Proposed Plan Template by meu51305


More Info
                             Proposed Plan Template
                                    Version 1.1
                                31 December 2009
             Instructions for completing this Proposed Plan template
                        (Delete this section when finished)
Public involvement in the remediation process is important. The proposed plan, and the
documents supporting it in the administrative record such as the RI/FS, are the only documents
the public can see and comment on before the remedy is selected, therefore it is imperative that
the proposed plan contain a concise but complete and understandable explanation of the
CERCLA and remedy selection process. While the ROD is also publically available, the remedy
selection and public participation opportunities respecting the remedy selection are complete at
that point. The Proposed Plan is intended to be a concise document with much less detail than a
ROD. Even so, after reading the PP, a reader unfamiliar with the site should have an
understanding of the site, site contamination issues, any risks they pose and the basis for the
preferred alternative. The information must be clearly presented and at a level understandable to
the general public. Plain English explanations should always accompany any technical term or
numeric representation such as cancer risk. Clear photos and illustrations are encouraged to
enhance understandability and visual appeal.

To aid in creation of PPs, this template was developed by the AF Restoration Program
Management Office (R-PMO) at AFCEE. The template uses the US EPA guidance document
“A Guide to Preparing Superfund Proposed Plans, Records of Decision, and Other Remedy
Selection Decision Documents” (EPA, 1999) as a foundation and incorporates all relevant
statutory requirements (CERCLA, DERP, and NCP). In doing so, R-PMO expects that use of
this PP template will:
     Standardize the content and format of PPs prepared throughout Air Force.
     Ensure that statutory and policy requirements are met.
     Facilitate efficient and timely preparation of PPs.
     Accelerate the review process.
     Result in high quality defensible PPs.

Additionally, HQ AFCEE/R-PMO recognizes that this template is a dynamic tool that should and
will be updated as new guidance, policies and laws are put in place. R-PMO also expects that
this document will be modified based on feedback from end users in order to constantly optimize
this tool. Users are encouraged to provide recommendations to R-PMO that will serve to
improve this template over time.

While specific LUC requirements for proposed plan inclusion are not included in this template, if
LUCs are a remedial component of the preferred alternative reference should be made to the
latest version of the Air Force LUC guidance, and the required LUC provisions contained in the
preferred alternative should be briefly summarized.

This template contains “hidden text” that includes important guidance for its use. Before using
this template, the show hidden text feature should be enabled so that it is visible to the user. In
order to make hidden text visible:
     Word 2003
         Select “Options…” under the “Tools” menu
         Under the “View” tab of the window that appears, place a checkmark in the box
          labeled “Hidden Text”
         Click the “OK” button to exit all windows.
         Hidden text embedded in the document will now be visible to the user. To turn this
          feature off, simply deselect the “Hidden Text” box described above.

    Word 2007
      Click the “Office Button”.
      Click “Word Options” at the lower right hand corner of the window.
      Select “Display” from the list on the left.
      Check the “Hidden Text” box. It is the fourth item in the list under “Always show
       these formatting marks on the screen.”
      Click “OK”

    Another option is to toggle the “Show/Hide” button which is indicated by the paragraph
     (¶) symbol. This button is on the main toolbar in Word 2003 and on the Home Ribbon
     (Paragraph section) in Word 2007.

Hidden text will not normally be included on printouts. However, it can be included on
printouts if desired by following the guidance below.
    Word 2003
        Select “Page Setup…” from the “File” menu.
        In the window that opens, select the “Paper” tab and click on the box entitled “Print
        Put a checkmark in the box labeled “Hidden Text”.
        Click the “OK” button to exit all windows.

    Word 2007
        Click the “Office Button”.
        Click “Word Options” at the lower right hand corner of the window.
        Select “Display” from the list on the left.
        Check the “Print Hidden Text” box. It is the fourth item in the list under “Printing
        Click “OK”

There are various types of text presented throughout this template as defined below.
        Black text – Template text that should be considered for inclusion in the PP
        [RED TEXT] – To be replaced with site specific text provided by the author.
          Sometimes offers choice of two words or phrases (e.g., [WILL/WILL NOT] would be
          replaced with the appropriate choice “will” or “will not”)
        Blue italic text – Embedded text tips, policies, statutory requirements, and guidance.
          Note that this text is hidden and cannot be seen unless the steps shown on the
          previous page are followed.
        Marching box- Link to tips, policies, statutory requirements, and guidance. To
          navigate to the guidance, click the linked text. Depending on your current Word
          settings, you may have to hold down the “Ctrl” key while clicking the linked text with
          your mouse. Note that this text is hidden. The full list of tips, policies, statutory
          requirements, and guidance are included at the end of this document as hidden text. It
          is to this location that the links will navigate when selected.

     Considering the definitions of various types of text provided above, this template
      should be fairly straightforward to use. Only standard MS Word features are used
      (e.g., no macros) which should allow it to be functional with most versions of MS
      Word. If additional help is needed to use or understand any feature please consult the
      MS Word help manual.
     Although efforts were made to standardize the template text, users should perform a
      thorough review of the template text to make sure it is grammatically correct for each
      application (e.g., correct use of singular vs. plural, verb tense, acronym definitions,
      references, etc.).
     The sections and content described in this template are comprehensive and reflect
      inclusion of the information recommended in EPA 1999. However, there may be
      instances where the detail requested in the template is not available for a particular site.
      In these instances, users should include the amount of detail available to them and
      explain why the detail requested in the template is not available or is not relevant.
      Users should not delete entire sections of the template simply because they do not have
      the requested information or because they do not believe that a specific section of the
      template applies to their PP.

                                 Proposed Plan for
                                  [OU/SITE NAME]
                           [INSTALLATION NAME, STATE]

                              Department of the Air Force

Air Force Announces Proposed Plan                    (NCP). This Proposed Plan summarizes
                                                     information that can be found in greater
This Proposed Plan identifies the Preferred          detail in the RI/FS report and other
Alternative for cleaning up the contaminated         documents contained in the Administrative
soil and ground water at the [OU/SITE                Record file for this site. The USAF and the
NAME] and provides the rationale for this            [support agency (ies)] encourage the public
preference. In addition this plan includes           to review these documents to gain a more
summaries of other cleanup alternatives              comprehensive understanding of the site and
evaluated for use at this site. This document        remedial activities that have been conducted
is issued by the Department of the Air Force         at the site.
(USAF), the lead agency for site activities,
and the [supporting or co-agency – either                        MARK YOUR CALENDARS
STATE AGENCY (ACRONYM) and/or                         PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD:
EPA], the support agency. The USAF, in                [BEGIN DATE – END DATE]
consultation      with     the     [supporting        The USAF will accept written comments on the
                                                      Proposed Plan during the public comment period.
agency(ies)], will select a final remedy for          Comment letters must be postmarked by [DATE]
the site after reviewing and considering all          and should be submitted to:
information submitted during the 30-day
                                                      [POC NAME, TITLE]
public comment period. At NPL facilities,             [AGENCY]
EPA must co-select, and in the cases of               [FULL ADDRESS]
disagreement, solely select remedies,                 [CITY, STATE ZIP]
therefore, the USAF will consult with the             Email: [EMAIL ADDRESS]
state and obtain EPA concurrence. The                 Fax: [FAX NUMBER]
USAF, in consultation with the [supporting
                                                      To request an extension send a request in writing to
agency (ies)], may modify the Preferred               [POC NAME] by [TIME, DATE].
Alternative or select another response action
presented in this Plan based on new
                                                      PUBLIC MEETING:
information or public comments. Therefore,            [DATE]
the public is encouraged to review and                The USAF will provide the opportunity for and if
comment on all the alternatives in this               requested a public meeting to explain the Proposed
                                                      Plan and all of the alternatives presented in the
Proposed Plan.                                        [FEASIBILTY STUDY]. Oral and written comments
     The USAF is issuing this Proposed Plan           will also be accepted at the meeting. The meeting
as part of its public participation                   will be held at [LOCATION, FULL ADDRESS,
responsibilities under Section 117 (a) of the
Comprehensive Environmental Response,                 For more information, see the Administrative
Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA,               Record at the following locations:
42 USC § 9617(a) and Section 300.430                  [LOCAL LOCATION]           U.S. EPA Records Center
(f)(3) of the National Oil and Hazardous              [ADDRESS]                  Region [REGION # ]
                                                      [CITY, STATE ZIP]          [ADDRESS]
Substances Pollution Contingency Plan                 [(xxx) xxx-xxxx]           [CITY, STATE ZIP]

 Hours: (e.g.,            [(xxx) xxx-xxxx]               necessary to protect public health or welfare
 Mon – Sat                Hours: (e.g., Mon – Fri,
 9 a.m. to 9 p.m.)        8:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.)
                                                         or the environment from actual or threatened
                                                         releases of hazardous substances into the
 [LOCAL ADVISORY GROUP, if applicable]
 [NAME]                                                      It is the USAF’s current judgment that
 [CONTACT INFORMATION]                                   the Preferred Alternative identified in this
                                                         Proposed Plan, or one of the other active
 [ARRANGEMENTS MADE FOR NON-ENGLISH                      measures considered in the Proposed Plan, is
 SPEAKERS, IF APPLICABLE]                                necessary to protect public health or welfare
                                                         or the environment from actual or threatened
                                                         releases of pollutants or contaminants from
                                                         this site which may present an imminent and
Site History and Background
                                                         substantial endangerment to public health or
   [SECTION TEXT]                                        welfare.”
                                                           Human Health Risks
         [INSERT SITE MAP HERE]                              [SUB-SECTION TEXT]
Site Characteristics                                       Ecological Risks
                                                             [SUB-SECTION TEXT]
       WHAT ARE THE “CONTAMINANTS OF                     Remedial Action Objectives
 The USAF and the [Supporting Agency (ies)] have            [SECTION TEXT]
 identified [NUMBER] contaminants that pose the
 greatest potential risk to human health [AND THE        Summary of Remedial Alternatives
 ENVIRONMENT, if applicable] at this site.
                                                            [SECTION TEXT]
 [COC #1]                                                No Action Alternatives
                                                         Alternative [#]: No Action
 [COC #2]
                                                         Estimated Capital Cost: [$COST]
 [COCs as needed]
                                                         Estimated Annual O&M Cost: [$COST]
                                                         Estimated Present Worth Cost: [$COST]
                                                         Estimated Construction Timeframe: [x
                                                         Estimated Time to Achieve RAOs: [x
Scope and Role of the Action                             MONTHS]
                                                             [ONE OR TWO PARAGRAPH
                                                         NARRATIVE DESCRIPTION OF NO
Summary of Site Risks                                    ACTION ALTERNATIVE]

    [SECTION TEXT]                                       Soil Alternatives
    It is the USAF’s current judgment that               Alternative [#]   [FULL NAME/
the Preferred Alternative identified in this                               DESCRIPTION]
Proposed Plan, or one of the other active                Estimated Capital Cost: [$COST]
measures considered in the Proposed Plan, is             Estimated Annual O&M Cost: [$COST]

Estimated Present Worth Cost: [$COST]                      [ONE OR TWO PARAGRAPH
Estimated Construction Timeframe: [#                     NARRATIVE DESCRIPTION OF ABOVE
MONTHS]                                                  ALTERNATIVE]
Estimated Time to Achieve RAOs: [#
MONTHS]                                                  [ADD GROUNDWATER
    [ONE OR TWO PARAGRAPH                                ALTERNATIVES AS NEEDED]


Groundwater Alternatives
Alternative [#]   [FULL NAME/
Estimated Capital Cost: [$COST]
Estimated Annual O&M Cost: [$COST]
Estimated Present Worth Cost: [$COST]
Estimated Construction Timeframe: [#
Estimated Time to Achieve RAOs: [#
                              Summary of Remedial Alternatives
                                     [OU/SITE NAME]
              Medium                          Designation                       Description



                  Evaluation Criteria for Superfund Remedial Alternatives
                                         THRESHOLD CRITERIA
   Overall Protectiveness of Human Health and the Environment determines whether an
   alternative eliminates, reduces, or controls threats to public health and the environment through
   institutional controls, engineering controls, or treatment.
   Compliance with ARARs evaluates whether the alternative meets Federal and State
   environmental statutes, regulations, and other requirements that pertain to the site, or whether a
   waiver is justified.

                              PRIMARY BALANCING CRITERIA
    Long-term Effectiveness and Permanence considers the ability of an alternative to maintain
    protection of human health and the environment over time.
    Reduction of Toxicity, Mobility, or Volume of Contaminants through Treatment evaluates
    an alternative's use of treatment to reduce the harmful effects of principal contaminants, their
    ability to move in the environment, and the amount of contamination present.
    Short-term Effectiveness considers the length of time needed to implement an alternative and
    the risks the alternative poses to workers, residents, and the environment during implementation.
    Implementability considers the technical and administrative feasibility of implementing the
    alternative, including factors such as the relative availability of goods and services.
    Cost includes estimated capital and annual operations and maintenance costs, as well as
    present worth cost. Present worth cost is the total cost of an alternative over time in terms of
    today's dollar value. Cost estimates are expected to be accurate within a range of +50 to -30
                                     MODIFYING CRITERIA
    Air Force as the Lead Agency and EPA and/or State as the Support Agency(ies)
    Acceptance considers whether the EPA and/or State agrees with the AF's analyses and
    recommendations, as described in the RI/FS and Proposed Plan.
    Community Acceptance considers whether the local community agrees with Air Force's
    analyses and preferred alternative. Comments received on the Proposed Plan are an important
    indicator of community acceptance.

