Noncompetitive Appointment of Certain Military Spouses, 40471-40477 [E9-19340]
Download as PDF
40471
Rules and Regulations
Federal Register
Vol. 74, No. 154
Wednesday, August 12, 2009
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER
contains regulatory documents having general
applicability and legal effect, most of which
are keyed to and codified in the Code of
Federal Regulations, which is published under
50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.
The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by
the Superintendent of Documents. Prices of
new books are listed in the first FEDERAL
REGISTER issue of each week.
OFFICE OF PERSONNEL
MANAGEMENT
5 CFR Parts 315 and 316
RIN 3206–AL73
Noncompetitive Appointment of
Certain Military Spouses
AGENCY: U.S. Office of Personnel
Management.
ACTION: Final rule.
SUMMARY: The U.S. Office of Personnel
Management (OPM) is issuing final
regulations which establish a
noncompetitive hiring authority for
certain military spouses to positions in
the competitive service. These
regulations implement Executive Order
13473 dated September 25, 2008, which
authorizes noncompetitive
appointments in the civil service for
spouses of certain members of the
armed forces. The intended effect of this
rule is to facilitate the entry of military
spouses into the Federal civil service as
part of an effort to recruit and retain
skilled and experienced members of the
armed forces and to recognize and
honor the service of members injured,
disabled, or killed in connection with
their service.
DATES: This rule is effective
September 11, 2009.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Jacquelyn A. Carrington at (202) 606–
0960, FAX at (202) 606–2329, TDD at
(202) 418–3134, or e-mail at
jacquelyn.carrington@opm.gov.
On
December 5, 2008, OPM issued
proposed regulations in the Federal
Register at 73 FR 74071 to regulate the
noncompetitive appointment of certain
military spouses in parts 315 and 316 of
title 5, Code of Federal Regulations
(CFR). We requested comments on the
proposed rule to be submitted by
January 5, 2009.
jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with RULES
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:35 Aug 11, 2009
Jkt 217001
OPM received comments from 43
individuals, 10 Federal agencies, and 1
military family organization that were
pertinent to the proposed changes. A
discussion of the comments we received
is categorized below into the following
areas: Agency Authority, Definitions,
Eligibility, Conditions, Proof of
Eligibility, Acquisition of Competitive
Status, and Miscellaneous.
Agency Authority
An individual asked OPM to explain
the circumstances under which eligible
spouses can be appointed under this
authority. The circumstances under
which spouses may be appointed are
listed at § 315.612(a). Agencies may use
this authority to noncompetitively
appoint to the competitive service
eligible spouses to temporary, term, or
permanent positions consistent with the
provisions of § 315.612 and 5 CFR part
316. For more specifics concerning the
use of this authority, OPM will issue
supplemental guidance on the use of
this authority, which will be available at
https://www.opm.gov.
Definitions
One agency commented that the Merit
Systems Protection Board decision in
Edward Thomas Hesse v. Department of
the Army (104 M.S.P.R. 647, 2007) may
impact the definition of ‘‘active duty’’ in
§ 315.612(b)(1). OPM does not agree
with the agency’s comment. The Hesse
decision related to the definition of
‘‘disabled veteran’’ under 5 U.S.C.
2108(2). The term ‘‘active duty’’ in
§ 315.612(b) is defined using the
language from Executive Order 13473.
Neither the Executive Order nor the
regulation changes the statutory
definition of ‘‘disabled veteran.’’
Two agencies suggested revising the
definition of ‘‘member of the armed
forces or service member’’ in
§ 315.612(b)(4)(ii) to clarify that a
service member’s 100 percent disability
must be military-related or serviceconnected. OPM agrees clarification is
needed and we have amended section
315.612(b)(4)(ii) accordingly.
One agency suggested that OPM
modify the definition of ‘‘member of the
armed forces or service member’’ in
section 315.612(b)(4)(ii) to include the
spouse of a military member who has
been declared catastrophically injured
by his or her attending physician, but
whose formal disability rating is not yet
finalized. OPM cannot adopt this
PO 00000
Frm 00001
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
suggestion because section 2(e) of E.O.
13473 defines a totally disabled veteran
as having a disability rating of 100
percent from the appropriate military
entity.
A national military family association
suggested that OPM expand section
315.612(b)(4)(i) to include a service
member who receives follow-on orders
to a military command in the same
geographic area to which he or she is
already stationed. OPM is not adopting
this suggestion because E.O. 13473 does
not authorize noncompetitive
appointment eligibility for service
members who receive follow-on orders.
The same organization suggested that
OPM expand section 315.612(b)(4)(i) to
include the spouse of a National Guard
or Reserve service member activated for
more than 180 days who did not receive
permanent change of station (PCS)
orders when activated. OPM cannot
adopt this suggestion because section
3(a) of E.O. 13473 limits eligibility
under this authority to spouses of
service members in receipt of PCS
orders (except in cases in which the
service member incurs a 100 percent
service-connected disability or is killed
while on active duty).
One individual suggested OPM delete
the provision in section 315.612(b)(ii)
requiring a 100 percent disability rating
for certain service members with a
service-connected disability. OPM
cannot adopt this suggestion because
section 2(e)(i) of E.O. 13473 specifies
that a 100 percent disability is required
for an individual with a serviceconnected disability.
An individual suggested that OPM
delete the period at the end of section
315.612(b)(4)(ii) to better clarify the
definition of a ‘‘member of the armed
services or service member.’’ We agree
that clarity is needed and have modified
the punctuation in section 315.612(b)(4)
to make clear that a ‘‘member of the
armed services or service member’’
means an individual who meets any of
the three criteria contained in the
definition instead of having to meet all
three criteria.
One individual and one national
military family association asked
whether eligibility under this authority
is limited to spouses of injured service
members or those killed while on active
duty. Section 315.612(a) explains that
eligibility under this authority, in
accordance with the other provisions of
E:\FR\FM\12AUR1.SGM
12AUR1
40472
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 154 / Wednesday, August 12, 2009 / Rules and Regulations
this rule, applies to the spouse of a
service member serving on active duty
in the armed forces who has received
PCS orders; the spouse of a 100 percent
disabled service member whose
disability resulted from active duty in
the armed forces; and, the un-remarried
widow or widower of a service member
who was killed while on active duty in
the armed forces.
One commenter asked whether a
service member must have been killed
in combat, as opposed to being killed
while on active duty but not in combat,
in order for the spouse of that service
member to be eligible under this
authority. One agency asked whether
the service member must have been
performing actual duty or simply have
been in an active duty status for the
spouse to be eligible. Section 3(c) of the
E.O. states that the unmarried widow or
widower of a member of the Armed
Forces who was killed while performing
active duty are eligible for noncompetitive appointment under this
authority. Because the intent of the E.O.
is to help widows and widowers of
spouses killed in the service of our
nation, OPM is applying the E.O.
language broadly to include spouses of
anyone killed while in active duty
status (i.e., the individual need not have
been killed in ‘‘combat’’).
Two individuals and one national
military family association suggested
that an individual who marries after his
or her military spouse receives PCS
orders should be eligible for
noncompetitive appointment under this
authority. OPM is not adopting this
suggestion. The intent of E.O. 13473 is
to provide employment opportunities
for individuals who are married to
service members at the time these
service members receive their orders to
relocate, become 100 percent disabled,
or are killed.
One individual suggested that this
authority apply to spouses of
individuals on training duty or who are
attending military service schools.
Section 2(c) of E.O. 13473 specifically
excludes training duties and attendance
at service schools from coverage under
this authority.
jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with RULES
Eligibility
One individual and two agencies
recommended revising section
315.612(c)(3) to clarify that the
geographical limitation applies only to
the spouse of a member of the armed
services or service member defined in
section 315.612(b)(4)(i). We agree that
clarification is needed and have
modified section 315.612(c)(3)
accordingly.
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:35 Aug 11, 2009
Jkt 217001
One individual and three agencies
asked whether the spouse of a service
member must relocate with the service
member in order to be eligible for
noncompetitive appointment under this
authority, for example, if the service
member goes on an unaccompanied
tour. As stated in section 3(a) of the
E.O., the spouse must relocate with the
service member in order to be eligible
for appointment under this authority.
Another individual recommended
providing eligibility for the widow or
widower of a service member who dies
after separation or medical retirement as
a result of injury sustained on active
duty. OPM cannot adopt this
recommendation because section 3(c) of
E.O. 13473 specifies that eligibility is
provided for service members who are
killed while performing active duty.
One agency asked whether agencies
can use this authority to appoint an
individual whose service member
spouse dies while assigned to an
unaccompanied tour. Although the
spouse was not eligible for appointment
under section 315.612(c)(1) because the
military member was on an
unaccompanied tour, the spouse could
become eligible under section
315.612(c)(3) as the un-remarried
widow or widower of a service member
killed while on active duty.
One agency recommended revising
section 315. 612(c)(1) to provide
eligibility for individuals who wait to
marry until they have orders to relocate,
or subsequently marry after the
relocation. The agency suggests that the
two-year eligibility period should be
predicated on the military member’s
orders and proof of marriage, regardless
of when or where the marriage takes
place. OPM cannot adopt this
recommendation. Section 3 of E.O.
13473 specifies that eligibility for
appointment under this authority is
limited to spouses who relocate to the
service member’s new permanent duty
station. To be eligible for the
noncompetitive appointment in this
scenario, the spouse must accompany
the military member on permanent
change of station orders. In order to
prove his or her eligibility, the spouse
must present documentation
authorizing him or her to accompany
the service member to the new duty
station along with a copy of the PCS
orders. Military orders, however, only
authorize dependent travel if the service
member is married at the time the
orders are processed. For this reason,
individuals who wait to marry after
their spouse relocates are not eligible for
noncompetitive appointment under this
authority.
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Five agencies and one individual
commented on the geographic limitation
contained in section 315.612(c)(3). One
of the agencies recommended revising
the language in this paragraph to add
that the agency head’s designee at the
Chief Human Capital Officer (CHCO)
level, or comparable level in a nonCHCO agency, may waive the
geographic limitation. OPM agrees that
the head of the agency could delegate
the waiver authority to his or her
designee, and we have modified the
language in paragraph (c)(3)
accordingly.
The individual commenter suggested
removing the geographic restriction
from section 315.612(c)(3) because some
spouses may not be able to relocate due
to family obligations. OPM is not
adopting this suggestion. Section 3(a) of
E.O. 13473 specifically states spouses
are eligible to be appointed under this
authority provided that the spouse
relocates to the member’s new
permanent duty station.
Two of the agencies suggested the
term ‘‘geographic area’’ be further
defined, e.g., by establishing a mileage
standard as the basis for determining the
geographic area within which the
noncompetitive appointing authority
will apply. OPM is not adopting these
suggestions. Establishing a definitive
mileage standard may adversely affect
certain spouses’ eligibility for
appointment. We believe the agency is
in the best position to determine the
reasonableness of commuting distance
within its location. In fact, most
agencies have defined ‘‘commuting
area’’ in their merit promotion plans
established under 5 CFR part 335. Also,
the parameters in section 315.612(c)(3)
specify that the geographic limit is
based on the duty station specified on
the service member’s PCS orders. (OPM
notes that we have clarified language in
paragraph (c)(3) to specify the
geographic limitation applies only to
spouses who relocated with their
spouses and are eligible for appointment
under section 315.612(b)(1).)
One of these same agencies
recommended modifying section
315.612(c)(3) to waive the geographic
limitation if no Federal agency exists in
the geographic area to which the
military member is relocated or there
are none that employs the occupational
specialty for which the spouse qualifies,
e.g., a nursing assistant or health care
information technology specialist. OPM
is not adopting this suggestion. The
intent of these provisions is to provide
employment opportunities for
individuals negatively impacted by their
military spouse’s relocation, not to
provide employment opportunities
E:\FR\FM\12AUR1.SGM
12AUR1
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 154 / Wednesday, August 12, 2009 / Rules and Regulations
jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with RULES
within the spouse’s occupational
specialty.
The other agency suggested OPM
provide guidance on applying the
geographic limitation. OPM will address
this concern in supplemental guidance
material which will be available on the
OPM Web site at https://www.opm.gov.
Conditions
Five individuals, ten agencies, and
one national military family
organization suggested the 2-year
eligibility period specified in section
315.612(d)(1) should be eliminated or
extended. OPM is not adopting this
suggestion because the intent of this
hiring authority is to provide
employment access for certain
individuals negatively impacted by their
military spouses’ relocation,
incapacitation, or death. We believe 2
years is a reasonable time period for
affected individuals to obtain Federal
employment via this authority. We note
that spouses of 100 percent disabled
service members and service members
killed while on active duty will have a
veterans’ preference entitlement in
addition to eligibility under this
appointing authority.
Two agencies asked whether the 2
year time limit specified under section
315.612(d)(1) is extended if the eligible
individual is appointed to a temporary
or term appointment. The 2 year time
limit cannot be extended for individuals
appointed to temporary or term
positions under this authority. The
intent of this hiring authority is to
provide employment access for certain
individuals. The 2 year time limit is
consistent with other noncompetitive
appointing authorities. We also note
again that spouses of 100 percent
disabled service members and service
members killed while on active duty
will have a veterans’ preference
entitlement in addition to eligibility
under this appointing authority.
One agency commented that the date
in section 315.612(d)(1)(i) should be
revised from 2 years from the date of the
service member’s PCS orders to 2 years
from the reporting or effective date
stated in the orders, to eliminate any
confusion, as some may think this is the
issuance date. OPM is not adopting this
suggestion. We believe a 2 year period
from the date the orders are issued
provides consistency and equitable
treatment of affected individuals
because individuals’ reporting times
may vary.
Two agencies and one individual
commented on section 315.612(d)(3),
which would have provided eligibility
to spouses who relocated with a service
member within 1 year prior to the
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:35 Aug 11, 2009
Jkt 217001
effective date of the final regulations.
One of these agencies recommended
removing this retroactive eligibility. The
other agency recommended extending
the period to 2 years, and the individual
commenter suggested extending the
period back to September 11, 2001.
OPM is adopting the recommendation to
delete this provision from the final
regulation. The separate 1-year
retroactive provision is not needed for
spouses who have already relocated
with the service member because their
eligibility has been established under
section 315.612(d)(1). This section
provides eligibility for 2 years from the
date of the member’s PCS orders. E.O.
13473 does not contain a grandfather
provision for service members who may
have met the eligibility criteria in prior
years. We have replaced the language in
paragraph (d)(3) with the language in
paragraph (d)(4) of the proposed
regulations and deleted paragraph
(d)(4).
One agency asked if there is a limit on
the number of noncompetitive
appointments a spouse of a 100 percent
disabled or deceased service member
may receive. There is no limit on the
number of appointments a spouse of a
100 percent disabled veteran or the
widow or widower of a deceased service
member may receive under this
authority; however, these spouses
remain subject to the 2-year period
specified in section 315.612(d)(1)(ii).
Spouses of relocating service members
are limited to only one appointment
under this authority per PCS order.
Three agencies asked whether the
2-year eligibility period specified in
section 315.612(d)(1) begins on the date
of the PCS orders or the date the eligible
spouse relocates to the new duty station.
Section 315.612(d)(1)(i) states that the
2-year eligibility period begins on the
date of the service member’s PCS orders.
One agency and one individual
suggested OPM eliminate the
requirement in section 315.612(d)(2),
which limits an individual’s eligibility
to one appointment per PCS relocation.
OPM is not adopting this suggestion
because the intent of this rule is to
provide employment opportunities to
individuals negatively impacted by a
PCS move.
Proof of Eligibility
Two agencies suggested we modify
section 315.612(e)(1)(c) to specify that
documentation must verify an
individual’s current marriage to a
service member. OPM is not adopting
this suggestion because we do not
believe this clarification is necessary.
Section 315.612(b)(6) defines a spouse
as the husband or wife of a member of
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
40473
the armed forces. This definition
implies that a spouse is a current
spouse. Agencies also commented that
the regulations should ensure the
currency and reliability of
documentation of death or disability.
OPM believes that the proof of
eligibility requirements in section
315.612(e) is sufficiently detailed. It is
incumbent on each agency to accept
eligibility documents from military
spouses seeking noncompetitive
appointment that are as reliable as the
eligibility documents submitted by
applicants for veterans preference. See
Instructions on Documentation
Required accompanying the Standard
Form 15, Application for 10-Point
Veterans Preference, available at https://
www.opm.gov/forms.
One of these agencies also suggested
we modify the parenthetical examples
in section 315.612(e)(1)(ii) and (iii) by
changing the ‘‘or’’ to ‘‘and’’ in these
examples. We are not adopting this
suggestion because there are valid forms
of documentation, other than a marriage
license, which some individuals may be
able to produce in lieu of a marriage
license in order to prove their eligibility
under this authority. Our intention is
provide individuals with as much
flexibility as possible when proving
their eligibility.
One agency asked whether the
documentation of 100 percent serviceconnected disability rating applies
regardless of how long the member has
been retired from active duty. The
amount of time a member has been
separated or retired from active duty
due to service-connected disability is
not a factor when considering a spouse’s
eligibility under this authority.
One agency recommended revising
section 315.612(e)(2)(ii) to add at the
end, ‘‘resulting from active duty’’ to
ensure the disability resulted from
active duty, a military-related cause,
and not another cause. OPM is not
adopting this suggestion because the
documentation specified in paragraph
(b)(4)(ii) is sufficient to prove a serviceconnected disability.
Acquisition of Competitive Status and
Tenure on Appointment
One agency asked for confirmation
that the noncompetitive appointing
authority does not apply to
appointments made under the Federal
Career Intern Program (FCIP) because
section 315.612 requires a careerconditional appointment, unless the
appointee has already completed the
service requirements for career tenure.
The agency is correct. Appointments
under the FCIP authority are made in
the excepted service.
E:\FR\FM\12AUR1.SGM
12AUR1
40474
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 154 / Wednesday, August 12, 2009 / Rules and Regulations
jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with RULES
One agency asked whether spouses
convert to career appointments after 1
year or 3 years of appointment under
this authority because section
315.612(g) specifies that an eligible
military spouse hired under this
authority has a career-conditional
appointment until the employee fulfills
the requirements for career tenure. The
agency misread the requirement.
Section 315.612(g) reads: ‘‘An
appointment under paragraph (a) of this
section is career-conditional unless the
appointee has already satisfied the
requirements for career tenure or is
exempt from the service requirement
pursuant to § 315.201.’’
Miscellaneous
One agency asked whether agencies
must rate and rank eligible spouses
when making appointments using this
authority. Because this is a
noncompetitive hiring authority,
agencies are not required to rate and
rank individuals when using this
authority. Agencies must evaluate
eligible spouses to determine whether
they meet the qualifications for the
positions being filled.
One individual asked whether this
appointing authority applies only to
positions being filled in the competitive
service. Similarly, one agency asked if it
is correct to say that the authority under
section 315.612 is no different than a
VRA or the Student Employment
Education Program and other Schedule
A appointing authorities. A
noncompetitive appointment is an
appointment to, or placement in, a
position in the competitive service that
is not made by selection from an open
competitive examination and that is
usually based on current or prior
Federal service. This authority applies
only to positions being filled in the
competitive service.
One individual commented that this
authority is not necessary because there
is already an Executive order for family
members returning from overseas
appointments. The hiring authority
provided by section 315.608 for certain
former overseas employees is a separate
noncompetitive hiring authority
established under Executive Order
11219. The new authority provided by
section 315.612 established under
Executive Order 13473 does not affect or
take precedence over other available
appointing authorities.
One individual suggested that OPM
change the rules pertaining to
citizenship requirements for Federal
employment to allow foreign military
spouses to be eligible under this
appointing authority. Executive Order
11935, signed on September 2, 1976,
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:35 Aug 11, 2009
Jkt 217001
restricts the employment of non-citizens
in competitive service positions covered
by title 5 of the U.S. Code. Executive
Order 13473, which provides for the
noncompetitive appointment of certain
military spouses, does not amend E.O.
11935, nor does it provide OPM with
any authority to supersede the
citizenship requirement.
One commenter asked whether OPM
will specify the qualifications
requirements pertaining to the various
positions agencies may fill under this
authority. Agencies use
Governmentwide qualification
standards when filling positions in the
competitive service. The qualification
requirements will vary depending on
the specific position an agency is
seeking to fill. Agencies will identify the
qualification requirements in the
vacancy announcement advertising the
specific position to be filled. This
authority is not limited to specific
positions, and may be used to fill any
position in the competitive service.
The same individual asked whether
agencies will be required to report, via
Central Personnel Data File (CPDF),
appointments made under this
authority. Agencies must submit hiring
activity reports for this authority to
CPDF the same as when making other
appointments. OPM will then capture
this CPDF data on the use of this
authority to monitor, on an ad hoc basis,
the use of this authority.
Three agencies asked OPM to clarify
whether agencies are required to post a
Federal vacancy announcement prior to
appointing individuals under this
authority. If a vacancy announcement is
required, two of these agencies
suggested that OPM eliminate this
requirement in conjunction with use of
this appointing authority. Per 5 U.S.C.
3330(b), agencies must follow public
notice requirements (i.e., posting of a
vacancy announcement on the
USAJOBS Web site) when using this
authority to fill permanent or term
positions, or temporary positions lasting
more than 1-year. In addition, 5 CFR
part 330 requires agencies to advertise
jobs lasting more than 120 days. In
response to a commenter’s question,
these vacancy announcement
requirements apply to competitive
service positions in the National
Security Personnel System (NSPS).
OPM will issue question and answer
guidance which will include
information on the use of this
appointing authority for NSPS
positions.
Another individual asked how
eligible spouses can find out about
employment opportunities under this
authority. Spouses may find out about
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
job opportunities under this authority
on OPM’s USAJOBS Web site (https://
www.usajobs.gov). In addition, some
agencies may choose to have
information on their Web sites specific
to positions being filled through this
authority. Job seekers should, therefore,
check the Web sites of agencies in
which they may wish to work, in
addition to USAJOBS.
Two individuals inquired about the
type of vacancy announcements eligible
spouses may respond to in applying for
employment under this authority.
Eligible spouses may apply for positions
advertised as being open to the
‘‘public,’’ ‘‘all sources,’’ or ‘‘status
candidates.’’ Use of this authority,
however, is at the discretion of the
hiring agency.
One individual asked whether this
authority will have any affect on other
veterans’ hiring authorities, such as
Veterans Recruitment Act (VRA)
appointments. OPM cannot predict the
impact of this appointing authority
because use of this authority is at the
discretion of hiring agencies.
One agency suggested that this
noncompetitive hiring authority should
not apply in overseas locations because
of the possible difficulty in
administering rotation programs. OPM
is not adopting the suggestion to limit
applicability of this authority.
Depending on the circumstances
surrounding the location of the position,
use of any competitive service
appointing authority may be
problematic (for example, when a treaty
with a host nation restricts appointing
U.S. citizens abroad). As a
noncompetitive hiring authority, this
authority is available for agencies to use
at their discretion.
One agency asked whether there is a
selection priority if more than one
eligible applies under this authority or
if multiple candidates eligible for
noncompetitive appointments apply for
a position. Agencies have the discretion
to select and appoint individuals under
any available appointing authority. In
accordance with 5 CFR 335.103(b)(4),
agency merit promotion plans must
provide for management’s right to select
from other appropriate sources. This
authority is one among many other
sources authorized and available to
agencies, such as other noncompetitive
authorities, competitive examining,
merit promotion, and excepted
authorities under 5 CFR part 213. OPM
will issue question and answer guidance
on the use of noncompetitive authorities
generally. The guidance will address
appropriate consideration of applicants
who have eligibility for noncompetitive
appointment, and who are also eligible
E:\FR\FM\12AUR1.SGM
12AUR1
jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 154 / Wednesday, August 12, 2009 / Rules and Regulations
for consideration under competitive or
merit promotion procedures.
One individual asked whether any
mechanisms will be put in place to
prevent personnel officers and military
commanders from hiring their spouses
regardless of whether the spouses are
qualified. Another person suggested that
oversight mechanisms were needed at
military installations to safeguard
against abuses by these entities when
using this authority. Mechanisms such
as nepotism rules, merit system
principles, and prohibited personnel
practices are currently in place to
ensure administrative probity with
respect to agencies’ use of this
appointing authority. Oversight at local
military installations is the
responsibility of the Installation
Commander or his or her designee. In
addition, OPM conducts periodic audits
of agencies’ hiring practices to ensure
agencies are using the various
appointing authorities appropriately
and in a manner consistent with all
applicable laws and regulations.
The same individual noted his belief
that this authority provides a hiring
preference for eligible military spouses.
OPM disagrees with this assertion. This
authority is a noncompetitive hiring
mechanism; it does not establish or
constitute a hiring preference for
eligible spouses, nor does it create an
entitlement to a Federal job for an
eligible spouse. Use of this authority is
completely at the discretion of hiring
agencies. As a result, it is one of many
hiring tools agencies may use to recruit
needed individuals.
One individual and one agency asked
whether an unmarried widow or
widower (i.e., eligible for appointment
under section 315.612(c)(1)(ii)) who
accepts an appointment under this
authority and remarries after being
employed under this authority will be
permitted to remain employed. Yes,
individuals eligible under section
315.612(c)(1)(ii) who remarry after
becoming employed under this
authority will not lose their jobs because
of their remarriage.
One agency asked OPM to explain the
effect of telework arrangements on the
geographic limitations specified in
section 315.612(c)(3). Spouses eligible
under paragraph (b)(4)(i) of this section
must relocate with their service member
spouse per paragraph (c)(1)(ii). Upon
relocation, these individuals are subject
to the same agency workplace flexibility
policies as are other employees of that
agency. We wish to remind readers the
intent of the proposal was to benefit
individuals negatively impacted by their
military spouses’ relocation. Individuals
eligible under paragraph (b)(4)(i) should
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:35 Aug 11, 2009
Jkt 217001
not be allowed to leverage this authority
unless they have actually relocated per
the intent of E.O. 13473.
One individual asked whether there
are any grade-level limitations for
positions filled through this appointing
authority. OPM is not imposing any
grade-level limitation on positions filled
through this hiring authority.
Another individual asked whether the
spouse of a 100 percent disabled
Vietnam Veteran has eligibility under
this rule. Spouses of any 100 percent
disabled veteran have a 2-year eligibility
period from the date of the
documentation verifying the service
member is 100 percent disabled, per
section 315.612(d)(1)(ii). Spouses of 100
percent disabled Vietnam Veterans who
are not eligible under this appointing
authority may be eligible for veterans’
preference based on their military
spouses’ disability. For more
information, we encourage such spouses
to visit VETSINFO Guide at https://
www.opm.gov/veterans/html/
vetsinfo.asp.
One agency asked how agencies will
know if the military spouse has used his
or her eligibility and been selected for
another position in the local commuting
area. OPM advises agencies to ensure
they ask potential appointees under this
authority whether they have used the
one-time eligibility under section
315.612(d)(3). OPM will address this
issue further in the supplemental
guidance.
One agency asked how spouses of
relocated service members should be
treated after they are appointed under
this authority. This agency also asked
whether the spouse would be available
for a new excepted appointment if he or
she resigned from an appointment
under this authority and reapplied.
OPM believes the regulation is clear as
written. The authority under section
315.612(g) provides that a selectee is
appointed under a career-conditional
appointment, unless the selectee meets
or is exempt from the service
requirement for career tenure pursuant
to section 315.201. Once appointed, the
selectee is treated as any other career or
career-conditional employee. Again,
agencies appoint individuals selected
under this authority to the competitive,
not the excepted, service.
One agency commented that OPM
needs to issue clear guidance on how
human resources (HR) offices are to
properly refer applicants who are
eligible under multiple appointment
authorities, particularly when one or
more eligibilities afford/s an applicant
veterans’ preference and one or more do
not. The agency also urged OPM to
address separately general procedures to
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
40475
be followed by HR offices conducting
recruitment for applicants with status
and special appointment eligibility, and
by HR offices conducting delegated
examining. OPM agrees and will issue
supplemental guidance, which will be
available on the OPM Web site at https://
www.opm.gov.
Another individual asked whether
agencies are required to establish
training programs in conjunction with
filling positions using this hiring
authority. OPM is not requiring agencies
to establish or utilize training programs
when filling positions under this
authority. We remind readers this
authority is simply a noncompetitive
hiring mechanism for positions in the
competitive service; it is not a training
and development program for eligible
spouses.
The same individual asked whether
this authority would have any impact
on agencies’ use of mobility agreements.
Use of this authority has no impact on
an agency’s decision to use mobility
agreements (which are applicable to an
agency’s current employees, not those
eligible under this rule).
Three individuals were opposed to
the proposed rule because they are
opposed to the policy reflected in E.O.
13473 One of these individuals only
supports eligibility for noncompetitive
appointment of only individuals
defined in section 315.612(b)(4)(ii) and
(iii). OPM cannot implement this
comment because we are obligated to
issue regulations that implement the
E.O.
Three individuals commented only to
support the proposed rule.
One individual asked when the
proposed rule would become effective.
The effective date of this rule will be 30
days from the date the final rules are
published in the Federal Register.
One individual asked whether this
rule applies to retired service members
who are married to individuals serving
on active duty. Prior military service, in
and of itself, does not prohibit an
individual from meeting the definition
of ‘‘spouse’’ in section 315.612(b)(6).
Provided they meet all applicable rules,
such individuals are eligible under this
authority.
The same individual asked whether
agencies may use this authority to
appoint eligible spouses who currently
have a Federal job. Yes, agencies may
use this authority to noncompetitively
appoint eligible spouses who currently
have a Federal job, consistent with all
applicable provisions.
