United States Government Accountability Office

GAO Report to the Subcommittee on Oversight 

of Government Management, the Federal 

Workforce, and the District of Columbia, 

Committee on Homeland Security and 

Governmental Affairs, U.S. Senate 

HUMAN CAPITAL

Retirements and 

Anticipated New 

Reactor Applications 

Will Challenge NRC’s 

Workforce 

January 2007 

 

GAO-07-105 
What GAO Found

United States Government Accountability Office

Why GAO Did This Study

Highlights

Accountability Integrity Reliability

www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-07-105.

To view the full product, including the scope 

and methodology, click on the link above. 

For more information, contact Jim Wells at 

(202) 512-3841 or wellsj@ gao.gov. 

Highlights of GAO-07-105, a report to the 

Subcommittee on Oversight of 

Government Management, the Federal 

Workforce, and the District of Columbia, 

Committee on Homeland Security and 

Governmental Affairs, U.S. Senate 

January 2007

HUMAN CAPITAL

Retirements and Anticipated New Reactor 

Applications Will Challenge NRC’s 

Workforce 

NRC’s human capital planning framework is generally aligned with its 

strategic goals and coherently identifies the activities needed to achieve the 

following strategic human capital outcomes: (1) continuous improvement in 

leadership and management effectiveness in delivering the mission and (2) a 

diverse, skilled workforce and an infrastructure that fully supports the 

agency’s mission and goals. To integrate its human capital planning with 

implementation activities, NRC has recently completed or drafted three key 

planning documents and created a Human Capital Council in July 2006. 

However, it is too soon to tell whether implementation of these initiatives 

will stimulate, for example, the rate of knowledge transfer necessary for new 

staff to gain the critical skills they need to perform their regulatory 

responsibilities. 

NRC has been effective in recruiting, developing, and retaining a critically 

skilled workforce to date, yet it is unclear whether this trend will continue in 

the next few years. For example, through improving such processes as how 

it implemented hiring for 60 different vacancy postings, NRC brought 371 

employees on board during fiscal year 2006—a substantially higher number 

than in previous years. Similarly, NRC filled several critical skills gaps in 

2006, yet it also identified many more new gaps in 2007 that require 

significant new hiring or training to fill. NRC has used various targets and 

measures to monitor its human capital progress, but could improve their 

application by gathering, analyzing, and sharing information about their 

usefulness among NRC’s offices and revising some of them. Similarly, NRC 

may miss opportunities to most effectively apply human capital funding to 

recruit, develop, and retain a critically skilled workforce because NRC 

evaluates only some of its human capital flexibilities, such as recruitment 

incentives, in terms of the frequency and cost of their use. 

NRC has acted to address two key uncertainties that affect its workforce 

needs: whether it can (1) maintain its workforce in the face of future 

competition for critically skilled workers and (2) accurately gauge its future 

workload. To better compete for workers, NRC tracks salaries in key 

disciplines to discern trends and is enhancing its university recruiting 

efforts. To handle the expected growth in reactor license applications, NRC 

has developed staffing and resource estimates, is reorganizing its affected 

workforce, and completed many elements of its review process for new 

reactors. Because of its workforce changes and anticipated increased 

workload, NRC needs flexibility, staff commitment, and sustained human 

capital management to adapt to any workforce climate shifts. Similarly, 

workload imbalances among employees and across offices could undermine 

employee satisfaction, making the recruiting and retention of a diverse, 

skilled workforce more difficult as expected industry competition 

intensifies. A failure to achieve these human capital goals could potentially 

hinder NRC’s ability to inspect existing reactors and license new ones, which 

might ultimately limit the availability of electricity in the U.S. market. 

The Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission (NRC) is responsible 

for licensing and inspecting the 

nation’s nuclear power plants to 

ensure their safety and security. By 

2010, about one third of NRC’s 

workforce with mission-critical 

skills will be eligible to retire. At 

the same time, NRC’s workforce 

needs to expand because NRC 

expects to receive at least 20 

applications for 29 new nuclear 

power reactors beginning in 

October 2007. GAO assessed NRC’s 

ability to meet its workforce needs 

by examining the extent to which 

NRC (1) has aligned its human 

capital planning framework with its 

strategic mission and 

programmatic goals; (2) is 

effectively recruiting, developing, 

and retaining critically skilled 

personnel; and (3) is addressing 

future uncertainties that could 

affect its overall workforce 

capacity. GAO examined strategic 

workforce planning and 

implementation documents, 

interviewed cognizant managers on 

NRC’s human capital framework 

and activities, and surveyed these 

managers about NRC’s human 

capital flexibilities and measures. 

What GAO Recommends

GAO is recommending that NRC 

better (1) integrate its strategic 

human capital planning with its 

operations and (2) evaluate the 

effectiveness of its human capital 

flexibilities and measures. In 

commenting on a draft of the 

report, NRC agreed with GAO’s 

recommendations. 
Contents 

Letter 1

Results in Brief 5

Background 8

NRC’s Human Capital Planning Framework Is Aligned with Its 

Strategic Mission and Programmatic Goals, but Some Further 

Actions Are Required 11 

NRC Has Generally Been Effective in Recruiting, Developing, and 

Retaining Critically Skilled Employees, yet Many Activities Were 

Only Recently Initiated 16 

NRC Is Taking Steps to Address Future Uncertainties That Could 

Adversely Affect Its Overall Workforce Capacity 36 

Conclusions 43

Recommendations for Executive Action 44 

Agency Comments 44 

Appendix I NRC’s Changing Workforce Demographics 46 

Appendix II Scope and Methodology 49 

Appendix III New Reactor Licensing 52 

Design Certifications 53 

Combined Licenses 54 

Appendix IV Time Line of NRC’s Workforce Reorganizations 56 

Appendix V NRC’s Use of Human Capital Flexibilities, 

Authorities, Tools, and Programs 58 

Appendix VI Comments from the Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission 64 

Page i GAO-07-105 Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Appendix VII GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments 66 

Related GAO Reports 67 

Tables 

Table 1: GAO’s Strategic Workforce Planning Principles and 

Descriptions 4

Table 2: Comparison of Selected NRC Workforce Demographics, 

Fiscal Years 2002 through 2006 46 

Table 3: Percentage of the NRC Workforce that Is Eligible to 

Retire, Fiscal Years 2002 through 2011 48 

Table 4: Employees Who Left NRC, Fiscal Years 2002 through 2006 48 

Table 5: Status of Reactor Design Certification, December 2006 53 

Table 6: NRC Managers’ Assessment of the Use of Human Capital 

Flexibilities, Authorities, Tools, and Programs 58 

Figures 

Figure 1: NRC’s Strategic Human Capital Planning and 

Implementation Framework 12 

Figure 2: Twenty Potential COL Applications, as of December 2006 55 

Page ii GAO-07-105 Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Abbreviations 

ABWR Advanced Boiling Water Reactor 

CDMP Comprehensive Diversity Management Plan 

COL combined license 

DCRA design-centered review approach 

DOE Department of Energy 

EPR Evolutionary Pressurized Water Reactor 

ESBWR Economic Simplified, Boiling Water Reactor 

FTE full-time equivalent 

IG Inspector General 

NEI Nuclear Energy Institute 

NRC Nuclear Regulatory Commission 

NRR Nuclear Reactor Regulation 

NSIR Nuclear Security and Incident Response 

NTEU National Treasury Employees Union 

OHR Office of Human Resources 

OPM Office of Personnel Management 

SES Senior Executive Service 

SWP strategic workforce planning 

This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright protection in the 

United States. It may be reproduced and distributed in its entirety without further 

permission from GAO. However, because this work may contain copyrighted images or 

other material, permission from the copyright holder may be necessary if you wish to 

reproduce this material separately. 

Page iii GAO-07-105 Nuclear Regulatory Commission
United States Government Accountability Office

Washington, DC 20548 

January 17, 2007 

The Honorable Daniel K. Akaka 

Chairman 

The Honorable George V. Voinovich

Ranking Minority Member 

Subcommittee on Oversight of Government Management, 

 the Federal Workforce, and the District of Columbia 

Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs 

United States Senate 

The Honorable Daniel K. Akaka 

Chairman 

The Honorable George V. Voinovich

Ranking Minority Member 

Subcommittee on Oversight of Government Management, 

 the Federal Workforce, and the District of Columbia 

Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs 

United States Senate 

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) licenses and regulates civilian

uses of nuclear materials to protect public health, safety, and the 

environment and promote the common defense and security. In particular, 

NRC is responsible for overseeing the electric power industry’s 103 

operating nuclear reactors that generate about 20 percent of the nation’s 

electricity by inspecting their operations and reviewing license

applications to, for example, extend reactors’ operating lives. Since 

October 2005, many electric power companies have announced their 

intent to apply to NRC for licenses to build and operate at least 29 new 

nuclear power reactors, with project costs estimated to range from $1.5 

billion to $4 billion. NRC expects to receive 8 applications by December 

2007, 10 more applications by October 2008, and 2 additional applications

by the end of September 2009—the first applications for construction 

licenses since the 1979 accident at the Three Mile Island nuclear power 

plant near Harrisburg, Pennsylvania. In addition, NRC is responsible for 

regulating the Department of Energy’s (DOE) nuclear waste repository at 

Yucca Mountain near Las Vegas, Nevada, as well as medical, educational,

and other uses of nuclear materials. 

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) licenses and regulates civilian

uses of nuclear materials to protect public health, safety, and the 

environment and promote the common defense and security. In particular, 

NRC is responsible for overseeing the electric power industry’s 103 

operating nuclear reactors that generate about 20 percent of the nation’s 

electricity by inspecting their operations and reviewing license

applications to, for example, extend reactors’ operating lives. Since 

October 2005, many electric power companies have announced their 

intent to apply to NRC for licenses to build and operate at least 29 new 

nuclear power reactors, with project costs estimated to range from $1.5 

billion to $4 billion. NRC expects to receive 8 applications by December 

2007, 10 more applications by October 2008, and 2 additional applications

by the end of September 2009—the first applications for construction 

licenses since the 1979 accident at the Three Mile Island nuclear power 

plant near Harrisburg, Pennsylvania. In addition, NRC is responsible for 

regulating the Department of Energy’s (DOE) nuclear waste repository at 

Yucca Mountain near Las Vegas, Nevada, as well as medical, educational,

and other uses of nuclear materials. 

Congress appropriated about $735 million for NRC’s activities in fiscal 

year 2006. By law, NRC is required to recover about 90 percent of its 

budget authority each fiscal year, less certain specified amounts, through 

the fees it charges licensees and applicants. For fiscal year 2007, the

Continuing Appropriations Resolution, 2007, would limit NRC’s 

appropriation to the fiscal year 2006 level, and Congressional leaders have

announced their intent to extend the Continuing Resolution for the full 

fiscal year, with few exceptions. In its comments on a draft of this report, 

NRC states that the funding in the Continuing Resolution would result in a 

$95 million reduction in funding compared with the amount that the full 

House of Representatives and the Senate Committee on Appropriations 

Congress appropriated about $735 million for NRC’s activities in fiscal 

year 2006. By law, NRC is required to recover about 90 percent of its 

budget authority each fiscal year, less certain specified amounts, through 

the fees it charges licensees and applicants. For fiscal year 2007, the

Continuing Appropriations Resolution, 2007, would limit NRC’s 

appropriation to the fiscal year 2006 level, and Congressional leaders have

announced their intent to extend the Continuing Resolution for the full 

fiscal year, with few exceptions. In its comments on a draft of this report, 

NRC states that the funding in the Continuing Resolution would result in a 

$95 million reduction in funding compared with the amount that the full 

House of Representatives and the Senate Committee on Appropriations 

Page 1 GAO-07-105 Nuclear Regulatory Commission
had approved for fiscal year 2007. According to NRC, the agency has 

begun to feel the impact of the Continuing Resolution’s restrictions on 

funding and full-time equivalent positions. NRC believes that these 

restrictions, if extended for a protracted period, will seriously imperil its 

ability to meet its human capital goals and will significantly delay its 

preparedness to review applications for new nuclear power reactors. NRC 

cites as an example that the agency would significantly curtail, and 

possibly cease, its fiscal year 2007 new hiring, except for those already 

given offers and those necessary for the most critical of skills. NRC also 

believes that the effects will cascade into future years. 

To fulfill its regulatory mission and help sustain public confidence in the 

safety of nuclear power, NRC needs a critically skilled workforce of 

scientists, engineers, and other employees with specialized knowledge, 

skills, and technical expertise. However, NRC expects that the 

demographics of its workforce will significantly change in the next few 

years, primarily because of two factors. NRC estimates that the percentage 

of employees eligible to retire will grow from the current level of about 16 

percent to about 33 percent of the workforce in fiscal year 2010. (See app.

I for demographics data on NRC’s workforce.) Nuclear power plant 

owners and NRC have expressed concerns about their ability to even 

maintain their workforces at current levels to ensure the safety of existing

plant operations and the rigor of inspections as workers retire and 

reactors age. Furthermore, at the same time, NRC projects that its 

workforce size will need to grow from about 3,100 employees in early 

fiscal year 2006 to nearly 4,000 employees by 2010 to meet the significant 

anticipated upsurge in workload demands as NRC begins to review power 

company applications for permits to construct and operate new nuclear 

reactors. To replace retiring employees and expand its workforce, NRC 

must hire from 300 to 400 employees per year through at least 2010. 

In August 2004, NRC issued its Strategic Plan, Fiscal Year 2004-Fiscal 

Year 2009, which identifies the agency’s vision; mission; values; and five

goals—safety, security, openness, effectiveness, and excellence in agency

management—shaping its activities through 2009. The strategic plan states

that one of NRC’s greatest management challenges will be to acquire, 

develop, and sustain a highly skilled and diverse technical workforce. 

Similarly, during the past 6 years, NRC’s Inspector General (IG) has 

identified human capital management as a key challenge. To address these 

concerns, NRC developed the 2004-2009 Strategic Human Capital and 

Page 2 GAO-07-105 Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Workforce Restructuring Plan (2004 strategic human capital plan), which 

presents strategies to ensure that the agency can recruit, develop, and 

retain the critically skilled workforce it needs.1

 In recent years, NRC was 

identified as the federal government’s third-best organization to work 

through an analysis of the Office of Personnel Management’s (OPM) 2004 

Federal Human Capital Survey data,2

 and NRC improved its performance 

in 16 of 18 categories measured by its own 2005 Safety Culture and 

Climate Survey (NRC’s 2005 employee survey) categories. 

Our December 2003 report on effective strategic workforce planning 

identified two critical elements: (1) aligning an organization’s human 

capital program with its current and emerging mission and programmatic 

goals and (2) developing long-term strategies for acquiring, developing, 

and retaining staff to achieve program goals.3

 The first element involves 

linking human capital management strategies with agency mission, goals, 

and organizational objectives and integrating these strategies into its 

strategic plans, performance and accountability plans, and budget 

requests. The second element involves undertaking workforce planning

activities to implement acquisition, development, and retention programs. 

Strategic workforce planning involves systematic assessments of current 

and future human capital needs and the development of long-term 

strategies to fill any gaps. Our previous work suggests that, regardless of 

an agency’s mission, needs, and approach, strategic workforce planning 

should incorporate the five key principles shown in table 1. 

 1

Recruiting, developing, and retaining activities include (1) identifying, recruiting, and 

hiring new personnel; (2) staffing, developing, and training new and existing personnel; and 

(3) transferring or managing the knowledge for, and retaining sufficient numbers of, 

critically skilled personnel. 

2

The Partnership for Public Service and American University’s Institute for the Study of 

Public Policy Implementation conducted the 2004 study. 

3

GAO, Human Capital: Key Principles for Effective Strategic Workforce Planning, 

GAO-04-39 (Washington, D.C.: Dec. 11, 2003); and OPM, Human Capital Assessment and 

Accountability Framework (Washington, D.C.: 2006). 

Page 3 GAO-07-105 Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Table 1: GAO’s Strategic Workforce Planning Principles and Descriptions

Principle Description

Involve top management, employees, and other stakeholders 

in developing, communicating, and implementing the strategic 

workforce plan.

Agencies’ top program and human capital leaders set the overall 

direction, pace, tone, and goals and involve employees and 

stakeholders in establishing a communication strategy that creates 

shared expectations for the outcomes of the process. 

Determine the critical skills and competencies that will be 

needed to achieve future programmatic results. 

Agencies determine how many personnel have the skills and

competencies needed to meet program goals and how many are likely 

to remain with the agency over time, given retirement and other 

attrition. Such analysis allows agencies to identify the resources 

needed to achieve current and future goals. 

Develop strategies that are tailored to address gaps and 

human capital conditions in critical skills and competencies 

that need attention. 

Agencies use strategies, including programs, policies, and practices, 

to address how the workforce is acquired, developed and trained, 

compensated; deployed; motivated; and retained. Such strategies help 

an agency move from the current to the future workforce. 

Build the capability needed to address administrative, 

educational, and other requirements important to support 

workforce strategies. 

Agencies educate managers and employees about available human

capital flexibilities so that the flexibilities are implemented openly, 

fairly, and effectively. 

Monitor and evaluate the agency’s progress toward its human 

capital goals and the contribution that human capital results 

have made toward achieving programmatic goals. 

Agencies use periodic measurement and evaluation to obtain data for 

identifying shortfalls and revising future workforce planning efforts. 

Gathering this information helps ensure that human capital strategies 

work as intended. 

Source: GAO.

Given the anticipated increase in NRC’s future workload, we assessed 

NRC’s ability to sufficiently recruit, develop, and retain the staff it needs to

inspect the operations of existing nuclear power plants, review the license

applications for constructing new reactors, and perform other regulatory

functions. Specifically, we examined the extent to which NRC (1) has 

aligned its human capital planning framework with its strategic mission 

and programmatic goals; (2) is effectively recruiting, developing, and

retaining critically skilled personnel; and (3) is taking steps to address 

future uncertainties that could affect its overall workforce capacity. 

To assess the alignment of NRC’s human capital framework with its 

strategic mission and programmatic goals, we analyzed a broad range of 

NRC’s policy, planning, and implementation documents; reviewed budget 

documents and performance and accountability reports; and interviewed 

cognizant managers in NRC’s Office of Human Resources (OHR), program 

offices—including Nuclear Reactor Regulation (NRR), and four regional 

offices. To assess NRC’s efforts to recruit, develop, and retain critically 

skilled personnel, we applied our five strategic workforce planning 

principles. In doing so, we analyzed NRC’s (1) demographics data; 

(2) critical skills information; (3) implementation of its recruiting, hiring, 

Page 4 GAO-07-105 Nuclear Regulatory Commission
training and development, and retention strategies; (4) implementation of 

new systems, programs, and processes that support human capital 

management and planning; and (5) measures of its progress and results. 

