Fiscal Year 2004 Integrated

OSHRC

OSHRC E-Filing System(Register as an e-filer and file documents)

Fiscal Year 2004 Integrated

Table of Contents

Fiscal Year 2004 Integrated Annual Performance Plan and Budget Request Page

I.         Summary and Highlights
1
II.        Introduction -- Mission, Vision, and Strategic Goal
2
III.       Budget Request and Annual Performance Plan by Organizational Function
4
IV.      Budget by Object Classification Category
20
V.        Other Tables
25

I. Summary and Highlights

Summary and Highlights

The Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission is requesting $10,115,000 in funding for FY 2004. This amount is 5.6 percent above the comparable amount requested for FY 2003 ($9,577,000). The request would support 69 FTEs. The increase in the budget request reflects increased rent and personnel/payroll costs and funds for financial audit, information technology (IT) security activities, non-judicial travel, and training.

The amount requested 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 goal in the strategic plan to improve service to the public. The Review Commission is in the process of updating and revising its strategic plan for the period FY 2003 through FY 2008. The annual performance plan for FY 2004 reflects the new goals and objectives.

OSHRC’s FY 2004 budget request includes:

• $7,854,000 to support 69 FTE. These costs represent 78 percent of the Review Commission’s request.

∙ $1,296,000 for office space rent.

∙ Funds for services provided by other Federal agencies such as support for financial and administrative services and for personnel and payroll services.

∙ Funds to enable the Agency to complete the annual performance plan goals and targets, including the implementation of the plan under the Government Paperwork Elimination Act.

∙ Funds to allow the Review Commission to comply with IT security requirements. Funding will support independent evaluations of the security of the information system and corrections or improvements in any weaknesses found as a result of the evaluation. With base resources, the Agency will also continue to support automation and technology efforts initiated earlier, including hardware, software and contractual support.

II. Introduction -- Mission,

Vision, and

Strategic Goal

Introduction -- Mission, Vision and Strategic Goal

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 when disputes arise with OSHA.

The Occupational Safety and Health Act and the Review Commission’s Rules of Procedure (which by law mirror the federal rules) 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 Goal

The Review Commission has as its strategic goal a public service goal which is to assure fair, just, and expeditious adjudication of disputes brought before the Commission and its judges. The Review Commission is in the process of updating and revising its strategic plan for the period FY 2003 through FY 2008.

III. Budget Request

and

Annual Performance Plan

Organizational function

FY 2004 Budget Request and Annual Performance Plan

This section describes the three functions of the Review Commission:

∙ Administrative Law Judge function

∙ Commission function

∙ 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 oversees the Agency’s strategic plan and supports both the Administrative Law Judge and Commission functions.

Funding and staffing by function is as follows:

Funding and FTE by Function

FY 2003 Est.

FY 2004 Est.

FTE

Administrative Law Judge

4.0

4.2

Commission

3.6

3.8

Management and Administration

2.0

2.1

Total

9.6

10.1

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 the 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 Commission’s Rules are based upon the Federal Rules, but in the absence of specific provisions in the Commission’s Rules, the procedures are in accordance with the Federal Rules of Procedure. The Rules are “constructed and administered to secure the 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 expedite the judicial process in a fair and impartial manner, strengthen its settlement procedures and case management responsibilities, and maintain the success of its E-Z Trial for cases that are not complex and Settlement Part processes for complex cases. The Administrative Law Judge function addresses a caseload which is becoming increasingly 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 (cases involving lock-out/tag-out, confined spaces, health care hazards, including asbestos, lead poisoning, construction industry hazards, etc.). 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:

∙ Intricacies of the law

∙ Volume of documents, including transcripts

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

∙ Number of alleged violations, items, and affirmative defenses (including distinct and separate items)

∙ Technical, novel, difficult or new standards raised

∙ Types of cases, such as those involving asbestos, lead poisoning, or ergonomics

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 in cases where the proposed aggregate penalty is $200,000 or more, or the Chief Judge finds that the case is appropriate for this part because of its complexity. 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 Review Commission continues 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 formal rules of procedure and evidence, while assuring that due process requirements will be maintained. Under this process, a business, with or without counsel, can present its case before a Review Commission judge and receive a prompt 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 arranged for an outside evaluation of the program which was performed in FY 2001. The evaluation showed that program implementation was effective and that the program is generally being implemented in accordance with the goals.

E-Z Trial Case Activity

FY 1999 through FY 2004

FY1999

FY2000

FY2001

FY2002

FY2003

FY2004

Actual

Est.

New Cases

2,324

2,407

2,316

2,134

2,280

Cases assigned to E-Z Trial

733

934

716

869

800

The proportion of new cases assigned to the E-Z Trial process has averaged 37% over the last three years. The budget assumes that the proportion of cases assigned to the program in FY 2003 and FY 2004 will be relatively stable.

Anticipated Administrative Law Judge Workload for FY 2004

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

OSHA projects that it will conduct 37,700 inspections in FY 2004, the same number as included in the FY 2003 budget. The Review Commission’s caseload is 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 tend to 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. For example, in FY 2000 the longest hearing was 69.5 hours, as compared to 182.5 hours in FY 2002.

Administrative Law Judge Case Activity

FY 1999 through FY 2004

FY1999

FY2000

FY2001

FY2002

FY2003

FY2004

Actual

Est.

OSHA Inspections

34,342

34,340

35,578

37,493

37,700

New Cases

2,324

2,407

2,316

2,134

2,280

Cases with aggregate penalties over $50,000

290

220

222

150

200

Administrative Law Judge

Case Inventory, Start of Year

842

985

846

840

812

New Cases

2,324

2,407

2,316

2,134

2,280

Total Caseload

3,166

3,392

3,162

2,974

3,092

Disposals

(1)

With Hearing

156

131

121

111

(2)

Without Hearing

2,025

2,415

2,201

2,067

2,169

Total Dispositions

2,181

2,546

2,322

2,162

2,280

Total Case Inventory, End of Year

985

846

840

812

The table above shows projected, as well as recent, case activity. Data for FY 2002 shows a decrease in the number of cases appealed to the Review Commission from the FY 2000 level. Factors that have contributed to the decrease in the inventory include improved case management through technological improvements, availability of temporary staff who provided assistance to the Administrative Law Judges, assignment of cases 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. However, the complexity of cases continues to increase, as stated above.

Over the last four years, 6.5% of the inspections performed by OSHA resulted in contested citations. In FY 2002, 5.7% of the inspections resulted in citations. The Review Commission projects that the proportion of contested citations will be level at 6% of the OSHA inspections.

The decrease in the number and proportion of contested citations resulted in a decrease in the inventory at the end of FY 2002 from the level at the end of FY 2001. Based on the assumption that the proportion of contested citations will be level at 6% and on the projected increase in OSHA inspections in FY 2003, the Agency expects that inventory at the end of FYs 2003 and 2004 will be stable.

Staffing

Of the total 69 FTEs requested, 26 are required for the Administrative Law Judge function. This staff level includes the employment of 13 Administrative Law Judges and of staff attorneys and other support staff. Given the number of inspections occurring in FY 2004, projected by OSHA for future years, and the complexity of the cases received, the Review Commission believes that this is the minimum number of FTEs needed to address the expected workload and meet its performance targets.

The Chief Judge manages the effort to meet the Agency’s GPRA goals at the Administrative Law Judge Level. 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

• Examines judicial case management practices of other entities.

Funding and FTE

FY 2003 Est.

FY 2004 Est.

FTE

Administrative Law Judge

4.0

4.2

Strategic Plan Goals and Objectives and Performance Goals and Measures

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

Strategic Plan Goal

Strategic Plan Performance Objectives

Public Service Goal

To assure fair, just, and expeditious adjudication of disputes brought before the Commission and its judges

•

Increase the percent of non-complex cases at the Administrative Law Judge level that are resolved in less than one year

•

Increase the percent of complex cases at the Administrative Law Judge level that are resolved within 18 months

The Review Commission intends to advance this strategic goal at the ALJ level through the following strategies. Objectives to be pursued during FY 2004 with the performance goals and indicators appear in the table that follows this list. Performance indicators or measures appear next to each performance goal.

• 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

• Expand alternative means of dispute resolution by improving existing ADR processes (i.e., Settlement Part and the E-Z Trial) and seeking new ADR methods

• 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

• Develop procedures for case processing and decision quality

• Make changes to the Agency’s Rules of Procedures to improve case processing

The Review Commission revised its strategic plan in FY 2000 for the FY 2000 - FY 2005 period and is in the process of revising and updating the plan once again for the period FY 2003 through FY 2008. The following goals are included in its performance plans for fiscal years 2001 through 2004:

Performance Goals

Performance Indicators

FY 2001

Actual (Target)

FY 2002

Actual

(Target)

FY 2003

Target

FY 2004

Target

1.1

Increase the percent of non-complex cases disposed of with hearing that are disposed of within 325 days

Percent within 325 days

83% (70%)

within 325 days

77% (75%)

within 325 days

78% within 325 days

This goal was replaced with the goals below

1.2*

Increase the percent of complex cases disposed of with hearing that are disposed of within 18 months

Percent within 540 days

100% (70%) within 540 days

92% (75%) within 540 days

80% within 540 days

This goal was replaced with the goals below

1.3

Increase the percent of cases that are disposed of without a hearing that are disposed of within six months

Percent within 180 days

73% (70%) within 180 days

77% (75%) within 180 days

76% within 180 days

This goal was replaced with the goals below

1.4

Increase the percent of cases that are disposed of without a hearing that are disposed of in less than one year

Percent within 365 days

98% (99%) within 365 days

99% within 365 days

This goal was replaced with the goals below

•

Increase the percent of non-complex cases at the ALJ level that are resolved in less than one year

Percent within 365 days

New for FY 04

93%

•

Increase the percent of complex cases at the ALJ level that are resolved within 18 months

Percent within 540 days

New for FY 04

93%

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 public service goal.

Proceedings Before the Commission

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 for Presidential appointment and Senate confirmation of three Commissioners, each with 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 direct any case decided by any judge for review by the full Commission. 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 presence 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. By statute cases can only be decided on the affirmative vote of two Commissioners. During periods when the Commission lacks a 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. As a result, action on important issues may be postponed and issuance of some pending cases will be delayed. The Commission was without a quorum during almost nine months in FY 2002, from December 20, 2001 until late August 2002.

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, and 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, two team leader positions were established 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

∙ 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 12 cases that had a cumulative age at the Commission level of 57 years. Most of these cases were very large, both in terms of record size and the number and complexity of issues.

During FY 2001, the Commission continued its efforts to reduce the inventory of its pending cases. The members resolved several older and complex cases in October 2000. The Commission resolved numerous other cases during the fiscal year, including a number of older cases. Indeed, despite the absence of a quorum for one month and a change in Commission composition, the Commission resolved 52 cases during the fiscal year. The Commission reduced its inventory from 88 cases at the beginning of the fiscal year to 67 cases by the end of FY 2001, improving on its earlier estimate of 80 cases.

Anticipated Commission Workload for FY 2004

The Commission had a quorum for the larger part of FY 2001 and maintained a quorum for the major part of the first quarter of FY 2002. (During the major part of the first quarter of FY 2002 there were two members in the Commission.) The appointment of one recess appointee expired upon the adjournment of Congress in December 2001. As a result, the Commission had no quorum from the adjournment of Congress late in December 2001 until a recess appointment was made in late August 2002. These vacancies during most of FY 2002 stopped the decision making process at the Commission level for nine months, from the end of December 2001 until late in August 2002. Therefore, there was an increase in the inventory of cases at the beginning of FY 2003. Although the assumption is that the Commission will maintain a quorum during FY 2004, unexpected vacancies may once again impact the ability to decide and issue cases.

Office of General Counsel and Commissioners’ Case Activity

FY 1999 - FY 2004

FY1999

FY2000

FY2001

FY2002

FY2003

FY2004

Actual

Est.

New Cases (a + b)

a. Cases Directed for Review

b. Other New cases

(1) Interlocutory Appeals

(2)

(1)

(0)

(1)

(2) Remands

(3)

(1)

(2)

(3) Other

(0)

(2)

(0)

(1)

c. Total New Cases (a + b)

Case Inventory from Prior Year

Total Caseload (1 + 2)

115

124

119

108

Dispositions

a. Final Decisions Issued

(24)

(27)

(37)

(15)

(34)

(41)

b. Other Dispositions

(19)

(9)

(15)

(6)

(8)

(5)

Case Inventory, End of Year

(3 - 4)

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 2001 decreased significantly from the number of cases pending at the end of FY 2000. A series of temporary hires were largely 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. Between July 2000 and October 2000, the Commission issued 12 cases that had a cumulative age at the Commission level of 57 years. During the first three months of FY 2001, 19 cases were resolved. By the end of the fiscal year, the Commission had resolved 52 cases. This exceeded earlier estimate of 46 cases.

However, because of a lack of a quorum during most of FY 2002, there was an increase in the number of pending cases at the end of FY 2002 as compared to the end of FY 2001. It should be noted that to dispose of 21 cases when the Commission had a quorum for four months is a considerable accomplishment. The higher inventory at the end of FY 2002 will impact the inventory at the end of FY 2003. Even with a quorum, there could be an increase in the number of cases at the end of FY 2003 over the inventory at the end of FY 2002. Assuming that the Commission has a quorum for most of FY 2003, a slight decrease in the inventory by the end of FY 2004 would result.

Staffing

The FY 2004 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 17 FTEs in the General Counsel’s office, for a total of 26 FTEs. The budget request assumes that the Commission will have a full complement of Commissioners in place throughout FY 2004.

Funding and FTE

FY 2003 Est.

FY 2004 Est.

FTE

Commission

3.6

3.8

Strategic Plan Goal and Objectives and Performance Goals and Measures

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

Strategic Plan Goal

Strategic Plan Performance Objectives

Public Service Goal

To assure fair, just, and expeditious adjudication of disputes brought before the Commission and its judges

•

Reduce the length of time to resolve Commission-level cases

The Review Commission intends to advance this strategic goal at the Commission level through the following strategies. Objectives to be pursued during FY 2004 with the performance goals and indicators appear in the table that follows this list. Performance indicators or measures appear next to each performance goal.

• Focus on the disposition of older cases, with the immediate aim of reducing the existing backlog and the eventual goal that no case will sit for more than six months on review

• Expedite the disposition of priority cases that require immediate action (e.g., cases that are be remanded back to the ALJ level, court remands, interlocutory reviews, and 60(b) cases)

∙ 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 Commissioners’ counsels, computerization of changes to draft decisions and development of strategies to resolve cases when there are only two Commission members

∙ Expand the use of teams and staff meetings in the Office of the General Counsel to reduce the time needed to write decisional memoranda and draft decisions

∙ Develop new methods to shorten case preparation time

• Develop procedures for case processing and decision quality

• Make changes to the Agency’s Rules of Procedures to improve case processing

The Review Commission revised its strategic plan in FY 2000 for the FY 2000 - FY 2005 period. and is in the process of revising and updating the plan once again for the period FY 2003 through FY 2008. The following performance goals have been developed for fiscal year 2004:

Performance Goals

Performance Indicators

FY 2000

Actual

FY 2001

Actual (Target)

FY 2002

Actual

(Target)

FY 2003

Target

FY 2004

Target

1.5

Increase the percent of Commission-level dispositions issued within 325 days

Percent of cases that are disposed of within 325 days

56% (50%)

43% (55%)

57%

This goal was replaced with the goals below

1.6

Reduce the number of cases pending Commission-level disposition for more than two years

Reduce by a percent the number of cases pending for more than 2 years

36%(25%)

22% (30%)

32%

This goal was replaced with the goals below

•

Reduce the length of time to resolve Commission-level cases

Percent of cases over 2 years old disposed of at the Commission level

New for FY 04

100%

•

Reduce the length of time to resolve priority cases

Percent of priority cases disposed of within 6 months

New for FY 04

100 %

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.

Management and Administration Operations

The Management and Administration function provides strategic planning and operational management of the organization. Management and Administration also includes the public information, case docketing, technology management, computer and information security, and financial and administrative services. The day-to-day tasks performed under the direction of the Executive Director and Chief Operating Officer, include:

∙ Overseeing and monitoring the development and implementation of the Agency’s strategic goal

∙ 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

∙ Maintaining and enhancing a website to provide the public with greater access to Review Commission information

∙ Providing support agency-wide in the areas of finance, budget, procurement, personnel, equal opportunity and administration

∙ Providing personnel, payroll, benefits, reproduction, and mail services, and travel assistance to agency employees

∙ Procuring goods and services, maintenance and needed repairs of equipment, training, reference materials, supplies and office

∙ Maintaining a library in the national office and in each regional office for legal and technical research

∙ Implementing improved computerized case management and administrative systems through hardware and software

∙ Developing computer systems and information security enhancements

enhancing telecommunications and improving technology efficiency and effectiveness

Anticipated Management and Administration Workload for FY 2004

During FY 2004, the Office of the Executive Director will pursue various activities in support of the Agency’s mission, with the following results expected:

∙ Improved financial and administrative services and enhanced integrity and efficiency of the Agency’s financial management and human resources programs

∙ Greater online access with citizens and government and non-government systems under Government Paperwork Elimination Act (GPEA)

∙ Improved security program based on an evaluation of the Review Commission’s computer security and compliance with the various security acts through the implementation of corrections or improvements in any weaknesses found as a result of evaluations

∙ Faster and better public access to and dissemination of Review Commission information and decisions through the use of modern automated technology and techniques, including the Agency’s website

The Review Commission is in the process of updating its strategic plan for the period FY 2003 through FY 2008. As part of the update, two strategic goals will be eliminated, the external communications goal and the organizational goal. Consequently, performance goals associated with these two goals have been deleted from the performance plan. However, while the goals have been eliminated from the performance plan, they will continue to be a priority within the Agency and will be monitored for effectiveness.

Staffing

The Review Commission requests 17 FTEs for the Management and Administration function in FY 2004. These positions consist of the Executive Director and her administrative assistant, information technology specialists, a public information officer and assistant, the Executive Secretary and three legal technicians, and the Director of the Office of Financial and Administrative Services and six administrative, personnel, procurement, and, financial accounting positions.

The Executive Director is the Chief Operating Officer. In this capacity, the Management and Administration staff has responsibility for implementing the President’s management and reform efforts, including implementing and monitoring strategic and performance plans and reports, budget and performance integration, human capital and competitive sourcing, and e-government.

Funding and FTE

FY 2003 Est.

FY 2004 Est.

FTE

Management and Administration

2.0

2.1

IV. Budget by Object

Classification Category

Budget by Object Classification Category

For FY 2004, the Review Commission requests $10,115,000. This amount is 5.6 percent above the comparable amount requested for FY 2003 , $9,577,000. The request would support 69 FTEs. The increase in the budget request reflects increased rent and personnel/payroll costs. Within the funds requested, the Review Commission would support a financial audit, information security activities, non-judicial travel, and training not included in the FY 2003 level.

The request includes funds for the 3.1 percent pay raise in FY 2003 and assumes a 2.0 percent pay raise in FY 2004. The request assumes that the Review Commission’s contribution rate to the Civil Service Retirement System will revert to 7.5 percent for the first quarter of FY 2004, and to 7 percent thereafter.

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 2003 and 2004

($ in 000s)

Change FY 2003-2004

Object Class

FY 2003

FY 2004

Full Time Permanent Positions

6,340

6,599

+259

+4.1

Other Compensation

Sub-total

6,365

6,624

+259

+4.1

Benefits to Personnel

1,137

1,230

+93

+8.2

Travel

117

+20

+20.1

Transportation of Things

Rental Payments to GSA

1,216

1,296

+80

+6.6

Communications, Utilities, and Miscellaneous

Printing

Other Services

302

388

+86

+28.5

Services by Other Federal Agencies

140

Repair and Maintenance of Equipment

Supplies

112

Equipment

Total

9,577

10,115

+538

+5.6

Full Time Permanent Positions

Change FY 2003-FY 2004

FY 2003

FY 2004

Amount

$6,340,000

$6,599,000

+259,000

+4.1

The request for FY 2004 includes $6,599,000 to fund the direct payroll costs of 69 FTEs. This is an increase of $259,000 from the FY 2003 level. This amount includes the effect of the general pay raise in January 2003 and of the proposed general pay raise in January 2004. We expect to use the 69 FTE requested in fiscal year FY 2004.

Other Compensation

Change FY 2003-FY 2004

FY 2003

FY 2004

Amount

$25,000

-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.

Personnel Benefits

Change FY 2003-FY 2004

FY 2003

FY 2004

Amount

$1,137,000

$1,230,000

+93,000

+8.2

An amount of $1,230,000 is needed to fund the payroll-related costs of employee benefits in FY 2004. These benefits principally consist of the government’s contribution to the CSRS and FERS retirement programs, life and health insurance programs, and the Thrift Savings Plan. The request reflects the decrease in the government contribution rates for the CSRS. Personnel Benefits are increasing as a proportion of personnel costs in general as more employees are covered by the FERS program and as the costs and types of other benefits increase.

Travel

Change FY 2003-FY 2004

FY 2003

FY 2004

Amount

$97,000

$117,000

+$20,000

+20.1

The Review Commission requests $117,000 for travel. Travel of administrative law judges to conduct hearings will require an estimated $97,000. The request also includes funds for travel associated with training, conferences and supervisory travel to the regional offices.

Transportation of Things

Change FY 2003-FY 2004

FY 2003

FY 2004

Amount

$7,000

-0-

An amount of $7,000 is requested to fund the cost of shipping materials between Review Commission offices and other locations, and the shipping costs associated with the purchase of supplies and equipment.

Rental Payments to GSA

Change FY 2003-FY 2004

FY 2003

FY 2004

Amount

$1,216,000

$1,296,000

+80,000

+6.6

The request includes $1,296,000 for office space rent. In FY 2001, the per square foot rate for the space occupied by the national office was $20.78. This rate increased to $21.17 in FY 2002. It should be noted that these rent costs were deflated because they reflected savings from negotiations with the General Services Administration (GSA) in FY 2000. Had these savings not been realized, the rent per square foot in FY 2001 would have been $40.00 instead of the $20.78 paid (based on the rent for properties in the surrounding area). The rental agreement will expire in 2003. The request assumes that the Agency will pay a total of $39.55 per square foot in FY 2003 and $39.71 per square foot in FY 2004. The rent that the Review Commission will pay, beginning in April 2003, (exclusive of the GSA fee ) is $36.30 per square foot, below the $38.56 per square foot rate reflected in a 2001 survey of commercial rents in Washington.

The request also reflects the 48% increase in our rent in Denver. The GSA will increase our Denver rent rates to the appraised rates effective in July 2003. According to GSA, the rents are based on independent appraisals and are still below most office spaces in the area. The rent for the Atlanta office will remain relatively stable.

Communications, Utilities and Miscellaneous Charges

Change FY 2003-FY 2004

FY 2003

FY 2004

Amount

$61,000

-0-

Telephone and postage costs are projected to require $61,000 in FY 2004. Local phone service is expected to require $38,000. Long distance service is estimated at $6,000, and postage for the required mailing of letters, cases, and other materials is expected to be $17,000.

Printing

Change FY 2003-FY 2004

FY 2003

FY 2004

Amount

$44,000

-0-

The printing costs consist mainly of the charges for publishing proposed regulations and announcements in the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) and the Federal Register, purchasing copies of the CFR and the Federal Register and other GPO publications. Together, these printing/publishing costs are expected to approximate $9,000 in fiscal year 2004. The balance of the budget -- $35,000 -- is needed for continuing development and maintenance of the Review Commission’s Internet website, which is housed and maintained by the Government Printing Office and for the production of compact discs which contain the latest decisions reached by the Review Commission’s Administrative Law Judges and by the full Commission.

Other Services

Change FY 2003-FY 2004

FY 2003

FY 2004

Amount

$302,000

$388,000

+$86,000

+28.5

An amount of $388,000 is requested for Other Services. These funds will support: court reporting ($90,000), maintenance and development of the Review Commission’s automated data processing system ($60,000), support for new information technology security ($30,000), the Transportation Subsidy Program ($40,000), and on-line legal research ($34,000). The category also includes funding for other contractual services such as the annual audit of our financial statements ($40,000), the services of a librarian ($25,000), training ($15,000), and contracting for services required to support the agency’s mission ($54,000).

The additional funds requested would allow the Agency to correct weaknesses identified in the evaluation of the security of its information technology systems, provide training for employees, and conduct the audit of our financial statements.

Services by Other Federal Agencies

Change FY 2003-FY 2004

FY 2003

FY 2004

Amount

$140,000

-0-

An amount of $140,000 is requested for services provided by other federal agencies. This area includes $15,000 for the costs of support for personnel and payroll services provided by the National Finance Center, $105,000 for the costs of financial and administrative services provided by the Bureau of Public Debt, and $20,000 for other interagency services.

Repair and Maintenance of Equipment

Change FY 2003-FY 2004

FY 2003

FY 2004

Amount

$36,000

-0-

An amount of $36,000 is requested for Repair and Maintenance of Equipment including equipment used for printing and reproduction of cases and automated data processing equipment.

Supplies

Change FY 2003-FY 2004

FY 2003

FY 2004

Amount

$112,000

-0-

The amount of $112,000 is requested for materials and publications. General office supplies will require an estimated $22,000. Automated data processing supplies, including software, will require approximately $20,000. We are requesting support to maintain licenses for software that ensures the security and integrity of our information system. Subscriptions necessary to maintain for our legal libraries will require $70,000.

Equipment

Change FY 2003-FY 2004

FY 2003

FY 2004

Amount

$60,000

-0-

The amount of $60,000 is required for equipment in FY 2004, of which $37,000 is to be applied to computer acquisitions. This amount will enable the Review Commission to continue the replacement cycle established in earlier years. The expected life cycle of our automated data processing equipment is four years. Our automated data processing equipment includes personal computers, printers, a local area network, and associated peripherals. The remaining $23,000 of the amount requested for equipment will be used to replace worn or obsolete equipment. Within this amount we will also fund any furniture that may be needed.

V. Other Tables

Appropriation History

Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission

Fiscal Year

Request to

Congress

House

Allowance

Senate

Allowance

Appropriation

1971

$ 75,000

1972

400,000

1,592,000

1973

5,979,000

3,850,000

1974

4,890,000

4,687,000

1975

5,720,000

5,512,000

5,700,000

5,512,000

1976

5,806,000

5,769,000

1,464,000

1977

6,280,000

6,607,000

1978

7,150,000

1979

7,658,000

1980

7,450,000

1981

7,806,000

1982

7,787,000

7,387,000

7,092,000

1983

6,316,000

1984

6,331,000

5,982,000

6,339,000

5,982,000

1985

6,143,000

1986

5,742,000

5,901,000

5,647,000

1987

5,750,000

5,647,000

5,750,000

1988

6,232,000

5,885,000

1989

6,002,000

5,831,000

5,845,000

1990

5,970,000

1991

6,401,000

1992

6,711,000

6,497,000

6,711,000

1993

7,241,000

7,169,000

1994

7,262,000

7,362,000

1995

7,655,000

7,595,000

1996

8,127,000

8,200,000

8,100,000

8,081,000

1997

7,753,000

7,738,000

1 Reduced to $8,081,000 by P.L. 104-134 2 Reduced to $7,738,000 by P.L. 104-208

Fiscal Year

Request to Congress

House Allowance

Senate Allowance

Appropriation

1998

7,800,000

7,900,000

7,800,000

7,900,000

1999

8,050,000

8,100,000

8,092,000

2000

8,500,000

8,100,000

8,500,000

8,470,000

2001

8,720,000

8,600,000

8,720,000

2002

8,964,000

8,958,000

2003

9,577,000

2004

10,115,000

3 Reduced to $8,092,000 by H.R. 1664 4 Reduced to $8,470,000 by P.L. 106-113

5 Reduced to $8,958,000 by P.L. 107-206

Authorized Full Time Positions, by Function

FY 2002

Actual

FY 2003 Estimate

FY 2004 Proposed

Commission

Executive Level III

Executive Level IV

ES-6

ES-3

GS-15

GS-14

GS-13

GS-11

GS-10

GS-9

GS-7

Sub-total

Administrative Law Judge

AL-I

AL-III

GS-14

GS-11

GS-9

GS-8

GS-6

Sub-total

Management and Administration

ES-6

GS-15

GS-14

GS-13

GS-12

GS-11

GS-10

GS-9

GS-7

Sub-total

Total full-time equivalent positions