[Congressional Record Volume 142, Number 135 (Thursday, September 26, 1996)]
[House]
[Pages H11340-H11352]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                OMNIBUS CIVIL SERVICE REFORM ACT OF 1996

  Mr. MICA. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill 
(H.R. 3841) to amend the civil service laws of the United States, and 
for other purposes, as amended.
  The Clerk read as follows:

                               H.R. 3841

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; TABLE OF CONTENTS.

       (a) Short Title.--This Act may be cited as the ``Omnibus 
     Civil Service Reform Act of 1996''.
       (b) Table of Contents.--The table of contents for this Act 
     is as follows:

Sec. 1. Short title; table of contents.

                    TITLE I--DEMONSTRATION PROJECTS

Sec. 101. Demonstration projects.

              TITLE II--PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT ENHANCEMENT

Sec. 201. Increased weight given to performance for order-of-retention 
              purposes in a reduction in force.
Sec. 202. No appeal of denial of periodic step-increases.
Sec. 203. Performance appraisals.
Sec. 204. Amendments to incentive awards authority.
Sec. 205. Due process rights of managers under negotiated grievance 
              procedures.
Sec. 206. Collection and reporting of training information.

    TITLE III--ENHANCEMENT OF THRIFT SAVINGS PLAN AND CERTAIN OTHER 
                                BENEFITS

Sec. 301. Loans under the Thrift Savings Plan for furloughed employees.
Sec. 302. Domestic relations orders.
Sec. 303. Unreduced additional optional life insurance.

                  TITLE IV--REORGANIZATION FLEXIBILITY

Sec. 401. Voluntary reductions in force.
Sec. 402. Nonreimbursable details to Federal agencies before a 
              reduction in force.

                    TITLE V--SOFT-LANDING PROVISIONS

Sec. 501. Temporary continuation of Federal employees' life insurance.
Sec. 502. Continued eligibility for health insurance.
Sec. 503. Job placement and counseling services.
Sec. 504. Education and retraining incentives.

                        TITLE VI--MISCELLANEOUS

Sec. 601. Reimbursements relating to professional liability insurance.
Sec. 602. Employment rights following conversion to contract.
Sec. 603. Debarment of health care providers found to have engaged in 
              fraudulent practices.
Sec. 604. Consistent coverage for individuals enrolled in a health plan 
              administered by the Federal banking agencies.
Sec. 605. Amendment to Public Law 104-134.
Sec. 606. Miscellaneous amendments relating to the health benefits 
              program for Federal employees.
Sec. 607. Pay for certain positions formerly classified at GS-18.
Sec. 608. Repeal of section 1307 of title 5 of the United States Code.
Sec. 609. Extension of certain procedural and appeal rights to certain 
              personnel of the Federal Bureau of Investigation.
                    TITLE I--DEMONSTRATION PROJECTS

     SEC. 101. DEMONSTRATION PROJECTS.

       (a) Definitions.--Paragraph (1) of section 4701(a) of title 
     5, United States Code, is amended by striking subparagraph 
     (A) and by redesignating subparagraphs (B) and (C) as 
     subparagraphs (A) and (B), respectively.
       (b) Pre-Implementation Procedures.--Subsection (b) of 
     section 4703 of title 5, United States Code, is amended to 
     read as follows:
       ``(b) Before an agency or the Office may conduct or enter 
     into any agreement or contract to conduct a demonstration 
     project, the Office--
       ``(1) shall develop or approve a plan for such project 
     which identifies--
       ``(A) the purposes of the project;
       ``(B) the methodology;
       ``(C) the duration; and
       ``(D) the methodology and criteria for evaluation;
       ``(2) shall publish the plan in the Federal Register;
       ``(3) may solicit comments from the public and interested 
     parties in such manner as the Office considers appropriate;
       ``(4) shall obtain approval from each agency involved of 
     the final version of the plan; and
       ``(5) shall provide notification of the proposed project, 
     at least 30 days in advance of the date any project proposed 
     under this section is to take effect--
       ``(A) to employees who are likely to be affected by the 
     project; and
       ``(B) to each House of the Congress.''.
       (c) Nonwaivable Provisions.--Section 4703(c) of title 5, 
     United States Code, is amended--
       (1) by striking paragraph (1) and inserting the following:
       ``(1) any provision of subchapter V of chapter 63 or 
     subpart G of part III of this title;''; and
       (2) by striking paragraph (3) and inserting the following:
       ``(3) any provision of chapter 15 or subchapter II or III 
     of chapter 73 of this title;''.
       (d) Limitations.--Subsection (d) of section 4703 of title 
     5, United States Code, is amended to read as follows:
       ``(d)(1) Each demonstration project shall terminate before 
     the end of the 5-year period beginning on the date on which 
     the project takes effect, except that the project may 
     continue for a maximum of 2 years beyond the date to the 
     extent necessary to validate the results of the project.
       ``(2)(A) Not more than 15 active demonstration projects may 
     be in effect at any time, and of the projects in effect at 
     any time, not more than 5 may involve 5,000 or more 
     individuals each.
       ``(B) Individuals in a control group necessary to validate 
     the results of a project shall not, for purposes of any 
     determination under subparagraph (A), be considered to be 
     involved in such project.''.
       (e) Evaluations.--Subsection (h) of section 4703 of title 
     5, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the 
     following: ``The Office may, with respect to a demonstration 
     project conducted by another agency, require that the 
     preceding sentence be carried out by such other agency.''.
       (f) Provisions for Termination of Project or Making It 
     Permanent.--Section 4703 of title 5, United States Code, is 
     amended--
       (1) in subsection (i) by inserting ``by the Office'' after 
     ``undertaken''; and
       (2) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(j)(1) If the Office determines that termination of a 
     demonstration project (whether under subsection (e) or 
     otherwise) would result in the inequitable treatment of 
     employees who participated in the project, the Office shall 
     take such corrective action as is within its authority. If 
     the Office determines that legislation is necessary to 
     correct an inequity, it shall submit an appropriate 
     legislative proposal to both Houses of Congress.

[[Page H11341]]

       ``(2) If the Office determines that a demonstration project 
     should be made permanent, it shall submit an appropriate 
     legislative proposal to both Houses of Congress.''.
              TITLE II--PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT ENHANCEMENT

     SEC. 201. INCREASED WEIGHT GIVEN TO PERFORMANCE FOR ORDER-OF-
                   RETENTION PURPOSES IN A REDUCTION IN FORCE.

       (a) In General.--Section 3502 of title 5, United States 
     Code, is amended--
       (1) in subsection (a)(4) by striking ``ratings.'' and 
     inserting ``ratings, in conformance with the requirements of 
     subsection (g).''; and
       (2) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(g)(1) The regulations prescribed to carry out subsection 
     (a)(4) shall be the regulations in effect, as of January 1, 
     1996, under section 351.504 of title 5 of the Code of Federal 
     Regulations, except as otherwise provided in this subsection.
       ``(2) For purposes of this subsection--
       ``(A) subsections (b)(4) and (e) of such section 351.504 
     shall be disregarded;
       ``(B) subsection (d) of such section 351.504 shall be 
     considered to read as follows:
       `` `(d)(1) The additional service credit an employee 
     receives for performance under this subpart shall be 
     expressed in additional years of service and shall consist of 
     the sum of the employee's 3 most recent (actual and/or 
     assumed) annual performance ratings received during the 4-
     year period prior to the date of issuance of reduction-in-
     force notices or the 4-year period prior to the agency-
     established cutoff date (as appropriate), computed in 
     accordance with paragraph (2) or (3) (as appropriate).
       `` `(2) Except as provided in paragraph (3), an employee 
     shall receive--
       `` `(A) 5 additional years of service for each performance 
     rating of fully successful (Level 3) or equivalent;
       `` `(B) 7 additional years of service for each performance 
     rating of exceeds fully successful (Level 4) or equivalent; 
     and
       `` `(C) 10 additional years of service for each performance 
     rating of outstanding (Level 5) or equivalent.
       `` `(3)(A) If the employing agency uses a rating system 
     having only 1 rating to denote performance which is fully 
     successful or better, then an employee under such system 
     shall receive 5 additional years of service for each such 
     rating.
       `` `(B) If the employing agency uses a rating system having 
     only 2 ratings to denote performance which is fully 
     successful or better, then an employee under such system 
     shall receive--
       `` `(i) 5 additional years of service for each performance 
     rating at the lower of those 2 ratings; and
       `` `(ii) 7 additional years of service for each performance 
     rating at the higher of those 2 ratings.
       `` `(C) If the employing agency uses a rating system having 
     more than 3 ratings to denote performance which is fully 
     successful or better, then an employee under such system 
     shall receive--
       `` `(i) 5 additional years of service for each performance 
     rating at the lowest of those ratings;
       `` `(ii) 7 additional years of service for each performance 
     rating at the next rating above the rating referred to in 
     clause (i); and
       `` `(iii) 10 additional years of service for each 
     performance rating above the rating referred to in clause 
     (ii).
       `` `(D) For purposes of this paragraph, a rating shall not 
     be considered to denote performance which is fully successful 
     or better unless, in order to receive such rating, such 
     performance must satisfy all requirements for a fully 
     successful rating (Level 3) or equivalent, as established 
     under part 430 of this chapter (as in effect as of January 1, 
     1996).'; and
       ``(C) subsection (c) of such section shall be considered to 
     read as follows:
       `` `(c)(1) Service credit for employees who do not have 3 
     actual annual performance ratings of record received during 
     the 4-year period prior to the date of issuance of reduction-
     in-force notices, or the 4-year period prior to the agency-
     established cutoff date for ratings permitted in subsection 
     (b)(2) of this section, shall be determined in accordance 
     with paragraph (2).
       `` `(2) An employee who has not received 1 or more of the 3 
     annual performance ratings of record required under this 
     section shall--
       `` `(A) receive credit for performance on the basis of the 
     rating or ratings actually received (if any); and
       `` `(B) for each performance rating not actually received, 
     be given credit for 5 additional years of service.'.''.
       (b)(1) Under regulations which shall be prescribed by the 
     Office of Personnel Management, for purposes of determining 
     the order of retention of employees in a reduction in force, 
     if an agency has more than 1 performance evaluation system--
       (A) employees of such agency who are covered by different 
     evaluation systems shall be placed in separate competitive 
     areas; and
       (B) such agency shall establish more than 1 competitive 
     level for such employees if--
       (i) employees in a competitive area have received ratings 
     under 1 or more evaluation systems different from a 
     significant number of other competing employees within the 
     same competitive area during any part of the applicable 4-
     year period described in the provisions of section 
     351.504(d)(1) of title 5 of the Code of Federal Regulations 
     (as deemed to be amended by section 3502(g)(2)(B) of title 5, 
     United States Code, as amended by this section); and
       (ii) the employees referred to in clause (i) would 
     otherwise be placed in the same competitive level.
       (2) The regulations shall require agencies to establish the 
     competitive levels under paragraph (1)(B) in accordance with 
     the following criteria:
       (A) To the extent feasible, the agency shall avoid the use 
     of single-position competitive levels.
       (B) All employees who have received ratings of record under 
     the same performance evaluation system for at least 3 of the 
     4 years described in the provisions referred to in paragraph 
     (1)(B)(i) shall be placed in the same competitive level.
       (C) Separate competitive levels shall be established for 
     those employees who--
       (i) have received ratings of record under the same 
     performance evaluation system for 2 of the 4 years described 
     in the provisions referred to in paragraph (1)(B)(i); or
       (ii) have received ratings of record under the same 
     performance evaluation system for 1 of the 4 years described 
     in the provisions referred to in paragraph (1)(B)(i).
       (3) No employee shall be placed or continued under a 
     performance evaluation system having only 1 rating to denote 
     performance which is fully successful (Level 3) or better 
     without such employee's written consent.
       (c) Report.--Not later than 270 days after the date of the 
     enactment of this Act, the General Accounting Office shall 
     submit to the Committee on Government Reform and Oversight of 
     the House of Representatives and the Committee on 
     Governmental Affairs of the Senate a report analyzing and 
     assessing the following:
       (1) Based on performance-ratings statistics in the 
     executive branch of the Government over the past 15 years, 
     the correlation (if any) between employees' ratings of record 
     and the following:
       (A) Promotions.
       (B) Awards.
       (C) Bonuses.
       (D) Quit rates.
       (E) Removals.
       (F) Disciplinary actions (other than removals).
       (G) The filing of grievances, complaints, and charges of 
     unfair labor practices.
       (H) Appeals of adverse actions.
       (2) The impact of performance ratings on retention during 
     reductions in force over the past 5 years.
       (3) Whether ``pass/fail'' performance systems are 
     compatible with the statutory requirement that efficiency or 
     performance ratings be given due effect during reductions in 
     force.
       (4) The respective numbers of Federal agencies, 
     organizational units, and Federal employees that are covered 
     by the different performance evaluation systems.
       (5) The potential impact of this section on employees in 
     different performance evaluation systems.
       (6) Whether there are significant differences in the 
     distribution of ratings among or within agencies and, if so, 
     the reasons therefor.

     Based on the findings of the General Accounting Office, the 
     report shall include recommendations to improve the 
     effectiveness of Federal performance evaluation systems.
       (d) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall apply with respect to reductions in force taking effect 
     on or after October 1, 1999.

     SEC. 202. NO APPEAL OF DENIAL OF PERIODIC STEP-INCREASES.

       (a) In General.--Section 5335(c) of title 5, United States 
     Code, is amended--
       (1) by striking the second sentence;
       (2) in the third sentence by striking ``or appeal''; and
       (3) in the last sentence by striking ``and the entitlement 
     of the employee to appeal to the Board do not apply'' and 
     inserting ``does not apply''.
       (b) Performance Ratings.--Section 5335 of title 5, United 
     States Code, as amended by subsection (a), is further 
     amended--
       (1) in subsection (a)(B) by striking ``work of the employee 
     is of an acceptable level of competence'' and inserting 
     ``performance of the employee is at least fully successful'';
       (2) in subsection (c)--
       (A) in the first sentence by striking ``work of an employee 
     is not of an acceptable level of competence,'' and inserting 
     ``performance of an employee is not at least fully 
     successful,''; and
       (B) in the last sentence by striking ``acceptable level of 
     competence'' and inserting ``fully successful work 
     performance''; and
       (3) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(g) For purposes of this section, the term `fully 
     successful' denotes work performance that satisfies the 
     requirements of section 351.504(d)(3)(D) of title 5 of the 
     Code of Federal Regulations (as deemed to be amended by 
     section 3502(g)(2)(B)).''.

     SEC. 203. PERFORMANCE APPRAISALS.

       (a) In General.--Section 4302 of title 5, United States 
     Code, is amended--
       (1) in subsection (b) by striking paragraphs (5) and (6) 
     and inserting the following:
       ``(5) assisting employees in improving unacceptable 
     performance, except in circumstances described in subsection 
     (c); and
       ``(6) reassigning, reducing in grade, removing, or taking 
     other appropriate action against employees whose performance 
     is unacceptable.''; and
       (2) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(c) Upon notification of unacceptable performance, an 
     employee shall be afforded an

[[Page H11342]]

     opportunity to demonstrate acceptable performance before a 
     reduction in grade or removal may be proposed under section 
     4303 based on such performance, except that an employee so 
     afforded such an opportunity shall not be afforded any 
     further opportunity to demonstrate acceptable performance if 
     the employee's performance again is determined to be at an 
     unacceptable level.''.
       (b) Effective Date.--
       (1) In general.--Subject to paragraph (2), this section and 
     the amendments made by this section shall take effect 180 
     days after the date of the enactment of this Act.
       (2) Exception.--The amendments made by this section shall 
     not apply in the case of any proposed action as to which the 
     employee receives advance written notice, in accordance with 
     section 4303(b)(1)(A) of title 5, United States Code, before 
     the effective date of this section.

     SEC. 204. AMENDMENTS TO INCENTIVE AWARDS AUTHORITY.

       Chapter 45 of title 5, United States Code, is amended--
       (1) by amending section 4501 to read as follows:

     ``Sec. 4501. Definitions

       ``For the purpose of this subchapter--
       ``(1) the term `agency' means--
       ``(A) an Executive agency;
       ``(B) the Library of Congress;
       ``(C) the Office of the Architect of the Capitol;
       ``(D) the Botanic Garden;
       ``(E) the Government Printing Office; and
       ``(F) the United States Sentencing Commission;

     but does not include--
       ``(i) the Tennessee Valley Authority; or
       ``(ii) the Central Bank for Cooperatives;
       ``(2) the term `employee' means an employee as defined by 
     section 2105; and
       ``(3) the term `Government' means the Government of the 
     United States.'';
       (2) by amending section 4503 to read as follows:

     ``Sec. 4503. Agency awards

       ``(a) The head of an agency may pay a cash award to, and 
     incur necessary expense for the honorary recognition of, an 
     employee who--
       ``(1) by his suggestion, invention, superior 
     accomplishment, or other personal effort, contributes to the 
     efficiency, economy, or other improvement of Government 
     operations or achieves a significant reduction in paperwork; 
     or
       ``(2) performs a special act or service in the public 
     interest in connection with or related to his official 
     employment.
       ``(b)(1) If the criteria under paragraph (1) or (2) of 
     subsection (a) are met on the basis of the suggestion, 
     invention, superior accomplishment, act, service, or other 
     meritorious effort of a group of employees collectively, and 
     if the circumstances so warrant (such as by reason of the 
     infeasibility of determining the relative role or 
     contribution assignable to each employee separately), 
     authority under subsection (a) may be exercised--
       ``(A) based on the collective efforts of the group; and
       ``(B) with respect to each member of such group.
       ``(2) The amount awarded to each member of a group under 
     this subsection--
       ``(A) shall be the same for all members of such group, 
     except that such amount may be prorated to reflect 
     differences in the period of time during which an individual 
     was a member of the group; and
       ``(B) may not exceed the maximum cash award allowable under 
     subsection (a) or (b) of section 4502, as applicable.''; and
       (3) in subsection (a)(1) of section 4505a by striking ``at 
     the fully successful level or higher'' and inserting ``higher 
     than the fully successful level''.

     SEC. 205. DUE PROCESS RIGHTS OF MANAGERS UNDER NEGOTIATED 
                   GRIEVANCE PROCEDURES.

       (a) In General.--Paragraph (2) of section 7121(b) of title 
     5, United States Code, is amended to read as follows:
       ``(2) The provisions of a negotiated grievance procedure 
     providing for binding arbitration in accordance with 
     paragraph (1)(C)(iii) shall, if or to the extent that an 
     alleged prohibited personnel practice is involved, allow the 
     arbitrator to order a stay of any personnel action in a 
     manner similar to the manner described in section 1221(c) 
     with respect to the Merit Systems Protection Board.''.
       (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a)--
       (1) shall take effect on the date of the enactment of this 
     Act; and
       (2) shall apply with respect to orders issued on or after 
     the date of the enactment of this Act, notwithstanding the 
     provisions of any collective bargaining agreement.

     SEC. 206. COLLECTION AND REPORTING OF TRAINING INFORMATION.

       (a) Training Within Government.--The Office of Personnel 
     Management shall collect information concerning training 
     programs, plans, and methods utilized by agencies of the 
     Government and submit a report to the Congress on this 
     activity on an annual basis.
       (b) Training Outside of Government.--The Office of 
     Personnel Management, to the extent it considers appropriate 
     in the public interest, may collect information concerning 
     training programs, plans, and methods utilized outside the 
     Government. The Office, on request, may make such information 
     available to an agency and to Congress.
    TITLE III--ENHANCEMENT OF THRIFT SAVINGS PLAN AND CERTAIN OTHER 
                                BENEFITS

     SEC. 301. LOANS UNDER THE THRIFT SAVINGS PLAN FOR FURLOUGHED 
                   EMPLOYEES.

       Section 8433(g) of title 5, United States Code, is amended 
     by adding at the end the following:
       ``(6) An employee who has been furloughed due to a lapse in 
     appropriations may not be denied a loan under this subsection 
     solely because such employee is not in a pay status.''.

     SEC. 302. DOMESTIC RELATIONS ORDERS.

       (a) In General.--Section 8705 of title 5, United States 
     Code, is amended--
       (1) in subsection (a) by striking ``(a) The'' and inserting 
     ``(a) Except as provided in subsection (e), the''; and
       (2) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(e)(1) Any amount which would otherwise be paid to a 
     person determined under the order of precedence named by 
     subsection (a) shall be paid (in whole or in part) by the 
     Office to another person if and to the extent expressly 
     provided for in the terms of any court decree of divorce, 
     annulment, or legal separation, or the terms of any court 
     order or court-approved property settlement agreement 
     incident to any court decree of divorce, annulment, or legal 
     separation.
       ``(2) For purposes of this subsection, a decree, order, or 
     agreement referred to in paragraph (1) shall not be effective 
     unless it is received, before the date of the covered 
     employee's death, by the employing agency or, if the employee 
     has separated from service, by the Office.
       ``(3) A designation under this subsection with respect to 
     any person may not be changed except--
       ``(A) with the written consent of such person, if received 
     as described in paragraph (2); or
       ``(B) by modification of the decree, order, or agreement, 
     as the case may be, if received as described in paragraph 
     (2).
       ``(4) The Office shall prescribe any regulations necessary 
     to carry out this subsection, including regulations for the 
     application of this subsection in the event that 2 or more 
     decrees, orders, or agreements, are received with respect to 
     the same amount.''.
       (b) Directed Assignment.--Section 8706(e) of title 5, 
     United States Code, is amended--
       (1) by striking ``(e)'' and inserting ``(e)(1)''; and
       (2) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(2) A court decree of divorce, annulment, or legal 
     separation, or the terms of a court-approved property 
     settlement agreement incidental to any court decree of 
     divorce, annulment, or legal separation, may direct that an 
     insured employee or former employee make an irrevocable 
     assignment of the employee's or former employee's incidents 
     of ownership in insurance under this chapter (if there is no 
     previous assignment) to the person specified in the court 
     order or court-approved property settlement agreement.''.

     SEC. 303. UNREDUCED ADDITIONAL OPTIONAL LIFE INSURANCE.

       (a) In General.--Section 8714b of title 5, United States 
     Code, is amended--
       (1) in subsection (c)--
       (A) by striking the last 2 sentences of paragraph (2); and
       (B) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(3) The amount of additional optional insurance continued 
     under paragraph (2) shall be continued, with or without 
     reduction, in accordance with the employee's written election 
     at the time eligibility to continue insurance during 
     retirement or receipt of compensation arises, as follows:
       ``(A) The employee may elect to have withholdings cease in 
     accordance with subsection (d), in which case--
       ``(i) the amount of additional optional insurance continued 
     under paragraph (2) shall be reduced each month by 2 percent 
     effective at the beginning of the second calendar month after 
     the date the employee becomes 65 years of age and is retired 
     or is in receipt of compensation; and
       ``(ii) the reduction under clause (i) shall continue for 50 
     months at which time the insurance shall stop.
       ``(B) The employee may, instead of the option under 
     subparagraph (A), elect to have the full cost of additional 
     optional insurance continue to be withheld from such 
     employee's annuity or compensation on and after the date such 
     withholdings would otherwise cease pursuant to an election 
     under subparagraph (A), in which case the amount of 
     additional optional insurance continued under paragraph (2) 
     shall not be reduced, subject to paragraph (4).
       ``(C) An employee who does not make any election under the 
     preceding provisions of this paragraph shall be treated as if 
     such employee had made an election under subparagraph (A).
       ``(4) If an employee makes an election under paragraph 
     (3)(B), that individual may subsequently cancel such 
     election, in which case additional optional insurance shall 
     be determined as if the individual had originally made an 
     election under paragraph (3)(A).''; and
       (2) in the second sentence of subsection (d)(1) by 
     inserting ``if insurance is continued as provided in 
     subparagraph (A) of paragraph (3),'' after ``except that,''.
       (b) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall take effect on the 120th day after the date of the 
     enactment of this Act and shall apply to employees who become 
     eligible, on or after such 120th day, to continue additional 
     optional insurance during retirement or receipt of 
     compensation.

[[Page H11343]]

                  TITLE IV--REORGANIZATION FLEXIBILITY

     SEC. 401. VOLUNTARY REDUCTIONS IN FORCE.

       Section 3502(f) of title 5, United States Code, is amended 
     to read as follows:
       ``(f)(1) The head of an Executive agency or military 
     department may, in accordance with regulations prescribed by 
     the Office of Personnel Management--
       ``(A) separate from service any employee who volunteers to 
     be separated under this subparagraph even though the employee 
     is not otherwise subject to separation due to a reduction in 
     force; and
       ``(B) for each employee voluntarily separated under 
     subparagraph (A), retain an employee in a similar position 
     who would otherwise be separated due to a reduction in force.
       ``(2) The separation of an employee under paragraph (1)(A) 
     shall be treated as an involuntary separation due to a 
     reduction in force, except for purposes of priority placement 
     programs and advance notice.
       ``(3) An employee with critical knowledge and skills (as 
     defined by the head of the Executive agency or military 
     department concerned) may not participate in a voluntary 
     separation under paragraph (1)(A) if the agency or department 
     head concerned determines that such participation would 
     impair the performance of the mission of the agency or 
     department (as applicable).
       ``(4) The regulations prescribed under this section shall 
     incorporate the authority provided in this subsection.
       ``(5) No authority under paragraph (1) may be exercised 
     after September 30, 2001.''.

     SEC. 402. NONREIMBURSABLE DETAILS TO FEDERAL AGENCIES BEFORE 
                   A REDUCTION IN FORCE.

       (a) In General.--Section 3341 of title 5, United States 
     Code, is amended to read as follows:

     ``Sec. 3341. Details; within Executive agencies and military 
       departments; employees affected by reduction in force

       ``(a) The head of an Executive agency or military 
     department may detail employees, except those required by law 
     to be engaged exclusively in some specific work, among the 
     bureaus and offices of the agency or department.
       ``(b) The head of an Executive agency or military 
     department may detail to duties in the same or another agency 
     or department, on a nonreimbursable basis, an employee who 
     has been identified by the employing agency as likely to be 
     separated from the Federal service by reduction in force or 
     who has received a specific notice of separation by reduction 
     in force.
       ``(c)(1) Details under subsection (a)--
       ``(A) may not be for periods exceeding 120 days; and
       ``(B) may be renewed (1 or more times) by written order of 
     the head of the agency or department, in each particular 
     case, for periods not exceeding 120 days each.
       ``(2) Details under subsection (b)--
       ``(A) may not be for periods exceeding 90 days; and
       ``(B) may not be renewed.
       ``(d) The 120-day limitation under subsection (c)(1) for 
     details and renewals of details does not apply to the 
     Department of Defense in the case of a detail--
       ``(1) made in connection with the closure or realignment of 
     a military installation pursuant to a base closure law or an 
     organizational restructuring of the Department as part of a 
     reduction in the size of the armed forces or the civilian 
     workforce of the Department; and
       ``(2) in which the position to which the employee is 
     detailed is eliminated on or before the date of the closure, 
     realignment, or restructuring.
       ``(e) For purposes of this section--
       ``(1) the term `base closure law' means--
       ``(A) section 2687 of title 10;
       ``(B) title II of the Defense Authorization Amendments and 
     Base Closure and Realignment Act; and
       ``(C) the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990; 
     and
       ``(2) the term `military installation'--
       ``(A) in the case of an installation covered by section 
     2687 of title 10, has the meaning given such term in 
     subsection (e)(1) of such section;
       ``(B) in the case of an installation covered by the Act 
     referred to in subparagraph (B) of paragraph (1), has the 
     meaning given such term in section 209(6) of such Act; and
       ``(C) in the case of an installation covered by the Act 
     referred to in subparagraph (C) of paragraph (1), has the 
     meaning given such term in section 2910(4) of such Act.''.
       (b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections for chapter 
     33 of title 5, United States Code, is amended by striking the 
     item relating to section 3341 and inserting the following:

``3341. Details; within Executive agencies and military departments; 
              employees affected by reduction in force.''.

       (c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall take effect 30 days after the date of the enactment of 
     this Act.
                    TITLE V--SOFT-LANDING PROVISIONS

     SEC. 501. TEMPORARY CONTINUATION OF FEDERAL EMPLOYEES' LIFE 
                   INSURANCE.

       Section 8706 of title 5, United States Code, is amended by 
     adding at the end the following:
       ``(g)(1) Notwithstanding subsections (a) and (b) of this 
     section, an employee whose coverage under this chapter would 
     otherwise terminate due to a separation described in 
     paragraph (3) shall be eligible to continue basic insurance 
     coverage described in section 8704 in accordance with this 
     subsection and regulations the Office may prescribe, if the 
     employee arranges to pay currently into the Employees Life 
     Insurance Fund, through the former employing agency or, if an 
     annuitant, through the responsible retirement system, an 
     amount equal to the sum of--
       ``(A) both employee and agency contributions which would be 
     payable if separation had not occurred; plus
       ``(B) an amount, determined under regulations prescribed by 
     the Office, to cover necessary administrative expenses, but 
     not to exceed 2 percent of the total amount under 
     subparagraph (A).
       ``(2) Continued coverage under this subsection may not 
     extend beyond the date which is 18 months after the effective 
     date of the separation which entitles a former employee to 
     coverage under this subsection. Termination of continued 
     coverage under this subsection shall be subject to provision 
     for temporary extension of life insurance coverage and for 
     conversion to an individual policy of life insurance as 
     provided by subsection (a). If an eligible employee does not 
     make an election for purposes of this subsection, the 
     employee's insurance will terminate as provided by subsection 
     (a).
       ``(3)(A) This subsection shall apply to an employee who, on 
     or after the date of enactment of this subsection and before 
     the applicable date under subparagraph (B)--
       ``(i) is involuntarily separated from a position due to a 
     reduction in force, or separates voluntarily from a position 
     the employing agency determines is a `surplus position' as 
     defined by section 8905(d)(4)(C); and
       ``(ii) is insured for basic insurance under this chapter on 
     the date of separation.
       ``(B) The applicable date under this subparagraph is 
     October 1, 2001, except that, for purposes of any involuntary 
     separation referred to in subparagraph (A) with respect to 
     which appropriate specific notice is afforded to the affected 
     employee before October 1, 2001, the applicable date under 
     this subparagraph is February 1, 2002.''.

     SEC. 502. CONTINUED ELIGIBILITY FOR HEALTH INSURANCE.

       (a) Continued Eligibility After Retirement.--Section 8905 
     of title 5, United States Code, is amended--
       (1) in the first sentence of subsection (b) by striking 
     ``An'' and inserting ``Subject to subsection (g), an''; and
       (2) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(g)(1) The Office shall waive the requirements for 
     continued enrollment under subsection (b) in the case of any 
     individual who, on or after the date of the enactment of this 
     subsection and before the applicable date under paragraph 
     (2)--
       ``(A) is involuntarily separated from a position, or 
     voluntarily separated from a surplus position, in or under an 
     Executive agency due to a reduction in force,
       ``(B) based on the separation referred to in subparagraph 
     (A), retires on an immediate annuity under subchapter III of 
     chapter 83 or subchapter II of chapter 84, and
       ``(C) is enrolled in a health benefits plan under this 
     chapter as an employee immediately before retirement.
       ``(2) The applicable date under this paragraph is October 
     1, 2001, except that, for purposes of any involuntary 
     separation referred to in paragraph (1)(A) with respect to 
     which appropriate specific notice is afforded to the affected 
     employee before October 1, 2001, the applicable date under 
     this paragraph is February 1, 2002.
       ``(3) For purposes of this subsection, the term `surplus 
     position', with respect to an agency, means any position 
     determined in accordance with regulations under section 
     8905a(d)(4)(C) for such agency.''.
       (b) Temporary Continued Eligibility After Being 
     Involuntarily Separated.--Section 8905a(d)(4) of title 5, 
     United States Code, is amended--
       (1) in subparagraph (A) by striking ``the Department of 
     Defense'' and inserting ``an Executive agency''; and
       (2) by amending subparagraph (C) to read as follows:
       ``(C) For purposes of this paragraph, the term `surplus 
     position' means a position that, as determined under 
     regulations prescribed by the head of the agency involved, is 
     identified during planning for a reduction in force as being 
     no longer required and is designated for elimination during 
     the reduction in force.''.

     SEC. 503. JOB PLACEMENT AND COUNSELING SERVICES.

       (a) Authority for Services.--The head of each Executive 
     agency may establish a program to provide job placement and 
     counseling services to current and former employees.
       (b) Types of Services Authorized.--A program established 
     under this section may include such services as--
       (1) career and personal counseling;
       (2) training in job search skills; and
       (3) job placement assistance, including assistance provided 
     through cooperative arrangements with State and local 
     employment service offices.
       (c) Eligibility for Services.--Services authorized by this 
     section may be provided to--
       (1) current employees of the agency or, with the approval 
     of such other agency, any other agency; and
       (2) employees of the agency or, with the approval of such 
     other agency, any other agency who have been separated for 
     less than 1 year, if the separation was not a removal for 
     cause on charges of misconduct or delinquency.

[[Page H11344]]

       (d) Reimbursement for Costs.--The costs of services 
     provided to current or former employees of another agency 
     shall be reimbursed by that agency.

     SEC. 504. EDUCATION AND RETRAINING INCENTIVES.

