OSHRC Fiscal Year 2002 Budget Request

Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission

OSHRC

Fiscal Year 2002

Integrated Budget Request

and

Annual Performance Plan

April 2001

Table of Contents

Fiscal Year 2002 Integrated Annual Performance Plan and Budget Request

Page

I. Summary and Highlights

II. Introduction -- Mission, Vision, and Strategic Goals

III. Budget Request and Annual Performance Plan by Organizational Function

IV. Strategies in the Strategic Plan (Revised)

V. FY 2001 Revised Final Annual Performance Plan

VI. Budget by Object Classification Category

VII. Other Tables

I. Summary and Highlights

The Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission is requesting $8,964,000 in funding for FY 2002. This amount is 2.8 percent above the amount available for FY 2001 ($8,720,000). The request would support 70 FTEs. The increase reflects the impact of the January 2001 and 2002 pay raises.

This amount would allow the Review Commission to fulfill its legislative mandate to serve as an administrative court providing just and prompt resolution of disputes involving the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), employers charged with violations of Federal safety and health standards, and employees and/or their representatives. The request supports the goals in our strategic plan that aim to improve service to and communications with the public along with an organizational goal that supports the two main goals.

Highlights of the FY 2002 budget request, more fully detailed in subsequent sections, are as follows:

The pay request would allow us to fund 70 FTEs to address the increasing complexity of the judicial workload and the retirement of old and complex cases at the review level. The request would allow us to begin the implementation of a workforce succession plan.
The request reflects the payroll and benefit increases due to mandatory cost of living and locality pay increases, increases in benefits costs due to changes in benefits, and within grade increases. The request assumes that there will be no Commission or judicial vacancies in FY 2002.
The request includes $727,000 for office space rent. This amount reflects the last year of savings from negotiations with GSA in FY 2000.
The funds would allow $187,000 for judicial travel and transcript costs.
The funds would also enable us to maintain our website which provides easy access to Review Commission decisions.
The request would provide for support of automation and technology, including hardware, software and contractual support and would allow us to continue investing in our employees.

The principal factors that affect the workload of our Administrative Law Judges are the number of safety and health inspections carried out by OSHA each year, the nature of those inspections, and the rate at which employers choose to contest the citations issued and penalties proposed by OSHA as a result of its enforcement activity. The FY 2002 request assumes that OSHA will conduct approximately the same number of inspections in FY 2002 as are planned for FY 2001.

At the Commission level, the maintenance of a three-member Commission, or at a minimum, a quorum, is the major factor impacting the Commission's workload. The Commission consists of three members. The Occupational Safety and Health Act requires a quorum of two Commissioners and the affirmative vote of two Commissioners to decide a case. During periods when the Commission has no quorum, no cases can be decided. With fewer than three members, deadlocks on votes may result. Cases with large proposed penalties and more complex cases have a greater likelihood of an impasse with only two members. Action on important issues may be postponed and issuance of pending cases may be delayed. During FY 2002 we expect that the Commission will be fully staffed. However, there is currently a vacancy in the Commission.

Conclusion

Spending has been pared to the maximum extent possible in every area. Our goals are to resolve cases and provide information to the public. Without the needed funding, the ability to resolve cases at the Administrative Law Judge and Commission levels would be impacted. Our communications with the public would be diminished and organizational effectiveness would be reduced.

II. Introduction -- Mission,

Vision, and

Strategic Goals

The Review Commission is an independent, adjudicatory agency created by the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970. Its sole statutory mandate is to serve as an administrative court providing just and expeditious resolution of disputes involving OSHA, employers charged with violations of Federal safety and health standards, and employees and/or their representatives. The Review Commission was created by Congress as an agency completely independent of the Department of Labor to ensure that OSHA's enforcement actions are carried out in accordance with the law and that all parties are treated consistent with due process should a dispute arise.

The Occupational Safety and Health Act and the Review Commission's Rules of Procedure provide two levels of adjudication when an employer timely contests an OSHA citation for alleged violations of the Act or failure to abate such alleged violations. The first is a trial level, which affords an opportunity for a hearing before a Review Commission Administrative Law Judge. The judge's decision becomes final unless the decision is directed for review to the Commission. The second level is a discretionary appellate review of the judge's decision by the Commission members. Both before its judges and the Commissioners, the Review Commission provides fair and impartial adjudication of cases concerning the safety and health of employees' working conditions in the United States.

The principal (national) office of the Review Commission is located in Washington, D.C. There are also regional offices in Atlanta and Denver.

Mission Statement

The mission of the Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission is to provide an impartial forum for the just and prompt adjudication of workplace safety and health disputes involving the Department of Labor, employers and employees, and/or their representatives under the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970.

Vision Statement

The Review Commission continues to strive to be:

a quasi judicial body that is -- and is recognized for being -- objective, fair, prompt, and professional;

an agency that creates a body of law through its decisions that defines and explains the rights and responsibilities of employers and employees under the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970;

a model Federal agency with highly effective processes, a highly motivated, qualified and diverse workforce, and modern information management, communications, and administrative systems; and

an agency that values team work, develops its employees, and strives to improve its performance, service, and value to the American people.

Strategic Goals

The Review Commission has three strategic goals:

Goal #1: Public Service Goal: To assure fair, just, and expeditious adjudication of disputes brought before the Commission and its judges, and achieve a high level of quality in all legal decisions

Goal #2: External Communications Goal: To enhance the efficiency and effectiveness of communications between the Commission and the public it serves

Goal #3: Organizational Goal: To further develop and invest in a highly effective, motivated, and diverse workforce equipped with modern information technology and communications systems to facilitate the accomplishment of its goals, meet program needs and increase organizational effectiveness and efficiency

NOTE: The Review Commission revised its Strategic Plan in October 2000. Copies of the previous and revised plans appear in our website: www.oshrc.gov. A copy of the strategies in our revised plan appears under section IV of this document. The Review Commission also revised its FY 2001 Final Annual Performance Plan, and a copy appears under section V of this document.

III. Budget Request

and

Annual Performance Plan

Organizational function

FY 2002 Budget Request and Annual Performance Plan

by Organizational Function

This section describes the three functions of the Review Commission:

Administrative Law Judge function,

the Commission function, and

the Management and Administration function.

Each function has a staff assigned exclusively to it, and there is virtually no sharing of staff resources between the functions. This circumstance principally stems from the nature of the Administrative Law Judge and Commission functions, which must be separate so that each of these review levels is, both in fact and appearance, independent of the other. The Management and Administration function supports both the Administrative Law Judge and Commission functions.

