3       UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
        /                  WASHINGTON. D.C. 204GO
                                               OSWER Directive 9242.6-13
                                   irvio                    °r MCE °H
                                 8 iyyi-           SOLID '.VAST!! AMO EME RGENCY RESPONS =

MEMORANDUM

SUBJECT:   Performance Tracking Under ARCS C9n^r^cts

PROM:      Henry L.  Longest II, Director
           Office of Emergency and Remed

TO:        Director,  Waste Management Division
                Regions I,  IV, V and VII
           Director,  Emergency and Remedial Response Division
                Region II
           Director,  Hazardous Waste Management Division
                Regions III,  VI,  VIII and IX
           Director,  Hazardous Waste Division
                Region X

PURPOSE

     The purpose of  this memorandum is to request  your assistance
in developing a non-resource intensive method for  reporting
performance based work allocation results under the  ARCS
contracts.


BACKGROUND

     One objective  of the  ARCS strategy is to encourage
outstanding contractor performance and customer service.  Those
uujitractors with high performance achiev
-------
 is  to initiate a resource intensive series of phone calls  to  the
 Project Officers in each Region.

      We anticipate a continuing need to report on the outcome of
 the ARCS performance system,  and the resulting assignment  of  new
 work.   Therefore,  a method needs to be implemented to regularly
 obtain this data from the Regions in a minimally intrusive way.


 IMPLEMENTATION

      The attached draft form  has been developed to serve as the
 vehicle to  transmit performance results data to the Hazardous
 Site Control Division at the  conclusion of each Performance     "
 Evaluation  Board (PEB).   It is recognized that many influences
 impact the  final decision as  to which contractor gets what work
 assignment  and some of those  have been incorporated into the
 information requested on the  form.

      In the implementation of this form,  it became evident that
 the data should represent the period beginning with the
 calculation of a Performance  Index Rating Score (PIRS) and ending
with the next revision of that score.   The reason for this is
 that we want to examine  the results of a  PIRS  on the  assignment
 of  work.  A PIRS will be used for this purpose until  it is
 recalculated at the next PEB.   Therefore,  the  period  for the
 attached form will  start with a PIRS calculation and  end with the
next PIRS calculation, and will not track with performance
evaluation  periods.

     For purposes of analyzing the  effectiveness of the reporting
 format,  I request that each Region  complete  the  form based upon
the  results of the  last  complete  period starting with the
establishment of the PIRS and ending with the  calculation of the
next PIRS.   For example,  assume that a PIRS  was  calculated on
January  15  for the  performance evaluation period  ending on
December 1  and that the  next  PIRS is calculated  on July 15 for
t-h*> p«T-forrnance evaluation period ending  on  June  1.  For the
purposes of this test, the PIRS established  on January 15 was
used in  the work assignment distribution  decisions until the next
PIRS was calculated on July 15  and  that is the period that we' are
 interested  in (January 15  to  July 15).

     I  recognize that the  PIRS  calculation is being revised by
the Acquisition Manager  to incorporate  both  technical as well as
Program  Management  ratings, however, for  the purpose of testing
the  form, use whatever PIRS was developed by your Region for the
period  reported.

     I  request that your completed  form reflecting the most
current  reporting period,  as  well as comments to  improve this
process, be submitted to Scott  Fredericks, mail code OS-220-W,
within  two  weeks from the  date  of this  memo.  Questions should
also be  directed to Scott  at  703-603-8771.

-------
                 Regional Award Fee Summary
Region: 	
Date PIRS Rating Assigned:
Combined PIRS Ratings in
Descending Order
Contractor Name
• No. of New Work Assignments
Issued to Contractors Durii
Rating Period
• Percentage (%) of New Work
Assignments Issued to Contractors
During Rating Period
• Dollars Obligated for Now Work
Assignments During Rating Period,
by Contractor
• Percentage (%) of Dollars Obligated
for New Work Assignments During
Rating Period, by Contractor
• Number of New Work Assionments
Representing Follow on Work, by
Contractor
• No. of Work Assignments Affected
by Serious COIs During Rating
Period, by Contractor
• No. of Work Assignments Affected
by Lack of Capacity During Bating
Period, by Contractor






















































                                                                    CS1OOM

-------