Fiscal Year 2012 Performance Evaluation Plan

FOR

SANDIA CORPORATION

MANAGEMENT AND OPERATION OFTHE SANDIA NATIONAL LABORATORIES

Contract No. DE-AC04-94AL85000 Performance period October 01, 2011 through September 30, 2012

October 21, 2011 Revision 1

Sandia National Laboratories

FY 2012 Performance Evaluation Plan Sandia Corporation, Contract DE-AC04-94AL850aO

Fiscal Year 2012 Performance Evaluation Plan

SANDIA CORPORATION MANAGEMENT AND OPERATION

OFTHE
SA OIA NATIONAL LABORATORIES

?wq(Wr/JII
Paul J. Hemmert President and Laboratories Sandia Corporation Date Director Patty Wagner Date Manager Sandia Site Office National Nuclear Security Administration

--1.v'1 L. . t--IY~JlM.. '1/u/i1
Jerry L. McDowell Date Deputy Laboratories Director and Executive Vice President for National Security Programs Sandia Corporation Kimberly A. Davis Date Deputy Manager Sandia Site Office National NUclear Security Administration

7~

C

etiW1'"

'1/)'f/1I

/

Kimberly C Sawyer Date Deputy Laboratories Director and Executive Vice President for Mission Support Sandia Corporation

Richard F. Sena Date Deputy Manager Sandia Site Office National Nuclear Security Administration

FY 2012 Performance Evaluation Plan Sandia Corporation, Contract DE-AC04-94AL85000

ii

FISCAL YEAR 2012 PERFORMANCE DOCUMENT REVISION

EVALUATION HISTORY

PLAN

The Performance Evaluation Plan (PEP) is revised periodically to reflect changes in the agreement that have been approved through the formal PEP modification control process. history of revisions is listed below.

A

Revision Revision 1 October 21, 2011

Comment Revised PBI-4.3.1 to clarify performance expections

FY 2012 Performance Evaluation Plan Sandia Corporation. Contract [}E~AG04-94AL850DO

iii

Table of Contents INTRODUCTION PRINCIPLES Performance """ ,, TRANSFORMATION 1 1 1 2 3 Objectives Objectives ., EVALUATION " 3 3 3 4 4 5 PROCESS , PERFOR.MANCE OBJ ECTIVES , 6 7 8 8 10 12 13 13 , ",,, , 14 15 16 16 - Stretch Goals 18 19 21 23 " 27

GUIDE SUCCESSFUL Measurement

and Oversight "

ORGANIZATION/COMPOSiTION DEFINITIONS Mission Focused Performance Mission Support Performance Performance PERFORMANCE PERFORMANCE Based Incentives

STANDARDS/PERFORMANCE RATING PROCESS

Table 1: FY 2012 Rating Scale MANAGEMENT ASSESSMENT

CHANGE CONTROL MISSION FOCUSED

PO-1: National Security Mission - Nuclear Weapons PO-2: National Security Missions - NonNuclear PO-3: Science, Technology MISSION SUPPORT PO-4: Operations PO-5: Business Management PO-6: C-orporate Governance PERFORMANCE Weapons

& Engineering
OBJECTIVES

PERFORMANCE

BASED INCENTIVES

PBI-1: Nuclear Weapons _ Stretch Goals PBI-2: Nuclear Weapons PBI-3: Management Quality Assurance

of Materials - Stretch Goals

PBI-4: Mission Support Efficiencies - Stretch Goals PBI-5: FY 2012 Multi-Site Targets ACRONYM. LIST" ""

FY 2012 Periormance Evaluation Plan Sandia Corporation, Contract DE-AC04-94AL85000

iv

INTRODUCTION
This Performance the Department Evaluation Plan (PEP) documents the negotiated performance criteria by which and 30,

of Energy (DOE)/National

Nuclear Security Administration (Sandia) performance

(NNSA) Sandia Site

Office (SSO) will appraise Sandia Corporation's operation of Sandia National Laboratories 2012. cover multiple years in the future. programmatic "Performance requirements.

in its management

(SNL) from October 1, 2011 through September PEPs for subsequent collaboratively

It will also be used as a basis for establishing It is developed

fiscal years, whtch may against contract and

between the NNSA and Sandia.

Its primary purpose is to establish a framework Based Management"

for assessing

Special Provision Clause H-1

°

performance

in the Sandia contract entitled appraisal requirements. of the entire

sets forth the annual performance to the government, is improved.

This PEP is mission focused and by organizing SNL mission, and the transparency

into mission areas, the management

PRINCIPLES

GUIDE SUCCESSFUL

TRANSFORMATION
based on prudent

This PEP evaluates and promotes a new Governance management of risk, trust, and accountability.

and Oversight framework

It has been written to implement the collective by the Deputy Secretary of Energy and

Governance and Oversight Reform principles as expressed the NNSA Administrator.1,2,3,4

Performance Measurement and Oversight
The contractor is accountable Accordingly, for measuring and credibly assessing its performance with the terms and conditions leadership Oversight against the

prescribed objectives and incentives in accordance standards based on consideration

of the contract.

the model for this PEP is to rely on the contractor's of risk, its management

in utilizing appropriate is primarily conducted mettles, and

and assuranoe systems, and the related measures,

measures, metrics, and evidence in assessing its performance. by verifying and validating performance evidence. against these appropriate

The framework for this PEP is driven by a need to evaluate Sandia's ability to sustain and improve mission performance by remaining an aqlle, multi-program laboratory that is able to tackle the Therefore, the contractor is risk urgent and complex problems of the nation quickly and effectively. management government performance information Management This must be done with sufficient transparency is evaluated

expected to manage SNL in an efficient, effective, mission driven manner, with appropriate to know how risks are managed' and what, when and with what degree of rigor

to allow the contractor and the This promotes an "eyes on,

by the contractor and the government.
Assurance

hands off' approach by the government, in the Performance System (ILMS).

evaluating the reiiability of the metrics and other System (PAS) portion of the Integrated Laboratory

1 Departmental IElements and Contractors, Daniel B. Poneman to Departmental Elements and Contractors, December 2, 2009.
2 NNSA Enterprise Re-engineering Reform Initiative - LOGAS, Thomas P. D'Agostinoto

Distribution, December 22, 2009.

3 Implementation of Governance Reform at the Sandia Site Office and Sandia .National Laboratories, Thomas P. D'Agostino to

Manager, Sandia Site Office, February 5, 2010.
4 NNSA Policy Letter: NAP-21 Transformational Governance' and OverSight, February 28, 2011,

FY 2012 Performance Evaluation Plan Sandia Corporation, Contract DE-AC04-94AL85000

FOR FISCAL YEAR (FY) 2012, NNSA'S "GETTING THE JOB DONE" GOALS

~ Produce
6

and dehver aU required r;omp!~'e

iimitiad life components to ensure an effective deterrent. plans and assess the stockpire to I1lSqt Navy deployments

Successfully

surveillance:

~ Fx!'!clHe IN76 f FP producti()n feC(lVe'Y schedule
6

Executean

NV\iCappr,oved S6l Life Extension Program
Enterpns,e

• M.eet or exceed plarmed cismsnnement qlUlantitit=Js. ,. Implemem t'1e Defense Programs Plan fOf governance reform across :he Improve mission execution and safely ar,d sect rity performance
• Ach10V~ ,gn6or~ on'th€' NIF. ~ Aclueveadvances primary implosion.
~. S;i<ec~lle the • A[;hielle

to

Fliflding 'Iml€stlgalrons and msupportlfl!;,t plar,

tn expefllmental anocompl.ltational tools, us,ed in resolving Significant Lt_P aC£I';'liles associated with early phase
at

for subcritlcal experiments

U 101.

