Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request for a Revised Information Collection: SF-15 Application for 10-Point Veteran Preference, 44187-44189 [E7-15164]

Agencies

• Office of Personnel Management
• Personnel Management Office

[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 151 (Tuesday, August 7, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Pages 44187-44189]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-15164]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

OFFICE OF PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT


Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request for a Revised 
Information Collection: SF-15 Application for 10-Point Veteran 
Preference

AGENCY: Office of Personnel Management.

ACTION: 30-Day Notice of Information Collection Under Review: Form SF-
15, Application for 10-Point Veteran Preference; OMB Control Number 
3206-0001.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Office of Personnel Management (OPM) has submitted the 
following information collection request to the Office of Management 
and Budget (OMB) for review and clearance in accordance with the 
Paperwork

[[Page 44188]]

Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA). The information collection was previously 
published in the Federal Register Volume 72, Number 17, page 3880 on 
January 26, 2007, allowing for a 60 day comment period on the Standard 
Form 15 (SF-15) Application for 10-Point Veteran Preference.
    The purpose of this Notice is to allow for an additional 30 days 
for public comments. This process is in accordance with 5 CFR 1320.10.
    The SF-15 is used by agencies, OPM examining offices, and agency 
appointing officials to adjudicate individuals' claims for veterans' 
preference in accordance with the Veterans' Preference Act of 1944. 
Approximately 11,252 forms were completed last year. Each form requires 
approximately 10 minutes to complete. The annual estimated burden is 
1,875 hours.
    In the 60-Day Notice published January 26, 2007, OPM announced our 
request for clearance for the SF-15 and invited public comments. OPM 
received 14 comments by the closing date on March 27, 2007. A 
discussion of the comments is provided below.
    One commenter asked why we were reviewing the SF-15. The purpose of 
reviewing the SF-15 is to seek public comment concerning whether the 
content and questions still serve their intended purposes. Primarily, 
we are reviewing the form to see whether the form should be simplified.
    One commenter asked OPM to maintain the SF-15 in its current form 
without changes because the instructions are simple. We will consider 
this comment, but we will also review all other collected comments and 
accept proposed changes that we conclude will improve the form.
    We received comments from three individuals and two veteran service 
organizations (VSOs) recommending that OPM continue to use the form. 
Another commenter asked whether this review process was intended to 
remove 10-point veterans' preference for disabled veterans seeking 
Federal employment. OPM is not removing the SF-15 form from use. The 
SF-15 is a useful information collection instrument that enables 
disabled veterans and those seeking entitlement for derived preference 
(e.g., spouses, widows, and mothers) to select the particular type of 
preference depending on their individual circumstances. Agencies use 
the information on the form to adjudicate claims for veterans' 
preference, in part by identifying the basis on which each individual 
is claiming entitlement to preference (e.g., ten-point (non-compensable 
disability); ten-point (compensable disability); ten-point (spouse); 
ten-point (widow or widower); ten-point (mother, deceased veteran); and 
ten-point (mother, disabled veteran).
    One commenter noted that the SF-15 is dated December 2004 and has 
no expiration date and questioned why we were seeking re-clearance. 
Under the PRA, OMB requires continuing approval for the use of any 
information collection (e.g., forms, surveys). OPM submits a periodic 
request (every three years) for approval by OMB to continue the use of 
the SF-15 form. The Notice informs the public, as required by law, that 
we are reviewing the form and will consider any questions and comments 
regarding its content and use.
    One commenter asked why VSO liaison members who regularly meet with 
OPM were not notified in advance of this Notice. Another individual 
suggested that the Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) should be 
queried for their input in reviewing the form. The purpose of 
publishing revisions in advance and establishing a comment period is to 
provide interested parties with an opportunity to comment on proposed 
revisions. We welcome comments from VSOs, the DVA, and any other 
individual or organization that wishes to comment. Pursuant to this 
notice, we are now providing an additional 30 days for interested 
parties to comment.
    One VSO submitted a consolidated listing of questions and 
recommendations from its constituents, addressing the content and 
design of the SF-15 form. Their first question was whether the full 
social security number (SSN) was needed on the form and if so, could it 
be masked to protect an individual from identity theft. We agree 
protection of applicants' SSNs is important and have removed those 
blocks on the SF-15 that specifically ask for the SSN.
    Another individual asked who processes the SF-15 after an 
individual completes it. Once the SF-15 is completed by the applicant, 
the applicant sends the SF-15 to the agency to which the individual is 
applying.
    One commenter wanted to know who signs the SF-15 at the bottom of 
the form in the block: Signature of Appointing Officer. This block is 
signed by the Federal agency's designated Appointing Officer if the 
applicant is selected for employment.
    One commenter questioned the use of the term ``burden'' as used in 
the Notice. Americans spend incalculable hours each year providing 
information to Federal agencies by filling out forms, surveys, and or 
questionnaires. A major aim of the PRA is to minimize the ``burden''--a 
term used in the law--which the information collection imposes on the 
public. Under the PRA, OMB must approve all such information 
collections and has broad authority over annual Governmentwide 
paperwork reduction goals established by law. Generally, when a Federal 
agency seeks to collect information from ten or more people, OMB must 
approve the collection. Information collections that fall under OMB's 
purview include application forms, questionnaires, surveys, and 
reporting or recordkeeping requirements. The total ``annual burden 
hours'' and ``annual burden dollars'' for each such form are tracked by 
OMB and monitored by Congress.
    Another commenter wanted to know whether the SF-15 is used to 
collect data for statistical or census purposes. The information on the 
SF-15 form is used for identifying the individual's claim to the type 
of veterans' preference entitlement on the form. OPM uses data from the 
SF-15 to identify the number of persons employed and entitled to the 
various types of veterans' preference.
    One commenter asked if there is a general clearinghouse to maintain 
all the SF-15's so veterans do not have to keep filling out the form 
each time they apply for a Federal job. OPM does not maintain a 
clearinghouse on all SF-15's. Agencies may do this as a part of their 
applicant supply files, but are not required to do so. Agencies are 
required to keep all hiring records for two years but are not required 
to match an SF-15 already on file with a new application.
    One group of veterans collectively submitted their recommendations 
to revise the content on the SF-15 form. These recommendations are as 
follows:
    Page 1 of the Standard Form 15, Block 2: delete three (e.g., civil 
service exam, postal exam, and position you currently occupy) of the 
four areas and use the block only for the job announcement number. We 
have considered this recommendation and do not concur. Block 2 has 
multiple uses that are still valid today (e.g., identifying an exam 
that was recently taken or notifying an agency that a current employee 
is changing his or her entitlement to veterans' preference based on a 
call-up for military service that resulted in a service-connected 
disability). Removing the three areas (e.g., civil service exam, postal 
exam, and position you currently occupy) would limit the form to only 
those applying for specific job announcements.
    Block 5: drop the ``Date exam was held'' and use the block only for 
the ``Date the application was submitted'' to the agency. We do not 
concur with the

[[Page 44189]]

recommendation. As long as we are retaining a reference to an exam in 
Block 2, we should retain a reference to an exam here as well. The 
applicant can select his or her choice in Block 5 and provide the date 
as applicable.
    Blocks 4 (SSN), 7 (Service Number), 8 (SSN), and 9 (VA Claim 
Number) are asking the applicant to provide potentially the same 
information and the group recommended consolidating these four blocks. 
We have considered the recommendation and find Blocks 7 and 9 should 
remain on the form. We have removed Blocks 4 and 8 that asked for an 
SSN and have renumbered all applicable blocks on the SF-15.
    The group recommended that OPM be cognizant of visually impaired 
disabled veterans and increase the size of text on the form. We concur 
and will increase the smaller size font used on the SF-15. We wish to 
remind readers that a fillable version of the updated form will be 
available on the OPM Web site (https://www.opm.gov/forms/pdf_fill/
SF15.pdf). Anyone completing this version of the form can adjust the 
font size as needed.
    The group recommended using one line for stating the full title of 
the form (Application for 10-Point Veterans Preference) instead of the 
title being separated into two lines. We agree. We have changed the 
title of the form to be on one line.
    One suggestion was that OPM replace Block 10 with Block 11, because 
many of the veterans currently filling out this form are rated by VA as 
30% or higher disabled and this being the first block would provide a 
more user-friendly format for efficiency and effectiveness purposes. We 
have considered this recommendation, but decided not to change the 
order in which these blocks appear. The flow of information on the form 
begins in Block 10 (now renumbered as Block 8), with those veterans 
entitled to veterans' preference based on non-compensable service-
connected disabilities of less than 10% followed by Block 11 (now Block 
9), used by those veterans who are in receipt of or eligible for 
compensation based on service-connected disabilities rated as 10% or 
more.
    The group recommended adding ``at 30% or greater'' in Block 11 
after ``compensation from the VA'' We agree that adding a percentage to 
this sentence assists veterans to understand that Block 11 is for those 
receiving compensation. As compensation is provided to those service 
men and women rated as 10% or more disabled as a result of service-
connected injuries, we have added ``of 10% or more'' to what is now 
Block 9.
    The group recommended adding ``dashes and arrows'' to Blocks 12, 
13, and 14 to connect the narrative with the questions, similar to what 
was done in Blocks 10 and 11. We disagree, as adding dashes and arrows 
to Blocks 12, 13, and 14 would clutter this area of the document 
potentially making it harder for the applicant to read in completing 
this form.
    The group recommended moving the statement ``This form must be 
signed by all persons claiming 10-Point preference,'' which appears at 
the lower right side of the form, and placing it directly under the 
statement ``I certify that all of the statements made in this claim * * 
*'' block on the lower left side of the page. We agree and revised the 
form accordingly.
    The group also recommended moving the block containing the 
statement ``Preference entitlement was verified'' to the space where 
the block containing the statement ``This form must be signed by all 
persons claiming 10-Point preference'' was previously located. We agree 
and the SF-15 shows we have changed the form.
    The group recommended moving the ``For Use by Appointing Officer 
only'' and placing this under the ``Preference entitlement was 
verified'' block. We agree and the SF-15 shows we have changed the 
form.
    The group recommended increasing the font size of ``Signature of 
person claiming preference.'' We agree and have changed both signature 
blocks on the form.
    One commenter asked why page 2 contains questions 1 and 2 when that 
information is already provided in the applicant's resume. The SF-15 is 
a summarized document that readily assists both the veteran and the 
agency in reviewing the correct documents for adjudicating veterans' 
preference. By asking these two questions on the form, the agency saves 
time and effort in not having to research the resume or application in 
finding this information.
    One commenter questioned why we are requiring the information 
requested in Block 3 and Block 4 at the bottom of page 2. The primary 
reason for asking these two questions is to enable the agency to 
identify the employability of the disabled veteran and entitlement of 
the spouse to receive derived preference. If a disabled veteran is 
disqualified for a Federal position along the general lines of his or 
her usual occupation because of a service-connected disability, and if 
the spouse of the disabled veteran has competed for a Federal position, 
then the spouse is entitled to have ten points added to a passing 
examination score or rating. Such a disqualification may be presumed 
when the veteran is unemployed and is rated by the appropriate military 
or Department of Veterans Affairs authority to be 100 percent disabled 
and/or unemployable; has retired, been separated, or resigned from a 
civil service position on the basis of a disability that is service-
connected in origin; or has attempted to obtain a civil service 
position or other position along the lines of his or her usual 
occupation and has failed to qualify because of a service-connected 
disability. These two questions identify these occupations and further 
assist the agency in adjudicating the claim to the particular veterans' 
preference sought.
    One commenter recommended shifting the ``Privacy Act statement'' 
from the bottom of Page 1 to the bottom of Page 2. We have considered 
this recommendation and find that the Privacy Act and Public Burden 
Statement is best located on the front page with the majority of 
information collected.
    For copies of this proposal, contact Mary Beth Smith-Toomey on 
(202) 606-8358, Fax (202) 418-3251 or e-mail to mbtoomey@opm.gov. 
Please include a mailing address with your request.

DATES: Comments on this proposal should be received within 30 calendar 
days from the date of this publication August 7, 2007.

ADDRESSES: Written comments and or suggestions regarding this notice 
should be directed to: Karen Jacobs, Acting Deputy Associate Director, 
Center for Talent and Capacity, U.S. Office of Personnel Management, 
1900 E Street, NW., Room 6551, Washington, DC 20415; and Brenda 
Aguilar, OPM Desk Officer, Office of Information & Regulatory Affairs, 
Office of Management & Budget, New Executive Office Building NW., Room 
10235, Washington, DC 20503.
    For Administrative Coordination Contact: Scott A. Wilander by 
telephone at (202) 606-0960; by fax at (202) 606-0390; TTY at (202) 
606-3134; or by e-mail at scott.wilander@opm.gov.

    Office of Personnel Management,
Tricia Hollis,
Chief of Staff & Director of External Affairs.
[FR Doc. E7-15164 Filed 8-6-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6325-39-P