Reduction in Force, 81839-81847 [2020-26347]
Download as PDF
81839
Proposed Rules
Federal Register
Vol. 85, No. 243
Thursday, December 17, 2020
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER
contains notices to the public of the proposed
issuance of rules and regulations. The
purpose of these notices is to give interested
persons an opportunity to participate in the
rule making prior to the adoption of the final
rules.
OFFICE OF PERSONNEL
MANAGEMENT
5 CFR Parts 351 and 430
RIN 3206–AO06
Reduction in Force
Office of Personnel
Management.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
The Office of Personnel
Management (OPM) is issuing a
proposed regulation to revise its
reduction-in-force (RIF) regulations to
set forth the principle that agencies
should prioritize performance over
length of service when determining
which employees will be retained in a
RIF following regulations that OPM will
issue. In addition, OPM is exercising its
authority to modify the order of
retention, clarify tenure group
definitions, and modify how credit for
performance is computed.
DATES: Comments must be received on
or before January 19, 2021.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments,
identified by the docket number or
Regulation Identifier Number (RIN) for
this proposed rulemaking, by any of the
following methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for sending comments.
All submissions received must
include the agency name and docket
number or RIN for this document. The
general policy for comments and other
submissions from members of the public
is to make these submissions available
for public viewing at https://
www.regulations.gov as they are
received without change, including any
personal identifiers or contact
information.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Kimberly A. Holden by email at
employ@opm.gov or by fax at (202) 606–
4430.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The OPM
is proposing to revise its regulations
governing reduction in force and related
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:56 Dec 16, 2020
Jkt 253001
technical changes under statutory
authority vested in it by Congress in 5
U.S.C. 1103, 3502, 3596, 4305, and
4315. The regulations will also assist
agencies in carrying out certain
principles set forth by the President in
Executive Order (E.O.) 13839, titled:
‘‘Promoting Accountability and
Streamlining Removal Procedures
Consistent with Merit Systems and
Principles’’ consistent with law, and
update current procedures to make them
more efficient and effective. The
proposed regulations will change
existing regulations regarding RIF
procedures to modify the order of
retention and enhance the value of
performance relative to length of service
when determining which employees
will be retained in a RIF.
The proposed regulations will assist
agencies in better aligning, consistent
with law, to certain of the principles
articulated by the President to the
Executive Branch in E.O. 13839 and
update current procedures to make them
more efficient and effective.1 Apart from
OPM’s existing authority to promulgate
regulations relating to reductions in
force, 5 U.S.C. 3502, Section 7 of the
E.O. directs OPM to propose revisions to
existing regulations, as needed, to
effectuate the principles set forth in
section 2, including those pertaining to
RIFs.
Reduction in Force
Section 2(j) of E.O. 13839 calls on
agencies to prioritize performance over
length of service in determining who
will be retained in a RIF. Section 7 of
the E.O. directs OPM to examine
whether existing regulations effectuate
the principles set forth in section 2 of
the Order. It directs OPM, ‘‘to the extent
necessary or appropriate,’’ to propose
for notice and public comment
appropriate regulations to effectuate the
principles set forth in Section 2.
1 Some of the provisions of E.O. 13839 were
enjoined by the United States District Court for the
District of Columbia. Am. Fed’n of Gov’t Employees,
AFL–CIO v. Trump, 318 F. Supp. 3d 370 (D.D.C.
2018). The principles pertaining to RIFs, however,
were not among those provisions that were
enjoined. Id. at 440. The plaintiffs did not seek
further judicial review of this decision, so this
determination is final. In any event, the decision
imposing the injunction against other provisions of
the E.O. was subsequently reversed, see Am. Fed’n
of Gov’t Employees, AFL–CIO v. Trump, 929 F.3d
748 (D.C. Cir. 2019), and thus no longer has any
effect.
PO 00000
Frm 00001
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
After conducting this examination,
OPM, under its statutory authority in 5
U.S.C. 3502, is proposing, in accordance
with the procedural requirements under
5 U.S.C. 1103(b) and the Administrative
Procedure Act, to amend its regulations
at Subpart E of 5 CFR part 351 and to
make corresponding changes to
Subparts B and Subpart G of 5 CFR part
351 and to Subpart B of 5 CFR part 430
to prioritize performance over length of
service in a RIF. In addition, we are
modifying the order of retention at 5
CFR 351.501. Specifically, when
determining the order in which
employees are placed on a RIF retention
register, agencies will do so on the basis
of tenure first, followed by performance,
then veterans’ preference, and finally
length of service, as outlined in further
detail below. In addition, we are
proposing to clarify the definition of
tenure groups.
Proposed § 351.501 Order of retention
establishes that competing employees in
a RIF will be classified on a retention
register on the basis of (in descending
order): (1) Tenure of employment, (2)
performance, (3) veterans’ preference,
and (4) length of service. This section
also clarifies that the order of retention
provisions applies to employees in both
the competitive and excepted services.
Under current regulations at 5 CFR
351.501, the order of retention for
classifying competing employees on a
retention register is (in descending
order): Tenure of employment, veterans’
preference, length of service, and
performance. Length of service is
augmented by performance; an
employee receives additional retention
service credit (i.e., additional years of
service) based on the employee’s
applicable ratings of record. OPM is
proposing to modify the order of
retention to be: Tenure of employment,
performance, veterans’ preference, and
length of service.
Under the current regulations at 5
CFR 351.504, credit for performance is
used to supplement an employee’s
length of service for purposes of
determining an employee’s standing on
a retention register (both of these
retention factors are expressed in years).
An employee receives additional
retention service credit based on his or
her performance ratings of record and
their assigned summary levels. This
additional credit is added to the
employee’s length of service to
E:\FR\FM\17DEP1.SGM
17DEP1
81840
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 243 / Thursday, December 17, 2020 / Proposed Rules
determine that employee’s retention
standing within the employee’s
appropriate tenure group and veterans’
preference subgroup. An employee
receives additional credit for
performance (added to his or her length
of service) on the following basis: 20
additional years of service for each
rating of record with a Level 5
(Outstanding or equivalent) summary
level; 16 additional years of service for
each rating of record with a Level 4
(Exceeds Fully Successful or equivalent)
summary level; and 12 additional years
of service for each rating of record with
a Level 3 (Fully Successful or
equivalent) summary level, in
accordance with the summary levels
described in 5 CFR 430.208. The
additional years of service are added
together, divided by 3, and rounded up
to a whole number if necessary to
determine the number of years that will
be used to adjust an employee’s actual
service computation date and arrive at
an adjusted service computation date for
RIF purposes.
OPM is proposing to elevate
performance above length of service in
the RIF order of retention. We propose
to do this by establishing performance
as a subgroup within the appropriate
tenure group. The proposed order of
retention will be: (1) Tenure, (2)
performance, (3) veterans’ preference,
and (4) length of service. Under this
proposal, employees competing in a RIF
will first be sorted into their appropriate
tenure group; then within each tenure
group employees will be sorted by
performance in descending order based
on the total of the employee’s three most
recent ratings of record; then within
each tenure group and performance
subgroup, according to their veterans’
preference status or subgroup; then
within each tenure group, performance
subgroup, and veterans’ preference
subgroup, employees will be listed on
the retention register in terms of their
length of service based on each
employee’s actual service computation
date. Thus, length of service will be
used as a tie-breaker for employees with
the same tenure, three-year total of their
summary level performance ratings, and
veterans’ preference status (i.e., the first
three factors being equal, an employee
with longer length of service will be
listed ahead of an employee(s) with
shorter length of service).
We are proposing that an agency
determine an employee’s performance
standing by adding each employee’s
summary level performance rating for
the three most recent ratings of record
issued under 5 CFR part 430 (or
equivalent ratings of record established
in accordance with 5 CFR 430.201(c))
prior to the RIF. An agency will place
employees on a retention register based
on the total of each employee’s
summary level rating in descending
order, within each tenure group. In most
Tenure
group
Name
Al ......................................................................................................................
Barb .................................................................................................................
Carl ..................................................................................................................
Dave .................................................................................................................
Emma ...............................................................................................................
Under the current rules, a retention
register constructed in 2018 for these
employees would look like this, based
on retention factors considered in this
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:56 Dec 16, 2020
Jkt 253001
Frm 00002
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Rating of
record
summary
levels
Vets pref
subgroup
I
I
I
I
I
order: Tenure | Vets Pref | Adjusted
Service Computation Date (ASCD) —
i.e., the service computation date (SCD)
adjusted for additional service credit
PO 00000
instances, an employee’s summary level
ratings of record for the three most
recent ratings of record will be added
together. Ratings of record will be
assigned a numerical value as follows in
conjunction with the patterns of
summary level in 5 CFR 430.208(d): 5
for a Level 5 (Outstanding or equivalent)
summary level, 4 for a Level 4 (Exceeds
Fully Successful or equivalent)
summary level, 3 for a Level 3 (Fully
Successful or equivalent) summary
level, 2 for a Level 2 (Minimally
Successful or equivalent) summary
level, 1 for a Level 1 (Unacceptable)
summary level. Agencies will list
competing employees on the retention
register in descending order (within the
same tenure group) based on the total of
their three most recent ratings of record.
OPM believes listing employees in
descending order (i.e., highest to lowest)
based on their total summary level
rating for three most recent ratings of
record is the most objective
methodology for these purposes, and
best implements the principle of
emphasizing performance over length of
service as set forth in E.O. 13839.
The following example illustrates and
contrasts the impact of performance
ratings of record and their summary
levels on a retention register under the
current rules and the proposed rules.
Consider the following employees in a
General Schedule (GS) 201–12 position:
A
A
A
A
A
3/3/3
5/4/5
3/4/3
4/5/4
3/4/4
Service
comp date
01/01/1988
01/01/2010
01/01/2000
01/01/1980
01/01/2014
(ASC) based on ratings of record and
summary levels:
E:\FR\FM\17DEP1.SGM
17DEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 243 / Thursday, December 17, 2020 / Proposed Rules
Barb: I | 14 | A | 01/01/2010
Dave: I | 13 | A | 01/01/1980
Emma: I | 11 | A | 01/01/2014
Carl: I | 10 | A | 01/01/2000
Al: I | 9 | A | 01/01/1988
The following illustrates how
veterans’ preference and length of
service will be used under the proposed
Al ......................................................................................................................
Barb .................................................................................................................
Carl ..................................................................................................................
Dave .................................................................................................................
Emma ...............................................................................................................
Under the proposed rules, the
retention register for these employees
would look like this, based on
considering retention factors in this
order (in this example Carl is listed
ahead of Al because he is in veterans’
preference subgroup AD despite having
less service credit than Al):
Barb: I | 14 | A | 01/01/2010
Dave: I | 13 | A | 01/01/1980
Emma: I | 11 | A | 01/01/2014
Carl: I | 9 | AD | 01/01/2000
Al: I | 9 | A | 01/01/1988
OPM is proposing to revamp 5 CFR
part 351, sections 501 through 505. We
are proposing to renumber current
§ 351.505 Records, and § 351.506
Effective date of retention standing, to
§ 351.506 Records and § 351.507
Effective date of retention standing,
respectively. We are also proposing
corresponding changes to § 351.701
Assignment rights (bump and retreat).
Lastly, OPM is proposing to modify
§ 430.208(d) to attune those provisions
with the proposed changes in 5 CFR
part 351. The proposed changes are as
follows:
Proposed § 351.501 Order of retention
establishes that competing employees in
a RIF will be classified on a retention
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:56 Dec 16, 2020
Jkt 253001
Rating of
record
summary
levels
Tenure
group
Name
I
I
I
I
I
register on the basis of (in descending
order): (1) Tenure of employment, (2)
performance, (3) veterans’ preference,
and (4) length of service. This section
also clarifies that the order of retention
provisions applies to employees in both
the competitive and excepted services.
