ML22026A206

04. Fy 2020 MD-715 Part E.3 - Workforce Analysis

ML22026A206
Person / Time
Issue date:	09/30/2020
From:	NRC/SBCR
To:
Garland, Stephanie - 301-415-2729
Shared Package
ML22026A185	List: ML22026A205 ML22026A206 ML22026A207 ML22026A208
References
NRC-2022-000059
Download: ML22026A206 (58)

Text

2020NRC WORKFORCE

ANALYSIS REPORT

The U.S. Government must ensure that all personnel actions are made free of any discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex (including MD-715 Report, Part E.3 pregnancy, sexual orientation, gender expression, or gender identity), Executive Summary:

national origin, disability, age, genetic information, or reprisal and that Workforce Analysis each of its agencies has an affirmative program of equal employment opportunity (EEO) for all employees and applicants for employment.

This report assists the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) in meeting its ongoing obligation to eliminate barriers that impede free and open competition in the NRC workplace and prevent individuals of any racial or national origin group, or sex (including pregnancy, gender expression, or gender identity), or sexual orientation, or individuals with disabilities from realizing their full potential. As part of the NRC s ongoing obligation, the Office of Small Business and Civil Rights (SBCR) works collaboratively with NRC offices, EEO a dvisory committees, resource groups, and other stakeholders to address EEO issues. SBCR also conducts an agency workforce analysis at least annual ly to evaluate the NRCs employment practices, identify triggers and where barriers may operate to exclude certain groups, and monitor agencywide progress.

Where barriers are identified, SBCR, together with management officials, develops corrective plans to eliminate them.

TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 INTRODUCTION.................................................................................................................... 6 1.1 Reputation........................................................................................................................ 6 1.2 Federal Employee Viewpoint Survey................................................................................ 6 1.3 The NRCs Commitment to Administering a Model EEO Program................................... 7 1.4 Workforce Composition.................................................................................................... 8 1.4.1 Total Workforce Complement......................................................................................... 9 1.4.2 Permanent Workforce Complement.............................................................................. 10 1.4.3 Temporary Workforce Complement.............................................................................. 12 1.4.4 Analysis of Participation Rates for Women and Minorities in NRC Mission-Critical Occupations.................................................................................................................. 12 2 ANALYSIS OF PARTICIPATION RATES FOR WOMEN, MINORITIES, AND INDIVIDUALS WITH DISABILITIES IN NRC STANDARD OCCUPATIONS............................................... 25 2.1 Executive/Senior Level Officials and Managers............................................................. 25 2.2 Professionals.................................................................................................................. 26 2.3 Technicians.................................................................................................................... 27 2.4 Administrative Support Workers..................................................................................... 28 2.5 Service Workers............................................................................................................. 28 3 ANALYSIS OF PARTICIPATION RATES FOR WOMEN AND MINORITIES IN AD 13-14 POSITIONS.......................................................................................................................... 29 4 RECRUITMENT.................................................................................................................... 30 4.1 Administration of Recruitment Program.......................................................................... 30 4.2 Recruitment Process...................................................................................................... 30 4.3 Developing the Fiscal Year 2020 Recruitment Schedule............................................... 30 4.4 Fiscal Year 2020 Recruitment and Advertisement Activities.......................................... 30 5 ADVERTISEMENT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2020 JOB VACANCIES...................................... 302 6 NEW HIRES BY TYPE OF APPOINTMENT........................................................................ 32 6.1 Permanent Workforce New Hires................................................................................... 32 6.2 Temporary New Hires..................................................................................................... 33 7 APPLICANTS AND NEW HIRES FOR NRC MISSION-CRITICAL OCCUPATIONS........... 33 7.1 General Engineering (0801)........................................................................................... 33 7.2 Nuclear Engineering (0840)............................................................................................ 34 7.3 General Attorney (0905)................................................................................................. 34 7.4 Health Physics (1306).................................................................................................... 35 8 INTERNAL COMPETITIVE PROMOTIONS FOR NRC MISSION-CRITICAL OCCUPATIONS................................................................................................................... 36 8.1 Executives...................................................................................................................... 36

Page 2 8.2 Supervisors..................................................................................................................... 36 8.3 Managers........................................................................................................................ 37 8.4 Senior Executive Service................................................................................................ 37 8.5 GG-15 or Equivalent....................................................................................................... 38 8.6 GG-14 or Equivalent....................................................................................................... 39 8.7 GG-13 or Equivalent....................................................................................................... 39 8.8 Management and Program Analysis (0343)................................................................... 40 8.9 General Engineering (0801)........................................................................................... 40 8.10 Nuclear Engineering (0840)............................................................................................ 41 8.11 Health Physics (1306).................................................................................................... 42 9 HIRING AND RECRUITMENT: FOCUSNONCOMPETITIVE HIRING, ROTATIONS, DETAILS, ASSIGNMENTS, ADVANCEMENTS, AND OTHER TYPES OF SELECTIONS. 42 10 TRAINING AND DEVELOPMENT OPPORTUNITIES.......................................................... 43 10.1 Training Availability......................................................................................................... 43 10.2 Professional Development Programs............................................................................. 43 10.3 Individual Development Plan.......................................................................................... 43 10.4 NRC Leaders Academy................................................................................................. 43 10.5 Training and Development Opportunities Made Available at the NRC Office Level....... 44 10.6 Analysis of NRC Training and Development Opportunities............................................ 44 11 RETENTION EFFORTS, INCLUDING SALARY DISTRIBUTION AND TIME-OFF AND CASH AWARDS................................................................................................................... 46 11.1 Employees Satisfaction with Their Pay.......................................................................... 46 11.2 NRC Salary Distribution.................................................................................................. 46 11.3 Employee Incentives...................................................................................................... 47 11.4 Employee Recognition and Awards................................................................................ 48 11.5 Time-Off Awards (1-10 Hours)....................................................................................... 48 11.6 Time-Off Awards (11-20 Hours)..................................................................................... 49 11.7 Time-Off Awards (21-30 Hours)..................................................................................... 49 11.8 Time-Off Awards (31-40 Hours)..................................................................................... 50 11.9 Time-Off Awards (41 or More Hours)............................................................................. 50 11.10 Cash Awards of $500 and Under................................................................................... 50 11.11 Cash Awards of $501- $999........................................................................................... 51 11.12 Cash Awards of $1,000- $1,999..................................................................................... 52 11.13 Cash Awards of $2,000- $2,999..................................................................................... 53 11.14 Cash Awards of $3,000- $3,999..................................................................................... 54 11.15 Cash Awards of $4,000- $4,999..................................................................................... 55 11.16 Cash Awards of $5,000 or More..................................................................................... 55

Page 3 11.17 Quality Step Increases Awarded.................................................................................... 56 11.18 Review of Employee Nominations, Acknowledgments, Recognitions, and Awards....... 57 12 SEPARATIONS.................................................................................................................... 57 12.1 Voluntary Separations.................................................................................................... 57 12.2 Retirements.................................................................................................................... 57 12.3 Involuntary Separations.................................................................................................. 58 12.4 Temporary Workforce Other Separations....................................................................... 58 12.5 Other Separations.......................................................................................................... 58 12.6 Triggers Identified Related to NRC Separations............................................................. 58 13 CONCLUSION...................................................................................................................... 58

Page 4 ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS

AD Administratively Determined ADM Office of Administration ALCP Aspiring Leaders Certificate Program CDMP Comprehensive Diversity Management Plan CDP Candidate Development Program CLF civilian labor force DMIC Diversity Management and Inclusion Council EEO equal employment opportunity EEOC Equal Employment Opportunity Commission EG Consultant EI Expert FEORP Federal Equal Opportunity Recruitment Program FEVS Federal Employee Viewpoint Survey FOCSE fair, open, cooperative, supportive, and empowering FY fiscal year GG Government Grade HR human resource(s)

IDP individual development plan IG Inspector General LCP Leaders at All Levels Certificate Program MD management directive MSP merit system principle NRC U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission NRR Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation NSIR Office of Nuclear Security and Incident Response OCHCO Office of the Chief Human Capital Officer OCLF occupational civilian labor force OGC Office of the General Counsel OPM Office of Personnel Management OWF Operation Warfighter PWD persons with disabilities PWTD persons with targeted disabilities QSI quality step increase RAPP relevant applicant pool percentage SACC Service Academy Career Conference SBCR Office of Small Business and Civil Rights SDP Supervisory Development Program SEG Staff Empowerment Group SES Senior Executive Service STEM science, technology, engineering, and mathematics TMS Talent Management System U.S.C. United States Code

Page 5 The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Part E.3: Executive Summary: Workforce Analysis

1 INTRODUCTION

The workforce analysis summary is intended to (1) examine the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commissions (NRCs) practices applied to recruitment, external hiring, competitive and noncompetitive promotions, hiring alternatives, training and career development, retention efforts (incentives and awards), and separations, (2) identify triggers and barriers that affect equal employment opportunity (EEO) at the NRC, (3) discuss measures to reduce or eliminate identified risks and barriers to EEO, and (4) highlight the agencys overall EEO efforts and practices and noteworthy accomplishments towards achieving a model Federal EEO workplace.

1.1 Reputation

The NRCs reputation extends beyond its organizational boundaries. In FY 202 0, the NRC was ranked one of the Top 50 STEM [science, technology, engineering, and mathematics ] Workplaces for Native STEM Professionals by the American Indian Science and Engineering Society and one of the Top 20 Government Employers in Woman Engineer magazine. The NRCs awards and recognitions also include its listing as both a 2019 and 2020 best of the best supporter of Hispanic or Latino-serving institutions by Hispanic Network magazine; of veterans by U.S. Veterans Magazine; and of Black or African Americans by Black EOE Journal. Professional Womans Magazine also recognized the NRC as one of the organizations that strive to support diversity in the workplace.

1.2 Federal Employee Viewpoint Survey

By statute, 1 Congress requires all e xecutive branch agencies to survey their employees each year. The inclusion of 16 congressionally mandated annual employee survey items in the G overnmentwide survey provides a common thread for trending. The Office of Personnel Management (OPM) Federal Employee Viewpoint Survey (FEVS) provides a snapshot in time of the self-reported perceptions of employees in the Federal G overnment about their work experience, work unit, agency, supervisor, organizational leadership, and satisfaction with a var iety of work-related components. 2

The NRC is consistently ranked as one of the Best Places to Work in the Federal Government, based on data from the OPM FEVS. The NRCs leadership has directed all O ffice Directors to examine and address the FEVS information and data results that were specific to their areas of control and to take appropriate actions on these results. The Executive Director for Operations instructed the Office Directors to work with their staffs on applicable FEVS responses and issues raised by employees. The NRC leadership issued this directive because managers and supervisors are responsible for implementing efforts to create and foster a diverse, high-performing workforce using data to further decisionmaking and optimizing policies, processes, and programs to drive inclusive diversity efforts and accomplish the NRCs mission. The office management and supervisors are responsible for promoting a positive and healthy NRC work environment and for creating a climate in which employees differences are appreciated and valued. These responsibilities include examining and using the FEVS results to (1) explain the data, (2) explore underlying issues, (3) develop a plan with specific deliverables and accountabilities, and (4) act on the data and follow up to ensure the completion of

1 See the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2004, Sec. 1128, Employee Surveys; 5 U.S.C. 7101; and Title 5 of the Code of Federal Regulations Part 250, Personnel Management in Agencies, Subpart C, Employee Surveys, which includes items required for the survey.

2 See the 2019 FEVS Governmentwide Management Report produced by OPM at https://www.OPM.Gov/FEVS.

Page 6 activities and achievement of results. The NRC O ffice Directors and their management discuss ed ways to identify concerns with their employees and made appropriate changes, which were reported in their biannual 2020 Comprehensive Diversity Management Plan (CDMP) reports submitted to the EEO office and discussed throughout the Management Directive (MD) 715 (MD-715) report.

The EEO office assists NRC offices in their efforts to address the FEVS results around engagement, the new inclusion quotient, and global satisfaction. As part of its efforts, the EEO office engages with senior leadership on a regular basis to support achievement of three prior ity-focused objectives:

(1) highest priority objectiveprovide immediate interface, technical assistance, and monitoring to help NRC offices with Employee Engagement and Inclusion Quotient Index subindices percent ratings of 50- 69 percent, (2) second-prior ity objectivecoordinate efforts with NRC offices with Index s ubindices ratings of 70- 79 percent to promote increased diversity and inclusion and achieve performance results, and (3) third-priority objectiveacknowledge, provide feedback, and encourage continued performance from NRC offices with Index subindices ratings at 80 percent and above. The following paragraphs highlight noteworthy examples of efforts by NRC offices to address the FEVS results.

The Office of Administration (ADM) formed a FEVS working group with participation at management and staff levels. The working group reviews and analyzes feedback from the FEVS, the Safety Culture Climate Survey, and other surveys as applicable to the five habits f air, open, cooperative, supportive, and empowering (FOCSE)t o identify areas for improvement and develop action plans. ADM leadership conducted focus groups to provide an opportunity for staff and management to collaborate to solve issues and discuss office processes, such as the FEVS.

The Office of Nuclear Security and Incident Response ( NSIR) created a Staff Empowerment Group (SEG) to review and analyze feedback from the FEVS. The SEG solicits additional feedback from NSIR staff through an anonymous deeper dive survey using Survey Monkey. SEG efforts have resulted in employees who feel valued and appreciated and have a sense of belonging.

The Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulations (NRRs) Safety Culture Teams reviewed and analyzed data from the FEVS, in addition to officewide surveys, and proposed actions to address issues based on the results. The Safety Culture Teams worked with division management to develop an action plan. A division in NRR implemented a strategy for increasing group cohesion that included staff completion of the Strength Deployment Inventory and a subsequent workshop on team building and strategies to continue improving communication. The i nventory is focused on relationship awareness and will allow NRR to identify areas of success and areas f or improvement. NRR anticipates the results will lead to greater understanding of communication styles and promote stronger collaboration among peers.

NRRs division management took the Implicit Association Test, which measures unconscious bias and used scores to identify any potential areas of unconscious bias. One division established an employee-directed office inclusion council that briefs leadership on recommendations for greater inclusion. Other NRR divisions conducted training on t he agencys Antiharassment Policy to prevent harassment in the workplace.

The Office of the General Counsel established a Safety Culture Working Group to examine FEVS results and implement actions to promote the five FOCSE habits to identify areas for improvement and develop action plans.

1.3 The NRCs Commitment to Administering a Model EEO Program

The NRC is committed to establishing and maintaining an effective model EEO program. The agency identified two goals in its Strategic Plan that must be achieved to carry out its mission: (1) the Safety strategic goal and (2) the Security strategic goal. In implementing supporting strategies and activities

Page 7 for these strategic goals, the plan makes clear that corporate functions such as human resource (HR) management 3 play a key role in the NRCs effective and efficient use of resources to deliver mission value. 4 The plan integrates EEO and diversity principles (equality, fairness, diversity, and inclusion) under the Workforce Dynamics section, which states the following:

The agencys most valuable resource is its staff, and its ability to recruit, hire, train, motivate, and retain qualified staff in a competitive job market is critical to meeting its strategic goals. The agency must also maintain a high -performing diverse and flexible workforce supported by a healthy organizational culture with a focus on safety, security, and continuous improvement to meet mission needs. This will require the NRC to better understand and meet the needs of its employees and become a more flexible and agile organization. 5

The NRC recognizes that a diverse and inclusive workforce is necessary to drive innovation in its regulatory activities, foster creativity, and guide business strategies. The NRC remains fully committed to attracting, developing, and maintaining a high-performing, diverse, engaged, and flexible workforce with the skills needed to adapt to workload changes and effectively carry out the NRCs mission now and in the future. The NRC is achieving its mission goals and those of its Inclusive Diversity Strategic Plan 6 and CDMP by incorporating cultural competency efforts and other measures to ensure that the agency has the right people in the right place at the right time.

The NRCs EEO advisory committees, Veterans Employee Resource Group, NRC Technical Womens Network, the NRCs chapter of Blacks In Government, DMIC, 7 and NRC Pride Alliance Diversity Management Advisory Committee provided invaluable input to the NRCs leadership and management to promote equality of opportunity and the sense of value and belonging for all NRC employees in every aspect of the agencys operations (i.e., recruitment outreach; hiring; promotion; training and development; upward mobility; and terms, conditions, and privileges of employment).

1.4 Workforce Composition

The NRCs current workforce reflects diversity in gender, ethnicity, education, occupation, age, and thought, as related to the working environment or safety culture. In 2020, the NRC had 2,866 employees, compared to 2,931 employees in 2019. The agency included 1,7 18 male employees (59.94 percent of the NRCs total workforce) and 1,148 female employees (40.06 percent of the NRC workforce). 8 In FY 2020, the NRC included employees in the following demographic groups:

3 The merit system principles (MSPs) are the fundamental basis of the entire Federal HR management system. The MSPs are part of the Civil Service Reform Act of 1978 and can be found at 5 U.S.C. § 2301(b), along with the Prohibited Personnel Practices at 5 U.S.C. § 2302(b). The nine MSPs are the core values that should be expressed in every HR decision and embodied within the NRCs mission Strategic Plan. Specifically, the MSPs provide guidance on how managers and supervisors should manage HR and oversee the core values. The MSPs include the following:

(1) recruit, select, and advance employees on merit after fair and open competition from all segments of society, (2) treat employees and applicants fairly and equitably; do not discriminate, (3) provide equal pay for work of equal value and reward excellent performance, (4) maintain high standards of integrity, conduct, and concern for the public interest, (5) manage the Federal workforce effectively and efficiently, (6) retain or separate employees on the basis of their performance, (7) educate and train employees if it will result in better organizational and individual performance, (8) protect employees from improper political influence, and (9) protect employees against reprisal for lawful disclosure of information, as in whistleblower situations.

4 NUREG-1614, Volume 7 (ML18032A561), Strategic Plan: Fiscal Years 2018 - 2022, issued February 2018, p. 6.

5 NUREG-1614, Volume 7, p. 18.

6 NRC Inclusive Diversity Strategic Plan for fiscal year (FY) 2021-2026.

7 The NRC issued the DMIC charter in September 2015. It identifies barriers to EEO consistent with MSPs and applicable law.

8 See Table A1, Total Workforce Distribution by Race, Ethnicity, and Sex, October 1, 2019, to September 30, 2020.

Page 8 1,831 White (42.01 percent male, 21.88 percent female), 458 Black or African American (5.69 percent male, 10.29 percent female), 186 Hispanic or Latino (3.87 percent male, 2.62 percent female),

310 Asian (6.84 percent male, 3.98 percent female), 2 Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander (0.03 percent male, 0.03 percent female), 21 American Indian or Alaska Native (0.38 percent male, 0.35 percent female), and 15 employees of two or more races (0.24 percent male, 0.28 percent female). 9

The overall distribution of Federal employees is 56.7 percent male and 43.3 percent female. 10 Compared with overall Government statistics, the representation of women and minorities in the NRCs workforce is below that of the Federal Government for all minorities except Asian and Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander. OPM reports reveal the following G overnmentwide demographics for 2017:

18.6 percent Black or African American, 8.9 percent Hispanic or Latino, 5.9 percent Asian, 0.5 percent Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander, 1.6 percent American Indian or Alaska Native, and 1.6 percent individuals of two or more races.

According to data compiled by OPM, the average age of Federal employees has steadily increased over the past two decades, with an average age of 47.5 in 2017. In 2017, 69 percent of the F ederal workforce was 40 years and older, compared to 54 percent of the total civilian labor force (CLF) in the United States. At the end of 2018, only 6 percent of the F ederal workforce was under the age of 30, while 24 percent of the U.S. CLF was under 30. 11 The NRCs statistic s for staff under 30 are below the Governmentwide figures; however, the agency will continue to identify current and future employment gaps, establish strategic plans to fill those gaps, and offer opportunities to attract diverse skilled individuals from all segments of society.

1.4.1 Total Workforce Comple ment In 2020, the NRCs total permanent, temporary, and non-appropriated workforce decreased from 2,931 to 2,866 employees, which is a difference of -65 employees, 0 percent workforce ratio change, and a -2.22 percent net change. The total workforce included 1,718 male employees (59.94 percent), which is a difference of -52 employees, -0.45 percent workforce ratio change, and a -2.94 percent net change.

The number of Hispanic or Latino male employees increased from 103 (3.51 percent) to 111 (3.87 percent), which is a difference of +8 employees, +0.36 percent workforce ratio change, and a

+7.77 percent net change. The number of White male employees decreased from 1,253 (42.75 percent) to 1,204 (42.01 percent), which is a difference of -49 employees, -0.74 percent workforce ratio change, and a -3.91 percent net change. The number of Black or African American male employees decreased from 165 (5.63 percent) to 163 (5.69 percent), which is a difference of -2 employees, -0.06 percent workforce ratio change, and a -1.21 percent net change. The number of Asian male employees decreased from 204 (6.96 percent) to 196 (6.84 percent), which is a difference of -8 employees, -0.12 percent workforce ratio change, and a -3.92 percent net change. The number of Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander male employees decreased from 2 (0.07 percent) to 1 (0.03 percent), which is a difference of -1 employee, -0.04 percent workforce ratio change, and a -50.00 percent net change. The number of American Indian or Alaska Native male employees decreased from 12 (0.41 percent) to 11 (0.38 percent), which is a difference of -1 employee, -0.03 percent workforce ratio change, and a - 8.33 percent net change. The number of male employees who are of two or more races remained at 7 (0.24 percent). The EEO office determined that triggers exist in the case of minority males (Hispanic or Latino, Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander, American Indian or Alaska Native, and i ndividuals of two or more races),

9 See Table A1.

10 See OPMs 2019 Federal Equal Opportunity Recruitment Program (FEORP) report for the period covering 2017.

11 See The Washington Post, Q & A fo r federal workers:

Dearth of younger employees,

by Eric Yoder, May 8, 2018.

Page 9 because their racial/ethnic group representation in the NRCs workforce is below the applicable CLF percentages (5.17, 0.07, 0.55, and 0.26). 12

Female employees decreased from 1,161 (39.61 percent) to 1,148 (40.06 percent), which is a difference of -1 3 employees, 0.45 percent workforce ratio change, and a - 1.12 percent net change. The number of H ispanic or Latino female employees increased from 72 (2.46 percent) to 75 (2.62 percent),

which is a difference of +3 employees, +0.16 percent workforce ratio change, and a +4.17 net percent change. The number of W hite female employees decreased from644 (21.97 percent) to 627 (21.88 percent), which is a difference of -17 employees, -0.0 9 percent workforce ratio change, and a

-2.64 percent net change. The number of Black or African American female employees decreased from 299 (10.20 percent) to 295 (10.29 percent), which is a difference of -4 employees, -0.09 percent workforce ratio change, and a -1.34 percent net change. The number of Asian female employees increased from 111 (3.79 percent) to 114 (3.98 percent), which is a difference of + 3 employees,

+0.1 9 percent workforce ratio change, and a +2.70 percent net change. The number of N ative Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander female employees remained at 1 (0.03 percent). The number of American Indian or Alaska Native female employees in creased from 8 (0.27 percent) to 10 (0. 35 percent), which is a difference of + 2 employees, + 0.08 percent workforce ratio change, and a + 25.00 percent net change. The number of female employees who are i ndividuals of two or more races in creased from 7 (0.24 percent) to 8 (0.28 percent), which is a difference of +1 employee, +0.04 percent workforce ratio change, and a + 14.29 percent net change. Based on a comparative review of the demographic data and CLF, the EEO office determined that triggers exist based on a comparison between the total NRC workforce complement percentages for females (40.06 percent) and the percentages for the CLF for females (48.14 percent). The EEO office also determined that triggers exist with regard to the cited females (Hispanic or Latino, White, Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander, and American Indian or Alaska Native), because their sex or racial/ethnic group representation in the NRCs workforce is below the applicable CLF percentages (4.79, 34.03, 0.07, and 0.53). 13

In 2020, there were 217 total workforce employees identified as persons with disabilities (PWD) and 35 persons with targeted disabilities (PWTD), which reflects changes in PWD and PWTD employees from FY 2019. 14 The number of employees identified as PWD decreased from 228 (7.78 percent) to 217 (7.57 percent), which is a total workforce difference of - 11 employees, -0.21 percent workforce ratio change, and a -4.82 percent net change. PWTD employees increased from 32 (1.09 percent) to 35 (1.22 percent), which is a total workforce difference of +3 employees, +0.13 percent workforce ratio change, and + 9.38 percent net change. Based on a review of demographic data, the NRC has not achieved the required Section 501 workforce goals of employing 12.00 percent PWD and 2.00 percent PWTD within the agencys permanent workforce. However, the data continue to reflect measurable progress towards achieving the Section 501 goals.15

1.4.2 Permanent Workforce Comple ment

The EEO office determined that triggers exist based on a comparison made between permanent workforce complement percentages for females (40.03 percent) and female racial/ethnic groups (Hispanic or Latino, White, Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander, American Indian or Alaska Native, and individuals of two or more races) (2.66 percent, 21.44 percent, 0.04 percent, 0.36 percent,

12 See Table A1.

13 See Table A1.

14 See Table B1-1, Total WorkforceDistribution by Disability Status (Participation Rate), October 1, 2019, to September 30, 2020. See also Table B1-2, Total WorkforceDistribution by Disability Status (Inclusion Rate),

October 1, 2019, to September 30, 2020.

15 See Table B1-1.

Page 10 and 0.26 percent), and the percentages for the CLF for females (48.14 percent) and female racial/ethnic groups (4.79 percent, 34.03 percent, 0.07 percent, 0.53 percent, and 0.28 percent). The EEO office also determined that triggers exist based on a comparison between permanent workforce complement percentages for male racial/ethnic groups (American Indian or Alaska Native and individuals of two or more races) (0.42 percent and 0.25 percent), and the CLF for male racial /ethnic groups (0.55 percent and 0.26 percent). 16 There were 210 permanent employees identified as PWD (7.66 percent) and 34 PWTD (1.24 percent). 17 There was a -12 workforce difference, -0.19 percent ratio change, and -5.41 percent net change in employees identified as PWD from FY 2019. There was a

+2 workforce difference, +0.11 percent ratio, and +6.25 percent net change in PWTD from FY 2019. 18 The following paragraphs discuss this in more depth.

In FY 2020, the total permanent workforce decreased from 2,827 employees to 2,743 employees, 19 which is a difference of - 84 employees, 0 percent workforce ratio change, and a -2.97 percent net change. The number of permanent male employees decreased from 1,709 (60.45 percent) to 1,645 (59.97 percent), which is a difference of -64 employees, -0. 48 percent workforce ratio change, and a -3.74 percent net change. The number of permanent H ispanic or Latino male employees in creased from 100 (3.54 percent) to 10 6 (3.86 percent), which is a difference of +6 employees, +0.32 percent workforce ratio change, and a +6 percent net change. The number of White male employees decreased from 1,198 (42.38 percent) to 1,142 (41.63 percent), which is a difference of -56 employees,

-0.75 percent workforce ratio change, and a -4.67 percent net change. The number of Black or African American male employees decreased from 163 (5.77 percent) to 16 0 (5.83 percent), which is a difference of -3 employees, 0.06 percent workforce ratio change, and a - 1.84 percent net change. The number of Asian male employees decreased from 203 (7.18 percent) to 193 (7.04 percent), which is a difference of -1 0 employees, 0.1 4 percent workforce ratio change, and a - 4.93 percent net change. The number of N ative Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander male employees decreased from 2 ( 0.07 percent) to 1 (0.04 percent), which is a difference of -1 employee, -0.03 percent workforce ratio change, and a -50.00 percent net change. The number of American Indian or Alask a Native male employees decreased from 12 (0.42 percent) to 11 (0.40 percent), which is a difference of -1 employee, -0.02 percent workforce ratio change, and a -8.33 percent net change. The number of male employees who are individuals of two or more races remained at 7 (0.26 percent). 20

Based on a comparative review of the demographic data and CLF, the EEO office determined that triggers exist for the cited minority male groups (Hispanic or Latino, Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander, and American Indian or Alaska Nati ve), because their racial/ethnic group representation in the NRCs workforce is below the applicable CLF percentages (5.17 percent, 0.07 percent, and 0.55 percent).

The number of permanent female employees decreased from 1,118 (39.55 percent) employees to 1,098 (40. 03 percent) employees, which is a difference of -20 employees, 0.4 8 percent workforce ratio change, and a -1.79 percent net change. The number of Hispanic or Latino female employees increased from 71 (2.51 percent) to 73 (2.66 percent), which is a difference of + 2 employees,

+0.15 percent workforce ratio change, and a +2. 82 percent net change. The number of W hite female employees decreased from 615 (21.75 percent) to 588 (21.44 percent), which is a difference of

16 See Table A2, Permanent Workforce by ComponentDistribution by Race, Ethnicity, and Sex (Participation Rate),

October 1, 2019, to September 30, 2020.

17 See Table B2, Permanent Workforce by ComponentDistribution by Disability Status (Participation Rate),

October 1, 2019, to September 30, 2020.

18 See Table B1-2, Total WorkforceDistribution by Disability Status (Inclusion Rate), October 1, 2019, to September 30, 2020.

19 See Table A1.

20 See Table A1.

Page 11

-27 employees, -0.31 percent workforce ratio change, and a - 4.39 percent net change. The number of Black or African American female employees decreased from 290 (10.26 percent) to 290 (10.5 7 percent), which is a difference of 0 employees, 0.31 percent workforce ratio change, and a 0.00 percent net change. The number of Asian fe male employees in creased from 108 (3.82 percent) to 111 (4.05 percent), which is a difference of +3 employees, +0.2 3 percent workforce ratio change, and a

+2.78 percent net change. The number of N ative Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander female employees remained at 1 (0.04 percent), which is a workforce difference of 0 employees, 0.00 percent workforce ratio change, and a 0 percent net change. The number of A merican Indian or Alaska Native employees increased from 8 (0.28 percent) to 10 (0.36 percent), which is a difference of +2 employees,

+0.08 percent workforce ratio change, and +25.00 percent net change. The number of employees of two or more races increased from 6 (0.21 percent) to 7 (0.26 percent), which is a difference of

+1 employee, +0.05 percent workforce ratio change, and a +16.67 percent net change. 21

Based on a review of demographic data, the NRC has not achieved the required Section 501 workforce goals of employing 12.00 percent PWD and 2.00 percent PWTD within the agencys permanent workforce. Although there have been PWD staff decreases, t he NRC is making meaningful progress towards reaching the Section 501 goals.

1.4.3 Temporary Workforce Complement

In FY 2020, the temporary workforce increased from 104 to 123 employees, which is a difference of

+19, a 0 percent temporary workforce ratio change, and a + 18.27 percent workforce net change. The male total temporary workforce consisted of 73 employees (59.35 percent), of whom 5 were Hispanic or Latino (4.07 percent), 62 White (50.41 percent), 3 Black or African American (2.44 percent), and 3 Asian (2.44 percent). The fem ale total temporary workforce consisted of 50 employees (4 0.65 percent), of whom 2 were Hispanic or Latino (1.63 percent), 39 White (31.71 percent), 5 Black or African American (4.07 percent), 3 Asian (2.44 percent), and 1 individual of two or more races (0.81 percent). 22 A review of the temporary workforce participation inclusion rate shows 7 PWD (5.69 percent) employees, which represented a +1 temporary workforce difference, -0.08 percent ratio change, and +16.67 percent net change.23 There was 1 PWTD (0.81 percent) employee, which represented a +1 temporary workforce difference, +0.81 percent ratio change, and 0.00 percent net change. 24

1.4.4 Analysis of Participation Rates for Women and Minorities in NRC Mission-Critical Occupations

The EEO office reviewed and analyzed 6 out of 20 major occupations 25 at the NRC to determine the representation of women, minorities, and persons with disabilities ( PWD and PWTD) 26 in these occupations. The sections below discuss the findings.

21 See Table A1.

22 See Table A1.

23 See Table A1.

24 See Table B1-2.

25 See Table A6P, Mission -Critical Occupations (Permanent) Distribution by Race, Ethnicity, and Sex (Participation Rate), October 1, 2019, to September 30, 2020.

26 See Table B6P, Mission -Critical Occupations (Permanent) Distribution by Disability (Participation Rate),

October 1, 2019, to September 30, 2020.

Page 12 1.4.1.1 Management and Program Analysis (0343)

The total management and program analysis workforce consisted of 107 employees. Eight employees self-identified as PWD (7.48 percent), and 1 employee self-identified as PWTD (0.93 percent). Males accounted for 22 employees (20.56 percent), of whom 0 were Hispanic or Latino (0 percent), 13 White (12.15 percent), 6 Black or African American (5.61 percent), 3 Asian (2.80 percent), 0 Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander (0 percent), 0 American Indian or Alaska Native (0 percent), and 0 individuals of two or more races (0 percent). Females accounted for 85 employees (79.44 percent), of whom 4 were Hispanic or Latino (3.74 percent), 32 White (29.91 percent), 43 Black or African American (40.19 percent), and 4 Asian (3.74 percent). There were no employees who were Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander, American Indian or Alaska Native, or individuals of two or more rac es. The EEO office identified triggers in the management and program analysis occupational category based on a comparison to the occupational CLF (OCLF) for male racial/ethnic groups (Hispanic or Latino, Asian, Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander, American Indian or Alaska Native, and individuals of two or more races) and for females (White, Native Hawaiian or O ther Pacific Islander, American Indian or Alaska Native, and individuals of two or more races). Otherwise, women and minorities are at or above CLF levels. 27

The EEO office reviewed and analyzed five grade levels within the m anagement and program analysis occupational series to determine the representation of women, minorities, and persons with disabilities at different grade levels: 28

• One position (Government Grade (GG)-11) was held by 1 male (White), and the employee did not self-identify as PWD or PWTD.

• Sixteen positions (GG-12) were held by 13 females (1 Hispanic or Latino, 5 White, and 7 Black or African American) and 3 males (2 White and 1 Black or African American). Within this grade level, 2 employees self-identified as PWD (12.50 percent). The representation of females (81.25 percent) and Hispanic or Latino and Black or African American groups (6.25 percent and 43.75 percent) at GG-12 were above the OCLF percentages for females (41.57 percent) and these groups (2.12 percent and 3.79 percent). The White female groups representation (31.25 percent) was below the groups OCLF (32.69 percent). Other minority racial/ethnic groups were not identified at the GG-12 level.

• Forty-one positions (GG-13) were held by 38 females (3 Hispanic or Latino, 12 White, 20 Black or African American, 2 Asian, and 1 unspecified ) and 3 males (2 Black or African American and 1 Asian). Within this grade level, 4 employees self-identified as PWD ( 9.76 percent). The percentages for females (92.68 percent) and the groups identified (7.32 percent, 29.27 percent, 48.78 percent, and 4.88 percent) are at or above the OCLF percentages for females (41.57 percent) and these groups (2.12 percent, 3.79 percent, and 2.46 percent). The White female groups representation (29.27 percent) was below the groups O CLF (32.69 percent).

Three positions (7.32 percent) were held by males (2 Black or African American and 1 Asian).

The percentage for the Black or African American male group (4.88 percent) is above the O CLF percentage for the group (2.95 percent). The percentage for the Asian male group (2.44 percent) is below the OCLF percentage for the group (3.34 percent). Other minority racial/ethnic groups were not identified at the GG-13 level.

27 See Table A6.

28 See Table A6.

Page 13

• Thirty-six positions (GG-14) were held by 26 females (14 White, 11 Black or African American, and 1 Asian). Within this grade level, 2 employees self-identified as PWD ( 5.56 percent), and 1 employee was identified as PWTD (2.78 percent). The percentages for females (72.22 percent) and the groups identified (38.89 percent, 30.56 percent, and 2.78 percent) are above the O CLF percentages for females (41.57) and for these groups (32.69 percent, 3.79 percent, and 2.46 percent). Ten positions (27.78 percent) were held by males (7 White, 2 Black or African American, and 1 Asian). The percentage for the Black or African American male group (5.56 percent) is above the OCLF percentage for the group (2.95 percent). The percentage for the Asian male group (2.78 percent) is below the OCLF percentage for the group (3.34 percent). Other minority groups were not identified at the GG-1 4 level.

• Thirteen positions (GG-15) were held by 8 females (1 White, 5 Black or African American, 1 Asian American, and 1 unspecified). Within this grade level, 0 employees self-identified as PWD or PWTD. The percentages for females (61.54 percent) and the Black or African American and Asian American groups identified (38.46 percent and 7.69 percent) are above the O CLF percentages for females (41.57) and for these groups (3.79 percent and 2.46 percent). The White female group representation (7.69 percent) was below the groups OCLF (32.69 percent).

Five positions (38.46 percent) were held by males (3 White, 1 Black or African American, and 1 Asian). The percentages for the Black or African American male and Asian groups (7.69 percent and 7.69 percent) are above the OCLF percentage for the groups (2.95 percent and 3.34 percent). Other minority groups were not identified at the GG-1 5 level.

1.4.1.2 General Engineering (0801)

The total general engineering workforce consisted of 8 45 employees. Fifty-one employees self-identified as PWD ( 6.04 percent), and 10 employees self-identified as PWTD (1.18 percent). Males accounted for 6 32 employees (74.79 percent), of whom 41 were Hispanic or Latino ( 4.85 percent),

444 White (52.54 percent), 52 Black or African American (6.15 percent), 73 Asian (8.64 percent),

1 Native Hawaiian or O ther Pacific Islander (0.12 percent), 2 American Indian or Alaska Native (0.24 percent), 5 individuals of two or more races (0.59 percent), and 14 employees whose race/ethnicity was unspecified. Females accounted for 213 employees (25.21 percent), of whom 2 5 were Hispanic or Latino (2.9 6 percent), 111 White (13.14 percent), 39 Black or African American (4.62 percent), 25 Asian (2.96 percent), 0 Native Hawaiian or O ther Pacific Islander (0 percent),

2 American Indian or Alaska Native (0.24 percent), 1 individual of two or more races (0. 12 percent), and 10 employees whose race/ethnicity was unspecified. The EEO office identified underrepresentation of minority racial/ethnic groups at the SES, Senior Level (SN), and AD -14, GG -0 7, GG-13, GG-15 levels within the general engineering occupation based on a comparison with the OCLF for females, minorities, PWD, and PWTD employees. The following paragraphs describe the review and analysis of grades within this occupation.

The EEO office reviewed and analyzed 13 grades within the general engineering occupational series to determine the representation of women, minorities, and PWD at different grade levels: 29

• There was no available information on Consultant (EG -00) positions in the statistical workforce data tables.

• There was no available information on Expert (EI-00) positions in the statistical workforce data tables.

29 See Table A6 and Table B6.

Page 14

• Sixty positions (ES-00) were held by 47 (78.33 percent) males (36 White, 5 Black or African American, 5 Asian, and 1 unspecified individual), and 13 (21.67 percent) females (11 White, 1 Black or African American, and 1 Asian). Within this grade level, 3 employees self-identified as PWD (5.00 percent), and 1 employee was identified as PWTD (1.67 percent). The percentage for the Black or African American male racial/ethnic group (8.33 percent) is above the OCLF percentage for the group (3.39 percent). The percentage for the Asian male racial/ethnic group (8.33 percent) is below the OCLF percentage for the group (9.11 percent). The percentages for females (21.67 percent) and the White and Black or African American racial/ethnic groups (1 8.33 percent and 1.67 percent) are above the OCLF percentages for females (11.54 percent) and the female racial/ethnic groups (7.93 percent and 0.91 percent). The percentage for the Asian female racial/ethnic group ( 1.67 percent) is below the OCLF percentage for the group (1.81 percent). Other female and male racial/ethnic groups were not identified at the ES -00 level.

• Four positions (Administratively Determined (AD)-1 3) were held by males (2 Hispanic or Latino and 2 White). Within this grade level, 0 employees self-identified as PWD or PWTD. The percentage for the male racial/ethnic group (50.00 percent) is above the OCLF percentage for the group (4.07 percent). Other female and male racial/ethnic groups were not identified at the AD-13 level.

• Eleven positions (AD-1 4) were held by 10 males (8 White, 1 Asian, and 1 unspecified individual) and 1 female (White). Within this grade level, 1 employee self-identified as PWD ( 9.09 percent).

The percentage for the Asian male racial/ethnic group (9.09 percent) is slightly below the OCLF percentage for the group (9.11 percent). The percentage for the White female group (9.09 percent) is above the OCLF percentage for the group (7.93 percent). Other female and male racial/ethnic groups were not identified at the AD -1 4 level.

• Twenty-three positions (GG-0 7) were held by 1 7 male employees (3 Hispanic or Latino, 11 White, 2 Black or African American, and 1 Asian) and 6 female employees (1 Hispanic or Latino, 2 White, and 3 Black or African American). Within this grade level, 1 employee self-identified as PWD (4.35 percent). The percentage for the Black or African American male racial/ethnic group (8.70 percent) is above the OCLF percentage for the group (3.39 percent).

The percentage for the Asian male racial/ethnic group (4.35 percent) is below the OCLF percentage for the group (9.11 percent). The total percentage for females (26.09 percent) and the percentages for racial/ethnic female groups are above the O CLF percentage for females (11.54 percent) and each racial/ethnic group (0.7 percent, 7.93 percent, and 0.91 percent).

Other female and male racial/ethnic groups were not identified at the GG- 07 level.

• Six positions (GG-0 9) were held by 5 male employees (1 Hispanic or Latino and 4 White) and 1 female (White). Within this grade level, 1 employee self-identified as PWD (16.67 percent).

The total percentages of females (16.67 percent) and White female group ( 16.67 percent) are above the OCLF percentage for females (11.54 percent) and the group (7.93 percent). Other female and male racial/ethnic groups were not identified at the GG-0 9 level.

• Three positions (GG-11) were held by 3 males (1 White, 1 Asian, and 1 individual of two or more races). Within this grade level, 0 employees self-identified as PWD or PWTD. The percentage for the male racial/ethnic group (33.33 percent) is above the OCLF percentage for the Asian and individuals of two or more races groups (9.11 percent and 0. 34 percent). Other female and male racial/ethnic groups were not identified at the GG-1 1 level.

Page 15

• Four positions (GG-12) were held by 3 males (White) and 1 female (Black or African American).

Within this grade level, 0 employees self-identified as PWD or PWTD. The percentage for the Black or African American female racial/ethnic group ( 25.00 percent) is above the OCLF percentage for the group (0.91 percent). Other female and male racial/ethnic groups were not identified at the GG-1 2 level.

• One hundred twenty -six positions (GG-13) were held by 82 (65.08 percent) males (10 Hispanic or Latino, 52 White, 10 Black or African American, 8 Asian, 1 Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander, and 1 unspecified) and 44 females (6 Hispanic or Latino, 15 White, 15 Black or African American, 5 Asian, 1 American Indian or Alaska Native, and 2 unspecified). Within this grade level, 9 employees self-identified as PWD (7.14 percent), and 1 employee was identified as PWTD (0.79 percent). The percentage for the Hispanic or Latino, Black or African American,

Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander male racial/ethnic group (7.94 percent, 7.94 percent and 0.79 percent) is above the OCLF percentage for the group (4.07 percent, 3.39 percent, 0.06 percent, and 0.05 percent). The percentage for the Asian male racial/ethnic group (6.35 percent) is below the OCLF percentage for the group (9.11 percent). The percentages for females (34.92 percent) and the Hispanic or Latino, White, Black or African American, Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander, and American Indian or Alaska Native racial/ethnic groups (4.76 percent, 11.90 percent, 11.90 percent, 3.97 percent, and 0.79 percent) are above the OCLF percentages for females (11.54 percent) and the female racial/ethnic groups (0.70 percent, 7.93 percent, 0.91 percent, 1.81 percent, and 0.05 percent). Other female and male racial/ethnic groups were not identified at the GG -13 level.

• Two hundred eighty-four positions (GG-14) were held by 210 (73.94 percent) males (18 Hispanic or Latino, 1 30 White, 23 Black or African American, 30 Asian, 3 individuals of two or more races, and 6 unspecified) and 74 females (11 Hispanic or Latino, 37 White, 12 Black or African American, 7 Asian, 1 individual of two or more races, and 6 unspecified). Within this grade level, 16 employees self-identified as PWD ( 5.63 percent), and 2 employees were identified as PWTD (0.70 percent). The percentages for the male minority racial/ethnic groups (6.34 percent, 8.10 percent, 10.56 percent, and 1.06 percent) are above the OCLF percentages for the groups (4.07 percent, 3.39 percent, 9.11 percent, and 0.34 percent). The percentages for females (26.06 percent) and the female racial/ethnic groups identified ( 3.87 percent, 13.03 percent, 4.23 percent, 2.46 percent, and 0.35 percent) are above the O CLF percentages for females (11.54 percent) and female racial/ethnic groups (0.70 percent, 7.93 percent, 0.91 percent, 1.81 percent, and 0.06 percent). Other female and male racial/ethnic groups were not identified at the GG-14 level.

• Three hundred seven positions (GG-1 5) were held by 235 (76.55 percent) males (6 Hispanic or Latino, 186 White, 12 Black or African American, 24 Asian, 1 American Indian or Alaska Native, 1 individual of two or more races, and 5 unspecified) and 72 females (7 Hispanic or Latino, 43 White, 7 Black or African American, 12 Asian, 1 American Indian or Alaska Native, and 2 unspecified). Within this grade level, 18 employees self-identified as PWD (5.86 percent), and 6 employees were identified as PWTD (1.95 percent). The percentages for the Black or African American and American Indian or Alaska Native male minority racial/ethnic groups (3.91 percent and 0.3 3 percent) are above the OCLF percentages for the groups (3.39 percent, and 0.05 percent). The percentages for the Hispanic or Latino, Asian, and individual of two or more races male minority racial/ethnic groups (1.95 percent, 7.82 percent, and 0.33 percent) are below the OCLF percentages for the groups (4.07 percent, 9.11 percent, and 0.34 percent). The percentages for females (23.45 percent) and the female racial/ethnic groups identified (2.28 percent, 14.01 percent, 2.28 percent, 3.91 percent, and 0.33 percent) are above the O CLF percentages for females (11.54 percent) and female racial/ethnic groups (0.70 percent,

Page 16 7.93 percent, 0.91 percent, 1.81 percent, and 0.05 percent). Other female and male racial/ethnic groups were not identified at the GG -15 level.

• Seventeen positions (SN-00) were held by 1 6 (94.12 percent) males (1 Hispanic or Latino, 11 White, 3 Asian, and 1 American Indian or Alaska Native) and 1 female (White). Within this grade level, 2 employees self-identified as PWD (11.76 percent). The percentages for the male minority racial/ethnic groups (5.88 percent, 17.65 percent, and 5.88 percent) are above the OCLF percentages for the group (4.07 percent, 9.11 percent, 0.05 percent). The percentages for females (5.88 percent) and White female racial/ethnic group (5.88 percent) are below the OCLF percentages for females (11.54 percent) and the group (7.93 percent). Other female and male racial/ethnic groups were not identified at the SN -00 level.

1.4.1.3 Nuclear Engineering (0840)

The total nuclear engineering workforce consisted of 279 employees. Males accounted for 240 employees (86.02 percent), of whom 1 4 were Hispanic or Latino (5.02 percent), 185 White (6 6.31 percent), 11 Black or African American (3.94 percent), 22 Asian (7.89 percent), 3 American Indian or Alaska Native (1.08 percent), and 5 employees whose race/ethnicity was unspecified.

Females accounted for 39 employees, of whom 4 were Hispanic or Latino (1.43 percent), 18 White (6.45 percent), 10 Black or African American (3.58 percent), 5 Asian (1.79 percent), and 2 employees whose race/ethnicity were unspecified.

The EEO office reviewed and analyzed 13 grades within the nuclear engineering occupational series to determine the representation of women, minorities, and PWD at different grade levels: 30

• There was no available information on EG -00 positions in the statistical workforce data tables.

• There was no available information on EI -00 positions in the statistical workforce data tables.

• Five positions (ES-00) were held by 5 males (4 White and 1 unspecified). No female or other male racial/ethnic groups were identified at the E S-00 level.

• Four positions (AD -13) w ere held by 4 males (3 White and 1 Asian). The Asian male racial/ethnic group (25.00 percent) was above the OCLF for the group (9.11 percent). No female or other male racial/ethnic groups were identified at the AD -13 level.

• Eight positions (AD -14) w ere held by 8 males (1 Hispanic or Latino and 7 White). The Hispanic or Latino male racial/ethnic group (1 2.50 percent) was above the OCLF for the group (4.07 percent). No female or other male racial/ethnic groups were identified at the AD -1 4 level.

• Two positions (GG-0 7) were held by 1 male (White) and 1 female (Asian). No other female or male racial/ethnic groups were identified at the GG-0 7 level.

• One position (GG-1 1) was held by a White male. No other female or male racial/ethnic groups were identified at the GG-1 1 level.

• Three positions (GG-12) w ere held by 2 males (1 Black or African American and 1 American Indian or Alaska Native) and 1 female (Asian). No other female or male racial/ethnic groups were identified at the GG-12 level.

30 See Table A6 and Table B6.

Page 17

• Ninety-six positions (GG-13) were held by 80 (83.33 percent) males (9 Hispanic or Latino, 58 White, 6 Black or African American, 4 Asian,1 A merican Indian or Alaska Native, and 2 unspecified) and 16 females (1 Hispanic or Latino, 4 White, 7 Black or African American, 3 Asian, and 1 employee whose race/ethnicity is unspecified). The percentages for the male Hispanic or Latino, Black or African American, and American Indian or Alaska Native racial/ethnic groups (9.38 percent, 6.25 percent, and 1.04 percent) are above the O CLF percentages for the groups (4.07 percent, 3.39 percent, and 0.05 percent ). The percentage for the male Asian racial/ethnic group (4.17 percent) is below the OCLF percentage for the group (9.11 percent). The percentages for females (16.67 percent) and female racial/ethnic groups (1.04 percent, 7.29 percent, and 3.13 percent) are above the OCLF percentages for females (11.54 percent) and female racial/ethnic groups (0.7 percent, 0.91 percent, and 1.81 percent).

The percentage for White females (4.17 percent) is below the OCLF percentage for the White female group (7.93 percent). No other female or male racial/ethnic groups were identified at the GG-1 3 level.

• One hundred twenty-two positions (GG-1 4) were held by 10 8 (8 8.52 percent) males (3 Hispanic or Latino, 90 White, 3 Black or African American, 11 Asian, and 1 American Indian or Alaska Native) and 14 females (3 Hispanic or Latino, 8 White, 2 Black or African American, and 1 unspecified). The percentages for the male Black or African American and American Indian or Alaska Native racial/ethnic groups (2.46 percent and 0.82 percent) are above the O CLF percentages for the groups (3.39 percent and 0.05 percent). The percentages for the male Hispanic or Latino and Asian racial/ethnic groups (2.46 percent and 9.02 percent) are below the OCLF percentages for the groups (4. 07 percent and 9.11 percent). The percentages for females (11.48 percent) and the female White racial/ethnic group (6.58 percent) are below the OCLF percentages for females (11.54 percent) and the White female group (7.93 percent). The percentages for the female Hispanic or Latino and Black or African American racial/ethnic groups (2.46 percent and 1.64 percent) are above the OCLF percentages for females (11.54 percent) and female racial/ethnic groups (0.7 percent and 0.91 percent). No other female or male racial/ethnic groups were identified at the GG-14 level.

• Thirty-seven positions (GG-1 5) were held by 30 (8 1.08 percent) males (1 Hispanic or Latino, 20 White, 1 Black or African American, 6 Asian, and 2 unspecified) and 7 females (6 White and 1 Black or African American). The percentage for the male Asian racial/ethnic group (16.22 percent) is above the OCLF percentage for the group (9.11 percent). The percentages for the male Hispanic or Latino and Black or African American racial/ethnic groups (2.70 percent and 2.70 percent), are below the OCLF percentages for each group (4.07 percent and 3.39 percent). The percentages for females (18.92 percent) and female White and Black or African American racial/ethnic groups (16.22 percent and 2.70 percent) are above the OCLF percentages for females (11.54 percent) and each female racial/ethnic group (7.93 percent and 0.91 percent). No other female or male racial/ethnic groups were identified at the GG-1 5 level.

• One position (SN-00) was held by a White male. Within this grade level, 0 employees self-identified as PWD or PWTD. No female or other male racial/ethnic groups were identified at the SN-00 level.

1.4.1.4 General Attorney (0905)

The total general attorney workforce consiste d of 91 employees. Males accounted for 42 employees (46.15 percent), of whom 1 was Hispanic or Latino (1.10 percent), 37 White (40.66 percent), 2 Asian (2.20 percent), and 2 American Indian or Alaska Native (2.20 percent). Females accounted for 49 employees, of whom 1 was Hispanic or Latino (1.10 percent), 41 White (45.05 percent), 3 Black or

Page 18 African American (3.30 percent), 2 Asian (2.20 percent), and 2 American Indian or Alaska Native (2.20 percent).

The EEO office reviewed and analyzed nine grades within the general attorney occupational series to determine the representation of women, minorities, and PWDs at different grade levels:

• There was no available information on EG -00 positions in the statisti cal workforce data tables.

• Ten positions (ES-00) were held by 3 (30.00 percent) males (2 White, 1 American Indian or Alaska Native) and 7 females (White). The percentages for females (70.00 percent) and the female racial/ethnic group (70.00 percent) are above the O CLF percentages for females (32.77 percent) and the female racial/ethnic group ( 26.40 percent). Other female and male racial/ethnic groups were not identified at the ES -00 level.

• Six positions ( Administrative Judge) ( AJ )-00) were held by males (White).

• One position (GG-1 1) was held by a female (White). Other female and male racial/ethnic groups were not identified at the GG-1 1 level.

• Four positions (GG-13) were held by 3 (75.00 percent) males (White) and 1 female (White). The percentages for females (25.00 percent) and the White female racial/ethnic group (25.00 percent) are below the OCLF percentages for females (26.40 percent). Other female and male racial/ethnic groups were not identified at the GG -13 level.

• Nineteen positions (GG-14) were held by 5 ( 26.32 percent) males (3 White and 2 Asian) and 14 females (12 White and 2 American Indian or Alaska Native). The percentage for the male minority racial/ethnic group (10.53 percent) is above the O CLF percentage for the group (1.82 percent). The percentages for females (73.68 percent) and female racial/ethnic groups (6 3.16 percent and 10.53 percent) are above the OCLF percentages for females (32.77 percent) and the groups (26.40 percent and 0.12 percent). Other female and male racial/ethnic groups were not identified at the GG-14 level.

• Forty-five positions (GG-1 5) were held by 20 (4 4.44 percent) males (1 Hispanic or Latino, 18 White, and 1 American Indian or Alaska Native) and 27 females (1 Hispanic or Latino, 19 White, 3 Black or African, 2 Asian, and 2 unspecified). The percentage for the male American Indian or Alaska Native racial/ethnic group (2.22 percent) is above the O CLF percentage for the group (0.12 percent). The percentage for the male Hispanic or Latino group (2.22 percent) is below the OCLF percentage for the group (2.51 percent). The percentages for females (60. 00 percent) and for Hispanic, White, Black or African American, and Asian females (2.22 percent, 42.22 percent, 6.67 percent, and 4.44 percent) are above the OCLF percentages for females (32.77 percent) and the racial/ethnic groups (1.78 percent, 26.40 percent, 2.55 percent, and 1.67 percent). Other female and male racial/ethnic groups were not identified at the GG-1 5 level.

• One position Inspector General (IG -00) w as held by a male (White). Other female and male racial/ethnic groups were not identified at the I G-00 level.

• Five positions (SN-00) were held by 3 (60.00 percent) males (White) and 2 (40 percent) females (White). Within this grade level, 1 employee self-identified as PWD (20.00 percent). The percentages for females (40.00 percent) and the White female racial/ethnic group (4 0 percent) are above the O CLF percentages for females (32.77 percent), and the White female

Page 19 racial/ethnic group (26.40 percent). Other female and male racial/ethnic groups were not identified at the SN-00 level.

1.4.1.5 General Physical Science (1301)

The total general phys ical science workforce consiste d of 109 employees. Six employees self-identified as PWD (5.50 percent), and 1 employee self-identified as PWTD (0.92 percent). Males accounted for 72 employees (66.06 percent), of whom 3 were Hispanic or Latino (2.75 percent), 57 White (52.29 percent), 5 Black or African American (4.59 percent), 6 Asian (5.50 percent), and 1 unspecified.

The percentage for the male Asian racial/ethnic group (5.50 percent) is above the OCLF percentage for the group (3.69 percent). The percentages for the male Hispanic or Latino and Black or African American racial/ethnic groups (2.75 percent and 4.59 percent) are below the OCLF percentages for each group (3.69 percent and 6.56 percent). Females accounted for 37 employees (33.94 percent), of whom 6 were Hispanic or Latino (5.50 percent), 17 White (15.60 percent), 9 Black or African American (8.26 percent), 4 Asian (3.67 percent),1 American Indian or Alaska Native (0.92 percent), and 6 unspecified. The percentages for female Hispanic or Latino, Black or African American, Asian, and American Indian or Alaska Native racial/ethnic groups (5.50 percent, 8.26 percent, 3.67 percent, and 0.92 percent) are above the OCLF percentages for female racial/ethnic groups ( 2.87 percent, 5.33 percent, 2.46 percent, and 0.82 percent). The percentages for the all females (33.94 percent) and White racial/ethnic group (15.60 percent) are below the OCLF percentages for all females (38.74 percent) and the group ( 21.72 percent). The following paragraphs describe the review and analysis of grades within this occupation.

The EEO office reviewed and analyzed 109 grades within the general physical science occupational series to determine the representation of women, minorities, and PWD at different grade levels:

• There was no available information on EG -00 positions in the statistical workforce data tables.

• There was no available information on EI -00 positions in the statistical workforce data tables.

• Six positions (ES-00) were held by 2 (33.33 percent) males (1 White and 1 Black or African American) and 4 females (3 White and 1 American Indian or Alaska Native). Within this grade level, 1 employee self-identified as PWD (16.67 percent). The percentage for male Black or African American racial/ethnic group (16.67 percent) is above the O CLF percentage for the male Black or African American racial/ethnic group (2.13 percent). The percentages for females (66.67 percent) and the female racial/ethnic groups (50.00 percent, 16.67 percent) are above the OCLF percentages for females (32.77 percent) and the female racial/ethnic groups (26.40 percent and 0.12 percent). Other female and male racial/ethnic groups were not identified at the ES-00 level.

• One position (GG-0 7) was held by 1 Hispanic or Latino male. Other female and male racial/ethnic groups were not identified at the GG -0 7 level.

• Two positions (GG-0 9) were held by 2 (100.00 percent) males (1 White and 1 Asian). The percentage for the male Asian racial/ethnic group (50.00 percent) is above the OCLF percentage for the group (1.82 percent). Other female and male racial/ethnic groups were not identified at the GG-0 9 level.

• Twenty positions (GG-13) were held by 9 (45.00 percent) males (6 White, 2 Black or African American, and 1 Asian) and 11 females (4 Hispanic or Latino, 3 White, and 4 Black or African American). The percentages for male Black or African American and Asian racial/ethnic groups

Page 20 (10.00 percent and 5.00 percent) are above the OCLF percentage for the male Black or African American and Asian racial/ethnic groups (2.13 percent and 1.82 percent). The percentages for females (55.00 percent) and the female Hispanic or Latino and Black or African American racial/ethnic groups (20.00 percent and 20.00 percent) are above the OCLF percentages for females (38.74 percent). The White female racial/ethnic group (15.00 percent) is below the OCLF percentage for the group (2 7.61 percent). Other female and male racial/ethnic groups were not identified at the GG-13 level.

• Forty-four positions (GG-14) were held by 3 1 (7 0.45 percent) males (2 Hispanic or Latino, 24 White, 2 Black or African American, and 3 Asian) and 13 females (2 Hispanic or Latino, 6 White, 2 Black or African American, and 3 Asian). The percentages for male Hispanic or Latino and Black or African American racial/ethnic groups (4.55 percent and 4.55 percent) are above the OCLF percentages for the male Hispanic or Latino and Black or African American racial/ethnic groups (2.32 percent and 1.41 percent). The percentage for the male Asian racial/ethnic group (6.82 percent) is below the OCLF percentage for the male Asian racial/ethnic group (8.18 percent). The percentages for the female Hispanic or Latino, Black or African American, and Asian racial/ethnic groups (4.55 percent, 4.55 percent, and 6.82 percent) are above the OCLF percentages for the female racial/ethnic groups (1.92 percent, 2.14 percent, and 6.67 percent). The percentages for all females (29.55 percent) and the White racial/ethnic group (13.64 percent) is below the OCLF percentages for all females (38.74 percent) and the White racial/ethnic group (27.61 percent). Other female and male racial/ethnic groups were not identified at the GG-1 4 level.

• Thirty-three positions (GG-15) were held by 25 (75. 76 percent) males (23 White, 1 Asian, and 1 unspecified) and 8 females (4 White, 3 Black or African American, and 1 Asian). The percentage for the Asian male racial/ethnic group (3.03 percent) is below the OCLF percentage for the group (8.18 percent). The percentage for the female Black or African American (9.09 percent) racial/ethnic groups is above the OCLF percentage for the racial/ethnic group (2.14 percent). The percentage for females (24.24 percent) and the percentages for White and Asian females (12.12 percent and 3.03 percent) are below the O CLF percentages for females (38.74 percent) and the racial/ethnic groups (27.61 percent and 6.67 percent). Other female and male racial/ethnic groups were not identified at the GG -15 level.

• Three positions (SN-00) were held by 2 (6 6.67 percent) males (White) and 1 female (White).

The percentage for total representation of females (33.33 percent) is below the OCLF percentage for females (38.74 percent). The percentage for White females (33.33 percent) is above the O CLF percentage for the racial/ethnic group (27.61 percent). Other female and male racial/ethnic groups were not identified at the SN -00 level.

1.4.1.6 Health Physics (1306)

The total health physics workforce consisted of 136 employees. Males accounted for 85 employees (6 2.50 percent), of whom 7 were Hispanic or Latino (5.15 percent), 65 White (47.79 percent), 5 Black or African American (3.68 percent), 7 Asian (5.15 percent), and 1 unspecified. The percentage for the male Hispanic or Latino and Black or African American groups (5.15 percent and 3.68 percent) are above the OCLF percentages for the group (2.32 percent and 1.41 percent). The percentage for the male Asian racial/ethnic group (5.15 percent) is below the OCLF percentage for the group (8.18 percent). Females accounted for 51 employees (37.50 percent), of whom 1 was Hispanic or Latino (0.74 percent), 36 White (26.47 percent), 12 Black or African American (8.82 percent), and 2 Asian (1.47 percent). The percentage for the female Black or African American racial/ethnic group (8.82 percent) is above the OCLF percentage for the group (2.14 percent). The percentages for

Page 21 females (37.50 percent) and the female Hispanic or Latino, White, and Asian racial/ethnic groups (0.74 percent, 26.47 percent, and 1.47 percent) are below the OCLF percentages for females (38.74 percent) and the female racial/ethnic groups (1.92 percent, 27.61 percent, and 6.67 percent).

The following paragraphs describe t he review and analysis of grades within this occupation.

The EEO office reviewed and analyzed nine grades within the health physics occupational series to determine the representation of women, minorities, and persons wi th disabilities at different grade levels:

• There was no available information on EG -00 positions in the statistical workforce data tables.

• There was no available information on EI -00 positions in the statistical workforce data tables.

• Three positions (GG-07) were held by 1 male (White) and 2 females (1 White and 1 Asian). The percentages for females (66.67 percent) and the female Asian racial/ethnic group (33.33 percent) is above the OCLF percentages for females (15.20 percent) and the Asian racial/ethnic group (6.67 percent). The percentage for female White racial/ethnic group (33.33 percent) is below the OCLF percentages for the female racial/ethnic group (27.61 percent). No other male or female groups were identified at the GG-0 7 level.

• One position (GG-0 9) was held by 1 White male. No other male or female groups were identified at the GG-0 9 level.

• Two positions (GG-1 1) were held by 2 males (White). No other male or female groups were identified at the GG-11 level.

• Fifty-four positions (GG-13) were held by 34 (62.96 percent) males (5 Hispanic or Latino, 23 White, 2 Black or African American, and 4 Asian) and 2 0 females (17 White and 3 Black or African American). The percentage for the male Hispanic or Latino and Black or African American groups (9.26 percent and 3.70 percent) are above the OCLF percentages for the group (2.32 percent and 1.41 percent). The percentage for the male Asian racial/ethnic group (7.41 percent) is below the OCLF percentage for the group (8.18 percent). Females accounted for 20 employees (37.04 percent), of whom 17 are White (31.48 percent) and 3 are Black or African American (5.56 percent). The percentage for females ( 37.04 percent) is below the OCLF percentages for females (38.74 percent). The percentages for female White and Black or African American racial/ethnic groups (31.48 percent and 5.56 percent) are above the OCLF percentages for the female racial/ethnic groups (27.61 percent, and 2.14 percent).

• Fifty-seven positions (GG-14) were held by 3 5 (61.40 percent) males (2 Hispanic or Latino, 27 White, 3 Black or African American, 2 Asian, and 1 unspecified) and 22 females (1 Hispanic or Latino, 14 White, 6 Black or African American, and 1 Asian). The percentage for the male Hispanic or Latino and Black or African American groups ( 3.51 percent and 5.26 percent) are above the OCLF percentages for the group (2.32 percent and 1.41 percent). The percentage for the male Asian racial/ethnic group (3.51 percent) is below the OCLF percentage for the group (8.18 percent). Females accounted for 22 employees (38.60 percent), of whom 1 is Hispanic or Latino (1.75 percent), 14 White (24.56 percent), 6 Black or African American (10.53 percent),

and 1 Asian (1.75 percent). The percentages for females (38.60 percent) and the female Hispanic or Latino, White, and Asian racial/ethnic groups (1.75 percent, 24.56 percent, and 1.75 percent) are below the OCLF percentages for females (38.74 percent) and the female racial/ethnic groups (1.92 percent, 27.61 percent, and 1.83 percent). Other female and male racial/ethnic groups were not identified at the GG -14 level.

Page 22

• Eighteen positions (GG-1 5) were held by 11 (61.11 percent) males (10 White and 1 Asian) and 7 females (4 White and 3 Black or African American). The percentage for the male Asian racial/ethnic group (5.56 percent) is below the OCLF percentage for the group (8.18 percent).

Females accounted for 7 employees (38.89 percent), of whom there were 4 White (22.22 percent), and 3 Black or African American (16.67 percent). The percentage for females (38.89 percent) is above the OCLF percentage for females (38.74 percent). The percentages for the female White and Black or African American racial/ethnic groups (22.22 percent and 16.67 percent) are above the OCLF percentages for females ( 12.31 percent and 0.14 percent).

Other female and male racial/ethnic groups were not identified at the GG -15 level.

• One position (SN-00) w as held by 1 White male. Other female and male racial/ethnic groups were not identified at the SN-00 level.

1.4.1.7 Information Technology Management (2210)

The total information technology management workforce consisted of 1 51 employees. Males accounted for 98 employees (64.90 percent), of whom 7 were Hispanic or Latino (4.64 percent), 58 White (38.41 percent), 17 Black or African American (11.26 percent), 14 Asian (9.27 percent), and 2 unspecified. Males accounted for 98 employees (64. 90 percent), of whom 7 were Hispanic or Latino (4.64 percent), 58 white (38.41 percent), 17 Black or African American (11.26 percent), and 14 Asian (9.27 percent). The percentages for Black or African American and Asian groups (11.26 percent and 9.27 percent) are above the OCLF percentages for the groups (6.51 percent and 5.11 percent). The percentage for the Hispanic or Latino racial/ethnic group (4.64 percent) is below the OCLF percentage for the group (5.31 percent).

Females accounted for 53 employees (35.10 percent), of whom 2 were Hispanic or Latino (1.32 percent), 29 White (19.21 percent), 15 Black or African American (9.93 percent), and 7 Asian (4.64 percent). The percentages for females (3 5.10 percent) and the female Black or African American, and Asian racial/ethnic groups (9.93 percent and 4.64 percent) are above the OCLF percentages for females (29.58 percent) and the female racial/ethnic groups (4.36 percent and 1.55 percent). The percentages for female Hispanic or Latino and White racial/ethnic groups (1.32 percent and 19.21 percent) are below the OCLF percentages for the female racial/ethnic groups (2.13 percent and 21.09 percent). The following paragraphs describe the review and analysis of grades within this occupation.

• Two positions (ES-00) were held by 2 males (White). Other female and male racial/ethnic groups were not identified at the ES -00 level.

• One position (GG-07) was held by 1 male (Asian). No other male or female groups were identified at the GG-0 7 level.

• Three positions (GG-11) were held by 2 males (White) and 1 female (White). The percentage for females (33.33 percent) is above the OCLF percentage for females (29.58 percent). The percentage for the female White racial/ethnic group (33.33 percent) is above the OCLF for the female White racial/ethnic group (21.09 percent). No other male or female groups were identified at the GG-11 level.

• Five positions (GG-1 2) were held by 3 males (1 White,1 Black or African American, and 1 Asian), and 2 females (1 White and 1 Black or African American). The percentages for females (40.00 percent) and the female Black or African American racial/ethnic group (20.00 percent) are above the OCLF percentage for females (29.58 percent) and the group (4.36 percent). The percentage for the female White racial/ethnic group ( 20.00 percent) is below

Page 23 the OCLF percentage for the group (21.09 percent). No other male or female groups were identified at the GG-12 level.

• Thirty-four positions (GG -13) were held by 19 (55.88 percent) males (3 Hispanic or Latino, 9 White, 5 Black or African American, and 2 Asian) and 15 females (1 Hispanic or Latino, 6 White, 7 Black or African American, and 1 Asian). The percentages for the male Hispanic or Latino, Black or African American, and Asian groups (8.82 percent, 14.71 percent, and 5.88 percent) are above the OCLF percentages for the groups (5.31 percent, 6.51 percent, and 5.11 percent). The percentages for females (44.12 percent) and the female Hispanic or Latino, Black or African American, and Asian racial/ethnic groups (2. 94 percent, 20.59 percent, and 2.94 percent) are above the OCLF percentages for females ( 29.58 percent) and the female racial/ethnic groups (2.13 percent, 4.36 percent, and 1.55 percent). The percentage for the female White racial/ethnic group (17.65 percent) is below the OCLF percentage for the group (21.09 percent).

• Sixty-two positions (GG-14) were held by 3 7 (59.68 percent) males (3 Hispanic or Latino, 19 White, 6 Black or African American, 8 Asian, and 1 unspecified) and 25 females ( 1 Hispanic or Latino, 14 White, 6 Black or African American, and 4 Asian). The percentages for the male Black or African American and Asian racial/ethnic groups (9.68 percent and 12.90 percent) are above the OCLF percentages for the groups (6.51 percent and 5.11 percent). The percentage for the male Hispanic or Latino racial/ethnic group (4.84 percent) is below the OCLF percentage for the group (5.31 percent). Females accounted for 25 employees (40.32 percent), of whom there were 1 Hispanic or Latino (1.61 percent), 14 White (22.58 percent), 6 Black or African American (9.68 percent), and 4 Asian (6.45 percent). The percentages for females and the female White, Black or African American, and Asian racial/ethnic groups are above the OCLF percentages for females ( 29.58 percent) and the female racial/ethnic groups ( 21.09 percent, 4.36 percent, and 1.55 percent). The percentage for the female Hispanic or Latino racial/ethnic group (1.61 percent) is below the OCLF for the group (2.13 percent). Other female and male racial/ethnic groups were not identified at the GG -14 level.

• Forty-two positions (GG-1 5) were held by 33 (78.57 percent) males (1 Hispanic or Latino, 25 White, 4 Black or African American, 2 Asian, and 1 unspecified) and 9 (21.43 percent) females (6 White, 1 Black or African American, and 2 Asian). The percentage for the male Black or African American group ( 9.52 percent) is above the OCLF percentage for the group (6.51 percent). The percentages for the male Hispanic or Latino and Asian racial/ethnic groups (2.38 percent and 4.76 percent) are below the OCLF percentages for each group (5.31 percent and 5.11 percent). The percentage for the female Asian racial/ethnic group (4.76 percent) is above the OCLF percentage for the group (1.55 percent). The percentages for females (21.43 percent) and female White and Black or African American racial/ethnic groups ( 14.29 percent and 2.38 percent) are below the OCLF percentages for females (27.61 percent) and for each group (21.09 percent and 4.36 percent). Other female and male racial/ethnic groups were not identified at the GG-1 5 level.

• Two positions (SN -00) were held by 1 male (Black or African American ) and 1 female (White).

Other female and male racial/ethnic groups were not identified at the SN -00 level.

Page 24 2 ANALYSIS OF PARTICIPATION RATES FOR WOMEN, MINORITIES, AND INDIVIDUALS WITH DISABILITIES IN NRC STANDARD OCCUPATIONS

The EEO office reviewed and analyzed the NRCs standard occupations 31 to determine the representation of women, minorities, and individuals with disabilities. No review was necessary for several occupational categories (i.e., sales, craft, operatives, and laborers and helpers) because they do not apply to the NRC. The EEO office conducted a full review of the remaining f ive applicable occupational categories. The sections below discuss these findings.

2.1 Executive/Senior Level Officials and M anagers

The EEO office reviewed the agencys senior grade levels to determine the representation of women, minorities, and individuals with disabilities. One hundred forty-one senior grade level positions were held by 102 males (72.34 percent), who belonged to the following racial/ethnic groups: 3 Hispanic or Latino, 78 White, 9 Black or African American, 8 Asian, 1 American Indian or Alaska Native, and 3 unspecified. Th ere were 39 females, who belonged to the following racial/ethnic groups: 32 White, 1 Black or African American, 3 Asian, 1 individual of two or more races, and 1 unspecified.

In 2020, the NRC had 113 Senior Executive Service (SES) employees. Males accounted for 75 of these employees (66.37 percent) of whom there were 57 White (50.44 percent), 9 Black or African Americans (7.96 percent), 6 Asian (5.31 percent), and 1 American Indian (0.88 percent). Females accounted for 38 SES employees (33.63 percent) of whom there were 31 White (27.43 percent),

1 Black or African American (0.88 percent), 3 Asian (2.65 percent), 1 American Indian (0.88 percent), 1 individual of two or more races (0.88 percent), and 1 unspecified. 32 A review of SES data for the past 5 years reveals similar gender and racial/ethnic percentages.

In 2020, Fedweek featured an article referencing Federal Governmentw ide SES representation, which reflects similar employee trends: gender distribution64.54 percent male and 35.45 percent female; and race/ethnicityWhite (78.64 percent), Black or African American (8.04 percent), Asian (4.62 percent), and Hispanic or Latino (2.95 percent). 33 The EEO office identified continuing disparities in the percentages of women and minorities in the agencys SES occupational category. Government statistics show that SES employees 34 in the Federal Government workforce decreased from 21 percent in FY 2016 to 20.7 percent in FY 2017. The overall distribution of the SES remains 66 percent male and 34 percent female. The percentages for minorities in the SES workforce by race/ethnicity are as follows: 10.4 percent Black or African American, 4.6 percent Hispanic or Latino, 3.5 percent Asian, 0.2 percent Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander, 1.2 percent American Indian or Alaska Native, and 0.8 percent of two or more races.

Within the SES group, 105 self-identified as no disability ( 92.92 percent), 1 employee did not self-identify this status (0.88 percent), 7 employees self-identified as PWD (6.19 percent), and 1 employee self-identified as PWTD (0.88 percent). 35

31 Table A3, Occupational CategoriesDistribution by Race, Ethnicity and Sex (Participation Rate), October 1, 2019, to September 30, 2020.

32 See Table A7, Senior Grade Levels by Race, Ethnicity, and Sex (Participation Rate), October 1, 2019, to September 30, 2020. See also Table A4, Senior Pay & General (GS) Grades, by Race, Ethnicity, and Sex (Participation Rate), October 1, 2019, to September 30, 2020.

33 See Fedweek, Facts About the Senior Executive Service (SES), October 29, 2018.

34 See OPMs 2017 Federal Equal Opportunity Recruitment Program ( FEORP) report and Federal employment reports that cover October 1, 2016, through September 30, 2017.

35 See Table B3, Occupational Categories Distribution by Disability (Participation Rate), October 1, 2019 to September 30, 2020.

Page 25 In 2018, the agency changed the SES Candidate Development Program ( CDP) process to address root causes of the disproportionate dropout rate among female candidates. The NRC selected 25 Federal employees (23 internal and 2 external) to participate in its 13th SES CDP, 36 and this class graduated in June 2020. The selections included 10 males (8 White, 1 Asian, and 1 American Indian or Alaska Native) and 15 females (10 White, 3 Black or African American, 1 Asian, and 1 individual of two or more races). The NRC expects increased participation of women and minorities in future SES CDPs.

In 2020, the NRC devised a strategy to affect SES replacement trends by requiring office management to develop succession planning strategies that help generate a pool of skilled women and minorities to increase diversity in the workforce and within the SES ranks (e.g., identify skill gaps; provide cross-train ing; and offer training, development, and career ladder opportunities). The NRC conducts an SES CDP when it is determined by the Executive Resources Board as part of succession planning. The SES CDP is announced in USAJOBS to recruit qualified individuals to be selected to participate, evaluated regularly, and reported on as part of the annual Federal E qual Opportunity Recruitment Program (FEORP ) report 37 submitted to OPM. The agency also collects demographic data on the SES CDP participants (i.e., race, gender, national origin, veteran status, persons with disabilities). The SES CDP provides a mix of in terage ncy leadership training, on-the -job executive-level developmental rotation assignments, and opportunities for self-development through mentoring and individualized learning. Upon completion of the SES CDP, candidates submit a certification package that includes a narrative of their executive core qualifications, documentation of their participation in the SESCDP, and endorsement by the NRC Executive Resources Board for review and certification by OPMs Qualifications Review Board (QRB). QRB certified candidates may receive an initial career SES appointment without further competition.QRB certification does not guarantee placement in the SES.

SES certification does not guarantee appointment to an SES position. Based on a comparative review of the NRCs demographic data and the FEVS Governmentwide Management Report statistics published by OPM in October 2019, the EEO office determined that triggers exist at the NRC regarding in the representation of females and minorities within the SES. The EEO office also determined that there are triggers related to the representation of PWD and PWTD based on the disparities identified when comparing the percentage of SES employees who are PWD and PWTD to employees who self-identified as not having a disability.

2.2 Professionals

The NRC professional occupational workforce consists of 1,671 employees. Males accounted for 1,207 employees (72.23 percent), and females accounted for 464 employees (27.77 percent). 38 These employees comprised the following races and ethnicities :

• White employees8 37 were males (50.09 percent), and 256 were females (15.32 percent).

• Black or African American employees 89 were males (5.33 percent), and 93 were females (5.57 percent).

• Asian employees168 were males (10.05 percent), and 58 were females ( 3.47 percent).

• Hispanic or Latino employees8 1 were males (4.85 percent), and 39 were females (2.33 percent).

36 See Yellow Announcement-1 8-0110, Senior Executive Service Candidate Development Program Selections, dated November 28, 2018.

37 See the NRCs 2020 FEORP report (ML19330F410) covering October 1, 2019, through September 30, 2020.

38 See Table A3.

Page 26

• American Indian or Alaska Native employees 7 were males (0.42 percent), and 5 were females ( 0.30 percent).

• Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander1 was male (0.06 percent), and 0 were females.

• Individuals of two or more races5 were males (0.30 percent), and 2 were females (0.12 percent).

• 30 employees were not specified in Table A3.

Within the professional occupation group, 1,504 employees self-identified as no disability (90.01 percent), 53 employees did not self-identify their status (3.17 percent), 114 employees self-identified as PWD (6.82 percent), and 19 employees self-identified as PWTD (1.14 percent). 39

Based on a comparative review of the demographic data, the EEO office determined that triggers exist in the representation of females and male minority racial/ethnic groups. The EEO office also identified a trigger related to the PWD and PWTD groups based on the disparities found when comparing the percentage of professional occupational employees who are PWD and PWTD to employees who self-identified as not having a disability.

2.3 Technicians

The NRC technician s occupational workforce consists of 3 employees, 2 males (66.67 percent) and 1 female (33.33 percent). 40 These employees comprised the following races and ethnicities :

• White employees1 was male (33.33 percent), and 0 were females (0.00 percent).

• Black or African American employees 0 were males (0.00 percent), and 1 was female (33.33 percent).

• Asian employeesNone.

• Hispanic or Latino employees1 was male (33.33 percent), and 0 were females ( 0.00 percent).

• American Indian or Alaska Native employees None.

• Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific IslanderNone.

• Individuals of two or more racesNone.

Within the t echnicians occupation group, 1 employee self-identified as no disability ( 33.33 percent),

2 employees did not self-identify their status (66.67 percent). No employees self-identified as PWD or PWTD. 41

Based on a comparative review of the demographic data, the EEO office did not determine that triggers exist in the representation of females, minorities, or employees who are PWD and PWTD.

39 See Table B3.

40 See Table A3.

41 See Table B3.

Page 27 2.4 Administrative Support Workers

The NRC administrative workers occupational workforce consists of 184 employees. Males accounted for 12 employees (6.52 percent), and females accounted for 172 employees (93.48 percent). 42 These employees comprised the following races and ethnicities :

• White employees5 were males (2.72 percent), and 98 were females (53.26 percent).

• Black or African American employees 4 were males (2.17 percent), and 45 were females (24.46 percent).

• Asian employees0 were males (0.00 percent), and 15 were females ( 8.15 percent).

• Hispanic or Latino employees1 was male (0.54 percent), and 9 were females ( 4.89 percent).

• American Indian or Alaska Native employees 0 were males (0.00 percent), and 3 were females ( 1.63 percent).

• Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander0 were males (0.0 0 percent), and 1 was female (0.54 percent),

• Individuals of two or more races2 were males (1.09 percent), and 0 were females (0.00 percent).

• 1 employee was not specified in Table A3.

Within the administrative workers occupation group, 149 employees self-identified as no disability (80.98 percent), 8 employees did not self-identify their status ( 4.35 percent), 27 employees self-identified as PWD ( 14.67 percent), and 4 employees self-identified as PWTD ( 2.17 percent). 43

Based on a comparative review of the demographic data, the EEO office did not determine that triggers exist in the representation of females and male minority racial/ethnic groups. The EEO office identified a trigger related to the PWD and PWTD groups based on the disparities found when comparing the percentage of administrative employees who are PWD and PWTD to employees who self-identified as not having a disability.

2.5 Service Workers

The NRC service workers occupational workforce consists of 35 employees. Males accounted for 29 employees (82.86 percent), and females accounted for 6 employees (17.14 percent). 44 These employees comprised the following races and ethnicities :

• White employees21 were males (60.00 percent), and 2 were females (5.71 percent).

• Black or African American employees 4 were males (11.43 percent), and 4 were females (11.43 percent).

42 See Table A3.

43 See Table B3.

44 See Table A3.

Page 28

• Asian employees1 was male (2.86 percent), and 0 were females ( 0.00 percent).

• Hispanic or Latino employees3 were males (8.57 percent), and 0 were femal es (0.00 percent).

• American Indian or Alaska Native employees None.

• Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific IslanderNone.

• Individuals of two or more racesNone.

Within the service workers group, 33 employees self-identified as no disability ( 94.29 percent),

2 employees did not self-identify their status (5.71 percent), and 0 employees self-identified as PWD or PWTD. 45

Based on a comparative review of the demographic data, the EEO office determined that triggers exist in the representation of females and male minority racial/ethnic groups. The EEO office also identified a trigger related to the PWD and PWTD groups based on the disparities found when comparing the percentage of service workers who are PWD and PWTD to employees who self-identified as not having a disability.

3 ANALYSIS OF PARTICIPATION RATES FOR WOMEN AND MINORITIES IN AD 13-14 POSITIONS

The EEO office reviewed and analyzed the NRCs AD-13 and AD -14 permanent positions 46 to identify the representation of females, minorities, and persons with disabilities. The total AD permanent workforce consisted of 28 employees. Males accounted for 27 employees (96.43 percent), of whom 3 are Hispanic or Latino (10.71 percent), 21 White (75.00 percent), and 2 Asian (7.14 percent). There was 1 White female (3.57 percent). 47

The AD-13 series consisted of 8 male employees, 2 of whom w ere Hispanic or Latino (2 5.00 percent),

5 White (62.50 percent), and 1 Asian (12.50 percent). No female employees were identified at the AD-13 level. 48 The AD-14 series consisted of 20 employees. Males accounted for 19 (95.00 percent) of the employees, of whom 1 was Hispanic or Latino (5. 00 percent), 16 were White (80.00 percent), 1 was Asian (5.00 percent), and 1 was unspecified (5.00 percent). There was 1 White female in the AD-14 group (5.00 percent). Within the AD-14 series, 1 employee self-identified as PWD ( 5.00 percent), and 0 employees self-identified as PWTD. 49

Based on a comparative review of the demographic data and the CLF, the EEO office determined that triggers exist in the current representation of females, minorities, PWD, and PWTD within the AD -13 and AD-14 classifications.

45 See Table B3.

46 See Table A4P, Participation Rates for AD Grades by Race/Ethnicity and Sex, October 1, 2019, to September 30, 2020.

47 See Table A4P.

48 See Table A4P.

49 See Table B6P.

Page 29 4 RECRUITMENT

The EEO office reviewed the NRCs recruitment program and agencywide recruitment outreach to determine the level of participation by women, minorities, and individuals with disabilities and to identify any triggers and barriers. The sections below discuss the results of the review.

4.1 Administration of Recruitment Program

OCHCO administers the NRCs FEORP plan and ensures that the agency implements the recruitment program as required by Public Law 95-454, the Civil Service Reform Act of 1978, and subsequent regulations and guidance issued by OPM.

4.2 Recruitment Process

The NRC typically focuses its recruitment efforts on engineers, scientists, security professional s, and those in other fields deemed important to carrying out the agencys mission. The NRC conducts its recruitment efforts for the agencys major occupations on the national, regional, and local levels.

OCHCO hosts the NRCs outreach and recruitment internal Web page, which is continuously updated and includes recruitment event information; handbooks and flyers; contact information; related links; frequently asked questions; a link for recruiters to obtain logistic al information on scheduled events; the annual outreach and recruitment schedule; the recruitment trip assessment; the recruitment team checklist; and the standard operating procedure that provides information related to the Outreach and Recruitment Schedule and the Recruiter Training Process, referenced in MD 10.1, Recruitment, Appointments, and Merit Staffing (ML14092A397), dated May 5, 2015.

OCHCO administers the agencys University Champions Program, which involves hiring officials and management-level representatives who maintain a high level of NRC presence on university campuses.

The University Champions Program communicates the NRCs mission, needed disciplines and skills, job openings, and developments related to nuclear safety and security.

4.3 Developing the Fiscal Year 2020 Recruitment Schedule

OCHCO leads the planning, development, and execution of the NRCs annual recruitment schedule.

However, it consults with, and obtains the concurrence of, the EEO office to ensure sensitivity to and inclusion of different cultural, racial, ethnic, gender, and disability status and representation of the constituents of the agencys Minority Serving Institutions Program. The NRCs overall recruitment outreach includes a broad range of activities performed by NRC Headquarters and regional offices. The EEO office routinely examines recruitment activities to determine potential barriers to equal opportunity through tracked sources (i.e., the NRCs annual recruitment schedule and office CDMP reports) and continuous engagement and monitoring of NRC recruitment outreach efforts.

4.4 Fiscal Year 2020 Recruitment and Advertisement Activities

During FY 2020, 58.00 percent (15 out of 26) of the NRCs recruitment activities focused on minorities, veterans, women, and individuals with di sabilities.

The NRC engages in extensive outreach and partnerships with educational institutions (e.g., prekindergarten level through postgraduate level, trade schools) to support academic achievement and produce a skilled diverse workforce. The NRC also c onducts career development and placement programs (i.e., Summer Hire, Co-Op, Honor Law Graduate Program, Nuclear Regulator Apprenticeship Network program, Minority Serving Institutions Program, and Integrated University

Page 30 Program). The Integrated University Program issues grants annually to help support colleges, universities, and trade schools that conduct NRC mission-focused programs geared towards students, graduates, and faculty or towards building institutions or program infrastructure.

The NRC recently revised its policy to use direct hire authority similar to that in the competitive service to recruit for certain hard-to-fill positions, similar to competitive service agencies, and to appoint candidates directly, without use of the standard hiring authority, under 5 U.S.C. 3304, Competitive Service; Examinations. This mechanism allows Federal agencies to fill vacancies in the competitive service when a critical hiring need or severe shortage of candidates exists. Under direct hire authority,

agencies may appoint qualified candidates for specific approved positions that have been identified as a critical need or that have a severe shortage. In 2020, the NRC posted public notice vacancies for positions in engineering/physical science, information technology security, acquisitions, and cybersecurity.

To increase outreach and the number of applications from individuals with disabilities, the agency continued its partnership with Equal Opportunity Publications and GettingHired.com. Through the two partnerships, the agency participated in recruitment events and posted job vacancies on the online job board. In addition, the NRC has a profile page on https://www.gettinghired.com/, which is a job board that empowers job seekers with disabilities to find employment. T he NRC advertises with ABILITY Corps/ABILITY Magazine, which concentrates on assistance to PWD, including PWTD. The NRC continued to partner with the U.S. Department of Defenses Operation Warfighter (OWF) Program, which provides Federal internship opportunities in a supportive work setting to recovering service members. NRC representatives periodically participated in OWF hiring events at Walter Reed National Military Center on a periodic basis. The NRC used the U.S. Department of Labors Office of Disability Employment Policy and the U.S. Department of Defense Workforce Recruitment Program résumé database to search for candidates for administrative assistant, information technology, and temporary summer student positions. Referred 14 resumes from the WRP database for consideration in the 2020 Temporary Summer Student Program and seven offers extended. Of the seven offers extended, four were accepted, two declined, and one withdrew from consideration. The NRC strengthened its relationship with the Wounded Warrior Project (WWP), and in June 2020, the NRC staff conducted an informational session with WWD constituents on special hiring authorities. The NRC participated in five veteran-focused outreach events during 2020. One event was the Service Academy Career Conference (SACC), which is administered and supported by the a lumni associations and Association of Graduates of the U.S. Military Academy, the U.S. Naval Academy, the U.S. Air Force Academy, the U.S. Coast Guard Academy, and the U.S. Merchant Marine Academy. Two events were hosted by the Navy Nuclear Power Officer Career Conference (NUPOCC) The other two events were associated with the OWF Program and Delaware Valley Veterans Career Fair. The NRCs Temporary Summer Student Program for 2020 included seven veterans. There were internship offer s made to additional veterans, but they were declined for a variety of reasons. During 2020, the agencys Veterans Employment Coordinator reached out to veterans and disabled veterans who had provided their résumés through career fairs and referred them to NRC hiring managers, resulting in one hire.In addition, NRC promoted the use of our Schedule A50 equivalent hiring authority by providing training for supervisors on special hiring authorities and forwarding resumes of eligible applicants to hiring managers.

50 Schedule A is a government hiring authority designed to help Federal agencies meet Affirmative Action obligations regarding hiring individuals with disabilities. Schedule A is different than the basic process for hiring skilled workers into Federal service. It is established in Federal regulation for the purpose of making hiring workers with disabilities much easier and faster. Schedule A is a hiring authority for Federal agencies to use to tap into a diverse and vibrant talent pool without going through the often-lengthy traditional hiring process.

Schedule A allows individuals to apply for a Federal appointment through a noncompetitive hiring process.

Page 31 The NRC also continued veteran outreach by posting online advertisements and/or vacancies with SACCentral, the SACC online job board, and Corporate Gray Online, which is a military -niche employment Web site connecting transitioning and former military with employers. In addition to posting with Corporate Gray Online, the Temporary Summer Student Program for 2020 was included in the Corporate Gray eNewsletter under their hot jobs section, and a blast email was sent out to the Corporate Gray subscribers informing them of the Contract Specialist vacancy. The NRC was also a Featured Employer in the January 2020 edition of the e-Newsletter.

5 ADVERTISEMENT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2020 JOB VACANCIES

The NRC promoted job opportunities by placing printed and online advertisements in diversity-focused publications and Web sites. The NRC used USA Jobs (https://www.usajobs.gov/Search/Results?a=NU00 ) to advertise job vacancies and process applications. In addition to the NRCs Web site, OCHCO advertised vacancies on online job boards (e.g., CorporateGray.com, GettingHired.com) and journals and magazines (i.e., Black EOE Journal, U.S. Veterans Magazine, Professional Womans Magazine, J SACC Central). The NRC used branding advertising (printed ads) through the previously cited journals and magazines, as well as the American Indian Higher Education Consortium (AIHEC) Journal, Ad for Navajo Technical Journal, Hispanic Network Magazine, Winds of Change m agazine (Tribal), Montgomery County Science Fair Program, and Women of Color STEM conference program. National Society of Black Engineers. The NRC used online banners on Web sites such as those for Professional Womans Magazine, the American Indian Science and Engineering Society, and the Society of Women Engineers.

6 NEW HIRES BY TYPE OF APPOINTMENT

6.1 Permanent Workforce New Hires

The EEO o ffices workforce review reveal ed that the NRCs leadership and management annually conducts Strategic Workforce Planning analysis of critical skills gaps in current staffing and determine entry-level hiring to support succession planning.

In 2020, the NRC employed 102 permanent workforce new hires. Males accounted for 5 5 employees (53.92 percent), of whom 9 were Hispanic or Latino (8.82 percent), 33 White (32.35 percent), 7 Black or African American (6.86 percent), 5 Asian (4.90 percent), 0 Native Hawaiian or O ther Pacific Islander (0 percent), 0 American Indian or Alaska Native (0 percent), and 1 individual of two or more races (0.98 percent). Females accounted for 47 employees (46.08 percent), of whom 5 were Hispanic or Latino (4.90 percent), 16 White (15.69 percent), 15 Black or African American ( 14.71 percent), 9 Asian (8.82 percent), 0 Native Hawaiian or O ther Pacific Islander (0 percent), 1 American Indian or Alaska Native (0.98 percent), and 1 individual of two or more races (0,98 percent). The EEO office did not identify triggers for male racial/ethnic groups (Black or African American, Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander, American Indian or Alaska Native, and individuals of two or more races). The percentages for females (46.08 percent) and female White racial/ethnic group percentage (15.69 percent) were below the CLF percentages (48.14 percent and 34.04 percent). 51

The new hires included 20 military veterans, of whom 9 were veterans with a 30 percent or more disability. The NRC has shown a steady increase in veteran hires from 2016 to 2020, including those who self-identified as PWD. There were 556 veterans working for the NRC (20 percent), of whom 67 were PWD (2.5 percent of the NRC workforce).

51 See Table A1.

Page 32 6.2 Temporary New Hires

In FY 2020, the NRC hired 76 temporary employees. Of the 48 male new hires (63.16 percent), 5 were Hispanic or Latino (6.58 percent), 31 White (40.79 percent), 6 Black or African American (7.89 percent),

and 6 Asian (7.89 percent). Of the 2 8 female hires (36.84 percent), 1 was Hispanic or Latino (1.32 percent), 23 White (30.26 percent), 1 Black or African American (1.32 percent), and 3 Asian (3.95 percent). There were 7 PWD (9.21 percent) and 2 PWTD (2.63 percent) among the new hires. 52

The EEO office determined that the male racial/ethnic groups ( Hispanic or Latino and Black or African American) percentages (6.58 percent and 7.89 percent) were above the CLF percentages for each group (5.17 percent and 5.49 percent). The EEO office determined that triggers exist in temporary female employee hires based on a comparison between hiring percentages for females (36.84 percent) and the female racial/ethnic groups (Hispanic or Latino, White, and Black or African American) percentages (1.32 percent, 30.26 percent, and 1.32 percent) and the CLF percentages for females (48.16 percent) and for the groups (4.79 percent, 34.03 percent, and 6.53 percent). 53

7 APPLICANTS AND NEW HIRES FOR NRC MISSION-CRITICAL OCCUPATIONS

The EEO office reviewed the new hires and selections for each listed NRC mission-critical occupation by race/ethnicity, sex, and disability to determine participation by females, minorities, 54 and individuals with disabilities. 55 The following sections discuss the findings.

7.1 General Engineering (0801 )

The NRC issued 22 vacancy announcements and received 270 applications for new hire to the general engineering position. The workforce table does not reflect a section titled voluntarily identified applicants. However, the section that reads internal applications # reveals applicant self-identified information pertaining to race/ethnicity ( 32 Hispanic or Latino, 113 White, 31 Black or African American, 25 Asian, 0 Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander, 1 American Indian or Alaska Native, 3 individuals of two or more races, and 174 unspecified). I n the Table A3, the number of male and female applicants listed (123 males and 5 8 females) conflicts with the numbers listed for each group. The actual total count is 205 (136 males and 69 females). Of the 136 male applicants, there were 17 Hispanic or Latino, 79 White, 18 Black or African American, 22 Asian, 0 Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander, 0 American Indian or Alaska Native, and 0 individuals of two or more races. Of the 69 female applicants, there were 15 Hispanic or Latino, 34 White, 13 Black or African American, 3 Asian, 0 Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander, 1 American Indian or Alaska Native, and 3 individuals of two or more races. The NRC determined that 252 applicants were qualified for the position (demographic information not listed in Table A3). The NRC referred 391 applicants to the hiring official (demographic information not listed in Table A3). The table reflects that no applicants were interviewed for the position. The agency promoted 29 applicants. Nineteen (65.52 percent) were males (3 Hispanic or Latino, 12 White, 2 Black or African American, 2 Asian), and 10 were females (1 Hispanic or Latino, 6 White, 1 Black or African American, and 2 Asian).

Within the general engineering hiring process, 123 employees self-identified as no disability (45.56 percent), 141 employees did not indicate their status (52. 22 percent), 6 employees self-identified

52 See Table B1-1.

53 See Table A1.

54 See Table A6.

55 See Table B6.

Page 33 as PWD (2.22 percent), and 1 employee self-identified as PWTD ( 0.37 percent). There was 1 PWD selected. 56

Based on the lack of data, the EEO office was not able to conduct an adequate review and make a sufficient comparison to the relevant applicant pool percentage ( RAPP) or identify qualified PWD or PWTD employees. However, there is sufficient information to indicate that triggers exist in applicant flow data, hiring practices, and disparities related to women, minorities, and individuals with disabilities in the general engineering new hire process. 57

7.2 Nuclear Engineering (0840)

The NRC issued nine vacancy announcements and received 59 applications for new hire to the nuclear engineering position. The workforce table does not reflect a section titled voluntarily identified applicants. However, the section that reads internal applications # reveal s applicant self-identified information pertaining to race/ethnicity ( 6 Hispanic or Latino, 30 White, 5 Black or African American, 4 Asian, 0 Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander, 1 American Indian or Alaska Native, 2 individuals of two or more races). I n the Table A3, the number of male and female applicants listed ( 31 males and 7 females) conflicts with the numbers listed for each group. The actual total count is 48 (40 males and 8 females). Of the 40 male applicants, there were 5 Hispanic or Latino, 24 White, 5 Black or African American, 3 Asian, 0 Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander, 1 American Indian or Alaska Native, and 2 individuals of two or more races. Of the 8 female applicants, there were 1 Hispanic or Latino, 6 White, 0 Black or African American, 1 Asian, 0 Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander, 0 American Indian or Alaska Native, and 0 individuals of two or more races. The NRC determined that 47 applicants were qualified for the position (demographic information not listed in the Table A3). The NRC referred 43 applicants to the hiring official (demographic information not listed in the Table A3). The table reflects that no applicants were interviewed for the position. The agency promoted 9 (65.52 percent) males (1 Hispanic or Latino, 7 White, and 1 Asian).

Within the nuclear engineering new hire process, 31 employees self-identified as no disability (52.54 percent), 27 employees did not self-identify their status ( 45.76 percent), 1 employee self-identified as PWD (1.69 percent), and 1 employee self-identified as PWTD (1.69 percent). No PWD or PWTD employees were selected. 58

Based on the lack of data, the EEO office was not able to conduct an adequate review and make a sufficient comparison to RAPP or identify qualified PWD or PWTD employees. However, there is sufficient information to indicate that triggers exist in applicant flow data, hiring practices, and disparities related to women, minorities, and individuals with disabilities in the nuclear engineering new hire process. 59

7.3 General Attorney (0905)

The NRC issued three vacancy announcements and received five applications for new hire to the general attorney position. The workforce table does not reflect a section titled voluntarily identified applicants. However, the section that reads internal applications # reveal s applicant self-identified information pertaining to race/ethnicity ( 1 Hispanic or Latino, 0 White, 0 Black or African American, 0 Asian, 0 Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander, 1 American Indian or Alaska Native, and 1 individual of two or more races ). In the Table A3, the number of applications received by the NRC (five) conflicts

56 See Table B3.

57 See Table A3.

58 See Table B3.

59 See Table A3.

Page 34 with the totals for male and females 3 males, and 0 females), which is reflected in the information under the racial/ethnic groups. Of the 3 male applicants, there were 1 Hispanic or Latino, 0 White, 0 Black or African American, 0 Asian, 0 Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander, 1 American Indian or Alaska Native, and 1 individual of two or more races. The NRC determined that 5 applicants were qualified for the position (demographic information not listed in the Table A3). The NRC referred 5 applicants to the hiring official (demographic information not listed in the Table A3). The table reflects that no applicants were interviewed for the position. The selection information is contradic tory in that the data show that total hires included 1 male (33.33 percent) and 2 females (66.67 percent). Further, the data reflect that the employees selected were 2 females (White) and 1 male (American Indian or Alaska Native). 60

Within the general attorney new hire process, 3 employees self-identified as no disability (60.00 percent), and 2 employees did not self-identify their status (40.00 percent). No employees self-identified as PWD or PWTD. 61

Based on the lack of data, the EEO office was not able to conduct an adequate review and make a sufficient comparison to the RAPP. However, there is sufficient information to indicate that triggers exist in applicant flow data, hiring practices, and disparities related to women and minorities in the general attorney new hire process. 62

7.4 Health Physics (1306)

The NRC issued one vacancy announcement and received 101 applications for new hire to the health physics position. The workforce table does not reflect a section titled voluntarily identified applicants.

However, a section that reads internal applications # reveal s applicant self-identified information pertaining to race/ethnicity ( 1 Hispanic or Latino, 21 White, 7 Black or African American, 11 Asian, 0 Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander, 0 American Indian or Alaska Native, 0 individuals of two or more races). In the A3 data table, the number of male applicants listed ( 28) conflicts with the numbers listed for each group. The actual total count is 4 0 (29 males and 11 females). Of the 29 male applicants, there were 1 Hispanic or Latino, 16 White, 3 Black or African American, 9 Asian, 0 Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander, 0 American Indian or Alaska Native, and 0 individuals of two or more races. Of the 11 female applicants, there were 0 Hispanic or Latino, 5 White, 4 Black or African American, 2 Asian, 0 Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander, 0 American Indian or Alaska Native, and 0 individuals of two or more races. The NRC determined that 2 7 applicants were qualified for the position (demographic information not listed in the Table A3). The NRC referred 110 applicants to the hiring official (demographic information not listed in the Table A3). The table reflects that no applicants were interviewed for the position. The agency promoted 1 female (White) applicant.

Within the health physics new hire process, 27 applicants self-identified as no disability (26.73 percent), 17 employees did not self-identify their status ( 16.83 percent), 1 employee self-identified as PWD (0.99 percent), and 1 employee self-identified as PWTD ( 0.99 percent). No PWD or PWTD employees were selected. 63

Based on the lack of data, the EEO office was not able to conduct an adequate review and make a sufficient comparison to the RAPP or identify qualified PWD or PWTD employees. However, there was sufficient information to indicate that triggers exi st in applicant flow data, hiring practices, and disparities related to women, minorities, and individuals with disabilities in the health physics new hire process. 64

60 See Table A6P.

61 See Table B3.

62 See Table A3.

63 See Table B3.

64 See Table A3.

Page 35 8 INTERNAL COMPETITIVE PROMOTIONS FOR NRC MISSION-CRITICAL OCCUPATIONS

The EEO office reviewed internal competitive promotions for each listed NRC mission-c ritical occupation by race/ethnicity, sex, 65 and disability to determine participation by women, minorities, and individuals with disabilities (PWD and PWTD). 66 The sections below discuss the findings.

8.1 Executives

The NRC issued 1 vacancy announcement and received 3 applications for internal competitive promotion to an e xecutive position. Table A8 reflects that the numbers aligned with the relevant applicant pool percentage (RAPP) consisted of1 Hispanic or Latino, 3 White, 0 Black or African American, 0 Asian, 0 Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander, 1 American Indian or Alaska Native, and 1 individual of two or more races. The number of total applicants (all males) listed (3) conflicts with the numbers listed for each group and the RAPP. The NRC determined that 3 applicants were qualified for the position (demographic information not listed in Table A 8). The NRC referred the 3 applicants to the hiring official (demographic information not listed in Table A8 ). The table reflects that 0 applicants were interviewed for the position. The agency promoted 1 internal applicant (American Indian or Alaska Native) to the e xecutive position.

Within the internal competitive promotion process for executives, 3 applicants self-identified as no disability ( 100.00 percent.

Based on the lack of and inconsistencies in data, the EEO office was not able to conduct an adequate review and make a sufficient comparison to the RAPP for applicants determined qualified or referred to the hiring official or identify qualified PWD or PWTD employees. However, there is sufficient information to indicate that triggers exist related to applicant flow data and hiring practices (e.g.,

indication that no interviews were conducted) in the executive promotional hiring process.

8.2 Supervisors

The NRC issued 7 vacancy announcements and received 77 applications for internal competitive promotion to Supervisor. - Table A8 reflects that the numbers aligned with the RAP P consisted of 14 Hispanic or Latino, 45 White, 9 Black or African American, 6 Asian, 0 Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander, 0 American Indian or Alaska Native, and 1 individual of two or more races. The number of applicants listed (39 males and 24 females) conflicts with the numbers listed for each group and the RAPP. The actual total count is 75 (47 males and 28 females). Of the 47 male applicants, there were 7 Hispanic or Latino, 28 White, 6 Black or African American, 5 Asian, 0 Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander, 0 American Indian or Alaska Native, and 1 individual of two or more races. Of the 28 female applicants, there were 7 Hispanic or Latino, 17 White, 3 Black or African American, and 1 Asian. The NRC determined that 63 applicants were qualified for the position (demographic information not listed in Table A8 ). The NRC referred 72 applicants to the hiring official (demographic information not listed in the Table A8. The table reflects that 0 applicants were interviewed for the position. The agency promoted 8 internal applicants (as opposed to the 9 listed in Table A8 ), of whom there were 5 males (1 Hispanic or Latino, 3 White, and 1 Black or African American); and 3 females (2 Hispanic or Latino and 1 White).

65 See Table A6P.

66 See Table B6.

Page 36 Within the internal competitive promotion process for supervisors, 36 applicants self-identified as no disability ( 46.75 percent), 35 employees did not self-identify their status ( 45.45 percent), 7 employees self-identified as PWD ( 9.09 percent), and 2 employees self-identified as PWTD ( 2.60 percent). No PWD or PWTD were selected for promotion to the supervisor position. 67

Based on the lack of and inconsistencies in data, the EEO office was not able to conduct an adequate review and make a sufficient comparison to the RAPP for applicants determined qualified or referred to the hiring official or identify qualified PWD or PWTD employees. However, there was sufficient information to indicate that triggers exist in applicant flow data, hiring practices (e.g., indication that no interviews were conducted), and disparities related to women, minorities, and individuals with disabilities (e.g., nonconformance with the agencys Disability Affirmative Action Plan) in the supervisor promotional hiring process.

8.3 Managers

The NRC issued 2 vacancy announcements and received 20 applications for internal competitive promotion to Managers. - Table A8 reflects that the numbers aligned with the RAPP consisted of 3 Hispanic or Latino, 9 White, 6 Black or African American, 1 Asian, 0 Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander, 1 American Indian or Alaska Native, and 3 individuals of two or more races. T he number of applicants listed (3 males and 11 females) conflicts with the numbers listed for each group and the RAPP. The actual total count is 23 (6 males and 17 females). Of the 6 male applicants, there was 1 Hispanic or Latino, 3 White, 1 Black or African American, 0 Asian, 0 Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander, 0 American Indian or Alaska Native, and 1 individual of two or more races. O f the 17 female applicants, there were 2 Hispanic or Latino, 6 White, 5 Black or African American, 1 Asian, 0 Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander, 1 American Indian or Alaska Native, and 2 individuals of two or more races. The NRC determined that 20 applicants were qualified for the position (demographic information not listed in the Table A8). The NRC referred 20 applicants to the hiring official (demographic information not listed in the A8 data table). The table reflects that 0 applicants were interviewed for the position. The agency promoted 2 White females.

Within the internal competitive promotion process for managers, 8 applicants self-identified as no disability ( 40.00 percent), 10 employees did not self-identify their status ( 50.00 percent), 2 employees self-identified as PWD ( 10.00 percent), and 1 employee self-identified as PWTD ( 5.00 percent). There was 1 PWD (50.00 percent) selected for promotion to the m anager position. 68

Based on the lack of and inconsistencies in data, the EEO office was not able to conduct an adequate review and make a sufficient comparison to the RAPP for applicants determined qualified or referred to the hiring official or identify qualified PWD or PWTD employees. However, there is sufficient information to indicate that triggers exist in applicant flow data, hiring practices (e.g., indication that no interviews were conducted), and disparities related to women, minorities, and individuals with disabilities (e.g., nonconformance with the agencys Disability Affirmative Action Plan) in the managers promotional hiring process.

8.4 Senior Executive Service (SES)

The NRC issued 2 vacancy announcements and received 9 applications for internal competitive promotion to a SES position. Table A7 reflects that the numbers aligned with the RAP P consisted of 1 Hispanic or Latino, 6 White, 2 Black or African American, 0 Asian, 0 Native Hawaiian or Pacific

67 See Table B8.

68 See Table B8.

Page 37 Islander, 1 American Indian or Alaska Native, and 1 individual of two or more races. The number of applicants listed (9) conflicts with the numbers listed for total males and females, each group and the RAPP. There were 7 males (1 Hispanic or Latino, 4 White, 0 Black or African American, 0 Asian, 0 Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander, 1 American Indian or Alaska Native, and 1 individual of two or more races). There were 4 females (2 White and 2 Black or African American). The NRC determined that 9 applicants were qualified for the position (demographic information not listed in the Table A 7). The NRC referred the 9 applicants to the hiring official (demographic information not listed in the Table A 7).

The table reflects that 0 applicants were interviewed for the position. The agency promoted two applicants (White female and an American Indian or Alaska Native male). 69

Within the SES internal competitive promotion process, 6 applicants self-identified as no disability (66.67 percent), and 3 employees did not self-identify their status (33.33 percent). 70

Based on the lack of and inconsistencies in data, the EEO office was not able to conduct an adequate review and make a sufficient comparison to the RAPP for applicants determined qualified or referred to the hiring official or identify qualified PWD or PWTD employees. However, information is sufficient to indicate that triggers exist related to applicant flow data and hiring practices (e.g., indication that no interviews were conducted), and disparities related to women, minorities, and individuals with disabilities in the SES promotional hiring process.

8.5 GG-15 or Equivalent

The NRC issued 18 vacancy announcements and received 275 applications for internal competitive promotion to GG-15 or equivalent. Table A7 reflects that the numbers aligned with the RAPP consisted of 32 Hispanic or Latino, 125 White, 34 Black or African American, 43 Asian, 0 Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander, 2 American Indian or Alaska Native, 1 0 individuals of two or more races, and 29 unspecified). The number of applicants listed (142 males and 63 females) conflicts with the numbers listed for each group and the RAPP. The actual total count is 247 (165 males and 81 females). Of the 165 male applicants, there were 1 5 Hispanic or Latino, 88 White, 21 Black or African American, 35 Asian, 0 Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander, 1 American Indian or Alaska Native, and 5 individuals of two or more races. Of the 81 female applicants, there were 17 Hispanic or Latino, 37 White, 13 Black or African American, 8 Asian, 0 Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander, 1 American Indian or Alaska Native, and 5 individuals of two or more races. The NRC determined that 2 01 applicants were qualified for the position (demographic information not listed in Table A7 ). The NRC referred 289 applicants to the hiring official (demographic information not listed in Table A7 ). The table reflects that 0 applicants were interviewed for the position. The agency promoted 23 internal applicants, of whom there were 14 males (60.87 percent) (2 Hispanic or Latino, 8 White, 1 Black or African American, and 3 Asian). There were 9 females selected (39.13 percent) (2 Hispanic or Latino, 6 White, 0 Black or African American, and 1 Asian.

Within the GG-15 or equivalent process, 126 applicants self-identified as no disability ( 45.82 percent),

130 employees did not self-identify their status ( 47.27 percent), 20 employees self--identified as PWD (7.27 percent), and 7 employees self-identified as PWTD ( 2.55 percent). There were 2 PWD (8.70 percent) and 1 PWTD (4.35 percent) selected for GG-15 or equivalent promotional positions.71

Based on the lack of and inconsistencies in data, the EEO office was not able to conduct an adequate review and make a sufficient comparison to the RAPP for applicants determined qualified or referred to

69 See Table A7, Management Positions (Participation Rate), October 1, 2019 to September 30, 2020.

70 See Table B7, Senior Grade Levels (Participation Rate) October 1, 2019 to September 30, 2020.

71 See Table B7.

Page 38 the hiring official or identify qualified PWD or PWTD employees. However, there is sufficient i nformation to indicate that triggers exist in applicant flow data, hiring practices (e.g., indication that no interviews were conducted), and disparities related to women, minorities, and individuals with disabilities (e.g.,

nonconformance with the agencys Disability Affirmative Action Plan) in GG-15 or equivalent promotional hiring process.

8.6 GG-14 or Equivalent

The NRC issued 32 vacancy announcements and received 252 applications for internal competitive promotion to GG-1 4 or equivalent. - Table A7 reflects that the numbers aligned with the RAPP consisted of 23 Hispanic or Latino, 89 White, 40 Black or African American, 18 Asian, 1 Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander, 3 American Indian or Alaska Native, 6 individuals of two or more races, and 72 unspecified). The number of applicants listed 151 (98 males and 5 3 females) conflicts with the numbers listed for each group and the RAPP. The actual total count is 180 (114 males and 66). Of the 114 male applicants, there were 18 Hispanic or Latino, 60 White, 20 Black or African American, 13 Asian, 0 Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander, 1 American Indian or Alaska Native, and 2. Of the 66 female applicants, there were 5 Hispanic or Latino, 29 White, 20 Black or African American, 5 Asian, 1 Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander, 2 American Indian or Alaska Native, and 4 individuals of two or more races.The NRC determined that 223 applicants were qualified for the position (demographic information not listed in Table A7). The NRC referred 315 (conflict between the number of applic ations received and referred to the hiring official, and demographic information is not listed in Table A7). The table reflects that 0 applicants were interviewed for the position. The agency promoted 36 internal applicants, 25 males (69.44 percent) (3 Hispanic or Latino, 18 White, 3 Black or African American, and 1). There were 11 females selected (30.56 percent) (1 Hispanic or Latino, 7 White, 2.

Within the GG-1 4 or equivalent process, 101 applicants self-identified as no disability ( 40.08 percent),

149 employees did not self-identify their status ( 59.13 percent), 3 employees self-identified as PWD (1.19 percent), and 3 employees self-identified as PWTD ( 1.19 percent). There was 1 PWTD (2.78 percent) selected for GG -1 4 or equivalent positions. 72

Based on the lack of and inconsistencies in data, the EEO office was not able to conduct an adequate review and make a sufficient comparison to the RAPP for applicants determined qualified or referred to the hiring official or identify qualified PWD or PWTD employees. However, there is sufficient information to indicate that triggers exist in applicant flow data, hiring practices (e.g., indication that no interviews were conducted), and disparities related to women, minorities, and individuals (e.g., nonconformance with the agencys Disability Affirmative Action Plan) with disabilities in the GG-14 or equivalent promotional hiring process.

8.7 GG-13 or Equivalent

The NRC issued 1 vacancy announcement and received 37 applications for internal competitive promotion to GG-1 3 or equivalent. - Table A7 reflects that the numbers aligned with the RAPP consisted of 0 Hispanic or Latino, 8 White, 19 Black or African American, 1 Asian, 0 Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander, 0 American Indian or Alaska Native, and 3 individuals of two or more races). The number of applications listed 37 (6 males and 20 females) conflicts with the numbers listed for each group and the RAPP. The actual total count is 31 (6 males and 25 females). Of the 6 male applicants, there were 0 Hispanic or Latino, 2 White, 3 Black or African American, 1 Asian, 0 Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander, 0 American Indian or Alaska Native, and 0 individuals of two or more races. Of the 25 female applicants, there were 0 Hispanic or Latino, 6 White, 16 Black or African American, 0 Asian, 0

72 See Table B7.

Page 39 Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander, 0 American Indian or Alaska Native, and 3 individuals of two or more races. The NRC determined that 20 applicants were qualified for the position (demographic information not listed in Table A7). The NRC referred 20 applicants to the hiring official (demographic information not listed in Table A7). The table reflects that 0 applicants were interviewed for the position. The agency promoted a female (Black or African American) to the position.

Within the GG-1 3 or equivalent process, 16 applicants self-identified as no disability ( 43.24 percent),

17 employees did not self-identify their status ( 45.95 percent), 4 employees self-identified as PWD (10.81 percent), and 1 employee self-identified as PWTD ( 2.70 percent). No PWD or PWTD was selected for GG -1 3 or equivalent positions. 73

Based on the lack of and inconsistencies in data, the EEO office was not able to conduct an adequate review and make a sufficient comparison to the RAPP for applicants determined qualified or referred to the hiring official or identify qualified PWD or PWTD employees. However, there is sufficient information to indicate that triggers exist in applicant flow data, hiring practices (e.g., indication that no interviews were conducted), and disparities related to women, minorities, and potentially individuals with disabilities in the GG-1 3 or equivalent promotional hiring process.

8.8 Management and Program Analysis (0 343)

The NRC issued 1 vacancy announcement and received 17 applications for promotion to the management and program analysis position. Table A6 reflects that the numbers aligned with the RAPP consisted of 2 White, 5 African American, and 1 Asian. The number of applicants listed (17) conflicts with the numbers listed for total males and females 8 (2 males and 6 females), numbers listed for each group (8 total group, 2 males, and 6 females), and the RAPP. There were 2 males (Black or African American). There were 6 females (2 White and 3 Black or African American, and 1 Asian). The NRC determined that 10 applicants were qualified for the position (demographic information not listed in Table A6). The NRC referred 13 applicants to the hiring official (demographic information not listed in Table A6). The table reflects that 0 applicants interviewed for the position. The agency hired 1 male applicant (Black or African American ).

Within the internal competitiveness promotions process for management and program analysis,

6 employees self-identified as no disability ( 35.29 percent); 4 employees did not self-identify their status (23.53 percent). No employees self--identified as PWD or PWTD. 74

Based on the lack of and inconsistencies in data, the EEO office was not able to conduct an adequate review and make a sufficient comparison to the RAPP for applicants determined qualified or referred to the hiring official. However, there is sufficient information to indicate that triggers exist in applicant flow data, hiring practices (e.g., indication that no interviews were conducted), and disparities related to women, minorities, and potentially individuals with disabilities in the internal competitive promotions for management and program analysis. 75

8.9 General Engineering (0801)

The NRC issued 3 vacancy announcements and received 293 applications for promotion to the general engineering position. Table A6 reflects that the numbers aligned with the RAPP consisted of 17 Hispanic or Latino, 55 White, 18 Black or African American, 22 Asian, 1 Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander, 3 American Indian or Alaska Native, 3 individuals of two or more races, and 174 unspecified).

73 See Table B7.

74 See Table B6.

75 See Table A6.

Page 40 The number of total male and female applicants listed 99 (81 males and 18 females) conflicts with the numbers listed for each group. The actual total count is 119 (92 males and 27 females). Of the 92 male applicants, there were 10 Hispanic or Latino, 43 White, 14 Black or African American, 20 Asian, 1 Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander, 2 American Indian or Alaska Native, and 2 individuals of two or more races. Of the 27 female applicants, there were 7 Hispanic or Latino, 12 White, 4 Black or African American, 2 Asian, 0 Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander, 1 American Indian or Alaska Native, and 1 individual of two or more races. The NRC determined that 56 applicants were qualified for the position (demographic information not listed in Table A6). The NRC referred 125 applicants to the hiring official (demographic information not listed in Table A6). The table reflects that 0 applicants interviewed for the position. The agency promoted 8 applicants, of whom 7 (87.50 percent) were males (6 White and 1 Hispanic or Latino), and 1 was female (White) (12.50 percent).

Within the internal competitiveness promotions for general engineering, 71 employees self-identified as no disability ( 24.23 percent), 62 employees did not self-identify their status (21.16 percent),

5 employees self-identified as PWD (1.71 percent), and 3 employees self-identified as PWTD (1.02 percent). There were no selections of either PWD or PWTD employees. 76

Based on the lack of and inconsistencies in data, the EEO office was not able to conduct an adequate review and make a sufficient comparison to the RAPP for applicants determined qualified or referred to the hiring official or identify qualified PWD or PWTD employees. However, there is sufficient information to indicate that triggers exist in applicant flow data, hiring practices (e.g., indication that no interviews were conducted), and disparities related to women, minorities, and individuals with disabilities (e.g.,

nonconformance with the agencys Disability Affirmative Action Plan) in the internal competitive promotions for general engineering 77

8.10 Nuclear Engineering (0840)

The NRC issued 1 vacancy announcement and received 73 applications for promotion to the nuclear engineering position. Table A6 reflects that the numbers aligned with the RAPP consisted of 2 Hispanic or Latino, 19 White, 7 Black or African American, 3 Asian, 0 Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander, 0 American Indian or Alaska Native, 1 individual of two or more races, and 41 unspecified).

The number of male and female applicants listed 29 (27 males and 2 females) conflicts with the numbers listed for total applicants (73) and each group. The actual total count is 32 (29 males and 3 females). Of the 27 male applicants, there were 1 Hispanic or Latino, 17 White, 7 Black or African American, 3 Asian, 0 Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander, 0 American Indian or Alaska Native, and 1 individual of two or more races. Of the three female applicants, there were 1 Hispanic or Latino, 2 White, 0 Black or African American, 0 Asian, 0 Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander, 0 American Indian or Alaska Native, and 0 individuals of two or more races. The NRC determined that 39 applicants were qualified for the position (demographic information not listed in Table A6). The NRC referred 19 applicants to the hiring official (demographic information not listed in Table A6). The t able reflects that 0 applicants interviewed for the position. The agency promoted 1 female (White).

Within the internal competitiveness promotions for nuclear engineering, 24 employees self-identified as no disability ( 32.88 percent), 14 employees did not self-identify their status (19.18 percent),

1 employee self-identified as PWD (1.37 percent), and 0 employees self-identified as PWTD (0.00 percent). The selected applicant was a PWD. 78

76 See Table B6.

77 See Table A6.

78 See Table B6.

Page 41 Based on the lack of and inconsistencies in data, the EEO office was not able to conduct an adequate review and make a sufficient comparison to the RAPP for applicants determined qualified or referred to the hiring official. However, there is sufficient information to indicate that triggers exist in applicant flow data, hiring practices (e.g., indication that no interviews were conducted), and disparities related to women, minorities, and potentially individuals with disabilities in the internal competitive promotions for nuclear engineering. 79

8.11 Health Physics (1306)

The NRC issued 5 vacancy announcements and received 36 applications for promotion to the health physics position. Table A6 reflects that the numbers aligned with the RAPP consisted of 3 Hispanic or Latino, 14 White, 4 Black or African American, 3 Asian, 0 Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander, 0 American Indian or Alaska Native, 0 individuals of two or more races, 12 unspecified. The number of male and female applications listed 23 (16 males and 7 females) conflicts with the numbers listed for total applications (36) and each group. The actual total count is 24 (17 males and 7 females). Of the 17 male applicants, there were 3 Hispanic or Latino, 9 White, 2 Black or African American, 3 Asian, 0 Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander, 0 American Indian or Alaska Native, and 0 individuals of two or more races. Of the 7 female applicants, there were 0 Hispanic or Latino, 5 White, 2 Black or African American, 0 Asian, 0 Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander, 0 American Indian or Alaska Native, and 0 individuals of two or more races. The NRC determined that 34 applicants were qualified for the position

(). The NRC referred 54 applicants to the hiring official (demographic information not listed in Table A6).

The table reflects that 0 applicants were interviewed for the position. Three males (2 White and 1 Black or African American) and two females (1 White and 1 Black or African American) were promoted to health physics positions.

Within the health physics internal competitiveness promotions, 11 employees self -identified as no disability ( 30.56 percent); 25 employees did not self-identify their status (69.44 percent). No employees self-identified as PWD or PWTD. 80

Based on the lack of and inconsistencies in data, the EEO office was not able to conduct an adequate review and make a sufficient comparison to the RAPP for applicants determined qualified or referred to the hiring official. However, there is sufficient information to indicate that triggers exist in applicant flow data, hiring practices (e.g., indication that no interviews were conducted), and disparities related to women, minorities and potentially individuals with disabilities. 81

9 HIRING AND RECRUITMENT: FOCUSNONCOMPETITIVE HIR ING, ROTATIONS, DETAILS, ASSIGNMENTS, ADVANCEMENTS, AND OTHER TYPES OF SELECTIONS

The EEO office reviewed the NRCs practices for noncompetitive promotions, alternate hiring, rotations, details, assignments, development and advancement, and other selectio n efforts to identify participation by women, minorities, and individuals with disabilities. The EEO office examined the measurable performance results of 10 Commission-level entities (i.e., committees, panels, and offices) and 14 offices under the Office of the Executive Director for Operations. The review revealed that management and leadership at all levels have complied with the agencys requirement to use Strategic Workforce Planning to determine critical skills gaps in current staffing and to project current and future hiring needs.

79 See Table A6.

80 See Table B6.

81 See Table A6.

Page 42 10 TRAINING AND DEVELOPMENT OPPORTUNITIES

The EEO office conducted a self-assessment of the NRCs training and development opportunities to determine whether training is made available to all employees equally, to monitor the agencys progress, and to identify areas where barriers may exclude certain groups. The sections below discuss the results of the internal review.

10.1 Training Availability

The NRCs policy is to provide training that improves individual and organizational performance to assist in achieving the agencys mission and performance goals.

OCHCO provides overall leadership and management of agencywide training and development policies, programs, and systems designed to establish, maintain, and enhance the skills employees need to perform their current jobs effectively and to meet the future skill needs of the agency. OCHCO manages the agencys learning management system through the recently implemented Talent Management System (TMS), which includes the agencys training and the collaborative learning environment blended learning system. The office also manages the agencys system for prioritizing external training needs and training coordination and ensures that agency resources are used to fund high-priority external training requirements. OCHCO operates the agencys training Help Desk and Professional Development Center and Technical Training Center to ensure a high level of employee support. OCHCO maintains training records for all agency staff members.

10.2 Professional Development Programs

Employee professional development and advancement are important to the NRC. To better ensure that employees and the NRC achieve the agencys mission and the employees career goals, the NRC offers professional career development programs, such as the Nuclear Regulator Apprenticeship Network program, Aspiring Leaders program, the mentoring program, and rotations.

10.3 Individual Development Plan

Although the NRC does not require employees to have an individual development plan ( IDP), the agency encourages employees to prepare these plans. O CHCO maintains a SharePoint site that contains training and guidance on how to complete the IDP form. In addition, OCHCO is able to deliver IDP workshops upon request.

A review of the 2020 CDMP reports shows that leadership and management in 13 offices regularly encouraged employees to develop and update IDPs. 82

10.4 NRC Leaders Academy

The NRC Leaders Academy provides current and future agency leaders with training and development opportunities for the full spectrum of leadership competencies outlined by OPM. OCHCO has a training and development Web site that assists employees with (1) the identification of types of training, (2) personal or professional development, and (3) leadership development information.

82 The percentages for nine offices were not specified (Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards, ADM, Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, Office of Congressional Affairs, Office of Investigations, and Regions I, II, and IV); two offices reported that 60 percent of their staff had IDPs in place (NSIR and the Office of the Chief Financial Officer); and two offices reported that over 80 percent of their staff had IDPs in place (the Office of Investigations and the Office of International Programs).

Page 43 The EEO office reviewed information and data related to the Leaders at All Levels Certificate Program (LCP) (geared towards GG-07 through GG-12 employees), which falls under the NRC Leaders Academy, to determine the participation of women, minorities, and individuals with disabilities. The LCP is self-directed and is available for staff participation. The LCP is regularly evaluated for efficiencies.

The agency collects demographic data on LCP participants (e.g., race, gender, national origin, veteran status, individuals with disabilities). 83

The EEO office reviewed information and data related to the Aspiring Leaders Certificate Program (ALCP ) (geared towards GG-13 thr ough GG-15 employees), which falls under the NRC Leaders Academy, to determine the participation of women, minorities, and individuals with disabilities. The ALCP is self -directed and available for staff participation. The ALCP is regularly evaluated for efficiencies. The agency collects demographic data on ALCP partici pants (e.g., race, gender, national origin, veteran status, individuals with disabilities).

The EEO office reviewed information and data related to the Supervisory Development Program (SDP)

(geared towards new and current supervisors), which falls under the NRC Leaders Academy, to determine the participation of women, minorities, and individuals with disabilities. The SDP is self-directed, with certain courses deemed mandatory for new supervisors, and is available to staff for participation. The SDP is regularly evaluated for efficiencies. The agency collects demographic data on SDP participants (e.g., race, gender, national origin, veteran status, individuals with disabilities).

The EEO office reviewed information and data related to 2020 Executive Leadership Seminars (geared towards all supervisors), which fall under the NRCs Leaders Academy, to determine the participation of women, minorities, and individuals with disabilities. The agency collects demographic data on seminar participants (e.g., race, gender, national origin, veteran status, individuals with disabilities).

10.5 Training and Development Opportunities Made Available at the NRC Office Level

The NRCs MD 10.77, Employee Development and Training (ML15341A156), dated January 4, 2016, provides general training guidelines, restrictions, criteria, and procedures for the selection, r egistration, confirmation, and evaluation of internal and external training courses. MD 10.77 refers to descriptions of NRC-sponsored development and training programs. It also provides a notice of nondiscrimination in its overall program administration, e qual opportunity in the selection of employees for training and development opportunities consistent with MSP s, and procedures to ensure accessibility to individuals with disabilities.

10.6 Analysis of NRC Training and Development Opportunities

The NRC recently implemented the TMS to collect and track training data. To comply with MD 715 requirements that agencies track their career development opportunities to permit analyses of potential barriers to equality of opportunity for women, minorities, and individuals with disabilities, OCHCO created a Microsoft Excel spreadsheet. 84 The spreadsheet tracks employees who applied for internal and external training and those selected (including PWD and PWTD), by numbers and percentages. At this time, OCHCO is exploring ways to (1) organize the data in the TMS, (2) connect to related HR data, and (3) generate this type of reporting more quickly in the future. 85 In 2020, the EEO office contacted the EEOC for assistance in identifying Federal b est practices or information on a software application used to track data for c areer development opportunities. The EEOC was unable to identify

83 See the NRCs 2020 FEORP report (including Career Tracker) covering October 1, 2019, through September 30, 2020.

84 OCHCO Microsoft Excel Summary Spreadsheet of Training for FY 2019 by Disability Category.

85 E-mail from OCHCO staff dated February 3, 2020.

Page 44 such items. It was mutually agreed that, in the interim, the NRC would continue tracking the required data through other means.

The OPM has not released the 2020 FEVS. As a result, the EEO office was unable to provide information on NRC employees responses to the standard five FEVS questions related to employee satisfaction with opportunities for professional development and growth.

The EEO office reviews office-level training and developmental activities to determine the participation of women, minorities, and individuals with disabilities as captured in required semiannual CDMP reports. The EEO office determined that NRC offices have made a broad range of formal and informal training opportunities available to NRC employees who are women, members of EEO minority groups, and individuals with disabilities. The EEO office determined, based on an analysis of the performance results of the cited NRC offices, that employees from all racial/ethnic groups and genders, and individuals with disabilities, are being afforded a broad range of training, internship opportunities, and mentoring sufficient to help them develop and achieve higher grade levels (including senior grade levels). The following paragraphs discuss highlights of NRC office performance results.

The NRC continues to engage in practices that enable employees to develop various skills (e.g., technical, leadership) and ensure availability of a diverse and qualified pool of candidates for future positions. In FY 2020, senior management supported training (including cross -training),

mentoring, open opportunities, Open Opportunities assignments, rotation assignments, details, and lateral/temporary assignments (within and outside of the NRC). For example, management supported an employees travel to Japan to complete a cross-a gency assignment through the International Atomic Energy Agency in Vienna, Austria, and championed an employee for selection to participate in a rotational opportunity in Spain intended to increase cross -national perspectives on nuclear power.

Several employees received opportunities for international travel to work on high-profile projects at the International Atomic Energy Agency. One staff member assumed responsibilities from the Senior Advisor to represent the NRC on the Working Group on Public Communication at the Nuclear Energy Agency in Paris, France. Management also supported a 1-year detail to the Nuclear Security Council of the United States, Executive Office of the President.

Some other examples of how NRC offices are supporting internal and external opportunities for employee professional development and growth are as follows:

• NRC management supported participation by minorities and females in training, including the White House Leadership Development Program, Federal Executive Board and Leadership Development Institute Program, Emerging HR Leaders Virtual Program, NRCs Aspiring ALCP,

the General Services Administrations Office of Chief Executive Councils Fellowship Program, Mansfield Fellowship, and Women Engineers Conference and Women in Nuclear Conference.

• NRC management also supported incoming and outgoing rotational assignments at supervisor y and non-supervisory levels to promote personal and professional growth and exposure to all parts of the agency.

• NRC management supported two individuals to participate in SES CDP at the Department of Commerce and the Internal Revenue Service.

• NRC management implemented mentoring and coaching program s and provided training guidance for new and experienced staff.

Page 45

• NRC management supported developmental and subject-matter training across the a gency.

11 RETENTION EFFORTS, INCLUDING SALARY DISTRIBUTION AND TIME -OFF AND CASH AWARDS

To identify triggers or barriers that may exclude women, minorities, and individuals with disabilities (PWD and PWTD), the EEO office reviewed: (1) the NRCs 2020 salary distribution, and (2) whether incentive awards are fairly distributed. The sections below discuss the internal review.

11.1 Employees Satisfaction with Their Pay

The OPM has not released the FY 2020 FEVS, so the EEO office is unable to provide agency -spec ific information pertaining to the FEVS Global Satisfaction Index results or FEVS pay satisfaction questions. In FY 2019, a review of the Index Component Scores and Trends revealed a mix of ratings among the 22 NRC offices participating in the FEVS. Seventeen offices received ratings ranging between 70 and 87 percent, and five offices rated between 53 and 67 percent.

11.2 NRC Salary Distribution

The EEO office reviewed the 2020 workforce data associated with the NRCs salary distribution. 86 The paragraphs below discuss the findings related to different salary ranges.

Salaries ranging from $40,001- $50,000, $50,001- $60,000, $60,001- $70,000, $70,001- $80,000,

$80,001- $90,000, $90,001- $100,000, $100,001- $110,000, and $110,001- $120,000 reflect higher percentages for females (100.00 percent, 89.47 percent, 68.24 percent, 79.63 percent, 72.22 percent, 69,77 percent, 52.27 percent, and 56.83 percent) when compared to the percentages for males (0.00 percent, 10.53 percent, 31.76 percent, 20.37 percent, 27.78 percent, 30.23 percent, 47.73 percent, and 43.17 percent). Within the identified salary ranges, percentages for female racial/ethnic groups were as follows: Hispanic or Latino (8.70 percent, 2.63 percent, 7.06 percent, 1.85 percent, 5.56 percent, 4.65 percent, 4.55 percent, 5.46 percent); White (65.22 percent, 60.53 percent, 25.88 percent, 38.89 percent, 35.19 percent, 37.21 percent, 28.41 percent, and 25.68 percent); Black or African American (17.39 percent, 15.79 percent, 23.53 percent, 27.78 percent, 24.07 percent, 25.58 percent, 14.77 percent, and 19.67 percent); Asian (4.35 percent, 7.89 percent, 9.41 percent, 9.26 percent, 7.41 percent, 2.33 percent, 3.41 percent, and 6.01 percent); Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander (0 percent, 0 percent, 0 percent, 1.85 percent, 0 percent, 0 percent, 0 percent, and 0 percent); American Indian or Alaska Native ( 4.35 percent, 0 percent, 2.35 percent, 0 percent, 0 percent, 0.00 percent, 1.14 percent, and 0 percent); and individuals of two or more races (0 percent, 0 percent, 0 percent, 0 percent, 0 percent, 0 percent, 0 percent, and 0.62 percent).

Within the identified salary ranges, the percentages for male racial/ethnic groups were as follows:

Hispanic or Latino (0.00 percent, 2.63 percent, 5.88 percent, 1.85 percent, 0.00 percent, 4.65 percent, 3.41 percent, and 5.46 percent); White (0 percent, 0 percent, 18.82 percent, 12.96 percent, 18.52 percent, 20.93 percent, 34.09 percent, and 26.78 percent); Black or African American (0 percent, 2.63 percent, 4.71 percent, 1.85 percent, 5.5 6 percent, 2.33 percent, 5.68 percent, and 8.20 percent);

Asian (0 percent, 2.63 percent, 1.18 percent, 1.85 percent, 3.70 percent, 0.00 percent, 4.55 percent, and 2.73 percent); Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander (0 percent, 0 percent, 0 percent, 0 percent, 0 percent, 0 percent, 0 percent, and 0 percent); American Indian or Alaska Native (0 percent, 0 percent, 0 percent, 0 percent, 0 percent, 2.33 percent, 0 percent, and 0 percent); and individuals of

86 See Table A5P, SalaryDistribution by Race, Ethnicity, and Sex (Participation Rate), October 1, 2019, to September 30, 2020.

Page 46 two or more races (0.00 percent, 2.63 percent, 1.18 percent, 1.85 percent, 0 percent, 0 percent, 0 percent, and 0 percent).

Salaries ranging from $120,001- $130,000, $130,001- $140,000, $140,001- $150,000,

$150,001- $160,000, $160,001- $170,000, $170,001- $180,000, and $180,001 and greater reflect a lower number of female employees and percentages for females ( 45.51 percent, 37.46 percent, 37.39 percent, 26.14 percent, 29.84 percent, 26.39 percent, and 27.59 percent) when compared to the number of male employees and percentages for males (54.49 percent, 62.54 percent, 62.61 percent, 73.86 percent, 70.16 percent, 73.61 percent, and 72.41 percent). Within the identified salary ranges, the percentages for female racial/ethnic groups were as follows: Hispanic or Latino ( 2.48 percent, 3.09 percent, 3.44 percent, 1.99 percent, 0.81 percent, 0.79 percent, and 0 percent); White (21. 36 percent, 17.18 percent, 20.87 percent, 14.20 percent, 19.35 percent, 16.47 percent, and 22.76 percent); Black or African American (16.10 percent, 11.00 percent, 7.57 percent, 6.53 percent, 4.84 percent, 4.96 percent, and 0.69 percent); Asian ( 3.72 percent, 4.81 percent, 2.98 percent, 3.13 percent, 4.03 percent, 3.37 percent, and 2.07 percent); Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander (none); American Indian or Alaska Native ( 0.31 percent, 0.34 percent, 0.4 6 percent, 0 percent, 0 percent, 0.20 percent, and 0.69 percent); and individuals of two or more races (0. 62 percent, 0.34 percent, 0.46 percent, 0 percent, 0 percent, 0.20 percent, and 0.69 percent).

Within the identified salary ranges, the percentages for male racial/ethnic groups were as follows:

Hispanic or Latino (6.50 percent, 6.19 percent, 6.19 percent, 2.84 percent, 2.42 percent, 0.60 percent, and 1.38 percent); White (35.60 percent, 39.86 percent, 41.74 percent, 48.01 percent, 57.26 percent, 56.94 percent, and 55.86 percent); Black or African American (7.74 percent, 6.87 percent, 7.34 percent, 3.98 percent, 6.45 percent, 4.37 percent, and 6.21 percent); Asian (4.64 percent, 7.56 percent, 5.28 percent, 17.05 percent, 3.23 percent, 9.13 percent, and 6.21 percent); Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander (0 percent, 0.34 percent, 0 percent, 0 percent, 0 percent, 0 percent, and 0 percent);

American Indian or Alaska Native (0 percent, 0.69 percent, 0.23 percent, 0. 28 percent, 0 percent, 0.79 percent, and 1.38 percent); and individuals of two or more races (0 percent, 0.34 percent, 0 percent, 0.57 percent, 0 percent, 0.20 percent, and 0 percent).

The EEO office plans to meet with OCHCO to discuss disparities in salary distribution (potentially determine pay gaps) and employee representation between males and females as part of the required routine meetings between the two offices on EEO/HR matters. The EEO office will report outcomes to the EEOC as part of the next MD 715 Report.

11.3 Employee Incentives

The law authorizes the NRC and other Federal agencies to provide recruitment, retention, relocation, bilingual services, student loan repayment, bar dues repayment, childcare facilities and subsi dies, and similar incentives. For example, a ttorneys in the Office of the General Counsel are able to take advantage of the Bar Dues Repayment Program and Student Loan Repayment Program. As an added bonus, attorneys licensed in their respective States receive reimbursements for their annual or biannual bar dues.

At the time of this report, the FY 2020 FEVS had not been released; therefore, the EEO office did not include responses from NRC employees to six related 2020 FEVS work/life balance questions.

The NRC holds managers and supervisors accountable for addressing employee responses to the FEVS and for improving performance through action plans.

Page 47 A review of the discrimination complaints filed in 2020 did not reveal any issues with the cited NRC work/life balance programs. The EEO office is unaware of any concerns voiced by the National Treasury Employees Union or other interest groups or stakeholders. Due to the COVID -19 pandemic, NRC employees were in a telework status from March 14, 2020, through September 30, 2020.

11.4 Employee Recognition and Awards

The EEO office reviewed employee recognition and awards to determine the participation levels of women, minorities, 87 and individuals with disabilities. 88 The sections below discuss the results of the review.

In FY 2018, the EEO office identified triggers in the issuance of time-off awards to women and minority groups in general, based on the disparities identified when comparing time-off awards ( ranges were 1-9 hours) made to White males.

11.5 Time-Off Awards (1 - 10 Hours)

The NRC gave a total of 737 time-off awards that ranged from 1-10 hours. The awards totaled 5,605 hours0.007 days <br />0.168 hours <br />0.001 weeks <br />2.302025e-4 months <br />, with an average of 7 hours8.101852e-5 days <br />0.00194 hours <br />1.157407e-5 weeks <br />2.6635e-6 months <br /> per award. The total male workforce received 433 time-off awards in this range (58.75 percent), totaling 3,292 hours0.00338 days <br />0.0811 hours <br />4.828042e-4 weeks <br />1.11106e-4 months <br /> (an average employee award of 7 hours8.101852e-5 days <br />0.00194 hours <br />1.157407e-5 weeks <br />2.6635e-6 months <br />).

The male racial/ethnicity groups received the following time -off awards: 288 to White males (39.08 percent), totaling 2,186 time-off hours (an average of 7 hours8.101852e-5 days <br />0.00194 hours <br />1.157407e-5 weeks <br />2.6635e-6 months <br />); 31 to Hispanic or Latino males (4.21 percent), totaling 285 time-off hours (an average of 9 hours1.041667e-4 days <br />0.0025 hours <br />1.488095e-5 weeks <br />3.4245e-6 months <br />); 45 to Black or African American males (6.11 percent), totaling 327 time-off hours (an average of 7 hours8.101852e-5 days <br />0.00194 hours <br />1.157407e-5 weeks <br />2.6635e-6 months <br />); 56 to Asian males (7.60 percent), totaling 396 time-off hours (an average of 7 hours8.101852e-5 days <br />0.00194 hours <br />1.157407e-5 weeks <br />2.6635e-6 months <br />); 0 to Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander males (0.00 percent), totaling 0 time-off hours (an average of 0 hours0 days <br />0 hours <br />0 weeks <br />0 months <br />); 4 to American Indian or Alaska Native males (0.54 percent), totaling 28 time-off hours (an average of 7 hours8.101852e-5 days <br />0.00194 hours <br />1.157407e-5 weeks <br />2.6635e-6 months <br />); and 4 to individuals of two or more races (0.54 percent), totaling 24 time-off hours (an average of 6 hours6.944444e-5 days <br />0.00167 hours <br />9.920635e-6 weeks <br />2.283e-6 months <br />).

The EEO office identified a trigger related to the EEO minority male racial/ethnicity groups based on the disparities found when comparing the time-off awards made to White males.

The total female workforce received 304 time-off awards in the range of 1-10 hours (41.25 percent),

totaling 2,313 hours0.00362 days <br />0.0869 hours <br />5.175265e-4 weeks <br />1.190965e-4 months <br /> (an average employee award of 7 hours8.101852e-5 days <br />0.00194 hours <br />1.157407e-5 weeks <br />2.6635e-6 months <br />). The female racial/ethnicity groups received the following time -off awards: 155 to White females (21.03 percent), totaling 1,212 time-off hours (an average of 7 hours8.101852e-5 days <br />0.00194 hours <br />1.157407e-5 weeks <br />2.6635e-6 months <br />); 23 to Hispanic or Latino females ( 3.12 percent), totaling 174 time-off hours (an average of 7 hours8.101852e-5 days <br />0.00194 hours <br />1.157407e-5 weeks <br />2.6635e-6 months <br />); 91 to Black or African American females ( 12.35 percent), totaling 651 time-off hours (an average of 7 hours8.101852e-5 days <br />0.00194 hours <br />1.157407e-5 weeks <br />2.6635e-6 months <br />); 24 to Asian females ( 3.26 percent), totaling 192 time-off hours (an average of 8 hours9.259259e-5 days <br />0.00222 hours <br />1.322751e-5 weeks <br />3.044e-6 months <br />); 4 to American Indian or Alaska Native females (0. 54 percent), totaling 30 time-off hours (an average of 7 hours8.101852e-5 days <br />0.00194 hours <br />1.157407e-5 weeks <br />2.6635e-6 months <br />); 2 to females of two or more races (0. 27 percent), totaling 6 time-off hours (an average of 3 hours3.472222e-5 days <br />8.333333e-4 hours <br />4.960317e-6 weeks <br />1.1415e-6 months <br />); and 5 unspecified time-off awards totaling 48 hours5.555556e-4 days <br />0.0133 hours <br />7.936508e-5 weeks <br />1.8264e-5 months <br />. The EEO office identified a trigger related to the EEO minority female racial/ethnicity groups based on the disparities found when comparing the time-off awards made to White males and females.

The NRC gave a total of 660 time-off awards to persons who self-identified as no disability (89.55 percent), totaling 4,933 time-off hours (an average of 7 hours8.101852e-5 days <br />0.00194 hours <br />1.157407e-5 weeks <br />2.6635e-6 months <br /> per award). Employees who did not self-identify their status received 26 time-off awards ( 3.53 percent), totaling 220 hours0.00255 days <br />0.0611 hours <br />3.637566e-4 weeks <br />8.371e-5 months <br /> (an average employee award of 8 hours9.259259e-5 days <br />0.00222 hours <br />1.322751e-5 weeks <br />3.044e-6 months <br />). PWD received 5 1 time-off awards ( 6.92 percent), totaling 452 hours0.00523 days <br />0.126 hours <br />7.473545e-4 weeks <br />1.71986e-4 months <br /> (an average employee award of 8 hours9.259259e-5 days <br />0.00222 hours <br />1.322751e-5 weeks <br />3.044e-6 months <br />). PWTD received 10 time-off awards ( 1.36 percent), totaling

87 See Table A9, Employee Recognition and AwardsDistribution by Race, Ethnicity, and Sex (Participation Rate),

October 1, 2019, to September 30, 2020.

88 See Table B9-2, Employee Recognition and Awards Distribution by Disability (Inclusion Rate), October 1, 2019, to September 30, 2020.

Page 48 84 hours9.722222e-4 days <br />0.0233 hours <br />1.388889e-4 weeks <br />3.1962e-5 months <br /> (an average employee award of 8 hours9.259259e-5 days <br />0.00222 hours <br />1.322751e-5 weeks <br />3.044e-6 months <br />). The EEO office identified a trigger related to the PWD and PWTD groups based on the disparities found when comparing the time-off awards made to PWD and PWTD with those made to employees who self-identified as not having a disability. 89

11.6 Time-Off Award s (11-20 Hours)

The NRC gave 120 time-off awards that ranged from 11-20 hours. The awards totaled 1,828 hours0.00958 days <br />0.23 hours <br />0.00137 weeks <br />3.15054e-4 months <br />, with an average of 15 hours1.736111e-4 days <br />0.00417 hours <br />2.480159e-5 weeks <br />5.7075e-6 months <br /> per award. The total male workforce received 6 5 time-off awards in this range (54.17 percent), totaling 984 hours0.0114 days <br />0.273 hours <br />0.00163 weeks <br />3.74412e-4 months <br /> (an average employee award of 1 5 hours5.787037e-5 days <br />0.00139 hours <br />8.267196e-6 weeks <br />1.9025e-6 months <br />). The male racial/ethnicity groups received the following awards: 4 1 to White males (34.17 percent), totaling 640 time-off hours (an average of 1 5 hours5.787037e-5 days <br />0.00139 hours <br />8.267196e-6 weeks <br />1.9025e-6 months <br />); 7 to Hispanic or Latino males (5.83 percent), totaling 96 time-off hours (an average of 1 3 hours3.472222e-5 days <br />8.333333e-4 hours <br />4.960317e-6 weeks <br />1.1415e-6 months <br />); 9 to Black or African American males (7.50 percent),

totaling 132 time-off hours (an average of 1 4 hours4.62963e-5 days <br />0.00111 hours <br />6.613757e-6 weeks <br />1.522e-6 months <br />); and 8 to Asian males (6.67 percent), totaling 114 time-off hours (an average of 1 4 hours4.62963e-5 days <br />0.00111 hours <br />6.613757e-6 weeks <br />1.522e-6 months <br />). The EEO office identified a trigger related to the EEO minority male racial/ethnicity groups based on the disparities found when comparing the time-off awards made to White males.

The total female workforce received 55 time-off awards in the range of 11-20 hours (45.83 percent),

totaling 844 hours0.00977 days <br />0.234 hours <br />0.0014 weeks <br />3.21142e-4 months <br /> (an average employee award of 1 5 hours5.787037e-5 days <br />0.00139 hours <br />8.267196e-6 weeks <br />1.9025e-6 months <br />). The female racial/ethnicity groups received the following awards: 37 to White females (30.83 percent), totaling 588 time-off hours (an average of 1 5 hours5.787037e-5 days <br />0.00139 hours <br />8.267196e-6 weeks <br />1.9025e-6 months <br />); 4 to Hispanic or Latino females (3.33 percent), totaling 56 time-off hours (an average of 1 4 hours4.62963e-5 days <br />0.00111 hours <br />6.613757e-6 weeks <br />1.522e-6 months <br />); 7 to Black or African American females (5.83 percent), totaling 100 time-off hours (an average of 1 4 hours4.62963e-5 days <br />0.00111 hours <br />6.613757e-6 weeks <br />1.522e-6 months <br />); 4 to Asian females (3.33 percent), totaling 56 time-off hours (an average of 14 hours1.62037e-4 days <br />0.00389 hours <br />2.314815e-5 weeks <br />5.327e-6 months <br />); 2 to American Indian or Alaska Native females (1.67 percent), totaling 32 time-off hours (an average of 16 hours1.851852e-4 days <br />0.00444 hours <br />2.645503e-5 weeks <br />6.088e-6 months <br />); and 1 unspecified time-off award totaling 12 hours1.388889e-4 days <br />0.00333 hours <br />1.984127e-5 weeks <br />4.566e-6 months <br />. The EEO office identified a trigger related to the EEO minority female racial/ethnicity groups based on the disparities found when comparing the time-off awards made to White males and females.

The NRC gave 10 8 time-off awards to persons who self-identified as no disability (90.00 percent),

totaling 1,644 time-off hours (an average of 15 hours1.736111e-4 days <br />0.00417 hours <br />2.480159e-5 weeks <br />5.7075e-6 months <br /> per award). Employees who did not self-identify their status received 5 time-off awards ( 4.17 percent), totaling 88 hours0.00102 days <br />0.0244 hours <br />1.455026e-4 weeks <br />3.3484e-5 months <br /> (an average employee award of 17 hours1.967593e-4 days <br />0.00472 hours <br />2.810847e-5 weeks <br />6.4685e-6 months <br />). PWD received 7 time-off awards ( 5.83 percent), totaling 96 hours0.00111 days <br />0.0267 hours <br />1.587302e-4 weeks <br />3.6528e-5 months <br /> (an average employee award of 1 3 hours3.472222e-5 days <br />8.333333e-4 hours <br />4.960317e-6 weeks <br />1.1415e-6 months <br />). PWTD received 2 time-off awards ( 1.67 percent), totaling 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> (an average employee award of 1 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br />). The EEO office identified a trigger related to the PWD and PWTD groups based on the disparities found when comparing the time-off awards made to PWD and PWTD and to employees self-identified as not having a di sability.90

11.7 Time-Off Awards (21-30 Hours)

The NRC gave 4 time-off awards that ranged from 21-30 hours. The awards totaled 123 hours0.00142 days <br />0.0342 hours <br />2.03373e-4 weeks <br />4.68015e-5 months <br />, with an average of 30 hours3.472222e-4 days <br />0.00833 hours <br />4.960317e-5 weeks <br />1.1415e-5 months <br /> per award.All four awards in this area went to female workers.

The total female workforce received 4 time-off awards in this range ( 100.00 percent), totaling 123 hours0.00142 days <br />0.0342 hours <br />2.03373e-4 weeks <br />4.68015e-5 months <br /> (an average employee award of 30 hours3.472222e-4 days <br />0.00833 hours <br />4.960317e-5 weeks <br />1.1415e-5 months <br />). The female racial/ethnicity groups received the following awards: 2 to White females (50.00 percent), totaling 72 time-off hours (an average of 36 hours4.166667e-4 days <br />0.01 hours <br />5.952381e-5 weeks <br />1.3698e-5 months <br />); 0 to Hispanic or Latino females (0 percent), totaling 0 time-off hours (an average of 0 hours0 days <br />0 hours <br />0 weeks <br />0 months <br />); and 2 to Black or African American females (50.00 percent), totaling 51 time-off hours (an average of 25 hours2.893519e-4 days <br />0.00694 hours <br />4.133598e-5 weeks <br />9.5125e-6 months <br />). The

89 See Table B9.

90 See Table B9.

Page 49 EEO office did not identify a trigger when comparing the time-off awards made to the female racial/ethnic groups.

The NRC gave a total of 3 time-off awards to persons who self-identified as no disability (75.00 percent), totaling 99 time-off hours (an average of 33 hours3.819444e-4 days <br />0.00917 hours <br />5.456349e-5 weeks <br />1.25565e-5 months <br /> per award). Employees who did not self-identify their status received 0 time-off awards. A PWD received 1 time-off award ( 25.00 percent),

totaling 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> (an average employee award of 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br />). PWTDs received 0 time-off awards. The EEO office identified a trigger related to PWD based on the disparities found when comparing the time-off awards made to PWD and to employees who self-identified as not having a disability. 91

11.8 Time-Off Awards (31-40 Hours)

The NRC gave a total of 3 time-off awards that ranged from 31-40 hours. The awards totaled 103 hours0.00119 days <br />0.0286 hours <br />1.703042e-4 weeks <br />3.91915e-5 months <br />, with an average of 34 hours3.935185e-4 days <br />0.00944 hours <br />5.621693e-5 weeks <br />1.2937e-5 months <br /> per award. Males did not receive time-off awards in the 31 -40 hours range.

The total female workforce received the 3 time-off awards in this range ( 100.00 percent), totaling 103 hours0.00119 days <br />0.0286 hours <br />1.703042e-4 weeks <br />3.91915e-5 months <br /> (an average employee award of 3 4 hours4.62963e-5 days <br />0.00111 hours <br />6.613757e-6 weeks <br />1.522e-6 months <br />). The female racial/ethnicity groups received the following awards: 1 to a White female (33.33 percent), totaling 40 time-off hours (an average of 40 hours4.62963e-4 days <br />0.0111 hours <br />6.613757e-5 weeks <br />1.522e-5 months <br />); and 2 to Asian females (66.67 percent), totaling 63 time-off hours (an average of 31 hours3.587963e-4 days <br />0.00861 hours <br />5.125661e-5 weeks <br />1.17955e-5 months <br />).

The EEO office did not identify a trigger when comparing the time-off awards made to the female racial/ethnic groups.

The NRC gave a total of 2 time-off awards to persons who self-identified as no disability (66.67 percent), totaling 72 time-off hours (an average of 36 hours4.166667e-4 days <br />0.01 hours <br />5.952381e-5 weeks <br />1.3698e-5 months <br /> per award). Employees who did not self-identify their status received 1 ti me-off award ( 33.33 percent), totaling 31 hours3.587963e-4 days <br />0.00861 hours <br />5.125661e-5 weeks <br />1.17955e-5 months <br /> (an average employee award of 31 hours3.587963e-4 days <br />0.00861 hours <br />5.125661e-5 weeks <br />1.17955e-5 months <br />). No time-off awards in this range went to employees identified as PWD or PWTD. The EEO office identified a trigger related to PWD based on the disparities found when comparing the time-off awards made to PWD and PWTD and those made to employees self-identified as not having a disability. 92

11.9 Time-Off Awards (41 or More Hours)

The NRC gave 1 time-off award in the 41-or -more -hour range. A White male received this time-off award, totaling 65 hours7.523148e-4 days <br />0.0181 hours <br />1.074735e-4 weeks <br />2.47325e-5 months <br />. This employee was not identified as ei ther PWD or PWTD. The EEO determined that no further analysis was warranted, due to the small number of awards in this time-off range. 93

11.10 Cash Awards of $500 and Under

The EEO office reviewed the NRCs cash awards of $500 and under to determine the participation levels of women, minorities, 94 and individuals with disabilities. 95 The NRC gave 987 cash awards ($500 and under) for a total of $366,088. The average amount of the award was $370.91.

The total male workforce received 4 76 cash awards of $500 or under (48.23 percent), totaling $17 9,659 (an average award of $377.44). The male racial/ethnicity groups received the following awards:

337 awards were given to White males ( 34.14 percent), totaling $125,110 (an average of $371.25);

91 See Table B9.

92 See Table B9.

93 See Table B9.

94 See Table A9.

95 See Table B9.

Page 50 35 to Hispanic or Latino males ( 3.55 percent), totaling $14,200 (an average of $ 405.71); 55 to Black or African American males (5.57 percent), totaling $20,155 (an average of $366.45); 36 to Asian males (3.65 percent), totaling $14,819 (an average of $411.64); 0 to Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander males (0 percent), totaling $0 (an average of $0); 1 to American Indian or Alaska Native males (0.10 percent), totaling $300 (an average of $ 300); and 1 to males of two or more races (0. 10 percent),

totaling $500 (an average of $ 500). There were also 11 unspecified cash awards, totaling $4,575. The EEO office identified a trigger related to the EEO minority male racial/ethnicity groups based on the disparities found when comparing the number of cash awards and cash amounts given to White males. 96

The total fe male workforce received 511 cash awards of $500 or under (46.93 percent), totaling

$186,429 (an average award of $364.83). The female racial/ethnicity groups received the following awards: 309 to White fe males (31.31 percent), totaling $114,562 (an average of $370.75); 26 to Hispanic or Latino females ( 2.63 percent), totaling $9,120 (an average of $ 350.77); 111 to Black or African American females ( 11.25 percent), totaling $40,340 (an average of $363.42); 55 to Asian females ( 5.57 percent), totaling $18,457 (an average of $ 335.58); 0 to Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander females (0 percent), totaling $0 (an average of $0); 4 to American Indian or Alaska Native females (0. percent), totaling $1,600 (an average of $ 400); 1 to a female of two or more races (0.10 percent), totaling $300 (an average of $ 300); and 5 unspecified cash awards, totaling $2,050. The EEO office identified a trigger related to the EEO minority female racial/ethnicity groups based on the disparities found when comparing the number of cash awards and cash amounts given to White males and females. 97

The NRC gave a total of 874 cash awards of $500 or under to persons who self-identified as no disability (88.55 percent), totaling $325,090 (an average of $371.96 per award). Employees who did not self-identify their status received 38 cash awards (3.85 percent), totaling $12,563 (an average employee award of $330.61). PWD received 75 cash awards (7.60 percent), totaling $28,435 (an average employee award of $379.13 ). PWTD received 13 cash awards (1.32 percent), totaling $4,175 (an average of $321.15). The EEO office identified a trigger related to PWD and PWTD based on the disparities found when comparing the cash awards made to PWD and PWTD and to employees who self-identified as not having a disability. 98

11.11 Cash Awards of $501- $999

The EEO office reviewed the NRCs cash awards of $501 - $999 to determine the participation levels of women, minorities, 99 and individuals with disabilities. 100 The NRC gave 1,425 cash awards ($501 to

$999) for a t otal of $ 1,050,355. The average amount of the award was $737.

The total male workforce received 776 cash awards of $501 - $999 (54.46 percent), totaling $574,641 (an average award of $740). The male racial/ethnicity groups received the following awards:

559 awards were given to White males (39.23 percent), totaling $413,924 (an average of $740); 40 to Hispanic or Latino males (2.81 percent), totaling $30,060 (an average of $ 751); 76 to Black or African American males (5.33 percent), totaling $54,804 (an average of $ 721); 87 to Asian males (6.11 percent), totaling $65,506 (an average of $752); 0 to a Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander male (0 percent), totaling 0 (an average of 0 ); 5 to an American Indian or Alaska Native male (0.35 percent), totaling $3,850 (an average of $ 770); 2 to males of two or more races (0. 14 percent),

96 See Table A9.

97 See Table A9.

98 See Table B9.

99 See Table A9.

100 See Table B9.

Page 51 totaling $1,317 (an average of $ 658); and 7 unspecified cash awards totaling $5,180. The EEO office identified a trigger related to the EEO minority male racial/ethnicity groups based on the disparities found when comparing the number of cash awards and cash amounts given to White males. 101 The total female workforce received 649 cash awards of $501 - $999 (45.54 percent), totaling $475,7 14 (an average award of $7 32). The female racial/ethnicity groups received the following awards: 362 to White females ( 25.40 percent), totaling $265,654 (an average of $733); 40 to Hispanic or Latino females ( 2.81 percent), totaling $30,060 (an average of $ 751); 151 to Black or African American females ( 10.60 percent), totaling $110,854 (an average of $ 734); 71 to Asian females ( 4.98 percent),

totaling $51,112 (an average of $720); 0 to Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander females (0 percent), totaling $0 (an average of $0); 11 to American Indian or Alaska Native fe males (0.77 percent), totaling $8,404 (an average of $ 764); 4 to females of two or more races (0. 28 percent),

totaling $3,000 (an average of $ 750); and 10 unspecified cash awards totaling $6,630. The EEO office identified a trigger related to the EEO minority female racial/ethnicity groups based on the disparities found when comparing the number of cash awards and cash amounts given to White males and females. 102

The NRC gave a total of 1,288 cash awards of $501- $999 to persons who self-identified as no disability (90. 39 percent), totaling $949,488 (an average of $737). Employees who did not self-identify their status received 53 cash awards (3.72 percent), totaling $38,750 (an average of $731). PWD received 84 cash awards (5.89 percent), totaling $62,117 (an average of $739). PWTD received 17 cash awards (1.19 percent), totaling $13,434 (an average of $790). The EEO office identified a trigger related to PWD and PWTD based on the disparities found when comparing the cash awards made to PWD and PWTD with those to employees self-identified as not having a disability. 103

11.12 Cash Awards of $1,000- $1,999

The EEO office reviewed the NRCs cash awards of $1,000- $1,999 to determine the participation levels of women, minorities, 104 and individuals with disabilities. 105 The NRC gave 1,226 cash awards

($1,000- $1,999) for a total of $1,734,807. The av erage amount of the award was $1,415.

The total male workforce received 655 cash awards of $1,000- $1,999 (53.43 percent), totaling

$934,857 (an average award of $1,4 27). The male racial/ethnicity groups received the following awards: 460 awards were given to White males (37.52 percent), totaling $654,489 (an average of

$1,422); 56 to Hispanic or Latino males (4.57 percent), totaling $80,693 (an average of $1,440); 58 to Black or African American males (4.73 percent), totaling $83,661 (an average of $1,442 ); 69 to Asian males (5.63 percent), totaling $100,930 (an average of $1,462 ); 0 to a Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander male (0 percent), totaling 0 (an average of 0); 2 to American Indian or Alaska Native males (0.16 percent), totaling $2,200 (an average of $1, 100); 3 to a male of two or more races (0. 24 percent),

totaling $4,281 (an average of $1,427 ); and 7 unspecified cash awards totaling $ 8,603. The EEO office identified a trigger related to the EEO minority male racial/ethnicity groups based on the disparities found when comparing the number of cash awards and cash amounts given to White males. 106

The total fe male workforce received 571 cash awards of $1,000- $1,999 (46.57 percent), totaling

$799,950 (an average award of $1,400). The female racial/ethnicity groups received the following awards: 296 to White fe males (24.14 percent), totaling $419,030 (an average of $1,415); 44 to Hispanic

101 See Table A9.

102 See Table A9.

103 See Table B9.

104 See Table A9.

105 See Table B9.

106 See Table A9.

Page 52 or Latino fe males (3.59 percent), totaling $60,245 (an average of $ 1,369); 165 to Black or African American females ( 13.46 percent), totaling $232,625 (an average of $1,409 ); 48 to Asian females (3.92 percent), totaling $65,975 (an average of $1,374); 1 to a Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander female ( 0.08 percent), totaling $1,170 (an average of $1,170); 3 to American Indian or Alaska Native females (0.24 percent), totaling $4,536 (an average of $1,512); 4 to female s of two or more races (0.33 percent), totaling $4,450 (an average of $1,112) ; and 10 unspecified cash awards totaling

$11,919. The EEO office identified a trigger related to the EEO minority male racial/ethnicity groups based on the disparities found when comparing the number of cash awards and cash amounts given to White males and females. 107

The NRC gave a total of 1,087 cash awards of $1,000- $1,999 to persons who self-identified as no disability (88. 66 percent), totaling $1,533, 879 (an average of $1,411). Employees who did not self-identify their status received 48 cash awards (3.92 percent), totaling $67,161 (an average of

$1,399). PWD received 91 cash awards (7.42 percent), totaling $133,767 (an average of $1,469 ).

PWTD received 13 cash awards (1.06 percent), totaling $1 9,488 (an average of $1,4 99). The EEO office identified a trigger related to PWD and PWTD based on the disparities found when comparing the cash awards made to PWD and PWTD and to employees who self-identified as not having a disability. 108

11.13 Cash Awards of $2,000- $2,999

The EEO office reviewed the NRCs cash awards of $2,000- $2,999 to determine the participation levels of women, minorities, 109 and individuals with disabilities. 110 The NRC gave 948 cash awards

($2,000- $2,999) for a total of $ 2,334,756. The average amount of the award was $2,462.

The total male workforce received 579 cash awards of $2,000 - $2,999 ( 61.08 percent), totaling

$1,427,921 (an average award of $2,466). The male racial/ethnicity groups received the following awards: 407 awards were given to White males (42.93 percent), totaling $1, 009,863 (an average of

$2,481); 40 to Hispanic or Latino males (4.22 percent), totaling $96,439 (an average of $2,410); 49 to Black or African American males (5.17 percent), totaling $11 6,094 (an average of $ 2,369); 66 to Asian males (6.96 percent), totaling $164,452 (an average of $ 2,491 ); 1 to Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander males (0.11 percent), totaling $2,078 (an average of $ 2,078); 5 to American Indian or Alaska Native males (0. 53 percent), totaling $12,639 (an average of $ 2,527 ); 2 to males of two or more races (0.21 percent), totaling $4,935 (an average of $2,467); and 9 unspecified cash awards totaling $21,421.

The EEO office identified a trigger related to the EEO minority male racial/ethnicity groups based on the disparities found when comparing the number of cash awards and cash amounts given to White males.111

The total female workforce received 3 69 cash awards of $2,000- $2,999 ( 38.92 percent), totaling

$906,835 (an average award of $2,4 57). The female racial/ethnicity groups received the following awards: 203 to White fe males (21.41 percent), totaling $505,686 (an average of $2,491); 29 to Hispanic or Latino fe males (3.06 percent), totaling $71,249 (an average of $ 2,456); 88 to Black or African American females ( 9.28 percent), totaling $208,234 (an average of $ 2,366 ); 36 to Asian females (3.80 percent), totaling $88,955 (an average of $2,470); 0 to Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander females (0 percent), totaling 0 (an average of 0 ); 2 to American Indian or Alaska Native females (0.21 percent), totaling $4,914 (an average of $ 2,457); 4 to female s of two or more races

107 See Table A9.

108 See Table B9.

109 See Table A9.

110 See Table B9.

111 See Table A9.

Page 53 (0.42 percent), totaling $9,829 (an average of $ 2,457); and 7 unspecified cash awards totaling $17,968.

The EEO office identified a trigger related to the EEO minority female racial/ethnicity groups based on the disparities identified when comparing the number of cash awards and cash amounts given to White males and females. 112

The NRC gave a total of 858 cash awards of $2,000- $2,999 to persons who self-identified as no disability (90.51 percent), totaling $2, 112,693 (an average of $2,462). Employees who did not self-identify their status received 32 cash awards (3.38 percent), totaling $76,608 (an average of

$2,394). PWD received 58 cash awards (6.12 percent), totaling $145,455 (an average of $2,507 ).

PWTD received 9 cash awards (0.95 percent), totaling $2 2,269 (an average of $2,474 ). The EEO office identified a trigger related to PWD and PWTD based on the disparities found when comparing the cash awards made to PWD and PWTD and to employees self-identified as not hav ing a disability. 113

11.14 Cash Awards of $3,000- $3,999

The EEO office reviewed the NRCs cash awards of $3,000- $3,999 to determine the participation levels of women, minorities, 114 and individuals with disabilities. 115 The NRC gave 409 cash awards

($3,000- $3,999) for a total of $ 1,387,304. The average amount of the award was $3,391.

The total male workforce received 2 91 cash awards of $3,000 - $3,999 ( 71.15 percent), totaling

$989,795 (an average award of $3,401). The male racial/ethnicity groups received the following awards: 226 awards were given to White males (55.26 percent), totaling $770,395 (an average of

$3,408); 10 to Hispanic or Latino males (2.44 percent), totaling $32,868 (an average of $3,286); 19 to Black or African American males (4.65 percent), totaling $64,670 (an average of $ 3,403 ); 28 to Asian males (6.85 percent), totaling $92, 889 (an average of $ 3,317 ); 1 to a Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander male (0.24 percent), totaling $3,645 (an average of $3,645); 3 to American Indian or Alaska Native males (0.73 percent), totaling $10,846 (an average of $ 3,615); and 4 unspecified cash awards totaling $14,482. The EEO office identified a trigger related to the EEO minority male racial/ethnicity groups based on the disparities found when comparing the number of cash awards and cash amounts given to White males.116

The total fe male workforce received 118 cash awards of $3,000- $3,999 ( 28.85 percent), totaling

$397,509 (an average award of $3,368). The female racial/ethnicity groups received the following awards: 69 to White females ( 16.87 percent), totaling $233,434 (an average of $3,383 ); 7 to Hispanic or Latino females ( 1.71 percent), totaling $22,098 (an average of $3,156); 22 to Black or African American females ( 5.38 percent), totaling $73,389 (an average of $ 3,335 ); 16 to Asian females ( 3.91 percent),

totaling $54,521 (an average of $ 3,407 ); 1 to a female of two or more races (0.24 percent), totaling

$3,460 (an average of $ 3,460); and 2 unspecified cash awards totaling $10,607. The EEO office identified a trigger related to the EEO minority female racial/ethnicity groups based on the disparities found when comparing the number of cash awards and cash amounts given to White males and females. 117

The NRC gave a total of 379 cash awards of $3,000- $3,999 to persons who self-identified as no disability (92.67 percent), totaling $1, 287,266 (an average of $3,396). Employees who did not self-identify their status received 8 cash awards (1.96 percent), totaling $25,152 (an average of

$3,144). PWD received 22 cash awards (5.38 percent), totaling $74,886 (an average of $3,403). PWTD

112 See Table A9.

113 See Table B9.

114 See Table A9.

115 See Table B9.

116 See Table A9.

117 See Table A9.

Page 54 received 6 cash awards (1.47 percent), totaling $20,911 (an average of $3,485). The EEO office identified a trigger related to PWD and PWTD based on the disparities found when comparing the cash awards made to PWD and PWTD and to employees self-identified as not having a disability. 118

11.15 Cash Awards of $4,000- $4,999

The EEO office reviewed the NRCs cash awards of $4,000- $4,999 to determine the participation levels of women, minorities, 119 and individuals with disabilities. 120 The NRC gave 107 cash awards

($4,000- $4,999) for a total of $ 455,843. The average amount of the award was $4,260.

The total male workforce received 68 cash awards of $4,000- $4,999 ( 63.55 percent), totaling $2 87,622 (an average award of $4,229). The male racial/ethnicity groups received the following awards:

52 awards were given to White males (48.60 percent), totaling $219,910 (an average of $4,229) ; 2 to Hispanic or Latino males (1.87 percent), totaling $8,208 (an average of $4,104); 7 to Black or African American males (6.54 percent), totaling $29,598 (an average of $ 4,228); 4 to Asian males (3.74 percent), totaling $17,081 (an average of $4,270); and 3 unspecified cash awards, totaling

$12,825. The EEO office identified a trigger related to the EEO minority male racial/ethnicity groups based on the disparities found when comparing the number of cash awards and cash amounts given to White males. 121

The total fe male workforce received 39 cash awards of $4,000- $4,999 ( 36.45 percent), totaling

$168,221 (an average award of $4,313). The female racial/ethnicity groups received the following awards: 26 to White females ( 24.30 percent), totaling $111,830 (an average of $4,301); 2 to Hispanic or Latino females ( 1.87 percent), totaling $8,208 (an average of $ 4,104); 6 to Black or African American females ( 5.61 percent), totaling $26,739 (an average of $ 4,456 ); 1 to an Asian female ( 0.93 percent),

totaling $4,150 (an average of $ 4,150 ); 1 to an American Indian or Alaska Native female ( 0.93 percent),

totaling $4,430 (an average of $4,43 0); 1 to a female of two or more races (0.93 percent), totaling

$4,350 (an average of $ 4,35 0); and 2 unspecified cash awards, totaling $8,514. The EEO office identified a trigger related to the EEO minority female racial/ethnicity groups based on the disparities found when comparing the number of cash awards and cash amounts given to White males and females.122

The NRC gave a total of 97 cash awards of $4,000- $4,999 to persons who self-identified as no disability (90.65 percent), totaling $412,557 (an average of $4,253). Employees who did not self-identify their status received 3 cash awards (2.80 percent), totaling $13,290 (an average of

$4,430). PWD received 7 cash awards (6.54 percent), totaling $29,996 (an average of $4,285). PWTD received 0 cash awards. The EEO office identified a trigger related to PWD based on the disparities found when comparing the cash awards made to PWD and to employees self-identified as not having a disability. 123

11.16 Cash Awards of $5,000 or M ore

118 See Table B9.

119 See Table A9.

120 See Table B9.

121 See Table A9.

122 See Table A9.

123 See Table B9.

Page 55 The EEO office reviewed the NRCs cash awards of $5,000 or more to determine the participation levels of women, minorities, 124 and individuals with disabilities. 125 The NRC gave 1 86 cash awards

($5,000 or more) for a total of $ 2,543,162. The average amount of the award was $1 3,672.

The total male workforce received 11 9 cash awards of $5,000 or more (6 3.98 percent), totaling

$1,686,790 (an average award of $1 4,174). The male racial/ethnicity groups received the following awards: 94 awards were given to White males (50.54 percent), totaling $1, 336,945 (an average of

$14,222); 3 to Hispanic or Latino males (1.61 percent), totaling $20,500 (an average of $6,833); 10 to Black or African American males (5.38 percent), totaling $163,345 (an average of $ 16,334); 8 to Asian males (4.30 percent), totaling $111,500 (an average of $ 13,937); 2 to American Indian or Alaska Native males (1.0 8 percent), totaling $20,500 (an average of $ 10,250); and 2 unspecified cash awards totaling

$34,000. The EEO office identified a trigger related to the EEO minority male racial/ethnicity groups based on the disparities found when comparing the number of cash awards and cash amounts given to White males. 126

The total fe male workforce received 67 cash awards of $5,00 0 or more (3 6.02 percent), totaling

$856,372 (an average award of $1 2,781). The female racial/ethnicity groups received the following awards: 55 to White females ( 29.57 percent), totaling $707,872 (an average of $12,870); 1 to Hispanic or Latino females (0.54 percent), totaling $7,500 (an average of $ 7,500) ; 5 to Black or African American females ( 2.69 percent), totaling $53,000 (an average of $ 10,600); 2 to Asian females ( 1.08 percent),

totaling $36,500 (an average of $ 18,250); 2 to American Indian or Alaska Native females (1.08 percent), totaling $24,500 (an average of $12,250); and 2 unspecified cash awards totaling

$27,000. The EEO office identified a trigger related to the EEO minority female racial/ethnicity groups based on the disparities found when comparing the number of cash awards and cash amounts given to White males and females. 127

The NRC gave a total of 173 cash awards of $5,000 or more to persons who self-identified as no disability (93.01 percent), totaling $2, 380,182 (an average of $13,758). Employees who did not self-identify their status received 2 cash awards (1.08 percent), totaling $24,000 (an average of

$12,000). PWD received 11 cash awards (5.91 percent), totaling $138,9 80 (an average of $12,634).

PWTD received 1 cash award (0.54 percent), totaling $14,500 (an average of $14,500). The EEO office identified a trigger related to PWD and PWTD based on the disparities found when comparing the cash awards made to PWD and PWTD and to employees who self-identified as not having a disability. 128

11.17 Quality Step Increases Awarded

The EEO office reviewed quality step increases (QSIs) to determine the participation levels of women, minorities, and individuals with disabilities.

The EEO office reviewed the NRCs QSI awards to determine the participation levels of women, minorities, 129 and individuals with disabilities. 130 The NRC gave 1 9 QSI awards. Thirteen males (10 White, 1 Hispanic or Latino, and 2 Black or African American) received QSI awards (68.42 percent).

Six females (3 White, 1 Black or African American, and 1 Asian) received QSI awards (31.58 percent).

White males received 52.63 percent of the QSI awards, and White females received 15.79 percent. The EEO office identified a trigger related to the EEO minority female and male racial/ethnicity groups

124 See Table A9.

125 See Table B9.

126 See Table A9.

127 See Table A9.

128 See Table B9.

129 See Table A9.

130 See Table B9.

Page 56 based on the disparities found when comparing the number and percentage of QSI awards given to White males and females.

The NRC gave a total of 17 QSI awards to persons who self-identified as no disability ( 89.47 percent).

Employees who did not self-identify - their status received 2 QSI awards (10.53 percent). PWD and PWTD received 0 QSI awards (0 percent). The EEO office identified a trigger related to PWD and PWTD based on the disparities found when comparing the QSI awards made to PWD and PWTD and to employees who self-i dentified as not having a disability. 131

11.18 Review of Employee Nominations, Acknowledgments, Recognitions, and Awards

On October 29, 2020, the NRC held its virtual 41st Annual Awards Ceremony to acknowledge employees from across the agency that contribute to its day-to -day suc cess. The NRC Distinguished Service Award is the highest honor granted by the NRC to an individual. This award is given on a highly selective basis for distinguished service and outstanding achievement for contributions that realize extraordinary results for the NRC. The Meritorious Service Award is the second highest honor granted by the NRC to an individual for achievement or service of unusual value to accomplishment of the agencys mission. The Meritorious Service Award for Equal Employment Opportunity Excellence recognizes exemplary performance in the implementation of the NRCs EEO program. The Distinguished and Meritorious Service awards were presented to a diverse group of NRC employees.

Throughout 2020, employees received a variety of other types of awards and recognition from NRC Headquarters and regional offices, such as employee of the m onth and quarter awards, individual and group special act awards, and innovation awards.

12 SEPARATIONS

In FY 2020, the NRC separated a total of 236 employees (47 workforce resignation, 116 retirement, 70 other separation, and 3 workforce removal). The EEO office conducted a self-assessment of the NRCs separations to identify barriers that may affec t women, minorities, 132 and individuals with disabilities. 133 The section below discusses the results of the self-assessment.

12.1 Voluntary Separations

There was a total of 47 voluntary separations from employment with the NRC. Male resignations consisted of 32 employees (68.09 percent), of whom 4 were Hispanic or Latino (8.51 percent), 21 White (44.68 percent), 2 Black or African American (4.26 percent), and 5 Asian (10.64 percent). Female resignations consisted of 15 employees (31.91 percent), of whom 1 was Hispanic or Latino (2.13 percent), 10 were White (21.28 percent), 2 were Black or African American (4.26 percent), and 2 were Asian (4.26 percent). 134 Within the voluntary separation group, there were 3 PWD (6.38 percent) and 1 PWTD (2.13 percent). 135

12.2 Retirements

131 See Table B9.

132 See Table A1.

133 See Table B1. See also Table B1-2.

134 Information is not noted in Table A1.

135 See Table B2.

Page 57 During the year, 116 employees retired from employment with the NRC. Males accounted for 82 retirements (70.69 percent), of whom there were 64 White (55.17 percent), 7 Black or African American (6.03 percent), 9 Asian (7.76 percent), 1 Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander (0.86 percent),

1 American Indian or Alaska Native (0.86 percent). 136 Females accounted for 34 retirements (29.31 percent), of whom there were 27 White (23.28 percent), 4 Black or African American (3.45 percent),

and 3 Asian (2.59 percent). Within the voluntary separation group 137

12.3 Involuntary Separations

Three employees were involuntarily separated from employment with the NRC, of whom there were 2 Black or African American females (66.67 percent) and 1 White male (33.33 percent). 138 Within the involuntary separation group, there was 1 PWD (33.33 percent). 139

12.4 Temporary Workforce Other Separations

There were 23 temporary workforce other separations, of which 4 were PWD (17.39 percent) and 1 was PWTD (4.35 percent). 140

12.5 Other Separations

There were 70 total workforce other separations from the NRC. Of these separations, males accounted for 35 (50.00 percent), of whom 23 were White (32.86 percent), 3 Hispanic (4.29 percent), 4 Black or African American (5.71 percent), 4 Asian (5.71 percent), and 1 individual of two or more races (1.43 percent). 141 Within the other separation group, there were 12 PWD (17.14 percent) and 1 PWTD (1.43 percent). 142

12.6 Triggers Identified Related to NRC Separations

In FY 2018, the EEO office determined, based on a review of NRC 2017 - 2018 Exit Interview Survey responses, that some separating employees gave reasons for leaving the agency that led to triggers.

The EEO offices review of the NRCs 2019 and 2020 Exit Interview Survey responses also noted reasons that raise concerns, which are being addressed. Accordingly, the EEO office has initiated MD 715 Part H and Part I plans to closer examine issues such as under lying reasons for voluntary employee separations from NRC employment, as well as implementing necessary corrective measures, where warranted.

13 CONCLUSION

The EEO office will continue to examine the triggers identified in this report and reconcile prior MD 715 reports with open items related to EEO and diversity and inclusion, as well as the fair and equitable participation of women, minorities, and individuals with disabilities in all areas of NRC operations. Part J of the MD 715 report presents a more indepth disability assessment.

136 Information is not noted in Table A1.

137 See Table A1.

138 See Table A1.

139 See Table B2.

140 See Table B2.

141 See Table A1.

142 See Table B2.

Page 58