EPA-lead RD and RA - Overview of RD/RA Project Delivery and Considerations for Scoping your RD and RA SOWs - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

kate garufi epa hq n.
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
EPA-lead RD and RA - Overview of RD/RA Project Delivery and Considerations for Scoping your RD and RA SOWs PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
EPA-lead RD and RA - Overview of RD/RA Project Delivery and Considerations for Scoping your RD and RA SOWs

play fullscreen
1 / 64
EPA-lead RD and RA - Overview of RD/RA Project Delivery and Considerations for Scoping your RD and RA SOWs
Download Presentation
Download Presentation

EPA-lead RD and RA - Overview of RD/RA Project Delivery and Considerations for Scoping your RD and RA SOWs

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript

  1. Kate Garufi, EPA HQ EPA-lead RD and RA- Overview of RD/RA Project Delivery and Considerations for Scoping your RD and RA SOWs

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

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

  4. Overview of the remedial acquisition framework

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

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

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

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

  9. Additional information on RAF • The revised Sources Sought/Request for Information (SS/RFI) has been posted to Fed Connect and Fed Biz Opps.  https://www.fbo.gov/index?s=opportunity&mode=form&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.

  10. Questions?

  11. RD/RA project delivery strategy

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

  22. Considering Management Effort

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

  24. Considering Cost Control

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

  26. Questions?

  27. Statement of work overview

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

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

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

  31. Different types of SOWs • Prescriptive • Performance-based

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

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

  34. Developing the remedial design statement of work

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

  45. Questions?

  46. Developing the remedial action statement of work

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

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

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

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