| Comment Number: | OL-10501648 |
| Received: | 2/27/2005 2:10:36 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:
Comments concerning - Federal Register: February 14, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 29) Proposed Rules: FR Document 05-2582/NSPS (National Security Personnel System) Page 7591: "Sec. 9901.711 Standard for action. The Department may take an adverse action under this subpart only for such cause as will promote the efficiency of the service." This a very vague statement and violates the previous assertion of a "clear, legal standard." "Nothing in this section limits the discretion of the Department to remove employees for offenses other than those identified by the Secretary as an MRO." Does this mean the SECDEF has been granted carte blanche? See above. "Contents of notice. (1) The proposal notice will inform the employee of the factual basis for the proposed action in sufficient detail to permit the employee to reply to the notice, and inform the employee of his or her right to review the Department's evidence supporting the proposed action." The factual basis is the alleged facts of the case as it has not be proven or does this mean that there is no longer a need for hearings or trials? Additionally, DoD has no obligation under NSPS to provide any materials to the employee as DoD may decide not to provide information at all or require the employee to seek the infomation elsewhere, such as the FOI Act, though even then the FOIA official may decide not to provide the information, or provide it in a manner that is not timely to the situation. A point of confusion here could be corrected by stating if there is to be training on NSPS, will there be a section of discovery, either through the agency or FOIA as this system is not at all clear. "Sec. 9901.715 Opportunity to reply" This is inconsistent with the previous section. Additionally, due process is violated. Since this is a civil matter, that is not a military tribunal or court-martial, then the defendent is presumed innocent until proven guilty. Lastly, veto power over one's representative lessens employees' trust in the system (NSPS) and trust in the system is supposed to be a cornerstone in NSPS. "(3) When considering an employee's medical condition, the Department is not required to withdraw or delay a proposed adverse action." This section is vague. If a employee is in the hospital or disabled and can not physically attend to the personnel action, then DoD must delay until the employee is fit to proceed.