This site displays a prototype of a “Web 2.0” version of the daily
Federal Register. It is not an official legal edition of the Federal
Register, and does not replace the official print version or the official
electronic version on GPO’s govinfo.gov.
The documents posted on this site are XML renditions of published Federal
Register documents. Each document posted on the site includes a link to the
corresponding official PDF file on govinfo.gov. This prototype edition of the
daily Federal Register on FederalRegister.gov will remain an unofficial
informational resource until the Administrative Committee of the Federal
Register (ACFR) issues a regulation granting it official legal status.
For complete information about, and access to, our official publications
and services, go to
About the Federal Register
on NARA's archives.gov.
The OFR/GPO partnership is committed to presenting accurate and reliable
regulatory information on FederalRegister.gov with the objective of
establishing the XML-based Federal Register as an ACFR-sanctioned
publication in the future. While every effort has been made to ensure that
the material on FederalRegister.gov is accurately displayed, consistent with
the official SGML-based PDF version on govinfo.gov, those relying on it for
legal research should verify their results against an official edition of
the Federal Register. Until the ACFR grants it official status, the XML
rendition of the daily Federal Register on FederalRegister.gov does not
provide legal notice to the public or judicial notice to the courts.
Rule
Enter a search term or FR citation e.g.
88 FR 38230 FR 78782024-13208USDA09/05/24RULE0503-AA39SORN
Choosing an item from
full text search results
will bring you to those results. Pressing enter in the search box
will also bring you to search results.
Choosing an item from
suggestions
will bring you directly to the content.
This rule is effective September 28, 2006 without further action, unless adverse comment is received by July 31, 2006. If adverse comment is received, OPM will publish a timely withdrawal of the rule in the Federal Register.
Table of Contents
Enhanced Content - Table of Contents
This table of contents is a navigational tool, processed from the
headings within the legal text of Federal Register documents.
This repetition of headings to form internal navigation links
has no substantive legal effect.
Document page views are updated periodically throughout the day and are
cumulative counts for this document. Counts are subject to sampling,
reprocessing and revision (up or down) throughout the day.
Page views
89
as of
10/07/2026 at 2:15 am EDT
Other Formats
Enhanced Content - Other Formats
This document is also available in the following formats:
This document has been published in the Federal Register. Use the PDF linked in the document sidebar for the official electronic format.
AGENCY:
Office of Personnel Management.
ACTION:
Direct final rule.
SUMMARY:
The Office of Personnel Management (OPM) is issuing final regulations to remove obsolete references to OPM central and regional offices from its classification and job grading appeals regulations.
DATES:
This rule is effective September 28, 2006 without further action, unless adverse comment is received by July 31, 2006. If adverse comment is received, OPM will publish a timely withdrawal of the rule in the
Federal Register
.
ADDRESSES:
Send or deliver comments to Mark Doboga, Deputy Associate Director, Center for Talent and Capacity Policy, Strategic Human Resources Policy, U.S. Office of Personnel Management, Room 6551, 1900 E Street, NW., Washington, DC 20415-9700, e-mail to
fedclass@opm.gov;
or fax to (202) 606-4891. Comments may also be sent through the Federal eRulemaking Portal at
http://www.regulations.gov.
All submissions received through the Portal must include the agency name and docket number or Regulation Identifier Number (RIN) for this rulemaking.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Georgeanna Emery, by e-mail at
fedclass@opm.gov,
by telephone at 202-606-3600, or by fax at 202-606-4891.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
The Office of Personnel Management (OPM) is publishing a direct final rule to make nonsubstantive revisions to parts 511 and 532 of title 5, Code of Federal Regulations. These revisions are necessary to remove obsolete references to OPM central and regional offices.
The specific sections of 5 CFR parts 511 and 532 to be revised are §§ 511.605(c), 511.613, 511.701(b)(2), 511.702(b), and 532.705(f). We are also revising the phrase “pay position” in the first sentence of paragraph (c) of § 511.702 to read “pay of the position.” Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553(B), solicitation of comments through the proposed rule process is not necessary due to the nonsubstantive nature of the amendments, i.e., changes in organizational titles and offices and a clerical error correction.
The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has reviewed this rule in accordance with E.O. 12866.
Regulatory Flexibility Act
I certify that these regulations would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities because they would apply only to Federal agencies and employees.
(c)
Reconsideration.
An employee or agency may request reconsideration of an Office appellate decision. The request must be in writing, and filed not later than 45 calendar days after the decision is issued. This time limit may be waived under exceptional circumstances by either the Director or the Director's designee.
The Office may, at its discretion, reopen and reconsider a certificate issued under this subpart.
(a) Requests which contain new and material information, or disagreements over the significance of information, will be remanded to the Director's designee for a decision.
(b) The Office may reopen and reconsider a decision only when written argument or evidence is presented which establishes a reasonable doubt concerning the technical accuracy of the decision.
Subpart G—Effective Dates of Position Classification Actions or Decisions
4. Revise paragraph (b)(2) of § 511.701 to read as follows:
(2) The implementation of the certificate may be suspended when it is determined before its effective date that a review of the classification decision is warranted and suspension is desirable. The determination to suspend implementation may be made by the Director or the Director's designee. Suspending the implementation of a certificate does not automatically change the effective date except when the certificate requires that the grade or pay of the position be reduced and the employee is not entitled to retained grade or pay.
* * * * *
5. Revise paragraphs (b) and (c) of § 511.702 to read as follows:
(b) The implementation of the decision may be suspended by the Office when it determines before the effective date that a review of the decision is warranted. The determination to suspend implementation may be made by the Director or the Director's designee. Suspending the implementation does not change the effective date of the
( printed page 37490)
decision except when the original decision requires that the grade or pay of the position be reduced and the employee is not entitled to grade or pay retention.
(c) When the original decision requires that the grade or pay of the position be reduced and the employee is not entitled to grade or pay retention, the reviewing authority, if sustaining the original decision, shall issue a new certificate and the effective date of the new certificate shall be not earlier than the date of the new decision and not later than the beginning of the fourth pay period following the date of the new decision, unless a subsequent date is specifically stated in the new decision.
PART 532—PREVAILING RATE SYSTEMS
6. The authority citation for part 532 continues to read as follows:
(f) The Office of Personnel Management may, at its discretion, reopen and reconsider any job-grading decision made by the Office when requested by an employee or an agency. This authority may be used under circumstances such as the following:
(1) An employee or an agency presents material facts not previously considered by the Office;
(2) There is room for reasonable doubt as to the appropriateness of the decision; or
(3) The potential impact of a decision on similar jobs is sufficiently significant to make further review of the decision desirable.