I. Welcome -Cliff Lee covered the procedures for evacuation in the event of an emergency evacuation and/or "Shelter-in-Place" crisis. He requested that participants make sure they sign the attendance sheet. He also reminded clients that the CAPPS Survey box was on the back table for representatives who wish to drop off their completed CAPPS surveys anonymously. He indicated that this morning Jody had sent the CAPPS reps a reminder to please complete the survey.

II. IDMS Release 16.0 - Gary Gaspard indicated that IDMS 16.0 was implemented across all of the non- payroll areas of the NFC this past weekend. During the test period on Saturday, there were no issues identified by NFC or external users who were testing. Therefore, this coming weekend (June 25th), the upgrade will be rolled out to the payroll applications. It will be rolled out at 2:00 pm Saturday for testing. If all goes well, it will remain in production. Al Guilliot has been coordinating the testing for IDMS Release 16.0. Please contact him if you have not already done so and want to participate. At this point NFC expects no issues for the 2nd rollout since the 1st one went so smoothly.

III. Pay Regulation Changes (aka: Special Rate Changes) - Because this encompasses more than just the Special Rate changes, Cliff immediately changed the title. He indicated that OPM issued CPM-2005-10 on May 26th which transmitted the new pay regulations. This is a big surprise if you have not seen them, confusion if you have read them. This is the general response so you are not alone.

A. As for the Special Salary Rate (SSR) changes, OPM terminated 103 SSR tables effective April 30th and modified 217 others. NFC implemented these changes in PP-10, retroactive to May 1, 2005. NFC swept the PMSO records and generated Pay Adjustment actions for employees with PRD 5 or 6 who's SSR was terminated.

B. Special Rate Supplement delayed until at least January 2006 (PP-01, 2006). OPM is proposing that you enter the 2006 General Schedule basic rate (or 491 rate for LEO's at grades 3 thru 10) in the scheduled salary (basic rate) field and a Special Rate Supplement in the geographic adjustment (locality adjustment) field; these fields would be added to give the Adjusted Salary (the special salary rate for the grade/step). Agencies will need to re-train their processing staffs on this change.

C. Major change in pay retention. Up until May 1st of this year, an employee on pay retention was entitled to locality pay on top of his/her retained basic rate of pay (scheduled salary). Effective May 1, 2005, employees on pay retention are not entitled to locality pay. OPM is saying - although they have not issued any processing guidance - that we need to process an 894 to change each individual's basic pay (scheduled salary) to include his/her current rate of pay with locality included. At that point we stop paying locality on top of the retained rate. OPM's Joann Perrini has indicated that OPM would like agencies to implement this provision by Pay Period 01/2006. Be advised that NFC must also change it's programming to accommodate this (i.e., stop paying locality on retained rates). Because of other issues currently going on which include two implementations in PP-17, we probably will not be able to get to this until sometime after PP-17.

1. Q: TR - The system won't be able to accept the 894's until PP-17? A: It will likely be sometime after PP-17.

2. Q: TR - Is OPM still asking for input on the supplement or is it a done deal? A: Cliff - It appears to be a done deal, even though there is discussion of EHRI asking for a separate field. However, when this issue was raised at Tuesday's meeting at OPM, it was not well received by the audience. FQ: TR- Since this is also covered via a pay table code will there be two pay table codes? A: No, an employee will only be covered by a SSR or locality, not both.

D. Leo's - OPM has treated the LEO 0491 table as a SSR table in the past. (Leo's in the grade 3 through 10 are covered by the 491 table). OPM is proposing that as of January 2006 agencies no longer treat Pay Table 491as a special rate table. OPM is recommending a GL pay plan to cover Leo's in grades 03 through 10 covered by Pay Table 491. Obviously NFC would have to modify the system to tie this new GL pay plan to the LEO indicator and make other modifications to implement this proposal. OPM wants to remove the PRD of 6 from these records since PRD 6 is intended to identify special rate employees under 5 U.S.C. 5305; the LEO basic rates are not special salary rates under 5 U.S.C.5305.

E. Q&A's

1. Q: FDIC - FDIC's pay is not subject to the other rules. Are other agencies doing that? A: Cliff - That is why we sent out a call for information from agencies not covered by Title 5. We know that we may have Congressional and/or independent agencies that need to notify us whether they will or will not follow the new Title 5 regulations and guidance for the Executive agencies. FC: Okay, but I am waiting on official word from management before I can do this. FA: Not a problem, we are not programming these changes in the near future. We just want agencies that have this flexibility to be working on their decisions in this area so that when it comes time to provide input you will be prepared to do so.

2. Q: DOC - We have several people that have been promoted out of SSR. After reading the new regulations we realize that we did not set their pay in accordance with them. The new regulations were effective on May 1st, but we just got them and did things wrong for three pay periods. Do we go back and fix them? A: Cliff - OPM's answer is yes.

F. System Edit Messages

1. If you get the 531 PINE error message for promotion actions, please use the override code of "C" for NFC to by-pass this edit. We anticipate that the change in pay regulations for special rate employees will result in more situations where the scheduled salary will actually decline in a promotion action while the adjusted salary is increased.

2. For those processing actions on a PRD E and F employee, you will be getting error messages 469/470 when you try to change the employee to PRD "B". Use the override of "L" to bypass those error messages.

3. The 582 PINE error message will not have an override, but we will be changing the PINE edit. When this edit change is programmed, the error messages will disappear for the PRD E and F cases.

4. George added that the PMSO edit requiring the SSR table be entered in the IP if there is a suffix on the title in the master is being reviewed. If you have any of these cases, blank out the suffix on the master, remove the SSR, re-modify the master to re-apply the suffix.

a. Q: TR - Does this generate a 903 action? A: NFC was not sure. The CSOSA representative indicated that they had used this method and it did generate the 903 for another employee that was sharing that master on whom they did not do a personnel action.

IV. Functional Requirements Document Process - Randy Gonzales followed-up on the April meeting discussion on the implementation of a functional requirements documents process. This had been discussed previously; this process is being implemented as the result of a recommendation from an OIG audit that the customer(s) should be more involved in the program change process. Beginning on July 1st, NFC will start using this new process. The agency's Customer Support Representative (CSR) will coordinate with the originator of the request. S/he will also coordinate within NFC to make sure that we understand what you wanted. Once everyone agrees on the changes, the process can move forward. In addition to the programming aspect, the new process also requires that reimbursable (inter-agency) agreements be established before we can start working on the project requirements.

A. C: George pointed out to the clients that this will extend the timeline for system changes. Randy added that initially it will lengthen the timeline. However, it should result in a shortened back-end process. Functional requirements will ensure that the appropriate programming is done and get the clients involved in the testing process to make sure that the changes are doing what the client intended.

B. Q: SI - Under the current process we had recently asked for a couple of projects. Typically I send a request to GESDRequest for an estimated time-frame and cost to program the changes. In these two recent situations, the next thing I knew we had a reimbursable agreement issued and the programming had already been done. A: Randy - Yes that sometimes happens now in the current process as we try to fit things in when we can. In the future, we will not do that anymore. If we do not have both parts in place, nothing will happen. FC: This will significantly delay the process. He submitted another request a month ago, but has yet to have an estimate on that one. FR: We have to do some initial analysis to determine the true cost. If we are not careful when doing the analysis, the cost estimate may not be close. This has also caused problems. With the new process the estimates should be much closer to actuality.

C. Q: FDIC - What happens to projects that already have a signed agreement? A: We will continue with the old process for those, but will make sure that we understand what you want.

V. 2005 Customer Forum - Theresa Trentacoste covered the key items about the Customer Forum next month. The dates are July 26th and 27th. Within the last two weeks NFC has sent targeted e-mails out on the forum. One went to the executive level points of contact (POC) such as the OCFO's, HCO's, and OCIO's. A separate one went to the more detailed POCs.

The format for the morning session on the 26th will be targeted to the executive level. Day 1 is to cover the strategic issues tied to the President's management agenda. The format for the afternoon session will build on that morning session, but will be much more detailed. Day 2 will be much more specific and will include discussing individual systems or processing topics. These sessions cover more detailed information like the schedule for the release of specific enhancements or features.

We are in the process of changing the banner on the NFC home page to provide more information. This should be done by tomorrow morning (June 16th) and the new banner will include a link that will provide more information on the Customer Forum. There is no registration (or pre-registration) required. The POC's may attend the sessions with as many individuals as they feel appropriate. We look forward to seeing you there.

VI. Employee Express / Employee Self Service - George did not have an update on any Employee Express issues. To his knowledge there was no meeting this month. Regarding the Employee Self Service (ESS), he requested input from Randy Gonzales. Randy indicated that there we no imminent changes. However, he said that NFC had met with SHPS and the long-term care partners about two weeks ago. One of the items discussed was OPM's offering of a new "Dental & Vision Benefit" that will be available soon. OPM is discussing providing a benefits portal to cover items like SHPS, Long-Term Care, and Dental & Vision Benefits, etc. As we get more information we will share it and if it is implemented we will provide a link on the ESS to OPM's "Benefits Portal".

A. Q: George - Will NFC be linking to TR for the bond site? A: Randy - We have not had any more discussions with Treasury Direct on what they want us to do as they move away from the paper bonds. As they progress with their e-bond initiative, we can direct people who go to the bond option on the ESS to the treasury web site for e-bonds.

B. Q: TR-BPD - What about the SF-50-b project on the ESS? A: Randy - We are still working on the issues for that project. Specifically, cancellations and corrections are a big issue with such an option. Of concern is the audit trail and what stays and what goes during the correction/cancellation process. Of course, these issues will go hand-in-hand with the new electronic OPF that OPM is proposing.

C. C: George added that he had received a call from OPM regarding the CFC electronic initiative. OPM was interested in what NFC might be developing in this arena. OPM is working with EEX and the Washington Area CFC campaign to develop a tentative package that would enable employees to elect CFC on-line and would be the prototype for a standard website for handling all contributions electronically. This election could link or feed to the payroll provider and would replace the old paper form process and well as reporting requirements. NFC is still reviewing what OPM sent us, but no action in the near future is contemplated.

VII. Recruitment, Relocation, and Retention (3R's) - Cliff indicated that for starters the new regulations changed the terminology for these from bonuses to incentives. However, the biggest change is that these will now be based upon the adjusted salary and not the base salary.

Cliff indicated that he has been receiving phone calls from offices where they have a former SSR employee with retention allowance. Everyone is concerned because the rate paid to these individuals has dropped. This is because under the old regulations this incentive was based on basic pay. Employees who came off the SSR due to the May 1st changes to the SSR tables now have a lower basic rate of pay. As a result the retention allowances have gone done. The agency has two options to handle these situations.

A. Option 1 - If the current incentive is less than 25%, and your agency plans allows you to do so, you may raise the percentage as needed to get the dollar value back to where it was. Or

B. Option 2 - If your agency plan allows it, you may renegotiate the retention allowance and give them the same rate under the new regulations. However, be advised that incentive paid under the new regulations must go through manual pay for the near term.

Cliff pointed out that Jo had sent a survey to the clients asking for input from the clients on outstanding Recruitment and Relocation agreements under the old regulations. Quite a few agencies had responded that several agreements under the old regulations were still outstanding. One particular agency had 59 pending. One of the programming complications for the 3-R's is that OPM is using the same NOA and authority combo for recruitment and relocation incentives paid under the new regulations that they used for the old regulations. Therefore, we cannot tell them apart to pay them differently. NFC probably will not be in a convenient position to make the programming changes for the 3-R's until sometime after PP-17. In light of the outstanding agreements, we will probably not attempt to accelerate this date. As we discuss our options further, we will let you know when you can begin using the system for the new incentives. You will have to use manual pay for them until then. On the other hand, you can continue to process those agreements made under the old regulations via the automated system.