Evaluation of Alternatives                                   is available during the FS, but can be
                                                             fully considered only after public
    Nine criteria are used to evaluate the                   comment is received on the Proposed
different       remediation      alternatives                Plan.
individually and against each other in order
to select a remedy. This section of the                      In the final balancing of trade-offs be-
Proposed Plan profiles the relative                      tween alternatives upon which the final rem-
performance of each alternative against the              edy selection is based.
nine criteria, noting how it compares to the                 The nine evaluation criteria are
other options under consideration.                       discussed below. The “Detailed Analysis of
                                                         Alternatives” can be found in the Feasibility
    The nine criteria fall into three groups:            Study.
threshold criteria, primary balancing criteria,
and modifying criteria. A description of the
purposes of the three groups follows:                    1. Overall Protection of Human Health and
                                                         the Environment
   Threshold criteria, which are                            [SECTION TEXT]
    requirements that each alternative must
    meet in order to be eligible for selection.
                                                         2. Compliance With ARARs
   Primary balancing criteria, which are                    [SECTION TEXT]
    used to weigh major trade-offs among
                                                         3. Long-Term Effectiveness and Permanence
   Modifying criteria, which may be
    considered to the extent that information                [SECTION TEXT]

4. Reduction of Toxicity, Mobility, or Volume         Community Participation
of Contaminants through Treatment
                                                          The USAF and [supporting agency(ies)]
                                                      provide information regarding the cleanup
5. Short-term Effectiveness                           of [SITE/OU] to the public through public
    [SECTION TEXT]                                    meetings, the Administrative Record file for
                                                      the site, and announcements published in the
6. Implementability                                   [NEWSPAPER NAME, CITY, STATE].
                                                      The USAF and the [supporting agency (ies)]
    [SECTION TEXT]                                    encourage the public to gain a more
                                                      comprehensive understanding of the site and
7. Cost                                               the remedial activities that have been
    [SECTION TEXT]                                    conducted at the site
                                                          The dates for the public comment
                                                      period, the date, location, and time of the
8. State/Support Agency Acceptance
                                                      public meeting, and the locations of the
    [SECTION TEXT]                                    Administrative Record files, are provided on
                                                      the front page of this Proposed Plan.
9. Community Acceptance
                                                       For further information on [SITE/OU], please
Summary of Preferred Alternative
                                                       [NAME]                   [NAME]
    [SECTION TEXT]                                     Remedial Project         Community Relations
    Based     on     information      currently        Manager                  Coordinator
                                                       [(xxx) xxx-xxxx]         [(xxx) xxx-xxxx]
available, the USAF believes the Preferred
Alternative meets the threshold criteria and           RAB/TRC POC:
provides the best balance of tradeoffs among           [(xxx) xxx-xxxx]

the other alternatives with respect to the
balancing and modifying criteria. The USAF                               U.S. Air Force
                                                                       [FULL ADDRESS]
expects the Preferred Alternative to satisfy                          [CITY, STATE ZIP]
the following statutory requirements of
CERCLA §121(b): (1) be protective of
human health and the environment; (2)
comply with ARARs [OR JUSTIFY A
WAIVER]; (3) be cost-effective; (4) utilize
permanent      solutions     and alternative
treatment technologies or resource recovery
technologies to the maximum extent
practicable; and (5) satisfy the preference for
treatment as a principal element, [OR

                                         Glossary of Terms
Specialized terms used in this Proposed Plan are defined below:
Applicable or relevant and appropriate                 Present Worth Analysis - a method of evaluation
requirements (ARARs) – the Federal and State           of expenditures that occur over different time
environmental cleanup standards and other              periods. By discounting all costs to a common base
substantive requirements that a selected remedy        year, the costs for different remedial action
will meet. These requirements may vary among           alternatives can be compared on the basis of a
sites and alternatives.                                single figure for each alternative. When calculating
                                                       present worth cost for Superfund sites, total
                                                       operations & maintenance costs are to be included.

Contaminant plume – a body of contamination Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA)
with measurable horizontal and vertical dimensions - the Federal act that established a regulatory
that is suspended in and moves with groundwater.   system to track hazardous wastes from the time
                                                   they are generated to their final disposal. RCRA
                                                   also provides for safe hazardous waste management
                                                   practices and imposes standards for transporting,
                                                   treating, storing, and disposing of hazardous waste.

Ex situ – the removal of a medium (for example,
water or soil) from its original place, as through
excavation, in order to perform the remedial action.
Groundwater – underground water that fills pores
in soil or openings in rocks to the point of
saturation. Groundwater is often used as a source of
drinking water via municipal or domestic wells.

Monitoring – ongoing collection of information
about the environment that helps gauge the
effectiveness of a clean-up action. [GIVE
MONITORED, e.g., monitor wells, stream


   Your input on the Proposed Plan for [SITE/OU, INSTALLATION] is important to the
USAF. Comments provided by the public are valuable in helping the USAF select a final cleanup
remedy for the site.

   You may use the space below to write your comments, then fold and mail. Comments must
be postmarked by [DATE]. If you have questions about the comment period, please contact
[NAME] at [(xxx) xxx-xxxx] or through the USAF’s toll free number at [1-800 xxx-xxxx].
Those with access to email may submit their comments to the USAF at the following address:



To top