[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 124 (Friday, June 27, 1997)] [Notices] [Pages 34876-34903] From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov] [FR Doc No: 97-16850] [[Page 34875]] _______________________________________________________________________ Part IV Office of Personnel Management _______________________________________________________________________ Science and Technology Reinvention Laboratory Personnel Demonstration Project at the Missile Research, Development, and Engineering Center (MRDEC); Notice Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 124 / Friday, June 27, 1997 / Notices [[Page 34876]] ----------------------------------------------------------------------- OFFICE OF PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT Science and Technology Reinvention Laboratory Personnel Demonstration Project at the Missile Research, Development, and Engineering Center (MRDEC) AGENCY: Office of Personnel Management ACTION: Notice of approval of Demonstration Project Final Plan. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY: The National Defense Authorization Act for fiscal year 1995 (P.L. 103-337) authorizes the Secretary of Defense, with Office of Personnel Management (OPM) approval, to conduct a Personnel Demonstration Project at Department of Defense (DoD) laboratories designated as Science and Technology Reinvention Laboratories. The legislation requires that most requirements of Section 4703 of Title 5 shall apply to the demonstration project. Section 4703 requires OPM to publish the project plan in the Federal Register. DATES: This demonstration project may be implemented by the MRDEC September 28, 1997. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: MRDEC: Dr. William H. Leonard, Special Assistant for Laboratory Management, Research, Development, and Engineering Center, U.S. Army Missile Command, ATTN: AMSMI-RD, Redstone Arsenal, Alabama 35898-5240, 205-876-1442. OPM: Fidelma A. Donahue, U.S. Office of Personnel Management, 1900 E. Street, NW, Room 7460, Washington, DC 20415, 202-606-1138. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 1. Overview Ninety letters and six e-mails were received, and six individuals commented on the Federal Register notice at the public hearing. These comments brought several new perspectives to the attention of those responsible for implementing, overseeing, and evaluating the project. The comments highlighted instances of miscommunication and misunderstanding with the present system as well as the project interventions. Further, they underscored the importance of providing training to employees and supervisors on the Demonstration Project. The substance of all comments received has been conveyed to the Center Directors, the President of AFGE Local 1858, and the MICOM Civilian Personnel Advisory Center in the event that local policies, processes and training sessions may benefit from such perspectives. A summary of all comments received, along with accompanied responses, is provided below. A. Step Increase Buy-In Comments: There were 73 comments (one manager claimed to speak for 77 employees and 58 comments were identical) that expressed concern over the method of conversion into the demonstration. Employees preferred to have their accumulated time toward their next within-grade increase added to their base pay instead of receiving a lump-sum cash payment. Both employees and union recognized the proposed method does not provide funds that can be added to employees' base pay, and have a positive impact on their benefits such as retirement and thrift savings plans. Response: This issue has been the subject of negotiations with the union since the initial development of the proposal. In the demonstration there will no longer be step increases. The funds that would have been expended for that purpose will form part of the Performance Pay Pools for the payout of both performance pay increases and/or performance bonuses. Each employee converted into the demonstration will compete during the first performance assessment period for those funds that would have been paid for step increases. Thus the strategy developed by the demonstration development team was to provide a lump sum cash incentive at the implementation of the demonstration for the time credited to the employee toward what would have been the employee's next within-grade (step) increase and to maintain the Performance Pay Pool at the highest value (2%) which could be supported by historical fiscal data. The MRDEC, in negotiations with the union, has agreed to convert employees into the demonstration so that their base pay will be adjusted effective the date of implementation, by a prorated value based upon the number of weeks an employee has completed toward the next higher step. Payment will equal the current value of the employee's next within-grade increase times the proportion of the waiting period completed at the time of conversion. Both MRDEC Management and the union recognize that the demonstration must be guided by the concept of in-house budget neutrality. Therefore, the MRDEC will reexamine the Payout Factor (F) at the end of the first assessment period to determine if a payout factor of 2% was maintained by revised labor rates. If not, then the factor F must be adjusted prior to the first year payout to compensate for the early payment of step increases which would have been used to form the full robust value of the payout factor. These changes are in Sections III.B (Performance Pay Increases and/or Performance Bonuses) and V (Conversion to the Demonstration Project). B. Competitive Area Comments: There were 73 comments (one manager claimed to speak for 77 employees and 58 comments were identical) that expressed concern over the revised Reduction-in-Force (RIF) procedures that limit a competitive area to occupational families in all geographic areas. These comments came primarily from employees in the Business Management and E&S Support Occupational Families. Their concerns were two fold: (1) The inability to bump outside of occupational families and retreat to a position during a RIF situation that had been previously held that may be in a different occupational family than that occupied by the employee, and (2) the reduced number of employees in a particular occupational family will result in smaller competitive levels which may lead to more separations from that family if a RIF occurs within the MRDEC. Three comments recommended that the best solution would be to put the Missile Command into the demonstration so as to widen the competitive areas. There was one comment that suggested that competitive areas be restricted to series rather than occupational families and to restrict the competitive area to local geographic areas. Response: The project designers proposed this intervention as a means of minimizing the severe turbulence that is normally caused during a RIF. Since the MRDEC is predominately customer funded, its vitality and future credibility depend upon a reasonably stable workforce that is highly trained and motivated to the precepts of customer service and quality products. This intervention would achieve the desired goal of minimizing personnel turbulence, but at the same time it may put some loyal and recently hired employees at an added risk of separation. For this reason, this issue has been negotiated with the union, and the project design will be changed to define the competitive areas as the separate geographic areas of the MRDEC. This change was made in full recognition that prior to any RIF action being taken, action will be taken to place affected employees in other parts of the parent organization and that the provisions of the DoD Stability of [[Page 34877]] Employment Programs (Priority Placement Program) will be used to assist affected employees. At this time the demonstration cannot be extended to all of the Missile Command in that the demonstration can only be conducted in a Science and Technology Reinvention Laboratory, which the Missile Command is not. The suggestion to define competitive areas along the lines of series was considered but rejected because the comment may have reflected confusion between competitive areas and competitive levels (competitive levels will continue to fall along series lines). These changes are in Section III.F (Revised Reduction- In-Force (RIF) Procedures). C. Supervisory Pay Differentials Comments: Seventy-one comments (one manager claimed to speak for 77 employees and 58 comments were identical) were received and all but three requested that supervisory pay differentials be made available to other than the engineers and scientists occupational family. One comment questioned whether the differential was an award or a bonus, one comment expressed concern about the impact of a supervisory differential on employee pay pools, and one comment recommended elimination of the supervisory differential. Response: A supervisory differential is a cash incentive that is paid on a pay period basis. It is not an award or a performance bonus. The differential is not automatic and will range in value from 0% to 10% of the supervisor's basic rate of pay. Seven factors are provided for the Director to consider in determining the value of a differential. Supervisory differentials were designed to compensate supervisors who supervise employees that are typically at the same grade level or higher. This normally occurs at the higher bands in the E&S Occupational Families. However, in recognition that restricting supervisory differentials to just the E&S occupational families may be perceived as an unfair application, the plan will be changed in Section III.B (Supervisory Pay Differentials) to state that supervisory differentials may be used, at the discretion of the MRDEC Director, to incentivize and reward supervisors who are in Paybands III, IV or V in any occupational family, except for employees in Payband V of the E&S occupational family. Additionally, the plan is modified in Section III.B (Supervisory Pay Differentials) to state that supervisory differentials and supervisory adjustments will not be funded from the performance pay pools. D. Performance Evaluation System Comments: Eleven comments (one manager claimed to speak for 77 employees) were received that raised questions and concerns about the mechanics of implementing the performance evaluation system and also about perceived shortcomings of the system. Concerns relating to the mechanics of implementation include that (1) managers must be timely with evaluations, (2) peer evaluations may not be useful, (3) three performance elements need to be added, (4) rating levels be clearly defined, and (5) the employee to supervisor ratio of about 15:1 should be waived. With regard to perceived shortcomings, the new system is very subjective, has no advantages over the existing system, does not provide fairness, reduces cooperation and teamwork, and does not provide simplification, according to some commenters. Additionally, one commenter stated that TAPES could be made to work. Response: The design team acknowledges that it is imperative for managers and supervisors to be timely with their evaluations. Oversight by the Performance Management Board and the use of a critical supervision/EEO performance element that ``requires timely/appropriate personnel actions'' will help ensure timeliness. Additionally, supervisory training will emphasize the importance of timely evaluations and the consequences of untimeliness on the payout process. Peer evaluations are in the proposal as an option only, and their use will be governed by the Personnel Management Board. The recommended three additional performance elements (empowers his/her personnel, acquisition streamlining initiatives, and support to the organization) will not be added since they are considered to be embedded within the five non-supervisory performance elements or the two supervisory or management elements. Seven performance elements (five for non-managers) are considered to be sufficient. No change will be made to the proposal with regard to rating levels in that they are clearly defined in Appendix D at four rating levels. The proposal contains no provisions for changing supervisory ratios. Like many Performance Evaluation Systems, the proposed intervention makes appropriate provisions for supervisory judgment. The use of benchmark performance standards as universal criteria for evaluating all employees in the demonstration project on any element will lead to greater fairness and reliability of evaluation, thus reducing the potential for subjectivity in the evaluation process. These benchmark performance standards define expected performance at the 100%, 70%, 50% and unsatisfactory levels, thus assuring a clear definition of expected performance levels. The use of a performance element which measures ``working relationships'' will assure that employees cooperate and that teamwork continues and rises to higher levels. The performance evaluation process is very critical to the pay-for-performance system, and as such the TAPES process has not necessarily been simplified but rather redesigned to make it supportive of the pay-for-performance system. A simplification does exist in that the rating supervisor is not required to write a justification for an assigned rating of record other than unsatisfactory. E. Pay-for-Performance System Comments: Seventy-six comments (one manager claimed to speak for 77 employees and 58 comments were identical) were received in this area. Comments included assertions that the 50% rule and the mid-point rule violate merit system principles, is a prohibited personnel practice and is arbitrary. Sixty-three comments expressed concern about the composition and control of pay pools, the source of funds for pay pools, and the effect of pay pool results on retirement and benefits; and one comment equated the pay-for-performance system to the discredited Performance Management Recognition System (PMRS). Two comments reflected a misunderstanding about whether the general increase was in the performance and bonus pay pools or not; two comments stated a desire to keep step increases. Response: As to the legality of the 50% rule and the mid-point rule, the MRDEC Personnel Demonstration proposal was reviewed by the MICOM Legal Office, DoD Office of General Counsel, and the OPM General Counsel prior to publishing it in the Federal Register on 13 March 1997. The proposal was determined at that time to not violate any merit system principles, to have clearly avoided any prohibited personnel practices, and to not have been arbitrary in the design of proposed personnel practices. The 50% rule and the mid-point rule are consistently and fairly applied to all employees in the proposed demonstration. Therefore, the rules meet the test of being fair and equitable, and are in consonance with merit system principles. The 50% rule is similar in purpose to the use of longer waiting periods at higher steps in the General Schedule pay system. The 50% [[Page 34878]] rule is not solely a cost containment method, but is also an effort to retain base pay as an incentive (i.e., to prevent reaching the top of a band too soon). Comments regarding the merit system principle of equal pay for work of equal value (5 U.S.C. 2301(b)(3)) are flawed. The words ``equal pay for work of equal value'' are intended to ensure that an employee's pay range is based on an accurate and equitable evaluation of the level of work for the employee's position. Employees performing at the same level (as defined by a grade or band) should be paid in the same pay range. Pay setting within a pay range can properly reflect factors such as tenure, past performance, and current performance, while ensuring equal treatment based on those factors. In fact, the latter part of the equal pay for work of equal value principle (5 U.S.C. 2301(b)(3)) expressly allows for ``Appropriate incentives and recognition * * * for excellence in performance.'' The proposed demonstration is consistent with the merit system principles. Bands will be assigned based on employee's nature and level of work. Pay progression within a band will be based on performance and contributions over time. To provide enhanced incentives for excellence in performance, employees will not be allowed to advance beyond the mid-point of the pay range without an A or B rating. Also, employees whose pay is beyond the midpoint (because of past performance) will not be entitled to further base pay increases without an A or B rating. It is true that the proposed demonstration places more emphasis on performance than the General Schedule (by design), but that does not violate merit system principles. The demonstration proposal attributes clearly change the methods of providing incentives to employees, including the provision of group or individual incentive bonuses or pay. This is clearly an allowable practice in accordance with Title 5 United State Code, chapter 47 Section 4703(a)(1-8). However, there is an assertion that, by changing the basic rate of pay that an employee may receive, this in effect changes the benefits defined in Chapter 63 or subpart G of Title 5, and therefore must be a violation of 4703(c)(1). All parts of Chapter 63 or subpart G of Title 5 are still intact, and have not been changed by this proposed demonstration. Changing the method of determining base pay increases does not change any provision of the retirement system or any other benefit program. The Personnel Management Board has been established, with permanent union membership, with the requirement to define the pay pool structure that will be used in the demonstration. This structure will be communicated to employees through a Director's Newsletter prior to implementation. At the minimum there could be two pay pools; one for supervisors and one for non-supervisors. The designers of the pay-for- performance system were well aware of the problems with the PMRS system and benefited from the lessons learned. The PMRS system structure lent itself to essentially the creation of a quota system for ratings. The proposed pay-for-performance system was designed so that managers could fairly evaluate and provide employee incentives without creating artificial quota systems for ratings. The proposal will be revised in Section III.B (Pay-for-Performance) to clarify that the General Increase will be received by all