       (a) Non-Federal Employment Incentive Payments.--
       (1) Definitions.--For purposes of this subsection--
       (A) the term ``eligible employee'' means an employee who is 
     involuntarily separated from a position, or voluntarily 
     separated from a surplus position, in or under an Executive 
     agency due to a reduction in force, except that such term 
     does not include an employee who, at the time of separation, 
     meets the age and service requirements for an immediate 
     annuity under subchapter III of chapter 83 or chapter 84 of 
     title 5, United States Code, other than under section 8336(d) 
     or 8414(b) of such title;
       (B) the term ``non-Federal employer'' means an employer 
     other than the Government of the United States or any agency 
     or other instrumentality thereof;
       (C) the term ``Executive agency'' has the meaning given 
     such term by section 105 of title 5, United States Code; and
       (D) the term ``surplus position'' has the meaning given 
     such term by section 8905(d)(4)(C) of title 5, United States 
     Code.
       (2) Authority.--The head of an Executive agency may pay 
     retraining and relocation incentive payments, in accordance 
     with this subsection, in order to facilitate the reemployment 
     of eligible employees who are separated from such agency.
       (3) Retraining incentive payment.--
       (A) Agreement.--The head of an Executive agency may enter 
     into an agreement with a non-Federal employer under which the 
     non-Federal employer agrees--
       (i) to employ an individual referred to in paragraph (2) 
     for at least 12 months for a salary which is mutually 
     agreeable to the employer and such individual; and
       (ii) to certify to the agency head any costs incurred by 
     the employer for any necessary training provided to such 
     individual in connection with the employment by such 
     employer.
       (B) Payment of retraining incentive payment.--The agency 
     head shall pay a retraining incentive payment to the non-
     Federal employer upon the employee's completion of 12 months 
     of continuous employment by that employer. The agency head 
     shall prescribe the amount of the incentive payment.
       (C) Proration rule.--The agency head shall pay a prorated 
     amount of the full retraining incentive payment to the non-
     Federal employer for an employee who does not remain employed 
     by the non-Federal employer for at least 12 months, but only 
     if the employee remains so employed for at least 6 months.
       (D) Limitation.--In no event may the amount of the 
     retraining incentive payment paid for the training of any 
     individual exceed the amount certified for such individual 
     under subparagraph (A), subject to subsection (c).
       (4) Relocation incentive payment.--The head of an agency 
     may pay a relocation incentive payment to an eligible 
     employee if it is necessary for the employee to relocate in 
     order to commence employment with a non-Federal employer. 
     Subject to subsection (e), the amount of the incentive 
     payment shall not exceed the amount that would be payable for 
     travel, transportation, and subsistence expenses under 
     subchapter II of chapter 57 of title 5, United States Code, 
     including any reimbursement authorized under section 5724b of 
     such title, to a Federal employee who transfers between the 
     same locations as the individual to whom the incentive 
     payment is payable.
       (5) Duration.--No incentive payment may be paid for 
     training or relocation commencing after June 30, 2002.
       (6) Source.--An incentive payment under this subsection 
     shall be payable from appropriations or other funds available 
     to the agency for purposes of training (within the meaning of 
     section 4101(4) of title 5, United States Code).
       (b) Educational Assistance.--
       (1) Definitions.--For purposes of this subsection--
       (A) the term ``eligible employee'' means an eligible 
     employee, within the meaning of subsection (a), who --
       (i) is employed full-time on a permanent basis;
       (ii) has completed at least 3 years of current continuous 
     service in any Executive agency or agencies; and
       (iii) is admitted to an institution of higher education 
     within 1 year after separation;
       (B) the term ``Executive agency'' has the meaning given 
     such term by section 105 of title 5, United States Code;
       (C) the term ``educational assistance'' means payments for 
     educational assistance as provided in section 127(c)(1) of 
     the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (26 U.S.C. 127(c)(1)); and
       (D) the term ``institution of higher education'' has the 
     meaning given such term by section 1201(a) of the Higher 
     Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1141(a)).
       (2) Authority.--Under regulations prescribed by the Office 
     of Personnel Management, and subject to the limitations under 
     subsection (c), the head of an Executive agency may, in his 
     or her discretion, provide educational assistance under this 
     subsection to an eligible employee for a program of education 
     at an institution of higher education after the separation of 
     the employee.
       (3) Duration.--No educational assistance under this 
     subsection may be paid later than 10 years after the 
     separation of the eligible employee.
       (4) Source.--Educational assistance payments shall be 
     payable from appropriations or other funds which would have 
     been used to pay the salary of the eligible employee if the 
     employee had not separated.
       (5) Regulations.--The Office of Personnel Management shall 
     prescribe regulations for the administration of this 
     subsection. Such regulations shall provide that educational 
     assistance payments shall be limited to amounts necessary for 
     current tuition and fees only.
       (c) Limitations.--
       (1) Aggregate limitation.--No incentive payment or 
     educational assistance payment may be paid under this section 
     to or on behalf of any individual to the extent that such 
     amount would cause the aggregate amount otherwise paid or 
     payable under this section, to or on behalf of such 
     individual, to exceed $10,000.
       (2) Limitation relating to educational assistance.--The 
     total amount paid under subsection (b) to any individual--
       (A) may not exceed $6,000 if the individual has at least 3 
     but less than 4 years of qualifying service; and
       (B) may not exceed $8,000 if the individual has at least 4 
     but less than 5 years of qualifying service.
       (3) Qualifying service.--For purposes of paragraph (2), the 
     term ``qualifying service'' means service performed as an 
     employee, within the meaning of section 2105 of title 5, 
     United States Code, on a permanent full-time or permanent 
     part-time basis (counting part-time service on a prorated 
     basis).
                        TITLE VI--MISCELLANEOUS

     SEC. 601. REIMBURSEMENTS RELATING TO PROFESSIONAL LIABILITY 
                   INSURANCE.

       (a) Authority.--Notwithstanding any other provision of law, 
     any amounts appropriated, for fiscal year 1997 or any fiscal 
     year thereafter, for salaries and expenses of Government 
     employees may be used to reimburse any qualified employee for 
     not to exceed one-half the costs incurred by such employee 
     for professional liability insurance. A payment under this 
     section shall be contingent upon the submission of such 
     information or documentation as the employing agency may 
     require.
       (b) Qualified Employee.--For purposes of this section, the 
     term ``qualified employee'' means--
       (1) an agency employee whose position is that of a law 
     enforcement officer;
       (2) an agency employee whose position is that of a 
     supervisor or management official; or
       (3) such other employee as the head of the agency considers 
     appropriate
       (c) Definitions.--For purposes of this section--
       (1) the term ``agency'' means an Executive agency, as 
     defined by section 105 of title 5, United States Code;
       (2) the term ``law enforcement officer'' means an employee, 
     the duties of whose position are primarily the investigation, 
     apprehension, prosecution, or detention of individuals 
     suspected or convicted of offenses against the criminal laws 
     of the United States, including any law enforcement officer 
     under section 8331(20) or 8401(17) of such title 5;
       (3) the terms ``supervisor'' and ``management official'' 
     have the respective meanings given them by section 7103(a) of 
     such title 5; and
       (4) the term ``professional liability insurance'' means 
     insurance which provides coverage for--
       (A) legal liability for damages due to injuries to other 
     persons, damage to their property, or other damage or loss to 
     such other persons (including the expenses of litigation and 
     settlement) resulting from or arising out of any tortious 
     act, error, or omission of the covered individual (whether 
     common law, statutory, or constitutional) while in the 
     performance of such individual's official duties as a 
     qualified employee; and
       (B) the cost of legal representation for the covered 
     individual in connection with any administrative or judicial 
     proceeding (including any investigation or disciplinary 
     proceeding) relating to any act, error, or omission of the 
     covered individual while in the performance of such 
     individual's official duties as a qualified employee, and 
     other legal costs and fees relating to any such 
     administrative or judicial proceeding.
       (d) Policy Limits.--
       (1) In general.--Reimbursement under this section shall not 
     be available except in the case of any professional liability 
     insurance policy providing for--
       (A) not to exceed $1,000,000 of coverage for legal 
     liability (as described in subsection (c)(4)(A)) per 
     occurrence per year; and
       (B) not to exceed $100,000 of coverage for the cost of 
     legal representation (as described in subsection (c)(4)(B)) 
     per occurrence per year.
       (2) Adjustments.--The head of an agency may from time to 
     time adjust the respective dollar amount limitations 
     applicable under this subsection to the extent that the head 
     of such agency considers appropriate to reflect inflation.

[[Page H11345]]

     SEC. 602. EMPLOYMENT RIGHTS FOLLOWING CONVERSION TO CONTRACT.

       (a) In General.--An employee whose position is abolished 
     because an activity performed by an Executive agency (within 
     the meaning of section 105 of title 5, United States Code) is 
     converted to contract shall receive from the contractor an 
     offer in good faith of a right of first refusal of employment 
     under the contract for a position for which the employee is 
     deemed qualified based upon previous knowledge, skills, 
     abilities, and experience. The contractor shall not offer 
     employment under the contract to any person prior to having 
     complied fully with this obligation, except as provided in 
     subsection (b), or unless no employee whose position is 
     abolished because such activity has been converted to 
     contract can demonstrate appropriate qualifications for the 
     position.
       (b) Exception.--Notwithstanding the contractor's obligation 
     under subsection (a), the contractor is not required to offer 
     a right of first refusal to any employee who, in the 12 
     months preceding conversion to contract, has been the subject 
     of an adverse personnel action related to misconduct or has 
     received a less than fully successful performance rating.
       (c) Limitation.--No employee shall have a right to more 
     than 1 offer under this section based on any particular 
     separation due to the conversion of an activity to contract.
       (d) Regulations.--Regulations to carry out this section may 
     be prescribed by the President.

     SEC. 603. DEBARMENT OF HEALTH CARE PROVIDERS FOUND TO HAVE 
                   ENGAGED IN FRAUDULENT PRACTICES.

       (a) In General.--Section 8902a of title 5, United States 
     Code, is amended--
       (1) in subsection (a)(2)(A) by striking ``subsection (b) or 
     (c)'' and inserting ``subsection (b), (c), or (d)'';
       (2) in subsection (b)--
       (A) by striking ``may'' and inserting ``shall'' in the 
     matter before paragraph (1); and
       (B) by amending paragraph (5) to read as follows:
       ``(5) Any provider that is currently suspended or excluded 
     from participation under any program of the Federal 
     Government involving procurement or nonprocurement 
     activities.'';
       (3) by redesignating subsections (c) through (i) as 
     subsections (d) through (j), respectively, and by inserting 
     after subsection (b) the following:
       ``(c) The Office may bar the following providers of health 
     care services from participating in the program under this 
     chapter:
       ``(1) Any provider--
       ``(A) whose license to provide health care services or 
     supplies has been revoked, suspended, restricted, or not 
     renewed, by a State licensing authority for reasons relating 
     to the provider's professional competence, professional 
     performance, or financial integrity; or
       ``(B) that surrendered such a license while a formal 
     disciplinary proceeding was pending before such an authority, 
     if the proceeding concerned the provider's professional 
     competence, professional performance, or financial integrity.
       ``(2) Any provider that is an entity directly or indirectly 
     owned, or with a 5 percent or more controlling interest, by 
     an individual who is convicted of any offense described in 
     subsection (b), against whom a civil monetary penalty has 
     been assessed under subsection (d), or who has been excluded 
     from participation under this chapter.
       ``(3) Any provider that the Office determines, in 
     connection with claims presented under this chapter, has 
     charged for health care services or supplies in an amount 
     substantially in excess of such provider's customary charges 
     for such services or supplies (unless the Office finds there 
     is good cause for such charge), or charged for health care 
     services or supplies which are substantially in excess of the 
     needs of the covered individual or which are of a quality 
     that fails to meet professionally recognized standards for 
     such services or supplies.
       ``(4) Any provider that the Office determines has committed 
     acts described in subsection (d).'';
       (4) in subsection (d), as so redesignated by paragraph (3), 
     by amending paragraph (1) to read as follows:
       ``(1) in connection with claims presented under this 
     chapter, that a provider has charged for a health care 
     service or supply which the provider knows or should have 
     known involves--
       ``(A) an item or service not provided as claimed;
       ``(B) charges in violation of applicable charge limitations 
     under section 8904(b); or
       ``(C) an item or service furnished during a period in which 
     the provider was excluded from participation under this 
     chapter pursuant to a determination by the Office under this 
     section, other than as permitted under subsection 
     (g)(2)(B);'';
       (5) in subsection (f), as so redesignated by paragraph (3), 
     by inserting ``(where such debarment is not mandatory)'' 
     after ``under this section'' the first place it appears;
       (6) in subsection (g), as so redesignated by paragraph 
     (3)--
       (A) by striking ``(g)(1)'' and all that follows through the 
     end of paragraph (1) and inserting the following:
       ``(g)(1)(A) Except as provided in subparagraph (B), 
     debarment of a provider under subsection (b) or (c) shall be 
     effective at such time and upon such reasonable notice to 
     such provider, and to carriers and covered individuals, as 
     shall be specified in regulations prescribed by the Office. 
     Any such provider that is excluded from participation may 
     request a hearing in accordance with subsection (h)(1).
       ``(B) Unless the Office determines that the health or 
     safety of individuals receiving health care services warrants 
     an earlier effective date, the Office shall not make a 
     determination adverse to a provider under subsection (c)(4) 
     or (d) until such provider has been given reasonable notice 
     and an opportunity for the determination to be made after a 
     hearing as provided in accordance with subsection (h)(1).'';
       (B) in paragraph (3)--
       (i) by inserting ``of debarment'' after ``notice''; and
       (ii) by adding at the end the following: ``In the case of a 
     debarment under paragraphs (1) through (4) of subsection (b), 
     the minimum period of exclusion shall not be less than 3 
     years, except as provided in paragraph (4)(B)(ii).''; and
       (C) in paragraph (4)(B)(i)(I) by striking ``subsection (b) 
     or (c)'' and inserting ``subsection (b), (c), or (d)'';
       (7) in subsection (h), as so redesignated by paragraph (3), 
     by striking ``(h)(1)'' and all that follows through the end 
     of paragraph (2) and inserting the following:
       ``(h)(1) Any provider of health care services or supplies 
     that is the subject of an adverse determination by the Office 
     under this section shall be entitled to reasonable notice and 
     an opportunity to request a hearing of record, and to 
     judicial review as provided in this subsection after the 
     Office renders a final decision. The Office shall grant a 
     request for a hearing upon a showing that due process rights 
     have not previously been afforded with respect to any finding 
     of fact which is relied upon as a cause for an adverse 
     determination under this section. Such hearing shall be 
     conducted without regard to subchapter II of chapter 5 and 
     chapter 7 of this title by a hearing officer who shall be 
     designated by the Director of the Office and who shall not 
     otherwise have been involved in the adverse determination 
     being appealed. A request for a hearing under this subsection 
     must be filed within such period and in accordance with such 
     procedures as the Office shall prescribe by regulation.
       ``(2) Any provider adversely affected by a final decision 
     under paragraph (1) made after a hearing to which such 
     provider was a party may seek review of such decision in the 
     United States District Court for the District of Columbia or 
     for the district in which the plaintiff resides or has his 
     principal place of business by filing a notice of appeal in 
     such court within 60 days from the date the decision is 
     issued and simultaneously sending copies of such notice by 
     certified mail to the Director of the Office and to the 
     Attorney General. In answer to the appeal, the Director of 
     the Office shall promptly file in such court a certified copy 
     of the transcript of the record, if the Office conducted a 
     hearing, and other evidence upon which the findings and 
     decision complained of are based. The court shall have power 
     to enter, upon the pleadings and evidence of record, a 
     judgment affirming, modifying, or setting aside, in whole or 
     in part, the decision of the Office, with or without 
     remanding the cause for a rehearing. The district court shall 
     not set aside or remand the decision of the Office unless 
     there is not substantial evidence on the record, taken as a 
     whole, to support the findings by the Office of a cause for 
     action under this section or unless action taken by the 
     Office constitutes an abuse of discretion.''; and
       (8) in subsection (i), as so redesignated by paragraph 
     (3)--
       (A) by striking ``subsection (c)'' and inserting 
     ``subsection (d)''; and
       (B) by adding at the end the following: ``The amount of a 
     penalty or assessment as finally determined by the Office, or 
     other amount the Office may agree to in compromise, may be 
     deducted from any sum then or later owing by the United 
     States to the party against whom the penalty or assessment 
     has been levied.''.
       (b) Effective Date.--
       (1) In general.--Except as provided in paragraph (2), this 
     section shall take effect on the date of the enactment of 
     this Act.
       (2) Exceptions.--(A) Paragraphs (2) and (4) of section 
     8902a(c) of title 5, United States Code, as amended by 
     subsection (a), shall apply only to the extent that the 
     misconduct which is the basis for debarment thereunder occurs 
     after the date of the enactment of this Act.
       (B) Section 8902a(d)(1)(B) of title 5, United States Code, 
     as amended by subsection (a), shall apply only with respect 
     to charges which violate section 8904(b) of such title 5 for 
     items and services furnished after the date of the enactment 
     of this Act.
       (C) Section 8902a(g)(3) of title 5, United States Code, as 
     amended by subsection (a), shall apply only with respect to 
     debarments based on convictions occurring after the date of 
     the enactment of this Act.

     SEC. 604. CONSISTENT COVERAGE FOR INDIVIDUALS ENROLLED IN A 
                   HEALTH PLAN ADMINISTERED BY THE FEDERAL BANKING 
                   AGENCIES.

       Section 5 of the FEGLI Living Benefits Act (Public Law 103-
     409; 108 Stat. 4232) is amended--
       (1) by inserting ``and the Board of Governors of the 
     Federal Reserve System'' after ``Office of the Comptroller of 
     the Currency and the Office of Thrift Supervision'' each 
     place it appears;

[[Page H11346]]

       (2) in subsection (a), by inserting ``or under a health 
     benefits plan not governed by chapter 89 of such title in 
     which employees and retirees of the Board of Governors of the 
     Federal Reserve System participated before January 4, 1997,'' 
     after ``January 7, 1995,'';
       (3) in subsection (b)--
       (A) by inserting ``(in the case of the Comptroller of the 
     Currency and the Office of Thrift Supervision) or on January 
     4, 1997 (in the case of the Board of Governors of the Federal 
     Reserve System)'' after ``on January 7, 1995'' each place it 
     appears;
       (B) by inserting ``, or in which employees and retirees of 
     the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System 
     participate,'' after ``Office of the Comptroller of the 
     Currency or the Office of Thrift Supervision'' each place it 
     appears; and
       (C) by inserting ``(in the case of the Comptroller of the 
     Currency and the Office of Thrift Supervision) or after 
     January 5, 1997 (in the case of the Board of Governors of the 
     Federal Reserve System)'' after ``January 8, 1995'' each 
     place it appears;
       (4) in subsection (b)(1)(A), by striking ``title;'' and 
     inserting ``title or a retiree (as defined in subsection 
     (e);''; and
       (5) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(e) Definition.--For purposes of this section, the term 
     `retiree' shall mean an individual who is receiving benefits 
     under the Retirement Plan for Employees of the Federal 
     Reserve System.''.

     SEC. 605. AMENDMENT TO PUBLIC LAW 104-134.

       Paragraph (3) of section 3110(b) of the Omnibus 
     Consolidated Rescissions and Appropriations Act of 1996 
     (Public Law 104-134; 110 Stat. 1321-343) is amended to read 
     as follows:
       ``(3) The Corporation shall pay to the Thrift Savings Fund 
     such employee and agency contributions as are required by 
     sections 8432 and 8351 of title 5, United States Code, for 
     those employees who elect to retain their coverage under the 
     Civil Service Retirement System or the Federal Employees' 
     Retirement System pursuant to paragraph (1).''.

     SEC. 606. MISCELLANEOUS AMENDMENTS RELATING TO THE HEALTH 
                   BENEFITS PROGRAM FOR FEDERAL EMPLOYEES.

       (a) Definition of a Carrier.--Paragraph (7) of section 8901 
     of title 5, United States Code, is amended by striking 
     ``organization;'' and inserting ``organization and the 
     Government-wide service benefit plan sponsored by an 
     association of organizations described in this paragraph;''.
       (b) Service Benefit Plan.--Paragraph (1) of section 8903 of 
     title 5, United States Code, is amended by striking ``plan,'' 
     and inserting ``plan, underwritten by participating 
     affiliates licensed in any number of States,''.
       (c) Preemption.--Section 8902(m) of title 5, United States 
     Code, is amended by striking ``(m)(1)'' and all that follows 
     through the end of paragraph (1) and inserting the following:
       ``(m)(1) The terms of any contract under this chapter which 
     relate to the nature, provision, or extent of coverage or 
     benefits (including payments with respect to benefits) shall 
     supersede and preempt any State or local law, or any 
     regulation issued thereunder, which relates to health 
     insurance or plans.''.

     SEC. 607. PAY FOR CERTAIN POSITIONS FORMERLY CLASSIFIED AT 
                   GS-18.

       Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the rate of 
     basic pay for positions that were classified at GS-18 of the 
     General Schedule on the date of the enactment of the Federal 
     Employees Pay Comparability Act of 1990 shall be set and 
     maintained at the rate equal to the highest rate of basic pay 
     for the Senior Executive Service under section 5382(b) of 
     title 5, United States Code.

     SEC. 608. REPEAL OF SECTION 1307 OF TITLE 5 OF THE UNITED 
                   STATES CODE.

       (a) In General.--Section 1307 of title 5, United States 
     Code, is repealed.
       (b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections for chapter 
     13 of title 5, United States Code, is amended by repealing 
     the item relating to section 1307.

     SEC. 609. EXTENSION OF CERTAIN PROCEDURAL AND APPEAL RIGHTS 
                   TO CERTAIN PERSONNEL OF THE FEDERAL BUREAU OF 
                   INVESTIGATION.

       (a) In General.--Section 7511(b)(8) of title 5, United 
     States Code, is amended by striking ``the Federal Bureau of 
     Investigation,''.
       (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by this section 
     shall apply with respect to any personnel action taking 
     effect after the end of the 45-day period beginning on the 
     date of the enactment of this Act.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from 
Florida [Mr. Mica] and the gentlewoman from Illinois [Mrs. Collins] 
each will control 20 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Florida [Mr. Mica].
  Mr. MICA. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to bring before the Congress the Omnibus 
Civil Service Reform Act of 1996. This is significant legislation for 
our Federal employees and the taxpayers they serve. It is my hope that 
it will improve the performance and accountability of Federal 
employees, rewarding those who work hard and obey the rules. This bill 
will soften the impact of Government downsizing on dedicated Federal 
employees. And it will address a wide variety of other problems. For 
example, it will give the Office of Personnel Management the tools it 
needs to deal swiftly with anyone who tries to defraud the Federal 
Health Benefits Program.
  This bill is the product of hard work by Members from both sides of 
the aisle. I want to thank the distinguished gentlelady from Maryland 
of [Mrs. Morella]. She has been an active and effective champion of 
Federal employees, and she has made invaluable contributions to this 
legislation. Both Frank Wolf and Tom Davis, distinguished 
Representatives from Virginia, have also made significant contributions 
to this bill. Thanks are also due to another Virginian, Jim Moran, the 
distinguished ranking member of the Civil Service Subcommittee. His 
leadership, diligence, and willingness to work with Members of both 
parties are very much appreciated.


                         performance management

  No part of this bill, Mr. Speaker, is more important to taxpayers and 
to the many dedicated Federal employees than title two. This title 
sends the right message--loud and clear--to Federal employees and 
taxpayers alike: Good performance will be rewarded. Performance 
management in the Federal Government is strengthened. Federal managers 
are given important tools so they can correct problems when they occur. 
More important, this bill rewards employees for their good work.
  Under this bill, managers need not place poor performers repeatedly 
on Performance Improvement Plans. Agencies should not have to waste 
precious resources dealing with chronic poor performers.
  But the cornerstone of this title is section 201. This section 
increases the weight given to performance on the job during a reduction 
in force. Although seniority would remain an important factor in 
determining who remains after a reduction in force, outstanding 
performance will now be properly considered and credited. This is 
especially important for employees with less than 15 years of service. 
As we downsize the Federal workforce and restructure agencies, we must 
assure taxpayers that the Government will retain its most productive 
employees. We must also reward and recognize those productive 
employees.


              reorganization flexibility and soft landings

  This bill also contains provisions that give Federal agencies 
additional flexibility in restructuring and soften the impact of 
downsizing on individual employees. Under this bill, agencies can allow 
individuals to volunteer to be separated in reductions in force. It 
also allows agencies to make 90-day nonreimbursable details of 
individuals targeted for RIF to other agencies. In effect, this given 
the employee a 90-day tryout with a new agency.
  Other provisions provide a safety net to separated employees by 
providing continuity of health and life insurance. Agencies are also 
authorized to establish job placement and counseling services. The bill 
authorizes relocation and retraining assistance to separated employees 
who take jobs in the private sector and educational assistance to help 
them develop new skills. Finally, this bill guarantees Federal 
employees whose jobs are contracted the right of first refusal for 
those jobs with the contractor.


                            other provisions

  Numerous provisions provide the Administration with tools to deal 
with existing problems in the civil service system. Title I 
significantly expands demonstration authority to experiment with new 
ways of managing personnel. This was high on the Administration's list 
of priorities for civil service reform. The bill also gives the 
Administration authority to debar health care providers found to have 
engaged in fraudulent practices. This is an important tool for the 
Office of Personnel Management to use in the fight against fraud and 
abuse in the Federal Employees Health Benefit Program.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from 
Virginia [Mr. Moran] to control the time.
  Mr. MORAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Florida [Mr. Mica] for his 
kind words and for bringing up this bill.

[[Page H11347]]

                              {time}  1730

  Mr. Speaker, this is a shadow of its former self. We had a number of 
provisions in this that I think would have gone a long ways towards 
reforming some of the parts of the civil service system that really 
need to be addressed; for example, the appeals process. Right now 
people with mixed appeals can decide they want to appeal a grievance to 
the Merit System Protection Board or the Equal Employment Opportunity 
Commission or the National Federal Labor Relations Board. They have got 
any number of choices, and if they really want to obstruct the process 
of appealing and make it very difficult for a manager to discipline an 
employee, that employee has any number of ways to punish the manager 
for even attempting to do so.
  So what we wanted to do was to tell the employee, pick one appeals 
process. Speed up the process. We do not have enough time, with all the 
responsibilities of the Federal Government, to get bogged down in 
simply these structural appeals processes that have much more to do 
with process than with progress.
  Another thing that we wanted to do was to give more discretion to 
managers and to employees. One of the things that seemed to make a 
compelling amount of common sense was to require that when there was an 
employee grievance they ought to engage in the alternative dispute 
resolution process, sit down, see if the manager and the employee first 
cannot work it out, until you get into this very legalistic structure. 
The gentlewoman from the District of Columbia, Ms. Norton, supported 
that very strongly from her experience with the EEOC. We did not get 
anyplace on it. Those are the kinds of things that really should have 
been included.

  Now there are some very important provisions that are still included, 
provisions that will help employees that may be adversely effected 
through Federal downsizing. For example, if an employee is RIF'd, the 
Federal Government would pay 100 percent of their health insurance 
premium for 18 months. Currently, although the Federal employee can 
keep their health insurance, they have to pay all of it. Excuse me, the 
employer would continue to pay the employer's share, which is 72 
percent. Life insurance we would extend for another 18 months, until 
the person gets a job.
  These are called soft landing provisions.
  There is a provision I put in where an agency can provide money for 
education and training for an employee being RIF'd. That seemed to make 
a lot of sense. We have a provision that gives preference for people 
within the same Federal agency to find other jobs if they are being 
RIF'd, again a common sense measure. Those measures need to be passed 
now.
  Unfortunately, we have a provision in, and I can understand why it is 
in because I support the concept, which may be a killer provision. The 
Senate says they will not accept it because it is controversial. As a 
result, if it is included, this bill is not going to go anywhere this 
session.
  What that provision does is to give added weight to performance. If 
an employee gets an outstanding performance rating instead of a 
satisfactory or a fully satisfactory, it may sound semantic, but they 
are quite different in terms of the points that they would get. An 
outstanding rating in 1 year gives you 10 points. If it is only 
satisfactory, you only get 5 points. That would be added to 1 point for 
every year of service.
  Now for people that got outstanding ratings in the 3 years prior to 
being RIF'd, they could get as much as 30 points added onto their 
length of service. Somebody that did not get even a satisfactory rating 
but that had 30 years of service themselves, they would be equally 
treated.
  Now many people say that leaves too much subjective judgment to the 
manager, to the person running the program, to the person making that 
evaluation, and so it is a very controversial measure. It is something 
we could have worked out perhaps in conference with the Senate, we 
could have worked out if we had more time. We do not have any more time 
left in this session to work that type of controversial provision out. 
I understand why it is in, but I am afraid by keeping it in this bill, 
despite all our hard work and despite the very important provisions 
that provide soft landing for Federal employees, they are not gong to 
be enacted this year because of that provision.
  I think the debate we are going to hear is going to largely center on 
that one provision. It would probably not give the amount of attention 
that ought to be given to the other provisions, solely because the 
other provision are really not all that controversial.
  After working on this for almost 2 years, it saddens me to realize 
that this may very well not become law, but if that is the case, we 
will know why, and we will just have to let the chips fall where they 
may. I appreciate the fact that the gentleman from Florida [Mr. Mica] 
has gotten this bill to the floor, I appreciate the work he has put 
into it, and I also appreciate the leadership that the gentleman from 
Pennsylvania [Mr. Clinger] has given, and the ranking Democrat member 
of the full committee, the gentlewoman from Illinois [Mrs. Collins].
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. MICA. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 
Pennsylvania [Mr. Clinger], the distinguished chairman of our full 
committee.
  Mr. CLINGER. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to support H.R. 3841, the 
Omnibus Civil Service Reform Act. This is a significant piece of 
legislation for our Federal employees and the people they serve. Laws 
governing the Federal civil service have not had a major revision since 
the civil Service Reform Act of 1978. Throughout the 104th Congress, 
the Civil Service Subcommittee has conducted nearly 20 oversight 
hearings on Federal human resource management policies. This piece of 
legislation is a praiseworthy culmination of that work.
  Due to the reductions in personnel, agencies need additional tools 
for improving employee performance. Section 201 of the bill goes a long 
way toward ensuring that the Federal Government continues to 
efficiently serve the American public as the Government downsizes.
  Mr. Speaker, section 201 puts increased emphasis upon performance in 
determining who is retained during a reduction in force, or RIF. As 
agencies downsize, Federal managers no longer will be forced to retain 
those who have been on the job the longest and release employees who 
consistently outperform senior employees. Performance must be rewarded. 
Instead of retaining only those who have been on the job a long time, 
we recognize those employees who have done the most with the time they 
have been on the job.
  Under this section, employees will be credited with additional years 
of service based on the sum of their three most recent performance 
ratings preceding the RIF. Employees will earn 5 years of additional 
service for each rating of fully successful, 7 years for each rating of 
exceeds fully successful performance, or 10 years for each rating of 
outstanding.
  This section, Mr. Speaker, also establishes rules for crediting years 
of service when an agency uses a pass/fail appraisal system. Pass/fail 
systems are unfair to employees because they do not allow for 
recognition of the extra effort put in by many Federal employees. 
Nevertheless, this administration has been aggressively promoting this 
unfair performance review system. Section 201, therefore, establishes 
rules to separate competition among employees in different performance 
systems. These rules assume that employees are treated equitably when 
their agency has more than one performance evaluation system and that 
employees in the same competitive area are not adversely affected as a 
result of having been covered by different performance systems.
  Finally, Mr. Speaker, the performance rules established in this 
section will be applied to RIF's taking effect on or after October 1, 
1999. The bill purposefully delays implementation of the stronger 
performance requirements in order to allow agencies to strengthen their 
internal management systems. This will help ensure fairness across 
agencies in the executive branch.
  In closing, Mr. Speaker, I would strongly urge my colleagues to 
support this bill. It is a good bill. It will promote effectiveness and 
efficiency in the

[[Page H11348]]

Federal Government by recognizing and regarding the people on whom we 
rely to enforce the laws we pass. Again I commend the gentleman from 
Florida [Mr. Mica], the gentleman from Virginia [Mr. Moran], and my 
colleague and ranking member, the gentlewoman from Illinois [Mrs. 
Collins], for the work and the willingness to allow this legislation to 
be considered today.
  Mr. MORAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentlewoman from 
Illinois [Mrs. Collins] the ranking minority member of the full 
committee.
  (Mrs. COLLINS of Illinois asked and was given permission to revise 
and extend her remarks.)
  Mrs. COLLINS of Illinois. Mr. Speaker, it is with considerable regret 
that I rise in opposition to H.R. 3841, the Omnibus Civil Service 
Reform Act. I know well the amount of time and effort that the 
subcommittee's ranking member, Jim Moran, and its chairman, John Mica, 
have put into the measure during the 104th Congress; however, the bill 
they have crafted is flawed in one important and fatal respect: It 
contains section 201 which would replace a flexible regulatory system 
with a new statutory formula for determining the order in which 
employees are to be separated during a reduction-in-force [RIF].
  The new formula would devalue the use of seniority and replace it 
with highly subjective ratings. Because the majority is unwilling to 
purge or at least modify the provision which many on our side find 
objectionable, what would otherwise by a very desirable and bipartisan 
bill may actually fail.
  During full committee consideration of this legislation, section 201 
of the bill became the target of an amendment that was going to be 
offered by my colleague from Florida, Congresswoman Carrie Meek, who 
opposed it because she believed as I do, that the current regulatory 
framework provided a ore appropriate and flexible means to manage a 
RIF.
  After considerable debate and negotiation, an agreement was reached 
which led her to suspend her opposition to the provision, thereby 
enabling the bill to be approved by the committee by a voice vote. What 
was supposed to follow the markup was a serious effort on the part of 
the majority staff to work with minority and affected groups to further 
refine the language of section 201 so that it would better meet 
Congresswoman Meek's concerns. Unfortunately, these efforts failed. The 
language which the majority staff put forward proved to be even more 
rigid and cumbersome.
  Congresswoman Meek and I are not alone in voicing opposition to 
section 201 of this bill. During the subcommittee's hearing on the 
measure which occurred prior to the mark-ups, the Office of Personnel 
Management, the three major Federal employee unions, as well as the 
three of the associations representing Federal managers and executives 
all testified in opposition to this provision. They strenuously argued 
that a regulatory rather than a statutory approach to crediting 
performance in connection with a RIF would make it more possible for 
agencies to address inequities and disparities which might result. 
Their thoughtful observations and those of others have gone unheeded by 
the bill's managers. I ask my colleagues not to ignore them today.
  The hearing testimony and the subsequent research conducted by 
Congresswoman Meek and my own staff has identified three basic problems 
that would be made worse by the implementation of section 201:
  First, performance appraisals are routinely challenged as being 
subjective and unfair, overinflated, and biased against minorities. 
Just a few years ago, when the Performance Management and Recognition 
System for mid-level managers was in place, which tied cash awards to 
performance ratings, those employees subject to it asked the Congress 
to let it sunset because of complaints it was corrupted by favoritism. 
As the result, the trend in Government has been to move away from the 
highly subjective multilevel rating systems and toward the use of more 
simplistic pass/fail rating systems. Section 201 was specifically 
designed by the subcommittee's chairman and his staff to discourage the 
growing use of pass/fail appraisal systems.
  Second, it is not unusual for divisions, bureaus, or units within the 
same agency to utilize different types of performance appraisal 
systems. Under existing regulations, agencies have been free to have 
five, four, three, or two-level rating systems. Merging employees from 
different rating systems into the same competitive area for the purpose 
of conducting an agencywide RIF could result in inequities under 
section 201's formula because of the way in which it more favorably 
credits employees from multilevel rating systems.
  Third, a report issued just last month by the Merit Systems 
Protection Board [MSPB], entitled ``Fair & Equitable Treatment: A 
Progress Report on Minority Employment in the Federal Government,'' 
indicates that minorities are better represented within the Federal 
workforce than they are within the private sector. Data obtained by 
Congresswoman Meek from the Office of Personnel Management [OPM] on the 
length of service of African-Americans and other minority groups within 
the Federal workforce reveals that African-Americans have an above 
average length of service.
  The information from MSPB and OPM, taken together, would appear to 
suggest that the Federal Government has been a primary source of job 
opportunities for African-Americans and that when we get a government 
job, we tend to keep it and build up seniority. The MSPB report 
indicates, however, that even with their seniority, African-Americans 
and other minorities appear to be concentrated at the lower grade 
levels, hampered in obtaining recognition and promotions by performance 
ratings which are disproportionately lower than those received by non-
minorities.
  The clear indication being, therefore, that the devaluation of 
seniority, which is the objective of section 201, would be especially 
harmful to African-Americans who have had to rely on it to secure their 
advancement in the Federal workplace.
  There are many aspects of this bill I do support. Most of these 
provisions are not controversial, such as: soft-landing provisions that 
would enable laid-off employees to maintain their health and life 
insurance benefits, pursue retraining opportunities, and obtain job 
placement assistance; providing agencies some reorganization 
flexibilities; and increasing the opportunities to conduct 
demonstration projects to test innovative ideas.
  Other controversial provisions have been eliminated. For example, 
during the subcommittee's mark-up of the bill, I successfully pursued 
the adoption of an amendment removing what was then title II, a 
provision that would have eliminated the essential role which the Equal 
Employment Opportunity Commission plays in resolving the appeals of 
adverse personnel actions tied to complaints of employment 
discrimination.
  In summary, while the bill contains many useful provisions, it is 
unfortunate that the majority has been unable to resolve the one fatal 
flaw in this bill that would reduce the protections of seniority in 
favor of a system of flawed and biased ratings.

                              {time}  1745

  Mr. MICA. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 4 minutes to the 
distinguished gentlewoman from Maryland [Mrs. Morella], a leader in 
civil service reform and civil service issues.
  Mrs. MORELLA. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding time to 
me.
  Mr. Speaker, today we are considering a bill to improve our civil 
service system. I appreciate the willingness of Civil Service 
Subcommittee Chairman Mica and ranking Democrat Jim Moran to bring 
together Members from both sides of the aisle, OPM, and Federal 
employee unions to reach consensus on this legislation. This truly has 
been a team effort. I also want to thank Congressmen Davis and Wolf for 
their valuable contributions to help Federal employees.
  Several provisions included are pieces of legislation that I have 
introduced. While I know that this legislation is not a panacea, and it 
does not remedy some problems with our civil service system, it does 
make some important improvements and helps employees and agencies 
adjust to downsizing.
  This bill contains several important titles to improve demonstration 
projects, provide for soft landings, increase worker retraining, 
provide additional optional life insurance for Federal retirees, and 
promote reorganization flexibility.

[[Page H11349]]

  This legislation originally included legislation I introduced last 
year to enhance the thrift savings plan, H.R. 2306. I am very pleased 
that portions of that legislation passed last night as part of S. 868. 
Under that legislation, Federal employees will be able to invest their 
money in one of the two new investment options under the thrift savings 
plan: a Small Capitalization Stock Index Investment Fund or the 
International Stock Index Fund. This bill also originally contained a 
provision I introduced to allow Federal employees to increase their own 
TSP contributions to the IRS limit--$9,500. Although that provision was 
not included, I will continue to work to see it enacted.
  Throughout this Congress, I have pursued a legislative strategy to 
help Federal employees and agencies cope with downsizing. The 1994 
Workforce Restructuring Act mandated that we reduce our Federal work 
force by 272,900 FTE's by 1999. I believe that the Congress has the 
responsibility to help our dedicated civil servants through this 
difficult time, and I have introduced several bills to provide for 
reemployment training and retirement incentives. Although I wish they 
had all been incorporated in the bill before us today, this legislation 
does include important retraining provisions and a soft-landings 
package to ease the pain of downsizing for Federal employees.
  When a Federal employee faces a reduction in force, his or her life 
is turned upside down. The provisions in this bill will help Federal 
employees cope with this transition. This legislation would create 
educational accounts so that employees separated from the Government 
could return to school to learn new skills. It would also allow 
employees to continue FEGLI life insurance coverage at its full cost in 
the event of a RIF, and extend health insurance for displaced Federal 
employees by waiving the 5-year minimum and extending an agency's 
payment for 18 months.

  As the Federal work force shrinks to its lowest level since President 
Kennedy's administration, Federal workers must look to the private 
sector for reemployment. This civil service reform bill would also 
allow retraining for private sector jobs, a concept I introduced in 
H.R. 2825, the Strategic Reemployment Training Act. This simple, but 
critical, change will allow agencies to tailor their job training and 
counseling programs toward the private sector. To help Federal 
employees move into new jobs, this legislation would permit 
nonreimbursable details to Federal agencies before a RIF so that 
Federal employees can try out different kinds of jobs before they are 
separated. This concept was also in legislation I introduced, the 
Retraining and Outplacement Opportunity Act.
  This omnibus bill includes legislation that I have introduced to help 
Federal retirees and their dependents by allowing Federal retirees to 
retain additional, optional life insurance under any circumstance. I 
became aware of the need for this legislation because one of my 
constituents, Harry Bodansky, has a son with severe disabilities. It 
doesn't seem fair that Federal retirees cannot continue their 
additional, optional life insurance if they pay the premium. 
Unfortunately, this bill cannot go back and retroactively help those 
who were unable to extend their insurance at the time of their 
retirement, but I am hopeful that it will help future retirees with 
dependents with disabilities.
  The legislation before us today contains many other valuable 
provisions that will positively impact the tens of thousands of Federal 
employees and retirees in my district. I urge all my colleagues to vote 
in favor of the Mica-Moran-Morella civil service reform legislation 
considered today. Again, I want to thank Mr. Mica, Mr. Moran, Mr. 
Davis, and Mr. Wolf for their commitment to helping Federal employees 
and moving this bill forward.
  Mr. MORAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the very distinguished 
gentlewoman from Florida, Mrs. Carrie Meek.
  Mrs. MEEK of Florida. Mr. Speaker, first I would like to commend the 
subcommittee chairman and the ranking subcommittee chairman on the work 
that has gone into the preparation of this bill.
  Mr. Speaker, in committee I opposed a section of this bill, section 
201, and of course I was told that there would be work toward 
correcting this particular flaw. As my ranking member, the gentlewoman 
from Illinois, Cardiss Collins, has said, this bill is seriously 
flawed. I want to tell the Members why.
  There are about 2 million Federal workers to whom this bill will 
apply, and to have it go into the statutes to say that this is the way 
that they will be ranked or rated in terms of a RIF process. I think 
the Members of the Congress should realize that.
  With almost 2 million people being affected, 11,000 of them in my 
district, we must think, first, of the flaw that is in this bill. That 
provision, 201, should be removed. If it is not removed, then this bill 
should be stopped right here on this floor because of the serious 
contradictions in it.
  Second, there is a problem in codifying these regulations. Why not 
have them regulate it so that we will have some flexibility, and not 
put it in the statute?

  The second thing is, Why is it in this bill that we are using 
performance ratings above that of seniority? We are putting another 
level in that in some way will take away the weight of seniority.
  I am not against merit at all. I am looking for merit, just as the 
committee is. But think about the subjective nature of performance 
evaluations. They are very subjective. By our own studies here in the 
Federal Government, it proves that a person will evaluate someone 
positively that they feel most comfortable with. The figures show that 
white Americans naturally rate white Americans better. These are our 
own figures. Black Americans rate black Americans better. We do not 
want that bias. This was brought up by one of our own studies here 
within the Federal Government.
  Mr. Speaker, I am concerned that this is too subjective. We are not 
objective enough when we are dealing with folks' lives. We are going to 
RIF these people and make people be laid off.
  Our own Office of Personnel Management has addressed that. They have 
said in terms of their report, and I have it here, Fair and Equitable 
Treatment: A Progress Report on Minority Employment in the Federal 
Government. This is a recent report, recent statistics, showing the 
negative implications of this kind of evaluation. This is probably due 
to the fact that the Federal Government, as my ranking member has 
brought to the Members' attention, has hired more of these level of 
persons than anyone else.
  Mr. Speaker, I support it, as I said before, and this committee is 
fine. But our own U.S. Merit System Protection Board confirms what we 
have said here today, that it is a subjective rating of performance 
evaluations. The report found that the race of the evaluator and the 
race of the person being evaluated makes a difference. That further 
emphasizes what I have just mentioned. There is a strong weakness in 
using performance evaluations as the greatest weight in your criteria.
  Remember, Mr. Speaker, these people hold, a lot of them, supervisory 
positions. They are not always fair. It establishes this new formula. 
It gives less weight to seniority and more weight to performance 
evaluations than the current formula. We do not want that. The unions 
have told us that it is wrong, and everyone has spoken to the committee 
to say it is wrong. Yet, our subcommittee is adamant about maintaining 
this particular provision. We are moving too quickly on this. It is a 
very complicated kind of thing. It affects 2 million people, not just 
here but all over the country.
  Mr. Speaker, this controversial particular feature, as I have said 
before, is a bill opposed by many people. We are very concerned. The 
Office of Personnel Management, as I have stated before, is against 
putting this procedure into the statutes. I appeal to the Members and 
to the subcommittee, we need to kill this bill right here. I do not 
think we are going to change it anymore. I do not think it is going to 
be acceptable anywhere, when there is any measure of unfairness in 
anything that comes from the Federal Government, putting in the statute 
something that is inflexible regarding the lives of 2 million people. 
We certainly want it to be fair to all concerned. I submit to each of 
the Members that section 201 is not fair to all concerned, and either 
it

[[Page H11350]]

should be removed, or this Congress should vote against it. I am 
adamantly opposed to this particular bill.
  Mr. MICA. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the 
gentleman from Virginia [Mr. Wolf].
  Mr. WOLF. Mr. Speaker, I would like to focus on the soft landing 
provisions of the bill.
  Budget reductions, reinventing government, downsizing, rightsizing, 
streamlining, and restructuring--whatever it's called, the result could 
be the same--reductions-in-force [RIF]. Many dedicated Federal 
employees are concerned that they will be displaced from their jobs by 
RIF's. As the Nation's largest employer, it is our responsibility to 
make sure that downsizing is conducted in the most fair, sensitive, and 
humane manner. These soft landing provisions will do just that.
  The bill before us contains many of the provisions contained in H.R. 
2751, the ``Federal Employee Separation Incentive and Reemployment 
Act,'' which I introduced on December 7, 1995. These soft landing 
provisions will help the separated Federal employee make a smooth 
transition into the private sector.
  This legislation will permit employees separated in connection with a 
RIF to continue health and life insurance benefits for 18 months. It 
authorizes agencies to establish job counseling and job placement 
programs for current or former employees. It authorizes agencies to 
provide retraining and relocation assistance to employees separated in 
connection with a RIF who take a job with a non-Federal entity.

                              {time}  1800

  This would also provide educational assistance to employees separated 
in connection with a RIF. These provisions are good for Federal 
employees, good for morale, good for the Federal Government and just 
make good sense.
  Mr. Speaker, this soft landing provision in this bill is very, very 
important. I strongly support it.
  Mr. MORAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
Pennsylvania [Mr. Holden], a distinguished member of our subcommittee.
  Mr. HOLDEN. I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time.
  Mr. Speaker, it is with great regret, that I rise today to ask my 
colleagues to vote in opposition to the Omnibus Civil Service Reform 
Act.
  First, I want to commend Mr. Mica and Mr. Moran for their hard work 
on this bill. Their efforts have been critical in getting the bill this 
far.
  Nevertheless, I am afraid that I cannot support this bill because 
there are still changes which need to be made. I understand the late 
hour requires that this bill be considered on the Suspension Calendar, 
but I cannot support it without amendment.
  When the bill was considered in subcommittee and full committee, we 
agreed to continue to work to remedy the concerns about the performance 
evaluation sections.
  Unfortunately, those concerns have not been addressed, and the 
performance evaluation section remains. This bill is correctable, and I 
am confident that these problems can be addressed in the future.
  For today, I ask my colleagues to vote against this bill, and I hope 
we can work in the future to pass civil service reform.
  Mr. MICA. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 
Virginia [Mr. Davis].
  Mr. DAVIS. I thank my friend for yielding me this time.
  Mr. Speaker, we have worked on this legislation for a long time, 
Members from both parties. I feel genuinely conflicted about this. With 
the inclusion of section 201, this legislation has proved more 
controversial than I think it needed to be. If we had spent some more 
time on this legislation working with some of the affected groups, we 
might have been able to come up to a better resolution. I am afraid 
that its inclusion is going to poison the well for this when it leaves 
this body and goes to the other body, and it may end up meaning that we 
do not end up with a bill. I think that is unfortunate, because there 
are a number of good provisions in this bill.
  I thank the gentleman from Florida [Mr. Mica], the chairman, the 
gentleman from Virginia [Mr. Moran], the ranking member, the gentleman 
from Virginia [Mr. Wolf], the gentlewoman from Maryland [Mrs. Morella], 
the gentleman from Maryland [Mr. Hoyer], and the gentleman from 
Maryland [Mr. Wynn], and others who have worked to try to get some of 
these provisions in that I think give soft landings to Federal 
employees at a time of downsizing.
  It authorizes, for example, making Thrift Savings Plan loans to 
employees who have been furloughed due to lapses in appropriations when 
Congress and the President do not get their jobs done. This gives them 
out.
  It distributes life insurance proceeds in accordance with divorce 
decrees, and it permits retirees to elect to continue unreduced life 
insurance policies.
  It provides management flexibility in reorganizing agencies, 
including allowing voluntary RIFs for all agencies.
  And it provides soft landing support to employees affected by 
downsizing, something that we need to be ready for over the next few 
years as government continues to reorganize itself and become more 
efficient.
  I am concerned that as the Federal Government shrinks and as we make 
the transition to an information and high-technology-based society, the 
need for a highly qualified and professional work force increases. The 
Federal Government must be able to recruit and retain the best 
qualified professionals. Therefore, we have to provide a compensation 
package that is competitive with the private sector.
  We also need to provide extensive training opportunities for 
employees while developing appropriate soft landing and job transition 
services for our departing Federal workers. The American taxpayers, our 
customers, demand excellent government service provided by qualified 
professionals who are treated fairly.
  This bill incorporates a variety of provisions originally introduced 
by the gentleman from Virginia [Mr. Wolf], myself, and others that will 
help do this by serving to soften the landings of Federal employees who 
face the loss of their jobs due to downsizing.
  Under H.R. 3841, they would specifically be authorized to continue 
their coverage under the Federal employees group life insurance program 
if they pay the full premiums. Agencies could also extend health 
insurance coverage for as long as 18 months for RIFed employees, with 
the Government continuing to pay its share of the premiums.
  The reform bill also authorizes priority placement programs in 
agencies and outplacement assistance for Federal employees and 
incorporates a right of first refusal for jobs with a contractor if 
Federal jobs are converted to contract. This title would also create 
educational accounts and allow for reimbursement of retraining and 
relocation expenses of up to $10,000.
  These are good, solid provisions that ought to be enacted into law. I 
hope they are not jeopardized here at the last minute by the inclusion 
of section 201.
  By voting today to send this over to the Senate, perhaps they can 
make their amendments, and it is our only chance because these 
provisions, I think, are demanded if we are to have a professional work 
force for our Federal employees in the future.
  Mr. MORAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield the balance of my time to the 
gentleman from Maryland [Mr. Hoyer], a constant and strong advocate on 
behalf of Federal employees.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Gutknecht). The gentleman from Maryland 
is recognized for 2\1/4\ minutes.
  (Mr. HOYER asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition, and I am sorry that I 
rise in opposition. This bill has much in it which deals with Federal 
employees fairly at a time when they are at risk, at a time when they 
have been traumatized by shutting down the Federal Government, telling 
them to go home and maybe we will pay you, and maybe we will not.
  This bill comes at probably one of the most tenuous times in the 
civil service that I have seen. We are going to have trouble recruiting 
and retaining our good people.
  Let me tell you what is wrong with this section 201 if you are a 
supervisor and you are charged with the responsibility of rating an 
employee. That is an extraordinarily difficult task under the best of 
circumstances, because human beings have trouble judging one another.

[[Page H11351]]

  But I tell my friends who are bringing this section 201 to the floor 
that if the consequences of my rating my Federal employee is to either 
give them 10, 7, or 5 years seniority, the pressure on me will be 
geometrically increased, geometrically increased, because that employee 
know that I not only do not give him or her an outstanding rating, but 
that the consequences of that may be, after 5 or 10 or 15 years' 
service, that somebody with 5 years' service will have more points than 
I do. So that if Mr. Moran is Steny Hoyer's supervisor, I really have 
high expectations for what he will do.
  I suggest to you, my friends, that if there is any doubt, you are 
going to see a pressure for evaluation inflation beyond that which 
exists today.
  In closing, let me say that obviously this bill has merit. Just as 
obviously, unfortunately, the concept that 201 speaks to has merit as 
well. It is a shame, therefore, that we consider it under suspension, 
no amendments, limited time, without sufficient time to debate fully an 
important concept.
  I urge the Members to reject this bill under these circumstances.
  Mr. MICA. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
  In conclusion, I believe this is a very important bill and it sends 
the right message to our Federal employees at a time when they are 
uncertain about their job security.
  The bill says to those who have worked hard that we will make a 
special effort to help them keep their jobs. And it says to taxpayers 
that we are serious once and for all about improving the performance 
and accountability in the civil service.
  Sometimes it is easy to do what is expedient, but sometimes it is 
more important to do what is right. Tonight it is time to do what is 
right. This bill provides a safety net to those who lose their jobs as 
we reduce the size and scope of government and will help in the 
transition to the private sector. And this bill also provides the tools 
to make government more efficient, and, I believe, more effective.
  Mr. Speaker, I have tried to work my best with my colleagues on the 
other side. We have even asked for their input as we drafted and made 
changes in section 201. I am sorry that they will oppose this. We would 
continue to work with them as the legislation might make its way 
through the other body. But tonight it is important that we do what is 
right and we do not just do what is expedient.
  Mr. MORAN. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent for 1 additional 
minute in regard to the bill.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Virginia?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. MORAN. Mr. Speaker, I would urge Members on both sides to vote 
for this bill. The soft landing provisions on health insurance and life 
insurance and educational assistance by themselves have more than 
sufficient merit to pass this bill. But I do think that there is merit 
as well in section 201. I do not agree--and I have discussed this with 
the gentlewoman from Illinois [Mrs. Collins] and the gentlewoman from 
Florida [Mrs. Meek]--that giving more weight to performance ratings has 
anything to do within a racial context. I do not think that there is an 
issue of racial discrimination here. In fact, I think that new hires, 
in fact, would be better served under this new system. We have some 
disagreement and obviously there is a report that lends credence to the 
argument that has been made. But I would urge my colleagues to vote for 
this bill, for giving more weight to performance ratings in the civil 
service and certainly for the soft landing provisions that are an 
important and necessary part of this bill.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the Omnibus Civil Service Reform 
Act and urge its passage.
  Earlier this year, Chairman Mica, Mrs. Morella, Mr. Davis, and I met 
to discuss the possibility of drafting and enacting some important 
civil service reforms. At that meeting, we all agreed that there were 
certain reforms and modifications that simply had to be done this year. 
We agreed that we would draft a bipartisan bill--one that took into 
consideration the concerns of Federal employee associations, Federal 
employee unions, and rank and file Federal employees.
  The result is this legislation. This bill does not contain every 
provision that I wanted. It does not contain every provision that Mr. 
Mica wanted. It does, however, contain a number of important provisions 
that will improve the performance of our civil service and that will 
improve the lives of our Nation's civil servants.

  The bill contains provisions originally offered by the administration 
to improve the Demonstration Projects Program. Title I of this 
legislation will enable agencies to try new initiatives and demonstrate 
different ways to run the Federal civil service.
  The bill contains provisions to improve the performance management of 
the federal civil service. Since the first caucus of the Civil Service 
Subcommittee, we have focused on how to remove poor performers from the 
Federal workforce and reward those employees who are outstanding. This 
is particularly important now that the Federal Government is 
downsizing. We have about the same number of Federal employees today as 
we did during the Kennedy administration.
  These employees, however, are involved in activities never foreseen 
in 1963. If we are to have fewer employees doing more work, we must 
ensure that those employees retained during a reduction in force are 
the best and brightest employees. Section 201 of this legislation, the 
section which has received the most criticism, is an attempt to reward 
performance rather than seniority when agencies are undergoing RIFs. 
Other sections in title II enable managers to effectively do their jobs 
and either take action against poor performers or reward outstanding 
work performance.
  The remainder of this bill incorporates a number of provisions 
designed to help employees undergoing reductions in force. These 
provisions allow an employee to continue to participate in the 
Government life insurance programs, provided that he pay both the 
employer and employee contributions. It would allow an employee who 
loses his job due to a reduction in force to continue to participate in 
the Federal Employee Health Benefits Program. It also establishes a 
priority placement program and education assistance grants to help 
displaced Federal employees improve their competitiveness through 
greater education.
  Throughout this process a number of Federal employee organizations 
have raised concerns about a number of provisions. These concerns have, 
for the most part, been addressed. The Civil Service Subcommittee has 
dropped provisions to streamline the appeals processes and have ensured 
that certain provisions contained in the legislation do not adversely 
impact employees covered by collective bargaining. The Government 
Reform and Oversight Committee modified section 201 of this bill to 
ensure that its affect is not discriminatory.
  The bill considered by the subcommittee was 100 percent better than 
the original draft. The bill marked up in full committee was 100 
percent better than the subcommittee draft.

  Since Chairman Mica and I first assumed our positions on the Civil 
Service Subcommittee, we have had a number of serious disagreements 
over Federal employee policies. We continue to have ideological 
differences. Throughout this Congress, however, we have worked together 
in an effort to improve the Federal work force. We agree on the 
provisions contained in this legislation.
  This does not mean Mr. Mica has softened his positions or I have 
softened mine. Instead, this legislation represents a mutual 
identification of reforms that simply had to be made this year. I 
appreciate the work Mr. Mica and his staff have put into this 
legislation and I greatly appreciate his willingness to work closely 
with me and my staff on this effort. I also appreciate the work Vice 
President Gore and his staff have done in trying to reinvent the 
Federal work force. Many of the positive reforms incorporated in this 
bill come directly from his work. The National Performance Review has 
benefited us all by focusing on how to improve the Federal work force.
  I understand the concerns raised by a number of Federal employee 
groups about section 201 of this bill. As everyone knows, I have worked 
closely with all of these groups throughout this Congress and, 
together, we have been able to defeat efforts to unfairly increase 
retirement contributions and improperly modify the Federal Employee 
Health Benefits Program. We worked hard to protect Federal employees 
from continued downsizings and Federal Government shutdowns.
  This, however, is an area in which we simply disagree. I strongly 
believe that Federal employees and Federal taxpayers must ensure that 
the best employees are retained during RIF's. I oppose RIF's. I was the 
first to speak out against the original NPR report because I thought it 
unfairly targeted Federal employees. But the Federal Government is 
downsizing and we simply cannot afford to retain any unsatisfactory or 
minimally successful employees.
  Regardless of our individual positions on title II, we must all agree 
that this is an extremely important bill. I sincerely hope that we do 
not defeat this entire effort, and all the benefits it provides Federal 
employees, because of our disagreements.

[[Page H11352]]

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Foley). The question is on the motion 
offered by the gentleman from Florida [Mr. Mica] that the House suspend 
the rules and pass the bill, H.R. 3841, as amended.
  The question was taken.
  Mrs. MEEK of Florida. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and 
nays.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 5 of rule I and the 
Chair's prior announcement, further proceedings on this motion will be 
postponed.

                          ____________________