|
Contractor |
DOE Office |
|
Contract No.: DE-AC03-76SF00515 |
IMD: Name: Barry Savnik |
|
Point of Contact: Burl Skaggs |
Telephone No.:
(510)
637-1700 |
|
Telephone No.: (650) 926- 2245 |
CO Name: Tyndal
Lindler |
|
E-mail: burl@slac.stanford.edu |
Telephone No.: (650) 926-4963(SLAC) |
|
|
(510) 637-1885 (OAK) |
Date of last assessment: October 1999
The Project and Facilities Management functional area consists of five individual areas: Real Property Management, Project Management, Maintenance Management, Energy Management, and Physical Assets Planning.
Departmental Overview
The Stanford Linear Accelerator Center (SLAC) is dedicated to experimental and theoretical research in elementary particle physics and in those fields that make use of its synchrotron radiation facilities, including biology, chemistry, geology, material science and electrical engineering. This includes the development of new techniques in particle acceleration and detection, and of synchrotron radiation sources and associated instrumentation. The center is operated as a national user facility for the Department of Energy by Stanford University.
Organizational Mission
Site Engineering and Maintenance (SE&M) is a newly formed organization combining most of the previous responsibilities of Facilities Office and Plant Engineering Department. This new department is committed to customer service and effective utilization of available financial and human resources. SE&M is responsible for maintaining the entire SLAC site except the experimental apparatus, beam components, cafeteria service and mail delivery.
This report represents the results of the Project and Facilities Management functional area self-assessment, an ongoing process which began as part of the Business Management Oversight Pilot established by DOE in March 1995 and continued by executive order as part of the DOE performance-based management process. Assessment materials were collected from data collected over the past year, followed by a process of validation of findings, analysis, and report writing. The Project and Facilities Management functional area self-assessment is based on and measured against performance activities currently agreed to between SLAC and DOE/OAK in order to address customer satisfaction, cost efficiency, and contract compliance.
Names, titles, affiliations of participants
Burl Skaggs, Department Head, SE&M
Objectives/Goals for FY2000
Facilities Office
Plant Engineering
Discussion of goals for FY2000
In January 2000, the Facilities office and Plant Engineering were merged into one department now called Site Engineering and Maintenance (SE&M). As a result of this organization change, a new group was formed to create a customer service desk and information management system for SE&M. This report reflects the accomplishments of the service group in devising and getting a computerized service request system on line with the added feature of real time customer feedback. A significant task in implementation included the conversion to NT of a large portion of the SE&M desktop computing system. These activities complete both Facilities and Plant Engineering goals #1.
On-site fueling for vehicles was suddenly eliminated by the illness of the subcontractor
performing the task. No substitute could be found and, therefore, the vehicles have been fueled off-site for a
significant period of time. This meets Facilities goal #2. A new fixed fueling station has been ordered that
meets the current air resources board requirements. This facility should be operational the first half of FY2001.
A University Technical Representative (UTR) guide manual was completed and published the third quarter of FY2000. Two class sessions have been held to date to train UTR personnel with regards to the contents of the manual. This completes Plant Engineering goal #3.
The only goal not fully completed is Plant Engineering goal #2, as the available manpower after the reorganization did not allow development to proceed on uniform site engineering standards>
Discussion of Individual Performance Objectives
Performance Objective #1 Real Property Management
The laboratory will effectively manage real property
Performance Criteria 1.1 Office Space Utilization
The Laboratory will optimize its total primary office space utilization excluding trailer space
Performance Measure: 1.1a GSA Standard Available Points: 5.0
Calculate net square feet per person for permanent and leased office space.
Assumptions: The intent is to efficiently utilize office space by following the GSA Standard of 125 square feet per occupant.
Performance Gradient:
Outstanding: 112 square feet or 10% reduction from prior year
Excellent: 118 to 113 square feet per person or 5% to 9.9% reduction from last year
Good: 119 to 131 square feet or closer to standard than last year
Marginal: 132 to 137 square feet and no closer to standard than last year
Unsatisfactory: 138 square feet or more and no improvement over last year
Findings : The average net square feet per occupant is 106 square feet. This data was obtained by direct measurement of the office areas in a major portion of the laboratory.
