| Comment Number: | OL-10511937 |
| Received: | 3/16/2005 6:37:10 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:
Section 9901.703 defines suspensions, of any length, as adverse actions covered by the procedures of 9901.713. Section 9901.703 eliminates the distinction between long-term and short-term suspensions resulting in the same procedure being used for both. (Section 9901.801 retains the distinction between long and short term suspensions, which limits Merit System Protection Board jurisdiction to suspensions for more than 14 days - the same as the current provision.) NSPS objectives might not be served by applying the procedures of 9901.713 to both long and short-term suspensions. The current CFR provision for taking suspensions of 14 days or less provides for (1) notice and (2) a minimum 24 hour period to reply. So for short-term suspensions, NSPS multiplies a 1-day notice period 15 times. It seems that most suspensions against workers are for 14-days or less. This practice may have developed because suspensions for more than 14 days are appealable to MSPB. Agencies tend to avoid taking long-term suspensions in favor of short-term suspensions. NSPS unnecessarily extends the reply period for short-term suspensions from 24 hours to 15 days, making swift corrective action no longer possible. In Defense agencies where tables of penalties require management to consider imposing the least severe penalty, typical suspensions of 1, 2 or 3 days, which can now be speedily effected, will becomed delayed under NSPS's lengthier reply period. With respect to Section 9901.801, on MSPB appeals, with the exception of the provision for summary judgement, which the MSPB may already possess legally, I feel that the proposed changes may not produce the intended benefits. The DoD already enjoys a high win rate before the MSPB. Managers and HR practitioners generally view MSPB decisions as fair, comprehensive, understandable, reliable, predictable and timely. Will the proposed changes affect the quality of MSPB work that the DoD now enjoys? Time limits that are shortened for the employee and MSPB are directly, or indirectly, shortened for the agency as well. Are the assumed benefits worth the risk of harm to the quality and fairness of this adjudicative process? Changing the appeals system to insert a DoD decision process in between an initial MSPB decision and higher level appeal seems unwarranted in view of the MSPB's performance record as an impartial adjudicative body. Thank you for this opportunity to submit my personal opinions.