This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER

contains notices to the public of the proposed

issuance of rules and regulations. The

purpose of these notices is to give interested

persons an opportunity to participate in the

rule making prior to the adoption of the final

rules.

Proposed Rules Federal Register

63454

Vol. 60, No. 237

Monday, December 11, 1995

OFFICE OF PERSONNEL

MANAGEMENT

5 CFR Parts 317 and 412

RIN 3206–AF96

Executive and Management

Development

AGENCY: Office of Personnel

Management.

ACTION: Proposed regulations.

SUMMARY: The Office of Personnel

Management (OPM) is proposing to

amend part 317 of its regulations

governing initial career appointment to

the Senior Executive Service (SES) and

Qualifications Review Board

certification. The proposed changes to

part 317 would eliminate the 3-year

limitation on the validity of

Qualifications Review Board (QRB)

certification for appointment to the

Senior Executive Service and simplify

the Executive Resources Board (ERB)

certification of candidates. The Office is

also proposing to amend part 412 of its

regulations governing executive and

management development. The

coverage will be expanded to include

supervisory development. The revised

regulations present broad program

criteria on the systematic development

of executives, managers, supervisors,

and candidates. They also establish

minimum requirements for formal

Senior Executive Service candidate

development programs. The changes

proposed promote training and

development activities which foster a

corporate perspective of Government.

DATES: Written comments will be

considered if received no later than

February 9, 1996.

ADDRESSES: Send or deliver written

comments to the Ms. K. Joyce Edwards,

Assistant Director, Office of Executive

Resources, Office of Personnel

Management, Room 6484, 1900 E Street

NW., Washington, DC 20415.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Constance Maravell, 202–606–1832.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Office

of Personnel Management (OPM) issued

proposed regulations on executive and

management development on March 2,

1993 (58 FR 11988). We received

comments from 23 agencies, 9

individuals and the Federal Executive

Institute Alumni Association. Most

comments expressed support for

including the development of

supervisors along with that of managers

and executives. The proposed

regulations were withdrawn on

February 11, 1994 (59 FR 6593) to see

which objectives of the regulations

could be achieved through alternative

means and so they could be reviewed in

the context of the sunsetting of the

Federal Personnel Manual in December

1993.

General

In keeping with the spirit of Executive

Order 12861 on ‘‘Elimination on OneHalf of Executive Branch Internal

Regulations,’’ we re-examined the

proposed regulations. This has resulted

in the elimination of regulations on

needs assessments for the management

profession and for individuals and

formal candidate development programs

for supervisors and managers. Proposed

requirements in these areas have been

removed, not because we have found

such activities to be ineffective, but

because agencies should be free to

engage in them without being required

to do so. Well selected developmental

experiences enhance the competence

and broaden the perspective of the

managerial workforce. We encourage

agencies to undertake these activities on

a systematic basis.

We are also deleting regulations that

are covered by statute which require no

further clarification such as OPM’s

responsibility for the review of agency

programs. We would like to draw

agency attention to two provisions of

statute which will not be regulated

further. The first is the use of sabbaticals

in general, 5 U.S.C. 3396(c). The second

is, 5 U.S.C. 3396(d), authorizing

sabbaticals, training, or details or other

temporary assignments in other

agencies, State or local governments, or

the private sector for the continuing

training and development of incumbent

career SES members

The earlier proposed regulations also

provided for the reactivation of expired

QRB certifications for graduates of

formal SES candidate development

programs (CDP). Reactivation was

accomplished by a variation to the

regulations in December 1993, which

extended certifications until December

31, 1996. The current proposed

regulations in part 317 would remove

the present 3-year time limit on all QRB

certifications. The removal would apply

to certifications issued before the

regulations as well as those issued

afterwards.

In response to a recommendation

from the Executive Resources

Management Group work group on

staffing, we propose to simplify

procedural requirements for the ERB

certification of SES candidates.

Specifically, when there are less than 10

eligible candidates for an SES position,

an ERB would be permitted to refer all

candidates to the appointing authority

without further ranking. The statutory

requirement that ERB’s make written

recommendations must be observed

regardless of the number of candidates.

What remains in the regulations is a

clear set of criteria which promote a

corporate perspective of governance

through the systematic development of

candidates for the SES and the

continuing development of supervisors,

managers, and executives. Public

managers with a corporate perspective

respect and embrace the dynamics of

American democracy; they recognize

their fundamental responsibility for

balancing change and continuity. Their

values encompass a respect for both

diversity and merit. Their commitment

to Government service transcends their

agency mission and individual

profession. Executives with a corporate

perspective will play a critical role in

the reinvention of Government.

These regulations recognize and give

meaning to the findings of OPM’s 1992

Leadership Effectiveness Study. The

10,000 managers who responded

identified 22 generic competencies

essential to successful performance as

leaders in any government position. The

study found that effective supervisors,

managers and executives have a shared

base of competencies. As individuals

move from supervisors to managers and

executives they must acquire additional

enhanced competencies. For this reason,

the preparation of supervisors and

managers is considered integral to the

development of candidates for the SES.
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 237 / Monday, December 11, 1995 / Proposed Rules 63455

The criteria in section 412.103 are

designed to enable agencies to run

strong supervisory, managerial and

executive development programs to

provide a corporate perspective in the

context of their succession planning

systems. This assures that there are

enough prepared and qualified

employees as candidates for SES

positions. This section requires agencies

to provide initial and continuing

training and development to their

management corps. Formal SES

candidate development programs are

one option, but not the only one for

assuring that agencies have enough

candidates for the SES.

SES Candidate Development Programs

(CDP)

If an agency desires graduates of its

SES candidate development program to

receive Qualifications Review Board

certification, the program must meet the

minimum standards in § 412.104. OPM

will review all programs prior to

announcement for the first time under

these regulations regardless of whether

they have been approved under the

previous regulations. After the initial

announcement, OPM will only review

programs if there is a significant change

in the program.

The standards meet statutory

requirements and support the National

Performance Review recommendation

for promoting a corporate culture in the

SES. During the time the candidates are

in the program, they must attend at least

80 hours of formal interagency training

programs; have developmental

assignments totalling 4 months; and

have a mentor. If an agency wishes to

deviate from these minimum

requirements, it must obtain an

exception from OPM before the

candidate starts the program.

OPM believes that even individuals

who are well qualified for an SES

appointment can benefit from this

minimum training and development. It

is not our intention to grant exceptions

to the minimum requirements based on

the fact that the candidate is already

well qualified to enter the SES. OPM

does not support the use of the formal

SES candidate development program as

a mechanism for ‘‘precertifying’’ fully

qualified individuals for the SES.

These standards differ from the

existing regulations in the following

ways. Agencies can choose, under the

standards, the formal interagency

executive level training experience

rather than be limited to OPM approved

programs. An agency may substitute a

work experience, longer than 80 hours,

that involves multiple agencies for

formal training; but this substitution

does not eliminate the requirement for

a developmental assignment. The length

of the developmental work assignments

has been specified to eliminate

confusion about what cases will be

presented to the QRB.

One way to promote a corporate

perspective in the SES is to encourage

the selection of qualified applicants

from outside the agency. The law, in 5

U.S.C. 3393(a), supports this goal by

requiring at least governmentwide

competition for initial appointment to

the SES. While the proposed regulations

on recruitment for SES CDP are

consistent with this statutory

requirement, they provide flexibility for

those agencies which have

demonstrated support for an SES

corporate perspective.

Specifically, the exception from

Governmentwide competition in the

current regulations for agencies with

150 or fewer allocated SES positions for

their candidate development programs

has been changed in two ways. First, the

exception is available to agencies which

can show OPM that in the 5 years prior

to announcing a CDP, at least 15% of

the career SES members appointed

come from outside the agency. An

agency may be able to conduct one

offering of a CDP under this exception

but not another because the agency does

not meet the criterion at that time.

Second, when there has only been

agencywide competition for the CDP,

the graduates of these programs are

required to compete Governmentwide

for entry to the SES.

The regulations on ‘‘status’’ and ‘‘nonstatus’’ SES candidate development

programs currently in subpart E have

been rewritten in a new subpart B to

eliminate redundancy. There is no

change in the nature of the programs.

Regulatory Flexibility Act

I certify that these regulations will not

have significant economic impact on a

substantial number of small entities

because they affect only Federal

employees and agencies.

List of Subjects in 5 CFR Parts 317 and

412

Government employees.

Office of Personnel Management.

James B. King,

Director.

Accordingly, the Office of Personnel

Management proposes to amend 5 CFR

parts 317 and 412 as follows:

PART 317—EMPLOYMENT IN THE

SENIOR EXECUTIVE SERVICE

1. The authority citation for part 317

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 5 U.S.C. 3392, 3393, 3393a,

3395, 3397, 3593, and 3595.

2. In section 317.501, paragraph (c)(5)

is revised to read as follows:

§ 317.501 Recruitment and selection for

initial SES career appointment.

* * * * *

(c) * * *

(5) Provide that the ERB make written

recommendations to the appointing

authority on the eligible candidates and

identify the best qualified candidates. If

there are less than 10 eligible

candidates, the ERB may refer to the

appointing authority all candidates as

‘‘best qualified.’’ Rating sheets may be

used to satisfy the written

recommendations requirement for

individual candidates, but the ERB must

certify in writing the list of candidates

to the appointing authority.

* * * * *

3. In section 317.502, paragraph (c) is

revised to read as follows:

§ 317.502 Qualifications Review Board

certification.

* * * * *

(c) Qualifications Review Board

certification of executive qualifications

must be based on demonstrated

executive experience; successful

completion of an OPM-approved

candidate development program; or

possession of special or unique qualities

that indicate a likelihood of executive

success. Any existing time limit on a

previously approved certification is

removed.

* * * * *

PART 412—EXECUTIVE,

MANAGEMENT, AND SUPERVISORY

DEVELOPMENT

3. Part 412 is revised to read as

follows:

PART 412—EXECUTIVE,

MANAGEMENT, AND SUPERVISORY

DEVELOPMENT

Subpart A—General Provisions

Sec.

412.101 Coverage.

412.102 Purpose.

412.103 Criteria for programs for the

systematic training and development of

executives, managers, supervisors, and

candidates.

412.104 Formal candidate development

programs for Senior Executive Service

positions.

Subpart B—Senior Executive Service Status

and Nonstatus Candidate Development

Programs

412.201 Purpose.

412.202 ‘‘Status’’ programs.

412.203 ‘‘Non-status’’ programs.
63456 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 237 / Monday, December 11, 1995 / Proposed Rules

Authority: 5 U.S.C. 3397, 4101, et seq.

Subpart A—General Provisions

§ 412.101 Coverage.

This subpart applies to all incumbents

of or candidates for supervisory,

managerial, and executive positions in

the General Schedule, the Senior

Executive Service (SES), or equivalent

pay systems who are also covered by

part 410 of this chapter.

§ 412.102 Purpose.

(a) This subpart implements for

supervisors, managers, and executives

the provisions of chapter 41 of title 5 of

the United States Code related to

training and section 3396 of title 5

related to the criteria for programs of

systematic development of candidates

for the SES and the continuing

development of SES members.

(b) The subpart identifies a

continuum of preparation starting with

supervisory positions and proceeding

through management and executive

positions governmentwide. For this

reason, the subpart establishes a

comprehensive system that is intended

to:

(1) Provide the competencies needed

by supervisors, managers, and

executives to perform their current

functions at the mastery level of

proficiency; and

(2) Provide learning through

development and training in the context

of succession planning and corporate

perspective to prepare individuals for

advancement, thus supplying the

agency and the government with an

adequate number of well prepared and

qualified candidates to fill supervisory,

managerial, and executive positions

governmentwide.

§ 412.103 Criteria for programs for the

systematic training and development of

executives, managers, supervisors, and

candidates.

Each agency must provide for the

initial and continuing development of

individuals in executive, managerial,

and supervisory positions, and

candidates for those positions. The

agency must issue a written policy to

assure that their development programs:

(a) Are designed as part of the

agency’s strategic plan and foster a

corporate perspective.

(b) Make assignments to training and

development consistent with the merit

system principles set forth in 5 U.S.C.

2301(b) (1) and (2).

(c) Provide for:

(1) Initial training as an individual

makes critical career transitions to

become a new supervisor, a new

manager, or a new executive consistent

with the results of needs assessments;

(2) Continuing learning experiences,

both short- and long-term, throughout

an individual’s career in order for the

individual to achieve the mastery level

of proficiency for his or her current

management level and position; and

(3) Systematic development of

candidates for advancement to a higher

management level. Formal candidate

development programs leading to

noncompetitive placement eligibility

represent one, but not the only, type of

systematic development.

§ 412.104 Formal candidate development

programs for Senior Executive Service

positions.

Formal SES candidate development

programs permit the certification of the

executive qualifications of graduates by

a Qualifications Review Board under the

criterion of 5 U.S.C. 3393(c)(2)(B) and

selection for the SES without further

competition. The agency must have a

written policy describing how the

program will operate. The agency must

obtain OPM approval of the program

before it is conducted for the first time

under these regulations and whenever

there are substantive changes to the

program. Agency programs must meet

the following criteria.

(a) Recruitment. (1) Recruitment for

the program is from all groups of

qualified individuals within the civil

service, or all groups of qualified

individuals whether or not within the

civil service.

(2) Agencies may request an exception

to the provision in paragraph (a)(1) of

this section if they can show that during

the 5-year period prior to the

announcement of a program they have

made at least 15% of their career SES

appointments from sources outside the

agency. Notwithstanding this exception

recruitment must be competitive and be

announced at least agencywide.

Graduates of these programs who have

been certified by a QRB must then

compete Governmentwide for entry to

the SES, but do not have to obtain a

second QRB certification before

appointment.

(b) In recruiting, the agency,

consistent with the merit system

principles in 5 U.S.C. 2301(b) (1) and

(2), takes into consideration the goal of

achieving a diversified workforce.

(c) All candidates are selected through

SES merit staffing procedures. The

number selected shall be consistent

with the number of expected vacancies.

(d) Each candidate has an SES

development plan covering the period

of the program. The plan is prepared

from a competency-based needs

determination. It is approved by the

Executive Resources Board.

(e) The minimum program

requirements, unless an exception is

obtained in advance of the beginning of

the candidate’s program, for an SES

development plan are as follows:

(1) There is a formal training

experience that addresses the executive

core qualifications and their application

to SES positions governmentwide. The

training experience must include

interaction with a wide mix of Federal

employees outside the candidate’s

department or agency to foster a

corporate perspective but may include

managers from the private sector and

state and local governments. The nature

and scope of the training must have

Governmentwide or multi-agency

applicability. If formal interagency

training is used to meet this

requirement, it must total at least 80

hours. If an interagency work

experience is used, it must be of

significantly longer duration than 80

hours.

(2) There are developmental

assignments that total at least 4 months

of full-time service outside the

candidate’s position of record. The

purpose of the assignments is to

broaden the candidate’s experience and/

or increase knowledge of the overall

functioning of the agency so that the

candidate is prepared for a range of

agency positions.

(3) There is a member of the Senior

Executive Service as a mentor.

(f) Each candidate’s performance in

the program is evaluated periodically,

and there is a written policy for

discontinuing a candidate’s

participation in the program. A

candidate can be discontinued or may

withdraw from the program without

prejudice to his or her ability to apply

directly for SES positions.

(g) Each candidate has a documented

starting and finishing date in the

program.

Subpart B—Senior Executive Service

Status and Nonstatus Candidate

Development Programs

§ 412.201 Purpose.

Section 3393 of title 5, United States

Code, requires that career appointees to

the SES be recruited either from all

groups of qualified individuals within

the civil service, or from all groups of

qualified individuals whether or not

within the civil service. This subpart

sets forth regulations establishing two

types of SES candidate development

programs, ‘‘status’’ and ‘‘nonstatus.’’
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 237 / Monday, December 11, 1995 / Proposed Rules 63457

§ 412.202 ‘‘Status’’ programs.

Only employees serving under career

appointments, or under career-type

appointments as defined in 5 CFR

317.304(a)(2), may participate in

‘‘status’’ candidate development

programs.

§ 412.203 ‘‘Nonstatus’’ programs.

(a) Eligibility. Candidates are from

outside Government and/or from among

employees serving on other than career

or career-type appointments within the

civil service.

(b) Requirements. (1) Candidates must

be appointed utilizing the Schedule B

authority authorized by 5 CFR

213.3202(j). The appointment may not

exceed or be extended beyond 3 years.

(2) Assignments must be to a full-time

position created for developmental

purposes connected with the SES

candidate development program.

Candidates serving under Schedule B

appointment may not be used to fill an

agency’s regular positions on a

continuing basis.

(3) Schedule B appointments must be

made in the same manner as merit

staffing requirements prescribed for the

SES, except that each agency shall

follow the principle of veteran

preference as far as administratively

feasible. Positions filled through this

authority are excluded under 5 CFR

302.101(c)(6) from the appointment

procedures of part 302.

[FR Doc. 95–30053 Filed 12–8–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6325–01–M

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Federal Crop Insurance Corporation

7 CFR Part 457

RIN 0563–AB24

Common Crop Insurance Regulations;

Malting Barley Price and Quality

Endorsement Crop Insurance

Provisions

AGENCY: Federal Crop Insurance

Corporation.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: The Federal Crop Insurance

Corporation (‘‘FCIC’’) hereby proposes

to revise the Malting Barley Option Crop

Insurance provisions. The intended

effect of this action is to improve the

insurance coverage now available for

producers who grow malting barley

under contract with a brewery, or

business that sells malt or processed

mash to a brewery; and to provide a new

option that will allow producers

without contracts (open market

producers) to obtain insurance for their

malting barley.

DATES: Written comments, data, and

opinions on this proposed rule must be

submitted by the close of business

December 21, 1995 to be considered

when the rule is to be made final. The

comment period for information

collections under the Paperwork

Reduction Act of 1995 continues

through February 5, 1996.

ADDRESSES: Written comments, data,

and opinion on this proposed rule

should be sent to Diana Moslak,

Regulatory and Procedural Development

Staff, Federal Crop Insurance

Corporation, USDA, Washington, D.C.

20250. Hand or messenger delivery

should be made to 14th and

Independence Avenue, S.W., Room

6097, South Building, Washington, D.C.

Written comments will be available for

public inspection and copying in the

Office of the Manager, 14th and

Independence Avenue, S.W., Room

6097, South Building, Washington, D.C.,

during regular business hours, Monday

through Friday.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For

further information and a copy of the

Regulatory Economic Analysis of the

Malting Barley Endorsement Crop

Insurance provisions, contact Diana

Moslak, Regulatory and Procedural

Development Staff, Federal Crop

Insurance Corporation, USDA,

Washington, D.C. 20250. Telephone

(202) 720–0713.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This

action has been reviewed under United

States Department of Agriculture

(‘‘USDA’’) procedures established by

Executive Order 12866 and

Departmental Regulation 1512–1. This

action constitutes a review as to the

need, currency, clarity, and

effectiveness of these regulations under

those procedures. The sunset review

date established for these regulations is

July 1, 2000.

This rule has been determined to be

‘‘significant’’ for the purposes of

Executive Order 12866 and, therefore,

has been reviewed by the Office of

Management and Budget (‘‘OMB’’).

A Regulatory Economic Analysis has

been completed and is available to

interested persons at the address listed

above. In summary, the analysis finds

that the expected benefits of this action

outweigh the costs. The new Malting

Barley Price and Quality Endorsement

will simplify program operations,

benefit FCIC and reinsured companies,

and enhance the insurance coverage for

malting barley producers.

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995

The information collection

requirements contained in these

regulations were submitted to OMB for

their approval under section 3507(j) of

the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995,

and received emergency approval

through March 5, 1996. The agency is

also seeking a valid approval for 3 years

under section 3507(d). These

requirements were previously approved

by OMB under OMB control number

0563–0003 through September 30, 1998.

Public comments are due by February 5,

1996.

The title of this information collection

is ‘‘Catastrophic Risk Protection Plan

and Related Requirements including

General Crop Insurance Regulations,

Common Crop Insurance Regulations;

Malting Barley Price and Quality

Endorsement Crop Insurance

Provisions.’’ The Information to be

collected includes: a crop insurance

acreage report, an insurance application

and continuous contract. Information

collected from the acreage report and

application is electronically submitted

to FCIC by the reinsured companies.

Some respondents may provide

additional information for the purpose

of selecting malting barley insurance

coverage options. Potential respondents

to this information collection are

growers of malting barley that are

eligible for Federal crop insurance.

The information requested is

necessary for the insurance company

and FCIC to provide insurance, provide

reinsurance, determine eligibility,

determine and collect premiums or

other monetary amounts (or fees), and

pay benefits.

All information is reported annually.

The reporting burden for this collection

of information is estimated to average

16.9 minutes per response for each of

the 3.6 responses from approximately

1,755,015 respondents. The total annual

burden on the public for this

information collection is 2,676,932

hours.

The comment period for information

collections under the Paperwork

Reduction Act of 1995 continues

through February 5, 1996, on the

following: (a) whether the proposed

collection of information is necessary

for the proper performance of the

functions of the agency, including

whether the information shall have

practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the

agency’s estimate of the burden of the

proposed collection of information; (c)

ways to enhance the quality, utility, and

clarity of the information to be

collected; and (d) ways to minimize the

burden of the collection of information