The selecting official has the right to select or not select from among a group of appropriately certified candidates. Management also has the right to select from other appropriate sources (i.e. reinstatement, transfer, veterans' appointment, those within reach on an appropriate external certificate, etc.) or concurrent selection from several appropriate sources.

The selecting official may select any candidate referred as BQ as well as those referred as non-competitive candidates (i.e. reinstatements, transfer, reassignment, etc.). Additional guidance on selecting a candidate being considered for a lateral reassignment is contained in the section below, Lateral Reassignment (see 6.335.1.12.15).

If a BQ candidate is selected and does not accept the position, the declination must be documented in the promotion file. The selecting official then has several options:

Additional positions of the same kind (i.e. the vacancy announcement information would be the same) may be filled within 60 calendar days of the initial selection.

Promotion files will be documented if actions occur within the life of the promotion action that may lead employees to believe that pre-selection, favoritism or other merit violations are affecting competitive selections (i.e. last-minute additions to the selection referral, reappraisals of candidates, long delays in making selections, etc.).

Generally, the application and consideration procedures in the promotion system will be allowed to function as freely as possible. Employees may continue to file voluntary applications for positions of their choice. Unless the area of consideration was restricted in the vacancy announcement, employees will continue to receive full consideration for lateral reassignments by the selecting office.

However, to promote fairness for all concerned parties, an action involving an employee selected for a lateral reassignment will be effected only if the employee is considered to be the best person for the position and after the impact on the losing office has been determined, or in cases of real hardship.

The determination as to whether or not an employee is the best person for the position does not necessarily have to result from a structured competitive process; however, non-competitive actions must be based on a review of the employee’s abilities and the management needs involved. Lateral reassignments will not be effected to avoid recruiting or training local people, just because the employee involved wants to move there, or for other reasons that are not either cost effective or directly mission related.

In terms of deciding the best person for the job, selecting officials will be encouraged to give preference to their local candidates, particularly when filling positions at and below the full working level. Selecting officials are strongly encouraged to exhaust the supply of local, well-qualified employees eligible for promotion before making lateral reassignments.

After the "best person" test has been met, appropriate officials must also look at the impact of the selection on the losing BOD, and reach an agreement as to where the greater need exists. After the selecting office has determined that an employee is the best person for the position, that BOD will contact the losing BOD to discuss the situation, and reach an agreement based on a mutual consideration of each other’s needs.

No BOD may have a policy prohibiting the release of employees for lateral reassignment. All lateral reassignments will be in compliance with existing regulations and the release of employees for lateral reassignment will be made within a reasonable timeframe as well as mutually agreeable to both the gaining and losing office.

In the case of competitive reassignments, an employee determined to be among the BQ through the competitive process meets the " best person" test. Competitive reassignments between two BODs (or equivalent) will be granted unless there are extenuating circumstances that would negatively impact the overall operation of the organization and that cannot be relieved by an extended reporting date. Competitive reassignments within a BOD can be denied with the concurrence of the lowest supervisory level in the BOD with supervisory responsibility over both the gaining and losing organizations.

Release disputes between BODs will be raised for resolution to the Division Commissioners (or equivalent). If the Division Commissioners (or equivalent) cannot agree, then the Deputy Commissioner will have final authority.

No lateral reassignment may be finalized until the above process is completed, and the losing office has agreed to the release. An employee should not be notified of his/her selection until all required coordination has taken place. The release date should be coordinated between the two BODs.

However, there are two situations when the losing office should not object to an employee’s release. These are:

The appropriate management officials will determine whether or not moving expenses will be paid. However, moving expenses will not be paid when the lateral reassignment is effected at the employee’s request based on hardship circumstances, except in very unusual situations personally approved by the Division Commissioner (or equivalent). Division Commissioner (or equivalent) should establish appropriate controls to comply with these instructions.. (Information pertaining to moving expenses will be contained in the Travel Handbook which can be accessed from the AWSS home page at: http://awss.web.irs.gov/ess/TRAVEL/news/traveltimes/tt_121506.htm#New

Release of an employee for promotion, reassignment or change to lower grade will normally not be delayed beyond the end of the first full pay period after selection, or after the position is vacant if selection is made in advance.

Exceptions to this provision may be made in circumstances when an employee’s release date within the prescribed time limits would unduly hamper operations, or greatly inconvenience the employee involved. Such exceptions can be made only by mutual concurrence of the gaining and losing BODs.

An employee’s promotion will under no circumstances be delayed beyond two full pay periods after selection unless the employee agrees to the delay or the promotion is contingent upon an established training date. It is not required that the promotion effective date and the reporting date be the same. If they are not the same, applicable detail requirements apply.

Documentation of a promotion action must be sufficient for a reviewer to reconstruct the action in its entirety, including reasons for determining qualified, HQ, and BQ. Complete promotion files must be maintained for two years from the date final selection is made and the selecting official signs the appropriate selection form. There is no need to duplicate information available in the Plan, the negotiated agreement or in other Personnel records; however, it must be annotated in the file where this information can be located.

The promotion folder (electronic or manual) must contain, at a minimum, the following information:

The personnel action of the selected candidate must indicate whether the promotion was made under competitive procedures, as a career promotion or as an exception to competitive promotion procedures and that, at the time of promotion, the employee met all qualification requirements and other legal and regulatory requirements.

Promotion records may be used for the following purposes:

This Plan should be reviewed annually by servicing EOs to ensure that:

In reviewing the Plan, employees, management and the union should be given an opportunity to present their views in order to ensure a thorough evaluation of the Program.

Upon receipt of a request to release a crediting plan, the servicing HCO, ETS, EO will:

If the efforts described in paragraph (1) do not resolve the request, the servicing HCO, ETS, EO will prepare a written request with all appropriate information. As a minimum, the request must include:

The HCO, ETS, Policy and Programs Office must review and approve all requests for the release of crediting plans from the servicing EOs. No action should be taken to release a crediting plan or the material it contains unless and until written approval is received from the HCO, ETS, Policy and Programs Office. In the very rare event such a release is determined to be necessary, prior written approval will be provided. In the event that such approval is requested, the servicing HCO, ETS, EO should obtain a copy of the grievance, if applicable, and prepare a transmittal for the HCO, ETS, Policy and Programs Office explaining the following:

Crediting plans will not be duplicated and used to record ranking scores or narrative. If that process was utilized, then the release of ranking results would compromise the crediting plan.

Interview questions that are used as part of the assessment process are part of the crediting plan.

Procedural - A procedural violation occurs when an internal competitive action does not conform to the requirements of this Plan. It may include:

Regulatory - A regulatory violation occurs when the selected employee did not meet legal requirements or regulatory requirements at the time of promotion. It may include:

Program - A program violation occurs when agency promotion guidelines do not conform to regulatory requirements or to other high level guidelines. It may include:

The general rule is that an erroneously promoted employee may be retained in the position only if the promotion action can be corrected to conform essentially to all OPM and agency requirements as of the date the action was taken. However, corrective action decisions must be tempered by all the facts surrounding the violation. Under some conditions, it may be permissible to retain the employee in the position even when the general rule does not apply. These conditions include:

Corrective Action - If an employee is not retained in the position, he/she must be returned to his/her former position or placed in another position for which he/she is qualified. If the latter position is in a higher grade or level than the position he/she held prior to the erroneously promotion, the position change is made under competitive promotion procedures as though the employee was still serving at the grade or level from which erroneously promoted.

Retention of Erroneously Selected Employee - A determination for retaining an employee in his/her position will be dependent on the nature, extent, and seriousness of the violations involved in the particular situation. It will take into account factors such as:

If the corrective action was to require that the position be vacated, an employee, who was not promoted or given proper consideration because of the violation, will be considered for promotion to the vacated position before candidates under a new promotion or other placement action are considered.

If the corrective action did not include vacating the position, an employee who was not promoted or given proper consideration because of the violation is to be given PC for the next appropriate vacancy before candidates under a new competitive or other placement action are considered. An employee may be selected on the basis of this consideration as an exception to the competitive promotion procedures of this Plan.

Violations of the Plan can have a serious impact on personnel management that goes beyond the particular cases involved. Proper competitive actions are essential to ensure that the best people are being selected for Service positions and employees are receiving fair consideration. An official who permits a violation to occur shall be informed of the violation and told what will be done to avoid repetition. Whether and what type of action should be taken against the official will depend on such factors as the severity of the violation, the motivation for the violation and whether the violation was repetitive. Action may include withdrawal of authority to make selections or promotions and/or disciplinary action up to and including separation from the Service. At a minimum, repetitive violations will be considered when completing the official’s performance appraisal

Other corrective actions, including retroactive promotion, are appropriate when an employee has been found to have undergone an unjustified or unwarranted personnel action as defined in 5 CFR Part 550 and Comptroller General decisions. Additional information pertaining to corrective actions and retroactive promotions can be found in IRM 6.550.1, Pay Administration.

MSP requires evaluation of each candidate against the leadership and technical competencies for the position being filled.

Behavioral indicators are determined from job analysis. These behavioral indicators serve as the crediting plan to evaluate candidate potential in the ranking process and are unique to each position within each Division or function. The job analysis must be conducted prior to the issuance of the managerial vacancy announcement.

The selecting official must specify the weight given in the ranking process for leadership and technical competencies, as well as the assigned weight for each technical competency prior to announcing a managerial position under MSP.

In addition to the vacancy announcement requirements outlined in IRM 6.335.1.12.4, all managerial announcements must identify the technical competencies for the position to be filled or clearly identify where candidates can locate the specific technical competencies

Under the MSP, the Evaluation of Managerial Potential (EMP) is completed at the end of each appraisal period to identify leadership competencies for development and to determine potential in the competitive process. Recently many managers completed the four stages of the Leadership Succession Review (LSR) assessment which also identifies leadership competencies for development. Until further notice, managers who have completed all four stages of the LSR will not be required to complete the EMP annually as part of the appraisal process. Managers who have not completed all four stages of the LSR assessment will continue to complete the EMP as part of the annual appraisal process.

The EMP form is used in the competitive process for management positions.