This is the accessible text file for GAO report number GAO-03-141 
entitled 'Air Traffic Control: Impact of Revised Personnel Relocation 
Policies Is Uncertain' which was released on November 12, 2002.



This text file was formatted by the U.S. General Accounting Office 

(GAO) to be accessible to users with visual impairments, as part of a 

longer term project to improve GAO products’ accessibility. Every 

attempt has been made to maintain the structural and data integrity of 

the original printed product. Accessibility features, such as text 

descriptions of tables, consecutively numbered footnotes placed at the 

end of the file, and the text of agency comment letters, are provided 

but may not exactly duplicate the presentation or format of the printed 

version. The portable document format (PDF) file is an exact electronic 

replica of the printed version. We welcome your feedback. Please E-mail 

your comments regarding the contents or accessibility features of this 

document to Webmaster@gao.gov.



Report to the Chairman, Subcommittee on Aviation, Committee on 

Transportation and Infrastructure, House of Representatives:



United States General Accounting Office:



GAO:



October 2002:



Air traffic control:



Impact of Revised Personnel Relocation Policies Is Uncertain:



Air Traffic Control:



GAO-03-141:



Contents:



Letter:



Results in Brief:



Background:



Eligibility Policies Are the Same for Air Traffic Controllers and 

Managers, but Funding Policies Differ:



Air Traffic Controllers Were Less Likely than Managers to Receive 

Funding for PCS Moves:



Possible Impacts of FAA’s New PCS Policies:



Agency Comments and Our Evaluation:



Appendix I: Details on GAO’s Data Analyses:



Appendix II: GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments:



GAO Contact:



Acknowledgments:



Figures:



Figure 1: Funding of Managers’ and Controllers’ PCS Moves for 

Promotions between Field Facilities, Fiscal Years 1999-2001:



Figure 2: Funding of Managers’ and Controllers’ PCS Lateral Moves 

between Field Facilities, Fiscal Years 1999-2001:



Figure 3: Air Traffic Services Annual PCS Costs, Fiscal Years 1996-

2001:



Abbreviations:



FAA: Federal Aviation Administration:



NATCA: National Air Traffic Controllers Association:



PCS: Permanent Change of Station:



Letter:



October 31, 2002:



The Honorable John L. Mica

Chairman, Subcommittee on Aviation

Committee on Transportation

 and Infrastructure

House of Representatives:



Dear Mr. Chairman:



In fiscal year 2001, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) spent 

more than $15 million to move air traffic controllers (who are 

responsible for controlling the takeoff, landing, and ground movement 

of planes) and their managers (who oversee and administer the air 

traffic control program) to new permanent duty locations. FAA 

classifies the funds that it spends for these moves as permanent change 

of station (PCS) benefits. In 1998, as part of a broader effort to 

reform its personnel policies, FAA changed its policies on PCS 

benefits. Instead of fully reimbursing the costs of all PCS moves and 

prohibiting unfunded PCS moves, as it once did, FAA now determines the 

amount of PCS benefits to be offered on a position-by-position basis. 

Under its new policies, FAA can fully reimburse the costs of a move if 

it determines that the move is in the interest of the government, or it 

can offer partial (fixed) relocation benefits if it determines that the 

agency will derive some benefit from the move. Under the new policy, 

employees and managers can now also move at their own expense. We 

examined the impact of these changes in PCS policies on FAA’s Air 

Traffic Services organization as part of our ongoing work for you on 

the impact of FAA’s 1996 personnel reforms. As agreed with your office, 

we researched three questions:



* How do FAA’s policies on eligibility for, and the amount of, PCS 

benefits differ for air traffic controllers and their managers?



* How did the likelihood of being offered PCS benefits differ for 

controllers and managers?



* What has been the impact of PCS policies on Air Traffic Services’ 

annual PCS costs and its ability to staff vacant positions?



To address these questions, we obtained and analyzed information on 

trends since fiscal year 1996 in PCS policies and funding for air 

traffic controllers and air traffic managers. We also analyzed data on 

the type of funding for, and purpose of, controllers’ and managers’ PCS 

moves between field offices from 1999 through 2001. We also examined 

available information regarding moves other than those between field 

offices. See appendix I for details about our data analyses. We also 

met with representatives of Air Traffic Services and FAA’s Conference 

Managers Association to discuss the impact of FAA’s PCS policies. We 

conducted our review from March 2002 through August 2002 in accordance 

with generally accepted government auditing standards.



