Appendix F, Sec. A, Part II, Revised 5/2/96

Appendix F
OBJECTIVE STANDARDS OF PERFORMANCE

Section A -- Performance Objectives
Part II --ENVIRONMENT, SAFETY AND HEALTH

PERFORMANCE OBJECTIVE #1 -- Protection and Prevention
PERFORMANCE OBJECTIVE #2 -- Compliance

PERFORMANCE OBJECTIVE #1 -- Protection and Prevention

The Laboratory will conduct operations in a safe manner that protects human health, the environment and the public and prevents adverse impacts thereon. (Weight = 45%)

CRITERIA PERFORMANCE MEASURES

1.1

Effective Protection and Prevention
An effective Environment, Safety and Health Program will identify, control and respond to hazards. The intent of the following group of performance measures is to assure that the Laboratory's ES&H systems effectively address protection and prevention. They represent key protection and prevention elements that are adequate to demonstrate the effectiveness of ES&H systems. (Weight = 45%)
1.1.a Radiation Protection of Workers
Occupational external and tritium (excluding accidental exposure and/or intake) radiation doses from DOE operations will be managed to assure that applicable 10 CFR 835 limits (5 rem/yr) and DOE Administrative Limits (2 rem/yr) are not exceeded. An effective ALARA program is in place to manage collective dose. (Weight = 5%)

Assumptions:

For FY96 the performance period is January 1, 1995 through December 31, 1995.

Any actual or anticipated significant change in workloads (interpreted to be an increase or decrease of 10% or more) that would affect radiation doses will be brought to the attention of UC and DOE and appropriate adjustments will be made.

The Laboratory will define any change in its control level for collective dose in coordination with its local DOE office by October 1 for use during the following calendar year.

For individual exposures the Laboratory will not exceed the 10 CFR 835 limits or DOE Administrative Limits, and will manage to the more stringent administrative goals defined by the Laboratory.

Gradient:
Meets Expectations:

A proactive management strategy (such as an effective ALARA Program) is in place to manage and reduce exposure for the optimum individual and collective dose.

All individual doses are below 10 CFR 835 limits.

Collective dose is within 5% of the Laboratory's 3 year running average.

A Laboratory specific control level for collective dose is established.

Exceeds/Far Exceeds Expectations:
Is evaluated by considering a combination of the following:

all routine individual occupational exposures are below DOE Administrative Limits

collective dose is reduced by at least 10% of the Laboratory's 3 year running average (this criterion is not a factor if the Laboratory is at or below its established control level for collective dose)

evidence of Senior Management involvement/leadership in the ALARA Program

Laboratory ALARA goals and administrative goals for individual exposures are achieved

1.1.b Radiation Protection of the Public
Public radiation doses to the maximally exposed individual from DOE operations will be measured or calculated and controlled to assure that applicable Federal limits are not exceeded. An effective ALARA program in place to manage dose to the public. (Weight = 5%)

Assumptions:

For FY96 the performance period is January 1, 1995 through December 31, 1995.

Any actual or anticipated significant change in workloads (interpreted to be an increase or decrease of 10% or more) that would affect radiation doses will be brought to the attention of UC and DOE and appropriate adjustments will be made.

Each Laboratory will define any change in its site control level for the maximally exposed individual dose in coordination with its local DOE office by October 1 for use during the following year.

Gradient:
Meets Expectations:

A proactive management strategy such as an effective ALARA program is in place to manage and reduce dose, or to maintain dose at the control level.

Federal limits are not exceeded.

Maximally exposed individual dose is within at least 5% of the site's 3 year running average.

A Laboratory site control level is established.

Exceeds/Far Exceeds Expectations:
Is evaluated by considering a combination of the following:

public dose is reduced by 10% percent from the site's three year running average (this criterion is not a factor if the Laboratory is at or below its site control level)

public dose is maintained below 1 mrem

1.1.c Radiological Exposure Prevention
Unplanned internal exposures to radioactive material and ORPS reportable occurrences of skin or personal clothing contamination are managed and minimized. (Weight = 5%)

Assumptions:

For FY96 the performance period is January 1, 1995 through December 31, 1995.

The severity of the events is to be considered in the evaluation. The weighting from high to low severity is: intakes of greater than 100 mrem, skin contamination, then clothing contamination.

Data for this measure is reported as a normalized number of occurrences or exceedances.

Some variability is expected which may not be indicative of a trend.

Gradient:
Meets Expectations:

A proactive management strategy is in place to reduce frequency and severity which includes follow-up to occurrences or exceedances.

The number of occurrences will be maintained to within 5% of the baseline (calendar year 1994) or a number agreed upon by the Laboratory and the local DOE office.

Exceeds Expectations:

The number of occurrences meets the goal for a decreasing trend set by agreement between the local DOE office and the Laboratory.

Far Exceeds Expectations:

The reduction in the number of occurrences exceeds the goal established between the local DOE office and the Laboratory.

1.1.d Chemical Exposure Prevention
Using a risk-based approach, the Laboratory will maintain and improve a site-wide exposure assessment and monitoring plan to characterize employee exposures to hazardous chemicals, physical agents (except ionizing radiation) and biological agents. The number of toxic material/physical agent exposures above OSHA medical removal levels and exposures above applicable action levels will be tracked. A decreasing trend is expected. For small numbers, control limits will be established; the expectation will be to stay within the control limits. (Weight = 5%)

Assumptions:

For FY96 the performance period is January 1, 1995 through December 31, 1995.

The intent of this measure is to assist in preventing employee exposures to toxic materials, physical agents, and biological agents.

For FY96 and thereafter, "action level" is defined as one-half of the OSHA PEL, ACGIH TLV, or other published occupational health standards, unless a different action level is specified by OSHA.

Data for this measure is reported as the number of occurrences or exceedances versus the number of measurements taken.

Exposure measurements will be corrected by the protection factor of the personal protective equipment in use.

Some variability is expected which may not be indicative of a trend. Changes in operational levels or volumes shall be considered fully.

Applicable exposures above the OSHA PELs resulting from an accident will be addressed by the local DOE office and the Laboratory.

Control limits are set by the local DOE office and the Laboratory.

Gradient:
Meets Expectations:

The exposure and monitoring plan is implemented.

The exposure and monitoring plan is of sufficient quality and integrates Industrial Hygiene and Medical.

There is no toxic material/physical agent exposure greater than the OSHA PEL.

There is no biological exposure above OSHA medical removal levels.

There is appropriate and documented follow-up to exposures above an action level.

A proactive management strategy is in place to minimize exposures.

Exceeds Expectations:

There is no toxic material/physical agent exposure greater than the ACGIH TLV or other published occupational health standards.

Far Exceeds Expectations:

There is no toxic material/physical agent exposure exceeding the action level.

A proactive process to evaluate hazardous materials and replace them with less hazardous materials as appropriate, or totally isolate/enclose them such that no exposure above the action level can occur, is developed and agreed to by the local DOE office. The process is implemented within the performance period.

1.1.e Accident Prevention
Severity and frequency of accidents over the baseline 3 years (1991-1993) were analyzed to identify the top 3 personnel accident/injury types in each area. The number of Bureau of Labor Statistics reportable occurrences of these accidents will be tracked. A downward trend is expected as compared to the baseline years. (Weight = 5%)

Assumptions:

For FY96 the performance period is January 1, 1995 through December 31, 1995.

Laboratory statistics will be collected for the baseline population previously defined. It is envisioned that the population will be slightly different for each Laboratory.

The Laboratory and its local DOE office will agree on a data base and tracking system.

It is recognized that an initial increase may be experienced whenever a new prevention program is introduced and that some variability is expected which may not be indicative of a trend. For the FY96 Performance Measure (calendar year 1995), the frequency and/or severity should be stabilized or decreasing.

Workers' Compensation costs will be considered during the self assessment.

For FY97 and future years, the accident/injury types and baseline years will be updated by mutual agreement of the local DOE office and the Laboratory.

Subcontractor operations/personnel are included if the subcontractor is performing part of the Laboratory's operations. Subcontractors are excluded if they are "servicing" the Laboratory (e.g., copy machine vendors or transient construction workers covered under 29 CFR 1926).

Gradient:
Meets Expectations:

A downward trend in frequency and/or severity for each of the 3 accident/injury types is achieved.

The subcontractor work force (as defined in the assumptions) is included.

Exceeds Expectations:

A downward trend in frequency and severity for each of the 3 accident/injury types is achieved.

A proactive management strategy is in place to reduce frequency and severity and to include the subcontractor work force.

Far Exceeds Expectations:

An ongoing process to evaluate the accident prevention records of "transient" subcontractor companies is in place.

An exceptional reduction in frequency and severity for each of the 3 accident/injury types is achieved.

An additional 2 "accident/injury types" are identified and reduced.

1.1.f Medical and Industrial Hygiene Integration
Monitoring data from the Industrial Hygiene Exposure Assessment and Monitoring plan (see Performance Measure 1.1.d) will be provided to the medical staff who will utilize these data in the health evaluation of employees. Continuous quality improvement of the interaction between Industrial Hygiene and Medical will be based on the Peer Review and Improvement Process. (Weight = 5%)

Assumptions:

The intent of this measure is to help prevent injuries and illnesses from occupational exposure to chemical, biological and physical agents. The long term goal is primary prevention and enhancement of secondary prevention capabilities (early detection and intervention, minimization of adverse health effects, and implementation of corrective action).

The Peer Review and Improvement Process will be refined and used by Laboratory Medical Directors and Laboratory Health and Safety Managers. The process shall include broad objectives for the 3 Laboratories; specific objectives shall be developed for each individual Laboratory.

DOE will be invited to participate in the Peer Review and Improvement Process. Medical confidentiality will be maintained in the process. "Peers" are the 3 Laboratory Medical Directors or their designate, and an Industrial Hygiene representative from each Laboratory.

The Peer Review may include a random sample of employee medical charts, and/or review of other appropriate documents to evaluate the interaction between Industrial Hygiene and Medical.

Gradient:
Meets Expectations:

Industrial Hygiene exposure and monitoring information is used by Medical.

A quality Peer Review and Improvement Process is in place. Baseline Peer Review has been completed by June 30, 1996.

Exceeds Expectations:

Medical surveillance feedback information is used by Industrial Hygiene.

The Peer Review and Improvement Process includes evaluating the integration of Medical with other safety/health disciplines in addition to Industrial Hygiene.

Far Exceeds Expectations:

There is optimal two-way interaction between Medical and all appropriate safety/health disciplines.

1.1.g Process Waste Minimization
Jointly, DOE and the Laboratory selected 3 of 5 process waste streams that were the highest generators of waste (hazardous, LLW, TRU or mixed) for 1993 generation data. These 3 waste streams shall continue, at a minimum, to be reduced annually by an average of 5%. Annually, beginning in 1995, the Laboratory will review the previous year's waste generation for the purpose of proposing new waste streams to be added to this performance measure. Progress on new waste streams will initially be tracked to specific milestones agreed upon with the local DOE office. Once the waste minimization efforts are implemented the wastes will at a minimum be reduced annually by an average of 5%, but a larger reduction target will be negotiated for the first implementation year. (Weight = 5%)

Assumptions:

Any actual or anticipated significant change in workloads will be brought to the attention of the UC and DOE as soon as possible and an appropriate change is to be made in this goal. Significant change should be interpreted to be a change of 10% (or more) in workload which would affect waste generation rates.

Annual reviews will be completed by the Laboratory by October 1 of each calendar year and selection of additional or deletion of waste streams and development of milestones shall be agreed upon by January 31 of the following year.

Selection criteria for waste streams will be negotiated by the Laboratory and the local DOE office.
Waste reduction goals for the first year�s reduction performance will be negotiated by the Laboratory and the local DOE office.

If reasonable efforts are made to obtain funding, and funding is not forthcoming or the timing is such that a milestone will be missed, the milestone schedule may be renegotiated.

Progress towards the waste reduction goal for each new waste stream will be measured after the waste minimization efforts are implemented.

The reduction will be measured from January 1 through December 31 of the calendar year subsequent to implementation of the waste minimization efforts.

Gradient:
Meets Expectations:

Milestones are met.

Reduction in rate of generation of each of the new waste streams meets the agreed upon reduction rate.

Reductions in the out years will be maintained at an annual average rate of 5% per year until it is determined that the effectiveness of the waste minimization measure has been realized.

A proactive management strategy is in place to minimize process wastes.

Credit will be given for capital investments to realize reduction over more than a year.

Exceeds Expectations:

Completing milestones prior to their target date.

Achieving greater than the negotiated reduction rate.

Credit will be given for exceeding the average 5% reduction during the out years.

Far Exceeds Expectations:

Credit will be given for adding more than 2 waste streams to the performance measure annually.

1.1.h Solid Waste Minimization
The Laboratory will decrease annually the aggregate weight of all waste generated sitewide. (Weight = 5%)

Assumptions:

For FY96 the performance period is January 1, 1995 through December 31, 1995.

Any actual or anticipated significant change in workloads will be brought to the attention of the UC and DOE as soon as possible and an appropriate change is to be made in this goal. Significant change should be interpreted to be a change of 10% (or more) in workload which would affect waste generation rates.

The aggregate weight reduction may include non-hazardous solid waste. Air emissions and sanitary wastewater are excluded.

Recycling is considered to be a method of waste minimization.

Waste minimization and recycling efforts implemented on construction debris and waste, demolition and decommissioning waste, and environmental restoration wastes should be discussed in the self assessment but separated from the baseline for the purpose of calculating the reduction.

Self assessments will include discussions of the types and quantities of material that are recycled, reused or exchanged.

Gradient:
Meets Expectations:

A percentage reduction per calendar year is achieved. The percentage will be agreed to by the Laboratory and the local DOE office by October 31, 1995. If an agreement cannot be reached between the Laboratory and the local DOE office, the reduction percentage will be set at 10%.

A proactive management strategy is in place to minimize solid waste.

Exceeds Expectations:

Greater than agreed to percentage (or greater than 10% if no agreement) reduction in any calendar year.

A documented increase annually in the types and amounts of wastes avoided, materials recycled or reused.

Far Exceeds Expectations:

A documented annual proportional increase in procurements of material and products containing recycled materials.

1.1.i Source Reduction and Pollution Prevention
The Laboratory surveyed its operations for opportunities related to source reduction and pollution prevention in 1995. Agreed upon specific milestone were implemented. Annually, effective with FY96, the Laboratory will continue to survey on-site operations for opportunities to eliminate, reduce, recover or recycle potential pollutants to all media, including air, water, soil, sediments, and biota.

The Laboratory will annually evaluate and prioritize a site-specific number of pollution prevention opportunities and establish milestones/metrics that allow the measurement of progress for each opportunity. Upon agreement with the Laboratory and the local DOE office they will be tracked. The Laboratory's success will be measured by progress on funded, site-specific milestones. If opportunities are not found, supporting data and arguments must be supplied. (Weight = 5%)

Assumptions:

For FY96 the performance period is January 1, 1995 through December 31, 1995.

This Performance Measure focuses on (but is not limited to) pollutants regulated under the Clean Air Act and Clean Water Act and chemicals subject to the ozone depleting substances and TRI reduction goals.

Source reduction activities that focus on particular waste streams are addressed in Performance Measure 1.1.g.

The intent of this measure is to have a process integrated into the pollution prevention program for assessing ongoing and new activities to reduce pollution sources outside the scope of measures 1.1.g and 1.1.h.

Criteria for selecting opportunities include reductions in the number of discharge points, chemical substitution or process changes that reduce pollutant mass emissions or releases, and process changes that result in the reuse or recycling of potential pollutants.

The opportunities should be prioritized using a cost/benefit approach, and must be justified with written documentation, such as a Pollution Prevention Opportunity Assessment or similar report.

Gradient:
Meets Expectations:

An updated survey of opportunities is completed by October 31, 1995 and annually thereafter.

A revised prioritized list or supporting documentation that opportunities were not found is provided by January 31, 1996 and annually thereafter.

A proactive management strategy is in place to prevent pollution.

Good progress is made on most funded, site-specific milestones.

Exceeds/Far Exceeds Expectations:

Good progress is made on all funded, site-specific milestones.

Meeting milestones on funded opportunities with a mutually defined aggressive schedule will merit an Exceeds or Far Exceeds.

PERFORMANCE OBJECTIVE #2 -- Compliance
TThe Laboratory will comply with applicable Federal, State and local ES&H laws, regulations and ordinances and with applicable and accepted DOE directives. (Weight = 15%)

CRITERIA PERFORMANCE MEASURES

2.1.

Effective Compliance Programs
The Laboratory will have effective programs in place designed to achieve compliance with applicable Federal, State and local laws, regulations and ordinances and, where cost-beneficial, with applicable DOE orders as provided in Article XV, Clause 3 of the Prime Contract. The intent of the following performance measures is to assure the Laboratory�s ES&H systems effectively address compliance. They represent key compliance elements that are adequate to demonstrate the effectiveness of ES&H compliance systems. (Weight = 12%)
2.1.a Tracking and Trending of Findings and Violations
The number of validated environmental violations and findings resulting from inspections by regulatory agencies and formal audits will be tracked and trended. A downward trend is expected for each category from the 1993 base year. Changes in regulatory procedures after the 1993 base year that increase or decrease the level of occurrence reporting shall be brought to the attention of UC and DOE as soon as possible and adjustments made to the base year figure, as appropriate. (Weight = 4%)

Assumptions:

"Formal" audit is defined as one that results in a formal report to the Laboratory that flows through the appropriate audit tracking departments at the Laboratory (LLNL-ARO, LBNL-OAA and LANL- AA).

All uncontested violations and findings will be counted. Contested violations will not be reported. "Validated" means after the Laboratory and DOE agree that it is a violation or finding.

Data will be normalized based on number of inspections the Laboratory has by reporting the number of inspections and number of uncontested violations/findings. The trending will be done on the number of violations and findings in a calendar year.

Gradient:
Meets/Exceeds/Far Exceeds Expectations:

A downward trend in findings and violations is achieved.

A proactive management strategy is in place to reduce or minimize findings and violations.

2.1.b Tracking and Trending of Environmental Releases
Reportable occurrences of environmental releases exceeding regulatory or permitted levels imposed by local, State or Federal agencies will be determined and trended. A downward trend is expected. Changes in regulatory procedures after the 1993 base year that increase or decrease the level of occurrence reporting shall be brought to the attention of UC and DOE as soon as possible and adjustments made to the base year figure, as appropriate. (Weight = 4%)

Assumptions:

Tracking and trending will not include reports of excursions that do not exceed regulatory requirements. Such excursions are within compliance limits.

Data will be collected for the period of January 1, 1995 through December 31, 1995.

Gradient:
Meets/Exceeds/Far Exceeds Expectations:

A downward trend is achieved.

A proactive management strategy is in place to reduce or minimize environmental releases.

2.1.c Occupational Safety and Health
Imminent danger situations as defined by Section 13(a) of the Occupational Safety and Health Act will be mitigated immediately upon discovery. Serious violations will be mitigated or corrected as soon as possible, but in no case longer than 5 working days without formal concurrence by the local DOE office. After mitigation, equivalent protection or abatement will be implemented to ensure protection of workers. (Weight = 4%)

Assumptions:

The performance measure allows time for dialogue, on a case-by-case basis, to determine whether a violation is to be classed as "serious."

Serious violations are as defined by the OSHA Field Inspection Reference Manual.

Subcontractor operations/personnel are included if the subcontractor is performing part of the Laboratory's operations. Subcontractors are excluded if they are "servicing" the Laboratory (e.g., copy machine vendor or transient construction workers covered under 29 CFR 1926).

Data will be collected for the period of July 1, 1995 through June 30, 1996.

Gradient:
Meets Expectations:

All imminent danger situations are mitigated immediately.

All serious violations are mitigated within 5 working days or an agreed upon schedule.

The Laboratory demonstrates that its safety and health systems effectively address compliance.

Exceeds Expectations:

A proactive management strategy is in place to minimize the occurrence of imminent danger situations and serious violations.

A level of achievement above minimum compliance is demonstrated. The Laboratory's safety and health systems include some or all of key program elements that are indicative of exemplary safety and health programs. These program elements include management leadership, employee involvement, worksite analysis, hazard prevention and control, and safety and health training.

Far Exceeds Expectations:

The Laboratory has successfully implemented all key program elements to demonstrate a consistent level of excellence.

2.2 Regulatory Response
The Laboratory will be responsive to regulatory agencies. (Weight = 3%)
2.2.a Regulatory Commitments
All funded regulatory consent agreement milestones will be met. If such milestones cannot be met, the Laboratory must inform the University and DOE in writing at the earliest possible time before the milestone passes and seek written concurrence from the appropriate regulatory agency on a revised schedule. (Weight = 3%)

Assumptions:

For FY96 the performance period will be July 1, 1995 to June 30, 1996.

Gradient:
Meets Expectations:

100% of milestones met.

Requests generated by the Laboratory for written concurrence on a revised schedule are submitted 30 days prior to the due date.

Exceeds/Far Exceeds Expectations:
Accomplish milestones ahead of schedule as defined through dialogue with the local DOE office.

PERFORMANCE OBJECTIVE #1 -- Protection and Prevention The Laboratory will conduct operations in a safe manner that protects human health, the environment and the public and prevents adverse impacts thereon. (Weight = 45%)
CRITERIA	PERFORMANCE MEASURES
1.1	Effective Protection and Prevention An effective Environment, Safety and Health Program will identify, control and respond to hazards. The intent of the following group of performance measures is to assure that the Laboratory's ES&H systems effectively address protection and prevention. They represent key protection and prevention elements that are adequate to demonstrate the effectiveness of ES&H systems. (Weight = 45%)	1.1.a	Radiation Protection of Workers Occupational external and tritium (excluding accidental exposure and/or intake) radiation doses from DOE operations will be managed to assure that applicable 10 CFR 835 limits (5 rem/yr) and DOE Administrative Limits (2 rem/yr) are not exceeded. An effective ALARA program is in place to manage collective dose. (Weight = 5%)
Assumptions: For FY96 the performance period is January 1, 1995 through December 31, 1995. Any actual or anticipated significant change in workloads (interpreted to be an increase or decrease of 10% or more) that would affect radiation doses will be brought to the attention of UC and DOE and appropriate adjustments will be made. The Laboratory will define any change in its control level for collective dose in coordination with its local DOE office by October 1 for use during the following calendar year. For individual exposures the Laboratory will not exceed the 10 CFR 835 limits or DOE Administrative Limits, and will manage to the more stringent administrative goals defined by the Laboratory. Gradient: Meets Expectations: A proactive management strategy (such as an effective ALARA Program) is in place to manage and reduce exposure for the optimum individual and collective dose. All individual doses are below 10 CFR 835 limits. Collective dose is within 5% of the Laboratory's 3 year running average. A Laboratory specific control level for collective dose is established. Exceeds/Far Exceeds Expectations: Is evaluated by considering a combination of the following: all routine individual occupational exposures are below DOE Administrative Limits collective dose is reduced by at least 10% of the Laboratory's 3 year running average (this criterion is not a factor if the Laboratory is at or below its established control level for collective dose) evidence of Senior Management involvement/leadership in the ALARA Program Laboratory ALARA goals and administrative goals for individual exposures are achieved
		1.1.b	Radiation Protection of the Public Public radiation doses to the maximally exposed individual from DOE operations will be measured or calculated and controlled to assure that applicable Federal limits are not exceeded. An effective ALARA program in place to manage dose to the public. (Weight = 5%)
Assumptions: For FY96 the performance period is January 1, 1995 through December 31, 1995. Any actual or anticipated significant change in workloads (interpreted to be an increase or decrease of 10% or more) that would affect radiation doses will be brought to the attention of UC and DOE and appropriate adjustments will be made. Each Laboratory will define any change in its site control level for the maximally exposed individual dose in coordination with its local DOE office by October 1 for use during the following year. Gradient: Meets Expectations: A proactive management strategy such as an effective ALARA program is in place to manage and reduce dose, or to maintain dose at the control level. Federal limits are not exceeded. Maximally exposed individual dose is within at least 5% of the site's 3 year running average. A Laboratory site control level is established. Exceeds/Far Exceeds Expectations: Is evaluated by considering a combination of the following: public dose is reduced by 10% percent from the site's three year running average (this criterion is not a factor if the Laboratory is at or below its site control level) public dose is maintained below 1 mrem
		1.1.c	Radiological Exposure Prevention Unplanned internal exposures to radioactive material and ORPS reportable occurrences of skin or personal clothing contamination are managed and minimized. (Weight = 5%)
Assumptions: For FY96 the performance period is January 1, 1995 through December 31, 1995. The severity of the events is to be considered in the evaluation. The weighting from high to low severity is: intakes of greater than 100 mrem, skin contamination, then clothing contamination. Data for this measure is reported as a normalized number of occurrences or exceedances. Some variability is expected which may not be indicative of a trend. Gradient: Meets Expectations: A proactive management strategy is in place to reduce frequency and severity which includes follow-up to occurrences or exceedances. The number of occurrences will be maintained to within 5% of the baseline (calendar year 1994) or a number agreed upon by the Laboratory and the local DOE office. Exceeds Expectations: The number of occurrences meets the goal for a decreasing trend set by agreement between the local DOE office and the Laboratory. Far Exceeds Expectations: The reduction in the number of occurrences exceeds the goal established between the local DOE office and the Laboratory.
		1.1.d	Chemical Exposure Prevention Using a risk-based approach, the Laboratory will maintain and improve a site-wide exposure assessment and monitoring plan to characterize employee exposures to hazardous chemicals, physical agents (except ionizing radiation) and biological agents. The number of toxic material/physical agent exposures above OSHA medical removal levels and exposures above applicable action levels will be tracked. A decreasing trend is expected. For small numbers, control limits will be established; the expectation will be to stay within the control limits. (Weight = 5%)
Assumptions: For FY96 the performance period is January 1, 1995 through December 31, 1995. The intent of this measure is to assist in preventing employee exposures to toxic materials, physical agents, and biological agents. For FY96 and thereafter, "action level" is defined as one-half of the OSHA PEL, ACGIH TLV, or other published occupational health standards, unless a different action level is specified by OSHA. Data for this measure is reported as the number of occurrences or exceedances versus the number of measurements taken. Exposure measurements will be corrected by the protection factor of the personal protective equipment in use. Some variability is expected which may not be indicative of a trend. Changes in operational levels or volumes shall be considered fully. Applicable exposures above the OSHA PELs resulting from an accident will be addressed by the local DOE office and the Laboratory. Control limits are set by the local DOE office and the Laboratory. Gradient: Meets Expectations: The exposure and monitoring plan is implemented. The exposure and monitoring plan is of sufficient quality and integrates Industrial Hygiene and Medical. There is no toxic material/physical agent exposure greater than the OSHA PEL. There is no biological exposure above OSHA medical removal levels. There is appropriate and documented follow-up to exposures above an action level. A proactive management strategy is in place to minimize exposures. Exceeds Expectations: There is no toxic material/physical agent exposure greater than the ACGIH TLV or other published occupational health standards. Far Exceeds Expectations: There is no toxic material/physical agent exposure exceeding the action level. A proactive process to evaluate hazardous materials and replace them with less hazardous materials as appropriate, or totally isolate/enclose them such that no exposure above the action level can occur, is developed and agreed to by the local DOE office. The process is implemented within the performance period.
		1.1.e	Accident Prevention Severity and frequency of accidents over the baseline 3 years (1991-1993) were analyzed to identify the top 3 personnel accident/injury types in each area. The number of Bureau of Labor Statistics reportable occurrences of these accidents will be tracked. A downward trend is expected as compared to the baseline years. (Weight = 5%)
Assumptions: For FY96 the performance period is January 1, 1995 through December 31, 1995. Laboratory statistics will be collected for the baseline population previously defined. It is envisioned that the population will be slightly different for each Laboratory. The Laboratory and its local DOE office will agree on a data base and tracking system. It is recognized that an initial increase may be experienced whenever a new prevention program is introduced and that some variability is expected which may not be indicative of a trend. For the FY96 Performance Measure (calendar year 1995), the frequency and/or severity should be stabilized or decreasing. Workers' Compensation costs will be considered during the self assessment. For FY97 and future years, the accident/injury types and baseline years will be updated by mutual agreement of the local DOE office and the Laboratory. Subcontractor operations/personnel are included if the subcontractor is performing part of the Laboratory's operations. Subcontractors are excluded if they are "servicing" the Laboratory (e.g., copy machine vendors or transient construction workers covered under 29 CFR 1926). Gradient: Meets Expectations: A downward trend in frequency and/or severity for each of the 3 accident/injury types is achieved. The subcontractor work force (as defined in the assumptions) is included. Exceeds Expectations: A downward trend in frequency and severity for each of the 3 accident/injury types is achieved. A proactive management strategy is in place to reduce frequency and severity and to include the subcontractor work force. Far Exceeds Expectations: An ongoing process to evaluate the accident prevention records of "transient" subcontractor companies is in place. An exceptional reduction in frequency and severity for each of the 3 accident/injury types is achieved. An additional 2 "accident/injury types" are identified and reduced.
		1.1.f	Medical and Industrial Hygiene Integration Monitoring data from the Industrial Hygiene Exposure Assessment and Monitoring plan (see Performance Measure 1.1.d) will be provided to the medical staff who will utilize these data in the health evaluation of employees. Continuous quality improvement of the interaction between Industrial Hygiene and Medical will be based on the Peer Review and Improvement Process. (Weight = 5%)
Assumptions: The intent of this measure is to help prevent injuries and illnesses from occupational exposure to chemical, biological and physical agents. The long term goal is primary prevention and enhancement of secondary prevention capabilities (early detection and intervention, minimization of adverse health effects, and implementation of corrective action). The Peer Review and Improvement Process will be refined and used by Laboratory Medical Directors and Laboratory Health and Safety Managers. The process shall include broad objectives for the 3 Laboratories; specific objectives shall be developed for each individual Laboratory. DOE will be invited to participate in the Peer Review and Improvement Process. Medical confidentiality will be maintained in the process. "Peers" are the 3 Laboratory Medical Directors or their designate, and an Industrial Hygiene representative from each Laboratory. The Peer Review may include a random sample of employee medical charts, and/or review of other appropriate documents to evaluate the interaction between Industrial Hygiene and Medical. Gradient: Meets Expectations: Industrial Hygiene exposure and monitoring information is used by Medical. A quality Peer Review and Improvement Process is in place. Baseline Peer Review has been completed by June 30, 1996. Exceeds Expectations: Medical surveillance feedback information is used by Industrial Hygiene. The Peer Review and Improvement Process includes evaluating the integration of Medical with other safety/health disciplines in addition to Industrial Hygiene. Far Exceeds Expectations: There is optimal two-way interaction between Medical and all appropriate safety/health disciplines.
		1.1.g	Process Waste Minimization Jointly, DOE and the Laboratory selected 3 of 5 process waste streams that were the highest generators of waste (hazardous, LLW, TRU or mixed) for 1993 generation data. These 3 waste streams shall continue, at a minimum, to be reduced annually by an average of 5%. Annually, beginning in 1995, the Laboratory will review the previous year's waste generation for the purpose of proposing new waste streams to be added to this performance measure. Progress on new waste streams will initially be tracked to specific milestones agreed upon with the local DOE office. Once the waste minimization efforts are implemented the wastes will at a minimum be reduced annually by an average of 5%, but a larger reduction target will be negotiated for the first implementation year. (Weight = 5%)
Assumptions: Any actual or anticipated significant change in workloads will be brought to the attention of the UC and DOE as soon as possible and an appropriate change is to be made in this goal. Significant change should be interpreted to be a change of 10% (or more) in workload which would affect waste generation rates. Annual reviews will be completed by the Laboratory by October 1 of each calendar year and selection of additional or deletion of waste streams and development of milestones shall be agreed upon by January 31 of the following year. Selection criteria for waste streams will be negotiated by the Laboratory and the local DOE office. Waste reduction goals for the first year�s reduction performance will be negotiated by the Laboratory and the local DOE office. If reasonable efforts are made to obtain funding, and funding is not forthcoming or the timing is such that a milestone will be missed, the milestone schedule may be renegotiated. Progress towards the waste reduction goal for each new waste stream will be measured after the waste minimization efforts are implemented. The reduction will be measured from January 1 through December 31 of the calendar year subsequent to implementation of the waste minimization efforts. Gradient: Meets Expectations: Milestones are met. Reduction in rate of generation of each of the new waste streams meets the agreed upon reduction rate. Reductions in the out years will be maintained at an annual average rate of 5% per year until it is determined that the effectiveness of the waste minimization measure has been realized. A proactive management strategy is in place to minimize process wastes. Credit will be given for capital investments to realize reduction over more than a year. Exceeds Expectations: Completing milestones prior to their target date. Achieving greater than the negotiated reduction rate. Credit will be given for exceeding the average 5% reduction during the out years. Far Exceeds Expectations: Credit will be given for adding more than 2 waste streams to the performance measure annually.
		1.1.h	Solid Waste Minimization The Laboratory will decrease annually the aggregate weight of all waste generated sitewide. (Weight = 5%)
Assumptions: For FY96 the performance period is January 1, 1995 through December 31, 1995. Any actual or anticipated significant change in workloads will be brought to the attention of the UC and DOE as soon as possible and an appropriate change is to be made in this goal. Significant change should be interpreted to be a change of 10% (or more) in workload which would affect waste generation rates. The aggregate weight reduction may include non-hazardous solid waste. Air emissions and sanitary wastewater are excluded. Recycling is considered to be a method of waste minimization. Waste minimization and recycling efforts implemented on construction debris and waste, demolition and decommissioning waste, and environmental restoration wastes should be discussed in the self assessment but separated from the baseline for the purpose of calculating the reduction. Self assessments will include discussions of the types and quantities of material that are recycled, reused or exchanged. Gradient: Meets Expectations: A percentage reduction per calendar year is achieved. The percentage will be agreed to by the Laboratory and the local DOE office by October 31, 1995. If an agreement cannot be reached between the Laboratory and the local DOE office, the reduction percentage will be set at 10%. A proactive management strategy is in place to minimize solid waste. Exceeds Expectations: Greater than agreed to percentage (or greater than 10% if no agreement) reduction in any calendar year. A documented increase annually in the types and amounts of wastes avoided, materials recycled or reused. Far Exceeds Expectations: A documented annual proportional increase in procurements of material and products containing recycled materials.
		1.1.i	Source Reduction and Pollution Prevention The Laboratory surveyed its operations for opportunities related to source reduction and pollution prevention in 1995. Agreed upon specific milestone were implemented. Annually, effective with FY96, the Laboratory will continue to survey on-site operations for opportunities to eliminate, reduce, recover or recycle potential pollutants to all media, including air, water, soil, sediments, and biota. The Laboratory will annually evaluate and prioritize a site-specific number of pollution prevention opportunities and establish milestones/metrics that allow the measurement of progress for each opportunity. Upon agreement with the Laboratory and the local DOE office they will be tracked. The Laboratory's success will be measured by progress on funded, site-specific milestones. If opportunities are not found, supporting data and arguments must be supplied. (Weight = 5%)
Assumptions: For FY96 the performance period is January 1, 1995 through December 31, 1995. This Performance Measure focuses on (but is not limited to) pollutants regulated under the Clean Air Act and Clean Water Act and chemicals subject to the ozone depleting substances and TRI reduction goals. Source reduction activities that focus on particular waste streams are addressed in Performance Measure 1.1.g. The intent of this measure is to have a process integrated into the pollution prevention program for assessing ongoing and new activities to reduce pollution sources outside the scope of measures 1.1.g and 1.1.h. Criteria for selecting opportunities include reductions in the number of discharge points, chemical substitution or process changes that reduce pollutant mass emissions or releases, and process changes that result in the reuse or recycling of potential pollutants. The opportunities should be prioritized using a cost/benefit approach, and must be justified with written documentation, such as a Pollution Prevention Opportunity Assessment or similar report. Gradient: Meets Expectations: An updated survey of opportunities is completed by October 31, 1995 and annually thereafter. A revised prioritized list or supporting documentation that opportunities were not found is provided by January 31, 1996 and annually thereafter. A proactive management strategy is in place to prevent pollution. Good progress is made on most funded, site-specific milestones. Exceeds/Far Exceeds Expectations: Good progress is made on all funded, site-specific milestones. Meeting milestones on funded opportunities with a mutually defined aggressive schedule will merit an Exceeds or Far Exceeds.
PERFORMANCE OBJECTIVE #2 -- Compliance TThe Laboratory will comply with applicable Federal, State and local ES&H laws, regulations and ordinances and with applicable and accepted DOE directives. (Weight = 15%)
CRITERIA	PERFORMANCE MEASURES
2.1.	Effective Compliance Programs The Laboratory will have effective programs in place designed to achieve compliance with applicable Federal, State and local laws, regulations and ordinances and, where cost-beneficial, with applicable DOE orders as provided in Article XV, Clause 3 of the Prime Contract. The intent of the following performance measures is to assure the Laboratory�s ES&H systems effectively address compliance. They represent key compliance elements that are adequate to demonstrate the effectiveness of ES&H compliance systems. (Weight = 12%)	2.1.a	Tracking and Trending of Findings and Violations The number of validated environmental violations and findings resulting from inspections by regulatory agencies and formal audits will be tracked and trended. A downward trend is expected for each category from the 1993 base year. Changes in regulatory procedures after the 1993 base year that increase or decrease the level of occurrence reporting shall be brought to the attention of UC and DOE as soon as possible and adjustments made to the base year figure, as appropriate. (Weight = 4%)
Assumptions: "Formal" audit is defined as one that results in a formal report to the Laboratory that flows through the appropriate audit tracking departments at the Laboratory (LLNL-ARO, LBNL-OAA and LANL- AA). All uncontested violations and findings will be counted. Contested violations will not be reported. "Validated" means after the Laboratory and DOE agree that it is a violation or finding. Data will be normalized based on number of inspections the Laboratory has by reporting the number of inspections and number of uncontested violations/findings. The trending will be done on the number of violations and findings in a calendar year. Gradient: Meets/Exceeds/Far Exceeds Expectations: A downward trend in findings and violations is achieved. A proactive management strategy is in place to reduce or minimize findings and violations.
		2.1.b	Tracking and Trending of Environmental Releases Reportable occurrences of environmental releases exceeding regulatory or permitted levels imposed by local, State or Federal agencies will be determined and trended. A downward trend is expected. Changes in regulatory procedures after the 1993 base year that increase or decrease the level of occurrence reporting shall be brought to the attention of UC and DOE as soon as possible and adjustments made to the base year figure, as appropriate. (Weight = 4%)
Assumptions: Tracking and trending will not include reports of excursions that do not exceed regulatory requirements. Such excursions are within compliance limits. Data will be collected for the period of January 1, 1995 through December 31, 1995. Gradient: Meets/Exceeds/Far Exceeds Expectations: A downward trend is achieved. A proactive management strategy is in place to reduce or minimize environmental releases.
		2.1.c	Occupational Safety and Health Imminent danger situations as defined by Section 13(a) of the Occupational Safety and Health Act will be mitigated immediately upon discovery. Serious violations will be mitigated or corrected as soon as possible, but in no case longer than 5 working days without formal concurrence by the local DOE office. After mitigation, equivalent protection or abatement will be implemented to ensure protection of workers. (Weight = 4%)
Assumptions: The performance measure allows time for dialogue, on a case-by-case basis, to determine whether a violation is to be classed as "serious." Serious violations are as defined by the OSHA Field Inspection Reference Manual. Subcontractor operations/personnel are included if the subcontractor is performing part of the Laboratory's operations. Subcontractors are excluded if they are "servicing" the Laboratory (e.g., copy machine vendor or transient construction workers covered under 29 CFR 1926). Data will be collected for the period of July 1, 1995 through June 30, 1996. Gradient: Meets Expectations: All imminent danger situations are mitigated immediately. All serious violations are mitigated within 5 working days or an agreed upon schedule. The Laboratory demonstrates that its safety and health systems effectively address compliance. Exceeds Expectations: A proactive management strategy is in place to minimize the occurrence of imminent danger situations and serious violations. A level of achievement above minimum compliance is demonstrated. The Laboratory's safety and health systems include some or all of key program elements that are indicative of exemplary safety and health programs. These program elements include management leadership, employee involvement, worksite analysis, hazard prevention and control, and safety and health training. Far Exceeds Expectations: The Laboratory has successfully implemented all key program elements to demonstrate a consistent level of excellence.
2.2	Regulatory Response The Laboratory will be responsive to regulatory agencies. (Weight = 3%)	2.2.a	Regulatory Commitments All funded regulatory consent agreement milestones will be met. If such milestones cannot be met, the Laboratory must inform the University and DOE in writing at the earliest possible time before the milestone passes and seek written concurrence from the appropriate regulatory agency on a revised schedule. (Weight = 3%)
Assumptions: For FY96 the performance period will be July 1, 1995 to June 30, 1996. Gradient: Meets Expectations: 100% of milestones met. Requests generated by the Laboratory for written concurrence on a revised schedule are submitted 30 days prior to the due date. Exceeds/Far Exceeds Expectations: Accomplish milestones ahead of schedule as defined through dialogue with the local DOE office.

Appendix F Table of Contents
Appendixes Table of Contents
Contract 98 Table of Contents

Appendix F OBJECTIVE STANDARDS OF PERFORMANCE Section A -- Performance Objectives Part II --ENVIRONMENT, SAFETY AND HEALTH

PERFORMANCE OBJECTIVE #1 -- Protection and Prevention

PERFORMANCE OBJECTIVE #2 -- Compliance

Appendix F
OBJECTIVE STANDARDS OF PERFORMANCE

Section A -- Performance Objectives
Part II --ENVIRONMENT, SAFETY AND HEALTH