Daily Rules, Proposed Rules, and Notices of the Federal Government


Office of the Secretary

Science and Technology Reinvention Laboratory Personnel Management Demonstration Project, Department of Navy, Office of Naval Research

AGENCY: Office of the Deputy Under Secretary of Defense (Civilian Personnel Policy) (DUSD (CPP)), Department of Defense (DoD).
ACTION: Notice.
SUMMARY: Section 342(b) of Public Law (Pub .L.) 103-337, as amended by section 1114 of Public Law 106-398, authorizes the Secretary of Defense (SECDEF) to conduct personnel management demonstration projects at Department of Defense (DoD) laboratories designated as Science and Technology Reinvention Laboratories (STRLs). Section 1107 of Public Law 110-181, as amended by section 1109 of Public Law 110-417, requires the SECDEF to execute a process and plan to employ the Department's personnel management demonstration project authorities found in section 4703 of title 5, United States Code (U.S.C.) at the STRLs enumerated in section 9902(c)(2) of title 5 U.S.C., as redesignated in section 1105 of Public Law 111-84 and 73Federal Register(FR) 73248, to enhance the performance of the missions of the laboratories. Section 1107 of Public Law 110-181 further authorizes in subsection 1107(c) that any flexibility available to any demonstration laboratory shall be available for use at any other laboratory as enumerated in section 9902(c)(2) of title 5 U.S.C. The Office of Naval Research (ONR) is listed as one of the designated STRLs.

This notice announces the approval of the final personnel demonstration project plan for the ONR. This includes adoption of existing demonstration project flexibilities in other STRL demonstration project plans and any necessary modifications thereto for better conformance to the ONR mission requirements and culture.

DATES: Implementation of this demonstration project will begin no earlier than December 1, 2010.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Office of Naval Research: Ms. Margaret J. Mitchell, Director, Human Resources Office, Office of Naval Research, 875 North Randolph Street, Code 01HR, Arlington, VA 22203;

DoD: Ms. Betty A. Duffield, CPMS-PSSC, Suite B-200, 1400 Key Boulevard, Arlington, VA 22209-5144


Since 1966, many studies of Department of Defense (DoD) laboratories have been conducted on laboratory quality and personnel. Almost all of these studies have recommended improvements in civilian personnel policy, organization, and management. Pursuant to the authority provided in section 342(b) of Public Law 103-337, as amended, a number of DoD STRL personnel demonstration projects were approved. These projects are “generally similar in nature” to the Department of Navy's “China Lake” Personnel Demonstration Project. The terminology, “generally similar in nature,” does not imply an emulation of various features, but rather implies a similar opportunity and authority to develop personnel flexibilities that significantly increase the decision authority of laboratory department heads and/or directors.

This demonstration project involves: (1) Streamlined delegated examining; (2) noncitizen hiring; (3) expanded detail authority; (4) extended probationary period for newly hired employees; (5) expanded temporary promotion; (6) voluntary emeritus program; (7) pay banding; (8) contribution-based compensation system; (9) performance-based reduction-in-pay or removal actions; and (10) reduction-in-force (RIF) procedures.

2. Overview

DoD published notice in 73 FR 73248, December 2, 2008, that pursuant to subsection 1107(c) of Public Law 110-181 the three STRLs listed in 73 FR 73248 not having personnel demonstration projects at this time may adopt the flexibilities of the other laboratories listed in subsection 9902(c)(2), as redesignated in section 1105 of Public Law 111-84. ONR is one of the three STRLs specified in this provision.

Accordingly, ONR intends to build its demonstration project using flexibilities adopted from existing STRL demonstration projects (specifically the Naval Research Laboratory (NRL), Aviation Missile Research, Development and Engineering Center (AMRDEC), Medical Research and Materiel Command (MRMC), and Communications-Electronics Research, Development and Engineering Center (CERDEC)). Final plans for the NRL, AMRDEC, MRMC, CERDEC personnel management demonstration projects were published inFederal Registersas follows:

Department of the Navy:NRL—64 FR 33970, June 24, 1999. No amendments have been published;

Department of the Army:AMRDEC—62 FR 34876 and 62 FR 34906, June 27, 1997; and amendments and/or corrections to final plans published—64 FR 11074, March 8, 1999; 64 FR 12216, March 11, 1999; 65 FR 53142, August 31, 2000; and 67 FR 5716, February 6, 2002;

Department of the Army:MRMC—63 FR 10439, March 3, 1998; and amendments and/or corrections to final plans published—64 FR 30377, June 7, 1999; 64 FR 12216, March 11, 1999; 65 FR 53142, August 31, 2000; and 67 FR 5716, February 6, 2002; and

Department of the Army:CERDEC—66 FR 10439, October 30, 2001.

On May 28, 2010, DoD published the proposed ONR demonstration project plan in 75 FR 30918. During the public comment period ending June 28, 2010, DoD received comments from 22 individuals. All comments were carefully considered.

The following summary addresses the comments received, provides responses, and notes resultant changes to the original proposed project plan. Most commenters addressed several topics which are counted separately. Thus, the total number of comments exceeds the number of individuals cited earlier.

A. General Project Comments

(1)Comment:Five commenters addressed the necessity and wisdom of implementing a laboratory personnel demonstration project at ONR considering the recent repeal of the DoD National Security Personnel System (NSPS), and that the implementation of a demonstration project similar to NSPS could not improve overall performance of an above-average organization and could only create controversial concerns for ONR's workforce.

Response:Government studies have validated the need for establishing different personnel systems within STRLs. There are currently eight operating STRL Personnel Demonstration Projects with another seven STRL personnel demonstration projects pending expected implementation between December 2010 and April 2011. These seven STRLs were mandated to implement a demonstration project within eighteen months of enactment of NDAA for FY 2010 (Public Law 111-84) by section 1105 of that law. Regarding the similarity to NSPS, ONR's demonstration project does have foundational similarities, but its rating and payout structures differ from NSPS.

(2)Comment:One commenter wanted to know what the reasons are behind ONR's decision to implement a demonstration project.

Response:Section 1105 of Public Law 111-84 requires all STRLs named therein to implement a demonstration project within 18 months of the enactment of the law. Regardless of the legal mandate to implement a demonstration project, ONR has displayed a continued interest in having a demonstration project since 2001. Since that time, ONR leadership has believed that a personnel demonstration project will enable greater overall organizational effectiveness, enable ONR to sustain a quality workforce, improve overall employee satisfaction, and ultimately improve ONR's ability to achieve its mission.

(3)Comment:One commenter felt that the implementation of a demonstration project performance management system will be overly cumbersome, elaborate, and time consuming.

Response:The performance management system to be carried out under the demonstration project will require more attention from employees and supervisors when compared to the General Schedule's performance management system. The demonstration project places a greater emphasis on performance management by utilizing the concepts of cascading, line-of-sight goals and on-going performance communications. Organizations employing such techniques in their performance management systems experience increased productivity and customer satisfaction. A primary goal of the performance management system under ONR's demonstration project is to facilitate a decrease in misdirected work activities, and as a result, provide meaning and distinguishing value to the employee's work and contributions.

(4)Comment:Three commenters questioned ONR's decision to adopt the Naval Research Laboratory's demonstration project, as they do not see a similarity between NRL's and ONR's operation, location, and workforce structure.

Response:Although there are some important differences between work performed by NRL and ONR, there are close similarities between the workforces. Just like NRL, ONR has a highly educated and experienced workforce, with expertise in science, engineering, acquisition/contracting, finance, and other professional areas. The demonstration project programs that were designed to attract, motivate, reward, and retain the NRL workforce have been carefully reviewed by ONR management to be sure they are right for the ONR workforce. Where needed, some modifications to NRL's programs have been made to better suit ONR's workforce needs and culture. The demonstration project programs are not dependent on where the employees are physically working, but rather they make up a new system for the Command to manage and reward all employees' work and contributions consistently and fairly.

(5)Comment:Two commenters inquired about the possibility of conducting a pilot demonstration project at ONR Headquarters to test the demonstration project programs prior to implementation at the regional or global offices.

Response:As established by section 1105 of Public Law 111-84, ONR must implement a demonstration project before the end of April 2011 for all eligible employees, regardless of the location of their official duty station. Due to the deadline of this mandate, there is not sufficient time to design, implement, and test a small pilot before activating the demonstration project for all eligible ONR employees.

(6)Comment:One commenter believed that the WIGI buy-in calculation is flawed for OCONUS employees because the formula assumes everyone receives locality pay. This was specifically in reference to paragraph 5 on page 30217 stating that special salary employees will be eligible to receive full locality pay and OCONUS employees do not receive locality pay.

Response:The determination of basic pay (not including locality pay or a special salary rate) is the foundation of the formula for both the WIGI buy-in and the recalculation of pay for an employee on a special salary rate. Once the new basic pay is determined in either situation, any WIGI buy-in is added to the new basic pay and the sum is multiplied by a locality pay percentage, if appropriate. If the new basic pay exceeds the maximum for the current pay band, the employee will be granted maintained pay.

(7)Comment:One commenter asked how Living Quarters Allowance (LQA) and post allowance levels established by the Department of State Standardized Regulations (DSSR) would be determined under Lab Demo.

Response:Typically, personnel demonstration projects determine a General Schedule grade equivalency using their conversion out of the demonstration project schema to determine entitlements to such items as Living Quarters Allowance, training, base housing, etc. The equivalent General Schedule grade is then used to compare with the entitlement requirements. For example, the demo General Schedule equivalency grade would be compared to the LQA matrix chart containing GS grades in section 135.2 of the DSSR to determine comparable LQA entitlements.

(8)Comment:One commenter asked how the Global offices will be supported when there is a large time-zone difference and ONR's Human Resource (HR) department is not opened 24 hours a day.

Response:ONR's Global offices will continue to receive the same high level of support under the demonstration project as they do currently under the General Schedule. Based on the experience of other previously implemented personnel demonstration projects, ONR does not anticipate any issues associated with the demonstration project that would require routine around-the-clock access to the Headquarters HR Department. ONR HR will endeavor to respond to any concern within 24 hours on demo issues and make accommodations for their Global customers to ensure continued enhanced customer satisfaction.

(9)Comment:One commenter noted that ONR has primarily adopted NRL's STRL personnel demonstration project, and used in its FRN the language from NRL's original FRN. A proposed amendment has since been written by NRL and the commenter recommended that ONR review NRL's proposed amendment and adopt the suggested changes as appropriate. The commenter also recommended ONR review the minor changes that NRL made as well and include those where appropriate.

Response:ONR agrees with the commenter and has carefully reviewed NRL's amendment and list of minor changes. ONR has modified the FRN in a number of places as a result of this review and those changes are listed in the subsequent summary of substantive changes.

B. CCS Appraisal Process

(1)Comment:One commenter expressed concern that employees will be told verbally by their supervisors to expect a certain Overall Contribution Score (OCS) and payout but the actual payout amount received would be less than what the employee was led to expect by their supervisor.

Response:Under ONR's demonstration project, standard operating procedures and policies will be such that employees receive notification of their OCS and adjusted basic pay including locality only after a final decision has been rendered by the Pay Pool Panel. Employees are not to bemade aware of their initial suggested score provided by their supervisor or potential adjusted basic pay prior to the Pay Pool Manager's approval of the Pay Pool Panel's final decision.

(2)Comments:Fairness: Six commenters stated concerns about the equitable application of the evaluations made under the Contribution-based Compensation System (CCS). Two commenters thought the system was too subjective and favoritism would drive the process. One commenter expressed concern that more credit would be given to scientific than support personnel. One commenter felt that the CCS system would only reward supervisors for outcomes and ultimately create a negative working environment for their subordinates. Two commenters discussed the need for a 360-degree performance evaluation plan for supervisors to ensure accountability for their performance management duties.

Response:To promote fairness and reduce favoritism, the CCS process provides for review of employee assessments by a group of supervisory officials who are in the same pay pool. In the pay pool panel process, scores assigned by individual supervisors are reviewed by other supervisors in the same pay pool. The supervisors work to apply the CCS level descriptors consistently within their pay pool, and to identify and correct any inappropriately inflated or deflated scores. The pay pool manager provides an additional level of review and is the ultimate approval level. CCS contains various mechanisms to ensure employees receive proper credit under the generic contribution elements, descriptors, and discriminators. Contribution elements may be weighted, expectations and results to be achieved for the work assigned may be described in supplemental criteria, and discriminators may be considered either separately or in a more integrated manner for groups of employees. Meaningful assessment demands consideration of quality, value, customer service, and other criteria can be established early in the cycle and described in supplemental information to the CCS factors. Flexibility was deemed necessary for individual divisions to tailor the system to their special needs. Supervisors will continue to determine the value of employees' accomplishments when assessing their contributions. Work valued under the current system will continue to be valued under CCS. In addition, supervisors and employees will be encouraged to communicate throughout the appraisal period to avoid misunderstandings at the end of the year.

The primary benefit expected from Lab Demo is greater organizational effectiveness through increased supervisor and employee interaction leading to enhanced employee involvement, communication, understanding, satisfaction, and productivity. Lab Demo training, targeting the CCS process and goals, has been rolled out across the Command to ensure a synonymous understanding of performance management practices for both employees and supervisors, and to ensure that proper performance management techniques will occur under CCS. The CCS performance management process is designed to help supervisors create a performance culture in which the performance and contributions of the workforce are linked to the ONR mission. This in turn will add meaning to the employee's job and contributions.

Supervisors will be held accountable for their performance management duties under CCS. The CCS contribution elements and level descriptors specifically include expectations regarding performance management and workforce development to recognize the importance of this value at ONR.

The managers/second-line supervisors have always been free to solicit feedback from subordinate employees and other customers to consider in assessing and appraising the supervisory effectiveness of their direct subordinates and their employees. This will continue to be an option under CCS. However, a formal program providing for 360-degree evaluations for supervisors has not currently been implemented. ONR has also provided mandatory hands-on training for supervisors that emphasized supervisory responsibilities and how to engage employees in the performance management process. In addition, supervisor performance will be evaluated as an enhancement of the normal pay pool process.

(3)Comment:One commenter questioned the use of the CCS terms Overcompensated and Undercompensated. The commenter felt that both terms have a negative connotation and will not be received well by the workforce.

Response:ONR agrees these terms could have a potential negative connotation to some employees. However, because ONR is adopting the CCS automated system from NRL where these terms are hosted, ONR has decided to adopt these terms as well in order to make efficient use of available resources. Other demos have used and are using these terms, including NRL which has not experienced any difficulties as a result of this terminology. It is important to note that the over- and undercompensated nomenclature do not reflect employees' work ethic and/or the value of their work.

(4)Comment:One commenter stated that the grouping of different General Schedule (GS) grades in the same pay band and pay pool will not incentivize the workforce to take on supervisory/team lead positions; instead, it will inhibit one's decision to take on a leadership role since, for example, a GS-14 could potentially make the same amount as a GS-15 without taking on the added leadership responsibilities.

Response:This commenter may have misunderstood the purpose and intent behind pay banding (grouping GS grades into one pay band). One of the goals of ONR's demonstration project is to provide a compensation system that will provide more flexibility to enable ONR to compensate its employees equitably at a rate that is commensurate with their levels of responsibility and contribution, and is more competitive with those found in the labor market. Although the General Schedule system did allow an organization to distinguish levels of performance and provide different levels of rewards, the demonstration project will provide more authority and flexibility for ONR to utilize a wider variety of recognition. By implementing pay banding, ONR will have the opportunity to provide a more direct link between levels of individual contribution and the compensation received. ONR will be able to compensate their workforce in a manner that is appropriate to their contribution. Basic pay increases will no longer be automatic under Lab Demo. Therefore, the workforce should have increased motivation to take on leadership and/or supervisory roles in order to have a higher contribution, thus having eligibility for a larger payout. In addition, ONR has decided to adopt a Supervisory Pay Adjustment and Differential flexibility providing even additional incentive for the workforce to take on supervisory/team lead positions.

(5)Comment:One commenter noted that the Contribution Elements had not yet been finalized by leadership and still needed to be reviewed and possibly modified.

Response:This commenter is correct and ONR's leadership has reviewed and modified the Contribution Elements as needed. The revised Contribution Elements are included in this version of the FRN.

(6)Comment:One commenter noted that OCSs against normal pay rangewould actually not be available until January; therefore, any reference to providing them at the beginning of the performance assessment cycle was incorrect.

Response:ONR agrees and has modified the FRN to reflect that OCSs applicable to an employee's normal pay range for each appraisal period will be available when pay actions are effected in January.

C. Compensation

(1)Comment:Two commenters had questions pertaining to those individuals who are at the top of their pay band and questioned how under the new system those employees would receive any benefit; whether these individuals could receive additional compensation, and how the system specifically would benefit, those that were assigned to a pay band that hosted only one GS grade.

Response:If an employee's basic pay is at the top of the pay band, s/he can receive a pay increase that is commensurate with the general increase designated by Congress for that year. An employee whose basic pay is at the maximum of her/his pay band may receive recognition through a contribution award, Time-off Award, or a combination of both. For those employees entering into a pay band that hosts only a single grade, they will only be eligible for basic pay assigned to that pay band. However, the employee may have the opportunity to advance to a pay band with a higher maximum basic pay through a CCS promotion, if appropriate.

(2)Comment:One commenter expressed concern over the possibility of the science and engineering professionals' pay pool receiving disproportionate funding over the other pay pools in order to provide greater benefit to those in the Science and Engineering Career Track with greater bonuses and basic pay increases over others at ONR.

Response:The pay pool funding normally will be set percentages of the total basic pay of all eligible employees in a specific pay pool. The pay pool funding percentages are the same for all pay pools. The percentage of basic pay allotted for basic pay increases for employees in the ONR pay pools will be the same for each pay pool, and the percentage of basic pay allotted for contribution bonuses will also be the same for each pay pool. For example, if the total basic pay of the employees in Pay Pool A is $1,000,000 and the total basic pay of the employees in Pay Pool B is $2,000,000, then the pay pool funding for performance-based contribution awards (using ONR's historical percentage of 1.5% for contribution-based bonuses) would be $15,000 for Pay Pool A and $30,000 for Pay Pool B to be distributed among their respective members based on contribution.

(3)Comment:Four commenters suggested for ONR to adopt a flexibility for Supervisory Pay Differentials and Adjustments to compensate supervisors for their additional performance management responsibilities and workload.

Response:ONR agrees with the commenters and has adopted CERDEC's flexibility for a Supervisory Pay Differential and Adjustment.

(4)Comment:One commenter expressed concern that a decision could be made by the pay pool panel to decrease an employee's compensation.

Response:Under CCS, as with the General Schedule, an employee's salary can only decrease as a result of an adverse or performance-based action. This requirement currently operates under the General Schedule and will be retained by the demonstration project to preserve an emphasis on employee performance and conduct under a contribution-based compensation system. The CCS rating system by itself does not implement any mechanism to decrease an employee's basic pay. During the actual CCS rating process and pay pool panel deliberations an employee's basic pay will not be decreased. If based on the OCS and current salary an employee is assessed to be in the Overcompensated category then that employee would not be eligible for a merit increase or contribution award, and may or may not receive a general increase. They would still receive locality pay.

(5)Comment:One commenter noted the adjusted minimum basic rate of pay for the S&E Professional Level V needs to be adjusted to be 120% of the GS-15, step 1, basic pay rate for 2010, or $119,554.

Response:ONR agrees and has made the change where applicable in the FRN.

D. Accessions and Internal Placements

(1)Comment:One Commenter expressed the need for ONR to have Lab Demo training required for all new hires.

Response:ONR agrees and will make Lab Demo training mandatory for all new employees and new supervisors.

(2)Comment:One commenter questioned if veterans' preference still applied under the demonstration project and if ONR's demonstration project complied with laws protecting veterans and disabled veterans.

Response:All statutes and regulations covering veterans' preference will be observed under all lab demonstration programs.

E. Technology

(1)Comment:One commenter expressed the concern that the RIF Support Systems (RIFSS) could not accommodate NRL's need and ONR should reconsider if they will still use this system or adopt another.

Response:ONR agrees and prior to committing specifically to RIFSS will look closely at the system's availability and capacity.

(2)Comment:One commenter pointed out that DCPDS is no longer a legacy system.

Response:ONR agrees and the language in Section X.B. has been modified accordingly.

(3)Comment:One commenter noted that ONR does not intend to use the COREDOC application to generate RDs.

Response:The commenter is correct and ONR will be using RDWriter instead. The language in Section X.C. has been updated to reflect the correct tool intended to be used.

F. Classification

(1)Comment:Three commenters did not believe that some of the occupational series were correctly aligned with the proper career tracks; one stated that 0335, Computer Clerk series, was listed under both Administrative Support and Administrative Specialist and Professional and only belonged in the Administrative Support Career Track; the second stated that 0110, Economist series, should be moved to the S&E Professional Career Track because of the similarities to the education requirements and other social science professions included in that Career Track; and a third stated that 0802, Engineering Technician series, should not be in the Science and Engineering Professional Career Track but rather in the Administrative Specialist and Professional Career Track.

Response:ONR management agrees with the reasoning of the first commenter. Therefore, occupational series 0335 will only be aligned with the Administrative Support Career Track. Based on the work being done, the qualifications required, and how other STRLs, such as the Air Force Research Laboratory, have classified 0110, ONR management disagrees with the second commenter and occupational series 0110 will remain in the Administrative Specialist & Professional Career Track. In the case of the third commenter, ONR management agrees and since ONR doesnot have a technical career track, the proper classification for 0802 is the Administrative Specialist and Professional Career Track.

(2)Comment:Seven commenters felt that the construction of the pay band levels for the Administrative Specialist and Professional Career Track is either unfair or biased. One commenter specifically noted pay band IV in the Administrative Specialist and Professional career track sets an unfair barrier for those employees who are currently a GS-13, and in turn signals that their work is of less importance and therefore is not mixed with higher GS grades. Six commenters specifically questioned why the Administrative Specialists and Professionals Career Track does not have an Above 15 Pay Band the same way the S&E Professionals Career Track does and feel it unfairly elevates the importance of the S&E group over the Administrative Specialist and Professionals.

Response:In accordance with DoD Instruction 1400.37, pages 73248 to 73252 of volume 73, ONR's demonstration project was modeled after the demonstration project implemented at NRL. During the initial review of ONR's demonstration project, ONR leadership learned that any change to the NRL pay band structure would have created a year's delay in implementing ONR's demonstration project, due to additional approval and IT system modification requirements. Given the NDAA requirement that ONR be under a Lab Demo before the end of April 2011, an additional year to implement was not an option. ONR leadership evaluated NRL's pay bands and concluded that the NRL structure would work with ONR's current career paths and GS breakdown of the workforce. ONR leadership decided to move forward with the NRL pay band structure. Operational procedures and guidelines will address any unintended limitations that this structure would impose on the career progression of ONR employees. For example, there will be procedures for non-competitive promotion between bands (if in a career ladder position or if warranted by level of work and value of contributions).

ONR made the decision to participate in the DoD initiative to implement an Above 15 Pay Band for scientific and engineering professionals in order to take advantage of an opportunity to correct a critical void in classification standards and guidance for civilian senior executive Scientific and Professional (ST) and Senior Executive Service (SES) positions. This void impacted an organization's ability to advance scientific and engineering positions which surpass the GS-15 classification criteria because of the combination of excellent scientific and/or engineering expertise and performance of high-level science and technology (S&T) research and development work with significant technical supervisory and managerial responsibilities comprising 25 percent or more of the position's time. These positions were not considered to be appropriately classified as STs because of the degree of supervisory and managerial responsibilities. Conversely, these positions were not appropriately classified as SES positions because of their requirement for highly specialized scientific or engineering expertise and because the positions were not at the level of general managerial authority and impact required for an SES position.

(3)Comment:Two commenters questioned ONR's proposed pay band grade composition and if it was the most suitable structure for ONR. One commenter suggested that both the S&E Professional and Administrative Specialist and Professional Career Tracks should be modified to have GS-5 through GS-13 in one pay band. Another commenter suggested that a specific position could be more easily/appropriately filled if the Administrative Support Career Track pay bands were modified to include at least up to a GS-12 level.

Response:As stated in the response to previous comments, ONR leadership evaluated NRL's pay bands and concluded that the NRL structure would work with ONR's current career paths and GS breakdown of the workforce. The different pay band structures in the Career Tracks support the various levels of duties, qualifications, and types and scope of work encompassed by ONR's position management structure. Therefore, ONR management considers the NRL pay banding scheme appropriate at this time. Since many aspects of a demonstration project are experimental, modifications may be made from time to time as experience is gained, results are analyzed, and conclusions are reached on how the new system is working.

(4)Comment:One commenter questioned the approval process designated for promotions under ONR's demonstration project. The commenter felt that including the CNR's approval for certain promotions (laid out in section IV.C.8) would slow down the promotion process and actual create a more inflexible system for promotions.

Response:ONR agrees with the commenter's concern and has made the appropriate change under section IV.C.8. It is not ONR's intent to make the promotion process less flexible under the demonstration project. Thus, all individuals covered under the demonstration project who are eligible for a promotion will need a promotion nomination by their supervisor, endorsement from the pay pool panel, and final approval by the pay pool manager. CCS Promotions under the demonstration project will not need approval beyond the pay pool manager.

(5)Comment:One commenter stated that the Career Promotion Eligibility clause needed to be expanded to include those employees who may be eligible for an established career ladder promotion to a grade encompassed in the next higher pay band during the first 12 months of the demonstration project and as a result would advance into a higher pay band.

Response:ONR agrees with the commenter's point and the Career Promotion Eligibility clause in the FRN has been modified to also cover previously established career ladders which would contain a career promotion that would be into a higher pay band within the first 12 months of the demonstration project if recommended and the employee meets all requirements. The FRN language has been edited to make this clause clearer.

G. Formatting and Language

(1)Comment:Eight commenters made note of various places in the FRN where language was inconsistently used or information was not consistent; the term pay band should be used in places where the term career level was used instead; score ranges and basic pay information listed in the appendices was in some instances different than what was listed in the main part of the document; in various places footnotes do not show up in the correct place or are non-existent; in the normal pay range graph in the appendix it should read mid-rail and not med-rail; and Figure 4 is missing the word `review' for Administrative Support Career Track pay band III.

Response:ONR agrees and has made these appropriate changes and corrections to formatting and the text.

(2)Comment:Three commenters noted places where language was vague and needed to be clarified; the language in section VI.A.4 was noted to be unclear; the language in section IV.C.2 and 3 is unclear if there will only be one pay pool manager; and section VI.A.3 the language was noted as not being clear if this was a prorated portion.

Response:ONR agrees and in each of the sections listed above the language has been edited for clarification.

3. Demonstration Project Notice Changes

The following is a summary of substantive changes and clarifications which have been made to the project proposal.

A. Supplementary Information, Overview. Added MRMC and CERDEC to the list of existing STRL demonstration projects from which ONR is using flexibilities to build its demonstration project.

B. III.H.2. Internal Actions. Added a flexibility for Supervisory Pay Adjustments and Supervisory Pay Differentials.

C. IV.A.1.d. Fair Labor Standards Act. Corrected Figure 4 by including the word `review' for Pay Band III of the Administrative Support career track.

D. IV.C.4. Annual CCS Appraisal Process. The current FRN states that employees will be notified of the Overall Contribution Scores (OCSs) which correspond to each employee's Normal Pay Range (NPR) at the beginning of the appraisal period. This is corrected to state that OCSs which correspond to each employee's NPR will be available after pay adjustments have been processed, normally early-to-mid January.

E. IV.C.4 and 5. Annual CCS Appraisal Process and Exceptions. Provision added that requires employees who serve less than 90 days during an appraisal cycle to receive a presumptive rating of acceptable.

F. IV.C.4. Annual CCS Appraisal Process. In order to ensure compliance with state bar rules a provision was added that prohibits the pay pool panel from changing CCS scores on ONR attorneys provided by the ONR Counsel.

G. IV.C.4 and 5. Exceptions. Clarified the conditions for which employees who would normally be exempted from the CCS process may still be given a CCS score.

H. IV.C.8.b. Career Movements based on CCS. Corrected to state that it is the ONR Executive Director and not the CNR which must approve certain promotions.

I. IV.C.9. Grievance Process. Modified to clarify the process; prevent the need for the ONR Executive Director from possibly deciding the same grievance twice; inform employees that the contents of the CCS Plans are nongrievable as were the contents of performance plans in the traditional performance management system; and ensure compliance with state bar rules.

J. VI.A.3. WGI Buy-in. Added clarifying language to state that employees will be provided a prorated portion.

K. VI.A.4. Career Promotion Eligibility. Modified to state that an exception will also be made for employees who become eligible for a career ladder promotion during the first 12 months after conversion if their promotion would cause them to move to a higher pay band. Examples included providing greater clarity to the entire section.

L. VI.D. New Hires. Modified to add that mandatory demonstration project training will be provided to new employees and new supervisors.

M. VI.D.3. New Hires. Provided clarification for Federal employees who are on retained pay or who are receiving special salary rates and are moving into the ONR demonstration project.

N. VI.E.1.Grade Determination. Clarified conversion-out rules when there are more than two GS grade levels in a career field.

O. X. Automation. Clarified that DCPDS is not a legacy system, that RD Writer will be used instead of COREDOC, and that the automated tool RIFSS will not specifically be used.

P. Appendix A. Updated chart based on the addition of the supervisory pay adjustment and differential flexibility, and added the MRMC Career Promotion flexibility which had mistakenly been left out previously.

Q. Appendix B. Added required waivers for; the Supervisory Pay Adjustment and Differential Flexibility; the presumptive rating of acceptable for employees who serve less than 90 days, and the Voluntary Emeritus Program (which were erroneously left out previously).

R. Appendix D. Corrected 0335, Computer Clerk series, to be listed only under the Administrative Support career track and moved the 0802 series to the Administrative Specialist and Professional Career Track.

S. Appendix E. Science & Engineering Professional contribution elements were updated to provide additional clarification of the discriminators.

T. Appendix F. Integrated pay chart was updated to reflect the minimum basic pay for S&E pay band V as $119,554.

4. Access to Flexibilities of Other STRLs

Flexibilities published in thisFederal Registershall be available for use by the STRLs previously enumerated in section 9902(c)(2) of title 5 United States Code, which are now designated in section 1105 of the NDAA for FY 2010, Public Law 111-84, 123 Stat. 2486, October 28, 2009, if they wish to adopt them in accordance with DoD Instruction 1400.37; pages 73248 to 73252 of volume 73,Federal Register; and the fulfilling of any collective bargaining obligations.

Dated: December 2, 2010. Patricia Toppings, OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense. Table of Contents I. Executive Summary II. Introduction A. Purpose B. Problems with the Current System C. Waivers Required D. Expected Benefits E. Participating Organizations and Employees F. Project Design III. Accessions and Internal Placements A. Hiring Authority 1. Background 2. Delegated Examining B. Legal Authority C. Determining Employee and Applicant Qualifications D. Noncitizen Hiring E. Expanded Detail Authority F. Extended Probationary Period G. Definitions 1. Basic Pay 2. Maintained Pay 3. Promotion 4. Reassignment 5. Change to Lower Pay Band 6. Pay Adjustment 7. Detail 8. Highest Previous Rate 9. Approving Manager H. Pay Setting Determinations Outside the CCS 1. External New Hires 2. Internal Actions a. Promotion. b. Pay Adjustment (Voluntary Change to Lower Pay) or Change to Lower Pay Band (except RIF). c. Pay Adjustment (Involuntary Change to Lower Pay) or Change to Lower Pay Band Due to Adverse or Performance-based Action. d. Involuntary Change to Lower Pay Band or Reassignment to a Career Track with a Lower Salary Range, Other than Adverse or Performance-based. e. RIF Action (including employees who are offered and accept a vacancy at a lower pay band or in a different career track). f. Upward Mobility or Other Formal Training Program Selection. g. Return to Limited or Light Duty From a Disability as a Result of Occupational Injury to a Position in a Lower Pay Band or to a Career Track With Lower Basic Pay Potential Than Held Prior to the Injury. h. Restoration to Duty i. Reassignment j. Student Educational Employment Program k. Hazard Pay or Pay for Duty Involving Physical Hardship l. Supervisory Pay Adjustments m. Supervisory Pay Differentials I. Priority Placement Program (PPP) J. Expanded Temporary Promotion K. Voluntary Emeritus Program IV. Sustainment A. Position Classification 1. Career Tracks and Pay Bands a. Target Pay Band b. Occupational Series and Position Titling c. Classification Standards d. Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) (1) Guidelines for FLSA Determinations (2) Nonsupervisory and Leader Positions (3) Supervisory Positions 2. Requirements Document (RD) 3. Delegation of Classification Authority a. Delegated Authority b. Position Classification Accountability B. Integrated Pay Schedule 1. Annual Pay Action 2. Overtime Pay 3. Classification Appeals 4. Above GS-15 Positions 5. Distinguished Contributions Allowance (DCA) a. Eligibility b. Nomination c. Reduction or Termination of a DCA d. Lump-Sum DCA Payments e. DCA Budget Allocation f. Concurrent Monetary Payments C. Contribution-Based Compensation System (CCS) 1. General 2. CCS Process 3. Pay Pool Annual Planning a. Element Weights and Applicability b. Supplemental Criteria 4. Annual CCS Appraisal Process (See Figure 7) 5. Exceptions 6. Normal Pay Range (NPR)—Basic Pay Versus Contribution 7. Compensation a. General Increases b. Merit Increases c. Locality Increases d. Contribution Awards 8. Career Movement Based on CCS a. Advancements in Pay Band Which May Be Approved by the Pay Pool Manager b. Advancements in Pay Band Which Must Be Approved by the Executive Director c. Advancement To Pay Band V of the Science and Engineering (S&E) Professional Career Track d. Regression to Lower Pay Band (See Figure 8, “Employee A”) 9. CCS Grievance Procedures V. Separations A. Performance-Based Reduction-in-Pay or Removal Actions B. Reduction-in-Force (RIF) Procedures 1. RIF Authority 2. RIF Definitions a. Competition in RIF b. Competitive Area c. Competitive Level d. Service Computation Date (SCD) (1) Federal SCD (2) CCS Process Results (3) Credit From Other Rating Systems (4) RIF Cutoff Date 3. Displacement Rights a. Displacement Process b. Retention Standing c. Vacant Positions d. Ineligible for Displacement Rights e. Change to Lower Pay Band Due to an Adverse or Performance-Based Action 4. Notice Period 5. RIF Appeals 6. Separation Incentives 7. Severance Pay 8. Outplacement Assistance VI. Demonstration Project Transition A. Initial Conversion or Movement to the Demonstration Project 1. Placement Into Career Tracks and Pay Bands 3. WGI Buy-In 4. Career Promotion Eligibility 5. Conversion of Special Salary Rate Employees 6. Conversion of Employees on Temporary Promotions 7. Non-Competitive Movement Into the Demonstration Project B. CCS Start-Up C. Training 1. Types of Training a. Employees b. Supervisors and Managers c. Support Personnel D. New Hires Into the Demonstration Project E. Conversion or Movement From Demonstration Project 1. Grade Determination 2. Pay Setting 3. Employees in Positions Classified Above GS-15 4. Determining Date of Last Equivalent Increase F. Personnel Administration G. Automation H. Experimentation and Revision VII. Demonstration Project Duration VIII. Demonstration Project Evaluation Plan A. Overview B. Evaluation Model IX. Demonstration Project Costs A. Cost Discipline B. Implementation Costs X. Automation Support A. General B. Defense Civilian Personnel Data System (DCPDS) C. Requirements Document Writer (RDWriter) D. RIF Support System (RIFSS) E. Contribution-Based Compensation System Data System (CCSDC) Appendix A. Summary of Demonstration Project Features Adopted by ONR Appendix B: Required Waivers to Laws and Regulations Appendix C: Definitions of Career Tracks and Pay Bands Appendix D: Table of Occupational Series Within Career Tracks Appendix E: Classification and CCS Elements Administrative Support Appendix F: Computation of the IPS and the NPR I. Executive Summary

This project adopts with some modifications the STRL personnel management demonstration project designed by NRL and additional flexibilities from the AMRDEC, MRMC, and CERDEC personnel management demonstration projects. The modified design of the demonstration project described herein was developed by ONR with the participation of and review by the DON, the DoD, and incorporation of the knowledge and design of other STRL demonstration projects.

The Office of Naval Research (ONR) coordinates, executes, and promotes the science and technology programs of the United States Navy and Marine Corps. ONR's directorates balance a robust science and technology portfolio, allocating funds to meet the warfighter's requirements, focusing efforts on all three major phases of development funding: Basic research, applied research and advanced technology development. ONR's six science and technology departments coordinate and execute research in the areas of:

1. Expeditionary Maneuver Warfare and Combating Terrorism

2. Command, Control, Communications, Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance

3. Ocean Battlespace Sensing

4. Sea Warfare and Weapons

5. Warfighter Performance

6. Naval Air Warfare and Weapons

In order to sustain these unique capabilities, ONR must be able to hire, retain, and continually motivate enthusiastic, innovative, and highly-educated scientists and engineers, supported by skilled business management and administrative professionals as well as a skilled administrative and technical support staff.

The goal of the project is to enhance the quality and professionalism of the ONR workforce through improvements in the efficiency and effectiveness of the human resource system. The project flexibilities will strive to achieve the best workforce for the ONR mission, adjust the workforce for change, and improve organizational efficiency. The results of the project will be evaluated within five years of implementation.

II. Introduction A. Purpose

The purpose of the project is to demonstrate that the effectiveness of DoD STRLs can be enhanced by expanding opportunities available to employees and by allowing greater managerial control over personnel functions through a more responsive and flexible personnel system. Federal laboratories need more efficient, cost effective, and timely processes and methods to acquire and retain a highly creative, productive, educated, and trained workforce. This project, in its entirety, attempts to improve employees' opportunities and provide managers, at the lowest practical level,the authority, control, and flexibility needed to achieve the highest quality organization and hold them accountable for the proper exercise of this authority within the framework of an improved personnel management system.

Many aspects of a demonstration project are experimental. Modifications may be made from time to time as experience is gained, results are analyzed, and conclusions are reached on how the system is working. The provisions of this project plan will not be modified, or extended to individuals or groups of employees not included in the project plan without the approval of the DUSD (CPP). The provisions of DoDI 1400.37 are to be followed for any modifications, adoptions, or changes to this demonstration project plan.

B. Problems With the Current System

The current Civil Service GS system has existed in essentially the same form since the 1920's. Work is classified into one of fifteen overlapping pay ranges that correspond with the fifteen grades. Basic pay is set at one of those fifteen grades and the ten interim steps within each grade. The Classification Act of 1949 rigidly defines types of work by occupational series and grade, with very precise qualifications for each job. This system does not quickly or easily respond to new ways of designing work and changes in the work itself.

The performance management model that has existed since the passage of the Civil Service Reform Act has come under extreme criticism. Employees frequently report there is inadequate communication of performance expectations and feedback on performance. There are perceived inaccuracies in performance ratings with general agreement that the ratings are inflated and often unevenly distributed by grade, occupation and geographic location.

The need to change the current hiring system is essential as ONR must be able to recruit and retain scientific, engineering, acquisition support and other professionals and skilled technicians. ONR 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.

Finally, current limitations on training, retraining and otherwise developing employees make it difficult to correct skill imbalances and to prepare current employees for new lines of work to meet changing missions and emerging technologies.

C. Waivers Required

ONR proposes changes in the following broad areas to address its problems in human resources management: Accessions and internal placements, sustainment, and separations. Appendix B lists the laws, rules, and regulations requiring waivers to enable ONR to implement the proposed systems. All personnel laws, rules, and regulations not waived by this plan will remain in effect. Basic employee rights will be safeguarded and Merit System Principles will be maintained.

D. Expected Benefits

The primary benefit expected from this demonstration project is greater organizational effectiveness through increased employee satisfaction. The long-standing Department of the Navy “China Lake” and NIST demonstration projects have produced impressive statistics on increased job satisfaction and quality of employees versus that for the Federal workforce in general. This project will demonstrate that a human resource system tailored to the mission and needs of the ONR workforce will facilitate:

(1) Sustainment of ONR's quality scientific and business management workforces in today's competitive environment;

(2) Improved employee satisfaction with pay setting and adjustment, recognition, and career advancement opportunities;

(3) Human Resources (HR) flexibilities needed to staff and shape a quality workforce of the next 10-20 years;

(4) Increased retention of high-level contributors; and

(5) Simpler and more cost effective HR management processes.

An evaluation model was developed for the Director, Defense, Research and Engineering (DDR&E) in conjunction with STRL service representatives and the OPM. The model will measure the effectiveness of this demonstration project, as modified in this plan, and will be used to measure the results of specific personnel system changes.

E. Participating Organizations and Employees

ONR is comprised of the ONR Headquarters in Arlington, Virginia, and ONR employees geographically dispersed at the locations shown in Figure 1. It should be noted that some sites currently have fewer than ten people and that the sites may change should ONR reorganize or realign. Successor organizations will continue coverage in the demonstration project.

The demonstration project will cover approximately 450 ONR civilian employees under title 5, U.S.C. in the occupations listed in Appendix D. The project plan does not cover members of the Senior Executive Service (SES), Senior Level (SL), Scientific and Professional (ST), expert and consultant employees (EH), or Administratively Determined (AD) pay plans. However, SES, SL, and ST employees, after leaving Federal government service, may participate in the Voluntary Emeritus Program. There are no labor unions representing ONR employees.

EN10DE10.095 F. Project Design

In response to the initial authority granted by Congress to develop a demonstration project, ONR chartered a design team to develop the project plan. The team was led by a senior ONR manager from outside the Human Resources Office (HRO) and was responsible for developing project proposals. The team was composed of 20 employees of different grade levels and in different occupations. There was a mix of managers, supervisors, and non-supervisors from offices throughout ONR. The team had the assistance of HR personnel from ONR and from NRL. It also received information and advice from OPM, the Office of the DUSD (CPP), and a number of organizations with on-going demonstration projects. Information and suggestions were solicited from ONR employees and managers through interviews, briefings, small-group meetings, and a suggestion program established specifically for the design effort. This plan was submitted to DUSD (CPP) in 2001. Work on this plan was postponed pending the outcome of several Departmental HR initiatives addressing new personnel systems.

Following enactment of Public Law 110-181, ONR undertook an effort to review and resubmit the demonstration project plan. Upon extensive review and discussion with internal and external stakeholders, ONR leadership decided to adopt existing flexibilities according to subsection 1107(c) of Public Law 110-181 and DoDI 1400.37. Specifically, ONR proposes to adopt the NRL demonstration project plus additional flexibilities from the AMRDEC and MRMC demonstration projects. Appendix A summarizes the modifications proposed for each of the adopted project flexibilities and administrative procedures. Modifications to existing flexibilities are made when necessary to address ONR's specific organizational, workforce, and approval needs; technical modifications to conform to changes in the law and governing Office of Personnel Management (OPM) regulations, which are not being waived, that were effected after the publication of the NRL personnel demonstration project plan. Further changes to the project plan may be made in response to comments received during the 30-day comment period following publication of this notice.

III. Accessions and Internal Placements A. Hiring Authority 1. Background

Private industry and academia are the principal recruiting sources for scientists and engineers at ONR. It is extremely difficult to make timely offers of employment to hard-to-find scientists and engineers. Even when a candidate is identified, he or she often finds another job opportunity before the lengthy recruitment process can be completed.

2. Delegated Examining

a. Competitive service positions within the ONR Demonstration Project will be filled through Merit Staffing or under Delegated Examining.

b. The “Rule of Three” will be eliminated. When there are no more than 15 qualified applicants and no preference eligibles, all eligible applicants are immediately referred to the selecting official without rating and ranking. Rating and ranking will be required only when the number of qualified candidates exceeds 15 or there is a mix of preference and nonpreference applicants. Statutes and regulations covering veterans'preference will be observed in the selection process and when rating and ranking are required. If the candidates are rated and ranked, a random number selection method using the application control number will be used to determine which applicants will be referred when scores are tied after the rating process. Veterans will be referred ahead of non-veterans with the same score.

B. Legal Authority

For actions taken under the auspices of the ONR Demonstration Project, the legal authority, Public Law 103-337, will be used. For all other actions, ONR w