General Schedule Locality Pay Areas, 74996-74998 [05-24212]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
74996
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 242 / Monday, December 19, 2005 / Rules and Regulations
supplements. A rate payable to a GM
employee is considered a GS rate.
*
*
*
*
*
I 8. In § 531.610, revise paragraph (k) to
read as follows:
§ 531.610 Treatment of locality rate as
basic pay.
*
*
*
*
*
(k) Lump-sum payments under 5 CFR
part 550, subpart L, for accumulated and
accrued annual leave;
*
*
*
*
*
PART 575—RECRUITMENT,
RELOCATION, AND RETENTION
INCENTIVES; SUPERVISORY
DIFFERENTIALS; AND EXTENDED
ASSIGNMENT INCENTIVES
9. The authority citation for part 575
continues to read as follows:
I
Authority: 5 U.S.C. 1104(a)(2) and 5307;
subparts A, B, and C also issued under sec.
101, Pub. L. 108–411, 118 Stat. 2305 (5 U.S.C.
5753 and 5754); subpart D also issued under
5 U.S.C. 5755; subpart E also issued under
sec. 207, Pub. L. 107–273, 116 Stat. 1779 (5
U.S.C. 5757).
Subpart B—Relocation Incentives
§ 575.206
[Amended]
10. In § 575.206(a)(4), remove the
word ‘‘recruitment’’ and add in its place
the word ‘‘relocation.’’
I
Subpart C—Retention Incentives
§ 575.310
[Amended]
11. In § 575.310(a), remove ‘‘(g)’’ and
add in its place ‘‘(f).’’
I
Office of Personnel Management.
Linda M. Springer,
Director.
[FR Doc. 05–24214 Filed 12–16–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6325–39–M
OFFICE OF PERSONNEL
MANAGEMENT
5 CFR Part 531
RIN 3206–AK78
General Schedule Locality Pay Areas
Office of Personnel
Management.
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: On behalf of the President’s
Pay Agent, the Office of Personnel
Management is issuing final regulations
on locality pay areas for General
Schedule employees. The final
regulations merge the Kansas City, St.
Louis, and Orlando locality pay areas
with the Rest of U.S. locality pay area;
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:05 Dec 16, 2005
Jkt 208001
create new locality pay areas for Buffalo,
NY; Phoenix, AZ; and Raleigh, NC; add
the Federal Correctional Complex
Butner, NC, to the Raleigh locality pay
area under revised criteria for evaluating
Federal facilities that cross locality pay
area boundaries; 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 will
become effective in January 2006.
DATES: The regulations are effective
January 1, 2006. The regulations are
applicable on the first day of the first
pay period beginning on or after January
1, 2006.
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
area. Non-Federal pay levels are
estimated by means of salary surveys
conducted by the Bureau of Labor
Statistics (BLS). In 2005, 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
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Federal Salary Council, we use
Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) and
Combined Statistical Area (CSA)
definitions established by OMB as the
basis for locality pay area definitions.
On June 20, 2005, OPM issued a
proposed rule on behalf of the Pay
Agent to—
• Create new locality pay areas for
Buffalo, Phoenix, and Raleigh;
• Merge the Kansas City, St. Louis,
and Orlando locality pay areas with the
Rest of U.S. locality pay area;
• Include several new areas of
application in the new Raleigh locality
pay area; and
• Add Fannin County, TX, to the
Dallas locality pay area, Culpepper
County, VA, to the Washington, DC,
locality pay area, and change the name
of the Santa Barbara-Santa Maria-Goleta,
CA, Metropolitan Statistical Area within
the Los Angeles locality pay area.
Comments Received
We received 31 comments on the
proposed regulations. Several of the
commenters requested that separate
locality pay areas be established in
additional locations due to high living
costs. The suggested areas included
Eureka, CA; Fresno, CA; Las Vegas, NV;
Norfolk, VA; Preston County, WV; Salt
Lake City, UT; Tampa, FL; and Toledo,
OH. Norfolk, Salt Lake City, and Tampa
have been surveyed for the locality pay
program in the past, but the surveys
indicated that pay levels in each
location were below pay levels in the
RUS locality pay area.
Living costs are not directly
considered in setting locality pay or
defining locality pay areas. Locality pay
is set by comparing GS and non-Federal
pay for the same levels of work to allow
the Government to recruit and retain an
adequate workforce. Locality pay is not
designed to equalize living standards for
GS employees across the country. Since
living costs are just one of many factors
that affect the supply and demand for
labor, they are not considered
separately.
Several commenters were opposed to
merging the Kansas City, St. Louis, and
Orlando locality pay areas with the RUS
area and expressed concerns about the
impact on pay for employees in those
areas. Salary survey results consistently
show that the pay disparity in these
three areas is below that in the RUS
locality pay area. Since the purpose of
locality pay is to enable the Government
to offer higher pay in high-pay areas,
there is no policy-based justification for
continuing these three cities as separate
locality pay areas.
Commenters expressed several other
concerns about Kansas City, St. Louis,
E:\FR\FM\19DER1.SGM
19DER1
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 242 / Monday, December 19, 2005 / Rules and Regulations
and Orlando. These included that pay
levels are higher in the core city than
the broader locality pay area, that
including outlying areas reduces pay
levels, that living costs are higher in the
suburbs than in the inner cities, that
reductions in locality rates will cause
staffing problems, and that recent
increases in oil prices have affected
employees in these three areas. Some or
all of these same factors may also apply
in any of the other locality pay areas,
but they do not justify treating Kansas
City, St. Louis, and Orlando differently
than the other areas. The Pay Agent
does not anticipate any significant
staffing difficulties in Kansas City, St.
Louis, or Orlando due to this action
because the differences between the
RUS rate and the current locality rates
in these areas are small and the
regulations are expected to become
effective at the same time as an acrossthe-board GS pay increase.
A number of commenters focused on
the geographic coverage of existing
locality pay areas. Some commenters
recommended adding Colorado Springs
to the Denver locality pay area, adding
Toledo to the Detroit locality pay area,
adding Fort Dix to the New York
locality pay area, including San Diego in
the Los Angeles locality pay area,
including more locations in
Pennsylvania near York County in the
Washington-Baltimore locality pay area,
extending locality pay to employees in
foreign areas or in Alaska and Hawaii,
and including nurses and other medical
personnel in Fannin County, TX, who
are paid under title 38, United States
Code, in the Dallas locality pay area.
Colorado Springs, Toledo, Fort Dix,
and the additional areas in
Pennsylvania do not pass the criteria
recommended by the Federal Salary
Council for including a location in an
existing locality pay area. San Diego is
already surveyed separately, and recent
survey results indicate that pay levels in
San Diego are similar to those in the Los
Angeles locality pay area. While the
Federal Salary Council considered
combining several existing locality pay
areas in 2003 in order to free up survey
resources (including merging the Los
Angeles and San Diego locality pay
areas), they took no action on the
proposal because BLS indicated there
would not be any significant reduction
in survey work. Because the areas under
consideration were all large areas, they
would still have to be surveyed
separately for BLS’ nationwide
products, including the Employment
Cost Index.
Section 5304 of title 5, United States
Code, does not provide for locality
payments in foreign areas or in Alaska
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:05 Dec 16, 2005
Jkt 208001
74997
or Hawaii, so the Pay Agent cannot
extend locality payments to employees
in those areas.
The Department of Veterans Affairs is
responsible for setting pay for
employees covered by title 38, United
States Code, and is not required to use
the locality pay area boundaries
established by the President’s Pay Agent
under the GS locality pay program for
those employees.
Finally, both the American Federation
of Government Employees and the
prison wardens at the Federal
Correctional Facility, Butner, NC,
expressed support for adding the entire
facility to the new Raleigh locality pay
area.
Council’s recommended revision, as set
forth here:
For Federal facilities that cross
locality pay area boundaries: To be
included in an adjacent locality pay
area, the whole facility must have at
least 500 GS employees, with the
majority of those employees in the
higher-paying locality pay area, or 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 higherpaying locality pay area.
The Federal Correctional Complex,
Butner, NC
The final regulations 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 124 permanently
assigned GS employees, is in Granville
County, outside the Raleigh CSA but
less than a mile from the county line.
Granville County, with a total of about
134 GS employees, does not pass the GS
employment criterion previously
recommended by the Federal Salary
Council for including an adjacent
county in a higher-paying locality pay
area. Likewise, the portion of the prison
in Granville County, with 124 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 concluded
that it would not be administratively
feasible or desirable to include only part
of the prison facility in the new Raleigh
locality pay area and proposed to
include the entire correctional facility in
that area.
The Pay Agent requested that the
Federal Salary Council consider this
matter when it met in 2005. At its
meeting on October 3, 2005, the Council
voted to amend its recommended
criteria for evaluating Federal facilities
that cross locality pay area boundaries.
The Pay Agent concurs with the
Impact of Changes
The changes in locality pay area
boundaries move about 34,000 GS
employees to the RUS locality pay area
and move about 25,000 GS employees
from the RUS locality pay area to a
separate metropolitan locality pay area.
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Waiver of Delay in Effective Date
In order to give practical effect to
these regulations at the earliest possible
moment, I find that good cause exists for
making this rule effective in less than 30
days. The delay in effective date is
waived so that affected agencies and
employees may benefit from the new
locality pay area definitions on the
effective date of the January 2006 GS
pay adjustment.
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 will not
have a significant economic impact on
a substantial number of small entities
because they will 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.
Linda M. Springer,
Director.
Accordingly, OPM is amending 5 CFR
part 531 as follows:
I
PART 531—PAY UNDER THE
GENERAL SCHEDULE
1. The authority citation for part 531
continues to read as follows:
I
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.
E:\FR\FM\19DER1.SGM
19DER1
74998
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 242 / Monday, December 19, 2005 / Rules and Regulations
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
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
2. In § 531.603, paragraph (b) is
revised to read as follows:
I
§ 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 CSA;
(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
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:05 Dec 16, 2005
Jkt 208001
Hartford-West Hartford-Willimantic, CT
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 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 MSA;
(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 CSA, plus the Fayetteville, NC MSA,
the Goldsboro, NC MSA, 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
Francisco-Oakland, CA CSA, plus the
Salinas, CA MSA and San Joaquin
County, CA;
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
(30) Seattle-Tacoma-Olympia, WA—
consisting of the Seattle-TacomaOlympia, WA CSA;
(31) Washington-Baltimore-Northern
Virginia, DC-MD-PA-VA-WV—
consisting of the Washington-BaltimoreNorthern Virginia, DC-MD-VA-WV CSA,
plus the Hagerstown-Martinsburg, MDWV MSA, the York-Hanover-Gettysburg,
PA CSA, 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. 05–24212 Filed 12–16–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6325–39–P
FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM
12 CFR Part 229
[Regulation CC; Docket No. R–1244]
Availability of Funds and Collection of
Checks
Board of Governors of the
Federal Reserve System.
ACTION: Final rule; technical
amendment.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: The Board of Governors is
amending appendix A of Regulation CC
to delete the reference to the New
Orleans branch office of the Federal
Reserve Bank of Atlanta and reassign
the Federal Reserve routing symbols
currently listed under that office to the
head office of the Federal Reserve Bank
of Atlanta, and to correct typographical
errors in the routing symbols listed
under the Helena branch office of the
Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis.
The Board also is providing notice that
the previously announced transfer of the
Nashville branch office’s checkprocessing operations to the Atlanta
head office will be delayed until 2007.
Finally, the Board is providing advance
notice concerning future appendix A
changes affecting the Federal Reserve
Bank of New York and the Federal
Reserve Bank of Philadelphia.
DATES: The amendment to appendix A
under the Ninth Federal Reserve District
(Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis)
is effective December 19, 2005. The
amendment to appendix A under the
Sixth Federal Reserve District (Federal
Reserve Bank of Atlanta) is effective on
March 31, 2006.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jack
K. Walton II, Associate Director (202/
452–2660), or Joseph P. Baressi, Senior
Financial Services Analyst (202/452–
3959), Division of Reserve Bank
E:\FR\FM\19DER1.SGM
19DER1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 242 (Monday, December 19, 2005)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 74996-74998]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-24212]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
OFFICE OF PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT
5 CFR Part 531
RIN 3206-AK78
General Schedule Locality Pay Areas
AGENCY: Office of Personnel Management.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: On behalf of the President's Pay Agent, the Office of
Personnel Management is issuing final regulations on locality pay areas
for General Schedule employees. The final regulations 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 the Federal Correctional Complex
Butner, NC, to the Raleigh locality pay area under revised criteria for
evaluating Federal facilities that cross locality pay area boundaries;
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 will become effective in
January 2006.
DATES: The regulations are effective January 1, 2006. The regulations
are applicable on the first day of the first pay period beginning on or
after January 1, 2006.
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). In 2005, 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 OMB as the basis for
locality pay area definitions.
On June 20, 2005, OPM issued a proposed rule on behalf of the Pay
Agent to--
Create new locality pay areas for Buffalo, Phoenix, and
Raleigh;
Merge the Kansas City, St. Louis, and Orlando locality pay
areas with the Rest of U.S. locality pay area;
Include several new areas of application in the new
Raleigh locality pay area; and
Add Fannin County, TX, to the Dallas locality pay area,
Culpepper County, VA, to the Washington, DC, locality pay area, and
change the name of the Santa Barbara-Santa Maria-Goleta, CA,
Metropolitan Statistical Area within the Los Angeles locality pay area.
Comments Received
We received 31 comments on the proposed regulations. Several of the
commenters requested that separate locality pay areas be established in
additional locations due to high living costs. The suggested areas
included Eureka, CA; Fresno, CA; Las Vegas, NV; Norfolk, VA; Preston
County, WV; Salt Lake City, UT; Tampa, FL; and Toledo, OH. Norfolk,
Salt Lake City, and Tampa have been surveyed for the locality pay
program in the past, but the surveys indicated that pay levels in each
location were below pay levels in the RUS locality pay area.
Living costs are not directly considered in setting locality pay or
defining locality pay areas. Locality pay is set by comparing GS and
non-Federal pay for the same levels of work to allow the Government to
recruit and retain an adequate workforce. Locality pay is not designed
to equalize living standards for GS employees across the country. Since
living costs are just one of many factors that affect the supply and
demand for labor, they are not considered separately.
Several commenters were opposed to merging the Kansas City, St.
Louis, and Orlando locality pay areas with the RUS area and expressed
concerns about the impact on pay for employees in those areas. Salary
survey results consistently show that the pay disparity in these three
areas is below that in the RUS locality pay area. Since the purpose of
locality pay is to enable the Government to offer higher pay in high-
pay areas, there is no policy-based justification for continuing these
three cities as separate locality pay areas.
Commenters expressed several other concerns about Kansas City, St.
Louis,
[[Page 74997]]
and Orlando. These included that pay levels are higher in the core city
than the broader locality pay area, that including outlying areas
reduces pay levels, that living costs are higher in the suburbs than in
the inner cities, that reductions in locality rates will cause staffing
problems, and that recent increases in oil prices have affected
employees in these three areas. Some or all of these same factors may
also apply in any of the other locality pay areas, but they do not
justify treating Kansas City, St. Louis, and Orlando differently than
the other areas. The Pay Agent does not anticipate any significant
staffing difficulties in Kansas City, St. Louis, or Orlando due to this
action because the differences between the RUS rate and the current
locality rates in these areas are small and the regulations are
expected to become effective at the same time as an across-the-board GS
pay increase.
A number of commenters focused on the geographic coverage of
existing locality pay areas. Some commenters recommended adding
Colorado Springs to the Denver locality pay area, adding Toledo to the
Detroit locality pay area, adding Fort Dix to the New York locality pay
area, including San Diego in the Los Angeles locality pay area,
including more locations in Pennsylvania near York County in the
Washington-Baltimore locality pay area, extending locality pay to
employees in foreign areas or in Alaska and Hawaii, and including
nurses and other medical personnel in Fannin County, TX, who are paid
under title 38, United States Code, in the Dallas locality pay area.
Colorado Springs, Toledo, Fort Dix, and the additional areas in
Pennsylvania do not pass the criteria recommended by the Federal Salary
Council for including a location in an existing locality pay area. San
Diego is already surveyed separately, and recent survey results
indicate that pay levels in San Diego are similar to those in the Los
Angeles locality pay area. While the Federal Salary Council considered
combining several existing locality pay areas in 2003 in order to free
up survey resources (including merging the Los Angeles and San Diego
locality pay areas), they took no action on the proposal because BLS
indicated there would not be any significant reduction in survey work.
Because the areas under consideration were all large areas, they would
still have to be surveyed separately for BLS' nationwide products,
including the Employment Cost Index.
Section 5304 of title 5, United States Code, does not provide for
locality payments in foreign areas or in Alaska or Hawaii, so the Pay
Agent cannot extend locality payments to employees in those areas.
The Department of Veterans Affairs is responsible for setting pay
for employees covered by title 38, United States Code, and is not
required to use the locality pay area boundaries established by the
President's Pay Agent under the GS locality pay program for those
employees.
Finally, both the American Federation of Government Employees and
the prison wardens at the Federal Correctional Facility, Butner, NC,
expressed support for adding the entire facility to the new Raleigh
locality pay area.
The Federal Correctional Complex, Butner, NC
The final regulations 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 124 permanently assigned
GS employees, is in Granville County, outside the Raleigh CSA but less
than a mile from the county line. Granville County, with a total of
about 134 GS employees, does not pass the GS employment criterion
previously recommended by the Federal Salary Council for including an
adjacent county in a higher-paying locality pay area. Likewise, the
portion of the prison in Granville County, with 124 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 concluded that
it would not be administratively feasible or desirable to include only
part of the prison facility in the new Raleigh locality pay area and
proposed to include the entire correctional facility in that area.
The Pay Agent requested that the Federal Salary Council consider
this matter when it met in 2005. At its meeting on October 3, 2005, the
Council voted to amend its recommended criteria for evaluating Federal
facilities that cross locality pay area boundaries. The Pay Agent
concurs with the Council's recommended revision, as set forth here:
For Federal facilities that cross locality pay area boundaries: To
be included in an adjacent locality pay area, the whole facility must
have at least 500 GS employees, with the majority of those employees in
the higher-paying locality pay area, or 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.
Impact of Changes
The changes in locality pay area boundaries move about 34,000 GS
employees to the RUS locality pay area and move about 25,000 GS
employees from the RUS locality pay area to a separate metropolitan
locality pay area.
Waiver of Delay in Effective Date
In order to give practical effect to these regulations at the
earliest possible moment, I find that good cause exists for making this
rule effective in less than 30 days. The delay in effective date is
waived so that affected agencies and employees may benefit from the new
locality pay area definitions on the effective date of the January 2006
GS pay adjustment.
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 will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities because they
will 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.
Linda M. Springer,
Director.
0
Accordingly, OPM is amending 5 CFR part 531 as follows:
PART 531--PAY UNDER THE GENERAL SCHEDULE
0
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.
[[Page 74998]]
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 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
0
2. 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 CSA;
(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 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 MSA;
(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 CSA, plus the Fayetteville, NC MSA, the Goldsboro, NC MSA, 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-PA-VA-WV--
consisting of the Washington-Baltimore-Northern Virginia, DC-MD-VA-WV
CSA, plus the Hagerstown-Martinsburg, MD-WV MSA, the York-Hanover-
Gettysburg, PA CSA, 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. 05-24212 Filed 12-16-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6325-39-P
