**ATTACHMENT J.2**

**APPENDIX B**

**PERFORMANCE EVALUATION MEASUREMENT PLAN**

**Applicable to the Operation of**

**Ernest Orlando Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory**

**Contract No. DE-AC02-05CH11231**

**Performance Evaluation Measurement Plan**

INTRODUCTION 1

I. SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY 6

II\. LABORATORY LEADERSHIP 7

III\. OPERATIONS

9

A. Technical Services

> 1\. Facilities and Infrastructure Management 9
>
> 2\. Environment, Safety, and Health Protection 18
>
> 3\. Information Technology Management and Cybersecurity 24

B. Business Services

1\. Financial Management 26

2\. Procurement 28

3\. Property Management 34

4\. Human Resources 37

IV\. ASSESSMENT AND APPRAISAL 38

Attachment 1: Performance-Based Management Guidelines 42

# FY2005 Performance Evaluation Measurement Plan

# Introduction

# 

This Appendix sets forth the plan and procedure to be used in the
evaluation of Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory's (LBNL) performance
*for whatever portion of FY2005 that operations are conducted under the
new contract.* This is required by Part I, Section H, Clause H.14 -
Standards of Contractor Performance Evaluation, and as referenced in
Part II, Section I, Clause I.82 - Total Available Fee: Base Fee Amount
and Performance Fee Amount, of the Contract.

The procedure described in this Appendix utilizes a set of evaluation
criteria for Science and Technology (S&T) mission performance, and, to
the extent possible, a set of "Expectations," \"Objectives," and
\"Measures" against which LBNL's performance will be assessed for each
Leadership and Operations (L&O) mission support area identified herein.
In addition, this procedure encourages the use of management systems and
processes that LBNL functional organizations operate under to assist in
achieving organizational goals, supporting the Laboratory's mission, and
reducing/mitigating performance-related risks.

A performance-based management contract and appraisal process will be
used, including a Contractor self-assessment due at the end of the
fiscal year. Guidelines on the use of the performance expectations,
objectives, and measures are set forth in Attachment 1,
Performance-Based Management Guidelines.

The DOE Office of Science (SC), comprised of organizations in HQ
(Washington D.C.), the Berkeley Site Office (BSO), and the SC Integrated
Support Center (Chicago, IL and Oak Ridge, TN) will evaluate and assess
the performance of the Contractor and the Lawrence Berkeley National
Laboratory (LBNL, or the Laboratory). The appraisal will use, but not be
limited to, the performance criteria below for the Science and
Technology research mission, and the performance expectations,
objectives and measures below for Laboratory Leadership and Operations
support functions. The latter include 7 functional areas: Facilities and
Infrastructure management (F&I); Environment, Safety and Health
protection (ES&H); Information Technology management and Cybersecurity
(IT&C); Financial management (FIN); Procurement management (PROC);
Property management (PROP); and Human Resources management (HR). The
results of the DOE performance appraisal will be used as the basis for
determining earned performance fee and other incentives under the
contract.

[Functional Balanced Scorecards]{.underline}: For the Operations
functions, DOE changed its approach to contract performance measures and
assessment beginning in FY 2004. Each such functional area has from one
to a few institutional system-level performance expectations, backed by
an annual "Balanced Scorecard" (BSC) that provides a more uniform
framework across functions and more detailed performance objectives,
measures, and gradients from which the overall functional rating is
derived. The Balanced Scorecard is a conceptual framework for
translating the goals for an organization into a set of performance
indicators distributed among common performance perspectives, e.g.,
Customer, Financial, Customer, Operations and Internal Process,
Ethics/Governance/Compliance, People/Employees, and Learning and Growth.
Indicators are maintained to measure an organization's progress toward
achieving goals and realizing improvement, while other indicators
measure long-term enablers of sustained success. Through the BSC, a
support organization monitors its customer support performance, its
resource stewardship and cost efficiency, its streamlining of processes,
enhancement of information systems and strengthening of controls, its
meeting of external requirements, its alignment and development of
employees, in short, its ability to continuously learn and improve.

The overarching contract performance goals are as follows:

> **Science and Technology**: LBNL will deliver innovative, forefront
> science and technology aligned with DOE strategic goals, and conceive,
> design, construct, and operate world-class user facilities, all in a
> safe, environmentally sound and efficient manner.
>
> **Laboratory Leadership**: Laboratory leadership enables successful
> implementation of research programs for DOE missions and ensures the
> long-term stewardship and viability of the institution. The Contractor
> will provide leadership, guidance, and oversight that add value to the
> overall management of LBNL.
>
> **Operations**: LBNL will be an employer of choice, conduct all work
> and operations cost effectively and with distinction, while stewarding
> federal resources and assets and fully protecting its workers, its
> users, the public, and the environment.

The performance expectations, objectives, and measures in Section III
incorporate the recently developed DOE Office of Science (SC) goals in
the following areas:

**[Facilities Management]{.underline}**

[Maintenance]{.underline}: SC has established maintenance investment
goals for its national laboratories. The Maintenance Investment Index
(MII) goal is defined as the total Maintenance funding a laboratory
spends in a fiscal year, divided by the Replacement Plant Value (RPV) of
the laboratory. For FY2004, LBNL is reaching the established MII goal of
1.4%. The SC MII goal for LBNL is 1.7% for FY2005, and 2.0% for FY2006.

**[Environment, Safety and Health]{.underline}**

SC has established a goal of achieving a strong safety culture and
"Best-in-Class" safety performance at all of its national laboratories.
This includes achieving specific goals for minimizing accidents and
injuries resulting from laboratory work. SC's target rates for the
laboratory's Total Recordable Cases (TRC) and Days Away, Restricted, or
Transferred (DART), including both contractor and subcontractor
employees working on site are:

[FY2005]{.underline}: both TRC and DART rates will be in the [top 25^th^
percentile]{.underline} of research and testing firms with 1000+
employees (Standard Industrial Code (SIC) 873), i.e., TRC
[\<]{.underline} 1.1 per 100 FTEs, DART [\<]{.underline} 0.5 per 100
FTEs.

[FY2007]{.underline}: both TRC and DART rates will be in the [top 10^th^
percentile]{.underline} of research and testing firms with 1000+
employees (specific rates to be calculated by the Bureau of Labor
Statistics).

The Parties agree to work together to clarify and improve, when
necessary, the process to be used to measure and validate the level of
performance attained. In particular, the Parties agree to:

-   check the validity of each respective Performance Expectation,
    Objective, and Measure as an accurate and meaningful reflector of
    performance and to replace them if necessary.

-   provide for an approach for validation/certification of LBNL
    management systems to ensure the adequacy, effectiveness, and
    efficiency of the systems.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   consider adding to or subtracting from the complement of performance
    objectives, expectations and measures in order to more meaningfully
    and accurately track performance objectives.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   consider adding or subtracting Performance Expectations, Objectives,
    and Measures as appropriate in response to the evolving requirements
    of DOE; in particular, the Parties undertake to replace requirements
    contained in DOE Directives with performance measures whenever
    feasible.

The Parties acknowledge that changes to Departmental Directives occur
and that implementation of such directives may require changes to refine
selected performance Expectations, Objectives, and Measures to implement
data collection and reporting mechanisms, and establish benchmarks
against which to set targets for performance improvement and/or
measurement. The Parties recognize that the evaluation period will also
be utilized to assure that systems and processes are implemented,
tested, evaluated, and refined.

**II. Science and Technology**

DOE will apply the S&T research and development performance assessment
*criteria* below to major sponsored programs at LBNL. The Laboratory
will continue to use external peer reviews to provide internal
management advice on the overall quality of technical work, the
effectiveness of Laboratory management in fostering an atmosphere
conducive to scientific inquiry, and other aspects affecting the ability
of the Laboratory to effectively support the DOE's missions.

[Quality of Science]{.underline}

Recognized indicators of scientific excellence will be assessed,
including leadership in the scientific community, innovation, sustained
achievement, and the influence of scientific contributions. Other
performance measures such as publications, citations, and awards may be
considered. This criterion is to be applied to all aspects of technical
work, including science, engineering, and technical development.

[Research Impacts on AgencyM Missions and National Needs]{.underline}

The impact of Laboratory research and development on the mission needs
of the Department of Energy and the nation will be assessed.
Considerations include energy policy and security, national
environmental goals, economic competitiveness, advancement of
fundamental science, and strengthening science education. The impact of
Laboratory programs on industrial competitiveness and national
technology needs, and the effectiveness of outreach efforts to/with
industry may be assessed. Considerations may include patents and
licenses, collaborative agreements with industry, and the value of
commercial spin-offs.

[Technical Development and Operation of Major Research Facilities & User
Resources]{.underline} Performance elements include success in meeting
scientific and technical mission objectives, technical performance
specifications, and user availability goals. Other considerations may
include the quality of user science performed, extent of user
participation, user satisfaction, operational reliability and
efficiency, and effectiveness of planning for future improvements.

[Program Planning and Management]{.underline}

The assessment should focus on broad program goals including: satisfying
sponsors, planning the orderly continuation or completion of programs,
meeting established technical objectives and milestones, carrying out
work within budget and on schedule, providing cost-effective
performance, and publication and dissemination of scientific and
technical information. Program and planning considerations include: the
ability to execute projects furthering mission objectives,
responsiveness to changes in scope or technical direction, and strategic
responsiveness to new research directions and emerging national needs.
Program management considerations include: quality of leadership,
innovation in approaches to achieving scientific breakthroughs,
effectiveness in managing scientific resources (including mobilizing
interdisciplinary teams), efforts to maintain and enhance the
laboratory's key competencies, organizational effectiveness, employee
morale, and the efficiency of facility operations.

**[Mission Support Performance Expectations, Objectives and
Measures]{.underline}**

**II. Laboratory Leadership**

### [Performance Expectation]{.underline}

1.0 Laboratory Leadership

Laboratory leadership activities enable successful planning and
implementation of research programs for DOE missions and ensure the
stewardship and viability of the institution. (Weight = 100%)

### [Performance Objective]{.underline}

1.1 Institutional Stewardship and Viability

Laboratory senior management\'s approach, deployment and results for
ensuring that the institution is capable of executing its current and
future missions. (Weight = 100%)

### [Performance Measures]{.underline}

1.1.a Planning and Strategic Direction

Evaluation of management's approach for strategic planning and
implementation that aligns Laboratory goals, resources, and
infrastructure with DOE missions, strategic plans, and programmatic
needs. (Weight = 40%)

1.1.b External and Internal Relations

Evaluation of management's approach and effectiveness for external and
internal communications, community relations, educational outreach, and
diversity awareness and planning. (Weight = 30%)

1.1.c Stewardship and Accountability

Evaluation of management's approach for the establishment and
maintenance of internal controls and institutional management systems
that support and ensure public accountability and effective resource
management. (Weight = 30%)

[Gradient]{.underline}

The performance appraisal for each performance measure will use the
scoring criteria in Table 1 below.