We also surveyed 45 NRC managers in OHR, NRR and other program 

offices, and four regional offices about the use of existing human capital 

flexibilities, authorities, tools, and programs; our response rate was 71 

percent. To assess the extent to which NRC has addressed future 

uncertainties that could adversely affect its overall workforce capacity, we

examined the engineering, science, and technology labor pool and NRC’s 

efforts to prepare for a surge in new reactor license applications. 

Specifically, we interviewed NRC managers and Nuclear Energy Institute 

(NEI) executives about the supply and demand for critically skilled 

workers, examined NRC’s efforts to develop a “pipeline” for recruiting 

these personnel, and assessed its need for any new flexibilities and 

authorities. (See app. II for additional information about our scope and 

methodology.) We conducted our work from March through December 

2006 in accordance with generally accepted government auditing 

standards. 

NRC’s human capital planning framework is generally aligned with its 

strategic outcomes and goals. NRC’s strategic plan and associated plans 

coherently outline its human capital goals, strategies, performance 

measures, and activities, and these elements are linked to NRC’s strategic 

outcomes: (1) continuous improvement in NRC’s leadership and 

management effectiveness in delivering the mission and (2) a diverse, 

skilled workforce and an infrastructure that fully supports the agency’s 

mission and goals. Although its framework is generally sound, NRC has 

not fully implemented three key plans that would facilitate the recruitment 

and development of employees who its offices need to maintain agency 

expertise and to respond to anticipated growth in applications for reactor 

licenses in the next few years. For example, NRC’s 2004 strategic human

capital plan called for annual agencywide human capital implementation 

plans beginning in October 2005 that would link NRC strategies to its 

offices’ tactical planning for accomplishing yearly goals. However, NRC 

has drafted but has not completed its first annual implementation plan, in

part because of competing human capital demands particularly the need to

achieve its sharply increased hiring targets. Without the plan, NRC 

managers face increased complexity and difficulty in managing activities 

to recruit and develop the critically skilled employees they will need. 

Similarly, although NRC recently completed two agencywide strategic 

documents for knowledge management and training and development, it 

remains to be seen whether NRC managers’ implementation of these 

Results in Brief 

Page 5 GAO-07-105 Nuclear Regulatory Commission
initiatives will stimulate, for example, the rate of knowledge transfer 

necessary for new staff to gain the critical skills they need to perform their 

regulatory responsibilities. In addition, although NRC created a Human 

Capital Council in July 2006 to formulate and integrate strategies for 

NRC’s offices to address human capital challenges, it is too early to 

determine whether the council can balance its responsibility both to 

develop solutions and to provide strategic direction for effectively 

addressing these key challenges. Accordingly, we are recommending that

NRC take actions to better integrate its strategic human capital planning

into its implementation activities. NRC agreed with our recommendation. 

NRC has been effective in recruiting, developing, and retaining a critically

skilled workforce to date, and has taken several actions in 2006 to increase 

its overall workforce capacity, but because NRC has not fully implemented 

some of its planned efforts to enhance its hiring and training, it is unclear 

whether this performance will be sustained. NRC has addressed our five 

key principles for strategic workforce planning and has used its human 

capital tools, authorities, and flexibilities to recruit, develop, and retain the

critically skilled workers it needs; however, the agency has not evaluated

the effectiveness of some of these flexibilities. For example, its leadership 

and management have been extensively involved in establishing, 

communicating, and implementing workforce planning strategies. NRC 

also has developed a process that inventories existing critical skills and 

compares them with needs to identify gaps. Furthermore, NRC uses many 

targets and measures to monitor the status of its efforts, such as the 

composition of its hires and separations. As a result, during fiscal year 

2006, NRC exceeded its initial goal of hiring 300 new staff by bringing 371 

employees on board, which was substantially higher than in previous 

years. Of these new workers, 54 percent were midlevel hires—many with 

nuclear industry experience—who typically require less training before 

performing their jobs than entry-level hires from universities. 

Although NRC has strengthened its efforts to identify and fill critical skills 

gaps, it is too early to assess the effectiveness of some strategies that were 

put into practice during fiscal year 2006. For example, NRC closed about 

55 critical skills gaps but identified 115 additional critical skills gaps, many 

of which will require 1 year or more of classroom and on-the-job technical 

training to fill. NRC also does not systematically evaluate its use of human 

capital authorities and flexibilities—such as recruitment incentives or 

early replacement hiring—for recruiting, developing, and retaining a 

critically skilled workforce, although it tracks the frequency of use and 

associated costs for some of these authorities and flexibilities. Without 

this information, NRC may either under- or over-use certain authorities 

Page 6 GAO-07-105 Nuclear Regulatory Commission
and flexibilities and inefficiently use its annual human capital funding. In 

addition, NRC managers told us that while some human capital measures 

and targets are reliable and useful, others do not provide sufficiently 

meaningful information to assess progress. NRC planned in 2004 to 

develop a human capital accountability system plan that, in part, would 

describe the measures, metrics, and associated targets needed to assess its 

achievement of human capital outcomes; this plan has not yet been 

drafted. Without this framework, it is difficult for offices to identify useful 

practices and improve agencywide understanding of how human capital 

activities directly support the achievement of agency goals and strategic 

outcomes. Furthermore, although NRC has previously surveyed employees

about their satisfaction with its human capital program, the agency does 

not plan to conduct a survey during fiscal year 2007 even though doing so 

could provide a useful, updated perspective in assessing initiatives as NRC 

continues to expand its workforce. Accordingly, we are recommending 

that NRC take actions to evaluate (1) the effectiveness of its use of human 

capital tools, authorities, and flexibilities and (2) the usefulness of its 

human capital measures; intended outputs; and targets for recruiting, 

developing, and retaining a critically skilled workforce. We are also 

recommending that NRC survey its employees during fiscal year 2007 

about their satisfaction with its human capital program, including new 

initiatives and offices’ use of flexibilities to maintain a quality work 

environment. NRC agreed with our recommendations. 

NRC has acted to address two key uncertainties that affect its workforce 

needs—that is, whether it can (1) maintain its workforce in the face of 

future competition with the nuclear power industry for critically skilled 

workers and (2) accurately gauge its workload, particularly for reviewing 

license applications for new nuclear reactors, during the next 3 years so it 

can meet its commitments for timely reviews while ensuring nuclear 

power plant safety and security. Regarding its ability to continue to attract 

and retain key personnel, NRC annually tracks the number and salaries of

U.S. scientists and engineers in a few key disciplines to discern shifting 

trends. NRC also has initiated additional activities, authorized by the 

Energy Policy Act of 2005, to support key university programs to attract 

greater numbers of students into mission-critical skills areas, and to offer 

scholarships to those studying in these fields. Such activities have the 

potential to enhance the quality of NRC’s entry-level candidate pool with a 

pipeline of critically skilled candidates. Nevertheless, NRC will face 

greater competition in attracting and retaining experienced scientists and 

engineers, and, further complicating matters, NRC generally employs only 

U.S. citizens in these positions. Regarding the anticipated growth of 

license applications for new reactors, NRC expects to complete its review 

Page 7 GAO-07-105 Nuclear Regulatory Commission
of applications within 42 months, including holding required public 

hearings. Although NRC’s process is intended to allow for a more efficient 

review of combined license applications and is generally supported by the 

nuclear power industry, it is as yet untested. In addition, in anticipation of 

receiving an initial wave of applications in October 2007, NRC has 

periodically met with power company representatives to discuss and 

resolve matters related to how the process is to move forward. 

The Energy Reorganization Act of 1974 established NRC as an 

independent agency, headed by a five-member Commission, to regulate

the nation’s civilian use—commercial, industrial, academic, and medical—

of nuclear energy and materials, including nuclear power reactors and 

research and test reactors.4

 NRC’s mission is to ensure that civilian users 

of nuclear materials adequately (1) protect public health and safety; 

(2) promote the common defense and security, including securing special 

nuclear materials against radiological sabotage and theft or diversion; and 

(3) protect the environment. NRC’s total operating budget, excluding the 

IG’s office, grew from about $618 million in fiscal year 2004 to about $735 

million in fiscal year 2006.5

 While NRC requested about $808 million for 

fiscal year 2007, the Continuing Appropriations Resolution, 2007, limits its 

appropriations to the fiscal year 2006 funding level. Similarly, NRC’s 

funding allocations for recruiting, training, and other human capital

activities have grown from a total of $35 million, or 6 percent of its total 

Background 

 4

Pub. L. No. 93-438. 

5

NRC is required by law to recover through fees about 90 percent of its budget authority 

each fiscal year, less certain specified amounts. Under the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation 

Act of 1990 (OBRA-90), as amended, the fee recovery requirement was about 100 percent in 

fiscal years 1991 through 2000, and gradually reduced to 90 percent in 2006. The Energy

Policy Act of 2005 permanently extended NRC’s 90-percent fee recovery requirement 

beginning in fiscal year 2007. NRC collects license and inspection fees under the authority

of the Independent Offices Appropriation Act of 1952, known as the User Charge Statute, 

31 U.S.C. § 9701. NRC collects “annual fees”—generic and other regulatory costs not

covered by the license and inspection fees—under the authority of OBRA-90, as amended.

Operators of federally owned research reactors are exempt from paying fees if the reactors

are used primarily for educational training and research and meet certain technical design 

criteria. See 71 Fed. Reg. 30722, 30732 (May 30, 2006). 

Page 8 GAO-07-105 Nuclear Regulatory Commission
operating budget, in fiscal year 2004 to about $61 million, or 8 percent of 

its planned allocations, in fiscal year 2007.

6

About 70 percent of NRC’s workforce in fiscal year 2006 was dedicated to

ensuring the safe and secure operation of civilian nuclear power reactor 

facilities and research and test reactors. NRC estimates that at least 500 

new critically skilled positions will be added through fiscal year 2009, 

primarily to license and inspect the construction of new reactors. (See 

app. III for more information on NRC’s new reactor licensing process.) 

NRC’s reactor safety activities and their related percentages of NRC’s 

workforce include the following: 

• reactor licensing: power upgrades (approving increases in the allowable 

level of generated power) and license transfers, operator licensing, 

regulation development, operating experience evaluation, and financial 

assurance (25 percent of NRC’s workforce); 

• reactor license renewal (3 percent); 

• new reactor licensing (6 percent); 

• reactor inspection and performance assessment: emergency preparedness

and incident response, reactor technical and regulatory training, 

imposition of enforcement sanctions for violations of NRC requirements, 

and investigation of alleged wrongdoing by licensees, applicants, 

contractors, or vendors (30 percent); 

• homeland security activities: threat assessment, safeguards and security 

reviews and inspections, force-on-force exercises, and regulatory 

infrastructure (5 percent); and 

• international efforts to enhance domestic and global nuclear safety (1 

percent). 

 6

NRC uses OPM’s Human Capital Assessment and Accountability Framework categories 

to organize its human capital budget. In fiscal year 2006, three human capital budget

categories—talent, results oriented performance culture, and leadership and knowledge 

management—contained over 25 items and accounted for nearly $40 million and over 90

full-time equivalent (FTE) positions. In addition, strategic alignment, accountability, and 

workforce planning/deployment were assigned 2 FTE positions. 

Page 9 GAO-07-105 Nuclear Regulatory Commission
In fiscal year 2006, about 28 percent of NRC’s workforce was devoted to

the following nuclear materials and nuclear waste safety activities to 

secure the use and management of radioactive materials: 

• nuclear fuel cycle facilities (6 percent of NRC’s workforce); 

• nuclear materials activities (10 percent); 

• repository or disposal of high-level waste—specifically, licensing decisions 

and regulatory oversight (4 percent);

• decommissioning of nuclear reactors and other facilities, and low-level 

waste management (almost 4 percent); and 

• storage and transportation of spent nuclear fuel both at and away from 

reactor sites (almost 4 percent). 

NRC estimates little growth in the number of personnel committed to 

these activities, with some slight increases related to fuel cycle production

facilities and possibly high-level waste storage, depending upon DOE’s 

submission of its license application for the Yucca Mountain repository.7

In fiscal year 2007, NRC expects to oversee more than 4,400 licenses for 

nuclear materials and nuclear waste safety, while 34 Agreement States will 

regulate and oversee over 18,000 licenses.8

 7

In July 2006, DOE announced its intention to submit its license application for the Yucca

Mountain repository to NRC by June 30, 2008, and to initiate repository operations in 2017. 

DOE stated the 2017 opening date is a “best-achievable schedule” and is predicated upon 

enactment of new legislation. 

8

Under section 274(b) of the Atomic Energy Act, NRC has relinquished to the 34 Agreement

States responsibility for licensing and regulating the use of source, by-product and certain 

quantities of special nuclear material within the state. 

Page 10 GAO-07-105 Nuclear Regulatory Commission
NRC’s human capital planning framework is generally aligned with its 

strategic mission, outcomes, and programmatic goals; however, some key 

plans and activities are still being developed or implemented. 

NRC’s human capital planning framework has generally aligned human 

capital activities with NRC’s management goal and the goal’s strategic 

outcomes. NRC also has taken significant steps, particularly during fiscal 

year 2006, to ensure that human capital plans and strategies are 

demonstrated through its human capital activities by achievement of 

agencywide and office-specific goals and outcomes. In addition, NRC’s 

strategic and existing operational planning documents link human capital 

goals and strategies to several agencywide performance measures. 

A critical success factor for high-performing organizations is the alignment 

of their human capital initiatives with mission and goal accomplishment. 

Alignment is demonstrated by linking human capital management 

strategies with agency mission, goals, and organizational objectives and 

integrating these strategies into its strategic plans, performance and 

accountability plans, and budget requests. This linkage allows agencies to 

assess and understand the extent to which their workforce contributes to 

achieving the overarching mission. 

As shown in figure 1, NRC’s strategic human capital approach

demonstrably supports the agency’s organizational performance 

objectives. Together, NRC’s plans and strategies, programs, and activities 

provide a coherent structure designed to support NRC’s safety and 

security mission. Specifically, NRC’s strategic plan outlines six human 

capital strategies that delineate how the agency will achieve its strategic 

outcomes of (1) continuous improvement in NRC’s leadership and 

management effectiveness in delivering the mission and (2) a diverse, 

skilled workforce and an infrastructure that fully support the agency’s 

mission and goals. 

NRC’s Human Capital 

Planning Framework 

Is Aligned with Its 

Strategic Mission and 

Programmatic Goals, 

but Some Further 

Actions Are Required 

NRC’s Strategic Human 

Capital Planning 

Framework Is Coherently 

Aligned 

Page 11 GAO-07-105 Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Figure 1: NRC’s Strategic Human Capital Planning and Implementation Framework 

Strategic Plan

Goals Outcomes

Goal 1: Safety

Goal 2: Security

Goal 3: Openness

Goal 4: Effectiveness

Management Performance Measures

Fiscal Year 2004 - 2009 Strategic Human Capital and Workforce

Restructuring Plan

Comprehensive Diversity Management Plan: A plan that 

outlines strategies to enhance NRC’s organizational capacity, 

guide decisions and practices that impact equal opportunity, and 

promote the principles of diversity management.

Knowledge Management Program: A framework that integrates

existing and new approaches for generating, capturing, and 

transferring knowledge relevant to NRC’s mission. 

Training and Development Strategic Plan: A plan whose 

purpose is to establish priorities and leverage investments to 

provide NRC with a highly skilled and diverse workforce prepared 

to meet emerging demands. 

Annual Human Capital Implementation Plan: When created, 

this plan intends to incorporate action-based elements of the 

above plans and programs, and will explicitly link to regional and 

program office operating plans. 

Source: GAO analysis of NRC documents.

Goal 1: Safety

Goal 2: Security

Goal 3: Openness

Goal 4: Effectiveness

1. Optimize the agency’s organizational structure to facilitate

 achievement of performance goals.

2. Use innovative recruitment, development, and retention

strategies to achieve a high-quality, diverse workforce with the

skills needed to achieve the agency mission.

3. Develop the agency’s current and future leaders.

4. Strengthen managerial and supervisory accountability for 

 setting individual and organizational performance expectations

 and provide timely and complete feedback.

5. Foster a work environment free of discrimination and provide

 opportunities for all employees to optimally use their diverse

 talents in support of NRC’s mission and goals.

6. Use competitive sourcing to improve the efficiency of commercial

 activities while ensuring organizational effectiveness. 

Outcome 1:

Continuous improvement in

NRC’s leadership and management 

effectiveness in delivering the 

mission.

Outcome 2:

A diverse, skilled workforce and an 

infrastructure that fully supports the 

agency’s mission and goals. 

Goal 5: Management:

Excellence in agency 

management in support of 

the NRC’s mission.

Goal 5: Management: Ensure excellence in agency management 

to carry out NRC’s strategic objective.

Performance measure one is comprised of 3 output performance 

measures focused on efficiency improvements in 3 agency 

processes, of which 1 is human capital-related.

Performance measure two is comprised of 24 output 

performance measures focused on the delivery of intended 

outcomes by various management programs; 5 of these output 

measures are human capital-related.

Agencywide Plans

NRC has also taken significant steps to ensure that human capital plans 

and strategies are implemented to achieve agencywide and office-specific 

goals and outcomes. For example, NRC’s 2004 strategic human capital 

plan delineates tools, authorities, flexibilities, and programs for hiring, 

developing, and retaining personnel, most of which NRC currently uses. 

The strategic human capital plan also directs the development of several 

additional plans, strategies, and activities—many of which have been put 

into place—to achieve the workforce needed to accomplish NRC’s goals. 

NRC’s strategic and existing operational planning documents also link 

Page 12 GAO-07-105 Nuclear Regulatory Commission
human capital goals and strategies to several agencywide performance 

measures, in part illustrated in its annual performance budget and 

accountability reporting.

Some Key Human Capital 

Planning and 

Implementation Efforts 

Are Still in Process 

While NRC’s planning framework delineates the relationship between 

human capital activities and strategic outcomes, some key plans are still 

being developed, completed, or put into practice. Although most of NRC’s 

agencywide and office specific plans provide human capital management 

strategies, the linkage is not fully delineated between generally identifying 

strategies and selecting and deploying particular strategies. 

An agency that is successful in aligning and integrating human capital

approaches and goals considers further initiatives and refinements when 

organizational needs change or when successes or shortcomings of its 

human capital efforts are demonstrated.9

 NRC is currently undergoing 

such a transition because the agency, both in terms of demographics and 

workload, will have increasing and diverse human capital needs in coming 

years. In response, during fiscal year 2006, NRC initiated a range of 

activities, in various stages of completion, intended to provide a more 

robust framework through which to operate during the next few years. For 

example: 

• Since late 2005, NRC’s four regional offices have developed or are further 

implementing human capital management plans that reflect their human 

capital activities. The general framework of these plans mirror NRC’s 2004 

strategic human capital plan. 