~ Achieve

for critical' plutonium ~:CMRR NF) and uranium (UPF) faGiIities. lP~ooichveCapalo 1 !ity Framework. commitments, and popLllate Component MatLlratfon Framewoffi< wIth technologies requnec to meet StocKpi'le Stewanj'shlp MSl1ageulsnt Plan objectives and gQalsfQr the stockpile milestones

ORGAN IZA TlON/COMPOSITION The PEP is organized into three broad areas: • Mission Performance - Documents the performance objectives and evaluation criteria of Sandia's programmatic work, which will be performed safely, securely, and in an environmentally sound manner through the use of Mission Focused Performance Objectives (POs). • Mission Support - Documents the POs and evaluation criteria of critical operations and infrastructure, which support the mission through the use of Mission Support POs. Performance Based IncentiVes (PBls) • Consists of measures and targets tied to incentive fee.

Mission Focused POs describe the performance expectations to execute the mission of the Laboratory., and to do so in a safe, secure, and environmentally sound manner. They include nonFY 2012 Performance Evaluation Plan Sandia Corporation, Contract DE-AC04-94AL85000 2

nuclear and nuclear mission activities. expectations Business Management,

Mission Support pas describe the performance incl.uding that provided by the Operations, pas are graded on a five-tier functions.

to support the mission of the Laboratory, and Corporate Governance

system from "Excellent" to "Unsatisfactory",

without percentages· assigned, as shown in Table 1:

FY2012 Rating Scale.
FOT

the purposes of the overall performance collectively.

evaluation,

both Mission Focused pas and Mission on pas

Support pas will be considered

The expected minimum level of performance

to be eligible to earn incentive fee is the ''Very Good" adjectival rating level. PBls incentivize the achievement performance. percentages of stretch goals, new initiatives, problem areas, and Multi-Site with

PBls are graded on a five-tier scale from "Excellent" to "Unsatisfactory", assigned per adjectival rating, as shown in Table 1: FY 2012 Rating DEFINITIONS

Scale.

Mission Focused Performance Accomplishment contract. and environmentally

Objectives mission work in a safe, secure, efficient, effective, expectation of this These POs are

of the nuclear and non-nuclear

sound manner, while managing risk, is a fundamental

These pas address performance

on current year mission execution.

designed to permit the contractor to focus its resources and contract funds on the mission, while at the same time, providing the Government safe, secure, and environmentally Mission Support Performance Accomplishment managing risk, is a fundamental with assurance that the mission is being executed in a risk mitigation. sound manner, with appropriate Objectives while on expectation of this contract of capabilities These POs address performance

of the mission work, safely, and securely, efficiently and effectively,

current year mission support and stewardship

and systems for long-term success of with

the NNSA. These POs are designed to permit the contractor to focus its resources and contract funds on those areas of critical importance, while at the same time, providing the Government assurance that the general site and business management executed and managed. Performance performance initiatives. Based Incentives areas that represent innovative (stretch) goals, improvement Targets. and new The Measures and Performance areas that are critical and have been identified for performance Each PBI has associated to the contractor's Performance operations are effective and efficiently

PBls are used to meet specific performance

amount of fee that is available for the contractor to earn is distributed to the contractor commensurate laboratories performance on PBls. Multi.-Site PBls have associated on the performance of national measures and targets (levels of achievement) that are dependent

and production plants within the Nuclear Security Enterprise (NSE). on a five-tier scale shown in Table 1: FY 2012 Rating Scale.

Each PSI is rated individually

FY 2012 Performance Evaluation Plan Sandia Corporation, Contract DE-AC04-94AL85000

3

PERFORMANCE

5T ANDARDS/PERFORMANCE

EVALUATION

The evaluation of Sandia's performance barriers (e.g., budget restrictions, accomplishments

against POs and PSis will also consider unanticipated outside Sandia's control), period. will that may occur during the performance

rule changes, circumstances

and other circumstances

Effective Sandia efforts to overcome or mitigate the impact of such barriers or circumstances be a factor in evaluating performance, circumstances commensurate

If a PSI goal remains unmet at year-end due to extenuating
incentives and distributed to the contractor

beyond Sandia's control, the amount of available incentive fee allocated to that to the contractor's performance against the remaining incentives. RATING PROCESS against the PQs and PSis and other Officer, in the form of a of the H-10

particular incentive may be reallocated to the remaining

PERFORMANCE Sandia

will provide a self-assessment

of its performance

significant factors as determined Performance "Performance

by the Contractor and Contracting clause of the contract.

Evaluation and Assurance Based Management"

Report (PEAR) meeting the requirements

The PEAR will be submitted to SSO no rev'iew and release. found In

later than October 1, 2012, to allow sufficient time for program management An overall performance

rating for each PO and PSI (five-tiers from "Excellent" to "Unsatisfactory")

will be identified by Sandia in the PEAR. These ratings will be based on the descriptors groups. The NNSA will consider the PEAR in preparing the Performance to the Fee Determining Evaluation

the Table 1.: FY 2012 Rating Scale and the overalll rating will consider the Mission and Support
Report (PER) ratings and when making its final recommendations and incentive fees for fiscal year performance. The available fee amounts for FY 2012 are specified in Section S of Contract No. DE-AC0494AL85000. Official on performance

FY 2012 Performance Evaluation Plan Sandia Corporation, Contract DE-AC04-94AL85DDO

4

Table 1: FY 2012 Rating Scale
POs and PBI's will be assessed using the rating scale below, score. Ratings will be communicated to Sandia in accordance schedule as outlined in Special Provision H-10, "Performance PO I PBI POs will not include the percentage with the performance Based Management"
i

assessment

Adjectival Rating _~_ .~ . ~-=--

Excellent

Very Good

has exceeded substantially ; all of the significant performance i criteria and has met overall cost, i schedule, and technical performance I ! requirements of the contract as defined ! ! and measured against the criteria in ! : the Objectives and Incentives for the 1 evaluation period. ~ Contractor has exceeded many of the significant performance criteria and has met overall cost, schedule, and technical performance requirements of the contract as defined· and measured against the criteria in the Objectives and Incentives for the evaluation I period.

I Contractor

Adjectival Rating Common Oefinition -,---.__ ~

~ : Fixed Fee
~l

I

Award Fee Pool Available to be Earned

!

!
I

N/A

91-100%

N1A

76 -90%

Good

Contractor has exceeded some of the significant performance criteria and has met overall cost, schedule, and technical performance requirements of the contract as defined and measured against the criteria in the Objectives and Incentives for the evaluation period. _ Contractor has met overall cost, schedule and technical performance requirements of the contract as defined and measured against the criteria in the Objectives and Incentives for the evaluation period. ._---, I Contractor has failed to meet overall loost, schedule, and technical j performance requirements of the I contract as defined and measured against the criteria in the Objectives I and Incentives for the evaluation
,

N/A

51%-75%

S ati sfactory

N/A

I
, i ,
!

