Final Department of Defense - State Memorandum of Agreement (DSMOA)

ASTSWMO Memorandum
DoD Memorandum
Department of Defense and State Memorandum of Agreement (DSMOA)

ASTSWMO Memorandum

Association of State and Territorial Solid Waste Management Officials (ASTSWMO)

TO:
State Waste Program Directors
State Superfund Program Managers
State Assistant Attorneys General

FROM:
William C. Child, President
ASTSWMO

RE:
Final Department of Defense - State Memorandum of Agreement (DSMOA)

DATE:
July 18, 1989

Enclosed is a final version of the model Department of Defense State Memorandum of Agreement (DSMOA), developed by the Association of State and Territorial Solid Waste Management Officials (ASTSWMO) and the Department of Defense (DoD) with assistance from representatives of the National Association of Attorneys General (NAAG) and the National Governors' Association (NGA). The model DSMOA is the result of eight months of negotiations between ASTSWMO, NAAG, NGA and the DoD. The ASTSWMO Board of Directors by a vote of eleven to three has accepted and endorsed the model DSMOA as a reasonable mechanism to facilitate State/DoD interaction during the cleanup of hazardous waste contamination at DoD installations.

When executed between States and DoD, the model DSMOA provides for states to be paid for their review and other services provided during cleanup activities at DoD installations for both National Priorities List (NPL) and non-NPL sites. The model DSMOA clearly sets out the types of review and other services the States will likely conduct at both NPL and non-NPL sites. An executed DSMOA would also formalize a State's role in developing and using the DoD's priority model, provide for designating lead agencies in each State, establish a dispute resolution process, and set up a process for reopening or terminating the DSMOA.

While no organization can bind individual State decisions, ASTSWMO has negotiated what we believe is a sound document which would apply to most States. Each State has an opportunity to decide whether it is advantageous to enter into a DSMOA for the DoD installations in that State. DoD anticipates that, unlike the IAGs for NPL sites, each state would not negotiate different DSMOA provisions. It is the hope of both organizations that the model DSMOA will be seen as a useful document by a majority of States. The Department of Defense has reviewed and approved the enclosed model DSMOA. We are encouraged by this opportunity to work cooperatively with the DoD.

There are a few aspects of the model CSMOA which should receive special attention.

First, and most importantly, the model DSMOA provides that a State is eligible to receive up to one percent of the entire cost of all DoD installation cleanups in a State that is funded by the Defense Environmental Restoration Account (DERA) for costs the State incurs as a result of the review and other services associated with the cleanups. The application of this approach is best understood through an example:

State X has three DoD installations with a total of four sites. Three of the sites are on the NPL. The following is a list of the sites and the anticipated cleanup costs.

Installation A (NPL)	15,000,000
Installation B	5,000,000
Installation C
Site 1 (NPL)	10,000,000
Site 2 (NPL)	20,000,000
TOTAL ESTIMATED CLEANUP COSTS	$50,000,000

Under the model DSMOA (Section I, paragraph D) the following maximum funding would be available to State X.

Total funds available to state for the life of all of the cleanups	$500,000
Maximum funds available in first year of DSMOA	$125,000
Minimum funds available in first year of DSMOA	$50,000

The model DSMOA thus allows a State to "front end load" its work at the sites during the RI/FS period as the state finds it necessary. The total cleanup cost estimates may be revised annually and the total funding available to the State adjusted accordingly. A safeguard is built in for the relatively unusual situation where the cost of a cleanup is reduced after completion of the RI/FS. (See Section I, paragraph F.) The process in this case will be as in the following example:

Original cleanup estimate	$10,000,000
State expenditure ceiling (@ 1%)	$100,000
Actual state expenditure during RI/FS	$65,000
Post RI/FS cleanup estimate	$4,000,000
Additional funding available to state for use during remedial
design and remedy implementation (1/4 of 1 percent of cleanup costs)	$10,000

Under the model DSMOA, States would be eligible for payment or reimbursement of the actual cost of State work which is covered in Section I, paragraph B, not to exceed one percent of the total DoD costs for all sites in the State during the lifetime of the cleanups. Note that this would allow a State to deal with a situation where actual costs at one site exceed one percent of the cleanup costs for that single site.

Given current program cost projections, through the DSMOA mechanism, it is expected to make the States eligible to receive between $100- 150 million for their activities at DoD installations. States may also recover previous costs incurred between October 17, 1986 through the effective date of the DSMOA, again as long as the total State costs are within the one percent figure.

ASTSWMO State representatives have carefully analyzed the adequacy of the funding provided under the DSMOA and several have determined that the funding level should be adequate to cover reasonably anticipated State costs. The flexibility of moving funds from one site to another and from one year to another was viewed as crucial to the workability of the approach laid out in the model DSMOA. From the DoD perspective, it was important to establish a predictable funding level that could fit into the DoD budgeting process. If you have questions on how the funding process works please feel free to call Bharat Mathur (IL), Chair, ASTSWMO Federal Facilities Task Force at 217-782-6760.

A second important aspect of the model DSMOA is that it will utilize cooperative agreements to transfer the DoD funds to States. It is anticipated that advance payment and/or reimbursement will be available under the cooperative agreement approach.

A third key element of the model DSMOA is the funding levels only cover routine State activities related to a DoD cleanup funded under DERA. Emergency removals and special arrangements where the State may conduct more of the work at a site are handled separately in section I, paragraphs H and I.

A fourth key element of the model DSMOA addresses funding priorities. Currently DoD has adequate funding to meet all of its cleanup commitments. However, it is anticipated the cost of cleanup work will, at some point, exceed the funding appropriated by Congress. At which time, priorities will have to be established. The priority system could take into account not only which sites should be cleaned up first, but also the speed of cleanup activities. Priorities will apply to RD/RA work rather than RI/FS work since the DoD priority model will be applied after the RI/FS is completed.

A sub-group of the ASTSWMO Federal Facility Task Force is currently working with DoD to assist in the design of the priority system as well as the State role in implementing the system. The DSMOA recognizes the role of a DoD priority system and requires DoD to consider information provided by the States related to establishing priorities.

Finally, the model DSMOA establishes a dispute resolution process to resolve differences at all sites not covered by an IAG.

During the meeting of the ASTSWMO Board of Directors on April 18, 1989 there was consensus that the approach proposed in the model DSMOA is a significant breakthrough on the contentious issue of the respectability of federal facilities to pay State review and other services costs. Further, entering into DSMOAs with DoD may help establish a better working relationship with DoD installations in your State. DoD has agreed to, at the end of a two year period, after initial DSMOAs are in place, to resume discussions with ASTSWMO to evaluate -the appropriateness and effectiveness of the DSMOA. A list of the ASTSWMO Federal Facilities Task Force participants is attached. You should feel free to contact any of the participants if you have additional questions.

In conclusion, the DoD is extending to State Agency Directors a personal invitation to enter into a DSMOA with the Department under separate cover. It has also instructed the military components to have their installations cooperate with the States to get the information you need to get a cooperative agreement (CA) application. A copy of that memo is included as Attachment C of the DSMOA. DoD plans to make arrangements for funds to be available beginning in October of this year.

FEDERAL FACILITIES TASK FORCE

Bharat Mathur, Deputy Manager
Division of Land Pollution Control
Illinois Environmental Protection Agency
2200 Churchill Road
P.O. Box 19276
Springfield, Illinois 62794-9276
(217) 782-6760

Bob Dullinger, Supervisor
Responsible Party/Unit II
Site Response Section
Groundwater and Solid Waste Division
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency
520 Lafayette Road North
St. Paul, Minnesota 55155
(612) 296-7785

Alex R. Cunningham, Chief Deputy Director
Toxic Substances Control Division
California Department of Health Services
P.O. Box 942732
400 P Street
Sacramento, California 94234-7320
(916) 323-2913

Howard Roitman, Section Chief
Remedial Programs
Hazardous Materials and Management Division
Colorado Department of Health
4210 East 11th Avenue.
Denver, Colorado 80220
(303) 331-4517

LeRoy C. Paddock, Assistant Attorney General
Office of the Attorney General
525 Park Street
St. Paul, Minnesota 55103
(612) 297-1140

Christine O'Donnell
State Superfund Liaison
National Governors Association
400 North Capitol St, NW
Suite 250
Washington, D.C. 20001
(202) 624-7871

Phil King, EPA/IPA
OERR/HSCD/SLCB
OS-220
Room 226, Southeast Mall
401 M Street, SW
Washington, D.C. 20460
(202) 475-9840

Bob Goodman, Supervisor
Preliminary Assessment and Site Inspections Unit
Hazardous Waste Investigation and Cleanup Program
Department of Ecology
Mall Stop PV-11
Olympia, Washington 98504-8711
(206) 438-3077

DoD Memorandum

THE OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF DEFENSE
WASHINGTON D.C. 20301-8000

PRODUCTION AND LOGISTICS
April 6, 1989

MEMORANDUM FOR DEPUTY ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF THE ARMY,
(ENVIRONMENT, SAFETY, AND OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH) OASA (I&L)
DEPUTY DIRECTOR FOR ENVIRONMENT, OASN (S&L)
DEPUTY ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE (ENVIRONMENT, SAFETY, AND
OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH) SAF/RQ
DIRECTOR, DEFENSE LOGISTICS AGENCY (DLA-W)

SUBJECT: Completion of the DSMOA with State Workgroup

My staff and a state workgroup have just completed working out the details for the Defense and State Memorandum of Agreement for our cleanup activities. The product of this effort is attached. With your support along the way, I believe that we have come out with a very reasonable and advantageous construct for handling reimbursement of state services, funding priorities, resolving disputes, and determining state lead agencies. Thank you for your involvement.

The next steps are for the state workgroup to get broad state concurrence with the DSMOA by their membership and for us to verify that we can use cooperative agreements as a reimbursement vehicle. The state workgroup is shooting for broad state concurrence of the DSMOA by May 1. My staff is actively pursuing the use of cooperative agreements.

I'm pleased by our ability to devise a DSMOA that accommodates the primary interests of DoD and the States. Getting as many states as possible to enter these agreements should greatly aid program implementation.

Should your staff have any questions on this, my point of contact remains Sam Napolitano (325-2211).

William H. Parker, III, P.E.
Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense (Environment)

Attachment-

Final Draft

Department of Defense and State Memorandum of Agreement (DSMOA)

In order to expedite the cleanup of hazardous waste sites on Department of Defense (DoD) installations within the State of _________________ and ensure compliance with the applicable State law and regulations of the State, DoD and the [State Agency] on behalf of the State of [State] enter into this Agreement.

Except as otherwise specified, the terms in this document are unique to this document only.

Section I. Reimbursement of State Costs

Coverage
1. This Agreement covers reimbursement of the costs associated with providing State services to Department of Defense installations for activities funded under the Environmental Restoration, Defense (ER, D) appropriation. Installations covered by this Agreement are those owned by the Federal government on the effective date of the Agreement including installations with sites on the National Priorities List (NPL) and installations with sites not on the NPL. The installations covered by this Agreement are listed in Attachment A. This Agreement does not cover the costs of services rendered prior to October 17, 1986; services at properties not owned by the Federal government; and activities funded from sources other than ER, D appropriation.
2. Unless a site specific agreement provides otherwise, this Agreement is the mechanism for payment of the costs incurred by the State in providing the services listed in paragraph B of this Agreement in relation to ER, D funded activities at the installations covered by this Agreement. Full payment of State costs pursuant to this Agreement constitutes final settlement of any claims the State of_____ may have for performance of services outlined in Section I(B) with respect to ER, D funded work carried out after October 17, 1986 at all of the installations covered by this Agreement, except for those State costs covered by a site-specific agreement.
3. DoD agrees to seek sufficient funding through the DoD budgetary process in accordance with Section II and to pay the State of for the services specified in paragraph B for all ER, D funded activities at installations covered by this Agreement, subject to the conditions and limitations set forth in this section.
Services

State services that qualify for payment under this Agreement include the following types of assistance provided by the State commencing at site identification and continuing through construction, as well as any other activities that are funded by ER, D:
1. Technical review, comments and recommendations on all documents or data required to be submitted to the State under an agreement between the State and a DoD component, all documents or data that a DoD Component requests the State to review, and all documents or data that are provided by a DoD Component to the State for review as a result of a request from the State made under applicable State law.
2. Identification and explanation of State applicable or relevant and appropriate requirements related to response actions at DoD installations.
3. Site visits to review DoD response actions and ensure their consistency with appropriate State requirements, or in accordance with site-specific requirements established in other agreements between the State and DoD Component.
4. Participation in cooperation with DoD in the conduct of public education and public participation activities in accordance with Federal and State requirements for public involvement.
5. Services provided at the request of DoD in connection with participation in Technical Review Committees.
6. Preparation and administration of a cooperative agreement (CA) to implement this Agreement, including the estimates of State costs.
7. [Other services that the State will provide that are set out in this Agreement or are included in installation-specific agreements.]
Accounting Procedures
1. Subject to the provisions of paragraphs D and E, reimbursement of eligible State costs incurred between October 17, 1986, and the date of this Agreement shall be paid if the costs have been documented using accounting procedures and practices that reasonably identify the nature of the costs involved, the date the costs were incurred, and show that the costs were entirely attributable to activities at an installation covered by this Agreement.
2. Payment of eligible State costs for services provided after the effective date of this Agreement must comply with all applicable Federal procurement and auditing requirements.
Maximum Reimbursement

Reimbursement for services provided under paragraph B for all installations included in Attachment A shall not exceed one (1) percent of the estimated total costs for all of the work that has been funded by ER, D since October 17, 1986, and that will in the future be funded by ER, D or a total of $50,000, whichever is greater. Estimates of cleanup costs developed under this Agreement are provided solely for the purpose of calculating the amount of funding the State is eligible to receive.
Annual Budget Limits

The State may ordinarily request that up to a maximum of twenty-five (25) percent of the total State services funds for all installations listed in Attachment A be provided in accordance with Section II during any fiscal year. DoD may approve an annual budget limit that exceeds twenty-five (25) percent of the total State services funds if the State demonstrates the need for a higher percentage based on the scope of the work projected during the fiscal year. At least ten (10) percent of a State services funding request will be provided in accordance with Section II of this Agreement during a fiscal year if the State requests an allocation of ten (10) percent or more for services under this Agreement. The State may carry over unused funds into subsequent years. If the cost of State services during a fiscal year exceeds the annual budget limit, the State may expend its own funds to pay the costs of those services. To the extent allowable under Federal procedures for cooperative agreements, the State may then seek reimbursement of these costs in a subsequent year through a cooperative agreement as long as the total amount of the payments to the State does not exceed the one (1) percent ceiling, or the annual budget limit for that fiscal year. A payment schedule for reimbursement of past costs will be devised by the State of _____ and the DoD.
Adjustment of Cost Estimates

The State or DoD may request a review of total estimated ER, D funded project costs covered by this Agreement once during the terms of a cooperative agreement. The total project costs shall be revised to reflect the new estimates. The ceiling of one (1) percent of the total project costs shall be adjusted based on the revisions of the total project costs since October 17, 1986. If total project costs are estimated to be lower than originally predicted, the State remains entitled to payment for services rendered prior to the completion of the new estimate if the services are within the ceiling applicable under the previous estimate. In addition, a State shall be eligible to receive payment of up to one quarter (1/4) of one (1) percent of the ER, D funded cost of the remedy included in the record of decision (ROD) or equivalent document, or the amount that remains when the amount of State services already claimed by the State for the site is subtracted from one (1) percent of the highest cost estimate for cleanup of the site, whichever is less.
Procedures for Reimbursement

Procedures for State reimbursement through cooperative agreements (CAs) are as described in Attachment B and in accordance with Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circulars A-102, A-87, and A-128. After a CA is awarded, the [State Agency] may submit a request for advance or reimbursement to DoD on a quarterly basis. DoD will process the request and transfer funds in accordance with Circular A-102. Within 60 days after the end of each quarter, the [State Agency] shall submit to DoD a status report, including cost summaries which directly relate allowable costs actually incurred by the State under this Agreement during the quarter for services at each installation. Allowable costs shall be determined in accordance with this Agreement and Circular A-87. DoD shall reconcile continuing awards and close out completed awards in accordance with Circular A-102. Auditing of States programs shall be accomplished in accordance with Circular A-128.
Additional Work

When an installation requests that a State perform a specific technical study or similar technical support that could otherwise be done by a contractor, and [State Agency] agrees to do the work, funding will be negotiated between the installation and the State outside of this Agreement.
Emergencies

In an emergency situation involving a threat to public health or the environment, the State must, unless the nature of the emergency does not permit notification, notify the DoD Component prior to taking removal action in order to be reimbursed for its reasonable costs. Reimbursement of the State for its work will be handled directly between the DoD component and the State, and outside of this Agreement. Disagreements that arise under this paragraph are subject to the Dispute Resolution process in section IV.

Section II. Funding and the Priority System

The Office of the Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense (Environment), as the designee of the Office of the Secretary of Defense responsible for carrying out the Defense Environmental Restoration Program, and the DoD components shall seek sufficient funding through the DoD budgetary process to carry out their obligations for response actions at DoD installations within the State. Funds authorized and appropriated annually by Congress under the ER, D appropriation in the DoD Appropriations Act shall be the source of funds for all work contemplated by this Agreement.
Should the ER, D appropriation be inadequate in any year to meet the total DoD requirements for cleanup of hazardous or toxic contaminants, DoD shall establish priorities among sites in a manner which maximizes the protection of human health and the environment. In the prioritization process, DoD shall employ a model which has been and will be further developed with the assistance of the States and the EPA. Future enhancements or refinements to the model shall occur in consultation with the States and the EPA. DoD shall also involve the States and the EPA in its use of this prioritization model through review of technical site data. The DoD components shall receive and give full consideration to information provided by the States regarding factors to be considered in decision making in the annual prioritization process for allocating resources available for cleanups. The State accepts that a DoD prioritization system developed and operated as described in this subparagraph is needed and provides a reasonable basis for allocating funds among sites in the interest of a national worst first cleanup program. To that extent, the State will make every effort to abide by the priorities developed thereunder.
Nothing in this Agreement shall be interpreted to require obligation or payment with regard to a site remediation in violation of the Anti-Deficiency Act (31 U.S.C. 1341).

Section III. Lead Agencies

Each DoD Component shall designate an individual responsible for managing remedial and removal actions for each installation within the State. This individual shall be responsible for coordinating all tenant activities at the installation with regard to the remedial and removal action program. The individual will also act as remedial project manager (RPM) within the meaning of the National Contingency Plan (40 CFR Part 300).

The State shall designate a lead State agency for each DoD installation within the State. (This agency may vary by installation). The lead State agency for an installation shall coordinate among other State agencies to represent a single State position as to remedial/ removal actions at the installation. The lead State agency shall designate a State Agency Coordinator (SAC) who shall be the single point-of-contact between the appropriate DoD component installation and the State regarding State involvement in the remedial and removal actions program at the installation.

Section IV. Dispute Resolution

The Remedial Project Manager (RPM) and the State Agency Coordinator (SAC) shall be the primary points of contact to coordinate the remedial and removal program at each military installation within the State, including the resolution of disputes. With regard to installations or sites for which there are executed Federal Facility Agreements under CERCLA section 120, dispute resolution provisions as specified in those agreements shall govern. For other sites, it is the intention of the parties that all disputes shall be resolved at the lowest possible level of authority as expeditiously as possible within the following framework. All timeframes for resolving disputes below may be lengthened by mutual consent.
1. Should the RPM and SAC be unable to agree, the matter shall be referred in writing as soon as practicable but in no event to exceed ten (10) working days after the failure to agree, to the installation commander and the chief of the designated program office of the lead State agency or their mutually agreed upon representatives designated in writing.
2. Should the installation commander and the chief of the designated program office of the lead State agency or their mutually agreed upon representatives designated in writing be unable to agree within ten (10) working days, the matter shall be elevated to the head of the lead State agency and a counterpart member of the lead Service involved who shall be a general/flag officer or a member of the senior executive service.
3. Should the head of the lead State agency and the counterpart DoD representative fail to resolve the dispute within 20 working days the matter shall be referred to the Governor and the Service Secretary concerned for resolution.
It is the intention of the parties that all disputes shall be resolved in this manner. Alternative dispute resolution methods may be used. In the event that the Governor and the Service Secretary are unable to resolve a dispute, the State retains any enforcement authority it may have under State and Federal law.

Section V. Reopener

The terms of this Agreement may be modified at any time by mutual Agreement of the parties. If a party requests the Agreement to be reopened but the other party does not concur, the matter will be referred to an individual designated in writing by the signators to this agreement. In the event they fail to agree within 10 working days the matter will be referred to the signators of this agreement or their successors in office. If no resolution is reached within 20 days, the Agreement shall not be reopened.

Section VI. Termination

This Agreement may be terminated by either party at the expiration of any cooperative agreement entered into pursuant to this Agreement if the party seeking termination has notified the other party in writing at least 90 days prior to the expiration of the cooperative agreement. After receiving a notice of termination, a party may invoke the dispute resolution process in Section V. Each signator of the agreement may involve other officials to whom they report in the process of resolution. The parties by mutual agreement may also refer the matter to the Governor of the State of and his (her) counterpart within the Department of Defense. Alternative dispute resolution methods may be used. Failing their agreement, this Agreement shall be considered terminated as of the date the cooperative agreement expires.

State signature block for Agency signing on behalf of the State

DoD signature block

Attachment A: DoD Installations Covered by this Agreement

State of ______________________

Army

e.g., Fort ___________________
etc.

Navy

e.g., Naval Air Station ___________________
etc.

Air Force

e.g., ________________ Air Force Base
etc.

Defense Logistics Agency

e.g., Defense Supply Center
etc.

INSTALLATIONS MAY BE ADDED TO THIS LIST PERIODICALLY AS NECESSARY IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION V, REOPENER.

Attachment B: Procedures for State Reimbursement

The Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Environment (DASD(E)) and the Head of the Agency signing on behalf of the State will sign the DSMOA.
The DSMOA is the overarching agreement of commitment between the DoD and the State, but does not obligate or commit funds.
Reimbursement will be accomplished, using Federal procedures for cooperative agreements (CAs), with States that have signed DSMOAs. Eligible activities are limited to those authorized for the Defense Environmental Restoration Program (DERP), and funded by the Defense Environmental Restoration Account (DERA), Sections 2701 et seq, of Title 10 USC, and as specified in the DSMOA.
- Reimbursement will commence as soon as possible with DERA funds.
[DoD policies and procedures for processing CA applications and payments will be developed with input from the States and announced in a Federal Register notice as soon as possible.
- In general, these activities will be centralized in the ODASD(E).
- It is anticipated that these policies and procedures will encompass the following: who may apply; what can be funded; selection criteria for awards; submission procedures and closing dates for receipt of applications; and grantee responsibilities.
- Within this framework, it is anticipated that monitoring and quarterly reporting procedures for States' program status and financial status will be developed.]
Administration of CAs will be in accordance with Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular A-102 procedures (revised March 3, 1988).
- A State will submit a complete application package for Federal assistance, consisting of Standard Form 424 (SF 424) and attachments, including a proposal narrative, the signed DSMOA, and a project management plan. The State's application must also include a description of the type and amount of support services that the State plans to provide for each installation covered in the DSMOA for the specific award period of the CA.
- CAs will be awarded for a term of 2 years, based on an annual estimate of requirements. Applications will be accepted after signature of the DSMOA by both parties; DoD processing time for applications is expected to be two months.
- The DASD(E) will accept the application, review it, and make a decision as to the award. This CA agreement, when signed by both the DASD(E) and the Head of the Agency signing on behalf of the State, comprises the contractual relationship between the DoD and the State.
- States may then submit Requests for Advance or Reimbursement using Standard Form 270 to the DASD(E) on a quarterly basis. [An alternative approach using a letter of credit with the Department of Treasury will also be considered. The DASD(E) will process the request in accordance with standard DoD accounting procedures; DoD processing time for payments is expected to be two months.]
Allowable costs will be determined in accordance with OMB Circular A-87 procedures (proposed revisions of October 14, 1988). Specific services to be provided by the States will be as described in the DSMOA.
Auditing of States programs will be accomplished in accordance with OMB Circular A-128 procedures (April 12, 1985).