The Performance Gradient attained: Outstanding
Performance Objective: #2 Project Management
Performance Criteria: 2.1 General Plant Projects (GPP)
Complete GPP greater than or equal to $500,000 within budget, schedule, and technical baseline.
Performance Measure 2.1a Available Points: 9.0
Number of milestones completed on schedule and within budget.
Assumptions:
The intent is to measure actual progress against that planned for the fiscal year and for the Laboratory to execute GP projects within budget in a timely manner. A milestone list for all GP projects above the $500k threshold will be negotiated with DOE at the time that each project is submitted to DOE. Only significant milestones will be listed, but each active project will have at least one milestone. Project completion is based upon beneficial occupancy or beneficial use. By mutual agreement between the Laboratory and DOE, milestones and project final cost may be weighted for significance, for late/early completion, and/or for increased/diminished scope. OAK/SSO may approve changes to project milestones due to changes in Laboratory funding priorities, programmatic schedules, or delays due to uncontrollable forces, as it relates to this performance measure.
Performance Gradient:
Outstanding: All milestones completed on schedule
Excellent: *One milestone not completed on schedule
Good: *Two to Three milestones not completed on schedule
Marginal: *Four milestones not completed on schedule
Unsatisfactory: *Five or more milestones not completed on schedule
* If there are less than five milestones identified for the rating period, the final performance grade will be based on SLAC and OAK/SSO’s evaluation of the process and specific reasons contributing to the failure to meet milestones or budgets and the resulting impact to the program mission.
Findings
The following five projects underway for this fiscal year greater than $500k are;
Light Assembly Bldg Clean Room $1m
Subcontract for clean room awarded on 5/23/00. Clean room construction scheduled for completion 12/29/00 at a budget of $700k. The balance of the project is under the GLAST project office jurisdiction for completion.
Campus Cooling Tower Utilities Upgrade $932k
This project was planned for completion this spring, but funding was not forthcoming at mid-year to complete the mechanical portion. Project is complete except for $114k.
PEP II Fire Alarm Sys. Upgrade $1.42m
Upgraded PEP II Alarm system has been in operation since April 1999
East Linac Cooling Tower Replacement $751k
Subcontract for purchase and installation of tower was awarded in August 2000. Project planned for completion during the down time in the first quarter of FY01.
Storm Drain Upgrade Near Master Substation $544k
This is the culmination of a multi year project. The last two phases were scheduled to be completed this year. Additional unrelated work in the area and design modifications have slowed the overall project, which will now be completed by the end of October, instead of September.
The overall rating for this objective should be excellent as only one project for the Campus Utilities Upgrade will not likely be completed within the first quarter of FY01.
The Performance Gradient attained: Excellent
Performance Objective #3 Maintenance Management
Performance Criteria: 3.1 Non-programmatic Maintenance
Performance Measure: 3.1a Available Points: 5.0
Inspect a portion of the square footage of real property assets in accordance with the SLAC facility inspection program.
Assumptions
The intent is to efficiently inspect and maintain the site real property assets by following the DOE Condition Assessment Survey (CAS) program guidelines using a three-year cycle inspection program.
Performance Gradient:
Outstanding: .330 or greater
Excellent: .310 to .329
Good: .290 to .309
Marginal: .270 to .289
Unsatisfactory: less than .270
Findings:
43% of the total site structures were inspected and measured for total and internal square footages. This is to re-baseline the site data for buildings and structures. It is planned to complete 100% of the site in FY01. Condition of the structures was not inspected per the CAS system for this period, instead the new SE&M organization performed a study of the service requests based on the new service request tracking data now available. For example, roofs were identified as a major problem and instead of following the previous plan of funding the replacement of one roof, a program of multiple roof repairs was undertaken for the equivalent funding, prioritized by the type and amount of service activity documented from last winter. The non-programmatic maintenance systems continued as before, but are being evaluated for inclusion into a single preventative maintenance system site–wide. As reported in the third quarter, less than 30 items of 2500 are past 90 days for completion.
The Performance Gradient attained: Outstanding
Performance Criteria: 3.2 Programmatic Maintenance
Maintenance to support critical programmatic equipment will be fully accomplished.
Performance Measure: 3.2a Available Points: 5.0
All programmatic maintenance activities completed within one full operating cycle/all programmatic maintenance activities scheduled to be completed within that full operating cycle.
Assumptions
Programmatic maintenance is that which, if not accomplished, will eventually require emergency repairs resulting in the unscheduled interruption of the program. A full operating cycle is that time spanning a programmatic run, followed by a scheduled downtime, and ending at the start of another programmatic run.
Performance Gradient:
Outstanding: .990 or greater
Excellent: .950 to .989
Good: .900 to .949
Marginal: .850 to .988
Unsatisfactory: less than .850
This performance measure cannot be graded, as SLAC has not yet completed an operating cycle. The downtime is currently scheduled to begin Nov 2000. Planning for maintenance activities is underway, but the total accomplished is not yet known.
The Performance Gradient attained: Not Rated
Performance Criteria; 3.3 Minimize Occurrence Reports
Performance Measure: 3.3a Available Points: 3.0
The number of final occurrence reports resulting from failures of real property, installed equipment and programmatic utilities that can be attributed to maintenance program deficiencies or performance of maintenance work will be counted.
Assumptions:
Non-performance of scheduled maintenance is considered a maintenance program deficiency.
Process used to meet objective/measure:
A good maintenance program that uses the graded approach, with
appropriate emphasis on those processes and equipment that are critical to
program activities, health & safety, and protecting the environment will
minimize Occurrence Reports.
Findings:
Of the six final Occurrence Reports for FY00 (1999-0006 through –0008,
and 2000-0001 through 0003), none were a result of a deficiency in maintenance.
The
Performance Gradient attained:
Outstanding
Performance
Criteria: 3.4
Preventive Maintenance
Planned non-programmatic periodic preventative maintenance activities
are performed as scheduled.
Performance Measure:
3.4a
Available Points: 5.0
The number of planned preventive maintenance activities overdue by three
months or more/the total number of planned preventive maintenance activities.
Performance Gradient:
Outstanding:
.020 or less
Excellent:
.050 to .021
Good:
.080 to .051
Marginal:
.110 to .081
Unsatisfactory:
greater than .110
Findings:
29 of 2585 items are overdue by 90 days for a score of
.011
The
Performance Gradient attained:
Outstanding
Performance
Objective: #4
Energy Management
Performance Criteria:
4.1
Use Energy Efficiently
Performance Measure:
4.1a
Available Points: 7.0
Current fiscal year energy goals accomplished/goals scheduled to be
accomplished in accordance with the multi-year energy management plan.
Assumptions:
The laboratory will maintain a multi-year energy management plan,
consistent with the thirteen statutory and Executive Order requirements in DOE
430.2. The plan will be negotiated
and will be made a matter of record not later than the first month of the fiscal
year. Annual goals will include an
update of the energy management plan, quarterly reporting of energy use, DOE
directed initiatives, and an annual report on in-house energy management. Goals may be revised during the year by mutual agreement between the
Laboratory and OAK.
Performance Gradient:
Outstanding: .950 or greater
Excellent:
.850 to .949
Good:
.750 to .849
Marginal:
.600 to .749
Unsatisfactory:
less than .600
Process used to
meet objective/measure:
The FY0 Energy Management
Plan identified seventeen activities for FY2000. See attached SLAC’s Energy Management Plan for FY2000. All goals for
FY2000 were completed with the exception of the following:
Reconcile the square footage in the EMS3 and the FIMS databases and
populate the four FIMS energy categories by 12/23/99.
This was not completed, but is underway as part of the re-baseline activity initiated by SE&M after the reorganization. We are measuring the actual occupancy and square footage of all structures at SLAC and will make both FIMS and EMS3 comply with the new information upon completion in FY01. The data elements in FIMS will be updated concurrently.
This was not done with IHEM funds. A project is underway that is funded by ES&H division to address the storm water and sump water discharge problem, which includes water reuse options. This study is planned for completion the first quarter of FY01.
This was not completed; a preliminary survey has been done as part of the enhanced CDR for the Research Office Building project, which will use the central chiller plant for cooling.
The GPP funding was not approved. Task could not be started.
Three of seventeen goals were not completed for a percentage of .823.
The
Performance Gradient attained:
Good
Performance
Criteria: 4.2
Reliable Electrical Service
Performance Measure:
4.2a
Available Points: 11.0
Program customer hour outages. Sum of planned operating hours for all
programs minus operating hours lost for any program due to unplanned electrical
outages, the quantity divided by the sum of planned operating hours for all
customers. The reporting format shall be made a matter of record the first month
of the fiscal year.
Assumptions: SLAC will measure the reliability of its electrical service using a 12-month running average. Only those outages, which are a result of, or cause an outage of the medium voltage distribution transformer(s) will be counted. Unplanned outages that are caused by occurrences outside the boundary of SLAC’s utility system will be excluded. Results will be reported quarterly.
Process used to
meet objective/measure: The
data was summarized from daily logs and reports produced by the PED Electrical
Maintenance Shop. The performance gradient is that recommended by SLAC for FY00.
Outstanding:
99.9950% or greater
Excellent: 99.9900% to 99.9949%
Good: 99.9820% to 99.9899%
Marginal: 99.9750% to 99.9819%
Unsatisfactory: less than 99.9750%
Findings:
Two incidents of three hours duration each were reported that can be attributed to the electrical distribution system. One occurred at PEP IR2 and one at a point that interrupted both IR2 and IR12. The other trips were due to equipment failures not related to the distribution system and one PG&E power dip.
ASAI=(8760hours-(K1 X T)/K2))/8760 hours
K1 is total interrupted load in KVA, which was 4000
T is the length of the interruption in hours, which equals 3 hours
K2 is the total connected load in KVA, which equals 100,000
ASAI=(8760-(4000 X 3)/100000))/8760 = 99.9986%
The Performance Gradient attained: Outstanding
Performance
Objective: #5 Physical Assets Planning
Performance
Criteria: 5.1
Comprehensive Integrated Planning Process
The laboratory develops, documents and maintains a comprehensive,
integrated planning process that is aligned with SLAC mission needs.
Performance Measure:
5.1a Effectiveness of Planning Process
Assess how the planning process is implemented to achieve maximum
effectiveness in anticipating and articulating DOE and Laboratory needs
Assumptions:
The planning process is
executed to achieve maximum effectiveness in anticipating and articulating DOE
and Laboratory needs. SLAC will make a matter of record its major planning
activities, with associated milestones, extracted from its Comprehensive
Planning Process, within the first month of the fiscal year.
Performance Gradient:
Outstanding:
.900 or greater
Excellent:
.800 to .899
Good:
.700 to .799
Marginal:
.600 to .699
Unsatisfactory:
less than .600
Discussion:
Fifteen FY00 planning activity milestones were identified in the
Comprehensive Site Plan, Appendix II. The
essential milestones were all reached during the course of this FY. All of the allocated GPP funds were distributed, the ES&H project
list was upgraded through the ADS process, the University Technical
Representative (UTR) guide was approved, and the various budget requests have
been made to DOE.
A significant change occurred this fiscal year with the creation of a
permanent site planning position reporting to the Lab Director. A dedicated site planning person has now changed the dynamics of the site
planning process during the later portion of this fiscal year. It is anticipated that the Comprehensive Site Plan will be upgraded next
year to reflect this change.
The
Performance Gradient attained:
Excellent