Budget by Major Categories

FY 2001 - FY 2002

(In 000s of dollars)

	FY 2001 (CY)		FY 2002 (BY)
	$	%	$	%
Personnel Compensation and Benefits	7,030	80.1%	7,274	81.1%
Non-Payroll	1,690	19.9%	1,690	18.9%
Total Obligations	8,720	100%	8,964	100%

Full Time Equivalent Positions	72		70

Personnel Compensation and Benefits are the Agency's largest cost. In FY 2002, Personnel Compensation and Benefits will constitute 81.1 percent of the amount requested. This proportion is 1 percent greater than in FY 2001 and reflects the impact of the January 2001 and 2002 pay raises.

The request would allow the Review Commission to begin the implementation of a workforce succession plan. Twenty-five percent of the Review Commission's permanent staff can retire now. By the end of FY 2003, 53 percent of the permanent staff will be able to retire. Seventy-five percent of our Administrative Law Judges, can retire now. Similarly, one third of our attorneys could retire by the end of FY 2003.

Staffing by function is as follows:

FTE by Function
	FY 2001 Est.	FY 2002 Est.
Administrative Law Judge	29	29
Commission	25.5	23.5
Management and Administration	17.5	17.5
Total	72	70

Administrative Law Judge Function

Function

The function of the Review Commission's Administrative Law Judge Division is to conduct formal hearings and related proceedings in a fair, just, and expeditious manner. The function is directly related to our public service goal.

The Administrative Law Judges report organizationally, through the Chief Judge, to the Chairman. However, they act independently in arriving at case decisions. The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, which we follow, provide guidelines for managing cases. The rules require a "just, speedy and inexpensive determination of every action."

Proceedings Before the Review Commission's Administrative Law Judges

The events leading to the presentation of an OSHA case before a Review Commission Administrative Law Judge follow an established procedure. To contest all or part of a citation, penalty, or abatement period, an employer must file a notice of contest within 15 working days from the receipt of the citation proposed by OSHA. The Secretary of Labor transmits the notice of contest and all relevant documents to the Review Commission's Executive Secretary for filing. After the case is docketed, it is forwarded to the Office of the Chief Judge who monitors the process and assigns the case to an Administrative Law Judge. The case is generally assigned to an Administrative Law Judge in the Review Commission office closest to where the alleged violation occurred. Thereafter, the Administrative Law Judge has full responsibility for all pre-hearing and pre-trial procedures, including settlement, and is charged with providing a fair and impartial hearing in an expeditious manner, and rendering a decision promptly.

Administrative Law Judge Operations

The Review Commission strives to increase the percent of cases adjudicated, strengthen its settlement procedures and case management responsibilities, and maintain the success of its E-Z Trial and Settlement Part processes. The Administrative Law Judge function also has to address a caseload which is becoming more complex. Achieving these ends is the primary responsibility of the Chief Administrative Law Judge.

OSHA's emphasis during recent years on more serious workplace hazards, and the consequent increase in proposed penalties, has translated into more complicated cases, and more costly trials. These cases command a greater portion of the judges' time. The Review Commission anticipates that this trend will continue.

The complexity of these cases is the result of the existence of any one or a combination of the following:

the intricacies of the law,

the number of parties,

the volume of documents, including transcripts,

the large number of witnesses (including expert witnesses in such fields as engineering, architecture, construction, soil, physics, epidemiology, pathology, neurology and infectious diseases),

the length of the trial,

the large amounts of money involved,

the number of alleged violations, items, and affirmative defenses (including distinct and separate items),

the technical, novel, difficult or new standards raised,

the types of cases, such as those involving air pollution, asbestos, lead poisoning, tuberculosis, or ergonomics, or

the extensive pre-trial discovery in the largest or most complex cases, including volumes of depositions and interrogatories, conferences, and numerous motions.

This trend presents a challenge to the goal of achieving a just and prompt decision in each case.

In FY 1999, the Review Commission piloted a mandatory settlement process known as the "Settlement Part" to handle large cases. The "Settlement Part" requires formal settlement efforts where the proposed penalty is $200,000 or over, or if the Chief Judge finds that a case is appropriate for this part because of its complexity. Such cases have a higher probability of going to trial, and when they do, they are likely to take more than two years to resolve under our conventional process. In FY 2000, 42 cases were assigned to "Settlement Part." In FY 1999, the settlement procedure resulted in the settlement of a majority of the cases assigned to the program. A formal evaluation of the program was completed in September 2000. The evaluation showed generally positive results, including substantial satisfaction among the program's users. Accordingly, the Commission voted to make the program permanent. The Chairman will continue to monitor the program to ensure its effectiveness.

The E-Z Trial process allows parties with relatively simple cases to have their "day in court" unencumbered by the myriad rules of procedure and evidence while assuring that due process requirements are maintained. Under this process, small businesses with or without counsel can present a case before an impartial judge and receive a swift decision. Most paperwork, including legal filings, has been eliminated so that justice can be rendered swiftly and inexpensively. The process is intended to reduce the time and legal expenses to employers contesting relatively small penalty cases. The process also allows more time for Administrative Law Judges to address the more complex cases.

The Review Commission expects to continue the use of the E-Z Trial process and to evaluate its effectiveness in FY 2001.

E-Z Trial Case Activity

FY 1998 through FY 2002

	FY 1998	FY 1999	FY 2000	FY 2001	FY 2002
	Actual	Actual	Actual	Est.	Est.

New Cases	2,124	2,324	2,407	2,500	2,500
Cases assigned to E-Z Trial	611	733	934	975	975

The proportion of new cases assigned to the E-Z Trial process increased over the last three years. We estimate that the proportion of cases assigned to the program in FY 2001 and FY 2002 will be relatively stable.

Anticipated Administrative Law Judge Workload for FY 2002

Three major factors impact on this function's workload: (1) the quantity, magnitude, and nature of the cases, (2) the success of the process initiatives (the E-Z Trial and Settlement Part processes), and (3) the number of trials held, and their length and complexity.

OSHA recently projected that it expects to conduct 36,400 inspections in FY 2002. The Review Commission's caseload will be affected not only by the number of inspections but by OSHA's focus on the highest hazard workplaces and most serious workplace hazards. These inspections could result in more complex cases. These complex cases consume extensive judicial time since the discovery process is lengthy and time consuming, motion practice is expanded, legal research and decision writing time is protracted and, of necessity, the trial process is elongated and complicated.

Administrative Law Judge Case Activity

FY 1998 through FY 2002

				FY 1998	FY 1999	FY 2000	FY 2001	FY 2002
				Actual	Actual	Actual	Est.	Est.
1.	OSHA Inspections			34,443	34,342	36,350	36,400	36,400
2.	New Cases			2,106	2,324	2,407	2,500	2,500
		Cases over $50,000		235	290	220	250	250
3.	Administrative Law Judge
	a.	Case Inventory, Start of Year		1,021	842	985	846	736
	b.	New Cases		2,106	2,324	2,407	2,500	2,500
	c.	Total Caseload		3,127	3,166	3,392	3,346	3,236
	d.	Disposals
		(1)	With Hearing	158	156	131	127	127
		(2)	Without Hearing	2,127	2,025	2,415	2,483	2,483
	e.	Total Dispositions		2,285	2,181	2,546	2,610	2,610
4.	Total Case Inventory, End of Year			842	985	846	736	626

The table above shows projected, as well as recent, case activity. As shown in this table, the level of inspections by OSHA, combined with the focus on alleged large-scale and willful violators of health and safety regulations, is expected to result in an increase in new cases appealed to the Review Commission -- from 2,106 cases in FY 1998 to 2,500 cases in FY 2002. In FY 2000 there were 2,546 dispositions at the Administrative Law Judge level. This represents an increase of 11 percent over the FY 1998 case disposition level of 2,285. Factors that have contributed to the increase include improved case management through technological improvements, the increased proportion of cases that are assigned to E-Z Trial, and improved settlement efforts. The Review Commission's performance goals include several goals aimed at increasing the percent of cases issued within a specific time.

Staffing

Of the total 70 FTEs requested, 29 are required for the Administrative Law Judge function. This staff level includes the employment of fourteen Administrative Law Judges and fifteen staff attorneys and other support staff. Given the number of inspections occurring in FY 2000 and projected by OSHA for future years, the Review Commission believes that this is the minimum number of FTEs needed to address the expected workload.

The Chief Judge manages the effort to increase the percent of cases tried within the established goal and to increase the percent of cases processed without a hearing within the established goal. The Chief Judge:

Conducts early review and screening of the potentially difficult cases before assignment,
Exercises strong management and monitoring of progress of cases to meet performance goals,
Ensures training of judicial and administrative staff, and
Engages in benchmarking efforts of other judicial case management practices.

The assumption of these additional administrative duties make it even more important to maintain a full complement of Administrative Law Judges.

FTE
	FY 2001 Est.	FY 2002 Est.
Administrative Law Judge	29	29

Strategic Plan Goals and Objectives and Performance Goals and Measures

The Review Commission's Strategic Plan (Revised) includes the following goals and objectives related to this function:

Strategic Plan Goal	Strategic Plan Objectives
GOAL # 1 Public Service Goal To assure fair, just, and expeditious adjudication of disputes brought before the Commission and its judges, and achieve a high level of quality in all legal decisions	1.1	Increase the percent of non-complex cases heard by Administrative Law Judges that take less than a year to resolve
	1.2	Increase the percent of complex cases heard by Administrative Law Judges within 18 months
	1.3	Increase the percent of cases settled within six months
	1.4	Increase the percent of cases that take less than a year to settle to 99 percent
	1.7	Establish and comply with quality standards
	1.8	Explore ways to adapt alternative means of dispute resolution to case processing

The Review Commission intends to advance this strategic goal and objectives during FY 2002 with the performance goals and indicators in the next table. Performance indicators or measures appear next to each performance goal.

1.1 *	Performance Goals	Performance Indicators	FY 1998 Actual	FY 1999 Actual	FY 2000 Actual	FY 2001 Estimate	FY 2002 Estimate
	Increase the percent of non-complex cases disposed of with hearing that are disposed of within 325 days	75% within 325 days	NEW FOR FY 2001	NEW FOR FY 2001	NEW FOR FY 2001	70% within 325 days	75% within 325 days
1.2 *	Increase the percent of complex cases disposed of with hearing that are disposed of within 18 months	75% within 540 days	NEW FOR FY 2001	NEW FOR FY 2001	NEW FOR FY 2001	70% within 540 days	75% within 540 days
1.3	Increase the percent of cases that are disposed of without a hearing that are disposed of within six months	75% within 180 days	NEW FOR FY 2001	NEW FOR FY 2001	NEW FOR FY 2001	70% within 180 days	75% within 180 days
1.4	Increase the percent of cases that are disposed of without a hearing that are disposed of in less than one year	99% within 365 days	96% within 365 days	97% within 365 days	98% within 365 days*	99% within 365 days	99% within 365 days
1.7	Establish quality standards for trial decisions and case processing	Percent of effort to complete	NEW FOR FY 2002	NEW FOR FY 2002	NEW FOR FY 2002	NEW FOR FY 2002	25% (Establish team to benchmark quality standards for case processing)
1.8	Explore alternative means of dispute resolution for Review Commission cases	Benchmark other ADR initiatives	NEW FOR FY 2002	NEW FOR FY 2002	NEW FOR FY 2002	NEW FOR FY 2002	Benchmark other ADR initiatives

* Conventional cases disposed of with hearing were measured and reported without regard to complexity in fiscal years 1998, 1999, and 2000. Conventional cases settled without a hearing within six months and all cases (conventional and E-Z Trial) settled within a one-year cycle time were measured and reported in FYs 1998, 1999, and 2000. The new measurements for cases tried with or without a hearing include conventional and E-Z Trial cases.

Commission Function

Function

The function of the Commissioners is to adjudicate cases contested under the Act, subsequent to an initial decision by an Administrative Law Judge. This higher level of review must be both prompt and protective of the parties' rights. The function is directly related to our public service goal.

Proceedings Before the Commission

As mentioned previously, the Review Commission performs an adjudicatory function independent from the enforcement and rule-making functions vested in OSHA. Disputed enforcement proceedings are tried initially before the Review Commission's Administrative Law Judges. Decisions by the Review Commission's Administrative Law Judges may then be reviewed by the Commission members.

The Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 provides that the President appoint, and the Senate confirm, each Commissioner to serve a six-year term. The Commissioners sit as an appellate review body with discretionary authority to review any case decided by the Review Commission's Administrative Law Judges. Each Commission member has the authority to review any case decided by any judge and may, by a single vote, direct a particular case for hearing by the Commission members. Absent such a direction, the decisions of the Administrative Law Judges become final by operation of law. Once directed for review, the Commission members have authority to review all aspects of a case, including judges' conclusions of law, findings of fact, penalty assessments and abatement schedules.

Each Commissioner is aided by a counsel who is responsible for providing assistance and advice on all pending matters, including the proper disposition of cases and motions and whether cases are appropriate for Commission review. Each counsel also aids the Commissioner in researching and editing draft opinions. Their work complements the work of the General Counsel.

The General Counsel has primary responsibility for preparing and presenting factual and legal analyses to assist Commission members in adjudicating appeals. Office of General Counsel staff has primary responsibility for presenting cases to the Commission for disposition and for preparing drafts of the Commission's opinions.

Commission Operations

The Commission strives to reduce the time for adjudicating cases and the number of pending cases. Aided by improved case management technology, the Commission seeks to strengthen the internal processes by which a case is prepared. Two external factors have a major impact on the operations of the Commission: the maintenance of a quorum and the complexity of cases.

As mentioned previously, the Commission consists of three members. The Occupational Safety and Health Act requires a quorum of two Commissioners and the affirmative vote of two Commissioners to decide cases. During periods when the Commission has no quorum, no cases can be decided. In addition, with only two Commissioners, it may be more difficult to reach agreement sufficient to dispose of some cases. In cases where such agreement cannot be reached, deadlocks result ("impasses"). As a result, action on important issues may be postponed and issuance of some pending cases will be delayed.

The number of safety and health inspections carried out by OSHA each year, the nature of those inspections, and the rate at which employers choose to contest the citations issued and penalties proposed by OSHA as a result of its enforcement activity have an impact on the cases filed with the Review Commission. In turn, OSHA's emphasis during recent years on more serious workplace hazards, and the consequent increase in proposed penalties, has translated into more complicated cases, more costly trials. Consequently, the complexity of the cases both at the Administrative Law Judge level and at the Commission level has increased steadily in recent years.

The Commission's inventory of cases includes a number of extremely large and difficult cases. Preparation of each of these cases consumes a huge amount of attorney and Commissioner time. This, in turn, slows work on all other cases. The size and complexity of these cases have impacted the ability of the Office of the General Counsel to prepare and present a steady flow of cases to the Commission for disposition and to prepare the initial drafts of the Commission's opinions. To address this problem, we established two team leader positions in the Office of the General Counsel to speed preparation, facilitate coordination of issues, and to help assure consistency among cases. Team case preparation has shortened the time to analyze, present, and draft a number of these cases.

During FY 2000 the Commission implemented several strategies to resolve as many cases as possible, while adhering to high standards of quality:

Identifying as a priority the resolution of older, larger, more significant, or more complex cases

Increasing the number and the length of Commission meetings to ensure thorough consideration of the various complex issues

Utilizing a cross-section of expertise in resolving complex cases -- including individual discussions with the General Counsel, the Deputy General Counsel, team leaders, and the counsel to each Commissioner -- in addition to discussions with and reviews by the Commissioners themselves

As a result of these strategies, in FY 2000, the Commission resolved several cases dating back to the early part of the 1990s. Over the period July 2000 through October 2000, the Review Commission issued twelve cases that had a cumulative age at the Commission level of 57. Most of these cases were very large, both in terms of record size and the number and complexity of issues.

Anticipated Commission Workload for FY 2002

The Commission was without a quorum for most of FY 1998 and was without a third Commissioner from April 1997 to December 1999. As a result of a recess appointment in December 1999, the Commission had a full three-member Commission until the end of November 2000. Currently, there is one vacancy in the Commission. There also is one recess appointee whose term will expire upon the adjournment of this session of Congress, if he is not confirmed. As a result, the Commission expects to maintain a quorum throughout the remainder of FY 2001. Any additional vacancies during FY 2001 will have an impact on the number and types of cases that can be decided during FY 2001 and therefore, on the inventory of cases at the beginning of FY 2002. Although we anticipate that the Commission will be fully staffed during FY 2002, vacancies will continue to impact our ability to decide and issue cases.

Office of General Counsel and Commissioners' Case Activity

FY 1998 - FY 2002

		FY 1998	FY 1999	FY 2000	FY 2001	FY 2002
		Actual	Actual	Actual	Est.	Est.

1.	New Cases (a + b)
	a. Cases Directed for Review	43	31	48	36	40
	b. Other New cases	4	5	4	2	2
	(1) Interlocutory Appeals	(0)	(2)	(1)	(0)	(0)
	(2) Remands	(2)	(3)	(3)	(2)	(2)
	(3) Other	(2)	(0)	(0)	(0)	(0)
	c. Total New Cases (a + b)	47	36	52	38	42
2.	Case Inventory from Prior Year	45	79	72	88	80
3.	Total Caseload (1 + 2)	92	115	124	126	122
4.	Dispositions	13	43	36	46	48
	a. Final Decisions Issued	(9)	(24)	(27)	(32)	(32)
	b. Other Dispositions	(4)	(19)	(9)	(14)	(16)
5.	Case Inventory, End of Year (3 - 4)	79	72	88	80	74

The table above shows projected, as well as recent, case activity. As shown in this table, the number of cases in the inventory at the end of FY 2000 increased from the level of the inventory at the end of FY 1998. This is a reflection of a higher number of cases directed for review, the fact that the Commission only had two members for three months in FY 2000, and the complexity of the older cases that the Commission addressed during the year. The facts that the Commission focused on more difficult cases in FY 2000, which take more time to resolve, and that there were more cases directed for review, also contributed to the increase in the inventory at the end of the year.

During FY 1999, when the Commission had a quorum for approximately a nine-month period, there were 43 dispositions as compared to only 13 dispositions in FY 1998. Eighteen of the 43 dispositions (42 percent) occurred during the last three months of the fiscal year. During that same year, fewer cases were directed for review. The net effect was that the inventory of cases at the end of the year was reduced. However, the cases that remained were older and more complex. These are the cases that the Commission addressed during most of FY 2000.

A series of temporary hires in FY 2000, who largely were used to help expedite the processing of newer and less complex cases while freeing up the more senior permanent staff attorneys to concentrate on the old and complex cases, and in some instances supported the work on these cases. The success of this strategy is without precedent in the Review Commission. Between July 2000 and October 2000, the Commission issued twelve cases that had a cumulative age at the Commission level of 57 years.

Staffing

The FY 2002 budget requests funding for 9 FTEs to include the three Commissioners and their immediate staff (each Commissioner has a counsel and a confidential assistant) and 14.5 FTEs in the General Counsel's office, for a total of 23.5 FTEs. The budget request assumes that the Commission will have a full complement of Commissioners in place throughout FY 2002.

FTE
	FY 2001 Est.	FY 2002 Est.
Commission	25.5	23.5

Strategic Plan Goals and Objectives and Performance Goals and Measures

The Review Commission's Strategic Plan (Revised) includes the following goals and objectives related to this function:

Strategic Plan Goal		Strategic Plan Objectives
GOAL # 1 Public Service Goal To assure fair, just, and expeditious adjudication of disputes brought before the Commission and its judges, and achieve a high level of quality in all legal decisions	1.5	Increase the percent of Commission-level review decisions issued within a year
	1.6	Reduce the percent of Commission-level cases pending more than two years
	1.7	Establish and comply with quality standards
	1.8	Explore ways to adapt alternative means of dispute resolution to case processing

Performance Goals		Performance Indicators	FY 1998 Actual	FY 1999 Actual	FY 2000 Actual	FY 2001 Estimate	FY 2002 Estimate
1.5*	Increase the percent of Commission-level dispositions issued within 325 days	55% of cases that are disposed of issued within 325 days	NEW FOR FY 2001	NEW FOR FY 2001	NEW FOR FY 2001	50%	55%
1.6	Reduce the percent of cases pending for more than two years	Reduce by 30% the number of cases pending more than 2 years	NEW FOR FY 2001	NEW FOR FY 2001	NEW FOR FY 2001	25%	30%
1.7	Establish quality standards for Commission decisions and case processing	Percent of effort to complete	NEW FOR FY 2002	NEW FOR FY 2002	NEW FOR FY 2002	NEW FOR FY 2002	25 % (Establish team to benchmark quality standards for case processing)
1.8	Explore alternative means of dispute resolution for Review Commission cases	Benchmark other ADR initiatives	NEW FOR FY 2002	NEW FOR FY 2002	NEW FOR FY2 002	NEW FOR FY 2002	Benchmark other ADR initiatives

* The measurement in FY 1998, FY 1999, and FY 2000 was to issue 95% of cases within 375 days, 350 and 325 days respectively.

Management and Administration Function

Function

The function of Management and Administration is to provide executive management and administrative support services for the Review Commission, to assure its success in fulfilling its mission. The function is directly related to our public service goal, our communications goal, and to our organizational goal.

Management and Administration Operations

The Management and Administration function includes the public information function which facilitates communication with the public. Management and Administration also provides strategic planning and operational management of the organization, including case docketing, technology management, procurement of goods and services, payroll and personnel services, training, and materiel and space needs for each of the offices. The aim is to ensure that headquarters staff and regional office staffs can carry out their case responsibilities with adequate administrative support.

The day-to-day tasks performed under the direction of the Executive Director, include:

docketing incoming cases resulting from OSHA appeals and communicating with the public in general and case parties in particular

maintaining a public information office, including providing case decisions to the public

responding to Congressional and Freedom of Information Act inquiries

disseminating case file documents to the public

maintaining and enhancing a website to provide the public with greater access to Review Commission information, particularly decisions at the Administrative Law Judge and Commission levels

responding to requests of or fulfilling responsibilities to other executive agencies

formulating and presenting the Review Commission's annual budget and performance plans and reports

controlling the obligation and disbursement of funds

maintaining a personnel function, including establishing and implementing personnel policies and hiring, training, and promoting employees

procuring goods and services

maintaining and repairing equipment

maintaining a library for legal and technical research

providing travel assistance to Administrative Law Judges and others

implementing improved computerized case management and administrative systems through hardware and software

developing security enhancements
enhancing telecommunications and improving technology efficiency and effectiveness

Anticipated Management and Administration Workload for FY 2002

During FY 2002 this function will pursue activities in support of the Agency's three goals. The request supports the goals in our strategic plan that aim for improved service to and communications with the public through the implementation of goal #3, the organizational goal. During FY 2002, the Review Commission will:

Use modern technology and techniques to provide faster and better public access to and dissemination of Review Commission information and decisions
Support and enhance a website to provide ready access to Review Commission decisions and procedural rules and guidance
Improve the Review Commission's capability to obtain paperless interfaces and on line access with government and non-government systems
Enhance the Review Commission's computer security programs and policies, and increase employee awareness
Enhance the case management and case tracking systems
Migrate to a client server for major applications in conjunction with wide area computer network to improve data availability for staff
Meet the critical training needs of all Review Commission employees, particularly in the areas of information technology and technical and legal training for judges and attorneys
Implement family-friendly initiatives, including a telework pilot
Continue the employee award and recognition system, which includes a comprehensive array of chairman, individual, and team awards
Support a financial statement audit by an independent accounting firm
Support the conversion to the Foundation Financial Information System developed by the National Finance Center
Improve procurement through the expanded application of on-line procurement and by making greater use of performance-based contracts
Develop plans for employee succession, workforce transition, organizational streamlining (as appropriate) and knowledge management and implement strategies

Maintain reproduction equipment and other operating equipment
Include performance goals in support of strategic plans in performance evaluation plans for employees
Monitor performance measures in the performance plan

We are in the process of developing an information security program/strategy that adheres to the principles outlined for securing Government agencies technology investments. In this regard, we will:

(1) explore and assess information security risks to business operations;

(2) determine what policies, standards, and controls should be implemented to reduce these risks and establish appropriate levels of security without disrupting business performance;

(3) prioritize security projects to ensure success

- develop fast-track security procedures to rapidly respond to Government electronic initiatives

- look at best practices for scaling security programs to meet security

needs;

(4) determine the most effective way to develop and communicate a security vision, and promote staff awareness and understanding; and

(5) periodically reevaluate security parameters to best support diverse business requirements and assess compliance and control effectiveness.

Staffing

The Review Commission requests 17.5 FTEs for the Management and Administration function in FY 2002, the same level as in the preceding year. These positions consist of the Executive Director and her Administrative Assistant, an Information Technology Officer and an Analyst, A Public Information Officer and Assistant, the Executive Secretary and three Legal Technicians, the Director of the Office of Financial and Administrative Services and six administrative, personnel, procurement, and, financial accounting positions, and a part-time Librarian.

The normal duties and responsibilities of the Management and Administration staff have been augmented in the past years by the requirement to develop, implement, and monitor strategic and performance plans and reports, and to implement, on a day-to-day basis, objectives of the strategic and performance plans. The Executive Director has continuing responsibility for achieving the external communication and organizational goals as well as objectives supporting the public service goal.

FTE
	FY 2001 Est.	FY 2002 Est.
Management and Administration	17.5	17.5

Strategic Plan Goals and Objectives and Performance Goals and Measures

The Review Commission's Strategic Plan (Revised) includes the following goals and objectives related to this function:

Strategic Plan Goals	Strategic Plan Performance Objectives
GOAL # 1 Public Service Goal To assure fair, just, and expeditious adjudication of disputes brought before the Commission and its judges, and achieve a high level of quality in all legal decisions	1.7	Establish and comply with quality standards
	1.8	Explore alternative means of dispute resolution for Review Commission cases
GOAL # 2 External Communications Goal To enhance the efficiency and effectiveness of communications between the Commission and the public it serves	2.1	Improve the effectiveness of the Review Commission's website to ensure that communications remains open, research-friendly, and current
	2.2 2.3	Provide decisions and other agency publications to the public and litigants through the website Increase the frequency of publication of CD-ROMs for use by litigants, libraries, and other interested parties
	2.4	Improve and strengthen mechanisms for communications between the Review Commission and entities that have an interest in its activities
	2.5	Produce reports of Review Commission Activities
	2.6	Promote the use of electronic transmission of documents to the Review Commission
	2.7	Improve the timeliness of responses to questions received from the public

Strategic Plan Goals		Strategic Plan Performance Objectives
GOAL #3 Organizational Goal	3.1	Recruit and maintain a diverse, and highly motivated staff with the skills necessary to support the mission of the Agency
To further develop and invest in a highly effective, motivated, and diverse workforce equipped with modern information technology and communications systems to facilitate the accomplishment of its goals, meet program needs and increase organizational effectiveness and efficiency	3.2 3.3 3.4	Provide training and increase staff development opportunities that optimize our employees' capabilities, potential, and level of technical competence through a variety of methods Improve internal communications and create a culture that promotes teamwork Implement management and administrative tools to support the organizational and program needs
	3.5	Fully use the awards system to motivate high-level performance and innovation, and to encourage achievement of the Agency's strategic goals
	3.6	Improve the performance management program (e.g., position descriptions, performance plans, award systems) to enhance individual and organizational effectiveness
	3.7	Invest in an effective information technology infrastructure that meets user needs, protects privacy, and secures against unauthorized access or disruption
	3.8	Increase employee productivity and improve the quality of work products by ensuring that employees have the automation and research tools necessary to perform their job
	3.9	Increase electronic communications to improve quality, availability, and speed of information and efficiency of operations
	3.10	Enhance case management/tracking abilities to provide additional management and performance evaluation information
	3.11	Improve the quality of work life

Performance Goals		Performance Indicators	FY 1998 Actual	FY 1999 Actual	FY 2000 Actual	FY 2001 Estimate	FY 2002 Estimate
1.7	Establish quality standards for Review Commission case processing	Percent of effort to complete	NEW FOR FY 2002	NEW FOR FY 2002	NEW FOR FY 2002	NEW FOR FY 2002	25 % (Establish team to benchmark quality standards for case procesing)
2.1	Improve the effectiveness of our website to ensure that communications remain open, research-friendly, and current	Number of enhancements	NEW FOR FY 2002	NEW FOR FY 2002	NEW FOR FY 2002	NEW FOR FY 2002	1
2.2 P.9 under FY 97-00 SP & FY 01 PP	Extent to which decisions and other agency publications are made available to the public and litigants through the website	% of effort completed	50% of (Website established with recent decisions)	70% (Site established with earlier decisions)	100% (Enhanced website)	75% (Include older decisions and enhance search capabilities)	25% (Increase information on website)
2.3 P.11 under FY 97-00 SP & FY 01 PP	Improve the frequency of publication of CD-ROMs for use by litigants, libraries, and other interested parties	Number of CD-ROMS	0	1	2	3	3
2.4 P.12 under FY 97-00 SP & FY 01 PP	Improve and strengthen mechanisms for communications between the Review Commission and entities that have an interest in its activities	Percent of effort completed	50%	70%	100%	100% (Survey)	50% (Focus Groups)
2.5 P.13 under FY 97-00 SP & FY 01 PP	Produce reports on the Review Commission's activities	Number of Biennial reports	0	1	1	0	1
2.6	Promote the use of electronic transmission of documents to the Review Commission	Percent of steps completed	Not applicable	Determine feasibility	Pretest and pilot	Continue pilot	50% (Evaluate the pilot -- new effort)
2.7	Improve the timeliness of responses to questions received from the public	Average number of days	NEW FOR FY 2002	NEW FOR FY 2002	NEW FOR FY 2002	NEW FOR FY 2002	20 days from receipt
3.1 P.19 under FY 97-00 SP & FY 01 PP	Recruit and maintain a diverse, and highly motivated staff	Percent of effort completed	NEW FOR FY 2001	NEW FOR FY 2001	NEW FOR FY 2001	50% (Develop succession plans, knowledge management strategies and job competencies)	50% (Complete FY 2001 efforts and write workforce transition plans)
3.2 P.18 & 21 under FY 97-00 SP & FY 01 PP	Provide training and career development opportunities for employees	Average number of training hours	30 hours	40 hours	40 hours	40 hours	Assess and prioritize training needs
3.2.1	Expand training delivery methods to accommodate workforce needs	Percent of training offered by specific means	NEW FOR FY 2002	NEW FOR FY 2002	NEW FOR FY 2002	NEW FOR FY 2002	70% - classroom 20% - audio/video tape 10% - on-line
3.3 P.17 under FY 97-00 SP & FY 01 PP	Improve internal communications	Percent of effort completed	NEW FOR FY 2001	NEW FOR FY 2001	NEW FOR FY 2001	50% (Develop and install Intranet)	50% (Complete development and installation of Intranet)
3.3.1 P.20 under FY 97-00 SP & FY 01 PP	Create a culture that promotes teamwork	Percent of effort completed	NEW FY 2001	NEW FY 2001	NEW FY 2001	50% (Assess current and target culture)	50% (Develop management initiative)
3.4 P.16 under FY 97-00 SP & FY 01 PP	Improve the systems that support financial management and personnel and payroll services	Percent of effort completed	NEW FOR FY 2002	NEW FOR FY 2002	NEW FOR FY 2002	NEW FOR FY 2002	25% (Planning coordination efforts with the National Finance Center)
3.5	Link employee performance and team and incentive awards to the achievement of innovation and Agency strategic and performance goals	Percent of effort	NEW FOR FY 2002	NEW FOR FY 2002	NEW FOR FY 2002	NEW FOR FY 2002	50% (Revise awards policies)
3.6	Improve the performance management program to enhance individual and organizational effectiveness	Percent of effort completed	NEW FOR FY 2002	NEW FOR FY 2002	NEW FOR FY 2002	NEW FOR FY 2002	25% (Review and rewrite 25% of position descriptions)
3.7	Invest in an effective information technology infrastructure that meets user needs and secures against unauthorized access or disruption	Percent of effort completed	NEW FOR FY 2002	NEW FOR FY 2002	NEW FOR FY 2002	NEW FOR FY 2002	50% (Develop security policy and employee awareness initiatives)
3.8 P.15 under FY 97-00 SP & FY 01 PP	Improve the automation and research tools	Percent of effort completed	NEW FOR FY 2001	NEW FOR FY 2001	NEW FOR FY 2001	50% (Develop inter-component team to define and assess efficiency improvement)	30% (Prototype and monitor determined solutions for effectiveness)
3.9 P.14 under FY 97-00 SP & FY 01 PP	Increase electronic communications to improve quality, availability, and speed of information and efficiency of operations	Percent of improvement over base year, FY 99	30% of effort completed	100% of effort completed	Assess	50% (Improve speed and access to outside sources)	30% (Migrate to client server environment for major applications)
3.10 P.13 under FY 97-00 SP & FY 01 PP	Improve case information	Percent of effort completed	60% of effort completed	80% of efforts completed	100% of effort completed	50% (Enhance case management information system)	50% (Implement additional reporting and data communication enhancements)
3.11	Improve the quality of work life	Number of initiatives	NEW FOR FY 2002	NEW FOR FY 2002	NEW FOR FY 2002	NEW FOR FY 2002	2 initiatives

IV. Strategies in the Strategic Plan (Revised)

FY 2000 - 2005

Strategies in the Strategic Plan (Revised)

The Review Commission has three strategic goals. A series of strategies were developed in support of each goal.

GOAL #1: Public Service Goal: To assure fair, just, and expeditious adjudication of disputes brought before the Commission and its judges, and achieve a high level of quality in all legal decisions

Strategies

Use an internal team to develop baselines for case processing and decision quality
Benchmark alternative means of dispute resolution used in similar adjudicative processes and adapt appropriate measures to reduce the costs of dispute resolution

Administrative Law Judge TRIAL LEVEL

Expedite the assignment of cases to judges
Use objective criteria to determine complex cases, and track the processing of these cases
Monitor closely case performance, and improve case management information systems and reports
Conduct early review and screening of the potentially difficult cases
Provide training to all judges on a variety of subjects, including technical and legal issues, legal writing, case management and alternative means of dispute resolution to help them develop the most skillful services and processes equal to the very best in judicial arenas
Continue to use a team of judges to handle, on a rotational basis, extremely complex cases and assign appropriate staff to timely process and monitor such cases, including settlement discussions

COMMISSION LEVEL

Continue the Commission's effort to focus on the disposition of a balance of older and newer cases, giving priority to the more significant and more complex cases
Concentrate efforts on issuing the maximum number of decisions possible, while at the same time, reducing the number of older cases pending and ultimately the age of the pending inventory
Implement internal markers to assist in the preparation of cases and issuance of Commission decisions
Accelerate processing of cases through a variety of efforts, including early intervention of the chief counsels, briefing new attorneys and new Commissioners on Review Commission procedures and legal precedent, developing a Review Commission procedures manual, and creating ways to resolve cases when there are only two Commission members
Continue to use teams and staff meetings in the Office of the General Counsel
Develop creative methods to shorten case preparation of documents and develop alternatives to current formats of decisions

GOAL #2: External Communications Goal: To enhance the efficiency and effectiveness of communications between the Commission and the public it serves

Strategies

The thrust of our strategy here will be to build on the improvement in the quality of our procedural guides and the professionalization of our other paper publications by making all of our decisions and publications available in electronic format, as we work toward paperwork reduction and elimination. Our emphasis will be on timely dissemination of information in a format that is research-friendly.

Provide greater public access to Review Commission activities and decisions (Administrative Law Judge, Commission and published appellate court) through the use of the Internet
Use modern automated technology and techniques, both inside and outside the Review Commission, to provide faster and better public access to and dissemination of Review Commission information and decisions
Convert older Review Commission decisions into research-friendly electronic form for inclusion on the Review Commission's web site
Continue to provide links to appropriate state websites on the Review Commission's website to assist the public in gaining easy access to information from each of the states that operates its own Federally approved job safety and health enforcement and adjudication system
Provide safety and health information developed by the Review Commission through our website
Use the Review Commission's website to provide information released under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) and certain other information not currently available to the public without the need to make a FOIA request first or without the need for significant search time
Develop methods to routinely get feedback from the Commission's external stakeholders
Explore and develop technology which will enable electronic transmission of information required by the Review Commission, and improve the quality and efficiency of filing documents with the Review Commission
Promote the use of electronic communications when dealing with litigants and other external resources (e.g., government agencies, vendor solicitations, FOIA requests)
Develop and strengthen mechanisms to disseminate significant Review Commission information on a timely basis to inform the public of critical safety and health issues decided by the Review Commission
Expand our public information role in disseminating Review Commission decisions
Expand the use of web-enabled and other information technologies that increase the effectiveness and efficiency of Review Commission operations
Improve the Review Commission's capability to obtain paperless interfaces and online access with government and non government systems

GOAL #3: Organizational Goal: To further develop and invest in a highly effective, motivated, and diverse workforce equipped with modern information technology and communications systems to facilitate the accomplishment of its goals, meet program needs and increase organizational effectiveness and efficiency

Strategies

Human Resources

In the human resource area, our strategy has three significant elements to create and maintain a high performing workforce -- recruitment, employee development, and management and administrative support tools.

Develop and implement succession and workforce transition plans to minimize the impact of attrition because of the expected retirement wave, and recruit for positions from a cross section of sources, including colleges, universities, law schools
Create a culture that incorporates core values and provide a work environment with workplace policies and programs that enable employees to excel, including telecommuting initiatives, family-friendly initiatives, and enhanced transit subsidies
Rewrite position descriptions, develop core competencies for positions, and link appropriate employees' performance plans to accomplishment of the Agency's strategic and performance goals
Integrate the redesigned performance and Chairman team awards and suggestions programs with our performance management systems to encourage innovation, quality improvements, team work, and goal achievement, as well as high level individual performance
Assess periodically the training needs of employees to target and prioritize training for basic, developmental and leadership courses and deliver training by using the most efficient and effective means, including use of Internet, on-line training, video training, and CD ROMs to achieve Agency goals, and high quality performance
Develop documentation and data collection instruments to assess the quality of training provided and to determine the extent to which training expenditures enhance employees' ability to better perform their jobs
The General Counsel will conduct on-the-job training on various subjects, including significant legal or procedural developments, and effective and efficient case handling. The Executive Director will conduct training on Agency goals, objectives, and strategies and measurements
Develop knowledge management strategies, supported by appropriate software, to maintain a highly effective workforce technically proficient in the rapid changes in computer technology, worker safety and health standards, procurement, leadership and management initiatives, and financial and personnel management
Assess the effectiveness of internal communications, develop and disseminate revised Agency policy directives, prepare a list of specific changes that can be made to improve the effectiveness of communications among Review Commission employees, and between employees and managers, and implement necessary changes
Guard the integrity and efficiency of the financial management and human resource programs to support program and organizational needs

Continue to provide state-of-the-art research tools, including on-line capabilities and improved Review Commission library services

Information Technology

Our strategy is to capitalize on the advances we have made and continue to increase proficiency and efficiency in our use of new technology to effectively accomplish program objectives and meet customer expectations.

Improve telecommunications, availability, and speed of information accessed by employees, Federal agencies, and the public
Maintain an infrastructure of modern servers, personal computers, networks, operating systems, databases, telecommunications and other technology
Develop an overall information technology (IT) security program plan, and provide IT security awareness training
Improve technology to support our knowledge management strategies
Develop Intranet to assist in operating more efficiently and increase employees' effectiveness in servicing internal and external customers
Develop useful management and financial information systems that facilitate aggregate reporting and oversight procedures and secure the information we possess
Enhance case management/case tracking by developing systems that will support additional reporting and data communications capabilities, including tracking large or complex cases
Equip appropriate employees with portable computers to function as both desktop and portable systems ("docking stations")
Provide the most efficient and effective means of delivering training, including use of the Internet, on-line training, and video training

V. FY 2001

Revised Final Annual

Performance Plan

The Review Commission is revising some of the fiscal year 2001 performance goals and measures identified in our public service strategic goal. We are revising our performance goals and indicators based on performance information identified in our FY 1999 Performance Report, preliminary performance information obtained in fiscal year 2000 and the profile of cases in our inventory.

The Government Performance Results Act allows an agency to revise its final Annual Performance Plan based on actual performance data contained in the program performance report for the previous fiscal year. Circular A-11 specifies:

"As agencies collect and report program performance information for the prior fiscal year, this actual information may show a need to modify performance goals for a fiscal year."

The current performance measures are based on reducing cycle times for cases adjudicated before our Administrative Law Judges and Commissioners. Since that measure was developed in fiscal year 1997, the cases have increased in complexity. Moreover, the Commission membership has experienced frequent changes. The combined impact of these factors, which are beyond the control of the Review Commission, was identified in our FY 1999 Performance Report, and continues to adversely affect our ability to meet our goals. Therefore, we are changing our performance measurements from a reduction in cycle time to an increase in the percent of cases that are resolved by the Review Commission, taking into account the complexity of cases and the need to retire our older cases.

At the Administrative Law Judge level, the increase in large and complex cases have affected our ability to meet our goals. The number of complex cases continues to increase. The current indicator assumes that 10 percent of complex cases at the trial level are complex cases. However, the Review Commission realized a 23 percent increase in large or complex cases between fiscal years 1998 and 1999. The complexity of cases results from the existence of a combination of factors which include: number of parties, number of expert witnesses, volume of documents, and number of alleged violations.

At the Commission level, at the beginning of FY 2000, more than 26 cases were older than two years, many more than four years old. This is due in part to the lack of a quorum and/or a full three-member Commission for most of the past three years. The inability to resolve cases has resulted in an increased inventory of cases. As the cases that have been on the docket for several years are resolved, the average cycle time inevitably increases. This creates a dilemma, and possibly an incentive to resolve last-in cases first, in order to meet the cycle time goal. Over time, as more and more older cases are retired, this dilemma will be resolved. But in the meantime, an aggressive retirement of old cases results in cycle times that far exceed our goals.

Since the submission of the Final FY 2001 Annual Performance Plan, we have carefully reviewed program performance information and made the following changes. The table below displays the changes from the FY 2001 Annual Performance Plan to the FY 2001 Final Revised Annual Performance Plan.

Current FY 2001 Performance Goals and Measures			Final Revised FY 2001 Annual Performance Plan
P.1	Reduce cycle time for most conventionally tried ALJ cases	90% in 325 days or less	1.1	Increase the percent of non-complex cases disposed of with hearing that are disposed of within 325 days	70% within 325 days
P.1	Reduce cycle time for most conventionally tried ALJ cases	90% in 325 days or less	1.2	Increase the percent of complex cases disposed of with hearing that are disposed of within 18 months	70% within 540 days
P.2	Maintain average cycle time for conventional ALJ case settlements for non-trial cases	180 days or less	1.3	Increase the percent of cases that are disposed of without a hearing that are disposed of within six months	70% within 180 days
P.3	Virtually eliminate cases that take more than one year to settle	1%	1.4	Increase the percent of cases that are disposed of without a hearing that are disposed of in less than one year	99% within 365 days
P.4	Reduce cycle time for Commission review to less than one year	95% in 325 days or less	1.5	Increase the percent of Commission-level dispositions issued within 325 days	50% of cases that are disposed of issued within 325 days
P.4		95% in 325 days or less	1.6	Reduce the percent of cases pending for more than two years	25% reduction in the number of pending cases
P.5	Maintain cycle time for cases under the E-Z Trial program	160 days	These goals will be tracked in FY 2001, but will be discontinued thereafter since they are subsumed in the new performance goals noted above (1.1 - 1.3).
P.6	Expand the use of E-Z Trial	30%
P.7	Expand the use of Settlement Part	30

VI. Budget by Object

Classification Category

Budget by Object Classification Category

For FY 2002, the Review Commission requests $8,964,000. This amount is 2.8 percent above the amounts available for FY 2001. The request would support 70 FTEs. The increase reflects the impact of the January 2001 and 2002 pay raises. The proposed budget by object classification category is shown in the table below, along with the current year budget. A narrative explanation of the amounts requested for each object classification follows the table.

Object Classification Table

for the

Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission

Fiscal Years 2001 and 2002

($ in 000s)

				Change FY 2001-2002
Object Class		FY 2001	FY 2002	$	%
11.1	Full Time Permanent	6,038	6,222	+184	+3
11.5	Other Compensation	25	25	0	0
	Sub-total	6,063	6,247	+184	+3
12.1	Benefits to Personnel	967	1,027	+60	+6
21.0	Travel	127	127	0	0
22.0	Transportation of Things	7	7	0	0
23.1	Rental Payments to GSA	727	727	0	0
23.2	Rents, Communications, Utilities, and Miscellaneous	61	61	0	0
24.0	Printing	44	44	0	0
25.0	Other Services	424	424	0	0
25.1	Services by Other Federal Agencies	70	70	0	0
25.3	Repair and Maintenance of Equipment	36	36	0	0
26.0	Supplies	112	112	0	0
31.0	Equipment	82	82	0	0
	Total	8,720	8,964	+244	+3

11.1 Full Time Permanent Positions

		Change FY 2001-FY 2002
FY 2001	FY 2002	Amount	%
$6,038,000	$6,222,000	+184,000	+3

The request for FY 2002 includes $6,222,000 to fund the direct payroll costs of a staff of 70 employees. This is an increase of $184,000 from the level available in FY 2001. This amount includes the effect of the general pay raise in January 2001 and of the presumed general payraise in January 2002.

All authorized positions are expected to be filled at the start of the fiscal year, and any positions becoming vacant during the year will need to be filled quickly. The net effect of these two expectations is that the entire amount requested will be needed.

11.5 Other Compensation

		Change FY 2001-FY 2002
FY 2001	FY 2002	Amount	%
$25,000	$25,000	-0-	-0-

Consistent with the Review Commission's encouragement of individual employee initiative and performance, $25,000 is requested to provide funds to reward employees for superior performance or special acts or services. Cash awards are a necessary incentive in the Review Commission's continuing effort to improve the quality and timeliness of its work product, which in turn, contributes to overall agency efforts to accomplish its Annual Performance Plan objectives.

12.1 Personnel Benefits