The following is additional information regarding the general procedures that DoD plans to use in implementing DSMOAs and CA's with the States:

DoD DASD(E) will invite States to sign DSMOAs and submit applications for CAs.
DASD(E) will send a memorandum (Attachment C) to the DoD Components (Army, Navy, Air Force, DLA, and other DoD agencies) asking them to cooperate with the States and compile necessary data. The States and Installations will communicate directly on response activities anticipated to take place over the next two years and on the total DERA cost estimate.
DoD Components will use their Chain-Of-Command to develop and pass on data to DASD(E): Component Headquarters will give the message to their Major Commands (e.g., Army Materiel Command), and the Major Commands will forward the message to their Installations (e.g., Sacramento Army Ammunition Depot).
The Components will provide information, obtained from their Installations and Major Commands, to DASD(E) by State.
Each State contacts DASD(E) about its desire to have a DSMOA and CA, and works with DoD to have State-specific information inserted into the provisions where indicated in the model language and to fill out the CA application.
DASD(E) and the State sign the DSMOA and the CA.
The State submits requests for payment in advance based on anticipated workload or for reimbursement of services provided under the CA, on a quarterly basis.
Quarterly In-Process Reviews (IPRs) will be held between DASD(E) staff and the State agency. IPRs will include State progress reports concerning activities and funding.
CA audits will be carried out in accordance with OMB Circular A-128.

Attachment C: Letter to DoD Components

SUBJECT: DoD Components' Cooperation with the States for Cooperative Agreements on Site Cleanups

In anticipation of DoD-State Memoranda of Agreements (DSMOAs) for site cleanups becoming a reality this summer, I request that you inform the appropriate people in your component that they should be ready to respond to requests from the States for information necessary for the States to prepare applications for cooperative agreements (CAs) in accordance with Attachment B of the standard DSMOA language.

Once a State and I have signed a DSMOA or started the process towards signature, the lead State agency will be contacting the remedial project managers for the installations listed in Attachment A of the DSMOA to determine what DERA-funded response actions they have planned for the period of the proposed CA (the next two years). The State will use this information to prepare its application for a cooperative agreement and its request for advance or reimbursement. Your representatives should also make available to the States information regarding the activities planned through the life of the program and the estimated cost and schedule of the DERA-funded response actions. This will help the State plan all its activities under the lifetime cap.

This information is generally available from your program planning activities, preparation of the FY 90/91 DERA budget, and anticipated RI/FS results. States will already have much of this information if they are receiving expedited notice of program activities and participating in such areas as: review of program planning and reporting documents, meetings of technical review committees, negotiation and implementation of interagency agreements, and public participation activities.

Since the CAs will be centrally administered by DoD, we request that the Components give my office the same information that they give to the States within three weeks of giving it to the States.

Since the CAs are envisioned to run for two years, the information on planned program activities and cost estimates will need to be updated every two years. During the CA period, if there is a significant change in response activities or estimated costs, the Component should notify this office and the State as soon as possible.

Please provide a copy of the attached standard DSMOA language to those who will be responsible for providing the necessary information to the States and to us.

We will also provide more detailed information in the following documents as they are developed:

DoD Policies and Procedures for the cooperative Agreements Program under DSMOAs
DoD Directive on responsibilities and requirements for the Cooperative Agreement Program.
Federal Register notice announcing the program and the availability of funds.

Cooperation and communication are paramount to the success of this program. I encourage you and your installations to make every effort to continually build a good working relationship with your counterparts in the State agencies. I believe that a cooperative effort with the States, to include mutual consideration of each others comments and program objectives, is the key to cost-effective and timely execution of the Defense Environmental Restoration Program.

Thank you for your continuing efforts in making the program a success. If you have questions or comments, Sam Napolitano (202-325-2211) remains my point of contact for DSMOAs, and Andres Talts (202-325-2214) has the lead in carrying out the CA Program.

William H. Parker, III, P.E.
Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense(Environment)

Attachment [The DSMOA will be attached to the letter to the Components. The letter alone will be Attachment C to the DSMOA]