Frequently Asked Questions
A. In February 1994, the Careers Council of the Vail Agenda created the Resources Careers initiative with the given purpose to define and implement a human resources development program for resources management careers that will meet the stewardship needs of the National Park Service and strengthen the profession.
In 1995 and 1996, 46 fact-finding reviews were conducted by personnel management specialists and subject matter experts. The reviews encompassed 125 positions, in 19 different series, duty stationed in 14 parks and one center dispersed across all 7 regions. Those reviews examined the type of natural and cultural resources management work performed in NPS areas and the grade level of the work. Positions and parks were selected to get a broad representation of positions, park complexity, and regions. The results confirmed that professional resources management work exists in every park, whether or not it is recognized, and that the appropriate grade for most full performance positions is GS-11.
Managers will still have the discretion locally to use a non-Benchmark Position Description to establish professional positions that will not have promotion potential beyond the GS-9 level at that location.
Q. Why are we using the generic Benchmark PD approach to the classification of resources management positions?
A. There are a number of reasons for using the Benchmark PD approach in the classification of positions within a career field. Among them are (1) to establish a recognized career field and pattern of professional growth for employees who are charged with the protection and preservation of our cultural and natural resources for the education and enjoyment of this and future generations, (2) to ensure that similar jobs within the career field are similarly classified as to series and grade, and (3) to provide critical position management and classification services by the most effective and efficient means possible despite continuing reductions in staff available to perform such personnel services.
Q. Does the prohibition against adding "other duties" to a Benchmark PD that would affect the title, series, and/or grade of the position preclude assigning such "other duties" as would require the addition of a parenthetical title to a technician Benchmark PD?
A. The prohibition with respect to adding "other duties" that would affect the title, series, and/or grade to a Benchmark is primarily intended to avoid adding other duties that would so change the position as to make it no longer appropriately fit the designated series and grade. Adding "other duties" that would perhaps require the addition of a parenthetical title would not generally prohibit the use of the Benchmark PD. For example, "other duties" reflecting a concentration in a particular scientific field, such as wildlife biology, might appropriately be added to a biological science technician Benchmark PD that otherwise meets the 80% criterion in describing a technician's actual duties. If, as a result of adding this concentration in the "other duties" amendment, the Classifier found that a parenthetical title of Biological Science Technician (Wildlife) was warranted, it might be appropriate to use the Benchmark PD and simply add the parenthetical title. Servicing personnel office staff will make final classification determinations about the appropriate use of Benchmark PDs with the addition of a parenthetical title.
Q. I noticed that the technician Benchmark PDs are all written with full-performance levels of GS-5, GS-6 or GS-7. Will current GS-8 or higher technicians have to be downgraded and placed on one of these Benchmark PDs unless eligible for and promoted to a professional Benchmark position?
A. No! The technician Benchmark PDs at GS-5, GS-6, and GS-7 full-performance level were developed at those levels only because those were the most common grade levels for technician positions in most of the affected series. The lack of technician Benchmark PDs either below GS-5 or above GS-7 should in no way be construed to mean that all technician positions should have a full-performance level between GS-5 and GS-7. There are existing technician positions in the Service with legitimate full-performance levels as high as GS-11 in some series, and as low as GS-4 in others. If any of the technician Benchmark PDs meet the 80% criterion when compared to the actual work being performed by one or more of their employees, managers are encouraged to use the appropriate GS-5 or GS-6 or GS-7 level technician Benchmark PD. At other grade levels, the existing technician PD may very well be appropriate for continued use, or if it needs updating, a new PD will need to be developed locally and classified individually.
Q. How do employees in the "rare" professional positions that will not have promotion potential to the GS-11 level locally be considered for promotion to GS-11 positions elsewhere?
A. Such employees may apply in response to any individual vacancy announcement for a GS-11 position that may be issued through the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) vacancy announcement system, USAJOBS.
Q. What happens when a GS-9 employee in one of these "rare situations" applies for a GS-11 elsewhere but is not selected? Is there a guarantee that these employees will be selected when referred for higher graded positions?
A. There is no guarantee that an employee who is duty-stationed in a park that has established a non-Benchmark PD for a GS-9 professional resources management position will be selected when he or she applies for a GS-11 position elsewhere. Authority rests with the designated selecting official to determine whether an applicant best meets the particular staffing need.
Q. May the Benchmark PDs be used for positions in regional offices and other central offices as well as parks?
A. Yes. The Benchmark PDs have been developed primarily for parks but may be appropriate for other locations. FIREPRO positions, however, have their own Benchmark PDs that were developed through a separate initiative.
Q. We have been told that Resources Careers will not be implemented because we are a small park, and our Superintendent says we cannot afford any upgrades. Is there anything that can be done about that?
A. First and foremost, the implementation of the Resources Careers initiative is mandatory Servicewide for all professional positions at or below the GS-11 level in the covered series. The career ladder of GS-5/7/9/11 will now be the norm throughout the Service. Managers and supervisors will need to review the Benchmark PDs to determine which, if any, most closely match the actual work being performed or needing to be performed. In some cases, there may be no Benchmark PD which meets the 80% criterion for use. In that event, an existing local PD may be used or another locally-developed PD may be written. If the position is classified in a technician series, however, no Servicewide career ladder coverage will apply.
Any employee who feels that his or her position has been improperly classified (i.e., that the duties and responsibilities assigned are not classified in the appropriate series and/or grade) may appeal the classification of the position at any time. Questions about the classification appeal process may be directed to your servicing personnel office.
Q. Why can't developmental level professional Benchmark PDs be used for temporary appointments?
A. Both term and permanent employees can, under the conditions of their appointments, be promoted. Consequently, the developmental Benchmark PDs may appropriately be used when hiring term or permanent employees.
Temporary employees, however, generally cannot be promoted, thus making it impractical to use a developmental PD (whether a Benchmark or locally-developed PD) when hiring them. Any change in a temporary employee's grade can only be processed through the employee's being within reach for selection through "recompetition" for the position. This includes a requirement to announce the opportunity to, and consider, other external candidates who may have priority over the current temporary employee for such appointment. For instance, an application from a well-qualified displaced employee of another Federal agency in the local commuting area would block any consideration of a current temporary employee for the upgraded temporary position. If the temporary employee was a non-veteran, an application from a qualified veterans preference eligible could also block the employee's selection for an upgraded temporary position.
The inability to use developmental Benchmark PDs for temporary appointments should not, however, be construed as prohibiting in any way the hiring of temporary employees at full-performance grades below GS-11. Parks may certainly develop local, non-Benchmark professional PDs for temporary positions, including such positions with a GS-9 full-performance level. This is especially true and, in fact, represents sound position management when the park has a higher graded permanent or term professional employee on staff who can provide the necessary professional guidance and technical direction for such work.
Q. I'm confused! When does an employee have to compete for a promotion as a result of Resources Careers, and when is competition not required?
A. Often, when a position is upgraded, the incumbent can be non-competitively promoted. This is especially true when the upgrading is due to the correction of a classification error or when a new classification standard or guideline is issued. Sometimes, even when a position is upgraded as a result of the assignment of additional duties and responsibilities, an incumbent may be eligible for non-competitive promotion. The final determination as to whether competition must be applied depends upon a number of variables.
Regardless of the circumstances surrounding a position upgrade, to be promoted, an employee must fully meet the qualification requirements (including positive education requirements, if any) and time-in-grade requirements for the higher grade position. If the employee does not yet meet the time-in-grade or length of specialized experience requirements, promotion cannot occur until such qualifications and other requirements are met. In such cases, reassignment into a developmental-level PD may be appropriate, but a determination would still need to be made about whether competition is required.
The existing organizational structure is often a factor in determining whether competition is required. For instance, if there are a number of similarly graded positions in the immediate work unit, and higher graded duties and responsibilities are being added to some, but not all, such positions, then competition will likely be required to determine which employee(s) will be assigned to the higher graded position(s), and which employees will remain at their present grade. On the other hand, if all similarly situated positions in the immediate work unit (i.e., reporting to the same immediate supervisor) were being upgraded, competition would generally not be required in order to promote the incumbent or to reassign him or her in a developmental-level PD.
Requirements for merit promotion competition and exceptions to such requirements are spelled out in Governmentwide personnel regulations and the DOI Merit Promotion Plan. Servicing Personnel Office staff will assist in determining whether competition must be applied in a particular situation.
Q. When merit promotion procedures must be applied, can an incumbent's competitive promotion be blocked by a local displaced DOI employee eligible for special selection priority under the DOI Career Transition Assistance Plan?
A. Under changes to the DOI Career Transition Assistance Plan (CTAP) as revised on September 8, 1997, the receipt of an application from a well-qualified displaced NPS employee in the local commuting area with special selection priority (SSP) eligibility would block the incumbent's competitive promotion unless failing to promote the incumbent would cause an NPS employee to be separated by reduction in force. However, the receipt of an application from a well-qualified SSP eligible from another DOI bureau in the local commuting area would not block the incumbent's selection under competitive promotion procedures. For further information about the applicability of CTAP when filling competitive service vacancies, see Section A, Question 4, and Section C, Question 5, of the DOI CTAP dated September 8, 1997.