[Federal Register: June 26, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 122)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 30459-30462]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr26jn09-1]
========================================================================
Rules and Regulations
Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains regulatory documents
having general applicability and legal effect, most of which are keyed
to and codified in the Code of Federal Regulations, which is published
under 50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.
The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by the Superintendent of Documents.
Prices of new books are listed in the first FEDERAL REGISTER issue of each
week.
========================================================================
[[Page 30459]]
OFFICE OF PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT
5 CFR Part 332
RIN 3206-AL13
Recruitment and Selection Through Competitive Examination
AGENCY: U.S. Office of Personnel Management.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The U.S. Office of Personnel Management (OPM) is issuing final
regulations pertaining to recruitment and selection through the
competitive examination process. The purpose of this rule is to clarify
the distinction among objections, pass overs, and suitability
determinations. OPM is also adopting two new definitions to further
clarify the distinction between an objection and a pass over request.
Additionally, OPM is removing an obsolete section in this part dealing
with filling certain postmaster positions.
DATES: The final rule is effective on July 27, 2009.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Linda Watson by telephone at (202)
606-0830; by fax at (202) 606-2329; by TTY at (202) 418-3134; or by e-
mail at linda.watson@opm.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On September 2, 2008, OPM published a
proposed rule with request for comments in the Federal Register at 73
FR 51245 to amend its regulations governing recruitment and selection
through competitive examination, primarily to clarify the distinction
among objections, pass over requests, and suitability determinations.
OPM also proposed to add two new definitions, of ``objection'' and
``pass over request,'' to further clarify the differences and
relationship between them and to improve the readability of section
332.102. In addition, OPM proposed to remove section 332.103 because it
contained outdated information concerning filling positions in the U.S.
Postal Service.
Background
Pursuant to provisions codified in title 5, United States Code
(U.S.C.), and Executive orders issued pursuant to those provisions,
Congress and the President have delegated to OPM several authorities
related to the recruitment and selection process for individuals
seeking competitive service positions in the Federal Government. Under
5 U.S.C. 3318, Congress confers upon OPM the authority to rule on any
objection or pass over request filed by a Federal agency seeking to
fill vacancies for such positions. In recent years, OPM has delegated
examining authority to Federal agencies to adjudicate most objections
and pass over requests. OPM retains exclusive authority to (a) make
medical qualification determinations pertaining to preference eligibles
and (b) grant or deny an agency's pass over request of a preference
eligible with a compensable service-connected disability of 30 percent
or more. Except for OPM's exclusive authority, Federal agencies with
delegated examining authority under 5 U.S.C. 1104(a)(2) have the
authority to adjudicate objections and pass over requests pertaining to
applicants for positions in their agencies, but do not have such
authority with respect to positions elsewhere in the Federal
Government.
An objection is a request to remove a candidate from consideration
on a particular certificate, and a pass over request is an objection
filed against a preference eligible that results in the selection of a
non-preference eligible. (Throughout this discussion, the use of the
term ``objection'' in this document should be read to encompass pass
overs, even if pass overs are not explicitly mentioned.) OPM
promulgated regulations in section 332.406 of title 5, Code of Federal
Regulations (CFR), in which it describes the circumstances under which
an objection will be sustained or a pass over request granted.
In addition to its authority for adjudicating objections and pass
overs, OPM is authorized to regulate the fitness of applicants for
competitive service positions and for career appointment in the Senior
Executive Service, as well as the conduct of employees in competitive
service and Senior Executive Service positions. OPM, exercising this
authority, published regulations governing suitability determinations,
which are located at 5 CFR part 731. As with objections and pass over
requests, OPM has delegated to Federal agencies the authority to make
most suitability determinations.
Although the statutory schemes related to suitability
determinations and objections are separate and distinct from each
other, OPM has, in the recent past, unintentionally mingled the two,
possibly giving rise to the impression that the objection regulations
and the suitability regulations were connected in some way. The Merit
Systems Protection Board's (MSPB) decisions in Edwards v. Department of
Justice, 86 MSPR 365 (2000) and 87 MSPR 518 (2001), which, to some
extent, erased the distinction between the two regulatory schemes, led
OPM to conclude that it was essential to restore clarity to these two
important and distinct features of the Federal personnel system. To
dispel any confusion that has been created, OPM is proposing to revise
this regulation to clarify that an agency's objection (including its
pass over requests) do not constitute suitability actions and that
decisions on these objections are not suitability actions.
