United States General Accounting Office

GAO Report to Congressional Requesters

July 1996 DEFENSE RESEARCH

AND DEVELOPMENT

Federal Centers’ 1993

Compensation in

Relation to Federal

Levels

G O A

years

1921 - 1996

GAO/NSIAD-96-140

GAO United States

General Accounting Office

Washington, D.C. 20548

National Security and

International Affairs Division

B-259031 

July 10, 1996

The Honorable Ted Stevens

Chairman

The Honorable Daniel K. Inouye

Ranking Minority Member

Subcommittee on Defense

Committee on Appropriations

United States Senate

The Honorable C. W. Bill Young

Chairman

The Honorable John P. Murtha

Ranking Minority Member

Subcommittee on National Security

Committee on Appropriations

House of Representatives

This report provides information on the professional staff, managers, and

executives of the Department of Defense (DOD) Federally Funded

Research and Development Centers (FFRDC). As requested, we reviewed

fiscal year 1993 costs for salaries, other cash compensation, and benefits

to determine total compensation for the FFRDCs, and identified the federal

levels that contained the average compensation paid by the FFRDCs to their

personnel. However, we did not compare FFRDC and federal government

positions or personnel, nor did we match positions or personnel among

FFRDCs. This report is the third in a series covering the DOD FFRDC

personnels’ affiliations and pay.1

Background The FFRDCs were established during World War II to meet special research

needs that federal and private sector facilities could not provide. The

number of FFRDCs has varied over the years, but in fiscal year 1993 there

were 39,2

 with 10 being sponsored by DOD—the Aerospace Corporation,

the Center for Naval Analyses,3

 the Institute for Defense Analyses, the

1

Previously issued reports were Defense Research and Development: Affiliations of Fiscal Year 1993

Trustees for Federally Funded Centers (GAO/NSIAD-95-135, July 26, 1995) and Defense Research and

Development: Fiscal Year 1993 Trustee and Adviser Costs at Federally Funded Centers

(GAO/NSIAD-96-27, Dec. 26, 1995).

2

The 29 non-DOD FFRDCs are managed by the Department of Energy (19), the National Science

Foundation (6), the Federal Aviation Administration (1), the Internal Revenue Service (1), the National

Institutes of Health (1), and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (1).

3

The CNA Corporation manages the Center for Naval Analyses.

Page 1 GAO/NSIAD-96-140 Defense Research and Development
B-259031 

Lincoln Laboratory,4 the Logistics Management Institute, the MITRE

Corporation, the RAND Corporation,5

 and the Software Engineering

Institute.6

 Each FFRDC is managed by a private sector nonprofit company

or university and funded primarily through a renewable 5-year, sole-source

contract. In fiscal year 1993, Congress appropriated about $1.4 billion for

the DOD FFRDCs.

Our study included 7,423 full-time, professional employees out of a total

fiscal year employment of 10,248 (72 percent). Our study included all of

the FFRDC executives. We included all managers and professional staff who

were directly involved in research and development work at the FFRDCs.

These employees represented 79 percent of managers and 71 percent of

staff (see app. I). See the scope and methodology section for a description

of the employees excluded from our study.

The total salaries paid by the FFRDCs in fiscal year 1993 were: the MITRE

Corporation $217 million, the Aerospace Corporation $203 million, the

Lincoln Laboratory $131 million, the Institute for Defense Analyses

$48 million, the Center for Naval Analyses $26 million, the RAND

Corporation $16 million, and the Logistics Management Institute and the

Software Engineering Institute $14 million each. Our study included 

81 percent of the DOD FFRDCs’ fiscal year 1993 total salary costs

($669 million).

The fiscal year 1993 federal pay and compensation levels used in this

report are those for the General Schedule (GS) grades 13 through 15 and

for a combined executive level. (See tables IV.1 through IV.7 for more

details.)

From fiscal year 1993 to date, according to the DOD FFRDCs: (1) there have

been no significant changes to major benefits; (2) salary levels rose

slightly, with maximum annual increases of about 4 percent; and

(3) employment went up at five FFRDCs and down at three others, with the

overall employment increasing by about 2 percent.

4

The Massachusetts Institute of Technology manages the Lincoln Laboratory.

5

RAND Corporation manages three FFRDCs—the Arroyo Center for the Army, Project Air Force, and

the National Defense Research Institute for DOD.

6

Carnegie Mellon University manages the Software Engineering Institute.

Page 2 GAO/NSIAD-96-140 Defense Research and Development
B-259031 

Results in Brief The FFRDCs’ average base salaries,7

 benefits, and total compensation for

the three types of personnel we studied are shown in appendix II. The

average base salary for all FFRDC study employees was $73,000, with

individual averages for FFRDCs ranging from $67,000 for the Center for

Naval Analyses to $81,000 for the RAND Corporation. The greatest

difference among FFRDCs was in executive base salaries, with averages

ranging from $123,000 for the Center for Naval Analyses to $183,000 for the

MITRE Corporation. (See table II.1 for more details.)

The average employer cost of benefits (as a percent of salary) for all the

FFRDC personnel in our study ranged from 16 percent for the Aerospace

Corporation to 24 percent for the Institute for Defense Analyses and the

RAND Corporation. The greatest difference among FFRDCs was in the cost

of executive benefits, which ranged from 19 percent of salary for the

Lincoln Laboratory to 54 percent for the MITRE Corporation. For all

federal and FFRDC executives (excepting those at the Aerospace and the

MITRE Corporations) benefits received were about the same as those

provided to all other employees. (See tables II.2 and II.3 for more details.)

The average total compensation cost for the FFRDC personnel in our study

ranged from $81,000 for the Center for Naval Analyses to $100,000 for the

RAND Corporation. The greatest difference among FFRDCs was in average

executive compensation costs, which ranged from $149,000 for the Center

for Naval Analyses to $282,000 for the MITRE Corporation. (See table II.4

for more details.)

The average compensation for all fiscal year 1993 FFRDC employees in our

study was $89,000. The federal level at this compensation was GS-14 

step 8. For executive personnel, the average compensation was above

federal levels for the Aerospace, the MITRE, and the RAND Corporations,

and at Executive Schedule (ES) level for all the rest. For managers, five

FFRDCs were at the Senior Executive Service (SES) level, and the

Aerospace Corporation, the Center for Naval Analyses, and the MITRE

Corporation were at the GS-15 level. For staff positions, the Institute for

Defense Analyses, the Logistics Management Institute, the Software

Engineering Institute, and the RAND Corporation were at the GS-14 level,

while the other four were at the GS-13 level. The federal compensation

levels noted in this report are based on Office of Management and Budget

Circular A-76. (See tables III.1 through III.8 and IV.1 through IV.7 for more

details.)

7

The average salaries used in our report are the means for the base salaries of the FFRDC executives,

managers, and professional staff. Our analysis of within-FFRDC salary distributions showed

comparable results using either mean or median salaries.

Page 3 GAO/NSIAD-96-140 Defense Research and Development
B-259031 

Scope and

Methodology

We initially requested data from each FFRDC on salaries, other cash

compensation, and benefits provided in fiscal year 1993 to their

professional staff, managers, and executives who were employed on a

full-time basis on September 30, 1993. We asked that information be

provided for all individuals in the above three employee categories if

50 percent or more of their salary during fiscal year 1993 was paid by the

FFRDC component of their organization.

We defined the chief executive officer and all other corporate officers as

executives, including administrative and operational officers.

We defined managers as those who plan, organize, direct, and control

major functions or departments of the FFRDCs through subordinates who

may also be managers or supervisors. Managers may also perform

independent research and development work. We excluded managers of

support operations, such as the heads of personnel and training.

We defined professional staff to include scientists, engineers, analysts, and

others in similar positions, whether they supervised others or worked

alone. We asked that the FFRDCs provide information on only professional

staff with responsibilities for work in basic and applied research and

development, special studies and analyses, and systems planning,

engineering, and integration. We excluded professional staff whose

functions were in support of the above work, such as legal, accounting,

training, and purchasing services, or who were intermittent workers or

consultants to the FFRDC. We also excluded all nonprofessional technicians

and analysts performing work in support of professional staff.

We requested data on (1) individual employees’ annual base salaries,

(2) employer annual costs for benefits, and (3) other data on FFRDC

operations and personnel. We also requested data on bonuses, incentive

awards, and other cash compensation. However, none of these were

reported by the FFRDCs as paid in fiscal year 1993. The FFRDCs reported

overall fiscal year 1993 salary and benefit costs for full-time FFRDC

employees in our study. The employer expenditures for benefits used in

our study were the premiums paid for life, health, and worker’s

compensation and the costs of contributions toward employee retirement,

and social security. We took employer benefit costs for these same

benefits provided to federal employees from the Office of Management

and Budget Circular A-76, which established federal employer benefit

Page 4 GAO/NSIAD-96-140 Defense Research and Development
B-259031 

costs for fiscal year 1993 at 30 percent of salary.8 We excluded the

employer costs of some benefits provided to FFRDC and federal employees.9

These employer costs were small, relative to those we considered, or the

benefits were offered to only a few employees or by only a few FFRDCs or

federal agencies. Leave costs were included as part of base salary and,

therefore, were not considered separately as a benefit. We did not

compare the content, value, or quality of any benefit plan nor did we

analyze the differences in leave amounts or policies.

The average salaries used in our report are the means for the base salaries

of the FFRDC executives, managers, and professional staff. Analysis of

within-FFRDC salary distributions showed comparable results using either

mean or median salaries. Federal compensation levels in this report

consist of base salary and benefits costs for federal employees. Salary

figures taken from the 1993 federal salary schedules were adjusted to

include the 30-percent cost of benefits to the federal government and

where applicable, an 8-percent geographic differential for GS employees.

SES and ES level positions did not receive geographic differential pay in

fiscal year 1993. Where a compensation amount is in two federal levels, we

express it as the lower level. For example, an average compensation of

$75,000, in both the GS-13 step 8 and GS-14 step 2 levels, is noted at the

GS-13 level. When a salary or compensation was over a federal level by

any amount it was expressed at the next level. Since we used the entire 

ES pay scale, we did not use SES levels 5 and 6, which overlap ES levels V

and IV. We did not compare FFRDC and federal government positions or

personnel, nor did we match positions or personnel among FFRDCs.

The FFRDCs provided all of the salary and benefit data on the individuals

and groups in our study. In addition, each FFRDC verified that the numbers

used in this report for its salaries and benefits were accurate and

presented a fair representation of its costs. Our work on this and other

previously issued reports was performed from July 1994 through June 1996

in accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards.

8

The fiscal year 1993 federal employer benefit costs were 29.55 percent of salary, rounded to

30 percent, consisting of 21.7 percent for retirement and social security, 4.7 percent for health and life

insurance, 1.7 percent for workers’ compensation and miscellaneous benefits, and 1.45 percent for

medicare.

9

Benefit costs reported by some FFRDCs that were excluded from our study included college tuition,

home security systems, airline upgrade coupons, child care, elder care, and free physicals. We also

excluded the costs of federal benefits for subsidized parking, child care, physicals, and health club

facilities.

Page 5 GAO/NSIAD-96-140 Defense Research and Development
B-259031 

Agency Comments In commenting on a draft of this report, each of the eight organizations

managing DOD’s FFRDCs agreed that the report accurately presented the

data provided on their employees’ salaries and compensation. We also

discussed the contents of the draft report with representatives of the

Office of Personnel Management and DOD. Several of these organizations

offered technical corrections or editorial suggestions that we incorporated

in the report where appropriate.

We are providing copies of this report to the Secretaries of Defense, the

Army, the Navy, and the Air Force; the Directors, Office of Management

and Budget and Defense Research and Engineering; other congressional

committees and subcommittees; and each of the DOD FFRDCs. We will also

make copies available to others on request.

If there are any questions about the information presented in this report,

please contact me on (202) 512-4587. Major contributors to this report are

listed in appendix V.

David E. Cooper

Associate Director, Defense Acquisitions

 Issues

Page 6 GAO/NSIAD-96-140 Defense Research and Development
Page 7 GAO/NSIAD-96-140 Defense Research and Development
Contents

Letter 1

Appendix I 

Fiscal Year 1993

Federally Funded

Research and

Development Center

Personnel Reviewed

by GAO

10

Appendix II 

Comparison of Fiscal

Year 1993 FFRDC

Base Salaries,

Benefits, and

Compensation

11

Appendix III 

Fiscal Year 1993

Range and Average

Total Compensation

for Each FFRDC

13

Appendix IV 

Fiscal Year 1993

Federal Compensation

Levels

15

Appendix V 

Major Contributors to

This Report

19

Page 8 GAO/NSIAD-96-140 Defense Research and Development
Contents

Tables Table I.1: Number of Personnel by Type Reviewed by GAO

Compared to Total FFRDC Employment

10

Table I.2: Percent of Personnel by Type Reviewed by GAO

Compared to Total FFRDC Employment

10

Table II.1: Comparison of Average FFRDC Base Salary Costs for

Different Types of Personnel

11

Table II.2: Comparison of Average FFRDC Benefit Costs for

Different Types of Personnel

11

Table II.3: Comparison of Average Benefit Cost for FFRDCs

Provided to Different Types of Personnel

11

Table II.4: Comparison of Average FFRDC Total Compensation

Costs for Different Types of Personnel

12

Table III.1: The Aerospace Corporation 13

Table III.2: CNA 13

Table III.3: IDA 13

Table III.4: LLB 13

Table III.5: LMI 14

Table III.6: The MITRE Corporation 14

Table III.7: The RAND Corporation 14

Table III.8: SEI 14

Table IV.1: Federal Executive Compensation With Benefits at 

30 Percent of Salary

15

Table IV.2: GS-15 Federal Compensation With Benefits at

30 Percent of Salary

15

Table IV.3: GS-15 Federal Compensation With Benefits at

30 Percent of Salary and 8-Percent Geographic Differential

16

Table IV.4: GS-14 Federal Compensation With Benefits at

30 Percent of Salary

16

Table IV.5: GS-14 Federal Compensation With Benefits at

30 Percent of Salary and 8-Percent Geographic Differential

17

Table IV.6: GS-13 Federal Compensation With Benefits at

30 Percent of Salary

17

Table IV.7: GS-13 Federal Compensation With Benefits at 

30 Percent of Salary and 8-Percent Geographic Differential

18

Abbreviations

DOD Department of Defense

FFRDC Federally Funded Research and Development Center

GAO General Accounting Office

Page 9 GAO/NSIAD-96-140 Defense Research and Development
Appendix I 

Fiscal Year 1993 Federally Funded Research

and Development Center Personnel

Reviewed by GAO

Table I.1: Number of Personnel by Type Reviewed by GAO Compared to Total FFRDC Employment

FFRDC

Executives

reviewed

Executives

total

Managers

reviewed

Managers

total

Staff

reviewed

Staff

total

Total

reviewed Total

Aerospace 12 12 493 647 1,925 2,251 2,430 2,910

CNA 14 14 15 23 251 431 280 468

IDA 6 6 33 57 374 749 413 812

LLB 29 29 133 159 1,013 2,246 1,175 2,434

LMI 7 7 17 17 146 199 170 223

MITRE 18 18 583 713 1,999 2,285 2,600 3,016

RAND 11 11 16 16 169 169 196 196

SEI 5 5 11 16 143 168 159 189

Total 102 102 1,301 1,648 6,020 8,498 7,423 10,248

Note: The following identify the acronyms used in the table: The Center for Naval Analyses (CNA),

the Federally Funded Research and Development Center (FFRDC), the Institute for Defense

Analyses (IDA), the Lincoln Laboratory (LLB), the Logistics Management Institute (LMI), and the

Software Engineering Institute (SEI).

Table I.2: Percent of Personnel by

Type Reviewed by GAO Compared to

Total FFRDC Employment FFRDC

Executives

reviewed

Managers

reviewed

Staff

reviewed

Total

reviewed

Aerospace 100 76 86 84

CNA 100 65 58 60

IDA 100 58 50 51

LLB 100 84 45 48

LMI 100 100 73 76

MITRE 100 82 87 86

RAND 100 100 100 100

SEI 100 69 85 84

Total 100 79 71 72

Page 10 GAO/NSIAD-96-140 Defense Research and Development
Appendix II 

Comparison of Fiscal Year 1993 FFRDC

Base Salaries, Benefits, and Compensation

Table II.1: Comparison of Average

FFRDC Base Salary Costs for Different

Types of Personnel

Dollars in thousands

FFRDC Executives Managers Staff Total

Aerospace $175 $94 $68 $74

CNA 123 100 62 67

IDA 137 109 75 79

LLB 140 110 64 71

LMI 127 92 67 72

MITRE 183 90 65 71

RAND 162 105 74 81

SEI 139 101 75 79

Total $151 $94 $67 $73

Table II.2: Comparison of Average

FFRDC Benefit Costs for Different

Types of Personnel

Dollars in thousands

FFRDC Executives Managers Staff Total

Aerospace $72 $15 $11 $12

CNA 26 21 13 14

IDA 33 26 18 19

LLB 27 21 12 13

LMI 29 21 15 17

MITRE 99 20 14 16

RAND 39 25 18 19

SEI 31 22 17 17

Total $45 $21 $15 $16

Table II.3: Comparison of Average

Benefit Cost for FFRDCs (as a percent

of salary) Provided to Different Types

of Personnel

FFRDC Executives Managers Staff Total

Aerospace 41 16 16 16

CNA 21 21 21 21

IDA 24 24 24 24

LLB 19 19 19 19

LMI 23 23 23 23

MITRE 54 22 22 23

RAND 24 24 24 24

SEI 22 22 22 22

Page 11 GAO/NSIAD-96-140 Defense Research and Development
Appendix II 

Comparison of Fiscal Year 1993 FFRDC

Base Salaries, Benefits, and Compensation

Table II.4: Comparison of Average

FFRDC Total Compensationa Costs for

Different Types of Personnel

Dollars in thousands

FFRDC Executives Managers Staff Total

Aerospace $247 $109 $79 $86

CNA 149 121 75 81

IDA 170 135 93 98

LLB 167 131 76 84

LMI 156 113 82 89

MITRE 282 110 79 87

RAND 201 130 92 100

SEI 170 123 92 96

Total $196 $115 $82 $89

aTotal compensation consists of salary plus benefits.

Page 12 GAO/NSIAD-96-140 Defense Research and Development
Appendix III 

Fiscal Year 1993 Range and Average Total

Compensation for Each FFRDC

Table III.1: The Aerospace Corporation

Dollars in thousands

Type of personnel

Number of

people

Range of

compensation

Average total

compensation

Executives 12 $183 to $374 $247

Managers 493 67 to 193 109

Staff 1,925 35 to 158 79

Total 2,430 $35 to $374 $86

Table III.2: CNA

Dollars in thousands

Type of personnel

Number of

people

Range of

compensation

Average total

compensation

Executives 14 $110 to $248 $149

Managers 15 100 to 143 121

Staff 251 30 to 149 75

Total 280 $30 to $248 $81

Table III.3: IDA

Dollars in thousands

Type of personnel

Number of

people

Range of

compensation

Average total

compensation

Executives 6 $117 to $279 $170

Managers 33 99 to 191 135

Staff 374 37 to 181 93

Total 413 $37 to $279 $98

Table III.4: LLB

Dollars in thousands

Type of personnel

Number of

people

Range of

compensation

Average total

compensation

Executives 29 $111 to $273 $167

Managers 133 93 to 154 131

Staff 1,013 40 to 151 76

Total 1,175 $40 to $273 $84

Page 13 GAO/NSIAD-96-140 Defense Research and Development
Appendix III 

Fiscal Year 1993 Range and Average Total

Compensation for Each FFRDC

Table III.5: LMI

Dollars in thousands

Type of personnel

Number of

people

Range of

compensation

Average total

compensation

Executives 7 $114 to $185 $156

Managers 17 42 to 150 113

Staff 146 25 to 148 82

Total 170 $25 to $185 $89

Table III.6: The MITRE Corporation

Dollars in thousands

Type of personnel

Number of

people

Range of

compensation

Average total

compensation

Executives 18 $222 to $447 $282

Managers 583 63 to 179 110

Staff 1,999 39 to 183 79

Total 2,600 $39 to $447 $87

Table III.7: The RAND Corporation

Dollars in thousands

Type of personnel

Number of

people

Range of

compensation

Average total

compensation

Executives 11 $114 to $296 $201

Managers 16 95 to 172 130

Staff 169 33 to 144 92

Total 196 $33 to $296 $100

Table III.8: SEI

Dollars in thousands

Type of personnel

Number of

people

Range of

compensation

Average total

compensation

Executives 5 $151 to $218 $170

Managers 11 98 to 135 123

Staff 143 38 to 153 92

Total 159 $38 to $218 $96

Page 14 GAO/NSIAD-96-140 Defense Research and Development
Appendix IV 

Fiscal Year 1993 Federal Compensation

Levels

Table IV.1: Federal Executive

Compensation With Benefits at 

30 Percent of Salary

Dollars in thousands

Category

Fiscal year

1993 base

30-

percent

benefits Compensation

SES-1 $92.9 $27.9 $120.8

SES-2 97.4 29.2 126.6

SES-3 101.8 30.5 132.3

SES-4 107.3 32.2 139.5

SES-5 111.8 33.5 145.3

SES-6 115.7 34.7 150.4

ES-V 108.2 32.5 140.7

ES-IV 115.7 34.7 150.4

ES-III 123.1 36.9 160.0

ES-II 133.6 40.1 173.7

ES-I 148.4 44.5 192.9a

aThe maximum fiscal year 1993 federal compensation of $192,900 (for Executive Schedule (ES) I)

is composed of $148,400 in salary and $44,500 in benefits (30 percent of salary). Federal

executive level positions did not receive geographic differential pay.

Table IV.2: GS-15 Federal

Compensation With Benefits at

30 Percent of Salary

Dollars in thousands

Steps

Fiscal year

1993 base

30-

percent

benefits Compensation

1 $66.6 $20.0 $86.6

2 68.8 20.6 89.4

3 71.0 21.3 92.3

4 73.3 22.0 95.3

5 75.5 22.7 98.2

6 77.7 23.3 101.0

7 79.9 24.0 103.9

8 82.1 24.6 106.7

9 84.4 25.3 109.7

10 86.6 26.0 112.6

Page 15 GAO/NSIAD-96-140 Defense Research and Development
Appendix IV 

Fiscal Year 1993 Federal Compensation

Levels

Table IV.3: GS-15 Federal

Compensation With Benefits at

30 Percent of Salary and 8-Percent

Geographic Differential

Dollars in thousands

Steps

Fiscal year

1993 base

+8

percenta

30-

percent

benefits Compensation

1 $66.6 $71.9 $21.6 $93.5

2 68.8 74.3 22.3 96.6

3 71.0 76.7 23.0 99.7

4 73.3 79.2 23.8 103.0

5 75.5 81.5 24.5 106.0

6 77.7 83.9 25.2 109.1

7 79.9 86.3 25.9 112.2

8 82.1 88.7 26.6 115.3

9 84.4 91.2 27.4 118.6

10 86.6 93.5 28.1 121.6

aThe federal GS-level positions in the parts of California where the Aerospace and the RAND

Corporations were located got an 8-percent geographic differential added to their salary.

Table IV.4: GS-14 Federal

Compensation With Benefits at

30 Percent of Salary

Dollars in thousands

Steps

Fiscal year

1993 base

30-

percent

benefits Compensation

1 $56.6 $17.0 $73.6

2 58.5 17.6 76.1

3 60.4 18.1 78.5

4 62.3 18.7 81.0

5 64.2 19.3 83.5

6 66.1 19.8 85.9

7 68.0 20.4 88.4

8 69.8 20.9 90.7

9 71.7 21.5 93.2

10 73.6 22.1 95.7

Page 16 GAO/NSIAD-96-140 Defense Research and Development
Appendix IV 

Fiscal Year 1993 Federal Compensation

Levels

Table IV.5: GS-14 Federal

Compensation With Benefits at

30 Percent of Salary and 8-Percent

Geographic Differential

Dollars in thousands

Steps

Fiscal year

1993 base

+8

percenta

30-

percent

benefits Compensation

1 $56.6 $61.1 $18.3 $79.4

2 58.5 63.2 19.0 82.2

3 60.4 65.2 19.6 84.8

4 62.3 67.3 20.2 87.5

5 64.2 69.3 20.8 90.1

6 66.1 71.4 21.4 92.8

7 68.0 73.4 22.0 95.4

8 69.8 75.4 22.6 98.0

9 71.7 77.4 23.2 100.6

10 73.6 79.5 23.9 103.4

aThe federal GS-level positions in the parts of California where the Aerospace and the RAND

Corporations were located got an 8-percent geographic differential added to their salary.

Table IV.6: GS-13 Federal

Compensation With Benefits at

30 Percent of Salary

Dollars in thousands

Steps

Fiscal year

1993 base

30-

percent

benefits Compensation

1 $47.9 $14.4 $62. 3

2 49.5 14.9 64.4

3 51.1 15.3 66.4

4 52.7 15.8 68.5

5 54.3 16.3 70.6

6 55.9 16.8 72.7

7 57.5 17.3 74.8

8 59.1 17.7 76.8

9 60.7 18.2 78.9

10 62.3 18.7 81.0

Page 17 GAO/NSIAD-96-140 Defense Research and Development
Appendix IV 

Fiscal Year 1993 Federal Compensation

Levels

Table IV.7: GS-13 Federal

Compensation With Benefits at 

30 Percent of Salary and 8-Percent

Geographic Differential

Dollars in thousands

Steps

Fiscal year

1993 base

+8

percenta

30-

percent

benefits Compensation

1 $47.9 $51.7 $15.5 $67.2

2 49.5 53.5 16.1 69.6

3 51.1 55.2 16.6 71.8

4 52.7 56.9 17.1 74.0

5 54.3 58.6 17.6 76.2

6 55.9 60.4 18.1 78.5

7 57.5 62.1 18.6 80.7

8 59.1 63.8 19.1 82.9

9 60.7 65.6 19.7 85.3

10 62.3 67.3 20.2 87.5

aThe federal GS-level positions in the parts of California where the Aerospace and the RAND

Corporations were located got an 8-percent geographic differential added to their salary.

Page 18 GAO/NSIAD-96-140 Defense Research and Development
Appendix V 

Major Contributors to This Report

National Security and

International Affairs

Division, Washington,

D.C.

Charles F. Rey, Assistant Director

Marilyn Mauch, Assistant Director

Roy B. Karadbil, Evaluator-in-Charge

Charles W. Malphurs, Evaluator-in-Charge

Shirley B. Johnson, Evaluator

Stacy Edwards, Evaluator

Kathleen M. Joyce, Social Science Analyst

Minette D. Richardson, Computer Specialist

(705064) Page 19 GAO/NSIAD-96-140 Defense Research and Development
Ordering Information

The first copy of each GAO report and testimony is free.

Additional copies are $2 each. Orders should be sent to the

following address, accompanied by a check or money order

made out to the Superintendent of Documents, when

necessary. VISA and MasterCard credit cards are accepted, also.

Orders for 100 or more copies to be mailed to a single address

are discounted 25 percent.

Orders by mail:

U.S. General Accounting Office

P.O. Box 6015

Gaithersburg, MD 20884-6015

or visit:

Room 1100

700 4th St. NW (corner of 4th and G Sts. NW)

U.S. General Accounting Office

Washington, DC

Orders may also be placed by calling (202) 512-6000 

or by using fax number (301) 258-4066, or TDD (301) 413-0006.

Each day, GAO issues a list of newly available reports and

testimony. To receive facsimile copies of the daily list or any

list from the past 30 days, please call (202) 512-6000 using a

touchtone phone. A recorded menu will provide information on

how to obtain these lists.

For information on how to access GAO reports on the INTERNET,

send an e-mail message with "info" in the body to:

info@www.gao.gov

or visit GAO’s World Wide Web Home Page at:

http://www.gao.gov

PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
United States

General Accounting Office

Washington, D.C. 20548-0001

Official Business

Penalty for Private Use $300

Address Correction Requested

Bulk Rate

Postage & Fees Paid

GAO

Permit No. G100