The same individual also asked
whether agencies must apply veterans’
preference when making appointments
under this authority. When a
E:\FR\FM\12AUR1.SGM
12AUR1
40476
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 154 / Wednesday, August 12, 2009 / Rules and Regulations
noncompetitive list is used in
conjunction with a competitive list,
there is no obligation to exhaust
preference eligibles from the
competitive list before making
selections from the noncompetitive list.
In addition, once an agency has
determined to make the selection from
the noncompetitive list, there is no
ability to apply veterans’ preference.
Veterans’ preference requirements apply
only when positions are filled from a
list prepared through a competitive
hiring process or when positions are
filled pursuant to part 302 of OPM’s
regulations.
One agency asked whether eligibles
being considered under this authority
may be appointed to the excepted
service if they do not have all of the
required documentation. The authority
under section 315.612 is for
appointments in the competitive service
only.
OPM received 8 comments that were
outside the scope of this regulation.
Regulatory Flexibility Act
I certify that these regulations will not
have a significant economic impact on
a substantial number of small entities
because the regulations pertain only to
Federal employees and agencies.
Paperwork Reduction Act
The information collection
requirements contained in this final rule
are currently approved by OMB under
RIN 3206–AL73. This final regulation
does not modify this approved
collection.
Executive Order 12866, Regulatory
Review
This rule has been reviewed by the
Office of Management and Budget in
accordance with Executive Order 12866.
List of Subjects in 5 CFR Parts 315 and
316
Government employees.
Office of Personnel Management.
John Berry,
Director.
Accordingly, OPM is issuing final
regulations to amend title 5, Code of
Federal Regulations, part 315, subpart F,
and part 316, as follows:
■
jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with RULES
PART 315—CAREER AND CAREERCONDITIONAL EMPLOYMENT
Subpart F—Career or CareerConditional Appointment Under
Special Authorities
1. The authority citation for part 315
is revised to read as follows:
■
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:35 Aug 11, 2009
Jkt 217001
Authority: 5 U.S.C. 1302, 3301, and 3302;
E.O. 10577, 3 CFR, 1954–1958 Comp. p. 218,
unless otherwise noted; and E.O. 13162.
Secs. 315.601 and 315.609 also issued under
22 U.S.C. 3651 and 3652. Secs. 315.602 and
315.604 also issued under 5 U.S.C. 1104. Sec.
315.603 also issued under 5 U.S.C. 8151. Sec.
315.605 also issued under E.O. 12034, 3 CFR,
1978 Comp. p. 111. Sec. 315.606 also issued
under E.O. 11219, 3 CFR, 1964–1965 Comp.
p. 303. Sec. 315.607 also issued under 22
U.S.C. 2506. Sec. 315.608 also issued under
E.O. 12721, 3 CFR, 1990 Comp. p. 293. Sec.
315.610 also issued under 5 U.S.C. 3304(c).
Sec. 315.611 also issued under 5 U.S.C.
3304(f). Sec. 315.612 also issued under E.O.
13473. Sec. 315.708 also issued under E.O.
13318, 3 CFR, 2004 Comp. p. 265. Sec.
315.710 also issued under E.O. 12596, 3 CFR,
1987 Comp. p. 229. Subpart I also issued
under 5 U.S.C. 3321, E.O. 12107, 3 CFR, 1978
Comp. p. 264.
2. Add § 315.612 to subpart F to read
as follows:
■
§ 315.612 Noncompetitive appointment of
certain military spouses.
(a) Agency authority. In accordance
with the provisions of this section, an
agency may appoint noncompetitively a
spouse of a member of the armed forces
serving on active duty who has orders
specifying a permanent change of
station (not for training), a spouse of a
100 percent disabled service member
injured while on active duty, or the unremarried widow or widower of a
service member who was killed while
performing active duty.
(b) Definitions. (1) Active duty means
full-time duty in the armed forces,
including full-time National Guard
duty, except that for Reserve
Component members the term ‘‘active
duty’’ does not include training duties
or attendance at service schools.
(2) Armed forces has the meaning
given that term in 10 U.S.C. 101.
(3) Duty station means the permanent
location to which a member of the
armed forces is assigned for duty as
specified on the individual’s permanent
change of station (PCS) orders.
(4) Member of the armed forces or
service member means an individual
who:
(i) Is serving on active duty in the
armed forces under orders specifying
the individual is called or ordered to
active duty for more than 180
consecutive days, has been issued
orders for a permanent change of
station, and is authorized for dependent
travel (i.e., the travel of the service
member’s family members) as part of the
orders specifying the individual’s
permanent change of station;
(ii) Retired from active duty in the
armed forces with a service-connected
disability rating of 100 percent as
documented by a branch of the armed
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
forces, or retired or was released or
discharged from active duty in the
armed forces and has a disability rating
of 100 percent as documented by the
Department of Veterans Affairs; or
(iii) Was killed while serving on
active duty in the armed forces.
(5) Permanent change of station
means the assignment, reassignment, or
transfer of a member of the armed forces
from his or her present duty station or
location without return to the previous
duty station or location.
(6) Spouse means the husband or wife
of a member of the armed forces.
(c) Eligibility. (1) A spouse of a
member of the armed forces as defined
in paragraph (b)(4)(i) of this section
must have:
(i) Married the member of the armed
forces on, or prior to, the date of the
service member’s orders authorizing a
permanent change of station; and
(ii) Relocated with the member of the
armed forces to the new duty station
specified in the documentation ordering
a permanent change of station.
(2) A spouse of a member of the
armed forces as defined in paragraph
(b)(4)(iii) of this section must be the unremarried widow or widower of the
member of the armed forces killed on
active duty in the armed forces.
(3) For spouses eligible under
paragraph (b)(4)(i) of this section,
noncompetitive appointment under this
section is limited to the geographic area,
as specified on the service member’s
permanent change of station orders. It
includes the service member’s duty
station and the surrounding area from
which people reasonably can be
expected to travel daily to and from
work. The head of an agency, or his or
her designee, may waive this limitation
(i.e., accept applications from spouses)
if no Federal agency exists in the
spouse’s geographic area. Spouses of
active duty military members who are
on retirement or separation PCS orders
from active duty are not eligible to be
appointed using this authority unless
the service member is injured with a
100 percent disability.
(4) Spouses of retired or separated
active duty members who have a 100
percent disability are not restricted to a
geographical location.
(d) Conditions. (1) In accordance with
the provisions of this section, spouses
are eligible for noncompetitive
appointment for a maximum of 2 years
from the date of:
(i) The service member’s permanent
change of station orders;
(ii) Documentation verifying the
member of the armed forces is 100
percent disabled; or
E:\FR\FM\12AUR1.SGM
12AUR1
jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 154 / Wednesday, August 12, 2009 / Rules and Regulations
(iii) Documentation verifying the
member of the armed forces was killed
while on active duty.
(2) A spouse may receive only one
noncompetitive appointment under this
section to a permanent position per the
service member’s orders authorizing a
permanent change of station.
(3) Any law, Executive order, or
regulation that disqualifies an applicant
for appointment also disqualifies a
spouse for appointment under this
section.
(e) Proof of Eligibility. (1) Prior to
appointment, the spouse of a member of
the armed forces as defined in
paragraph (b)(4)(i) of this section must
submit to the employing agency:
(i) A copy of the service member’s
active duty orders which authorize a
permanent change of station. This
authorization must include:
(A) A statement authorizing the
service member’s spouse to accompany
the member to the new permanent duty
station;
(B) The specific location to which the
member of the armed forces is to be
assigned, reassigned, or transferred
pursuant to permanent change of station
orders; and
(C) The effective date of the
permanent change of station; and
(ii) Documentation verifying marriage
to the member of the armed forces (i.e.,
a marriage license or other legal
documentation verifying marriage).
(2) Prior to appointment, the spouse
of a member of the armed forces as
defined in paragraph (b)(4)(ii) of this
section must submit to the employing
agency copies of:
(i) Documentation showing the
member of the armed forces was
released or discharged from active duty
due to a service-connected disability;
(ii) Documentation showing the
member of the armed forces retired, or
was released or discharged from active
duty, with a disability rating of 100
percent; and
(iii) Documentation verifying marriage
to the member of the armed forces (i.e.,
a marriage license or other legal
documentation verifying marriage).
(3) Prior to appointment, the spouse
of a member of the armed forces as
defined in paragraph (b)(4)(iii) of this
section must submit to the employing
agency copies of:
(i) Documentation showing the
individual was released or discharged
from active duty due to his or her death
while on active duty;
(ii) Documentation verifying the
member of the armed forces was killed
while serving on active duty; and
(iii) Documentation verifying marriage
to the member of the armed forces (i.e.,
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:35 Aug 11, 2009
Jkt 217001
a marriage license or other legal
documentation verifying marriage); and
(iv) A statement certifying that he or
she is the un-remarried widow or
widower of the service member.
(f) Acquisition of competitive status.
A person appointed under paragraph (a)
of this section acquires competitive
status automatically upon completion of
probation.
(g) Tenure on appointment. An
appointment under paragraph (a) of this
section is career-conditional unless the
appointee has already satisfied the
requirements for career tenure or is
exempt from the service requirement
pursuant to § 315.201.
PART 316—TEMPORARY AND TERM
EMPLOYMENT
3. The authority citation for part 316
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 5 U.S.C. 3301, 3302; E.O. 10577,
3 CFR, 1954–1958 Comp., p. 218.
4. Section 316.302(b)(3) is revised to
read as follows:
■
§ 316.302
Selection of term employees.
*
*
*
*
*
(b) * * *
(3) Career-conditional appointment
under § 315.601, 315.604, 315.605,
315.606, 315.607, 315.608, 315.609,
315.612, or 315.711 of this chapter;
*
*
*
*
*
■ 5. Section 316.402(b)(3) is revised to
read as follows:
§ 316.402 Procedures for making
temporary appointments.