C. Q&A's

1. Q: TR - Can we do the manual process via SPPS? A: Cliff and JO were not sure. The FEC rep indicated that they had just utilized SPPS to do one and then typed the manual SF-50b. The user just selects retention bonus (or whichever 3-R that is appropriate for the case).

2. Q: DOJ - If we have do it through SPPS, we have to do it all through SPPS not just the difference between the new and the old and enter a personnel action, right? A: Yes. Do not use both systems for one incentive.

3. Q: TR - There is no edit in the SPPS system that would prohibit us from processing all 100% of an incentive in the first year, is there? A: Correct. There are NO edits of this type in the SPPS system.

4. Q: Will we be charged for the manual payments? A: Randy - Don't know. We will have to check into that. FQ: TR pointed out that there are not charges for SPPS when the agency enters the document and does the work right? Therefore, if we did the installments each pay period, there shouldn't be a charge, right? FA: Randy - that would be a logical assumption since you, the agency, are doing the work.

5. Q: DOJ - If the incentive is going to be done as a percentage each pay period, can we just enter it in SPPS once? A: No. It must be entered each pay period.
Cliff repeated that the major change is that the new incentives are based upon the adjusted salary and not on basic pay.

VIII. User & Work Group Updates

A. Awards - JO pointed out that since the meetings were now quarterly, there was no meeting in June. The next one is scheduled for August. She also indicated that the 840/841 NET being programmed for SS, but open to everyone has been postponed from PP-11. She did not have the new release date.

B. Benefits - Cliff informed the clients that Jody was at the TSP quarterly meeting. Her next benefits meeting is scheduled for June 23rd. She intends to send more information out on that meeting before the 23rd.

C. EPIC - Gary indicated that there is a meeting scheduled for tomorrow (June 16th).

1. An NFC representative, Mark Liegey, we will be in attendance along with Lynda Wilson who is on contract with the NFC. Gary pointed out that many clients may know Lynda since she used to work for NFC, but retired in May 2004.

2. The expectation is that the EPIC work group will begin meeting on a regular basis. Please participate. If you have any questions, please contact Lynda Wilson. Lynda indicated that she had sent the dial-in number for those who had requested it. Gary indicated that Lynda had prepared a list of pending EPIC issues, some long-standing, and it should be an interesting first meeting. If group simply gets through the list they will be doing well. The first few meetings will used to obtain in-put on these issue and prioritize them.

a. Q: TR - Will the list be sent to those dialing in? A: Yes.

D. EPP - Randy Gonzales indicated that the only new item is the possibility of the Benefits link in the near future.

E. FESI - Randy - Nothing to report in this area.

F. PMSO - George - We are continuing to work through the last large package of PMSO issues/concerns. When it is done we will distribute it to the group for review and discussion. Right now they are just sifting through the package because there is much to "chew-on".

G. T&A - JO indicated that the T&A meetings last week were cancelled because she had to spend the week at OPM discussing T&A and payroll issues with the other payroll providers. She also apologized to STAR 4.25 users for the system operation over the last few days and thanked them for their patience. She indicated that as of 9:00 this morning users had transmitted 101,997 T&As in STAR 4.25. Since the total volume of STAR 4.25 submissions for last pay was 135,000, this number is actually very good. While the system is slow, the clients are getting their work through it.

1. Q: Can you tell us what the problems were? A: JO asked if there was anyone available at NOLA that could detail the issues that had arisen. Gary Gaspard indicated that one of the problems appeared to be with CoolGen coding (it had been modified for the SPPS implementation). In addition, there were also server issues. After that, we have experienced volume issues due to the delay in the first few days of the T&A cycle.

2. Q: HUD - We are concerned over the distribution of the information. What we receive us often too little, too late. In addition, sometimes by the time it is out, the status has changed. A: JO indicated that this is an issue that has been raised by the T&A user group in the past. There are NFC staff looking into the possibility of a "banner page" that would appear when the STAR URL was activated that could provide an update on STAR's status. She did not know the status of this initiative. Gary also added that the Customer Support area is working to develop a contact list for STAR users that they could utilize to distribute information about the system status

3. Q: DOC - On a different subject, what are other agencies doing for their lump sum payments. Specifically to exclude the comp time for travel (CTT) from the comp time reports that are generated. Are there reports that other agencies are using to identify and/or exclude these records? A: JO indicated that the records could be distinguished on the IRIS 139 screen because the rate does not appear for the CTT records. FQ: Yes, we realize this, but the rate is not included in our FOCUS report and we wanted to know if anyone had already written/changed a FOCUS report to capture this information or exclude the CTT's. FR: No representatives knew of an existing report within their organizations. DHS recommended that DOC just go to IRIS 139 like DHS does. DOC/Census indicated that they can do this, but they pay out approximately 300 of these Comp Time payments each pay period and the report method speeds up the process. JO recommend that they modify the FOCUS report for now.

POST MEETING UPDATE: If anyone reading these notes happens to have this type of report and is willing to share it, please get in touch with your CAPPS representative so the information can be passed to DOC and any other client who may be interested.

IX. Potpourri

A. DOL - We are relatively new to the NFC client community and since we are the Labor department we have several employees in unions. Our unions are very vocal and they have some suggestions on NFC's current E&L statement. It is very different from what DOL employees are used to having. Therefore, DOL is requesting that the E&L be modified to accommodate their changes. The representative distributed a package for other clients to consider that contained 1) their request, 2) the old DOL E&L statement, the E&L statement under the NFC system, and their cross-walk. George pointed out that we might be able to make changes but there would probably be a large cost. Randy added that we would not modify the E&L generation system for only one client. All of the clients would have to agree on the changes. The DOL representative indicated that they were okay with that. Buy-in from the other clients was what she was there to obtain. She added "We are only 17,000 of the 550,000+ NFC services, but we do have money and are willing to pay for the changes if the other clients agree to them." The rep would like to have input by the next meeting so that the issue can be discussed there. An electronic copy of the package will be provided to PPSPS so that it can be e-mailed to clients.

B. CFTC - Is the representative from Pre-trial here today? We accidently received some of their mail. PSA was not represented but the CSOSA rep, their sister organization, agreed to take it for them.

C. PC - We have an employee who is on a Dual appointment with SI. In PP-09 we processed a special act award for her that did not pay out. She contacted NFC and was told that the system had "dropped" some cash awards in PP-10 and to wait another pay period to see if it paid. Has anyone else experienced this and what happened? No other clients had the problem, or knew about it if they did. Neither JO nor Randy was aware of an awards problem in PP-10. The rep will get with JO off-line and provide specifics so that the case may be researched and provided to Randy.

D. Gary reminded clients not to forget to turn-in the CAPPS survey questionnaires.

X. Participants

A. Client Representatives:

1. In-Person: AG, AOC, CCR, CFTC, CSOSA, DHS, DOC, DOJ, DOL, FCC, FEC, FDIC, GAO, HUD, NEH, SBA, SI, TR, and USAID

2. Via Teleconference: TR, TR-BPD

B. NFC Representatives:

1. In-Person: Jo Bonner, Suneel Chirunomula, Johanna Heller, Cliff Lee, Sandie Mikell, George Morris, and Lynda Wilson

2. Via Teleconference: Gary Gaspard, Randy Gonzales, and Theresa Trentacoste