No Greater than

50%

---------_._-,_

; ;
j

!---------'----1

Unsatisfactory

N/A

!
J i

0%

!

i
:

[

! ,
,

,

i period.

l

Note:

The gateway to access at-risk/incentive fee will require achieving an overall "Very Good" in the Performance Objective (PO) space. Any changes to Table 1 will follow the same parameters described in the change control section of this document.

FY 2012 Performance Evaluation Plan

5

Sandia Corporation, Contract DE-AC04-94AL85000

MANAGEMENT
Under the principles of Governance Performance Assurance performance.

ASSESSMENT

PROCESS
on a

transformati.on, the NNSA monitors Sandia's performance Management

continuous basis by relying on Sandia's Integr.ated Laboratory awareness activities rather than traditional compliance-based activities, where SSO performs compliance-based Central to the PAS are measures, to manage a given performance order to validate, verify,inquilre, addition to compliance-based Performance Report (PCPR).

System (ILMS). I . System (PAS), third-party -assessments, and conducting operational assessment to evaluate Sandia's is with high-risk assessments.

The exception to this method of monitoring Sandia's performance oversight including traditional information metrics, indicators, and qualitative area, which shall be easily accessible

til at Sandia uses
data. In

and visible to the NNSA, in

and/or provide feedback on Sandia's critical performance assessment reports for high-risk oversight, evaluation of Sandia performance

ssa will transmit

(usually

quarterly) an integrated, comprehensive

in a Periodic Contractor

The PCPR includes performance performance

feedback with respect to the PEP. Assurance Meetings are

Based on the principle of collaborative held to discuss performance Assurance

reviews, Performance

regular.lyand

the ongoing results of meeting or review

Meetings are any collaborative

ssa oversight. between ssa and

Performance Sandia to discuss

progress. and issues, and to address questions evidence, or insufficiency To ensure full transparency performance, Management

and areas of concern with the performance

of evidence, that is housed in JLMS/PAS. into Laboratory management and operations and to review with Sandia's Corporate

Sandia conducts quarterly Management Conduct Management

Reviews (MR), followed by the Executive

Review (EMR).. The MRs and EMR are held in accordance into the Sandia Management

Procedure CG100.6.19, and performance

Review. These reviews provide SSO the System that identifies successes Participants and the in the EMR

opportunity to have transparency

issues of concern to the contractor and the government

include Sandia's President, Executive Vice Presidents and Vice Presidents, Manager, Deputy Managers and other a comprehensive, Approximately laboratory-wide

ssa

ssa

participants,

as requested by the SSO Manager.

Typically, the EMR will be followed by the transmittal evaluation

of SSO's PCPR, which provides Sandia with

of overall performance. meeting may be scheduled between Sandia. senior issues of concern to and/or any by Sandia's

two weeks after the EMR ajoint and

level management

sse

senior level management

to discuss performance

the ~overnment that were not covered in sufficient detail during the EMR. the pePR, other oversight concerns. The format for this set of meetings willi be determined will be utilized to help provide transparency President and the 8S0 Manager. SSO executive management sensitive issues and concerns.

In addition, monthly partnering meetings between Sandia and and identify time-

FY 2012 Performance Evaluation Plan Sandia Corporation, Contract DE-AC04-94AL85000

6

CHANGE CONTROL
It is essential that a baseline of performance beginning of the performance environment baseline are carefully managed. happen regularly. expectations and metries be established occurs in a dynamic of work Officer and (2) H-11 at the

period to equitably measure performance, It is recognized that performance

and that changes to that

and changes in the direction, requirements, and/or final approval.

funding, and administration

All changes will be reviewed by the SSO Manager/Contracting in contract clauses: (1) H-1 0 "Performance

(SOM/CO) for consideration NNSA as expressed "Performance possible.

While recognizing the unilateral rights of the Based Management,"

tncentives," bifateral changes are the preferred method of change whenever

Proposed verbatim I.anguage ohanges to the PEP will be based on a specific need or preferred strategy, to support the need for the proposed change. If there is disagreement on any issue that may have a significant impact, the issue should

be brought to the EMR meeting for a recommended Administrative

resolution or direction.

changes to the PEP, such as team members' names, will be resolved by the support to NNSA and Sandia. Plans, and The SOM/CO

Joint Support Staff, who provide liaison and administrative Multi-Site Incentive - The PEP and the associated equivalent documents, Management and Operating (M&O) Contractors

Proqrarn Implementation

will be placed on a portal and will be accessible informed of any substantial

to both the

and the Federal community.

will keep NNSA Headquarters Site by Sandia.

proposed changes to the Multi-

FY 2012 Performance Evaluation Plan Sandia Corporation, Contract DE-AC04-94AL85000

7

PERFOR,MANCE
Sandia will provide innovative, science-based, challenging government objectives. programmatic major functions contributing to mission success.

OBJECTIVES
solutions to the most all

systems-engineering

problems that face our nation and the globe.

NNSA will take into consideration is meeting the. those PAS based on Performance

This PEP seeks to set POs to describe what the within the contractor's

wants and puts in place measures for h.ow the contractor Specific targets or metrics are established

needs and operational goals tempered by risk assessment. By organizing of the management of the entire Laboratory

indicators,

and other evidence, are located within ILMS/PAS. areas, the transparency government.

into Mission and Mission Support is improved to the

MISSION FOCUSED PERFORMANCE
PO-1: National Sandia. Corporation programmatic Performance (NW) mission. 1.1 Critical Performance projections management Customers Measure 1.1: Demonstrate Security Mission-

OBJECTIVES

NucleaJ Weapons execute mission work based on the

(Sandia) will diligently and successfully established by customers

requirements

in alignment with Multi-Year Performance to the success of the Nuclear Weapons

Expectations. as measured through the line organizations .. This Objective includes Criticail Measures, and other evidence, contributing

effective analysis and management and effective analysis and

of

revenue, cost, and resource allocation compared to Mission Area expectations and the NNSA budget process. of customer satisfaction, Demonstrate as expressed by both Project Customers (HQ) feedback.

and Key (CSat)

(biennial), using data from the Sandia External Customer Satisfaction Headquarters'

Survey process, and DOEfNNSA

This measure will be

evaluated throuqh the following provisions: 1. t, 1 Evidence of monthly financial reporting, evaluating the percent revenue and percent cost relative to projected fiscal year plan, and that the results are used to demonstrate 1.1.2 effective management. charging for both current

Evidence of monthly evaluation of full time equivalent month and year-to-date used to demonstrate effective management

against projected fiscal year plan and that the results are

1..1.3

Evidence of effective management

of customer relationships

demonstrated

through

quarterly evaluation of anecdotal customer interaction and engagement, HQ's feedback, as well as the annual evaluation the corporate CSat survey. 1.2 Critical Performance Measure 1.2: Demonstrate successful performance

DOE/NNSA

of SMU feedback provided through

against Level II

Milestones associated with Advanced

Simulation and Computing

(ASC), Science Campaign

fY 2012 Performance Evaluation Plan Sandia Corporation, Contract DE-AC04-94AL85000

8

(SC)/lnertial (RTBF). 1,2.1

Confinement

Fusion (lCF), and Readiness

in Technical

Base and Facilities

This measure will be evaluated through the following provisions: Quarterly assessment performance are met Measure 1.3: Demonstrate successful performance against Level II Campaign (EC), Asset of Levell! Milestones to ensure schedule and technical

1.3

Critical Performance

Milestones associated with Directed Stockpile Work (DSW), Engineering and Readiness Campaign as well as Task Agreements (STA). 1.3.1 This measure will be evaluated through the following provisions: Quarterly assessment of Level II Milestones is met. management and Task Agreements

with Secure Transportation

to ensure

schedule anc technical performance 1.4 Critical Performance requirements Environment, performance

Measure 1.4: Demonstrate

assurance of functional & Security, and the effective Strategic Management

in Sandia policy areas such as Integrated Safeguards Safety & Health, Finance, and Corporate Governance, and implementation by line organizations performing

Unit (SMU) mission work. This measure will be evaluated through the following provisions: 1.4.1 Evidence through the management reviewed performance procedures; assurance process that line organizations have

and implementation

of Sandia's policies, processes, addressed

and and

assessed risk/impact to mission success; appropriately and appropriately concerns within the line organization. assurance

communicated

mission impact to programs/SMUs; implementation 1.4.2

performance

Evidence through the management has reviewed line performance

process that Executive Management issues elevated by either and/or

and policy implementation

the line, program, or policy areas, and has engaged the line organizations significantly 1.5 Critical Performance performance impact, successful execution of the SMU mission. continuous improvement

policy areas to address issues that are currently impacting, or have the potential to

Measure 1.5: Demonstrate

in NW mission

through process improvements

and other efficiencies.

This measure will be

evaluated through the following provisions: 1,5.1 Critical Performance periormance. Indicators and other evidence that demonstrate to ensure efficient, effective, and continually management improved

review and assessment

Performance

Team:

Sandia Jerry L. McDowell Bruce Walker

DOE/NNSA/SSQ Robert Scott

FY 2012 Performance Evaluation Plan Sandia Corporation, Contract DE-AC04-94AL85000

9

PO-2: National Security Missions - NonNuclear Weapons Sandia Corporation (Sandia) win diligently and successfully execute mission work based on the programmatic requirements established by customers as measured through the mission areas. This Objective includes Critical Performance Measures and other evidence contributing to the success of the following missions: a. Energy, Climate, and Infrastructure Security (ECIS) b. International, Homeland and Nuclear Security (IHNS) Co Defense Systems and Assessments (DSA) 2.1 Critical Performance Measure 2.1: Demonstrate effective analysis and management of revenue, cost, and resource allocation compared to Mission Area expectations and projections. Demonstrate effective analysis and management of Customer Satisfaction (CSat), as expressed by both Project Customers and Key Customers (bienni.al), using data from the Sandia External CSat Survey process. This measure will be evaluated through the following provisions: 2.1.. 1 Evidence of monthly financial reporting, evaluating the percent revenue and percent cost relative to projected fiscal year plan and that the results are used to demonstrate effective management. Evidence of monthly evaluation of full time equivalent charging for both current month and year-to-date against projected fiscal year plan and that the results are used to demonstrate effective management. Evidence of effective management of customer relationships demonstrated through quarterly evaluation of anecdotal customer interaction and engagement as well as annual evaluation of StrategiC Management Unit (SMU) feedback provided through the corporate CSat survey.

2.1.2

2.1.3

2.2

Critical Performance Measure .2.2: Demonstrate performanoe through management review and monitoring of DOE/NNSA Work Authorizations and other customer milestones and deliverables associated with the ECIS,IHNS, and DSA missions. This measure will be evaluated through the following provisions: 2.2.1 Evidence of quarterly review and evaluation of select program/project milestones to ensure deliverables are met,

2.3

Critical. Performance Measure 2.3: Demonstrate management assurance of functional. requirements in Sandia policy areas such as Integrated Safeguards and Security, Environment, Safety and Health, Finance, and Corporate Governance, and the effective performance and implementation by line organizations performing SMU mission work. This measure will be evaluated through the following provisions:

FY 2012 Performance Evaluation Plan Sandia Corporation, Contract DE-AC04-94AL85000

10

2.3.1

Evidence through the management reviewed performance procedures;

assurance process that line organizations of Sandia's policies, processes, appropriately addressed

have

and implementation

and and

assessed risk/impact to mission sucoess; and appropriately concerns within the line organization.

communicated

mission impact to programs/SMUs; implementation

performance

2.32

Evidence through the management has reviewed

assurance process that Executive Management issues elevated by either and/or

llne performance and policy implementation

the line, program or policy areas and has engaged the line organizations significantly 2.4 Critical Performance impact successful execution of the SMU mission. Measure 2.4: Demonstrate continuous improvement

policy areas to address issues that are currently impacting or have the potential to

in EGIS, IHNS, This

and DSA mission performance

through process improvements

and other efficiencies.

measure will be evaluated through the following provisions: 2.4.1
Critical Performance performance. Indicators and other evidence that demonstrate management improved

review and assessment to ensure efficient. effective, and continually

Performance

Team:

Sandia
Jill M. Hruby (IHNS SMU) Jeffrey A Isaacson (DSA. SMU) Richard H. Stu len (ECIS SMU) Dori Ellis

OQ.E/NNSA/SSO
Robert Scott

FY 2012 Performance Evaluation Plan Sandia Corporation, Contract DE-AC04-94AL850DO

1.1

PO-3: Science, Technology & Engineering
Sandia Corporation (Sandia) will effectively execute Science, Technology and Engineering (ST&E)

to

enable and support the Laboratories' of ST&E.

national security missions and to advance the frontiers of Measures used to assure effective

ST&E. This Objective includes Critical Performance management 3..1

Critical Performance of ST&E. 3.1.1

Measure 3.1: Demonstrate

the value, technical excellence and impact

This measure will be evaluated through. the following provisions: of vallue, impact, and technical

Evidence of quarterly and annual assessment excellence

using the Balanced Scorecard System. Measure 3.2: Demonstrate effective management and assessment of

3.2

Critical Performance the Laboratories' (SMU). 3.2.1

technical capabilities

in coordination

with the Strategic Management

Units

This measure will be evaluated through the following provisions: Evidence of quarterly and annual assessment excellence of value, impact, and technical

using the Balanced Scorecard System. Measure 3.3: Demonstrate effective management and successful This

3.3

Critical Performance

execution of a. Laboratory

Directed Research and Development

(LDRD) Program that capabilities.

promotes and enables innovation and creates new, differentiating measure will be evaluated through the following provisions: 3.3.1 Evidence of quarterly and annual assessment excellence

of value, impact, and technical

using the Balanced Scorecard System. Measure 3.4: Demonstrate the development and execution of effective

3A

Critical Performance partnerships

with universities,

industry and other laboratories.

This measure will be

evaluated through the following provisions: 3.4.1 Evidence of quarterly and annual assessment excellence 3.5 of value, impact, and technical

using the Balanced Scorecard System. Measure 3.5: Demonstrate continuous improvement in the

Critical Performance management provisions: 3.5 ..1

and execution of ST&E.

This measure will be evaluated through the following

Evidence that ST&E management management

is effectively identifying and addressing continuously improving the

issues

during quarterly and annual assessments,and and execution of ST&E.

Performance Team:

Sandia J. Stephen Rottler
12

DOE/NNSA/SSO
Robert Scott

FY2012 Performance Evaluation Plan Sandia Corporation, Contract DE-AC04-94AL85000

MISSION SUPPORT PERFORMANCE PO·4: Operations
Sandia Corporation (ES&H), Emergency

OBJECTIVES

(Sandia) will maintain effective and efficient Environment" Management (EM), Integrated Safeguards infrastructure, of the mission. Safety, and Health-accomplishment

Safety, and Health

and Security (lS&8), and Facilities

Operations, such that the appropriate

tools, training, policies, and guidance are in

place to fully support successful accomplishment 4.1
Critical Performance

Measure 4.1:, Environment,

Maintain effective This

and efficient ES&H such that the appropriate

infrastructure,

tools, training, policies, and of the mission.

guidance are in place to fully support successful

measure will be evaluated through the foHowing provisions:

4.1.1

Critical Performance

Jndlcators and other evidence that demonstrate management review and assessment of ES&H to ensure efficient, effective, and continually
improved performance.

4.2

Critical Performance Management

Measure 4.2: Integrated Safeguards accomplishment

and Security and Emergency and of the mission, While protecting

-- Manage and operate the safeguards

and security, counterintelligence

EM functions to fully support successful conditions of the contract 4.2.1 Critical Performance demonstrate

the public, the worker, and national security assets in accordance with the terms and This measure will be evaluated through the following provisions: Indicators, including essential elements defined in the Defense (MYSO), and other evidence that of IS&S and EM to ensure review and assessment

Nuclear Security Multi Year Strategilc Objectives management efficient, effective and continually

improved performance.

4.. 3

Critical Performance

Measure

4.3: Facilities Operations -- Manage and operate the
accomplishment described of the and national security in the Reporting tool maintained

Facilities and Fire Protection Programs to fully support successful mission, while protecting the public, the worker, the environment, assets in accordance provisions of the contract as found in the Facilities Management in the Integrated Laboratory Management System (ILMS). throuqh the following provisions: with operating and sustainabiHty requirements

This measure will be evaluated

4.. ,1 3

Criucal Performance

Indicators and other evidence that demonstrate of Facilities and Fire Protection improved performance.

management

review and assessment

Programs to ensure

efficient, effective and continually Performance

Team:

Sandia
Michael

DOElNNSAlSSO

W. Hazen

Kimberly C. Sawyer

Dan Pellegrino Eileen Johnston Mike McFadden Jim Todd
13

FY 2012 PerfOfl']lance Evaluation Plan Sandia Corporation, Contract DE-AC04-94AL85000

PO-5: Business Sandia Corporation

Management and business

(Sandia) will maintain effective and efficientinfrastruc.ture

services, ensuring the appropriate tools, training, policies and guida.nce are in place to fully accomplish the mission. 5.1 Critical Performance Measure 5.1: Finance -- Support the mission by managing and described in the provisions of the contract. This

operating the Finance Program and policy areas in an effective and efficient manner and in accordance with operating requirements measure will be evaluated through the fdllowing provisions: 5.1.1 Critical Performance Indicators and other evidence demonsteaflnq Performance Division's Contractor Performance compliance with

operating requirements. Rating Criteria. 5.2 Critical Performance manner in accordance contract. Measure

will primarily be measured through the NNSA Measures and

Field Financial Management

5.2: Human Resources -- Support the mission by' managing
Program and policy areas in an effective and efficient described in the provisions of the

and operating the Human Resources

with operating requirements

This measure will be evaluated through the following provlsions: Indicators and other evidence, primarily those measures in the Objective Matrix, demonstrating compliance with operating

5.2.1

Critical Performance Human Resources requirements,

5.3

Critical Performance Technology

Measure 5.3: Information

Management

(1M) -- Support the mission by

managing and operating the 1M Program and policy areas (Cyber Security, information (IT) and Records Management) and information in an effective and efficient manner in to ensure confldentlality, integrity and access, accordance with applicable contractual availability of information modmcatlon or denial. 5.3.1 requirements

systems, guarding against unauthorized

This measure will be evaluated through the following provisions: Indicators and other evidence, primarily from the Cyber Objectives, demonstrating

Critical Performance

Security Annual Operating Plan and IT Performance compliance with operating requirements. 5.4 Critical Performance Measure

5.4: Supply Chain Management -- Support the mission by
Program and policy areas in an within. the with operating requirements

managing and operating the Supply Chain Management effective and efficient manner in accordance provisions of the contract.

This measure will be evaluated through the following provisions: Indicators and other evidence primarily found in the Supply

5.4.1

Critical Performance

Chain Objective Matrix, Performance Team: Sandia Matthew J. O'Brien Kimberly C. Sawyer
14

DOE/NNSA/SSO Lloyd DeSerisy

FY 2012 Performance Evaluation Plan Sandia Corporation, Contract DE-AC04-94AL85DOO

PO-6: Corporate Sandia Corporation decision-making demonstrating assessment,

Governance system,

(Sandia) will efficiently and effectively operate its quality assurance to the Contractor Assurance oversight reform. System (CAS) through formal

framework, improvement

and implement rules governing employee and business conduct while action planning and monitoring supporting 'NNSA's

causal analysis, and improvement to Governance

continued transformation

6.1 Critical Performance
being implemented

Measure 6.1.: Demonstrate

through objective evidence that the Program QMS are based on thefollowinq:

Sandia Corporate Quality Mana.gement System (OMS) and supporting for all elements of DOE Order414.1D

6.1.1 Corporate OMS and supporting Program QMS elements are defined and
infrastructures are in place. The evidence are the required Quality Assurance procedures. Plans (QAP) and corporate and program specific implementing 6,1.2 Corporate QMS and supporting

Program OMS elements are being implemented. completed by the Corporate and supporting of their QAPs against the standards). and effectiveness

The evidence are the assessments QAP owners on the implementation

applicable quality criteria (I.e., DOE Order 414.1 D or appropriate 6.2 Critical Performance Measure

6.2: Demonstrate through critical performance indicators
improvement to the Sandia CAS.

and other evidence measurable 6.2.1

Completed actions/milestones as defined in the Assurance (revision 1.,. ugust 5, 2011) to include development of root A and completion of resulting actions addressing appropriate Sandia CAS Affirmation Readiness Review final report and Review final report. Sustainable implementation and performance improvement

Improvement Plan
and contributing causes, issues identified in the the Federal Affirmation

6.2.2

as shown by progress

toward established

Sandia entity maturity target levels. -- Effectively implement and follow

6.3 Critical Performance

Measure 6.3: Legal Management Pllan that complies with 10 C.F.R

a

Legal Management

970.5228-1

entitled Insurance-Litigation

Part719 and Clause 1-91, DEAR and Claim$ (Deviation), dated March 2002, while These best practices demonstrate to maintain acceptable legal

also incorporating management

best practices and procedures.

effective internal controls and continuous

improvement

designed to reduce the following: litigation costs; outside counsel fees and Should Sandia's best praotioes

costs; and cost of judgments,. awards, and settlements. require a deviation from for obtaining such. Performance Team:

10 C.F.R 719.10, Sandia agrees to comply with the procedures
per 10 C.F.R 719.7. DOElNNSA1SSO Jo Loftis Michele Reynolds

a deviation,

Sandia Patricia N. Smith Becky Krauss Kimberly C. Sawyer
1.5

FY 2012 Performance EValuation Plan Sandia Corporation, Contract DE-AC04-94AL85000

PERFORMANCE BASED INCENTIVES
PBI·1: Nuclear Weapons - Streich Goals (Sandia) leadership

Achieve stretch goals detailed below to demonstrate

Sandia Corporation's

within the Nuclear Security Enterprise (NSE) .. Evaluation

of these stretch goals will consider the

availability of sufficient funding needed to complete such additional work. 1.1 Performance Carnpaiqns, Measure 1.1: Exceed Level II Milestones associated and Readiness in Technical with Advanced Fusion

Simulation and Computing CASC), Science Campaigns, evaluated through the following provisions: 1.1.1 ASC-related stretch goal(s): Provide engineering and Validation Identification

Inertial Confinement

CleF)

Basis and. Facilities (RTBF).

This measure will be

analysis in support of the 861

consistent with the Verification assessment mechanical, environments and Phenomena applications

(V&V) principles of the .ASC program.

This includes: 1.)Establish baseline Predictive Capability Maturity Model (PCMM) and Ranking Table (PIRT) analysis for abnormal and major simulation 2) Demonstrate (abnormal thermal, electromagnetic, simulations

etc.) in support of 861 Life Extension Program (LEP) qualification; impact of computational definition activities. on 861 LEP for design and

(Note: This stretch goal is contingent upon full

scope 861 LEP in FY 2012).
1.1.2 ICF Campaign-related stretch goal(s): Establish plutonium (Pu) dynamic materials as measured by (1) Pu shot per quarter to access (MA)

shots as routine work on the ZRacceleraior the most critical new environmental demonstration or greater. Laboratory

for FY 2012 .. Continue efforts to develop, test, and certify new capabilities regimes for these rnaterials.Includinq for Puexperiments (HQ). and approval of containment

16 MegaAmps on

Provide results from each Pu test within 30 days to Los. Alamos National (LANL) and NNSA Headquarters (Note: This is contingent

timely reception of the needed targets from LANL). 1.11.3
Science Campaign-related conditions stretch goal: Determine hlgher pressure Pu experimental This is

needed to address critical long-term Science Campaign needs. Document experimental

not necessarily tied to facility pulsed power; Sandia will explicitly evaluate other means of reaching the desired conditions. risks and demonstrate shaping accuracy), Laboratory the intent of performing (OSS) Director. 1.1.4 RTBF-related stretch goals: Fire suppression systems that support Documented in Mission plans to reduce feasibility of: (1) diagnostics, (2) drivers (including pulseThe plans will be prepared with National

(3) targets, and (4) containment

a peer review by LANL and Lawrence livermore

(LLNL), and presented to the NNSA HQ Office of Stockpile Stewardship

Safety Analysis are available 98% of the time; Establish a list of process/programmatic Critical facilities. equipment that are vital to sustaining capabilities Report the percentage
16

of operating days per month that an item of

FY 2012 Performance Evaluation Plan Sandia Corporation, Contract DE-AC04-94AL85000

equipment was available; Begin recapitalization

of Silicon Fabrication Sciences Application Study.

facility per FY (MESA)

2.0111risk ranked Microsystems
recapitalization

and Engineering

study; and begin revitalization

activities at the Tonopah Test Range

(TTR) per the FY 2.011 priority ranked TTR Revitalization

1.2

Performance

Measure 1.2: Exceed Level II Milestones associated Campaigns.

with Directed Stockpile

Work (OSW) and Engineering following provisions:

This measure will be evaluated through the

1.2.1 1.2.2

Implement the NNSA 3-point cost estimating approach on the W88 Alteration (ALT). Utilize existing resources within the stockpile systems to conduct Engineering Evaluation for hardware and testers per the requalification the NNSNSandia/Kansas Manufacturing and Sourcing (.KCRIMS) Steering Committee activity plans derived by Infrastructure and summarize impacts City Plant Kansas City Responsive

to the stockpile systems at the end of FY 2.012.
1.2.3 Lower 861 LEP technical risk by meeting all criteria to increase Technical Readiness Level (TRL) (goal of TRL-5) for the following key items by end of FY

2.012: (items to be negotiated post Nuclear Weapons Complex option down-select).

Performance

Team:

Sandia
Jerry L. McDowell

DOE/NNSA/SSO Robert Scott

FY 2012 Performance Evaluation Plan Sandia Corporation, Contract D6·AC04-94AL85000

17

PBI-2: Nuclear Sandia Corporation

Weapons

Quality

Assurance- Stretch

Goals (QA) methods and focus

(Sandia) will continue to improve its quality assurance for improvement, as identified below.

on the identified opportunities addressed, would significantly

These areas, jf successfully etc).

benefit product realization and product quality delivery at Sandia

and its Nuclear Security Enterprise (NSE) partners (Kansas City Plant, Pantex, suppliers,

2.1

Performance effectiveness deficiencies,

Measure 2.1: Execute a quality improvement of the Sandia Nuclear Weapons and leads to cost-effective

plan to improve the System (QMS) recurring quality

(NVV) Quality Management This measure

that incorporates

prevention of weapon product defects, addresses quality assurance.

will be evaluated

through Critical Performance

Indicators within the following provisions: issues: Major

2.1.1

Address and resolve the following systemic NW Supplier Management gaps and weaknesses implemented Major gaps, weaknesses,

in Sandia's approach to NW Supplier Quality Management. and corrective action plan will be identified and Self~ Assessment conducted in FY 2Q11/FY

from the Sandia-led

2012.
2.1,2 Address each Supplier's QMS capability to meet DOE/NNSA Policy (QC~1)requirements the completion/on-time Stockpile Work (DSVV). and demonstrate Weapons Quality

that gaps are mitIgated by Sandia for

and on-budget delivery of quality products for Directed

2.1.3

Identify and implement demonstrate

improvements

in Sandia's NW QMS for product realization (RPSS), and assurance of product realization

around but not limited to improving the Realize· Product Subsystem accountabilities for management have improved. 2.1.4 Perform additional quality improvements Improvements Improvements to resolution. to processes to ensure in NW processes

associated

with: 1)

Sandia desighs are suffidel1tly mature prior to
facilities; 2)

entering into full-scale production at the NSE manufacturing

in executing Sandia processes so that Sandia QA and Nuclear Track both QA and NS concerns, and document timely management that targeted NW Members of the Workforce methodology that production defects that at the

Safety (NS) subject matter expert's inputs are acted upon by Sandia management resolution decisions; 3) Demonstrate leads to the effective prevention

are fully trained and qualified; and 4) Implement a cross-cutting of quality-related minimum causes scrap and rework, Performance Team:

Sandia
Carolyne Hart Jerry L. McDowell

DOE/NNSA/SSO Jo Loftis

FY 2012 Performance Evaluation Plan Sandia Corporation, Contract DE-AC04-94AL85000

18

PBI-3:. Management

of Materials - Stre·tch Goals

Sandia Corporation (Sandia) will safely and efficiently manage materials that pose inherent risks at National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) / Sandia National Laboratories (SNL) sites. 3.1. Performance Measure 3 ..1: Safely and efficiently remove No Defined Use (NDU) nuclear materials from NNSAlSNL sites. This measure will be evaluated through the following provisions: 3.1.1 Complete the removal of a minimum of six Hazard Category 3 or remote-handled, non-MOX NDU items. Significant progress toward 1) disposal of Sodium bonded Uranium, 2) separation of MOXfrom Uranium in container C-OQ210010 and disposal of that Uranium, and 3) sampling/analysis of Enriched Uranium Kerf/residues for FY 2013 shipment. Complete the characterization and proceed with preparations for the removal of classified radioactive materials stored in Building 927 at SNLICal'ifornia. Repackage the NDU LRRI Curium 244 and complete aU required preparations remeval/shiprnent of this material. for

3.1,2

3.1.3

3.1.4

3.2

Performance Measure 3.2: Safely and efficiently remove excess explosive/energetlc material and unneeded chemicals from SNL sites, This measure will be evaluated through the 'following provisions: 3.2.1 Remove at least 40,000 pounds gross weight of explosives before the end of FY .2012., or energetic materials

3.2.2

Update the Rocket Motor Inventory Management Plan and provide the updated plan to the Sandia Site Office before the end of April 2012. Reduce the number of containers of chemicals that have been on site over 10 years by 11650 focusing on those that are shock sensitive.

3.2.3

3.3

Performance Measure 3.3:. Complete removal of non-certified Co-50 sources from the Gamma Irradiation Facility (GIF). This measure will be evaluated through the followinq provisrons: 3.3.1 33.2 Downgrade the G IF to a radiological facility. Complete the removal of the GIF non-certified Mexi.co (NM) site. Co-50 sources from the SNL/New

3,4

Performance management 3.4.1

Measure 3.4: Reduce the Nuclear Facility footprint and enhance the of nuclear materials.

Provide a feaSibility study, by March 2012, that develops, analyzes, assesses, and ranks options for reducing the need for Hazard Category 2 or 3 nuclear facilities, without reducing mission effeotiveness,at NNSAISNUNM beyond FY 2015.

FY 2012 Performance Evaluation Plan Sandia Corporation, Contract DE-AC04-94AL85000

19

3.4.2

Formalize the processes and controls governing the acceptance of accountable
nuclear materials onto NNSA/SNL sites.

Performance

Team:

Sandia Michael W. Hazen Jerry L. McDowell

DOE1NNSAISSO Jim Todd Dan Pellegrino

FY 2012 Performance Evaluation Plan Sandia Corporation, Contract DE-AC04-94AL85000

20

PBI·4:· Mission Support Efficiencies - Stretch Goals Establish enduring Sandia Corporation (Sandia) practices that achieve operational efficiency, while sustaining effeotiveness, through reform of Laboratory-wide processes and the implementation of Governance, 4.1 Performance Measure 4.1: Use management techniques and methodologies to reduce and/or avoid costs. Sustainable cost efficiencies create both savings (reduction in actual expenditures) and avoidance (decreased or prevented future costs). This measure will. be evaluated through the following provisions: 4..1.1 Use risk-based decision-making, Lean Six Sigma tools/techniques, and other business operations improvements that result in sustainable process improvement savings equivalent to $16 million (including savings from PBI-4.1.2). Reported cost savings/avoidance from implemented process improvements wiU be in accordance with Sandia CPS FIN1OO.2.RPRT.2: Document Efficiency & Cost Savings or as estimated and documented through Lean Six Sigma methodology. G.enerally, cost savings/avoidance wlll only be reported for a 12-month period, starting with the date of implementation. Capture and reportall cost savings and avoidances reaHzed through Governance lmplementations. Identify how cost/resource and savings/avoidance were redirected.

4.1.2

4.1.3 4.2

Performance Measure 42: Undertake and implement a strategy in FY 2.012to address workforce planning to Identify and maintain core capability while ensuring seamless operations. This measure will be evaluated through the following provisions: 4.2.1 Develop a workforce strategy to articulate future workforce requirements in accordance with Sandia HR 100.1.6,. Implement an Integrated Workforce Management Approach. Progress to plan will be monitored and reported quarterly through the Management Assurance process. Reaching 80% or more of the planned hires by the close of FY 2012 defines success for the entire corporation.

4,3

Performance Measure 4.3: Increase efflciencies, sustain reasonable costs for customers, and create pools for recapitalization/investments as identified in Objective #3 in Sandia's Strategic Plan for FY 2012 through FY 2016. Additionally, implement the objectives outlined in the joint SSO/Sandia initiative that evaluates Sandia's indirect cost drivers, with the goal of vectoring costs downward towards best business practices over the next three years. 4.3.1 Continue to focus on indirect and overall cost efficiencies while successfully executing mission work and increasing productivity. Realize $30 million of indirect cost savings in FY 2012 and pursue equivalent cost savings throughout the year to achieve Sandia's internal goal. The savings will be reinvested by Sandia to help meet the objectives in Sandia's Strategic Plan, Identify and benchmark three indirect cost pool elements and identify changes that can be implemented to vector indirect rates downward towards best business practices.

4.3 ..2

FY 2012 Performance Evaluation Plan Sandia Corporation, Contract DE.-AC04-94AL85000

21

4.3.3

Continue and expand on the indirect program transparency efforts. Provide details on the processes for the establishment and management the FY 2012 indirect cost pools and rates. Provide visibility to the change control process, including benefits and risks associated with FY 2012 funding change decisions, and mitigation of those risks. On a quarterly basis, provide a status to plan, summary of significant changes, and real-time notification of those funding changes.

4.4

Performance Measure 4.4: To improve the efficiency and effectiveness of SNLlNM's mission planning, SNLlNM will provide technical support to DOE and the DOE/National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) efforts. 4.4.1 Through effective management techniques, allocate funds for the updated Site-Wide Environmental Impact Statement (SWEIS) effort. Sandia wHIrespond to data calls and will provide Site Wide Envimnmentallmpact. Statement (SWEIS) development support of high quality to.the DOE and the DOE SWEIS Contractor in a timely manner.

4.4.2

Performance Team:

Sandia Matthew J. O'Brien Kimberly C, Sawyer

DOE/NNSA/SSO Lloyd DeSerisy Jo Loftis Dan Pellegrino

FY 2012 Performance Evaluation Plan Sandia Corporation, Contract DE-AC04-94AL85000

22

CIJ(I) Z 1::

«l!!

:z 3: .a

o '@
Q)

c

>
ci ..... <!: Z
'

N

.t:
al

o I

.~ c
Ul Ul
(I)

,::I
!,J !,J

iI:I

--

rn 'o ~ 1:: o
o

()

N

....
>IJ;.

....
::::I

'"":'

.;;;:
w

-

'<3: ..--:
-e-'

-co o o

~

... 't:!
e
o o

E

E

5
~ m ,

LO

't:!

...
::I

en

o

o o

-o [l_«
"",0

c'<;t ('i)0

rn

§w

- (Iil, .._ co

<11 .... ::J 0

LTI§
C <11

2l'-:
'1::0
(LO

c

E"'" ~ CiI o .._

0

Ole-

NO '-cu 0·N"C )-oro LLlf)

c:

<I!! VJI!) Z:5:

21:

o
~

(I) •:;;

. '!)

(1)'-

((~....
t: -ii)
Ol-

ro

_J

Q)et::

O::::§:

m:::J
Q)-o

0..1U
t:

::Jet::

00.

o

>

(I)

0
V
N

Eli
Q)

.>-0... Cf;Ju. 0(1) -0(1) t:i:

1i)2

:;; >

0·«
C')

oo

N

..--

"'" c'i
..--

l{)

C"!

'lii~~
:!::C')C') :;;..,

It!

U-'-"-

.~

~

)<:

<tC (/,I .2 za. .zE

o~ J:u
:;
I

.~
,

W

"C

E ::::; ....
I;)

en

- ....
~~
N~

::::; II)

.... 1011)

N:!::: U.

>-VJ

E

==

IV

2
C

III

iii
0)

:t:
III

c..
_.I...J t::zz...J III...J«Z e, ...J...J

.!:!

en

"C III III ...J

.Q
a
Q)

c

o_

.c

';:
(II

11:1

OJ C

.ct:

+"U

iii t: o

.~ a

o

"""""' "i: !/) III III ::I

o

(I] t: _0 :C:, ::,;:; Q) t:

3:. u

~

·c .Q).c

Ern
c,.u

s
f/'J

x

u.:

(l)

...
U III +-'

... o
C

z
.c

c; a 0_

C'il ~

';:';; Q)

U
N
'<'"

o

o c o ,:2

... c
(II

a."S

0(1]

ECi..

<-0

:>
LL

...
't'
C
U ::l

~i:

III

o
~ ....

o

~.,,:

(II'<t

1.0

U..-

.,,:
..-

co
T""

.21 ~
.!!!
J:: U

c

.;::a ~
,S2-o
UIJ:)C'il

...
C

III

f: ffi

C'il -

.,,:

E

C)x..c: cW (/)'
lilT""

·x w

....

«

_01

.E""": • (II c..

«c .S!
(I)

zc.
::tu

>III C
(II

>III
C
C III III

zE

o~

C

III

U

tS

',Q..
,011::

.!!!
o

U)

o

'(3

III U C III

UJ

E III ::

"C
(IS II)

...J

.etl!! en ZC ~
II)

Z·o

o en
Cf)

.!!!.~
-:::l

o 0

-

..... «15

.....

:::::s

en ()
zcn
Zt::

.;:
II)

o
(I) (I)

.;:
Q)

(IS

«.i'; C
:;:::;0 «1_c
:::l

0II)

W (]) O.g
co:::

o o

Q..E E til o til U Q) -cOO
ttl «I _Q)
C Q)_
0_

en

...
E
C

... u
o

... o

:::::s

_

c

00

..... «I.e
Q)

co

N

til .... C ~Q)

E..Q

x-c

U
N

Q):; Q) 0

..... > u,

i.i=-.....;;

CU

a:::£w
N N

Q)<'ilu_

.etC::: en .2 zo.. zE
O~

>Q)
C

{!!.
Q)

IV

E

...J

o o o L!) co

::I:u

o o

Q) Q)

u
s:::::

!i!(.)

'<t 1::0

~ '<t ,
(J)

E ~ ~
Q)

IV

o...~

0,;:;0 rot) ..=!ro ro ...
UJ

§w

;> .....

11.

(1)(.) u_
I:: I::

§

ro 0 E:;:::; ... ro
'1::0

o

<-

a.O

a>e0 -

...
E Q)

Nt.) "(1)

N"
0 LL(J)
C >-(1)

ACRONYM LIST
ALT ASC CAS CFR CPS CSat DEAR DOD DOE DSA DSW EC ECIS EM EMR ES&H Alteration Advanced Scientific Computing Contractor Assurance System Code of Federal Regulations Corporate Policy System Customer Satisfaction Department of Energy Acquisition Regulation Department of Defense Department of Energy Defense Systems and Assessments Directed Stockpile Work Engineering Campaign Energy, Climate, and Infrastructure Security Emergency Management Executive Management Review Environment, Safety; and Health Federal Program Manager Full Time Equivalent Fiscal Year Gamma Irradiation Facility Headqua rters Inertial. Confinement Fusion International, Homeland and Nuclear Seeurity Integrated Laboratory Management System Information Management Integrated Phase Gate Independent Project Review Integrated Safeguards and Security

fPM
fTE

FY GIF HQ IGF II-jNS ILMS

1M
IPG IPR .IS&8

1T

InformatiOn Technology
Joint Performance Review Assurance Integration Teams Kansas City Plant Level 1 Los Alamos National Laboratory Laboratory Directed Research and Development Life Extension Program Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Lovelace Respiratory Research Institute MegaAmp Microsystems and Engineering Sciences Application Management and Operation Members of Workforce Mixed Oxide Multi Year Strategic Objectives National Ignition Campaign No Defined Use National Environmental Policy Act No Later Than National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada National Security Site
27

JPAITs KCP L1 LANL LORD LEP LLNL LRRI MA MESA M&O

MOW MOX
MYSO NIC NDU NEPA NLT NNSA NNSS

FY 2.012 Performance Evaluation Plan Sandia Corporation, Contract DE-AC04-94AL85000

NS NSE NW NWC OSS PAS PBI P-Card PCO PCMM PEAR PEP PER PIRT PO Pu

Nuclear .Nuclear Nuclear Nuclear

Safety

Security Enterprise
Weapons Weapons Complex

Office of Stockpile Stewardship
Performance Assurance System Performance Based Incentive Purchase Card Program Control Document Predictive Capability Maturity Model Performance Evaluation and Assurance Report Performance Evaluation Plan Performance Evaluation Report Phenomena .Identification and Ranking Table Performance Objective Plutonium Pantex Facility Quality Assurance Quality Assurance Program QuaHty Management System Resource Conservation and Recovery Act Realize Product Subsystem Readiness in Technical Base and Facilities Sandia Corporation Science Campaign Strategic Management Unit Sandia National Laboratories Sandia National Laboratortes/Callfornia Sandia National Laboratories/New Mexico Special Nuclear Material Savannah River Site Stockpile Stewardship & Management Plan Sandia Site Office Science, Technology & Engineering Secure Transportation Asset Site Wide Environmental Impact Statement Technical Readiness Level Tonopah Test Ranqe Nevada Test Site underground tunnel complex Under GrOl,lnd Test (nuclear) Verification and Validation Weapon Design & Cost Report Work for Others Waste Isolation Pilot Plant Y-12 National Security Complex

PX

QA QAP QMS RCRA RPSS RTBF

Sandia

se

SMU SNL SNLfCA SNL/NM SNM SRS SSMP SSO ST&E STA SWEIS TRL

TTR

U1a UGT V&V WDCR WFO WIPP Y-12

Sandia Corporation, Contract DE-AC04-94AL85000

FY 2012 Performance Evaluation Plan

28

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful