May 17, 2006

New ALJ Register On The Way?

Nancy Kichak, Associate Director of the Strategic Resources Policy Division of the Office of Personnel Management (OPM), testified today before the Committe on Government Reform of the House of Representatives on issues regarding Administrative Law Judges (ALJs) employed by the federal government. OPM is responsible for maintaining a register of applicants for the position of ALJ. The register has been effectively closed to new applicants since 1999 due to litigation and OPM's lethargy. ALJs are still being hired off a very old list of applicants. OPM published draft regulations in December 2005. Here is a quote from Ms. Kichak's statement, which does not suggest that OPM is planning to rush into anything:
OPM is presently completing work on the new ALJ exam [the "exam" for ALJs is mostly a review of the application]. Although the opening date will depend entirely upon the issuance of newly proposed ALJ regulations, OPM is committed to rolling out the new exam expeditiously once the revised regulations become effective. When a new register is generated from the new exam, the current register will be terminated. When the new exam comes out, OPM also plans to take advantage of our state-of-the-art examining technology, USA Staffing, which allows applicants to apply on-line.

We are making great progress in developing the revised regulations referenced above. In December 2005, OPM posted a proposed rule to revise the ALJ program. The proposed rule removed redundant procedures and outdated information, clarified bar membership requirements, and provided for the ALJ examination process to be established in a manner similar to other OPM examinations. The proposed rule was open for public comment for 60 days. In conjunction with publishing these proposed regulations, OPM also posted a new ALJ qualification standard on its Web site. The ALJ qualification standard was also open for public comment for a 60-day period. At this time, OPM is carefully considering the comments submitted on both the proposed rule and ALJ qualification standard

No comments: