General Schedule Locality Pay Areas, 35383-35385 [05-12033]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
35383
Proposed Rules
Federal Register
Vol. 70, No. 117
Monday, June 20, 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 531
RIN 3206–AK78
General Schedule Locality Pay Areas
Office of Personnel
Management.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: On behalf of the President’s
Pay Agent, the Office of Personnel
Management is issuing proposed
regulations on the locality pay program
for General Schedule employees. The
proposed regulations would merge the
Kansas City, St. Louis, and Orlando
locality pay areas with the Rest of U.S.
locality pay area; create new locality
pay areas for Buffalo, NY; Phoenix, AZ;
and Raleigh, NC; add Fannin County,
TX, to the Dallas-Fort Worth locality
pay area; and make minor changes in
the official description of the Los
Angeles-Long Beach-Riverside and
Washington-Baltimore-Northern
Virginia locality pay areas. The new
locality pay area definitions would
become effective in January 2006.
DATES: We must receive comments on or
before August 19, 2005.
ADDRESSES: Send or deliver comments
to Donald J. Winstead, Deputy Associate
Director for Pay and Performance
Policy, Office of Personnel Management,
Room 7H31, 1900 E Street, NW.,
Washington, DC 20415–8200; FAX:
(202) 606–4264; or e-mail: payperformance-policy@opm.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Allan Hearne, (202) 606–2838; FAX:
(202) 606–4264; e-mail: payperformance-policy@opm.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section
5304 of title 5, United States Code,
authorizes locality pay for General
Schedule (GS) employees with duty
stations in the contiguous United States
and the District of Columbia. By law,
locality pay is set by comparing GS pay
rates with non-Federal pay rates for the
same levels of work in each locality pay
VerDate jul<14>2003
14:18 Jun 17, 2005
Jkt 205001
area. Non-Federal pay levels are
estimated by means of salary surveys
conducted by the Bureau of Labor
Statistics (BLS). Currently, there are 32
locality pay areas: 31 separate
metropolitan locality pay areas and a
‘‘Rest of U.S.’’ (RUS) locality pay area
that consists of all locations in the
contiguous United States that are not
part of one of the 31 separate
metropolitan locality pay areas.
Section 5304(f) of title 5, United
States Code, authorizes the President’s
Pay Agent (the Secretary of Labor, the
Director of the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB), and the Director of
the Office of Personnel Management
(OPM)) to determine locality pay areas.
The boundaries of locality pay areas
must be based on appropriate factors,
which may include local labor market
patterns, commuting patterns, and the
practices of other employers. The Pay
Agent must give thorough consideration
to the views and recommendations of
the Federal Salary Council, a body
composed of experts in the fields of
labor relations and pay policy and
representatives of Federal employee
organizations. The President appoints
the members of the Federal Salary
Council, which submits annual
recommendations to the President’s Pay
Agent about the locality pay program.
Based on recommendations of the
Federal Salary Council, we use
Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) and
Combined Statistical Area (CSA)
definitions established by the Office of
Management and Budget as the basis for
locality pay area definitions.
Merging Three Locality Pay Areas With
the RUS Locality Pay Area
The Federal Salary Council
recommended in 2003 that the Pay
Agent merge the Kansas City, St. Louis,
and Orlando locality pay areas with the
RUS locality pay area in 2005 and ask
BLS to reallocate its survey resources to
cover other areas. The Council made
this recommendation because pay
comparisons between General Schedule
pay and non-Federal pay show that the
overall pay disparity in those areas has
been below that for the RUS locality pay
area for several years. The RUS area
serves as the ‘‘base’’ rate, since it is not
reasonable to allow a locality pay rate in
a metropolitan area to be below the
catch-all RUS area rate that would apply
just outside the metropolitan area. The
PO 00000
Frm 00001
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Council determined that BLS survey
resources would be better used in other
locations currently in the RUS locality
pay area where non-Federal pay levels
might warrant higher locality pay and
where large numbers of GS employees
work. The Pay Agent concurred with
this recommendation in its 2003 report
to the President, but later requested that
the Council review the matter further.
After reviewing more recent salary
survey data, the Council recommended
in 2004 that the Kansas City, St. Louis,
and Orlando locality pay areas be
merged with the RUS locality pay area
in 2006. The Pay Agent concurred with
this recommendation in its 2004 report
to the President. This proposed
regulation would implement the
Council’s recommendation by merging
the Kansas City, St. Louis, and Orlando
locality pay areas with the Rest of U.S.
locality pay area in January 2006.
New Locality Pay Areas for 2006
The Council also recommended in
2004 that existing BLS surveys in the
Austin, Buffalo, Louisville, Memphis,
Phoenix, and Raleigh metropolitan areas
be redesigned as full-scale locality pay
surveys and that Buffalo, Phoenix, and
Raleigh be made separate locality pay
areas in 2006. This proposed regulation
follows the Council’s recommendation
and would make Buffalo (Cattaraugus,
Erie, and Niagara Counties, NY),
Phoenix (Maricopa and Pinal Counties,
AZ), and Raleigh (Chatham, Durham,
Franklin, Harnett, Johnston, Orange,
Person, and Wake Counties, NC)
separate locality pay areas in 2006.
The six metropolitan areas listed
above each have 2,500 or more GS
employees and 375,000 or more nonfarm workers in the local economy (a
sufficient base for measuring local pay
levels). In addition, smaller-scale BLS
salary surveys indicated that pay levels
in each area were above those found in
the RUS locality pay area. For the 2004
review of locality pay, the Pay Agent
asked BLS to produce data for these six
metropolitan areas (including modeled
data as done for the existing locality pay
areas) and compared the survey results
to base GS rates using its standard
locality pay methodology. The Council
based its recommendation to add three
new locality pay areas in 2006 on pay
comparisons showing that Buffalo,
Phoenix, and Raleigh each had a
Federal/non-Federal pay disparity
E:\FR\FM\20JNP1.SGM
20JNP1
35384
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 117 / Monday, June 20, 2005 / Proposed Rules
significantly higher than the pay
disparity in the RUS locality pay area.
The pay comparisons for Memphis
showed that the pay disparity was less
than 1 percentage point above the RUS
area pay disparity and that pay
disparities in Austin and Louisville
were slightly below the RUS area pay
disparity. BLS plans to continue work to
redesign its salary surveys over the next
several years, and the Federal Salary
Council and the Pay Agent plan to
review data for all six of these areas in
the future as additional data become
available.
Criteria for Areas of Application
Applied to New Locality Pay Areas
Based on the Council’s
recommendations, the Pay Agent
established criteria for evaluating areas
adjacent to metropolitan locality pay
areas for inclusion in that locality pay
area.
The criteria are as follows:
1. For adjacent MSAs and CSAs: To
be included in an adjacent locality pay
area, an adjacent MSA or CSA currently
in the RUS locality pay area must have
at least 1,500 GS employees and an
employment interchange measure of at
least 7.5 percent.
2. For adjacent counties that are not
part of a multi-county MSA or CSA: To
be included in an adjacent locality pay
area, an adjacent county that is
currently in the RUS locality pay area
must have at least 400 GS employees
and an employment interchange
measure of at least 7.5 percent.
3. For Federal facilities that cross
locality pay area boundaries: To be
included in an adjacent locality pay
area, that portion of a Federal facility
outside of a higher-paying locality pay
area must have at least 750 GS
employees, the duty stations of the
majority of those employees must be
within 10 miles of the separate locality
pay area, and a significant number of
those employees must commute to work
from the higher-paying locality pay area.
To calculate commuting rates, OPM
uses the ‘‘Employment Interchange
Measure’’ which is defined by the
Bureau of the Census as ‘‘the sum of the
percentage of employed residents of the
smaller entity who work in the larger
entity and the percentage of the
employment in the smaller entity that is
accounted for by workers who reside in
the larger entity.’’
Based on the above criteria, no
additional areas would be added to the
new Buffalo or Phoenix locality pay
areas, and the following additional areas
would be included in the new Raleigh
locality pay area:
VerDate jul<14>2003
14:18 Jun 17, 2005
Jkt 205001
• The Fayetteville, NC, Metropolitan
Statistical Area (MSA), consisting of
Hoke and Cumberland Counties, NC;
• The Goldsboro, NC, MSA,
consisting of Wayne County, NC; and
• The Federal Correctional Complex
Butner, NC.
The Federal Correctional Complex
Butner, NC
The proposed regulations would
include the Federal Correctional
Complex Butner, NC, in the new Raleigh
locality pay area. Based on information
provided by the Wardens of the prison
complex, about 1,050 General Schedule
employees are stationed at the prison,
with an additional 375 to be added in
the spring of 2006. The Durham/
Granville County line runs through the
prison complex. In fact, the county line
runs through several of the buildings at
the facility, and many employees work
in more than one building on a daily
basis. Most of the prison land area and
buildings are located in Durham
County, inside the Raleigh CSA, but the
Low Security Institute, with
approximately 285 GS employees, is in
Granville County, outside of the Raleigh
CSA but less than a mile from the
county line. Granville County, with
approximately 295 GS employees, does
not pass the GS employment criterion
for including an adjacent county in a
higher-paying locality pay area.
Likewise, the portion of the prison in
Granville County, with 285 GS
employees, does not pass the 750 GS
employment criterion for including all
of a Federal facility in a locality pay
area. However, the Pay Agent believes it
would not be administratively feasible
or desirable to include only part of the
prison facility in the new Raleigh
locality pay area and proposes to
include the entire correctional facility in
that area. We request that the Federal
Salary Council consider this matter
when it meets later this year and will
defer a final decision on this matter
until after we hear the Council’s views.
Changes in Locality Pay Areas Because
of Revisions in Metropolitan Statistical
Areas
On February 22, 2005, OMB
published OMB Bulletin 05–02
updating MSAs. The bulletin adds the
Bonham, TX Micropolitan Statistical
Area (Fannin County, TX) to the DallasFort Worth, TX CSA, and adds the
Culpeper, VA Micropolitan Statistical
Area (Culpeper County, VA) to the
Washington-Baltimore-Northern
Virginia, DC-MD-VA-WV CSA. The
Bulletin also changes the name of the
Santa Barbara-Santa Maria-Goleta, CA
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
MSA to the Santa Barbara-Santa Maria,
CA MSA.
In keeping with these changes, the
proposed regulations would add the
Bonham, TX Micropolitan Statistical
Area (Fannin County, TX) to the DallasFort Worth, TX locality pay area. Under
5 CFR 531.606, any additions made by
OMB in MSA or CSA definitions
affecting locality pay areas will result in
changes in the affected locality pay area
that become effective at the beginning of
the next calendar year. Because
Culpeper County, VA already is part of
the Washington-Baltimore-Northern
Virginia locality pay area, the
boundaries of the WashingtonBaltimore-Northern Virginia area will
not change. Finally, we have updated
the definition of the Los Angeles-Long
Beach-Riverside, CA locality pay area to
reflect the new name of the Santa
Barbara-Santa Maria, CA MSA.
Impact and Implementation
The Pay Agent plans to implement the
changes in locality pay area boundaries,
as described above, in January 2006.
Overall, the proposed changes in
locality pay area boundaries would
move about 34,000 GS employees to the
RUS locality pay area and move about
25,000 GS employees to a separate
metropolitan locality pay area from the
RUS locality pay area.
E.O. 12866, Regulatory Review
The Office of Management and Budget
has reviewed this rule in accordance
with E.O. 12866.
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 apply only to
Federal agencies and employees.
List of Subjects in 5 CFR Part 531
Government employees, Law
enforcement officers, Wages.
Office of Personnel Management.
Dan G. Blair,
Acting Director.
Accordingly, OPM is proposing to
amend 5 CFR part 531 as follows:
PART 531—PAY UNDER THE
GENERAL SCHEDULE
1. The authority citation for part 531
continues to read as follows:
Authority: 5 U.S.C. 5115, 5307, and 5338;
sec. 4 of Pub. L. 103–89, 107 Stat. 981; and
E.O. 12748, 56 FR 4521, 3 CFR, 1991 Comp.,
p. 316; Subpart B also issued under 5 U.S.C.
5303(g), 5333, 5334(a), and 7701(b)(2);
Subpart C also issued under 5 U.S.C. 5304,
5305, and 5553; sections 302 and 404 of
E:\FR\FM\20JNP1.SGM
20JNP1
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 117 / Monday, June 20, 2005 / Proposed Rules
Federal Employees Pay Comparability Act of
1990 (FEPCA), Pub. L. 101–509, 104 Stat.
1462 and 1466; and section 3(7) of Pub. L.
102–378, 106 Stat. 1356; Subpart D also
issued under 5 U.S.C. 5335(g) and 7701(b)(2);
Subpart E also issued under 5 U.S.C. 5336;
Subpart F also issued under 5 U.S.C. 5304,
5305(g)(1), and 5553; and E.O. 12883, 58 FR
63281, 3 CFR, 1993 Comp., p. 682 and E.O.
13106, 63 FR 68151, 3 CFR, 1998 Comp., p.
224; Subpart G also issued under 5 U.S.C.
5304, 5305, and 5553; section 302 of the
FEPCA, Pub. L. 101–509, 104 Stat. 1462; and
E.O. 12786, 56 FR 67453, 3 CFR, 1991 Comp.,
p. 376.
Subpart F—Locality-Based
Comparability Payments
1. In § 531.603, paragraph (b) is
revised to read as follows:
§ 531.603
Locality pay areas.
*
*
*
*
*
(b) The following are locality pay
areas for purposes of this subpart:
(1) Atlanta-Sandy Springs-Gainesville,
GA-AL—consisting of the Atlanta-Sandy
Springs-Gainesville, GA-AL CSA;
(2) Boston-Worcester-Manchester,
MA-NH-ME-RI—consisting of the
Boston-Worcester-Manchester, MA-NH
CSA, plus the Providence-New BedfordFall River, RI-MA MSA, Barnstable
County, MA, and Berwick, Eliot, Kittery,
South Berwick, and York towns in York
County, ME;
(3) Buffalo-Niagara-Cattaraugus, NY—
consisting of the Buffalo-NiagaraCattaraugus, NY Combined Statistical
Area;
(4) Chicago-Naperville-Michigan City,
IL-IN-WI—consisting of the ChicagoNaperville-Michigan City, IL-IN-WI
CSA;
(5) Cincinnati-MiddletownWilmington, OH-KY-IN—consisting of
the Cincinnati-Middletown-Wilmington,
OH-KY-IN CSA;
(6) Cleveland-Akron-Elyria, OH—
consisting of the Cleveland-AkronElyria, OH CSA;
(7) Columbus-Marion-Chillicothe,
OH—consisting of the ColumbusMarion-Chillicothe, OH CSA;
(8) Dallas-Fort Worth, TX—consisting
of the Dallas-Fort Worth, TX CSA;
(9) Dayton-Springfield-Greenville,
OH—consisting of the DaytonSpringfield-Greenville, OH CSA;
(10) Denver-Aurora-Boulder, CO—
consisting of the Denver-AuroraBoulder, CO CSA, plus the Ft. CollinsLoveland, CO MSA and Weld County,
CO;
(11) Detroit-Warren-Flint, MI—
consisting of the Detroit-Warren-Flint,
MI CSA, plus Lenawee County, MI;
(12) Hartford-West HartfordWillimantic, CT-MA—consisting of the
Hartford-West Hartford-Willimantic, CT
VerDate jul<14>2003
14:18 Jun 17, 2005
Jkt 205001
CSA, plus the Springfield, MA MSA and
New London County, CT;
(13) Houston-Baytown-Huntsville,
TX—consisting of the HoustonBaytown-Huntsville, TX CSA;
(14) Huntsville-Decatur, AL—
consisting of the Huntsville-Decatur, AL
CSA;
(15) Indianapolis-AndersonColumbus, IN—consisting of the
Indianapolis-Anderson-Columbus, IN
CSA, plus Grant County, IN;
(16) Los Angeles-Long BeachRiverside, CA—consisting of the Los
Angeles-Long Beach-Riverside, CA CSA,
plus the Santa Barbara-Santa Maria, CA
MSA and all of Edwards Air Force Base,
CA;
(17) Miami-Fort Lauderdale-Miami
Beach, FL—consisting of the Miami-Fort
Lauderdale-Miami Beach, FL MSA, plus
Monroe County, FL;
(18) Milwaukee-Racine-Waukesha,
WI—consisting of the MilwaukeeRacine-Waukesha, WI CSA;
(19) Minneapolis-St. Paul-St. Cloud,
MN-WI—consisting of the MinneapolisSt. Paul-St. Cloud, MN-WI CSA;
(20) New York-Newark-Bridgeport,
NY-NJ-CT-PA—consisting of the New
York-Newark-Bridgeport, NY-NJ-CT-PA
CSA, plus Monroe County, PA, and
Warren County, NJ;
(21) Philadelphia-Camden-Vineland,
PA-NJ-DE-MD—consisting of the
Philadelphia-Camden-Vineland, PA-NJDE-MD CSA, plus Kent County, DE,
Atlantic County, NJ, and Cape May
County, NJ;
(22) Phoenix-Mesa-Scottsdale, AZ—
consisting of the Phoenix-MesaScottsdale, AZ Metropolitan Statistical
Area;
(23) Pittsburgh-New Castle, PA—
consisting of the Pittsburgh-New Castle,
PA CSA;
(24) Portland-Vancouver-Beaverton,
OR-WA—consisting of the PortlandVancouver-Beaverton, OR-WA MSA,
plus Marion County, OR, and Polk
County, OR;
(25) Raleigh-Durham-Cary, NC—
consisting of the Raleigh-Durham-Cary,
NC Combined Statistical Area, plus the
Fayetteville, NC Metropolitan Statistical
Area, the Goldsboro, NC Metropolitan
Statistical Area, and the Federal
Correctional Complex Butner, NC;
(26) Richmond, VA—consisting of the
Richmond, VA MSA;
(27) Sacramento—Arden—Arcade—
Truckee, CA-NV—consisting of the
Sacramento—Arden-Arcade’Truckee,
CA-NV CSA, plus Carson City, NV;
(28) San Diego-Carlsbad-San Marcos,
CA—consisting of the San DiegoCarlsbad-San Marcos, CA MSA;
(29) San Jose-San Francisco-Oakland,
CA—consisting of the San Jose-San
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
35385
Francisco-Oakland, CA CSA, plus the
Salinas, CA MSA and San Joaquin
County, CA;
(30) Seattle-Tacoma-Olympia, WA—
consisting of the Seattle-TacomaOlympia, WA CSA;
(31) Washington-Baltimore-Northern
Virginia, DC-MD-VA-WV—consisting of
the Washington-Baltimore-Northern
Virginia, DC-MD-VA-WV CSA, plus the
Hagerstown-Martinsburg, MD-WV MSA,
and King George County, VA; and
(32) Rest of U.S.—consisting of those
portions of the continental United States
not located within another locality pay
area.
*
*
*
*
*
[FR Doc. 05–12033 Filed 6–17–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6325–39–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. FAA–2005–21410; Directorate
Identifier 2005–CE–31–AD]
RIN 2120–AA64
Airworthiness Directives; Raytheon
Aircraft Company Model 390 Airplanes
Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM).
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to adopt a
new airworthiness directive (AD) for
certain Raytheon Aircraft Company
(Raytheon) Model 390 airplanes. This
proposed AD would require you to
replace the rudder pedal arm assemblies
used in the rudder control system with
parts of improved design. This proposed
AD results from reports of cracks found
on the rudder pedal arm assemblies. We
are issuing this proposed AD to prevent
failure of the rudder pedal arm
assemblies caused by fatigue cracks.
This failure could lead to loss of rudder
control, loss of nose gear steering, and
loss of toe brakes on the side on which
the failure occurs.
DATES: We must receive any comments
on this proposed AD by August 19,
2005.
ADDRESSES: Use one of the following 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.
E:\FR\FM\20JNP1.SGM
20JNP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 117 (Monday, June 20, 2005)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 35383-35385]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-12033]
========================================================================
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. 117 / Monday, June 20, 2005 /
Proposed Rules
[[Page 35383]]
OFFICE OF PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT
5 CFR Part 531
RIN 3206-AK78
General Schedule Locality Pay Areas
AGENCY: Office of Personnel Management.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: On behalf of the President's Pay Agent, the Office of
Personnel Management is issuing proposed regulations on the locality
pay program for General Schedule employees. The proposed regulations
would merge the Kansas City, St. Louis, and Orlando locality pay areas
with the Rest of U.S. locality pay area; create new locality pay areas
for Buffalo, NY; Phoenix, AZ; and Raleigh, NC; add Fannin County, TX,
to the Dallas-Fort Worth locality pay area; and make minor changes in
the official description of the Los Angeles-Long Beach-Riverside and
Washington-Baltimore-Northern Virginia locality pay areas. The new
locality pay area definitions would become effective in January 2006.
DATES: We must receive comments on or before August 19, 2005.
ADDRESSES: Send or deliver comments to Donald J. Winstead, Deputy
Associate Director for Pay and Performance Policy, Office of Personnel
Management, Room 7H31, 1900 E Street, NW., Washington, DC 20415-8200;
FAX: (202) 606-4264; or e-mail: pay-performance-policy@opm.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Allan Hearne, (202) 606-2838; FAX:
(202) 606-4264; e-mail: pay-performance-policy@opm.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section 5304 of title 5, United States Code,
authorizes locality pay for General Schedule (GS) employees with duty
stations in the contiguous United States and the District of Columbia.
By law, locality pay is set by comparing GS pay rates with non-Federal
pay rates for the same levels of work in each locality pay area. Non-
Federal pay levels are estimated by means of salary surveys conducted
by the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS). Currently, there are 32
locality pay areas: 31 separate metropolitan locality pay areas and a
``Rest of U.S.'' (RUS) locality pay area that consists of all locations
in the contiguous United States that are not part of one of the 31
separate metropolitan locality pay areas.
Section 5304(f) of title 5, United States Code, authorizes the
President's Pay Agent (the Secretary of Labor, the Director of the
Office of Management and Budget (OMB), and the Director of the Office
of Personnel Management (OPM)) to determine locality pay areas. The
boundaries of locality pay areas must be based on appropriate factors,
which may include local labor market patterns, commuting patterns, and
the practices of other employers. The Pay Agent must give thorough
consideration to the views and recommendations of the Federal Salary
Council, a body composed of experts in the fields of labor relations
and pay policy and representatives of Federal employee organizations.
The President appoints the members of the Federal Salary Council, which
submits annual recommendations to the President's Pay Agent about the
locality pay program. Based on recommendations of the Federal Salary
Council, we use Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) and Combined
Statistical Area (CSA) definitions established by the Office of
Management and Budget as the basis for locality pay area definitions.
Merging Three Locality Pay Areas With the RUS Locality Pay Area
The Federal Salary Council recommended in 2003 that the Pay Agent
merge the Kansas City, St. Louis, and Orlando locality pay areas with
the RUS locality pay area in 2005 and ask BLS to reallocate its survey
resources to cover other areas. The Council made this recommendation
because pay comparisons between General Schedule pay and non-Federal
pay show that the overall pay disparity in those areas has been below
that for the RUS locality pay area for several years. The RUS area
serves as the ``base'' rate, since it is not reasonable to allow a
locality pay rate in a metropolitan area to be below the catch-all RUS
area rate that would apply just outside the metropolitan area. The
Council determined that BLS survey resources would be better used in
other locations currently in the RUS locality pay area where non-
Federal pay levels might warrant higher locality pay and where large
numbers of GS employees work. The Pay Agent concurred with this
recommendation in its 2003 report to the President, but later requested
that the Council review the matter further.
After reviewing more recent salary survey data, the Council
recommended in 2004 that the Kansas City, St. Louis, and Orlando
locality pay areas be merged with the RUS locality pay area in 2006.
The Pay Agent concurred with this recommendation in its 2004 report to
the President. This proposed regulation would implement the Council's
recommendation by merging the Kansas City, St. Louis, and Orlando
locality pay areas with the Rest of U.S. locality pay area in January
2006.
New Locality Pay Areas for 2006
The Council also recommended in 2004 that existing BLS surveys in
the Austin, Buffalo, Louisville, Memphis, Phoenix, and Raleigh
metropolitan areas be redesigned as full-scale locality pay surveys and
that Buffalo, Phoenix, and Raleigh be made separate locality pay areas
in 2006. This proposed regulation follows the Council's recommendation
and would make Buffalo (Cattaraugus, Erie, and Niagara Counties, NY),
Phoenix (Maricopa and Pinal Counties, AZ), and Raleigh (Chatham,
Durham, Franklin, Harnett, Johnston, Orange, Person, and Wake Counties,
NC) separate locality pay areas in 2006.
The six metropolitan areas listed above each have 2,500 or more GS
employees and 375,000 or more non-farm workers in the local economy (a
sufficient base for measuring local pay levels). In addition, smaller-
scale BLS salary surveys indicated that pay levels in each area were
above those found in the RUS locality pay area. For the 2004 review of
locality pay, the Pay Agent asked BLS to produce data for these six
metropolitan areas (including modeled data as done for the existing
locality pay areas) and compared the survey results to base GS rates
using its standard locality pay methodology. The Council based its
recommendation to add three new locality pay areas in 2006 on pay
comparisons showing that Buffalo, Phoenix, and Raleigh each had a
Federal/non-Federal pay disparity
[[Page 35384]]
significantly higher than the pay disparity in the RUS locality pay
area. The pay comparisons for Memphis showed that the pay disparity was
less than 1 percentage point above the RUS area pay disparity and that
pay disparities in Austin and Louisville were slightly below the RUS
area pay disparity. BLS plans to continue work to redesign its salary
surveys over the next several years, and the Federal Salary Council and
the Pay Agent plan to review data for all six of these areas in the
future as additional data become available.
Criteria for Areas of Application Applied to New Locality Pay Areas
Based on the Council's recommendations, the Pay Agent established
criteria for evaluating areas adjacent to metropolitan locality pay
areas for inclusion in that locality pay area.
The criteria are as follows:
1. For adjacent MSAs and CSAs: To be included in an adjacent
locality pay area, an adjacent MSA or CSA currently in the RUS locality
pay area must have at least 1,500 GS employees and an employment
interchange measure of at least 7.5 percent.
2. For adjacent counties that are not part of a multi-county MSA or
CSA: To be included in an adjacent locality pay area, an adjacent
county that is currently in the RUS locality pay area must have at
least 400 GS employees and an employment interchange measure of at
least 7.5 percent.
3. For Federal facilities that cross locality pay area boundaries:
To be included in an adjacent locality pay area, that portion of a
Federal facility outside of a higher-paying locality pay area must have
at least 750 GS employees, the duty stations of the majority of those
employees must be within 10 miles of the separate locality pay area,
and a significant number of those employees must commute to work from
the higher-paying locality pay area.
To calculate commuting rates, OPM uses the ``Employment Interchange
Measure'' which is defined by the Bureau of the Census as ``the sum of
the percentage of employed residents of the smaller entity who work in
the larger entity and the percentage of the employment in the smaller
entity that is accounted for by workers who reside in the larger
entity.''
Based on the above criteria, no additional areas would be added to
the new Buffalo or Phoenix locality pay areas, and the following
additional areas would be included in the new Raleigh locality pay
area:
The Fayetteville, NC, Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA),
consisting of Hoke and Cumberland Counties, NC;
The Goldsboro, NC, MSA, consisting of Wayne County, NC;
and
The Federal Correctional Complex Butner, NC.
The Federal Correctional Complex Butner, NC
The proposed regulations would include the Federal Correctional
Complex Butner, NC, in the new Raleigh locality pay area. Based on
information provided by the Wardens of the prison complex, about 1,050
General Schedule employees are stationed at the prison, with an
additional 375 to be added in the spring of 2006. The Durham/Granville
County line runs through the prison complex. In fact, the county line
runs through several of the buildings at the facility, and many
employees work in more than one building on a daily basis. Most of the
prison land area and buildings are located in Durham County, inside the
Raleigh CSA, but the Low Security Institute, with approximately 285 GS
employees, is in Granville County, outside of the Raleigh CSA but less
than a mile from the county line. Granville County, with approximately
295 GS employees, does not pass the GS employment criterion for
including an adjacent county in a higher-paying locality pay area.
Likewise, the portion of the prison in Granville County, with 285 GS
employees, does not pass the 750 GS employment criterion for including
all of a Federal facility in a locality pay area. However, the Pay
Agent believes it would not be administratively feasible or desirable
to include only part of the prison facility in the new Raleigh locality
pay area and proposes to include the entire correctional facility in
that area. We request that the Federal Salary Council consider this
matter when it meets later this year and will defer a final decision on
this matter until after we hear the Council's views.
Changes in Locality Pay Areas Because of Revisions in Metropolitan
Statistical Areas
On February 22, 2005, OMB published OMB Bulletin 05-02 updating
MSAs. The bulletin adds the Bonham, TX Micropolitan Statistical Area
(Fannin County, TX) to the Dallas-Fort Worth, TX CSA, and adds the
Culpeper, VA Micropolitan Statistical Area (Culpeper County, VA) to the
Washington-Baltimore-Northern Virginia, DC-MD-VA-WV CSA. The Bulletin
also changes the name of the Santa Barbara-Santa Maria-Goleta, CA MSA
to the Santa Barbara-Santa Maria, CA MSA.
In keeping with these changes, the proposed regulations would add
the Bonham, TX Micropolitan Statistical Area (Fannin County, TX) to the
Dallas-Fort Worth, TX locality pay area. Under 5 CFR 531.606, any
additions made by OMB in MSA or CSA definitions affecting locality pay
areas will result in changes in the affected locality pay area that
become effective at the beginning of the next calendar year. Because
Culpeper County, VA already is part of the Washington-Baltimore-
Northern Virginia locality pay area, the boundaries of the Washington-
Baltimore-Northern Virginia area will not change. Finally, we have
updated the definition of the Los Angeles-Long Beach-Riverside, CA
locality pay area to reflect the new name of the Santa Barbara-Santa
Maria, CA MSA.
Impact and Implementation
The Pay Agent plans to implement the changes in locality pay area
boundaries, as described above, in January 2006. Overall, the proposed
changes in locality pay area boundaries would move about 34,000 GS
employees to the RUS locality pay area and move about 25,000 GS
employees to a separate metropolitan locality pay area from the RUS
locality pay area.
E.O. 12866, Regulatory Review
The Office of Management and Budget has reviewed this rule in
accordance with E.O. 12866.
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 apply only to Federal agencies and employees.
List of Subjects in 5 CFR Part 531
Government employees, Law enforcement officers, Wages.
Office of Personnel Management.
Dan G. Blair,
Acting Director.
Accordingly, OPM is proposing to amend 5 CFR part 531 as follows:
PART 531--PAY UNDER THE GENERAL SCHEDULE
1. The authority citation for part 531 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 5 U.S.C. 5115, 5307, and 5338; sec. 4 of Pub. L. 103-
89, 107 Stat. 981; and E.O. 12748, 56 FR 4521, 3 CFR, 1991 Comp., p.
316; Subpart B also issued under 5 U.S.C. 5303(g), 5333, 5334(a),
and 7701(b)(2); Subpart C also issued under 5 U.S.C. 5304, 5305, and
5553; sections 302 and 404 of
[[Page 35385]]
Federal Employees Pay Comparability Act of 1990 (FEPCA), Pub. L.
101-509, 104 Stat. 1462 and 1466; and section 3(7) of Pub. L. 102-
378, 106 Stat. 1356; Subpart D also issued under 5 U.S.C. 5335(g)
and 7701(b)(2); Subpart E also issued under 5 U.S.C. 5336; Subpart F
also issued under 5 U.S.C. 5304, 5305(g)(1), and 5553; and E.O.
12883, 58 FR 63281, 3 CFR, 1993 Comp., p. 682 and E.O. 13106, 63 FR
68151, 3 CFR, 1998 Comp., p. 224; Subpart G also issued under 5
U.S.C. 5304, 5305, and 5553; section 302 of the FEPCA, Pub. L. 101-
509, 104 Stat. 1462; and E.O. 12786, 56 FR 67453, 3 CFR, 1991 Comp.,
p. 376.
Subpart F--Locality-Based Comparability Payments
1. In Sec. 531.603, paragraph (b) is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 531.603 Locality pay areas.
* * * * *
(b) The following are locality pay areas for purposes of this
subpart:
(1) Atlanta-Sandy Springs-Gainesville, GA-AL--consisting of the
Atlanta-Sandy Springs-Gainesville, GA-AL CSA;
(2) Boston-Worcester-Manchester, MA-NH-ME-RI--consisting of the
Boston-Worcester-Manchester, MA-NH CSA, plus the Providence-New
Bedford-Fall River, RI-MA MSA, Barnstable County, MA, and Berwick,
Eliot, Kittery, South Berwick, and York towns in York County, ME;
(3) Buffalo-Niagara-Cattaraugus, NY--consisting of the Buffalo-
Niagara-Cattaraugus, NY Combined Statistical Area;
(4) Chicago-Naperville-Michigan City, IL-IN-WI--consisting of the
Chicago-Naperville-Michigan City, IL-IN-WI CSA;
(5) Cincinnati-Middletown-Wilmington, OH-KY-IN--consisting of the
Cincinnati-Middletown-Wilmington, OH-KY-IN CSA;
(6) Cleveland-Akron-Elyria, OH--consisting of the Cleveland-Akron-
Elyria, OH CSA;
(7) Columbus-Marion-Chillicothe, OH--consisting of the Columbus-
Marion-Chillicothe, OH CSA;
(8) Dallas-Fort Worth, TX--consisting of the Dallas-Fort Worth, TX
CSA;
(9) Dayton-Springfield-Greenville, OH--consisting of the Dayton-
Springfield-Greenville, OH CSA;
(10) Denver-Aurora-Boulder, CO--consisting of the Denver-Aurora-
Boulder, CO CSA, plus the Ft. Collins-Loveland, CO MSA and Weld County,
CO;
(11) Detroit-Warren-Flint, MI--consisting of the Detroit-Warren-
Flint, MI CSA, plus Lenawee County, MI;
(12) Hartford-West Hartford-Willimantic, CT-MA--consisting of the
Hartford-West Hartford-Willimantic, CT CSA, plus the Springfield, MA
MSA and New London County, CT;
(13) Houston-Baytown-Huntsville, TX--consisting of the Houston-
Baytown-Huntsville, TX CSA;
(14) Huntsville-Decatur, AL--consisting of the Huntsville-Decatur,
AL CSA;
(15) Indianapolis-Anderson-Columbus, IN--consisting of the
Indianapolis-Anderson-Columbus, IN CSA, plus Grant County, IN;
(16) Los Angeles-Long Beach-Riverside, CA--consisting of the Los
Angeles-Long Beach-Riverside, CA CSA, plus the Santa Barbara-Santa
Maria, CA MSA and all of Edwards Air Force Base, CA;
(17) Miami-Fort Lauderdale-Miami Beach, FL--consisting of the
Miami-Fort Lauderdale-Miami Beach, FL MSA, plus Monroe County, FL;
(18) Milwaukee-Racine-Waukesha, WI--consisting of the Milwaukee-
Racine-Waukesha, WI CSA;
(19) Minneapolis-St. Paul-St. Cloud, MN-WI--consisting of the
Minneapolis-St. Paul-St. Cloud, MN-WI CSA;
(20) New York-Newark-Bridgeport, NY-NJ-CT-PA--consisting of the New
York-Newark-Bridgeport, NY-NJ-CT-PA CSA, plus Monroe County, PA, and
Warren County, NJ;
(21) Philadelphia-Camden-Vineland, PA-NJ-DE-MD--consisting of the
Philadelphia-Camden-Vineland, PA-NJ-DE-MD CSA, plus Kent County, DE,
Atlantic County, NJ, and Cape May County, NJ;
(22) Phoenix-Mesa-Scottsdale, AZ--consisting of the Phoenix-Mesa-
Scottsdale, AZ Metropolitan Statistical Area;
(23) Pittsburgh-New Castle, PA--consisting of the Pittsburgh-New
Castle, PA CSA;
(24) Portland-Vancouver-Beaverton, OR-WA--consisting of the
Portland-Vancouver-Beaverton, OR-WA MSA, plus Marion County, OR, and
Polk County, OR;
(25) Raleigh-Durham-Cary, NC--consisting of the Raleigh-Durham-
Cary, NC Combined Statistical Area, plus the Fayetteville, NC
Metropolitan Statistical Area, the Goldsboro, NC Metropolitan
Statistical Area, and the Federal Correctional Complex Butner, NC;
(26) Richmond, VA--consisting of the Richmond, VA MSA;
(27) Sacramento--Arden--Arcade--Truckee, CA-NV--consisting of the
Sacramento--Arden-Arcade'Truckee, CA-NV CSA, plus Carson City, NV;
(28) San Diego-Carlsbad-San Marcos, CA--consisting of the San
Diego-Carlsbad-San Marcos, CA MSA;
(29) San Jose-San Francisco-Oakland, CA--consisting of the San
Jose-San Francisco-Oakland, CA CSA, plus the Salinas, CA MSA and San
Joaquin County, CA;
(30) Seattle-Tacoma-Olympia, WA--consisting of the Seattle-Tacoma-
Olympia, WA CSA;
(31) Washington-Baltimore-Northern Virginia, DC-MD-VA-WV--
consisting of the Washington-Baltimore-Northern Virginia, DC-MD-VA-WV
CSA, plus the Hagerstown-Martinsburg, MD-WV MSA, and King George
County, VA; and
(32) Rest of U.S.--consisting of those portions of the continental
United States not located within another locality pay area.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 05-12033 Filed 6-17-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6325-39-P