covered employees whose rating of record is greater than U. Additionally, the proposal will be revised in Section III.B (Performance Pay Increases and/or Performances Bonuses) to state that performance bonuses have no impact on benefits such as retirement. F. Paybands and Occupational Families Comments: Eighty-two comments (three sets of identical comments: 58, 4, and 3) were received in this area. Sixty comments (fifty-eight identical) recommended moving Budget Assistants (GS-561), Procurement Clerks (GS-1106), and Management Assistants (GS-344) from the General Support occupational family to the Business Management occupational family; move Library Technicians (GS-1411) from the General Support occupational family to the E&S Support occupational family; and aligning all Miscellaneous Administrative and Program positions (GS-301 and GS-303) to the appropriate non-E&S occupational families depending upon the closest alignment. A comment cited the need to include the series Operations Research Analyst (Cost Analysis) (GS-1515) in the Business Management occupational family. Four identical comments expressed agreement with the use of benchmark position descriptions and one comment liked the payband structure. Four identical comments expressed concern that the creation of occupational families restricted movement between occupational families for career development purposes. Eight comments dealt with the width of Payband III in the E&S occupational family, removing high grade controls, and the lack of parity by not having all bands the same width. Two comments expressed concern that E&S band V would result in job losses and seriously reduce funds available for employee performance pay pools. One comment questioned the use of the term ``specific course work'' as a requirement for the E&S occupational family. One comment stated the need for a management occupational family. Response: The suggested occupational series changes are not considered feasible because the Technical and Business Support paybands are not compatible with the typical pay range and progression pattern of those series identified in the comments. The demonstration will not present barriers to employees who want to cross occupational family lines for career development purposes. However, the proposal will clarify in Section V (Personnel Administration) that this barrier does not exist and that the benchmark position descriptions identify series, specialty code, and function code. As a result of a Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) 95 decision, the proposal will be modified in Appendix A to include Operations Research Analyst (Cost Analyst) (GS 1515) in the Technical and Business occupational family. The proposed paybands for engineers and scientists were designed in conjunction with the union and with consideration given to OPM design guidelines, the developments of the Acquisition Corps and the definition of critical Acquisition Corps positions (GS 14 and 15), the designs of the China Lake experiment (banding of GS 14 and 15), and the job needs of the MRDEC. A separate management occupational family was considered, but rejected because the occupational families defined in the proposal already provide for career progression of managers. High grade controls are not an OPM or Title 5 authority; therefore, they cannot be affected by a Title 5 demonstration project. The initial salary of a Payband V employee comes from general operating budgets and does not adversely impact allocation of funds to the performance pay pools. The E&S Support and Business Management families are combined into one occupational family titled ``Technical and Business Support.'' This change is portrayed in Section III.A (Paybands) and also in Appendix A. This proposal modification is a technical change, and is a natural consequence of changing the MRDEC competitive areas from occupational families to the separate geographic areas of MRDEC. The new occupational family has one payband structure and benchmark position descriptions have been developed for each payband. [[Page 34879]] G. Management Issues Comments: Twenty comments (two identical sets of 4 and 3; and one manager claimed to speak for 77 employees) were received in this area. These comments generally addressed: (1) Permanent union membership in the Personnel Management Board, (2) limited promotion opportunities for GS-13 engineers and scientists, (3) the inability of the proposal to solve stated personnel system problems, and (4) management's ability to fairly implement the demonstration project. Response: An extensive effort was made with the employees who submitted comments to clarify their comments and concerns. Section II.H (Personnel Management Board) is clarified to specify permanent union membership in the Personnel Management Board. In regard to promotions and solving personnel system problems, management literature is replete with theories on what motivates employees to higher standards of excellence. However, there have been very few experiments to validate these theories in a large, dynamic organizational environment over an extended period of time. This demonstration is a very large scale experiment to assess such interventions as sabbaticals, degree training for critical skills, a simplified assignment process to enhance career development through job rotations, performance pay and bonus increases in many cases without the need for promotion actions, minimal classification issues, greater ranges for promotions, and greater ranges for setting entrance salaries. The evaluation process will endeavor to measure the stated expected effects and determine improvements not only in personnel practices, but also to determine if the MRDEC collectively as an organization produces better science and technology. The demonstration attributes do offer simplifications in classification, staffing, compensation, and performance management. For example, hundreds of job descriptions will be eliminated and replaced by as few as about 30 benchmark position descriptions. The need for promotion considerations has been reduced by more that 50 percent. The personnel problems faced by laboratory management are being addressed by both Title 5 changes and parallel actions involving both Service changes to regulations and to relief from issues managed by the Office of Management and Budget. This proposed demonstration is not a total solution, but serves as a significant building block to evolve to a better personnel system that is more management and employee friendly. A few comments questioned the ability of MRDEC supervisors to competently and fairly implement this personnel experiment. This issue has been discussed in negotiations with the union as an area of concern. The negotiated solution to this concern is through training and employee feedback. Prior to implementing the demonstration, managers and supervisors will be trained in the added responsibilities and accountabilities associated with the demonstration interventions. Additionally, the union will be given an opportunity to describe their role and function in the demonstration program. MRDEC management and the union agree that employee feedback to supervisors (in a non- threatening and not-for-attribution environment) is essential for the success of this demonstration. Therefore, the proposal is changed in Section III.B (Performance Scores) to provide an employee feedback capability. H. Miscellaneous Comments Comments: There were ninety-one comments (four identical sets of 58, 4, 3, and 2; and one manager claimed to speak for 77 employees) in this area. These comments include the following: (1) The proposal limits employee ability to seek employment elsewhere; (2) the demonstration supports E&S/E&S Support occupational family positions only, therefore limit the demonstration to E&S occupational family; (3) the proposal should extend E&S perks to all occupational families; (4) the RIF retention points assignment process is unfair; and (5) clarify the demonstration project purpose. Response: Section V (Personnel Administration) is changed to clarify that the proposal does not present barriers to applying for external jobs and for movement between occupational families for career development purposes. In the proposal, training for degrees was always intended to apply to the entire workforce. The proposal will be changed in Section III.E.2 (Training for Degrees) to clarify that training for degrees is available for all occupational families. The Expanded Developmental Opportunity Program (sabbaticals) has been extended in Section III.E.1 (Expanded Developmental Opportunity Program) to all occupational families except for the General Support occupational family. Section III.B (Supervisory Pay Differentials) has been changed to make supervisory differentials applicable to all occupational families. The RIF retention point strategy proposed was designed to reward performance. Sensitivity modeling has demonstrated that this intervention will achieve the desired effect of retaining high achievers who have a limited amount of career status. Therefore, this intervention will be retained. 2. Demonstration Project System Changes The following is a summary of changes and clarifications in the project proposal that were of paramount interest to employees: (1) In Section V (Conversion), the method of converting employees into the demonstration is changed so that employees' base pay will be adjusted effective the date of implementation by a prorated value based upon the number of weeks an employee has completed toward the next higher step. Payment will equal the value of the employee's next within-grade increase times the proportion of the waiting period completed at the time of conversion. (2) Section III.B (Performance Pay Increases and/or Performance Bonuses) is changed to reflect that both MRDEC Management and the Union recognize that the demonstration must be guided by the concept of in- house budget neutrality. Therefore, the MRDEC will reexamine the Payout Factor (F) at the end of the first assessment period to determine if a payout factor of 2% was maintained by revised labor rates. (3) In Section III.F (Competitive Areas), the project design is changed to redefine the competitive areas as separate geographic areas of the MRDEC. Additionally, the method of bumping and retreating is redefined as follows: ``In the Demonstration Project an employee can bump to a position held by another employee in a lower subgroup or tenure group; the position may be no lower than the equivalent of three GS grades (or appropriate grade intervals) below the minimum GS grade level of his/her current band. An employee can retreat to a position held by another employee in the same subgroup who has a lower adjusted RIF service computation date; the position may be no lower than the equivalent of three GS grades (or appropriate grade intervals) below the minimum GS grade level of his/her current band. A preference eligible with a compensable service-connected disability of 30 percent or more may retreat to a position equivalent to five GS grades below the minimum grade level of his/her current band.'' (4) In Section III.A (Paybands) and Appendix A, the proposal is changed to combine the E&S Support occupational family with the Business Management [[Page 34880]] occupational family to form one occupational family called ``Technical and Business Support.'' (5) Additionally, editorial and technical changes were made to correct the final version of the Project. James B. King, Director. Table of Contents I. Executive Summary II. Introduction A. Purpose B. Problems with the Present System C. Changes Required/Expected Benefits D. Participating Organization E. Participating Employees F. Labor Participation G. Project Design H. Personnel Management Board III. Personnel System Changes A. Broadbanding B. Pay-for-Performance Management System C. Classification D. Hiring and Appointment Authorities E. Employee Development F. Revised Reduction-in-Force (RIF) Procedures IV. Training V. Conversion VI. Project Duration VII. Evaluation Plan VIII. Demonstration Project Costs IX. Required Waivers to Laws and Regulations Appendix A: Occupational Series by Occupational Family Appendix B: Project Evaluation and Oversight Appendix C: Performance Elements Appendix D: Benchmark Performance Standards I. Executive Summary This project was designed by the Department of the Army, with participation of and review by the Department of Defense (DoD) and the Office of Personnel Management (OPM). The purpose of the project is to achieve the best workforce for the MRDEC mission, adjust the workforce for change, and improve workforce quality. The MRDEC strives to exceed the greatest expectations of its many customers. To achieve this, the MRDEC must be able to balance customer requirements for near-term technical and scientific products and information with the evolving capabilities of the workforce. These purposes will be significantly enhanced by interventions such as training for degrees in critical skills areas, the contingent employee appointment authority, and the Voluntary Emeritus Program. The foundations of this project are based on the concept of linking performance to pay for all covered positions; simplifying paperwork and the processing of classification and other personnel actions; emphasizing partnerships among management, employees, and unions representing covered employees; and delegating classification and other authorities to line managers. Additionally, the research intellect of the MRDEC workforce will be revitalized through the use of expanded opportunities for employee development. These opportunities will reinvigorate the creative intellect of the research and development community. Development and execution of this project will be in-house budget neutral, based on a baseline of September 1995 in-house costs and consistent with the Department of the Army (DA) plan to downsize laboratories. Army managers at the DoD S&T Reinvention Laboratory sites will manage and control their personnel costs to remain within established in-house budgets. An in-house budget is a compilation of costs of the many diverse components required to fund the day-to-day operations of a laboratory. These components generally include pay of people (labor, benefits, overtime, awards), training, travel, supplies, non-capital equipment, and other costs depending on the specific function of the activity. This project will be under the joint sponsorship of the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Research, Development and Acquisition and the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Manpower and Reserve Affairs. The Commander, U.S. Army Materiel Command, will execute and manage the project. Project oversight within the Army will be achieved by an executive steering committee made up of top-level executives, co- chaired by the Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Army for Research and Technology and the Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Army (Civilian Personnel Policy)/Director, Civilian Personnel. Oversight external to the Army will be provided by the Department of Defense and the Office of Personnel Management. II. Introduction A. Purpose The purpose of the project is to demonstrate that the effectiveness of Department of Defense (DoD) laboratories can be enhanced by allowing greater managerial control over personnel functions and, at the same time, expanding the opportunities available to employees through a more responsive and flexible personnel system. The quality of DoD laboratories, their people, and products has been under intense scrutiny in recent years. This perceived deterioration of quality is due, in substantial part, to the erosion of control which line managers have over their human resources. This demonstration, in its entirety, attempts to provide managers, at the lowest practical level, the authority, control, and flexibility needed to achieve quality laboratories and quality products. B. Problems with the Present System The MRDEC products contribute to the readiness of U.S. forces and to the stability of the American economy. To do this, the MRDEC must acquire and retain an enthusiastic, innovative, and highly educated and trained workforce, particularly scientists and engineers. The MRDEC must be able to compete with the private sector for the best talent and be able to make job offers in a timely manner with the attendant bonuses and incentives to attract high quality employees. Today, industry laboratories can make an offer of employment to a promising new hire before the government can prepare the paperwork necessary to begin the recruitment process. Currently, jobs are described using a classification system that is overly complex and specialized. This hampers a manager's ability to shape the workforce and match the positions while making best use of employees. Managers must be given local control of positions and their classification to move both their employees and vacancies within their organization to other lines of the business activities to match the life cycle needs of supported customers. These issues work together to hamper supervisors in all areas of human resource management. Hiring restrictions and overly complex job classifications, coupled with poor tools for rewarding and motivating employees and a system that does not assist managers in removing poor performers builds stagnation in the workforce and wastes valuable time. C. Changes Required/Expected Benefits This project is expected to demonstrate that a human resource system tailored to the mission and needs of the MRDEC will result in: (a) Increased quality in the total workforce and the products they produce; (b) increased timeliness of key personnel processes; (c) increased retention of high quality employees and separation rates of poor quality employees; and (d) increased customer satisfaction with the MRDEC and its products by all customers it serves. The MRDEC demonstration program builds on the successful features of [[Page 34881]] demonstration projects at China Lake and the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST). These demonstration projects have produced impressive statistics on the job satisfaction for their employees versus that for the federal workforce in general. Therefore, in addition to expected benefits mentioned above, the MRDEC demonstration expects to find more satisfied employees on many aspects of the demonstration including pay equity, classification decisions, and career development opportunities. A full range of measures will be collected during project evaluation (Section VII). D. Participating Organization MRDEC has approximately 1881 employees covered by the project. Approximately 99 percent of the employees are located at Redstone Arsenal, Alabama, with the remaining located at the following sites: Andover, Massachusetts; Eglin AFB, Florida; Orlando, Florida; Dallas, Texas; White Sands Missile Range, New Mexico; Camden, Arkansas; Los Angeles, California; Washington, DC; Fort Benning, Georgia; Hampton, Virginia; and Kwajalein Island. E. Participating Employees The demonstration project includes civilian appropriated funded employees in the competitive and excepted service paid under the General Schedule (GS) pay system. Scientific and Professional (ST) employees and positions will be included for employee development, performance appraisal, and award provisions only; their classification, staffing, and compensation, however, will not change. Senior Executive Service employees and positions, Federal Wage System employees, and employees in the Quality Assurance Specialist (Ammunition Surveillance) (QASAS) career program will not be covered in the demonstration project. Additionally, DA interns will not be converted to the demonstration until they complete their intern program. Personnel added to the laboratory after implementation, in like positions covered by the demonstration (either through appointment, promotion, reassignment, change to a lower grade or where their functions and positions have been transferred into the laboratory) will be converted to the demonstration project. Successor organizations which may result from actions associated with the 1995 Base Realignment and Closure Commission (BRAC) or future Commissions will continue coverage in the demonstration project. F. Labor Participation The American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE) represents many GS employees at MRDEC. The MRDEC is continuing to fulfill its obligations to consult and/or negotiate with the AFGE, in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 4703(F) and 7117. The participation with the AFGE is within the spirit and intent of Executive Order 12871. The AFGE represents all professional and non-professional employees except those who are supervisors or managers. AFGE Local 1858 has been involved with and has participated in the development of the project since its inception. The union is an integral part of this personnel demonstration, and will be a full partner in arriving at major decisions involving program implementation. G. Project Design An Integrated Process Team approach was used at the U.S. Army Missile Command to develop the attributes of this personnel demonstration proposal. The team was lead by MRDEC management, and team members came from managers and associates from the MRDEC, AFGE Local 1858, the Civilian Personnel Office, and several other major functional organizations within the Missile Command. This personnel system design has been subjected to critical reviews by Executive Steering Groups within the MRDEC and the Missile Command. Additionally, negotiations with AFGE Local 1858 have influenced the design in areas of significant concern to bargaining unit employees. A survey, designed by AFGE Local 1858, was conducted to elicit MRDEC employee opinions and preferences on key features of the proposal. The design was preceded by an exhaustive study of broadbanding systems currently practiced in the Federal sector. A first generation design was briefed to the MRDEC workforce with the assistance of AFGE Local 1858. During these briefing sessions, employees were provided a copy of the first generation proposal, a set of anticipated questions and answers, and a list of points of contact for concerns and questions. Later design generations have evolved from critical reviews by headquarters elements of the Department of the Army, Department of Defense, and the Office of Personnel Management. Additionally, consultation was provided by the designers of the broadbanding systems practiced by the Navy China Lake experiment and the National Institute of Standards and Technology. H. Personnel Management Board The MRDEC intends to establish an appropriate balance between the personnel management authority and accountability of supervisors and of the oversight responsibilities of a Personnel Management Board (PMB). The Director will delegate management and oversight of the Project at MRDEC to a Personnel Management Board whose members, Chairperson, and staff (other than the union and Equal Employment Opportunity Office members) will be appointed by the Director. The union and the Equal Employment Opportunity Office will have permanent membership in the PMB, and their representatives will be selected by the respective organizations. The establishment of this Board shall not affect the authority of any management official in the exercise of their management rights set forth in 5 U.S.C. 7106(b)(1). The PMB will be tasked with the following: 1. Overseeing the civilian pay budget, 2. Determining the composition of the pay-for-performance pay pools in accordance with the guidelines of this proposal and internal procedures, 3. Administering funds allocation to pay pool managers, 4. Reviewing operation of MRDEC pay pools, 5. Reviewing hiring and promotion salaries as well as exceptions to pay-for-performance salary increases, 6. Providing guidance to pay pool managers, 7. Monitoring award pool distribution by organization or any other special categorization, 8. Selecting participants for the Expanded Developmental Opportunity Program, long term training, and any special developmental assignments, 9. Managing promotions to stay within ``high grade'' controls, 10. Addressing in-house budget neutrality issues to include tracking of average salaries, 11. Assessing the need for changes to demonstration procedures and policies. III. Personnel System Changes A. Broadbanding Occupational Families Occupations at the MRDEC will be grouped into occupational families. Occupations will be grouped according to similarities in type of work, customary requirements for formal training or credentials, and in consideration of the business practices at the MRDEC. The common patterns of advancement within the occupations as [[Page 34882]] practiced at DoD Laboratories and in the private sector will also be considered. The current occupations and grades have been examined, and their characteristics and distribution have served as guidelines in the development of the three occupational families described below: 1. Engineers and Scientists (E&S). This occupational family includes all technical professional positions, such as engineers, physicists, chemists, metallurgists, mathematicians, and computer scientists. Predominantly, specific course work or educational degrees are required for these occupations. 2. Technical and Business Support. This occupational family contains positions that directly support the E&S mission: it includes specialized functions in such fields as technical information management, librarians, equipment specialists, quality assurance, engineering and electronics technicians, finance, accounting, administrative computing, and management analysis. Employees in these jobs may or may not require college course work. Analytical ability and specialized knowledge in administrative fields are required. Knowledge of and training in the various electrical, mechanical, chemical, or computer principles, methods, and techniques are also generally required. 3. General Support. This occupational family is composed of positions for which minimal formal education is needed, but for which special skills, such as office automation or shorthand, are usually required. Clerical work usually involves the processing and maintenance of records. Assistant work requires knowledge of methods and procedures within a specific administrative area. Other support functions include the work of secretaries, guards, and mail clerks. Paybands Each occupational family will be composed of discrete paybands (levels) corresponding to recognized advancement within the occupations. These paybands will replace grades. They will not be the same for all occupational families. Each occupational family will be divided into four to five paybands; each payband covering the same pay range now covered by one or more grades. A salary overlap, similar to the current overlap between GS grades, will be maintained. Ordinarily an individual will be hired at the lowest salary in a payband. Exceptional qualifications, specific organizational requirements, or other compelling reasons may lead to a higher entrance level within a band. The proposed paybands for the occupational families and how they relate to the current GS grades are shown in Figure 1. Application of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) within each payband is also shown in Figure 1. This payband concept has the following advantages: 1. It may reduce the number of classification decisions required during an employee's career. 2. It simplifies the classification decision-making process and paperwork. A payband covers a larger scope of work than a grade, and will be defined in shorter and simpler language. 3. It supports delegation of classification authority to line managers. 4. It provides a broader range of performance-related pay for each level. In many cases, employees whose pay would have been frozen at the top step of a grade will now have more potential for upward movement in the broader payband. 5. It prevents the progression of low performers through a payband by mere longevity, since job performance serves as the basis for determining pay. The MRDEC paybanding plan expands the paybanding concept used at China Lake and NIST by creating Payband V of the Engineers and Scientists occupational family. This payband is designed for Senior Scientific Technical Managers. Current legal definitions of Senior Executive Service (SES) and Scientific and Professional (ST) positions do not fully meet the needs of MRDEC. The SES designation is appropriate for executive level managerial positions whose classification exceeds the GS-15 grade level. The primary knowledges and abilities of SES positions relate to supervisory and managerial responsibilities. Positions classified as ST are reserved for bench research scientists and engineers; these positions require a very high level of technical expertise and they have little or no supervisory responsibility. MRDEC currently has several positions, typically directorate/office chiefs, that have characteristics of both SES and ST classifications. Most directorate/office chiefs in MRDEC are responsible for supervising other GS-15 positions, including function chiefs, non-supervisory research engineers and scientists and, in some cases, ST positions. Most directorate/office chief positions are classified at the GS-15 level, although their technical expertise warrants classification beyond GS-15. Because of their management responsibilities, these individuals are excluded from the ST system. Because of management considerations, they cannot be placed in the SES. Management considers the primary requirement for directorate/office chiefs to be knowledge of, and expertise in, the specific scientific and technology areas related to the mission of their directorates/offices. Historically, incumbents of these positions have been recognized within the community as scientific and engineering leaders, who possess primarily scientific/engineering credentials and are considered experts in their field. However, they must also possess strong managerial and supervisory abilities. Therefore, although some of these employees have scientific credentials that might compare favorably with ST criteria, classification of these positions as STs is not an option, because the managerial and supervisory responsibilities inherent in the positions cannot be ignored. The purpose of Payband V (which will reinforce the equal pay for equal work principle) is to solve a critical classification problem. It will also contribute to an SES ``corporate culture'' by excluding from the SES positions for which technical expertise is paramount. Payband V proposes to overcome the difficulties identified above by creating a new category of positions, the Senior Scientific Technical Manager, which has both scientific/technical expertise and full managerial and supervisory authority. Current GS-15 directorate/office chiefs will convert into the demonstration project at Payband IV. After conversion they will be reviewed against established criteria to determine if they should be reclassified to Payband V. Other positions possibly meeting criteria for classification to Payband V will be reviewed on a case by case basis. The proposed salary range is a minimum of 120% of the minimum rate of basic pay for GS-15 with a maximum rate of basic pay established at the rate of basic pay (excluding locality pay) for SES level 4 (ES-4). Vacant positions in Payband V will be competitively filled to ensure that selectees are preeminent researchers and technical leaders in the specialty fields who also possess substantial managerial and supervisory abilities. MRDEC will capitalize on the efficiencies that can accrue from central recruiting by continuing to use the expertise of the Army Materiel Command SES Office as the recruitment agent. Panels will be created to assist in filling Payband V positions. Panel members will be selected from a pool of current MRDEC SES members, ST employees, and later those in Payband V, and an equal number of individuals [[Page 34883]] of equivalent stature from outside the laboratory to ensure impartiality, breadth of technical expertise, and a rigorous and demanding review. The panel will apply criteria developed largely from the current OPM Research Grade Evaluation Guide for positions exceeding the GS-15 level. DoD will test the establishment of Payband V for a five-year period. Positions established in Payband V will be subject to limitations imposed by OPM and DoD. Payband V positions will be established only in an S&T Reinvention Laboratory which employs scientists, engineers, or both. Incumbents of Payband V positions will work primarily in their professional capacity on basic or applied research and secondarily perform managerial or supervisory duties. The number of Payband V positions within the Department of Defense will not exceed 40. These 40 positions will be allocated by ASD (FMP), DoD, and administered by the respective Services. The number of Payband V positions will be reviewed periodically to determine appropriate position requirements. Payband V position allocations will be managed separately from SES, ST, and SL positions. An evaluation of the Payband V concept will be performed during the fifth year of the demonstration project. The final component of Payband V is the management of all Payband V assets. Specifically, this authority will be exercised at the DA level, and includes the following: authority to classify, create, or abolish positions within the limitations imposed by OPM and DoD; recruit and reassign employees in this payband; set pay and to have their performance appraised under this project's Pay for Performance System. The laboratory wants to demonstrate increased effectiveness by gaining greater managerial control and authority, consistent with merit, affirmative action, and equal employment opportunity principles. BILLLING CODE 6325-01-U [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN27JN97.009 BILLING CODE 6325-01-C Fair Labor Standards Act Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) exemption and nonexemption determinations will be made consistent with criteria found in 5 CFR part 551. There are six paybands (see Figure 1) where employees can be either exempt or nonexempt from overtime provisions. For these six paybands supervisors with classification authority will make the determinations on a case-by-case basis by comparing the duties and responsibilities assigned, the classification standards for each payband, and the FLSA criteria under 5 CFR part 551. Additionally, the advice and assistance of the Civilian Personnel Advisory Center/ Civilian Personnel Operations Center (CPAC/CPOC) will be obtained in making determinations as part of the performance review process. The benchmark position descriptions will not be the sole basis for the determination. Basis for exemption will be documented and attached to each description. Exemption criteria will be narrowly construed and applied only to those employees who clearly meet the spirit of the exemption. Changes will be documented and provided to the CPAC/CPOC, as appropriate. Simplified Assignment Process Today's environment of downsizing and workforce transition mandates that the MRDEC have increased flexibility to assign individuals. Broadbanding can be used to address this need. As a result of the assignment to a particular level descriptor, the organization will have increased flexibility to assign an employee, without pay change, within broad descriptions consistent with the needs of the organization, and the individual's qualifications and rank or level. Subsequent assignments to projects, tasks, or functions anywhere within the organization requiring the same level and area of expertise, and qualifications would not constitute an assignment outside the scope or coverage of the current level descriptor. Such assignments within the coverage of the generic descriptors are accomplished without the need to process a personnel action. For instance, [[Page 34884]] a technical expert can be assigned to any project, task, or function requiring similar technical expertise. Likewise, a manager could be assigned to manage any similar function or organization consistent with that individual's qualifications. This flexibility allows a broader latitude in assignments and further streamlines the administrative process and system. Promotion A promotion is a move of an employee to (1) a higher payband in the same occupational family or (2) a payband in another occupational family in combination with an increase in the employee's salary. Positions with known promotion potential to a specific band within an occupational family will be identified when they are filled. Not all positions in an occupational family will have promotion potential to the same band. Movement from one occupational family to another will depend upon individual knowledge, skills, and abilities, and needs of the organization. Promotions will be processed under competitive procedures in accordance with merit principles and requirements and the local merit promotion plan. The following actions are excepted from competitive procedures: (a) Re-promotion to a position which is in the same payband and occupational family as the employee previously held on a permanent basis within the competitive service. (b) Promotion, reassignment, demotion, transfer or reinstatement to a position having promotion potential no greater than the potential of a position an employee currently holds or previously held on a permanent basis in the competitive service. (c) A position change permitted by reduction in force procedures. (d) Promotion without current competition when the employee was appointed through competitive procedures to a position with a documented career ladder. (e) A temporary promotion, or detail to a position in a higher payband, of 180 days or less. (f) Reclassification to include impact of person on-the-job promotions. (g) A promotion resulting from the correction of an initial classification error or the issuance of a new classification standard. (h) Consideration of a candidate not given proper consideration in a competitive promotion action. (i) Impact of person on the job and Factor IV process (application of the Research Grade Evaluation Guide, Equipment Development Grade Evaluation Guide, Part III, or similar guides) promotions. Link Between Promotion and Performance Career ladder promotions and promotions resulting from the addition of duties and responsibilities are examples of promotions that can be made noncompetitively. Promotions can be made noncompetitively when contributions and achievements are such that a higher payband is achieved when comparing the overall position to the Equipment Development Grade Evaluation Guide, Part III or the Research Grade Evaluation Guide. To be promoted noncompetitively from one band to the next, an employee must meet the minimum qualifications for the job and have a current performance rating of B or better (see Performance Evaluation) or equivalent under a different performance management system. Selection of employees through competitive procedures will require a current performance rating of B or better. B. Pay-for-Performance Management System Performance Evaluation Introduction The performance evaluation system will link compensation to performance through annual performance appraisals and performance scores. The performance evaluation system will allow optional use of peer evaluation and/or input from subordinates as determined appropriate by the Personnel Management Board. The system will have the flexibility to be modified, if necessary, as more experience is gained under the project. Performance Objectives Performance objectives are statements of job responsibilities based on the work unit's mission, goals and supplemental benchmark position descriptions. Employees and supervisors will jointly develop performance objectives which will reflect the types of duties and responsibilities expected at the respective pay level. In case of disagreements, the decision of the supervisor will prevail. Performance objectives deal with outputs and outcomes of a particular job. The performance objectives, representing joint efforts of employees and their rating chains, should be in place within 30 days from the beginning of each rating period. Performance Elements Performance elements are generic attributes of job performance, such as technical competence, that an employee exhibits in performing job responsibilities and associated performance objectives. New performance elements and rating forms will be designed to implement a new scoring and rating system. The new performance evaluation system will be based on critical and non-critical performance elements defined in Appendix C. Each performance element is assigned a weight between a specified range. The total weight of all elements is 100 points. The supervisor assigns each element some portion of the 100 points in accordance with its importance for mission attainment. As a general rule, essentially identical positions will have the same critical elements and the same weight. These weights will be developed along with employee performance objectives. Mid-Year Review A mid-year review between a supervisor and employee will be held to determine whether objectives are being met and whether ratings on performance elements are above an unsatisfactory level. Performance objectives should be modified as necessary to reflect changes in planning, workload, and resource allocation. The weights assigned to performance elements may be changed if necessary. Additional reviews may be held as deemed necessary by the supervisor or requested by the employee. The supervisor will provide periodic feedback to the employee on their level of performance. If the supervisor determines that the employee is not performing at an acceptable level on one or more elements, the supervisor must alert the employee and document the problem(s). This feedback will be provided at any time during the rating cycle. Employee Feedback to Supervisors Employee feedback to supervisors (in a non-threatening and not-for- attribution environment) is considered essential for the success of this demonstration. A feedback process will be developed and implemented within six months after implementation of the demonstration. The employee feedback will be for the supervisors' information only, and will not be a factor in determining annual ratings of record. Additionally, the individual supervisor ratings will be aggregated into a summary for the Director's use (with copies furnished to the union) in assessing the quality of supervision [[Page 34885]] provided and to take whatever steps are needed in supervisory training and development. Performance Appraisal A performance appraisal will be scheduled for the final weeks of the annual performance cycle, although an individual performance appraisal may be conducted at any time after the minimum appraisal period of 120 days is met. The performance appraisal process brings supervisors and employees together for formal discussions on performance and results in (1) written appraisals, (2) performance ratings, (3) performance scores, and (4) other individual performance- related actions as appropriate. A performance appraisal shall consist of two meetings held between employee and supervisor: the performance review meeting and the evaluation feedback meeting. Performance Review Meeting Between Employee and Supervisor The review meeting is to discuss job performance and accomplishments. Supervisors will not assign performance scores or performance ratings at this meeting. The supervisor notifies the employee of the review meeting in time to allow the employee to prepare a list of accomplishments. Employees will be given an opportunity at the meeting to give a personal performance assessment and describe accomplishments. The supervisor and employee will discuss job performance and accomplishments in relation to performance elements and performance objectives. Evaluation Feedback Meeting Between Employee and Supervisor In this second meeting between employee and supervisor, the supervisor informs the employee of management's appraisal of the employee's performance on performance objectives, and the employee's performance score and rating on performance elements. During this second meeting, the supervisor and employee will discuss and document performance objectives for the next rating period. Performance Scores The overall score is the sum of individual performance element scores. Employees will receive an academic-type rating of A, B, C, or U depending upon the score attained. These summary ratings are representative of pattern E (a 4 level system) in summary level chart in 5 CFR 430.208(d)(1). This rating will become the rating of record, and only those employees rated C or higher will receive general increases, performance pay increases (i.e., basic pay increases), and/ or performance bonuses. A rating of A will be assigned for scores from 85 to 100 points, B for scores from 70 to 84, C for scores from 50 to 69, and U for scores from 0 to 49 or a failure to achieve at the 50% level of any critical element. The academic-type ratings will be used to determine performance payouts and to award additional RIF retention years as follows: ------------------------------------------------------------------------ RIF Rating Compensation retention yrs added ------------------------------------------------------------------------ A................................... 4 shares + c *......... 10 B................................... 2 shares + c *......... 7 C................................... 1 share + c *.......... 3 U................................... 0...................... 0 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ * c = GS General Increase (Title 5, Section 5303). Pay increases for employees receiving retained rates will be determined in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 5363 except that those with a U rating will receive no pay increase. Selection of the weighted points to assign to an employee's performance on performance elements is assisted by use of benchmark performance standards (Appendix D). These benchmark performance standards are modified versions of the performance standards used by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), National Bureau of Standards. Each benchmark performance standard describes the level of performance associated with a particular point on a rating scale. Supervisors may add supplemental standards for employees they supervise to further elaborate the benchmark performance standards. Performance-Based Actions MRDEC will implement a process to deal with poor performers. This process may lead to involuntary separations, with grievance or appeal rights. The process may start at any time during the rating period, not necessarily at the end of an appraisal period. This process begins when the supervisor identifies a deficiency(ies) which causes the level of performance to be at the U (unsatisfactory) level based on a composite score that is less than 50 for all elements or a score on any critical element of less than 50 percent. When the employee's performance is determined to be unsatisfactory at the close of the annual rating period, the Unsatisfactory (U) rating will become the rating of record for all matters relating to pay or Reduction-in-Force (RIF). There are two processes to deal with poor performers: 1. Change in Assignment--Because it is recognized that employees may be assigned to a position for which they are not suited, an attempt will be made to place poor performers in a position better suited to their skills and capabilities. The offer of change in assignment will be contingent upon the employee's concurrence and will be either within the same band or in the next lower payband. If reassigned, the employee will receive written notification that they will be given a reasonable opportunity period of no less than thirty (30) calendar days in length, to demonstrate performance at a level that is at least equal to that of a summary level C rating. The period of time considered to be reasonable will be determined, in part, by whether the employee's reassignment is to a substantially similar or the same position under a different supervisor, or in a different office, or in a substantially different position. Essential training and mentoring will be provided as appropriate during this opportunity period. Failure to achieve a level of performance that is at least equal to that of a summary level C rating (following the above-referenced opportunity period) will place the employees in Step 3 of this process. There will be no further opportunity period. 2. Performance Improvement Plan (PIP)--If the employee does not accept an offer of change in assignment, or if there is no appropriate, available position to assign an employee, the supervisor will develop a PIP that will be monitored for a reasonable period of time (no less than 30 calendar days). When an employee is placed in a PIP, the employee will be informed in writing, that unless their level of performance improves to, and is sustained at a level at least equal to that of a summary level C rating, the employee may be removed from the position (change in assignment, reduction in pay, or removal from the Federal service). If, during or at the conclusion of the PIP, the employee's level of performance improves to a level at least equal to that of a summary level C rating and is again determined to deteriorate to below level C in any area during one year from the beginning of the PIP, the MRDEC may initiate action to remove the employee from the position with no additional opportunity to improve. An employee whose level of performance improves to a level at least equal to that of a summary level C rating for one year from the beginning of the PIP, and then deteriorates to below level C again, in any area, during succeeding rating periods, will be placed in a second PIP before initiating action to remove the employee from the position. [[Page 34886]] If and when performance improves during the period in which the employee is otherwise ineligible for the general increase, then the general increase shall be restored. Such restoration is not retroactive and is separate and apart from incentive pay. 3. Removal--If the employee fails to demonstrate a level of performance at least equal to that of a summary level C rating after completing either Step 1 or Step 2, the employee will be given a written notice of proposed removal from the position. The notice period will be a minimum of 30 calendar days and the employee will have a reasonable period of time in which to reply. The employee will be given a written notice of decision to include all applicable grievance and appeal rights. Note: Performance-based adverse actions may be taken under 5 U.S.C. Chapter 75, rather than Chapter 43. A decision to remove an employee for poor performance may be based only on those instances of poor performance that occurred during the opportunity period (Step 1) or during the one-year period ending on the date of proposed removal (Step 2). The notice of decision will specify the instances of poor performance on which the action is based and will be given to the employee at or before the time the action will be effective. The MRDEC will preserve all relevant documentation concerning an action taken for poor performance and make it available to review by the affected employee or designated representative. At a minimum, the record will consist of a copy of the notice of proposed action; the employee's written reply, if provided, or a summary if the employee makes an oral reply. Additionally, the record will contain the written notice of decision and the reasons therefore, along with any supporting material including documentation regarding the opportunity afforded the employee to demonstrate improved performance. An employee who sustains their performance at a level at least equal to a summary level C rating for one year, will have all relevant documentation removed from their record. Employee Relations Employees covered by the project will be evaluated under a performance evaluation system that affords grievance or appeal rights comparable to those provided currently. Senior Executive Service and 5 U.S.C. 3104 (ST) Employees Members of the SES will remain under the current SES performance appraisal system. Title 5 U.S.C. 3104 (ST) employees will be included in the project performance evaluation system, but will not be in the project pay-for-performance system. Awards The MRDEC currently has an extensive awards program consisting of both internal and external awards. On-the-spot, special act (which are both performance related and nonperformance related), and other internal awards (both monetary and nonmonetary) will continue under the project, and may be modified or expanded as appropriate. MACOM, DA, and DoD awards and other honorary noncash awards will be retained. Teams may distribute an award pool among themselves where appropriate. Thus, a team leader or supervisor may allocate a sum of money to a team for outstanding completion of a special task, and the team may decide the individual distribution of the total dollars among themselves. The MRDEC Director will have the authority to grant awards to covered employees of up to $10,000 for a special act. The scale of the award will be determined using criteria in AR 5-17. AFGE Local 1858 will be notified and provided an opportunity to comment on proposed special act awards for bargaining unit employees before the effective date of the award. The name of proposed special act awardees will not be released to the union for privacy act purposes. Members of the SES will remain under their current awards system and will not participate in the project performance recognition bonus awards program. Title 5 U.S.C. 3104 (ST) employees will be eligible for cash awards. Pay Administration Introduction The objective is to establish a pay system that will improve the ability of the MRDEC to attract and retain quality employees. The new system will be a pay-for-performance system and, when implemented, will result in a redistribution of pay resources based upon individual performance. The first performance payout will be made effective with the first full pay period of FY 1999 (October 1998). Future pay adjustments will be effective at the beginning of the first full pay period of subsequent fiscal years. General increase payouts in January 1998 will be provided to all covered employees regardless of their rating of record or current performance status. Pay-for-Performance MRDEC will use a simplified performance appraisal system that will permit both the supervisor and the employee to focus on quality of the work. The proposed system will permit the manager/supervisor to base incentive pay increases entirely on performance or value added to the goals of the organization. This system will allow managers to withhold pay increases from nonperformers, thereby giving the nonperformer the incentive to improve performance or leave government service. For example, employees with ratings of U will receive no performance pay increase, general increase, or performance bonus. This action may result in the employee's pay falling below the minimum rate of their current payband because the minimum rate is increased by the general increase (5 U.S.C. 5303). Under these transitory conditions, the employee's payband designator will remain the same. Since there is no reduction in band level or pay, there is no adverse action. Pay for performance has two components: performance pay increases and/or performance bonuses. The basic rates of pay used in computing the pay pool and performance payouts exclude locality pay. All covered employees will be given the full amount of locality pay adjustments when they occur regardless of performance. Additionally, all covered employees who have a rating of record above U will receive a full general increase, except that employees receiving retained rates will receive a pay increase in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 5363. The funding for performance pay increases and/or performance bonuses is composed of money previously available for within-grade increases, quality step increases, promotions from one grade to another where both grades are now in the same payband, and for some performance awards. Additionally, funds will be obtained from performance pay increases withheld for poor performance (see Performance Evaluation ). Performance Pay Pool The performance pay pool is composed of a base pay fund and a bonus pay fund. The payouts made to employees from the performance pay pool will be a mix of base pay increases and bonus payments, subject to the amounts available in the respective funds. The funding for the base pay fund is composed of money previously available for within-grade increases, quality step increases, and promotions between grades that are banded under [[Page 34887]] the demonstration project. The bonus pay fund is separately funded within the constraints of the organization's overall performance award budget. Some portion of the performance award budget will be reserved for special ad hoc awards--e.g., suggestion awards or special act awards--and will not be included as part of the performance pay pool. The MRDEC Center Support Office, in consultation with AFGE Local 1858 and supporting personnelists, will calculate the total performance pay pool funds and allocate pay pools prior to implementation to Major Organizational Units or teams as appropriate. Performance Pay Increases and/or Performance Bonuses A pay pool manager is accountable for staying within pay pool limits. The pay pool manager assigns performance pay increases and/or performance bonuses to individuals on the basis of an academic-type rating, the value of the performance pay pool resources available, and the individual's current basic rate of pay within a given payband. A pay pool manager may request approval from the Personnel Management Board (PMB) or its designee to grant a performance pay increase to an employee that is higher than the compensation formula for that employee to recognize extraordinary achievement or to provide accelerated compensation for local interns. Performance payouts will be calculated for each individual based upon a performance pay pool value that will be initially 3 percent (e.g., 2.0% performance pay + 1.0% performance bonus) of the combined basic rates of pay of the assigned employees. This percentage, a payout factor, will be adjusted as necessary to compensate for changing employee demographics which impact the elements used in the GS system, such as the amount of step raises, quality step increases, and promotions. The MRDEC will reexamine the payout factor (F) at the end of the first assessment period to determine if a payout factor of 2% was maintained by revised labor rates. If not, then the factor F must be adjusted prior to the first year payments to compensate for the early payment of step increases which would have been used to form the full robust value of this factor. Performance payouts will be calculated so that a pay pool manager will not exceed the resources that are available in the pay pool. An employee's performance payout is computed as follows: [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN27JN97.010 Where: Pool Value=F * SUM (SALk); k=1 to n n=Number of employees in pay pool N=Number of shares earned by an employee based on their performance rating (0 to 4) SAL=An individual's basic rate of pay SUM=The summation of the entities in parenthesis over the range indicated F=Payout Factor Once the individual performance payout amounts have been determined, the next step is to determine what portion of each payout will be in the form of a base pay increase as opposed to a bonus payment. A base pay share factor is derived by dividing the amount of the base pay fund by the amount of the total performance pay pool. This factor is multiplied by the individual performance payout amounts to derive each individual's projected base pay increase. Certain employees will not be able to receive the projected base pay increase due to base pay caps. Base pay is capped when an employee reaches the maximum rate of pay in an assigned payband, when the midpoint principle applies (see below), and when the 50 percent rule applies (see below). Also, for employees receiving retained rates above the applicable payband maximum, the entire performance payout will be in the form of a bonus payment. If the organization determines it is appropriate, it may reallocate a portion (up to the maximum possible amount) of the unexpended base pay funds for capped employees to uncapped employees. This reallocation must be made on a proportional basis so that all uncapped employees receive the same percentage increase in their base pay share (unless the reallocation adjustment is limited by a pay cap). Any dollar increase in an employee's projected base pay increase will be offset, dollar for dollar, by an accompanying reduction in the employee's projected bonus payment. Thus, the employee's total performance payout is unchanged. A midpoint principle will be used to determine performance pay increases. This principle requires that employees in all paybands must receive a B rating or higher to advance their basic rate of pay beyond the midpoint dollar threshold of their respective paybands. If the performance payout formula yields a basic pay increase for a C-rated employee that would increase their basic rate of pay beyond the midpoint dollar threshold, then their basic rate of pay will be adjusted to the midpoint dollar threshold and the balance converted to a performance bonus. Once an employee has progressed beyond the midpoint dollar threshold, future performance pay increases will require a B rating or greater. If an employee attains a C rating and is beyond the midpoint dollar threshold, incentive pay increases will be restricted to performance bonuses only. Annual performance pay increases will be limited to (1) 50 percent of the difference between the particular maximum band rate and the employee's current basic rate of pay, or (2) the projected performance pay increase, whichever is less, with the balance converted to a performance bonus. This rule will not apply when an employee's current basic rate of pay is within $100 of the maximum band rate. This means that employees whose pay has reached the upper limits of a particular payband will receive most performance incentives as a performance bonus. Performance bonuses are cash payments and are not part of the basic pay for any purpose (e.g., lump sum payments of annual leave on separation, life insurance, and retirement). Supervisory Pay Adjustments Supervisory pay adjustments may be used at the discretion of the MRDEC Director, to compensate employees assuming positions entailing supervisory responsibilities. Supervisory pay adjustments are increases to the supervisor's basic rate of pay, ranging up to 10 percent of that pay rate, subject to the constraint that the adjustment may not cause the employee's basic rate of pay to exceed the payband maximum rate. Only employees in supervisory positions with formal supervisory authority meeting that required for coverage under the OPM GS Supervisory Guide may be considered for the supervisory pay adjustment. Criteria to be considered in determining the pay increase percentage include the following organizational [[Page 34888]] and individual employee factors: (1) Needs of the organization to attract, retain, and motivate high quality supervisors; (2) budgetary constraints; (3) years of supervisory experience; (4) amount of supervisory training received; (5) performance appraisals and experience as a group or team leader; (6) their organizational level of supervision; and (7) managerial impact on the organization. The supervisory pay adjustment will not apply to 5 U.S.C. 3104 (ST) positions or to employees in Payband V of the E&S occupational family. Conditions, after the date of conversion into the demonstration project, under which the application of a supervisory pay adjustment may be considered are as follows: (1) New hires into supervisory positions will have their initial rate of basic pay set at the supervisor's discretion within the pay range of the applicable payband. This rate of pay may include a supervisory pay adjustment determined using the ranges and criteria outlined above. (2) A career employee selected for a supervisory position that is within the employee's current payband may also be considered for a supervisory pay adjustment. If a supervisor is already authorized a supervisory pay adjustment and is subsequently selected for another supervisory position, within the same payband, then the supervisory pay adjustment will be redetermined. Within the demonstration project rating system, the performance element ``Supervision/EEO'' is identified as a critical element. Changes in the rating value for this element awarded to a supervisor with a supervisory pay adjustment may generate a review of the adjustment and may result in an increase or decrease to that adjustment. Decrease to a supervisory pay adjustment is not an adverse action if this action results from changes in supervisory duties or supervisory ratings. Supervisors, upon initial conversion into the demonstration project into the same, or substantially similar position, will be converted at their existing basic rate of pay and will not be offered a supervisory pay adjustment. Supervisory adjustments will not be funded from performance pay pools. The initial dollar amount of the adjustment will be removed when the employee voluntarily leaves the supervisory position. The cancellation of the adjustment under these circumstances is not an adverse action and is not appealable. If an employee is removed from a supervisory position for personal cause (performance or conduct), the adjustment will be removed under adverse action procedures. However, if an employee is removed from a non-probationary supervisory position for conditions other than voluntary or for personal cause, then the pay retention provisions of 5 CFR part 536 will prevail. Supervisory Pay Differentials Supervisory differentials may be used, at the discretion of the MRDEC Director, to incentivize and reward supervisors who are in Paybands III, IV, and V of any occupational family in supervisory positions with formal supervisory authority meeting that required for coverage under the OPM GS Supervisory Guide (excluding Payband V of the E&S occupational family). A supervisory pay differential is a cash incentive that may range up to 10 percent of the supervisor's basic rate of pay. It is paid on a pay period basis and is not included as part of the supervisor's basic rate of pay. Criteria to be considered in determining the amount of this supervisory pay differential includes those identified for Supervisory Pay Adjustments. The supervisory pay differential may be considered, either during conversion into or after initiation of the demonstration project, if the supervisor has subordinate employees in the same payband. The differential must be terminated if the employee is removed from a supervisory position, regardless of cause, or no longer meets established eligibility criteria. Supervisory differentials will not be funded from performance pay pools. As specified in Supervisory Pay Adjustments, after initiation of the demonstration project, all personnel actions involving a supervisory differential will require a statement signed by the employee acknowledging that the differential may be terminated or reduced at the MRDEC Director's discretion. The termination or reduction of the differential is not an adverse action and is not subject to appeal. Pay and Compensation Ceilings An employee's total monetary compensation paid in a calendar year may not exceed the basic rate of pay paid in level I of the Executive Schedule consistent with 5 U.S.C. 5307 and 5 CFR part 530, subpart B. In addition, each payband will have its own pay ceiling, just as grades do in the current system. Pay rates for the various paybands will be directly keyed to the GS rates. Except for retained rates, basic pay will be limited to the maximum rates payable for each payband. Pay Setting for Promotion Upon promotion to a higher payband, an employee will be entitled to a 6% pay increase or the lowest level in the payband to which promoted, whichever is greater. Highest previous rate also may be considered in setting pay upon promotion, under rules similar to the highest previous rate rules in 5 CFR 531.203 (c) and (d). Grade and Pay Retention Except where waived or modified in the waivers section of this plan, grade and pay retention will follow current law and regulations. C. Classification Introduction The objectives of the new classification system are to simplify the classification process, make the process more serviceable and understandable, and place more decision-making authority and accountability with line managers. All positions listed in Appendix A will be in the classification structure. Provisions will be made for including other occupations as employment requirements change in response to changing technical programs. Occupational Series The present GS classification system has over 400 occupations (also called series), which are divided into 22 groups. The occupational series will be maintained. New series, established by OPM, may be added as needed to reflect new occupations in the workforce. Appendix A lists the occupational series currently represented at the MRDEC by occupational family. Classification Standards MRDEC will use a classification system that is a modification of the system now in use at the U.S. Navy, Naval Command, Control and Ocean Surveillance Center, San Diego, California. The present classification standards will be used to create local benchmark position descriptions for each payband, reflecting duties and responsibilities comparable to those described in present classification standards for the span of grades represented by each payband. There will be at least one benchmark position description for each payband. A supervisory benchmark position description may be added to those paybands that include supervisory employees. Present titles and series will continue to be used in order to recognize the types of work being performed and educational backgrounds [[Page 34889]] and requirements of incumbents. Locally developed specialty codes and OPM functional codes will be used to facilitate titling, making qualification determinations, and assigning competitive levels to determine retention status. Position Descriptions and Classification Process The MRDEC Director will have delegated classification authority and may redelegate this authority to subordinate managers. New benchmark position descriptions will be developed to assist managers in exercising delegated position classification authority. Managers will identify the occupational family, job series, the functional code, the specialty code, payband level, and the appropriate acquisition codes. The manager will document these decisions on a cover sheet similar to the present DA Form 374. Specialty codes will be developed by Subject Matter Experts (SMEs) to identify the special nature of work performed. Functional codes are those currently found in the OPM Introduction to the Classification Standards which define certain kinds of activities, e.g., Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, etc., and covers Engineers & Scientists. Classification Appeals An employee may appeal the occupational family, occupational series, or payband level of his or her position at any time. An employee must formally raise the areas of concern to the supervisors in the immediate chain of command, either verbally or in writing. If an employee is not satisfied with the supervisory response, he or she may then appeal to the DoD appellate level. If an employee is not satisfied with the DoD response, he or she may then appeal to the Office of Personnel Management, only after DoD has rendered a decision under the provisions of this demonstration project. Appellate decisions from OPM are final and binding on all administrative, certifying, payroll, disbursing, and accounting officials of the Government. Time periods for case processing under Title 5 apply. An employee may not appeal the accuracy of the position description, the demonstration project classification criteria, or the pay-setting criteria; the assignment of occupational series to an occupational family; the title of a position; the propriety of a salary schedule; or matters grievable under an administrative or negotiated grievance procedure or an alternative dispute resolution procedure. The evaluation of a classification appeal under this demonstration project are based upon the demonstration project classification criteria. Case files will be forwarded for adjudication through the Civilian Personnel Advisory Center/Civilian Personnel Operations Center (CPAC/CPOC) providing personnel service and will include copies of appropriate demonstration project criteria. D. Hiring and Appointment Authorities 1. Hiring Authority A candidate's basic eligibility will be determined using Office of Personnel Management's (OPM) Qualification Standards Handbook for General Schedule Positions. Candidates must meet the minimum standards for entry into the payband. For example, if the payband includes positions in grades GS-5 and GS-7, the candidate must meet the qualifications for positions at GS-5 level. Specific experience/ education required will be determined based on whether a position to be filled is at the lower or higher end of the band. Selective placement factors can be established in accordance with the OPM Qualification Handbook, when judged to be critical to successful job performance. These factors will be communicated to all candidates for particular position vacancies and must be met for basic eligibility. Under the demonstration authority, the MRDEC will modify qualification standards only as authorized in the General Policies and instructions (paragraph 8) of the Qualification Standard Handbook. 2. Appointment Authority Under the demonstration project, there will continue to be career and career conditional appointments and temporary appointments not to exceed one year. These appointments will use existing authorities and entitlements. Non-permanent positions (exceeding one year) needed to meet fluctuating or uncertain workload requirements will be filled using a Contingent Employee appointment authority. Employees hired for more than one year, under the contingent employee appointment authority, are given term appointments in the competitive service for no longer than five years. The MRDEC Director is authorized to extend a contingent appointment one additional year. These employees are entitled to the same rights and benefits as term employees and will serve a one year trial period. The Pay-for- Performance Management System described in III.B applies to contingent employees. Appointments will be made under the same appointment authorities and processes as regular term appointments, but recruitment bulletins must indicate that there is a potential for conversion to permanent employment. Employees hired under the contingent employee authority may be eligible for conversion to career-conditional appointments. To be converted, the employee must (1) have been selected for the term position under competitive procedures, with the announcement specifically stating that the individual(s) selected for the term position(s) may be eligible for conversion to career-conditional appointment at a later date; (2) served two years of substantially continuous service in the term position; (3) be selected under merit promotion procedures for the permanent position; and (4) have a current rating of B or better. Employees serving under regular term appointments at the time of conversion to the Demonstration Project will be converted to the new contingent employee appointments provided they were hired for their current positions under competitive procedures. These employees will be eligible for conversion to career-conditional appointment if they have a current rating of B or better (or one of the top two ratings on the current evaluation system), and are selected under merit promotion procedures for their permanent position after having completed two years of continuous service. Time served in term positions prior to conversion to the contingent employee appointment is creditable to the requirement for two years of continuous service stated above, provided the service was continuous. 3. Extended Probationary Period The current one year probationary period will be extended to two years for all newly hired employees in the Engineers and Scientists and Technical and Business Support occupational families. The purpose of extending the probationary period is to allow supervisors an adequate period of time to fully evaluate an employee's ability to complete a cycle of work (such as research, program development and execution, and technology transfer) and to fully evaluate an employee's contribution and conduct. Employees in the General Support occupational family will serve a one year probationary period. Aside from extending the time period, all other features of the current probationary period are retained [[Page 34890]] including the potential to remove an employee without providing the full substantive and procedural rights afforded a non-probationary employee. Any employee appointed prior to the implementation date will not be affected. The two year probation will apply to new hires or those who do not have reemployment rights or reinstatement privileges. Probationary employees will be terminated when the employee fails to demonstrate proper conduct, technical competency, and/or adequate contribution for continued employment. When the MRDEC decides to terminate an employee serving a probationary period because his/her work performance or conduct during this period fails to demonstrate their fitness or qualifications for continued employment, it shall terminate his/her services by written notification of the reasons for separation and the effective date of the action. The information in the notice as to why the employee is being terminated shall, as a minimum, consists of the manager's conclusions as to the inadequacies of their performance or conduct. 4. Supervisory Probationary Periods Supervisory probationary periods will be made consistent with 5 CFR 315, Subchapter 315.901. Employees that have successfully completed the initial probationary period will be required to complete an additional one year probationary period for the initial appointment to a supervisory position. If, during the probationary period, the decision is made to return the employee to a nonsupervisory position for reasons solely related to supervisory performance, the employee will be returned to a comparable position of no lower payband and pay than the position from which they were promoted. 5. Voluntary Emeritus Program Under the demonstration project, the MRDEC Director will have the authority to offer retired or separated individuals (engineers and scientists) voluntary assignments in the MRDEC. This authority will include individuals who have retired or separated from Federal service. Voluntary Emeritus Program assignments are not considered ``employment'' by the Federal government (except for purposes of injury compensation). Thus, such assignments do not affect an employee's entitlement to buyouts or severance payments based on an earlier separation from Federal service. The Voluntary Emeritus Program will ensure continued quality research while reducing the overall salary line by allowing higher paid individuals to accept retirement incentives with the opportunity to retain a presence in the scientific community. The program will be of most benefit during manpower reductions as senior S&Es could accept retirement and return to provide valuable on-the-job training or mentoring to less experienced employees. Voluntary service will not be used to replace any employee, or interfere with career opportunities of employees. To be accepted into the emeritus program, a volunteer must be recommended by MRDEC managers to the MRDEC Director. Everyone who applies is not entitled to a voluntary assignment. The MRDEC Director must clearly document the decision process for each applicant (whether accepted or rejected) and retain the documentation throughout the assignment. Documentation of rejections will be maintained for two years. To ensure success and encourage participation, the volunteer's federal retirement pay (whether military or civilian) will not be affected while serving in a voluntary capacity. Retired or separated federal employees may accept an emeritus position without a break or mandatory waiting period. Volunteers will not be permitted to monitor contracts on behalf of the government or to participate on any contracts or solicitations where a conflict of interest exists. The same rules that currently apply to source selection members will apply to volunteers. An agreement will be established between the volunteer, the MRDEC Director and the CPAC/CPOC Director. The agreement will be reviewed by the local Legal Office for ethics determinations under the Joint Ethics Regulation. The agreement must be finalized before the assumption of duties and shall include: (a) a statement that the voluntary assignment does not constitute an appointment in the civil service and is without compensation, and any and all claims against the Government (because of the voluntary assignment) are waived by the volunteer, (b) a statement that the volunteer will be considered a federal employee for the purpose of injury compensation, (c) volunteer's work schedule, (d) length of agreement (defined by length of project or time defined by weeks, months, or years), (e) support provided by the MRDEC (travel, administrative, office space, supplies), (f) a one page Statement of Duties and Experience, (g) a provision that states no additional time will be added to a volunteer's service credit for such purposes as retirement, severance pay, and leave as a result of being a member of the Voluntary Emeritus Program, (h) a provision allowing either party to void the agreement with 10 working days written notice, and (i) the level of security access required (any security clearance required by the assignment will be managed by the MRDEC while the volunteer is a member of the Voluntary Emeritus Program). E. Employee Development 1. Expanded Developmental Opportunity Program The MRDEC Expanded Developmental Opportunity Program will be funded by the MRDEC, and it will cover all demonstration project employees in the Engineers and Scientists and the Technical and Business Support occupational families. An expanded developmental opportunity complements existing developmental opportunities such as (1) long term training, (2) one year work experiences in an industrial setting via the Relations With Industry Program, (3) one year work experiences in laboratories of allied nations via the Science and Engineer Exchange Program, (4) rotational job assignments within the MRDEC, (5) up to one year developmental assignments in higher headquarters within the Army and Department of Defense, and (6) self directed study via correspondence courses and local colleges and universities. Each developmental opportunity period should benefit the MRDEC, as well as increase the employee's individual effectiveness. Various learning or uncompensated developmental work experiences may be considered, such as advanced academic teaching or research, or on-the- job work experience with public or non-profit organizations. Employees will be eligible after completion of seven years of Federal service. Final approval authority will rest with the MRDEC Director, and selection of an employee to be granted an expanded developmental opportunity will be on a competitive basis. An expanded developmental opportunity period will not result in loss of (or reduction in) basic pay, leave to which the employee is otherwise entitled, or credit for time or service. Employees accepting an expanded developmental opportunity [[Page 34891]] do not have to sign a continued service agreement cited in 5 U.S.C. 4108(a)(1) (Supplement 1995). The opportunity to participate in the Expanded Developmental Opportunity Program will be announced annually. Instructions for application and the selection criteria will be included in the announcement. Final selection for participation in the program will be made by the Personnel Management Board. The position of employees on an expanded developmental opportunity may be backfilled with employees temporarily promoted or contingent employees or employees assigned via the simplified assignment process in III.A. However, that position or its equivalent must be made available to the employee returning from the expanded developmental opportunity. 2. Training for Degrees Degree training is an essential component of an organization that requires continuous acquisition of advanced and specialized knowledge. Degree training in the academic environment of laboratories is also a critical tool for recruiting and retaining employees with or requiring critical skills. Constraints under current law and regulation limit degree payment to shortage occupations. In addition, current government wide regulations authorize payment for degrees based only on recruitment or retention needs. Degree payment is not permitted currently for non-shortage occupations involving critical skills. The MRDEC proposes to expand the authority to provide degree payment to employees in all occupational families for purposes of meeting critical skill requirements, to ensure continuous acquisition of advanced and specialized knowledge essential to the organization, and to recruit and retain personnel critical to the present and future requirements of the organization. Degree payment may not be authorized where it would result in a tax liability for the employee without the employee's express and written consent. It is expected that the degree payment authority will be used primarily and largely for advanced degrees, except where an undergraduate program is necessary to the attainment of an advanced degree or credits. Any variance from this policy must be rigorously determined and documented. The MRDEC will develop guidelines to ensure competitive approval of degree payment and that such decisions are fully documented. F. Revised Reduction-in-Force (RIF) Procedures Introduction Modifications include limiting competitive area, as defined below, and increasing the emphasis on performance in the RIF Process. Retention criteria are in the following order; tenure, veterans' preference, service credit adjusted by a sum of the last three performance ratings. Current reduction in force regulations/procedures have been adjusted in the context of the occupational family and the payband classification system. Competitive Areas All positions included in the Demonstration Project at a specific geographic location will be considered a separate competitive area. Bumps and retreats will occur only within the competitive area and only to positions for which the employee is qualified. Competitive levels will be established based on the payband, classification series, and where responsibilities are similar enough in duties, qualification requirements, pay schedules, and working conditions so that an employee may be reassigned to any of the other positions within the level without requiring significant training or causing undue interruption. Separate competitive levels will be established for positions in the competitive and excepted service; for positions filled on a full-time, part-time, intermittent, seasonal, or on-call basis; and separate levels will be established for positions filled by an employee in a formally designated trainee or developmental program. Retention Competing employees are listed on a retention register in the order shown below. Each tenure group has three subgroups (30% or higher compensable veterans, other veterans, and non-veterans) and employees appear on the retention register in that order. Within each subgroup, employees are in order of years of service adjusted to include performance credit. Tenure I (Career employees) Tenure II (Career-Conditional employees) Tenure III (Contingent employees) In the demonstration project, an employee can bump to a position held by another employee in a lower subgroup or tenure group; the position may be no lower than the equivalent of three GS grades (or appropriate grade intervals) below the minimum GS grade level of his/ her current band in accordance with Section V (Conversion or Movement from a Project Position to a General Schedule Position, a. Grade- Setting Provision). An employee can retreat to a position held by another employee in the same subgroup who has a lower adjusted RIF service computation date; the position may be no lower than the equivalent of three GS grades (or appropriate grade intervals) below the minimum GS grade level of his/her current band, in accordance with Section V (Conversion or Movement from a Project Position to a General Schedule Position, a Grade Setting Provision). A preference eligible with a compensable service-connected disability of 30 percent or more may retreat to a position equivalent to five GS grades (or appropriate grade intervals) below the minimum grade level of his/her current band. An employee with a current annual performance rating of U has assignment rights only to a position held by another employee who has a U rating. An employee who has been given a written decision of removal because of unacceptable performance will be placed at the bottom of the retention register for his/her competitive level. Link Between Performance and Retention An employee will have additional years of service added to the service computation date for retention purposes. The credit is applied for each of the last three annual performance ratings of record, received over the last four years, for a potential credit of 30 years. If an employee has less than three annual performance ratings of record, then for each missing rating, an average of the ratings received for the past four years will be used. Ratings given under non- demo systems will be converted to the demo rating scheme and provided the equivalent rating credit. Rating A adds 10 years Rating B adds 7 years Rating C adds 3 years Rating U adds no credit for retention IV. Training Introduction The key to the success or failure of the proposed demonstration project will be the training provided for all involved. This training will not only provide the necessary knowledge and skills to carry out the proposed changes, but will also lead to program commitment on the part of participants. Training before the beginning of implementation and throughout the demonstration will be provided to supervisors, employees, and the administrative staff responsible for [[Page 34892]] assisting managers in effecting the changeover and operation of the new system. The elements to be covered in the orientation portion of this training will include: (1) A description of the personnel system, (2) how employees are converted into and out of the system, (3) the pay adjustment and/or bonus process, (4) familiarization with the new position descriptions and performance objectives, (5) the performance evaluation management system, (6) the reconsideration process, and (7) the demonstration project administrative and formal evaluation process. AFGE Local 1858 will be given an opportunity to describe their role and function in the demonstration program. Supervisors The focus of this project on management-centered personnel administration, with increased supervisory and managerial personnel management authority and accountability, demands thorough training of supervisors and managers in the knowledge and skills that will prepare them for their new responsibilities. Training will include detailed information on the policies and procedures of the demonstration project, skills training in using the classification system, position description preparation, performance evaluation, and interaction with AFGE Local 1858 as a partner. Additional training may focus on nonproject procedural techniques such as interpersonal and communication skills. Administrative Staff The administrative staff, generally personnel specialists, technicians, and administrative officers, will play a key role in advising, training, and coaching supervisors and employees in implementing the demonstration project. This staff will need training in the procedural and technical aspects of the project. Employees The MRDEC, in conjunction with the AFGE Local 1858 and education and development assets of the CPAC/CPOC will train employees covered under the demonstration project. In the months leading up to the implementation date, meetings will be held for employees to fully inform them of all project decisions, procedures, and processes. V. Conversion Conversion to the Demonstration Project a. Initial entry into the demonstration project will be accomplished through a full employee protection approach that ensures each employee an initial place in the appropriate payband without loss of pay. Employees serving under regular term appointments at the time of the implementation of the demonstration project will be converted to the contingent employee appointment. Position announcement, etc. will not be required for these contingent employee appointments. An automatic conversion from current GS/GM grade and pay into the new broadband system will be accomplished. Each employee's initial total salary under the demonstration project will equal the total salary received immediately before conversion. Employees who enter the demonstration project later by lateral reassignment or transfer will be subject to parallel pay conversion rules. If conversion into the demonstration project is accompanied by a geographic move, the employee's GS pay entitlements in the new geographic area must be determined before performing the pay conversion. b. Employees who are on temporary promotions at the time of conversion will be converted to a payband commensurate with the grade of the position to which promoted. At the conclusion of the temporary promotion, the employee will revert to the payband which corresponds to the grade of record. When a temporary promotion is terminated, the employee's pay entitlements will be determined based on the employee's position of record, with appropriate adjustments to reflect pay events during the temporary promotion, subject to the specific policies and rules established by the MRDEC. In no case may those adjustments increase the pay for the position or record beyond the applicable pay range maximum rate. The only exception will be if the original competitive promotion announcement stipulated that the promotion could be made permanent; in these cases actions to make the temporary promotion permanent will be considered, and if implemented, will be subject to all existing priority placement programs. c. Employees who are covered by special salary rates, prior to the demonstration project, will no longer be considered a special rate employee under the Demonstration Project. These employees will, therefore, be eligible for full locality pay. The adjusted salaries of these employees will not change. Rather, the employees will receive a new basic pay rate computed by dividing their adjusted basic pay (higher of special rate or locality rate) by the locality pay factor for their area. A full locality adjustment will then be added to the new basic pay rate. Adverse action and pay retention provisions will not apply to the conversion process as there will be no change in total salary. d. During the first 12 months following conversion, employees will receive pay increases for non-competitive promotion equivalents when the grade level of the promotion is encompassed within the same broadband, the employee's performance warrants the promotion and promotions would have otherwise occurred during that period. Employees who receive an in-level promotion at the time of conversion will not receive a prorated step increase equivalent as defined below. e. Under the current pay structure, employees progress through their assigned grade in step increments. Since this system is being replaced under the demonstration project, employees (including those added to the MRDEC by BRAC 95 actions) will be awarded that portion of the next higher step based upon the portion of the waiting period they have completed prior to the date of implementation. As under the current system, supervisors will be able to withhold these partial step increases if the employee's performance falls below fully successful. Rules governing Within-Grade Increases (WGI) under the current Army performance plan will continue in effect until the implementation date. Adjustments to the employee's base salary for WGI equity will be computed effective the date of implementation to coincide with the beginning of the first formal PFP assessment cycle. WGI equity will be acknowledged by increasing base salaries by a prorated share based upon the number of weeks an employee has completed toward the next higher step. Payment will equal the current value of the employee's next WGI times the proportion of the waiting period completed (weeks completed in waiting period/weeks in the waiting period) at the time of conversion. Employees at step 10, or receiving retained rates, on the date of implementation will not be eligible for WGI equity adjustments since they are already at or above the top of the step scale. Conversion or Movement From a Project Position to a General Schedule Position If a demonstration project employee is moving to a General Schedule (GS) position not under the demonstration project, or if the project ends and each project employee must be converted back to the GS system, the following procedures will be used to convert the employee's project payband to a GS-equivalent grade and the employee's project rate of pay to GS equivalent rate of pay. The converted GS grade and GS [[Page 34893]] rate of pay must be determined before movement or conversion out of the demonstration project and any accompanying geographic movement, promotion, or other simultaneous action. For conversions upon termination of the project and for lateral reassignments, the converted GS grade and rate will become the employee's actual GS grade and rate after leaving the demonstration project (before any other action). For transfers, promotions, and other actions, the converted GS grade and rate will be used in applying any GS pay administration rules applicable in connection with the employee's movement out of the project (e.g., promotion rules, highest previous rate rules, pay retention rules), as if the GS converted grade and rate were actually in effect immediately before the employee left the demonstration project. a. Grade-Setting Provisions: An employee in a payband corresponding to a single GS grade is converted to that grade. An employee in a payband corresponding to two or more grades is converted to one of those grades according to the following rules: (1) The employee's adjusted rate of basic pay under the demonstration project (including any locality payment) is compared with step 4 rates in the highest applicable GS rate range. (For this purpose, a ``GS rate range'' includes a rate in (1) the GS base schedule, (2) the locality rate schedule for the locality pay area in which the position is located, or (3) the appropriate special rate schedule for the employee's occupational series, as applicable.) If the series is a two-grade interval series, only odd-numbered grades are considered below GS-11. (2) If the employee's adjusted project rate equals or exceeds the applicable step 4 rate of the highest GS grade in the band, the employee is converted to that grade. (3) If the employee's adjusted project rate is lower than the applicable step 4 rate of the highest grade, the adjusted rate is compared with the step 4 rate of the second highest grade in the employee's payband. If the employee's adjusted rate equals or exceeds step 4 rate of the second highest grade, the employee is converted to that grade. (4) This process is repeated for each successively lower grade in the band until a grade is found in which the employee's adjusted project rate equals or exceeds the applicable step 4 rate of the grade. The employee is then converted at that grade. If the employee's adjusted rate is below the step 4 rate of the lowest grade in the band, the employee is converted to the lowest grade. (5) Exception: If the employee's adjusted project rate exceeds the maximum rate of the grade assigned under the above-described ``step 4'' rule but fits in the rate range for the next higher applicable grade (i.e., between step 1 and step 4), then the employee shall be converted to that next higher applicable grade. (6) Exception: An employee will not be converted to a lower grade than the grade held by the employee immediately preceding a conversion, lateral reassignment, or lateral transfer into the project, unless since that time the employee has undergone a reduction in band. b. Pay-Setting Provisions: An employee's pay within the converted GS grade is set by converting the employee's demonstration project rate of pay to GS rate of pay in accordance with the following rules: (1) The pay conversion is done before any geographic movement or other pay-related action that coincides with the employee's movement or conversion out of the demonstration project. (2) An employee's adjusted rate of basic pay under the project (including any locality payment) is converted to a GS adjusted rate on the highest applicable rate range for the converted GS grade. (For this purpose, a ``GS rate range'' includes a rate range in (1) the GS base schedule, (2) an applicable locality rate schedule, or (3) an applicable special rate schedule.) (3) If the highest applicable GS rate range is a locality pay rate range, the employee's adjusted project rate is converted to a GS locality rate of pay. If this rate falls between two steps in the locality-adjusted schedule, the rate must be set at the higher step. The converted GS unadjusted rate of basic pay would be the GS base rate corresponding to the converted GS locality rate (i.e., same step position). (If this employee is also covered by a special rate schedule as a GS employee, the converted special rate will be determined based on the GS step position. This underlying special rate will be basic pay for certain purposes for which the employee's higher locality rate is not basic pay.) (4) If the highest applicable GS rate range is a special rate range, the employee's adjusted project rate is converted to a special rate. If this rate falls between two steps in the special rate schedule, the rates must be set at the higher step. The converted GS unadjusted rate of basic pay will be the GS rate corresponding to the converted special rate (i.e., same step position). c. E&S Payband V Employees: An employee in Payband V of the E&S Occupational family will convert out of the demonstration project at the GS-15 level. The MRDEC, in consultation with the MICOM CPAC, will develop a procedure to ensure that employees entering Payband V understand that if they leave the demonstration project and their adjusted pay exceeds the GS-15, step 10 rate, there is no entitlement to retained pay; their GS-equivalent rate will be deemed to be the rate for GS-15, step 10. For those Payband V employees paid below the adjusted GS-15, step 10 rate, the converted rates will be set in accordance with paragraph b. d. Employees with Band or Pay Retention: (1) If an employee is retaining a band level under the demonstration project, apply the procedures in paragraphs a and b, above, using the grades encompassed in the employee's retained band to determine the employee's GS- equivalent retained grade and pay rate. The time in a retained band under the demonstration project counts toward the 2-year limit on grade retention in 5 U.S.C. 5382. (2) If an employee is retaining rate under the demonstration project, the employee's GS-equivalent grade is the highest grade encompassed in his or her band level. MRDEC will coordinate with OPM to prescribe a procedure for determining the GS-equivalent pay rate for an employee retaining a rate under the demonstration project. e. Within-Grade Increase--Equivalent Increase Determinations: Service under the demonstration project is creditable for within-grade increase purposes upon conversion back to the GS pay system. Performance pay increases (including a zero increase) under the demonstration project are equivalent increases for the purpose of determining the commencement of a within-grade increase waiting period under 5 CFR 531.405(b). Personnel Administration All personnel laws, regulations, and guidelines not waived by this plan will remain in effect. Basic employee rights will be safeguarded and merit principles will be maintained. Supporting personnel specialists will continue to process personnel-related actions and provide consultative and other appropriate services. Use of benchmark position descriptions is not anticipated to adversely impact an employee's ability to seek employment outside of MRDEC. MRDEC employees participating in the project will have short generic benchmark position descriptions which describe the general type of work performed, and the range of complexity and supervisory controls. The [[Page 34894]] benchmark position description cover sheet lists the OPM occupational series, e.g., 855 for Electronics Engineer, to which the employee is assigned, and, where additional specificity is needed, lists a specialty code, which ties the employee's benchmark description to a particular technology or functional area. The OPM occupational code will serve as ready identification Government-wide of the basic qualifications and experience that the employee possesses. In addition, virtually all federal employment systems, including the Office of Personnel Management's, rely on employee-generated resumes which allow the applicants to summarize or describe the details of their experience and training. Any pertinent information regarding the MRDEC employees' knowledge, skills or abilities not contained in the benchmark position description can be conveyed to potential employers through their resume. Automation The MRDEC will continue to use the Defense Civilian Personnel Data System (DCPDS) for the processing of personnel-related data. Payroll servicing will continue from the respective payroll offices. Local automated systems will be developed to support computation of performance related pay increases and awards and other personnel processes and systems associated with this project. Experimentation and Revision Many aspects of a demonstration project are experimental. Upon written request by Management or the union to the other party, modifications may be negotiated at any time as experience is gained, results are analyzed, and conclusions are reached on how the system is working. The MRDEC will make minor modifications, such as changes in the occupational series in an occupational family without further notice. Major changes, such as a change in the number of occupational families, will be negotiated with the union and published in the Federal Register. See 5 CFR part 470. VI. Project Duration Public Law 103-337 removed any mandatory expiration date for this demonstration. The project evaluation plan adequately addresses how each intervention will be comprehensively evaluated for at least the first 5 years of the demonstration. Major changes and modifications to the interventions can be made through announcement in the Federal Register and would be made if formative evaluation data warranted. At the 5 year point, the entire demonstration will be reexamined for either: (a) Permanent implementation, (b) change and another 3-5 year test period, or (c) expiration. VII. Evaluation Plan Chapter 47 (Title 5 U.S.C.) requires that an evaluation system be implemented to measure the effectiveness of the proposed personnel management interventions. An evaluation plan for the entire laboratory demonstration program covering 24 DoD labs was developed by a joint OPM/DoD Evaluation Committee. A Comprehensive evaluation plan was submitted to the Office of Defense Research & Engineering in 1995 and subsequently approved (Proposed Plan for Evaluation of the Department of Defense S&T Laboratory Demonstration Program, Office of Merit Systems Oversight & Effectiveness, June 1995). The overall evaluation effort will be coordinated and conducted by OPM's Personnel Resources and Development Center (PRDC). The primary focus of the evaluation is to determine whether the waivers granted result in a more effective personnel system than the current as well as an assessment of the costs associated with the new system. The present personnel system with its many rigid rules and regulations is generally perceived as an impediment to mission accomplishment. The Demonstration Project is intended to remove some of those barriers and therefore, is expected to contribute to improved organizational performance. While it is not possible to prove a direct causal link between intermediate and ultimate outcomes (improved personnel system performance and improved organizational effectiveness), such a linkage is hypothesized and data will be collected and tracked for both types of outcome variables. An intervention impact model (Appendix B) will be used to measure the effectiveness of the various personnel system changes or interventions. Additional measures will be developed as new interventions are introduced or existing interventions modified consistent with expected effects. Measures may also be deleted when appropriate. Activity specific measures may also be developed to accommodate specific needs or interests which are locally unique. The evaluation model for the Demonstration Project identifies elements critical to an evaluation of the effectiveness of the interventions. The overall evaluation approach will also include consideration of context variables that are likely to have an impact on project outcomes: e.g., HRM regionalization, downsizing, cross-service integration, and the general state of the economy. However, the main focus of the evaluation will be on intermediate outcomes, i.e., the results of specific personnel system changes which are expected to improve human resources management. The ultimate outcomes are defined as improved organizational effectiveness, mission accomplishment, and customer satisfaction. Data from a variety of different sources will be used in the evaluation. Information from existing management information systems supplemented with perceptual data will be used to assess variables related to effectiveness. Multiple methods provide more than one perspective on how the demonstration project is working. Information gathered through one method will be used to validate information gathered through another. Confidence in the findings will increase as they are substantiated by the different collection methods. The following types of data will be collected as part of the evaluation: (1) Workforce data; (2) personnel office data; (3) employee attitudes and feedback using surveys, structured interviews, and focus groups; (4) local activity histories; and, (5) core measures of laboratory effectiveness. VIII. Demonstration Project Costs Costs associated with the development of the personnel demonstration system include software automation, training, and project evaluation. All funding will be provided through the MICOM/MRDEC budget. The projected annual expenses for each area is summarized in Table 1. Table 1.--Projected Developmental Costs (Then Year Dollars) -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- FY 96 FY 97 FY 98 FY 99 FY 00 FY 01 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Training......................... $6K $99K $12K Project Evaluation............... $25K $60K $60K $60K $60K $60K [[Page 34895]] Automation....................... $80K $10K ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Totals..................... $111K $169K $72K $60K $60K $60K -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- IX. Required Waivers to Law and Regulation Public Law 103-337 gave the DoD the authority to experiment with several personnel management innovations. In addition to the authorities granted by the law, the following are the waivers of law and regulation that will be necessary for implementation of the Demonstration Project. In due course, additional laws and regulations may be identified for waiver request. 1. Title 5, U.S. Code Chapter 31, Section 3111: Acceptance of Volunteer Service--To the extent that the acceptance of retired or separated engineers and scientists are included as volunteers under current statute. Chapter 31, Section 3132: The Senior Executive Service; Definitions and exclusions. Chapter 33, Section 3324: Appointment to positions classified above GS-15. Chapter 41, Section 4107: Pay for Degrees. Chapter 41, Section 4108: Employee Agreements; Service after Training--To the extent that employees who accept an expanded developmental opportunity (sabbatical) do not have to sign a continued service agreement. Chapter 43, Sections 4301(3): Definitions Chapter 43, Section 4302: Establishment of Performance Appraisal Systems. Chapter 43, Section 4303(a), (b), and (c): Actions based on Unacceptable Performance. Chapter 51, Sections 5101-5111: Related to classification standards and grading; to the extent that white collar employees will be covered by broadbanding. Pay category determination criteria for federal wage system positions remain unchanged. Chapter 53, Sections 5301, 5302 (8) and (9), 5303 and 5304: Sections 5301, 5302, and 5304 are waived only to the extent necessary to allow demonstration project employees to be treated as General Schedule employees and to allow basic rates of pay under the demonstration project to be treated as scheduled rates of pay. This waiver does not apply to ST employees who continue to be covered by these provisions, as appropriate. Employees in Payband V of the E&S occupational family are treated as ST employees for the purposes of these provisions. Chapter 53, Section 5305: Special Rates Chapter 53, Sections 5331-5336: General Schedule pay rates. Chapter 53, Sections 5361-5366: Grade and pay retention--This waiver applies only to the extent necessary to (1) replace ``grade'' with ``payband'; (2) allow demonstration project employees to be treated as General Schedule employees; (3) provide that pay retention provisions do not apply to conversions from General Schedule special rates to demonstration project pay, as long as total pay is not reduced, and to reductions in pay due solely to the removal of a supervisory pay adjustment upon voluntarily leaving a supervisory position; (4) provide that an employee on pay retention whose performance rating is ``U'' is not entitled to 50 percent of the amount of the increase in the maximum rate of basic pay payable for the payband of the employee's position; and, (5) ensure that for employees of Payband V of the E&S occupational family, payband retention is not applicable and pay retention provisions are modified so that no rate established under these provisions may exceed the rate of basic pay for GS-15, step 10 (i.e., there is no entitlement to retained rate). This waiver does not apply to ST employees unless they move to a GS- equivalent position under the demonstration project under conditions that trigger entitlement to pay retention. Chapter 55, Section 5545(d): Hazardous duty differential--This waiver applies only to the extent necessary to allow demonstration project employees to be treated as General Schedule employees. This waiver does not apply to ST employees or employees in Payband V of the E&S occupational family. Chapter 57, Section 5753, 5754, and 5755: Recruitment and Relocation Bonuses, Retention Allowances and Supervisory Differentials--This waiver applies only to the extent necessary to allow employees and positions under the demonstration project to be treated as employees and positions under the General Schedule. This waiver does not apply to ST employees who continue to be covered by these provisions, as appropriate. Employees in Payband V of the E&S occupational family are treated as ST employees for the purposes of these provisions. Chapter 75, Section 7512(3): Adverse actions--This waiver applies only to the extent necessary to replace ``grade'' with ``payband''. Chapter 75, Section 7512(4): Adverse actions--This waiver applies only to the extent necessary to provide that adverse action provisions do not apply to (1) conversions from General Schedule special rates to demonstration project pay, as long as total pay is not reduced and (2) reductions in pay due to the removal of a supervisory pay adjustment upon voluntary movement to a nonsupervisory position. 2. Title 5, Code of Federal Regulations: Part 300.601-605: Time-in-Grade requirements--Restrictions eliminated under the demonstration. Part 308.101 through 308.103: Volunteer Service--To the extent that retired engineers/scientists can perform voluntary services. Part 315.801 and 315.802: Probationary Period--Demonstration project employees in some occupational families will have extended probationary period. Part 316.301: Term Appointments--Adding years to exceed 4. Part 316.303: Tenure of Term Employees--Demonstration allows for conversion. Part 316.305: Eligibility for Within-Grade Increases. Part 351.402(b): Competitive Areas--Demonstration establishes each separate geographic location of the MRDEC as a separate competitive area. Part 351.403: Competitive level--To the extent that payband is substituted for grade. Part 351.504: Credit for Performance--As it relates to years of credit. Part 351.701: Assignment Involving Displacement--To the extent that employees bump and retreat rights will be limited to one payband except in the case of 30% preference eligibles which is a position equivalent to five GS grades below the minimum grade level of his/her payband. Part 430 subpart B, Performance Appraisal for General Schedule, [[Page 34896]] Prevailing Rate, and Certain Other Employees: Employees under the demonstration project will not be subject to the requirements of this subpart. Part 432: Modified to the extent that an employee may be removed, reduced in band level with a reduction in pay, reduced in pay without a reduction in band level and reduced in band level without a reduction in pay based on unacceptable performance. Also modified to delete reference to critical element. For employees who are reduced in band level without a reduction in pay, Sections 432.105 and 432.106(a) do not apply. Part 432, Sections 104 and 105: Proposing and Taking Action Based on Unacceptable Performance. Part 511: Classification Under the General Schedule--To the extent that grades are changed to paybands, and that white collar positions are covered by paybanding. Part 530, subpart C: Special salary rates. Part 531, subparts B, D, and E: Determining rate of basic pay, within-grade increases, and quality step increases. Part 531, subpart F: Locality pay--This waiver applies only to the extent necessary to allow demonstration project employees to be treated as General Schedule employees, and basic rates of pay under the demonstration project to be treated as scheduled annual rates of pay. This waiver does not apply to ST employees who continue to be covered by these provisions, as appropriate. Employees in Payband V of the E&S occupational family are treated as ST employees for the purposes of these provisions. Part 536: Grade and pay retention--This waiver applies only to the extent necessary to (1) replace ``grade'' with ``payband'; (2) provide that pay retention provisions do not apply to conversions from General Schedule special rates to demonstration project pay, as long as total pay is not reduced, and to reductions in pay due solely to the removal of a supervisory pay adjustment upon voluntarily leaving a supervisory position; (3) provide that an employee on pay retention whose performance rating is ``U'' is not entitled to 50 percent of the amount of the increase in the maximum rate of basic pay payable for the payband of the employee's position; and, (4) ensure that for employees of Payband V of the E&S occupational family, payband retention is not applicable and pay retention provisions are modified so that no rate established under these provisions may exceed the rate of basic pay for GS-15, step 10 (i.e., there is no entitlement to retained rate). This waiver does not apply to ST employees unless they move to a GS- equivalent position under the demonstration project under conditions that trigger entitlement to pay retention. Part 550.703: Severance Pay--This waiver applies only to the extent necessary to modify the definition of ``reasonable offer'' by replacing ``two grade or pay levels'' with ``one band level'' and ``grade or pay level'' with ``band level'. Part 550.902: Hazardous Duty Differential--This waiver applies only to the extent necessary to allow demonstration project employees to be treated as General Schedule employees. This waiver does not apply to ST employees or employees in Payband V of the E&S occupational family. Part 575, subparts A, B, C, and D: Recruitment Bonuses, Relocation Bonuses, Retention Allowances and Supervisory Differentials--This waiver applies only to the extent necessary to allow employees and positions under the demonstration project covered by paybanding to be treated as employees and positions under the General Schedule. This waiver does not apply to ST employees who continue to be covered by these provisions, as appropriate. Employees in Payband V of the E&S occupational family are treated as ST employees for the purposes of these provisions. Part 752.401 (a)(3): Adverse Actions--This waiver applies only to the extent necessary to replace ``grade'' with ``payband.'' Part 752.401(a)(4): Adverse Actions--This waiver applies only to the extent necessary to provide that adverse action provisions do not apply to (1) conversions from General Schedule special rates to demonstration project pay, as long as total pay is not reduced and (2) reductions in pay due to the removal of a supervisory pay adjustment upon voluntary movement to a nonsupervisory position. Appendix A: Occupational Series by Occupational Family I. Engineers & Scientists 0801 General Engineer 0806 Materials Engineer 0808 Architecture 0810 Civil Engineer 0819 Environmental Engineer 0830 Mechanical Engineer 0850 Electrical Engineer 0854 Computer Engineer 0855 Electronics Engineer 0861 Aerospace Engineer 0892 Ceramics Engineer 0893 Chemical Engineer 0896 Industrial Engineer 0899 Student Trainee (Engr) 1301 Physical Scientist 1310 Physicist 1320 Chemist 1321 Metallurgist 1515 Operations Research Analyst 1520 Mathematician 1529 Mathematician Stat 1550 Computer Scientist II. Technical and Business Support 0028 Environ Protec Specialist 0301 Data & Configuration Management, Standardization 0301 Misc Admin & Program 0334 Computer Specialist 0340 Program Manager 0341 Administrative Officer 0342 Support Services Spec 0343 Mgmt/Prog Analyst 0346 Log Mgt Spec 0391 Telecommunications 0560 Budget Analyst 0802 Engineering Technician 0809 Construction Rep 0856 Electronics Technician 1001 General Arts & Information 1040 Language Specialist 1082 Technical Information Writer 1083 Technical Writer/Editor 1102 Contract Specialist 1150 Industrial Specialist 1176 Building Manager 1311 Physical Sciences Tech 1410 Librarian (Phy Sci & Engr) 1412 Technical Information Spec 1499 Student Trainee 1515 Operations Research Analyst (Cost) 1521 Mathematics Technician 1670 Equipment Specialist 1910 Quality Assurance Specialist 42001 General Supply Spec III. General Support 0085 Guard 0302 Messenger 0303 Misc Clerk and Asst 0305 Mail Clerk 0312 Clerk-Stenographer 0318 Secretary 0326 Ofc Automation Clerk 0344 Management Assistant 0561 Budget Assistant 1106 Procurement Clerk 1411 Library Technician 2005 Supply Technician BILLING CODE 6325-01-U [[Page 34897]] [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN27JN97.011 [[Page 34898]] [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN27JN97.012 [[Page 34899]] [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN27JN97.013 [[Page 34900]] [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN27JN97.014 [[Page 34901]] [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN27JN97.015 BILLING CODE 6325-01-C Appendix C--Performance Elements All employees will be rated against at least the five generic performance elements listed through ``e'' below. Technical competence is a mandatory critical element. Other elements may be identified as critical by agreement between the rater and the employee. In case of disagreements, the decision of the supervisor will prevail. Generally, any performance element weighted 25 or higher should be critical. However, only those employees whose duties require manager/leader responsibilities will be rated on element ``f.'' Supervisors will be rated against an additional critical performance element, listed at ``g'' below: a. Technical Competence. Exhibits and maintains current technical knowledge, skills, and abilities to produce timely and quality work with the appropriate level of supervision. Makes prompt, technically sound decisions and recommendations that add value to mission priorities and needs. For appropriate occupational families, seeks and accepts developmental and/or special assignments. Adaptive to technological change. (Weight range: 15 to 50) b. Working Relationships. Accepts personal responsibility for assigned tasks. Considerate of others' views and open to compromise on areas of difference, if allowed by technology, scope, budget, or direction. Exercises tact and diplomacy and maintains effective relationships, particularly in immediate work environment and teaming situations. Always willing to give assistance. Shows appropriate respect and courtesy. (Weight Range: 5 to 15) c. Communications. Provides or exchanges oral/written ideas and information in a manner that is timely, accurate and cogent. Listens effectively so that resultant actions show understanding of what was said. Coordinates so that all relevant individuals and functions are included in, and informed of, decisions and actions. (Weight Range: 5 to 15) d. Resource Management. Meets schedules and deadlines, and accomplishes work in order of priority; generates and accepts new ideas and methods for increasing work efficiency; effectively utilizes and properly controls available resources; supports organization's resource development and conservation goals. (Weight Range: 15 to 50) e. Customer Relations. Demonstrates care for customers through respectful, courteous, reliable and conscientious actions. Seeks out and develops solid working relationships with customers to identify their needs, quantifies those needs, and develops practical solutions. Keeps customer informed and prevents surprises. Within the scope of job responsibility, seeks out and develops new programs and/or reimbursable customer work. (Weight Range: 10 to 50) f. Management/Leadership. Actively furthers the mission of the organization. As appropriate, participates in the development and implementation of strategic and operational plans of the organization. Develops and implements tactical plans. Exercises leadership skills within the environment. Mentors junior personnel in career development, technical competence, and interpersonal skills. Exercises due responsibility of technical/acquisition/organizational positions assigned to them. (Weight Range: 0 to 50) g. Supervision/EEO. Works toward recruiting, developing, motivating, and retaining quality team members; takes timely/ appropriate personnel actions, applies EEO/merit principles; communicates mission and organizational goals; by example, creates a positive, safe, and challenging work environment; distributes work and empowers team members. (Weight Range: 15 to 50) BILLING CODE 6325-01-U [[Page 34902]] [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN27JN97.016 [[Page 34903]] [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN27JN97.017 [FR Doc. 97-16850 Filed 6-26-97; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6325-01-C