 |
| Resource Library > Restoration > RPO > sequence |
|
| The RPO system follows a three-phased approach: |
- Phase I - Annual Update of RPO Inventory
- Phase II - Engineering Evaluation of Recommendations (Contractor)
- Phase III- Implementation of Recommendations (Installation)
|
PHASE I - Annual Update of RPO Inventory
Annually a Phase 1 evaluation collects key performance indicators and associated cost information. This data can then be used to prioritize optimization potential. The steps provide a preferred business model for jump-starting a MAJCOM's optimization program.
Step 1: Inventory and Review
The Environmental Decision Information Tracking Tool (EDITT) is a web-based knowledge management tool used to inventory and evaluate remedial systems at a given client installation and prioritize those systems for optimization opportunities. EDITT includes the System Inventory (SI), formerly known as the RPO Inventory and Performance Software (RIPS), as well as the Performance Tracking Tool (PTT).
The RPM at each installation needs to complete and submit the System Inventory annually to allow:
- Performance tracking capability to allow for benchmarking technologies
- Cost accounting of the O&M of systems/monitoring and details of system performance to be tracked and recorded
- The RPO Outreach Office to retrieve the EDITT information
Step 2: The RPO Technical Assistance Visit(s) (TAVs)
TAVs may be conducted for:
- Sites with known remedy performance problems
- Sites within 18 months of a Five-year Review
The TAV team is made up of members from a variety of disciplines and the visit is typically one week long. The team reviews all active sites at the installation, and then provides a draft report at the outbriefing.
Step 3: Prioritize and Report Findings
If additional funding is available than following the site visit, the Optimization Team will prioritize all the systems in terms of RPO opportunities. Remedial systems and LTM programs are prioritized in terms of potential opportunities within the following guidelines:
- Initially ranked on the basis of annual O&M costs (excluding monitoring costs), annual monitoring costs, and life-cycle O&M costs.
- Each system/LTM program is evaluated for effectiveness and efficiency based on the other information provided in the RIPS database (e.g., system and operational data). Special attention is given to regulatory, political, social, and public relations issues that may impact the associated recommendations, including conceptual site models, contamination plumes, hydrogeology, and the overall risk.
- Once all factors have been considered and compared to each system/LTM program, the optimization team will use professional judgment to re-rank the systems/LTM programs in terms of overall RPO potential and optimization opportunities.
Update of the System Inventory (SI) is an annual requirement according to Air Force policy.
PHASE II - Engineering Evaluation of Recommendations (contractor)
In a Phase II evaluation, larger issues of overall system effectiveness are evaluated, including incremental changes or system replacement to include considerations of new technologies, as well as alternative regulatory approaches.
Optimization must be implemented within the confines of the existing decision document. At sites where there is a formal Record of Decision (ROD) or Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) Corrective Action Plan, Phase II evaluations should begin eighteen months prior to the initiation of any mandatory program review.
Significant opportunities for optimization are identified during the Phase II evaluation; the new technologies or regulatory approaches are installed or initiated during Phase III, the implementation phase.
For more information, please see the Remedial Process Optimization Visit Short Course
PHASE III - Implementation of Recommendations (installation)
The RPMO is responsible for evaluating the Phase II reports and determining whether the recommendations should be implemented.
Changes to systems must be accomplished within the regulatory framework and the signed decision document for the site.
AF RPO policy emphasizes the need and involvement of the regulators throughout the RPO process, especially for those recommendations that require regulatory approval prior to implementation. Incorporating regulators from the Interstate Technology Regulatory Council (ITRC) is encouraged and may be helpful in gaining the cooperation from the regulatory community.
|
|
|
|
|
