Prevailing Rate Systems; Redefinition of the Central North Carolina Appropriated Fund Wage Area, 28488-28489 [05-9894]

Download as PDF 28488 Proposed Rules Federal Register Vol. 70, No. 95 Wednesday, May 18, 2005 This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains notices to the public of the proposed issuance of rules and regulations. The purpose of these notices is to give interested persons an opportunity to participate in the rule making prior to the adoption of the final rules. OFFICE OF PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT 5 CFR Part 532 RIN 3206–AK83 Prevailing Rate Systems; Redefinition of the Central North Carolina Appropriated Fund Wage Area Office of Personnel Management. ACTION: Proposed rule with request for comments. AGENCY: SUMMARY: The Office of Personnel Management is issuing a proposed rule that would redefine the geographic boundaries of the Central North Carolina Federal Wage System (FWS) appropriated fund wage area. The proposed rule would remove Edgecombe and Wilson Counties, NC, from the survey area and add Hoke County, NC, to the survey area. The redefinition of Edgecombe, Hoke, and Wilson Counties would align the geographic definition of the Central North Carolina wage area more closely with the regulatory criteria used to define FWS wage areas. DATES: We must receive comments on or before June 17, 2005. ADDRESSES: Send or deliver comments to Donald J. Winstead, Deputy Associate Director for Pay and Performance Policy, Strategic Human Resources Policy Division, Office of Personnel Management, Room 7H31, 1900 E Street, NW., Washington, DC 20415– 8200; email pay-performancepolicy@opm.gov; or FAX: (202) 606– 4264. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Madeline Gonzalez, (202) 606–2838; email pay-performancepolicy@opm.gov; or FAX: (202) 606– 4264. The Office of Personnel Management (OPM) is engaged in an ongoing project to review the geographic definitions of Federal Wage System (FWS) wage areas. OPM SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: VerDate jul<14>2003 18:53 May 17, 2005 Jkt 205001 considers the following regulatory criteria under 5 CFR 532.211 when defining FWS wage area boundaries: (i) Distance, transportation facilities, and geographic features; (ii) Commuting patterns; and (iii) Similarities in overall population, employment, and the kinds and sizes of private industrial establishments. OPM reviewed each county in the Central North Carolina wage area and found that the area of application for the wage area is appropriately defined. As part of the review of wage area boundaries, OPM also considers whether the survey areas within each wage area should be changed. Based on an analysis of the regulatory criteria for defining FWS wage areas, OPM proposes to remove Edgecombe and Wilson Counties, NC, from the survey area because there are no FWS employees working in Edgecombe or Wilson Counties. Defining Edgecombe and Wilson Counties as part of the Central North Carolina area of application would allow FWS pay rates to reflect more closely the prevailing rates where FWS employees actually work. The amount of wage survey data obtained from Edgecombe and Wilson Counties has been relatively low in past surveys, with only about 15 percent of the Central North Carolina survey data during the last full-scale wage survey coming from private industrial establishments located in these two counties. Edgecombe and Wilson Counties would remain in the Central North Carolina area of application. In addition, OPM proposes to add Hoke County to the Central North Carolina survey area. Hoke County is currently defined as part of the Central North Carolina area of application. While there are no FWS employees working in Hoke County, Fort Bragg, the Central North Carolina’s host activity, extends into Hoke County. Also, Hoke County is one of the two counties of the Fayetteville, NC Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA). The other county of the Fayetteville, NC MSA, Cumberland County, is already defined as part of the Central North Carolina survey area. These changes would be effective for the next full-scale wage survey in the Central North Carolina wage area, which is scheduled to begin in May 2006. The Federal Prevailing Rate Advisory Committee (FPRAC), the national labormanagement committee that advises PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 OPM on FWS pay matters, reviewed and recommended these changes by consensus. Based on its review of the regulatory criteria for defining FWS wage areas, FPRAC recommended no other changes in the geographic definition of the Central North Carolina wage area. Regulatory Flexibility Act I certify that these regulations would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities because they would affect only Federal agencies and employees. List of Subjects in 5 CFR Part 532 Administrative practice and procedure, Freedom of information, Government employees, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Wages. Office of Personnel Management. Dan G. Blair, Acting Director. Accordingly, the Office of Personnel Management proposes to amend 5 CFR part 532 as follows: PART 532—PREVAILING RATE SYSTEMS 1. The authority citation for part 532 continues to read as follows: Authority: 5 U.S.C. 5343, 5346; § 532.707 also issued under 5 U.S.C. 552. 2. In appendix C to subpart B, the wage area listing for the State of North Carolina is amended by revising the listing for Central North Carolina to read as follows: Appendix C to Subpart B of Part 532— Appropriated Fund Wage and Survey Areas North Carolina * * * * * Central North Carolina Survey Area North Carolina: Cumberland Durham Harnett Hoke Johnston Orange Wake Wayne Area of Application. Survey Area Plus: North Carolina: Alamance Bladen Caswell E:\FR\FM\18MYP1.SGM 18MYP1 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 95 / Wednesday, May 18, 2005 / Proposed Rules Chatham Davidson Davie Edgecombe Franklin Forsyth Granville Guilford Halifax Lee Montgomery Moore Nash Northampton Person Randolph Richmond Robeson Rockingham Sampson Scotland Stokes Surry Vance Warren Wilson Yadkin South Carolina: Dillon Marion Marlboro * * * between the upper actuator and the TRAS lock. We are proposing this AD to prevent high power in-flight deployment of a thrust reverser, which could cause high roll force and consequent departure from controlled flight. * * [FR Doc. 05–9894 Filed 5–17–05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6325–39–P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA–2005–21236; Directorate Identifier 2005–NM–011–AD] RIN 2120–AA64 Airworthiness Directives; Boeing Model 767 Airplanes Equipped with General Electric Model CF6–80C2 Engines Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of Transportation (DOT). ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM). AGENCY: SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain Boeing Model 767 airplanes. This proposed AD would require modifying a relay installation and associated wiring of the engine cowl anti-ice system and performing a functional test of the thrust reverser system. This proposed AD would also require replacing the operational program software of certain indicating/ recording systems. This proposed AD is prompted by numerous operator reports of failures of the lock flexshaft of the thrust reverser actuation system (TRAS) VerDate jul<14>2003 We must receive comments on this proposed AD by July 5, 2005. ADDRESSES: Use one of the following addresses to submit comments on this proposed AD. • DOT Docket Web site: Go to https://dms.dot.gov and follow the instructions for sending your comments electronically. • Government-wide rulemaking Web site: Go to https://www.regulations.gov and follow the instructions for sending your comments electronically. • Mail: Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of Transportation, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Nassif Building, room PL–401, Washington, DC 20590. • By fax: (202) 493–2251. • Hand Delivery: Room PL–401 on the plaza level of the Nassif Building, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. For service information identified in this proposed AD, contact Boeing Commercial Airplanes, P.O. Box 3707, Seattle, Washington 98124–2207. You can examine the contents of this AD docket on the Internet at https:// dms.dot.gov, or in person at the Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of Transportation, 400 Seventh Street, SW., room PL–401, on the plaza level of the Nassif Building, Washington, DC. This docket number is FAA–2005– 21236; the directorate identifier for this docket is 2005–NM–011–AD. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sulmo Mariano, Aerospace Engineer, Propulsion Branch, ANM–140S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98055–4056; telephone (425) 917–6501; fax (425) 917–6590. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: DATES: 18:53 May 17, 2005 Jkt 205001 Comments Invited We invite you to submit any relevant written data, views, or arguments regarding this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address listed under ADDRESSES. Include ‘‘Docket No. FAA– 2005–21236; Directorate Identifier 2005–NM–011–AD’’ in the subject line of your comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory, economic, environmental, and energy aspects of the proposed AD. We will consider all comments submitted by the closing date and may PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 28489 amend the proposed AD in light of those comments. We will post all comments we receive, without change, to https:// dms.dot.gov, including any personal information you provide. We will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact with FAA personnel concerning this proposed AD. Using the search function of that Web site, anyone can find and read the comments in any of our dockets, including the name of the individual who sent the comment (or signed the comment on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.). You can review DOT’s complete Privacy Act Statement in the Federal Register published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477–78), or you can visit https:// dms.dot.gov. Examining the Docket You can examine the AD docket on the Internet at https://dms.dot.gov, or in person at the Docket Management Facility office between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The Docket Management Facility office (telephone (800) 647–5227) is located on the plaza level of the Nassif Building at the DOT street address stated in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after the DMS receives them. Discussion We have received a report that operators have reported more than 140 failures of the lock flexshaft of the thrust reverser actuation system (TRAS) between the upper actuator and the TRAS lock, on certain Boeing Model 767 airplanes. Analysis showed these failures were caused by pneumatic pressure that was insufficient to decelerate the TRAS at the end of the deploy stroke. This condition, if not corrected, could result in high power inflight deployment of a thrust reverser, which could cause high roll force and consequent departure from controlled flight. Related Rulemaking On April 26, 2000, we issued AD 2000–09–04, amendment 39–11712 (65 FR 25833, May 4, 2000), which is applicable to certain Boeing Model 767 series airplanes equipped with General Electric Model CF6–80C2 engines. That AD requires tests, inspections, and adjustments of the thrust reverser system and installation of a terminating modification and repetitive follow-on actions; in accordance with Boeing Service Bulletin 767–78A0081, Revision 1, dated October 9, 1997; Boeing Service E:\FR\FM\18MYP1.SGM 18MYP1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 95 (Wednesday, May 18, 2005)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 28488-28489]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-9894]


========================================================================
Proposed Rules
                                                Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains notices to the public of 
the proposed issuance of rules and regulations. The purpose of these 
notices is to give interested persons an opportunity to participate in 
the rule making prior to the adoption of the final rules.

========================================================================


Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 95 / Wednesday, May 18, 2005 / 
Proposed Rules

[[Page 28488]]



OFFICE OF PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT

5 CFR Part 532

RIN 3206-AK83


Prevailing Rate Systems; Redefinition of the Central North 
Carolina Appropriated Fund Wage Area

AGENCY: Office of Personnel Management.

ACTION: Proposed rule with request for comments.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Office of Personnel Management is issuing a proposed rule 
that would redefine the geographic boundaries of the Central North 
Carolina Federal Wage System (FWS) appropriated fund wage area. The 
proposed rule would remove Edgecombe and Wilson Counties, NC, from the 
survey area and add Hoke County, NC, to the survey area. The 
redefinition of Edgecombe, Hoke, and Wilson Counties would align the 
geographic definition of the Central North Carolina wage area more 
closely with the regulatory criteria used to define FWS wage areas.

DATES: We must receive comments on or before June 17, 2005.

ADDRESSES: Send or deliver comments to Donald J. Winstead, Deputy 
Associate Director for Pay and Performance Policy, Strategic Human 
Resources Policy Division, Office of Personnel Management, Room 7H31, 
1900 E Street, NW., Washington, DC 20415-8200; email pay-performance-
policy@opm.gov; or FAX: (202) 606-4264.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Madeline Gonzalez, (202) 606-2838; 
email pay-performance-policy@opm.gov; or FAX: (202) 606-4264.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Office of Personnel Management (OPM) is 
engaged in an ongoing project to review the geographic definitions of 
Federal Wage System (FWS) wage areas. OPM considers the following 
regulatory criteria under 5 CFR 532.211 when defining FWS wage area 
boundaries:
    (i) Distance, transportation facilities, and geographic features;
    (ii) Commuting patterns; and
    (iii) Similarities in overall population, employment, and the kinds 
and sizes of private industrial establishments.
    OPM reviewed each county in the Central North Carolina wage area 
and found that the area of application for the wage area is 
appropriately defined. As part of the review of wage area boundaries, 
OPM also considers whether the survey areas within each wage area 
should be changed. Based on an analysis of the regulatory criteria for 
defining FWS wage areas, OPM proposes to remove Edgecombe and Wilson 
Counties, NC, from the survey area because there are no FWS employees 
working in Edgecombe or Wilson Counties. Defining Edgecombe and Wilson 
Counties as part of the Central North Carolina area of application 
would allow FWS pay rates to reflect more closely the prevailing rates 
where FWS employees actually work. The amount of wage survey data 
obtained from Edgecombe and Wilson Counties has been relatively low in 
past surveys, with only about 15 percent of the Central North Carolina 
survey data during the last full-scale wage survey coming from private 
industrial establishments located in these two counties. Edgecombe and 
Wilson Counties would remain in the Central North Carolina area of 
application.
    In addition, OPM proposes to add Hoke County to the Central North 
Carolina survey area. Hoke County is currently defined as part of the 
Central North Carolina area of application. While there are no FWS 
employees working in Hoke County, Fort Bragg, the Central North 
Carolina's host activity, extends into Hoke County. Also, Hoke County 
is one of the two counties of the Fayetteville, NC Metropolitan 
Statistical Area (MSA). The other county of the Fayetteville, NC MSA, 
Cumberland County, is already defined as part of the Central North 
Carolina survey area.
    These changes would be effective for the next full-scale wage 
survey in the Central North Carolina wage area, which is scheduled to 
begin in May 2006.
    The Federal Prevailing Rate Advisory Committee (FPRAC), the 
national labor-management committee that advises OPM on FWS pay 
matters, reviewed and recommended these changes by consensus. Based on 
its review of the regulatory criteria for defining FWS wage areas, 
FPRAC recommended no other changes in the geographic definition of the 
Central North Carolina wage area.

Regulatory Flexibility Act

    I certify that these regulations would not have a significant 
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities because they 
would affect only Federal agencies and employees.

List of Subjects in 5 CFR Part 532

    Administrative practice and procedure, Freedom of information, 
Government employees, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Wages.

Office of Personnel Management.
Dan G. Blair,
Acting Director.
    Accordingly, the Office of Personnel Management proposes to amend 5 
CFR part 532 as follows:

PART 532--PREVAILING RATE SYSTEMS

    1. The authority citation for part 532 continues to read as 
follows:

    Authority: 5 U.S.C. 5343, 5346; Sec.  532.707 also issued under 
5 U.S.C. 552.

    2. In appendix C to subpart B, the wage area listing for the State 
of North Carolina is amended by revising the listing for Central North 
Carolina to read as follows:

Appendix C to Subpart B of Part 532--Appropriated Fund Wage and Survey 
Areas

North Carolina

* * * * *

Central North Carolina

Survey Area

North Carolina:
    Cumberland
    Durham
    Harnett
    Hoke
    Johnston
    Orange
    Wake
    Wayne

Area of Application. Survey Area Plus:

North Carolina:
    Alamance
    Bladen
    Caswell

[[Page 28489]]

    Chatham
    Davidson
    Davie
    Edgecombe
    Franklin
    Forsyth
    Granville
    Guilford
    Halifax
    Lee
    Montgomery
    Moore
    Nash
    Northampton
    Person
    Randolph
    Richmond
    Robeson
    Rockingham
    Sampson
    Scotland
    Stokes
    Surry
    Vance
    Warren
    Wilson
    Yadkin
South Carolina:
    Dillon
    Marion
    Marlboro
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 05-9894 Filed 5-17-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6325-39-P
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.