Introduction/Background
Point of Contact: Burl Skaggs
Phone No.: (650) 926- 2245
Email: burl@slac.stanford.edu
Cumulative Available Points: 25 points Total Weight:
100%
Projects and Facilities Management includes the effective
and efficient management of the SLAC Infrastructure. The infrastructure
(buildings, equipment, utilities, roads, and property) is required
to be able to perform science at SLAC. Projects and Facilities
Management involves the balancing of performing science today
while ensuring that science can be performed at SLAC in the
future. Future science is highly dependent on the SLAC maintenance
program and new construction.
The following Performance Objective, Criteria and Measures
evaluate the effectiveness of facilities management, while addressing
the Balanced Scorecard.
Performance Period: Unless otherwise specified
in the measures, the performance period is October 1, 2004 to
September 30, 2005.
Performance Objective 1: Physical Assets Planning,
Real Property Management and Facility/Infrastructure Management
The Laboratory uses Physical Assets Planning, Real Property
Management and Facility/Infrastructure Management to achieve
excellence in managing SLAC facilities. (Total Weight: 100%)
Performance Criterion: 1.1 Comprehensive Integrated
Planning Process
The Laboratory will develop, document, and maintain a comprehensive,
integrated plan that is aligned with DOE mission needs.
Real property will be managed consistent with mission requirements
and DOE directions.
- Space manager and the Space Planning Advisory Committee
(SPAC) meet regularly to identify and evaluate upcoming
space problems and research potential solutions. Meeting
minutes are distributed and kept on file for progress tracking
and reporting.
The Space Manager has been conducting meeting as required.
- The Ten Year Site Plan will be updated annually.
The Ten Year Site Plan was submitted to DOE/SSO on June
3, 2005.
- The Infrastructure Planning Committee will meet regularly
to prioritize infrastructure projects in accordance with
the program and Ten Year Site Plan.
The Infrastructure Committee meets regularly.
Performance Measure 1.1.a Physical Assets Planning
and Real Property Management (Weight: 20%)
The intent is to measure the quality and timeliness of the
planning process and products. Planning quality will be
measured against integration of planning with program and operating
budgets for the acquisition, utilization, maintenance, recapitalization
and disposition of real property, and documentation using a
Ten Year Site Plan and related SLAC planning documents.
Timeliness will be based on meeting SC deadlines and SLAC internal
schedules.
SLAC will document its major planning activities (work plan)
with associated milestones within the first month of the fiscal
year, unless an alternate date is mutually agreed to with SSO.
Milestones will include achieving SC’s FY05 goals for the Asset
Utilization Index and Asset Condition Index and accuracy and
completeness of the Facilities Information Management System.
- Update FIMS Quality Assurance Plan (QAP) annually.
Update of the FIMS QAP Plan is complete.
- Validate FIMS data fields annually for 20% of the
total buildings on site. Rotate choice of buildings
annually so that at the end of five years all buildings
will have been validated.
FIMS field validation is complete for 100% of the site.
- Meet deadlines for FIMS ‘Deferred, Actual and Required’
Maintenance reporting.
FIMS reporting is on schedule.
- Identify planned DM Reduction by fiscal year for
all colors of money: SLI, GPP, direct funded maintenance,
indirect funded maintenance, and the SC DM reduction initiative.
Actual DM reduction amount is being finalized as a combination
of operating budget items, GPP, and infrastructure project
funds.
- Develop the system to prioritize all DM deficiencies
listed in the DM database.
A revised DM definition is being finalized to filter
the deficiencies list. Priorities will be determined
using the Infrastructure Committee model which ranks tasks
based on likelihood of occurrence and criticality to operations.
Performance Gradient:
The performance score will be determined by calculating the
number of milestones completed as scheduled divided by the total
number of milestones selected.
Target
|
Points
|
90% and above |
5 |
80% but less than 90% |
4 |
70% but less than 80% |
3 |
60% but less than 70% |
1 |
Less than 60% |
0 |
Performance Criterion: 2.1 Facility
Construction Projects (excluding LCLS and GLAST/LAT: LCLS is
covered under S&T, SR 2.4 and GLAST/LAT under S&T, HEP 1.4)
SLAC is required to have a formal project management system
in place that is compliant with the requirements in DOE Order
413.3, “Project and Program Management for the Acquisition of
Capital Assets”, and the accompanying DOE Manual 413.3-1. These
documents include specific requirements for projects costing
greater than $5M and a tailored system for those costing less
than or equal to $5M. In addition, a certified Earned Value
Management System is required for projects costing greater
than $20M. Regardless of the size of the project, a project
baseline is established for each project prior to construction
or implementation. Project performance is measured against
the approved project baseline. The overall objective of this
performance measure is to ensure that the Laboratory completes
facilities or infrastructure construction projects within approved
cost, schedule and technical baselines. During FY-05,
SSO will be working with SLAC to review the overall SLAC Project
Management System.
1. The S&ORIP SLI project performance will be scored for
this measure.
Quarterly reports and phone conferences continue to track
this project.
Performance Measure 2.1.a Construction Project Management
The intent of this performance measure is to measure SLAC
performance in managing projects. Project scope, cost
and schedule baselines will be established for all active projects
(except LCLS and GLAST/LAT which are measured elsewhere) over
$250K (about 7 projects) regardless of funding type. SLAC
Project baselines will be established in partnership with SSO
and made a matter of record at the beginning of the fiscal year,
or as soon as possible after the project baselines are approved.
Projects will be weighted based on the project budget for that
year. A project can be re-baselined, if agreed to by SSO (in
general, for reasons beyond SLAC control). This revised
baseline becomes the approved baseline and will be used to calculate
performance. Project variances are deviations from the
plan. A positive variance means that SLAC is performing
better than planned, while a negative variance means that SLAC
is performing less than planned. (Weight: 40%)
1. A project spreadsheet
will be attached to identify the projects, milestones and
budget targets for the active projects.
A project spreadsheet is
attached reflecting the labs performance this year in light
of the late funding authorization and SLAC’s recover process
from the Type A accident.
Performance Gradient:
The project cost and schedule variances will be calculated
separately. At the end of the fiscal year, each project cost
variance will be determined and expressed as a percent (essentially
this is a calculation of what was paid for completed work compared
to what was planned to be paid for the completed work).
Each cost variance will then be multiplied (weighted) by the
respective project budget for FY-05. To determine the
average calculated cost variance, these cost calculations (project
cost variance times project budget) will be summed and then
divided by the total budget for all the projects. This
average calculated cost variance is then used to determine a
final rating. In these calculations, positive variances
are used to offset negative variances.
Average Calculated Cost
Variance |
Points |
On Target or positive variance |
3.75 |
Less than or equal to 5% over target |
3.3 |
More than 5% but less than or equal
to 10% over target |
2.5 |
More than 10% but less than or equal
to 15% over target |
1.5 |
More than 15% over target |
0 |
The project cost and schedule variances will be calculated
separately. At the end of the fiscal year, each project schedule
variance will be determined and expressed as a percent (essentially
this is a calculation of what work was actually completed compared
to what work was planned to completed). Each project schedule
variance will then be multiplied (weighted) by the respective
project budget for FY-05. To determine the average calculated
schedule variance, these schedule calculations (project schedule
variance times project budget) will be summed and then divided
by the total budget for all the projects. This average
calculated schedule variance is then used to determine a final
rating. In these calculations, positive variances are
used to offset negative variances.
Average Calculated
Schedule Variance |
Points |
On Target or positive variance |
3.75 |
Less than or equal to 5% over target |
3.3 |
More than 5% but less than or equal
to 10% over target |
2.5 |
More than 10% but less than or equal
to 15% over target |
1.5 |
More than 15% over target |
0 |
Performance Criterion: 3.1 Facilities Management
The Laboratory will maintain capital assets to ensure reliable
operations in a safe and cost-effective manner. Energy
initiatives will be managed consistent with a comprehensive
energy management plan.
Performance Measure: 3.1.a Facility and Infrastructure
Maintenance and Energy Management
The intent is to measure the effectiveness of SLAC’s facility
maintenance and energy management programs. The Laboratory
objective is to plan, budget and execute its programs in a manner
which promotes operational safety, worker health, environmental
compliance, property preservation, and cost effectiveness, while
meeting program missions. Maintenance performance measures
include: a Maintenance Investment Index (MII) final target
of 2 percent in FY-06 for a defined set of conventional buildings/office
trailers and negotiated percentages for subsets of unique buildings,
such as accelerator tunnels; annual maintenance summary report;
and Energy Management Plan. Specific MII objectives, maintenance
plan milestones and energy management objectives will be established
in partnership with SSO and made a matter of record at the beginning
of the fiscal year. (Weight: 20%)
- Complete final increment of condition assessment
inspections.
The final inspection is completed; resulting deficiencies
have been input into FIMS.
