U.S. Office of Personnel Management
Office of Merit Systems Oversight and Effectiveness
Classification Appeals and FLSA Programs

Chicago Oversight Division
230 S. Dearborn Street, DPN 30-6
Chicago, IL 60604-1687


Job Grading Appeal Decision
Under section 5346 of title 5, United States Code

	Appellants:		[Name]
				[Name]
				[Name]
				[Name]
 
	Agency classification:	Engineering Equipment Operator
				WG-5716-10

	Organization:		[Name] Team
				[Name] Division
				Directorate [Name]
				[Name] Army Depot
				[City, State]

	OPM decision:		Engineering Equipment Operator
				WG-5716-10

	OPM decision number:	C-5716-10-02


/s/ (Douglas K. Schauer)
_____________________________
Douglas K. Schauer
Classification Appeals Officer

October 18, 2001
_____________________________
Date



As provided in section S7-8 of the Operating Manual: Federal
Wage System, this decision constitutes a certificate that is
mandatory and binding on all administrative, certifying, payroll,
disbursing, and accounting officials of the government. There is
no right of further appeal. This decision is subject to
discretionary review only under conditions and time limits
specified in section 532.705(f) of title 5, Code of Federal
Regulations (address provided in the Introduction to the Position
Classification Standards, appendix 4, section H).


Decision sent to:

Appellants:

[appellant names and address]


[name and address of appellants' representative]

Agency:

[name and address of appellants' Commanding Officer]


[name and address of appellants' servicing Civilian Personnel
Advisory Center]


[name and address of appellants' servicing personnel office]


Mr. Harrel Sholar, Director
U.S. Army Civilian Personnel Evaluation Agency
U.S. Department of the Army
Crystal Mall 4, Suite 918
1941 Jefferson Davis Highway
Arlington, Virginia 22202-4508


Introduction

The four appellants in this classification appeal work for the
[Name] Team in the [Name] Division, Directorate [Name], [Name]
Army Depot in [City, State]. They are employed as Engineering
Equipment Operator, WG-5716-10, but perform other duties in
addition to operating engineering equipment. They believe that
they are not adequately credited for the container inspection
work that they perform, and do not believe that they have
received proper credit for the crane operating work. We
requested an administrative report from the agency, and it was
received on August 8, 2001. During the course of fact gathering
we interviewed two of the four appellants, and the two
supervisors in the management chain with the most complete
knowledge of the appellants' duties and responsibilities.

General Issues

The appellants take issue with management's assignment of one
major duty to their position. As a regular and recurring part of
their work they inspect for serviceability containers (MILVANs)
that are used to store and contain ammunition for transport.
They believe this is work that should be assigned to and
performed by General Schedule (GS) quality assurance specialists
(QAS), and state that many years ago this was performed by the
QAS. The appellants should understand that management has a
legal right to assign duties and responsibilities to positions
(Section 7106, title 5 United States Code). Management has
assigned to them tasks that may previously have been performed by
GS employees, however, management may make assignments necessary
to accomplish the organization's mission. The classification of
this inspection work is provided below.

Position Information

The appellants work at the [Name] Army Depot one of whose major
missions is to dispose of excess, damaged or obsolete ammunition.
During the course of a year the appellants work at various
physical locations around the facility, utilizing several types
of equipment to accomplish different tasks related to this
mission. In periods ranging from three to six months during the
summer they operate bulldozers to dig pits and manicure the
grounds for ammunition demolition. They dig pits from six to
eight feet deep in which to place ammunition and explosives.
After they cover the pits up with soil, other employees blow up
the ammunition within them. Periodically, they utilize an
earthmover to move back to the demolition ground soil that has
been displaced by the explosions. They operate a bulldozer to
clear vegetation, build protective berms, and provide fire
protection in another area used to burn powder. The area is
surrounded by brush and trees which occasionally ignite during a
fire. At other locations they operate a modified front-end
loader to pick up and stack MILVAN containers. In another area
they operate an adjustable boom crane with a magnetic or other
lifting device to pick up and move large caliber artillery
shells. They also operate a small bobcat in a small explosive
chamber to remove refuse after a firing. They operate the
earthmover and bulldozer to rough grade some roads on the
installation. During the winter they operate a dump truck
modified to plow snow and distribute salt or sand. They operate
rough terrain forklifts when and where requested. As stated
above, they inspect MILVAN containers for serviceability and
determine whether they are acceptable, or whether they need minor
repair which can be accomplished on the installation, or need
major repair and must be sent to [State] for this to be
accomplished.

Title and Series Determination

The primary reason for the existence of the appellants' positions
is to operate one or more pieces of engineering equipment, and
the majority of this work is performed in the demolition area
using the bulldozer and earthmover. The amount of time this
latter work is performed varies from year to year. This year the
work began in mid-April and was finished by the end of September.
In the year prior, the work began in July and was completed in
September. Our interview with the supervisor of the demolition
area indicated that the work the appellants perform using the
aforementioned engineering equipment averages about five months
per year. Another piece of engineering equipment they operate is
what is referred to as a MILVAN Handler. It is a converted front-
end loader with a capacity of up to 50,000 pounds, and it is used
to pick up, maneuver, and stack ammunition containers up to 40
feet long and weighing up to 43,000 pounds gross weight. It is
not a forklift. The appellants also operate a bobcat, which is a
small caterpillar dozer, for a period of time during the year, as
well as other pieces of engineering equipment. All of this work
is properly classified in the Engineering Equipment Operator
series, WG-5716. Specifically, WG-5716 includes the operation of
gasoline- or diesel-powered wheeled or tracked engineering
equipment to move, dig and grade earth, sand, stone and other
materials. Equipment typically operated includes graders,
bulldozers, front-end loaders, backhoes, and large industrial
tractors with pan or scraper attachments. The engineering
equipment is operated by the appellants over the course of a year
approximately 60 percent of the time.

Another of the appellants' major duties is to perform inspection
and certification of MILVAN containers. According to both the
appellants and the supervisor we spoke with, the task had been
done previously by quality assurance specialists assigned from
the [Name] Army Depot. Some years ago, evidently to keep busy
during slack periods, one of the engineering equipment operators
volunteered to do this inspection work, and it has been
accomplished by the appellants' position ever since. They
inspect the MILVAN containers for holes in the walls and floors,
for the soundness of welds, for gaskets, and other designated
deficiencies which would fail established certification criteria.
They either certify the MILVAN as serviceable or, if not
serviceable, determine whether it can be repaired locally or sent
to another installation for repair. This work constitutes less
than 25 percent of the appellants' time.

The agency classified the inspection work by comparison to the
Materials Examiner and Identifier series, WG-6912. The
appellants believe that the inspection work they perform is
properly classified in the Quality Assurance Series, GS-1910.
The series definition for GS-1910 states, in part, that the
series covers positions involved in administering quality
assurance programs supporting the use and maintenance of products
required by Federal agencies. The inspection work that the
appellants perform is part of a quality assurance program, but
not a program that they administer. They perform an important
segment of a quality assurance program that is administered by
quality assurance specialists who are responsible for the overall
ammunition quality assurance program at the [Name] Army Depot.
In a discussion under the Series Coverage section of the GS-1910
series, the standard differentiates between quality assurance and
inspection. It states that while not all quality assurance
positions may be concerned with the entire range of activities
described for each functional program, they are concerned with a
variety of systematic activities designed to prevent defective
products and to assure that these products are acceptable and
perform as intended. Inspection is but one of the techniques
applied by quality assurance specialists in the administration of
their program.

The GS-1910 standard explains that for inspection positions, test
and measurement of a product typically serves as the basis for
accepting or rejecting the product. The inspector is primarily
concerned with determining conformance of the product to drawings
or technical specifications and reporting technical defects
encountered. The standard follows by calling attention to a list
of inspection and test functions discussed under the Exclusions
section of the standard. In this section the standard identifies
work that is exempt from coverage by the GS-1910 series, and
directs the reader to the occupation which covers the work
described. While not an exact fit, a review of the Exclusion
section shows that the inspection work performed by the
appellants is most properly classified to a Federal Wage System
(FWS) occupation.

The agency classified the appellants' inspection work to the
Materials Examiner and Identifier Series, WG-6912. This
occupation is appropriate for positions involved with the
identification, examination, classification, acceptance and
disposition of materials and equipment. Materials examiners and
identifiers determine physical condition, adherence to product
specifications, and equipment defects, utilizing shipping
documents, contracts, catalogs, drawings, and related documents.
The work setting is usually within a warehouse facility or in a
property reutilization and disposal facility. Another
occupational designation which merits consideration is the FWS
Job Grading Standard for Inspectors. This standard is used to
grade nonsupervisory jobs that involve examining services,
materials and products that are processed, manufactured, or
repaired by workers performing trade or craft work to determine
that the physical and operating characteristics are within
acceptable standards, specifications, or contractual
requirements. Positions properly graded by reference to this
standard are placed in the same occupation code as that of the
work they inspect. Our conclusion is that the inspection work is
most closely equated to the inspection work performed by
positions classified to the WG-6912 series. More similar to WG-
6912 than to the Inspector Standard, they examine, determine the
physical condition of, and accept or reject MILVAN containers
based upon training and established guidelines. Their inspection
work does not follow a manufacture or repair process as is called
for in the Inspector series.

There is another duty that the appellants perform for a
significant portion of their normal work year. They operate two
different varieties of mobile boom cranes to perform various
lifting and moving tasks, one of 25 ton capacity and the other of
50 tons, and they occasionally borrow a 60-ton crane from a local
US Army Reserve unit. They use one crane with, normally, a
magnetic lifting device to lift and place large caliber artillery
shells. Management has advised us that this was performed very
little during the 2001 calendar year, but that in normal years it
is a significant duty. They also operate a boom crane to lift
and place containers and equipment, sometimes to close
tolerances. This crane operating work is properly classified to
the Crane Operator Series, WG-5725. This work is performed for
less than 25 percent of the appellants' time, but it is a skill
which is required and performed. As is shown below, the crane
operation work is graded no higher than WG-9. The remainder of
the employees' time is occupied in performing other engineering
equipment and motor vehicle operation tasks on the installation
as required by management.

The appellants work in a mixed series position as defined in the
Introduction to the Federal Wage System Job Grading System. This
document advises that when a position performs work in two or
more occupations, the job should be coded to the occupation which
is most important for recruitment, selection, placement,
promotion, or reduction-in-force purposes. Normally this is the
occupation having the highest skill and knowledge requirements.
As shown below, we agree with the agency that the position is
properly coded to the Engineering Equipment Operator Series, WG-
5716. Although crane operation is significant in terms of the
skill required, the work is of a lower grade than the engineering
equipment operation. The engineering equipment operating work is
the highest graded work and constitutes the most important skill
for recruitment, selection, placement, promotion and reduction-in-
force purposes. The appropriate occupational series for the
appellants' position is the Engineering Equipment Operator, WG-
5716. The title for nonsupervisory positions in this series is
Engineering Equipment Operator.

Grade Determination

We show below the grades we have determined for each of the
appellants' major duties.

Comparison to Engineering Equipment Operator, WG-5716

 Skill and Knowledge

 Workers at the WG-10 level operate one or more types of
heavy equipment to excavate, backfill, grade or level earth to
rough specifications. They move earth on mountains and steep
slopes, graded curves and shoulders, rocky or soft ground, hilly
forests, and other surfaces with similar rough features. They
grade surfaces, compact soils, or roll to exact specifications on
flat or rolling terrain. They utilize the skill and knowledge to
be able to operate the equipment to grade surfaces to rough or
fine specifications by adjusting attachments while the vehicle is
in motion and on all types of terrain.

At the WG-11 level employees operate one or more types of
engineering equipment to fine grade slopes, inclines, ramps,
curves and excavations by scraping, scooping, rolling or leveling
on rough and rocky terrain or in dense forest areas. They work
to fine specifications from grade stakes set by engineers. This
type of work is considered to be the most difficult because it is
harder to steer and to manipulate the control levers and
attachments to reach the exact level of the surface under the
most difficult operating conditions. It requires a higher level
of skill and knowledge than at the WG-10 level because it is
harder to grade to fine specifications on more difficult terrain
than it is on flat or rolling terrain as described at the lower
level. Greater knowledge of surface conditions is required at
the WG-11 level because subsurfaces frequently change in hilly
terrain or weather conditions may alter the soil condition which
may require a change of attachments or an alternate approach to
meet the changing conditions.

The appellants regularly operate a variety of engineering
equipment to include a bulldozer, earth mover, grader, front-end
loader (MILVAN stacker), and bobcat. They operate this equipment
in an open area to dig pits which are used to blow old, damaged
or obsolete ammunition and explosives. The area used for this
purpose, referred to as the demo ground, is a 20-30 acre space
stripped of vegetation. The soil is a heavy clay with a
substrata of limestone below the normal bottom level of the pits.
The appellants dig a series of 30 pits at a time, each from six
to eight feet deep and about 10 feet wide with a 12-14 foot blast
wall between pits. The walls are dug at approximately a 30-
degree angle with a ramp to enable a rough terrain forklift to
deposit the items to be blown into the pit. When the materials
are in place, the appellants use the bulldozer to cover each pit.
After the pits are blown, the appellants re-build the pits for
the next demolition. On heavy work days in periods of good
weather they build up to 90 pits a day (three times 30). The
limestone strata below the pits causes problems, because the
continuous explosions blows up large pieces of stone which have
to be hauled away and replaced with soil. The demo ground itself
is situated on a level plain. The constant demolition re-figures
the terrain to the extent that a considerable amount of soil
material is blown away and drainage of water is a consideration
in rebuilding the demo ground. The appellants use an earth mover
with a scraper pan to pick more soil to replace the rocks and
soil lost through the demolition. They then use the bulldozers
to re-build the grounds and dig more pits. They also use the
bulldozer to clear trees and other vegetation from an area where
explosive powder is blown. One of the bulldozers must be on
station while this burn is accomplished in case of fire spreading
to the nearby vegetation.

For a significant portion of the year the appellants operate a
front-end loader that has been modified to lift, transport and
stack MILVAN containers. They operate this around vehicles such
as trucks and rail cars, in storage areas, and on roads on the
installation. They pick up empty and loaded containers up to 40
feet in length and over 40,000 pounds gross weight when full.
They sometimes drive the equipment with load over installation
roads from one area to another. When they do this they must be
careful to avoid obstructions along the roads such as trees,
brush, poles and power lines. The appellants say that it is
difficult to see to maneuver when loaded. The appellants also
operate other engineering equipment when necessary.

The appellants' position equates to the WG-10 level for this
factor. As described at that level the appellants operate one or
more types of heavy equipment to excavate, backfill and level
earth to rough specifications. They move earth on one area that
is comprised of clay and rock, and when wet it is slippery and
dangerous to work. They have to build their pits to exact
specifications as expressed in the SOP. They have to operate the
equipment and use the attachments while the vehicle is in motion.
Another area they work is forested with heavy brush. Their work
does not meet the WG-11 level because they do not work to the
fine specifications as expressed at that level. For example,
they do not work from grade stakes set by engineers. This is
typical of grading work done prior to the laying of asphalt or
concrete on roadways. And they do not fine grade slopes,
inclines, ramps, curves and excavations on rough and rocky
terrain or in dense forest areas as described at the WG-11 level.

 Responsibility

 At the WG-10 level workers follow oral or written work
orders, but the work is performed without direct supervision.
They are responsible for the operation of the equipment to grade
surfaces to rough or fine specifications by adjusting attachments
while the vehicle is in motion and on all types of terrain. They
are responsible for operating the equipment safely and for seeing
that the equipment is not damaged. At WG-11 they also follow
oral or written instructions and work without direct supervision.
But at this level the work performed is more difficult. It
includes responsibility for satisfying the fine grade
requirements in a minimum amount of time. It also includes
responsibility for more exacting requirements to insure properly
banked curves, slopes and shoulders, and drainage features.

The appellants' position meets the WG-10 for this factor. As at
that level they work from mainly oral instructions and they work
under only general supervision. The work includes responsibility
for operating bulldozers, graders, and earth movers to grade dig
pits to specifications and rough grade other surfaces. They are
responsible for operating the equipment safely and ensuring that
it is not damaged. They do not meet the WG-11 level where
operators are responsible for satisfying fine grade requirements
in a minimum amount of time or for exacting requirements to
ensure properly banked curves, slopes and shoulders.

 Physical Effort

 Physical effort at the WG-10 level involves constant
reaching, bending, turning and moving arms, feet, and legs to
handle different sets of controls to operate the equipment and
attachments. Considerable strain is caused by the constant
vibration of the equipment, and because of the location of some
of the controls and attachments, the operators are frequently
required to work in awkward or strained positions. The work is
strenuous because of the large pieces of equipment and
requirement for frequent adjustments under adverse operating
conditions. Physical effort at the WG-11 level is similar to the
WG-10 level except that the operators must change the position of
the attachments more often and more rapidly as they adjust to the
changing conditions of the surface.

The position of the appellants' is a match to the WG-10 level for
this factor. Similar to that level they operate the equipment
with one attachment for extended periods of time. They adjust
the attachments frequently to meet depth, width and length
requirements of the pits and the safety distances and blast walls
between pits. Their work does not meet the WG-11 level where
operating the equipment to meet fine specifications on changing
surface conditions causes more frequent changes in the
attachments and controls.

 Working Conditions

 The appellants match the WG-10 for this factor. They do not
meet the WG-11 level where operators must pay closer attention to
the attachments which allows less time to concentrate on the
speed and direction of the vehicle. As a result, there is more
danger of tipping or overturning the vehicle, especially when
working on steep banks and side slopes.

 Comparison to Crane Operator, WG-5725

 Skill and Knowledge

 WG-9 employees operate boom cranes at various outdoor
locations where maneuverability is not a major problem and
accuracy is not critical. Worksites may contain some obstacles
such as trees, walls and equipment, but there is considerable
room to maneuver around and over these objects. The crane is
normally operated with standard boom lengths, and with loads that
are well within the lifting capacity of the crane. The boom
crane is fitted with attachments such as hook, clamshell bucket,
orangepeel bucket, magnet, piledriver, demolition hammer, or
dragline bucket, and is typically used to:

 - load and unload crates, lumber, or equipment at worksites or
 outdoor storage areas;

 - load sand, coal, gravel, or other loose material at loading
 docks;

 - segregate and move scrap metal into trucks, bins, or
 railroad cars within a salvage yard; or

 - dig trenches in a sanitary fill area.

The WG-9 operators must be skilled to compensate for changes in
the lifting capacity of the crane caused by variations in the
angle of the boom, length of the boom, position of the revolving
frame and the slope of the terrain. They must determine what
moves the crane will need to make in order to complete the move,
and assure the lifting capacity will not be exceeded. Because
boom cranes have a large number of controls, considerable eye,
hand, and foot coordination is required to produce the desired
movements while watching the load and its clearance with other
objects.

At the WG-11 level workers operate boom cranes at various outdoor
locations where maneuverability is restricted and accuracy is
critical. Work is typically done near obstructions which
restrict not only the load movement, but also the movement of the
boom. Many work areas do not permit positioning the crane near
the work to be done, and to reach the load, extreme boom lengths
or angles must be used, greatly reducing the lifting capacity of
the crane and further restricting maneuverability. The operator
makes precise load placements where exact movements must be made
to position the load accurately and safely. The boom crane at
this level is typically used to:

 - load and unload equipment and supplies on board ships where
 masts, antenna, or other obstructions are in the way;

 - precision set objects such as guns into mounts, sonar
 equipment onto ships, or wings on to aircraft;

 - dig and move earth or rock close to buildings, walls, or
 under ground obstructions; or

 - destroy obsolete brick and stone structures near high-
 voltage power lines or other structures.

In addition to the skill and knowledge required at the WG-9
level, operators at this level must be skilled in operating
cranes at all boom lengths, angles, and positions. They must be
skilled in making rapid lifting capacity judgments during
continual position changes. They must be skilled in operating
near or at the crane's lifting capacity and within extremely
congested areas. They must be skilled in producing exact
movements while precision setting loads onto or into other
objects, e.g., positioning and holding a hull section of a ship
while it is being welded into place. Grade 11 operators must be
skilled in simultaneously operating the crane's controls, making
difficult clearance judgments while watching the moving load and
boom, and compensating for variations in the crane's lifting
capacity during position changes.

The appellants operate a 25-ton and a 50-ton boom crane to pick
up, move and place large caliber artillery shells, MILVANs and
other containers, and other equipment. On occasion they may
borrow a 60-ton crane from the US Army Reserves for a special
project. When moving ammunition the cranes are normally operated
at full boom length. The MILVAN stacking crane stacks containers
up to four high in outdoor areas where there is little need for
concern about nearby buildings or overhead obstructions. The
appellants need to be careful in the placement of the containers
one on top of the other because only one configuration will work,
and they must be safety conscious in the use of cranes with a
somewhat limited visibility in the presence of other workers.

The appellants' position matches the WG-9 level for this factor.
Consistent with that level they operate a boom crane with a
magnet attachment to move containers and ammunition canisters in
an outdoor area where maneuverability is not a major problem and
accuracy is not critical. Although they must sometimes maneuver
the MILVAN containers or other items around obstacles, this is
not to the degree of constricted movement as discussed at the WG-
11 level. Although their movement and placement of items must be
relatively precise, accuracy is not critical as explained at the
WG-11 level. The skill required to pick up and move large
caliber shells or to pick up, move and place bulky and heave
MILVAN containers is not as demanding as is required for the work
described at the WG-11 level. The areas where the appellants
pick, move and place their items have been denuded of such
obstacles as are regularly confronted by a WG-11 operator.
Consequently, the skill and knowledge required are not to the
degree described at the higher level.

 Responsibility

 WG-9 operators work from oral or written instructions
indicating the crane to be operated, location of the work,
general nature of the work to be done, and any problems which may
be encountered. Within the assigned work area, the operators
plan the positioning of the crane to provide for maximum freedom
of movement and the greatest possible lifting capacity. They
assure that the boom crane is well within its lifting capacity
during position changes and that all moves are safely carried
out. They may recommend changes in boom length, rigging, and
attachments to the supervisor if they feel the situation warrants
it. Their work is spot checked for compliance with standard
operating procedures.

Because the work is typically done near obstructions, WG-11 boom
crane operators have greater responsibility for determining the
positioning of the crane than WG-9 operators. They must consider
such factors as the safest routing of the load, clearances along
the route, position changes needed to complete the move, and the
effect of these changes on the crane's lifting capacity. These
determinations are critical due to the greater responsibility of
exceeding the crane's lifting capacity, injuring personnel, and
damaging the load, crane, and obstructions while making position
changes.

The appellants' level of responsibility meets the WG-9 level.
They operate the cranes in flat areas working with objects of
known weight and size, there is little need to maneuver around
obstacles, they do not have to worry about the safest routing of
the load or clearances along the way, and they do not have to
determine the effects of these changes on the crane's lifting
capacity. They do not have to make the critical determinations
characteristic of the WG-11 level. In the appellants' appeal
submission, they maintain that they operate the cranes in areas
where maneuverability is very restricted and precision required
in setting in loads. For example, they have used a crane to lift
machinery into place inside of buildings with just inches to
spare, and set large furnaces into place half inside of buildings
and half outside with inches to play with. Our interviews
indicate that such precision work is so infrequent that it is not
considered regular and recurring work and, therefore, not
creditable for grading purposes.

 Physical Effort

 WG-9 boom crane operators exert heavy effort in pushing,
pulling and depressing the various levers, clutches and brakes.
They are subject to strain caused by vibrations of the crane and
from the jerking and jolting motions while lifting and moving
loads. In addition to the physical effort described at this
level, WG-11 level operators have to make continual control
changes to maneuver the crane and load around obstructions, to
stay within the lifting capacity, and to position the load at the
desired location. Because the appellants do not perform work
described at the WG-11 level, they do not have the degree of
physical effort described at that level.

 Working Conditions

 Operators at the WG-9 level work outdoors in a partially
enclosed crane cab in all kinds of weather. They are exposed to
unpleasant noise, heat and fumes produced by the engine. They
are exposed to the possibility of injury caused by swinging loads
from the crane overturning. In addition to this, WG-11 operators
are exposed to a greater possibility of injury from overturning
because they must frequently work near or at the crane's lifting
capacity. The appellant's work does not meet the WG-11 level
because they operate the cranes well within the lifting capacity,
and the danger of the cranes overturning is minimal.

 Comparison to Materials Examiner and Identifier, WG-6912

 The appellants inspect for serviceability MILVAN containers
that have normally been in the inventory for quite some time.
They are standard items, and what to look for in the inspections
is covered in the training provided and in written guidelines.
The containers are used for storing and transporting a great
variety of military ammunition; therefore, the serviceability of
the containers is of critical interest to the organization's
mission. When the containers do not meet standards, they make a
decision as to whether the container can be repaired at the depot
machine shop or must go to another installation for repair. When
repaired on the installation, they check the container again to
make sure it meets standards. The highest level of work
described in the standard is WG-7. Comparison of the appellants'
work to the standard shows that it does not exceed this level.

 Comparison to Motor Vehicle Operator, WG-5703

 The appellants operate various types of motor vehicles as
assigned by management. This includes, in particular, a dump
truck modified for use as a snow removal vehicle by the
attachment of a blade and salt/sand dispersal equipment. They
operate this equipment on the installation to clear roads of snow
and ice. Comparison of this work to the Motor Vehicle Operator
standard shows that the work does not exceed the WG-6 level. It
does not meet the WG-7 level because the vehicle is not operated
on public roads in heavy traffic as described at that level.

Decision

The appellants' position is mixed, with duties performed in
several FWS occupations. The highest graded work is that
associated with operating the engineering equipment; therefore,
that becomes the final occupation and grade. The position is
classified as Engineering Equipment Operator, WG-5716-10.