Table 1. Appraisal Scoring Guidelines for Laboratory Leadership

+------------+--------------------------------+------------------------+
| Narrative  | Approach/Deployment            | Results                |
| Rating     |                                |                        |
| (Score     |                                |                        |
| Range)     |                                |                        |
+------------+--------------------------------+------------------------+
| Unsa       | Little or no systematic        | Little or no results   |
| tisfactory | approach evident; anecdotal    | in key mission and     |
|            | information                    | business areas.        |
| (59% and   |                                |                        |
| Below)     |                                |                        |
+------------+--------------------------------+------------------------+
| Marginal   | Beginning of a systematic      | Early stages of        |
|            | approach to the key mission    | developing; some       |
| (60 to     | and business areas.            | improvements and/or    |
| 69%)       |                                | early good performance |
|            | Early stages of a transition   | level in a few key     |
|            | from reacting to problems to a | mission and business   |
|            | general improvement            | areas.                 |
|            | orientation.                   |                        |
|            |                                |                        |
|            | Major gaps exist in deployment |                        |
|            | that would inhibit progress in |                        |
|            | achieving the key mission and  |                        |
|            | business objectives.           |                        |
+------------+--------------------------------+------------------------+
| Sa         | A sound systematic approach,   | Improvement trends     |
| tisfactory | responsive to the key mission  | and/or good            |
|            | and business areas.            | performance levels     |
| (70 to     |                                | reported for most key  |
| 79%)       | A fact-based improvement       | mission and business   |
|            | process in place in key areas; | areas.                 |
|            | more emphasis is placed on     |                        |
|            | improvement than on reaction   | No pattern of adverse  |
|            | to problems.                   | trends and/or poor     |
|            |                                | performance levels in  |
|            | No major gaps in deployment,   | the key mission and    |
|            | though some areas may be in    | business areas.        |
|            | the very early stages of       |                        |
|            | deployment.                    | Some trends and/or     |
|            |                                | current performance    |
|            |                                | levels show areas of   |
|            |                                | strength and/or good   |
|            |                                | to very good relative  |
|            |                                | performance levels.    |
+------------+--------------------------------+------------------------+
| Excellent  | A sound systematic approach,   | Current performance is |
|            | responsive to the key mission  | Excellent in most key  |
| (80 to     | and business areas.            | mission and business   |
| 89%)       |                                | areas.                 |
|            | A fact-based improvement       |                        |
|            | process is a key management    | Most improvement       |
|            | tool; clear evidence of        | trends and/or current  |
|            | refinement and improved        | performance levels are |
|            | integration as a result of     | sustained in most      |
|            | improvement cycles and         | other areas.           |
|            | analysis.                      |                        |
|            |                                | Many to most trends    |
|            | Approach is well developed,    | and/or current         |
|            | with no major gaps; deployment | performance levels     |
|            | may vary in some areas.        | show areas of          |
|            |                                | leadership and very    |
|            |                                | good relative          |
|            |                                | performance levels.    |
+------------+--------------------------------+------------------------+
| O          | A sound systematic approach,   | Current performance is |
| utstanding | fully responsive to key        | Outstanding in most    |
|            | mission and business areas.    | key mission and        |
| (90 to     |                                | business areas.        |
| 100%)      | A very strong fact-based       |                        |
|            | improvement process is a key   | Excellent performance  |
|            | management tool; strong        | levels in most other   |
|            | refinement and integration -   | areas.                 |
|            | backed by Excellent analysis.  |                        |
|            |                                | Strong evidence of     |
|            | Approach is fully deployed     | industry and benchmark |
|            | without significant weaknesses | leadership             |
|            | or gaps in the key areas.      | demonstrated in many   |
|            |                                | areas.                 |
+------------+--------------------------------+------------------------+

**III. Operations Management**

**A. [Technical Services]{.underline}**

**Performance Expectation for All Technical Operations:**

Use effective and efficient institutional management systems and
approaches to guide decision-making, improve support to the Laboratory's
mission, align and optimize resources, streamline and improve
operations, ensure institutional stewardship, and advance staff
development.

**1. [Facilities & Infrastructure: Real Property and Construction
Project Management]{.underline}**

**Performance Expectation:**

Plan, develop, manage and maintain Laboratory facilities, infrastructure
and related services to support effective research and operations in a
cost-efficient, safe and environmentally responsible manner.

**[Performance Objectives:]{.underline}**

The Laboratory implements effective site planning, Real Property
Management, and Construction Project Management to achieve excellence in
the stewardship and management of the facilities and infrastructure at
LBNL. The Laboratory will support and document its assessment against
established criteria contained in DOE O 413.3 and DOE M 413.3-1: Project
Management for the Acquisition of Capital Assets, DOE O 430.1B: Real
Property Asset Management and DOE 430.2A:  Departmental Energy and
Utilities Management.

Special emphasis will be placed on progress towards meeting the FY2005
DOE-SC goals for the Laboratory for Maintenance Investment Initiative
(MII), Asset Condition Index (ACI), Asset Utilization Index (AUI) and
Energy Management.

**[Performance Measures:]{.underline}**

The following Balanced Scorecard (BSC) measures and weightings will be
used. Multiple measures under a BSC milestone are given an equivalent,
proportional share of the weighting assigned to that milestone, e.g.,
for a milestone with four measures assigned 8% of the functional
weighting, each measure would have 2% of the weighting.

![](media/image1.png){width="9.245833333333334in" height="6.0in"}

**Milestones**

+----------+---------------+------------------+----------------------+
| **Perspe | **Category**  | **Performance    | **Milestone**        |
| ctives** |               | Measure**        |                      |
|          |               |                  |                      |
| **Mi     |               |                  |                      |
| lestones |               |                  |                      |
| Index**  |               |                  |                      |
+----------+---------------+------------------+----------------------+
| **Cu     | ** **         | ** **            | ** **                |
| stomer** |               |                  |                      |
+----------+---------------+------------------+----------------------+
| **C1-1** | **            | Determine        | Contract M+W Zander  |
|          | Comprehensive | customer         | to complete a        |
|          | Integrated    | satisfaction     | satisfaction survey  |
|          | Planning      | with revised     | w/ key LBNL staff.   |
|          | Process**     | Space Management |                      |
|          |               | Protocol.        |                      |
+----------+---------------+------------------+----------------------+
| **C1-2** | **            | Receive,         | Examine project      |
|          | Comprehensive | analyze, and     | justifications and   |
|          | Integrated    | prioritize       | ensure appropriate   |
|          | Planning      | candidate        | ranking based on:\   |
|          | Process**     | project requests | \> Laboratory mgmt   |
|          |               |                  | mission priorities\  |
|          |               |                  | \>Space utilization, |
|          |               |                  | division             |
|          |               |                  | co-location, and     |
|          |               |                  | condition goals\     |
|          |               |                  | \>ES&H concerns.     |
+----------+---------------+------------------+----------------------+
| **C1-3** | **            | Improve Unified  | Actively review      |
|          | Comprehensive | Project Call     | process and schedule |
|          | Integrated    | process          | during the FY05      |
|          | Planning      |                  | Unified Project Call |
|          | Process**     |                  | process and propose  |
|          |               |                  | improvements.        |
+----------+---------------+------------------+----------------------+
| **C1-4** | **            | Develop Long     | Develop LRDP EIR and |
|          | Comprehensive | Range            | any necessary        |
|          | Integrated    | Development Plan | assessments,         |
|          | Planning      | Environmental    | studies, or          |
|          | Process**     | Impact Report.   | analyses. Track      |
|          |               |                  | progress quarterly.  |
+----------+---------------+------------------+----------------------+
|          |               |                  |                      |
+----------+---------------+------------------+----------------------+
| **C2-1** | **Space       | The Laboratory   | Remain below the GSA |
|          | Utilization** | will optimize    | standard of 125      |
|          |               | its total office | sf/person (average)  |
|          |               | space            | in primary office    |
|          |               | utilization.     | space on-site and in |
|          |               |                  | off-site leased      |
|          |               |                  | space. Track, report |
|          |               |                  | quarterly.           |
+----------+---------------+------------------+----------------------+
|          |               |                  |                      |
+----------+---------------+------------------+----------------------+
| **C3-1** | **Customer    | Develop Customer | Develop Customer     |
|          | Liaison       | Liaison Program  | Liaison Program incl |
|          | Program**     | for Projects and | necessary            |
|          |               | Const            | assessments,         |
|          |               | Management.      | studies, or          |
|          |               |                  | analyses. Track      |
|          |               |                  | progress quarterly.  |
+----------+---------------+------------------+----------------------+

+----------+---------------+------------------+----------------------+
| **Perspe | **Category**  | **Performance    | **Milestone**        |
| ctives** |               | Measure**        |                      |
|          |               |                  |                      |
| **Mi     |               |                  |                      |
| lestones |               |                  |                      |
| Index**  |               |                  |                      |
+----------+---------------+------------------+----------------------+
| **C4-1** | **Utility     | Develop a Peak   | Copy of the plan     |
|          | Service       | Load             | sections as they are |
|          | Reliability   | Mana             | completed.           |
|          | and Demand    | gement/Emergency |                      |
|          | Control**     | Conservation     |                      |
|          |               | Plan             |                      |
+----------+---------------+------------------+----------------------+
| **F      | ** **         |                  |                      |
| inance** |               |                  |                      |
+----------+---------------+------------------+----------------------+
| **F1-1** | **Project     | Track project    | Copy of the Report.  |
|          | Delivery      | cost and report  |                      |
|          | Costs**       | as a % of TEC    |                      |
|          |               | for Line Item    |                      |
|          |               | projects.        |                      |
+----------+---------------+------------------+----------------------+
| **F1-2** | **Project     | Track project    | Copy of the Report.  |
|          | Delivery      | cost and report  |                      |
|          | Costs**       | as a % of TEC    |                      |
|          |               | for GPP and      |                      |
|          |               | other projects   |                      |
|          |               | \> \$500k.       |                      |
+----------+---------------+------------------+----------------------+
| **F1-3** | **Project     | Track Delivery   | Copy of the Report.  |
|          | Delivery      | cost (EDI &      |                      |
|          | Costs**       | PM/CM) and       |                      |
|          |               | report as a % of |                      |
|          |               | construction     |                      |
|          |               | costs for Line   |                      |
|          |               | Item projects.   |                      |
+----------+---------------+------------------+----------------------+
| **F1-4** | **Project     | Track Delivery   | Copy of the Report.  |
|          | Delivery      | cost (EDI &      |                      |
|          | Costs**       | PM/CM) and       |                      |
|          |               | report as a % of |                      |
|          |               | construction     |                      |
|          |               | costs for        |                      |
|          |               | General Plant &  |                      |
|          |               | other projects   |                      |
|          |               | \>\$500k.        |                      |
+----------+---------------+------------------+----------------------+
|          |               |                  |                      |
+----------+---------------+------------------+----------------------+
| **F2-1** | **Maintenance | MII, AUI, and    | Achieve FY05 Goal    |
|          | Costs**       | ACI              | for MII, ACI and AUI |
+----------+---------------+------------------+----------------------+
|          |               |                  |                      |
+----------+---------------+------------------+----------------------+
| **F3-1** | **Building    | The reduction in | Achieve greater than |
|          | Energy        | energy usage     | 20% reduction in     |
|          | Usage**       | from FY90 levels | energy usage.        |
|          |               | in BTUs per      |                      |
|          |               | gross square     |                      |
|          |               | feet of building |                      |
|          |               | expressed as a   |                      |
|          |               | percent of FY90  |                      |
|          |               | energy usage.    |                      |
+----------+---------------+------------------+----------------------+

+----------+---------------+------------------+----------------------+
| **Perspe | **Category**  | **Performance    | **Milestone**        |
| ctives** |               | Measure**        |                      |
|          |               |                  |                      |
| **Mi     |               |                  |                      |
| lestones |               |                  |                      |
| Index**  |               |                  |                      |
+----------+---------------+------------------+----------------------+
| **Ops,   |               |                  |                      |
| Internal |               |                  |                      |
| P        |               |                  |                      |
| rocess** |               |                  |                      |
+----------+---------------+------------------+----------------------+
| **O1-1** | **Asset       | Based on above   | Document             |
|          | Conditio      | utilization      | underutilized or     |
|          | n/Suitability | analyses,        | unsuitable excess    |
|          | Assessment**  | identify excess  | space. If approved,  |
|          |               | space Recommend  | ensure entry into    |
|          |               | inclusion in     | FIMS and inclusion   |
|          |               | FIMS and         | in the Strategic     |
|          |               | Strategic        | Facilities Plan      |
|          |               | Facilities Plan. |                      |
+----------+---------------+------------------+----------------------+
| ** **    |               |                  |                      |
+----------+---------------+------------------+----------------------+
| **O2-1** | **Real        | Explore and      | List off-site lease  |
|          | Property      | recommend        | options in           |
|          | Leases**      | off-site leased  | satisfying space     |
|          |               | opportunities.   | requests. Report     |
|          |               |                  | quarterly.           |
+----------+---------------+------------------+----------------------+
|          |               |                  |                      |
+----------+---------------+------------------+----------------------+
| **O3-1** | **Real        | Ensure FIMS      | Produce              |
|          | Property      | consistency with | documentation that   |
|          | Program       | other DOE        | shows quarterly      |
|          | Imp           | databases.       | reconciliation       |
|          | lementation** |                  | between FIMS and     |
|          |               |                  | Management and       |
|          |               |                  | Analysis Reporting   |
|          |               |                  | System (MARS).       |
+----------+---------------+------------------+----------------------+
| **O3-2** | **Real        | Ensure FIMS      | Prepare annual memo  |
|          | Property      | supports Space   | to DOE regarding     |
|          | Program       | Banking          | Space Banking,       |
|          | Imp           | Reporting.       | reflecting FIMS      |
|          | lementation** |                  | archived square      |
|          |               |                  | footage, facilities  |
|          |               |                  | flagged as excess,   |
|          |               |                  | and excess years.    |
+----------+---------------+------------------+----------------------+
| **O3-3** | **Real        | Ensure accurate  | Revise RPVs to       |
|          | Property      | RPV reporting    | reflect DOE-HQ       |
|          | Program       | using criteria   | supported RS         |
|          | Imp           | consistent       | Means-based          |
|          | lementation** | across all of SC | methodology for      |
|          |               | Labs.            | calculations.        |
+----------+---------------+------------------+----------------------+
|          |               |                  |                      |
+----------+---------------+------------------+----------------------+
| **O4-1** | **Project     | Bldg 51 and      | CD-1 Approve         |
|          | Work          | Bevatron         | Alternative          |
|          | Performed**   | Demolition       | Selection and Cost   |
|          |               |                  | Range                |
+----------+---------------+------------------+----------------------+
| **O4-2** | **Project     | Animal Care      | Submit documents for |
|          | Work          | Facility         | CD-2 Approval        |
|          | Performed**   |                  |                      |
+----------+---------------+------------------+----------------------+

+----------+---------------+------------------+----------------------+
| **Perspe | **Category**  | **Performance    | **Milestone**        |
| ctives** |               | Measure**        |                      |
|          |               |                  |                      |
| **Mi     |               |                  |                      |
| lestones |               |                  |                      |
| Index**  |               |                  |                      |
+----------+---------------+------------------+----------------------+
|          |               |                  |                      |
+----------+---------------+------------------+----------------------+
| **O4-3** | **Project     | Molecular        | Construction Project |
|          | Work          | Foundry          | Review               |
|          | Performed**   |                  |                      |
+----------+---------------+------------------+----------------------+
| **O4-4** | **Project     | B77 Phase II     | Submit documents for |
|          | Work          | Rehabilitation   | CD-3 Approval        |
|          | Performed**   |                  |                      |
+----------+---------------+------------------+----------------------+
| **O4-5** | **Project     | User Support     | Submit documents for |
|          | Work          | Building         | CD-1 Approval        |
|          | Performed**   |                  |                      |
+----------+---------------+------------------+----------------------+
| **O4-6** | **Project     | Alternative      | Mission Need         |
|          | Work          | Finance          | Statement and CD-0,  |
|          | Performed**   | Facilities       | Approval             |
+----------+---------------+------------------+----------------------+
| ** **    | ** **         |                  |                      |
+----------+---------------+------------------+----------------------+
| **O5-1** | **Project     | Implement        | Implement Project    |
|          | Management    | Project          | Management Info      |
|          | Info System   | Management Info  | System               |
|          | Imp           | System           |                      |
|          | lementation** |                  |                      |
+----------+---------------+------------------+----------------------+
|          |               |                  |                      |
+----------+---------------+------------------+----------------------+
| **O6-1** | **Maintenance | FY05 By-Bldg.    | Complete FY05        |
|          | Program       | Maintenance      | By-Bldg. Maintenance |
|          | Imp           | Actual versus    | Actual versus        |
|          | lementation** | Requirements     | Requirements Report  |
|          |               | Report           |                      |
+----------+---------------+------------------+----------------------+
| **O6-2** | **Maintenance | FY05 By-Bldg. &  | Complete FY05        |
|          | Program       | Site Deferred    | By-Bldg. & Site      |
|          | Imp           | Maintenance      | Deferred Maintenance |
|          | lementation** | Backlog &        | Backlog & Projects   |
|          |               | Projects Plan    | Plan                 |
+----------+---------------+------------------+----------------------+
| **O6-3** | **Maintenance | Condition        | Complete Condition   |
|          | Program       | Assessment       | Assessment Summary   |
|          | Imp           | Summary Report   | Report               |
|          | lementation** |                  |                      |
+----------+---------------+------------------+----------------------+
| **O6-4** | **Maintenance | FY05 By-Bldg. &  | Complete FY05        |
|          | Program       | Site Deferred    | By-Bldg. & Site      |
|          | Imp           | Maintenance      | Deferred Maintenance |
|          | lementation** | Report           | Report               |
+----------+---------------+------------------+----------------------+

+----------+---------------+------------------+----------------------+
| **Perspe | **Category**  | **Performance    | **Milestone**        |
| ctives** |               | Measure**        |                      |
|          |               |                  |                      |
| **Mi     |               |                  |                      |
| lestones |               |                  |                      |
| Index**  |               |                  |                      |
+----------+---------------+------------------+----------------------+
| ** **    | ** **         |                  |                      |
+----------+---------------+------------------+----------------------+
| **O7-1** | **Energy      | Long-range       | Copy of the plan     |
|          | Management    | Energy Mgmt Plan | sections as they are |
|          | Plan**        | is in accordance | completed.           |
|          |               | with DOE O       |                      |
|          |               | 430.2A, Att. 1.  |                      |
|          |               | Each of the 15   |                      |
|          |               | requirements     |                      |
|          |               | listed in the    |                      |
|          |               | CRD addressed in |                      |
|          |               | adequate detail. |                      |
+----------+---------------+------------------+----------------------+
| **O7-2** | **Energy      | Implement at     | Copy of the plan     |
|          | Management    | least 4 of the   | sections as they are |
|          | Plan**        | Fed'l Energy     | completed.           |
|          |               | Mgmt Program's   |                      |
|          |               | water efficiency |                      |
|          |               | best mgmt        |                      |
|          |               | practices        |                      |
|          |               | published at 10% |                      |
|          |               | of the total     |                      |
|          |               | facility square  |                      |
|          |               | footage.         |                      |
+----------+---------------+------------------+----------------------+
| *        |               |                  |                      |
| *Ethics, |               |                  |                      |
| Gov      |               |                  |                      |
| ernance, |               |                  |                      |
| Comp     |               |                  |                      |
| liance** |               |                  |                      |
+----------+---------------+------------------+----------------------+
| **E1-1** | Project       | Initiate         | Prepare              |
|          | Management    | practices,       | Implementation Plan. |
|          |               | procedures to    |                      |
|          |               | support the      |                      |
|          |               | implementation   |                      |
|          |               | of Project       |                      |
|          |               | Management       |                      |
|          |               | Manual (DOE M    |                      |
|          |               | 413.3-1)         |                      |
+----------+---------------+------------------+----------------------+
| **E1-2** | Business      | Develop Business | Select or develop    |
|          | Ethics        | Ethics training  | ethics training and  |
|          |               | for managers     | schedule for all     |
|          |               |                  | managers             |
+----------+---------------+------------------+----------------------+
| **       |               |                  |                      |
| People** |               |                  |                      |
+----------+---------------+------------------+----------------------+
| **P1-1** | Management    | APPA and IFMA    | Four key Managers    |
|          | Technical     | membership for   | become members of    |
|          | Capability    | key managers     | APPA or IFMA         |
+----------+---------------+------------------+----------------------+
| **P2-1** | Supervisory   | Develop          | Curriculum defined   |
|          | Training      | curriculum for   | and Supervisors      |
|          |               | facility         | identified to attend |
|          |               | supervisor       |                      |
|          |               | training         |                      |
+----------+---------------+------------------+----------------------+
| **P3-1** | Increased Use | Advance the use  | Training completed   |
|          | of existing   | of enterprise    | on new enterprise    |
|          | I             | information      | information system   |
|          | nfrastructure | systems          |                      |
+----------+---------------+------------------+----------------------+

**OVERALL FACILITIES & INFRASTRUCTURE SCORING**

  -------------- -------------------------------------- --------------- ------------
                 ** **                                  ** **           Milestones
                                                                        Scheduled

  **MILESTONES   **PERFORMANCE MEASURES**               **WEIGHTING**   FY 2005
  INDEX**                                                               

  C1             Comprehensive Integrated Planning      10              4
                 Process (Criterion 1.0)                                

  C2             Space Utilization (Criterion 1.0)      5               1

  C3             Develop Customer Liaison Program for   5               1
                 Projects and Const Management                          

  C4             Utility Service Reliability and Demand 5               1
                 Control (Criterion 3.0)                                

                                                                        

  F1             Project Delivery Costs (Criterion 2.0) 8               4

  F2             Achieve FY05 Goal for MII, ACI and AUI 10              1
                 (Criterion 3.0)                                        

  F3             Building Energy Usage (Criterion 3.0)  5               1

                                                                        

  O1             Asset Condition/Suitability Assessment 5               1
                 (Criterion 1.0)                                        

  O2             Real Property Leases (Criterion 1.0)   5               1

  O3             Facilities Information Management      5               3
                 System (FIMS) Completeness (Criterion                  
                 1.0)                                                   

  O4             Project Work Performed (Criterion 2.0) 8               6

  O5             Implement Project Management Info      4               1
                 System (Criterion 2.0)                                 

  O6             Maintenance Program Implementation     10              4
                 (Criterion 3.0)                                        

  O7             Energy Management Plan Goals           10              2
                 Accomplished (Criterion 3.0)                           
  -------------- -------------------------------------- --------------- ------------

  -------------- ------------------------------------- --------------- ----------
  **MILESTONES   **PERFORMANCE MEASURES**              **WEIGHTING**   FY 2005
  INDEX**                                                              

  E1             Initiate practices/procedures to      5               1
                 support the implementation of Project                 
                 Management Manual (DOE M 413.3-1)                     
                 (Criterion 2.0)                                       

  E2             Revise Project Call process to        \*              1
                 enhance financial controls (Criterion                 
                 1.0)                                                  

  E3             Develop Business Ethics training for  \*              1
                 managers (Criterion 1.0)                              

                                                                       

  P1             APPA and IFMA membership for managers \*              1
                 (Criterion 3.0)                                       

  P2             Develop curriculum for facility       \*              1
                 supervisor training (Criterion 2.0)                   

  P3             Advance the use of enterprise         \*              1
                 information system (Criterion 3.0)                    

                                                                        

                 Total Weight, Milestones, and Overall 100             37
                 Score                                                 
  -------------- ------------------------------------- --------------- ----------

**2. [Environment, Safety and Health (ES&H) Protection]{.underline}**

**Performance Expectation:**

Ensure the safety and health of the workforce and members of the public,
and protection of the environment, in all program activities.

**[Performance Objectives]{.underline}:**

The Laboratory uses an institutional Integrated Safety Management (ISM)
system to integrate ES&H into Laboratory work processes at all levels so
those missions are accomplished while protecting workers, the public and
the environment. The Laboratory pursues best practices, including
external validation and/or certification of ES&H Management Systems.

Special emphasis will be placed on meeting the DOE-SC FY2005 goals for
reduced Total Recordable Cases (TRC) and Days Away/Restricted Time
(DART).

[Performance Measure]{.underline}:

Best Practices and Certified/Independently Validated ES&H Management
Systems.

The Laboratory will assess, develop, and implement best practices and
certified/independently validated ES&H management systems based upon
industry best practices and international/ national standards.

To meet efficiency and effectiveness standards of its internal business
processes, the Laboratory is satisfactorily progressing towards
certification, validation, or accreditation (CVA) of its ES&H Management
Systems and implementing actions from its best practices studies.
(weight = 40%)

**Performance Gradients**

Unsatisfactory Little or no effort has been demonstrated towards the
achievement of the performance measure.

Marginal Some effort is demonstrated however results fall short of the
expectations for the good gradient.

Satisfactory CVA progress and best practices implementation are
significant but impediments have occurred that delay the completion of
some certified, validated, or accredited ES&H management system
milestones and best practices milestone (\>75% of milestones completed).

Excellent CVA progress is on-schedule with few delays in the completion
of certified, validated, or accredited ES&H management system milestones
and best practice milestones (\>85% of milestones completed).

Outstanding CVA progress is on-schedule with no significant delays in
the completion of certified, validated, or accredited ES&H management
system milestones and best practice milestones (\>95% of milestones
completed).

**Assumptions**

-   Target Occupational Health and Safety Assessment Series (OHSAS)
    18001 or other safety system certification.

-   CVA of ES&H management systems is a multi-year effort. Future
    events, issues, or circumstances may result in required or
    recommended changes to CVA action plans or the elimination/addition
    of candidate systems. Any changes to action plans or candidate ES&H
    management systems must be mutually agreed to by DOE-BSO and LBNL.

[Performance Measure]{.underline}:

ISM effectiveness, measured through the ISM Balanced Scorecard (BSC).

The Laboratory has an effective ISM System that protects Lab employees,
the public and the environment while supporting the scientific mission
of the Lab.

Note: ISM includes environmental protection as well as the safety and
health of workers and the public. (weight = 60%)

> **Performance Gradients**
>
> Performance is rated through the ISM Balanced Scorecard. (The balanced
> scorecard gradients are in the ES&H ISM Performance Assessment Model
> agreed to by LBNL and BSO. They are incorporated by reference).
> Adjectival rating is based on the following percent score:

  -----------------------------------------------------------------------
  **BSC Overall Percent Score**       **Performance Gradients**
  ----------------------------------- -----------------------------------
  Less than 60%                       Unsatisfactory

  \> 60% to \< 70%                    Marginal

  \> 70% to \< 80%                    Satisfactory

  \> 80% to \< 90%                    Excellent

  More than 90%                       Outstanding
  -----------------------------------------------------------------------

**Assumptions**

-   Supplemental information on the quality and effectiveness of the
    Berkeley Lab\'s ISM program can be provided through the BSO/LBNL
    Operational Awareness (OA) Program, including results from any line
    or staff office ES&H reviews.

-   The Lab will continue to gather data to monitor worker radiation
    dose, unplanned radiation exposure, radiation contamination,
    environmental releases, and overexposure to chemical, biological and
    physical agents.

**ISM Balanced Scorecard**

+------+--------+-----------------+------------------+----+----------+
| **   | **ISM  | **Performance   | **BSC            | *  | *        |
| Bala | Funct  | Expectations**  | Measurements**   | *W | *Goals/R |
| nced | ions** |                 |                  | ei | atings** |
| Sco  |        |                 |                  | gh |          |
| reca |        |                 |                  | ti |          |
| rd** |        |                 |                  | ng |          |
|      |        |                 |                  | ** |          |
|      |        |                 |                  |    |          |
|      |        |                 |                  | ** |          |
|      |        |                 |                  | Fa |          |
|      |        |                 |                  | ct |          |
|      |        |                 |                  | or |          |
|      |        |                 |                  | ** |          |
+======+========+=================+==================+====+==========+
| **Cu | Scope  | Missions are    | *Self-Assessment | 1X | Strong   |
| stom | of     | effectively     | ISM Criterion    |    | ES&H     |
| er** | Work   | translated into | E2*, There is    |    | commu    |
|      | and    | work.           | ongoing and      |    | nication |
|      | Pl     | Responsibility  | systematic ES&H  |    | in       |
|      | anning | for safety by   | communication    |    | organ    |
|      |        | managers and    | between          |    | ization. |
|      |        | staff is        | management and   |    |          |
|      |        | effectively     | staff.           |    |          |
|      |        | communicated.   |                  |    |          |
+------+--------+-----------------+------------------+----+----------+
|      | Fe     |                 | *Self-Assessment | 1X | C        |
|      | edback |                 | ISM Criterion    |    | ustomers |
|      | and    |                 | E11*, Managers   |    | actively |
|      | Impro  |                 | and staff are    |    | engaged  |
|      | vement |                 | regularly        |    | in ES&H  |
|      |        |                 | involved in ES&H |    | act      |
|      |        |                 | feedback and     |    | ivities. |
|      |        |                 | improvements.    |    |          |
+------+--------+-----------------+------------------+----+----------+
|      |        | Internal        | Annual           | 1X | Customer |
|      |        | customers are   | Operations       |    | feedback |
|      |        | satisfied with  | Scorecard        |    | positive |
|      |        | EH&S services   | ratings for EH&S |    | in all   |
|      |        | and programs    | performance in   |    | areas.   |
|      |        | that support a  | quality,         |    |          |
|      |        | safe workplace  | timeliness,      |    |          |
|      |        | and protection  | cost,            |    |          |
|      |        | to the          | communication,   |    |          |
|      |        | environment and | innovation and   |    |          |
|      |        | public.         | support of       |    |          |
|      |        |                 | missions.        |    |          |
+------+--------+-----------------+------------------+----+----------+
| *    | Scope  | There is cost   | *Self-Assessment | 1X | E        |
| *Fin | of     | effective       | ISM Criterion    |    | ffective |
| anci | Work   | delivery of     | E1*, Resources   |    | al       |
| al** | and    | ES&H services   | are effectively  |    | location |
|      | Pl     | and programs.   | allocated to     |    | of ES&H  |
|      | anning | Value is added  | address ES&H     |    | re       |
|      |        | while           | considerations.  |    | sources. |
|      |        | controlling     |                  |    |          |
|      |        | costs.          |                  |    |          |
+------+--------+-----------------+------------------+----+----------+
|      |        |                 | Implement        | 1X | Per      |
|      |        |                 | performance      |    | formance |
|      |        |                 | goals            |    | goals    |
|      |        |                 | established in   |    | id       |
|      |        |                 | the FY04         |    | entified |
|      |        |                 | performance year |    | in FY04  |
|      |        |                 | mutually agreed  |    | are      |
|      |        |                 | on by LBNL and   |    | impl     |
|      |        |                 | BSO.             |    | emented. |
|      |        |                 |                  |    |          |
|      |        |                 | **(see note 1)** |    | **(see   |
|      |        |                 |                  |    | note     |
|      |        |                 |                  |    | 1)**     |
+------+--------+-----------------+------------------+----+----------+

+------+--------+-----------------+------------------+----+----------+
| **Op | Hazard | There is an     | *Self-Assessment | 1X | Hazard   |
| erat | Id     | effective       | ISM Criterion    |    | ID and   |
| ions | entifi | process to      | E4,* Divisions   |    | analysis |
| (    | cation | identify,       | have a process   |    | system   |
| Inte | and    | analyze and     | to identify,     |    | in place |
| rnal | An     | categorize LBNL | analyze, and     |    | &        |
| Busi | alysis | hazards.        | categorized      |    | ef       |
| ness |        |                 | hazards          |    | fective. |
| Pr   |        |                 | associated with  |    |          |
| oces |        |                 | work.            |    |          |
| s)** |        |                 |                  |    |          |
+------+--------+-----------------+------------------+----+----------+
|      | Im     | Administrative  | *Self-Assessment | 1X | Controls |
|      | plemen | and engineering | ISM Criterion    |    | checked  |
|      | tation | controls to     | E5,* Engineering |    | and      |
|      | of     | p               | and other safety |    | ef       |
|      | Hazard | revent/mitigate | controls are in  |    | fective. |
|      | Co     | hazards are     | place and        |    |          |
|      | ntrols | effectively     | maintained;      |    |          |
|      |        | tailored to the | *Criterion E6,*  |    |          |
|      |        | work being      | Administrative   |    |          |
|      |        | performed.      | controls are in  |    |          |
|      |        | Applicable      | place and        |    |          |
|      |        | safety          | maintained.      |    |          |
|      |        | standards,      |                  |    |          |
|      |        | requirements,   |                  |    |          |
|      |        | and safety      |                  |    |          |
|      |        | envelopes are   |                  |    |          |
|      |        | established.    |                  |    |          |
+------+--------+-----------------+------------------+----+----------+
|      | P      | LBNL operations | Progress shall   | 5X | TRC and  |
|      | erform | and activities  | be measured      |    | DART     |
|      | Work   | will minimize   | towards reducing |    | rates    |
|      |        | accidents and   | the TRC and DART |    | are      |
|      |        | injuries.       | rates to the     |    | reduced  |
|      |        |                 | 25^th^           |    | to the   |
|      |        |                 | percentile of    |    | 25^th^   |
|      |        |                 | the 2001 SIC 873 |    | pe       |
|      |        |                 | large            |    | rcentile |
|      |        |                 | establishment    |    | of the   |
|      |        |                 | rates by FY2005. |    | 2001 SIC |
|      |        |                 | **(see note 1)** |    | 873      |
|      |        |                 |                  |    | rates.   |
|      |        |                 |                  |    |          |
|      |        |                 |                  |    | **(see   |
|      |        |                 |                  |    | note     |
|      |        |                 |                  |    | 1)**     |
+------+--------+-----------------+------------------+----+----------+
| **   | Fe     | Employee        | *Self-Assessment | 1X | \%       |
| Peop | edback | development     | ISM Criterion    |    | Co       |
| le** | and    | promotes staff  | E9*, Staff is    |    | mpletion |
|      | Impro  | competency and  | proficient in    |    | of       |
|      | vement | professional    | performing work  |    | required |
|      |        | certifications. | safely.          |    | t        |
|      |        |                 |                  |    | raining. |
+------+--------+-----------------+------------------+----+----------+
|      |        |                 | Implement        | 1X | Per      |
|      |        |                 | performance      |    | formance |
|      |        |                 | goals            |    | goals    |
|      |        |                 | established in   |    | id       |
|      |        |                 | the FY04         |    | entified |
|      |        |                 | performance year |    | in FY04  |
|      |        |                 | mutually agreed  |    | are      |
|      |        |                 | upon by LBNL and |    | impl     |
|      |        |                 | BSO.             |    | emented. |
|      |        |                 |                  |    |          |
|      |        |                 | **(see note 1)** |    | **(see   |
|      |        |                 |                  |    | note     |
|      |        |                 |                  |    | 1)**     |
+------+--------+-----------------+------------------+----+----------+
| **Et | P      | External        | Number of major  | 4X | I        |
| hics | erform | reviews by      | non-compliance   |    | ncidents |
| Go   | Work   | regulatory      | issues is below  |    | of       |
| vern |        | agencies show   | internal control |    | nonco    |
| ance |        | that LBNL is in | number.          |    | mpliance |
| Comp |        | compliance with |                  |    | under    |
| lian |        | regulatory      |                  |    | control  |
| ce** |        | requirements.   |                  |    | number.  |
+------+--------+-----------------+------------------+----+----------+
| *    |        |                 |                  | t  |          |
| *Ove |        |                 |                  | ot |          |
| rall |        |                 |                  | al |          |
| Per  |        |                 |                  | we |          |
| cent |        |                 |                  | ig |          |
| Sco  |        |                 |                  | ht |          |
| re** |        |                 |                  | ed |          |
|      |        |                 |                  | n  |          |
|      |        |                 |                  | um |          |
|      |        |                 |                  | er |          |
|      |        |                 |                  | ic |          |
|      |        |                 |                  | al |          |
|      |        |                 |                  | v  |          |
|      |        |                 |                  | al |          |
|      |        |                 |                  | ue |          |
|      |        |                 |                  | /  |          |
|      |        |                 |                  | 54 |          |
|      |        |                 |                  | (t |          |
|      |        |                 |                  | ot |          |
|      |        |                 |                  | al |          |
|      |        |                 |                  | po |          |
|      |        |                 |                  | ss |          |
|      |        |                 |                  | ib |          |
|      |        |                 |                  | le |          |
|      |        |                 |                  | sc |          |
|      |        |                 |                  | or |          |
|      |        |                 |                  | e) |          |
+------+--------+-----------------+------------------+----+----------+

**Notes:**

1.  Performance ratings of BSC measures for ES&H cost effectiveness
    (financial), TRC/DART rates (operations), and professional
    certifications (people) are described in detail below.

> **[BSC "People" Measure]{.underline}:** Employee development promotes
> staff competency and professional certification.
>
> **Lab Process:** Implement goals established from the FY04 staff
> certification benchmarking study.

-   Provide adequate funding to support achieving and maintaining
    professional certification for the EH&S staff.

-   Identify EH&S staff who are on career tracks for professional
    certifications. Achieve certification as per the tasks and schedule
    described in the identified employee's development plan.

-   Maintain the 50% benchmark for percent certified staff per total
    EH&S professional staff.

> **Performance Rating:**
>
> **Satisfactory (green):** There is objective evidence that all three
> goals are fully met.
>
> **Partial (yellow):** There is objective evidence that only two of the
> three goals are fully met; one of the met goals must be maintaining
> the 50% benchmark.
>
> **Marginal (red):** There is objective evidence that none or only one
> of the three goals is fully met.
>
> **[BSC "Financial" Measure]{.underline}:** There is cost effective
> delivery of ES&H services and programs. Value is added while
> controlling costs.
>
> **Lab Process:** Implement goals established from the FY04 cost
> effectiveness study.

-   Establish Process Improvement Teams (PIT) to evaluate at least two
    mutually agreed upon EH&S programs/processes for improved
    effectiveness while controlling costs.

-   Identify the operational improvements for the assessed
    programs/processes.

-   Implement according to a mutually agreed upon schedule the
    operational improvements for the programs/processes.

> **Performance Rating:**
>
> **Satisfactory (green):** There is objective evidence that all three
> goals are fully met.
>
> **Partial (yellow):** There is objective evidence that only two of the
> three goals are fully met.
>
> **Marginal (red):** There is objective evidence that none or only one
> of the three goals is fully met.
>
> **[BSC "Operations - Accident Prevention" Measure]{.underline}:** LBNL
> operations and activities will minimize accidents and injuries.
>
> **Lab Process:** The Lab will reduce its TRC and DART rates to the
> 25^th^ percentile of the 2001 SIC 873 large establishment rate by
> fiscal year 2005. LBNL shall demonstrate significant progress towards
> meeting the 25th percentile goal. The corresponding TRC/DART rates are
> the following:
>
> **Performance Rating:**

  --------------------- --------------------------------- ---------------
  **Ratings**           **TRC**                           **DART**

  **Satisfactory        \<= 1.1                           \<= 0.5
  (green) 3pts**                                          

  **Partial (yellow)    \> 1.1 to \<= 1.3                 \> 0.5 to \<=
  2pts**                                                  1.0

  **Marginal (red)      \> 1.3                            \> 1.0
  1pt**                                                   
  --------------------- --------------------------------- ---------------

> TRC rate above 1.725 shall receive 0 pts. in the scoring.

2.  BSC scoring is based on a red/yellow/green
    (unsatisfactory/marginal/satisfactory) rating system. Each
    color-coded rating has a numerical value equal to: green = 3 points;
    yellow = 2 points; red = 1 point. Each BSC measure has a weighting
    factor of 1X, 4X, or 5X its numerical score to signify the relative
    importance of the measure in the Balanced Scorecard. Overall score
    is the total numerical value of the measurement ratings over the
    total possible score of 54. The BSC overall percent score is the
    basis for rating performance for Measure 2.1, ISM System, in the
    Appendix F contract.

3.  BSC measurements shall utilize existing LBNL metrics whenever
    feasible. Seven of the eleven measures are from Berkeley Lab's FY04
    Self-Assessment ISM Performance Criteria. Each ISM criterion is
    given a percent score based on performance from each of the 16 LBNL
    divisions or directorates. The ISM percent score is equivalent to
    the BSC color-coded rating as follows: 90% to 100% = green; 80%-89%
    = yellow; and less than 79% = red. ISM percent score is provided in
    the far right column of the "At-a-Glance" table from the Lab's
    Annual ES&H Self-Assessment Report.

4.  Eight of the eleven measures have direct application to DOE's annual
    validation of ISM. For DOE's purposes, the scores of those measures
    can be used separately from the total ISM Balanced Scorecard.

5.  Incidents of noncompliance are based on the weighted number of
    reportable occurrences under Group 9 of the Occurrence Reporting and
    Processing System (ORPS). Less than or equal to two occurrences =
    green rating; more than two and less than four occurrences = yellow
    rating; and more than four occurrences = red rating.

Assumptions:

> When the number of incidents is less than or equal to 3, scoring will
> be based solely on this number.
>
> Environmental releases or excursions that remain within compliance
> limits will not be counted as incidents by this measure.

The Laboratory has the option to apply a weighting factor to each
incident, depending on its severity and magnitude. All environmental
incidents that are serious will be given a weighing factor of 1, on a
scale of 0 to 1. A release or violation is considered serious unless an
alternate weighting factor is proposed by Berkeley Lab. The Laboratory
and DOE will jointly agree upon the assignment of an appropriate
weighting factor for non-serious releases.

**3. [Information Technology Management and Cybersecurity]{.underline}**

**Performance Expectation and Objective:**

The Laboratory will provide a well-managed information technology
infrastructure that ensures the availability and security of information
systems that are supportive of and responsive to customer needs, and are
consistent with DOE certification and accreditation requirements.

[Performance Measures:]{.underline}

Indicated in the IT Management and Cybersecurity Balanced Scorecard
below.

Submeasure 4.2 includes the completion of the SC System-level Security
Plan of Actions and milestones for LBNL. Submeasure 4.3 will be rated
based on DOE's IT Systems Certification and Accreditation status for
LBNL.

+----------------+--------------------------------+-------------------+
| Balanced Score | Metric                         | Weighting / Score |
| Card Activity  |                                |                   |
+----------------+--------------------------------+-------------------+
| Customer       | 1.1 Credibility, Trust, and    | Points based on   |
|                | Satisfaction                   | IT system user    |
|                |                                | survey results:   |
|                |                                | straight line     |
|                |                                | gradient -        |
|                |                                | outstanding       |
|                |                                | service = 4       |
|                |                                | points, poor      |
|                |                                | service = 0       |
|                |                                | points            |
+----------------+--------------------------------+-------------------+
| Financial      | 2.1 Cost Effective Products    | Establish         |
|                | and Services                   | baseline and      |
|                |                                | goals = 4 points. |
|                |                                |                   |
|                |                                | Establish         |
|                |                                | baseline = 2      |
|                |                                | points. No        |
|                |                                | baseline          |
|                |                                | established = 0   |
|                |                                | points            |
+----------------+--------------------------------+-------------------+
| Operational    | 3.1 High Quality Products,     | Establish         |
| Internal       | Services, and Infrastructure   | baseline and      |
| Processes      |                                | goals = 4 points. |
|                |                                |                   |
|                |                                | Establish         |
|                |                                | baseline = 2      |
|                |                                | points. No        |
|                |                                | baseline          |
|                |                                | established = 0   |
|                |                                | points.           |
+----------------+--------------------------------+-------------------+
| Ethics,        | 4.2 Compliance with            | A straight line   |
| Governance,    | regulations and contractual    | gradient:         |
| and Compliance | commitments                    | complete all      |
|                |                                | action items by   |
|                |                                | scheduled date =  |
|                |                                | 8 points.         |
+----------------+--------------------------------+-------------------+
|                | 4.3 Maintains IT Systems       | Yes = 75 points   |
|                | Certification and              |                   |
|                | Accreditation                  | No = 0 points     |
+----------------+--------------------------------+-------------------+
| People         | 5.1 Employees with the right   | Straight line     |
|                | skills for today and tomorrow  | gradient: 95% of  |
|                |                                | the employees     |
|                | 5.2 Highly Motivated,          | trained = 5       |
|                | Satisfied Employees            | points, 60%       |
|                |                                | trained = 0       |
|                | 5.3 Safe work environment      | points            |
+----------------+--------------------------------+-------------------+

ITM&C GRADIENT:

[OVERALL RATING]{.underline} [TOTAL POINTS:]{.underline}

Outstanding \>95

Excellent \>85

Satisfactory \>75

Unsatisfactory \<75

**B. [Business Services]{.underline}**

**Performance Expectation for All Business Operations:**

Use efficient and effective institutional management systems and
approaches to guide decision-making, streamline and improve operations,
align resources and reduce costs, and improve the delivery of products
and services.

**1. [Financial Management]{.underline}**

[Performance Objective:]{.underline} The Laboratory will implement and
execute effective financial management practices in accordance with the
DOE policies, procedures and requirements, and provide quality customer
services that support the mission of the Laboratory.

**1.1.** **Criterion: Effectively Meet Customer Needs**

1.1.a **Performance Measure:** Monitor processes to ensure customers are
provided with timely and relevant information and services. (Quarterly,
12%)

1.  **Criterion: Accounting Practices**

2.1.a **Performance Measure:** Reconciliations -- Ensure every balance
sheet account is regularly reconciled in a timely, accurate and complete
manner. (Quarterly, 4%)

2.  **Criterion: Internal Controls**

2.2.a **Performance Measure:** Audit Findings - Ensure timely and
appropriate closure of external and internal audit findings of a
financial nature. LBNL will aggressively set target completion dates to
ensure that the audit follow-up system promotes prompt and effective
corrective actions. A quarterly tracking report is submitted that
includes the difference between the target completion date and the
actual resolution date of audit recommendations. Revisions to target
completion dates will be adequately justified and should adhere to LBNL
and DOE policies on audit resolution and follow-up. (Quarterly, 5%)

2.2.b **Performance Measure:** Policies and Procedures - Execute project
implementation plan establishing financial policies and procedures that
support CAS and DOE requirements. Ensure policies and procedures are
accessible to users. (Quarterly, 5%)

3.  **Criterion: Budget/Financial Reporting**

2.3.a **Performance Measure:** All DOE Budget and Financial reports and
requests are submitted by the established due date in an accurate and
complete manner. (Quarterly, see attached gauge, 10%)

4.  **Criterion: Funds Control**

2.4.a **Performance Measure:** Ensure costs are within the B&R
Obligation Control Levels (OCL) at the end of each monthly accounting
period for the DOE direct funding (Monthly, 24%)

2.4.b **Performance Measure:** Ensure Reimbursable WFO costs do not
exceed available funds at the Reimbursable Work Order (RWO) Obligation
Control Level (OCL) at year end.

> (Annual, 10%).

1.  **Criterion: Staffing**

    a.  **Performance Measure:** Monitor and update the staffing plan in
        order to execute the functional /operational requirements
        necessary for effective financial management. (Annual, 5%)

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
1.  **Criterion: Financial Productivity and DOE Support**

    a.  **Performance Measure:** UC annual independent financial
        statement audit certification ensures highest level of accuracy
        and reliability for core financial processes. (Annual, 10%)

    b.  **Performance Measure:** Ensures compliance with DOE system
        priorities and initiatives (including FMSIC, and the
        implementation of ePME, STARS and I-MANGAGE) (Quarterly, 15%)

**2. [Procurement Management]{.underline}**

[Introduction]{.underline}

### The Four Perspectives of the Balanced Scorecard for Procurement

[Customer]{.underline}: This perspective captures the ability of the
organization to provide quality goods and services, effective delivery,
and overall customer satisfaction.

-   *Customer Satisfaction*

[Internal Business Perspective]{.underline}: This perspective provides
data regarding the internal business results against measures that lead
to financial success and satisfied customers.

-   *Effective Internal Controls*

-   *Effective Supplier Management*

-   *Use of Effective Competition*

-   *Effective Utilization of Alternate Procurement Approaches*

-   *Acquisition Process*

-   *Good Corporate Citizenship through Purchasing*

[Learning and Growth:]{.underline} This perspective captures the ability
of employees, information systems, and organizational alignment to
manage the business and adapt to change. A process will only succeed if
adequate skilled and motivated employees, supplied with accurate and
timely information, are driving them.

-   *Employee Satisfaction*

-   *Employee Alignment*

-   *Information Availability*

[Financial]{.underline}: Cost efficiency, delivering maximum value to
the customer for each dollar spent.

-   *Optimum cost Efficiency of Purchasing Operations*

**1. Performance Objective: Customer Satisfaction**

The Laboratory shall assess the degree of satisfaction with
Procurement's ability to meet internal customer needs in terms of
timeliness, quality, and communications.

**1.1 Criterion: Surveys**

The Procurement function will survey the needs and satisfaction of its
Laboratory customers relative to its purchasing systems and methods.

**1.1.a Performance Measure: Customer Satisfaction Rating**

As a continuous indicator of overall customer satisfaction under the
BSC, LBNL Procurement will conduct real-time transaction surveys of its
requesters relative to its purchasing systems and methods and use the
results to determine satisfaction ratings. FY 2005 surveys will be
conducted as described below.

[Customer Sampling]{.underline}

The Laboratory will conduct an annual customer climate survey, which
incorporates the following items:

1.  Timeliness: Extent of customer satisfaction with timeliness of
    procurement processing; planning activities; and on-going
    communications.

2.  Quality: Extent of customer satisfaction with the quality of
    procurement services

3.  Communications: Extent to which procurement communicates accurate
    information which impacts the work of the customer's organization.

Gradient**:**

> Unsatisfactory \< 61.0% satisfied customers.
>
> Marginal 62% - 71% satisfied customers.
>
> Satisfactory 72% - 81% satisfied customers.
>
> Excellent 82% - 91% satisfied customers.
>
> Outstanding \> 92% satisfied customers.

**2.0 Performance Objective: Internal Business Processes**

The Laboratory shall have systems in place to ensure Procurement
programs operate in accordance with policies and procedures approved by
DOE, and the requirements contained in Prime Contract Clause entitled,
Contractor Purchasing System.

**2.1 Criterion: Effective Internal Controls**

The Laboratory conducts, documents, and reports annually, the results of
a successful assessment of its purchasing system against evaluation
criteria.

**2.1.a Performance Measure: Assessing System Operations**

The Laboratory shall develop and submit a risk-based system evaluation
plan to the Contracting Officer, no later than 30 days after award of
the contract for review and concurrence. The procurement system will be
assessed against system evaluation criteria as identified in the plan.
In addition, a cost effective management plan for resolution of system
deficiencies and opportunities for process improvement shall be
developed. Management of the results of the system assessment shall be
evaluated. System deficiencies will include those identified by the
Laboratory, internal Laboratory organizations, and external
organizations.

[Gradient]{.underline}

> Unsatisfactory There is not an approach to the primary purpose of the
> system evaluation and there are major gaps in deployment of the
> assessment process. Cost benefit analyses and risk assessments are not
> accomplished and opportunities for improvement are not addressed.
> Leadership involvement is not evident.
>
> Marginal There is a basic approach to the primary purpose of the
> system evaluation. Cost benefit analyses and risk assessments are
> applied to some deficiencies and opportunities for improvement are
> generally addressed. Remedial actions are pursued and leadership
> involvement is evident in some cases.
>
> Satisfactory There is a sound, systematic approach, responsive to the
> primary purpose of the system evaluation. Cost benefit analyses and
> risk assessments are good when addressing deficiencies and/or
> opportunities for improvement. Remedial actions are appropriate and
> demonstrate responsible leadership in many to most cases.
>
> Excellent The requirements for a \"Good\" rating are met. In addition,
> the approach is responsive to the overall purpose of the system
> evaluation and cost benefit analyses and risk assessments are good to
> excellent when addressing deficiencies and/or opportunities for
> improvement. Remedial actions are sound and demonstrate responsible
> leadership in most cases.

Outstanding The requirements for an \"Excellent\" rating are met. In
addition, the approach is fully responsive to all the requirements of
the system evaluation and cost benefit analyses and risk assessments are
excellent when addressing deficiencies and/or opportunities for
improvement. Remedial actions are sound and demonstrate strong
leadership in most cases.

**2.2 Criterion: Effective Supplier Management**

The Laboratory shall manage its suppliers in such a manner as to ensure
that the goods and services provided meet the Laboratory's requirements.

**2.2.a Performance Measure: Measuring Supplier Performance**

The Laboratory shall measure the percentage of on-time deliveries. The
percentage of on-time deliveries of purchased goods will be tracked
quarterly and performance will be measured on a cumulative basis. The
following formula will be used:

Number of On-Time Deliveries / Total Number of Deliveries

Performance will be based on cumulative results through year-end.
Assessment and rating will be based on the following gradient:

> Unsatisfactory \< 76%
>
> Marginal 76 -- 80%
>
> Satisfactory 81 -- 85%
>
> Excellent 86 -- 90%
>
> Outstanding \> 90%

**2.3. Performance Measure: Effective Competition for Actions over
\$100,000**

> Goal is = 30% of Competition Base

**2.4 Performance Measure: Percentage of Transactions Placed by Users**

> Goal is = 40% of all Procurement transactions

**2.5 Criterion: Percent of Transactions Placed Through Rapid Purchasing
Techniques**

The percentage of transactions placed through Rapid Purchasing
Techniques will be measured. Transactions will include purchase cards,
long-term purchasing agreements (blankets), e-commerce (see below),
Just-In-Time (JIT), Oral Purchasing Orders, strategic agreements and
supplier programs (e.g. Integrated Contractor Purchasing Team (ICPT)
National Agreements).

**2.5.a Performance Measure: Rapid Purchasing Techniques**

The percent utilization of rapid purchasing techniques will be measured
using the following formula:

[Number of Transactions Placed through Rapid Purchasing
Techniques]{.underline}

Total Number of Transactions

Performance will be assessed and rated based on the following gradients:

> Unsatisfactory \< 80.0%
>
> Marginal 80.0 -- 84.9%
>
> Satisfactory 85.0 -- 89.9%
>
> Excellent 90.0 -- 92.9%
>
> Outstanding \> 92.9%

**2.6 Performance Measure: Transactions Placed Through Electronic
Commerce**

> Goal is = 10% of all Procurement transactions

**2.7 Performance Measure: Acquisition Process**

The Laboratory will be measured against benchmarks and industry
standards for cycle time results for transactions the goals are as
follows:

6 to 9 days for \<\$100,000

27 to 32 days for \> \$100,000

9 to 12 days for all actions

**2.8 Performance Objective: Socioeconomic Subcontracting**

> The Laboratory shall support and promote socioeconomic subcontracting
> programs.
>
> The Procurement organization will provide, the percentage of actual
> subcontract dollar obligations (not subcontract face value) in the
> following six categories: Small Business, Small Disadvantaged
> Business, Woman-Owned Small Business, HUBZone Small Business, and
> Veteran-Owned Small Business. A description of annual activities in
> support of the socioeconomic program will also be provided.
>
> Goals for FY 2005 are as follows:
>
> Small Business 50 percent
>
> Small Disadvantaged Business 15 percent
>
> Women-Owned Small Business 10 percent
>
> HUB Zone Small Business 3 percent
>
> Veteran-Owned Small Business 3 percent

Performance will be based on cumulative results through year-end.
Assessment and rating will be based on points received by meeting each
goal as follows:

> Small Business: 5 Points
>
> Small Disadvantaged Business: 2 Point
>
> Women-Owned Small Business: 2 Point
>
> Hubzone Small Business: 0.5 Point
>
> Veteran-Owned Small Business: 0.5 Point

**3.0 Performance Objective: Learning and Growth**

> The Laboratory shall ensure that information and feedback mechanisms
> are available to procurement employees to enhance continued successful
> procurement operations.

**3.1 Criterion: Employee Feedback**

> The Laboratory shall foster improvement of processes and performance
> by assessing and pursuing improvements in employee satisfaction.

**3.1.a Performance Measure: Employee Satisfaction Rating**

> A Procurement employee satisfaction rating shall be created from the
> results of an employee survey. The satisfaction rating is to be
> tracked and trended.
>
> [Procurement Employees]{.underline}
>
> All LBNL Procurement employees will be surveyed during May of 2005,
> based upon a 100% confidence level.
>
> [Questionnaire]{.underline}
>
> The survey will include the following items: work environment,
> organization's professionalism, tools, culture and values. This rating
> may include data from employee survey, focus groups, or other methods.
>
> [Scoring]{.underline}
>
> The following formula will be applied to measure Employee
> satisfaction:
>
> Employee Satisfaction Rating = [Number of Satisfied
> Employees]{.underline}

Total Number of Employees Responding to Survey

> [Survey Results]{.underline}
>
> Survey results and comments for potential areas for improvement will
> be compared against the previous survey results to the maximum
> practicable extent and presented to Procurement management for review,
> analysis, and required action. Results will be reported in the
> year-end Self-Assessment.
>
> [Gradient]{.underline}
>
> Unsatisfactory \< 60.0% of employees responding to survey are
> satisfied.
>
> Marginal 60.0% - 69.9% of employees responding to survey are
> satisfied.
>
> Satisfactory 70.0% - 79.9% of employees responding to survey are
> satisfied.
>
> Excellent 80.0% - 89.9% of employees responding to survey are
> satisfied.
>
> Outstanding \> 89.9% of employees responding to survey are satisfied.

**3.2 Performance Measure: Employee Alignment**

> Number of employee plans whose performance evaluation plans are
> aligned with organizational goals and objectives. The Goal is 98%.

**4.0 Performance Objective: Optimum Cost Efficiency of Purchasing
Operations**

> The Laboratory shall ensure optimum cost efficiency of purchasing
> operations.

**4.1 Criterion: Process Cost**

> The Laboratory shall compare its operating costs as a percentage of
> total procurement dollars obligated to benchmarking data and industry
> standards and establish goals and gradients accordingly.

**4.1.a Performance Measure: Cost to Spend Ratio**

> Operating costs as a percentage of total procurement dollars obligated
> will be computed. The Laboratory's Purchasing Organization costs shall
> be divided by total purchasing obligations using the following
> formula:
>
> Cost to Spend Ratio = [Purchasing Organization Costs\*]{.underline}
>
> Total Purchasing Obligations
>
> \*Costs associated with Total Purchasing Obligations
>
> [Gradient]{.underline}:

Unsatisfactory \>3.00

Marginal 2.75 -- 2.99

Satisfactory 2.50 -- 2.74

Excellent 2.25 -- 2.49

> Outstanding \<2.24

**3. [Property Management]{.underline}**

### The Four Perspectives of the Balanced Scorecard for Property Management

[Customer Perspective]{.underline}: measures Effective
Service/Partnership

-   *Customer Satisfaction in External, Internal and Accuracy of
    property assignments*

[Internal Business Perspective:]{.underline} measures Effective Property
Life Cycle Management of Assets

-   *Asset Accountability*

-   *Equipment Utilization*

-   *Disposal of excess equipment within a timeframe*

-   *Use of information technology*

-   *Purchase card acquisitions recorded within timeframe*

-   *Properly recorded sub-contractor property*

[Learning and Growth Perspective:]{.underline} employee alignment to
real time access to strategic and management information

-   *System Access to reliable property management information*

-   *Employee training aligned to respond to Balanced Score Card
    Objectives*

-   *Information Availability*

[Financial]{.underline}: Cost efficiency in all areas of property
management.

-   *Identify major property costs*

-   *Optimization of fleet efficiency and effectiveness*

-   *Reduction of petroleum consumption*

**1. Performance Expectation: Customer Service Perspective**

The Laboratory shall assess internal, external customer satisfaction
with specific personal property services or percent of products and
services that were delivered timely, as well as, accuracy and consent of
assigned individuals assigned to be accountable for property.

**1.1 Performance Objective:** **Timeliness, Quality, Partnership**

**1.1.1 Performance Measure: Customer Satisfaction Rating**

The measure of each element of this performance objective will be a
continuous measure as follows:

> **Core Measure #1:** External Customer satisfaction 80%

**Core Measure #2:** Internal Customer satisfaction 80%

**Core Measure #3a:** Accuracy of property sampled 98%

**Core Measure #3b:** % Sample by assigned individual 98%

**2.0 Performance Expectation: Internal Business Perspective**

The Laboratory shall have systems in place to ensure property programs
operate in accordance with policies and procedures approved by DOE and
the requirements contained in Prime Contract Clause entitled, Contractor
Property System.

**2.1 Performance Objective: Effective Internal Controls**

Asset Accountability, Equipment Utilization & Volume. Timely excess
property disposal, Information technology, Purchase card and
subcontractor property accountability.

**2.1.a Performance Measure: Cost accountability** --

Equipment (Acq. Cost) 99%

(Items) 98%

Sensitive Property (Acq. Cost) 99%

(Items) 98%

Stores inventory (Acq. Cost) 99%

(Items) 98%

**2.2 Performance Measure: Equipment Utilization**

Percent of equipment meeting Federal or local utilization Standards &
Objectives (S&O).

**2.2.a Performance Measure:** Percent of vehicles meeting S & O

Goal is 90% (optional: equipment pool, Motor equipment, or established
tool crib issued S&Os)

**2.3. Performance Measure:** Percent increase of volume disposed excess
within 180 days compared to previous cycle

Goal is = 5% increase

**2.4 Performance Measure: Use of Technology to improve Asset
Management**

> Goal is = 5% of surplus items sold using "online" sales media increase
> per year for 3 years

**2.5 Performance Measure: Percent of Personal Property acquired via
purchase card recorded in the financial and property databases within 72
hours of receipt of property** Goal = 98%

**2.5.a Performance Measure:** Percent of sub-contractor held property
database in contractors property data base Goal = 98% accuracy

**3.0 Performance Expectation: Learning and Growth Perspective**

> Extent to which property management system measures are in place and
> communicated regularly.

**3.1 Performance Objective: External and Internal Customer
Communication Plan**

> Percent of property management employees aligned with expectations and
> training requirements that respond to balanced score card
> requirements.

**3.1.a Performance Measure:** percent of scheduled training that
conforms to balanced score card objectives during the period.

> **Performance Measure:** 90% of scheduled training completed
>
> **Performance Measure:** 90% of personal property professional staff
> have individual development plans aligned with balanced scorecard
> objectives
>
> **Performance Measure:** 90% of personal property professional staff
> receiving an annual review of performance against balanced score card
> objectives

**4.** **Performance Expectation: Financial Perspective**

**4.1 Performance Objective**

Efficient property management operations

**4.1.1 Performance Measure:** Cost of major processes e.g., physical
inventory, warehousing, disposition costs baseline and trend annually.

**4.1.2 Performance Measure:** Efficiency measure by cost over
performance improvement trend.

**4.2 Performance Objective**

Fleet composition to meet contractor mission and achieve maximum economy
and effectiveness.

**Performance Measure:** 90% of each Sport Utility Vehicle's (SUV) trips
by non-law

Enforcement (by comparing the number of trips made that required driving
on other than normal road conditions with the total of number of SUV
trips made)

**4.3 Performance Objective**

Ensure DOE meets the reduction of petroleum consumption requirement of
Executive Order 13149, *Greening the Government Federal Fleet and
Transportation Efficiency*

**Performance Measure:** 20% reduction in petroleum consumption within
the entire motor vehicle fleet as compared with FY 1999 petroleum
consumption levels, for FY 2005, demonstrate significant improving trend
in reducing the net petroleum consumption and by FY 2008, achieve at
least the 20% petroleum consumption reduction.

**4. [Human Resources Management]{.underline}**

Performance Expectation

Human Resources programs, services and processes support the scientific
mission and operational needs of the Laboratory.

Performance Objective

The Laboratory will support and document its assessment against metrics
contained in the Human Resources Balanced Scorecard.

Performance Measure: The Laboratory will pursue HR system certification
against mutually agreed upon best practice and/or national standards,
and the metrics contained in the HR BSC.

+-------------------------+---------------------------------+---------+
| **Balanced Scorecard    | **Activity**                    | **W     |
| Category**              |                                 | eight** |
+-------------------------+---------------------------------+---------+
| **Customer**            | -   Review the FY04 Ops         | > 15%   |
|                         |     Customer Satisfaction       |         |
|                         |     survey                      |         |
|                         |                                 |         |
|                         | -   Define action plan          |         |
|                         |     responsive to the           |         |
|                         |     recommendations             |         |
+-------------------------+---------------------------------+---------+
| **Ethics/               | -   Audits/Compliance           | > 20%   |
| Governance/Compliance** |     Requirements: i.e. BICE I-9 |         |
|                         |     Audit (12/03), PERB,        |         |
|                         |     EEOC/OFCCP, and DOE or      |         |
|                         |     State/Federal Agency audits |         |
|                         |     and reviews                 |         |
|                         |                                 |         |
|                         | -   Internal Audit Reviews      |         |
+-------------------------+---------------------------------+---------+
| **Finance**             | -   Determine Saratoga          | > 15%   |
|                         |     Institute Targets for three |         |
|                         |     metrics: HR Expense Factor, |         |
|                         |     HR Headcount Ratio, and HR  |         |
|                         |     Professional Headcount      |         |
|                         |     Ratio                       |         |
|                         |                                 |         |
|                         | -   Manage the HR budget:       |         |
|                         |     monthly analysis of         |         |
|                         |     spending vs. forecast       |         |
+-------------------------+---------------------------------+---------+
| **People**              | -   Define Balanced Scorecard   | > 15%   |
|                         |     Employee Satisfaction Index |         |
|                         |                                 |         |
|                         | -   Launch CORE Supervisor      |         |
|                         |     training                    |         |
|                         |                                 |         |
|                         | -   Draft leadership dev't      |         |
|                         |     approach                    |         |
+-------------------------+---------------------------------+---------+
| **Operational/Internal  | -   Prepare for accreditation   | > 35%   |
| Process**               |     standards pilot activity in |         |
|                         |     the following areas:        |         |
|                         |                                 |         |
|                         |     -   Strategic Management    |         |
|                         |                                 |         |
|                         |     -   Compensation and        |         |
|                         |         Benefits                |         |
|                         |                                 |         |
|                         |     -   Workforce Planning and  |         |
|                         |         Employment              |         |
|                         |                                 |         |
|                         |     -   Employee and Labor      |         |
|                         |         Relations               |         |
|                         |                                 |         |
|                         |     -   Human Resource          |         |
|                         |         Development             |         |
|                         |                                 |         |
|                         |     -   HR Metrics/Scorecard    |         |
+-------------------------+---------------------------------+---------+

#  V. Assessment and Appraisal

**A. Laboratory and Contractor Self-Assessment and Rating Process**

For Science and Technology (S&T) mission execution, the Laboratory will
continue to use external peer reviews to provide internal advice to its
management on the overall quality and direction of scientific and
technical work, the effectiveness of research program planning and
management, and other aspects affecting the ability of the Laboratory to
effectively support DOE's missions and national research needs. An S&T
Self-Assessment report will be produced and made available to DOE each
year summarizing the results of these peer reviews, and including a
programmatic cross-walk.

For mission support functions and systems, a Laboratory and Contractor
management team documents and evaluates performance for Laboratory
Leadership, Technical Services Operations (Facilities and Infrastructure
Management, Environment, Safety and Health Protection, Information
Technology Management and Cybersecurity) and Business Services
Operations (Financial Management, Human Resources, Procurement, and
Property Management) on the basis of established performance
expectations, objectives, measures, and gradients. Table 1 below defines
the overall adjectival ratings for the functional areas and shows the
conversion of overall functional area scores and adjectival ratings.

The Contractor will provide self-assessment ratings for each of these
Leadership and Operations (L&O) areas. A Performance Self-Assessment
report and related briefing will be produced and provided to DOE at the
end of the fiscal year. To help ensure accuracy and credibility, drafts
of the self-assessment report sections will be reviewed and validated by
functional Independent Evaluation Teams that include DOE employees.

Table 1 -- Adjectival Rating Gradient and Functional Score Conversion

+-----------------+----------------------------------+-----------------+
| **Adjectival    | **Performance Definition**       | **Functional    |
| Rating**        |                                  | Score**         |
+-----------------+----------------------------------+-----------------+
| # Outstanding   | Significantly exceeds the        | 90.0 -- 100%    |
|                 | standard of performance;         |                 |
|                 | achieves noteworthy results;     |                 |
|                 | accomplishes very difficult      |                 |
|                 | tasks in a timely manner.        |                 |
+-----------------+----------------------------------+-----------------+
| # Excellent     | Exceeds the standards of         | 80.0 -- 89.9%   |
|                 | performance; although there may  |                 |
|                 | be room for improvement in some  |                 |
|                 | elements, this is offset by      |                 |
|                 | better performance in all other  |                 |
|                 | elements.                        |                 |
+-----------------+----------------------------------+-----------------+
| # Satisfactory  | Meets the standard of            | 70.0 -- 79.9%   |
|                 | performance; assigned tasks are  |                 |
|                 | carried out in an acceptable     |                 |
|                 | manner - timely, efficiently,    |                 |
|                 | and economically. Deficiencies   |                 |
|                 | do not substantively affect      |                 |
|                 | performance.                     |                 |
+-----------------+----------------------------------+-----------------+
| # Marginal      | Below the standards of           | 60.0 -- 69.9%   |
|                 | performance; deficiencies are    |                 |
|                 | such that management attention   |                 |
|                 | and corrective action are        |                 |
|                 | required.                        |                 |
+-----------------+----------------------------------+-----------------+
| #               | Significantly below the standard | \<60.0%         |
|  Unsatisfactory | of performance; deficiencies are |                 |
|                 | serious, and may affect overall  |                 |
|                 | results, immediate senior        |                 |
|                 | management attention, and prompt |                 |
|                 | corrective action is required.   |                 |
+-----------------+----------------------------------+-----------------+

**B. DOE Evaluation and Appraisal Process**

The DOE Berkeley Site Office (BSO) is responsible for annually
developing and producing an overall Laboratory performance appraisal for
work done under the contract. The goal is to produce this annual report
in the first quarter-year after the end of a fiscal year, i.e., October
through December each year. This is done in two parts: the S&T part of
the evaluation is based on the input of DOE-HQ program sponsors of LBNL
research, and the L&O part of the evaluation is generated locally
utilizing the validated Laboratory and Contractor self-assessment and
rating as one source of input.

Late in the fiscal year, the BSO solicits S&T evaluation input and
program performance ratings from major DOE sponsors of Laboratory
research work based on the established assessment criteria and
adjectival gradient. These include the DOE Office of Science (SC) with
six sub-programs, Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE), Fossil
Energy (FE), Civilian Radioactive Waste Management (CRWM)/Yucca Mountain
Project (YMP), and potentially other program offices. The narrative
input can be edited and supplemented by cognizant BSO program
representatives as needed and appropriate. The program ratings are set
by the sponsors, and the programs are weighted by their relative annual
funding to develop the overall S&T mission performance score. Any S&T
performance appraisal input not based on a 100-point scale will be
converted to a 100-point scale for the purposes of aggregating the
assessments of the various programs and deriving an overall S&T score
and adjectival rating.

At the end of the fiscal year, BSO functional managers assigned to each
L&O area generate a performance evaluation and functional rating based
on the details of the associated performance expectations, objectives,
measures, and gradients, including Balance Scorecard elements. The
Laboratory/Contractor self-assessment provides an important, but not the
only, source of input for these functional appraisals. BSO functional
managers may also use the results of monitoring and awareness activities
conducted throughout the year pertinent to the systems being assessed.

The results of the S&T and L&O evaluations are aggregated, and an
overall Laboratory performance appraisal report is drafted. The BSO
develops a corresponding presentation highlighting the annual outcomes
and trends from prior years. This is presented by the BSO Site Manager
or designee to a DOE Performance Review Board (PRB) chaired by HQ-SC.
The PRB provides comments, input, suggested changes or direction, which
are addressed and incorporated. The draft appraisal report is provided
to the Contractor for a factual accuracy review; any comments are
addressed and a final report is generated and distributed. Based on the
final appraisal results, the BSO Contracting Officer determines the
annual performance-based fee earned under the contract, and solicits
HQ-SC approval for its release to the Contractor.

**C. Performance Assessment Rating and Fee**

With respect to the Contractor's performance fee, DOE reserves its
rights specified elsewhere in this Contract, including those in Part I,
Section H, Clause H.14 - Standards of Contractor Performance Evaluation,
and those in Part II, Section I, Clause I.82 - Total Available Fee: Base
Fee Amount and Performance Fee Amount and Clause I. 83 - Conditional
Payment of Fee, Profit, or Incentives -- Facility Management Contracts.

For FY2005, an overall laboratory performance rating and score is not
planned. For the purposes of deriving an overall performance *fee*
earned based on the adjectival ratings of the various areas, the
relative *weightings* of the performance areas (S&T plus 8 L&O
functions) are established at the beginning of the evaluation cycle. The
fee-earning gradient shown in Table 2 is applied to each area based on
its assessed adjectival rating.

**Table 2 -- Performance Area Fee-Earning Based on Adjectival Ratings**

  ------------------------------------------ ----------------------------
  **Area Adjectival Rating**                 **% Area Fee Earned**

                                             

  **Outstanding**                            **100%**

  **Excellent**                              **85%**

  **Satisfactory**                           **70%**

  **Marginal**                               **0%**

  **Unsatisfactory**                         **0%**
  ------------------------------------------ ----------------------------

Table 3 summarizes the FY 2005 performance areas, ratings, assigned
weightings, and methodology for calculating the earned performance fee.
For each area, the percentage of the fee earned for that area times its
assigned weighting equals the percentage of the total available FY2005
performance fee earned by that area. Summing these area percentages
together equals the overall percentage of total available fee earned.
Multiplying this overall percentage by the total available performance
fee yields the amount of performance fee earned for the period of
performance.

**Table 3 -- Performance Area Ratings, Weightings, and Fee-Earning**

+--------------------------+----------+-------+---------+------------+
| **AREA**                 | **Ad     | **Pe  | **We    | **Percent  |
|                          | jectival | rcent | ighting | of Total   |
|                          | R        | of    | (out of | Available  |
|                          | atings** | Area  | 100)**  | Fee        |
|                          |          | Fee   |         | Earned**   |
|                          |          | Ear   | =       |            |
|                          |          | ned** |         |            |
|                          |          |       |         |            |
|                          |          | **(   |         |            |
|                          |          | Table |         |            |
|                          |          | 2)**  |         |            |
|                          |          |       |         |            |
|                          |          | x     |         |            |
+--------------------------+----------+-------+---------+------------+
| **Science & Technology** | **Outst  |       | **60**  |            |
|                          | anding** |       |         |            |
+--------------------------+----------+-------+---------+------------+
|                          |          |       |         |            |
+--------------------------+----------+-------+---------+------------+
| **Laboratory             |          |       | **10**  |            |
| Leadership**             |          |       |         |            |
+--------------------------+----------+-------+---------+------------+
|                          |          |       |         |            |
+--------------------------+----------+-------+---------+------------+
| **Technical Services:**  |          |       |         |            |
+--------------------------+----------+-------+---------+------------+
| **Facilities &           |          |       | **6**   |            |
| Infrastructure**         |          |       |         |            |
+--------------------------+----------+-------+---------+------------+
| **Environment, Safety &  |          |       | **6**   |            |
| Health**                 |          |       |         |            |
+--------------------------+----------+-------+---------+------------+
| **IT Mgmt &              |          |       | **3**   |            |
| Cybersecurity**          |          |       |         |            |
+--------------------------+----------+-------+---------+------------+
| **Business Services:**   |          |       |         |            |
+--------------------------+----------+-------+---------+------------+
| **Financial Management** |          |       | **6**   |            |
+--------------------------+----------+-------+---------+------------+
| **Procurement**          |          |       | **3**   |            |
+--------------------------+----------+-------+---------+------------+
| **Property Management**  |          |       | **3**   |            |
+--------------------------+----------+-------+---------+------------+
| **Human Resources**      |          |       | **3**   |            |
+--------------------------+----------+-------+---------+------------+
|                          |          |       |         |            |
+--------------------------+----------+-------+---------+------------+
| **TOTAL OVERALL**        |          |       | **100** |            |
+--------------------------+----------+-------+---------+------------+
|                          |          |       |         | **x**      |
+--------------------------+----------+-------+---------+------------+
| **Total Available        |          |       |         | **\$**     |
| Performance Fee**        |          |       |         |            |
|                          |          |       |         |            |
| **(from clause I.82)     |          |       |         |            |
| (\$)**                   |          |       |         |            |
+--------------------------+----------+-------+---------+------------+
| **Total Earned           |          |       |         | **\$**     |
| Performance Fee**        |          |       |         |            |
|                          |          |       |         |            |
| **for FY2005 (\$)**      |          |       |         |            |
+--------------------------+----------+-------+---------+------------+

**Attachment 1**

**Performance-Based Management Guidelines**

1\. The purpose of these Guidelines is to institutionalize a
performance-based management system that encourages and rewards
excellence, continuous improvement, cooperation and timely
communication.

2\. In keeping with the objectives set forth above, any
performance-based management contract must begin with the establishment
of contract performance objectives, measures, and expectations which may
be linked to pre-established performance incentives that, if achieved,
will:

> a\. Contribute directly to or enhance the Laboratory's ability to
> accomplish its R&D mission for DOE and the Nation

b\. Drive performance by concentrating on desired outcomes.

c\. Compel the Laboratory to focus on systems performance, cost
effectiveness and continuous improvement of functions and services
essential to the mission.

d\. Allow for meaningful analysis of trends and rates of change.

e\. Add commensurate value in the context of the Laboratory's mission
and the entire performance plan.

f\. Encourage benchmarking (incorporation of best practices).

g\. Ensure accurate and meaningful reflection of performance.

h\. Encourage self-assessment and proactive improvement.

i\. Correct an important problem or resolve a significant issue.

3\. Performance-Based Contract Measures (PBCMs) which include
Performance Measures and System Assessment Measures should be
constructed to drive improvements and focus on effectiveness of systems
and maintaining the appropriate level of internal controls. They should
incorporate \"best practices\" and reflect DOE\'s and the Contractor\'s
judgment as to the key performance elements which will enhance
fulfillment of the Department\'s mission objectives. Mission Critical
Performance Measures are tied directly to performance fee. General
Operations System Assessment Measures are not directly tied to
performance fee.

4\. PBCMs are composed of three tiers:

-   Expectation: Statements of desired outcomes for an activity or
    organization.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Objective: A quantitative or qualitative characterization of
    performance.

-   Measure: The desired conditions or target levels of performance for
    each objective.

5\. Adjectival Ratings are defined in Table 1.

6\. Self Assessment:

> In addition to the development of specific contract Performance
> Criteria directly tied to incentives, an effective Performance-Based
> Management system should also be established which institutionalizes
> an internal self-assessment program which fosters assessment of
> existing internal systems, policies, and procedures and encourages
> continuous improvement. The Contractor\'s self-assessment program
> shall be developed in formal agreement with the Contracting Officer
> and provide for the following:
>
> a\. an assessment of performance against Expectations, Objectives, and
> Measures.
>
> b\. an assessment of overall operations for:
>
> \(1\) compliance with the prime contract, law, or other DOE, Federal,
> and State requirements (such as regulations, directives, etc.) as may
> be applicable pursuant to the terms of the prime contract.
>
> \(2\) the adequacy and the degree to which internal policies,
> procedures and controls are implemented and are being met.
>
> c\. identification of improvement opportunities and improvement plans.

7\. PBCMs should reference industry standards, best practices, or other
standards which are meaningful, appropriate, and consistent with DOE
requirements rather than trying to arbitrarily develop standards. To
this end, benchmarking initiatives are strongly encouraged. When
establishing benchmarks and setting targets the Parties should consider
the return on the cost required for further improvements.

8\. The methodology for measuring each expectation shall be established
by mutual agreement of the Parties (except as may be otherwise specified
in this contract) prior to the start of the performance period.

9\. The Parties acknowledge that the performance levels achieved against
the specific performance Expectations, Objectives, and Measures,
established in the contract are the primary but not the sole criteria
for determining the Contractor\'s final performance ratings and fee
earned in any given performance period. With respect to determining the
Contractor\'s final performance ratings and fee earned in any given
performance period for each area evaluated, the Contracting Officer
shall also consider any other relevant information which is deemed to
have had a significant impact (either positive or negative) on the
Contractor\'s performance. Other relevant information may become
available from a number of different sources including but not limited
to the Contractor\'s self-assessment, DOE\'s day-to-day operational
awareness, annual business reviews (if applicable), Inspector General
reviews, General Accounting Office (GAO) audits, for-cause reviews,
etc., as well as Contractor cooperation, interaction, and responsiveness
to DOE throughout the performance period. This does not impact DOE\'s
rights under Part II**,** Section I, Clause I.83 - Conditional Payment
of Fee, Profit, or Incentives -- Facility Management Contracts.

Should the Contracting Officer contemplate considering other relevant
information in establishing the final performance rating for any of the
Performance or Functional Areas for the performance period, the
Contracting Officer shall give the Contractor written notice specifying
such information at the appropriate and reasonable time, the reasons for
considering it relevant and significant, and the intended effect on the
performance rating for the year. The Contractor will be given the
opportunity to respond in writing and, if the Contractor requests, in a
meeting to respond to the Contracting Officer\'s intended action.

The Contracting Officer will issue his/her written assessment along with
the proposed performance ratings to the Contractor within ten (10)
working days of the above written notice.

10\. The Contracting Officer shall review, approve and periodically
verify how the Contractor collects, compiles and scores its performance
against the measures established annually and incorporated into the
contract.

11\. PBCMs are to be developed in a team approach involving appropriate
DOE Berkeley Site Office, Chicago Office, HQ, Contractor and LBNL
representatives.

12\. Failure to include a specific objective and/or measure in the
contract as part of this Appendix B does not eliminate the need for the
Contractor to comply with any contractual requirements, and failure to
comply may result in the Contracting Officer modifying the performance
rating achieved against a specific performance measure.

13\. The Director of the Office of Science (SC-1) has the primary
responsibility for evaluating Science and Technology performance but
input also will be sought from cognizant DOE Assistant Secretaries,
Office Directors and Program Managers. The DOE Berkeley Site Manager has
the primary responsibility for evaluating the Contractor Management and
Operations performance in accordance with the Objectives, Criteria and
Measures, of this Appendix B. However, the Contracting Officer shall
inform SC-1 of any issues or concerns that should be considered when
evaluating the Contractor\'s performance in Science and Technology. This
is especially important in those areas where operational performance
could have a significant impact on the Contractor\'s ability to conduct
successful research for the Department. The Contractor has primary
responsibility to compile the data necessary to document its performance
against all measures.

14\. For reasons beyond the Contractor\'s control, certain data input
may not be available to meet the agreed-upon appraisal schedules. The
evaluation shall proceed according to schedule for measures which have
complete data. Final ratings shall not be determined until all ratings
are completed. A final assessment report with final adjectival ratings
will only be issued when sufficient data is available to evaluate the
Contractor\'s performance against all measures. The Contracting Officer
may, based upon the measures completed and the performance achieved,
award a provisional portion of any performance incentive, pending the
complete assessment of all measures, at which time the final incentives
earned will be determined and awarded.

15\. The Contractor and DOE agree to establish specific weights for the
Performance Objectives set forth in this Appendix B. In addition, within
each of these areas, individual criterion will have measures established
to gauge Laboratory performance. If the Parties cannot reach agreement
on either, the specific weights for the evaluation criteria or the
individual measures, the Contracting Officer shall have the right to
establish such weights and/or expectations.

16\. In the event the Contracting Officer determines it necessary to
exercise the right set forth in 15 above, the Contracting Officer will
notify the Contractor in writing of the intended decision. The final
weightings and/or expectations will be issued to the Contractor within
10 working days after written notification to the Contractor.

17\. Subject to the paragraph below, the Contractor shall have the
ability to earn an annual performance fee as described in this Appendix.
If the Contractor\'s performance in any one of the Evaluation Areas
receives a "marginal" or "unsatisfactory", the Contractor will not be
entitled to any performance fee for that area.