- Complete the working definition of DM to be used
to identify those items found in the inspections that qualify
as DM items.
A definition has been completed and piloted against
previous DM reports. An excessive amount of items
were de-listed, so the proposed DM definition is being revised
to better reflect the actual conditions at the laboratory.
- Select and prioritize CAS deficiencies for input
into FIMS and the service system.
This has been done using the previous definition of
DM, as the new definition is still in development.
- Update key plans for final increment of 20% CAS inspection
of the site.
Key plans were completed prior to start of inspection
as planned.
- Review all AME inspection identified CAS deficiencies
for all years to identify an updated DM amount that can
be verified by SSO based on application of the approved
working definition of DM.
This was done, however an excessive amount of findings
were deleted as a result of the application of the prototype
definition, so it is being revised.
Performance Gradient:
The performance score will be determined by calculating the
number of milestones completed as scheduled divided by the total
number of milestones selected.
Target
|
Points
|
90% and above |
5 |
80% but less than 90% |
4 |
70% but less than 80% |
3 |
60% but less than 70% |
1 |
Less than 60% |
0 |
Performance Measure: 3.1.b Maintenance Management
Index
SLAC will be measured against the successful achievement
of the FY-05 Maintenance Investment Index goals established
by the Office of Science for maintenance management. This
goal involves achieving an MII of 1.7 for all conventional buildings
at SLAC. Non-conventional buildings will not be assessed
until the MII standard has been established for the non-conventional
buildings (e.g. tunnels and large detector buildings). (Weight
20%)
1. The approved list of conventional buildings will be
determined and MII calculated against these buildings at year
end.
Discussion continues to quantify the buildings to be included,
additional DOE guidance continues to be received. The
procurement and execution of an external evaluation of high
RPV buildings is expected to be completed the first quarter
of FY06. Better tracking of actual maintenance expenditures
in a limited manner was undertaken for this period.
Actual SLAC MII |
Points |
1.7 and above |
7.5 |
1.6 up to 1.7 |
6.5 |
1.5 up to 1.6 |
5.5 |
1.4 up to 1.5 |
4.0 |
Less than 1.4 |
0 |
Specific Goals
In FY 2005, the SLAC Conventional and Experimental Facilities
Department was responsible for developing, reporting, and meeting
specific energy management performance measures as follows:
Objective 1
Energy Management initiatives are managed consistently with
a Comprehensive Energy Management Program and Plan that includes
the minimum requirements of Department of Energy (DOE) O 430.2A,
Departmental Energy and Utilities Management.
- Enter all energy usage data as required into the
EMS4 website not later than the submission due date.
This goal was implemented as stated. Performance gradient:
1.
- Prepare and submit FY2005 Energy Management Assessment
Report not later than the submission due date.
This document is the FY 2005 Assessment Report. Performance
gradient: 1.
- Provide potable water use data in the FY 2005 Annual
Report not later than the submission due date.
FY 2005 Annual Energy Management Report is not due at this
time. We expect that DOE FEMP will formally announce the
due date soon. We plan to implement this goal as stated.
Performance gradient: 1.
- Complete Conceptual Design of Combined Heat and Power
(CHP) Plant for SLAC Computer Center (Building 50). When
constructed this project will generate electricity and cooling
for SLAC Computer Center by means of a gas-burning internal
combustion engine and an absorption chiller.
The study and conceptual design was performed by DE Solutions
consulting engineering firm. Report on the study is available
upon request. Economic attractiveness of the project is
very sensitive to fluctuation of electricity and natural
gas costs. Due to current market’s uncertainties with energy
prices the project implementation is on hold at this time.
Performance gradient: 1.
- Upon completion of goal #4, above, assess project
financing alternatives and perform comparative life cycle
cost analysis.
This goal was implemented as stated. ESP contracting has
been evaluated with input from Sempra Energy. As with the
previous goal, the economic attractiveness of the project
is very sensitive to fluctuation of electricity and natural
gas cost. Due to current market’s uncertainties with energy
prices the project implementation is on hold at this time.
Performance gradient: 1.
- Implement feasibility study, conceptual design and
life-cycle cost analysis of “Collider Housing Lighting Upgrade”
project. Submit a proposal for the project retrofit to DOE
FEMP for funding consideration.
This goal was implemented as stated. Performance gradient:
1.
- Design “Collider Housing Lighting Upgrade” project.