Proposed § 351.502 Tenure of
employment defines tenure groups for
competitive service and excepted
service employees. Proposed
§ 351.502(a) defines tenure groups for
competitive service employees. The new
§ 351.502(a) incorporates the provisions
currently found in § 351.501(b)(1)–(3)
but clarifies that Tenure group I will
consist of career employees who are not
serving a probationary period. Proposed
tenure group II will consist of careerconditional employees and other
employees serving a probationary
period, as well as the other categories of
employees currently described in
§ 351.501(b)(2). OPM is deleting the
reference to ‘‘temporary appointments
pending establishment of a register’’
listed in current Tenure group III at
§ 351.501(b)(3) because these types of
appointments, also known as TAPER
appointments, were abolished in 2003
(see 68 FR 35265, ‘‘Organization of the
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
rules. Assuming the same group of
employees but with two differences: Al
and Carl have the same ratings of
record, but Carl’s veterans’ preference
subgroup is AD, as follows:
3/3/3
5/4/5
3/3/3
4/5/4
3/4/4
Vets pref
subgroup
A
A
AD
A
A
Service
comp date
01/01/1988
01/01/2010
01/01/2000
01/01/1980
01/01/2014
Government for Personnel Management,
Overseas Employment, Temporary and
Term Employment, Recruitment and
Selection for Temporary and Term
Appointments Outside the Register,
Examining System, and Training’’).
Proposed § 351.502(b) defines tenure
groups for excepted service employees.
The new § 351.502(b) incorporates the
provisions currently found in § 351.502
Order of retention—excepted service
without change. OPM is proposing to
consolidate tenure of employment
definitions for both services into one
section for the convenience of the
reader.
Proposed § 351.503 Performance
establishes that an agency will list
employees on a RIF retention register
(within the same tenure group) based on
the total of each employee’s summary
level ratings for the employee’s three
most recent ratings of record for
performance. In accordance with 5 CFR
430.208(d) summary level ratings of
record for these purposes are as follows:
(i) 5 for a Level 5 (Outstanding or
equivalent) summary level
(ii) 4 for a Level 4 (Exceeds Fully
Successful or equivalent) summary
level
E:\FR\FM\17DEP1.SGM
17DEP1
EP17DE20.075
Under the proposed rules, the
retention register for these same
competing employees would look like
this, based on considering retention
factors in this order: Tenure |
Performance based on the total of the
employee’s summary levels | Vets Pref |
Service Computation Date:
81841
81842
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 243 / Thursday, December 17, 2020 / Proposed Rules
(iii) 3 for a Level 3 (Fully Successful or
equivalent) summary level
(iv) 2 for a Level 2 (Minimally
Successful or equivalent) summary
level, and
(v) 1 for a Level 1 (Unacceptable)
summary level
This section also explains that an
agency lists competing employees on
the retention register in descending
order (i.e., highest to lowest) based on
their totals within the same tenure
group.
Section 351.503(b) Ratings used
explains that an employee’s ratings of
record are to be used in a manner
consistent with the provisions of
subpart B of 5 CFR part 430, and
provides guidance as to how an agency
determines an employee’s performance
standing for RIF purposes for employees
not covered under subpart B of 5 CFR
part 430 and in other special
circumstances. § 351.503(b) remains
largely unchanged from the provisions
currently in § 351.504(a)(1)–(3), though
we are removing the reference to
‘additional retention service credit’
currently found in § 351.504(a)(1).
Section 351.503(c) Consideration of
performance includes language
currently in § 351.504(b) but modifies
this language by removing the reference
to ‘‘additional retention service credit’’
consistent with the aim of E.O. 13839
(i.e., credit for performance will no
longer be added to an employee’s length
of service). Performance will now be a
subgroup, within the tenure group,
which will be based on the total of each
employee’s summary level ratings for
the employee’s three most recent ratings
of record for performance consistent
with § 351.503(a). Proposed
§ 351.503(c)(1) removes the reference to
‘awarding additional retention service
credit’ currently found in
§ 351.504(b)(4).
Section 351.503(d) How to apply
performance ratings is a new subsection
which explains to agencies that they
must total the summary levels from an
employee’s three most recent ratings of
record to derive a total summary level
value for purposes of placing the
employee on a RIF retention register
under this part. This new subsection
uses the rating of record summary levels
described in subpart B of 5 CFR part
430. For example, the employees below
are covered under a pattern H fivesummary level rating performance
appraisal system as described in 5 CFR
430.208(d). Their ratings and totals are:
Employee
Alice ..............................
Bill .................................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
Ratings
Total
5/4/4
4/3/3
17:56 Dec 16, 2020
Jkt 253001
13
10
elevating performance over length of
service, and it provides an agency with
Carol .............................
4/4/3
11 a method for making meaningful
Fred ..............................
3/4/5
12 distinctions among employees with a
fully successful rating when some of
These employees would be listed on
these employees were recognized for
the retention register in the following
exceptional performance.
order: Alice, Fred, Carol, then Bill.
Section 351.503(f) Multiple rating
New paragraph § 351.503(e) Single
patterns
addresses situations in which
rating pattern describes how agencies
an agency has employees in a
list employees who have been covered
competitive area who have ratings of
under the same rating pattern of
summary levels during the 4-year period record under more than one pattern of
summary levels, as described in 5 CFR
prior to the date of issuance of the
403.208(d). This paragraph explains that
reduction in force notice or the agencyan agency shall consider the mix of
established cutoff date. Subparagraph
patterns and proposes that an agency
(e)(ii) proposes that for employees
shall provide enhanced performance
covered under a summary level
standing to employees under disparate
appraisal system in which the highest
summary level is a level ‘‘3’’ rating (i.e., pattern summary levels under certain
circumstances. To do this OPM is
a pattern A (‘pass/fail’), or pattern D
proposing that an agency transmute or
system) the agency may create a
assign an employee a higher summary
performance subgroup for employees
level rating than what he or she received
who have documented exceptional
under a previous rating system only
performance above the norm. This
when there is documented evidence of
subparagraph explains that evidence of
exceptional or higher level performance
exceptional performance may include
documentation showing an agency: Has consistent with the criteria in proposed
§ 351.503(e). An agency must transmute
awarded an employee the highest
Agency or Departmental award (such as the rating of an employee who meets
this requirement to the highest summary
a Secretary’s or Chairman’s award), a
level of the pattern summary level being
special act or service award, a quality
used during the RIF (i.e., a level ‘‘4’’
step increase, or other performance
rating if the agency conducting the RIF
awards or bonus (e.g., a ‘time-off’ for
uses a pattern C or G summary level
demonstrated performance above
appraisal system, or a level ‘‘5’’ rating if
expectations). OPM is proposing this to
the agency uses a pattern B, E, F, or H
effectuate the principle of the E.O.
summary level appraisal system).
(which is to elevate performance over
Documented evidence of exceptional or
length of service) and to provide a
higher level performance for these
method by which an agency may make
purposes includes: Award or receipt of
meaningful distinctions among
the highest Agency or Departmental
employees in a pattern A or D
performance appraisal program (i.e., the award (such as a Secretary’s or
highest summary level rating is a ‘‘3’’ or Chairman’s award), a quality step
increase, or an annual performance
satisfactory) who have documented
performance above expectations in these appraisal bonus. For example, an
employee was covered by a pattern A
appraisals systems.
In new subparagraph
(pass/fail) appraisal program for two
§ 351.503(e)(2)(B) OPM is also
years and a pattern H (5 summary level)
proposing to allow an agency to give
appraisal program for the one year prior
more weight to certain performanceto a RIF. While covered under the
related actions than others for purposes
pattern A appraisal program the
of listing some level ‘‘3’’ employees
employee received his agency’s highest
ahead of other employees on a retention award for excellent performance in the
register. For example, an agency could
second year. Under the five-summary
list all employees who received the
level system he received a level ‘‘4’’
agency’s highest sustained performance rating. Under this proposal the agency
award ahead of all employees who
must assign the employee a higher
received an organizational or
rating level; so in this instance the
component-specific award, and ahead
employee’s performance ratings for the
employee who received a time off award three year period would be 3/5/4 (his
(both groups would be listed ahead of
level 3 rating would be transmuted to a
the other level ‘‘3’’ employees). An
level 5) and his ratings of record total
agency that chooses this option must
for the three year period would be 12 for
specify and document, in advance of
purposes of 351.503(d). OPM is also
any RIF, how it will prioritize
proposing that an employee who goes
performance awards for these purposes. from an appraisal system which uses a
OPM believes this option is consistent
higher pattern of summary levels to a
with the E.O. and the principle of
lower one (e.g., an employee who goes
PO 00000
Employee
Frm 00004
Fmt 4702
Ratings
Sfmt 4702
Total
E:\FR\FM\17DEP1.SGM
17DEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 243 / Thursday, December 17, 2020 / Proposed Rules
from a 5 summary level appraisal
program to two level system (i.e., pass/
fail system)) with ratings above the
highest summary level of the lower
pattern system be listed ahead of any
employee on the retention register who
does not have documented evidence of
exceptional performance as described
above. Lastly, this proposed section
requires an agency to specify the basis
on which it will consider exceptional or
higher level performance described in
§ 351.503(e) and transmute or assign an
employee a higher rating in accordance
with the pattern of summary level used
during the RIF, and make this
information readily available for review
prior to running a reduction in force.
OPM is proposing enhanced
performance credit or standing to
implement the E.O.’s principle that an
agency emphasize performance over
length of service in a RIF. We believe
this method prevents exceptional
performers from being disadvantaged
because they may be covered under two
or more patterns of summary rating
levels which may not make meaningful
distinctions for performance among
employees.
§ 351.503(g) Missing ratings describes
how an agency should factor
performance ratings into the RIF process
when an employee does not have three
actual ratings of record during the 4year period prior to the date of issuance
of RIF notices, or the 4-year period prior
to the agency-established cut-off date.
Proposed § 351.503(g) uses the modal
rating concept for employees with no
ratings during the 4 year period prior to
the RIF currently found in
§ 351.504(c)(1) but modifies the current
provisions by removing the reference to
’’additional retention service credit’’
consistent with the aim of E.O. 13839
(i.e., credit for performance will no
longer be added to an employee’s length
of service). The term ‘modal rating’ is
currently defined in § 351.203. For
employees with at least one rating of
record but less than three, this section
proposes that an agency total the
summary levels, divide by the number
of ratings, and use this value for the
missing ratings. For example, an
employee in five level pattern H
summary level appraisal system has
summary level rating of ‘‘3’’ fully
successful and ‘‘4’’ exceeds fully
successful but is missing a third rating.
The agency would add 3 + 4, then
divide by 2, for a value of 3.5 for the
missing rating. The agency then adds
the three ratings of record: 3, 4, and 3.5
for a total of 10.5 and enters the
employee on the retention register
accordingly.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:56 Dec 16, 2020
Jkt 253001
Proposed § 351.504 Veterans’
preference defines veterans’ preference
subgroups for employees in both the
competitive and excepted services. This
proposed section will consist of the
provisions currently found in
§ 351.501(c) and (d) without change.
OPM is proposing to delete current
§ 351.502 Order of retention—excepted
service and cover these provisions in
proposed § 351.501(a).
OPM is proposing to modify current
§ 351.705 Administrative assignment to
be consistent with the proposed changes
to §§ 351.501–.505. Specifically, OPM is
proposing to update § 351.705(a)(2) to
incorporate the new order of retention
and the creation of the new subgroup
called ‘performance’.
Performance Management
OPM is proposing to modify current
§ 430.208(d)(4) to attune this language
with the proposed changes in part 351.
To do this, we propose removing the
current reference to ‘‘. . . assigning
additional retention service credit under
§ 351.504.’’
OPM is proposing to modify current
§ 430.208(d)(5) by removing the
reference to ‘‘the number of years of
additional retention service credit’’ and
replacing it with a general reference to
proposed § 351.503 Performance.
Regulatory Impact Analysis
OPM has examined the impact of this
rulemaking as required by Executive
Order 12866 and Executive Order
13563, which directs agencies to assess
all costs and benefits of available
regulatory alternatives and, if regulation
is necessary, to select regulatory
approaches that maximize net benefits
(including potential economic,
environmental, public, health, and
safety effects, distributive impacts, and
equity). A regulatory impact analysis
must be prepared for major rules with
economically significant effects of $100
million or more in any one year. While
this proposed rule does not reach the
economic effect of $100 million or more
under Executive Order 12866, this
proposed rule is still designated as a
‘‘significant regulatory action,’’ under
Executive Order 12866.
Reducing Regulation and Controlling
Regulatory Costs
This proposed rule is not an E.O.
13771 regulatory action because this
proposed rule is expected to be no more
than de minimis costs.
Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Office of Personnel Management
certifies that this proposed rule will not
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
81843
have a significant economic impact on
a substantial number of small entities.
Federalism
We have examined this proposed rule
in accordance with Executive Order
13132, Federalism, and have
determined that this proposed rule will
not have any negative impact on the
rights, roles and responsibilities of
State, local, or tribal governments.
Civil Justice Reform
This regulation meets the applicable
standard set forth in Executive Order
12988.
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of
1995
This proposed rule will not result in
the expenditure by state, local, and
tribal governments, in the aggregate, or
by the private sector, of $100 million or
more in any year and it will not
significantly or uniquely affect small
governments. Therefore, no actions were
deemed necessary under the provisions
of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
of 1995.
Congressional Review Act
The Congressional Review Act (5
U.S.C. 801 et seq.) requires rules to be
submitted to Congress before taking
effect. OPM will submit to Congress and
the Comptroller General of the United
States a report regarding the issuance of
this proposed rule before its effective
date, as required by 5 U.S.C. 801. This
proposed rule is not a major rule as
defined by the Congressional Review
Act (CRA) (5 U.S.C. 804).
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44
U.S.C. Chapter 35)
This regulatory action will not impose
any additional reporting or
recordkeeping requirements under the
Paperwork Reduction Act.
List of Subjects in 5 CFR Parts 351 and
430
Government employees.
Office of Personnel Management.
Alexys Stanley,
Regulatory Affairs Analyst.
Accordingly, for the reasons stated in
the preamble, OPM proposes to amend
5 CFR parts 351, and 430 as follows:
PART 351—REDUCTION IN FORCE
1. Revise the authority citation for part
351 to read as follows:
■
Authority: 5 U.S.C. 1302, 3502, 3503; sec.
351.801 also issued under E.O. 12828, 58 FR
2965; E.O. 13839, 83 FR 25343.
E:\FR\FM\17DEP1.SGM
17DEP1
81844
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 243 / Thursday, December 17, 2020 / Proposed Rules
Subpart B—General Provisions
2. In § 351.203, revise the definition of
‘‘Current rating of record’’ to read as
follows:
■
§ 351.203
Definitions.
*
*
*
*
*
Current rating of record is the rating
of record for the most recently
completed appraisal period as provided
in § 351.503(c)(3).
*
*
*
*
*
Subpart E—Retention Standing
■
3. Revise Subpart E to read as follows:
Subpart E—Retention Standing
Sec.
351.501
351.502
351.503
351.504
351.505
351.506
351.507
§ 351.501
Order of retention.
Tenure of employment.
Performance.
Veterans’ preference.
Length of service.
Records.
Effective date of retention standing.
Order of retention.
Competing employees in the
competitive and excepted services shall
be classified on a retention register on
the basis of four factors: Tenure of
employment, performance, veterans’
preference, and length of service as
follows:
(a) On the same retention register in
descending order by tenure group I,
group II, group III, as described in
§ 351.502;
(b) Within each tenure group by
performance based on the sum of the
summary levels for the employee’s three
most recent ratings of record for
performance in accordance with
§ 351.503;
(c) Within each performance subgroup
by veterans’ preference subgroup AD,
subgroup A, subgroup B, as described in
§ 351.504; and
(d) Within each veterans’ preference
subgroup by years of service beginning
with the earliest service computation
date, as computed under § 351.505,
when two or more employees have the
same summary level total value for the
employees’ three most recent ratings of
record.
§ 351.502
Tenure of employment.
(a) Competitive service. Tenure groups
in the competitive service are defined as
follows:
(1) Group I includes each career
employee who is not serving a
probationary period. (A supervisory or
managerial employee serving a
probationary period required by subpart
I of part 315 of this chapter is in group
I if the employee is otherwise eligible to
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:56 Dec 16, 2020
Jkt 253001
be included in this group.) The
following employees are in group I as
soon as the employee completes any
required probationary period for initial
appointment:
(i) An employee for whom substantial
evidence exists of eligibility to
immediately acquire status and career
tenure, and whose case is pending final
resolution by OPM (including cases
under Executive Order 10826 to correct
certain administrative errors);
(ii) An employee who acquires
competitive status and satisfies the
service requirement for career tenure
when the employee’s position is brought
into the competitive service;
(iii) An administrative law judge;
(iv) An employee appointed under 5
U.S.C. 3104, which provides for the
employment of specially-qualified
scientific or professional personnel, or a
similar authority; and
(v) An employee who acquired status
under 5 U.S.C. 3304(c) on transfer to the
competitive service from the legislative
or judicial branches of the Federal
Government.
(2) Group II includes each careerconditional employee, and each
employee serving a probationary period
under subpart H of part 315 of this
chapter. (A supervisory or managerial
employee serving a probationary period
required by subpart I of part 315 of this
chapter is in group II if the employee
has not completed a probationary period
under subpart H of part 315 of this
chapter.) Group II also includes an
employee when substantial evidence
exists of the employee’s eligibility to
immediately acquire status and careerconditional tenure, and the employee’s
case is pending final resolution by OPM
(including cases under Executive Order
10826 to correct certain administrative
errors).
(3) Group III includes all employees
serving under indefinite appointments,
status quo appointments, term
appointments, and any other non-status
non-temporary appointments which
meet the definition of provisional
appointments contained in §§ 316.401
and 316.403 of this chapter.
(b) Excepted service. Tenure groups in
the excepted service are defined as
follows:
(1) Group I includes each permanent
employee whose appointment carries no
restriction or condition such as
conditional, indefinite, specific time
limit, or trial period.
(2) Group II includes each employee:
(i) Serving a trial period; or
(ii) Whose tenure is equivalent to a
career-conditional appointment in the
competitive service in agencies having
such excepted appointments.
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
(3) Group III includes each employee:
(i) Whose tenure is indefinite (i.e.,
without specific time limit), but not
actually or potentially permanent;
(ii) Whose appointment has a specific
time limitation of more than 1 year; or
(iii) Who is currently employed under
a temporary appointment limited to 1
year or less, but who has completed 1
year of current continuous service under
a temporary appointment with no break
in service of 1 workday or more.
§ 351.503
Performance.
(a) Performance subgroup. Within the
tenure groups an agency shall list
competing employees in descending
order (i.e., highest to lowest) based on
the total of the summary levels for each
employee’s three most recent ratings of
record for performance in accordance
with part 430 of this Chapter.
(b) Ratings used. (1) Except as
provided at § 351.503(d)(3), only ratings
of record as defined in § 351.203 shall
be used as the basis for classifying an
employee’s performance in a reduction
in force.
(2) For employees who received
ratings of record while covered by part
430, subpart B, of this chapter, the
summary levels assigned for those
ratings of record shall be used to
establish the employee’s performance
subgroup in a reduction in force in
accordance with 5 CFR 351.501, except
as provided in 5 CFR 351.503(d)(3).
(3) For employees who received
performance ratings while not covered
by the provisions of 5 U.S.C. chapter 43
and subpart B of part 430 of this
chapter, those performance ratings shall
be considered ratings of record with
summary levels for designating an
employee’s performance subgroup in a
reduction in force only when it is
determined that those performance
ratings are equivalent ratings of record
under the provisions of § 430.201(c) of
this chapter. The agency conducting the
reduction in force shall make that
determination.
(c) Consideration of performance. (1)
An employee’s entitlement to
performance consideration under this
subpart shall be based on the
employee’s three most recent ratings of
record received during the 4-year period
prior to the date of issuance of reduction
in force notices, except as otherwise
provided in paragraphs (c)(2) and (g) of
this section.
(2) To provide adequate time to
determine employee performance total
values, an agency may provide for a
cutoff date, a specified number of days
prior to the issuance of reduction in
force notices after which no new ratings
of record will be put on record and used
E:\FR\FM\17DEP1.SGM
17DEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 243 / Thursday, December 17, 2020 / Proposed Rules
for purposes of this subpart. When a
cutoff date is used, an employee’s
performance average will be based on
the three most recent ratings of record
received during the 4-year period prior
to the cutoff date.
(3) To be considered for purposes of
this subpart, a rating of record and its
assigned summary level (including any
adjustments to performance consistent
with this subpart) must have been
issued to the employee, with all
appropriate reviews and signatures, and
must also be on record (i.e., the rating
of record is available for use by the
office responsible for establishing
retention registers).
(4) The use of performance ratings of
record and assigned summary levels
(including any adjustments to
performance) for purposes of this
subpart must be uniformly and
consistently applied within a
competitive area, and must be
consistent with any agency’s
appropriate issuance(s) that implement
these policies in part 351. Each agency
must specify in its appropriate
issuance(s):
(i) The conditions under which a
rating of record is considered to have
been received for purposes of
determining whether it is within the 4year period prior to either the date the
agency issues reduction in force notices
or the agency-established cutoff date for
ratings of record, as appropriate; and
(ii) If the agency elects to use a cutoff
date, the number of days prior to the
issuance of reduction in force notices
after which no new ratings of record
will be put on record and used for
purposes of this subpart.
(d) How to apply performance ratings
of record. Agencies determine each
competing employee’s performance
standing (or numerical value) by adding
the employee’s three most recent
summary level ratings of record during
the 4-year period prior to the date of
issuance of the reduction in force notice
or the agency-established cutoff date.
An agency lists competing employees
on the retention register in descending
order (i.e., highest to lowest) based on
these totals.
(e) Single rating pattern. (1) If all
employees in a reduction in force
competitive area have received ratings
of record under a single pattern of
summary levels as set forth in
§ 430.208(d) of this chapter, agencies
must apply the method described in
paragraph (d) of this section.
(2) An agency may give additional
credit for performance for employees
covered under a summary level
appraisal system in which the highest
summary level is a level ‘‘3’’ rating (i.e.,
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:56 Dec 16, 2020
Jkt 253001
a pattern A ‘pass/fail’, or pattern D
system), consistent with § 430.208(d) of
this chapter. At its discretion an agency
may create a subgroup of level ‘‘3’’
employees with demonstrated
exceptional performance and list them
ahead of other level ’’3’’ employees if,
within the 4-year period prior to either
the date the agency issues reduction in
force notices or the agency-established
cutoff date for ratings of record, the
following condition is met:
(i) The agency has applied
performance-related criteria and taken
an action that recognizes the employee’s
exceptional performance; such actions
may include but are not limited to
awarding an employee: The highest
Agency or Departmental award (such as
a Secretary’s or Chairman’s award), a
special act or service award, a quality
step increase, or other performance
awards or bonus (e.g., a ’time-off’ for
demonstrated performance above
expectations), etc.
(ii) An agency may determine on its
own whether to give more weight to the
performance-related action described in
paragraph (e)(2)(i) of this section for
purposes of listing some level ‘‘3’’
employees ahead of other on a retention
register. For example, an agency could
list all employees who received the
agency’s highest sustained performance
award ahead of all employees who
received an organizational or
component-specific award, and ahead of
an employee who received a time off
award. An agency which chooses this
option must specify and document, in
advance of the RIF, how it will
prioritize performance awards for these
purposes.
(iii) An agency that chooses to give an
employee additional credit for
performance must specify and
document, in advance of the RIF, how
it will prioritize performance awards for
these purposes and make this criterion
readily available for review.
(f) Multiple rating patterns. (1) If an
agency has employees in a competitive
area who have ratings of record under
more than one pattern of summary
levels, as set forth in § 430.208(d) of this
chapter, it shall consider the mix of
patterns and provide additional
retention credit for performance in
accordance with the following:
(i) Transmute or assign an employee
a higher summary level rating than what
he or she received under their previous
appraisal system in accordance with the
appraisal system (i.e., pattern of
summary level) being applied to the
Reduction in Force;
(ii) Transmute or assign an employee
a summary level rating only when there
is documented evidence of exceptional
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
81845
or higher level performance as
evidenced by an employee who received
the highest Agency or Departmental
award (such as a Secretary’s or
Chairman’s award), a quality step
increase, or appraisal performance
awards or bonus (e.g., a ‘‘time-off’’ for
demonstrated performance above
expectations in lieu of a cash bonus);
and
(iii) Each agency must specify and
document, in advance of a RIF, the basis
on which it will transmute an
employee’s rating; i.e., the agency needs
to describe how it will translate
evidence of documented exceptional
performance to a higher performance
rating under the appraisal system (i.e.,
pattern of summary level) being applied
to the RIF and make this criteria readily
available for review.
(iii) An agency must transmute the
rating of an employee who meets the
requirement in 351.503(f)(1)(B) to the
highest summary level of the pattern
summary level being applied to the RIF
(i.e., a level ‘‘4’’ rating if the agency
conducting the RIF uses a pattern C or
G summary level appraisal system, or a
level ‘‘5’’ rating if the agency uses a
pattern B, E, F, or H summary level
appraisal system). An agency cannot
transmute a rating to a summary level
which is not among those in the pattern
being applied to the RIF.
(ii) In situations in which the agency
running the RIF is using a pattern
summary level rating appraisal system
with a summary level no higher than a
level ‘‘3’’ (i.e., a pass/fail system) but
has employees rated previously under a
pattern with higher summary levels the
agency must place the employees with
the higher summary ratings at the
performance subgroup at the top of
retention register, or ahead of, other
summary level ‘‘3’’ employees with no
documented evidence of exceptional
performance.
(g) Missing ratings. (1) Use of
performance ratings for employees who
do not have three actual ratings of
record during the 4-year period prior to
the date of issuance of reduction in
force notices or the 4-year period prior
to the agency-established cutoff date for
ratings of record permitted in paragraph
(c)(2) of this section shall be determined
under paragraph (d) of this section, as
appropriate, and as follows:
(2) The performance standing of an
employee who has not received any
rating of record for any year during the
4-year period shall be based on the
modal rating as defined in 5 CFR
351.203 for the summary level pattern
that applies to the employee’s official
position of record at the time of the
reduction in force.
E:\FR\FM\17DEP1.SGM
17DEP1
81846
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 243 / Thursday, December 17, 2020 / Proposed Rules
(3) The performance standing of an
employee who has received at least one
but fewer than three previous ratings of
record during the 4-year period shall
have his or her performance standing
determined on the basis of the value of
summary levels for the actual rating(s)
of record divided by the number of
actual ratings received. If an employee
has received only two actual ratings of
record during the period, the value of
the summary levels is added together
and divided by 2, with the result being
either (1) a whole number or (2) a
number with .5 decimal value. The
agency totals these values and lists the
employee in score order in accordance
with § 351.204(d). If an employee has
received only one actual rating of record
during the period, its summary level
value determines the employee’s
performance subgroup for purposes of
this part.
§ 351.504
Veterans’ preference.
(a) Veterans’ preference subgroups.
Veterans’ preference subgroups for both
competitive and excepted service
employees are defined as follows:
(1) Subgroup AD includes each
preference eligible employee who has a
compensable service-connected
disability of 30 percent or more.
(2) Subgroup A includes each
preference eligible employee not
included in subgroup AD.
(3) Subgroup B includes each
nonpreference eligible employee.
(b) A retired member of a uniformed
service is considered a preference
eligible under this part only if the
member meets at least one of the
conditions of the following paragraphs
(b)(1), (2), or (3) of this section, except
as limited by paragraph (b)(4) or (b)(5):
(1) The employee’s military
retirement is based on disability that
either:
(i) Resulted from injury or disease
received in the line of duty as a direct
result of armed conflict; or
(ii) Was caused by an instrumentality
of war incurred in the line of duty
during a period of war as defined by
sections 101 and 301 of title 38, United
States Code.
(2) The employee’s retired pay from a
uniformed service is not based upon 20
or more years of full-time active service,
regardless of when performed but not
including periods of active duty for
training.
(3) The employee has been
continuously employed in a position
covered by this part since November 30,
1964, without a break in service of more
than 30 days.
(4) An employee retired at the rank of
major or above (or equivalent) is
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:56 Dec 16, 2020
Jkt 253001
considered a preference eligible under
this part if such employee is a disabled
veteran as defined in section 2108(2) of
title 5, United States Code, and meets
one of the conditions covered in
paragraphs (b)(1), (2), or (3) of this
section.
(5) An employee who is eligible for
retired pay under chapter 67 of title 10,
United States Code, and who retired at
the rank of major or above (or
equivalent) is considered a preference
eligible under this part at age 60, only
if such employee is a disabled veteran
as defined in section 2108(2) of title 5,
United States Code.
§ 351.505
Length of service.
(a) All civilian service as a Federal
employee, as defined in 5 U.S.C.
2105(a), is creditable for purposes of
this part. Civilian service performed in
employment that does not meet the
definition of Federal employee set forth
in 5 U.S.C. 2105(a) is creditable for
purposes of this part only if specifically
authorized by statute as creditable for
retention purposes.
(b)(1) As authorized by 5 U.S.C.
3502(a)(A), all active duty in a
uniformed service, as defined in 5
U.S.C. 2101(3), is creditable for
purposes of this part, except as provided
in paragraphs (b)(2) and (b)(3) of this
section.
(2) As authorized by 5 U.S.C.
3502(a)(B), a retired member of a
uniformed service who is covered by
§ 351.503(b) is entitled to credit under
this part only for:
(i) The length of time in active service
in the Armed Forces during a war, or in
a campaign or expedition for which a
campaign or expedition badge has been
authorized; or
(ii) The total length of time in active
service in the Armed Forces if the
employee is considered a preference
eligible under 5 U.S.C. 2108 and 5
U.S.C. 3501(a), as implemented in
§ 351.504(b).
(3) An employee may not receive dual
service credit for purposes of this part
for service performed on active duty in
the Armed Forces that was performed
during concurrent civilian employment
as a Federal employee, as defined in 5
U.S.C. 2105(a).
(c)(1) The agency is responsible for
establishing the service computation
date applicable to each employee
competing for retention under this part.
If applicable, the agency is also
responsible for adjusting the service
computation date to withhold retention
service credit for non-creditable service.
(2) The service computation date
includes all actual creditable service
PO 00000
under paragraph (a) and paragraph (b) of
this section.
(d) Service computation date. The
service computation date is computed
on the following basis:
(1) The effective date of appointment
as a Federal employee under 5 U.S.C.
2105(a) when the employee has no
previous creditable service under
paragraph (a) or (b) of this section; or if
applicable,
(2) The date calculated by subtracting
the employee’s total previous creditable
service under paragraph (a) or (b) of this
section from the most recent effective
date of appointment as a Federal
employee under 5 U.S.C. 2105(a).
Frm 00008
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
§ 351.506
Records.
(a) The agency is responsible for
maintaining correct personnel records
that are used to determine the retention
standing of its employees competing for
retention under this part.
(b) The agency must allow its
retention registers and related records to
be inspected by:
(1) An employee of the agency who
has received a specific reduction in
force notice, and/or the employee’s
representative if the representative is
acting on behalf of the individual
employee; and
(2) An authorized representative of
OPM.
(c) An employee who has received a
specific notice of reduction in force
under authority of subpart H of this part
has the right to review any completed
records used by the agency in a
reduction in force action that was taken,
or will be taken, against the employee,
including:
(1) The complete retention register
with the released employee’s name and
other relevant retention information
(including the names of all other
employees listed on that register, and
their individual service computation
dates calculated under § 351.505(d)), so
that the employee may consider how the
agency constructed the competitive
level, and how the agency determined
the relative retention standing of the
competing employees; and
(2) The complete retention registers
for other positions that could affect the
composition of the employee’s
competitive level, and/or the
determination of the employee’s
assignment rights (e.g., registers to
which the released employee may have
potential assignment rights under
§ 351.701(b) and (c)).
(d) An employee who has not
received a specific reduction in force
notice has no right to review the
agency’s retention registers and related
records.
E:\FR\FM\17DEP1.SGM
17DEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 243 / Thursday, December 17, 2020 / Proposed Rules
(e) The agency is responsible for
ensuring that each employee’s access to
retention records is consistent with both
the Freedom of Information Act (5
U.S.C. 552), and the Privacy Act (5
U.S.C. 552a).
(f) The agency must preserve all
registers and records relating to a
reduction in force for at least 1 year after
the date it issues a specific reduction in
force notice.
§ 351.507 Effective date of retention
standing.
(a) The retention standing of each
employee released from a competitive
level in the order prescribed in
§ 351.601 is determined as of the date
the employee is so released.
(b) The retention standing of each
employee retained in a competitive
level as an exception under
§ 351.606(b), § 351.607, or § 351.608, is
determined as of the date the employee
would have been released had the
exception not been used. The retention
standing of each employee retained
under any of these provisions remains
fixed until completion of the reduction
in force action which resulted in the
temporary retention.
(c) When an agency discovers an error
in the determination of an employee’s
retention standing, it shall correct the
error and adjust any erroneous
reduction-in-force action to accord with
the employee’s proper retention
standing as of the effective date
established by this section.
■ 5. Revise § 351.705(a)(2) to read as
follows:
§ 351.705
Administrative assignment.
(a) * * *
(2) Permit an employee in tenure
group III, same performance subgroup,
veterans’ preference subgroup AD to
displace an employee in tenure group
III, same performance subgroup,
veterans’ preference subgroup A or B, or
permit an employee in tenure group III,
same performance subgroup, veterans’
preference subgroup A to displace an
employee in tenure group III, same
performance subgroup, veterans’
preference subgroup B consistent with
§ 351.701 (e.g., an employee in tenure
group III, performance summary level
ratings of record total of 12, veterans’
preference subgroup AD to displace an
employee tenure group III, performance
summary level ratings of record total of
12, veterans’ preference subgroup A or
B).
*
*
*
*
*
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:56 Dec 16, 2020
Jkt 253001
PART 430—PERFORMANCE
MANAGEMENT
Subpart B—Performance Appraisal for
General Schedule, Prevailing Rate, and
Certain Other Employees
6.Revise § 430.208(d)(4) to read as
follows:
■
§ 430.208
Rating Performance.
*
*
*
*
*
(d) * * *
(4) The designation of a summary
level and its pattern shall be used to
provide consistency in describing
ratings of record and as a reference
point for applying other related
regulations, excluding enhanced
performance values under § 351.503(d)
and (f) of this chapter.
§ 430.208
[Amended]
7. In § 430.208, remove paragraph
(d)(5).
■
[FR Doc. 2020–26347 Filed 12–16–20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6325–39–P
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
10 CFR Part 26
[Docket Nos. PRM–26–3; NRC–2009–0482,
PRM–26–5; NRC–2010–0304]
Fitness-for-Duty Program
Nuclear Regulatory
Commission.
ACTION: Petitions for rulemaking; denial.
AGENCY:
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission (NRC) is denying two
petitions for rulemaking related to the
fitness-for-duty program that were
docketed as PRM–26–3, ‘‘Professional
Reactor Operator Society—Fitness-forDuty Programs,’’ and PRM–26–5,
‘‘Nuclear Energy Institute—Fitness-forDuty Programs,’’ due to the
discontinuation of the associated
rulemaking.
SUMMARY:
As of December 17, 2020, the
dockets for PRM–26–3 and PRM–26–5
are closed.
ADDRESSES: Please refer to Docket IDs
NRC–2009–0482 or NRC–2010–0304
when contacting the NRC about the
availability of information regarding this
document. You may obtain publiclyavailable information related to this
document using any of the following
methods:
• Federal Rulemaking Website: Go to
https://www.regulations.gov and search
for Docket IDs NRC–2009–0482 or NRC–
2010–0304. Address questions about
NRC dockets to Dawn Forder;
DATES:
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
81847
telephone: 301–415–3407; email:
Dawn.Forder@nrc.gov. For technical
questions, contact the individuals listed
in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT section of this document.
• NRC’s Agencywide Documents
Access and Management System
(ADAMS): You may obtain publiclyavailable documents online in the
ADAMS Public Documents collection at
https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/
adams.html. To begin the search, select
‘‘Begin Web-based ADAMS Search.’’ For
problems with ADAMS, please contact
the NRC’s Public Document Room (PDR)
reference staff at 1–800–397–4209, 301–
415–4737, or by email to pdr.resource@
nrc.gov. The ADAMS accession number
for each document referenced (if it is
available in ADAMS) is provided the
first time that it is mentioned in the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section.
• Attention: The PDR, where you may
examine and order copies of public
documents, is currently closed. You
may submit your request to the PDR via
email at PDR.Resource@nrc.gov or call
1–800–397–4209 between 8:00 a.m. and
4:00 p.m. (EST), Monday through
Friday, except Federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Yanely Malave, Office of Nuclear
Material Safety and Safeguards, U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
Washington, DC 20555–0001; telephone:
301–415–1519, email: Yanely.MalaveVelez@nrc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
Title 10 of the Code of Federal
Regulations (10 CFR) 2.802, ‘‘Petition
for rulemaking—requirements for
filing,’’ provides an opportunity for any
interested person to petition the
Commission to issue, amend, or rescind
any regulation in 10 CFR chapter I. The
NRC received the following petitions for
rulemaking (PRMs) regarding 10 CFR
part 26, ‘‘Fitness for Duty Programs,’’
subpart I, ‘‘Managing Fatigue,’’ from the
Professional Reactor Operator Society
(PROS) and the Nuclear Energy Institute
(NEI) after the NRC issued a final rule 1
in 2008 that substantially revised its
fitness for duty requirements:
(1) PRM–26–3 Submitted by Robert N.
Meyer on Behalf of PROS
On October 16, 2009, Mr. Robert N.
Meyer, on behalf of PROS, an
organization of operations personnel
employed at nuclear power plants
throughout the United States, submitted
a PRM requesting that the NRC amend
its fatigue management regulations to
1 ‘‘Fitness for Duty Programs; Final Rule,’’ 73 FR
16966 (March 31, 2008).
E:\FR\FM\17DEP1.SGM
17DEP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 243 (Thursday, December 17, 2020)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 81839-81847]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-26347]
========================================================================
Proposed Rules
Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains notices to the public of
the proposed issuance of rules and regulations. The purpose of these
notices is to give interested persons an opportunity to participate in
the rule making prior to the adoption of the final rules.
========================================================================
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 243 / Thursday, December 17, 2020 /
Proposed Rules
[[Page 81839]]
OFFICE OF PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT
5 CFR Parts 351 and 430
RIN 3206-AO06
Reduction in Force
AGENCY: Office of Personnel Management.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Office of Personnel Management (OPM) is issuing a proposed
regulation to revise its reduction-in-force (RIF) regulations to set
forth the principle that agencies should prioritize performance over
length of service when determining which employees will be retained in
a RIF following regulations that OPM will issue. In addition, OPM is
exercising its authority to modify the order of retention, clarify
tenure group definitions, and modify how credit for performance is
computed.
DATES: Comments must be received on or before January 19, 2021.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by the docket number or
Regulation Identifier Number (RIN) for this proposed rulemaking, by any
of the following methods:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the instructions for sending comments.
All submissions received must include the agency name and docket
number or RIN for this document. The general policy for comments and
other submissions from members of the public is to make these
submissions available for public viewing at https://www.regulations.gov
as they are received without change, including any personal identifiers
or contact information.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kimberly A. Holden by email at
[email protected] or by fax at (202) 606-4430.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The OPM is proposing to revise its
regulations governing reduction in force and related technical changes
under statutory authority vested in it by Congress in 5 U.S.C. 1103,
3502, 3596, 4305, and 4315. The regulations will also assist agencies
in carrying out certain principles set forth by the President in
Executive Order (E.O.) 13839, titled: ``Promoting Accountability and
Streamlining Removal Procedures Consistent with Merit Systems and
Principles'' consistent with law, and update current procedures to make
them more efficient and effective. The proposed regulations will change
existing regulations regarding RIF procedures to modify the order of
retention and enhance the value of performance relative to length of
service when determining which employees will be retained in a RIF.
The proposed regulations will assist agencies in better aligning,
consistent with law, to certain of the principles articulated by the
President to the Executive Branch in E.O. 13839 and update current
procedures to make them more efficient and effective.\1\ Apart from
OPM's existing authority to promulgate regulations relating to
reductions in force, 5 U.S.C. 3502, Section 7 of the E.O. directs OPM
to propose revisions to existing regulations, as needed, to effectuate
the principles set forth in section 2, including those pertaining to
RIFs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Some of the provisions of E.O. 13839 were enjoined by the
United States District Court for the District of Columbia. Am. Fed'n
of Gov't Employees, AFL-CIO v. Trump, 318 F. Supp. 3d 370 (D.D.C.
2018). The principles pertaining to RIFs, however, were not among
those provisions that were enjoined. Id. at 440. The plaintiffs did
not seek further judicial review of this decision, so this
determination is final. In any event, the decision imposing the
injunction against other provisions of the E.O. was subsequently
reversed, see Am. Fed'n of Gov't Employees, AFL-CIO v. Trump, 929
F.3d 748 (D.C. Cir. 2019), and thus no longer has any effect.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reduction in Force
Section 2(j) of E.O. 13839 calls on agencies to prioritize
performance over length of service in determining who will be retained
in a RIF. Section 7 of the E.O. directs OPM to examine whether existing
regulations effectuate the principles set forth in section 2 of the
Order. It directs OPM, ``to the extent necessary or appropriate,'' to
propose for notice and public comment appropriate regulations to
effectuate the principles set forth in Section 2.
After conducting this examination, OPM, under its statutory
authority in 5 U.S.C. 3502, is proposing, in accordance with the
procedural requirements under 5 U.S.C. 1103(b) and the Administrative
Procedure Act, to amend its regulations at Subpart E of 5 CFR part 351
and to make corresponding changes to Subparts B and Subpart G of 5 CFR
part 351 and to Subpart B of 5 CFR part 430 to prioritize performance
over length of service in a RIF. In addition, we are modifying the
order of retention at 5 CFR 351.501. Specifically, when determining the
order in which employees are placed on a RIF retention register,
agencies will do so on the basis of tenure first, followed by
performance, then veterans' preference, and finally length of service,
as outlined in further detail below. In addition, we are proposing to
clarify the definition of tenure groups.
Proposed Sec. 351.501 Order of retention establishes that
competing employees in a RIF will be classified on a retention register
on the basis of (in descending order): (1) Tenure of employment, (2)
performance, (3) veterans' preference, and (4) length of service. This
section also clarifies that the order of retention provisions applies
to employees in both the competitive and excepted services.
Under current regulations at 5 CFR 351.501, the order of retention
for classifying competing employees on a retention register is (in
descending order): Tenure of employment, veterans' preference, length
of service, and performance. Length of service is augmented by
performance; an employee receives additional retention service credit
(i.e., additional years of service) based on the employee's applicable
ratings of record. OPM is proposing to modify the order of retention to
be: Tenure of employment, performance, veterans' preference, and length
of service.
Under the current regulations at 5 CFR 351.504, credit for
performance is used to supplement an employee's length of service for
purposes of determining an employee's standing on a retention register
(both of these retention factors are expressed in years). An employee
receives additional retention service credit based on his or her
performance ratings of record and their assigned summary levels. This
additional credit is added to the employee's length of service to
[[Page 81840]]
determine that employee's retention standing within the employee's
appropriate tenure group and veterans' preference subgroup. An employee
receives additional credit for performance (added to his or her length
of service) on the following basis: 20 additional years of service for
each rating of record with a Level 5 (Outstanding or equivalent)
summary level; 16 additional years of service for each rating of record
with a Level 4 (Exceeds Fully Successful or equivalent) summary level;
and 12 additional years of service for each rating of record with a
Level 3 (Fully Successful or equivalent) summary level, in accordance
with the summary levels described in 5 CFR 430.208. The additional
years of service are added together, divided by 3, and rounded up to a
whole number if necessary to determine the number of years that will be
used to adjust an employee's actual service computation date and arrive
at an adjusted service computation date for RIF purposes.
OPM is proposing to elevate performance above length of service in
the RIF order of retention. We propose to do this by establishing
performance as a subgroup within the appropriate tenure group. The
proposed order of retention will be: (1) Tenure, (2) performance, (3)
veterans' preference, and (4) length of service. Under this proposal,
employees competing in a RIF will first be sorted into their
appropriate tenure group; then within each tenure group employees will
be sorted by performance in descending order based on the total of the
employee's three most recent ratings of record; then within each tenure
group and performance subgroup, according to their veterans' preference
status or subgroup; then within each tenure group, performance
subgroup, and veterans' preference subgroup, employees will be listed
on the retention register in terms of their length of service based on
each employee's actual service computation date. Thus, length of
service will be used as a tie-breaker for employees with the same
tenure, three-year total of their summary level performance ratings,
and veterans' preference status (i.e., the first three factors being
equal, an employee with longer length of service will be listed ahead
of an employee(s) with shorter length of service).
We are proposing that an agency determine an employee's performance
standing by adding each employee's summary level performance rating for
the three most recent ratings of record issued under 5 CFR part 430 (or
equivalent ratings of record established in accordance with 5 CFR
430.201(c)) prior to the RIF. An agency will place employees on a
retention register based on the total of each employee's summary level
rating in descending order, within each tenure group. In most
instances, an employee's summary level ratings of record for the three
most recent ratings of record will be added together. Ratings of record
will be assigned a numerical value as follows in conjunction with the
patterns of summary level in 5 CFR 430.208(d): 5 for a Level 5
(Outstanding or equivalent) summary level, 4 for a Level 4 (Exceeds
Fully Successful or equivalent) summary level, 3 for a Level 3 (Fully
Successful or equivalent) summary level, 2 for a Level 2 (Minimally
Successful or equivalent) summary level, 1 for a Level 1 (Unacceptable)
summary level. Agencies will list competing employees on the retention
register in descending order (within the same tenure group) based on
the total of their three most recent ratings of record. OPM believes
listing employees in descending order (i.e., highest to lowest) based
on their total summary level rating for three most recent ratings of
record is the most objective methodology for these purposes, and best
implements the principle of emphasizing performance over length of
service as set forth in E.O. 13839.
The following example illustrates and contrasts the impact of
performance ratings of record and their summary levels on a retention
register under the current rules and the proposed rules. Consider the
following employees in a General Schedule (GS) 201-12 position:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rating of
Name Tenure group Vets pref record summary Service comp
subgroup levels date
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Al.............................................. I A 3/3/3 01/01/1988
Barb............................................ I A 5/4/5 01/01/2010
Carl............................................ I A 3/4/3 01/01/2000
Dave............................................ I A 4/5/4 01/01/1980
Emma............................................ I A 3/4/4 01/01/2014
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Under the current rules, a retention register constructed in 2018
for these employees would look like this, based on retention factors
considered in this order: Tenure [bond] Vets Pref [bond] Adjusted
Service Computation Date (ASCD) -- i.e., the service computation date
(SCD) adjusted for additional service credit (ASC) based on ratings of
record and summary levels:
[[Page 81841]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP17DE20.075
Under the proposed rules, the retention register for these same
competing employees would look like this, based on considering
retention factors in this order: Tenure [bond] Performance based on the
total of the employee's summary levels [bond] Vets Pref [bond] Service
Computation Date:
Barb: I [bond] 14 [bond] A [bond] 01/01/2010
Dave: I [bond] 13 [bond] A [bond] 01/01/1980
Emma: I [bond] 11 [bond] A [bond] 01/01/2014
Carl: I [bond] 10 [bond] A [bond] 01/01/2000
Al: I [bond] 9 [bond] A [bond] 01/01/1988
The following illustrates how veterans' preference and length of
service will be used under the proposed rules. Assuming the same group
of employees but with two differences: Al and Carl have the same
ratings of record, but Carl's veterans' preference subgroup is AD, as
follows:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rating of
Name Tenure group record summary Vets pref Service comp
levels subgroup date
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Al.............................................. I 3/3/3 A 01/01/1988
Barb............................................ I 5/4/5 A 01/01/2010
Carl............................................ I 3/3/3 AD 01/01/2000
Dave............................................ I 4/5/4 A 01/01/1980
Emma............................................ I 3/4/4 A 01/01/2014
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Under the proposed rules, the retention register for these
employees would look like this, based on considering retention factors
in this order (in this example Carl is listed ahead of Al because he is
in veterans' preference subgroup AD despite having less service credit
than Al):
Barb: I [bond] 14 [bond] A [bond] 01/01/2010
Dave: I [bond] 13 [bond] A [bond] 01/01/1980
Emma: I [bond] 11 [bond] A [bond] 01/01/2014
Carl: I [bond] 9 [bond] AD [bond] 01/01/2000
Al: I [bond] 9 [bond] A [bond] 01/01/1988
OPM is proposing to revamp 5 CFR part 351, sections 501 through
505. We are proposing to renumber current Sec. 351.505 Records, and
Sec. 351.506 Effective date of retention standing, to Sec. 351.506
Records and Sec. 351.507 Effective date of retention standing,
respectively. We are also proposing corresponding changes to Sec.
351.701 Assignment rights (bump and retreat). Lastly, OPM is proposing
to modify Sec. 430.208(d) to attune those provisions with the proposed
changes in 5 CFR part 351. The proposed changes are as follows:
Proposed Sec. 351.501 Order of retention establishes that
competing employees in a RIF will be classified on a retention register
on the basis of (in descending order): (1) Tenure of employment, (2)
performance, (3) veterans' preference, and (4) length of service. This
section also clarifies that the order of retention provisions applies
to employees in both the competitive and excepted services.
Proposed Sec. 351.502 Tenure of employment defines tenure groups
for competitive service and excepted service employees. Proposed Sec.
351.502(a) defines tenure groups for competitive service employees. The
new Sec. 351.502(a) incorporates the provisions currently found in
Sec. 351.501(b)(1)-(3) but clarifies that Tenure group I will consist
of career employees who are not serving a probationary period. Proposed
tenure group II will consist of career-conditional employees and other
employees serving a probationary period, as well as the other
categories of employees currently described in Sec. 351.501(b)(2). OPM
is deleting the reference to ``temporary appointments pending
establishment of a register'' listed in current Tenure group III at
Sec. 351.501(b)(3) because these types of appointments, also known as
TAPER appointments, were abolished in 2003 (see 68 FR 35265,
``Organization of the Government for Personnel Management, Overseas
Employment, Temporary and Term Employment, Recruitment and Selection
for Temporary and Term Appointments Outside the Register, Examining
System, and Training''). Proposed Sec. 351.502(b) defines tenure
groups for excepted service employees. The new Sec. 351.502(b)
incorporates the provisions currently found in Sec. 351.502 Order of
retention--excepted service without change. OPM is proposing to
consolidate tenure of employment definitions for both services into one
section for the convenience of the reader.
Proposed Sec. 351.503 Performance establishes that an agency will
list employees on a RIF retention register (within the same tenure
group) based on the total of each employee's summary level ratings for
the employee's three most recent ratings of record for performance. In
accordance with 5 CFR 430.208(d) summary level ratings of record for
these purposes are as follows:
(i) 5 for a Level 5 (Outstanding or equivalent) summary level
(ii) 4 for a Level 4 (Exceeds Fully Successful or equivalent) summary
level
[[Page 81842]]
(iii) 3 for a Level 3 (Fully Successful or equivalent) summary level
(iv) 2 for a Level 2 (Minimally Successful or equivalent) summary
level, and
(v) 1 for a Level 1 (Unacceptable) summary level
This section also explains that an agency lists competing employees
on the retention register in descending order (i.e., highest to lowest)
based on their totals within the same tenure group.
Section 351.503(b) Ratings used explains that an employee's ratings
of record are to be used in a manner consistent with the provisions of
subpart B of 5 CFR part 430, and provides guidance as to how an agency
determines an employee's performance standing for RIF purposes for
employees not covered under subpart B of 5 CFR part 430 and in other
special circumstances. Sec. 351.503(b) remains largely unchanged from
the provisions currently in Sec. 351.504(a)(1)-(3), though we are
removing the reference to `additional retention service credit'
currently found in Sec. 351.504(a)(1).
Section 351.503(c) Consideration of performance includes language
currently in Sec. 351.504(b) but modifies this language by removing
the reference to ``additional retention service credit'' consistent
with the aim of E.O. 13839 (i.e., credit for performance will no longer
be added to an employee's length of service). Performance will now be a
subgroup, within the tenure group, which will be based on the total of
each employee's summary level ratings for the employee's three most
recent ratings of record for performance consistent with Sec.
351.503(a). Proposed Sec. 351.503(c)(1) removes the reference to
`awarding additional retention service credit' currently found in Sec.
351.504(b)(4).
Section 351.503(d) How to apply performance ratings is a new
subsection which explains to agencies that they must total the summary
levels from an employee's three most recent ratings of record to derive
a total summary level value for purposes of placing the employee on a
RIF retention register under this part. This new subsection uses the
rating of record summary levels described in subpart B of 5 CFR part
430. For example, the employees below are covered under a pattern H
five-summary level rating performance appraisal system as described in
5 CFR 430.208(d). Their ratings and totals are:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Employee Ratings Total
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alice............................................... 5/4/4 13
Bill................................................ 4/3/3 10
Carol............................................... 4/4/3 11
Fred................................................ 3/4/5 12
------------------------------------------------------------------------
These employees would be listed on the retention register in the
following order: Alice, Fred, Carol, then Bill.
New paragraph Sec. 351.503(e) Single rating pattern describes how
agencies list employees who have been covered under the same rating
pattern of summary levels during the 4-year period prior to the date of
issuance of the reduction in force notice or the agency-established
cutoff date. Subparagraph (e)(ii) proposes that for employees covered
under a summary level appraisal system in which the highest summary
level is a level ``3'' rating (i.e., a pattern A (`pass/fail'), or
pattern D system) the agency may create a performance subgroup for
employees who have documented exceptional performance above the norm.
This subparagraph explains that evidence of exceptional performance may
include documentation showing an agency: Has awarded an employee the
highest Agency or Departmental award (such as a Secretary's or
Chairman's award), a special act or service award, a quality step
increase, or other performance awards or bonus (e.g., a `time-off' for
demonstrated performance above expectations). OPM is proposing this to
effectuate the principle of the E.O. (which is to elevate performance
over length of service) and to provide a method by which an agency may
make meaningful distinctions among employees in a pattern A or D
performance appraisal program (i.e., the highest summary level rating
is a ``3'' or satisfactory) who have documented performance above
expectations in these appraisals systems.
In new subparagraph Sec. 351.503(e)(2)(B) OPM is also proposing to
allow an agency to give more weight to certain performance-related
actions than others for purposes of listing some level ``3'' employees
ahead of other employees on a retention register. For example, an
agency could list all employees who received the agency's highest
sustained performance award ahead of all employees who received an
organizational or component-specific award, and ahead employee who
received a time off award (both groups would be listed ahead of the
other level ``3'' employees). An agency that chooses this option must
specify and document, in advance of any RIF, how it will prioritize
performance awards for these purposes. OPM believes this option is
consistent with the E.O. and the principle of elevating performance
over length of service, and it provides an agency with a method for
making meaningful distinctions among employees with a fully successful
rating when some of these employees were recognized for exceptional
performance.
Section 351.503(f) Multiple rating patterns addresses situations in
which an agency has employees in a competitive area who have ratings of
record under more than one pattern of summary levels, as described in 5
CFR 403.208(d). This paragraph explains that an agency shall consider
the mix of patterns and proposes that an agency shall provide enhanced
performance standing to employees under disparate pattern summary
levels under certain circumstances. To do this OPM is proposing that an
agency transmute or assign an employee a higher summary level rating
than what he or she received under a previous rating system only when
there is documented evidence of exceptional or higher level performance
consistent with the criteria in proposed Sec. 351.503(e). An agency
must transmute the rating of an employee who meets this requirement to
the highest summary level of the pattern summary level being used
during the RIF (i.e., a level ``4'' rating if the agency conducting the
RIF uses a pattern C or G summary level appraisal system, or a level
``5'' rating if the agency uses a pattern B, E, F, or H summary level
appraisal system). Documented evidence of exceptional or higher level
performance for these purposes includes: Award or receipt of the
highest Agency or Departmental award (such as a Secretary's or
Chairman's award), a quality step increase, or an annual performance
appraisal bonus. For example, an employee was covered by a pattern A
(pass/fail) appraisal program for two years and a pattern H (5 summary
level) appraisal program for the one year prior to a RIF. While covered
under the pattern A appraisal program the employee received his
agency's highest award for excellent performance in the second year.
Under the five-summary level system he received a level ``4'' rating.
Under this proposal the agency must assign the employee a higher rating
level; so in this instance the employee's performance ratings for the
three year period would be 3/5/4 (his level 3 rating would be
transmuted to a level 5) and his ratings of record total for the three
year period would be 12 for purposes of 351.503(d). OPM is also
proposing that an employee who goes from an appraisal system which uses
a higher pattern of summary levels to a lower one (e.g., an employee
who goes
[[Page 81843]]
from a 5 summary level appraisal program to two level system (i.e.,
pass/fail system)) with ratings above the highest summary level of the
lower pattern system be listed ahead of any employee on the retention
register who does not have documented evidence of exceptional
performance as described above. Lastly, this proposed section requires
an agency to specify the basis on which it will consider exceptional or
higher level performance described in Sec. 351.503(e) and transmute or
assign an employee a higher rating in accordance with the pattern of
summary level used during the RIF, and make this information readily
available for review prior to running a reduction in force. OPM is
proposing enhanced performance credit or standing to implement the
E.O.'s principle that an agency emphasize performance over length of
service in a RIF. We believe this method prevents exceptional
performers from being disadvantaged because they may be covered under
two or more patterns of summary rating levels which may not make
meaningful distinctions for performance among employees.
Sec. 351.503(g) Missing ratings describes how an agency should
factor performance ratings into the RIF process when an employee does
not have three actual ratings of record during the 4-year period prior
to the date of issuance of RIF notices, or the 4-year period prior to
the agency-established cut-off date. Proposed Sec. 351.503(g) uses the
modal rating concept for employees with no ratings during the 4 year
period prior to the RIF currently found in Sec. 351.504(c)(1) but
modifies the current provisions by removing the reference to
''additional retention service credit'' consistent with the aim of E.O.
13839 (i.e., credit for performance will no longer be added to an
employee's length of service). The term `modal rating' is currently
defined in Sec. 351.203. For employees with at least one rating of
record but less than three, this section proposes that an agency total
the summary levels, divide by the number of ratings, and use this value
for the missing ratings. For example, an employee in five level pattern
H summary level appraisal system has summary level rating of ``3''
fully successful and ``4'' exceeds fully successful but is missing a
third rating. The agency would add 3 + 4, then divide by 2, for a value
of 3.5 for the missing rating. The agency then adds the three ratings
of record: 3, 4, and 3.5 for a total of 10.5 and enters the employee on
the retention register accordingly.
Proposed Sec. 351.504 Veterans' preference defines veterans'
preference subgroups for employees in both the competitive and excepted
services. This proposed section will consist of the provisions
currently found in Sec. 351.501(c) and (d) without change.
OPM is proposing to delete current Sec. 351.502 Order of
retention--excepted service and cover these provisions in proposed
Sec. 351.501(a).
OPM is proposing to modify current Sec. 351.705 Administrative
assignment to be consistent with the proposed changes to Sec. Sec.
351.501-.505. Specifically, OPM is proposing to update Sec.
351.705(a)(2) to incorporate the new order of retention and the
creation of the new subgroup called `performance'.
Performance Management
OPM is proposing to modify current Sec. 430.208(d)(4) to attune
this language with the proposed changes in part 351. To do this, we
propose removing the current reference to ``. . . assigning additional
retention service credit under Sec. 351.504.''
OPM is proposing to modify current Sec. 430.208(d)(5) by removing
the reference to ``the number of years of additional retention service
credit'' and replacing it with a general reference to proposed Sec.
351.503 Performance.
Regulatory Impact Analysis
OPM has examined the impact of this rulemaking as required by
Executive Order 12866 and Executive Order 13563, which directs agencies
to assess all costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives
and, if regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that
maximize net benefits (including potential economic, environmental,
public, health, and safety effects, distributive impacts, and equity).
A regulatory impact analysis must be prepared for major rules with
economically significant effects of $100 million or more in any one
year. While this proposed rule does not reach the economic effect of
$100 million or more under Executive Order 12866, this proposed rule is
still designated as a ``significant regulatory action,'' under
Executive Order 12866.
Reducing Regulation and Controlling Regulatory Costs
This proposed rule is not an E.O. 13771 regulatory action because
this proposed rule is expected to be no more than de minimis costs.
Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Office of Personnel Management certifies that this proposed
rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities.
Federalism
We have examined this proposed rule in accordance with Executive
Order 13132, Federalism, and have determined that this proposed rule
will not have any negative impact on the rights, roles and
responsibilities of State, local, or tribal governments.
Civil Justice Reform
This regulation meets the applicable standard set forth in
Executive Order 12988.
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
This proposed rule will not result in the expenditure by state,
local, and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the private
sector, of $100 million or more in any year and it will not
significantly or uniquely affect small governments. Therefore, no
actions were deemed necessary under the provisions of the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995.
Congressional Review Act
The Congressional Review Act (5 U.S.C. 801 et seq.) requires rules
to be submitted to Congress before taking effect. OPM will submit to
Congress and the Comptroller General of the United States a report
regarding the issuance of this proposed rule before its effective date,
as required by 5 U.S.C. 801. This proposed rule is not a major rule as
defined by the Congressional Review Act (CRA) (5 U.S.C. 804).
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35)
This regulatory action will not impose any additional reporting or
recordkeeping requirements under the Paperwork Reduction Act.
List of Subjects in 5 CFR Parts 351 and 430
Government employees.
Office of Personnel Management.
Alexys Stanley,
Regulatory Affairs Analyst.
Accordingly, for the reasons stated in the preamble, OPM proposes
to amend 5 CFR parts 351, and 430 as follows:
PART 351--REDUCTION IN FORCE
0
1. Revise the authority citation for part 351 to read as follows:
Authority: 5 U.S.C. 1302, 3502, 3503; sec. 351.801 also issued
under E.O. 12828, 58 FR 2965; E.O. 13839, 83 FR 25343.
[[Page 81844]]
Subpart B--General Provisions
0
2. In Sec. 351.203, revise the definition of ``Current rating of
record'' to read as follows:
Sec. 351.203 Definitions.
* * * * *
Current rating of record is the rating of record for the most
recently completed appraisal period as provided in Sec. 351.503(c)(3).
* * * * *
Subpart E--Retention Standing
0
3. Revise Subpart E to read as follows:
Subpart E--Retention Standing
Sec.
351.501 Order of retention.
351.502 Tenure of employment.
351.503 Performance.
351.504 Veterans' preference.
351.505 Length of service.
351.506 Records.
351.507 Effective date of retention standing.
Sec. 351.501 Order of retention.
Competing employees in the competitive and excepted services shall
be classified on a retention register on the basis of four factors:
Tenure of employment, performance, veterans' preference, and length of
service as follows:
(a) On the same retention register in descending order by tenure
group I, group II, group III, as described in Sec. 351.502;
(b) Within each tenure group by performance based on the sum of the
summary levels for the employee's three most recent ratings of record
for performance in accordance with Sec. 351.503;
(c) Within each performance subgroup by veterans' preference
subgroup AD, subgroup A, subgroup B, as described in Sec. 351.504; and
(d) Within each veterans' preference subgroup by years of service
beginning with the earliest service computation date, as computed under
Sec. 351.505, when two or more employees have the same summary level
total value for the employees' three most recent ratings of record.
Sec. 351.502 Tenure of employment.
(a) Competitive service. Tenure groups in the competitive service
are defined as follows:
(1) Group I includes each career employee who is not serving a
probationary period. (A supervisory or managerial employee serving a
probationary period required by subpart I of part 315 of this chapter
is in group I if the employee is otherwise eligible to be included in
this group.) The following employees are in group I as soon as the
employee completes any required probationary period for initial
appointment:
(i) An employee for whom substantial evidence exists of eligibility
to immediately acquire status and career tenure, and whose case is
pending final resolution by OPM (including cases under Executive Order
10826 to correct certain administrative errors);
(ii) An employee who acquires competitive status and satisfies the
service requirement for career tenure when the employee's position is
brought into the competitive service;
(iii) An administrative law judge;
(iv) An employee appointed under 5 U.S.C. 3104, which provides for
the employment of specially-qualified scientific or professional
personnel, or a similar authority; and
(v) An employee who acquired status under 5 U.S.C. 3304(c) on
transfer to the competitive service from the legislative or judicial
branches of the Federal Government.
(2) Group II includes each career-conditional employee, and each
employee serving a probationary period under subpart H of part 315 of
this chapter. (A supervisory or managerial employee serving a
probationary period required by subpart I of part 315 of this chapter
is in group II if the employee has not completed a probationary period
under subpart H of part 315 of this chapter.) Group II also includes an
employee when substantial evidence exists of the employee's eligibility
to immediately acquire status and career-conditional tenure, and the
employee's case is pending final resolution by OPM (including cases
under Executive Order 10826 to correct certain administrative errors).
(3) Group III includes all employees serving under indefinite
appointments, status quo appointments, term appointments, and any other
non-status non-temporary appointments which meet the definition of
provisional appointments contained in Sec. Sec. 316.401 and 316.403 of
this chapter.
(b) Excepted service. Tenure groups in the excepted service are
defined as follows:
(1) Group I includes each permanent employee whose appointment
carries no restriction or condition such as conditional, indefinite,
specific time limit, or trial period.
(2) Group II includes each employee:
(i) Serving a trial period; or
(ii) Whose tenure is equivalent to a career-conditional appointment
in the competitive service in agencies having such excepted
appointments.
(3) Group III includes each employee:
(i) Whose tenure is indefinite (i.e., without specific time limit),
but not actually or potentially permanent;
(ii) Whose appointment has a specific time limitation of more than
1 year; or
(iii) Who is currently employed under a temporary appointment
limited to 1 year or less, but who has completed 1 year of current
continuous service under a temporary appointment with no break in
service of 1 workday or more.
Sec. 351.503 Performance.
(a) Performance subgroup. Within the tenure groups an agency shall
list competing employees in descending order (i.e., highest to lowest)
based on the total of the summary levels for each employee's three most
recent ratings of record for performance in accordance with part 430 of
this Chapter.
(b) Ratings used. (1) Except as provided at Sec. 351.503(d)(3),
only ratings of record as defined in Sec. 351.203 shall be used as the
basis for classifying an employee's performance in a reduction in
force.
(2) For employees who received ratings of record while covered by
part 430, subpart B, of this chapter, the summary levels assigned for
those ratings of record shall be used to establish the employee's
performance subgroup in a reduction in force in accordance with 5 CFR
351.501, except as provided in 5 CFR 351.503(d)(3).
(3) For employees who received performance ratings while not
covered by the provisions of 5 U.S.C. chapter 43 and subpart B of part
430 of this chapter, those performance ratings shall be considered
ratings of record with summary levels for designating an employee's
performance subgroup in a reduction in force only when it is determined
that those performance ratings are equivalent ratings of record under
the provisions of Sec. 430.201(c) of this chapter. The agency
conducting the reduction in force shall make that determination.
(c) Consideration of performance. (1) An employee's entitlement to
performance consideration under this subpart shall be based on the
employee's three most recent ratings of record received during the 4-
year period prior to the date of issuance of reduction in force
notices, except as otherwise provided in paragraphs (c)(2) and (g) of
this section.
(2) To provide adequate time to determine employee performance
total values, an agency may provide for a cutoff date, a specified
number of days prior to the issuance of reduction in force notices
after which no new ratings of record will be put on record and used
[[Page 81845]]
for purposes of this subpart. When a cutoff date is used, an employee's
performance average will be based on the three most recent ratings of
record received during the 4-year period prior to the cutoff date.
(3) To be considered for purposes of this subpart, a rating of
record and its assigned summary level (including any adjustments to
performance consistent with this subpart) must have been issued to the
employee, with all appropriate reviews and signatures, and must also be
on record (i.e., the rating of record is available for use by the
office responsible for establishing retention registers).
(4) The use of performance ratings of record and assigned summary
levels (including any adjustments to performance) for purposes of this
subpart must be uniformly and consistently applied within a competitive
area, and must be consistent with any agency's appropriate issuance(s)
that implement these policies in part 351. Each agency must specify in
its appropriate issuance(s):
(i) The conditions under which a rating of record is considered to
have been received for purposes of determining whether it is within the
4-year period prior to either the date the agency issues reduction in
force notices or the agency-established cutoff date for ratings of
record, as appropriate; and
(ii) If the agency elects to use a cutoff date, the number of days
prior to the issuance of reduction in force notices after which no new
ratings of record will be put on record and used for purposes of this
subpart.
(d) How to apply performance ratings of record. Agencies determine
each competing employee's performance standing (or numerical value) by
adding the employee's three most recent summary level ratings of record
during the 4-year period prior to the date of issuance of the reduction
in force notice or the agency-established cutoff date. An agency lists
competing employees on the retention register in descending order
(i.e., highest to lowest) based on these totals.
(e) Single rating pattern. (1) If all employees in a reduction in
force competitive area have received ratings of record under a single
pattern of summary levels as set forth in Sec. 430.208(d) of this
chapter, agencies must apply the method described in paragraph (d) of
this section.
(2) An agency may give additional credit for performance for
employees covered under a summary level appraisal system in which the
highest summary level is a level ``3'' rating (i.e., a pattern A `pass/
fail', or pattern D system), consistent with Sec. 430.208(d) of this
chapter. At its discretion an agency may create a subgroup of level
``3'' employees with demonstrated exceptional performance and list them
ahead of other level ''3'' employees if, within the 4-year period prior
to either the date the agency issues reduction in force notices or the
agency-established cutoff date for ratings of record, the following
condition is met:
(i) The agency has applied performance-related criteria and taken
an action that recognizes the employee's exceptional performance; such
actions may include but are not limited to awarding an employee: The
highest Agency or Departmental award (such as a Secretary's or
Chairman's award), a special act or service award, a quality step
increase, or other performance awards or bonus (e.g., a 'time-off' for
demonstrated performance above expectations), etc.
(ii) An agency may determine on its own whether to give more weight
to the performance-related action described in paragraph (e)(2)(i) of
this section for purposes of listing some level ``3'' employees ahead
of other on a retention register. For example, an agency could list all
employees who received the agency's highest sustained performance award
ahead of all employees who received an organizational or component-
specific award, and ahead of an employee who received a time off award.
An agency which chooses this option must specify and document, in
advance of the RIF, how it will prioritize performance awards for these
purposes.
(iii) An agency that chooses to give an employee additional credit
for performance must specify and document, in advance of the RIF, how
it will prioritize performance awards for these purposes and make this
criterion readily available for review.
(f) Multiple rating patterns. (1) If an agency has employees in a
competitive area who have ratings of record under more than one pattern
of summary levels, as set forth in Sec. 430.208(d) of this chapter, it
shall consider the mix of patterns and provide additional retention
credit for performance in accordance with the following:
(i) Transmute or assign an employee a higher summary level rating
than what he or she received under their previous appraisal system in
accordance with the appraisal system (i.e., pattern of summary level)
being applied to the Reduction in Force;
(ii) Transmute or assign an employee a summary level rating only
when there is documented evidence of exceptional or higher level
performance as evidenced by an employee who received the highest Agency
or Departmental award (such as a Secretary's or Chairman's award), a
quality step increase, or appraisal performance awards or bonus (e.g.,
a ``time-off'' for demonstrated performance above expectations in lieu
of a cash bonus); and
(iii) Each agency must specify and document, in advance of a RIF,
the basis on which it will transmute an employee's rating; i.e., the
agency needs to describe how it will translate evidence of documented
exceptional performance to a higher performance rating under the
appraisal system (i.e., pattern of summary level) being applied to the
RIF and make this criteria readily available for review.
(iii) An agency must transmute the rating of an employee who meets
the requirement in 351.503(f)(1)(B) to the highest summary level of the
pattern summary level being applied to the RIF (i.e., a level ``4''
rating if the agency conducting the RIF uses a pattern C or G summary
level appraisal system, or a level ``5'' rating if the agency uses a
pattern B, E, F, or H summary level appraisal system). An agency cannot
transmute a rating to a summary level which is not among those in the
pattern being applied to the RIF.
(ii) In situations in which the agency running the RIF is using a
pattern summary level rating appraisal system with a summary level no
higher than a level ``3'' (i.e., a pass/fail system) but has employees
rated previously under a pattern with higher summary levels the agency
must place the employees with the higher summary ratings at the
performance subgroup at the top of retention register, or ahead of,
other summary level ``3'' employees with no documented evidence of
exceptional performance.
(g) Missing ratings. (1) Use of performance ratings for employees
who do not have three actual ratings of record during the 4-year period
prior to the date of issuance of reduction in force notices or the 4-
year period prior to the agency-established cutoff date for ratings of
record permitted in paragraph (c)(2) of this section shall be
determined under paragraph (d) of this section, as appropriate, and as
follows:
(2) The performance standing of an employee who has not received
any rating of record for any year during the 4-year period shall be
based on the modal rating as defined in 5 CFR 351.203 for the summary
level pattern that applies to the employee's official position of
record at the time of the reduction in force.
[[Page 81846]]
(3) The performance standing of an employee who has received at
least one but fewer than three previous ratings of record during the 4-
year period shall have his or her performance standing determined on
the basis of the value of summary levels for the actual rating(s) of
record divided by the number of actual ratings received. If an employee
has received only two actual ratings of record during the period, the
value of the summary levels is added together and divided by 2, with
the result being either (1) a whole number or (2) a number with .5
decimal value. The agency totals these values and lists the employee in
score order in accordance with Sec. 351.204(d). If an employee has
received only one actual rating of record during the period, its
summary level value determines the employee's performance subgroup for
purposes of this part.
Sec. 351.504 Veterans' preference.
(a) Veterans' preference subgroups. Veterans' preference subgroups
for both competitive and excepted service employees are defined as
follows:
(1) Subgroup AD includes each preference eligible employee who has
a compensable service-connected disability of 30 percent or more.
(2) Subgroup A includes each preference eligible employee not
included in subgroup AD.
(3) Subgroup B includes each nonpreference eligible employee.
(b) A retired member of a uniformed service is considered a
preference eligible under this part only if the member meets at least
one of the conditions of the following paragraphs (b)(1), (2), or (3)
of this section, except as limited by paragraph (b)(4) or (b)(5):
(1) The employee's military retirement is based on disability that
either:
(i) Resulted from injury or disease received in the line of duty as
a direct result of armed conflict; or
(ii) Was caused by an instrumentality of war incurred in the line
of duty during a period of war as defined by sections 101 and 301 of
title 38, United States Code.
(2) The employee's retired pay from a uniformed service is not
based upon 20 or more years of full-time active service, regardless of
when performed but not including periods of active duty for training.
(3) The employee has been continuously employed in a position
covered by this part since November 30, 1964, without a break in
service of more than 30 days.
(4) An employee retired at the rank of major or above (or
equivalent) is considered a preference eligible under this part if such
employee is a disabled veteran as defined in section 2108(2) of title
5, United States Code, and meets one of the conditions covered in
paragraphs (b)(1), (2), or (3) of this section.
(5) An employee who is eligible for retired pay under chapter 67 of
title 10, United States Code, and who retired at the rank of major or
above (or equivalent) is considered a preference eligible under this
part at age 60, only if such employee is a disabled veteran as defined
in section 2108(2) of title 5, United States Code.
Sec. 351.505 Length of service.
(a) All civilian service as a Federal employee, as defined in 5
U.S.C. 2105(a), is creditable for purposes of this part. Civilian
service performed in employment that does not meet the definition of
Federal employee set forth in 5 U.S.C. 2105(a) is creditable for
purposes of this part only if specifically authorized by statute as
creditable for retention purposes.
(b)(1) As authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3502(a)(A), all active duty in a
uniformed service, as defined in 5 U.S.C. 2101(3), is creditable for
purposes of this part, except as provided in paragraphs (b)(2) and
(b)(3) of this section.
(2) As authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3502(a)(B), a retired member of a
uniformed service who is covered by Sec. 351.503(b) is entitled to
credit under this part only for:
(i) The length of time in active service in the Armed Forces during
a war, or in a campaign or expedition for which a campaign or
expedition badge has been authorized; or
(ii) The total length of time in active service in the Armed Forces
if the employee is considered a preference eligible under 5 U.S.C. 2108
and 5 U.S.C. 3501(a), as implemented in Sec. 351.504(b).
(3) An employee may not receive dual service credit for purposes of
this part for service performed on active duty in the Armed Forces that
was performed during concurrent civilian employment as a Federal
employee, as defined in 5 U.S.C. 2105(a).
(c)(1) The agency is responsible for establishing the service
computation date applicable to each employee competing for retention
under this part. If applicable, the agency is also responsible for
adjusting the service computation date to withhold retention service
credit for non-creditable service.
(2) The service computation date includes all actual creditable
service under paragraph (a) and paragraph (b) of this section.
(d) Service computation date. The service computation date is
computed on the following basis:
(1) The effective date of appointment as a Federal employee under 5
U.S.C. 2105(a) when the employee has no previous creditable service
under paragraph (a) or (b) of this section; or if applicable,
(2) The date calculated by subtracting the employee's total
previous creditable service under paragraph (a) or (b) of this section
from the most recent effective date of appointment as a Federal
employee under 5 U.S.C. 2105(a).
Sec. 351.506 Records.
(a) The agency is responsible for maintaining correct personnel
records that are used to determine the retention standing of its
employees competing for retention under this part.
(b) The agency must allow its retention registers and related
records to be inspected by:
(1) An employee of the agency who has received a specific reduction
in force notice, and/or the employee's representative if the
representative is acting on behalf of the individual employee; and
(2) An authorized representative of OPM.
(c) An employee who has received a specific notice of reduction in
force under authority of subpart H of this part has the right to review
any completed records used by the agency in a reduction in force action
that was taken, or will be taken, against the employee, including:
(1) The complete retention register with the released employee's
name and other relevant retention information (including the names of
all other employees listed on that register, and their individual
service computation dates calculated under Sec. 351.505(d)), so that
the employee may consider how the agency constructed the competitive
level, and how the agency determined the relative retention standing of
the competing employees; and
(2) The complete retention registers for other positions that could
affect the composition of the employee's competitive level, and/or the
determination of the employee's assignment rights (e.g., registers to
which the released employee may have potential assignment rights under
Sec. 351.701(b) and (c)).
(d) An employee who has not received a specific reduction in force
notice has no right to review the agency's retention registers and
related records.
[[Page 81847]]
(e) The agency is responsible for ensuring that each employee's
access to retention records is consistent with both the Freedom of
Information Act (5 U.S.C. 552), and the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. 552a).
(f) The agency must preserve all registers and records relating to
a reduction in force for at least 1 year after the date it issues a
specific reduction in force notice.
Sec. 351.507 Effective date of retention standing.
(a) The retention standing of each employee released from a
competitive level in the order prescribed in Sec. 351.601 is
determined as of the date the employee is so released.
(b) The retention standing of each employee retained in a
competitive level as an exception under Sec. 351.606(b), Sec.
351.607, or Sec. 351.608, is determined as of the date the employee
would have been released had the exception not been used. The retention
standing of each employee retained under any of these provisions
remains fixed until completion of the reduction in force action which
resulted in the temporary retention.
(c) When an agency discovers an error in the determination of an
employee's retention standing, it shall correct the error and adjust
any erroneous reduction-in-force action to accord with the employee's
proper retention standing as of the effective date established by this
section.
0
5. Revise Sec. 351.705(a)(2) to read as follows:
Sec. 351.705 Administrative assignment.
(a) * * *
(2) Permit an employee in tenure group III, same performance
subgroup, veterans' preference subgroup AD to displace an employee in
tenure group III, same performance subgroup, veterans' preference
subgroup A or B, or permit an employee in tenure group III, same
performance subgroup, veterans' preference subgroup A to displace an
employee in tenure group III, same performance subgroup, veterans'
preference subgroup B consistent with Sec. 351.701 (e.g., an employee
in tenure group III, performance summary level ratings of record total
of 12, veterans' preference subgroup AD to displace an employee tenure
group III, performance summary level ratings of record total of 12,
veterans' preference subgroup A or B).
* * * * *
PART 430--PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT
Subpart B--Performance Appraisal for General Schedule, Prevailing
Rate, and Certain Other Employees
0
6.Revise Sec. 430.208(d)(4) to read as follows:
Sec. 430.208 Rating Performance.
* * * * *
(d) * * *
(4) The designation of a summary level and its pattern shall be
used to provide consistency in describing ratings of record and as a
reference point for applying other related regulations, excluding
enhanced performance values under Sec. 351.503(d) and (f) of this
chapter.
Sec. 430.208 [Amended]
0
7. In Sec. 430.208, remove paragraph (d)(5).
[FR Doc. 2020-26347 Filed 12-16-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6325-39-P