ML23249A210

Tpiwg Final Report Oct 27 2022. - Redacted

ML23249A210
Person / Time
Issue date:	10/31/2022
From:	NRC/EDO
To:
References
Download: ML23249A210 (84)

Text

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Telework Policy and Implementation Working Group FINAL REPORT October 2022 1 l P age

Table of Contents Executive Summary ...................................................................................................................... 3 Introduction.................................................................................................................................... 5 Process and Methodology Used to Develop Recommendations ................................................... 6 Information Gathering Activities ................................................................................................. 6 Evaluation .................................................................................................................................. 7 Recommendations......................................................................................................................... 8 Phase 1: Telework Pilot - Recommendations and Actions ........................................................ 8 Phase 1: Telework Pilot - Hybrid Work Model at a Glance........................................................ 9 Phase 1: Implementation Activities .......................................................................................... 14 Phase 2: Telework Pilot - Recommendations and Actions ...................................................... 14 Phase 2: Telework Pilot - Hybrid Work Model at a Glance...................................................... 14 Phase 2: Recommendations ................................................................................................... 15 Phase 2: Implementation Activities .......................................................................................... 17 Post-Pilot Assessment and Path Forward ................................................................................... 17 Post-Pilot Assessment Activities .............................................................................................. 17 Enclosures................................................................................................................................... 18 Enclosure 1: Team Composition .............................................................................................. 19 Enclosure 2: Glossary of Key Terms ....................................................................................... 20 Enclosure 3: Results of the Evaluation of the TPIWG Charter Objectives ............................... 23 Enclosure 4: Be Risk SMART Remote Work Eligibility for Temporary Assignments................ 38 Enclosure 5: Be Risk SMART Telework Pilot Analysis ............................................................ 41 Enclosure 6: Telework Policy - Hybrid Work Model at a Glance and Narrative ....................... 54 Enclosure 7: Assessing the Effectiveness of the Telework Pilot .............................................. 60 Enclosure 8: Listening Session and Employee Feedback Summary ....................................... 65 Enclosure 9: TPIWG Selected List of Key References ............................................................ 83 2 l P age

Executive Summary The Telework Policy and Implementation Working Group (TPIWG or working group) was formed by the Executive Director for Operations (EDO) on July 14, 2022, (ML22194A933) to assess the Nuclear Regulatory Commissions (NRC) telework policy and its implementation. The working group (Enclosure 1) was specifically tasked to provide recommendations to ensure that the agencys telework policy would have sufficient flexibility to meet our mission needs, and could be implemented fairly, equitably, consistently, and transparently. This report contains the results of our efforts and includes recommendations that were developed to support an expanded and more flexible approach to managing telework. As individuals, we share common goals with all employeesto accomplish our safety and security mission and to build and sustain our organizational culture.

Our recommendations were informed by input from a wide variety of sources including:

discussions with the Hybrid Environment Assessment and Review Team (HEART) members and a review of their report (ML22271A894); feedback from numerous employees who participated in one of four listening sessions and from many supervisors and managers who participated in a focused listening session; discussions with agency labor, financial, legal, and culture specialists; meetings with representatives from the National Treasury Employees Union (NTEU); informal comments and input from staff and supervisors provided directly to working group members; and our own literature reviews. As we began this effort, it became clear that many external organizations are engaged in similar efforts. They face comparable levels of uncertainty and have diverse views on the optimal blend of remote and in-person work. These uncertainties, coupled with the information we gathered, shaped our recommendation to conduct a two-phase pilot to assess the potential benefits and unintended consequences of a new approach, before finalizing any permanent changes to our telework policy.

In making this recommendation, we recognize that the agency is currently operating in a hybrid work environmentan environment that includes a mix of remote and in-person work. While the agency expanded the amount of telework available to employees during re-entry, we did not implement the necessary tools and guidance to ensure consistency in how we applied existing telework policy flexibilities and did not sufficiently focus on optimizing the benefits of our in-person work activities. As a result, many employees reported dissatisfaction with the current work environment, expressing a view that activities performed in-office often were no different than those routinely performed virtually. Employees also pointed out that they had limited in-person interactions when they were in the office. To address these concerns, we recommend empowering supervisors to be flexible as they manage employee work schedules. We all should be more intentional about how we manage our in-person time to achieve the presence with purpose (PwP) goals discussed in the HEART report.

We recommend defining three categories of workers: hybrid workers, who are expected to work from an agency worksite a minimum of two days per pay period; hybrid remote workers, who are expected to work in an agency worksite on a regular and recurring basis, but less than two days per pay period; and full remote workers who do not have a regular or recurring requirement to work from an agency worksite.

We recommend a two-phase pilot. Phase 1 includes activities that can be completed in the near-term, while Phase 2 includes activities that require more significant planning and preparation. During Phase 1, we recommend adjusting the number of required in-person days from the currently required fixed four days per pay period to a more flexible schedule with a 3 l P age

minimum of two days of in-person work per pay period, combined with additional days, as needed, to support achieving PwP. During Phase 1, every employee would either be a hybrid or full remote worker. Phase 2 further reduces the minimum number of regularly scheduled in-person days to two days per month, supplemented with additional in-person days as needed to support PwP goals, in effect creating the need for a hybrid remote worker category. Employees who currently reside more than 50 miles from an official NRC worksite would not be eligible for the hybrid remote option because of the cost and other impacts on the agencys operations. For eligible employees who opt to become hybrid remote workers during Phase 2, their alternate work location would become their official duty station. This change in duty station has the potential to affect an employees locality pay. Employees who opt to work from an agency worksite two or more days per month, or who have duties that are not portable, would remain hybrid workers.

We make a number of recommendations related to full remote work, three of which are highlighted here. First, we recommend that employees with existing full remote agreements be permitted to continue with their current work arrangements. Second, we recommend that the annual review of full remote arrangements be discontinued, and that feedback related to the employees performance and effectiveness as a full remote worker be addressed during their annual performance discussion. Third, we recommendif warranted for recruitment or retention purposesthat future vacancy announcements include a statement that a position is eligible for full remote work. This will streamline and add transparency to the current process.

Finally, the development of policy recommendations to establish the proper mix and approaches for managing telework versus in-person work is complicated by the evolving nature of information and operational experience in this area, the multiple and diverse views that were shared, and the need to consider how other federal requirements might interact with some policy recommendations. As a group, despite our diverse views, we agreed on the primary goals of adding flexibility, empowering supervisors, and focusing on activities to achieve PwP, but differed on the details of some recommendations. In our report, we highlight additional perspectives to better inform agency policymakers as they consider our recommendations.

4 l P age

Introduction The NRCs return to the office strategy changed the workplace model from one where most employees work in the office for a majority of the work week to a model where most employees work remotely for a majority of the week. As described in the July 28, 2021 message from the EDO 1, the NRCs decision to implement a new hybrid work environment was based on staff 0F input, an assessment of scholarly works, and the judgement of the NRCs senior leaders.

Specifically, the NRCs leadership determined that the hybrid model best supported our ability to achieve our mission by balancing the need to build and sustain the long-term organizational health benefits associated with face-to-face interactions, while enhancing the work-life benefits that remote work offers employees and supporting a preference for expanded remote work opportunities.

While NRC leadership saw the new hybrid work model as expanding remote work opportunities, many employees viewed the new model as a reduction in the flexibilities afforded to them during the height of the COVID-19 public health emergency. Many of the staff pointed to the agencys success in meeting the mission while operating in a maximum telework posture for nearly 18 months as a basis for providing most staff with the option to continue working remotely all or nearly all of the time. Additionally, many staff noted that they were not having the face-to-face interactions with their colleagues that are desired to support organizational health. Most staff indicated that they see very few people on days they come into the office and do the same work they do remotely. This feedback prompted the EDO to charter the HEART to provide recommendations to agency senior leadership on how to optimize organizational health in a hybrid work environment, now and in the future. The EDO also chartered our group to holistically assess NRCs telework policy and its implementation. He tasked the group to provide recommendations to ensure the agencys telework policy has sufficient flexibility to meet mission needs and ensure the program can be implemented fairly and equitably, consistently, and with transparency.

Like many organizations, the NRC is working to evaluate and optimize its approach to the hybrid work model. Establishing the right balance between in-office and virtual work time, and how to best use the in-person time is a challenge facing many organizations. Although many organizations are increasing workplace flexibilities, the long-term impacts on organizational health and mission accomplishment of this approach are unclear. Gartner 2, an industry 1F consultant group, indicated that the hybrid work model is an experiment and could be the biggest change to the model of work since Peter Drucker coined the phrase knowledge worker in the late 1950s, which took 30 years to truly understand. According to Gartner, CEOs and human capital leaders are wrestling with the full implications of the hybrid work model on their organizations. Many leaders are optimistic that increasing flexibility will help them meet their mission, but also indicate that unbounded flexibility (which occurred during the pandemic) has had a negative impact on organizations. Over the last two years, leaders have indicated that they are seeing impacts including strained employee/supervisor relationships, staff burnout, and weaker connection of employees to the organization and its culture. The ability to sustain a 1 Message from the EDO: Important Updates on Agency Re-Entry Plan, Implementation, and Announcement of Full Re-Entry Date (July 28, 2021) https://intranet.nrc.gov/announcements/standard/covid-19/65458.

2 Kidson, A. (2022, September 20). The Changing Experience of Culture in a Hybrid Work World [Webinar]. Gartner Inc. https://webinar.gartner.com/420348/agenda/session/974761?login=ML.

5 l P age

healthy organizational culture with a hybrid work model is a primary concern for many leaders and will require organizations to establish new approaches to maintain their culture.

Although leaders expressed concern about impacts on culture, they also determined that a hybrid work model has the potential to increase productivity and staff morale. In a 2021 Harvard Business Review article, How to do Hybrid Right, 3 the author focused on how to boost 2F productivity in a hybrid work model. This expert indicated that companies are focused on implementing flexible work designed to significantly boost productivity and employee satisfaction. According to this expert, to boost productivity, managers will need to consider four primary factors when developing a hybrid work model: (1) jobs and tasks, (2) employee preferences, (3) projects and workflows, and (4) inclusion and fairness.

There appears to be much to be learned about the long-term effects of a hybrid work model on organizational health and effectiveness. Therefore, we sought to offer recommendations that balanced the desire to provide enhanced employee workplace flexibilities with sufficient and meaningful in-office interactions to achieve our goal of building and sustaining the agencys mission, organizational health, and values. The bases for the recommendations included are transparent and provide a framework for implementing a hybrid work environment that promotes work-life balance, supports a healthy culture, and provides flexibility for staff and supervisors regarding where and how they work.

Process and Methodology Used to Develop Recommendations Each of the working group members brought a unique perspective to the table. We had a broad range of views, shaped by our diverse life and work experiences, and we came prepared to openly share our opinions as we embarked on this important effort. This was evident from the start, as each member shared their personal vision for an ideal hybrid work model. To effectively leverage our differences, while continuing to work in an open and collaborative manner, we aligned on using the core NRC Organizational ValuesIntegrity, Service, Openness, Commitment, Cooperation, Excellence, and Respectas our guiding principles to measure the efficacy of our recommendations. As a result, we enjoyed an inclusive work experience that allowed us to fully explore and understand each other's views while efficiently aligning on recommendations.

Through our discussions and deliberations, we developed responses to the five objectives outlined in the Charter 4 which informed our recommendations (Enclosure 3). In addition, we 3F sought input and feedback from employees, agency subject matter experts, and other internal stakeholders.

Information Gathering Activities To begin, we met with the EDO and the Deputies to gain alignment and understanding of their expectations on the goals and objectives of the tasking. In addition, we leveraged outreach 3 Gratton, L. (May-June 2021). How to do Hybrid Right. Harvard Business Review https://hbr.org/2021/05/how-to-do-hybrid-right.

4 Charter for the working group on assessing the NRC telework policy and implementation, dated July 14, 2022.

6 l P age

efforts from various groups from across the agency who have been closely involved with reviewing and assessing the hybrid work environment, specifically from the HEART and the Agency Culture Team. We frequently consulted with employee and labor relations and telework experts in the Office of the Chief Human Capital Officer and the Office of the General Counsel.

In addition, we engaged with travel experts in the Office of the Chief Financial Officer and facilities experts in the Office of Administration (ADM). Lastly, we met with members from the NTEU to receive feedback and suggestions.

Additionally, as part of our data collection we reviewed the HEART report and documents obtained throughout their assessment which included information from various agency working groups, external benchmarking entities, and literature reviews. We reviewed EDO Town Hall questions and answers from meetings that were held between February 2021 through July 2022, where there were approximately 110 comments related to telework. We also reviewed telework and attrition/retention data, responses from exit survey interviews, feedback from summer employees, and data provided by the Office of the Chief Information Officer (OCIO) and ADM related to building occupancy and network access. Finally, we reviewed telework policies from other federal agencies including the Department of Energy.

To further support engagement and employee outreach, we conducted four agencywide listening sessions to provide employees the opportunity to share their insights and perspectives on the current telework policy, considerations for enhancements, and how/when to best leverage in-person and virtual interactions. A total of 1,057 employees attended the listening sessions and 63 employees provided comments orally. Equally important, we conducted an additional listening session dedicated to supervisors. While this session was intended for first-line supervisors to provide their perspectives, senior managers also were invited to participate and share their feedback. A total of 312 participated in the supervisor listening session and 22 supervisors provided comments orally. A summary of the listening session feedback is provided in Enclosure 8.

Furthermore, we obtained feedback from more than 26 employees via email or during open door sessions. We reviewed and considered this feedback to inform our recommendations. A summary of the employee feedback is provided in Enclosure 8.

Finally, we issued a voluntary agencywide survey to capture additional information on pay, job function, distance from assigned NRC offices, commute time, and locality pay. The survey was active from October 3 - 14, 2022, and received 1507 responses (~54% of the agency). This survey data further informed recommendations for the future hybrid work model. A summary of the survey data analysis is provided in Enclosure 6.

Evaluation We considered and analyzed the information provided from the above sources to support the development and assessment of the recommendations contained in this report. Specifically, each recommendation was reviewed to ensure that it: 1) would support continued effective accomplishment of our safety and security mission and would build and sustain our organizational health; 2) was consistent with NRC Organizational Values; 3) considered risk (i.e., benefits versus challenges as described in the BeRiskSMART evaluation in Enclosure 5);

4) was consistent with, or permitted by, current requirements (e.g., the Collective Bargaining Agreement or applicable Federal requirements); 5) considered resource impacts; and 6) improved or responded to identified concerns that were associated with the current policy.

7 l P age

Our recommendations are described below. For some, we provide additional information to highlight key challenges or benefits to better inform decisions related to acceptance or non-acceptance of any recommendation.

Recommendations To optimize the agencys organizational health in a hybrid environment and inform future hybrid work model changes, we recommend that immediate, near-term, and longer-term telework changes be piloted.

Figure 1: TPIWG Approach The telework pilot we propose consists of two phases of recommendations and actions as outlined in Figure 1 with the overarching goal of successfully achieving agencywide implementation of the PwP telework philosophy. Each phase of the telework pilot provides an opportunity for the agency to learn from a period of progressively reduced fixed in-person requirements for the majority of employees. The proposed approach provides for near-term implementation of Phase 1 to enable the agency to make an initial shift to a flexible, and more meaningful in-person presence and, if considered successful, to prepare for the transition to Phase 2. Phase 2 further reduces the amount of fixed in-person presence to twice per month and we recommend piloting this hybrid work model for a full year. At the completion of Phase 2, we recommend the NRC complete a post-pilot assessment to determine a path forward for the agencys telework policy, appropriately informed by the pilot results.

Phase 1: Telework Pilot - Recommendations and Actions Over the course of our effort, we identified recommendations for immediate and near-term action that do not have or are not foreseen to have significant policy implications. Some of these recommendations were provided to the EDO or a specific office in advance of the final report because the working group determined that the recommendation was associated with ongoing efforts to address some specific telework issues. Recommendations outlined in Phase 1 are those that have been accepted by the EDO; are in progress and led by an agency office 8 l P age

for implementation; or are new near-term recommendations. Additionally, Phase 1 includes necessary actions that should be considered for implementation of Phase 2 of the telework pilot.

Phase 1: Telework Pilot - Hybrid Work Model at a Glance Figure 2 illustrates the proposed agency hybrid work model for Phase 1 of the telework pilot.

Additional details are provided in the recommendations below.

Figure 2: Phase 1 - Telework Pilot Recommendation 1: Adopt and implement PwP. This includes the need for all employees to adjust work schedules as needed to support the PwP guiding principles of in-person interactions to connect, collaborate, create, and celebrate.

• Offices should implement in-person core days once a month. These core days should include some PwP activities. We provide a calendar example in Enclosure 3, page 36 to illustrate this concept. These core days also provide opportunities to bring in full remote workers and resident inspectors to participate in office-wide meetings and team building activities on occasion.

A risk associated with the PwP monthly core day approach that we considered is the impact on individual employee telework schedules. The benefit of a core day is that it provides an opportunity for PwP activities across the office. This was viewed as important enough to offset any potential impact on individual preferred telework schedules. In any case, supervisors would retain the ability to grant exceptions.

9 l P age

Recommendation 2: Modify the current agency hybrid work model to reduce the number of required fixed schedule in-person days from four to two days per pay period if the nature of the work supports it. The authority to approve telework schedules will reside with the Branch Chief.

Under this new hybrid work model, supervisors will have the discretion to exceed this two-day minimum, consistent with their responsibility to support necessary in-person PwP activities.

• The authority to approve telework schedules will reside with the Branch Chief. Under this new hybrid work model, supervisors will have the discretion to exceed this two-day minimum, consistent with their responsibility to support necessary in-person PwP activities.

• This telework schedule includes employees who will have a fixed schedule of at least two days per pay period in-person. Employees under this plan would retain their existing office worksite as their official duty station for purposes of locality pay.

A risk that we considered associated with further reducing the amount of in-person presence for the telework baseline was the impact on the agencys ability to recruit and retain staff for positions that are unable to support this amount for telework due to the nature of their work (e.g., Headquarters operations officers, resident inspectors, etc.). To address this risk, we will continue to emphasize the importance of monitoring the impact of our telework pilot to our ability recruit and retain these critical positions. These positions have sometimes been difficult to fill, and the agency has employed various incentive strategies to address this challenge. Continued monitoring will allow leaders to assess any new or modified incentives that should be put into place.

Recommendation 3: Modify the processes related to full remote work by implementing the following items.

• Approval should be based on the need to support recruitment and retention to maintain critical skills, and should be the exception, not the norm.

• Where office directors/regional administrators determine it is necessary to address recruitment or retention challenges, provide an option to post vacancy announcements with location identified as To Be Determined (TBD)/Anywhere.

• Change approval authority for full remote work from the Chief Human Capital Officer (CHCO) to the office director or regional administrator.

• Emphasize that the approval guidance is forward looking and will not affect existing full remote arrangements.

• Eliminate the annual renewal process and incorporate instead into annual performance conversations a discussion of what has worked during full remote telework and may need to be addressed.

This recommendation addresses two concerns expressed by staff during the listening sessions related to the uncertainty and stress associated with the annual review of full remote telework arrangements and eliminates the multi-step process that requires full remote employees to report to the agency worksite after selection for, and acceptance of, a new position before being eligible to apply to become a full remote worker. By specifying up-front that a position may be eligible for full remote work, candidates can make an informed decision about whether to apply for the position.

10 l P a g e

We acknowledge this recommendation does not directly address concerns expressed by current full remote workers about limited promotion opportunities, but it will increase fairness and transparency.

We recognize that some employees who feel no recurring minimum amount of in-person presence is necessary would prefer for the new hybrid work model to make full remote work available to any employee who requests it. The working group holds the view that such wide scale full remote work could over time negatively impact our organizational health and erode our ability to meet the agencys mission. Instead, we offer an approach that, increases employee flexibility, reduces the minimum in-person time and with proper implementation of PwP, makes in-person interactions more meaningful.

This recommendation expands upon the clarification provided by the EDO 5 regarding 4F annual full remote telework renewals. Specifically, the EDO clarified the expectation that annual full-time telework agreements will continue to be renewed unless there are significant changes to the work of the position or there is a significant change to the justification for the original agreement, as outlined in agency policy and the Collective Bargaining Agreement 6. 5F Detailed discussion of the working groups analysis of full remote work is included in Enclosure 3.

Recommendation 4: Delegate approval authority and streamline the full remote work approval process for temporary assignments (i.e., rotations and details) to better enable the agency to fill emergent limited-duration agency needs, see Enclosure 4.

• Update guidance to reflect delegated approval of full remote work to Division Director level with office director/Regional Administrator included for awareness prior to posting the temporary assignment.

• Post all temporary assignments with preferred location (e.g., Headquarters, Region 3) with a clear statement that full remote work may be available, if the work is portable.

• Supervisor to design a plan that provides the appropriate mix of in-person and remote work to achieve organizational needs. This plan will be included in the posting.

• Minimize or eliminate telework paperwork for selected employees.

Some aspects of this recommendation were included in the EDO message to staff on organizational health, dated September 19, 2022.. Specifically, the EDO supports the posting of rotations/details/temporary assignments as eligible for remote work from a persons permanent duty station if the work is portable (for a duration up to 6 months) 5 EDO Message to Staff on Organizational Health September 19, 2022 https://intranet.nrc.gov/announcements/standard/general-interest/edo-message-to-staff-on-organizational-health.

6 Collective Bargaining Agreement.

https://adamsxt.nrc.gov/idmws/ViewDocByAccession.asp?AccessionNumber=ML21321A264.

11 l P a g e

Recommendation 5: Streamline and automate agency telework process and associated forms.

Streamline the telework request process and automate the process in a way that allows the agency to capture, maintain, and analyze telework data to support future decision-making.

This recommendation builds on the winning staff submission from the 2021 agencywide IdeaScale challenge campaign to identify ways to Better Use of Technology, Data, Analytics, and Automation. The winning submission was to automate the telework request process. This recommendation is in process for implementation and is being led by the Office of the Chief Human Capital Officer (OCHCO) and OCIO]

Recommendation 6: Revise and clarify guidance on appropriate use of Project-Based Telework.

• Issue a reminder about the purpose of project-based telework: to provide a short-term (i.e., hours or days) telework arrangement, when an employees work assignments, or a portion of them, can be performed remotely for a short period of time and where project-based telework is necessary to meet mission requirements.

• Emphasize that the use of project-based telework should be occasional (e.g., special project, inclement weather, recovery from a medical procedure), and that we expect limited need for project-based telework for many employees because of the expansion of telework flexibilities.

• Revise guidance related to approval authority and consecutive workday thresholds to reflect the updated hybrid work model that will be available to many employees.

• Emphasize that project-based telework shall not be used to circumvent the agencys telework policy.

Recommendation 7: Replace the term full-time telework (FTTW) with the term full remote telework.

This modification aligns more closely with Office of Personnel Managements (OPM) usage.

OPM guidance uses the term remote to indicate an arrangement in which an employee, under a written remote work agreement, is scheduled to perform their work at an alternative worksite and is not expected to perform work at an agency worksite on a regular and recurring basis. 7 6F Recommendation 8: Provide clarification of existing telework flexibilities.

Provide communication to NRC supervisors on existing telework flexibilities to optimize the hybrid work environment. These flexibilities include supervisors' ability to adjust an employees fixed telework day without a formal change to support purposeful engagement; crediting in-person activities as in-office days when they may take place at an alternate work location (ex. Licensee facility); clarifying that employees do not need to make up an in-office 7 Office of Personnel Management, 2021 Guide to Telework and Remote Work in the Federal Government (Nov.

2021) at 11, available at https://www.telework.gov/guidance-legislation/telework-guidance/telework-guide/guide-to-telework-in-the-federal-government.pdf (OPM 2021 Telework guide).

12 l P a g e

day if the fixed day is on a holiday, employee is on leave or for some other extenuating circumstance. [Lead: OCHCO]

Recommendation 9: Update and consolidate all telework guidance to enable successful implementation of the agencys telework program.

Recommendation 10: Establish the infrastructure to capture agency telework data to enhance transparency and support analysis and information needs to support the pilot and enable the agency to make ongoing decisions related to telework.

Recommendation 11: Update telework guidance to explicitly capture expectations and norms for optimizing hybrid and virtual meetings.

Specifically, include but not limited to:

• Cameras should generally be used when participating virtually (e.g., cameras should be on when speaking or when in small group meetings).

• Employees should physically attend and be present at meetings when they are in-office, and a designated space is reserved.

The above recommendation addresses a risk associated with expanded use of remote work.

To make the most of the hybrid environment, we will need to continuously adapt our behaviors to leverage the capabilities of new and evolving technologies. This recommendation is intended to promote the use of tools considered necessary to enhance interpersonal communications and improve the quality of both in-person and virtual interactions.

Recommendation 12: Establish an agencywide position on the minimum number of hours in the office for the in-person day to 6 hours6.944444e-5 days <br />0.00167 hours <br />9.920635e-6 weeks <br />2.283e-6 months <br />.

This recommendation provides clarity by setting clear expectations. We recognize that it may increase the amount of time per day that some employees would normally be expected to perform in-person work at an agency worksite. This change is necessary to support effective accomplishment of the PwP activities identified in this report.

13 l P a g e

Phase 1: Implementation Activities

• Establish a Telework Pilot Implementation Team with an SES champion to implement the pilot recommendations.

• Develop an Implementation and Change Management Plan

• Establish metrics to evaluate the success and sustainability of the hybrid work model and implantation and to assess the impact on organizational health (Enclosure 7).

• Establish a Human Capital Council Sub-Committee to monitor pilot implementation and periodically review data throughout the pilot.

• Provide supervisors with hybrid management guidance and training that focuses on effectively using in-office days in support of PwP.

• Stand up an agencywide Branch Chief community of practice to collaborate and share experiences, best practices, and examples of PwP to foster success, and to share feedback with the HCC Sub-Committee.

• Provide additional guidance to supervisors and staff on the process for approving full remote work requests.

• Develop process changes and associated guidance for posting positions to ensure employees understand remote work eligibility for the position.

• Implement a streamlined and automated telework approval process, including all associated forms.

• Review elements and standards and performance plan verbiage for all employees to ensure expectations align with and support a hybrid work environment.

Phase 2: Telework Pilot - Recommendations and Actions Phase 2 recommendations include actions that require more significant planning and preparation. Therefore, the working group recommends that this phase last for at least a year.

This will provide time to assess the potential benefits, impacts, and challenges associated with the pilot. We also include implementation activities for Phase 2.

The new approach emphasizes flexibility in the scheduling of in-office workdays, further expands the decision-making authorities of first-line supervisors as described below and prioritizes PwP. This new approach reflects a significant adjustment from our current agency hybrid work model and is designed to enhance connection, collaboration, creation, and celebration to help us better achieve our shared goal of building and sustaining strong organizational health and a more engaged workforce.

Phase 2: Telework Pilot - Hybrid Work Model at a Glance Figure 3 illustrates the proposed agency hybrid work model for Phase 2 of the telework pilot.

Additional details are provided in the recommendations below.

14 l P a g e

Figure 3: Phase 2 - Telework Pilot Phase 2: Recommendations Recommendation 13: Establish a new telework option, hybrid remote worker, that requires a minimum of 2 days per month in-person and PwP.

• Supervisors will have the discretion to add days consistent with their responsibility to support necessary in-person PwP activities. This telework option is limited to employees that reside within 50 miles of their assigned agency worksite.

• Employees who elect this telework option will be considered hybrid remote workers. The hybrid remote worker differs from full remote workers because hybrid remote workers will be in-person on a regular and recurring basis, that is a minimum of twice per month.

A hybrid remote workers duty station will change to their alternate worksite because they will be scheduled to report to the agency worksite less than two days per pay period. Note: some eligible employees may elect to voluntarily maintain a fixed telework schedule of greater than 2 days per pay period to retain a higher locality pay instead of converting to hybrid remote status.

• This option is available to employees who reside within 50 miles of their assigned agency worksite. Federal Travel Regulations require agencies to reimburse employees for travel exceeding 50 miles, including time spent traveling to the office when the employees duty station is not the NRC facility.

This recommendation may raise fairness concerns for employees that live greater than 50 miles from their assigned agency worksite. A relatively small percentage of employees live 15 l P a g e

outside the 50-mile limit for mandated reimbursement. Excluding employees on full-time telework agreements, we estimate that approximately 150 out of the 2800 staff in the agency fall into this category. (Further details about the assumptions underlying this estimate can be found in Enclosure 6.) By federal law, the agency would be required to consider hybrid remote employees living beyond 50-mile of the agency worksite to be on official duty travel when commuting into the office. We estimated this would cost the agency

$1.2 to $2 million annually, see Enclosure 6. We also considered the agency cost savings that might be realized by reducing the NRCs office space if we included these employees in the hybrid remote worker plan. Any space savings associated with transitioning approximately 150 staff from 2 days per pay period to 2 days per month spread across six different NRC office locations would be relatively small; and any net savings would not be realized for years. An additional consideration is that the analysis only accounted for current employees and did not adjust for potential cost increases in the future if more workers elect to live beyond the 50-mile range. As a result, we do not recommend making employees residing beyond the 50-mile range eligible for the hybrid remote plan. These workers will remain hybrid workers.

We recognize that the hybrid remote plan is progressive and represents a significant reduction to in-person presence, which comes with the risk of unintended effects on organizational health and on our ability to successfully train and develop new employees and future agency leaders. We were particularly concerned with the potential impact on our ability effectively onboard, train, and integrate into the NRC culture a large percentage of new employees; over the next several years the NRC may evolve to a condition where nearly 50 percent of agency staff will have less than five years of NRC experience. There is a potential concern that the amount of in-person engagement contained in this recommendation may not be sufficient to properly train and integrate these new employees into the NRC workforce. However, if embraced by all employees, PwP should mitigate this risk if employees identify the need for and conduct in-person interactions to properly onboard and develop new staff. Therefore, we were largely willing to recommend accepting this risk for a limited-duration pilot in exchange for the opportunity to collect data that will allow the agency to closely monitor impacts on organizational health and to assess the effectiveness of the agencys ability to make the new hybrid work environment and PwP successful. Preliminary thoughts on data collection needs to monitor pilot implementation are provided in Enclosure 7.

Upon implementation, there will be increased cost to the agency for employees who are located less than 50 miles from an agency worksite. Based on survey data collected, for the vast majority of respondents within 50 miles, locality pay will not change. However, we identified a risk of further increased agency costs as a result of employees who potentially relocate to a higher locality pay area or onboarding new employees in a higher locality pay area. It is important to monitor and manage associated costs and determine if future changes to the hybrid work model are warranted.

As discussed in Phase 1, a key risk that we considered was the potential impact of ineligibility for the hybrid remote plan on our ability to recruit and retain staff for positions that are less portable. Phase 2 has the potential to compound this risk further.

16 l P a g e

Recommendation 14: Modify Management Directive 14.1 Official Temporary Duty Travel to provide that the NRC will not reimburse local travel for employees commuting 50 or less miles from their alternate worksite to their assigned agency worksite. The modification does not affect reimbursement for local travel for other purposes.

Phase 2: Implementation Activities

• Execute an Implementation and Change Management Plan

• Create a SharePoint site and dashboard to monitor and communicate telework pilot information

• Establish an Agency PSAT Risk focused on the success and sustainability of the telework pilot implementation and to assess the impact on organizational health.

• Report telework pilot metrics during Quarterly Performance Review meetings.

• Implement a one-year pilot

• Measure the pilot results throughout the implementation year (including maintaining awareness of external factors that could shape the pilot)

Post-Pilot Assessment and Path Forward While monitoring will occur throughout the implementation of the pilot, we recommend that a post-pilot assessment be conducted to determine the path forward for implementation of NRCs telework policy.

Recommendation 15: Conduct a thorough assessment of the pilot to inform any new policy changes or potentially determine a need to modify or extend the pilot to better inform the content and implementation of a new policy.

Post-Pilot Assessment Activities

• Develop a new telework policy or extend/modify the pilot to gain additional information to inform the final policy

• Identify policy implications and make modifications to affected policy documents and guidance

• Modify the agencys signposts and markers to include an assessment of the agency telework program (ex. environmental factors, monitoring/trends)

• Establish a plan for continuous assessment of policy and implementation

• Implement new policy changes based on results of the pilot

• Consider the impact to office space experienced over the pilot in developing a long-term plan and final policy 17 l P a g e

Enclosures : TPIWG Team Composition : Glossary of Key Terms : Results of the TPIWG Charter Objectives Evaluation : Be Risk SMART Remote Work Eligibility for Temporary Assignments : Be Risk SMART Telework Pilot Analysis : Telework Pilot - Hybrid Work Model at a Glance and Narrative : Assessing Effectiveness of the Telework Pilot : Listening Session and Employee Feedback Summary : TPIWG Selected List of Key References 18 l P a g e

Enclosure 1: Team Composition As outlined in memorandum, Charter for the working group on assessing the NRC telework policy and implementation, dated July 14, 2022, the EDO selected the following senior managers to serve on the TPIWG.

• Mike King, Co-Chair TPIWG, Deputy Director for Reactor Safety Programs and Mission Support, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

• David Pelton, Co-Chair TPIWG, Deputy Regional Administrator, Region II

• Bernice Ammon, Deputy General Counsel for Licensing, Hearings, and Enforcement, Office of the General Counsel

• Stephanie Coffin, Deputy Director, Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research

• Eric Dilworth, Deputy Chief Human Capital Officer

• Scott Flanders, Deputy Chief Information, Officer Office of the Chief Information Officer

• Raymond K. Lorson, Deputy Regional Administrator, Region I In addition, the following individuals provided technical staff support:

• Carey Bickett, Technical Assistant, Region I

• Christine Steger, Executive Technical Assistant, Office of the Executive Director for Operations (detail; home office OCHCO)

TPIWG members during in-person work session. TPIWG members during virtual work session.

19 l P a g e

Glossary of Key Terms The key terms described below are referenced throughout the TPIWG report. To provide consistency, we use terms and definitions provided in the OPM Telework Guidance, the Nuclear Regulatory Commissions HEART Report, NRCs Strategic Plan Fiscal Years 2022-2026, and the Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA).

• OPM 2021 Guide to Telework and Remote Work in the Federal Government: (page 11)

• HEART Report: Appendix B ML22271A896

• NRC Strategic Plan Fiscal Years 2022-2026 (NUREG-1614, Volume 8, page 13)

• Collective Bargaining Agreement Article 7 - Telework Agency Worksite Agency worksite refers to an official federal agency location where work activities are based, generally considered a centralized location of an employees assigned organization. The term regular worksite is also used to describe agency worksite. [OPM]

Alternative Worksite Alternative worksite is generally considered an employees approved telework site, or, for a remote worker, the approved remote site (e.g., an employees residence). [OPM]

Distributed Workforce An organizational unit with some members working primarily at varying locations from each other. [HEART]

Duty Station The duty station is the location of the employees official worksite as documented on an employees Standard Form 50. [OPM]

Fixed A recurring telework arrangement with a fixed schedule that designates the day(s) and hours each pay period in which work will be performed at the employees home or approved offsite location [alternative worksite], including other NRC facilities not associated with an employees position of record. A request for approval of a fixed telework schedule shall be submitted to the first-line supervisor. [CBA]

Full Remote Worker A type of teleworker who is not expected to perform work at an agency worksite on a regular or recurring basis. [TPIWG]

Hybrid Worker A type of teleworker who is required to have a minimum of in-person presence two days per pay period with additional in-person days as necessary to support presence with purpose activities.

This hybrid workers official worksite is the agency worksite. [TPIWG]

Hybrid Remote Worker A type of teleworker who is required to have a minimum of in-person presence two days per month with additional in-person days as necessary to support presence with purpose activities.

The remote hybrid workers official worksite is an alternate worksite that is less than or equal to 50 miles from their agency worksite. [TPIWG]

20 l P a g e

Hybrid Work Environment An organization that maintains a workplace scenario where the workplace is not fixed or homogenous. Typically, in a hybrid work environment a subset of the organization works physically from the office paired with another subset that works away from the office on any given day. [HEART]

In-Office or Onsite Work location that is not the employees alternate worksite. Examples would include, but are not limited to, an NRC office, licensee site, inspection field location, and/or in-person training location. [TPIWG]

In-Person More broadly used in terms of being physically present together such as face-to-face interactions that may occur in-office by meeting with someone rather than engaging via Teams, talking on the phone, or e-mailing. [TPIWG]

Locality Locality relates to the region where the employee works. This factor adjusts the base rate of pay for the cost of living in a geographic area. While each position is assigned to a specific grade, and each employee is assigned to a step within that grade, the pay rate will vary by location. [OPM] Locality Pay Area Definitions Official Worksite Official worksite is the agency worksite for most employees, including a teleworker [hybrid worker]. For a [full] remote worker, the official worksite is the alternative worksite to which the agency and the employee agreed (e.g., the employees residence). The official worksite is generally the location of an employees duty station as documented on an employees Standard Form 50. [OPM]

Organizational Health At the NRC, organizational health refers to the NRCs ability to adapt and cope with change, while continuing to meet its important public health and safety mission.

A healthy organization would result in an infrastructure that facilitates continuous learning and innovation, knowledge management, diversity and inclusion, technology adoption, and strategic planning, which inspires the NRC's workforce.

A healthy organization includes a culture that creates a sense of belonging, promotes and sustains a strong safety culture, fosters creativity and innovation, connects vision with action, and continuously adapts and strives to be a healthy organization. [HEART and NRCs Strategic Plan]

Presence with Purpose Approach In a Presence with Purpose approach, the organization emphasizes being intentional about connection and flexible regarding location of where work is performed. Employees go to in-person locations, as needed, to accomplish work that cannot be performed remotely (e.g.,

facility inspection). Further, in-person interactions should be considered for connection, collaboration, creation, and celebration. [HEART]

Project-Based Telework 21 l P a g e

A short-term telework, when an employees work assignments, or a portion thereof, can be performed remotely for a short period of time. The duration of an approved project-based telework arrangement can be measured in terms of hours or a few days. [CBA]

Special Circumstances A non-permanent telework arrangement [typically full remote] for a relatively short period of time due to personal incapacitation or a personal hardship. [CBA]

Telework The term 'telework' or 'teleworking' refers to a work flexibility arrangement under which an employee performs the duties and responsibilities of such employee's position, and other authorized activities, from an approved worksite other than the location from which the employee would otherwise work. [HEART and OPM]

22 l P a g e

Results of the Evaluation of the TPIWG Charter Objectives The TPIWG considered and evaluated the following five objectives outlined in the Charter to inform our recommendations.

• Objective 1: Develop key messages around hybrid work including the benefits to the organization of remote work and the benefits to the organization of in-person engagement.

• Objective 2: Evaluate the implementation of hybrid (combination of virtual and in-office) work schedules, including how to provide flexibility in scheduling in-office work to support effective collaboration, mentoring, difficult conversations, etc.

• Objective 3: Evaluate the implementation of full-time telework within the commuting area, including consideration of the level of approval and ways to ensure transparency and consistent implementation for similar work throughout the agency. Evaluate the use of the term rare in existing policy and practice.

• Objective 4: Evaluate consideration of the agency interests and level of approval related to authorizing full-time telework outside the commuting area.

• Objective 5: Evaluate impacts of telework (with particular focus on onboarding, knowledge management, and organizational health) and identify specific examples for people to come into the office.

Objective 1: Develop key messages around hybrid work including the benefits to the organization of remote work and the benefits to the organization of in-person engagement.

Response

Our re-entry experience has demonstrated that the types of activities conducted remotely verses in-person must be thoughtfully considered in order to have PwP. Some types of work are enhanced by being conducted remotely, while others may benefit more if conducted in-person. Intentional collaboration and PwP will need to be a key part of our day-to-day thinking and planning to sustain a healthy culture, complete the work activities that must be, or can most effectively be accomplished in-person, while increasing telework opportunities to enhance employee work-life balance. In-person activities provide us with the opportunity to connect, collaborate, create, and celebrate, which are key components of maintaining organizational health.

Successful implementation of hybrid work enables any organization to reap the benefits of both in-person and remote work, improving organizational agility and effectiveness. There are some clear benefits to both (as outlined below) however, determining the appropriate balance between in-person and remote work is not an exact science and will likely evolve as we gain additional experience.

Based on reviews of related literature, benchmarking, listening session feedback, individual staff member feedback, and other data, the following are some examples of key benefits of remote and in-person work and the TPIWG report highlights some additional examples:

23 l P a g e

Benefits of Remote:

• Increased flexibility to support work-life balance

• Less commute time

• Increased productivity during working hours

• Increased access to meetings through virtual platforms

• Increased opportunity to realize long-term cost savings (Space, etc.)

• Increased resilience to bad weather, etc.

• Increased resilience to individual personal challenges

• Extends trust up and down and across the organization Benefits of In-Person:

• Improved interpersonal connections

• Increased focus and fewer digital distractions

• Improves ability to work through conflicts

• Enables more effective team building

• Provides more opportunity for organic & serendipitous interactions

• Makes it easier for free-flowing discussions

• Helps to avoid the Always On syndrome Like others seeking to optimize the hybrid work experience, we do not have all the answers. We fully acknowledge that some degree of risk and uncertainty exists with how best to implement a more flexible hybrid work model. We believe that conducting a pilot, with embedded monitoring capability to measure successes and challenges, will allow us to move forward with a more flexible hybrid work model while providing a platform for addressing concerns and identifying best practices. As identified by HEART, these is no one-size-fits-all solution for the appropriate mix of in-person and virtual work activities. We will need to work together, learn together, and grow together with a shared goal of realizing the benefits of both in-person and remote work.

Objective 2: Evaluate the implementation of hybrid (combination of virtual and in-office) work schedules, including how to provide flexibility in scheduling in-office work to support effective collaboration, mentoring, difficult conversations, etc.

Response

The working group began this effort by reviewing the underlying factors that led to the agencys decision to develop a hybrid work model, or a model that involves a mix of work locations, both in-person and virtual, with a majority of the staff expected to work virtually for some part of the 24 l P a g e

work week. These factors were described in a message from the EDO 8 dated July 28, 2021, 7F and included: staff input, an assessment of scholarly works, and the judgement of NRC senior leaders. The EDOs message stated that the longer-term benefits of having some face-to-face interactions enhanced our ability to achieve our mission and also stated a desire to maintain those benefits following re-entry. The EDO message also highlighted the success of the agency at accomplishing the mission during the pandemic and attributed the success, in part, to the leveraging of strong partnerships and relationships that had been developed prior to the pandemic through in-person interactions.

Based on how well the organization functioned in a nearly full remote work model during the height of the pandemic, NRC leadership saw value in expanding the use of telework following re-entry and developed a model where a majority of the employees would have the opportunity to telework six days a pay period, which was greater than the number of days that many of the staff teleworked prior to the pandemic. While not explicitly stated, it seemed the goal of implementing a hybrid work model was to provide a framework that balanced the need for sufficient in-person interactions to sustain a healthy culture, and complete the work activities that must be, or can most effectively be accomplished in-person, while increasing telework opportunities to enhance work-life balance. With these goals in mind, effective implementation of a hybrid work schedule would seek to have employees in-office for activities that benefit most from in-person interactions and would provide flexibility to allow employees to work virtually when in-person interactions are not anticipated or needed to work effectively. We evaluated two work schedule models:

• The agencys current schedule where a majority of the staff are expected to work in-office a minimum of four days per pay period, and

• A flexible schedule that emphasizes an approach where in-office days are developed and adjusted as needed to support PwP activities and engagement.

Current Agency Work Schedule The agencys current hybrid work schedule model requires a majority of staff to come into the office four days per pay period (nominally two days per week) unless an exception is approved.

An employee may request a work schedule that requires less than two days of in-office presence per week and that request is required to be approved by the office director/Regional Administrator. In addition, an employee may request to work virtually full-time (i.e., remote worker) and those requests must be approved by the office director/Regional Administrator and also by the Director of the OCHCO. While some work units may coordinate schedules of employees, the current policy does not require that in-office days be coordinated with other colleagues. The current model has been in place for about 8 months, which does not account for the approximate 3-month period (mid-December to mid-March) where the agency returned to maximum full-time telework following an increase COVID infections from the Omicron variant.

Based on observation, data provided by HEART, and input from listening sessions, implementation of the current hybrid work schedules has not fully achieved the goal of having a sufficient number of meaningful in-person interactions to conduct culture sustaining activities.

8 Important Updates on Agency Re-Entry Plan, Implementation, and Announcement of Full Re-Entry Date, https://intranet.nrc.gov/announcements/standard/covid-19/65458.

25 l P a g e

Many employees have reported that they rarely see colleagues when they come into the office and frequently perform many of the same activities in-office as they do when working virtually.

For example, employees may participate in Teams meetings and interact with other colleagues who are working virtually while the employee is working from the office on one of their scheduled in-office days. The feedback from the staff and supervisor listening sessions suggests that there does not appear to be sufficient guidance and/or a common understanding of the flexibilities available within the current work schedule, which has led to inconsistent implementation, not fully utilizing available flexibilities, and not fully achieving the benefits of having employees in-office.

Many of the challenges above can be attributed to a few key factors. First, the current hybrid work model requires the same number of fixed in-office days for most of the employees, without consideration of the type of work performed. The HEART report stated that the appropriateness of different types of hybrid work schedules varies greatly by organizational function, team, role, and individual. There is no ideal one-size-fits-all answer. 9 In our case, 8F establishing a four day per pay period in-office work schedule for most staff created a requirement for employees to come into the office on a fixed schedule without sufficient consideration of the activities to be performed while in-office. As noted above this led to many employees performing similar activities while in-office that they were performing at home (e.g.,

participating in Teams meetings, heads down report writing, etc.) Second, the flexibility afforded to the employees to select their in-office days has not led to having sufficient numbers of employees in-office together to take advantage of meaningful in-person interactions. Third, guidance to employees and supervisors prior to re-entry was not sufficient to ensure a common understanding of the flexibilities and adjustments to the fixed work schedules that could be implemented to better support employee requests and/or to enhance the experiences and interactions of employees during their in-office workdays.

Flexible Schedule One alternative to the agencys current hybrid work model is a flexible schedule model. A flexible schedule would encourage staff and supervisors to identify and adjust work schedules to support meaningful in-person presence activities. If properly implemented, a flexible work schedule provides an increased opportunity for staff to have more meaningful in-office interactions, particularly when coupled with a PwP philosophy as recommended by HEART.

However, as HEART noted in their report, a flexible work schedule model, even when implemented with a PwP philosophy, has the potential to have negative consequences such as inferior orientation and onboarding for new employees, less effective collaboration, diminished relationship building, and insufficient knowledge transfer/management (See HEART Report Appendix L). Additionally, inconsistent application could also have a negative impact on organizational health and may lead to difficulty in filling important agency positions such as resident inspectors who dont have as much opportunity for telework. The HEART report mentions some approaches through the use of technology that may help mitigate some of the challenges related to training of new employees, collaboration, diminished relationship building, and knowledge transfer.

TPIWG Recommended Hybrid Work Schedule 9 See page 9 of NRC Hybrid Environment Assessment and Review Team Report (ML22271A894).

26 l P a g e

We agree with HEARTs recommendation to implement a PwP philosophy when implementing hybrid work schedules, and we agree that teams and branches are best position to determine when, how, and where in-person interactions will best support that work unit. However, we believe that some guideposts are needed to help mitigate some of the potentially negative consequences identified by HEART. While we agree with the mitigation recommendations proposed by HEART, we also believe that establishing some parameters around in-person interactions for all NRC organizations is necessary to better facilitate a more consistent approach across the agency to reduce the risk of the agency experiencing many of the negative impacts noted above. A core component of the NRC leaderships view on organizational health is to establish an environment to provide sufficient numbers of in-person interactions to conduct culture sustaining activities. For a level of consistency, and as a further mitigating action to address the challenges identified by the HEART, and to avoid the challenge of not providing sufficient guidance during the initial re-entry, we determined that the flexible work schedule approach would work best when combined with expectations regarding a minimal number of in-person days. We also think it is important to establish a clear expectation that the agency fully embraces PwP guiding principles and supervisors should not simply require employees to come into the office based solely on their own work preferences. To appropriately implement the PwP philosophy, we expect employees will likely need come into the office more frequently than the minimum (i.e., two days per month), but rarely more than the current requirement (i.e., 4 days per pay period or 8 days per month). Additionally, some in-office days should be coordinated at an office level to further build office culture. As noted in the recommendations section, changes will be necessary to fully implement the recommended hybrid work model. However, many of the changes related to emphasizing PwP and taking advantage of current flexibilities can be adopted before all the changes are implemented.

As noted in the HEART report, implementation of the current hybrid work schedules could be improved without policy changes by supervisors using a PwP philosophy to create more intentional in-person interactions when employees are in the office. Supervisors could use the guiding principles for in-person interactions (i.e., 4-Cs) to identify moments that matter and then work with the staff to adjust schedules to ensure those in-person interactions are meaningful.

This should reduce the number of instances where the employees come into the office and carry out the same work they do remotely. However, because of the current four day per pay period fixed work schedule many employees will likely still have this experience. Any change to PwP philosophy should be complemented by additional employee training on the 4-Cs to facilitate effective in-office collaboration, mentoring, and constructive resolution of conflicts when engaged in difficult conversations. It should be noted that in recent months the agency has sponsored supervisor training on leading in a hybrid environment. We recommend the PwP philosophy and associated training be developed promptly and implemented immediately. This will improve implementation of the current work schedule model while changes are being made.

27 l P a g e

Objective 3: Evaluate the implementation of full-time telework within the commuting area, including consideration of the level of approval and ways to ensure transparency and consistent implementation for similar work throughout the agency. Evaluate the use of the term rare in existing policy and practice.

Objective 4: Evaluate consideration of the agency interests and level of approval related to authorizing full-time telework outside the commuting area.

These two Objectives are considered together. For purposes of both phases of the pilot, the term full remote applies to what the agency has previously called full-time teleworkers. We use full remote in the place of full-time throughout the discussion of these two objectives.

This change aligns with OPMs definition of remote: an arrangement in which an employee, under a written remote work agreement, is scheduled to perform their work at an alternative worksite and is not expected to perform work at an agency worksite on a regular and recurring basis. 10 We added the term full to provide clarity and distinguish this category of teleworker 9F from the hybrid remote category. Workers in this category may or may not be within the commuting area of NRC facilities and the considerations we address will apply without regard to the geographical location of a proposed full remote arrangement. Geographical location will, however, affect the choices some employees makethis also is true for some potential remote hybrid workersand these will be discussed.

Full Remote Telework Concerns. In addition to concerns over how re-entry was communicated, the issue generating perhaps the highest energy since re-entry has been full remote telework, in all its permutations (e.g., local, geographically distant, special circumstances). Staff, first-line supervisors, and executives all have raised questions about implementation of the existing policies and have provided views on how the policies should be modified. In our listening sessions, we heard vocal criticisms of the agencys posture on full remote telework. Individuals pointed to a wide range of concerns, including the difficulty of receiving approval for full remote telework and the level at which approval is required; the complexity of the process for requesting full remote telework; the frequency with which renewal must be requested and the associated stress related to annual review of full remote telework arrangements; the number/percentages of employees who should be on full remote telework within a work unit; eligibility for continued full remote telework as a barrier to promotion; supervisory burdens related to managing both full remote telework and hybrid work modes; onboarding challenges; coaching; hiring and retention challenges; and lack of consistency and equity within teams and across the agency. We heard a perception that the way full remote telework requests are processed and evaluated has 10 Office of Personnel Management, 2021 Guide to Telework and Remote Work in the Federal Government (Nov.

2021) at 11, available at https://www.telework.gov/guidance-legislation/telework-guidance/telework-guide/guide-to-telework-in-the-federal-government.pdf.

28 l P a g e

changedincluding when compared to pre-pandemic practiceswith the result that new and renewal requests are evaluated with an elevated level of rigor and at a higher level within OCHCO than they were before the pandemic arrived.

Counterpoint. In contrast to the vocal criticisms of the agencys hybrid posture that we heard during our listening sessions, other input, including outreach from individual employees and survey input, paints a more nuanced picture of views on full remote telework. Opinions on the importance of in-person, in-office/onsite interactions are mixed, as are opinions on how much in-office presence is needed to maintain organizational health. Opinions also are divided on the types of interactions that are best performed in-office/onsite, though there appears to be general agreement that in-office/onsite presence should be purposeful. The working group does not have precise data on employee preferences. However, a small sample survey of bargaining unit employees conducted by the union showed that a majority of those surveyed preferred to be in the office at least two days per week, with a third preferring to be in the office three or more days per week. While not conclusive based on the small sample size, the result does suggest that employee preferences are not uniform, and that a not insignificant number of employees would prefer to be in the office with a high degree of regularity.

NTEU Bargaining Unit Employee Survey Response to Telework Preference 0%

5%

3%

13% Always or Almost Always in the office Telework 1 or 2 Days a Week 4%

28% Telework 3 Days a Week Telework 4 Days a Week Local Remote (PwP)

National Remote International Remote 47%

Specific Considerations and Recommendations. A significant number of complaints heard during listening sessions and through other vehicles relate to the agencys implementation of its current full remote telework policies. Near-term recommendations to address some of these concerns are presented in the body of the report; some of these recommendations have already been accepted, and others are in progress. Concerns related to the level of approval for full remote telework requests, including the approval process; transparency and consistency of 29 l P a g e

decision-making; use of the word rare and the criteria that should apply to full remote telework approvals; agency interests; and local versus geographically distanced full remote telework considerations are examined here.

• Level of Approval (Approval Process)

Current Process. The agencys current process for requesting and receiving approval for full remote telework is a multi-step process that starts with completing and submitting paperwork that wends its way through the supervisory chain. Office directors or regional administrators make the first call on whether a given request should be approved, but the final decision is made by the CHCO, who can overturn the office directors or regional administrators decision. Full remote telework request paperwork is complicated and burdensome. Renewals are required to be formally requested and re-approved on an annual basis. Employees on geographically distanced full remote telework agreements who seek lateral or promotion opportunities are required to return to headquarters (or the relevant regional office) if they accept an offer and must reapply for full remote telework with no guarantee that their request will be approved.

Recommendations. Based upon input received, we recommend revising the entire process. First, the telework forms should be updated and simplified. Action on this front is underwaythe offices of the CHCO and Chief Information Officer have embarked on a project to examine workflows and requirements and to update, streamline, and automate the forms. To ensure and confirm complete understanding, the revised form will include a check box statement that transparently explains the implications for locality pay depending on the duty station proposed by the employee for full remote work.

Second, the level of approval required for full remote telework should be pushed down to the level where the right balance between the nature of the work and the costs and benefits of the proposed full remote plan are best understood. We heard strong arguments that the branch chief is in the best position to understand the nature of the work, and therefore whether a particular full remote telework plan makes sense for the organization. There is validity to that pointbut the branch chief is not necessarily going to have the complete picture. Similarly, a centralized agency decisionmaker may be too far removed from the day-to-day work to entirely understand the unique needs of the organization. Office directors and regional administrators are well-positioned to understand all factors. They have a good handle on the day-to-day work, the extent to which the work can be performed fully remote without affecting organizational health, and the budgetary implications of various levels of full remote workers. As a result, we recommend that the decision-making authority to approve full remote telework agreements be delegated to the office directors and regional administrators. As an additional consistency check, we recommend tasking a new subcommittee of the Human Capital Council with monitoring full remote work and suggesting course corrections when needed throughout phases 1 and 2 of the pilot.

To be crystal clear: Our recommendations are forward looking, and there are no plans to revisit existing full remote arrangements. Further, to reduce the stress that accompanies the current requirement for annual renewal of full remote telework agreements, we recommend replacing this requirement with a discussion and review during the annual appraisal process, with no renewal paperwork required. Generally, this should take place during the appraisal conversation between the employee and the first-line supervisor and should include a discussion of strategies that were successful during the appraisal period as well as ideas to improve the effectiveness of the full remote arrangement going forward. Only in exceptional 30 l P a g e

circumstances, where the nature of the work has changed to reduce its portability, where full remote work can no longer be sustained and mission is affected, or where performance issues have not been able to be addressed despite concerted efforts to manage them virtually, should the arrangement be altered. In these circumstances, the first-line supervisor should have elevated the conversation to the office director or regional administrator and should have engaged an employee relations specialist before engaging with the employee on the topic, since approval authority will reside at that higher level.

Additionally, full remote workers should not be subjected to unnecessary paperwork and approvals and should not face uncertainty when they look for promotion opportunities. As before, vacancy announcements should plainly specify locationbut we recommend an option to post vacancy announcements with location TBD/Anywhere in situations where the work clearly can be performed fully remotely, and where retention and recruitment needs, and the nature of the skillset required to fill the position justify filling it through a full remote posting. Similarly, job postings for positions that cannot be performed fully remotely should so state with absolute clarity. Further, offers to employees on existing full remote telework agreements should confirm that the offer includes continuation of the full remote arrangement, with no requirement to first return to headquarters (or the region) to reapply for a full remote arrangement. Action to develop and implement optional TBD/Anywhere location language is in progress, with the OCHCO taking the lead.

• Transparency and Consistency Current Status. Perceptions regarding transparency and consistency are mixed. Employees do not understand the basis for full remote telework decisions and perceive inequities in how approval and denial decisions are made. The approval process is a black box; many expect the routine answer to be denial. There are perceived inequities/consistency concerns between employees with long-standing full remote telework agreements and employees seeking similar agreements now. There also are perceived inequities/consistency concerns for those desiring local full remote telework arrangements as opposed to geographically distanced full remote arrangements.

Recommendations. Guidance for full remote telework decision-making should be transparent, well-understood, and consistent across the agency. Information about the process for applying for a full remote arrangement should be easy to find, posted on a prominent, centralized intranet site together with information about work schedule requirements, available schedule flexibilities, and project-based work options for each phase of the pilot, as well as PwP expectations. This intranet site should also serve as the portal to the revamped, automated telework forms. In addition, it should include clear guidance on the criteria to be used when making an approval decision, so that employees, supervisors, regional administrators, and office directors have a shared understanding of the process. It also should include guidance for supervisors and personnel staffing specialists regarding the decision on when to post vacancies announcements with location TBD/Anywhere and when location restrictions are appropriate based on the nature of the work. This guidance also should address situations where consultation with another office director or regional administrator is required. For example, if a vacancy is posted with location TBD/Anywhere, and the anywhere could end up being onsite at a regional office because of the nature of the job (e.g., information security requirements), the regional administrator should be consulted in advance, preferably at the vacancy announcement stage, to confirm the availability of office space.

31 l P a g e

As discussed, placing the authority for making approval decisions at the regional administrator or office director level, will serve to provide consistency and a balanced decision based on the type of work and broader office staffing, resource, knowledge management, and culture concerns. Also as discussed, the new subcommittee of the Human Capital Council charged with monitoring full remote work will provide an additional layer of consistency.

• Use of the Word Rare (Full Remote Telework Approval Criteria)

Current Usage. The use of the word rare in connection with full remote approval decisions, together with the guidance provided to leadership was a flashpoint for employees. Another flashpoint was the succession planning language included in the full remote telework approval forms. This language is interpreted by many as requiring supervisors to plan for replacing the fully remote employee with a person who would be located at headquarters or in a regional officewith the implied eventual termination of the full remote workers agreement and a forced choice to return or to leave the agency. Employees view use of the word rare as code for a policy of routinely denying full remote telework requests.

Recommendations. The proposed hybrid model, which includes a significant reduction in the number of mandatory days in-person onsite, coupled with additional, meaningful PwP in-person onsite activities, may largely obviate desire for requests for full remote telework schedules, except for employees who live a significant distance away from NRC facilities. In view of this potential result, we anticipate that requests for approval of full remote telework schedules whether local or somewhere else in the countrymay be infrequent and low in number. To the extent such requests are nonetheless made, routine, wholesale approvals of full remote telework schedules would be inconsistent with the PwP approach and would complicate our ability to meet organizational effectiveness goals. Criteria for approval decisions do need to be established, however. These criteria need to be transparent and easily understood by employees and managers alike.

OPMs telework guidance, on the Recruitment & Retention page, states that Agencies are encouraged to use telework as a tool to help attract, recruit, and retain the best possible workforce. 11 Further, telework can be used as an effective succession planning tool, 10F encouraging potential retirees to continue workingto facilitate a smooth and continuous transition of institutional knowledge and technical competencies. 12 While this guidance applies 11F to telework generallyincluding schedules where employees telework only part of the timeit also is instructive in the context of approvals for full remote telework requests. To balance organizational needs to build the best possible workforce with the critical skills needed to perform the mission, we recommend using full remote telework as a tool for recruitment and retention, including retention for knowledge management purposes.

Some factors to consider when deciding to use full remote telework as either a recruiting or a retention tool:

• Using the retention or the recruiting tool to maintain critical skills is in the agencys best interests 11 Accessible at: https://www.telework.gov/guidance-legislation/telework-guidance/recruitment-retention/.

12 Id.

32 l P a g e

• The skill set is unique, and the agency has experienced great hardship in finding or developing high performing employees with the requisite knowledge, skills, and abilities

• The current hiring environment and market analysis demonstrate that competitors routinely offer full remote work for this type of position

• The work is nearly 100% portable and can be successfully completed with only occasional in-person presence

• The cost of travel has been explicitly captured in the office budget, and there is a net benefit to the agency Additional factors to consider when deciding to use full remote telework as a retention tool:

• The employee is a demonstrated flight risk or is in a position that is highly recruited externally

• The employee is a key contributor to mission effectiveness, with multiple years of superior performance

• The employee has demonstrated the ability to operate effectively in a virtual environment, with little supervision

• The employee has repeatedly shown the ability to skillfully use tools and techniques for collaboration, knowledge management, and training of other employees

• Cost and time to backfill for the employee are significant

• The employee has a temporary or permanent need for full remote work due to life events outside the employees control Additional factors to consider when deciding to use full remote telework as a recruiting tool:

• All acceptable candidates (internal and external) with the skill set want full remote work

• Employees already in full remote status are known to have skill sets matching the requirements of the position

• Need to fill the position is acute Some employees and supervisors believe there are whole categories of work that are, by definition, fully portable; these categories are in job series where the agency has historically had recruitment challenges that have only been exacerbated by the current telework policy. We do not recommend the establishment of position-based categories at this time. But experience during the pilot may shed light on whether the agency should consider denoting certain positions as automatically eligible for full remote telework in the future. Other federal agencies have embarked on this course of action, and we can leverage their experience if the agency decides in future to pursue position-based categories.

• Agency Interests The agency has a basic need to maintain organization effectiveness going forward. The hybrid work model we recommend fundamentally requires some routine in-person PwP to sustain a healthy organizational culture. The model we propose includes a combination of hybrid, remote hybrid, and full remote work, with hybrid and remote hybrid as the predominant modes and full remote the exception. Too many exceptions to the hybrid plan would complicate our ability to meet organizational effectiveness goals and should only be considered where there is an overriding agency need, specifically, the need to retain or recruit highly qualified employees with critical skills. Additional agency interests include budgetary considerations, including costs of bringing geographically distanced full remote workers back to their headquarters or regional facility for PwP engagement with some reasonable periodicity; fairness and equity concerns for 33 l P a g e

employees who are not approved for full remote work; and potentially diminished promotion opportunities for full remote workers.

• Commuting Area (Local versus Geographically Distanced Full Remote Telework)

Current Model. Generally, the pre-pandemic and re-entry practice has been to view full remote telework as something that occurs in a geographical distant location. Local full remote telework has been discouraged except in the most exceptional circumstancesoften only in the context of a reasonable accommodation scenario or a situation where temporary special circumstances support full remote work for a brief period.

Recommendations. Setting aside the independent process for seeking a reasonable accommodationwhich is not under consideration herethe process for requesting full remote telework should be the same whether the request is for local or geographically distanced full remote teleworksee the approval process and approval criteria discussions above.

Importantly, however, the implications of a decision to request full remote telework should be clearly explained to employees and supervisors. In particular, a fact sheet explaining locality pay rules and employee responsibility for relocation expenses should be prepared, as should a fact sheet regarding the agencys responsibility for travel expenses. As discussed above, the telework forms should include a statement explaining the implications of an employees choice to request full remote telework on locality pay, with a check box to acknowledge understanding. Expectations for in-office presence for both local and geographically distanced full remote teleworkers should be established and should include in-person PwP activities on a frequency that aligns with the nature of the work and the office director or regional administrators assessment of the appropriate number of times per quarter or year that full remote workers should be onsite.

Objective 5: Evaluate impacts of telework (with particular focus on onboarding, knowledge management, and organizational health) and identify specific examples for people to come into the office.

Given the agencys demographics, we have an acute need to ensure our onboarding and knowledge management remain effective and our organizational health is sustained in a hybrid work environment. There is a widely held belief that onboarding, and knowledge management are most effective and organizational health is best sustained through regular, frequent, in-person interactions. As with all things telework-related, this belief has been challenged by our lived experience. The most effective approach to a specific situation depends on many factors.

It depends on the individuals involved (e.g., tactile learner versus auditory learner), how well they know each other (e.g., new relationship versus well-established relationship), and the quality of the relationship (e.g., antagonistic versus easy). It depends also on the complexity of the material and information of interest (e.g., tacit knowledge versus explicit knowledge). Social scientists agree physical connection is important for human beings to thrive [NASA]. In the workplace, however, the amount of physical connection necessary for an individual or a team to thrive will vary widely, depending on the individuals, team dynamics, and the nature of the mission-related work. The HEART reports recommendation of PwP and the 4Cs of connect, 34 l P a g e

collaborate, create, and celebrate provide all employees with the framework to determine the most effective approach.

The overarching sentiment from the listening sessions indicated that onboarding and knowledge management, has been and will continue to be successful, and that organizational health will continue to be sustained even in a fully remote environment. The testimonials of several new hires who shared their positive onboarding and training experiences during the pandemic, while under maximum telework were of particular relevance. In contrast to this experience, an exit survey of our summer hires indicated a desire for more in-person interactions. We also received feedback through informal emails, chats and drop ins that indicated some amount of in-person connection was desired, particularly for these three areas. Our recommendations recognize how much our employees can do well in a virtual environment and the benefits that accrue from teleworkingthus we recommend expanding telework flexibilities. Our recommendations similarly recognize how critical in-person interactions are in support of many agency activities, particularly in the areas of onboarding, knowledge management, and organizational health.

Thus, we recommend implementing PwP including a monthly core day for all headquarters and Technical Training Center offices.

Lets turn to the benefits of and examples for in-person interactions:

• Physical proximity can enhance a sense of belonging (e.g., when welcoming a new hire into the agency)

• Physical proximity can provide an increased sense of safety (e.g., when participating in a contentious public meeting)

• Physical proximity can improve future performance (e.g., when preparing for presentations to the Advisory Committee for Reactor Safeguards, the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board, or the Commission)

• Physical proximity can enhance understanding and engagement (e.g., when brainstorming a solution to a thorny issue or explaining a complex technical topic)

Many important activities require in-person presence. The HEART report refers to such activities as location dependent. We note that the activity rarely takes place in an employees workspace and may not occur in an NRC facility. We believe these activities are self-evident and well-understood by employees. Examples of such activities are provided below.

• Administrating badging, issuing laptops, and distributing mail

• Conducting inspections at an NRC licensee, applicant, or potential applicants facility

• Conducting environmental public scoping meetings at the location of interest

• Observing experiments or visiting experimental facilities

• Presenting at domestic or international conferences

• Presenting to the ACRS, ASLB, ACMUI, and the Commission

• Conducting classified or safeguards activities and some Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) activities

• Responding to an event at an NRC facility or an NRC licensees facility

• Maintaining safe and secure NRC facilities

• Administrating operator licensing exams

• Administrating or participating in drug testing

• Escorting visitors at an NRC facility

• Troubleshooting (e.g., building issues, IT issues) 35 l P a g e

There are also important activities that benefit from in-person presence, that align to a 4C outcome (i.e., connect, collaborate, create, and celebrate). What may be challenging about these types of activities is that the in-person benefits may be less obvious or immediate and less valued by one or more of the affected participants. A Harvard Business Review article described a work environment similar to our work environment and offered a useful view about how to move forward [Harvard]. Examples of gatherings that often benefit from in-person presence are provided below.

• Onboarding new employees (e.g., supervisor and team introductions, building walk-arounds, getting supplies, certain training, and development activities, establishing relationships) [Connect]

• Conducting Alternate Dispute Resolution meetings [Connect, Collaborate]

• Participating in recruiting events [Connect]

• Participating in certain training events (particularly multi-day intensive training) [Create]

• Recognizing employee contributions (e.g., giving or receiving awards and length of service, participating in retirement events) [Celebrate]

• Participating in public meetings and conferences [Connect, Collaborate]

• Resolving a conflict and/or devising a solution [Collaborate]

• Receiving distinguished guests [Connect]

• Giving and receiving feedback, coaching, or mentoring [Collaborate]

• Brainstorming, particularly when body language and immediate response or when white boarding improves understanding and engagement [Create, Collaborate]

• Participating in team building (e.g., kick-off meetings, project planning, brainstorming sessions, celebrating milestone completions) [Create, Connect, Collaborate, Celebrate]

• Networking [Connect, Collaborate]

• Attending affinity group gatherings [Connect, Collaborate, Celebrate]

• Preparing for high-priority, high-visibility meetings, qualification boards, interviews

[Create, Collaborate]

• Recognizing major organizational change events (e.g., new building or major renovation, organizational structure change) [Connect, Celebrate]

A schematic of what an in-office day in the life might look like for an employee follows:

36 l P a g e

37 l P a g e : Be Risk SMART Remote Work Eligibility for Temporary Assignments Rotations (Developmental):

How can we support rotational opportunities for staff outside of the commuting area, provide for meaningful in-person engagement necessary for staff development and effectively apply travel funds?

Proposal: This program would intentionally provide flexibility for the supervisor to design a plan that provides the appropriate mix of in-person and remote work to achieve organizational needs and allow staff outside of the commuting area to apply. The plan will be included in the rotational opportunity posting.

clear about the Be Delegate authority to the Division Director for approval of supervisors plans prior to posting the rotational opportunity. Each problem approval should be shared with the office director / Regional Administrator for awareness and to monitor for consistency of implementation.

Post all rotations with preferred location as HQ/regional office but with a clear statement that full remote work may be available if the work is portable. Given the typical immediate agency need to fill rotations, in cases where the best-qualified candidate will only accept the rotation on condition of full remote telework, the supervisor will work with the selectee to prepare the appropriate telework agreement.

Increases staff mobility across the Regions, TTC and HQ What can go Saves travel money (~$10K/month) right? Improves work/life balance for families Staff member on rotation receives on-the-job training, learns new skills, and builds relationships.

Complicates current agency baseline telework policy May lead to complaints in EEO, MSPB (whistleblower) space due to differences between rotatees approved telework What can go plans. Could be mitigated by consistency of application, advanced consideration (pre-posting/solicitation) of rotation plan wrong?

with clear reasons supporting the schedule of in-office needs, and position plan development that is free from individual Spot rotatees needs/desires - with limited exceptions (such as reasonable accommodations).

Staff perceptions of unfairness May complicate ongoing union negotiations, litigation What are the Demonstrates flexibility and openness consequences?

Implements Organizational Health Objective 3 and supporting strategies (2.3.3, 2.3.5)

Enhances Region/TTC/HQ coordination, communication, collaboration Increases pool of staff able to rotate to/from Regions, HQ, TTC How likely is it?

Develop and share clear communications Limit to full remote work schedule to rotatees who live outside of the commuting area Manage what you can Require rotational solicitations to include the rotation plan indicating the in-office needs Partner with the Union 38 l P a g e

Time-limited (normally 3 to 6-months).

Act on a decision Realize the result others what Teach you learned Details (Non-developmental):

How can we support details that can be filled by staff outside of the commuting area, be compatible with our current telework policy and effectively apply travel funds?

Proposal: Pre-approve all details as having an acceptable business case for supporting remote work if the best-qualified candidate will only accept the position if it includes full remote telework.

clear about the Be Post all details with preferred location as HQ/regional office but with a clear statement that full remote work may be problem available if the work is portable. Given the typical immediate agency need to fill details, in cases where the best-qualified candidate will only accept the rotation on condition of full remote telework, use a standard streamlined pre-approved template (developed in coordination with OCHCO/OGC) to complete the approval process.

Delegate authority to Division Director for approval. Each approval provided to office director / Regional Administrator for awareness and to monitor for consistency of implementation.

Improve ability to meet emergent and temporary agency needs What can go Increases staff mobility across the Regions, TTC and HQ right? Saves travel money (~$10K/month)

Improves work/life balance for families.

Less in-person interaction than would otherwise be experienced during the detail Increases interest in details which may stress offices and regions faced with staff shortages What can go May lead to complaints from NTEU or employees who are ineligible for the detail but nevertheless desire FTTW.

wrong?

Potentially weakens argument that an in-person presence is needed. Both issues can potentially be mitigated by having a Spot robust business case as mentioned in the first box.

Staff perceptions of unfairness May complicate ongoing union negotiations, litigation What are the Demonstrates flexibility and openness consequences?

Implements Organizational Health Objective 3 and supporting strategies (2.3.3, 2.3.5)

Enhances Region/TTC/HQ coordination, communication, collaboration Increases pool of staff able to support across Regions, HQ, TTC How likely is it?

Manage what you can Consider a short in-person period to acclimate new staff (if possible) 39 l P a g e

Develop and share clear communications Ensure that telework forms reflect that details are time-limited (3 to 6 - months) and expressly set forth facts showing telework eligibility criteria are met.

Limit to detailees who live outside of the commuting area Develop standard language for detail postings.

Partner with the Union Act on a decision Realize the result others what Teach you learned 40 l P a g e

Be Risk SMART Telework Pilot Analysis Evaluate implementation of the following:

Phase 1: Telework Pilot Phase 1 of the telework pilot consists of implementation of immediate and near-term recommendations that do not have or are not foreseen to have significant policy implications. This phase includes actions that have been accepted by the EDO; are in progress and led by an agency office for implementation; or are new near-term recommendations. This phase also includes necessary actions that should be considered for implementation of the Phase 2 of the telework Pilot. The Phase 1 actions included in this analysis are:

• Adopt and implement PwP

• Modify current agency hybrid work model to reduce the number of required fixed schedule in-person days from four to two days per pay period if the nature of the work supports it. The authority to approve telework Clearly articulating the schedules will reside with the Branch Chief. Supervisors will have he discretion to exceed this two-day problem is essential. Add minimum, consistent with PwP activities.

an introduction, sufficient

• Modify processes related to full remote work for a reader with no prior

• Delegate approval and streamline full remote work approval process for temporary assignments knowledge to understand

• Streamline and automate agency telework process and associated forms the objective and the

• Revise and clarify guidance on appropriate use of project-based telework scope. Where appropriate,

• Update telework guidance to explicitly capture expectations and norms for optimizing hybrid meetings cite the Management Be Directive or other

• Establish an agencywide position on the minimum number of hours in the office for the in-person day to 6 requirements and hours guidance that apply to the

• Update and consolidate all telework guidance issue. Include constraints

• Establish infrastructure to capture agency telework data to enhance transparency, and support analysis and such as compliance information needs requirements or standards that the solution would Phase 2: Telework Pilot need to meet.

• Establish a new telework option, Hybrid Remote Worker, that requires a minimum of 2 days per month in-office and PwP

• Modify Management Directive 14.1 Official Temporary Duty Travel such that NRC will not reimburse local travel for employees commuting 50 or less miles from their alternate worksite to their assigned agency worksite Post-Pilot Assessment and Path Forward

• Assess the pilot to inform any new policy changes or potentially determine a need to modify or extend the pilot to better inform the content and implementation of a new policy The HEART report (ML22271A894) included a Be riskSMART analysis of PwP. Because we support implementing PwP as part of the proposed hybrid work model, that concept is not specifically included in this analysis.

41 l P a g e

What can go wrong - challenges/risks What can go right - opportunities/benefits

1. Pilot demonstrates that the proposed model would 1. Increased flexibility in work schedules while prevent the agency from meeting its mission (High, maintaining some in-person presence (High, High)

Low)

2. Enables telework decision-making at the lowest

2. Increase in internal and external attrition in level (supervisor for telework and office positions that will not be able to take advantage of director/regional administrator for remote work) full flexibility due to the nature of their jobs (e.g., (High, High) resident inspectors, traveling inspectors, headquarters ops officers, TTC instructors) (High, 3. Improved clarity and transparency regarding High) recruitment/retention for full remote work (High, Medium)

3. The proposed minimum of two days in-office per month is not enough of an incentive to keep staff in 4. Full remote work allows the agency to recruit/retain What can go wrong/right?

positions that are 100% portable (High, Medium) diverse, skilled staff that would otherwise leave or Write down what can go not accept a position (High, High) wrong (in other words, the

4. Inconsistent application (Medium, High) risks and challenges) or Spot 5. Potential agency cost savings in office space and right (in other words, the

5. Potential increase in costs to the NRC due to overhead (High, Medium)

(the risk benefits and opportunities).

changes in employee duty station, locality pay, and triplet) travel expenses (Medium, Low) 6. Staff savings related to reducing commuting time Ratings in parentheses (environmental impact, fuel, convenience, etc.)

represent the

6. Staff become more siloed as the workforce (Medium, High) consequence and becomes more remote (Medium, Low) likelihood, respectively.

7. Optimizes the agencys ability to build and sustain

7. Reduced office presence adversely affects positive organizational health (High/High) onboarding of new employees (High, Low)

8. Granting remote work for recruitment/retention results in disparate treatment of staff in similar positions (Medium, Medium)

9. Staff concerns related to COVID safety impacts employee desire to return to the office in any instance (Low, Low)

10. Amenities like cafeteria service, fitness center, etc.

cannot be sustained due to low office presence (Low, Low) 42 l P a g e

11. Logistical and equipment challenges, e.g., badge issuance, printing, drug testing, in-person IT activities, appropriate bandwidth at telework location (Low, Low)

What are the 1. 1.

consequences? For each a. Difficulty in transitioning back to a less flexible a. Maintains a hybrid work environment (agency wrong and right, identify model interest) the consequences. Note b. Rework needed b. With some exceptions, allows staff more there can be multiple telework flexibility and autonomy compared to consequences for a given 2. the current model, which requires four days per wrong or right. To each a. Increased vacancies could challenge the ability pay period in-office consequence, assign an to accomplish work (e.g., inspections) impact. Usually, high, b. Increased burden on staff in those work groups 2.

medium, and low are a. Supervisor empowerment sufficient. 3. Increased attrition rates to similar positions in other b. Increased staff confidence in the process agencies that are offering remote work (supervisor knows staffs work and is in the position to make the best decision) 4.

a. Fairness/equity concern among employees 3.

b. Dissatisfaction a. Staff have more confidence in the process and

c. Loss of trust have a better understanding of how and when remote work is approved.

5. If increased costs are large enough and cannot be b. Drives decision-making to the office level (more offset, this could make the new model not in the best aware of staff job duties and needs).

interest of the NRC 4.

6. a. Easier to fill vacancies

a. Degradation of community and camaraderie; b. Provides for a more diverse/skilled workforce loss of staff networks

b. Coarsening of culture and degraded 5. These savings could indirectly offset any increases values/norms in how staff engages each other due to changes in duty station and increased travel (in-person behaviors vs. anonymous/virtual behaviors) 6.

c. Loss of serendipitous interactions that contribute a. Increase in staff morale to team building, knowledge transfer, and b. Increase in work/life balance culture

d. Difficulty in determining changes in agency 7. Sustained positive organizational health culture 43 l P a g e

e. Lower morale for staff that prefer to come to the office 7.

a. Difficulty for new staff to determine agency cultural norms

b. Challenge in building professional networks, job skills, and confidence

c. Challenge in successfully completing qualifications 8.

a. Fairness/equity concern

b. Employees will apply for the remote work version of their job to get remote work

c. Employee that does not have remote work feels devalued

d. Increase in the number of remote workers

e. Increase in attrition 9.

a. Staff do not return to the office

b. Staff come into the office and do not participate in in-person activities, diminishing the purpose of those activities 10.

a. Degraded in-office environment

b. Increased employee burden in finding substitutes for these amenities 11.

a. Increased travel costs to the agency if NRC pays to bring employee in for these activities

b. Delay in IT support which requires in-office presence

c. Inability to implement drug testing program efficiently

d. Inability to print documents

e. Difficulty in participating in Teams meetings 44 l P a g e

How likely is it? For each See above See above consequence, identify a likelihood. High, medium, and low are usually sufficient. Consider all available data.

Manage the risk of what Steps that can be taken to manage challenges and Steps that can be taken to enhance opportunities are can go wrong and risks identified with the proposed hybrid work model discussed in the narrative.

increase opportunities for are discussed in the narrative.

what can go right. What you manage will increase or decrease the Manage probabilities and consequences assigned in the previous step. The managed likelihoods and consequences are used to make the decision in the act step.

After receiving the inputs, We will send our recommendations to the Office of the Executive Director for Operations (OEDO) for a decision.

evaluating information, and A detailed discussion of our recommendations can be found in the report.

documenting what you spotted and managed, the decisionmaker can now make a fully informed Act decision given their risk appetite. In most decisions, the individual contributor or team is the decisionmaker. Strategic decisions require fair consideration of all views.

Realize is the implementation of the decision, monitoring progress and tracking Realize performance. If the issue has a performance indicator, then include the target and results. It is 45 l P a g e

also important to be prepared to make course corrections as needed.

The goal of the final step in We recommend sharing the recommendations agencywide during an EDO townhall, in EDO updates, network the framework is to announcements, etc.

manage knowledge by Teach providing lessons learned and insights to a broader audience - spread the word!

A key to understanding this analysis is that the Be riskSMART framework starts with understanding actions within our control (i.e., what can go right and what can go wrong). The outcomes of such actions are the factors that are evaluated as part of the consequence and likelihood in the risk triplet. The spot step in the Be riskSMART framework includes the following three components:

1. What could go wrong/right? These are the actions within our control.

2. What are the consequences? These are the outcomes, both positive and negative.

3. How likely? This is how likely the consequences will occur given the action. This is not an assessment of how likely it is that the given action will occur. The action is presumed to occur.

The opportunities and challenges are discussed below, including a description of the consequences, a narrative justification for each consequence/likelihood score, and specific ways that consequences can be managed.

OPPORTUNITIES TPIWG identified the following opportunities:

O.1 Increased flexibility in work schedules while maintaining some in-person presence O.2 Enables telework decision-making at the lowest level (supervisor for telework and office director/regional administrator for remote work)

O.3 Improves clarity and transparency regarding recruitment/retention for remote work O.4 Full remote work allows the agency to recruit/retain diverse, skilled staff that would otherwise leave or not accept a position O.5 Potential agency cost savings in office space and overhead O.6 Staff savings related to reducing commuting time (environmental impact, fuel, time, etc.)

O.7 Optimizes the agencys ability to build and sustain positive organizational health O.1 Increased flexibility in work schedules while maintaining some in-person presence Score: Consequences - High, Likelihood - High 46 l P a g e

The NRCs current hybrid work schedule model requires staff to come into the office four days per pay period unless an exception is approved. A request to come into the office less frequently is approved by the office director and any request to work virtually full-time (i.e.,

full remote worker) must be approved by the CHCO. In-office days are selected by the staff and coordinated with their supervisor, and staff are not required to coordinate in-office days with other colleagues.

We propose a more flexible hybrid work model to be implemented in multiple phases. Phase 1 involves immediate increased flexibility with modification of current agency telework posture to a fixed schedule of two days per pay period in-office from the current four days per pay period, with the branch chief as the approval authority. We also recommend adoption and implementation of PwP during Phase 1. Phase 1 could be implemented as the changes needed to support Phase 2 are developed. Phase 2 will establish a new telework option, the hybrid remote worker, that requires a minimum of two days per month in-office and PwP. Supervisors maintain the discretion to exceed the minimum in-office days as necessary to support PwP activities. The hybrid remote workers official worksite is an alternate worksite that is less than or equal to 50 miles from their agency worksite.

O.2 Enables telework decision-making at the lowest level (office director/regional administrator for remote work and supervisor for telework)

Score: Consequences - High, Likelihood - High We recommend that remote work be used as a tool for recruitment and retention. The current process for approval of remote work requires multiple levels of approval with the final decision made by the CHCO. We recommend that this decision be the responsibility of the respective office director/regional administrator, as they are well-positioned to understand all factors, including day-to-day work, the extent to which the work can be performed fully remote without affecting organizational health, and the budgetary implications of various levels of full remote workers. We also recommend establishment of an agency mechanism for monitoring consistency in granting full remote work (e.g., Human Capital Council Subcommittee).

We propose that the first-line supervisor make the decision on an employees telework schedule down to a minimum of two days per month.

The actual number of in-office days per month could vary based on the nature of the work and organizational needs. This enhances supervisor empowerment and generates increased staff confidence in the process, as the supervisor knows staffs work and is in the best position to decide required in-office presence. Supervisor empowerment in this regard was mentioned multiple times in the staff and supervisor listening sessions, as well as the HEART report.

O.3 Improves clarity and transparency regarding recruitment/retention for remote work Score: Consequences - High, Likelihood - Medium 47 l P a g e

To balance organizational needs to build the best possible workforce with the critical skills needed to perform the mission, we recommend using full remote telework as a tool for recruitment and retention, including retention for knowledge management purposes. To improve the clarity and transparency associated with this process, we provided various recommendations in our report, including:

• Creating a centralized, easy to find location for all telework information

• Implement streamlined and automated telework approval process and associated forms

• Provide additional guidance to supervisors and staff on the process for approving full remote work requests

• Include guidance for supervisors and personnel staffing specialists regarding the decision on when to post vacancies announcements with location TBD/Anywhere and when location restrictions are appropriate based on the nature of the work.

We propose that the authority for approving full remote work be at the office director/regional administrator level. This will serve to provide consistency and a balanced decision based on the type of work and broader office staffing, resource, knowledge management, and culture concerns. Additionally, the new subcommittee of the Human Capital Council charged with monitoring full remote work will provide an additional layer of consistency.

O.4 Full remote work allows the agency to recruit/retain diverse, skilled staff that would otherwise leave or not accept a position Score: Consequences - High, Likelihood - High Use of full remote work as a recruitment and retention tool will allow the NRC to more easily compete with other organizations to fill vacancies for positions that are in high-demand and/or require a very specialized skillset. This could also potentially result in recruitment of highly qualified candidates from more diverse geographical locations. Full remote work would also allow the NRC to retain experienced and/or highly skilled employees that may otherwise retire or leave the agency to a different job that offers remote work. In addition to retaining their skillset, this would improve bench strength at the agency and contribute to more effective knowledge management.

We recognize that using recruitment and retention as the foundational basis for approval of remote work could result in perceived disparate treatment amongst staff in similar positions. This is discussed further in Challenge C.8.

O.5 Potential agency cost savings in office space and overhead Score: Consequences - High, Likelihood - Medium We recognize that the new hybrid work model could result in a reduction in agency office space and associated cost savings. However, we estimate that the magnitude of these savings would be relatively small, especially since space consolidation was already in progress prior to the pandemic. Most notably, savings in office space would take significant time to realize depending on costs and time associated with giving up the space (e.g., relocation of critical infrastructure that would require significant funds to move), lease requirements, projected hiring, and the need to restructure/reassign space amongst the program offices. Though fewer employees will likely be in the office at any given time, enough space will still be needed for PwP activities, especially at the office level. More analysis is needed in this area to further quantify these uncertainties. Challenge C.5 discusses challenges associated with increased costs to the agency.

48 l P a g e

O.6 Staff savings related to reducing commuting time (environmental impact, fuel, time, etc.)

Score: Consequences - Medium, Likelihood - High Increased flexibility in the new hybrid work model could result in employees being in-office fewer days. This would result in lower commuting costs and less commuting time, and all the associated benefits, including improved work/life balance and increased staff morale.

O.7 Optimizes the agencys ability to build and sustain positive organizational health Score: Consequences - High, Likelihood - High Based on the discussion of the opportunities provided above, our proposal has the potential to optimize the agencys ability to build and sustain positive organizational health. In addition to providing increased work schedule flexibility to staff, our recommendations enable decision-making at the lowest possible level, which enhances supervisor empowerment and generates increased staff confidence in the process, as the supervisor knows staffs work and is in the best position to decide required in-office presence. Additionally, use of full remote as recruitment and retention tool will help the agency to attract and retain highly motivated employees, who are engaged, adaptable, high performing, and receptive to change.

CHALLENGES TPIWG identified the following challenges:

C.1 Pilot demonstrates that the proposed hybrid work model would prevent the agency from meeting its mission C.2 Increase in internal and external attrition in positions that will not be able to take advantage of full flexibility due to the nature of their jobs (e.g., resident inspectors, traveling inspectors, headquarters ops officers, TTC instructors)

C.3 The proposed minimum of two days in-office per month is not enough of an incentive to keep staff in positions that are 100%

portable C.4 Inconsistent application C.5 Potential increase in costs to the NRC due to changes in employee duty station, locality pay, and travel expenses C.6 Staff become more siloed as the workforce becomes more remote C.7 Reduced office presence adversely affects onboarding of new employees C.8 Granting full remote work for recruitment/retention results in disparate treatment of staff in similar positions C.9 Staff concerns related to COVID safety impacts employee desire to return to the office in any instance C.10 Amenities like cafeteria service, fitness center, etc. cannot be sustained due to low office presence C.11 Logistical and equipment challenges, e.g., badge issuance, printing, drug testing, in-person IT activities, appropriate bandwidth at telework location 49 l P a g e

C.1 Pilot demonstrates that the proposed hybrid work model would prevent the agency from meeting its mission Score: Consequences - High, Likelihood - Low Though very unlikely, transition to a progressive telework schedule that includes a minimum of two days per month in-office could result in the agency not meeting its mission. This would most likely be driven by Challenges C.2 and C.3, which describe loss of employees resulting from the proposed hybrid work model, and Challenge C.7, which describes onboarding of new employees.

Any challenges in this regard will likely be identified as the agency monitors the impact of transitioning from four days per pay period to two days per pay period, and thus allow for adjustments to Phase 2 to prevent this consequence. Closely monitoring and measuring Phase 2 of implementation and conducting periodic checks to ensure the agency is on-track to meet goals/metrics/etc. during this time will also mitigate this consequence.

C.2 Increase in internal and external attrition in positions that will not be able to take advantage of full flexibility due to the nature of their jobs (e.g., resident inspectors, traveling inspectors, headquarters ops officers, TTC instructors)

Score: Consequences - High, Likelihood - High Some employees will not be able to take full advantage of the proposed flexibilities due to the nature of their jobs. This may result in increased vacancies in these areas as staff migrate to other positions that offer more flexibility in work schedules. In addition to challenging mission-critical work, this could also exacerbate challenges in hiring efforts in some of these areas (e.g., resident inspector program), and result in increased burden on staff in those work groups. We rated this consequence higher, as this group generally represents front-line positions and the start-up costs for some of these positions is significant (e.g., inspector qualifications can take up to two years to complete).

Additionally, the likelihood was rated as high absent additional incentives.

As a mitigative measure, we recommend close monitoring of internal and external attrition and reasons for attrition to detect any early trends.

Additionally, the agency may need to consider implementing additional incentivization for positions that fall into this category. Continued work by the agency related to resident inspector retention will also be important to mitigate this challenge (e.g., Resident Inspector Standing Committee).

C.3 The proposed minimum of two days in-office per month is not enough of an incentive to keep staff in positions that are 100%

portable Score: Consequences - Medium, Likelihood - Medium There is a potential for increased attrition rates to similar positions in other agencies that are offering remote work. Additionally, it will be difficult to recruit people into these jobs if similar jobs with more telework is available. We rated the likelihood of this challenge as medium, as a minimum of two days per month in-office is very flexible.

50 l P a g e

As a mitigative measure, we recommend close monitoring of attrition and reasons for attrition to detect any early trends. Additionally, the agency may need to consider implementing additional incentivization for positions that fall into this category.

C.4 Inconsistent application Score: Consequences - Medium, Likelihood - Low Increased flexibility in work schedules will likely result in inconsistent application of the proposed hybrid work model across work groups. This would potentially be a fairness/equity concern for staff and could result in migration of staff to other groups that are perceived as more flexible (internal attrition); increases in grievances and complaints; and external attrition. We recognize that fairness/transparency/consistency in implementation does not necessarily mean that every branch with the same types of positions will have the same mix of in-office and virtual work. There may be disagreements between staff and supervisors as to which activities require in-office presence, and we recognize that staff may lose confidence in the process if it is applied inconsistently, or the outcome does not meet their expectations. The nature of the work and organizational needs will dictate what is appropriate, and supervisors, office directors, and regional administrators will have to manage this expectation.

As a mitigative measure, we recommend closely monitoring/measuring the pilot to ensure that work schedules and PwP are implemented consistent with organizational needs.

C.5 Potential increase in costs to the NRC due to changes in employee duty station, locality pay, and travel expenses Score: Consequences - Medium, Likelihood - Low To further refine the potential agency impact of allowing employees to work less than two days per pay period at their assigned NRC office, we issued an agencywide survey to gather data on pay, job function, distance from assigned NRC office, commute time, and locality pay. The survey was active from October 3 - 14, 2022 and received 1507 responses. This survey data provided a snapshot of how current employees would fit into the proposed hybrid work model. The survey data also allowed us to estimate agency costs associated with employees traveling to and from an NRC office for PwP activities.

Based on analysis of the survey data and consideration of existing NRC policies, we determined that allowing a fixed schedule of less than two days per pay period, with a minimum of two days per month in-office and PwP activities, would be acceptable for employees that live within 50 miles of their agency worksite, contingent upon policy changes related to local travel. TPIWG recommends that the NRC does not reimburse travel expenses to the assigned NRC office for Column 2 employees that live less than or equal to 50 miles from their agency worksite. This would require a policy modification to Management Directive 14.1, Official Temporary Duty Travel.

For employees that are greater than 50 miles from their assigned NRC office, we determined the adverse impact to the agency of allowing those individuals to maintain a hybrid schedule of less than two days per pay period outweighed the benefits of increased flexibilities to the 51 l P a g e

employees. As such, we recommend that employees in Column 2 that live greater than 50 miles from their assigned NRC office be assigned to Column 1 (i.e., minimum of two in-office days per pay period).

C.6 Staff become more siloed as the workforce becomes more remote Score: Consequences - Medium, Likelihood - Low As the workforce becomes more remote, there could be more degradation of community and camaraderie and loss of staff networks. This could result in:

• Loss of serendipitous interactions that contribute to team building, knowledge transfer, and desired culture

• Degradation of values and norms in how employees engage each other (e.g., in-person behaviors versus anonymous/virtual behaviors)

• Difficulty in determining changes in agency culture Successful implementation of PwP days is extremely important to mitigate this scenario. Additionally, more conscious effort to engage employees in a hybrid environment is needed. Employees must also be accountable in implementation of the proposed hybrid work model, in that employees must also seek in-person opportunities when available.

C.7 Reduced office presence adversely affects onboarding of new employees Score: Consequences - High, Likelihood - Low Less in-office presence could adversely affect onboarding of new employees. This could result in difficulty for new staff in determining agency cultural norms and challenges in building professional networks.

Successful implementation of PwP days is extremely important to mitigate this scenario. Additionally, more conscious effort to engage employees is needed. Employees must also be accountable in implementation of the hybrid work model, in that employees must also seek in-person opportunities when available.

C.8 Granting full remote work for recruitment/retention results in disparate treatment of staff in similar positions Score: Consequences - Medium, Likelihood - Medium Granting full remote work as an exception for recruitment and retention could result in disparate treatment of staff in similar positions. This would be a fairness/equity concern with staff and could result in an employee feeling devalued if they desire full remote work. The likelihood of this challenge will increase once the first remote job in a work group is posted, especially if others hold a similar position.

Recommendations described in the report may mitigate this challenge.

52 l P a g e

C.9 Staff concerns related to COVID safety impacts employee desire to return to the office in any instance.

Score: Consequences - Low, Likelihood - Low Staff concerns related to COVID safety could impact an employees desire to return to the office in any instance. This could result in reluctance to participate in any in-person activities, diminishing the purpose of those activities. Mitigative measures for this challenge would include actions as directed by the COVID/Hybrid Work Environment Group.

C.10 Amenities like cafeteria service, fitness center, etc. cannot be sustained due to low office presence.

Score: Consequences - Low, Likelihood - Low Reduced in-office presence could result in loss of ability to sustain these amenities. This would provide for a degraded in-office environment for staff and increased employee burden in finding substitutes for these amenities. Mitigative measures involve finding alternatives for these amenities (e.g., Fooda implementation at headquarters, potential reinstatement of gym membership reimbursements)

C.11 Logistical and equipment challenges, e.g., badge issuance, printing documents, drug testing, in-person IT activities, appropriate bandwidth at telework location Score: Consequences - Low, Likelihood - Low Decreased in-office presence could result in logistical and equipment challenges, like badge issuance, printing documents, drug testing, in-person IT activities, appropriate bandwidth at alternative worksite, etc. Some of these activities, like badge issuance and printing cold be timed with PwP activities. Additionally, there is currently a process in place that covers drug testing for remote employees.

53 l P a g e

Telework Policy - Hybrid Work Model at a Glance and Narrative Column 1 Column 2 Column 3 Nature of work Base Case 2 Exception for requires or days per month recruitment &

voluntary and PwP retention Category of Worker Hybrid Worker Hybrid Remote Worker Full Remote Worker Less than 2 days per pay period No fixed schedule At least 2 days per pay period in-person (approved by the branch chief (approved by the office Fixed In-Person Days per unless locality pay changes, then director/regional (approved by the branch chief)

Pay Period approved by office administrator) director/regional administrator)

Presence with Purpose Presence with Purpose Presence with Purpose Distance Pay and HQ/regional office/TTC Locality pay and duty station based on home office Duty Station locality pay and duty station location 50 miles (FTR limit) No reimbursement for trips to the office No reimbursement for trips Travel to the office

>50 miles Column 1: Hybrid worker Reimbursed for trips to Reimbursement the office for PwP Survey data (1507* total 352 respondents 1011 respondents (898 50 138 respondents respondents, ~64% of agency) miles and 113 > 50 miles)

• Six respondents did not provide sufficient information in the survey.

54 l P a g e

Our proposal defines three categories of telework employees.

Column 1: Hybrid Worker Hybrid Worker: A type of teleworker who is required to have a minimum of in-person presence 2x per pay period with additional in-person days as necessary to support PwP activities. The hybrid workers official worksite is the agency worksite.

Column 1 describes employees that by the nature of their work, are required to be in-person at least two days per pay period. In some cases, this could involve significantly more than two days per pay period depending on the requirements of the job position (e.g., resident inspectors, headquarters operations officers, facilities personnel, etc.). This column would also include employees that may be eligible for Column 2 but choose to commute to one of the six NRC office locations (i.e., Headquarters, Regions I - IV, Technical Training Center) which they are assigned to at least two days per pay period by choice and/or to maintain their assigned NRC office locality pay. Under this option, supervisors maintain the discretion to exceed the minimum in-person days as necessary to support PwP activities. Column 1 is most like the current hybrid schedule but requires only two days per pay period in-person instead of four. As is currently, the duty station and locality pay for these employees would be associated with their assigned NRC office. Time spent traveling to and from their assigned NRC office location would be considered normal commuting time and would not be reimbursable. Activities which are covered under official travel and/or local travel currently (e.g., inspection, training, etc.) would be unchanged under the proposed hybrid work model for employees in Column 1. Work schedule approval authority for this column would be the responsibility of the respective branch chief.

Column 2: Hybrid Remote Worker Hybrid Remote Worker: A type of teleworker who is required to have a minimum of in-person presence 2x per month with additional in-person days as necessary to support PwP activities.

The remote hybrid workers official worksite is an alternate worksite that is less than or equal to 50 miles from their agency worksite.

Column 2 describes a fixed schedule of less than two days per pay period, with a minimum of two days per month in-person with additional in-person days as necessary to support PwP activities. Employees that fall into this category generally have work that is fully portable.

Because in-office presence is less than two days per pay period, employees in this category will not meet OPM requirements for maintaining their assigned NRC office as their official duty station, and therefore, locality pay and duty station would be based on the employees alternative worksite (e.g., home). Given the change in official duty station, we considered three separate subcategories in Column 2 to quantify potential impacts to the agency, especially those associated with changes in locality pay, commuting time, and travel expenses.

• Employees that live less than or equal to 50 miles from their assigned NRC office. We determined 50 miles was appropriate based on Federal Travel Regulation requirements to reimburse any travel (including time spent commuting) greater than 50 miles.

• Employees that live greater than 50 miles but less than or equal to 120 miles from their assigned NRC office. We considered 120 miles as an upper bound for this category because it represented a reasonable commuting distance. Employees in this category would be eligible for official temporary duty travel for any trips from their alternative worksite to their assigned NRC office for PwP activities. Additionally, employees that 55 l P a g e

travel outside of their regular work schedule would be eligible for comp time for travel, and travel during their regular work schedule would be compensated as regular hours.

• Employees that live greater than 120 miles from their assigned NRC office. Employees in this category would be eligible for official temporary duty travel for any trips from their alternative worksite to their assigned NRC office for PwP activities. Additionally, employees that travel outside of their regular work schedule would be eligible for comp time for travel, and travel during their regular work schedule would be compensated as regular hours.

To further refine the potential agency impact of allowing employees to work less than two days per pay period at their assigned NRC office, we issued an agencywide survey to gather data on pay, job function, distance from assigned NRC office, commute time, and locality pay. The survey was active from October 3 - 14, 2022 and received 1507 responses. This survey data provided a snapshot of how current employees would fit into the proposed hyrbid work model.

The survey data also allowed us to estimate agency costs associated with employees traveling to and from an agency worksite for PwP activities. These costs included travel time, changes in locality, transportation, travel voucher fees, meals and incidentals, and lodging. Assumptions made during the analysis included:

• Localities and hourly rates were based on 2022 values. Per diem costs were based on 2023 values. If per diem rates fluctuate throughout the year, the highest value was used.

• All employees were at a step 10 in their grade. In cases where multiple grades were listed in the survey (e.g., GG 1-8), the highest grade was used.

• An employee would be in the NRC office for at least six hours for a PwP day.

• For employees that were greater than 50 miles from the office, a hotel stay would be needed for anyone with more than five hours of roundtrip travel or that requires a flight to get to and from the office.

• PwP days were not conducted back-to-back.

• Average roundtrip airfare was $350

• A privately-owned vehicle was used for travel less than 250 miles one way.

• When considering whether an employee would potentially choose to voluntarily commute to the office at least two days per pay period to maintain their locality pay, we considered change in annual salary, commuting distance and time, and travel reimbursement. This generally amounted to at least a $10,000 change in salary and/or at least 500-mile roundtrip commuting distance.

These assumptions are conservative and representative of a bounding value. We acknowledge there could be additional savings depending on specific employee circumstances.

Based on analysis of the survey data and consideration of existing NRC policies, we determined that allowing a fixed schedule of less than two days per pay period, with a minimum of two days per month in-person and PwP activities, would be acceptable for employees that live within 50 miles of their agency worksite, contingent upon policy changes related to local travel. We recommend that the NRC does not reimburse travel expenses to the assigned NRC office for Column 2 employees that live less than or equal to 50 miles from their agency worksite. This would require a policy modification to Management Directive (MD) 14.1, Official Temporary Duty Travel.

56 l P a g e

Requirements associated with local travel are agency-specific, as Federal Travel Regulations do not cover this topic. The NRC currently defines local travel, in part, as travel to points that are not in excess of 35 miles from the official station as determined by standard highway mileage guides. We recommend that the agencys policies associated with local travel be modified only as it relates to the proposed hybrid work model. Prior to implementing any recommendation to adjust the fixed work schedules for employees to work in-person from one of the six NRC office locations less than two days per pay period, the agency should implement a change to MD 14.1 Section II, Local Travel at the Official Station, to clarify that the agency will not cover an employees commuting time and/or any expense associated with travel to/from the alternate work location specified their telework agreement to their assigned official NRC office location. Under current requirements, the employees regular place of duty is defined as their official duty station. If the work schedule does not require the employee to spend a minimum of two days per pay period at an NRC official office location, then the alternate work location becomes their official duty station for the purposes of determining locality pay and eligibility for travel reimbursement.

While MD 14.1,Section II.A.2 states that the government does not pay commuting costs, it does allow an employee to be reimbursed for local travel to/from either the travelers home or official business site in the performance of official duties. MD 14.1 Section II.A.2 is clear about not paying the costs to commute from their home to an official NRC work location but is silent in terms of how to treat reimbursement for time and travel when the employees home becomes their official duty station. Note that the above recommendation only applies to reimbursement for local travel. Travel expenses (i.e., compensation for time spent in a travel status and the cost travel) for an employee whose alternate work location is greater than 50 miles from an NRC office must be compensated for by the agency in accordance with applicable Federal Travel Regulations.

The change proposed in this section is viewed as necessary to resolve any potential ambiguity and provide an explicit position that the agency will not pay the local travel expenses associated with travel to/from an alternate work location to an employees assigned official NRC office.

Further, the local travel limit for this specific instance would extend to less than or equal to 50 miles, versus 35 miles, between the alternate work location and the assigned NRC office facility.

We recommend that the current definition of local travel (less than or equal to 35 miles) be maintained for all other purposes, such as inspection, conference attendance, training, etc.

For employees that are greater than 50 miles from their assigned NRC office, we determined the adverse impact to the agency of allowing those individuals to maintain a hybrid schedule of less than two days per pay period outweighed the benefits of increased flexibilities to the employees. The key contributors to this determination are discussed below:

• As previously mentioned, employees that are not at their assigned NRC office at least two days per pay period would be required by OPM to change their duty station to their alternative worksite (e.g., home). For employees that are greater than 50 miles from their assigned NRC office, per Federal Travel Regulations, the agency would be required to reimburse those employees for travel to the office for PwP days (i.e., this is official temporary duty travel). Employees in this category cannot voluntarily cover the costs because this would put the agency in violation of Federal Travel Regulations.

• Time spent commuting to the office for PwP days would be compensable as either special compensatory time for travel or regular hours, depending on when the travel occurred. This time would effectively be lost productive time and could be significant depending on the location of the alternative worksite. In addition to potentially needing 57 l P a g e

to hire additional employees to account for the lost time, this could affect the ability of employees to respond in a timely manner to activities such as random drug testing, licensee events, emergent resident site support, etc.

• Based on survey results, travel costs were generally not offset by a change in locality pay. In some cases, employees live in a higher locality than their assigned NRC office.

In cases where there is a significant decrease in locality pay, using the assumptions discussed above, we concluded that most employees would likely travel to their assigned NRC office at least two days per pay period to maintain the higher locality pay.

Considering changes in locality pay, travel expenses, and employee time, we estimate that the expense to the agency to bring employees that live greater than 50 miles away into the office two to three days per month is approximately $1.2 - 2 million dollars per year. This number could change in the future depending on the other factors discussed here.

• The data shows that additional costs to the agency to implement this proposal are significant today for a relatively small population of employees affected (~150 of 2800) and it is in the best interest of the agency to account for unrealized/unfunded future costs and liabilities. This could include the potential for employees over time to migrate to areas further than 50 miles from the office or to areas of higher locality pay, which would result in increased costs to the agency. We recognize that future savings in office space may offset some of these costs. However, we estimate that the magnitude of these savings would be relatively small, especially since space consolidation was already in progress prior to the pandemic. Most notably, savings in office space would take significant time to realize depending on costs and time associated with giving up the space (e.g., relocation of critical infrastructure that would require significant funds to move), lease requirements, projected hiring, and the need to restructure/reassign space amongst the program offices. Though fewer employees will likely be in the office at any given time, enough space will still be needed for PwP activities, especially at the office level. More analysis is needed in this area to further quantify these uncertainties.

• We considered allowing reimbursement of travel expenses for Column 2 employees that were greater than 50 miles and less than or equal to 120 miles from their assigned NRC office. However, based on analysis of the survey results, we determined that it was not feasible at this point to develop a clear boundary and associated criteria for reimbursement that would be both fair to all employees and in the best interests of the agency. This is an area that could possibly be revisited following analysis of office space savings and the results of the proposed pilot.

Based on these factors, we recommend that employees in Column 2 that live greater than 50 miles from their assigned NRC office be assigned to Column 1 (i.e., minimum of two in-person days per pay period).

Approval authority for Column 2 work schedules would be the responsibility of the respective branch chief unless the work schedule would result in cost implications for the agency (e.g.,

change in locality pay), in which case we recommend that this decision be the responsibility of the respective office director/regional administrator, as they can evaluate overall budget implications, equity considerations, and other factors.

Column 3: Full Remote Worker Full Remote Worker: A type of teleworker who is not expected to perform work at an agency worksite on a regular or recurring basis.

58 l P a g e

Column 3 covers employees that would be considered full remote workers. These employees would not have a fixed schedule and would only travel to their assigned NRC office as needed.

Because in-person presence is less than two days per pay period, employees in this category will not meet OPM requirements for maintaining their assigned NRC office as their duty station, and therefore, locality pay and duty station would be based on the employees alternative worksite (e.g., home). This category is most similar to the current full-time telework program.

Based on the agencys desire to maintain a hybrid telework schedule, we recommend that this category be maintained as an exception and primarily used as a recruitment and retention tool to maintain critical skills. Approval authority for full remote work would be the associated office director/regional administrator. (Full remote work is discussed in more detail in Enclosure 3).

The survey/financial data table contents internal agency information and is not public available.

59 l P a g e

Assessing the Effectiveness of the Telework Pilot Consistent with Management Directive 6.9, Performance Management, the working group recognizes the importance of gathering and assessing data to ensure our hybrid work model is achieving the desired outcomes - that is, we are realizing the opportunities and mitigating the risks. This enclosure provides suggestions to assess the effectiveness of the telework pilot.

The first column, Data and Basis describes the specific data and the basis for collecting the data. The second column, Reporting Frequency, describes the frequency for the data collection. The third column, Monitoring Vehicle and Responsible Entity describes where the data will be captured and the group responsible for analysis and action. The fourth column, Example Metrics describes metrics tied with the opportunities and the risks associated with the hybrid work model.

Related to specific data collection and analysis efforts captured in the following table, the working group also recommends the following:

• Establish a Human Capital Council (HCC) Telework Subcommittee to monitor and assess telework data and metrics.

• Establish Programmatic Senior Assessment Team. risk to capture risk and mitigation plan and report out during Quarterly Performance Review meetings.

• Create SharePoint site and Telework Dashboard to monitor and communicate telework information. Automate data collection if possible.

• Create a Community of Practice amongst first-line supervisors (Branch Chiefs and Team Leaders) to vent, brainstorm, share best practices, identify recommendations to address common challenges, etc. to support and optimize our hybrid work model.

• Create Telework Pulse Surveys to get real-time feedback from employees.

• Procure contractor support as necessary.

• Establish recurring communication to employees on status of telework pilot (e.g., EDO Updates and Town Halls, Agency Network Announcements, Telework Dashboard).

• Engage internal controls experts to assess pilot program and provide insights and recommendations.

TPIWG considered the need for monitoring the impact of the new hybrid work model on external stakeholder interactions during the pilot and decided that a deliberate monitoring mechanism is not required. The proposed changes to telework have minimal effect on most of the NRCs interactions with external stakeholders. The NRC should use existing mechanisms (external working group interactions, public meeting feedback, etc.) to gain insight as needed.

60 l P a g e

Data and Basis Reporting Monitoring Example Metrics Frequency Vehicle and Responsible Entity Staff work schedules (e.g., number of in-person days, Quarterly or Semi- Telework

• Number of staff at scheduled floor number of telework days, job position, grade level, Annually Dashboard

• Number of staff scheduled to be in-person office/division/branch, other demographic information). everyday (i.e., those who cannot or choose Data collected via HCC not to telework)

Provides information for trending, cost projections, space telework forms. Subcommittee

• Trends based on office, job position, or planning, comparisons across similar positions, and demographics transparency for employees.

• Duty station changes Number of people in-office each day of the week. Weekly or monthly Telework

• Average number of staff in-office throughout Dashboard the week Provides insight as to whether in-person days are Data collected via occurring as expected and utilization of NRC office space, parking garage HCC facility services (e.g., food services). info and badge Subcommittee readers.

Office level PwP days Quarterly QPR and

• Percentage of office staff in-person during

• Frequency Telework office level PwP days

• Number of staff in-person Data collected at Dashboard

• Percentage of remote attendance at PwP

• Number of staff remote and reason office level via activities

• Staff demographics (with emphasis on length of pulse survey PSAT

• Staff/supervisor/director satisfaction re: office service to capture new employee information) level PwP days (Likert scale via survey)

• Activities conducted and feedback

• Survey write-in comments

• Surveys at staff/supervisor/director level re: office

• New employee satisfaction level in-person days Provides insight as to whether offices are meeting the hybrid work model, including whether staff are in-person, what activities are being conducted, etc. Provides insight as to whether the list of activities in the hybrid work model was helpful.

61 l P a g e

Data and Basis Reporting Monitoring Example Metrics Frequency Vehicle and Responsible Entity Branch-level PwP days Monthly or

• Percentage of branch staff in-person during

• Frequency quarterly BC/TL Community branch-level PwP days

• Number of staff in-person of Practice

• Percentage of remote attendance at PwP

• Number of staff remote and reason Data collected at activities

• Staff demographics (with emphasis on length of branch-level via

• Staff/supervisor satisfaction re: branch-level service to capture new employee information) pulse survey PwP days (Likert scale via survey)

• Activities conducted and feedback

• Survey write-in comments

• Surveys at staff/supervisor level re: branch-level in-

• New employee satisfaction person days Provides insight as to whether branches are meeting the hybrid work model, including whether staff are in-person, what activities are being conducted, etc. Provides insight as to whether the list of activities in the hybrid work model was helpful.

Other Surveys: As Available. HCC

• Applicable survey questions/indices (e.g.,

• FEVS Subcommittee engagement index)

• OIG Safety Culture Climate

• Trend in questions/indices

• Other surveys not described above (ad hoc)

Provides insights into staff satisfaction and engagement.

Depending on timing of the survey(s) and the pilot, this could be a lagging indicator.

Attrition and reasons for resignation (e.g., exit survey Quarterly Telework

• Number of employees that cited the hybrid data, resident inspector exit survey data) Dashboard work model as a reason for resignation Data collected at

• Trend compared to previous years Provides data for trending as to whether hybrid work office/region level Resident model was a driving factor in resignation decision. Inspector Standing Committee HCC Subcommittee Employees offered full remote work and reason (i.e., Quarterly Telework

• Number of employees offered full remote work recruitment or retention), associated declination data. Dashboard for retention reasons and number of those Include demographics, particularly diversity information. Data collected at offers that were accepted (i.e., full remote office level HCC work was successful in retaining employee)

Subcommittee 62 l P a g e

Data and Basis Reporting Monitoring Example Metrics Frequency Vehicle and Responsible Entity Provides insight as to whether the hybrid work model is

• Number of offers that included full remote effective in using full remote work schedule as a work for recruitment reasons and number of recruitment or retention tool and whether this tool is those offers that were accepted (i.e., full effective. remote work was successful in recruiting employee)

Provides insight as to whether considerations for granting

• Number of employees offered full remote work employees full remote work remains an exception (and for reasons other than recruitment or retention isnt becoming the norm). (e.g., reasonable accommodation).

.

• Number of requests accepted

• Number of requests declined

• Trends in hiring/declination based on demographics (e.g., is the hybrid work model helping agency diversity)?

Focus Groups (Both in-person and virtual options). Yearly Resident

• Feedback from newer employees to assess Include specific focus group(s) of summer hires, NRAN Inspector effectiveness of onboarding, knowledge cohort, other new employees, resident inspectors, security Standing management, and organizational culture.

specialists, etc. Contractor support may be appropriate. Committee

• Feedback from populations without the ability to regularly telework.

Provide insights of impact of telework hybrid work model HCC on specific populations within the agency. Subcommittee Periodic review of telework/remote work policies and Every 1 - 3 years CXOB

• Telework posture of other government practices (i.e., signposts and markers) at other agencies government agencies, licensees, other external CXOB Members

• Telework posture of licensees stakeholders as part of yearly environmental scan. 12F

• Telework posture of other external 13 Provides insight into how telework policies are evolving at stakeholders (e.g., Agreement States, external entities (e.g., licensees) are moving back to more congressional representatives, Tribal nations) in-person presence.

• Informs transition into Post-Pilot phase Actual time and travel data to inform the cost to the Quarterly or Telework

• Capture time for remote workers spent agency of various categories of teleworkers. Yearly Dashboard traveling to/from agency worksite in HCM.

13 TPIWG considered the need for assessing the impact of the hybrid work model on external stakeholder interactions and believe the proposed changes to the hybrid work model have minimal effect on our external stakeholders. The NRC should use existing mechanisms (external working group interactions, public meeting feedback, etc.)

to gain insight as needed.

63 l P a g e

Data and Basis Reporting Monitoring Example Metrics Frequency Vehicle and Responsible Entity Provides actual costs during the pilot (time and travel) and Office of the Chief HCC

• Capture travel costs associated with fully may influence future decisions to expand full remote Financial Officer Subcommittee remote worker trips to agency worksite in telework. ETS2.

• Capture teleworker category, locality pay, and distance from agency worksite in telework database Grievances related to telework Yearly HCC

• Number of grievances related to denial of Subcommittee requested telework schedule Provides insights into the impact of the telework pilot and SBCR and

• Reason for the grievance potential gaps. OCHCO Salary changes due to locality pay changes Yearly OCFO analysis

• Trend of salary costs over time Provides insights into the impact of locality changes on OCFO HCC employee salaries and may influence future decisions Subcommittee related to the hybrid work model.

64 l P a g e

Listening Session and Employee Feedback Summary Listening Sessions with the Telework Policy and Implementation Working Group Summary - September 2022 The TPIWG conducted four agencywide listening sessions to provide employees the opportunity to share their insights and perspectives on the current telework policy, considerations for enhancements, and how/when to best leverage in-person and virtual interactions. The first two sessions were conducted in a hybrid format, offering employees to attend in-person or virtually on Microsoft Teams, while the final two sessions were held virtually.

Following the initial agencywide sessions, the TPIWG determined it was necessary to conduct an additional virtual listening session dedicated to supervisors. While the session was intended for first-line supervisors to provide their perspectives, senior managers were also invited to participate and share their feedback.

The intent of the sessions was for TPIWG members to listen to employee perspectives, without responding to questions or comments being shared. All sessions were conducted using a similar format and were not recorded. Sessions were facilitated by NRC trained facilitators who opened the session and established ground rules. Facilitators then turned over the discussion to TPIWG who provided opening remarks sharing an overview of the TPIWG purpose and charter objectives, key messages on the tasking, and questions to prompt discussion. The facilitators then began the listening session and opened the floor for employees to share their feedback. Session notes were taken by NRC staff volunteers and chat discussions in Teams were captured.

The following standard set of questions were shared by TPIWG; however, employees were encouraged to share additional insights as they determined appropriate.

• Given that we are committed to a hybrid work environment, what sorts of activities do you think are most effectively done in-person, in the office? What is better done virtually? How do we best leverage both types of interactions?

• What is your view on the amount of in-person, in-office engagement needed to sustain a healthy organizational culture and develop our people? What is the right balance between in-office and virtual presence?

• How can we best use a hybrid environment to help our new staff understand our culture and feel like they are a part of the team?

• What are your concerns about the existing FTTW policy in general? What would you do differently? How would you evaluate whether a FTTW request should be granted?

Do you see a difference between local FTTW and remote FTTW?

• What haven't we asked that you would like to share?

65 l P a g e

Listening Session Participation The TPIWG held four employee listening sessions. Two of the sessions were held in a hybrid format where TPIWG attended in-person, and two were held virtually. A total of 1,057 employees (unique) attended the listening sessions and 63 employees provided comments verbally. There were several employees that attended multiple sessions; therefore, a higher number of participants is indicated in the chart below. Furthermore, TPIWG held one virtual listening session for supervisors. A total of 312 participated in supervisor listening session and 22 supervisors provided comments verbally.

Session Date/Time Virtual In-Person Verbal Attendance Attendance Commenters Employee - Thursday, August 25, 2022 404 employees 2 employees 18 Hybrid 9:30-11:30 am ET Employee - Thursday, August 25, 2022 364 employees 1 employee 21 Hybrid 1:30-3:30 pm ET Employee - Tuesday, August 30, 2022 496 employees n/a 13 Virtual 2:00-3:00 pm ET Employee - Wednesday, August 31, 2022 411 employees n/a 11 Virtual 10:00-11:00 am ET Total 1,675 3 participants 63 comments participated (unique) provided (not (1,054 unique unique) participants)

Supervisors - Wednesday August 31, 2022 312 participants n/a 22 Virtual 1:30-3:00 pm ET commenters (unique)

Summary of Employee Listening Session Feedback The purpose of this summary is to highlight common themes based on feedback and ideas shared throughout the listening sessions and provide suggestions for the TPIWG consideration for enhancing NRCs telework policy and implementation.

Considerations for In-Person, In-Office Presence Generally, employees strongly felt that in-person presence needs to be intentional and purposeful. Employees shared thoughts on activities where they felt were most effectively done in-person or in-office, as well as shared challenges with current in-person interactions.

When In-Person Presence is Most Effective:

• Onboarding new staff (meet

• Public meetings team/branch)

• Technical Training Center Training

• Knowledge transfer activities

• Conferences

• Inspections

• Briefing senior management

• Audits

• Meeting with external stakeholders

• Counterpart meetings 66 l P a g e

• Reviewing and handling classified

• Hearings Brainstorming meetings for work/materials strategic plans

• All Hands Meetings (when intent is

• Making decisions to introduce new commissioner/new

• Charting new paths sr. management)

• Social connections

• Headquarters Operation Officer Challenges with Current In-Person Interactions:

• Spontaneous interactions as intended by the current policy are not taking place

• Noise is an issue and distraction while in the office with other employees taking virtual meetings from their office.

• Being in-person is more of a hassle and a distraction; employee finding they need to go home to get work done.

• Quality of MS Teams connectivity and network connection is worse in the office than at home

• NRC mission is to do the work and not just come into the office to socialize

• Employee shared there is not a need to come into the office when they are doing online training Considerations for Virtual Presence Generally, employees provided feedback on virtual interactions based on the benefits of working virtually. When sharing thoughts on what is most effectively done virtually, employees felt most engagements are and can be accomplished successfully and effectively in a virtual environment, especially given the technology tools. Additionally, employees shared challenges being experienced when working virtually.

Benefits of Virtual Presence:

• No commuting

• Water cooler has changed - it is

• More productive at home Teams now

• Provides opportunity for rotations

• Mentoring outside permanent office/duty station

• Collaboration on work documents (ex. regional employee rotation to

• Teams meetings are a tremendous headquarters) help in improving total interaction for

• More inclusion now that employees person who has hearing disability are using available technology

• Enormous improvement in

• Use of technology to connect with collaboration between the regional people and build relationships staff and HQ staff

• Online training from home

• Life/work balance

• Ability to have social virtual meetings Challenges with Working Virtually:

• Unable to print at home

• People are not using their camera Organizational Culture and Health Employees shared general comments around the NRCs organizational culture, particularly noting that the culture at the NRC has changed since COVID and there is a need for change.

67 l P a g e

Participants shared that the new NRC culture needs to be more forward leaning in an innovative way and embrace more telework because in-person presence is not necessary to maintain organizational culture. It was suggested that the agency consider activities to improve the culture and that morale is going to be an issue if the agency continues to force staff to come into the office. Additional concern was shared that a threat to the NRC culture is the workload and being overscheduled and the endless drive to do everything faster.

We can either move backwards or forwards from here - I know its a massive cultural shift for managers that remember the vibrant culture from pre-pandemic. It has changed and it is never coming back. We need the best and brightest - industry is already saying we cant keep up. We have mid-career people that are leaving for FTTW and promotions elsewhere. We need to make this shift and it will be hard - people wont like it, but it needs to happen.

Being a person that is new to agency and joined during pandemic, the culture was very happy as they were teleworking. Culture has changed significantly.

Additionally, employees shared concerns related to broken trust between staff and management. It was shared that staff do not feel supported and trusted that they are doing their jobs while working in a virtual environment, nor that they are able to navigate working relationships on their own. It was expressed that trust has been eroded since re-entry, as agency leaders praised workers throughout the pandemic for being able to meet the mission and being productive, however are now being told that we need to be in the office and remote work is being retracted. Participants expressed that they did not have confidence that changes will be made, and staff feel that they are not being heard. A fear was shared that management will push for more in-person meetings to justify the need to be in the office.

Employees spoke about COVID and health concerns. They shared that COVID is still here, and that the virus still informs many employees decisions about whether to come into the office. It was suggested that the agency consider max flexibilities when a facility is in HIGH transmission. Concerns were also shared related to re-entry and decision being made before child vaccines were made available and the impact that personally caused.

Telework Policy: General Comments and Impacts of Current Policy Generally, employees shared perspectives that the current telework policy lacks clarity and transparency, fairness, and is inconsistent. More specifically:

• Inequity in the telework approval process is very apparent and causing low morale.

• Telework policy is arbitrary and capricious.

• Inconsistency and not a standardized policy across the agency that accounts for onsite time as in-office.

• Lack of transparency, clarity, consistency, and decision-making speed. Unclear what the current agency policy actually is, how decisions are being made, the rationale for why decisions are being made, and final decisions can take many months, which leaves the employee in limbo/high levels of uncertainty.

In addition, several employees shared perspectives on the impacts the agency is experiencing as a result of the current policy and its implementation, specifically related to recruitment and retention, growth, and development, and acclimating new employees.

68 l P a g e

Recruitment and Retention

• Losing key staff from earlier-than-planned retirements and laterals to other agencies because we have limited full-time remote telework.

• People are not applying for jobs due to lack of remote options, losing potential qualified staff.

• NRC cannot compete with external organizations offering remote positions

• People cannot afford to live in DMV area and do not apply or have left NRC

• Federal government pay is around 23% lower than private sector Growth and Development

• Promotion announcements may not be receiving the best/most qualified applicant pool when a physical move is required to HQ or another geographic region.

• Current telework policy deters employees from applying for promotions. Promotion opportunities for remote workers are not available. Remote workers lose the risk of their agreements not getting approved and the agency risks not getting qualified individual for a job. This is limiting the pool of candidates and it is unfairly punishing those of us that are full-time telework

• Lack of willingness to promote remote employees just because they were not at an NRC facility Acclimating New Employees:

Differing perspectives were shared on acclimating new employees, from employees who have been at the agency and those who identified themselves as new employees. Some employees shared concerns that it was more difficult in a hybrid environment to get acclimated into the culture and to meet people, while others shared that they have been able to connect and build relationships in a virtual environment.

• New staff we are hiring that they may not get the interaction, get that experience, and culture that we all gained over the years of in-office interaction

• Shared concern about how to pass on the institutional knowledge to new hires

• As new person, I had a hard time connecting with people online. Its a challenge to connect with people. First you have to build relationships to maintain them.

• "All those previous in-office interactions" that organically happened in the pre-pandemic workplace cannot be artificially regenerated under the new realities. We cannot artificially recreate the past. We need to figure out a path forward given the new realities.

• Rather than assuming telework will hamper new employee development, the agency could make it our goal to develop a best-in-class virtual onboarding process.

• Staff shared perspectives, as a new employee, they were able to manage building relationships, onboard, meet teammates virtually and did not experience issues or share the same concerns being expressed.

Considerations for Telework Policy Changes:

General Comments:

• Discourage TPIWG from doing top-down one-size-fits-all approach.

• Decisions need to be transparent

• Eliminate big broad, wordy processes, etc. Make general agency guidance.

• Allow staff to come into the office voluntarily 69 l P a g e

• Consider how allowing telework opens opportunities for staff in geographically different locations promote or work for organizations in other locations.

• If someone isnt meeting performance on telework, should do performance management, not bring them back into office. Performance-based work vs. manager needs to see you to know you are working.

• Difficult to find and retain contractors who also have to come into the office. Many contractors also want to work remotely, and since there are many contracting positions out there, it is very difficult to find one willing to come into the office.

Clarification on Telework Policy Terminology:

• Define what is meant by in-office. There needs to be a distinction between in-office and in-person. Example, if an employee is on travel for work, the individual doesnt click the Telework box, so is this really in-office or not? Leave, holidays, and travel are considered "in-office" days. (how to document in HRMS and does that count as your in-office day)

• Clearly define terms locality and duty station - differences, impacts etc.

• Define remote vs telework and the differences. Be careful using the word "remote" regarding what I assume to mean "non-local." "Remote" is a defined term by OPM.

which is defined as "an employee who doesn't report to their normal duty station at least twice per pay period." So, what we refer to as "FTTW" OPM refers to as "remote."

• Change the mindset that "in-person" interactions do NOT include phone calls, Teams meetings, etc. Teams chat might feel impersonal, but its still counts as in-person real-time communication.

Enhancements to Telework Process:

• Create templates, ensure they are legally accurate

• Look at the paperwork we are using - improvements can be made; remove redundancy.

Make it a more streamlined process.

• Have a one-stop SharePoint on what telework "per agency policy" means. There are so many sources of information including the CBA and several EDO/Commission memos on specific topics such as improving the Resident Inspection program. It is not clear what "per agency policy" means in USA jobs postings.

• Consider having a telework coordinator in each office - this will help with preparation of documents, routing, etc.

• Suggestion of creating an appeal process when the employee and supervisor dont agree.

• Guard against preference biases. Sometimes decisions are based on individual preferences. For example, some people are social and would lean towards having everyone in the office.

Signature Authority:

• Signature authority down to the lowest level. Empower supervisors to make the decisions. Allow first-line supervisors to determine what work is portable, manage interactions, working with their team. They know their staff best.

• OCHCO should not be approving telework at all - only informed for duty station changes, etc.

Policy Ideas:

• Identify what work is portable to determine work schedule 70 l P a g e

• 1 -3 days per month mandatory in-office for 4-6 hours of engagement that would be a good transition and allow more staff telework flexibility.

• Provide incentives for people to come into the office (ex. 10 months local, 2 months from anywhere); better offices (larger, door, window), not by seniority.

• We need to have a better list of purposes/goals for in-office work. We cannot measure success if we do not have a yardstick to measure against. For residents, we have a clear list of tasks and expectations when we go into the site; we also have different list of tasks/expectations when we go into the regional office.

• Need to look at resident inspector (RI) policy. At this time, RIs are only authorized telework up to 8 hrs. per week unless there is a documented need for more. The resident program is already struggling with recruitment and retention, and I foresee the telework limitations to be a sticking point for program growth/sustainability.

Full-Time Telework Considerations for Full-Time Telework (i.e., Remote)

• Consider Full-Time Telework (FTTW) option within the commuting area

• Revise FTTW annual renewal process.

o Change of policy has become stressful due to the new annual renewal of telework agreements.

o Uncertainty of not knowing the agreement will be renewed on an annual basis, causes stress and anxiety.

o Should not have an expiration date.

o Revise justification that training a replacement is needed

• There has been some talk about hiring staff on full-time telework, but caution NRC as it would cause major culture issues if not offered to current staff.

• Use of new employees to justify not offering FTTW is a flimsy excuse. (new employees who joined during the pandemic felt they were able to meet teammates and build relationships through use of technology i.e., Teams).

• Bar is too high for approval of FTTW. Seems to be done arbitrarily at this point. We need to be more open to approving FTTW.

• There is no difference between local and remote FTTW.

• Turn it around and ask why management shouldnt grant FTTW.

• Everyone should be able to do FTTW unless their work cannot be done remotely.

• I have heard from others that may be explored more (may take OPM transformational thinking if not already allowed within current regulations or really thinking outside the box at least if not legally prohibited) would be the possibility of allowing a person to be pay to be based on the requirement for that individual to live in a specific locality (like DC area, Chicago, etc..), the person could live anywhere and work for the agency therefore they would be free to live anywhere even the less expensive areas of the US. If a person were to choose to live in San Francisco, that would be their choice and ok, but the agency would not have a need for them to live there, therefore, not responsible for paying them at that locality. This could also help offset any travel expenses needed for that person to travel to in-person work when needed.

Benefits Shared on FTTW:

71 l P a g e

• Telework (TW)/FTTW creates opportunities for NRC staff to compete for, rotate in, work in, and promote into offices not geographically co-located. Consequently, this allows the NRC to tap into knowledge, skills, abilities, and potential in staff not geographically co-located.

• TW/FTTW affords the staff the ability to rapidly transition to work in the morning and to their personal lives at the end of the day. There are positive contributions to morale and mental health.

• TW/FTTW positively contributes to the Administrations goal of environmental justice.

There is an inherent reduction in the number of vehicles on the road and sitting in traffic.

There is also an inherent reduction in the reliance on fossil fuels.

• TW/FTTW reduces the federal governments reliance on contractual real estate.

• More broadly accepting full-time telework at the agency could allow for a larger population of individuals to apply for jobs at the NRC and therefore expand the agencys application pool to a more diverse population. Commuting can be an economic barrier for individuals with lower incomes, or a barrier for individuals with disabilities.

• Expanding FTTW could allow individuals to live in different parts of the country, which could allow for individuals to live in an area where they are paid less, that has a lower cost of living, and therefore provides greater dispersion of economic resources throughout the country.

Additional Suggestions for Agency Consideration Technology

• Portability has nothing to do with the type of information that can be accessed remotely.

Ex. DOD has moved to software that allows people to work on sensitive information remotely. NRC does not have the technology in place to facilitate portable work - i.e.,

there are software solutions to allow work on sensitive information in a remote environment. Suggestion: adopt software solutions that allows work on classified and Safeguards Information (SGI) remotely. Use software separation instead of just hardware fixes.

• Ensure agency can handle bandwidth if moving to more FTTW.

• Policies around using Teams and the Chat function Considerations That May Influence Telework Policy Changes:

• Office Space:

o Our mission talks about protecting the environment and teleworking will reduce carbon emissions and be a smaller footprint.

o Expanding full-time telework could also allow for a reduction in the amount of commercial office space, saving economic resources and allowing those economic resources to be put to a more productive use. Those office buildings could be converted to housing, which is currently in great demand and often perceived as too expensive. Converting office space to residential space

• Increase travel budget for meaningful interactions

• Additional resources in OCHCO to support telework duties - currently one person who has multiple duties in additional to managing the entire agencys telework program.

• Need to pay attention to ergonomics, look at the needs of those teleworking

• Federal Laws associated with to encourage telework as it: Reduces pollution from cars, reduces impacts to roads, bridges, etc..., increases diversity, reduces costs to federal agencies by reducing the building usage and associated support resources and reduces 72 l P a g e

impacts of localized natural or artificial disasters. Congress has pushed this idea as it is important to the country as a whole.

• Think of the fall-out from an all-out, FTTW situation. Many restaurants, shops, merchants, etc., that depend on workers being in the office would go out of business thus contributing to the unemployment rate.

Additional Comments:

• Ask that the TPIWG show us and strongly communicate what we can do to make sure we are being heard

• Need strong leadership to make the policy work

• Telework is a privilege and not an entitlement

• Commitment from all employees about being intentional with building relationships whether that is in-person or virtual.

• If the agency does believe in-person is valuable in building the community, then the agency needs to make people want to come into the office.

• Management has asked us to transform majorly in the recent past - staff is asking management to do the same related to FTTW.

Summary of Supervisor Listening Session The purpose of this summary is to highlight common themes based on feedback and ideas shared throughout the supervisor listening session and provide suggestions for the TPIWG consideration for enhancing NRCs telework policy and implementation.

Considerations for In-Person, In-Office, and Virtual Presence Generally, supervisors shared that the agency needs to be innovative and intentional about how we make meaningful connections with our colleagues - both virtually and in-person.

We dont need to focus on how much in-person is necessary to sustain culture and instead need to think about all ways to advance our people and culture.

Max choice coupled with purposeful interactions to give people a reason to get together.

The water cooler is not the water cooler anymore.

In-Person, In-Office Presence:

• Team building activities

• Coaching

• Branch meetings (Benefit to in-person if there is a critical mass)

• Presence with a purpose; intentional moments

• Brainstorming

• Seeing body language

• Initial training for new employees, hands-on training such as simulator refresher training

• Inspection of licensee activities ex. Training (TTC)

• Quick questions - to get immediate response

• Public meetings

• Audits 73 l P a g e

• Knowledge transfer activities

• Regional Counterpart meetings 74 l P a g e

• Most regions have "seminars" twice a year in which staff gather to socialize, discuss pertinent topics, and build relationships.

• Initial onboarding of a new employee

• Difficult conversations

• Social interactions - occasionally meeting for lunch Virtual:

• Brainstorming can be very effective virtually if you have all of the right tools to conduct a digital brainstorming session, and most importantly, if all of the impacted individuals know how to utilize any of the digital tools (Whiteboard & Click-Up) that may be used. If not, then an in-person session with paper and pen or mind-mapping would be just as effective as well.

• Virtual training, being able to take it at home vs. coming into the office

• Most interactions can take place virtually Telework Policy: General Comments and Impacts of Current Policy Generally, comments were shared about existing policy challenges and concerns including inconsistency with requirements, decisions, implementation and guidance

• Based on the last 2 years, everyone coming into the office is easy, everyone working virtually is easy, but trying to do this hybrid thing is difficult.

• Inconsistency with requirements for RI across the agency

• Not enough flexibility and not enough trust.

• Local FTTW verses remote FTTW was a mistake when the new policy changed.

Leverage the ability for the regional staff to work at HQ is important.

• No one-size-fits-all approach

• One of the biggest problems we saw as consistency across the board for decisions made. We need to make sure that we are consistent otherwise its not going to work.

• The hybrid work environment has only been partially implemented - and that is mostly the "positive" part. All of my employees are work-at-home 60% but they all still have offices. We are trying to hire new people but now have no offices available. We don't have clear policies on limitations and penalties, so (as an example) people seem to think they can take an extra WAH day when they schedule a medical appointment because they don't feel it is worth it to drive to work for the rest of the day. Or they feel they can work only 6 hours6.944444e-5 days <br />0.00167 hours <br />9.920635e-6 weeks <br />2.283e-6 months <br /> at work and 3-4 hours at home in one day because the rules are vague. Work hours have also gotten blurred, and some people are virtually working and taking more of a first 40 attitude rather than following a fixed schedule. Please build the rest of the policy.

• OCHCO should not have ability to deny FTTW approved by the office director or regional administrator.

• I'm really struggling with the idea that people are "entitled" to telework. Why should we have to incentivize people to come into the office? We already to - it's called a paycheck.

• Its not entitlement, its a benefit and we need that benefit in order to compete for employees against other job options.

Comments were shared about concerns with recruitment and retention; broken trust; acclimating new hires; low morale and engagement; COVID still exists.

75 l P a g e

Recruitment and Retention

• Unable hire due to telework policy.

• Todays kids expect to work from home in front of the computer. I want our agency to be able to recruit people. Hope you take the actions that will satisfy staff. Were going to lose good people and we cant fill the spots

• We may NEED to be more FTTW friendly now to compete, but we may very well have to revisit that decision later as the landscape changes.

• The reality is that many midcareer employees are leaving for full-time work at home positions in other govt agencies or other companies- we need to get smart about retention and a better use of full-time telework needs to be part of that retention Culture:

• What I havent heard is our culture in general. We are a regulatory agency that is apolitical. We want the agency out of the news. The culture has permeated down of risk aversion. Weve always done what we were told to do. We are always the first or second to come into compliance. Interesting enough with Bidens decision to come into the office mandate we were the first too. The world has changed but the world doesnt know what weve changed to? DOE, SEC, etc., etc. didnt have people coming in. The pandemic just accelerated what was already happening with people already going remote.

• NRCs senior leadership needs to accept that the landscape of work, work-life and workplace has fundamentally changed forever.

• Employees need to feel that they are receiving at least an equitable return on their investment of going into the office. Otherwise, there will continue to be low morale and disengagement.

Broken Trust:

• The agency's culture was damaged after the decision to re-entry during the pandemic.

We continue to hear the common theme of telework policies affecting the perception everyone has of the NRC and the potential effect on our ability to fulfill our safety mission. Please consider allowing greater flexibilities for full-time telework as proposed in this meeting. It will demonstrate the agency's openness to become a modern regulator.

• Distrust is the leading indicator (we are seeing that in this and the employee session) that I believe will be followed by an increase in retirements and loss of new/mid-term employees (lagging indicator)

• Arbitrary days in the office when an organization is telework ready conveys an immediate reflection of distrust in staff.

• If we want staff to come into the office, then we should ensure that we have an office worth coming to. I dont think we can have the appetite or ability to do that. We dont even have a cafeteria. Moreover, were modifying the facility in an unpopular way. Decisions like these have destroyed trust in the organization.

• Employees and their direct supervisors should be trusted to work collaboratively to determine when and where to work that makes the most sense for the mission, their work units, their stakeholders, and themselves.

Acclimating New Employees:

• Concern with an expansion of TW as an agency is new employee development......this is something that first-line supervisors are going to need to be deliberate about addressing (and that may mean Teleworking staff need to come in more often) 76 l P a g e

• I am worried about all the new staff we are hiring that they may not get the interaction, get that experience, and culture that we all gained over the years of in-office interaction... how are all the new staff going to get that. We can say that teams will allow that, but it does not in my experience. We still need some in-person interaction.

• Having people in the office to help train all the new employees is important. it gives purpose and builds culture. my new staff felt disconnected in the virtual environment.

COVID

• Staff are not willing to come into the office on the same day to do team building because of not wanting to get COVID Supporting In-Office Workers:

• How should the agency support folks who want/need to work in the office? Specifically, if someone wants to work in the office and all the people the want/need to work with are teleworking, it seems we are not support folks working in-office.

Considerations for Telework Policy Changes:

General Comments:

• We need to get away from the hybrid, we can determine what each branch can do virtually and then if everyone wants it, they can.

• The decision and re-entry was a catastrophic failure of our leadership so Im concerned about how the staff with buy in to this next stage.

• The opportunity to that telework can provide to rotations.

• Want to point out that staff has an overall negative perception of hybrid. That language can be inflammatory. As the working group comes up with changes, a rebranding of the negative connotation of hybrid.

• Instead of identifying what specific in-office days we have, I would suggest that we just identify how many days we are going to do in-person days per pay period and that way we can be flexible that way we can flex with what is going on with meetings and needs for in-office work.

Signature Authority:

• Strong agreement that first-line supervisors are in the best position to make decisions on staff work schedules and presence with a purpose.

• Delegating approval authority down to the lowest level.

• All telework approvals should remain within the office.

• Need clearer guidance on exceptions, implementation, etc. I am open to letting the 1st line supervisors make the decision but am afraid that if there are no guidelines in policy then it might put them in a difficult position for those employees who have a strong opinion.

• The BC are in the best position to make the decision, but things will change, and this will need to be revisited as things recycle.

• Managers should be given the decision-making for telework because they know what their employees' responsibilities are. Telework is a case-by-case thing, where we should be flexible.

• Supervisors having the discretion of deciding whether a position is full-time telework or not. I believe people would be surprised by how many supervisors would be open to making a positions FTTW if it meant keeping high performers and/or recruiting great staff.

77 l P a g e

• CAUTION - the danger with allowing a front-line supervisor to decide on FTTW is what to do if a new supervisor shows up and disagrees, or the staff member changes jobs -

unless we make those initial decision permanent as long as work is portable.

Process:

• Simplify the telework forms and process

• Need agency high level guidance that we can apply to the varied work environments across the Offices.

• Working hours - suggest having core hours/traditional hours so business done at a reasonable time rather than waiting till the next day.

• Full employee choice. Let staff decide when or if to come in on a regular basis and make FTTW available as a recruiting tool. Couple that with periodic in-person interactions "with a purpose" 3-4 times a year.

• Let the needed activities (team building, training, public meetings, etc.) drive when people "should" come into the office and then find ways to incentivize people to come in, encourage supervisors to use the activities to encourage people to come in for the activities that make sense, help with the culture, etc.

FTTW (Remote):

• Simplify the process to requesting FTTW.

• The impetus for the comment is based on an inconsistency of the implementation of the current telework program. If the concept of telework is divided between local and non-local is such a strange thing. If you are going to ask folks to come into the office, the local folks will bear the cost, but if an employee with an agreement to telework 900 miles away is asked to come into the office, who pays that expense? The agency or the employee? Is the new policy going to be that there will not be a recoup of that cost?

Just make the policy consistent and impartial.

Additional Suggestions for Agency Consideration Office Space:

• Suggest reducing footprint and offer agency employees come in on certain days (Tues, Wed, Thurs.)

• Reducing footprint, may be able to hire more people with the savings.

• Need to consider our space policy with telework policy. Proposals that if <2 days/week, people would not be entitled to an office.

• As part of revising our FTTW policy, we should consider re-evaluating whether regional offices should be consolidated.

• Office design, amenities, culture can/should attract personnel to desire to come to the office... making people do what they don't want to do is bad, offering a great environment that enriches their life and work is good

• Really would like it if any updated telework policy also define what it means as far as in-office space that folks will have or use.

Engagement Suggestions for TPIWG:

• Conduct small groups where we can help do develop the policy.

• Lets have another listening session about what does the agency want to be. What do we want to use our office space for?

• The agency should look at the resident program as a 40 year "remote work" program.

How do they stay engaged and develop culture then they are separate from their bosses 78 l P a g e

and colleague by long distances? Although every region (and branch) may be different, they have common tools such as Temporary Duty (TDY) travel at a frequency that supports collaboration. Counterpart meetings allow RIs to meet regional staff, objectivity visit requirements allow RIs focused time with other RIs. As IT tools have evolved, residents collaborate more with branch staff and other residents virtually. The key is the expectation to collaborate virtually and defined in-person meetings with the expectation to travel.

• Has TPIWG reached out to the resident inspector recruitment working group to determine a telework solution for resident inspectors? At this time, we are only authorized telework up to 8 hrs. per week unless there is a documented need for more.

The resident program is already struggling with recruitment and retention, and I foresee the telework limitations to be a sticking point for program growth/sustainability.

Summary of Insights from Employee Feedback via Email and Open Door In addition to insights and feedback shared directly during the listening sessions, the TPIWG obtained feedback from 26 employees via email or during open door. Below is a summary of the feedback shared.

General Comments

• Transparency, consistency, equity in granting FTTW.

o Multiple comments related to the training your replacement/succession strategy language in the current FTTW policy (e.g., What is the purpose of this requirement, and what happens to me after my replacement is trained?)

o Once FTTW is approved, what is the basis for denying FTTW to others in a similar role?

• Transparency, consistency, and equity in telework

• We were successful in implementing FTTW during the pandemic. Why cant we do it now? (reasons include better productivity, no commute time, COVID safety, work-life balance, cost savings, reducing carbon footprint, etc.)

• Recruitment and retention concerns.

o Make an easy path for FTTW for rotations.

o Being able to pick the best-qualified candidate even if they are remote

• Concerns regarding the reluctancy for FTTW employees to apply for other jobs because it is unclear whether they will be able to retain FTTW

• PwP (return on investment of going into the office)

• Improve/modernize the telework paperwork process

• Decisions regarding telework should be at lowest possible level (e.g., branch chief; regional administrators/office directors for FTTW)

• Onboarding should be performed in-person.

Other Items for Consideration Incentivization. Consider incentives for those who would not be able to take advantage of liberal telework policies by the nature of their jobs and for staff that would rather work in the office (e.g., offer private offices or higher priority in choosing office space)

Use job functions/position descriptions. Create classes of positions or functions that are eligible for FTTW. Utilize the position description to determine what work can be done remotely and what needs to be in-person.

79 l P a g e

Comments on In-Person Presence.

• Some examples where new employees did not feel involved with the agency while staff were remote.

• Fully remote work leads to most interactions being transactional in nature, which leads to a decline in culture.

• Seeing coworkers in-person creates a closer personal relationship Implementation Items

• Consider developing a process for when the supervisor and employee disagree on a telework schedule.

• Notification timeline for employees on FTTW (e.g., 2-hour advanced notice for local-remote and 48-hour advanced notice for remote-remote)

• There are mixed feelings on camera usage.

• Provide training to those not used to teleworking or working in a hybrid environment

• Consider providing examples where it would be appropriate for a branch chief to revisit/cancel a FTTW agreement (e.g., shift in policy)

Potential Ideas to Help Supervisors

• Regular weekly or biweekly meetings with a senior staff branch member for knowledge management and to discuss challenges with the employees projects

• Branch Chat on Teams where staff can feel encourage to drop a message to ask questions or request thoughts.

• Devote some branch meeting time so that, instead of staff providing personal work status updates, staff generate discussion to get insights on 2 or 3 challenges the branch is facing. These can be incredibly valuable and are better than getting feedback one-on-one as people feed off each others ideas.

• Devote some branch meeting time for staff to share personal life updates such as weekend activities. Patrice Reid would use a system called the 4 Hs. This could be done around once a month.

• Short biweekly meetings with branch chief to get status updates on work Thoughts Staff New to NRC

• Culture Team has many resources describing the desired culture. Division or branch management should share these resources and behavioral expectations.

• New staff member can send email introducing self to branch. There should also be a division wide communication welcoming the new staff member.

• Pair new employees with a staff member who can share the same in-person days (maybe even from a different office/branch to increase the pool of people).

• New employees shouldnt have to come into the office more than anyone else ONLY because they are new (consider in-person activities that are occurring, such as licensee site visits, TTC training, etc.).

• Consider a probationary period until new staff demonstrate they can FTTW effectively.

Insights from EDO Town Hall Information TPIWG reviewed approximately 110 comments that were related to telework (and most comments had multiple likes) from meetings held between February 2021 and July 2022.

80 l P a g e

General Comments:

• Transparency, consistency, equity in granting FTTW. This includes providing the definition of rare with regards to FTTW approval. There were also multiple comments suggesting that management provide specific information to staff re: how many employees are currently on FTTW.

• Employees should all be FTTW since we were successful during the public health emergency (reasons include better productivity, no commute time, COVID safety, work-life balance, cost savings, reducing carbon footprint, etc.)

• Recruitment and retention concerns

• Transparency, consistency, and equity in telework (e.g., some offices had to return, and others did not; some staff were asked to return even though their office directors did not; other agencies have more liberal telework policies than we do; etc.)

• PwP Other Items for Consideration:

COVID Concerns. Though our policy is written based on the assumption that it is meant to be applicable long-term, COVID is still a concern amongst staff, as demonstrated in the comments.

This will likely be a question in future roll-out meetings that will need to be answered. This could also be a consideration for information/tools that will need to be provided to supervisors during the pilot (i.e., what to do for staff who fall into this category).

• Response provided in the Town Hall Notes: Our special circumstances telework policy provides a process for employees to request telework for a relatively short period of time due to a personal incapacitation or personal hardship and is approved on a case-by-case basis. Decisions for initial special circumstance requests lie with the office directors and regional administrators. Employees should discuss their concerns with their supervisor, division management, or office director.

Amenities. There were several questions related to the availability of amenities such as the HQ cafeteria, gym, etc.

Work Schedules vs. In-Office Days. Would there be any differences to the policy for an employee that works a 4-10 schedule or a compressed schedule (i.e., more than 8 hours9.259259e-5 days <br />0.00222 hours <br />1.322751e-5 weeks <br />3.044e-6 months <br /> in a day?).

Risk Assessment. There were several comments related to whether a risk assessment was conducted to support the current telework policy.

Concerns with Telework. There were multiple comments (with multiple likes) related to more telework not being good for the agency because of staff being more siloed; more negative association with employment; learning more in-office than on Teams; failure to create community for new employees due to lack of in-person events, etc. There was also concern about speaking up against the tide.

Why Hybrid? This is the response provided in the Town Hall notes for consideration in the event we need to add this as a talking point with staff (consistency in messaging).

81 l P a g e

• At the outset of the NRCs maximum telework in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, agency leadership clearly communicated that the maximum telework posture was temporary.

• As indicated by several surveys weve conducted, most of our staff want a hybrid working model with some telework and some time in our buildings.

• Our model will also strive for all employees to have some in-person interactions. Our experiences over the last 16 months have shown our ability to adapt to working outside of our traditional settings and processes while reminding us of the importance of in-person interactions.

• Our success during the pandemics virtual environment is likely due, in part, to our leveraging of strong relationships and partnerships that we developed through in-person interactions.

• Based on feedback (from staff, affinity groups, and new employees), our assessment of scholarly works, and the best judgement of NRC leaders, the long-term benefits of having some face-to-face interactions has enhanced our ability to achieve our mission and we want to continue, after full re-entry, to have those benefits.

• We will continue to acknowledge that we have demonstrated much success working almost entirely virtually, but the nearly all-virtual environment will end at full re-entry in light of the important benefits we want to continue to derive from in-person interactions.

• We appreciate the staffs professionalism and continued focus on the NRCs mission as we move forward with re-entry.

82 l P a g e

TPIWG Selected List of Key References Doane,M. (2021, July 28). Message from the EDO - Important Updates on Agency Re-Entry Plan, Implementation, and Announcement of Full Re-Entry Date.

Kidson, A. (2022, September 20). The Changing Experience of Culture in a Hybrid Work World

[Webinar]. Gartner Inc.

Government Executive: Preparing for Re-entry into the Physical Workplace: Lessons from NASA Gratton, L. (May-June 2021). How to do Hybrid Right. Harvard Business Review NRC Culture Team: Considerations for Face-to-Face and Remote Work in a Hybrid Environment NRC Culture Team: Considerations for Camera Use in a Hybrid Work Environment NRC Culture Team: Employee Resources for Working in a Hybrid Work Environment NRC Culture Team: Best Practices for Hybrid Meetings NRC Culture Team: Hybrid Work Insights NRC Culture Team: Meeting Facilitation Tool NRC Culture Team: NRC Hybrid Environment Assessment and Review Team Report (ML22271A894)

NRC - Hybrid Work Environment Lessons Learned and Other Resources (Nuclepedia Article)

NRC White Paper - Considerations for Face-to-Face and Remote Work in a Hybrid Environment Region I - Distributed Work as a Team (Top 10 Tips)

Telework Policy and Implementation Working Group Charter, dated July 14, 2022 Policy Documents:

NRC:

• OCHCO Telework Website Resource: https://intranet.nrc.gov/ochco/catalog/317

• MD 10.166, "Telework"

• Collective Bargaining Agreement

• Telework Glossary

• Re-Entry Guidance (Memo)

• Re-Entry Information from OCHCO (PPT)

• Resident Inspector Telework Guidance 83 l P a g e

External Guidance:

• 5 CFR § 531.605 - Determining an employee's official worksite.

• Fact Sheet: Official Worksite for Location-Based Pay Purposes

• A Guide to Telework in the Federal Government

• Telework.gov - the official website of the Federal Government's telework program

• Telework Overview (GSA) 84 l P a g e