SECTION II:

CRITICAL PERFORMANCE MEASURES

YEAR 2000 COMPLIANCE:

OBJECTIVE: All functional aspects of laboratory infrastructure and information management systems are prepared for continued operation beyond the year 2000.

MEASURE: The site system application and component inventories are complete; renovations are budgeted and planned; systems are tested and certified as Year 2000 compliant; and contingency plans are in place. By the end of this rating period, all renovations/replacements are either (1) completed; (2) planned for completion prior to point of failure; or (3) included in contingency plan. Contingency plan includeS methods for addressing unexpected failures.

EXPECTATION: The dates by which Ames completes renovations/replacements and testing.

 

Performance Level

Metric
 

Outstanding

 Mission Essential Systems (MES) and Site Critical Systems (SCS) renovations/ replacements, testing and site Year 2000 Contingency Plan completed by March 31, 1999.
 

Excellent

 MES and SCS renovations/replacements tested by March 1999 and June 1999 respectively and Site Contingency Plan completed by June 30, 1999.
 

Good

 MES completed and tested by March 1999, SCS completed and tested by September 30, 1999, and Site Contingency Plan completed by September 30, 1999.
 

Marginal

 MES after March 1999 and SCS and contingency Plan after September 30, 1999.
 

Unsatisfactory

 MES after March 1999 and SCS and contingency Plan after December 1999.

 

Environment, Safety and Health

OBJECTIVE: Effective implementation of an Integrated Safety Management System (ISMS) that satisfies DOE’s Objectives, Guiding Principles, and Core Functions as expressed in DOE P 450.4, Safety Management System Policy, and as prescribed in 48 CFR (DEAR) 970.2303-2(a).

MEASURE 1: Implementation of corrective actions developed and agreed to jointly by Ames Laboratory and the Ames Group to address identified ISMS gaps (as defined in the corrective action plan in response to the rotating shaft accident and ISM implementation plan in response to the ISM self assessment).

EXPECTATION:

Performance Level

Metrics
 

Outstanding

 Ames Lab implements 90% or more of corrective actions by scheduled completion dates as agreed to by both Ames Lab and DOE-AMES.
 

Excellent

 Ames Lab implements 80-89% of corrective actions by scheduled completion dates as agreed to by both Ames Lab and DOE-AMES.
 

Good

 Ames Lab implements 70-79% of corrective actions by scheduled completion dates as agreed to by both Ames Lab and DOE-AMES.
 

Marginal

 Ames Lab implements 60-69% of corrective actions by scheduled completion dates as agreed to by both Ames Lab and DOE-AMES.
 

Unsatisfactory

 Ames Lab implements less than 60% of corrective actions by scheduled completion dates as agreed to by both Ames Lab and DOE-AMES.
 

Weight: 40%

  

 

MEASURE 2: Ames Lab notifies DOE-AMES that its previously submitted ISM description is ready for Phase I Review and Verification.

EXPECTATION:

Performance Level

Metrics
 

Outstanding

 Ames Lab notifies and DOE-AMES concurs that the Laboratory is ready for Phase I Verification Review by 6/1/99.
 

Excellent

 Ames Lab notifies and DOE-AMES concurs that the Laboratory is ready for Phase I Verification Review by 7/1/99.
 

Good

 Ames Lab notifies and DOE-AMES concurs that the Laboratory is ready for Phase I Verification Review by 8/1/99.
 

Marginal

 Ames Lab notifies and DOE-AMES concurs that the Laboratory is ready for Phase I Verification Review by 9/1/99.
 

Unsatisfactory

 Ames Lab notifies and DOE-AMES concurs that the Laboratory is ready for Phase I Verification Review after 9/1/99.
 

Weight: 40%

  

 

MEASURE 3: Ames Lab notifies DOE-AMES that the Laboratory is ready for Phase II Verification Review.

EXPECTATION:

Performance Level

Metrics
 

Outstanding

 Ames Lab notifies and DOE-AMES concurs that the Laboratory is ready for Phase II Verification Review by 10/31/99.
 

Excellent

 Ames Lab notifies and DOE-AMES concurs that the Laboratory is ready for Phase II Verification Review by 11/31/99.
 

Good

 Ames Lab notifies and DOE-AMES concurs that the Laboratory is ready for Phase II Verification Review by 12/15/99.
 

Marginal

 Ames Lab notifies and DOE-AMES concurs that the Laboratory is ready for Phase II Verification Review by 12/31/99.
 

Unsatisfactory

 Ames Lab notifies and DOE-AMES concurs that the Laboratory is ready for Phase II Verification Review after 12/31/99.
 

Weight: 20%

  

 

OBJECTIVE: The Contractor shall perform work safely, in a manner that ensures adequate protection for employees, the public, and the environment, and shall be accountable for the safe performance of work.


MEASURE 1: Conduct Activity Reviews of Ames Laboratory work.

EXPECTATION: Ames Laboratory will apply its Activity Review process to all research and support activities previously grandfathered and not reviewed in CY 1998. The Laboratory will provide a listing of all remaining research and support activities for which an Activity Review needs to be conducted to DOE by March 31, 1999.

The performance level attained will be determined by dividing the number of work projects/activities actually reviewed through the end of the calendar year by the total number of work projects/activities identified as needing to be reviewed. The reviews shall be fully documented in accordance with the procedure with findings and deficiencies resolved or appropriate procedures implemented prior to proceeding with any work.

 

PERFORMANCE LEVEL

METRIC
 

Outstanding

100%
 

Excellent

85 - 99%
 

Good

70 - 84%
 

Marginal

60 - 69%
 

Unsatisfactory

< 59%

 

MEASURE 2: Prevent fatalities, injuries, incidents of illness, exposures and releases (in excess of established limits).

EXPECTATION: The Contractor will minimize the Total Recordable Case Rate (TRCR) and Lost Workday Case Rate (LWCR).

Considerable data exists for these parameters over a number of years. Performance will be evaluated as follows:

Ratings will be based on the resulting annual change in Ames Laboratory’s three (3) year rolling average Total Recordable Injury/Illness Rate and Lost Workday Case Rate.

Calculation: Calculate the percent change for both TRCR and LWCR using the following formula and then average the two percentages and apply against the performance expectation matrix below.

% change = 3 year rolling average beginning of period x 100
                               3 year rolling average end of period

Contractor Specific Data.

TRCR

1ST QTR.

2ND QTR.

3RD QTR.

4TH QTR.

CY 95

4.4

1.6

0.8

3.7

CY 96

4.7

3.7

1.7

10.3

CY 97

4.3

2.1

2.0

4.7

CY 98

        

 

LWCR

1ST QTR.

2ND QTR

3RD QTR.

4TH QTR.

CY 95

2.7

0.0

0.0

2.8

CY 96

0.9

1.8

0.8

5.2

CY 97

1.1

2.1

1.0

2.4

CY 98

        

 

HISTORIC MEANS

CONTRACTOR TRCR

CONTRACTOR LWCR

CY 95

2.6

1.3

CY 96

4.9

2.1

CY 97

3.2

1.6

CY 98

    

 

EXPECTATION FOR TRCR AND LWCR:

 

Performance Level

Combined
TRCR and LWCR
% change rate

  
 

Outstanding

<90%

  
 

Excellent

90-110%

  
 

Good

111-130%

  
 

Marginal

131-150%

  
 

Unsatisfactory

>150%

  

 

 

OBJECTIVE: Maintain an effective environmental protection program by minimizing impacts to the public and the environment.

MEASURE 1: Achieve the waste minimization/pollution prevention goals delineated in the Ames Laboratory Pollution Prevention Program Plan.

EXPECTATION: Quantities of routine hazardous waste, not including radioactive, mixed or sanitary waste, generated from existing scientific program research will decrease on an annual basis.

Metric is based on a three (3) year rolling average of total RCRA waste that is generated in a calendar year.

 

Percent = Previous Year Rolling Average - Current Year Rolling Average X 100
                                               Previous Year Rolling Average

Calendar Years

Rolling Average (kg)

Percent Decrease

94-96

4142

1.5

95-97

3640

12.1

96-98

    

 

 

Performance Level

Percent Decrease

  
 

Outstanding

12-15

  
 

Excellent

8-12

  
 

Good

4-8

  
 

Marginal

0-4

  
 

Unsatisfactory

<0

  

 

Facilities and Business

OBJECTIVE: Facilities shall be managed efficiently and effectively.

MEASURE 1: Utilizing the results from the CY 1998 characterization of Wilhelm Hall, Ames will assess the risk, and develop a plan for future action.

EXPECTATION:

Performance Level

Metrics
 

Outstanding

 Risk Assessment conducted and plan for future action completed by September 30, 1999.
 

Excellent

 Risk Assessment conducted, and plan for future action completed by December 31, 1999.
 

Good

 Risk Assessment or plan for future action not completed by December 31, 1999.
 

Marginal

 Risk Assessment and plan for future action not completed by December 31, 1999.

 

OBJECTIVE: Implement and Maintain a program to promote efficient use of natural resources by maximizing recycling and preventing waste wherever possible.

MEASURE 1: Establish full compliance with Executive Order 12873, Federal Acquisition, Recycling, and Waste Prevention.

EXPECTATION: The Contractor will purchase EPA-designated items to the maximum extent practicable.

This metric will be calculated as follows:

Percent = $ spent on recycled EPA-designated items X 100
                      Total $ spent on EPA-designated items

 

Performance
Level

Percentage of $ Spent on Recyclables

Outstanding

90-100

Excellent

75-89

Good

60-74

Marginal

50-59

Unsatisfactory

<50