WILLIAM RANKIN, JR. - DETAIL TO SUPERGRADE POSITION

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP82-00357R000600130032-1
• Release Decision: RIFPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 4
• Document Creation Date: December 9, 2016
• Document Release Date: April 24, 2001
• Sequence Number: 32
• Publication Date: March 23, 1977
• Content Type: REPORT

?d For Rejease 2
DECISION
FILE: B-186064
P82-0086 1Q6Q01r,' 1BTN. NO. 300.40
THE COMPTROLLER GENERAL
O F THE UNITED STATES
W A S H I N G T O N . O. C. 2 0 5 4 8
GATE: March 23, 1977
MATTER OF: William Rankin, Jr. - Detail to Supergrade
Position
DIGEST: Employee at GS-15 level was detailed to
GS-17 position for more than 120 days
without agency request for Civil Service
Commission (CSC) approval as required
by regulations. Employee was subsequently
permanently promoted to the GS-1? position
with CSC approval. Employee is not en-
titled to retroactive temporary promotion
for period of detail since the law requires
CSC approval of appointee's qualifications
for promotion to GS-17, level. Subsequent
approval of employee's qualifications for
permanent position by CSC does not con-
stitute endorsement of his qualifications
for promotion during his detail. Moreover,
CSC regulations require prior approval be-
fore appointments may be made to supergrade
positions covered by 5 U. S. C. ? 3324(a).
This action concerns a request for an advance decision from
Mr. Billy J. Brown, Director, Personnel Division, Internal
Revenue Service (IRS), dated March 3, 1976, as to whether
Mr. William Rankin, Jr., an employee of the IRS, is entitled
to a retroactive temporary promotion incident to his detail to
the position of Acting Director, Internal Audit Division, for
approximately 11 months.
Mr. Brown states that on May 10, 1972, Mr. Rankin was
detailed from his permanent position as Chief, Data Processing
Activities Branch, a GS-15 position, to be the Acting Director,
Internal Audit Division, a GS-17 position in the Office of the -
Assistant Commissioner (Inspection). Mr. Rankin remained in
this detail (without prior approval from the Civil Service Com-
mission for the period beyond 120 days) until April 6, 1973, at
which time he was officially selected as permanent Director and
promoted to GS-17, with the approval of the Civil Service Com-
mission. The delay in promoting Mr. Rankin was due to the fact
that a great number of changes were occurring in the organization
and no permanent Assistant Commissioner was appointed until
December. 1972. As soon as the Assistant Commissioner was
appointed,. action was taken to fill the Director's position.
Approved For Release 2001/05/23: CIA-RDP82-00357R000600130032LJIFLISHED D,:CISIO
56 Cozip. Gen ........,
 Approved For Rele 01/05/23: CIA-RDP82-00357R00040WO032-1
' Attachment 2 to CSC BTN. NO. 300-40. (2)
In view of our decision in the Turner-Caldwell case,
B-183086, December 5, 1975, 55 Co men. 5323, Mr. Brown
asks whether Mr. Rankin is entitled to a retroactive temporary
promotion for having been detailed to a higher grade position for
more than 120 days. In that decision, we granted backpay to two
employees who had served extended details in higher grade positions.
Our decision was based on an interpretation by the Board of Appeals
and Review that, under the Commission's regulations, if an agency
detailed an employee to a higher grade position for more than 120
drays without seeking prior approval from the Commission, the em-
ployee would be entitled to a retroactive temporary promotion from
the 121st day of his detail until the detail terminated.
In the instant case, Mr. Rankin was detailed to a higher grade
position for approximately 11 months., and the IRS failed to apply
to the Commission for approval to extend the detail.
As Mr. Brown points out however, 55 Comp. Gen.- 539, supra,
did not address the situation in which the employee was detai en to
a supergrade (GS-16, GS-17, or GS-18) position. That decision
involved only the entitlement of employees to retroactive ternpo-
:rary promotions to positions not subject to the limitations found in
5 U. S. C. ?? 3324(a) and 5108(a) (1970.
Section 3324(a), supra, states in pertinent part:
"An appointment to a position in GS-16,
17, or 18 may be made only on approval of the
qualifications of the proposed appointee by the
Civil Service Commission. * T"
The relevant part of section 5108(a) is as follows:
"T T * A position may be placed in'GS-16,
17, or 18 only by action of, or after prior
approval by, a majority of the Civil Service
Commissioners.
Pursuant to the authority of 5 U. S. C. ? 3324(b) (1970), the
Commission has issued regulations concerning promotions to the
GS-16, GS-17, and GS-18 levels. Section 305. 505(b) of title 5, Co
of Federal Regulations, states:
Approved For Release 2001/05/23 : CIA-RDP82-00357R000600130032-1
- 2 -
 Approved For Release 2"5/23 : CIA-RDP82-00357R00060013Q -1
Attachment-2 to CSC BTN. NO. 300-40
B-186064
"Promotion. Subject to ? 305. 502
and to prior approval by the Commission of
the qualifications of the employee, an agency
may promote a career or career-conditional
employee to an initial career executive as-
signment, or from one career executive
assignment to another. "
Federal Personnel Manual, chapter 305, subchapter 3-3(f), states
the following with respect to such promotions to the GS-16, GS-1?,
or GS-18 levels:
"Qualifications approval. The appointing
officer reports T sscT tion to the Civil Service
Commission. However, as required by law, he
may not effect the assignment until the Commis-
sion specifically approves the qualifications of
the person selected. "
By decision of today, 13-183086, we have reaffirmed our
decision of December 5, 1975, in the Turner-Ca ldivell case,
55 Comp. Gen. 539. Hotivever, in today s'-decision we have
qualified Turner-Caldwell as follows:
" ~ It is necessary, however, that
the employee satisfy the requirements for a
retroactive temporary promotion. In this
connection, certain statutory and regulatory
.requirements could affect the entitlements of
an employee otherwise qualified for corrective
action as a result of an improper extended de-
tail. - For example, an employee improperly
detailed for an extended period, who fails to
meet the time in grade requirements of the
'Whitten Amendment, ' 5 U. S. C. ? 3101, note,
would not become entitled to a retroactive
temporary promotion until such time in grade
requirements were satisfied. See 55 Comp.
Gen. 539, 543. Similarly, an employee im-
properly detailed to a grade GS-16, 17 or 18
position for an extended period would not be
entitled to a retroactive temporary promotion
Approved For Release 2001/05/23 : CIA-RDP82-00357R000600130032-1
 Approved For Release 2001/05/23 : CIA-RDP82-00357R000600130032-1
htta'chme't 2 to CSC BTN.' No . 300-40 (4)
R-186064
unless the provisions of 5 U. S. C. ? 3324
governing appointments to such supergrade
positions had been complied with. "
We have been informally advised that there was no position
in the normal line of promotion in the grade immediately below.
that of the GS-17 position to which NIr. Rankin was detailed and
we understand he was in the GS-15 position for 1 year prior to
his detail. Thus, the prohibitions in the "Whitten Amendment"
do not appear to apply in this case. However, as to whether
Mr. Rankin may be entitled to a retroactive temporary promotion
to a supergrade position in light of 5 U. S. C. ? 3324(a.), we note
that Civil Service Commission approval of Nhr. Rankin's qualifi-
cations for a temporary promotion to the GS-17 level was neither
sought nor granted while he was on detail. The Commission did
eventually approve 1\1r. Rankin's qualifications for a permanent
' romotion to the GS-17 level. However, this Office cannot accept
the subsequent approval of Mr. Rankin's qualifications for a per-
manent GS-17 promotion as an endorsement of his qualifications
for a retroactive temporary promotion for the period of his detail.
It is solely within the purview of the Civil Service Commission
to approve qualifications of an appointee for a supergrade position
and we are without authority to make judgments, of this kind.
Moreover, the above-cited regulations are quite clear that
Commission approval.of the appointee's qualifications must be
granted prior to promoting the appoiritee to a supergrade position.
An agency cannot unilaterally place an employee in a supergrade
position and at some later date request Commission approval of
his qualifications for the purpose of granting him a retroactive
appointment.
Accordingly, Mr. Rankin may not receive a retroactive
temporary promotion with backpay for his services as Acting
Director in a grade GS-1? position. A
iY 6rYs~:s~
Comptroller General
of the United States
Approved For Release 2001/05/23 : CIA-RDP82-00357R000600130032-1