I'll clarify since you are correct in pointing out what seems like an apparent difference. 23M7 is part of our PWA and provides guidelines for the company to "deviate from the sequences under Section 23 N. or O." They sequence is all that is allowed to be changed. So they move to a step of coverage that requires inverse assignment and continue to run coverage from the new step. That doesn't allow them to make up steps or not comply with the requirements of the step. IA or A#x is how this is accounted for in coverage and pay. When I say it's not a real IA what is meant is that it didn't follow the sequence and end up at that step in the normal order of coverage. The fact that we don't have a way to differentiate the separate paths to arrive at the IA steps is the source of confusion. In either situation you are only forced/entitled to 1 IA until you are the only available pilot exactly like the GS steps of coverage. They are IAs for pay and coverage and all other PWA applicable situations, however the step was reached as a result of 23M7.