Consequently, when an objection or pass over request is made, the
regulation at 5 CFR 332.406 applies, and the procedures set forth in 5
CFR part 731 do not apply. OPM has also clarified its regulations in 5
CFR part 731 to ensure that the intended distinction between the two
procedures is understood and maintained (see 73 FR 20149 (April 15,
2008)). To demonstrate the basis for the distinction between these two
statutory schemes, a brief review of each of these schemes is helpful.
Objections/Pass Overs
In general, agencies may select candidates for vacancies in the
competitive service in one of two methods: the traditional ``Rule of
Three'' method, in which an agency selects from the highest three
eligibles available for appointment, drawing from a list of candidates
who have been rated and ranked by numerical scores; or alternate
ranking and selection procedures,
[[Page 30460]]
pursuant to which a category rating system for evaluating candidates is
established. The differences are straightforward.
When OPM or an agency's delegated examining office (DEO) uses the
traditional ``Rule of Three'' ranking and selection procedures, the
selecting official requests a list of eligible candidates who meet the
minimum qualification requirements. OPM or the DEO is required to
provide either a list of all qualified candidates, appropriately rated
and ranked, or enough names from the top of a register of qualified
candidates, appropriately rated and ranked, to permit an agency to
consider at least three candidates for appointment with respect to each
vacancy that the agency intends to fill (5 U.S.C. 3317(a)). Under this
procedure, eligible candidates are assigned numerical scores, including
veterans' preference points of 5 points or 10 points, as applicable (5
U.S.C. 3309, 3313). An appointing official must select from the highest
three candidates available for appointment on the certificate furnished
by OPM or the DEO, except as discussed below (5 U.S.C. 3318(a)).
When an agency uses a category-based rating method to assess, rate,
and rank job applicants for positions filled through the competitive
examination process, applicants who meet the minimum qualification
requirements are ranked by being placed in two or more pre-defined
quality categories instead of being ranked in numeric score order.
Veterans' preference is applied by listing preference eligibles ahead
of non-preference eligibles within the same quality category in which
they were assigned based upon the job-related assessment tool(s). No
points are assigned. Qualified preference eligibles with a compensable
service-connected disability of 30 percent or more and those with a
compensable service-connected disability of at least 10 percent but
less than 30 percent are placed at the top of the highest quality
category (except with respect to scientific or professional positions
at or above the GS-9 level), regardless of the quality category in
which they would be placed based upon their examination results. Under
category rating, an appointing official may select from any of the
candidates in the highest quality category (or, if fewer than three
candidates have been assigned to the highest category, from a merged
category consisting of the highest and the second highest quality
categories), except that, generally, all the preference eligible
choices must be exhausted before an agency may select a non-preference
eligible candidate (5 U.S.C. 3319).
Congress gave agencies the right to object to any candidate for
employment whose name appears on a certificate, whether the agency is
using the traditional ``Rule of Three'' or category rating. The
procedures are the same, regardless of the method of selection. As
prescribed in 5 U.S.C. 3318(a), OPM or an agency with delegated
examining authority may sustain an objection that is based on a
``proper and adequate reason under regulations prescribed by the Office
(OPM).'' To ensure that all applicants for competitive service
positions possess the necessary health, character, and ability for the
employment sought, OPM has determined that any of the reasons set forth
as criteria for making suitability decisions in 5 CFR part 731 or as
bases for disqualification by OPM in 5 CFR part 339 (Medical
Qualification Determinations) constitutes a ``proper and adequate
reason.'' In addition, OPM has reserved to itself the ability to set
forth in its Delegated Examining Operations Handbook additional reasons
that constitute ``proper and adequate'' reasons for objections.
As previously indicated, a request for a pass over is a specific
type of objection. As with any objection, an agency may not pass over a
preference eligible (with respect to a Rule-of-Three selection process)
or select a non-preference eligible ahead of a preference eligible in
the same quality category (with respect to a category rating selection
process) unless OPM or the appropriate DEO grants the agency's pass
over request under 5 U.S.C. 3318(b)(1). See also 5 U.S.C. 3319(c)(2).
When an agency seeks to pass over a preference eligible candidate who
is a 30 percent or more compensably disabled veteran, only OPM
possesses the authority to adjudicate the agency's pass over request.
The standard for adjudicating a pass over request is identical to the
standard for adjudicating any other objection. Consequently, an
agency's pass over request will be granted if that request is based on
``proper and adequate reasons,'' including those reasons derived from 5
CFR part 339 or 731.
There is no statutory or regulatory right to appeal from a decision
sustaining an objection, including granting a pass over request. For
that reason, an individual has no right of appeal to MSPB from an OPM,
agency or DEO decision to sustain an objection or grant a pass over
request, regardless of the reason for the decision.
Suitability Actions
In 5 U.S.C. 7301, Congress conferred upon the President the
authority to prescribe regulations for the conduct of employees in the
executive branch. In addition, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 3301, the President
may ``(1) prescribe such regulations for the admission of individuals
into the civil service in the executive branch as will best promote the
efficiency of that service; [and] (2) ascertain the fitness of
applicants as to age, health, character, knowledge, and ability for the
employment sought * * *.'' Executive Order 10577 directs OPM to examine
``suitability'' for competitive Federal employment.
Pursuant to 5 CFR part 731, OPM, an agency, or the DEO, as
appropriate, may cancel an individual's eligibility, remove an
individual from Federal employment, and/or debar an individual from
future Federal employment when it determines the action will protect
the integrity or promote the efficiency of the civil service. A non-
selection (e.g., objection or pass over pursuant to 5 CFR part 332) for
a specific position, however, is not a suitability action even if the
non-selection is based on reasons set forth in 5 CFR 731.202(b).
Prior to taking a suitability action, OPM or an agency with
delegated authority must notify the applicant, appointee, or employee
in writing of the proposed action and must specify the reasons for this
action. Under 5 CFR 731.302 and 731.402, the notice must also include
information on the individual's right to answer to the notice in
writing. After considering the answer of the individual, if any, OPM or
an agency with delegated authority then renders a final decision. In 5
CFR 731.501, an individual against whom a suitability action has been
taken is given the right of appeal to MSPB.
In light of these two separate and distinct statutory and
regulatory schemes, an agency that wishes, for reasons set forth in 5
CFR 731.202(b), not to appoint an individual on a certificate has two
options. First, the agency may make a suitability determination under 5
CFR part 731 with respect to the individual. Alternatively, the agency
may object to or request to pass over the candidate pursuant to 5 CFR
332.406. Under this latter authority, an agency may choose not to
appoint a candidate if its objection is sustained or its pass over
request is granted. An agency may pursue either route, but must satisfy
the standards applicable to the chosen procedure. It is permissible for
an agency to object or request to pass over
[[Page 30461]]
a candidate on a certificate of eligibles and then, if the objection is
sustained or the pass over request is granted, to refer the candidate's
application for suitability review and adjudication under 5 CFR part
731. When an agency objects to an individual on the basis of a
material, intentional false statement or deception or fraud in
examination or appointment, and the objection is sustained, an agency
must also refer the candidate's application to OPM for any suitability
action that may be warranted, because of the significance of these
factors and to ensure uniformity throughout the Federal Government.
OPM is revising 5 CFR 332.406 to make it clear that the procedure
for requesting objections is not part of the suitability process. OPM
is also clarifying that an individual may not appeal an OPM or agency
decision to sustain an objection or pass over request to MSPB under 5
CFR part 731, even if the decision is based on reasons set forth in 5
CFR 731.202(b).
In section 332.102, OPM is adding two new definitions of
``objection'' and ``pass over request'' to clarify the process that
applies to objections and pass over requests and distinguish that
process from the suitability process. OPM is also updating the
definitions of ``active military duty'' and ``certificate.''
OPM is revising the definition of ``active military duty'' to
reflect a recent change to this definition based on OPM's published
final rule on October 29, 2008. On February 6, 2007, the Merit Systems
Protection Board (MSPB) issued a decision in Edward Thomas Hesse v.
Department of the Army (AT-3443-05-0936-I-1) that affects the
eligibility criteria for veterans' preference based on a service-
connected disability under 5 U.S.C. 2108(2). On July 27, 2007, OPM
issued an interim rule with request for comments (Federal Register at
72 FR 41215) to amend the definition of ``active duty or active
military duty'' for veterans' preference entitlement. On October 29,
2008, OPM issued a final rule (Federal Register at 73 FR 64179)
amending the definition of ``active duty or active military duty'' in 5
CFR 211.102(f). The revised definition of ``active military duty'' in
section 332.102 refers to 5 CFR 211.102(f) as the appropriate
definition for the purpose of consistency.
OPM is removing 5 CFR 332.103, Filling certain postmaster
positions. This section is obsolete due to the passage of Public Law
91-375, the Postal Reorganization Act (Act). The Act transformed the
former Post Office Department into the United States Postal Service
(USPS) and made it a Government corporation of the executive branch of
the Federal Government. The USPS subsequently established its own
examining and hiring system.
OPM received two written comments on the proposed rule. Because
these comments from two agencies supported OPM's clarification and
revisions of 5 CFR part 332, we are issuing the final rule with only a
few minor changes in wording for clarity, including clarifying some
references to objections and pass over requests so that they are more
consistent with the way we have defined those terms (i.e., reflecting
the fact that pass over requests are a subset of objections).
E.O. 12866, Regulatory Review
This rule has been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget
in accordance with Executive Order 12866.
Regulatory Flexibility Act
I certify that these regulations will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities because they
would apply only to Federal agencies and employees.
List of Subjects in 5 CFR Part 332
Government employees.
U.S. Office of Personnel Management.
John Berry,
Director.
0
Accordingly, OPM is amending 5 CFR part 332 as follows:
PART 332--RECRUITMENT AND SELECTION THROUGH COMPETITIVE EXAMINATION
0
1. The authority citation for part 332 is revised to read as follows:
Authority: 5 U.S.C. 1103, 1104, 1302, 2108, 3301, 3302, 3304,
3312, 3317, 3318, 3319; E.O. 10577; 3 CFR, 1954-1958 Comp., p. 218;
SOURCE: 33 FR 12426, Sept. 4, 1968, unless otherwise noted.
Subpart A--General Provisions
0
2. Revise Sec. 332.102 to read as follows:
Sec. 332.102 Definitions.
In this part:
Active military duty has the meaning given that term in 5 CFR
211.102(f).
Certificate means a list of eligibles from which an appointing
officer selects one or more applicants for appointment.
Objection means an agency's request to remove a candidate from
consideration on a particular certificate.
Pass over request means an objection filed against a preference
eligible that results in the selection of a non-preference eligible.
Sec. 332.103 [Removed]
0
3. Remove Sec. 332.103.
* * * * *
Subpart D--Consideration for Appointment
0
4. Revise Sec. 332.406 to read as follows:
Sec. 332.406 Objections to eligibles.
(a) Delegated authority. Except as specified in paragraphs (a)(1)
and (a)(2) of this section, OPM has delegated to agencies the authority
to adjudicate objections to eligibles, including pass over requests.
(1) OPM retains exclusive authority to approve the sufficiency of
an agency's request to pass over preference eligibles who are thirty
percent (30%) or more compensably disabled. Such persons have the
right, in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 3318, to respond to the pass over
request before OPM makes a final decision.
(2) OPM also retains the exclusive authority to approve the
sufficiency of an agency's reasons to medically disqualify or medically
pass over a preference eligible or disabled veteran in certain
circumstances, in accordance with part 339 of this chapter.
(3) An agency must refer any objection (including a pass over
request) that is based on material, intentional false statement or
deception or fraud in examination or appointment to OPM for a
suitability action where warranted, under part 731 of this chapter.
(b) Standard for objections. An agency is not required to consider
an individual for a position when an objection to (including a request
to pass over) the particular individual is sustained or granted. An
objection, including a pass over request, may be sustained only if it
is based on a proper and adequate reason. The reasons set forth for
disqualification by OPM in part 339 of this chapter constitute proper
and adequate reasons to sustain an objection. Similarly, the criteria
for making suitability determinations in part 731 of this chapter
constitute proper and adequate reasons to sustain an objection. In
addition, reasons published by OPM in the Delegated Examining
Operations Handbook constitute proper and adequate reasons to sustain
an objection.
(c) Sufficiency of the reasons for a pass over. Subject to the
exception set forth in paragraph (e) of this section, an agency may not
pass over a preference eligible to select a non-preference eligible
unless OPM or an agency with delegated authority also makes a
determination that the sufficiency of the
[[Page 30462]]
reasons is supported by the evidence submitted for the pass over
request.
(d) Agency's obligation while request for objection is pending.
Subject to the exception set forth in paragraph (e) of this section, if
an agency makes an objection against an applicant for a position
(including seeking to pass over the applicant), and the individual that
the agency wishes to select would be within reach of selection only if
the objection is sustained, or the pass over granted, that agency may
not make a selection for the position until a final ruling is made.
(e) Applicability of paragraphs (c) and (d). Paragraphs (c) and (d)
of this section do not apply if the agency has more than one position
to fill from the same certificate and holds open (in the event the
objection is not sustained or the pass over request is denied) a
position that could be filled by the individual against whom an
objection or a pass over request has been filed.
(f) Procedures for objections and pass overs. Agencies must follow
the procedures for objecting to or requesting to pass over an eligible
that are published by OPM in the Delegated Examining Operations
Handbook.
(g) No appeal rights to Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB). An
individual may not appeal to the MSPB a decision by OPM or an agency
with delegated authority to sustain an objection pursuant to this part,
including a decision to grant a pass over request, irrespective of the
reason for the decision.
[FR Doc. E9-15184 Filed 6-25-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6325-39-P