C.F.R. » Title 5 » CHAPTER I—OFFICE OF PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT › SUBCHAPTER B—CIVIL SERVICE REGULATIONS › PART 351—REDUCTION IN FORCE › Subpart H—Notice to Employee

5 C.F.R. § 351.802

Content of notice

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) Except as otherwise provided in this part, a specific written notice under § 351.801 must include:

(1) The action to be taken, the reasons for the action, and its effective date;

(2) The employee's competitive area, competitive level, veterans' preference subgroup, tenure group and subgroup, service date, and three most recent ratings of record received during the last 4 years;

(3) A link to 5 CFR part 351 and information on how to access the agency's records pertinent to the reduction in force being taken.

(4) The reasons for retaining a lower-standing employee in the same competitive level under § 351.607 or § 351.608;

(5) Information on reemployment rights, except as permitted by § 351.803(a); and

(6) The employee's right, as applicable, to appeal to OPM, including the time limit for filing an appeal under § 351.902(b) of this part and the electronic filing system, identified on OPM's website, through which an appeal must be filed.

(b) When an agency issues an employee a notice, the agency must, upon the employee's request, provide the employee with a copy of OPM's retention regulations found in part 351 of this chapter.

[60 FR 2678, Jan. 11, 1995, as amended at 60 FR 44254, Aug. 25, 1995; 62 FR 62502, Nov. 24, 1997; 63 FR 32595, June 15, 1998; 91 FR 49226, 49263, Aug. 3, 2026; 91 FR 54795, Aug. 25, 2026]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 3 cases, 1982–2004 · leading case: Daniel R. Krizman v. Merit Sys. Prot. Bd., & United States Postal Serv., Intervenor, 77 F.3d 434 (Fed. Cir. 1996).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Daniel R. Krizman v. Merit Sys. Prot. Bd., & United States Postal Serv., Intervenor, 77 F.3d 434 (Fed. Cir. 1996). · cites it 2× “Although Krizman was a preference-eligible employee, the Postal Service had no obligation to advise him of his RIF rights, because he was never subjected to an ap-pealable RIF action — that is, he was never demoted, furloughed, or separated as a result of the restructuring.…”
Clifton L. Goodrich v. U. S. Dep't of the Navy & Merit Sys. Prot. Bd., 686 F.2d 169 (3d Cir. 1982). “5 C.F.R. § 351.802 (1982) (emphasis added).”
Cornyn v. Dep't of the Treasury, 96 F. App'x 678 (Fed. Cir. 2004). “The Board reviewed Cornyn’s notice with respect to both the statutory requirements stated above, as well as the requirements of the regulation promulgated thereunder, namely 5 C.F.R. § 351.802 (a). Initial Decision, slip op.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.