Results in Brief:



FAA’s policies on eligibility for PCS benefits are the same for air 

traffic controllers and their managers, but the amounts of the benefits 

vary. According to these policies, eligibility depends on a determining 

official’s decision about how critical a position is and/or whether FAA 

will benefit from the move. Depending on this determination, FAA may 

fully reimburse the costs of a move, offer a fixed amount of relocation 

benefits, or provide no relocation benefits. Under a memorandum of 

understanding between the National Air Traffic Controllers Association 

(NATCA) and FAA, controllers can receive a larger fixed relocation 

payment than managers. For all moves where fixed relocation payments 

are provided to controllers, they receive a payment of $27,000, whereas 

the amounts of the fixed relocation payments for managers and other 

nonunion employees are determined on a case-by-case basis up to 

$25,000. The average fixed relocation payment for managers’ moves 

between field offices (based on FAA estimates) was about $19,500 from 

1999 through 2001.



Air traffic controllers have been less likely than air traffic managers 

to be offered PCS benefits when they move between facilities. Our 

analysis of data on moves between field facilities in fiscal years 1999 

through 2001 (comprising 1,639 of 2,107, or almost 80 percent of all 

Air Traffic PCS moves) showed that Air Traffic Services funded 16 

percent of moves involving a promotion (123 of 774) and 6 percent of 

lateral moves between field facilities for controllers (14 of 250), 

compared with 38 percent of promotional moves (34 of 90) and 34 percent 

of lateral moves (14 of 41) for managers. For other moves (for example, 

from regional offices to field facilities or headquarters to regional 

offices), Air Traffic Services funded 9 percent for controllers (25 of 

275 moves), compared with 47 percent for managers (91 of 193 moves). 

Although controllers make up about 77 percent of the combined 

workforce, they are to get 65 percent of available Air Traffic PCS 

funding according to a February 2000 Memorandum of Understanding 

between FAA and NATCA. Air Traffic Services officials said that the 

relatively small number of managers who moved, combined with the fixed 

allotment of total PCS funding, led to the difference between managers 

and controllers in the likelihood for PCS funding.



According to FAA officials, PCS costs have decreased and FAA’s ability 

to quickly fill vacant controller positions has improved since the new 

PCS policies took effect. Data show that Air Traffic Services’ PCS 

annual costs decreased in 1998 when FAA began implementing its new PCS 

policies--for example, from $31.8 million in fiscal year 1997 to $17.5 

million in fiscal year 1998[Footnote 1]--but FAA does not have the data 

to determine to what extent the annual decreases are attributable to 

the new PCS policies. Lacking the requisite data, FAA has attributed 

the reduction to decreases in the agency’s budget rather than to the 

new PCS policies. Air Traffic Services’ officials have attributed 

improvements in FAA’s ability to quickly fill vacant controller 

positions at field facilities to broader flexibilities provided by the 

new PCS policies, but again, they lacked the data to support their 

views. On the other hand, FAA’s Conference Managers Association has 

expressed concern that the changes in PCS policies may result in 

unintended consequences in filling vacant positions. Specifically, the 

Association has suggested that these changes may reduce the pool of 

applicants (because fewer applicants may be willing to fund part or all 

of their moves), thereby, potentially affecting the qualifications and 

diversity of applicants for promotions. Moreover, according to the 

Association, PCS benefits paid to fill comparable positions could vary 

from year to year with changes in budget funding levels. However, the 

Association said that there were no data to determine whether these 

negative effects have occurred. Air Traffic Services officials said 

they were reviewing the concerns identified by the Association and 

planned to comment in the near future. Officials from FAA’s Office of 

Human Resources said they had agencywide plans to begin collecting 

information on the time to fill positions and survey new recruits on, 

among other things, the reasons they applied for the position into 

which they were hired. This information could help FAA determine the 

effects of its new PCS policies. Our ongoing work examines the extent 

to which FAA has gathered data to determine the impact of its personnel 

reform.



Background:



FAA currently employs almost 20,000 employees to operate and manage the 

nation’s air traffic control system.[Footnote 2] Most of these 

employees (about 15,250) are air traffic control specialists, or 

controllers, who are responsible for controlling the takeoff, landing, 

and ground movement of planes and are assigned to field 

facilities.[Footnote 3] (NATCA represents these controllers.) In 

addition, about 4,500 managers, supervisors, and staff specialists 

within FAA’s Air Traffic Services work to oversee and administer the 

air traffic control program. (About 3,900 of these 4,500 managers, 

supervisors, and specialists work in the various field facilities 

around the country and the other 600 provide management, direction, and 

oversight, as well as overall support, of the air traffic control 

system at headquarters and regional locations.) For this report, we 

focused our analysis on these two groups in FAA’s occupational job 

series 2152, which we refer to as controllers and managers, 

respectively.



In 1994, Congress directed the Secretary of Transportation to undertake 

a study of management, regulatory, and legislative reforms that would 

enable FAA to provide better air traffic control services.[Footnote 4] 

FAA’s resulting 1995 report to Congress stated that existing federal 

personnel rules and procedures limited FAA’s ability to attract and 

retain qualified staff at key facilities or to reassign employees in 

response to changing needs. The report also stated that exemption from 

federal personnel regulations would provide FAA with the flexibility to 

hire, reward, and relocate employees to better manage the air traffic 

control system.[Footnote 5] On November 15, 1995, Congress directed the 

FAA Administrator to develop and implement a new personnel management 

system to provide greater flexibility in the hiring, training, 

compensation, and location of personnel. The 1996 Department of 

Transportation Appropriations Act exempted FAA from most provisions of 

title 5 of the United States Code and other federal personnel 

laws.[Footnote 6] On April 1, 1996, FAA introduced a set of new 

personnel policies and procedures that included, among other things, 

personnel reforms for locating its workforce more effectively.



Controllers and managers may make PCS moves for promotions,[Footnote 7] 

downgrades,[Footnote 8] or lateral transfers. To be eligible for 

promotion within the controller or manager ranks or from controller to 

manager, individuals may be required to make a PCS move. For example, 

promotion for a controller may require making a PCS move to a higher-

level facility (i.e., one with higher levels of operational 

complexity).[Footnote 9] Promotion for a manager may require gaining 

greater experience with more complex and diverse air traffic 

operations. This may involve a PCS move to a regional office or FAA 

headquarters for policy and management experience.[Footnote 10] To be 

eligible for promotion from controller to manager, an individual may 

have to move to a lower-level facility where supervisory positions are 

available, to a regional office, or to FAA headquarters. Downgrades and 

lateral transfers are generally made for personal reasons but may also 

benefit the government.



Under title 5 rules, federal agencies may elect to pay for the expenses 

of transportation of immediate family and of household goods and 

personal effects to and from the assignment location for a PCS move 

when it is in the interest of the federal government.[Footnote 11] 

According to FAA Air Traffic Services and Human Resources officials, 

FAA historically interpreted title 5 rules as a requirement to fully 

reimburse all PCS moves, since FAA considered all such moves to be in 

the interest of the government. As part of its personnel reform, FAA 

delegated the authority to determine eligibility for and the amount of 

PCS benefits to each line of business[Footnote 12] and provided three 

PCS funding options: (1) full PCS reimbursement, (2) fixed relocation 

payments, and (3) unfunded moves. If the move is determined to be in 

the interest of the government, FAA will fully reimburse the individual 

for costs associated with the move.[Footnote 13] According to FAA, the 

average agencywide PCS cost for fully reimbursed PCS moves in fiscal 

year 2001 was about $54,000 (based on a sample of 100 fully funded PCS 

moves in that fiscal year.):



Under its personnel reform, FAA may offer a fixed relocation payment if 

it determines that the agency will derive some benefit from a move, 

even though the move is not in the interest of the government.[Footnote 

14] For example, Air Traffic Services may offer a fixed relocation 

payment as a recruitment tool, when necessary, to attract enough 

qualified candidates for a position.[Footnote 15]



If a move is not in the interest of the government and FAA does not 

determine that it will derive some benefit from the move, there is no 

basis for offering PCS funding. However, as a result of FAA’s personnel 

reforms, employees may choose to make unfunded moves at their own 

expense for personal reasons, to gain experience needed for 

professional advancement, or for promotion. Before 1996, when FAA’s 

policy did not allow unfunded moves, many vacancies went unfilled for 

lack of PCS funds, according to FAA’s Personnel Reform Executive 

Committee Task Force Report. The intent of the change in policy was to 

(1) improve employee morale by allowing willing employees to relocate 

and (2) allow FAA to relocate more employees without increasing the PCS 

budget. In February 2000, FAA signed a memorandum of understanding with 

NATCA that allowed FAA to offer controllers unfunded PCS moves to 

higher-level facilities.[Footnote 16] These moves to higher-level 

facilities are considered promotions because controllers’ pay increases 

with the level of the facility.



Eligibility Policies Are the Same for Air Traffic Controllers and 

Managers, but Funding Policies Differ:



FAA’s policies on eligibility for PCS reimbursement, created as a 

result of FAA’s 1996 personnel reform and implemented for air traffic 

controllers in the agency’s February 2000 memorandum of understanding 

with NATCA, do not differentiate between air traffic controllers and 

managers. However, the amount of the fixed relocation payment that Air 

Traffic Services may offer controllers and managers for PCS moves does 

differ. The February 2000 memorandum of understanding established a 

fixed relocation payment of $27,000 for controllers as a result of 

negotiations between FAA management and NATCA. This amount is set for 

all fixed relocation payments provided to controllers. Conversely, the 

amounts of fixed relocation payments for air traffic control managers 

are determined on a case-by-case basis up to a maximum of $25,000. The 

average PCS fixed relocation payment for managers’ moves between field 

offices during fiscal years 1999 through 2001 (based on FAA estimates) 

was about $19,500.[Footnote 17]



Air Traffic Controllers Were Less Likely than Managers to Receive 

Funding for PCS Moves:



Air traffic controllers were less likely than air traffic managers to 

receive funding for their moving expenses when moving between 

facilities. According to Air Traffic Services data, controllers and 

managers made 1,466 and 173 PCS moves, respectively, between field 

facilities from fiscal year 1999 through fiscal year 2001; these moves 

comprise 78 percent of all 2,107 Air Traffic PCS moves.[Footnote 18] 

About half of those moves (864) were for promotions. As shown in figure 

1, 84 percent of controllers’ PCS moves between field facilities for 

promotions (651 of 774) were unfunded during fiscal years 1999 through 

2001, while 62 percent of managers’ PCS moves for promotions (56 of 90) 

were unfunded.



Figure 1: Funding of Managers’ and Controllers’ PCS Moves for 

Promotions between Field Facilities, Fiscal Years 1999-2001:



[See PDF for image]



Source: GAO’s analysis of data provided by FAA.



[End of figure]



Similarly, controllers were less likely than managers to receive 

funding for lateral moves. From fiscal year 1999 through fiscal year 

2001, controllers and managers made 291 PCS moves for lateral 

assignment between field facilities. As shown in figure 2, 94 percent 

of controllers’ lateral moves (236 of 250) were unfunded, compared with 

66 percent of managers’ lateral moves (27 of 41).



Figure 2: Funding of Managers’ and Controllers’ PCS Lateral Moves 

between Field Facilities, Fiscal Years 1999-2001:



[See PDF for image]



Source: GAO’s analysis of data provided by FAA.



[End of figure]



Data were not available on the type of funding alternatives used for 

other PCS moves (from headquarters to the field, for example, and from 

regional offices to headquarters). However, data on whether any type of 

funding was provided for these other moves indicated that 91 percent of 

those by controllers were unfunded during fiscal years 1999 through 

2001 (250 of 275), compared with 53 percent of those by managers (102 

of 193).



According to the February 2000 memorandum of understanding between FAA 

and NATCA, 65 percent of PCS funding is to be allocated to controllers 

and 35 percent to the rest of air traffic staff. Thus, while they 

account for 77 percent of the combined workforce, controllers get a 

smaller proportion--65 percent--of air traffic PCS funding. FAA 

officials said that this resulted in a higher percentage of managers 

who received funding for PCS moves.



Although managers were more likely than controllers to receive funding 

for PCS moves for promotion in the field, they were less likely to make 

PCS moves between field locations for promotions. From fiscal year 1999 

through fiscal year 2001, about 2 percent of the total population of 

managers (4,490) made promotional moves between field facilities, 

compared with about 5 percent of the controller workforce (15,248). 

Lateral and downgrade moves between field facilities during the same 

period accounted for less than 3 percent of managers’ and controllers’ 

respective workforces. For other PCS moves (between headquarters, 

regional offices, and field facilities), managers (4 percent) were more 

likely to make moves than controllers (2 percent).



Possible Impacts of FAA’s New PCS Policies:



Although FAA officials said that PCS costs have decreased and FAA’s 

ability to quickly fill vacant controller positions has improved since 

the new PCS policies took effect, they did not have the data to 

determine to what extent the annual decreases or improvement in the 

agency’s ability to fill vacancies in field facilities are attributable 

to the new PCS policies implemented in 1998. For example, from fiscal 

year 1997, Air Traffic Services’ PCS costs decreased from $31.8 million 

to $17.5 million in fiscal year 1998 (see fig. 3).[Footnote 19] FAA has 

attributed these decreases to reductions in its budget rather than to 

the new PCS policies providing fixed relocation payments for PCS moves 

and allowing staff to pay for their own moves. However, officials noted 

that they lacked data to support this determination. FAA officials also 

said that the new PCS policies have improved their ability to fill 

controller vacancies in field facilities, but again, they lacked data 

to support their views. Officials from FAA’s Office of Human Resources 

said they had agencywide plans to begin collecting information on the 

time to fill positions and survey new recruits on, among other things, 

the reasons they applied for the position into which they were hired. 

This information should help FAA determine the impacts of its PCS 

policies.



Figure 3: Air Traffic Services Annual PCS Costs, Fiscal Years 1996-

2001:



[See PDF for image]



Note: Amounts adjusted for inflation to constant 2001 dollars.



Source: GAO’s presentation of data provided by FAA.



[End of figure]



FAA also lacks data to respond to questions raised by the FAA 

Conference Managers Association about the potential impacts of FAA’s 

new PCS policies.[Footnote 20] In the Association’s view, the change 

from the determination that a promotional opportunity is in the best 

interest of the government (under title 5 rules) to a determination 

based on general criteria by each of the lines of business that only 

some promotional opportunities are in the best interest of the 

government (under rules revised as a part of personnel reform) made the 

decision-making process too subjective. In March 2002,[Footnote 21] 

Association representatives expressed concern about the potential for 

unintended effects of the change in FAA’s PCS policy including a 

reduction in the number of qualified applicants that could weaken FAA’s 

leadership and a reduction in the diversity of potential applicant 

pools that could result in discrimination in filling positions. The 

Association also said that a disparate provision of PCS benefits due to 

funding concerns could have a negative impact on morale.



According to the managers association, some qualified managers may be 

reluctant to bid on opportunities for promotion because of the cost of 

partially or fully funding their own PCS moves. (As was shown in fig. 

1, almost two-thirds of these moves for managers are unfunded.) The 

Association was concerned that, because not all qualified potential 

applicants may apply for promotions, less qualified managers may bid on 

and be selected for promotion opportunities because they are willing to 

make the financial commitment to pay for some or all of the costs 

associated with a PCS move. The Association believes this outcome could 

weaken the quality of FAA’s leadership.



Another Association concern is that selecting officials may be unable 

to determine whether the pool of candidates who bid on unfunded PCS or 

fixed-funded PCS positions is representative of FAA managers. 

Specifically, the Association has suggested that this pool of 

candidates may not be as diverse as the pool of candidates who would 

bid on a position with a fully reimbursed PCS move. As a result, the 

Association believes the new PCS policies may inadvertently lead to 

discrimination.



Finally, Association officials expressed concern that FAA’s 

implementation of the variable PCS policy would be affected by 

fluctuations in FAA’s budget. In their view, the effect of using PCS 

funding to create an incentive for filling hard-to-staff positions (as 

is done under the new policies) rather than to fully reimburse all PCS 

moves (as was done under title 5 rules) was to reduce the funding for 

PCS moves. With less PCS funding available, the officials said 

managers’ decisions to fund PCS moves could be more sensitive to 

current funding issues than to operational staffing needs. As a result, 

the Association said comparable positions could be filled in different 

budget years at the same location using different levels of PCS 

benefits. Thus, two managers could receive disparate PCS benefits for 

essentially the same type of move.



The Association acknowledged that there were no data that showed these 

unintended effects had occurred. Likewise, without information such as 

the qualifications of employees and managers who applied for promotions 

before and after the change in policies, the qualifications of those 

who did not apply, and the funding for comparable positions over time, 

we could not determine whether the potential unintended effects 

identified by the Association had occurred. Air Traffic Services 

officials said they were still reviewing the concerns and planned to 

comment in the near future.



Agency Comments and Our Evaluation:



We provided a copy of the draft report to Department of Transportation 

and FAA officials who agreed with the contents of the report and 

provided a technical clarification regarding our description of the 

allocation of PCS funding under the 2000 Memorandum of Agreement 

between FAA and NATCA. They did not provide written comments on the 

report.



As agreed with your office, unless you publicly announce the contents 

of this report earlier, we plan no further distribution until 10 days 

from the report date. At that time, we will send copies of this report 

to interested congressional committees and to the Honorable Norman Y. 

Mineta, Secretary of Transportation; the Honorable Marion Blakely, 

Administrator, FAA; and the Honorable Mitchell E. Daniels, Jr., 

Director, Office of Management and Budget. We also will make copies 

available to others upon request. In addition, the report will be 

available at no charge on the GAO Web site at http://www.gao.gov.



If you or your staff have any questions about this report or would like 

to discuss it further, I can be reached at (202) 512-2834. Key 

contributors to this report are acknowledged in appendix II.



Sincerely yours,



Gerald L. Dillingham, Ph.D.

Director, Physical Infrastructure:



Signed by Gerald L. Dillingham, Ph.D.:



[End of section]



Appendix I: Details on GAO’s Data Analyses:



We obtained and analyzed data on trends in funding for permanent change 

of station (PCS) moves in the Federal Aviation Administration’s (FAA’s) 

Air Traffic Services line of business (the FAA line of business for air 

traffic controllers and air traffic managers) since fiscal year 1996 

and analyzed data on the type of funding (fully funded, fixed payments, 

or unfunded) and purpose (promotion, lateral transfer, or downgrade) of 

controllers’ and managers’ PCS moves between field offices from 1999 

through 2001, the only years for which these data were available. The 

PCS moves between field offices account for about 80 percent of all Air 

Traffic PCS moves. The only information available for other moves (for 

example, between headquarters and field offices or between regional 

offices and headquarters) was the total number of moves and whether 

they were funded or unfunded.



To assess the reliability of the data, we (1) discussed the data 

collection methods with responsible agency staff and (2) reviewed the 

information for reasonableness. We did not independently verify these 

data.



[End of section]



Appendix II: GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments:



GAO Contact:



Gerald L. Dillingham, Ph.D. (202) 512-2834:



Acknowledgments:



In addition to the individual named above, Elizabeth Eisenstadt, 

Michele Fejfar, David Hooper, Chris Keisling, and E. Jerry Seigler made 

key contributions to this report.



FOOTNOTES:



[1] Adjusted for inflation to constant 2001 dollars.



[2] The Office of Personnel Management classifies civilian air traffic 

controllers in FAA as occupational series 2152--civilian air traffic 

controller. In addition to these employees, there are about 2,800 

flight service station controllers who do not directly control or 

separate air traffic but provide pilot briefings, weather reports and 

emergency services to pilots before and during flights.



[3] Field facilities include FAA towers, terminal radar approach 

controls, and en route centers.



[4] Pub. L. No. 103-260, 108 Stat. 698 (1994).



[5] See Federal Aviation Administration, Background Paper: Personnel 

Management Reform for the Federal Aviation Administration, (Washington, 

D.C.: August 1995).



[6] Congress did not exempt FAA from provisions of title 5 pertaining 

to veterans’ preference; antidiscrimination; retirement, unemployment 

and insurance coverage; and limitations on the right to strike.



[7] FAA defines promotion as the movement of an employee to a higher 

grade or pay band.



[8] FAA defines a downgrade as a reduction in grade or pay level, which 

may be either voluntary (through assignment to a different position at 

a lower grade or pay level) or involuntary (through reclassification or 

reevaluation of the duties and responsibilities of a position).



[9] FAA’s pay system for air traffic controllers classifies each air 

traffic control facility into air traffic control grades with 

corresponding pay bands based on numerous factors, including the level 

of air traffic and complexity of operations at each location. Under 

this pay system, increasing levels of pay are associated with 

increasing levels of air traffic and more complex operations. 



[10] Federal Aviation Personnel Manual Letter 330-4, SUBJ: Merit 

Promotion Program, Appendix 9, “Air Traffic Competitive Career 

Progression Plan,” effective October 1, 1985.



[11] 5 U.S.C. sec. 5724a.



[12] FAA is organized along five lines of business: Airports, 

Commercial Space Transportation, Research & Acquisition, Regulation & 

Certification, and Air Traffic Services. 



[13] Reimbursable expenses include those related to the employee’s home 

sale and purchase, travel, and shipment of household goods and may 

include those for house hunting trips, subsistence in temporary 

quarters, and transportation of a privately owned vehicle; 

reimbursements are taxable.



[14] Employees receiving fixed relocation payments do not have to 

account for moving expenses and must pay income taxes on the fixed 

amount received.



[15] According to Air Traffic Services policy, determining officials 

state on the vacancy announcement the type of PCS benefits--full 

reimbursement or fixed relocation--to be offered. 



[16] The February 2000 memorandum of understanding was a supplemental, 

midterm agreement to FAA’s 1998 contract with NATCA.



[17] Based on estimated costs submitted by FAA regions for all 41 

reported fixed relocation payment PCS moves between field facilities 

from fiscal year 1999 through fiscal year 2001. Estimates in the 

database were not updated to reflect actual costs.



[18] Data on the funding alternatives for PCS moves were available only 

for moves between field facilities for fiscal years 1999 through 2001. 



[19] Adjusted for inflation to constant 2001 dollars.



[20] The Association represents about 1,700 FAA managers and 

supervisors.



[21] Federal Aviation Administration Conference Managers Association, 

Legislative Briefing Book, 107th Congress, Second Session, March 2002.



GAO’s Mission:



The General Accounting Office, the investigative arm of Congress, 

exists to support Congress in meeting its constitutional 

responsibilities and to help improve the performance and accountability 

of the federal government for the American people. GAO examines the use 

of public funds; evaluates federal programs and policies; and provides 

analyses, recommendations, and other assistance to help Congress make 

informed oversight, policy, and funding decisions. GAO’s commitment to 

good government is reflected in its core values of accountability, 

integrity, and reliability.



Obtaining Copies of GAO Reports and Testimony:



The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no 

cost is through the Internet. GAO’s Web site ( www.gao.gov ) contains 

abstracts and full-text files of current reports and testimony and an 

expanding archive of older products. The Web site features a search 

engine to help you locate documents using key words and phrases. You 

can print these documents in their entirety, including charts and other 

graphics.



Each day, GAO issues a list of newly released reports, testimony, and 

correspondence. GAO posts this list, known as “Today’s Reports,” on its 

Web site daily. The list contains links to the full-text document 

files. To have GAO e-mail this list to you every afternoon, go to 

www.gao.gov and select “Subscribe to daily E-mail alert for newly 

released products” under the GAO Reports heading.



Order by Mail or Phone:



The first copy of each printed report is free. Additional copies are $2 

each. A check or money order should be made out to the Superintendent 

of Documents. GAO also accepts VISA and Mastercard. Orders for 100 or 

more copies mailed to a single address are discounted 25 percent. 

Orders should be sent to:



U.S. General Accounting Office



441 G Street NW,



Room LM Washington,



D.C. 20548:



To order by Phone: 	



	Voice: (202) 512-6000:



	TDD: (202) 512-2537:



	Fax: (202) 512-6061:



To Report Fraud, Waste, and Abuse in Federal Programs:



Contact:



Web site: www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm E-mail: fraudnet@gao.gov



Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or (202) 512-7470:



Public Affairs:



Jeff Nelligan, managing director, NelliganJ@gao.gov (202) 512-4800 U.S.



General Accounting Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7149 Washington, D.C.



20548: