| Comment Number: | OL-10500903 |
| Received: | 2/22/2005 2:09:03 PM |
| Subject: | Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, Request for Comment |
| Title: | National Security Personnel System |
| CFR Citation: | 5 CFR Chapter XCIX and Part 9901 |
| No Attachments |
Comments:
Comment on "Pay and Pay Administration -Subpart C" page 7560 para. titled "Performance Payout" after example text states "In addition, the proposed regulations allow DoD to establish "control points" or other mechanisms within a band ..." This paragraph should be deleted. Effect of control points in current Navy Personnel Demonstration Projects in effect re-established the old GS pay scale bounderies. For example within the demo project ND-IV combined GS 12 and 13. "Upper quartile" control points were implemented which effectively re-established the old GS scale. Within the Navy Demo control points as implemented are not formally described, are not formally documented, are subject to random redefinitions and are arbitrarily applied with no opportunity to appeal or obtain reconsideration. The text does not define whether or not passing through the control point boundary is a one time check or if it is re-visited every year to confirm that the employee has again achieved the highest performance rating. The text does not define who in the DoD can establish these bounds. Are the bounds department wide and uniform or are they defined and implemented at each activity with varying criteria and levels of documentation? The text does not describe why the control points are desireable or what administrative purpose they have. The text does not describe how those passing a control point would be documented within the personnel records. If transfers to other activities occur, does passing the control point convey to the new activity? If the purpose of the control points is to constrain pay then do not implement broad banding. Stay with old GS categories and award bonus as described else where.