closeout
55Slide56
Considerations when scoping the RA SOW for IAs and CAs
The USACE or State/Tribe will develop the SOW for the
remedial action
contractorImportant that the RPM discusses the planned project delivery with the USACE or State/Tribe during the development of the designCritical to ensuring deliverables comport with contracting strategy and Agency or state requirements and to avoid procurement delays
56Slide57
RD and RA SOW examples
57Slide58
Overview3 ProjectsGroup survey to determine RD/RA project
d
elivery strategy
Given the RD/RA project delivery strategy, discuss:RD SOW development RA SOW development58Slide59
Things to ConsiderRD/RA Project Delivery Strategy considerations:
Site characterization
Site/remedy complexity
Contract flexibility needsCost control considerationsOversight needsRD SOW development considerations
Preliminary design investigation needs
Treatability study needs
Design deliverable needs
RA SOW development considerations
Is prescriptive SOW appropriate?
Might a performance
-based SOW be more appropriate?
59Slide60
Project #1Residential yard contaminated with lead
Result of aerial deposition (smelter)
Well defined nature and extent of contamination
Remedy calls for excavation of two feet of contaminated soil and backfillWell defined and/or less complex remedial technology
60Slide61
Project #2DNAPL contamination present in saturated zone under an abandoned building
Nature and extent of contamination not well defined
Remedy calls for thermal treatment of source zone
Remedy goal: Reduce source area by 90%61Slide62
Project #362
PCB contamination in St. Lawrence
River
Heavy tidal influence Heavy boat trafficRemedy includes dredging on PCB contamination > 50 ppb and capping of PCB contamination < 50 ppbSlide63
Helpful ReferencesOSWER 9355.0-43,
Guidance
for
Scoping the Remedial Design, March 1995. http://www.epa.gov/superfund/cleanup/pdfs/rdra/scopingrd.pdfOSWER 9355.0-04B,
Remedial Design/Remedial Action Handbook
, June 1995.
http://
www.epa.gov/superfund/cleanup/pdfs/rdrabook/table.pdf
Other relevant RD/RA guidance
http://
www.epa.gov/superfund/cleanup/rdra.htm
63Slide64
Questions64