[Senate Report 108-216]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
Calendar No. 407
108th Congress
1st Session SENATE Report
108-216
_______________________________________________________________________
GAO HUMAN CAPITAL REFORM ACT OF 2003
__________
R E P O R T
of the
COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS UNITED STATES SENATE
to accompany
S. 1522
TO PROVIDE NEW HUMAN CAPITAL FLEXIBILITIES WITH RESPECT TO THE GAO, AND
FOR OTHER PURPOSES
December 9, 2003.--Ordered to be printed
COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS
SUSAN M. COLLINS, Maine, Chairman
TED STEVENS, Alaska JOSEPH I. LIEBERMAN, Connecticut
GEORGE V. VOINOVICH, Ohio CARL LEVIN, Michigan
NORM COLEMAN, Minnesota DANIEL K. AKAKA, Hawaii
ARLEN SPECTER, Pennsylvania RICHARD J. DURBIN, Illinois
ROBERT F. BENNETT, Utah THOMAS R. CARPER, Delaware
PETER G. FITZGERALD, Illinois MARK DAYTON, Minnesota
JOHN E. SUNUNU, New Hampshire FRANK LAUTENBERG, New Jersey
RICHARD C. SHELBY, Alabama MARK PRYOR, Arkansas
Michael D. Bopp, Staff Director and Chief Counsel
Jennifer A. Hemingway, Professional Staff Member
Andrew G. Richardson, Staff Director, Oversight of Government
Management,
the Federal Workforce and the District of Columbia Subcommittee
Michael Dovilla, Professional Staff Member, Oversight of Government
Management, the Federal Workforce and the District of Columbia
Subcommittee
Joyce A. Rechtschaffen, Minority Staff Director and Counsel
Lawrence B. Novey, Minority Counsel
Emily J. Kirk, Minority Counsel, Oversight of Government Management,
the Federal Workforce and the District of Columbia Subcommittee
Jennifer Tyree, Minority Counsel, Financial Management,
the Budget, and International Security Subcommittee
Amy B. Newhouse, Chief Clerk
Calendar No. 407
108th Congress Report
SENATE
1st Session 108-216
======================================================================
GAO HUMAN CAPITAL REFORM ACT OF 2003
_______
December 9, 2003.--Ordered to be printed
_______
Mr. Collins, from the Committee on Governmental Affairs, submitted the
following
R E P O R T
[To accompany S. 1522]
The Committee on Governmental Affairs, to whom was referred
the bill (S. 1522) to provide new human capital flexibilities
with respect to the GAO, and for other purposes, having
considered the same, reports favorably thereon with amendments
and recommends that the bill do pass.
CONTENTS
Page
I. Purpose and Summary..............................................1
II. Background and Need for the Legislation..........................2
III. Legislative History..............................................9
IV. Section by Section Analysis......................................9
V. Estimated Cost of Legislation...................................15
VI. Evaluation of Regulatory Impact.................................17
VII. Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported...........17
I. Purpose and Summary
The purpose of S. 1522 is to provide new human capital
flexibilities with respect to the General Accounting Office
(GAO). The bill would permanently extend GAO's authority to
offer voluntary early retirement and voluntary separation
incentive payments to its workforce, and would provide new
authority for GAO to modify its personnel and workforce
practices to allow greater flexibility in determining pay
increases, pay retention rules, and other compensation matters.
S. 1522 would also rename the GAO as the ``Government
Accountability Office.''
II. Background
The General Accounting Office was established in 1921 by
the Budget and Accounting Act \1\ to ensure that federal
resources were spent in an economical, efficient, and effective
manner. The GAO is recognized as an independent agency within
the legislative branch, whose primary client is the Congress.
Today, GAO is a multidisciplinary professional services
organization, comprised of about 3,250 employees, that conducts
a wide range of financial and performance audits, program
evaluations, management reviews, investigations, and legal
services spanning a broad range of government programs and
functions.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Public Law 13, 67th Congress, 42 Stat. 20.
\2\ Hearing on Oversight of GAO: What Lies Ahead for Congress'
Watchdog?, Statement of David M. Walker, Comptroller General, before
the Committee on Governmental Affairs, September 16, 2003 (GAO-03-
1167T), (referred to as ``Walker testimony (GAO-03-1167T),'' pp. 51-52.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
GAO Personnel Act of 1980
Until 1980, GAO's personnel system was indistinguishable
from those of executive branch agencies--that is, GAO was
subject to the same laws, regulations, and policies as they
were. However, with the expansion of GAO's role in
congressional oversight of federal agencies and programs,
concerns grew about the potential for conflicts of interest. As
a result, legislation, originally introduced at GAO's request,
was favorably reported by the Committee and, on February 15,
1980, was enacted as the GAO Personnel Act of 1980, the
principal goal of which was to avoid potential conflicts by
making GAO's personnel system more independent of regulation by
executive branch agencies.\3\ Along with this independence, the
act gave GAO greater flexibility in hiring and managing its
workforce. Among other things, while requiring GAO to abide by
the same merit system principles and other key rights and
protections that are applicable to the executive branch, the
1980 Act granted the Comptroller General authority to: appoint,
promote, and assign employees on the basis of fitness and merit
but without regard to title 5, U.S. Code, requirements in these
areas; set employees' pay without regard to the federal
government's General Schedule (GS) pay system's classification
standards and requirements; and establish a merit pay system
for certain officers and employees. By excepting GAO from the
above requirements, the GAO Personnel Act of 1980 allowed GAO
to pursue significant innovations in managing its people,
including the establishment of a ``broad banding'' or ``pay
banding'' approach for classifying and paying its Analyst and
Attorney workforce in 1989. Therefore, as the Comptroller
General recently testified before this Committee, while certain
other agencies are now requesting authority to establish broad
banding and pay for performance systems, GAO has had almost 15
years of experience with such systems.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ S. Rep. 96-540 (Dec. 20, 1979); Public Law 96-191.
\4\ Walker testimony (GAO-03-1167T), note 2 above, pp. 52-53.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
GAO Personnel Flexibilities Act
In early 2000, GAO sought legislation affording additional
flexibilities to enable it to modernize and update its human
capital policies and performance management system. GAO made a
specific, fact-based demonstration that the requested
flexibilities were necessary and appropriate.\5\ Such
legislation was introduced by this Committee's then-Chairman,
Senator Thompson, and Ranking Member, Senator Lieberman, and
was incorporated, with their consent, into spending legislation
that passed the Senate; \6\ and revised legislation was
reintroduced, passed by the House and Senate, and, on October
13, 2000, enacted into law.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ S. Rep. 106-304 (May 23, 2000), pp. 37-42; Congressional
Record, H7802-H7803 (September 19, 2000).
\6\ S. 2529, incorporated into S. 2603, as reported, see S. Rep.
106-304 (May 23, 2000), pp. 37-42, further incorporated into H.R. 4516,
as passed by the Senate on July 17, 2000.
\7\ Public Law 106-303.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
This legislation, sometimes referred to as the ``GAO
Personnel Flexibilities Act,'' authorized the Comptroller
General to offer voluntary early retirement to certain
employees in order to realign the workforce to meet budgetary
constraints or mission needs; correct skill imbalances; or
reduce high-grade, managerial, or supervisory positions. The
voluntary early retirement authority was authorized through
December 31, 2003. In fiscal years 2002 and 2003, GAO granted
voluntary early retirement to 52 employees in fiscal year 2002
and 37 employees in fiscal year 2003.\8\ GAO believes, and the
Committee concurs, that careful use of voluntary early
retirement can be an important tool to assist federal agencies
in incrementally improving their overall human capital profile.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ Walker testimony (GAO-03-1167T), note 2 above, p. 19.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition to voluntary early retirement authority, the
GAO Personnel Flexibilities Act gave the Comptroller General
the authority to offer voluntary separation incentive payments,
through December 31, 2003, in order to realign the workforce to
meet budgetary constraints or mission needs; correct skill
imbalances; or reduce high-grade, supervisory, or managerial
positions. Although GAO has not yet used its buyout authority
under the Act, and the Comptroller General has indicated to the
Committee that GAO has no plans to do so in the foreseeable
future, \9\ GAO is seeking to retain this flexibility. Similar
authorities for voluntary early retirement and voluntary
separation incentive payments were provided to most federal
agencies under the Homeland Security Act of 2002.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ Id., p. 61.
\10\ Public Law 107-296, Sec. 1313.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The GAO Personnel Flexibilities Act also established
senior-level scientific, technical, and professional positions,
and provided those positions with the same pay and benefits
applicable to the Senior Executive Service. At present, GAO has
filled 8 senior level positions, including that of a Chief
Accountant, Chief Economist, Chief Statistician, and Chief
Actuary, as a result of the authority granted under the
Act.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ GAO, Report to Congressional Committees, ``Assessment of
Public Law 106-303: The Role of Personnel Flexibilities in
Strengthening GAO's Human Capital,'' (June 2003, GAO-03-954SP), p. 13.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Upon enactment of the GAO Personnel Flexibilities Act, GAO
began the process of developing regulations to implement its
new authorities. The Comptroller General used the flexibilities
to address significant issues involving succession planning and
imbalances in the structure, shape, and skills of its
workforce.
GAO's Development and Presentation of the Business Case for Personnel
Flexibilities
GAO identified human capital as one of three risk areas in
its FY2002 Performance and Accountability Report.\12\ Upon
further review of the range and limits of the GAO's existing
administrative and legislative authorities, the Comptroller
General concluded that GAO needed to seek from Congress
additional human capital flexibilities so that GAO could
enhance its ability to attract, retain, and reward a high-
performing workforce and lead by example in the area of human
capital management.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ GAO Strategic Plan 2002-2007, GAO-02-430SP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
GAO has been a leader in assisting Congress to stem the
human capital challenges facing the federal government. For
example, David Walker, Comptroller General, testified before
the Subcommittee on the Oversight of Government Management in
2001, on the role of Congress and the agencies when requesting
additional flexibilities to meet workforce needs. Mr. Walker
said,
For agencies that request legislative exceptions from
current civil service constraints, Congress can require
that they make a sound business case based on rational
and factbased analyses of their needs, the constraints
under which they presently operate, and the
flexibilities available to them. For example, before we
submitted human capital legislative proposals for GAO
last year, we applied the due diligence needed not only
to identify in our own minds the flexibilities we
needed to better manage our human capital, but also to
give Congress a clear indication of our needs, our
rationale, and the steps we were committed to taking in
order to maximize the benefits while managing the
risks. The process we followed included a thorough
analysis of our human capital needs and flexibilities,
clear standards for implementation, and multiple
opportunities for employee involvement and feedback.
The legislative flexibilities we eventually received,
tailored as they were to our specific needs, may not be
appropriate for other federal employers. However, the
process we followed in identifying and making a sound
business case for these flexibilities is one that would
be sensible for other agencies to follow.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ Hearing on Human Capital: Meeting the Governmentwide High-Risk
Challenge, Statement of David M. Walker, Comptroller General, before
the Subcommittee on Government Oversight and Management, February 1,
2001, GAO-01-357T, p. 15.
The Committee agrees and believes that for agencies to
request additional personnel flexibilities they should first
use existing human capital flexibilities responsibly and
strategically, have the infrastructure and safeguards in place
to use the flexibilities requested, work with employees in
developing the request for new flexibilities, and provide the
Congress with detailed information stating the reasons for the
request and how the new flexibilities will be used. The
Committee believes that GAO has followed this process and has
presented a sound business case for the need for additional
flexibilities.
In the Comptroller General's testimony regarding this
legislation he explained to the Committee that GAO has
effectively and strategically used existing flexibilities to
meet its workforce needs.\14\ Using the authority granted in
2000, GAO established a corps of senior level executives who
have the pay and benefits of the Senior Executive Service but
need not be generalist managers. In addition, GAO has
instituted a new knowledge transfer and succession planning
program that would allow select retirees to be reemployed as
annuitants for up to two years following retirement in order to
facilitate the transfer of knowledge in critical areas and
allow for a smooth transfer of responsibilities. To retain
staff with critical skills and staff with less than three years
of GAO experience, the GAO implemented legislation authorizing
federal agencies to offer student loan repayments in exchange
for certain federal service commitments. GAO ranks as one of
the top agencies in providing student loan repayments. As a
result of the student loan repayment program and other
innovative programs at the agency, GAO was listed by
Washingtonian magazine as one of the best federal agencies to
work.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ Walker testimony (GAO-03-1167T), note 2 above, pp. 19-23.
\15\ Sherri Dalphonse, Cindy Rich, Ellen McLellan, and Wayne
Nelson, 50 Great Places to Work, Washingtonian Mag., November 2003, p.
93.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Comptroller General also explained that GAO has the
infrastructure and safeguards in place to effectively use
additional flexibilities.\16\ In fiscal year 2002, GAO
completed an overhaul of its performance assessment system and
implemented a new, modern, effective, and credible performance
appraisal system for analysts and specialists; adapted the
system for attorneys; and began modifying the system for
administrative professional and support staff. GAO's
performance standards were revised to incorporate its core
values and strategic goals. GAO also updated descriptions of
performance to better reflect the current nature of its work
and implemented other key concepts, such as leadership by
example, client service, measurable results, matrix management,
open and constructive communications, and balancing people and
product considerations. The GAO performance management system
also includes safeguards to prevent arbitrary, discriminatory,
or retaliatory performance assessments. The GAO system allows
employees who are dissatisfied with their performance appraisal
to consult with the Human Capital Office, the Office of
Opportunity and Inclusiveness, or file a grievance. As a result
of its credible and meaningful performance assessment system--
with adequate safeguards--GAO was able to reward those with
outstanding performance. Given the positive results of this new
performance program, the Committee believes GAO is in a
position to handle an expanded pay for performance system.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ Walker testimony (GAO-03-1167T), note 2 above, pp. 23, 70-71.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Comptroller General also described how GAO has worked
with employees in developing and presenting its business case
for the requested flexibilities. GAO has an ongoing
communication program with its employees by conducting employee
surveys, holding meetings with the Employee Advisory
Council,\17\ soliciting employee suggestions for agency
improvements, and engaging in telecast chats with employees. In
addition, GAO has worked extensively with employees in the
development of this legislative proposal. GAO undertook a
phased approach that involved (1) developing a straw proposal,
(2) vetting the straw proposal broadly both externally and
internally, and (3) making appropriate adjustments based on
comments and concerns raised during the vetting process.\18\
Within GAO, members of the Executive Committee, which includes
GAO's Chief Operating Officer, General Counsel, and Chief
Mission Support Officer, as well as the Comptroller General,
worked with the managing directors and members of the Employee
Advisory Council. GAO consulted with the Office of Personnel
Management in developing its legislative proposal. The
Comptroller General testified that their outreach process was
both necessary and appropriate given the importance of the
proposed changes.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ The Employee Advisory Council, which is comprised of employees
elected to represent a cross-section of the agency, was formed in 1999
by the Comptroller General to advise him on issues pertaining to
management and employees.
\18\ Walker testimony (GAO-03-1167T), note 2 above, p. 56.
\19\ Id., p. 58.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As detailed in the next section and in GAO's testimony
before the Committee, GAO also explained why additional
flexibilities are needed and how current law has impeded its
efforts to build and maintain a high-quality workforce.\20\
Based on GAO's work in presenting a solid business case for
additional personnel flexibilities, particularly its current
utilization of available flexibilities, extensive employee
outreach efforts, and the presence of the necessary
infrastructure and safeguards, the Committee believes that the
requested targeted flexibilities are a logical incremental
advancement in modernizing GAO's human capital policies. The
process used by GAO to develop and request new human capital
flexibilities serves as an example for other agencies seeking
similar authority.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\20\ Id., p. 61-76.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
S. 1522, GAO Human Capital Reform Act of 2003
On July 31, 2003, Senators George Voinovich and Susan
Collins introduced legislation, S. 1522, the GAO Human Capital
Reform Act of 2003, based on the Comptroller General's
recommendations arising from review of GAO's existing
administrative and legal authorities and from the outreach
program discussed above. The Committee evaluated this
legislation, received and considered testimony from the
Comptroller General and from GAO's Employee Advisory
Council,\21\ and developed amended legislation that the
Committee reported favorably by voice vote, with no dissent, on
October 22, 2003.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\21\ Walker testimony (GAO-03-1167T), note 2 above; Statement for
the Record by GAO's Employee Advisory Council (September 16, 2003, GAO-
03-1162T).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The legislation is designed to allow GAO to continue to
invest in its human capital and attract, recruit, and retain
staff with the critical skills needed by GAO to accomplish its
mission both now and in future years. This legislation is
appropriate for GAO considering its role and responsibilities
in the legislative branch and its unique relationship to
Congress, and taking account of the sound business case that
GAO has presented to the Committee showing why the additional
flexibilities are needed and appropriate.
S. 1522 would make permanent the voluntary early retirement
authority and voluntary separation incentive payments
authorized under the GAO Personnel Flexibilities Act. Both
authorities were originally enacted to allow the Comptroller
General to realign GAO's workforce to address budgetary or
mission constraints; correct skills imbalances; and/or reduce
high-grade, supervisory, or managerial positions. The voluntary
early retirement authority that would be extended by S. 1522 is
limited to no more than 10 percent of the workforce in any one
year. The authority to offer voluntary separation incentive
payments is limited to no more than 5 percent of the workforce
in any given year. GAO is also required to use existing
resources to cover the cost of any voluntary separation
incentive payment offered. As detailed in the legislative
history of GAO's personnel flexibilities legislation enacted in
2000, these authorities include a number of provisions to
assure that employees are not subject to arbitrary or
unreasonable action.\22\ S. 1522 would also codify the sense of
Congress that the implementation of these authorities is
intended to reshape, not downsize, the GAO workforce.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\22\ S. Rep. 106-304 (May 23, 2000), pp. 37-42; Congressional
Record, H7802-H7803 (September 19, 2000).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The GAO Human Capital Reform Act of 2003 would allow GAO to
adjust the rates of basic pay on a basis separate from the
annual adjustment authorized for employees of the executive
branch. The alternative pay system will be put into place after
a minimum 2 yeartransition period. The provision would grant
the Comptroller General discretion to set annual pay increases by
taking into account alternative methodologies, and is designed to help
GAO allocate pay adjustments based on performance.
GAO already has a number of key systems and safeguards in
place, such as a validated performance measurement system for
its analysts and attorneys, and opportunity periods for
employee improvement, which will help guide the implementation
of the proposed compensation system. Absent extraordinary
circumstances or serious budgetary constraints, employees or
officers who perform at a satisfactory level would receive an
annual base pay adjustment based on compensation surveys that
are tailored to the nature, skills, and composition of GAO's
workforce. The base pay adjustment will be designed to protect
purchasing power and address differences in compensation ranges
by the local pay area.\23\ The Comptroller General estimates
that at least 95 percent of the workforce will qualify for an
additional performance-based increase once the proposed
compensation system is fully implemented.\24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\23\ Walker testimony (GAO-03-1167T), note 2 above, p. 81.
\24\ Id., p. 68.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
S. 1522 would ensure that an employee demoted as a result
of workforce restructuring or reclassification will be entitled
to pay retention, although he or she will not be eligible for
any automatic increase in basic pay until his or her current
rate is less than the maximum rate of the new position. This
safeguard will help ensure a smooth transition for employees
who are reclassified into a position with a lower level of
compensation. When GAO's analysts and attorneys were converted
to a broad band system, former Comptroller General Charles A.
Bowsher provided these employees with a guarantee that the
analysts and attorneys rated as meeting expectations in all
categories would fare at least as well under pay bands as under
the General Schedule system. Comptroller General Walker has
stated his intent to the Committee that he will honor his
predecessor's pay protection guarantee. In addition, the
Comptroller General has stated that mission support staff will
also receive this protection upon their conversion to pay
bands.\25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\25\ Id., p. 72.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Before finalizing and implementing the modified pay system
authorized under S. 1522, the Comptroller General will seek the
advice of GAO's managing directors and the Employee Advisory
Council. Employees will have the opportunity to review and
comment on the draft regulations for the modified pay system.
S. 1522 would grant GAO the authority, in appropriate
circumstances, to reimburse employees or officers for some
relocation expenses when a transfer benefits GAO but does not
meet the current requirements for reimbursement. Under current
law, employees who qualify for relocation benefits are entitled
to full benefits; however, there is no partial relief
available.\26\ The provision grants GAO the flexibility to
promulgate regulations in order to provide employees such
relief.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\26\ 5 USC Sec. 6303.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
S. 1522 would authorize GAO to provide 160 hours of annual
leave to key officers and employees who have under 3 years of
federal service. GAO has found that, in recruiting experienced
mid- and upper-level hires, the loss of leave they would incur
upon moving from the private to the federal sector is a major
disincentive.\27\ By increasing the annual leave that certain
newly hired officers and employees may earn, the provision will
assist GAO in its recruitment efforts.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\27\ Walker testimony (GAO-03-1167T), note 2 above, p. 74.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The GAO Human Capital Reform Act of 2003 would establish an
executive exchange program between GAO and private sector
entities, to help GAO address certain skills imbalances.
Currently, GAO has the authority to conduct such an exchange
with public entities and nonprofit organizations.\28\ Private
sector participants would be subject to the same conflict of
interest laws and regulations, and would receive their salaries
and benefits from their employers. Participation in the
executive exchange program would be limited to no more than 15
GAO employees or officers, and 30 private sector employees at
any one time. The legal framework to establish the regulations
for the exchange program will be based on the Information
Technology Exchange Program authorized under the E-Government
Act of 2002.\29\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\28\ The GAO is one of many agencies covered by the
Intergovernmental Personnel Act of 1970, Public Law 91-648, 5 USC
Sec. Sec. 3371-3376. Under this Act, federal agencies including GAO,
can detail their employees to State and local governments and nonprofit
organizations.
\29\ Public Law 107-347.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
S. 1522 would change the name of the agency from the
``General Accounting Office'' to the ``Government
Accountability Office.'' GAO requested this name change, which
maintains the well-known acronym, ``GAO,'' to better reflect
the current mission of the General Accounting Office as
incorporated into its strategic plan for serving Congress. When
established, GAO's workforce consisted primarily of accounting
clerks. Today, less than 15 percent of agency resources are
devoted to traditional accounting activities. GAO has said it
believes this name change will help avoid confusion among job
applicants, members of the public, the press, and within the
Congress, since it is often incorrectly assumed that GAO is
still solely a financial auditing agency.\30\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\30\ Walker testimony (GAO-03-1167T), note 2 above, p. 76.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
III. Legislative History
S. 1522 was introduced by Senator George Voinovich and
Senator Susan Collins on July 31, 2003, and was referred to the
Committee on Governmental Affairs. A hearing on S. 1522 was
held before the Committee on Governmental Affairs on September
16, 2003. The witnesses included Comptroller General David
Walker, General Accounting Office and Maurice McTigue,of the
Mercatus Center. The Employee Advisory Council of the General
Accounting Office submitted written testimony.
Proposed manager's amendments were developed, on a
bipartisan basis, to clarify a number of provisions and to set
forth certain commitments by GAO to ensure a fair and prudent
exercise of the new authorities. Among other things, the
proposed managers' amendments--(i) stated the sense of Congress
that the implementation of voluntary early retirement and
voluntary separation incentive authorities is intended to
reshape, not downsize, the GAO workforce; (ii) codified GAO's
intent to consider the protection of employees' purchasing
power in making annual pay adjustments; (iii) clarified the
terms of the executive exchange program to ensure that private
sector employees will be subject to federal ethics laws and
will not have access to trade secrets; and (iv) required GAO to
submit annual reports to Congress detailing its use of the
flexibilities in the bill. The Committee also received a
commitment from the Comptroller General that, absent
extraordinary circumstances or serious budgetary constraints,
employees or officers who perform at a satisfactory level will
receive an annual base-pay adjustment designed to protect their
purchasing power.
On October 15, 2003, the Subcommittee on Oversight of
Government Management, the Federal Workforce, and the District
of Columbia favorably polled out S. 1522. On October 22, 2003,
the Committee on Governmental Affairs met in open session and
by voice vote agreed to manager's amendments to S. 1522,
offered by Senator Voinovich, and by voice vote, ordered S.
1522 reported favorably with the amendments. Senators present:
Voinovich, Coleman, Bennett, Fitzgerald, Levin, Akaka,
Lautenberg, Pryor, and Collins.
IV. Section-by-Section Analysis
Section 1. Short title
Section 1 of the bill would entitle the Act the ``GAO Human
Capital Reform Act of 2003''.
Section 2. Amendments to Public Law 106-303
Subsection (a) would make permanent the authority of the
General Accounting Office (GAO) under Public Law 106-303,
sections 1 and 2, to offer voluntary early retirements and
voluntary separation payments to certain employees of GAO when
necessary to realign GAO's workforce in order to meet budgetary
or mission needs, correct skill imbalances, or reduce high-
grade positions. Originally, these authorities were to lapse on
December 31, 2003.
Subsection (b) would make an employee who, during the 36-
month period preceding separation performed services for which
a student loan repayment benefit was or is to be paid,
ineligible for a voluntary separation incentive payment.
Subsection (c) expresses the Sense of Congress that the
implementation of section 2 is intended to reshape the General
Accounting Office workforce and not downsize the General
Accounting Office workforce.
Section 3. Pay adjustments
This section would amend paragraph (3) of section 732(c) of
title 31, United States Code, to enable the Comptroller General
to annually adjust the pay rates for officers and employees of
the General Accounting Office without having to adjust the GAO
pay rates at the same time and to the same extent as the annual
statutory adjustments are made to the General Schedule.
Subsection (a) would accomplish this for all GAO employees
other than members of the Senior Executive Service (SES) and
Senior Level (SL) staff. Subsection (b) would accomplish this
for members of the SES and SL staff.
Paragraph (3) of section 732(c) would be amended to include
a number of requirements for the Comptroller General to
consider when annually adjusting the pay rates for officers and
employees of the General Accounting Office. This provision
would enable the Comptroller General to annually adjust the pay
rates for GAO officers and employees whose performance is at a
satisfactory level after reviewing various factors such as the
need to protect the purchasing power of employees of the Office
and pay disparities between GAO employees and private sector
employees in the local pay areas. In considering certain of
these factors related to economic data, the data would be
specifically related to positions at GAO. The provision also
would enable the Comptroller General to determine what other
factors, such as the overall agency performance and funding
levels, would be relevant to adjusting pay rates for GAO
officers and employees. Methodologies to support the
compensation of employees would be developed only after
consultation with the Employee Advisory Council and Managing
Directors, and employees would be given the opportunity for
notice and comment to any regulations promulgated to implement
this provision.
The provision is designed, among other reasons, to afford
additional flexibility to the Comptroller General to increase
the amount of merit or performance based compensation that
could be provided to reward employees at different rates, based
on their knowledge, skills, position, and performance rather
than on the passage of time, the rate of inflation and
geographic location. This would be accomplished in certain
years by increasing the funding for performance-based
compensation, the amounts of which can vary by performance
category. At the same time, employees could receive less annual
across the board base pay increases than they would receive
under the existing law. However, for some employees increases
in performance-based compensation would make up for this loss.
Under paragraph (3)(A) of subsection 732(c), the
Comptroller General would be required to consider the principle
that equal pay should be provided for work of equal value
within each local pay area. Paragraph (3)(B) of subsection
732(c) would require the Comptroller General to consider the
need to protect the purchasing power of officers and employees
of the General Accounting Office, and to take into
consideration the Consumer Price Index or other appropriate
indices. Paragraph (3)(C) of subsection 732(c) would require
the Comptroller General to consider any existing disparities
between officers and employees of the General Accounting Office
and non-federal employees in each local pay area, while
paragraph (3)(D) of subsection 732(c) would require
consideration of the pay rates for the same levels of work for
officers and employees of the General Accounting Office and
non-federal employees in each local pay area. Paragraph (3)(E)
of subsection 732(c) would require the Comptroller General to
consider the appropriate distribution of agency funds between
annual adjustments under section 3 and performance-based
compensation. Paragraph (3)(F) of 732(c) would state that the
Comptroller General will consider other criteria as
appropriate, including, but not limited to, the funding level
for the General Accounting Office, amounts allocated for
performance-based compensation, and the extent to which the
General Accounting Office is succeeding in fulfilling its
mission and accomplishing its strategic plan.
Subsection (c) would conform section 3 of the Act by
amending section 732(b)(6) of title 5, United States Code.
Section 4. Pay retention
This section would amend paragraph (5) of section 732(c) of
title 31, United States Code, to require the Comptroller
General to prescribe regulations ensuring employees or officers
of the General Accounting Office who are demoted due to a
reduction-in-force, other adjustment-in-force, reclassification
or other specified reasons as determined by the Comptroller
General are entitled to pay retention, if such a decision
results in their placement in a lower grade or band with a
maximum rate of basic pay less than their previous band or
grade.
This section would allow the Comptroller General to
immediately place employees in the band or grade that is
commensurate with the roles and responsibilities of their
positions. At the same time, the Comptroller General could not
reduce the basic pay of employees whose basic pay exceeds the
maximum rate of the grade or band in which the employees are
placed. The employees would retain this rate, without receiving
any increases to basic permanent pay, until their basic pay was
less than the maximum for their grade or band. These employees,
however, could be eligible for performance awards. As with
section 3, this provision would be implemented only after
consultation with the Employee Advisory Council and Managing
Directors, and opportunity for notice and comment by employees
to any pay retention regulations.
Section 5. Relocation benefits
Subsection (f) would grant the Comptroller General the
ability to provide employees who relocate but do not qualify
for the relocation benefits set forth in subchapter II of
chapter 57 of title 5, United States Code, partial relief from
the costs of relocating. Presently, employees whose transfer is
deemed to be in the interest of the Government are reimbursed
for most of their costs (i.e. travel expenses, real estate
expenses, moving expenses, and other related expenses) while
employees who are not eligible receive no reimbursements even
though their transfer may be of some benefit or value to the
agency. This provision would allow the Comptroller General to
promulgate regulations permitting employees who would otherwise
not receive any reimbursement for their relocation costs to
receive a portion of such costs in appropriate circumstances.
Section 6. Increased annual leave for key employees
Subsection (g) would allow the Comptroller General to
provide 160 hours of annual leave to key officers and employees
of the General Accounting Office who have less than 3 years of
Federal service, in accordance with section 6303(a)(2) of title
5, United States Code. Under the annual leave provision in
section 6303 of title 5, United States Code, employees earn
annual leave based on Federal years of service. Until an
employee has 3 years of service, the employee earns 104 hours
(13 days) of annual leave in a year. Between 3 and 15 years,
the employee earns 160 hours (20 days) of annual leave in a
year. The Comptroller General would be required to award such
increased annual leave as appropriate for the recruitment or
retention of key officers and employees, consistent with
regulations which would define key officers and employees, and
set forth the factors in determining which officers and
employees should be allowed to accrue such leave.
Section 7. Executive exchange program
This section would establish an executive exchange program
for the General Accounting Office.
Subsection (h) would authorize the Comptroller General, by
regulation, to establish an executive exchange program under
which officers and employees of the General Accounting Office
would have the ability to be assigned to private sector
organizations, and employees of private sector organizations
could be assigned to the General Accounting Office. Subsection
(h) makes it clear that the purpose of the exchange program is
to further the institutional interests of the General
Accounting Office or Congress, including for the purpose of
providing training to officers and employees of the General
Accounting Office.
Paragraph (1) of subsection (h) states that the regulations
to carry out the exchange program shall include provisions
consistent with sections 3702 and 3704 of title 5, United
States Code, which refers to the Information Technology
Exchange Program, for matters concerning the duration and
termination of assignments, reimbursements, and the benefits
and obligations of program participants.
Paragraph (2) of subsection (h) limits the number of
officers and employees who are assigned to private sector
organizations at any one time to not more than 15, and the
number of employees from private sector organizations who are
assigned to the General Accounting Office at any one time to
not more than 30.
Paragraph (3) of subsection (h) would make all private
sector participants subject to the same laws that are
applicable to the participants in the Information Technology
Exchange Program, relating to such matter as conflict of
interest and financial disclosure.
Paragraph (4) of subsection (h) would require that for an
employee of a private sector organization assigned to the
General Accounting Office, the Comptroller General must
determine that the assignment is an effective use of the GAO's
funds, and takes into account the best interests of the General
Accounting Office and the costs and benefits of alternative
methods of achieving the same results and objectives.
Paragraph (5) of subsection (h) states that the executive
exchange program would be sunset, with no assignments
permissible to begin under the exchange program, 5 years after
the date of enactment.
Subsection (i) lists sections of existing law that will
apply to any employee of a private sector organization assigned
to the General Accounting office under the executive exchange
program.
Section 8. Redesignation
Subsection (a) would change the name of the General
Accounting Office to the Government Accountability Office.
Subsection (b) states that any reference to the General
Accounting Office on the date of enactment shall be considered
to refer and apply to the Government Accountability Office.
Section 9. Performance management system
This section would amend section 732(d)(1) of title 31,
United States Code, to state that the performance management
system for the General Accounting Office must meet the
requirements of section 4302 of title 5, and adds a number of
new requirements. Specifically, the performance management
system would be required to include a link between the
performance management system and the agency's strategic plan;
adequate training and retraining for all employees,
supervisors, and managers in the performance management system;
a process for ensuring ongoing performance feedback and
dialogue between supervisors, managers, and employees
throughout the appraisal period and setting timetables for
review; effective transparency and accountability measures to
ensure that the management of the system is fair, credible, and
equitable; and a means to ensure that adequate resources are
allocated for the performance management system.
Section 10. Consultation
This section states that before the implementation of any
changes authorized under the Act, the Comptroller General will
consult with interested groups or associations that represent
employees of the General Accounting Office.
Section 11. Reporting requirements
Currently, under section 719(a) of title 31, United States
Code, the Comptroller General reports annually to the Congress.
Subsection (a) would require that for a 5-year period beginning
on the date of enactment of the Act, the annual report under
719(a) of title 31, United States Code, would summarize all
actions taken under section 2, 3, 4, 6, 7, 9, and 10 of the
Act.
Additionally, subsection (a)(1)(A) would require specific
information to be included in the report for certain
provisions, such as the number of officers and employees
separating from service under section 2, the number of officers
and employees receiving pay retention under section 4, the
number of officers and employees engaging in the Executive
Exchange Program under section 7, and the number of officers
and employees receiving annual leave under section 6.
Subsection (a)(1)(B) states that the annual report under
section 719(a) of title 31, United States Code, should include
a description of all actions with regard to the pay adjustments
under the Act in the annual report, including the methodology
applied, the amount of the annual pay adjustments, and any
extraordinary economic conditions or serious budget constraints
that significantly impacted on the determination of the
adjustments.
Subsection (a)(1)(C) states that the annual report under
section 719(a) of title 31, United States Code, must include an
assessment of the role of sections 2, 3, 4, 6, 7, 9, and 10 of
this Actin contributing to the General Accounting Office's
ability to carry out its mission, meet its performance goals, and
fulfill its strategic plan.
Subsection (a)(2) states that in each report submitted to
Congress under section 719(a) of title 31, United States Code,
after the effective date of section 3 of this Act and before
the close of the 5-year period referred to in paragraph (1),
the Comptroller General must include a detailed description of
the methodologies applied under section 3 of this Act and the
manner in which such methodologies were applied to determine
the appropriate annual pay adjustments for officers and
employees of the General Accounting Office. Subsection
(a)(2)(B) states that the report must include the amount of the
annual pay adjustment afforded to officers and employees of the
General Accounting Office under section 3 of this Act. Section
(a)(2)(C) states that the report must include a description of
any extraordinary economic conditions or serious budget
constraints that had a significant impact on the determination
of the annual pay adjustments for officers and employees of the
General Accounting Office.
Subsection (b) would require a final report not later than
6 years after the enactment of the Act, which summarizes the
information included for the prior 5 years in the annual report
regarding this Act, makes recommendations for any legislative
changes to sections 2, 3, 4, 6, 7, 9, or 10, and includes any
assessment of the GAO Personnel Appeals Board or interested
groups representing officers and employees.
Subsection (c) states that the reporting requirement under
subsection (a)(2)(C) shall apply to any report submitted under
section 719(a) of title 31, United States Code, whether during
the five year period beginning on the date of enactment of this
Act or at any time thereafter.
Section 12. Technical amendment
This section would correct a reference in subsection
732(h)((3)(A) of title 31, United States Code, so that the
existing term ``reduction force'' is changed to ``reduction in
force''.
Section 13. Effective dates
Subsection (a) states that except as provided in subsection
(b), the effective date of the Act will be the date of
enactment.
Subsection (b) states that section 3 would take effect for
any pay adjustments on or after October 1, 2005. Subsection (b)
states that two interim authorities would be in place prior to
any pay adjustments that would take effect on or after October
1, 2005. The first exception, (b)(2)(A), would give the
Comptroller General the authority to prescribe regulations that
would immediately preclude employees who are not performing at
a satisfactory level from receiving the annual adjustment to
the pay rates, instead of having to wait until section 4 is
effective. The second exception, (b)(2)(B), would authorize the
Comptroller General to prescribe regulations that would enable
him to give less than the full amount of the adjustments under
existing law, if the agency encounters serious budget
constraints or extraordinary economic conditions.
Subsection (b)(3) states that the Comptroller General would
be authorized to delay the implementation of sections 3 and 4
for groups of employees or officers if he deemed such action
appropriate.
V. Estimated Cost of Legislation
CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE COST ESTIMATE
S. 1522--GAO Human Capital Reform Act of 2003
Summary: S. 1522 would authorize the General Accounting
Office (GAO) to modify its personnel and workforce practices to
allow greater flexibility in determining pay increases, pay
retention rules, and other compensation matters. The bill also
would permanently extend GAO's authority to offer separation
(buyout) payments and early retirement to employees who
voluntarily leave GAO. Finally, S. 1522 would rename GAO as the
Government Accountability Office.
CBO estimates that enacting S. 1522 would increase direct
spending for retirement annuities and related health benefits
by about $1 million in fiscal year 2004, by $19 million over
the 2004-2008 period, and by $40 million over the 2004-2013
period. Several provisions of S. 1522 could affect GAO employee
compensation costs, but the net budgetary effect of such
provisions would depend on how GAO exercises its new
authorities and on whether future agency appropriations are
adjusted to reflect any savings or costs. Finally, we expect
that any addition discretionary costs associated with changing
the agency's name would not be significant.
S.1522 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector
mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandate Reform Act (UMRA)
and would not affect the budgets of state, local, or tribal
governments.
Estimated cost to the Federal Government: The estimated
impact of S. 1522 on direct spending is shown in the following
table. The costs of this legislation fall within budget
function 800 (general government).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
By fiscal year, in millions of dollars--
---------------------------------------------------------------------
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CHANGES IN DIRECT SPENDING
Estimated Budget Authority................ 1 3 5 5 5 5 4 4 4 4
Estimated Outlays......................... 1 3 5 5 5 5 4 4 4 4
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Basis of estimate
Direct spending
S. 1522 would give GAO permanent authority to offer
retirement to employees who voluntarily leave the agency early.
GAO's existing buyout authority, which will expire on December
31, 2003, allows the agency to offer certain employees a lump
sum payment of up to $25,000 to voluntarily leave the agency.
In addition, certain qualified employees who leave (whether
they collect a separation payment or not) are entitled to
receive immediate retirement annuities earlier than they would
have otherwise. CBO estimates that extending this authority
would increase direct spending by $1 million in 2004, by $19
million over the 2004-2008 period, and by $40 million over the
2004-2013 period.
Based on information provided by GAO about use of its early
retirement authority over the past several years, CBO estimates
that each year about 35 agency employees would begin receiving
retirement benefits three years earlier than they would have
under current law. Inducing some employees to retire early
results in higher-than-expected benefits from the Civil Service
Retirement and Disability Fund (CSRDF). CBO estimates that the
additional retirement benefits would increase direct spending
by $1 million in 2004, by $16 million over the 2004-2008
period, and by $32 million over the 2004-2013 period.
Extending GAO's buyout and early retirement authority also
would increase direct spending for federal retiree health
benefits. Many employees who retire early would continue to be
eligible for coverage under the Federal Employees' Health
Benefits (FEHB) program. The government's share of the premium
for retirees is classified as mandatory spending. Because many
of those accepting the buyouts under the bill would have
retired later under current law, mandatory spending on FEHB
premiums would increase. CBO estimates these additional
benefits would increase direct spending by less than $500,000
in 2004, by $3 million over the 2004-2008 period, and by $8
million over the 2004-2013 period.
Spending subject to appropriation
The authorities provided by S. 1522 would allow GAO to
create a performance-based employee compensation system to
govern basic pay adjustments, pay retention for employees
affected by reductions in force, relocation reimbursements, and
annual leave accruals beginning in fiscal year 2006. (Under
existing law, GAO is required to follow personnel management
policies determined by the Office of Personnel Management.)
Implementing the new authorities that would be provided by S.
1522 could affect GAO's total costs of providing employee
compensation, but CBO cannot predict any costs or savings
associated with these new authorities, or the net effect of all
such changes on the federal budget. Ultimately, the net
budgetary effect of the proposed authorities would depend on
the features of the compensation system adopted by GAO and on
how the agency applies that new system to individual employees.
Moreover, any resulting savings or costs would only be realized
if the agency's annual appropriations are adjusted accordingly.
Providing GAO with the option of providing voluntary
separation payments could also increase GAO's costs, but CBO
estimates that any new costs would average less than $500,000
annually over the 2004-2013 period. Section 2 of the bill would
allow GAO to offer certain employees payments of up to $25,000
to voluntarily leave the agency. The bill also requires that
GAO make a deposit amounting to 45 percent of each buyout
recipient's basic salary toward the CSRDF. Unlike an increase
in retirement benefits, these two payments would be from the
agency's discretionary budget and are thus subject to
appropriation. Since GAO's current buyout authority was first
authorized in October 2000, no one at the agency has received a
buyout payment. As such, CBO expects that relatively few
employees would receive a buyout payment over the next 10 years
and that the cost of any buyout payments and required deposits
toward the CSRDF would be negligible in any given year.
Intergovernmental and private-sector impact: S. 1522
contains no intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as
defined in UMRA and would not affect the budgets of state,
local, or tribal governments.
Estimate prepared by: Federal Costs: Ellen Hays, Geoffrey
Gerhardt, and Deborah Reis; and Impact on State, Local, and
Tribal Governments: Sarah Puro; and Impact on the Private
Sector: Paige Piper/Bach.
Estimate approved by: Peter H. Fontaine, Deputy Assistant
Director for Budget Analysis.
VI. Evaluation of Regulatory Impact
Pursuant to the requirements of paragraph 11(b)(1) of rule
XXVI of the Standing Rules of the Senate, the Committee has
considered the regulatory impact of this bill. CBO states that
there are no intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as
defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act and no costs on
state, local, or tribal governments. The legislation contains
no other regulatory impact.
VII. Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported
In compliance with paragraph 12 of rule XXVI of the
Standing Rules of the Senate, changes in existing law made by
the bill, as reported, are shown as follows (existing law
proposed to be omitted is enclosed in black brackets, new
matter is printed in italic and existing law, in which no
change is proposed, is shown in roman):
[PUBLIC LAW 106-303, ENACTED OCTOBER 13, 2000, 114 STAT. 1063]
AN ACT TO MAKE CERTAIN PERSONNEL FLEXIBILITIES AVAILABLE WITH RESPECT
TO THE GENERAL ACCOUNTING OFFICE AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES
* * * * * * *
SECTION. 1. [5 U.S.C. 8336 NOTE.] VOLUNTARY EARLY RETIREMENT AUTHORITY.
(a) Civil Service Retirement System.--Effective [for
purposes of the period beginning on the date of the enactment
of this Act and ending on December 31, 2003] October 13, 2000,
paragraph (2) of section 8336(d) of title 5, United States
Code, shall, with respect to officers and employees of the
General Accounting Office be applied as if it had been amended
to read as follows:
* * * * * * *
(b) Federal Employees' Retirement System.--Effective [for
purposes of the period beginning on the date of the enactment
of this Act and ending on December 31, 2003] October 13, 2003,
subparagraph (B) of section 8414(b)(1) of title 5, United
States Code, shall, with respect to officers and employees of
the General Accounting Office, be applied as if it had been
amended to read as follows:
* * * * * * *
(e) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of Congress that
the implementation of this section is intended to reshape the
General Accounting Office workforce and not downsize the
General Accounting Office workforce.
SEC. 2. [5 U.S.C. 5597 NOTE.] VOLUNTARY SEPARATION INCENTIVE PAYMENTS.
(a) In General.--Effective [for purposes of the period
beginning on the date of the enactment of this Act and ending
on December 31, 2003] October 13, 2003, the authority to
provide voluntary separation incentive payments shall be
available to the Comptroller General with respect to employees
of the General Accounting Office.
* * * * * * *
(b) Terms and Conditions.--The authority to provide
voluntary separation incentive payments under this section
shall be available in accordance with the provisions of
subsections (a)(2)(e) of section 663 of the Treasury, Postal
Service, and General Government Appropriations Act, 1997, as
contained in Public Law 104-208 (5 U.S.C. 5597 note), except
that--
* * * * * * *
[(2) subsection (a)(2)(g) of such section shall be
applied by construing thecitations therein to be
references to the appropriate authorities in connection with employees
of the General Accounting Office;]
(2)(A) subsection (a)(2)(G) of such section shall be
applied by construing the citations therein to be
references to the appropriate authorities in connection
with employees of the General Accounting Office; and
(B) employees excluded under subsection (a)(2)(G) of
such section, shall include any employee who, during
the 36-month period preceding the date of separation of
that employee, performed service for which a student
loan repayment benefit was or is to be paid under
section 5379 of title 5, United States Code.
* * * * * * *
(g) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of Congress that
the implementation of this section is intended to reshape the
General Accounting Office workforce and not downsize the
General Accounting Office workforce.
UNITED STATES CODE
TITLE 31--MONEY AND FINANCE
Subtitle I--General
CHAPTER 7--GENERAL ACCOUNTING OFFICE
Subchapter III--Personnel
* * * * * * *
Sec. 731. General
* * * * * * *
(f) The Comptroller General shall prescribe regulations
under which officers and employees of the Office may, in
appropriate circumstances, be reimbursed for any relocation
expenses under subchapter II of chapter 57 of title 5 for which
they would not otherwise be eligible, but only if the
Comptroller General determines that the transfer giving rise to
the relocation is of sufficient benefit or value to the Office
to justify such reimbursement.
(g) The Comptroller General shall prescribe regulations
under which key officers and employees of the Office who have
less than 3 years of service may accrue leave in accordance
with section 6302(a)(2) of title 5, in those circumstances in
which the Comptroller General has determined such increased
annual leave is appropriate for the recruitment or retention of
such officers and employees. Such regulations shall define key
officers and employees and set forth the factors in determining
which officers and employees should be allowed to accrue leave
in accordance with this subsection.
(h) The Comptroller General may by regulation establish an
executive exchange program under which officer and employees of
the Office may be assigned to private sector organizations, and
employees of private sector organizations may be assigned to
the Office, to further the institutional interests of the
Congress, including for the purpose of providing training to
officers and employees of the Office. Regulations to carry out
any such program--
(1) shall include provisions (consistent with
sections 3702 through 3704 of title 5) as to matter
concerning--
(A) the duration and termination of
assignments;
(B) reimbursements;
(C) status, entitlements, benefits, and
obligations of program participants;
(2) shall limit--
(A) the number of officers and employees who
are assigned to private sector organizations at
any one time to not more than 15;
(B) the number of employees from private
sector organizations who are assigned to the
Office at any one time to not more than 30;
(3) shall require that an employee of a private
sector organization assigned to the Office may not have
access to any trade secrets or to any other nonpublic
information which is of commercial value to the private
sector organization from which such employee is
assigned;
(4) shall require that, before approving the
assignment of an officer or employee to a private
sector organization, the Comptroller General shall
determine that the assignment is an effective use of
the Office's funds, taking into account the best
interests of the Office and the costs and benefits of
alternative methods of achieving the same results and
objectives; and
(5) shall not allow any assignment under this
subsection to commence after the end of the 5-year
period beginning on the date of enactment of this
subsection.
(i) an employee of a private sector organization assigned
to the Office under the executive exchange program shall be
considered to be an employee of the Office for purposes of--
(1) chapter 73 of title 5;
(2) sections 201, 203, 205, 207, 208, 209, 603, 606,
607, 643, 654, 1905, and 1913 of title 18;
(3) sections 1343, 1344, and 1349 (b) of this title;
(4) chapter 171 of title 28 (commonly referred to as
the Federal Torts Claims Act) and any other Federal
Tort liability statute;
(5) the Ethics in Government Act of 1978 (5 U.S.C.
App.);
(6) section 1043 of the Internal Revenue Code of
1986; and
(7) section 27 of the Office of Federal Procurement
Policy Act (41 U.S.C. 423).
Sec. 732. Personnel Management System
* * * * * * *
(b) The personnel management system shall--
* * * * * * *
(6) provide that the Comptroller General shall fix
the basic pay of officers and employees of the Office
not fixed by law consistent with section 5301 of [title
5] title 5, except as provided under subsection (c)(3)
of this section and section 733(a)(3)(B) of this title.
(c) Under the personnel management system--
* * * * * * *
(3) except as provided under section 733(a)(3)(B) of
this title [or section 5349(a) of title 5], basic pay
rates of officers and employees of the Office shall be
adjusted [at the same time and to the same extent as
basic pay rates of the General Schedule are adjusted]
annually to such extent as determined by the
Comptroller General, and in making the determination
the Comptroller General shall consider--
(A) the principle that equal pay should be
provided for work of equal value within each
local pay area;
(B) the need to protect the purchasing power
of officers and employees of the Office, taking
into consideration the Consumer Price Index or
other appropriate indices;
(C) any existing pay disparities between
officers and employees of the Office and non-
Federal employees in each local pay area;
(D) the pay rates for the same levels of work
for officers and employees of the Office and
non-Federal employees in each local pay area;
(E) the appropriate distribution of agency
funds between annual adjustments under this
section and performance-based compensation;
(F) such other criteria as the Comptroller
General considers appropriate, including, but
not limited to, the funding level for the
Office, amounts allocated for performance-based
compensation, and the extent to which the
Office is succeeding in fulfilling its mission
and accomplishing its strategic plan;
notwithstanding any other provision of this paragraph,
an adjustment under this paragraph shall not be applied
in the case of an officer or employee whose performance
is not at a satisfactory level, as determined by the
Comptroller General for purposes of such adjustment;
* * * * * * *
(5) [officers and employees of the Office are
entitled to grade and basic pay retention consistent
with subchapter VI of chapter 53 of title 5] the
Comptroller General shall prescribe regulations under
which an officer or employee of the Office shall be
entitled to pay retention if, as a result of any
reduction-in-force or other workforce adjustments
procedure, position reclassification, or other
appropriate circumstances as determined by the
Comptroller General, such officer or employee is placed
in or holds a position in a lower grade or band with a
maximum rate of basic pay that is less than the rate of
basic pay payable to the officer or employee
immediately before the reduction in grade or band; such
regulations--
(A) shall provide that the officer or
employee shall be entitled to continue
receiving the rate of basic pay that was
payable to the officer or employee immediately
before the reduction in grade or band until
such time as the retained rate becomes less
than the maximum rate for the grade or band of
the position held by such officer or employee;
and
(B) shall include provisions relating to the
minimum period of time for which an officer or
employee must have served or for which the
position must have been classified at the
higher grade or band in order for pay retention
to apply, the events that terminate the right
to pay retention (apart from the ones described
in subparagraph (A)), and the exclusions based
on the nature of the appointment; in
prescribing regulations under this
subparagraph, the Comptroller General shall be
guided by the provisions of sections 5362 and
5363 of title 5.
* * * * * * *
(d) The personnel Management System shall provide--
(1) for a system to appraise the performance of
officers and employees of the General Accounting Office
that meets the requirements of section 4302 of title 5
[;] and in addition includes--
(A) a link between the performance management
system and the agency's strategic plan;
(B) adequate training and retraining for
supervisors, managers, and employees in the
implementation and operation of the performance
management system;
(C) a process for ensuring ongoing
performance feedback and dialogue between
supervisors, managers, and employees throughout
the appraisal period and setting timetables for
review;
(D) effective transparency and accountability
measures to ensure that the management of the
system is fair, credible, and equitable,
including appropriate independent
reasonableness, reviews, internal assessments,
and employee surveys; and
(E) a means to ensure that adequate agency
resources are allocated for the design,
implementation, and administration of the
performance management system.
* * * * * * *
(h)(1)(A) * * *
* * * * * * *
(3)(A) Except as provided in subparagraph (B), an employee
may not be released due to a [reduction force] reduction in
force, unless such employee is given written notice at least 60
days before such employee is so released. Such notice shall
include--
* * * * * * *
Sec. 733. Senior Executive Service
(a) The Comptroller General may establish a General
Accounting Senior Executive Service--
* * * * * * *
(3) providing rates of basic pay--
* * * * * * *
(B) [adjusted at the same time and to the
same extent as rates in the Senior Executive
Service under section 5882 of title 5 are
adjusted] adjusted annually by the Comptroller
General after taking into consideration the
factors listed under section 732(c)(3) of this
title, except that an adjustment under this
subparagraph shall not be applied in the case
of an officer or employee whose performance is
not at a satisfactory level, as determined by
the Comptroller General for purposes of such
adjustment;
* * * * * * *