*
*
*
*
*
(b) * * *
(3) Career-conditional appointment
under § 315.601, 315.604, 315.605,
315.606, 315.607, 315.608, 315.609,
315.612, 315.703, or 315.711 of this
chapter.
*
*
*
*
*
[FR Doc. E9–19340 Filed 8–11–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6325–39–P
FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM
12 CFR Part 226
[Regulation Z; Docket No. R–1365]
Truth in Lending
AGENCY: Board of Governors of the
Federal Reserve System.
ACTION: Final rule; staff commentary.
SUMMARY: The Board is publishing a
final rule amending the staff
commentary that interprets the
requirements of Regulation Z (Truth in
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
40477
Lending). The Board is required to
adjust annually the dollar amount that
triggers requirements for certain home
mortgage loans bearing fees above a
certain amount. The Home Ownership
and Equity Protection Act of 1994
(HOEPA) sets forth rules for homesecured loans in which the total points
and fees payable by the consumer at or
before loan consummation exceed the
greater of $400 or 8 percent of the total
loan amount. In keeping with the
statute, the Board has annually adjusted
the $400 amount based on the annual
percentage change reflected in the
Consumer Price Index as reported on
June 1st. The adjusted dollar amount for
2010 is $579.
DATES: Effective Date: January 1, 2010.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Dana Miller, Attorney, Division of
Consumer and Community Affairs,
Board of Governors of the Federal
Reserve System, at (202) 452–3667. For
the users of Telecommunications Device
for the Deaf (‘‘TDD’’) only, contact (202)
263–4869.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
The Truth in Lending Act (TILA; 15
U.S.C. 1601–1666j) requires creditors to
disclose credit terms and the cost of
consumer credit as an annual
percentage rate. The act requires
additional disclosures for loans secured
by a consumer’s home, and permits
consumers to cancel certain transactions
that involve their principal dwelling.
TILA is implemented by the Board’s
Regulation Z (12 CFR part 226). The
Board’s official staff commentary (12
CFR part 226 (Supp. I)) interprets the
regulation, and provides guidance to
creditors in applying the regulation to
specific transactions.
In 1995, the Board published
amendments to Regulation Z
implementing HOEPA, contained in the
Riegle Community Development and
Regulatory Improvement Act of 1994,
Public Law 103–325, 108 Stat. 2160 (60
FR 15463). These amendments,
contained in §§ 226.32 and 226.34 of the
regulation, impose substantive
limitations and additional disclosure
requirements on certain closed-end
home mortgage loans bearing rates or
fees above a certain percentage or
amount. As enacted, the statute requires
creditors to comply with the HOEPA
rules if the total points and fees payable
by the consumer at or before loan
consummation exceed the greater of
$400 or 8 percent of the total loan
amount. TILA and Regulation Z provide
that the $400 figure shall be adjusted
annually on January 1 by the annual
E:\FR\FM\12AUR1.SGM
12AUR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 154 (Wednesday, August 12, 2009)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 40471-40477]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-19340]
========================================================================
Rules and Regulations
Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains regulatory documents
having general applicability and legal effect, most of which are keyed
to and codified in the Code of Federal Regulations, which is published
under 50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.
The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by the Superintendent of Documents.
Prices of new books are listed in the first FEDERAL REGISTER issue of each
week.
========================================================================
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 154 / Wednesday, August 12, 2009 /
Rules and Regulations
[[Page 40471]]
OFFICE OF PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT
5 CFR Parts 315 and 316
RIN 3206-AL73
Noncompetitive Appointment of Certain Military Spouses
AGENCY: U.S. Office of Personnel Management.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The U.S. Office of Personnel Management (OPM) is issuing final
regulations which establish a noncompetitive hiring authority for
certain military spouses to positions in the competitive service. These
regulations implement Executive Order 13473 dated September 25, 2008,
which authorizes noncompetitive appointments in the civil service for
spouses of certain members of the armed forces. The intended effect of
this rule is to facilitate the entry of military spouses into the
Federal civil service as part of an effort to recruit and retain
skilled and experienced members of the armed forces and to recognize
and honor the service of members injured, disabled, or killed in
connection with their service.
DATES: This rule is effective September 11, 2009.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jacquelyn A. Carrington at (202) 606-
0960, FAX at (202) 606-2329, TDD at (202) 418-3134, or e-mail at
jacquelyn.carrington@opm.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On December 5, 2008, OPM issued proposed
regulations in the Federal Register at 73 FR 74071 to regulate the
noncompetitive appointment of certain military spouses in parts 315 and
316 of title 5, Code of Federal Regulations (CFR). We requested
comments on the proposed rule to be submitted by January 5, 2009.
OPM received comments from 43 individuals, 10 Federal agencies, and
1 military family organization that were pertinent to the proposed
changes. A discussion of the comments we received is categorized below
into the following areas: Agency Authority, Definitions, Eligibility,
Conditions, Proof of Eligibility, Acquisition of Competitive Status,
and Miscellaneous.
Agency Authority
An individual asked OPM to explain the circumstances under which
eligible spouses can be appointed under this authority. The
circumstances under which spouses may be appointed are listed at Sec.
315.612(a). Agencies may use this authority to noncompetitively appoint
to the competitive service eligible spouses to temporary, term, or
permanent positions consistent with the provisions of Sec. 315.612 and
5 CFR part 316. For more specifics concerning the use of this
authority, OPM will issue supplemental guidance on the use of this
authority, which will be available at https://www.opm.gov.
Definitions
One agency commented that the Merit Systems Protection Board
decision in Edward Thomas Hesse v. Department of the Army (104 M.S.P.R.
647, 2007) may impact the definition of ``active duty'' in Sec.
315.612(b)(1). OPM does not agree with the agency's comment. The Hesse
decision related to the definition of ``disabled veteran'' under 5
U.S.C. 2108(2). The term ``active duty'' in Sec. 315.612(b) is defined
using the language from Executive Order 13473. Neither the Executive
Order nor the regulation changes the statutory definition of ``disabled
veteran.''
Two agencies suggested revising the definition of ``member of the
armed forces or service member'' in Sec. 315.612(b)(4)(ii) to clarify
that a service member's 100 percent disability must be military-related
or service-connected. OPM agrees clarification is needed and we have
amended section 315.612(b)(4)(ii) accordingly.
One agency suggested that OPM modify the definition of ``member of
the armed forces or service member'' in section 315.612(b)(4)(ii) to
include the spouse of a military member who has been declared
catastrophically injured by his or her attending physician, but whose
formal disability rating is not yet finalized. OPM cannot adopt this
suggestion because section 2(e) of E.O. 13473 defines a totally
disabled veteran as having a disability rating of 100 percent from the
appropriate military entity.
A national military family association suggested that OPM expand
section 315.612(b)(4)(i) to include a service member who receives
follow-on orders to a military command in the same geographic area to
which he or she is already stationed. OPM is not adopting this
suggestion because E.O. 13473 does not authorize noncompetitive
appointment eligibility for service members who receive follow-on
orders.
The same organization suggested that OPM expand section
315.612(b)(4)(i) to include the spouse of a National Guard or Reserve
service member activated for more than 180 days who did not receive
permanent change of station (PCS) orders when activated. OPM cannot
adopt this suggestion because section 3(a) of E.O. 13473 limits
eligibility under this authority to spouses of service members in
receipt of PCS orders (except in cases in which the service member
incurs a 100 percent service-connected disability or is killed while on
active duty).
One individual suggested OPM delete the provision in section
315.612(b)(ii) requiring a 100 percent disability rating for certain
service members with a service-connected disability. OPM cannot adopt
this suggestion because section 2(e)(i) of E.O. 13473 specifies that a
100 percent disability is required for an individual with a service-
connected disability.
An individual suggested that OPM delete the period at the end of
section 315.612(b)(4)(ii) to better clarify the definition of a
``member of the armed services or service member.'' We agree that
clarity is needed and have modified the punctuation in section
315.612(b)(4) to make clear that a ``member of the armed services or
service member'' means an individual who meets any of the three
criteria contained in the definition instead of having to meet all
three criteria.
One individual and one national military family association asked
whether eligibility under this authority is limited to spouses of
injured service members or those killed while on active duty. Section
315.612(a) explains that eligibility under this authority, in
accordance with the other provisions of
[[Page 40472]]
this rule, applies to the spouse of a service member serving on active
duty in the armed forces who has received PCS orders; the spouse of a
100 percent disabled service member whose disability resulted from
active duty in the armed forces; and, the un-remarried widow or widower
of a service member who was killed while on active duty in the armed
forces.
One commenter asked whether a service member must have been killed
in combat, as opposed to being killed while on active duty but not in
combat, in order for the spouse of that service member to be eligible
under this authority. One agency asked whether the service member must
have been performing actual duty or simply have been in an active duty
status for the spouse to be eligible. Section 3(c) of the E.O. states
that the unmarried widow or widower of a member of the Armed Forces who
was killed while performing active duty are eligible for non-
competitive appointment under this authority. Because the intent of the
E.O. is to help widows and widowers of spouses killed in the service of
our nation, OPM is applying the E.O. language broadly to include
spouses of anyone killed while in active duty status (i.e., the
individual need not have been killed in ``combat'').
Two individuals and one national military family association
suggested that an individual who marries after his or her military
spouse receives PCS orders should be eligible for noncompetitive
appointment under this authority. OPM is not adopting this suggestion.
The intent of E.O. 13473 is to provide employment opportunities for
individuals who are married to service members at the time these
service members receive their orders to relocate, become 100 percent
disabled, or are killed.
One individual suggested that this authority apply to spouses of
individuals on training duty or who are attending military service
schools. Section 2(c) of E.O. 13473 specifically excludes training
duties and attendance at service schools from coverage under this
authority.
Eligibility
One individual and two agencies recommended revising section
315.612(c)(3) to clarify that the geographical limitation applies only
to the spouse of a member of the armed services or service member
defined in section 315.612(b)(4)(i). We agree that clarification is
needed and have modified section 315.612(c)(3) accordingly.
One individual and three agencies asked whether the spouse of a
service member must relocate with the service member in order to be
eligible for noncompetitive appointment under this authority, for
example, if the service member goes on an unaccompanied tour. As stated
in section 3(a) of the E.O., the spouse must relocate with the service
member in order to be eligible for appointment under this authority.
Another individual recommended providing eligibility for the widow
or widower of a service member who dies after separation or medical
retirement as a result of injury sustained on active duty. OPM cannot
adopt this recommendation because section 3(c) of E.O. 13473 specifies
that eligibility is provided for service members who are killed while
performing active duty.
One agency asked whether agencies can use this authority to appoint
an individual whose service member spouse dies while assigned to an
unaccompanied tour. Although the spouse was not eligible for
appointment under section 315.612(c)(1) because the military member was
on an unaccompanied tour, the spouse could become eligible under
section 315.612(c)(3) as the un-remarried widow or widower of a service
member killed while on active duty.
One agency recommended revising section 315. 612(c)(1) to provide
eligibility for individuals who wait to marry until they have orders to
relocate, or subsequently marry after the relocation. The agency
suggests that the two-year eligibility period should be predicated on
the military member's orders and proof of marriage, regardless of when
or where the marriage takes place. OPM cannot adopt this
recommendation. Section 3 of E.O. 13473 specifies that eligibility for
appointment under this authority is limited to spouses who relocate to
the service member's new permanent duty station. To be eligible for the
noncompetitive appointment in this scenario, the spouse must accompany
the military member on permanent change of station orders. In order to
prove his or her eligibility, the spouse must present documentation
authorizing him or her to accompany the service member to the new duty
station along with a copy of the PCS orders. Military orders, however,
only authorize dependent travel if the service member is married at the
time the orders are processed. For this reason, individuals who wait to
marry after their spouse relocates are not eligible for noncompetitive
appointment under this authority.
Five agencies and one individual commented on the geographic
limitation contained in section 315.612(c)(3). One of the agencies
recommended revising the language in this paragraph to add that the
agency head's designee at the Chief Human Capital Officer (CHCO) level,
or comparable level in a non-CHCO agency, may waive the geographic
limitation. OPM agrees that the head of the agency could delegate the
waiver authority to his or her designee, and we have modified the
language in paragraph (c)(3) accordingly.
The individual commenter suggested removing the geographic
restriction from section 315.612(c)(3) because some spouses may not be
able to relocate due to family obligations. OPM is not adopting this
suggestion. Section 3(a) of E.O. 13473 specifically states spouses are
eligible to be appointed under this authority provided that the spouse
relocates to the member's new permanent duty station.
Two of the agencies suggested the term ``geographic area'' be
further defined, e.g., by establishing a mileage standard as the basis
for determining the geographic area within which the noncompetitive
appointing authority will apply. OPM is not adopting these suggestions.
Establishing a definitive mileage standard may adversely affect certain
spouses' eligibility for appointment. We believe the agency is in the
best position to determine the reasonableness of commuting distance
within its location. In fact, most agencies have defined ``commuting
area'' in their merit promotion plans established under 5 CFR part 335.
Also, the parameters in section 315.612(c)(3) specify that the
geographic limit is based on the duty station specified on the service
member's PCS orders. (OPM notes that we have clarified language in
paragraph (c)(3) to specify the geographic limitation applies only to
spouses who relocated with their spouses and are eligible for
appointment under section 315.612(b)(1).)
One of these same agencies recommended modifying section
315.612(c)(3) to waive the geographic limitation if no Federal agency
exists in the geographic area to which the military member is relocated
or there are none that employs the occupational specialty for which the
spouse qualifies, e.g., a nursing assistant or health care information
technology specialist. OPM is not adopting this suggestion. The intent
of these provisions is to provide employment opportunities for
individuals negatively impacted by their military spouse's relocation,
not to provide employment opportunities
[[Page 40473]]
within the spouse's occupational specialty.
The other agency suggested OPM provide guidance on applying the
geographic limitation. OPM will address this concern in supplemental
guidance material which will be available on the OPM Web site at https://www.opm.gov.
Conditions
Five individuals, ten agencies, and one national military family
organization suggested the 2-year eligibility period specified in
section 315.612(d)(1) should be eliminated or extended. OPM is not
adopting this suggestion because the intent of this hiring authority is
to provide employment access for certain individuals negatively
impacted by their military spouses' relocation, incapacitation, or
death. We believe 2 years is a reasonable time period for affected
individuals to obtain Federal employment via this authority. We note
that spouses of 100 percent disabled service members and service
members killed while on active duty will have a veterans' preference
entitlement in addition to eligibility under this appointing authority.
Two agencies asked whether the 2 year time limit specified under
section 315.612(d)(1) is extended if the eligible individual is
appointed to a temporary or term appointment. The 2 year time limit
cannot be extended for individuals appointed to temporary or term
positions under this authority. The intent of this hiring authority is
to provide employment access for certain individuals. The 2 year time
limit is consistent with other noncompetitive appointing authorities.
We also note again that spouses of 100 percent disabled service members
and service members killed while on active duty will have a veterans'
preference entitlement in addition to eligibility under this appointing
authority.
One agency commented that the date in section 315.612(d)(1)(i)
should be revised from 2 years from the date of the service member's
PCS orders to 2 years from the reporting or effective date stated in
the orders, to eliminate any confusion, as some may think this is the
issuance date. OPM is not adopting this suggestion. We believe a 2 year
period from the date the orders are issued provides consistency and
equitable treatment of affected individuals because individuals'
reporting times may vary.
Two agencies and one individual commented on section 315.612(d)(3),
which would have provided eligibility to spouses who relocated with a
service member within 1 year prior to the effective date of the final
regulations. One of these agencies recommended removing this
retroactive eligibility. The other agency recommended extending the
period to 2 years, and the individual commenter suggested extending the
period back to September 11, 2001. OPM is adopting the recommendation
to delete this provision from the final regulation. The separate 1-year
retroactive provision is not needed for spouses who have already
relocated with the service member because their eligibility has been
established under section 315.612(d)(1). This section provides
eligibility for 2 years from the date of the member's PCS orders. E.O.
13473 does not contain a grandfather provision for service members who
may have met the eligibility criteria in prior years. We have replaced
the language in paragraph (d)(3) with the language in paragraph (d)(4)
of the proposed regulations and deleted paragraph (d)(4).
One agency asked if there is a limit on the number of
noncompetitive appointments a spouse of a 100 percent disabled or
deceased service member may receive. There is no limit on the number of
appointments a spouse of a 100 percent disabled veteran or the widow or
widower of a deceased service member may receive under this authority;
however, these spouses remain subject to the 2-year period specified in
section 315.612(d)(1)(ii). Spouses of relocating service members are
limited to only one appointment under this authority per PCS order.
Three agencies asked whether the 2-year eligibility period
specified in section 315.612(d)(1) begins on the date of the PCS orders
or the date the eligible spouse relocates to the new duty station.
Section 315.612(d)(1)(i) states that the 2-year eligibility period
begins on the date of the service member's PCS orders.
One agency and one individual suggested OPM eliminate the
requirement in section 315.612(d)(2), which limits an individual's
eligibility to one appointment per PCS relocation. OPM is not adopting
this suggestion because the intent of this rule is to provide
employment opportunities to individuals negatively impacted by a PCS
move.
Proof of Eligibility
Two agencies suggested we modify section 315.612(e)(1)(c) to
specify that documentation must verify an individual's current marriage
to a service member. OPM is not adopting this suggestion because we do
not believe this clarification is necessary. Section 315.612(b)(6)
defines a spouse as the husband or wife of a member of the armed
forces. This definition implies that a spouse is a current spouse.
Agencies also commented that the regulations should ensure the currency
and reliability of documentation of death or disability. OPM believes
that the proof of eligibility requirements in section 315.612(e) is
sufficiently detailed. It is incumbent on each agency to accept
eligibility documents from military spouses seeking noncompetitive
appointment that are as reliable as the eligibility documents submitted
by applicants for veterans preference. See Instructions on
Documentation Required accompanying the Standard Form 15, Application
for 10-Point Veterans Preference, available at https://www.opm.gov/forms.
One of these agencies also suggested we modify the parenthetical
examples in section 315.612(e)(1)(ii) and (iii) by changing the ``or''
to ``and'' in these examples. We are not adopting this suggestion
because there are valid forms of documentation, other than a marriage
license, which some individuals may be able to produce in lieu of a
marriage license in order to prove their eligibility under this
authority. Our intention is provide individuals with as much
flexibility as possible when proving their eligibility.
One agency asked whether the documentation of 100 percent service-
connected disability rating applies regardless of how long the member
has been retired from active duty. The amount of time a member has been
separated or retired from active duty due to service-connected
disability is not a factor when considering a spouse's eligibility
under this authority.
One agency recommended revising section 315.612(e)(2)(ii) to add at
the end, ``resulting from active duty'' to ensure the disability
resulted from active duty, a military-related cause, and not another
cause. OPM is not adopting this suggestion because the documentation
specified in paragraph (b)(4)(ii) is sufficient to prove a service-
connected disability.
Acquisition of Competitive Status and Tenure on Appointment
One agency asked for confirmation that the noncompetitive
appointing authority does not apply to appointments made under the
Federal Career Intern Program (FCIP) because section 315.612 requires a
career-conditional appointment, unless the appointee has already
completed the service requirements for career tenure. The agency is
correct. Appointments under the FCIP authority are made in the excepted
service.
[[Page 40474]]
One agency asked whether spouses convert to career appointments
after 1 year or 3 years of appointment under this authority because
section 315.612(g) specifies that an eligible military spouse hired
under this authority has a career-conditional appointment until the
employee fulfills the requirements for career tenure. The agency
misread the requirement. Section 315.612(g) reads: ``An appointment
under paragraph (a) of this section is career-conditional unless the
appointee has already satisfied the requirements for career tenure or
is exempt from the service requirement pursuant to Sec. 315.201.''
Miscellaneous
One agency asked whether agencies must rate and rank eligible
spouses when making appointments using this authority. Because this is
a noncompetitive hiring authority, agencies are not required to rate
and rank individuals when using this authority. Agencies must evaluate
eligible spouses to determine whether they meet the qualifications for
the positions being filled.
One individual asked whether this appointing authority applies only
to positions being filled in the competitive service. Similarly, one
agency asked if it is correct to say that the authority under section
315.612 is no different than a VRA or the Student Employment Education
Program and other Schedule A appointing authorities. A noncompetitive
appointment is an appointment to, or placement in, a position in the
competitive service that is not made by selection from an open
competitive examination and that is usually based on current or prior
Federal service. This authority applies only to positions being filled
in the competitive service.
One individual commented that this authority is not necessary
because there is already an Executive order for family members
returning from overseas appointments. The hiring authority provided by
section 315.608 for certain former overseas employees is a separate
noncompetitive hiring authority established under Executive Order
11219. The new authority provided by section 315.612 established under
Executive Order 13473 does not affect or take precedence over other
available appointing authorities.
One individual suggested that OPM change the rules pertaining to
citizenship requirements for Federal employment to allow foreign
military spouses to be eligible under this appointing authority.
Executive Order 11935, signed on September 2, 1976, restricts the
employment of non-citizens in competitive service positions covered by
title 5 of the U.S. Code. Executive Order 13473, which provides for the
noncompetitive appointment of certain military spouses, does not amend
E.O. 11935, nor does it provide OPM with any authority to supersede the
citizenship requirement.
One commenter asked whether OPM will specify the qualifications
requirements pertaining to the various positions agencies may fill
under this authority. Agencies use Governmentwide qualification
standards when filling positions in the competitive service. The
qualification requirements will vary depending on the specific position
an agency is seeking to fill. Agencies will identify the qualification
requirements in the vacancy announcement advertising the specific
position to be filled. This authority is not limited to specific
positions, and may be used to fill any position in the competitive
service.
The same individual asked whether agencies will be required to
report, via Central Personnel Data File (CPDF), appointments made under
this authority. Agencies must submit hiring activity reports for this
authority to CPDF the same as when making other appointments. OPM will
then capture this CPDF data on the use of this authority to monitor, on
an ad hoc basis, the use of this authority.
Three agencies asked OPM to clarify whether agencies are required
to post a Federal vacancy announcement prior to appointing individuals
under this authority. If a vacancy announcement is required, two of
these agencies suggested that OPM eliminate this requirement in
conjunction with use of this appointing authority. Per 5 U.S.C.
3330(b), agencies must follow public notice requirements (i.e., posting
of a vacancy announcement on the USAJOBS Web site) when using this
authority to fill permanent or term positions, or temporary positions
lasting more than 1-year. In addition, 5 CFR part 330 requires agencies
to advertise jobs lasting more than 120 days. In response to a
commenter's question, these vacancy announcement requirements apply to
competitive service positions in the National Security Personnel System
(NSPS). OPM will issue question and answer guidance which will include
information on the use of this appointing authority for NSPS positions.
Another individual asked how eligible spouses can find out about
employment opportunities under this authority. Spouses may find out
about job opportunities under this authority on OPM's USAJOBS Web site
(https://www.usajobs.gov). In addition, some agencies may choose to have
information on their Web sites specific to positions being filled
through this authority. Job seekers should, therefore, check the Web
sites of agencies in which they may wish to work, in addition to
USAJOBS.
Two individuals inquired about the type of vacancy announcements
eligible spouses may respond to in applying for employment under this
authority. Eligible spouses may apply for positions advertised as being
open to the ``public,'' ``all sources,'' or ``status candidates.'' Use
of this authority, however, is at the discretion of the hiring agency.
One individual asked whether this authority will have any affect on
other veterans' hiring authorities, such as Veterans Recruitment Act
(VRA) appointments. OPM cannot predict the impact of this appointing
authority because use of this authority is at the discretion of hiring
agencies.
One agency suggested that this noncompetitive hiring authority
should not apply in overseas locations because of the possible
difficulty in administering rotation programs. OPM is not adopting the
suggestion to limit applicability of this authority. Depending on the
circumstances surrounding the location of the position, use of any
competitive service appointing authority may be problematic (for
example, when a treaty with a host nation restricts appointing U.S.
citizens abroad). As a noncompetitive hiring authority, this authority
is available for agencies to use at their discretion.
One agency asked whether there is a selection priority if more than
one eligible applies under this authority or if multiple candidates
eligible for noncompetitive appointments apply for a position. Agencies
have the discretion to select and appoint individuals under any
available appointing authority. In accordance with 5 CFR 335.103(b)(4),
agency merit promotion plans must provide for management's right to
select from other appropriate sources. This authority is one among many
other sources authorized and available to agencies, such as other
noncompetitive authorities, competitive examining, merit promotion, and
excepted authorities under 5 CFR part 213. OPM will issue question and
answer guidance on the use of noncompetitive authorities generally. The
guidance will address appropriate consideration of applicants who have
eligibility for noncompetitive appointment, and who are also eligible
[[Page 40475]]
for consideration under competitive or merit promotion procedures.
One individual asked whether any mechanisms will be put in place to
prevent personnel officers and military commanders from hiring their
spouses regardless of whether the spouses are qualified. Another person
suggested that oversight mechanisms were needed at military
installations to safeguard against abuses by these entities when using
this authority. Mechanisms such as nepotism rules, merit system
principles, and prohibited personnel practices are currently in place
to ensure administrative probity with respect to agencies' use of this
appointing authority. Oversight at local military installations is the
responsibility of the Installation Commander or his or her designee. In
addition, OPM conducts periodic audits of agencies' hiring practices to
ensure agencies are using the various appointing authorities
appropriately and in a manner consistent with all applicable laws and
regulations.
The same individual noted his belief that this authority provides a
hiring preference for eligible military spouses. OPM disagrees with
this assertion. This authority is a noncompetitive hiring mechanism; it
does not establish or constitute a hiring preference for eligible
spouses, nor does it create an entitlement to a Federal job for an
eligible spouse. Use of this authority is completely at the discretion
of hiring agencies. As a result, it is one of many hiring tools
agencies may use to recruit needed individuals.
One individual and one agency asked whether an unmarried widow or
widower (i.e., eligible for appointment under section
315.612(c)(1)(ii)) who accepts an appointment under this authority and
remarries after being employed under this authority will be permitted
to remain employed. Yes, individuals eligible under section
315.612(c)(1)(ii) who remarry after becoming employed under this
authority will not lose their jobs because of their remarriage.
One agency asked OPM to explain the effect of telework arrangements
on the geographic limitations specified in section 315.612(c)(3).
Spouses eligible under paragraph (b)(4)(i) of this section must
relocate with their service member spouse per paragraph (c)(1)(ii).
Upon relocation, these individuals are subject to the same agency
workplace flexibility policies as are other employees of that agency.
We wish to remind readers the intent of the proposal was to benefit
individuals negatively impacted by their military spouses' relocation.
Individuals eligible under paragraph (b)(4)(i) should not be allowed to
leverage this authority unless they have actually relocated per the
intent of E.O. 13473.
One individual asked whether there are any grade-level limitations
for positions filled through this appointing authority. OPM is not
imposing any grade-level limitation on positions filled through this
hiring authority.
Another individual asked whether the spouse of a 100 percent
disabled Vietnam Veteran has eligibility under this rule. Spouses of
any 100 percent disabled veteran have a 2-year eligibility period from
the date of the documentation verifying the service member is 100
percent disabled, per section 315.612(d)(1)(ii). Spouses of 100 percent
disabled Vietnam Veterans who are not eligible under this appointing
authority may be eligible for veterans' preference based on their
military spouses' disability. For more information, we encourage such
spouses to visit VETSINFO Guide at https://www.opm.gov/veterans/html/vetsinfo.asp.
One agency asked how agencies will know if the military spouse has
used his or her eligibility and been selected for another position in
the local commuting area. OPM advises agencies to ensure they ask
potential appointees under this authority whether they have used the
one-time eligibility under section 315.612(d)(3). OPM will address this
issue further in the supplemental guidance.
One agency asked how spouses of relocated service members should be
treated after they are appointed under this authority. This agency also
asked whether the spouse would be available for a new excepted
appointment if he or she resigned from an appointment under this
authority and reapplied. OPM believes the regulation is clear as
written. The authority under section 315.612(g) provides that a
selectee is appointed under a career-conditional appointment, unless
the selectee meets or is exempt from the service requirement for career
tenure pursuant to section 315.201. Once appointed, the selectee is
treated as any other career or career-conditional employee. Again,
agencies appoint individuals selected under this authority to the
competitive, not the excepted, service.
One agency commented that OPM needs to issue clear guidance on how
human resources (HR) offices are to properly refer applicants who are
eligible under multiple appointment authorities, particularly when one
or more eligibilities afford/s an applicant veterans' preference and
one or more do not. The agency also urged OPM to address separately
general procedures to be followed by HR offices conducting recruitment
for applicants with status and special appointment eligibility, and by
HR offices conducting delegated examining. OPM agrees and will issue
supplemental guidance, which will be available on the OPM Web site at
https://www.opm.gov.
Another individual asked whether agencies are required to establish
training programs in conjunction with filling positions using this
hiring authority. OPM is not requiring agencies to establish or utilize
training programs when filling positions under this authority. We
remind readers this authority is simply a noncompetitive hiring
mechanism for positions in the competitive service; it is not a
training and development program for eligible spouses.
The same individual asked whether this authority would have any
impact on agencies' use of mobility agreements. Use of this authority
has no impact on an agency's decision to use mobility agreements (which
are applicable to an agency's current employees, not those eligible
under this rule).
Three individuals were opposed to the proposed rule because they
are opposed to the policy reflected in E.O. 13473 One of these
individuals only supports eligibility for noncompetitive appointment of
only individuals defined in section 315.612(b)(4)(ii) and (iii). OPM
cannot implement this comment because we are obligated to issue
regulations that implement the E.O.
Three individuals commented only to support the proposed rule.
One individual asked when the proposed rule would become effective.
The effective date of this rule will be 30 days from the date the final
rules are published in the Federal Register.
One individual asked whether this rule applies to retired service
members who are married to individuals serving on active duty. Prior
military service, in and of itself, does not prohibit an individual
from meeting the definition of ``spouse'' in section 315.612(b)(6).
Provided they meet all applicable rules, such individuals are eligible
under this authority.
The same individual asked whether agencies may use this authority
to appoint eligible spouses who currently have a Federal job. Yes,
agencies may use this authority to noncompetitively appoint eligible
spouses who currently have a Federal job, consistent with all
applicable provisions.
The same individual also asked whether agencies must apply
veterans' preference when making appointments under this authority.
When a
[[Page 40476]]
noncompetitive list is used in conjunction with a competitive list,
there is no obligation to exhaust preference eligibles from the
competitive list before making selections from the noncompetitive list.
In addition, once an agency has determined to make the selection from
the noncompetitive list, there is no ability to apply veterans'
preference. Veterans' preference requirements apply only when positions
are filled from a list prepared through a competitive hiring process or
when positions are filled pursuant to part 302 of OPM's regulations.
One agency asked whether eligibles being considered under this
authority may be appointed to the excepted service if they do not have
all of the required documentation. The authority under section 315.612
is for appointments in the competitive service only.
OPM received 8 comments that were outside the scope of this
regulation.
Regulatory Flexibility Act
I certify that these regulations will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities because the
regulations pertain only to Federal employees and agencies.
Paperwork Reduction Act
The information collection requirements contained in this final
rule are currently approved by OMB under RIN 3206-AL73. This final
regulation does not modify this approved collection.
Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Review
This rule has been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget
in accordance with Executive Order 12866.
List of Subjects in 5 CFR Parts 315 and 316
Government employees.
Office of Personnel Management.
John Berry,
Director.
0
Accordingly, OPM is issuing final regulations to amend title 5, Code of
Federal Regulations, part 315, subpart F, and part 316, as follows:
PART 315--CAREER AND CAREER-CONDITIONAL EMPLOYMENT
Subpart F--Career or Career-Conditional Appointment Under Special
Authorities
0
1. The authority citation for part 315 is revised to read as follows:
Authority: 5 U.S.C. 1302, 3301, and 3302; E.O. 10577, 3 CFR,
1954-1958 Comp. p. 218, unless otherwise noted; and E.O. 13162.
Secs. 315.601 and 315.609 also issued under 22 U.S.C. 3651 and 3652.
Secs. 315.602 and 315.604 also issued under 5 U.S.C. 1104. Sec.
315.603 also issued under 5 U.S.C. 8151. Sec. 315.605 also issued
under E.O. 12034, 3 CFR, 1978 Comp. p. 111. Sec. 315.606 also issued
under E.O. 11219, 3 CFR, 1964-1965 Comp. p. 303. Sec. 315.607 also
issued under 22 U.S.C. 2506. Sec. 315.608 also issued under E.O.
12721, 3 CFR, 1990 Comp. p. 293. Sec. 315.610 also issued under 5
U.S.C. 3304(c). Sec. 315.611 also issued under 5 U.S.C. 3304(f).
Sec. 315.612 also issued under E.O. 13473. Sec. 315.708 also issued
under E.O. 13318, 3 CFR, 2004 Comp. p. 265. Sec. 315.710 also issued
under E.O. 12596, 3 CFR, 1987 Comp. p. 229. Subpart I also issued
under 5 U.S.C. 3321, E.O. 12107, 3 CFR, 1978 Comp. p. 264.
0
2. Add Sec. 315.612 to subpart F to read as follows:
Sec. 315.612 Noncompetitive appointment of certain military spouses.
(a) Agency authority. In accordance with the provisions of this
section, an agency may appoint noncompetitively a spouse of a member of
the armed forces serving on active duty who has orders specifying a
permanent change of station (not for training), a spouse of a 100
percent disabled service member injured while on active duty, or the
un-remarried widow or widower of a service member who was killed while
performing active duty.
(b) Definitions. (1) Active duty means full-time duty in the armed
forces, including full-time National Guard duty, except that for
Reserve Component members the term ``active duty'' does not include
training duties or attendance at service schools.
(2) Armed forces has the meaning given that term in 10 U.S.C. 101.
(3) Duty station means the permanent location to which a member of
the armed forces is assigned for duty as specified on the individual's
permanent change of station (PCS) orders.
(4) Member of the armed forces or service member means an
individual who:
(i) Is serving on active duty in the armed forces under orders
specifying the individual is called or ordered to active duty for more
than 180 consecutive days, has been issued orders for a permanent
change of station, and is authorized for dependent travel (i.e., the
travel of the service member's family members) as part of the orders
specifying the individual's permanent change of station;
(ii) Retired from active duty in the armed forces with a service-
connected disability rating of 100 percent as documented by a branch of
the armed forces, or retired or was released or discharged from active
duty in the armed forces and has a disability rating of 100 percent as
documented by the Department of Veterans Affairs; or
(iii) Was killed while serving on active duty in the armed forces.
(5) Permanent change of station means the assignment, reassignment,
or transfer of a member of the armed forces from his or her present
duty station or location without return to the previous duty station or
location.
(6) Spouse means the husband or wife of a member of the armed
forces.
(c) Eligibility. (1) A spouse of a member of the armed forces as
defined in paragraph (b)(4)(i) of this section must have:
(i) Married the member of the armed forces on, or prior to, the
date of the service member's orders authorizing a permanent change of
station; and
(ii) Relocated with the member of the armed forces to the new duty
station specified in the documentation ordering a permanent change of
station.
(2) A spouse of a member of the armed forces as defined in
paragraph (b)(4)(iii) of this section must be the un-remarried widow or
widower of the member of the armed forces killed on active duty in the
armed forces.
(3) For spouses eligible under paragraph (b)(4)(i) of this section,
noncompetitive appointment under this section is limited to the
geographic area, as specified on the service member's permanent change
of station orders. It includes the service member's duty station and
the surrounding area from which people reasonably can be expected to
travel daily to and from work. The head of an agency, or his or her
designee, may waive this limitation (i.e., accept applications from
spouses) if no Federal agency exists in the spouse's geographic area.
Spouses of active duty military members who are on retirement or
separation PCS orders from active duty are not eligible to be appointed
using this authority unless the service member is injured with a 100
percent disability.
(4) Spouses of retired or separated active duty members who have a
100 percent disability are not restricted to a geographical location.
(d) Conditions. (1) In accordance with the provisions of this
section, spouses are eligible for noncompetitive appointment for a
maximum of 2 years from the date of:
(i) The service member's permanent change of station orders;
(ii) Documentation verifying the member of the armed forces is 100
percent disabled; or
[[Page 40477]]
(iii) Documentation verifying the member of the armed forces was
killed while on active duty.
(2) A spouse may receive only one noncompetitive appointment under
this section to a permanent position per the service member's orders
authorizing a permanent change of station.
(3) Any law, Executive order, or regulation that disqualifies an
applicant for appointment also disqualifies a spouse for appointment
under this section.
(e) Proof of Eligibility. (1) Prior to appointment, the spouse of a
member of the armed forces as defined in paragraph (b)(4)(i) of this
section must submit to the employing agency:
(i) A copy of the service member's active duty orders which
authorize a permanent change of station. This authorization must
include:
(A) A statement authorizing the service member's spouse to
accompany the member to the new permanent duty station;
(B) The specific location to which the member of the armed forces
is to be assigned, reassigned, or transferred pursuant to permanent
change of station orders; and
(C) The effective date of the permanent change of station; and
(ii) Documentation verifying marriage to the member of the armed
forces (i.e., a marriage license or other legal documentation verifying
marriage).
(2) Prior to appointment, the spouse of a member of the armed
forces as defined in paragraph (b)(4)(ii) of this section must submit
to the employing agency copies of:
(i) Documentation showing the member of the armed forces was
released or discharged from active duty due to a service-connected
disability;
(ii) Documentation showing the member of the armed forces retired,
or was released or discharged from active duty, with a disability
rating of 100 percent; and
(iii) Documentation verifying marriage to the member of the armed
forces (i.e., a marriage license or other legal documentation verifying
marriage).
(3) Prior to appointment, the spouse of a member of the armed
forces as defined in paragraph (b)(4)(iii) of this section must submit
to the employing agency copies of:
(i) Documentation showing the individual was released or discharged
from active duty due to his or her death while on active duty;
(ii) Documentation verifying the member of the armed forces was
killed while serving on active duty; and
(iii) Documentation verifying marriage to the member of the armed
forces (i.e., a marriage license or other legal documentation verifying
marriage); and
(iv) A statement certifying that he or she is the un-remarried
widow or widower of the service member.
(f) Acquisition of competitive status. A person appointed under
paragraph (a) of this section acquires competitive status automatically
upon completion of probation.
(g) Tenure on appointment. An appointment under paragraph (a) of
this section is career-conditional unless the appointee has already
satisfied the requirements for career tenure or is exempt from the
service requirement pursuant to Sec. 315.201.
PART 316--TEMPORARY AND TERM EMPLOYMENT
0
3. The authority citation for part 316 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 5 U.S.C. 3301, 3302; E.O. 10577, 3 CFR, 1954-1958
Comp., p. 218.
0
4. Section 316.302(b)(3) is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 316.302 Selection of term employees.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(3) Career-conditional appointment under Sec. 315.601, 315.604,
315.605, 315.606, 315.607, 315.608, 315.609, 315.612, or 315.711 of
this chapter;
* * * * *
0
5. Section 316.402(b)(3) is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 316.402 Procedures for making temporary appointments.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(3) Career-conditional appointment under Sec. 315.601, 315.604,
315.605, 315.606, 315.607, 315.608, 315.609, 315.612, 315.703, or
315.711 of this chapter.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. E9-19340 Filed 8-11-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6325-39-P