The 1.8 miles North and South arc tunnels of the collider
housing are being illuminated by means of 374, 88-watt mercury
vapor lamps and of 122, 200-watt incandescent lamps located
overhead at 20 feet intervals. The lights are ON 24/7, year
round. Project design includes replacement of all the incandescent
lamps with energy-efficient fluorescent lighting assemblies
and installation of timers at all the lighting circuits
of the collider housing.
This goal was implemented as stated. DOE FEMP granted funding
for this project. Project design has been completed. Performance
gradient: 1.
- Purchase three (3) additional Neighborhood Electrical
Vehicles (NEV) in FY2005. (In FY2004 nine (9) additional
NEVs have been purchased by SLAC, totaling it to 24 NEVs).
The battery-operated NEVs allow SLAC to discontinue lease
of some of GSA gasoline-powered vehicles.
This goal was implemented as stated. Performance gradient:
1.
- Implement Title II design of “Underground Mechanical
Utilities Replacement” project. This goal includes detail
design and preparation of construction documents for underground
piping replacement of natural gas, compressed air, cooling-tower
water, chilled water and hot water systems. These systems
developed significant leaks over years that cause waste
of energy and impose additional maintenance cost. The proposed
work includes replacement of identified mains and branches
known or suspected of leaking.
Completion of Title II design was contingent on the result
of evaluation of the project by External Independent Review
team. The EIR’s recommendations prompted change in the project
schedule, i.e. Title II design has been rescheduled for
completion in FY 2006. Title I design was completed in FY
2005. Performance gradient: N/A.
- Develop scope of work and estimate cost of installation
of electrical meters at substations and feeders as necessary
for monitoring SLAC ordinary facilities electrical energy
consumption separately from the experiment-related energy-intensive
loads.
This goal is in process of implementation with scheduled
completion in FY2006, provided funding is available. Performance
gradient: 0.
- Evaluate a potential for implementing Energy Conservation
Incentive Program (ECIP) at SLAC. Currently there are no
economic incentives for divisions/ departments/building
managers to conserve energy and to implement energy conservation
projects. Evaluate for applicability recently implemented
ECIP at Stanford University. This program transfers responsibility
for paying for electricity use from Stanford Central
Budget office to 20 units (schools) on campus.
This goal was implemented as stated. Performance gradient:
1.
- Submit at least one article on the subject of energy
management to Interaction Point, SLAC’s publication.
This goal was implemented as stated. An article covering
the DOE’s “You Have the Power” campaign award nomination
was printed in June 17, 2005, issue of SLAC’s publication
“The Interaction Point”. Performance gradient: 1.
- Have SLAC Energy Manager to attend at least one energy
management workshop, seminar or conference.
This goal was implemented as stated. SLAC Energy Manager
attended Energy Efficiency Working Group conference, conducted
under auspices of DOE FEMP in August of 2005. Performance
gradient: 1.
- Continue participation in Environmental Management
System (EMS) development representing energy management
aspects of the system. Currently SLAC Energy Manager is
a member of the Working Group for the EMS development.
SLAC’s Energy Manager actively participated in the process
of developing SLAC’s EMS by attending scheduled meetings,
reviewing developed documents and developing objectives
and targets for energy and water conservation programs.
Performance gradient: 1.
- Conduct a presentation on SLAC Energy Management
Program for the Environmental Management System Working
Group (see related goal #14).
This goal was implemented as stated. The presentation was
conducted by SLAC Energy Manager. Performance gradient:
1.
- Update Energy Management website at least twice during
FY2005.
This goal was implemented as stated. Performance gradient:
1.
- Distribute DOE energy-awareness posters and other
outreach materials to SLAC building managers for displaying
in public places.
This goal was implemented as stated. Performance gradient:
1.
- To the extent that adequate funding is made available,
upgrade existing on-state gasoline fill up station to allow
use of Voyager credit card for 211 GSA-owned vehicles. This
will eliminate regular recurring off-site trips for gas
fill up purposes for 211 vehicles. Saving on gasoline, employee’s
time and the vehicles insurance premiums will be significant.
No funding was made available during FY2005. This goal will
be implemented in FY2006. Performance gradient: N/A.
- Incorporate sustainable design principles into design
of new lab/office building of Linac Coherent Light Source
(LCLS) project. The project was granted additional funding
to achieve Silver LEED certification.
This goal was implemented as stated. Title II design is
in progress. A LEED Credit 1.1 to “Optimize Energy Performance
by 15% better than ASHRAE 90.1-1999 is incorporated into
the design. Performance gradient: 1.
Objective 2
Energy Use Reductions and Green House Gas Reductions
show continuous improvement.
- Replace all existing obsolete fluorescent T12/electromagnetic-ballast
lighting assemblies in buildings 040 and 084 with new T8/electronic
ballasts, energy–efficient, assemblies. Total estimated
cost of the project is $150K. The project’s construction
bid package was prepared in FY 2004.
This goal was not implemented in FY2005 due to significant
changes in construction management, safety policies and
priorities in the aftermath of 10/11/2004 electrical accident
at SLAC following with DOE Type A investigation. Performance
gradient: 0.
- Implement the construction of “Collider Housing Lighting
Upgrade” project. Total estimated cost of the project is
$122K. This project is expected to result in annual electrical
energy saving of 446 MWH with the projected payback period
of 3.0 years (see related goal #6 and #7).
This goal was not implemented in FY2005 for the reason
stated in Goal #20 above. Performance gradient: 0.
- To the extent that adequate funding is made available,
upgrade existing DDC Energy Management System’s web control
by installing central server that will consolidate current
control functions and data. With the new control system
many control functions will be improved and energy saving
will be optimized. Total estimated cost of the project is
$100K.
This goal was not implemented in FY2005 due to diversion
of engineering /project management manpower in support of
LCLS project. A server, software and hardware have been
ordered. The project is scheduled for completion in FY 2006.
Weighted performance gradient: 0.25.
Objective 3
Develop and Implement Water Efficiency Program and
Plans.
- Develop a Water Management Plan that includes at
least four (4) BMPs.
This goal was implemented as stated. Performance gradient:
1.
- Audit existing landscapes for irrigation efficiency.
Propose operation and maintenance changes that will optimize
performance of irrigation systems.
This goal was re-substituted with the following goal “Implement
Site Water Efficiency Audit”. Landscaping irrigation efficiency
is included in the scope of work for this task. Currently
the audit is in process of implementation by Maddaus Water
Management firm. Weighted performance gradient: 0.25.
- Implement life cycle cost analysis of installation
no-flush urinals at five buildings.
This goal was re-substituted with the following goal: “Implement
a pilot installation at the men’s restroom in Building 044”:
The installation was completed and tested in FY 2005. The
result was not positive as the odor from the urinal is overwhelming
for the users. Performance gradient: 1.
- Replace existing PH and/or conductivity sensors and
Strantrol controllers with new sensors and PLC controllers
in at least two (2) out of four (4) cooling towers: 101,
1201, 1202 and 1701. The new control system will be connected
to existing Honeywell Scan DCS (Distributed Control System).
The system will allow remote monitoring and reset of the
automatically controlled system’s parameters, therefore
allowing optimizing the blow-down cycles.
This goal was not implemented in FY2005, due to changes
in priorities of facilities projects in the aftermath of
10/11/2005 electrical accident following with DOE Type A
investigation. Currently the project is scheduled for implementation
in FY 2006. Performance gradient: 0.
- Implement Title II design of campus cooling tower
CT101 replacement project. The new cooling tower will be
energy and water-efficient system with a sophisticated control
to monitor the blow-down and make up cycles.
As with Goal #20 above, completion of Title II design was
contingent on result of evaluation of the project by External
Independent Review team. The EIR’s recommendations prompted
change in the project schedule, i.e. Title II design has
been rescheduled for completion in FY 2006. Title I design
has been completed in FY 2005. Performance gradient: N/A.
Objective 6
Purchases of energy efficient technologies include
low standby power devices.
- Demonstrate by example, the purchase of low standby
power devices for 5 of the 10 device types.
This goal was implemented as stated. New query was created
by an administrator of SLAC purchasing. More than 10 low-power
standby power devices were identified by search using the
query system. Performance gradient: 1.
Objective 7
Control electric, gas, and water demand to control costs
and mitigate supply disruptions.
- Conduct site Assessment of Load and Energy Reduction
Techniques (ALERT).
Implementation of this goal has been postponed until
manpower is made available for this task. Performance gradient:
0.
- Develop work plans to implement Peak Load Management/Emergency
Conservation Plans and Alert Assessments recommendations.
Implementation of this goal has been postponed until manpower
is made available for this task. Performance gradient: 0.
Summary
Goals 9, 18 and 27 were not applicable for implementation
in FY 2005. The summation of the performance gradients for the
remaining 27 goals is 20 points. This represents overall performance
gradient of 0.74 (20/27) or “Good” performance level.
|