• In August 2006, NRC adopted a more comprehensive approach to its 

knowledge management and knowledge transfer. NRC’s prior approach to 

knowledge management did not fully support the agency’s need for a 

faster rate of knowledge transfer to accommodate increasing retirements, 

midcareer turnover, agency growth, and the broader scope of knowledge 

needed, for example, to support new technologies and new reactor 

designs. NRC’s new framework provides significant direction and detail 

regarding how knowledge management can be accomplished. However, it 

remains to be seen whether implementation of these initiatives will 

stimulate the rate of knowledge transfer necessary for new staff to gain

the critical skills they need to perform their regulatory responsibilities. 

 9

GAO, Exposure Draft: A Model of Strategic Human Capital Management, GAO-02-373SP

(Washington, D.C.: March 15, 2002). 

Page 13 GAO-07-105 Nuclear Regulatory Commission
• In fiscal years 2006 and 2007, NRC has been developing common measures 

for offices to monitor and evaluate performance in support of the goals in 

its 2004 Comprehensive Diversity Management Plan (CDMP) to (1) 

recruit diverse employees at all levels, (2) develop and retain diverse 

employees by promoting an environment that values differences, and (3) 

increase the diversity of employees in senior and managerial positions. 

CDMP was designed to promote strategies that increase NRC’s 

organizational capacity, guide decisions and practices that impact equal 

opportunity, and promote the principles of diversity management. 

• In early 2006, NRC developed a more detailed agencywide list of best 

practices strategies and actions for achieving equal employment 

opportunity goals through recruiting, staff development, merit process, 

inclusion and workforce culture, awards and recognition, communication, 

action tracking, and organization assessment. These best practices 

strategies and actions complement CDMP strategies.10

• In September 2006, NRC finalized a strategic training and development 

plan to more specifically identify how existing efforts to ensure the 

effectiveness and efficiency of training will be augmented and integrated. 

The plan’s goals are to enhance individual performance, meet agency 

needs, ensure resources are optimized, and confirm the extent to which 

NRC is realizing training benefits. 

• During fiscal year 2006, NRC identified inefficiencies in coordinating and

integrating planning and operations, stretching its human capital resources 

to hire and meet the need for nearly double the number of new employees 

than in previous years. In part, NRC’s intensified activity demonstrated 

that coordination among human resources and program offices, although 

considerable, was not yet optimized. In response, in July 2006, NRC 

created a Human Capital Council composed of office deputy directors and 

a deputy regional administrator to provide a senior leadership and 

programmatic perspective.11 OHR chairs and supports the council, whose 

 10GAO, Diversity Management: Expert-Identified Leading Practices and Agency 

Examples, GAO-05-90 (Washington, D.C.: Jan. 14, 2005). 

11Our report entitled Human Capital: Selected Agency Actions to Integrate Human 

Capital Approaches to Attain Mission Results, GAO-03-446 (Washington, D.C.: April 11,

2003) found that Human Capital Councils are among the key actions agencies have taken to

integrate human capital approaches with strategies for accomplishing agency missions. 

Generally composed of senior program and human capital managers, councils meet 

regularly to (1) review the agency’s integration efforts; (2) ensure that strategies are visible, 

viable, and relevant; and (3) monitor whether human capital approaches are well 

considered, effectively contribute to outcomes, and are implemented equitably. 

Page 14 GAO-07-105 Nuclear Regulatory Commission
purpose is to provide an agency-level forum to formulate strategies to 

address human capital challenges, share best practices, and develop an 

integrated approach to address human capital issues. The council is 

expected to make recommendations for action to the Executive Director 

for Operations and Chief Human Capital Officer to improve the agency’s 

management of human capital. The council also intends to identify ways 

by which OHR personnel can more proactively support program offices 

and solve problems. However, it is too early to determine whether the 

council can balance its responsibility to provide both strategic direction 

and develop an integrated approach for effectively addressing these key

challenges.

• NRC has drafted but has not completed its first annual human capital

implementation plan, in part because of the need to support competing 

human capital demands, particularly NRC’s sharply increased hiring 

targets.12 Similar to the aims of the Human Capital Council, the 

implementation plan would serve to link strategic planning to operational 

planning and implementation efforts. At least one program office, NRR, 

has developed such a plan, which both demonstrates alignment to NRC’s 

2004 strategic human capital plan and provides much more specificity on 

the means to achieve and implement human capital strategies. Without the 

plan, NRC managers face increased complexity and uncertainty in 

managing recruitment and development activities for the critically skilled 

employees they will need. 

It is too soon to determine the extent to which these recent efforts, taken 

together or separately, will help NRC to more effectively respond both to 

continuing and new workforce demands during 2007 through 2010, and 

beyond. The urgency to incorporate strategic human capital management 

principles more explicitly into operations may vary across program 

offices, in part because of somewhat different program needs or 

requirements. Because key internal stakeholder commitment and 

involvement will dictate their success, the further development and use of

these plans and activities are likely contingent on whether stakeholders 

consider them necessary and effective for integrating NRC’s human capital

activities and enable them to achieve the desired results. 

 12NRC’s 2004 strategic human capital plan called for annual agencywide human capital 

implementation plans beginning in October 2005. Each annual plan would link NRC 

strategies to its offices’ tactical planning for accomplishing yearly goals. 

Page 15 GAO-07-105 Nuclear Regulatory Commission
To date, NRC’s approach for recruiting, developing, and retaining a 

critically skilled workforce has generally been effective and addresses our 

five key principles for effective strategic workforce planning. NRC’s 

implementation of its workforce planning strategies demonstrates 

significant agency focus on achieving a diverse, skilled workforce to meet

anticipated workload demands that it foresees in the next few years. For 

example, NRC has estimated the skills and personnel it needs for new 

reactor licensing and exceeded its fiscal year hiring target by bringing on 

371 new employees. However, because of substantial challenges facing

NRC and because several efforts have not yet been fully put into practice,

the framework’s overall effectiveness in collectively enhancing NRC’s 

overall workforce capacity is not fully clear. As a result, while NRC 

determined that it closed about 55 critical skills gaps in fiscal year 2006, it

also identified 115 new gaps and 76 continuing or long-term gaps, many of 

which will take a significant amount of training and development to be 

considered filled. NRC has proposed to increase funding for leadership, 

training and development, and knowledge management by 37 percent in its 

fiscal year 2007 budget request in an effort to further close these gaps. In 

addition, NRC’s use of its flexibilities could be further improved by 

systematically evaluating how they contribute to desired outcomes. 

Similarly, NRC could revise some of its measures, metrics, and targets to

better target and gauge agency progress. 

Our prior work found that top leadership and management, when clearly 

and personally involved in workforce planning, can provide the 

organizational vision that is important in times of change, and can 

generate stability and cooperation within the agency to ensure that 

planning strategies are thoroughly implemented and sustained. With 

respect to our first principle, we found that over the past several years, 

NRC’s top leadership has provided direction, and together with senior 

management, has become increasingly engaged in human capital 

management and strategic workforce planning.

13 NRC’s 2004-2009 

Strategic Plan, which introduced a management goal and objectives 

specifically for strategic human capital management, was developed 

through high-level collaboration among the Deputy Executive Directors 

for Operations, the Chief Financial Officer, the four regional 

administrators, and the directors of program offices and OHR. 

NRC Has Generally 

Been Effective in 

Recruiting, 

Developing, and 

Retaining Critically

Skilled Employees, 

yet Many Activities 

Were Only Recently 

Initiated 

NRC’s Management Is 

Significantly Engaged in 

Establishing, 

Communicating, and 

Implementing Strategic 

Workforce Planning 

Efforts and Strategies 

 13NRC’s senior leadership includes its five Commissioners, Executive Director for 

Operations, and four Deputy Executive Directors. 

Page 16 GAO-07-105 Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Top leadership’s involvement in strategic workforce planning and human 

capital activities is further evidenced through annual briefings to the 

Commissioners on human capital management; biannual briefings to the 

Commissioners on comprehensive diversity management; and the 

Commission’s hosting of annual all-staff meetings, during which 

Commissioners communicate agency progress, discuss challenges the 

agency faces, and respond to employees’ questions. During the past year,

the Commissioners also solicited more information on, and provided more 

direction for, implementing such human capital activities as recruiting, 

hiring, and knowledge management. NRC managers generally told us that

the agency’s human capital approach plays a significant role in enabling 

NRC to attract, hire, and retain a diverse and skilled workforce. Overall, 

NRC’s 2005 employee survey results showed that employee perceptions of

management had improved since 2002; nevertheless, results also indicated

that NRC management could further improve upon how it encourages 

employees to give their best. 

In emphasizing the importance of succession planning, senior NRC 

managers also said the agency is active in identifying and developing its 

midlevel and upper-level managers and leaders. Our prior work has found 

that such activities can positively affect an agency’s ability to increase the 

retention of high-potential employees, maintain sufficient leadership 

capacity as senior executives retire, and achieve a more diverse 

workforce. NRC continued and intensified its succession planning 

activities in 2006 in light of agency growth and reorganization with 

managers conducting efforts to determine the appropriate skills and 

leadership “fit” for Senior Executive Service (SES) positions and 

anticipating replacement needs in 2-, 4-, and 6-year time frames.

14

Our prior human capital work also found that an organization’s effective 

use of communications strategies promotes transparency, creates shared 

expectations, and enables improved progress reporting. Although from 

2001 to 2005, NRC’s IG identified intra-agency communications as one of 

the most serious challenges facing the agency, it removed this challenge in 

its 2006 report because of various actions NRC has taken to improve 

internal communications. In addition, NRC’s 2005 employee survey results 

 14NRC’s Executive Resources Board is responsible for defining and overseeing succession 

planning activities. It is chaired by the Executive Director for Operations and includes the 

four Deputy Executive Directors for Operations, the four Regional Administrators, and 

most of the NRC office directors.

Page 17 GAO-07-105 Nuclear Regulatory Commission
demonstrated a significant improvement over the 2002 survey results. The 

steps that NRC has taken include the following:

• In response to a 2002 IG recommendation, NRC created a 

Communications Council in 2003. The council, which meets monthly, 

coordinates and launches internal communications initiatives, shares best 

practices, provides a forum for offices to advise and recommend further 

improvements, and posts meeting summaries to NRC’s internal Web page. 

• Management has promoted transparency by developing and disseminating 

key information on its human capital policies, procedures, and processes 

through management directives and “yellow announcements.”15

• To create shared expectations and buy-in, OHR conducts periodic video 

teleconferences with regional offices’ management, supervisors, and staff 

to explain new policies and procedures. OHR also provides other face-toface training as needed, typically on new developments or major changes 

in human capital policies and procedures. For example, in 2006, OHR and 

the General Counsel partnered to conduct focused training on such topics 

as merit staffing, performance and conduct issues, and equal employment 

opportunity, which NRC plans to incorporate into its formal supervisory 

curriculum. 

• The NRC Reporter, a weekly newsletter instituted in early 2005, provides 

employees with information on various agency initiatives, and an 

Executive Director for Operations Update, introduced in 2002, discusses 

operational activities on a weekly to biweekly basis. 

• NRC’s Web site and Agencywide Document and Access Management 

System also provide easy access to human capital materials, including 

transcripts of annual briefings, planning documents, and its “human 

capital management tool box.” 

• NRC routinely solicits feedback or comments from offices, employees, and 

the National Treasury Employees Union (NTEU) on the introduction of 

 15NRC traditionally used yellow paper to distribute official announcements to establish 

practices or procedures; introduce changes in policy, senior staff assignments, or 

organization; and address major agencywide events. NRC now maintains these “yellow

announcements” on its intranet. 

Page 18 GAO-07-105 Nuclear Regulatory Commission
new or major changes to flexibilities, policies, and procedures.16

• NRC’s 2005 employee survey results on NRC’s Differing Professional 

Opinions Program, through which employees can provide alternative 

professional theories or opinions, demonstrated no statistically significant 

increase in this category’s results since 2002, and NRC identified it as an 

area for improvement. A key senior manager also noted that concern still

existed about this program yet encouraged its use, saying that such 

opinions and resulting discussions make NRC’s organizational safety and

security mind-set sounder. 

Although NRC has demonstrated efforts in the above areas, opportunities 

exist to further enhance its capability to monitor and measure its human 

capital success and progress. We have found that leading organizations 

have periodically sought their employees’ input and explicitly addressed 

that input to adjust their human capital approaches.17 One way agencies 

assess employee satisfaction and leadership and management practices 

that contribute to agency performance is through employee surveys. 

NRC’s IG conducts its Safety Culture and Climate Survey every few 

years, the last being in 2005; NRC also participates in OPM’s biannual 

Federal Human Capital Survey, most recently conducted in 2006. Even 

though (1) at least one third of its workforce will be directly affected by 

office reorganizations or expansions, (2) several key human capital efforts 

are to be further implemented, and (3) over 200 retirements or 

resignations are anticipated, NRC does not plan to conduct an employee 

survey during fiscal year 2007. Employee survey results could provide 

NRC managers with employees’ feedback that could be used to adjust the 

human capital approaches as appropriate during this particularly critical

year. Without such data as a key basis for understanding the workforce 

climate, it will be more difficult for NRC to gauge any shifting trends, 

determine strategies to address any problems, and report on actions it has 

taken to move forward. 

NRC managers and a key NTEU official we interviewed said that their 

relationship, characterized as somewhat tenuous, could also be improved. 

NTEU officials told us that NTEU’s influence had diminished somewhat in 

recent years because (1) since 2001, federal agencies are no longer 

 16NTEU estimates that 30 to 40 percent of NRC’s workforce is eligible for NTEU 

membership, of which about 600 regularly pay dues.

17GAO-02-373SP. 

Page 19 GAO-07-105 Nuclear Regulatory Commission
required to establish partnerships with their labor organizations;18 (2) the 

union’s own leadership style was not always conducive to effecting 

change; and (3) the union provided limited resources and incentives to 

stimulate active participation of its members. NTEU officials and NRC 

managers also had differing views on how to facilitate Agency LaborManagement Partnership Committee meetings between senior union 

officials and NRC managers, yet they agreed on the need to raise issues 

appropriate for committee consideration. NRC managers and NTEU 

officials told us that they plan to defer renegotiation of the NTEU contract 

until 2008, although they recognize NRC’s work environment is rapidly 

changing. 

Our prior work found that maintaining information on the critical skills 

and competencies that an organization’s personnel possess is especially 

important for federal agencies operating in a changing environment.19

Shifts in national priorities, advances in technology, budget constraints, 

and other factors affect the critical skills an agency needs to fulfill its 

mission. NRC annually analyzes its workforce’s skills by gathering data on 

employee skills and competencies, identifying the existing and future 

critical skills needed, and determining if and where gaps exist. As a result 

of this process, which has become increasingly institutionalized since 

2002, NRC reviews its existing workforce characteristics, identifies 

ongoing and future critical skills needs, and tracks critical skills gaps. 

Engineers and scientists, who represent about half of the overall 

workforce, are the more evident of NRC’s critically skilled population; 

however, NRC has identified the fields of contracting, law, security, and 

risk assessment, among others, as mission-critical skills. In addition, 

because of increased homeland security requirements, NRC’s critical skill 

set has broadened in recent years to include more expertise in materials 

and reactor security, emergency preparedness, and incident response. 

For NRC’s annual critical skills assessment, (1) employees inventory their 

skills, competencies, and levels of expertise; (2) office and branch 

NRC Analyzes Its Mission 

Priorities and Workforce 

Capacity to Identify 

Ongoing and Future

Critical Skills Needs 

 18Although Executive Order 13203 (Feb. 17, 2001) revoked Executive Order 12871 (1993), 

which had directed that federal agencies establish such partnerships, NRC’s Agency LaborManagement Partnership Committee has continued by mutual agreement of management 

and NTEU officials. In addition, several NRC offices have continued their labormanagement partnerships with appropriate union officials. 

19GAO-04-39. 

Page 20 GAO-07-105 Nuclear Regulatory Commission
managers assess the supply of and demand for general and particular 

skills; and (3) OHR personnel further analyze this information to 

determine agencywide critical skills needs. The primary tool NRC uses to

gather detailed data on an employee’s critical skills and competencies is 

its strategic workforce planning (SWP) system database, which was 

developed in 2002. The SWP system identifies the critical skills and 

competencies each employee possesses, his or her career stage, and his or

her retirement eligibility dates. Supervisors, managers, or human 

resources personnel can then generate summary reports with a range of 

parameters. The SWP system’s staff and critical skill matrix lists all staff in 

a given branch or office, and indicates each employee’s skill level, title, 

retirement eligibility date, and years until retirement. OHR and program 

office managers told us that the SWP system’s accessibility and utility have 

improved in the last 2 years. Some program managers noted that they have

used SWP data to identify potential skills needs and gaps, to inform 

decisions when assigning work, and for succession planning. These 

managers noted that the SWP system requires recurring employee input

and managerial and supervisory inputs and analysis to be effective. In 

2006, over 80 percent of employees and supervisors updated their skills 

and anticipated needs, respectively.

In addition to gathering skills information, NRC has conducted an annual

agencywide needs and gaps assessment since 2003. More specifically, 

program office managers assess the supply of and demand for general and 

particular skills in their offices and branches, given their existing and 

anticipated workload. The offices each identify their “most critical” 

needs.20 They then categorize these needs as either near term (0 to 2 years) 

or long term (3 to 5 years), and their importance as either top tier or 

second tier. Then, OHR compiles these assessments, conducts further 

analyses, and reports the results to senior NRC managers and program 

offices. NRC’s fiscal year 2006 analyses identified over 300 critical skills 

needs, over 100 of which were categorized as top tier. 

In preparation for reviewing combined license (COL) applications for 

constructing and conditionally operating new nuclear reactors and plants, 

NRC has assessed the range and magnitude of critical skills needs. 

Specifically, NRC conducted a job-task analysis in early 2006 to better 

 20NRC defines “most critical” skills as knowledge, skills, or abilities that will be in extreme 

demand in the specified planning period. Limited availability of a most critical skill would 

severely affect an office’s ability to meet business requirements and/or mission demands. 

Page 21 GAO-07-105 Nuclear Regulatory Commission
define anticipated critical skills needs by identifying detailed tasks, 

competencies, and skills associated with prior reactor license application 

reviews. NRC managers determined that a large majority of skills 

associated with current licensing, regulatory, and technical expertise 

related to existing reactors are “portable” to the new reactor licensing 

reviews. These managers also identified a small number of new critical 

skills that are specific to new reactor licensing, such as hydrology and

reactor physics. NRR then developed an initial resource estimate model 

that, in part, estimated critical skills needs by functional areas.21 Five skill 

sets—project management, civil engineering, instrumentation and 

controls, legal, and operator licensing—make up over 50 percent of the 

estimated effort, while about 17 other skill sets make up the remainder. In 

the summer of 2006, NRR retained a contractor to develop a master 

project management plan for project planning and scheduling that would 

(1) support NRC’s review of COL applications for constructing and 

conditionally operating a new reactor and (2) link critical skills needs to

actual personnel, positions, and time frames. The plan, which will be 

completed in early 2007, will estimate how to phase, project manage, and

staff each aspect of the reviews, on the basis of validation of initial 

estimates. NRR is also developing a transitional staffing plan to identify 

the employees who will work in NRR and in NRC’s newly established 

Office of New Reactors. (See app. IV for information about NRC’s recent 

workforce reorganization and expansion.) In doing so, these managers 

said that the combined use of the SWP system, the resource estimate 

model, and the project management plan will inform how NRR will 

reorganize its personnel into the two offices and allocate its resources. 

Our prior work has found that, to fill skills gaps, agencies need to develop

human capital strategies and tools with the resources that are reasonably 

expected to be available. These strategies and tools encompass recruiting 

and hiring, training and developing staff and leadership, succession 

planning, knowledge management, and use of flexibilities. Agencies also 

need to align these strategies to eliminate gaps and optimize the 

contribution of current and future critical skills and competencies for 

mission success. 

NRC Primarily Uses 

Recruiting, Hiring, 

Training, and Development 

Strategies to Close 

Existing and Future 

Critical Skills Gaps 

 21NRR’s resource estimate model includes activities related to design certification. The new

reactor licensing effort will also require skills and resources from OHR and the Offices of

Administration, General Counsel, Nuclear Regulatory Research, Information Services, and

Nuclear Security and Incident Response. 

Page 22 GAO-07-105 Nuclear Regulatory Commission
NRC annually identifies critical skills gaps and develops strategies to 

address the gaps to achieve and maintain the level of expertise required to

meet existing and anticipated workload demands. During the last 2 years, 

program office managers have relied on (1) recruiting and hiring and 

(2) training and development as their key gap closure strategies, among 

others. These also represent the majority of the tools, programs, 

authorities, and flexibilities NRC regularly employs as human capital 

strategies. 

NRC’s recruiting and hiring approach enabled the agency to exceed both

its initial 2006 hiring target of 300 and its subsequent target of 350, by 

hiring 371 new employees who had reported as of September 30, 2006.

NRC uses both general and specific vacancy announcements at the entry,

mid, and upper levels that typically represent few to several critical skills 

areas in related disciplines and specialty areas.22 Fiscal year 2006 was the 

first year in over a decade that NRC’s recruiting and hiring efforts were 

targeted at both replacing personnel leaving the agency and expanding its

workforce—about half of the new hires replaced employees who left NRC 

through retirement or resignation and half increased NRC’s total 

workforce to 3,347 employees.23 In particular, NRR lost 75 employees—39

employees retired or resigned and 36 transferred to other NRC offices—

but hired nearly 200 employees, to staff both existing and new reactor 

licensing work. NRC’s fiscal year 2007 hiring needs represent over 25

critical skills areas, and represent general and specific engineering and 

science fields as well as security, intelligence, information technology, 

contract management, human resources, and project management fields. 

NRC’s approach is driven by the identification of critical skills needs and 

efforts to fill gaps, and includes the following activities: 

NRC Significantly Increased Its 

Recruiting and Hiring Efforts 

and Its Use of Certain 

Flexibilities in Fiscal Year 2006 

• NRC’s annual recruiting call projects the agency’s needs to hire entry-level 

and experienced employees with critical skills in particular disciplines. 

The fiscal year 2006 recruiting included general and specific engineering 

and science fields, security, information technology, and contract 

management fields. NRC’s recruiting program includes visits to 

 2242 U.S.C. § 2201(d) authorizes NRC to set special pay rates for scientists and engineers 

that are higher than many other federal agencies seeking to attract similar talent. NRC’s 

GG-5 to GG-11 grade levels are entry-level positions, and GG-13 and above grade levels are

midlevel and upper-level positions. 

23NRC expects to hire about 1,300 employees between fiscal years 2006 and 2009, according

to the IG. 

Page 23 GAO-07-105 Nuclear Regulatory Commission
universities and professional society organizations to identify highly 

qualified candidates. 

• While the percentages vary somewhat from year to year, NRC generally

brings on 60 to 70 percent of its new professional hires at the midlevel or 

upper level—frequently with several years of relevant professional 

experience—and the remainder of its hires at the entry level. About 200 of 

these hires—predominantly engineers, scientists, lawyers, human resource 

specialists, and contract specialists—came on at the midlevel or upper 

level in 2006, including over 50 hired from other federal agencies. Midlevel

or upper level hires generally require less training than entry-level hires 

from universities to perform their jobs. 

More broadly, although the agency exceeded its hiring goals in fiscal year 

2006, it is unclear whether NRC can effectively close critical skills gaps in 

the near and longer term. While the agency determined that it closed about 

55 gaps in fiscal year 2006, it also identified 115 new gaps and 76 

continuing or long-term gaps.24 Most new NRC employees typically need 

from 1 to several years of targeted technical training, on-the-job 

experience, and/or development opportunities to fully learn and perform 

agency job functions, according to NRC managers. In addition, making 

determinations about whether gaps are sufficiently filled is an involved 

process and often depends on managers’ understanding of each 

employee’s knowledge and skills. However, maintaining that

understanding will likely become more difficult as workforce 

demographics shift and NRC reorganizes and grows. In addition, gaps are 

determined at the branch level, reported at the office and regional levels, 

and compiled into an agencywide assessment. While some knowledge and

skills are easily shared within branches, divisions, or offices, managers 

told us that the transferability of employees across these areas can be 

limited. 

NRC also uses various flexibilities in recruiting and hiring new employees, 

and it tracks the frequency and cost associated with the use of some 

flexibilities. (See app. V for NRC’s use of human capital flexibilities, 

authorities, tools, and programs.) For example, we found that OHR, 

program, and regional managers identified recruitment incentives as 

among the most valuable of NRC’s tools. Comparisons of recruitment 

 24NRC defines “new gaps” as those of the current fiscal year; “continuing gaps” as those of 

the last 2 fiscal years; “long-term gaps” as those of 3 or more fiscal years; and “closed gaps” 

as those for which the need has been filled.

Page 24 GAO-07-105 Nuclear Regulatory Commission
incentive awards in fiscal years 2004 and 2006 show that (1) the number of 

awards increased from 6 to over 140, (2) total monetary awards increased 

from $77,000 to $979,000, and (3) the maximum value of an award 

increased from about $5,400 to over $20,000. NRC requested $1.25 million 

to make about 160 incentive awards in fiscal year 2007. In addition, NRC 

awards standardized recruitment incentives to many entry-level engineers 

and scientists and, on a case-by-case basis, to midlevel personnel who are 

typically in more specific critical skills areas. NRC tracks midlevel hires 

who received recruitment incentives—about 60 in fiscal year 2006—and at 

least 90 percent worked in the private sector, including many for nuclear 

power plants or reactor vendors. 

NRC managers we interviewed and surveyed were generally satisfied with 

recruitment incentive awards and other available recruiting and hiring 

flexibilities, but they also said that direct hire authority would be a 

particularly useful recruiting and hiring tool.25 In March 2006, OPM did not 

approve NRC’s request to obtain this authority because it determined that 

the law does not apply to NRC’s excepted-service positions. OHR 

managers told us that direct hire authority is among NRC’s most wanted 

legislative authorities and that NRC is exploring avenues for obtaining it 

by, for example, requesting legislation. 

Although NRC tracks the frequency and cost associated with some 

recruiting and hiring flexibilities, it does not fully use some of these data

to inform management decisions and further target recruiting and hiring

efforts. Similarly, NRC does not systematically evaluate the extent to 

which the flexibilities positively affect its ability to realize a diverse, highly 

skilled workforce. For example, NRC does not assess the effectiveness of 

alternative recruitment incentives in attracting highly skilled employees or

early replacement hiring that enables a new employee to work with a longterm employee who plans to transfer locations or retire. Without 

evaluating the effectiveness of its flexibilities, NRC may either under- or 

over-use certain authorities and flexibilities and inefficiently use its annual 

human capital funding. The Human Capital Council could provide a forum 

for evaluating the office- and agency-level implementation of human 

capital flexibilities and their effectiveness. 

 25Direct hire authority enables an agency to hire any qualified applicant, after public notice 

is given, without regard to competitive rating and ranking, veterans’ preference, and “rule 

of three” procedures. OPM can give direct hire authority to federal agencies when a critical 

hiring need or severe shortage of candidates exists. See 5 U.S.C. § 3304(a)(3). 

Page 25 GAO-07-105 Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Opportunities may also exist to improve some of NRC’s recruiting 

processes. For example, it is unclear to what extent NRC managers 

systematically prioritize the positions that need to be filled, including the 

extent to which incentives should be offered to prospective employees. 

Similarly, a cognizant NRC manager told us that the agency appeared to 

dedicate a disproportionate amount of resources to recruiting and hiring 

at the entry level, for which the pool of applicants is very robust, as 

opposed to midlevel and upper-level positions, for which candidates 

generally have had work experience in the nuclear power industry—

mainly either at nuclear power plants or reactor vendors. In addition, most 

NRC managers expressed concern about NRC’s future ability to recruit for 

midlevel and upper-level positions when faced with more aggressive 

industry competition. 

NRC’s training and development activities also represent a key gap closure 

strategy the agency uses. In general, the agency’s training and 

development efforts include (1) agencywide, formal technical or 

leadership training and certification programs; (2) external training such 

as enrollment in specialized programs; and (3) on-the-job training 

involving knowledge and skills transfer on particular subjects. NRC 

recently finalized both a knowledge management program and a strategic 

training and development plan to support and sustain its critically skilled 

workforce. In fiscal year 2006, NRC allocated about $9.7 million for 

leadership development, training and development, and knowledge 

management activities. Its fiscal year 2007 budget request proposed to 

increase training and development spending to about $15.4 million, 

including $4.2 million for new reactor training, $4 million for internal 

technical training, and over $3 million for office-specific training. 

Managers we interviewed and surveyed identified NRC’s formal training 

and development—such as qualification programs for materials or reactor 

health physics inspectors—and its Nuclear Safety Professional 

Development Program, SES Candidate Development Program, and 

Leadership Potential Program as among the most valuable for training and 

developing personnel. While NRC’s Nuclear Safety Professional 

Development Program has been in place and has grown over the past 

several years, the agency also has expanded development opportunities 

for its midlevel and upper-level supervisors and managers, particularly in 

fiscal year 2006. Specifically, NRC facilitated increased, more frequent 

enrollments in both the Leadership Potential Program and its counterpart

Team Leader Development Program. Because the increase in the overall 

size of NRC’s workforce corresponds with the need for trained 

supervisors, managers told us that providing sufficient training and 

NRC Has Many Training and 

Development Programs in 

Place and Is Using Flexibilities 

to Enhance Existing Capacity 

Page 26 GAO-07-105 Nuclear Regulatory Commission
development opportunities for new supervisors is vital. These managers 

expressed concern about any potential negative effect of excessive 

workloads on frontline supervisors, many of whom are also new to their 

positions. 

In addition to increasing participation in its development programs, NRC 

is increasing the frequency of key course offerings and focusing on 

particular critical skills areas. For example, in early 2006, OHR and NRR 

evaluated the extent to which training on new reactor designs would be 

required—anticipating future gaps on unique elements related to the 

regulatory process and design technologies—for which the agency has 

initiated specific training courses. Similarly, NRC plans to extend its 

Graduate Fellowship Program, which helps attract a small number of highquality, highly educated employees in critical skills areas that the agency

might not otherwise successfully hire. 

In July 2006, NRC instituted a knowledge management program to 

facilitate the transfer of knowledge and skills on specific subjects. The 

program is intended to systematize NRC’s existing structure to better 

support the faster rate of collection, transfer, and use of a broader scope 

of knowledge needed to support, for example, new reactor technologies 

and new reactor designs. The program outlines initiatives that serve to 

avoid significant loss of mission-critical knowledge. NRC plans to (1) take 

over 15 implementing actions to facilitate the transfer of knowledge and 

skills during fiscal years 2006 through 2008 and (2) allocate over $1 million 

and several personnel to implement the program.26 In general, the 

managers we interviewed and surveyed said the program would be an 

increasingly valuable tool in the coming years. NRC also uses the 

following specific flexibilities to transfer skills and knowledge: 

• NRC has hired replacements for certain positions before the current 

occupants leave the agency. Known as early replacement hiring or double 

encumbering, this flexibility allows NRC to provide salary and benefits 

funding for up to 1 year for the purpose of transferring critical skills, 

competencies, and institutional memory from an employee who is 

planning to leave NRC to a replacement employee. To be effective, early 

replacement hiring requires that the departing employee inform NRC of 

such intentions well in advance of the actual departure date. Since 2004, 

NRC’s annual funding for early replacement hiring has remained at 

 26Some of the fiscal years 2007 and 2008 funding and new projects have not been approved. 

Page 27 GAO-07-105 Nuclear Regulatory Commission
$630,000, and an agency manager estimated that NRC had spent about 

$565,000 for 12 positions in fiscal year 2006. 

• As authorized by the Energy Policy Act of 2005, NRC has waived dual 

compensation limitations, known as the pension offset, for rehired retirees 

receiving pensions. This flexibility, known as the elimination of pension 

offset, allows NRC to rehire a retiree to fill a position at full pay if NRC has 

had difficulty in filling the position or if a temporary emergency exists.27 In 

fiscal year 2006, NRC granted waivers for 46 retirees in eight headquarters 

and regional offices and spent about $2.3 million to employ them. The 

elimination of the pension offset is expected to become increasingly 

valuable to NRC in the next few years to retain access to expertise for 

knowledge transfer purposes. 

Also in 2006, NRC completed its agencywide training and development 

strategic plan to support more systematization, definition, and integration 

of its overall training and development approach. The plan delineates four

goals related to individual performance, training effectiveness, training 

efficiency, and organizational performance. It identifies the following 

actions that NRC plans to take to better anticipate staffing, skills, and 

expertise to improve planning and reduce reactive responses: 

• ensure that its intended benefits are realized by using a documented and 

integrated approach; 

• more comprehensively define competencies and training needs for major 

functions or groups of like positions; and 

• better integrate its training and development programs with performance 

elements and standards, position descriptions, training needs surveys, and 

the SWP system. 

NRC managers generally believe that documenting and enhancing training, 

development, and qualification programs will be essential to enable NRC 

personnel to accomplish NRC’s mission effectively and efficiently over the 

next several years. Because determining gap closure frequently requires 

tracking particular skills gaps over a multiyear period, and is not always 

easily demonstrated, NRC could benefit from this more systematic 

approach. 

 27NRC’s Federal Employees Pay Comparability Act panel, composed of senior management

officials, must approve the application of this and other flexibilities. 

Page 28 GAO-07-105 Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Nearly all of the managers we interviewed and surveyed said retention was 

not a problem, often citing NRC’s 2005 attrition rate of about 6 percent. As 

a result, few managers identified retention tools as primary gap strategies 

that NRC most frequently uses to meet existing and future skills needs. 

However, the managers expressed general concern about impending 

retirements and potential future resignations if competition with the 

nuclear power industry intensifies for critically skilled employees. 

NRC employs some of the same tools, programs, and flexibilities to retain 

personnel that it uses to hire employees, but their purpose, audience, and

application vary. For example: 

NRC’s Use of Tools, 

Authorities, and Flexibilities to 

Retain Critically Skilled

Employees Varies 

• NRC managers cited the relocation incentive as a valuable tool in retaining 

NRC personnel, especially inspectors, who move to new positions. Overall, 

39 employees at the midlevel and upper level received a cumulative 

amount of $638,000 in fiscal year 2006. When change-of-station benefits 

and relocation services are added to this amount, relocation outlays 

totaled approximately $15 million and represented the majority of NRC’s 

2006 human capital budget’s Talent subcategory.

• NRC offers retention incentives, although somewhat infrequently. In fiscal 

year 2006, it awarded four, totaling less than $35,000. 

• NRC spent less than $1 million in total for student loan repayments for 

fiscal years 2004 through 2006. Its use of student loan repayments as a 

retention incentive has been relatively steady in recent years and has 

primarily targeted a handful of employees hired into the Honor Law 

Graduate Program. However, some NRC managers believe its use might be 

expanded in the next few years. 

• Most managers we interviewed and surveyed considered telework and 

flexible work schedule arrangements to be very to extremely valuable, and 

would be of the same or increasing value in recruiting, hiring, and 

retaining NRC personnel in the next few years. However, a cognizant NRC 

manager said that managerial and supervisory responsiveness to such 

arrangements varies. NRC does not routinely track or evaluate telework 

participation, such as the number and type of requests approved and

denied, costs, benefits, and resource requirements associated with the 

program. However, NRC informally surveys offices about the number of 

employees who telework regularly, which is typically considered to be 1 

day per workweek. As of November 2005, when NRC last gathered this 

information, about 250 of NRC’s 3,000 employees regularly teleworked. In 

addition, many NRC employees telework on an irregular and infrequent 

basis. 

Page 29 GAO-07-105 Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Although NRC uses and tracks these retention flexibilities to varying 

extents, it has not collected the information on each flexibility’s costs and

benefits needed to assess its effectiveness in retaining critically skilled 

employees while fulfilling management’s objectives. 

Agencies should build the capability needed to address administrative, 

educational, and other requirements—including information technology, 

security, and adequate space—that are essential to supporting 

infrastructure needs. Our prior work has found that agency officials 

should look for instances to improve process and procedure efficiencies 

and economies to reallocate resources and enable their human capital

organizations to meet expanded roles in times of growth or change. We 

determined that NRC has taken steps to develop its internal capability to

support the large number of new employees it expects to hire in upcoming 

years because of retirements and anticipated applications for licensing 

new nuclear reactors. In recent years, NRC has enhanced its 

administrative and information technology and communications support 

processes to improve its infrastructure. However, the agency still faces a 

few key limiting factors that, if left unaddressed or unresolved, may 

adversely affect its ability to meet current and future workforce needs. 

To improve its human capital administrative processes related to 

management, NRC has streamlined its recruiting and hiring processes by, 

for example, introducing an automated hiring system, identifying areas 

where it could standardize and streamline its processes, and eliminating 

unnecessary duplication of efforts. Implemented in 2002, NRCareers is an 

automated hiring system that hosts on-line vacancy announcements and 

an online application process. While this system has the ability to support 

an automated rating process and interface with such Web sites as 

USAJOBs, the development of these capacities is still in process. In 

addition, NRC has been (1) working with its personnel security branch to 

streamline the security clearance process for new hires and (2) granting 

clearances under reciprocity required by pertinent executive orders. 

NRC also has been creating support systems to improve its management of

human capital data and reduce inefficiencies. For example, in July 2005, 

NRC created the Recruitment Activity Tracking System, a centralized Webbased system to monitor candidates’ status, including when offers are 

received and for what position, start dates, and reasons candidates gave 

for declining offers. OHR and program office managers use this system to 

monitor vacancy announcements agencywide. Because the system records 

acceptance status, it can enhance coordination when NRC offices extend

Some Enhancements of 

NRC’s Infrastructure to 

Support Administrative, 

Educational, and Other 

Requirements Are in 

Process 

Page 30 GAO-07-105 Nuclear Regulatory Commission
more than one offer to selected candidates; although calculating actual 

offers and acceptances is slightly more complex. NRC also uses the 

Recruitment Activity Tracking System to facilitate planning for space, 

security, resource allocation, and information technology by tracking 

employees’ arrival dates. NRC plans to expand the system’s capacity to 

track the security clearance process and notify OHR managers if 

candidates exceed a 30-day review period. NRC also has taken steps on 

e-Government initiatives to provide consolidated information on 

employment actions and history, integrating payroll and personnel action

processing, and human resources line-of-business alignment.28

To improve its educational infrastructure and internal communication 

process, NRC has developed and is in the process of implementing the 

following three information management systems during fiscal year 2007:

• NRC is developing an automated system to support its Lessons Learned 

Program—a set of processes, procedures, and oversight designed to 

collectively ensure that significant agency deficiencies are identified and

corrected so they do not recur. This tool will link two existing agency 

systems to provide a Web-based, searchable and retrievable record of how 

each recommendation is addressed and will support program efforts to 

institutionalize the knowledge gained through the corrective action 

processes and develop solutions for long-term organizational retention. 

• NRC is improving the quality and capabilities of its Agencywide Document 

and Access Management System in terms of availability, performance, 

functionality, ease of use, and timeliness. Specifically, as a tool to capture 

knowledge, the Agencywide Document and Access Management System 

could help coordinate the timely review of license applications by serving 

as a complete and easily accessible repository of documentation for 

licensee information, according to NRR managers. 

• By mid-2007, NRC plans to launch the Learning Management System, 

which will replace the current training administration system. The Webbased system is designed to facilitate employees’ and managers’ abilities to 

view training options, plan coursework, and track and record progress in 

qualification programs. The system’s original launch date, September 2005, 

was delayed because of compatibility problems related to the application 

 28The goals of the human resources line-of-business alignment include improved 

management, operational efficiencies, cost savings or avoidance, and improved customer

service. 

Page 31 GAO-07-105 Nuclear Regulatory Commission
and certification and accreditation requirements. NRC subsequently 

postponed its launch to implement an updated version of the application 

that had been developed. OHR managers want to link the Learning 

Management System to the SWP system because their efforts to efficiently

use training resources have been complicated by incompatible information 

technology systems. 

While these initiatives are under way, NRC faces challenges in building the 

information technology and security infrastructure necessary for its 

increasing workforce. For the past 5 years, NRC’s IG has cited the 

protection of information and the implementation of information 

resources as serious management challenges. NRC’s Office of Information 

Services—which is responsible for information management, architecture, 

and policies—has taken steps to improve the infrastructure by acquiring 

new systems and integrating existing systems. The Office of Information 

Services also has (1) interfaced with NRR and other offices to determine 

the amount and type of services needed for new reactor licensing, 

(2) recruited and hired additional personnel to support the implementation 

of these new systems, and (3) begun to investigate contracting options to 

complement these new hires. However, it is unclear whether these steps 

will adequately meet the challenges associated with NRC’s changing 

demographics and growing workforce. For example, NRC managers we 

interviewed and surveyed said telework would be one of the most valuable 

flexibilities available to NRC personnel in future years. However, NRC’s 

information technology infrastructure can support only a limited amount 

of telework and would need to be upgraded to provide teleworking 

employees with secure and reliable access to e-mail and agency 

applications. 

Providing sufficient physical space in which its growing workforce can

interact is one of NRC’s greatest human capital challenges, according to its 

top leadership. In April 2006, NRC requested congressional assistance in 

persuading the General Services Administration and the Office of 

Management and Budget to address its space needs because NRC had 

exhausted the space available in its headquarters building in Rockville, 

Maryland, despite its space optimization program. Among the negative 

effects of inadequate physical space cited by NRC’s top leadership are the 

inability to (1) appropriately colocate its new personnel with their 

organizational units to integrate them into the organization and provide 

supervision and (2) provide sufficient training and meeting space in 

headquarters for knowledge transfer and training and development 

purposes. OHR managers told us that training classes, in recently acquired

space, began in mid-October 2006 after a 6-month delay. However, it is 

Page 32 GAO-07-105 Nuclear Regulatory Commission
unclear when NRC will be able resolve its long-term space needs because 

the Office of Management and Budget had not authorized the General 

Services Administration to send its proposal for more space to Congress 

for approval. NRC’s top leadership is concerned that insufficient space will 

lead to overcrowding that will adversely affect NRC’s ability to attract new 

workers and could lead current workers to leave NRC for organizations 

with a better working environment. 

Our prior human capital work found that agencies need to develop 

appropriate performance measures to link human capital measures with 

strategic goals so they can be used to gauge success and evaluate the 

contribution of human capital activities toward achieving programmatic 

goals. We also found that developing meaningful outcome-oriented 

performance measures for both human capital and programmatic goals, 

and the collection of performance data to measure achievement of these 

goals, are major challenges for many agencies. 

NRC’s annual performance planning process, through which its 

performance budget is developed, provides performance measures for 

each goal in its strategic plan.29 Through the performance budget process, 

NRC develops key planning assumptions, program drivers, and outputs 

and establishes output- and outcome-based measures to monitor and 

evaluate program execution. NRC maintains two overall performance 

outcome measures to determine progress toward achieving excellence in

agency management. To monitor human capital performance, NRC 

assesses progress using six output measures and targets for the recruiting 

and staffing and the training and development categories. 

In assessing NRC’s human capital measurement framework, we found the 

following: 

Although NRC Uses 

Several Human Capital 

Measures, Some Do Not 

Provide Sufficiently 

Meaningful Information to 

Evaluate Progress 

• NRC has collected, tracked, and reported important demographics and 

human capital data and monitored workforce size, shape, and other 

characteristics for at least the past 5 years. OHR maintains a series of 

agencywide strategic workforce planning demographics tables that track 

employees by office and, for example, by their (1) race, ethnicity, and 

gender characteristics; (2) occupations and degree levels; (3) years of NRC 

 29Measuring and monitoring performance is one of four components of NRC’s Planning, 

Budgeting, and Performance Management process. 

Page 33 GAO-07-105 Nuclear Regulatory Commission
and federal service; (4) grade or pay level; and (5) retirement eligibility 

and attrition projections and rates. NRC uses these data to monitor 

progress in achieving such human capital targets as the number of 

professional entry-level hires as a percentage of total hires. 

• OHR uses around 30 intended outputs, targets, and measures to monitor 

progress in recruitment and staffing, training and development/knowledge 

management, strategic workforce planning, leadership development and 

succession planning, employee and labor relations, and diversity 

management. OHR categorizes intended outputs in terms of effectiveness, 

timeliness, quality, efficiency, and customer satisfaction and compiles the 

agencywide results on these metrics. Program offices also are expected to 

monitor certain administrative metrics, such as the percentage of 

professional hires at higher grade levels, and to report their status to the 

Executive Director for Operations. 

• In fiscal year 2006, NRC met or exceeded most of its human capital targets 

associated with its measures and intended outputs. For example, NRC 

exceeded its target for overall hires of 300 new employees—subsequently 

increased to 350 new hires—by bringing on 371 employees in fiscal year 

2006. In addition to these new hires who started by September 30, 2006, 

approximately 145 employees were hired as a result of fiscal year 2006 

efforts but reported for duty during the first quarter of fiscal year 2007. Of 

these 145 employees, at least 95 are in occupational series that are 

typically considered mission-critical. 

• NRC plans to develop, or is in the process of developing, several additional 

measures, outputs, or metrics to gauge its overall progress toward 

achieving human capital outcomes. These efforts include the following: 

• NRC is developing additional output measures for workforce diversity 

and work life services to include in its performance budget during 

fiscal year 2007. NRC also plans to develop measures to annually assess 

program results in knowledge management. 

• NRC continues to explore ways to improve its existing training and 

development performance measures and metrics. For example, NRC is 

refining its training output measures related to tracking the average

number of training hours completed per person and the percentage of 

personnel who completed a minimum number of training hours. These 

data will provide a baseline to determine appropriate future targets and 

ensure consistency across offices, as appropriate, according to OHR 

managers. These two output measures are among others being or 

already developed to enhance how NRC monitors the extent to which it 

Page 34 GAO-07-105 Nuclear Regulatory Commission
is addressing identified training needs, which is one of its broader 

performance plan measures. 

• NRC plans to refine preliminary employee and labor relations measures 

to improve both the monitoring and evaluation of employee and labor 

relations actions, services provided, or overall performance. In 

particular, a cognizant agency manager told us that measuring the 

timeliness of processing grievances and disciplinary actions, as well as 

services provided, would enhance performance measurement. 

Although NRC met many of its human capital-related targets for fiscal year 

2006, the agency has not fully implemented an agreed-upon framework by, 

for example, integrating its measures through a human capital 

accountability system plan. According to its 2004 strategic human capital 

plan, NRC intended to develop such a plan to identify the measures and 

associated targets that NRC would use to assess its achievement of human 

capital outcomes. Program office and OHR managers we interviewed and

surveyed cited the need for an agreed-upon framework to improve the 

effectiveness and appropriateness of specific measures and targets. In 

further commenting on NRC’s measurement framework, some managers 

cited the importance of sufficient linkage between the successful use of 

human capital strategies and meeting safety, security, openness, and 

effectiveness goals. The managers believe reliability and validity 

improvements would help NRC evaluate progress as its workforce 

expands and changes. Specifically, they expressed concern that while 

existing agency measures, intended outputs, and targets may be used to 

monitor progress, they do not enable managers to fully evaluate associated 

progress or performance. Without effective measures and appropriate 

targets, it may be more difficult for NRC to gauge workforce trends and 

use them to inform decision making.

In addition, the managers we interviewed and surveyed had varying 

opinions about specific measures or targets. For example: 

• While NRC exceeded a 75-percent target to retain personnel for a 

minimum of 3 years—reaching over 90 percent—some managers 

suggested that the target should be further examined to determine 

whether the 3-year target correlates with a long-term or career 

commitment because the new generation of workers appears to be less 

inclined than the previous generation to make a longer-term commitment 

to NRC. 

Page 35 GAO-07-105 Nuclear Regulatory Commission
• NRC also exceeded a target of hiring at least 25 percent of staff at the 

entry level—reaching 34 percent, a target originally put in place to reduce

the NRC employee’s average age, according to officials. However, some 

suggested that NRC consider whether the target is an appropriate 

agencywide measure, or would be better set at the program office level, 

given offices’ varied workforce needs. 

• NRC’s overall attrition rate of 6.3 percent for fiscal year 2006 was higher 

than its expected 6 percent; the agency lost about 205 staff, predominantly 

to retirement. NRC’s projected attrition rates are 6.25 percent for fiscal 

year 2008 and 6.5 percent for fiscal year 2009. Because NRC slightly 

underestimated its attrition for fiscal year 2006 and the attrition rate 

projection for fiscal year 2008 is lower than the actual fiscal year 2006 rate, 

maintaining these projections may underestimate the rate at which 

attrition may rise as nuclear industry competition for skilled employees 

increases and as older staff members retire. As a result, some managers 

believe that projections should incorporate a higher estimated attrition 

rate. 

• Some managers noted both the usefulness of having, and the difficulty in

attaining, the OPM target of issuing offer letters within 45 days after a 

vacancy announcement closes. NRC reported it met this target 67 percent 

of the time; however, while over 190 offer letters took at most 45 days, 

about 65 offer letters took at least 100 days to issue. Additionally, one 

manager stated that the 45-day time frame is too long for the competitive 

environment in which NRC is hiring. 

NRC is addressing two key uncertainties affecting its emerging workforce 

needs—how to (1) maintain its workforce in the face of future competition 

with the nuclear power industry for critically skilled workers and 

(2) accurately gauge its workload during the next 3 years—particularly for 

reviewing COL applications to construct and conditionally operate new 

reactors. Regarding a likely increase in competition with the nuclear 

industry for critically skilled workers, NRC is monitoring the numbers and 

salaries of scientists and engineers in a few key disciplines and working 

more closely with key university programs with the goal of strengthening 

its candidate pipeline. Regarding COL applications, although electric 

power companies have sent letters of intent to NRC, stating that they plan

to apply for 20 licenses to build and operate at least 29 new nuclear power

reactors in fiscal years 2008 and 2009, it is unclear how many of these 

projects will proceed in the near future. Specifically, NRC expects to 

receive 8 applications by December 2007, 10 additional applications by the 

end of September 2008, and 2 more by the end of September 2009; for each 

NRC Is Taking Steps 

to Address Future 

Uncertainties That 

Could Adversely 

Affect Its Overall 

Workforce Capacity 

Page 36 GAO-07-105 Nuclear Regulatory Commission
COL application, almost half of the resources required would be used in its 

first year. To reduce uncertainties and encourage efficiencies related to its

license review process, NRC has developed a design-centered approach to

standardize its review of COL applications for new reactors. However, 

changes in the number and timing of application submissions will affect 

NRC’s staffing and resource requirements. 

NRC and the nuclear power industry have raised concerns in recent years 

about a shrinking labor pool of critically skilled individuals in several 

workforce areas required for the research, design, construction, 

operations, and oversight of nuclear reactor and plant operations. The 

nuclear power industry estimated in 2001 that about 90,000 workers will 

be needed to support existing industry operations through 2011.30 In 

addition, thousands of employees will be needed for the design, licensing,

construction, and start-up operations of the proposed new reactors. 

Specifically, the nuclear industry faces a potentially critical shortage of 

workers in several fields over the next 5 years.31

To keep apprised of industrywide trends and inform its workforce 

assumptions, NRC has contracted with DOE’s Oak Ridge Institute for 

Science and Education for over 20 years to gather and evaluate 

occupational, salary, and university enrollment data particularly for 

nuclear engineering and health physics—two mission-critical occupations. 

For example, although university bachelor’s and master’s enrollments and 

degrees granted in these disciplines have increased since 2004, fewer than 

700 degrees are granted annually from about 60 academic programs 

nationwide,32 which is less than during the early to mid-1990s. For nuclear 

engineering, the institute also has reported: 

NRC Has Taken Steps to 

Address Broader 

Challenges It Faces in 

Sustaining Expertise 

• Overall national trends have improved in terms of enrollment and degrees 

granted. For example, in 2005 total junior, senior, and graduate student 

 30NEI is working to estimate the number and general types of workers needed to bring this

new generation of reactors and plants to fruition. 

31NEI, Nuclear Energy Industry Initiatives Target Looming Shortage of Skilled Workers, 

(Feb. 2006). 

32Oak Ridge Institute for Science and Education, Manpower Assessment Briefs #58 and 

#59: Nuclear Engineering and Health Physics Enrollments and Degrees Surveys, 2005 

Data (Oak Ridge, TN: 2005); Labor Market Trends for Nuclear Engineers through 2010 

(Oak Ridge, TN: 2006); and Labor Market Outlook for Health Physicists: Updated through

2008 (Oak Ridge, TN: 2005). 

Page 37 GAO-07-105 Nuclear Regulatory Commission
enrollments surpassed the 2,000 level for the first time since the mid1990s. However, only about 60 percent of new graduates directly enter the 

U.S. civilian labor force, while the other 40 percent continue their 

academic studies, enter active-duty military, or take jobs in foreign 

countries. Furthermore, NRC typically requires that applicants be U.S. 

citizens,33 which further reduces the number of graduating candidates 

eligible for employment, especially at advanced degree levels. While a 

large majority of B.S. degree recipients were U.S. citizens, non-U.S. 

citizens comprised 20 percent of master’s recipients and 47 percent of 

Ph.D. recipients in 2005.

• Because the demand for nuclear engineers is expected to grow faster than 

the supply, upward pressure on starting salaries—which increased by only 

2 percent in 2004-2005 but by over 5 percent in 2005-2006—will continue 

and provide even more competition to employers in the nuclear 

engineering field. 

For health physicists, the institute has reported:

• Overall trends have improved in terms of enrollments and degrees granted. 

For example, undergraduate and graduate enrollments were 15 percent 

higher than in 2004, and continuing increases are expected. The number of 

health physics-related B.S. degrees granted in 2005 increased by over 40 

percent from 2004, and at 78 is the highest reported since 1996; degrees in

master’s programs increased by 20 percent to 77 granted, while Ph.D.s 

granted remained constant. Similar to nuclear physics, while a large 

majority of B.S. degree recipients were U.S. citizens, 30 percent of master’s 

and 36 percent of Ph.D. degree recipients were non-U.S. citizens. 

• The number of job openings for new graduates will likely continue to 

exceed the number of new graduates available in the labor supply from 

2006 to 2008 and even with increases in enrollments will likely be 

insufficient to substantially reduce projected relative shortages of new 

graduates between 2006 and 2008. The institute noted that more health 

physicists will be retiring over the next few years and many, if not most, 

will have to be replaced, as reflected in a higher number of projected job

openings. NEI also reported that the general availability of health 

physicists is expected to decline over the next 5 years. 

 33NRC has authority to hire non-citizens. See 42 U.S.C. § 5852. However, according to NRC 

managers, the agency’s policy is to generally require U.S. citizenship, citing the cost and 

time of obtaining a security clearance as a primary concern. NRC would make an exception 

to this policy for highly sought after critical skills. 

Page 38 GAO-07-105 Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Because the workforce will likely tighten in several areas before current 

graduation levels produce anywhere near the number of trained and 

educated personnel to meet the likely demand over the next decade, NRC 

has taken the following steps to increase its talent pool: 

• Has planned to spend nearly $5 million in fiscal year 2007 to implement its 

authority under the Energy Policy Act of 2005 to award, in grants to 

universities and colleges, support for educational programs that will 

benefit its safety, security, and environmental responsibilities. During 

fiscal year 2006, training and development program managers worked to 

develop criteria for identifying educational programs for which 

investments will most likely expand expertise in critical skills areas. 

Implementation of this grants-to-universities program is targeted for fiscal 

year 2007. 

• Budgeted $225,000 in fiscal year 2006 and proposed $375,000 in fiscal year

2007 to offer scholarships and fellowships in critical skills areas. 

• Budgeted $125,000 in fiscal year 2006 and proposed $140,000 in fiscal year

2007 for student transportation and lodging expenses while on temporary 

assignment to NRC, which managers told us was particularly useful in 

attracting candidates. 

• Integrated and enhanced existing programs to create a program for 

Minority Serving Institutions—historically black colleges and universities, 

Hispanic serving institutions, and tribal colleges and universities—that 

provides financial assistance to programs and such activities as mentoring, 

training, research and development, cooperative agreements, fellowships, 

internships, and scholarships. In August 2006, NRC announced plans to 

link this program with its recruiting program and develop relationships 

with recipients of its financial assistance to (1) encourage the 

development of skills and research critical to the agency, (2) provide 

access to educational and career development opportunities, and 

(3) increase the diversity of the job applicant pool. 

While NRC has taken these steps, and the nuclear power industry is 

similarly making or continuing efforts to partner with educational 

institutions to develop workers or augment their existing training 

programs, enhancing the talent pool may require additional approaches. 

Besides health physics and nuclear engineering, many of the over 300 

vacancies—for which NRC posted over 60 position descriptions in several 

occupational series in fiscal year 2006—require specialized knowledge, 

skills, and experience that will likely continue to be hard to fill or in high 

demand. These include, but are not limited to, areas such as project 

Page 39 GAO-07-105 Nuclear Regulatory Commission
management, reliability and risk analysis, and digital instrumentation and

control. Quicker and more focused training options include intensifying 

the amount of course detail and/or increasing certification or 

specialization requirements, and further developing and executing 

strategies that capture and transfer the significant knowledge of aging 

workers. 

A number of activities that NRC has undertaken to prepare to review COL 

license applications to construct and conditionally operate new reactors 

are in various stages of completion. These NRC activities include 

(1) initiating its Construction Inspection Program; (2) moving forward on 

design certifications and early site permit activities; (3) continuing and 

finalizing the development of regulatory guidance, rulemaking, and 

standard review plan materials addressing the contents of a COL 

application. NRC also has developed initial estimates of the resources 

needed to review new reactor license applications. As of August 2006, 

when the Commission approved the creation of the Office of New 

Reactors, fewer than 100 employees were working either part- or full-time 

on new reactor licensing and preparatory activities. NRC is in the process 

of staffing the Office of New Reactors with the targeted number of 

employees scheduled to more than double from 230 in late January 2007 to

over 480 in October 2007.34 (See app. IV for information on NRC’s recent 

reorganization efforts.) In addition, NRC has estimated the following 

regarding new reactor licensing work: 

NRC Has Taken Several 

Steps to Prepare for New 

Reactor Licensing, but the 

Combined License Review 

Process Is Untested 

• NRC employees will perform about two-thirds and contractors will 

perform about one-third of the COL review work. In August 2006, NRC 

reported that about $60 million for contracted expertise would be required 

in fiscal year 2008 to acquire the expertise of individuals who have (1) very 

specialized skills that NRC personnel do not possess and that is not costeffective to add full time or (2) general engineering expertise that NRC 

personnel possess in insufficient numbers. 

• Given that nearly all applications are expected to be submitted in fiscal 

year 2008, licensing resource needs for new reactors would remain the 

same or increase slightly in fiscal year 2009, depending on whether NRC 

receives more applications, and on their timing and number. Industry has 

 34For purposes of this report, the number of employees is equated to FTE positions on a 

one-to-one basis. NRC provided estimates both in terms of the number of employees and 

FTE positions. 

Page 40 GAO-07-105 Nuclear Regulatory Commission
advised NRC of the possibility that higher than the planned number of 

applications—20 as of November 2006—may eventually be submitted. 

To integrate planned and ongoing activities, NRC is also developing a 

master schedule/project management plan that is to match activities to 

personnel with appropriate skills to scheduled completion dates; NRC 

estimated the plan’s completion date is early 2007. In addition, in the event

that the agency’s recruiting goals are not met, NRC is developing a 

procurement contingency plan. This plan would enable NRC to acquire

technical review support from a broad spectrum of organizations. NRC 

anticipates that the upcoming increase in contracting demand for a diverse 

range of skill sets needs may exceed the capabilities or supply of any given 

source. Also, NRC reported that DOE’s Office of Science laboratories are 

establishing a team to assist NRC in identifying needed technical resources 

and management skills.

NRC also has focused its new reactor licensing efforts on delineating its 

standardized design-centered review approach. NRC expects this 

approach will improve the efficiency of its review of COL applications by 

reducing the review time to at most 42 months, including holding required 

public hearings. NRC could not fully base its estimates on recent 

experience or historical data because its review process has yet to be

tested. However, NRC did evaluate the resource requirements for the first 

three early site permit applications it received in 2003 to inform its COL 

application estimates.35 NRC’s review of each early site permit took more 

time and effort than either NRC or the applicants expected. NRC managers 

told us that the agency learned from this initial experience and expects 

future early site permit reviews to go more smoothly. They expect a 

similar learning curve with the first group of COL reviews, noting that 

estimates of the personnel needed to review COL applications may thus be 

subject to some adjustment. In addition, because this first group could be 

large—10 applications are expected in the first 6 months of fiscal year 

2008, and 8 are expected in the second 6 months—any challenges, if not 

fully resolved, could be exacerbated.

The COL application process is new for the electric power companies as 

well. NRC’s staffing and resource estimates are based on standardization 

 35An early site permit resolves site safety, environmental protection, and emergency 

preparedness issues independent of a specific nuclear plant design. The early site permit 

application must address the safety and environmental characteristics of the site and

evaluate potential physical impediments to developing an acceptable emergency plan. 

Page 41 GAO-07-105 Nuclear Regulatory Commission
and consistency and complete, high-quality applications. To this end, NRC 

has established reactor design-based working groups with industry to 

facilitate communication and interaction about all aspects of the 

application process, including lessons learned on most recent construction 

activities as well as financing, hardware, supply, and other infrastructure 

issues. Nevertheless, the agency will not know how effective these 

activities have been until applications are submitted—NRC expects the 

first COL applications to be submitted in October 2007. In addition, 

determining the sufficiency of additional information NRC requests from a

licensee may require both significant analytical expertise and review by 

the agency, and timeliness on the part of the applicant. Furthermore, any 

delays in the completion of technical review plans or lack of clarity in 

regulatory guidance could make it more difficult for companies to ensure 

the adequacy of their submissions.36

The timing of COL application submissions could also adversely influence 

the intended effectiveness of NRC’s design-centered review approach. 

Although NRC documents state that the optimal implementation of the 

approach is to first have a completed design certification, many activities 

will likely occur simultaneously or near-simultaneously. Standardization is 

key to NRC’s approach, as applicants are expected to submit standard 

applications that use reactor designs that have been certified. This 

suggests that NRC would certify a reactor design before it reviews COL 

applications that refer to that design. That is not the case, however, for 8 

of the 20 COL applications NRC expects to receive because (1) applicants

plan to submit 3 COL applications about halfway through NRC’s 

certification of the associated design and (2) NRC expects to review 5 

 36In its October 6, 2006, report entitled Inspector General’s Assessment of the Most Serious 

Management and Performance Challenges Facing the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 

(OIG-07-A-01), the IG identified the ability to meet the demand for licensing new reactors 

as one of nine challenges. Elements of this challenge include having staff with project

management skills; reinstituting its construction inspection program; maintaining a defined 

technical review process; ensuring that its Standard Review Plan for examining license

applications is comprehensive and consistently implemented; and instituting a process to 

compile its regulatory examination into a Safety Evaluation Report that assesses a plant’s

ability to operate safely. 

Page 42 GAO-07-105 Nuclear Regulatory Commission
other COL applications nearly simultaneously with its certification of the 

design.37

Similarly, an important component of NRC’s approach is the use of a 

“reference application.” According to NRC managers and NEI executives,

around 70 percent of additional application contents are intended to be 

virtually identical to the reference application. NRC assumes it will realize 

FTE/resource savings of 50 percent on the safety reviews of applications 

consistent with the reference application. However, it is unclear whether 

the use of reference applications will actually save NRC review time when

they are reviewed concurrently with others. In essence, NRC will conduct

multiple, nearly simultaneous application reviews for all designs that 

companies currently intend to use. For example, NRC expects the 

reference application and three applications for the same design to arrive 

in the same fiscal quarter. Ultimately, because of these compressed time 

frames, the efficient and effective allocation of resources and adherence to

schedules is paramount. 

In recent years, NRC’s human capital management has been generally

effective in comparison with its federal government counterparts. 

Nevertheless, NRC faces a considerable challenge in addressing workforce 

retirements and anticipated significant additional work beginning in 

October 2007, as electric power companies submit applications for 

licenses to construct and operate the next generation of nuclear power 

reactors. Through its strategic human capital planning and management 

framework, NRC has taken several important steps to enhance its overall 

workforce capacity; however, some new and in-progress efforts have not 

yet been tested. It is unclear how the confluence of increasing regulatory

workload demands, maintaining existing focus on safety and security 

activities, rising numbers of retirement-eligible employees and other 

demographic shifts, and anticipated industry competition for critically 

skilled workers will ultimately influence NRC’s generally positive 

workforce trends and successes. These challenges require a considerable 

level of flexibility, staff commitment, and successful strategic human 

capital management for NRC to be able to appropriately adapt to shifting 

Conclusions 

 37Applicants generally plan to use the (1) Westinghouse Company’s AP 1000 reactor, which 

NRC has certified; (2) General Electric, Toshiba, and Hitachi’s Advanced Boiling Water 

Reactor, which NRC has certified; (3) General Electric’s Economic Simplified, Boiling 

Water Reactor, which NRC is currently reviewing; or (4) AREVA NP’s Evolutionary 

Pressurized Water Reactor, which NRC plans to begin reviewing in fiscal year 2008. 

Page 43 GAO-07-105 Nuclear Regulatory Commission
human capital needs. If overall workforce and resource allocations are not

balanced, NRC risks overextending its available workforce, undermining 

its employee satisfaction, and potentially increasing its attrition. If so, 

reviewing license applications and conducting other mission-critical 

activities within estimated time frames could become more difficult and 

could adversely affect NRC’s ability to ensure a safe and secure nuclear 

power industry. Furthermore, substantial delays in the license application 

process could adversely affect investor confidence, decrease the 

likelihood of nuclear energy generation being cost beneficial, and possibly 

reduce the amount of electricity available to the U.S. market. 

To improve NRC’s ability to meet its current and future needs for a 

critically skilled workforce, we are recommending that NRC take the 

following four actions: 

• Promote the coordination and integration of human capital planning and 

implementation activities by completing the agencywide human capital 

implementation plan; ensuring that the Human Capital Council provides 

strategic direction, advice, and recommendations on addressing human 

capital issues; and providing the appropriate level of resources to 

implement knowledge management program and strategic training and 

development plan. 

• Systematically assess the effectiveness of NRC’s use of tools, authorities, 

and flexibilities for recruiting, developing, and retaining its workforce and 

adjust their use and targeting, as necessary, to meet workforce needs. 

• Periodically and comprehensively evaluate and share information among

NRC’s offices on the usefulness of human capital measures, intended 

outputs, and targets to enhance NRC’s ability to monitor trends, reliably 

measure progress, and inform program office managers in achieving 

critical human capital tasks. 

• Survey employees during fiscal year 2007 on their satisfaction with NRC’s 

human capital program, including new initiatives and offices’ use of 

flexibilities to maintain a quality work environment. 

We provided NRC with a draft of this report for its review and comment. 

In written comments, NRC generally agreed with the report’s findings, 

conclusions, and recommendations, stating that they are very 

constructive. NRC also noted, however, that the circumstances underlying 

Recommendations for 

Executive Action 

Agency Comments 

Page 44 GAO-07-105 Nuclear Regulatory Commission
the report have changed because Congressional leaders have announced

their intent to extend the Continuing Appropriations Resolution, 2007, for

the full fiscal year, with few exceptions. According to NRC, the funding in

the Continuing Resolution—which extends the fiscal year 2006 

appropriation amount to fiscal year 2007—would result in a $95 million 

reduction in the level of funding that NRC had expected compared with 

the level approved by the full House of Representatives and the Senate 

Committee on Appropriations for fiscal year 2007. NRC states that the 

funding and FTE restrictions under a full-year Continuing Resolution at 

the fiscal year 2006 level would have a crippling effect on its ability to 

manage human capital, citing as an example that NRC would significantly 

curtail—and possibly cease—new hiring, except for those already given

offers and those necessary for the most critical of skills. (See app. VI.) In 

addition, NRC provided comments to improve the report’s technical 

accuracy, which we have incorporated as appropriate. 

We are sending copies of this report to interested congressional 

committees, the Chairman of NRC, the Director of the Office of 

Management and Budget, and other interested parties. We will also make 

copies available to others upon request. In addition, the report will be 

available at no charge on the GAO Web site at http://www.gao.gov. 

If you or your staffs have questions about this report, please contact me at 

(202) 512-3841 or wellsj@gao.gov. Contact points for our Offices of 

Congressional Relations and Public Affairs may be found on the last page 

of this report. GAO staff who made major contributions to this report are 

listed in appendix VII. 

Jim Wells 

Director, Natural Resources 

 and Environment 

Page 45 GAO-07-105 Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Appendix I: NRC’s Changing Workforce 

Demographics 

The demographics of NRC’s workforce will substantially change in the 

next few years for two reasons. First, the percentage of employees eligible

to retire is expected to grow from the current level of about 16 percent to

about 33 percent of the workforce in fiscal year 2010. Second, NRC 

projects that its workforce size will need to grow from about 3,100 

employees in early fiscal year 2006 to nearly 4,000 employees by 2010 to 

meet the significant anticipated upsurge in workload demands as NRC 

begins to review power company applications for permits to construct and 

operate new nuclear reactors. The following tables present information on 

NRC’s changing workforce demographics. 

Table 2: Comparison of Selected NRC Workforce Demographics, Fiscal Years 2002

through 2006 

Demographic

As of 

9/30/2002 

As of 

10/2/2004

As of 

9/30/2006

Total employees 2,928 3,110 3,347

Selected offices 

Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation 591 (20%) 593 (19%) 739 (22%)

Office of Nuclear Security and Incident 

Response 105 (4) 187 (6) 216 (6)

Office of Administration 98 (3) 98 (3) 123 (4)

Office of Nuclear Materials Safety and 

Safeguards 332 (11) 334 (11) 334 (10)

Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research 208 (7) 217 (7) 225 (7)

Employees by age 

Average age 47.83 47.91 47.60

Under 40 576 (20%) 631 (20%) 745 (22%)

 of which 29 and under 164 (6) 225 (7) 313 (9)

40 to 49 982 (34) 1002 (32) 1,016 (30)

50 to 60+ 1370 (47) 1477 (47) 1,586 (47)

Employees by NRC service years 

Average years 13.65 13.16 12.29

0 to 5 years 747 (26%) 1,013 (33%) 1,311 (39%)

6 to 10 years 274 (9%) 265 (9%) 371 (11%)

11 to 20 years 1059 (36%) 983 (32%) 802 (24%)

21 or more years 848 (29%) 849 (27%) 863 (26%)

Employees by federal service years 

Average years 17.88 17.27 16.21

0 to 5 years 438 (15%) 655 (21%) 895 (27%)

Appendix I: NRC’s Changing Workforce 

Demographics 

Page 46 GAO-07-105 Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Appendix I: NRC’s Changing Workforce 

Demographics 

Demographic

As of 

9/30/2002 

As of 

10/2/2004

As of 

9/30/2006

6 to 10 years 258 (9) 266 (9) 334 (10)

11 to 20 years 937 (32) 883 (28) 801 (24)

21 or more years 1,295 (44) 1,212 (39) 1,218 (36)

Employees: Science and engineering occupational series (percentage of agency 

total) 

Nuclear Engineering 14% 13% 12%

Other Engineering 29 31 34

Health Physics 7 6 6

Other Physical Science 5 6 6

Employees: Engineers, scientists, technical managers, and supervisors 

(percentage of office total) 

Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation 80% 81% 82%

Office of Nuclear Security and Incident 

Response 54 55 48

Office of Nuclear Materials Safety and 

Safeguards 78 77 79

Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research 77 78 80

Region I 73 76 75

Region II 67 67 68

Region III 68 71 73

Region IV 69 72 73

Employees by pay level (percentage of agency total) 

Senior level 8% 8% 7%

GG-15 23 25 25

GG-14 25 25 24

GG-13 18 18 20

GG-12 to 8 16 17 16

GG-7 to 2 10 8 7

Entry-level hire ratio

Agencywide 41% 25% 34%

Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation 40 41 34

Office of Nuclear Security and Incident 

Response 18 12 13

Office of Nuclear Materials Safety and 

Safeguards 75 29 23

Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research 65 27 60

Region I 30 19 50

Region II 55 42 36

Page 47 GAO-07-105 Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Appendix I: NRC’s Changing Workforce 

Demographics 

Demographic

As of 

9/30/2002 

As of 

10/2/2004

As of 

9/30/2006

Region III 33 13 38

Region IV 20 45 45

Source: NRC. 

Note: Percentages may not add to 100 percent due to rounding. 

Table 3: Percentage of the NRC Workforce that Is Eligible to Retire, Fiscal Years 

2002 through 2011

Optional retirement eligibility As of 9/30/2002 As of 10/2/2004 As of 9/30/2006

Fiscal year 2002 15%

Fiscal year 2003 19

Fiscal year 2004 23 16%

Fiscal year 2005 27 20

Fiscal year 2006 31 23 16%

Fiscal year 2007 36 28 21

Fiscal year 2008 32 24

Fiscal year 2009 37 29

Fiscal year 2010 33

Fiscal year 2011 37

Source: NRC. 

Note: Actual percentages of NRC’s workforce eligible to retire are shown for 2002 through 2006. 

Estimated percentages of NRC’s workforce eligible to retire are shown for 2007 through 2011. 

Table 4: Employees Who Left NRC, Fiscal Years 2002 through 2006 

Permanent attrition Number Percent

a

Fiscal year 2002 146 5.1

Fiscal year 2003 149 5.0

Fiscal year 2004 161 5.1

Fiscal year 2005 189 6.0

Fiscal year 2006 205 6.3

Source: NRC. 

a

Attrition percentages are annualized. 

Page 48 GAO-07-105 Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Appendix II: Scope and Methodology Appendix II: Scope and Methodology 

To assess the extent to which the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) 

has aligned its human capital planning framework with its strategic 

mission and programmatic goals, we analyzed a broad range of NRC 

policy, planning, and implementation documents and reviewed key 

performance budget and performance and accountability documents and 

reports. Specifically, we examined information on NRC’s operations and 

strategic planning efforts, including agencywide strategic plans and 

program documents, operating and human capital management plans, 

management directives, select internal analyses and communications of 

human resources personnel, Human Capital Council and Communications 

Council meeting minutes, and the NRC Inspector General’s Safety Culture 

and Climate Survey results for 1998, 2002, and 2005. 

