Review the new 2014 Federal Employees' Group Life Insurance (FEGLI) Handbook
Answering your questions about Healthcare and Insurance
Human Resources and Security Specialists should use this tool to determine the correct investigation level for any covered position within the U.S. Federal Government.
Visit this federal site to search for our regulatory notices, proposed and final rules.
See the latest tweets on our Twitter feed, like our Facebook pages, watch our YouTube videos, and page through our Flickr photos.
The content available is no longer being updated and as a result you may encounter hyperlinks which no longer function. You should also bear in mind that this content may contain text and references which are no longer applicable as a result of changes in law, regulation and/or administration.
OPM Contact: James Green
An employee requests reconsideration, for the third time, of his
claim for availability pay for the period from October 1, 1994 to
July 1, 1995. Employees who were receiving administratively
uncontrollable overtime (AUO) in the fiscal quarter preceding
October 1, 1994 automatically received availability pay. The agency
determined in the instant case, though, that the employee had not
received AUO during that time period, and therefore, did not
authorize availability pay for the employee.
The source of confusion, in part, is due to the fact that the
employee's supervisor approved certain hours worked during the
fourth quarter of fiscal year (FY) 94 as "AUO" hours. The agency
chose to pay the employee for those hours, however, as irregularly
scheduled overtime rather than AUO. Nonetheless, the payment has
been characterized by agency personnel as AUO. In our earlier
decisions, we reviewed these facts, among others, and concluded
that the payment for the overtime hours worked by the employee in
the fourth quarter of FY 94 did not qualify him for availability
pay beginning on October 1, 1995.
The employee has submitted additional documents that allegedly
establish that he received AUO during the fourth quarter of FY 94.
One of the documents, a January 23, 1995 OPM letter, only describes
in general terms how availability pay is to be implemented and has
been considered in previous decisions. The other two documents, an
April 8, 1994 memorandum and a June 24, 1994 memorandum, do not
address the precise question whether the agency authorized AUO for
the claimant during the fourth quarter of FY 94. Accordingly, the
settlement denying the employee's claim for availability pay is
This decision is final. No further administrative review is
available within OPM. Nothing in this settlement bars the claimant
from pursuing any remedies that may be available in court.