a business case for implementing

1

A Business Case for Implementingthe Uniform Federal Policy for

Quality Assurance Project Plans

The EPA Region 2 Experience

2

Region 2 Contacts

Robert Runyon, Chief, DESA-HWSB

(732) 321-6645 or runyon.robert@epa.gov

Linda Mauel, Chief, DESA-HWSB-HWSS

(732) 321-6766 or mauel.linda@epa.gov

3

Information Resources

http://www.epa.gov/region02/qaRegion 2 Quality Assurance program

http://www.epa.gov/fedfac/documents/quality

assurance.htmClick on Quality Assurance for UFP documents

http://www.epa.gov/region02/qa/documents.htmQuality Assurance Guidance and SOPs

4

Uniform Federal Policy

Intergovernmental Data Quality Task Force (IDQTF) (2000)DOD, DOE, EPA

Environmental Quality SystemsANSI/ASQ E4 (2004)

5

Uniform Federal Policies

Components: Organizational Specification

Quality Systems (UFP-QS 2003)Quality Management Plan (EPA QA/R-2 2001)

Project SpecificationSystematic Planning Process (EPA QA/G-4 2006)Dynamic work plan (ITRC Triad 2003)QAPP (UFP-QAPP 2005)

6

UFP Documents

UFP-Quality System (UFP-QS) A high level management document stating

QA Policy of the Organization

If UFP is adopted by a Federal Agency, a Quality System is Required

Look-- documents based on ANSI/ASQ E-4!!

7

UFP-QAPP Documents

PART 1: UFP-QAPP Manual - Provides instructions and guidance on QAPP

content and preparation PART 2A: QAPP Workbook

-Use not mandatory -Facilitates ease of compiling information and review

PART 2B: QA/QC Compendium -Lists required QC activities for the CERCLA process

Minimum set of requirements

-Other Programs (e.g. RCRA) can use the compendium if agreed by all parties

8

UFP-QAPP

Easy promotes consistency reduces amount of text

Cost Effective QA requirements based on data use minimizes re-mobilization

Faster Preparation/Review/Approval systematic planning/graded approach

Defendable data criteria are decision dependent

9

How is this Different?

Project Team - Planning thru Data Usability

Use of Worksheets - Readily Accessible

Data Review tied to Project Needs

RPM ensures process is followedQAPP must be signed!

10

Systematic Planning

Group effort to balance cost vs. amount of data

needed to make decision Understand how the data will be used Ensure you get what you pay for by defining

project needs in detail Knowing what was not delivered and why

Better planning may add cost at the beginning of the project

11

Road to Success

CHANGE

RESISTANCE

COMPLIANCE

Implementation

12

Keys to Success

Management Support

Information/Knowledge

Project Manager Buy-In

Institutional Constraints

13

Keys to Success

Management Support:

Briefing of Regional Haz. Waste Program Mgrs

Policy Buy In

Joint Implementation Strategy

Regional Order

All Superfund, RCRA, Brownfields

14

Keys to Success

Information/Knowledge

TRAINING

For Managers--On-line course

For PMs/POs--Regional ½ day course

For Implementers/Agency Reviewers--On-site, intensive 2-3 day course

15

Keys to Success

Technical Assistance

QA Open House/Help Sessions

Site/Project specific participation (graded approach)

Contractor specific feedback (meetings/conf. calls)

16

Keys to Success

Institutional Constraints

Funding-front loaded for

process: planning takes longer

project: additional participants

Language for AOCs, IAGs, Contracts

17

Success in Region 2 Implementation

Review documents in the context of UFP requirements

Track Implementation at the regional level via Management Accountability Systems

Compile feedback for improvements/modifications

18

Region 2 Staged Approach

Superfund sites and Federal Facilities

Brownfields

RCRA sites

19

Initial Success in Region 2

FY’06 FY ’07:

50% reduction of EPA FTE devoted to QAPP review

20% increase in QAPP submittals

20

Initial Success in Region 2

More than doubled use of UFP in 2007 for Superfund & Federal Facilities as a result of implementation strategy

2007 UFP Non-UFP

Quarters 1&2 12 24

Quarters 3&4 27 11

21

Continued Success in Region 2

UFP Compliance for SF/FF continues to grow:

* 1st Half of 2009

Reviewers saw an 80% decrease in the number of revisions prior to QAPP approval

Fiscal Year UFP Non-UFP Ratio

2007 39 35 8:7

2008 42 24 2:1

2009* 27 5 5:1

22

Continued Success in Region 2

Implementation has begun for Brownfields as well, for which the compliance is not yet mandatory, but steadily growing each year.

* 1st half of 2009

Fiscal Year UFP Non-UFP Ratio

2007 2 40 1:20

2008 6 42 1:7

2009* 12 23 1:2

23

Continued Success in Region 2

Region 2 contractors prepare 100% UFP compliant QAPPs

10% reduction in FTE devoted to QAPP preparation once familiar with UFP format

Decrease in revisions is attributed to use of logical tables and generic formatting versus text alone.

24

Next Steps for UFP-QAPP

Feedback IDQTF survey users and contractors

Are they using the UFP format? If yes, how can we make it better? If no, why? What are the barriers?

IDQTF data collection and streamlining workgroups will incorporate the changes into a national streamlined UFP-QAPP

Region 2 will implement these changes as well

25

Information Resources

http://www.epa.gov/region02/qaRegion 2 Quality Assurance program

http://www.epa.gov/fedfac/documents/quality

assurance.htmClick on Quality Assurance for UFP documents

http://www.epa.gov/region02/qa/documents.htmQuality Assurance Guidance and SOPs

26

Region 2 Contacts

Robert Runyon, Chief, DESA-HWSB

(732) 321-6645 or runyon.robert@epa.gov

Linda Mauel, Chief, DESA-HWSB-HWSS

(732) 321-6766 or mauel.linda@epa.gov