We corroborated information provided in these documents in interviews 

with human resources managers in NRC’s headquarters and regional 

offices. We also interviewed cognizant managers in NRC’s Office of 

Human Resources (OHR); program offices including Nuclear Reactor 

Regulation (NRR), Nuclear Regulatory Research, Nuclear Materials Safety

and Safeguards, and Nuclear Security and Incident Response; and NRC’s 

four regional offices—region I in King of Prussia, Pennsylvania; region II in

Atlanta, Georgia; region III in Lisle, Illinois; and region IV in Arlington, 

Texas. We visited regions I and II as well as NRC’s Technical Training 

Center in Chattanooga, Tennessee. 

To assess the extent to which NRC is effectively recruiting, developing, 

and retaining critically skilled personnel, we applied the five strategic 

workforce planning principles presented in our March 2002 exposure draft 

on a model for strategic human capital management and in our December 

2003 report on key principles for effective strategic workforce planning. 

(See the Related GAO Reports section at the end of this report for a list of 

previous reports that we have issued on NRC and strategic workforce 

planning and human capital management.) We also reviewed the Office of 

Personnel Management’s (OPM) Human Capital Assessment and 

Accountability Framework and related guidance. In doing so, we analyzed

NRC’s (1) workforce and demographics data; (2) critical skills 

information, including needs and gap assessments; (3) implementation of 

its recruiting, hiring, training and development, and retention strategies 

and plans; (4) implementation of new systems, programs, and processes 

that support human capital management and planning; and (5) measures 

of its progress and results. In addition, we analyzed NRC’s reorganization

plans, program plans, and human capital budget and flexibilities data. 

Furthermore, OHR and technical training center personnel provided 

Page 49 GAO-07-105 Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Appendix II: Scope and Methodology 

demonstrations on the Strategic Workforce Planning system database and 

Recruitment Activity Tracking System. 

We also examined data obtained from the Federal Personnel Payroll 

System, NRC’s Human Resource Management System, and NRC’s 

Recruitment Activity Tracking System. In addition, we obtained budget

and outlay data from NRC’s Chief Financial Officer and OHR. To assess 

the reliability of the data needed to answer the engagement objectives, we 

checked these data for obvious errors in accuracy and completeness, 

reviewed existing information about these data and the system that 

produced them, and interviewed agency officials knowledgeable about 

these data. We determined that these data were sufficiently reliable for the 

purposes of this report. 

To gain more insight into NRC’s use of human capital flexibilities, 

authorities, tools, measures, and targets, we surveyed 45 Senior Executive 

Service and GG-15 level managers in 11 NRC offices, including OHR, 

technical program offices, and regional offices who represent strategic 

human management and leadership in offices with large components of 

critically skilled personnel. We obtained responses from 32 of 45 NRC 

managers, a response rate of 71 percent. The questionnaire asked 

respondents to rate the value of human capital flexibilities, authorities, 

tools, and programs that NRC uses in hiring, developing, and retaining 

personnel, and their value in the future. We also asked the managers to 

rate the effectiveness and appropriateness of measures and metrics in 

monitoring and evaluating progress in achieving programmatic goals at the 

agencywide and office levels. 

The practical difficulties of conducting any survey may introduce certain 

types of errors, commonly referred to as “nonsampling errors.” For 

example, differences in how a particular question is interpreted, the 

sources of information available to respondents, or the types of people 

who do not respond can introduce unwanted variability into survey 

results. To reduce nonsampling errors, we conducted four pretests with 

respondents to ensure that questions and response categories were 

interpreted in a consistent manner and revised the instruments on the 

basis of the pretest results. 

To assess the extent to which NRC is taking steps to address future 

uncertainties that could adversely affect its overall workforce capacity, we

examined (1) the existing and future engineering, science, and technology 

labor pool and (2) NRC’s new reactor licensing activities. Regarding the 

labor pool, we reviewed reports provided to NRC by the Department of 

Page 50 GAO-07-105 Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Appendix II: Scope and Methodology 

Energy’s Oak Ridge Institute for Science and Education and the Nuclear 

Energy Institute (NEI), which represents the nuclear industry. We also 

examined NRC’s efforts to develop a “pipeline” of critically skilled 

personnel and its need for any new flexibilities and authorities and 

interviewed NRC managers and NEI executives about the supply and 

demand for workers with skills critical for fulfilling NRC’s mission. 

Regarding NRC’s new reactor licensing activities, we reviewed resource 

estimate model documents and planning documents and updates. We 

interviewed managers in NRR and the recently established Office of New 

Reactors. 

We conducted our work from March 2006 through December 2006 in 

accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards. 

Page 51 GAO-07-105 Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Appendix III: New Reactor Licensing Appendix III: New Reactor Licensing 

Prior to beginning construction, electric power companies are required to 

obtain a license from NRC to build and operate a new nuclear reactor or 

plant. In the past, NRC had a two-step process that required companies to 

obtain a permit to build a nuclear power plant and then to obtain a license

to operate the plant once construction was completed. In 1989, in 

response to the nuclear power industry’s concerns about the significant 

delays and added costs associated with NRC’s review of construction and 

operating license applications, NRC revised its licensing process to make 

it quicker and more predictable, with designs less subject to 

midconstruction, safety-related changes. Specifically, NRC combined 

construction permits and operating licenses into a single combined license 

(COL) and created two new licenses—design certifications and early site

permits—in 10 C.F.R. Part 52. A COL authorizes the licensee to construct 

and conditionally operate a nuclear power plant. In addition, NRC has 

formulated a design-centered review approach (DCRA), which is based on 

the concept of industry standardization of COL applications referencing a 

particular design. According to NRC, standardized applications would 

allow the staff, to the maximum extent practical, to use a “one issue, one 

review, one position” strategy to optimize the staff’s review effort, the 

resources needed to perform reviews, and the review schedules. 

Under Part 52, plant designs are standardized through design 

certifications. NRC reviews the design, limits on operation, and safety of a 

particular design; resolves any issues that arise; and then certifies the 

design through a rule-making process. One goal of the rule-making process 

is to establish stable plant designs that are not subject to major 

modifications during the COL application process. This provides more 

certainty to the applicant and allows NRC to use a single design review to

support multiple COL applications. A COL application is a detailed 

description of the proposed plant’s design, operations, site, and 

environmental impact. Once a design is certified, COL applicants can refer

to the associated design certification in their applications and do not have

to resubmit the information contained in the certification. COL applicants 

are not required to reference a design certification, but would then have to

submit the design information that would otherwise be in a certification. 

Another component of the DCRA is the “reference application,” which 

encourages applicants to use a standard application. Applicants work with 

the reactor’s vendor—for example, Westinghouse or General Electric—to 

develop a model application that subsequent applicants will use as the 

basis for their applications. NRC managers and NEI representatives 

estimate that 65 to 75 percent of the information in additional applications

will be identical to the associated reference application. NRC managers 

stated that each design under consideration will have a reference 

Page 52 GAO-07-105 Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Appendix III: New Reactor Licensing

application. NRC encourages applicants to use reference applications, but

they are not required to do so. 

The one aspect not standardized in Part 52 and the DCRA is site-specific 

factors. Applicants must submit information and assessments that address 

the safety, environmental impact, and emergency plans of a proposed site. 

Applicants have the option of providing that information through 

submitting an early site permit, which allows potential COL applicants to 

evaluate the suitability of a given site without going through the full COL 

application process. Once issued, an applicant can reference an early site

permit in its COL application and does not have to resubmit the site 

information. Although COL applicants are not required to reference an 

early site permit, if that review is not previously conducted, the company 

would then have to submit the site information that would otherwise be in 

an early site permit in the COL application. 

NRC has certified four reactor designs to date, two of which electric 

power companies selected in fiscal year 2006 for their intended COL 

applications—the AP1000 and the Advanced Boiling Water Reactor 

(ABWR). As of December 2006, companies had signaled their intent to use 

two other designs—the Evolutionary Pressurized Water Reactor (EPR) 

and the Economic Simplified, Boiling Water Reactor (ESBWR).1

 On the 

basis of previous experience, NRC estimates that new design certifications

will take about 30 months and require 120 full-time equivalent (FTE) 

positions. For each reactor design, table 5 identifies the vendor, 

certification status, and potential number of COL applications that plan to 

use this design. 

Table 5: Status of Reactor Design Certification, December 2006 

Design Certifications 

Reactor design Vendor 

Design certification

status

Number of 

potential COL 

applications

System 80+ Westinghouse Certified 0

ABWR General Electric,

Hitachi, Toshiba

Certified 2

AP600 Westinghouse Certified 0

 1

In December 2005, NRC docketed for review General Electric’s design certification 

application for its ESBWR. 

Page 53 GAO-07-105 Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Appendix III: New Reactor Licensing

Reactor design Vendor 

Design certification

status

Number of 

potential COL 

applications

AP1000 Westinghouse Certified 6

ESBWR General Electric Review in progress 3

EPR AREVA NP Certification review 

expected to begin in 

fiscal year 2008

5

USAPWR Mitsubishi Certification review

expected to begin in 

fiscal year 2008

0

Pebble-Bed Modular 

Reactor 

Eskom Precertification 0

International Reactor 

Innovative and Secure 

Westinghouse Precertification 0

Total 16

Source: NRC. 

Electric power companies have submitted letters of intent to NRC, stating 

that they plan to apply for 20 licenses to build and operate at least 29 new 

nuclear power reactors in fiscal years 2008 and 2009. NRC estimates that 

COL applications will take approximately 30 months for the technical 

review—additional review time and staff resources will be needed for 

applications that do not reference a certified design. Reference 

applications that reference an early site permit are expected to require 

approximately 68 FTEs, whereas subsequent applications are estimated to 

require approximately 38 FTEs. NRC estimates that reference applications 

that do not reference an ESP will require 83 FTEs, whereas subsequent 

applications are estimated to require approximately 53 FTEs. For the 20 

expected COL applications, figure 2 identifies the site locations, reactor 

design, electric power companies or consortia, and number of units. 

Combined Licenses 

Page 54 GAO-07-105 Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Appendix III: New Reactor Licensing

Figure 2: Twenty Potential COL Applications, as of December 2006 

a

Application is expected to reference an early site permit. 

Sources: NRC and NEI.

Design Company Site Unit

Expected

Receipt Date

AP1000

AP1000

AP1000

AP1000

AP1000

AP1000

ESBWR

ESBWR

ESBWR

EPR

EPR 

Duke

NuStart Energy

Progress Energy

Progress Energy

South Carolina Electric & Gas

Southern Nuclear Operating Co.

Dominion

Entergy

NuStart Energy

UniStar

UniStar

UniStar

UniStar

UniStar

Amarillo Power

NRG Energy

Florida Power & Light

TXU Power

Exelon

Unannounced

Total

Cherokee (SC)

Bellefonte (AL)

Harris (NC)

TBD (FL)

V.C. Summer (SC)

Vogtle (GA)a

North Anna (VA)a

River Bend (LA)

Grand Gulf (MS)

a

Calvert Cliffs (MD)

TBD

TBD

TBD

Nine Mile Point (NY)

TBD (TX)a

South Texas Project (TX)

Levy County (FL)

Comanche Peak (TX) 

TBD

TBD 

20

EPR

EPR

EPR

ABWR

ABWR

TBD

TBD

TBD

TBD

2

2

2

2

2

2

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

2

2

1

2

1

1

29

October 2007

October 2007

October 2007

July 2008

October 2007

March 2008

November 2007

May 2008

November 2007

1st quarter FY 2008

1st half FY 2008

1st half FY 2008

1st half FY 2008

4th quarter FY 2008

1st half FY 2008

October 2007

2nd half FY 2009

4th quarter 2008

November 2008

4th quarter FY 2008

PA

ND

SD

NE

TX

KS

OK

MN

IA

MO

AR

LA

IL

MS

IN

KY

TN

AL

FL

GA

SC

NC

VA

OH

NH

MA

RI MI

WI NY

ME

VT

WV

CT

NJ

DE

MD

DC

•

•

•

•

• •

•

•

•

•

•

•

Page 55 GAO-07-105 Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Appendix IV: Time Line of NRC’s Workforce Appendix IV Reorganizations : Time Line of NRC’s Workforce 

Reorganizations 

Since August 2005, NRC has announced several plans to reorganize and 

restructure its workforce. Previous actions since 2002 include the creation 

of the Office of Nuclear Security and Incident Response (NSIR) to 

consolidate security, incident response, and emergency preparedness. As 

of December 2006, NRC made announcements to take the following 

actions: 

• August 2005: NRC announced plans to reorganize NRR to (1) prepare for 

the increase in the new reactor licensing workload, (2) better align the 

organization for risk informed regulation, and (3) reduce a layer of 

executive management to allow an increase in the number of supervisors. 

In part, the reorganization created the Division of New Reactor Licensing; 

its implementation was effective October 30, 2005. 

• October 2005: NSIR established a New Reactor Security Team in its 

Division of Security Policy devoted solely to new reactor security 

licensing. In addition, as of September 2006, the Division of Preparedness 

approved realignment consistent with that of other divisions in NSIR. 

• November 2005: The Commission approved the reorganization of NSIR to 

(1) better align and manage the organization consistent with the scope and 

complexity of current and emergent nuclear security work, (2) enhance 

organizational effectiveness, (3) improve the supervisory span of control, 

and (4) restructure the organization consistent with the agency’s current 

human capital management strategy and goals. The reorganization split the 

Division of Nuclear Security into two divisions: the Division of Security 

Policy and the Division of Security Operations, each having two deputy 

directors. Included in the approved reorganization is a new division-level 

structure with five to six branches reporting to each division, with 

multiple teams. The reorganization was implemented on February 19,

2006. 

• April 2006: The Commission approved the initial approach to NRC’s 

Construction Inspection Program, which creates a dedicated organization

with total responsibility for the execution of all construction inspection 

activities across the country, and approved its location in region II’s 

offices in Atlanta, Georgia. In July 2006, the Commission approved the 

creation of a Deputy Regional Administrator for Construction in region II. 

The organization began operations on October 1, 2006. 

• April 2006: NRC’s Office of General Counsel implemented a 

reorganization to provide increased focus and attention to new reactor 

licensing, creating a Division of New Reactor Programs. 

Page 56 GAO-07-105 Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Appendix IV: Time Line of NRC’s Workforce 

Reorganizations 

• July 2006: NRC announced plans to reorganize its Nuclear Materials 

Safety and Safeguards and Office of State and Tribal Programs to combine 

activities that deal primarily with materials licensing, rulemaking and 

decommissioning under a new Office of National Materials. Nuclear 

Material Safety and Safeguards’ responsibilities include the nuclear fuel

cycle’s processing, transportation, and spent fuel storage and disposal. The 

reorganization was implemented on October 1, 2006. 

• August 2006: The Commission approved the creation of the Office of New 

Reactors, in response to dramatic growth in this program and to improve 

the span of control and organizational focus on new reactor licensing, 

while ensuring that appropriate focus is maintained on the safety of 

operating reactors. The Office of New Reactors is to be initially staffed 

with about 230 personnel by January 2007, and about 440 by July 2007.1

Five NRR branches are expected to migrate to the Office of New Reactors, 

including reactor planning and scheduling, reactor infrastructure guidance

development, reactor environmental projects, and two branches 

associated with three reactor designs. 

In addition to these actions, as of August 2006 the Office of Administration 

had added procurement, space management, and regulatory support staff; 

reorganized its Division of Facilities and Security; and was planning to 

reorganize the Division of Contracts to support the growth in new reactor

licensing work. 

 1

NRC is maintaining a level of flexibility in its staffing plan so that adjustments can be made

as the staff gains experience in performing new reactor licensing reviews, according to

NRC managers. 

Page 57 GAO-07-105 Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Appendix V: NRC’s Use of Human Capital Appendix V Flexibilities, Authorities, Tools, and Programs : NRC’s Use of Human Capital 

Flexibilities, Authorities, Tools, and 

Programs 

NRC carries out many of its human capital programs under the authority 

of section 161(d) of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954.

1

 While section 161(d) 

directs NRC to comply with classification and associated pay provisions of 

Title 5 of the United States Code, NRC is authorized to depart from them 

to the extent necessary to discharge its responsibilities, within certain 

prescribed limits. This authority allows NRC flexibility in various areas, 

such as recruitment and retention incentives, details to other positions in 

the agency, and setting pay for entry-level scientific and technical 

personnel. Some of NRC’s human capital programs are authorized under 

laws that also apply to other federal agencies, such as the Federal 

Workforce Flexibility Act of 20042

 and certain provisions of Title 5.3 The 

Energy Policy Act of 20054

 gave NRC additional human capital flexibilities.

In August 2006, 32 of the 45 NRC managers we surveyed assessed the 

value of each of these flexibilities, authorities, tools, and programs 

(referred to as flexibilities) in recruiting, hiring, developing, and retaining 

employees. Table 6 shows the number of survey respondents who rated 

each of NRC’s flexibilities as “very to extremely valuable,” or “not at all to

moderately valuable,” or “do not use.” 

Table 6: NRC Managers’ Assessment of the Use of Human Capital Flexibilities, Authorities, Tools, and Programs 

Number of respondents, by rating category

Flexibility,

authority, tool, or

program Definition 

Very to

extremely 

valuable 

Not at all to

moderately 

valuable Do not use

Advances in pay Used for newly appointed employees, advance payment of 

basic pay for no more than two pay periods. Typically is 

used for recent college graduates to assist in moving to a 

new location and associated costs. 

12 8 10

Awards Cash awards, honorary awards, informal recognition 

awards, and time-off awards may be given to federal

employees to recognize employee and group performance.

28 4 0

Childcare on-site, 

headquarters 

An on-site childcare center to provide employees with the 

opportunity to balance career and family. 

15 7 10

 1

42 U.S.C. § 2201(d). 

2

Pub. L. No. 108-411. 

3

For example, 5 U.S.C. § 5524a (authorizing advances in pay for newly appointed 

employees, 5 U.S.C. § 4503 (authorizing cash awards), and 5 U.S.C. § 3109 (authorizing 

employment of experts and consultants). 

4

Pub. L. No. 109-58. 

Page 58 GAO-07-105 Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Appendix V: NRC’s Use of Human Capital 

Flexibilities, Authorities, Tools, and Programs

Number of respondents, by rating category

Flexibility,

authority, tool, or

program Definition 

Very to

extremely 

valuable 

Not at all to

moderately 

valuable Do not use

Childcare tuition

assistance 

Appropriated funds (from salaries and expenses) used to 

assist lower income employees with the costs of child care.

8 10 10

Cooperative 

Program (Student 

Career Experience 

Program) 

A formally structured program for college or university 

students pursuing undergraduate or graduate degrees that 

allows them to alternate semesters of work and study. 

