Common use of Implementability Study Report Clause in Contracts

Implementability Study Report. The Implementability Study activities shall be performed concurrent with activities associated with the recontamination assessment. Specifically, the Implementability Study shall be performed to assess how the current site configuration and river dynamics (natural and anthropogenic) may impact both the selection of the remedial alternatives and the remedial design. As specified in the approved Work Plan schedule, after completion of related field activities and receipt of validated data, an Implementability Study Report shall be prepared. The objective of the Implementability Study tasks is to gain a more complete understanding of the physical, structural, and administrative (i.e., marine operations) factors that will impact the selection of a remedial alternative for the Project Area as well as its design. It is very important that these factors be understood early in the selection and design process. The Implementability Study activities shall specifically consider the following factors that affect remedy implementability, ease of construction, reliability, operation, and maintenance of the alternative; potential problems that could be encountered during the implementation of an alternative including the on-going operations of existing facilities, the implications of business disruption and lost time on potential remedy costs; the implementation limitations of completing remedial actions around the existing structures; the required approvals and permits from regulatory agencies; the availability of required off-site treatment or disposal services; and the availability of necessary equipment, materials, and personnel. After review of existing data needs, the Respondents and EPA identified the following activities to be conducted as part of this SOW to inform RM 11E remedial design, regardless of which remedy is selected by EPA: • Identify the location and types of underground utilities including fiber optics and electrical cable crossings to provide information on the practicability of certain actions in light of existing infrastructure. • Summarize current and projected in-water operations including loading and unloading activities, types of vessel traffic within the Project Area, monitoring requirements, and other operation and maintenance activities associated with the various facilities. • Summarize projected maintenance dredging operations, including private dredging at shore side terminals and dredging of the federal navigation channel. • Complete an expanded survey of underwater debris and structures, especially in areas likely targeted for dredging, capping, or other active remedial action. This is expected to include a more detailed review of the existing data; potential interviews with local dredge operators familiar with the area and, if needed additional side scan sonar surveys or in- water diver assessments. • Evaluate the configuration and integrity of existing infrastructure to determine potential impact to remedy selection and design elements. The effort will require coordination with facility owners to review specific information regarding dock construction materials, foundations, and other surface and subsurface components, repair history, and design details to the extent possible. The dock assessment will evaluate the stability, life expectancy, near dredging tolerances (see following bullet), capping constraints, demolition issues, and remaining data gaps associated with the docks within the Project Area. • Where necessary, collect selected surface and subsurface samples near the dock structures to refine the depths of impact and establish needed dredging setbacks from docks and in-water structures. Supplemental sediment data will be collected in the near or under dock areas, as necessary, to evaluate the depth of sediment impacts and better evaluate alternatives and risk to human health and the environment. • Assess slope stability to inform the remedial design. • Identify and evaluate Institutional Controls that may be utilized in remedial alternatives. The analysis should include the following: 1) potential objectives for the Institutional Controls, 2) the specific types of Institutional Controls that can be considered for use to meet RAOs, 3) investigate when such Institutional Controls may need to be implemented and/or secured and how long they must be in place, 4) research, discuss, and document any existing or potential agreements with the proper entities (e.g., state and/or local government entities, local landowners, conservation organizations, Respondents) on exactly who will be responsible for securing, maintaining, and enforcing the Institutional Controls. For guidance see Institutional Controls: A Site Managers Guide to Identifying, Evaluating and Selecting Institutional Controls at Superfund and RCRA Corrective Action Cleanups (EPA 540-F-00-005), OSWER Directive 9355.0-74FS-P, September 2000. • Identify economic implications associated with access limitations to dock facilities within the Project Area. • Identify remedial technologies and potential alternatives that could be adapted to minimize adverse economic impacts and business interruptions in the Project Area. The components of the Implementability Study Report are expected to include: • Introduction: This section will provide a brief description of the Project Area and describe the factors being considered as well as an overview of the remainder of the report.