24 8 0

Details A personnel action that temporarily assigns employees in 

120-day increments to other positions within the agency. 

This provides additional work experience and exposure for 

the employee.

21 10 0

Differing 

Professional 

Opinions Program 

An internal NRC program that seeks to engender an

environment in which employees feel comfortable 

contributing alternative professional theories or opinions 

and are safe from retaliation.

16 15 0

Direct hire authority An OPM-granted authority that expedites the hiring process. 

This authority currently is not available to NRC. 

16 2 13

Early replacement 

hiring (double 

encumbering) 

Typically used with employees who plan to retire. Allows 

NRC to hire someone for a position not yet vacated to 

ensure the continuity of critical skills. 

27 5 0

Employee

assistance program 

Provides a range of confidential services, including 

counseling and referrals, to employees experiencing such

personal problems as work and family pressures; substance 

abuse; or financial problems that can adversely affect 

performance, reliability, and personal health.

21 10 0

Developmental

assignments and 

employee rotations 

Internal rotations and/or developmental assignments that 

allow employees to work in another office or position on a 

temporary basis as well as to fill workforce gaps. 

26 6 0

Employment of 

experts/consultants 

The excepted service appointment is used to hire experts 

and consultants to perform expert or consultant work that is

temporary (not to exceed 1 year) or intermittent. 

23 8 1

Fitness center onsite, headquarters An on-site fitness center with gym equipment, nutritional 

counseling, and health programs to promote work/life 

balance. 

13 8 9

Flexible and 

compressed work 

schedules 

Allow variations in starting and ending times or allow 

employees to complete the basic 80-hour biweekly work 

requirement in fewer than 10 workdays. 

27 4 0

Formal training and 

development 

NRC has a training and development program that 

incorporates external and internal training, self-paced 

learning, and formal developmental and qualification 

programs. 

31 1 0

Page 59 GAO-07-105 Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Appendix V: NRC’s Use of Human Capital 

Flexibilities, Authorities, Tools, and Programs

Number of respondents, by rating category

Flexibility,

authority, tool, or

program Definition 

Very to

extremely 

valuable 

Not at all to

moderately 

valuable Do not use

Graduate fellowship 

program 

A developmental program used to recruit, retain, and 

develop technical experts through experience and 

advanced degrees in specialized engineering and scientific 

disciplines. Entails a minimum 9-month period of work at 

NRC, pursuit of a graduate education, and permanent 

return to the agency in a position that uses the learning 

gained through graduate study. 

15 13 3

Grants to schools Authorized in the Energy Policy Act of 2005. Allows the 

agency to provide grants to universities and college with

programs and research that support NRC’s mission. 

4 10 16

Healthcare on-site, 

headquarters 

An on-site health clinic staffed with nurses and a doctor to 

promote work/life balance. 

18 8 5

Honor Law 

Graduate Program 

A 2-year program for graduating law students or judicial law

clerks with high academic credentials featuring 6-month 

rotations through different divisions in the Office of General

Counsel and additional training. 

13 2 16

Implementation of 

federal leave 

programs 

NRC has the authority to administer leave and excused 

absences, with regard to NRC work requirements and the 

concerns of individual employees. For example, NRC can 

grant employees annual leave at the beginning of the year 

or advanced sick leave in appropriate situations or 

accommodate employees’ personal needs through leave 

programs. 

25 5 0

Intergovernmental 

Personnel Act 

assignments 

Temporary (e.g., 2-year) assignments from and to state and 

local governments, colleges and universities, tribal 

governments, and other not-for-profit organizations made 

for the mutual benefit of the federal government and the 

nonfederal entity. 

1 21 7

Knowledge 

management/ 

knowledge transfer 

NRC’s framework to integrate new and existing approaches

for generating, capturing, and transferring knowledge 

relevant to the agency’s mission. 

24 8 0

Leadership Potential 

Program 

A 12-month, part-time program to prepare employees for 

team leader and supervisory roles, or other positions 

requiring supervisory, managerial, and leadership skills. 

29 3 0

Nuclear Safety

Professional 

Development 

Program 

A 2-year developmental program, open to entry-level 

applicants with high academic credentials, featuring 

structured coursework, formal and informal training events, 

and tailored developmental assignments to expose 

participants to the range of regulatory activities NRC 

performs. 

31 1 0

Other special 

employment 

Special employment programs to facilitate the recruitment of 

highly qualified candidates from diverse backgrounds to fill 

a wide variety of positions and job training opportunities 

within the agency. 

10 9 10

Page 60 GAO-07-105 Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Appendix V: NRC’s Use of Human Capital 

Flexibilities, Authorities, Tools, and Programs

Number of respondents, by rating category

Flexibility,

authority, tool, or

program Definition 

Very to

extremely 

valuable 

Not at all to

moderately 

valuable Do not use

Part-time 

employment 

A part-time work schedule that requires an employee to 

work at least 16 hours, but no more than 32 hours, weekly. 

It is typically used to retain employees with critical skills who

may otherwise leave the agency. 

15 15 1

Pay setting authority This authority allows NRC to set pay within limits prescribed

by its statute. This authority is currently used to set pay, for 

example, for entry-level science and engineering applicants 

and resident inspectors. 

23 5 3

Recruitment 

incentives 

Subject to management approval, bonuses of up to 25 

percent of employee’s pay are available to recruit highly 

qualified and competitive candidates. 

29 3 0

Recruitment 

tokens/giveaways 

Giveaway items used to promote NRC at recruiting events. 6 26 0

Re-employed

annuitants 

Used to obtain staff with knowledge, skills and abilities that 

would otherwise be difficult to obtain. This tool allows the 

agency to rehire, at full salary, employees who have retired 

from civil service. 

a a a

Referral awards The referral award provides employees with a monetary 

award if candidates referred to NRC are hired. 

14 16 1

Relocation 

incentives 

One-time bonuses up to 25 percent of basic pay that are 

offered to relocate new or existing employees in difficult-tofill positions. 

29 3 0

Retention incentives Authorized additional percentage of pay to retain employees 

with knowledge, skills, or abilities that would otherwise be 

difficult to fill. 

14 13 5

Salary exceptions Special pay flexibility to appoint employees with superior 

qualification to a higher step rate above the first step of their 

grade. 

24 6 2

Schedule variations 

for training 

Alteration of work schedules to accommodate training. 15 11 3

Scholarship and 

Fellowship for 

Service 

Scholarships or fellowships available to students pursuing 

degrees in a field of study that is a mission-critical skill 

area—contingent upon an agreed period of service at NRC.

10 5 14

Service credit for 

annual leave 

Allows the agency to grant a newly appointed or 

reappointed employee credit for prior work experience that 

would otherwise not be creditable for the purpose of 

determining the employee’s annual leave accrual rate. 

23 4 3

Senior Executive 

Service Candidate 

Development 

Program 

A program providing high potential GG-14 and above 

employees with training and developmental activities that 

prepare them for future positions as senior executives within

the agency. 

29 3 0

Page 61 GAO-07-105 Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Appendix V: NRC’s Use of Human Capital 

Flexibilities, Authorities, Tools, and Programs

Number of respondents, by rating category

Flexibility,

authority, tool, or

program Definition 

Very to

extremely 

valuable 

Not at all to

moderately 

valuable Do not use

Special rate 

schedules or 

administratively 

determined rates 

Under its statutory authority, NRC can establish rates for 

scientific and technical positions above the regular general

schedule rates, within prescribed limits. (See also pay 

setting authority.) 

19 9 3

Student loan 

repayments 

An incentive authorizing the repayment of student loans. 21 10 1

Summer hire 

program (Student 

Temporary 

Employment 

Program) 

Through this program, college and high school students 

have the opportunity to work at NRC—typically during the 

summer to gain exposure to career opportunities at the 

agency. 

24 8 0

Lodging and 

transportation 

expenses for 

student employees 

In some cases, NRC may offer to pay lodging, 

transportation, and subsistence expenses for students 

working for the agency, through the Student Temporary 

Employment Program and the Student Career Experience 

Program. 

20 9 3

Team Leader 

Development 

Program 

A part-time program that typically lasts 12 months to 

develop the agency’s team leaders for supervisory or other 

positions requiring supervisory, managerial, and leadership 

skills and abilities, with training and development 

opportunities comparable to the Leadership Potential 

Program. 

b b b

Telecommuting

(telework) 

A recruitment and retention tool that provides some 

employees with flexible work arrangements. Telecommuting

can occur on a project-based or fixed schedule, from home 

or through an official Federal Telecommuting Center. 

17 15 0

Undergraduate

Scholarship

Program 

This program provides tuition, fees, and books for a limited 

number of college seniors who participated in NRC’s 

Cooperative Program and obligates recipients to a specified

period of employment with NRC. 

12 6 13

Visiting fellows Used to supplement NRC expertise in medicine, health 

physics, engineering, and other professional (e.g., legal) 

and scientific disciplines by employing visiting fellows who 

can contribute to NRC’s mission. 

3 11 15

Voluntary leave 

transfer 

Allows other federal employees to donate annual leave to 

an employee who has a personal or family medical

emergency and who has exhausted his or her own leave. 

16 15 0

Voluntary 

Separation Incentive 

Payments and 

Voluntary Early

Retirement Authority 

Voluntary Separation Incentive Payments and Voluntary 

Early Retirement Authority help agencies complete major 

downsizing with minimal workforce disruption. 

11 17 3

Waiver of dual 

compensation 

limitations 

Using this authority, NRC can waive the salary “offset” 

required when reemploying retired Federal employees who 

receive a federal pension. 

23 4 4

Page 62 GAO-07-105 Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Appendix V: NRC’s Use of Human Capital 

Flexibilities, Authorities, Tools, and Programs

Number of respondents, by rating category

Flexibility,

authority, tool, or

program Definition 

Very to

extremely 

valuable 

Not at all to

moderately 

valuable Do not use

Waiver of time in 

grade 

Director of OHR may approve exceptions to the rate of 

promotion upon written request by office directors or 

regional administrators. 

11 16 4

Source: Results of GAO survey of 32 NRC managers. 

Note: Responses may not total 32 because some managers did not respond to every question. 

a

NRC discontinued use of this flexibility in 2006 in favor of the pension offset waiver.

b

NRC began this program in 2006.

Page 63 GAO-07-105 Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Appendix VI: Comments from the Nuclear Appendix VI: Comments from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission

Regulatory Commission 

Page 64 GAO-07-105 Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Appendix VI: Comments from the Nuclear 

Regulatory Commission

Page 65 GAO-07-105 Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Appendix VII: 

A

GAO Contact and Staff 

cknowledgments 

Page 66 GAO-07-105

Appendix VII: GAO Contact and Staff 

Acknowledgments 

Jim Wells, (202) 512-3841 or wellsj@gao.gov 

In addition to the individual named above, Richard Cheston (Assistant 

Director), Sarah J. Lynch, Katherine Hudson Walker, Nancy Crothers, 

Brandon Booth, William Doherty, Cindy Gilbert, and Doreen Feldman 

made key contributions to this report. 

GAO Contact 

Staff 

Acknowledgments 

Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Related GAO Reports 

Page 67 GAO-07-105

Related GAO Reports 

Nuclear Regulatory Commission: Oversight of Nuclear Power Plant 

Safety Has Improved, but Refinements Are Needed. GAO-06-1029. 

Washington, D.C.: September 27, 2006. 

Nuclear Power Plants: Efforts Made to Upgrade Security, but the Nuclear 

Regulatory Commission’s Design Basis Threat Process Should Be 

Improved. GAO-06-388. Washington, D.C.: March 14, 2006. 

Nuclear Regulatory Commission: Challenges Facing NRC in Effectively 

Carrying Out Its Mission. GAO-05-754T. Washington, D.C.: May 26, 2005. 

Nuclear Regulatory Commission: Preliminary Observations on Efforts 

to Improve Security at Nuclear Power Plants. GAO-04-1064T. Washington, 

D.C.: September 14, 2004. 

Nuclear Regulation: NRC Needs to More Aggressively and 

Comprehensively Resolve Issues Related to the Davis-Besse Nuclear 

Power Plant’s Shutdown. GAO-04-415. Washington, D.C.: May 17, 2004. 

Nuclear Regulatory Commission: Oversight of Security at Commercial

Nuclear Power Plants Needs to Be Strengthened. GAO-03-752 Washington, 

D.C.: September 4, 2003. 

Nuclear Regulatory Commission: Status of Achieving Key Outcomes and 

Addressing Major Management Challenges. GAO-01-760. Washington, 

D.C.: June 29, 2001. 

Nuclear Regulation: Challenges Confronting NRC in a Changing 

Regulatory Environment. GAO-01-707T. Washington, D.C.: May 8, 2001.

Major Management Challenges and Performance Risks: Nuclear 

Regulatory Commission. GAO-01-259. Washington, D.C.: January 2001. 

Defense Space Activities: Management Actions Are Needed to Better 

Identify, Track, and Train Air Force Space Personnel. GAO-06-908. 

Washington, D.C.: September 21, 2006. 

Nuclear Regulatory

Commission 

Strategic Workforce 

Planning and Human 

Capital Management 

The Federal Workforce: Additional Insights Could Enhance Agency 

Efforts Related to Hispanic Representation. GAO-06-832. Washington, 

D.C.: August 17, 2006. 

Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Related GAO Reports 

Special Operations Forces: Several Human Capital Challenges Must Be 

Addressed to Meet Expanded Role. GAO-06-812. Washington, D.C.: July 31, 

2006. 

Securities and Exchange Commission: Some Progress Made on Strategic 

Human Capital Management. GAO-06-86. Washington, D.C.: January 10,

2006. 

International Trade: USTR Would Benefit from Greater Use of Strategic 

Human Capital Management Principles. GAO-06-167. Washington, D.C.: 

December 6, 2005. 

Department of Homeland Security: Strategic Management of Training 

Important for Successful Transformation. GAO-05-888. Washington, D.C.: 

September 23, 2005. 

Human Capital: Selected Agencies Have Opportunities to Enhance 

Existing Succession Planning and Management Efforts. GAO-05-585. 

Washington, D.C.: June 30, 2005. 

Human Capital: Agencies Need Leadership and the Supporting 

Infrastructure to Take Advantage of New Flexibilities. GAO-05-616T. 

Washington, D.C.: April 21, 2005. 

Human Capital: Selected Agencies’ Statutory Authorities Could Offer 

Options in Developing a Framework for Governmentwide Reform. 

GAO-05-398R. Washington, D.C.: April 21, 2005. 

National Nuclear Security Administration: Contractors’ Strategies to 

Recruit and Retain a Critically Skilled Workforce Are Generally 

Effective. GAO-05-164. Washington, D.C.: February 2, 2005. 

Diversity Management: Expert-Identified Leading Practices and Agency 

Examples. GAO-05-90. Washington, D.C.: January 14, 2005. 

Human Capital: Principles, Criteria, and Processes for Governmentwide

Federal Human Capital Reform. GAO-05-69SP. Washington, D.C.: 

December 2004. 

Human Capital: Increasing Agencies’ Use of New Hiring Flexibilities. 

GAO-04-959T. Washington, D.C.: July 13, 2004. 

Page 68 GAO-07-105 Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Related GAO Reports 

Human Capital: Key Practices to Increasing Federal Telework. GAO-04-

950T. Washington, D.C.: July 8, 2004.

Human Capital: Status of Efforts to Improve Federal Hiring. GAO-04-

796T. Washington, D.C.: June 7, 2004.

Human Capital: A Guide for Assessing Strategic Training and 

Development Efforts in the Federal Government. GAO-04-546G. 

Washington, D.C.: March 2004. 

Human Capital: Selected Agencies’ Experiences and Lessons Learned in

Designing Training and Development Programs. GAO-04-291. 

Washington, D.C.: January 30, 2004. 

Human Capital: Key Principles for Effective Strategic Workforce 

Planning. GAO-04-39. Washington, D.C.: December 11, 2003. 

Human Capital: Succession Planning and Management Is Critical 

Driver of Organizational Transformation. GAO-04-127T. Washington, 

D.C.: October 1, 2003. 

Human Capital: A Guide for Assessing Strategic Training and 

Development Efforts in the Federal Government (Exposure Draft). GAO03-893G. Washington, D.C.: July 2003. 

Human Capital: Opportunities to Improve Executive Agencies’ Hiring 

Processes. GAO-03-450. Washington, D.C.: May 30, 2003. 

Human Capital: OPM Can Better Assist Agencies in Using Personnel 

Flexibilities. GAO-03-428. Washington, D.C.: May 9, 2003. 

Human Capital: Effective Use of Flexibilities Can Assist Agencies in 

Managing Their Workforces. GAO-03-2. Washington, D.C.: December 6, 

2002. 

A Model of Strategic Human Capital Management. (Exposure Draft)

GAO-02-373SP. Washington, D.C.: March 15, 2002. 

(360670) Page 69 GAO-07-105 Nuclear Regulatory Commission
GAO’s Mission The Government Accountability Office, the audit, evaluation and 

investigative arm of Congress, exists to support Congress in meeting its 

constitutional responsibilities and to help improve the performance and 

accountability of the federal government for the American people. GAO 

examines the use of public funds; evaluates federal programs and policies; 

and provides analyses, recommendations, and other assistance to help

Congress make informed oversight, policy, and funding decisions. GAO’s 

commitment to good government is reflected in its core values of 

accountability, integrity, and reliability. 

The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no cost

is through GAO’s Web site (www.gao.gov). Each weekday, GAO posts 

newly released reports, testimony, and correspondence on its Web site. To

have GAO e-mail you a list of newly posted products every afternoon, go 

to www.gao.gov and select “Subscribe to Updates.” 

The first copy of each printed report is free. Additional copies are $2 each. 

A check or money order should be made out to the Superintendent of 

Documents. GAO also accepts VISA and Mastercard. Orders for 100 or 

more copies mailed to a single address are discounted 25 percent. Orders 

should be sent to: 

U.S. Government Accountability Office 

441 G Street NW, Room LM 

Washington, D.C. 20548 

To order by Phone: Voice: (202) 512-6000 

TDD: (202) 512-2537 

Fax: (202) 512-6061 

Contact: 

Web site: www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm

E-mail: fraudnet@gao.gov

Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or (202) 512-7470 

Gloria Jarmon, Managing Director, JarmonG@gao.gov (202) 512-4400 

U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7125 

Washington, D.C. 20548 

Paul Anderson, Managing Director, AndersonP1@gao.gov (202) 512-4800

U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7149 

Washington, D.C. 20548 

Obtaining Copies of 

GAO Reports and 

Testimony

Order by Mail or Phone 

To Report Fraud,

Waste, and Abuse in 

Federal Programs 

Congressional 

Relations 

Public Affairs 

PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER